[Closed] Oil drilling on Leith Hill

I think they only tend to drill where there's a likelihood of oil.

I think they only tend to drill where there's a likelihood of oil.

Google suggests

"Europa, who will now receive an 18-week period in which to explore for oil or gas"

So the drill derrick (and flare) will be removed after that, much like other onshore oil locations.

I used to regularly ride past one of the UK's biggest onshore oil wells only a few miles from there, and it had none of those things

in fact you'd be hard pressed to even know it was there unless you knew about it

It's not a question of the 18 week timescale, but more the damage that will be done to the area in its construction and then decommissioning.

I’m guessing the thousands of tons of stone won’t be removed, and any damage to the ancient sunken lane leading to the site would be next to impossible to repair.

It will also be drilling through aquifers used for local water.

Plus there were several other drill sites possible instead of Coldharbour, but they were expensive for the company due to a longer horizontal drill.

Yes, and?

ap, sadly you are wrong, the site has been chossen as its the easiest spot for them to drill for the oil which is actually slightly away from the proposed site, as I understand it its about the local geology. If you knew the area which from your comment I assume you don't you'd realise how inappropriate the location is.

Look at the LHAG (Leith Hill Action Group) website which has been fighting this for several years now and you'll see its not an objection to extracting the oil just the proposed site from which to do so

If you knew the area which from your comment I assume you don't you'd realise how inappropriate the location is.

That's the problem. Unless you are a local or have ridden here and got knowledge of the area it just looks like a load of hippies standing in the way of progress.

It really is not.

I’m guessing the thousands of tons of stone won’t be removed,

Could be a great little donation for the local trail builders

Touche...

Though even with the site itself returned to its former glory (if that happens) there's still the potential (and I admit it is only potential) damage to the road leading up there. In places it's only a matter of inches wider than the trucks going up.
The sunken lanes are what give Leith Hill some of it's character.

7.146 - Here you go guys, here's thousands of tons of stone for you, it's yours to collect from over there <points to drill site>...

But the timber wagons already use that entrance to the woods regularly, don't they?

OK, this would be a temporary increase in the number of wagons, but its not like an HGV has never been down that lane before.

its not an objection to extracting the oil just the proposed site from which to do so

Its true there are timber trucks already using that road but in nothing like the quantity this is proposing and anyway, that doesn't mean its appropriate, far from it in fact and I'm sure if a better method of extracting the timber could be found it would be used whereas the oil exploration could be done from different sites.

Right, no point of ending up in an argument on hear, I once again refer you to the LHAG website where all this is discussed including the concerns of locals which might help you understand their reasoning even if you don't agree with it

I would say that the proposed 20 a day is quite an increase on what would normally be used. There isn't a lot of logging done up there, though periodically there will be a cull.

MOLEVALLEY.GOV.UK "https://www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/3/j/item_11_-_Support_for_LHAG.pdf"

Has a few more details on lower down.
From Europa's point of view it's a much shorter drill = cheaper.
I'm sure that a couple of the sites were in Beare Green and Ockley.
Both of which are next to main roads and not an AONB, but longer horizontal drills.

I think over the 5 years of fighting this that alternative sites would have been suggested. 10 sites mentioned on that document.

Have a look on google maps at the A631 west of Beckingham, Nottinghamshire. See if you can pick out the oil well sites, there are plenty of them. The drilling rigs have been and gone, leaving nodding donkey production pumps in the corners of fields, and a little compound for maintenance and operations. These wells were horizontally drilled, and injection fracked. You can scroll north west four miles or so to find Misson. Protesters there have been campaigning for years that fracking is going to kill everyone and trash the environment for everyone. Mmm. A little more perspective and less hysteria needed perhaps.

are they not still proposing to put a temporary road in from Bear Green, i'm sure that had been mooted recently.

Anyway, i am local and yes it sucks massive, if they do choose the route a nuber of ancient trees need to be cut down and the hill will be turned into a 1 way street (well traffic lights spread 1.5 miles apart)

Indeed, and there are a few nodding donkeys scattered around Surrey already, certainly there is one quite near by at Brockham, as you say hidden away and I'm sure lots of people don't know its there. But that's not what's this is about and once again if you don't know the area its hard for you to understand the arguments and alternative sites. I once again refer you to the LHAG website where you can find out more

just seen that they have also put in a request to remove a major condition from their planning consent, to not do surveys (fix) on the roads pre and post construction... naughty naughty...

