Message-ID: <9210712.1075856358923.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 05:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: bob.lee@enron.com
To: richard.reichardt@enron.com, vince.kaminski@enron.com
Subject: Re: Seismic Data via satellite
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Bob Lee
X-To: Richard Reichardt, Vince J Kaminski
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Vincent_Kaminski_Jun2001_2\Notes Folders\Discussion threads
X-Origin: Kaminski-V
X-FileName: vkamins.nsf

FYI

---------------------- Forwarded by Bob Lee/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 11:46 AM 
---------------------------


Gregory P Smith@ECT
10/16/2000 10:06 AM
To: Bob Lee/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Re: Seismic Data via satellite  


	

Bob,
Here are a few comments on this note:
1. Deal with seismic company was done by a Mark Peterson who is still with 
Enron.  I haven't caught up with him for details but it had to do with 
underwriting (risk of no sales) seismic survey.  Timing is important.  
Interest may have picked up in new surveys and the survey company decided 
that they didn't need Enron anymore because they no longer saw a risk of no 
sales.  

2. 3-D surveys will happen where there is an abundance of E & P activity or 
be spurred on by successes in a given basin.  While activity continues in the 
Gulf of Mexico on the shelf, the major discoveries are being found in the 
deep water.  Worldwide, the shallow water plays have been looked at and 
worked for years - they were accessible with the extraction technology of the 
time.  I don't think that deep water sedimentation /depositional systems were 
completely understood to even begin to try to justify looking in deep water.  
Concepts have evolved quite quickly.  The point is that many deep water 
accumulations are incredibly large - billion barrel accumulations.  These 
sizes are like those accumulations that were found decades ago when companies 
were drilling surface structures.  The large reserves are needed to pay for 
the corresponding incredibly expensive costs of deepwater field development.  
I believe that finding and development costs ($/barrel) are at least two to 
three times shelf f & d costs in the Gulf of Mexico.  This differential is 
probably large with international projects (and that doesn't take into 
account political risk). 

I'll look forward to more involvement if and when this project /concept goes 
forward.  Feel free to forward this to all participants.  

Greg



Bob Lee@ENRON
13/10/2000 08.30
To: Gregory P Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Reichardt/Enron Communications@Enron 
Communications
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Seismic Data via satellite

I am preparing a summary or our Thursday discussions to be used as a 
background piece for discussion/brainstorming with oil traders.  I will 
circulate this for review/correction later today, or ,at the latest, Monday.

Greg, you mentioned that Enron had participated in a speculative survey in 
the Gulf of Mexico that was successful.  It might be useful to get more info 
on this.  Terms, return realized (over what time frame), why we have not 
continued to do this, etc.

Also, from your comments, many, if not most of the 3-D surveys are in deep 
water.  I read recently that Shell, I believe, is participating in a deep sea 
drilling/extraction project in the Gulf.  What oil price is required to make 
these kinds of projects viable financially?

Bob Lee



