Ghana’s Ministry of Energy is presenting its planned intervention in Springfield Exploration & Production’s (SEP) West Cape Three Points Block 2 (WCTP2) as a bold, evidence-based move to unlock stranded value. But investigations show otherwise, with a confidential technical assessment by the Petroleum Commission suggesting that the country’s upstream regulator has information which exposes a sharply different reality: the Afina discovery does not meet commercial thresholds, its data is incomplete or compromised, and key performance claims by Springfield are technically unconfirmed
An internal report, reviewed by NorvanReports, challenges the core assumptions behind the government’s eagerness to re-evaluate or acquire the interest. It raises fresh concerns that political motivations, not geoscience, may be shaping state decision-making just as Ghana’s broader petroleum output faces a steep decline.
Industry analysts say the Commission’s findings leave little ambiguity, and the Executive Director of the Africa Centre for Energy Policy (ACEP), Ben Boakye, is now openly calling on the government to produce the evidence behind its plans or “walk away and enforce the rules.”
The case for the scale and commerciality of Afina has long been contentious. But the Commission’s review is decisive on one point: the appraisal data submitted is incomplete, inconsistent, or technically unreliable.
The regulator reports that the formation pressure data (MDT) acquired during the 2024 re-entry was “compromised due to fluid contamination” and cannot be relied upon for critical determinations about reservoir pressure changes or connectivity with Sankofa in the adjacent OCTP block.
The exploration company compounded the issue by failing to provide full in-situ fluid analyses for most sampling points, a fundamental requirement for pressure validation.
The commission is also said to have discovered an 8-hour, 35-minute gap in the Drill Stem Test (DST) flow data, leaving a significant portion of the well’s behaviour unaccounted for. For a discovery touted publicly as “world-class”, the said missing and compromised data raise major red flags.
But the exploration company has previously asserted that Afina demonstrated commercial flow rates of up to 4,500 barrels per day and projected an average plateau of 16,000 barrels per day for the full field. But the regulator’s internal assessment contradicts this dramatically.
According to the Commission, the sustainable flow rate from the DST is in the hundreds, not up to a thousand barrels per day. The headline “4,497 barrels per day” spike lasted just one minute before collapsing and is deemed “not sustainable” for commercial evaluation. WCTP2’s simulation model, which estimates 4,000 barrels per day for each horizontal well, is considered “highly uncertain” and does not match the actual performance of the DST, being almost 10 times higher.
The regulator goes further, comparing Afina to OP-8, a horizontal well in nearby Sankofa that has better permeability and underwent stimulation. Despite peaking well below 2,500 barrels per day and currently producing around 400 barrels per day, the Commission maintains that WCTP2’s models lack credibility.
The production company used a Pressure Transient Analysis (PTA) model to argue that there was a 63 psi drop in pressure, which implies that there is ongoing interaction But the Commission’s own PTA, using the same data set, found a pressure increase, not a depletion, invalidating WCTP2’s conclusions.
The regulator bluntly states that, without proper MDT pressure data, WCTP2’s claim of depletion is “highly inconclusive.”
Even more striking is the production company’s omission of the reservoir’s effective permeability, the most critical parameter in determining productivity. The Commission calculates the effective permeability at 0.7–0.75 millidarcies, universally regarded as poor for commercial oil production.
Given such low permeability, the regulator concludes it is technically unrealistic for the field to deliver the multi-thousand-barrel rates in earlier claims.
Other required information that the exploration company failed to provide includes a complete reservoir simulation model, a permeability distribution map, correctly labelled NTG and porosity maps, a full PTA model, and cost details for the appraisal, which were flagged by the Commission as missing.
The exploration company of the WCTP2 now estimates P50 oil in place at 239 million barrels, a steep drop from GNPC’s earlier estimate of 642 million barrels, a discrepancy of more than 400 million barrels. The Commission requests clarification on this vast difference.
Economically, the regulator is categorical:
Afina is not commercial as a standalone development, given its high breakeven price of $62 per barrel and inadequate flow rates.
Only a tie-back to Sankofa makes it viable, requiring a breakeven price of $53 per barrel and a long-term crude price of $75.
ACEP’s Boakye: “Everyone in the industry knows the truth; the government must be careful.”
In an interview with NorvanReports, ACEP’s Executive Director Ben Boakye issued one of the clearest public warnings yet:
“Everyone in this industry knows the truth about that block. There is no commercially producible oil there today without further work.”
Boakye says the government’s insistence on pursuing a transaction, instead of enforcing relinquishment, raises questions about political motivations.”
Crucially, he asks, “What data will the independent consultant use? Springfield’s discredited data? Or the Commission’s? Government must publish the evidence.”
He further warns that the government does not need to “buy” anything:
“If the operator cannot justify commerciality, the block reverts to the State for free. Why commit public money when the evidence does not support it?”
Source: energycrossroad.com