Thanks for the information OP - I'll have a read and try and get some biscuits up to the camp tomorrow. Have just joined the FB group too.

hey all

my post on this in bike forum got shut down, not sure why, maybe because I linked to another bike site. good job ant77 for getting this out.

this is a big deal. (the drill not the post). a very big deal.

this is what that want to install. it's 35 metres high and the size of a small village. http://www.bdf.co.uk/equipment_rig_28_Ideco_BIR5625.php

the site is about 800 metres down Coldharbour Lane from Coldharbour in the direction of Dorking, right on the Heads Roll jump site and the other side of the road from Redlands.

they want 1,100 HGV movements up and down the Lane. plus the rig in.

the oil cos think there is a lot of oil under the Weald and they want to bang out a lot of wells - the more they do the cheaper they get. bang bang bag across the hills just to start. another is already planned for Brockham.

the OP gave you the key links and I also encourage you to visit the site and camp. the protectors are smart and friendly. and they will give you a cup of tea too.

Twitter is here: https://twitter.com/SaveLeithHill @SaveLeithHill

pls ride to the Tower (top of Leith Hill) for 1130 - midday on Sat 3 Dec. It would be awesome of the MTB community was well represented.

and tell your roadie mates too, they love that Lane.

That's the problem. Unless you are a local or have ridden here and got knowledge of the area it just looks like a load of hippies standing in the way of progress.

It really is not.

Word.

& watch the movie!

Thanks STW.

http://singletrackmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/big-oil-threatens-mountain-bike-trails/

The concern I have is this is just an initial exploratory drill. They'll then do another, and another, and another, etc. Then they get to doing the real drilling.

Likely they are looking at drilling all around Redlands. Each site will require an area of deforestation, and although maybe each is small, it would need clearance for access and probably large area will be fenced off with security, cutting off a lot of access. I suspect Redlands may just become out of bounds entirely (public bridleways through probably being moved with government permission which will be no problem to get if oil is involved). Though of course it's a bit out of bounds technically anyway aside from the rights of way 😉

p.s. I heard these may be horizontal drilling and there's concern that it goes right under Coldhabour. Concern being the risk to ground water.

/Pedant

singletrack in sensationalising shocker.

big oil is not threatening leith hill.....

europa are not big oil - a supermajor such as bp or conoco philips would be big oil.

what you have here is a small speculator from ireland but that doesnt sound as exciting.

Surely its fairly academic as to the size of the company?

I've just done an illustration of Leith Hill. Which was a bit weird as I've never actually been there

[url= https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5478/30912185620_50a4eb9d07_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5478/30912185620_50a4eb9d07_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/P6B2PA ]Leith Hill[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/14162682@N00/ ]bin lid[/url], on Flickr

if anyone associated with the campaign would like me to do some artwork for it, can they give me a shout, and I'll sort that out. email in profile. As I live in proposed fracking central, I feel your pain. Solidarity 'n all that

Each site will require an area of deforestation, and although maybe each is small, it would need clearance for access and probably large area will be fenced off with security, cutting off a lot of access. I suspect Redlands may just become out of bounds entirely (public bridleways through probably being moved with government permission which will be no problem to get if oil is involved).

Nothing like a good bit of speculation in the morning.

well my dear binners - it seemed important enough to imply it was a massive horrible faceless oil company in the title of the article.

Whereas its a small, cuddly one, thats giving out free hugs, and a kitten for every local resident?

Nice one Binners.

Access considerations really need to be considered in this area, the roads are very narrow and do not stand up well in winter. I'll have to read the document they have submitted to consider how they will mitigate against damaging the roads.

Plus. Redlands is awesome, leave it alone.

Surely its fairly academic as to the size of the company?

To an extent but you loose credibility as jurno when you can't get the basics right.

Plus. Redlands is awesome, leave it alone.

The site is right at the other side of the Lane from Redlands. In fact the campaign used a Forestry Commission Redlands sign for publicity.

Binners I have bumped your info up to campaign. Thank you.

Thanks for the posts, have been reading the Facebook. In two minds about this pro and con, will think some more.

@jambalaya the campaign is about the site. We are seeing no pros. Mail if u want to chat.

