I see your point Lanman, and is correct, in every sense. I would like you and other to see what is there which is not spoken or written and if identified, it can provide valuable information as to where this thing is going. We are talking about producing gas from a BCGA, unitization does not help get this thing off the ground. The purpose of initizing Mako is different from that.

Though I really dont want to do this right now ( I have an 80 proof waiting for me), I'll just take a minute to comment on the reasons provided.

***** It avoids the economic waste of unnecessary well drilling and construction of related facilities that would otherwise occur under the competitive rule of capture.

For starters, Mako is big enough that it can support duplication or triplication of infracstructure. So my point was/is that this reason does not apply to Mako.

***** It allows sharing of development infrastructure, thus lowering the costs of production through economies of scale and operating efficiencies.

Lowering the cost for whom? the only party party that benefits from this concept is that which has a trap in every dam and it is not FO.

***** It maximizes the ultimate recovery of petroleum from a field according to the best technical or engineering information, whether during primary production operations or enhanced recovery operations.

I thought we were talking about BCGA at Mako, and this type of gas does not benefit from unitization in terms of recovery

***** It gives all owners of rights in the common reservoir a fair share of the production (in U.S. terminology, it "protects correlative rights").

Not applicable to BCGA's

***** It minimizes surface use of the land and surface damages by avoiding unnecessary wells and infrastructure. (14)

Someone is feeling festive here and I an rolling on a bear skin rug laughing my heart out. Good thing I haven't touched the 80 proof yet. In respect of BCGA's, not a single well will be saved as a result of unitization.

db