CALGARY, ALBERTA–(Marketwired – April 18, 2013) –
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWSWIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Manitok Energy Inc. (the “Corporation” or “Manitok“) (TSX VENTURE:MEI) is pleased to provide an update on its 2013 drilling program.
The 12th Cardium oil well (65% working interest) in the program was a horizontal well drilled in the northern extent of the Stolberg trend, offsetting the 1996 discovery well drilled by another operator. After an unstimulated open hole completion, the well was swabbed back at highly variable rates of up to 450 bbls/d (293 net) of 42º API oil, over approximately one week, with 100% oil cut and little associated gas. The reason for the variability in the flow rates is presently unknown since reservoir quality is comparable to other more prolific wells in this trend. Manitok is currently evaluating the technical data in order to determine the next steps in putting the well on production. The well is one of the deeper wells in the Stolberg structural complex and it has now extended the oil-water contact significantly downward, suggesting an oil column at least 600 meters high.
The 13th Cardium oil well (33.3% working interest) in the program offsets the 2nd, 6th and 7thCardium oil wells drilled by Manitok into the Stolberg trend. Manitok pooled its 50% working interest in a half-section along the Stolberg trend with an adjacent half-section where it did not have any working interest. The net effect was to convert two 50% working interest drilling locations into five possible 33.3% working interest drilling locations. It is the first of potentially four wells from this pad location. This well was tested with the drilling rig over a short period of 72 hours in order to validate well deliverability before moving to the next location on the same pad. The well was unstimulated and swabbed over an initial 24-hour period. After partial recovery of some of the drilling fluid, the well began to free flow at rates of 900 to 1,170 bbls/d (300 to 390 net) of 42º API oil and about 80 boe/d (27 net) of associated gas. During the last 19 hours of the test period, the well free-flowed at an average rate of about 950 bbls/d (316 net) of 42º API oil with 79 boe/d (26 net) of associated gas. The well has been suspended for the time being and the rig is now moving over to spud the second location on the pad.
Manitok is a public oil and gas exploration and development company focusing on conventional oil and gas reservoirs in the Canadian foothills. Manitok’s corporate strategy is that of being an “early mover” in the exploitation phase of the development life cycle of hydrocarbon reserves in the Canadian Foothills. The Corporation will continue to utilize its experience and expertise to develop the untapped conventional sweet oil and liquids-rich natural gas pools in this large and under-exploited region of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin.
For further information view our website at www.manitokenergy.com.
This press release contains forward-looking statements. More particularly, this press release contains statements concerning anticipated rates of production and Manitok’s operational and drilling plans.
The forward-looking statements in this press release are based on certain key expectations and assumptions made by Manitok, including expectations and assumptions concerning the success of future drilling and development activities, the performance of existing wells, the performance of new wells, the successful application of technology, the validity of the geological and other technical interpretations that have been performed by Manitok’s technical staff, prevailing weather conditions, commodity prices, royalty regimes and exchange rates and the availability of capital, labour and services.
Although Manitok believes that the expectations and assumptions on which the forward-looking statements are based are reasonable, undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking statements because Manitok can give no assurance that they will prove to be correct. Since forward-looking statements address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of factors and risks. These include, but are not limited to, risks associated with the oil and natural gas industry in general (e.g., operational risks in development, exploration and production; delays or changes in plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures; the uncertainty of reserves estimates; the uncertainty of estimates and projections relating to production, costs and expenses; and health, safety and environmental risks), uncertainty as to the availability of labour and services, commodity price and exchange rate fluctuations, unexpected adverse weather conditions and changes to existing laws and regulations. Certain of these risks are set out in more detail in Manitok’s current Annual Information Form, which is available on Manitok’s SEDAR profile atwww.sedar.com.
Forward-looking statements are based on estimates and opinions of management of Manitok at the time the statements are presented. Manitok may, as considered necessary in the circumstances, update or revise such forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, but Manitok undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, except as required by applicable securities laws.
The term barrels of oil equivalent (“boe“) may be misleading, particularly if used in isolation. Per boe amounts have been calculated using a conversion ratio of six thousand cubic feet of natural gas (6 mcf) to one barrel of oil (1 bbl). This boe conversion ratio of 6 mcf to 1 bbl is based on an energy equivalency conversion method primarily applicable at the burner tip and does not represent a value equivalency at the wellhead. Given that the value ratio based on the current price of crude oil as compared to natural gas is significantly different from the energy equivalency of 6:1, utilizing a conversion on a 6:1 basis may be misleading as an indication of value.