/Pedant

singletrack in sensationalising shocker.

big oil is not threatening leith hill.....

europa are not big oil - a supermajor such as bp or conoco philips would be big oil.

what you have here is a small speculator from ireland but that doesnt sound as exciting.

that's just the kind of petty negative trolling that makes this forum an increasingly unpleasant place

that's just the kind of petty negative trolling that makes this forum an increasingly unpleasant place

Calling people trolls because they dont support sensationalism is what makes this forum an increasingly unpleasant place...

As Ant77 said earlier [i]Unless you are a local or have ridden here and got knowledge of the area it just looks like a load of hippies standing in the way of progress.[/i]

Arguing that your sensationalist viewpoint is truth does just make you look like a NIMBY or 'hippies'. There are a lot a proper reasons to protest this, sensationalism isn't one of them.

But MASSIVE DERRRICCKKK!!XX!!&&^$"!!!

The rig is 35 metres high.

We are nimbys, the siting is nuts.

The water company agrees: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-34930442

Binners - am liking your artwork and especially the fact that there are no dog walkers in it. Could you remove the horse too and just leave the mountain biker at the base of the tower there? 😉

In all seriousness, is anyone heading up there for midday this coming Saturday? I live on the road just beneath the tower so it's a 5 min climb up for me. Maybe we should pin STW badges with our login names on to our jerseys for recognition.

This protection group is really making noises suddenly. They only moved in a few short weeks ago and have already attracted quite a lot of attention. I've been living here for 10 years now and along with many from Coldharbour have donated money to the LHAG group. LHAG's position was to fight the drilling from a planning perspective, not to oppose the extraction of gas/oil outright. We suggested a movement of the drill site to a better location where the lorries could get access without destroying the sunken lane that leads to the current site.

I drive down Coldharbour lane all of the time and in places it is virtually singletrack (as in road). It is going to be absolute chaos with the levels of HGV that will need to trundle up and down the road just to build the site. Goodness knows what it will be like if they find something and extract from there too.

BTW - I don't drive a 4WD before anyone asks, but I do have an Audi, work in I.T. and have a wood-burning stove.

bikers are going tealeith - I will be there with some mates, several MTB sites have written up articles, Richard Kelly's on the case with his crew, and the campaign are trying to get the roadies now - roadies love that lane.

there is an "official" ride starting St Josephs Church, Falkland Grove, Dorking RH4 3DL - that will be up the Lane I guess but off road is viable too. or make your own way of course. not a compliant lot are we?

It doesn't matter as long as you get there.

Personally I'm hoping for record number of bikes at the Tower, and yes I include 'that' event in the summer'. 😉

BTW - I don't drive a 4WD before anyone asks, but I do have an Audi,

Ah yes, we may have had some near misses. 😉

Funny really that a number of the people (middle class, pillar of the community types) crying out about how an oil well will destroy the tranquility of the Surrey Hills are the same people who a couple of years ago were crying out about how mountain bikers were destroying the tranquility of the Surrey Hills

^^ love you guys.

Calling people trolls because they dont support sensationalism is what makes this forum an increasingly unpleasant place...

People going through threads trying to call each other out over minor points is ruining it, myself included obvs.

But seriously it seems the done thing now is for people to go around trying to trip each other up, especially in off topic threads which seem to have descended into the same 8 - 10 people bickering and picking errors in each other.

Why would people try to dismantle the argument of some people passionate about the place where they go biking and it being potentially damaged and thus posting about this on a biking forum so other bikers and local residents can become aware, informed and take part?

'twas ever thus Jim. I have to really really [i]really[/i] care about something to go near the STW chat forum!

Someone isn't trolling when they point out the facts.

Why would people try to dismantle the argument of some people passionate about the place where they go biking and it being potentially damaged and thus posting about this on a biking forum so other bikers and local residents can become aware, informed and take part?

Why? because the sensational 'headline' arguments are flawed and masking the better reasons to protest. As pointed out the derrick is temporary, the road is already used by HGV's (small amount) and nodding donkeys already appear across Surrey. Once this was raised real issues started getting highlighted ... until others came in and we are back to <wavesarms>BIG OIL n MASSIV DERRICK!</wavesarms>

But hey, we shouldn't stamp on sensationalism because we like the end goal, I mean it worked for Trump didn't it.

