You are absolutely right - proven technology but it is the costs that could be prohibitive. Here distance plays a role with Yulleroo better situated to the coast than Valhalla-Asgard.
The idea was in a bare bones scenario to make a buck on the liquids and break even on the gas. The remoteness of these projects will probably not make the numbers work.
The point I was making about gas vs liquids is that per volumetric unit you get a better price (much better) for the liquids than the gas. Gas is of course most economically moved by pipelines and here is where the achieved per well flow rate and the size of the field fundamentally affect whether it is profitable.
A small flow/reserve and high infrastructure/transportation costs means a long payout, if ever, and the gas remains stranded. However flows after stimulation (I don't use the F word) in the +3MMcfd from multiple wells would be economic especially with the associated liquids.
A very detailed economic plan has many variable with inputs that are uncertain now and especially in the future. Way too complex for someone on the outside to make more than an educated guess.
In general to develop gas you need a stable economic environment (price/red tape/green tape) where the rules will not change. This is hardly the case in Australia at the moment and given the coming election will get worse. Development money will naturally flow to more business friendly countries.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