And regarding 'Big Oil'. Id guess Eupropa are probably worth less than a couple of nice houses round there, get some of the richer supporters to sell their houses and youd probably have a majority share holding 😆

Critiquers please start posts with a YES/NO on if you know the site. Will make decision on responding, or not, much easier. Thanks.

Yes

And on the basis of other operating oil wells I have seen in the area, I think they are NIMBY's making a fuss over nothing

I would also add that as a long term access campaigner, and member of the Surrey local access forum, with good ties to the AONB staff I think that the scaremongering over the impact on MTB in the area is reprehensible, none of the plans put in front of me have any significant impact on access, and I think you're being used as pawns by single issue campaigners.

@ninfan good.

I'll disagree your first point, this is a different kind of rig, 35m high, significant hardened install pad, lighting, hardened perimeter (currently in PP), permanent security staff.

You have some points in para 2, though who's using who is debatable. It's right by Heads Roll though.

IMO if we find a way to stop it all benefit. My feeling is if it goes ahead they will soon want more, near.

I'll disagree your first point, this is a different kind of rig, 35m high, significant hardened install pad, lighting, hardened perimeter (currently in PP), permanent security staff.

Temporary though, and it it turned long term then the footprint and impact, as we see from other wells in the area, is insignificant

Look at and compare with the number of old quarries in the area.

I would add that your point on hardened perimeter/security fencing & staff is perhaps the weakest objection, as it's only necessary because of the extremist eco-loons that inevetably attach themselves to these protests.

Well Nin fan we'll just have to agree to differ and hope you calm down a bit. Is it possible to care about something local to you yet not be a NIMBY? And are you suggesting the people close to it should rely on other people arond the country to raise the issue and fight the cause

Perfectly calm thanks, and trying to have a reasoned discussion

I think you're a NImby when you protest against anything and everything resembling development in the area. As I pointed out, a number of the voices here are the same ones who were kicking up a fuss about MTB a while back, now they are suddenly trying to pull MTB'ers into their cause - see my point about being pawns.

Ninfan I've been to the camp, I have met no extremist eco-loons.

Your posting starting 'yes' has some objectivity but it feels to me your other posts, the loon one and the '[i]middle class, pillar of the community types[/i]' one betray some prejudice.

Anyway it's OK to disagree. We'll see what happens. This will make for a good chat in the Plough one day!

But we aren't, we are protesting about one thing and think the site is wrong and there are better options in the very local vicinity of a mile or two at most which actually is even more local to both Mattjg and myself but anyway, let's just agree to differ. Just remember to check the lights are red or green before going down the road to Dorking on your bike when you pop out of one of the many small paths accessing the road

yeah that could get messy, esp with the HGVs travelling in convoys of 3.

I've never understood the term NIMBY being used as a negative. Is it wrong to care about where you live? I'd assume that other people would want to protect their own areas and do similar and if they don't then can't complain when something happens to it.

Basically, being NIMBY is a good thing and shows you care. Surely it's worse to not give a monkeys? This is sort of a caring survival of the fittest.

Basically, being NIMBY is a good thing and shows you care. Surely it's worse to not give a monkeys? This is sort of a caring survival of the fittest.

[i]NIMBY (an acronym for the phrase "Not In My Back Yard"[1][2]), or Nimby (as a word, instead of an acronym),[3] is a pejorative characterization of opposition by residents to a proposal for a new development because it is close to them (or, in some cases, because the development involves controversial or potentially dangerous technology) [b]often with the connotation that such residents believe that the developments are needed in society but should be further away[/b].[/i]

The full polite Wiki answer (with [b]what everyone else means answer[/b], i.e. I think someone else should have the problem for no reason other than I dont want it)

It also holds an example...

[i]In the affluent English village of Ashtead, [b]Surrey[/b], which lies on the outskirts of London, residents objected in 2007 to the conversion of a large, £1.7 million residential property into a family support centre for relatives of wounded British service personnel. The house was to be purchased by a registered charity, SSAFA Forces Help. Local residents objected to the proposal out of fear of increased traffic and noise, as well as the possibility of an increased threat of terrorism.[/i]

terrorism! WTF!

can you define how far away it has to be before its not a NIMBY issue. For example a mile from my house,10 miles,100 perhaps. What if I think there is a better site nearer me, does that make me a NIMBY. Have you actually read any of the 7 years worth of data on the LHAG website. Personally I am quite happy to be a NIMBY on this issue. Did you knoiw this site is only proposed for initial exploration but if they find what they expect they are planning on putting the nodding donkeys at sites with much better transport links, funny that

-cancelled original post. whatevs. by all means folks turn up and see for yourselves.-

I'll come over and show some support - would be a real crime to damage the local area for all concerned

tealeith - Member

I've never understood the term NIMBY being used as a negative. Is it wrong to care about where you live? I'd assume that other people would want to protect their own areas and do similar and if they don't then can't complain when something happens to it.

The implication of NIMBY is that you want it in someone else's backyard, just not yours. That doesn't really seem to be the case here.

An important point to be aware of in this debate is that even Surrey County Council rejected the proposal by Europa.
They were overruled.

I assume the local residents want their oil and gas from somewhere. I can't see the big fuss about an oil well, it won't be much different impact wise than a wind turbine.

Dragon, read the LHAG page then you might have some idea even if you disagree with it. Are you saying no one can use oil and gas unless it is extracted from very close to them ! weird.

ybot - Member
What if I think there is a better site nearer me, does that make me a NIMBY. Have you actually read any of the 7 years worth of data on the LHAG website. Personally I am quite happy to be a NIMBY on this issue.

I was responding to your question on what a NIMBY is. If you are protesting against a something that isn't near you, then you are not a NIMBY. Have I read the 7 years worth of info, no because I was responding to your question on what a NIMBY is. Instead your post reads like you are trying to place yourself on some pedestal of righteousness.

Read this whole topic again, most people (Ninfan aside) are not saying the protest is wrong, we are asking about aspects of it because a few are making false accusations, blowing things out of proportion or just wildly speculating. Only Atn77 has so far discussed anything, Matt is only intrested in rounding up pitchforks (probably why his previous topic got removed). This is a forum, for discussion, not referring to a facebook page.

Assumptions STATO, some obviously incorrect with 20 seconds effort.

No matter, kicking the NIMBY or not football around informs no one.

If anyone is concerned and wants to know more it's getting easier every day to get informed.

Have a good day y'all.

dragon - Member 
I assume the local residents want their oil and gas from somewhere. I can't see the big fuss about an oil well, it won't be much different impact wise than a wind turbine.

As this is a mountain bike magazine forum (though you wouldn't know it sometimes), I'm surprised some people aren't concerned that the location potentially affects bike trails and jumps.

An oil well involves a bigger footprint than a wind turbine in the initial development to clear the trees, cut a big truck width road to it and erect fences. Plus there are temporary buildings that go with it. Besides that, this is dense woodland in an AONB, not an exposed hill.

Access road is ludicrously unsuitable. It's bad enough driving through the sunken lanes round there with a car and meeting other traffic, but getting massive lorries through there frequently will be utter chaos. Also people ride up there. Is Coldharbour Lane also used for bike races?

I must admit that some of the headlines, and even the content of the various publications around this have been completely sensationalised so far, but then that's the way media works these days isn't it? This doesn't make it right of course and some of the storm being whipped up is dragging the argument completely away from what LHAG's original opposition was all about.

The protestors, or "protectors" as they prefer to be known as are waving "NO FRACKING" signs even though the geology of the hill is not compatible with this type of extraction and is not what Europa are proposing anyway. I think it's fair to see that many of the facts and points that have been been stated in recent weeks are not entirely accurate. The tens of thousand of pounds that LHAG raised and that went on barrister fees through the courts were to oppose this entirely based on fact and around the planning application itself. The points raised and argued were around things like impact to the road, people, and environment. Europa had plans to put in traffic lights at the top and bottom of the hill during the lorry visits, aware of the fact that they would completely block the road in transit up and down. This would encompass a stretch of road covering MILES instead of yards. Insane!

I speak to friends and neighbours in the village of Coldharbour and there's a mixed reaction to the protectors who have moved in but even the ones who are not entirely happy with their residence can understand the hardship they are going through at the moment. People are sending food parcels, blankets and other comforts and I think that people are at the very least grateful for the sacrifice they are making for Leith Hill.

So, to bring this full circle and back to the LHAG group's aims. The precise drilling site that has been chosen is completely ridiculous, with access to the site down an ancient sunken lane which is tricky for even regular sized cars to pass in places. Yes, HGVs do travel up there currently: forestry vehicles, builders vans, shopping lorries and so on. The forestry vehicles are by far and away the largest of those types but are extremely far and few between in their visits. Logging of the surrounding forest doesn't occur every day.

Finally, to return to my original point about the term NIMBY. I know what this means and was just trying to say that maybe it can be used in a non-emotive way as a statement of intent rather than in the pejorative sense. As I've already stated, what is wrong with defending what is local to you? If an opposition was to be successful then somewhere/somebody else possibly would suffer the consequences instead, agreed. That's human nature though surely, to protect what's closest and most dear to you. I'm proud to live in an area that people care about and that don't want to see damaged - would it better if people didn't and holed themselves up in their homes with no care of what is around them?

People want to drive cars everywhere and buy things made of plastic. Oil is needed for this. Surely this is as good a place as any? And if not here, where else. London and the SE profits greatly from environmental degradation of other parts of the UK and the world (China), so fair's fair, no?

Cake and eat it stuff.

tealeith - Member

....

^^^ see mattjg, its not hard to engage in discussion and get valid points without across getting all huffy about it 😆

larrydavid - Member

People want to drive cars everywhere and buy things made of plastic. Oil is needed for this. Surely this is as good a place as any?

National level infrastructure does have a pretty big stick to wave on its side, but that shouldn't mean it can be done just anywhere. Look at roads and things, all needed and in some cases might 'need' to go through some places they probably shouldn't, but there should be very valid reasons.

In this case its destruction of some important woodland and significant impact on the community for 4 months. How does that balance against the benefit, when that benefit can still be realised through another location (at unknown extra cost).

*incidentally. Ive read some about it and this is purely a test location, so drilling to confirm quantity of oil. There wont be any extraction from this bore, so no nodding-donkeys, that will be done from elsewhere through the horizontal drilling etc. already discussed.

Decide for yourselves folks. Research the rig that's going in to Bury Hill Woods, it's no nodding donkey. Take a look at how it's going to get in - the size of it and the proposed route. And take a look at the ongoing planning applications for Horse Hill, which is also 'exploratory'. Check out the water company's discomfort over risk to the water supply - easy to find article on BBC News.

Ta for looking.

Planning Inspectorate decision is worth reading, and offers an independent analysis of the arguments and options:

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewDocument.aspx?fileid=12012676

Research the rig that's going in to Bury Hill Woods, it's no nodding donkey.

My I respectfully suggest that it is you who needs to do the research. The rig and the nodding donkey are two different things used for two different purposes. The rig will drill the well and and complete it and the nodding donkey (if that is what is to be a used) will be installed. Once done the rig will be removed and go to a different site (they are much too expensive to leave on hire at a site doing nothing) but the production will continue with the nodding donkey.

but the production will continue with the nodding donkey.

EDIT; They have a separate planning application for drill corridor into the reservoir from another location. This location was chosen as it allowed a single test well to hit all the layers of the reservoir, rather than 2+ locations/sites required if they go elsewhere.

In that case the test well is drilled, results taken and the well is either abandoned or completed for conversion at a later date. Either way the rig leaves the site.

I think that is widely understood gonefishin, infact this site is purely for the exploration and currently not proposed to have a nodding Donkey at all, assuming they get the results they want then these will be put in places with better access which kind of brings us full circle. This site is entirely inappropriate based on the required lorry movements, damage to sunken lane, damage to AONB, why not drill from a proposed nodding donkey site ? Who knows but id ha e a guessits harder and will cost more

why not drill from a proposed nodding donkey site ? Who knows but id ha e a guessits harder and will cost more

The planning link Ninfan posted states why, they cant hit all the layers of the reservoir from anywhere else so the reservoir would be either under utilised or not used at all. Horizontal drilling from another location would just hit a layer or pocket, it cant be used to properly explore the reservoir.

why not drill from a proposed nodding donkey site ? Who knows but id ha e a guessits harder and will cost more

wont want to lose a production slot to exploration.

You can complete exploration wells but often the results are not great due to formation damage during testing.

+ the above.

just be glad it isnt lithium they have found 😉

Id love an oil well at the edge of the village here ... as it is i have as sodding great 4 lane road and interchange being built. ....

You could fix the road access problem like this:

[img] [/img]