fx energy 2013 reserve report for poland

8/12/2019 FX Energy 2013 Reserve Report for Poland

1/105

CAUTIONARYNOTETO INVESTORS

Proved, Pr obable and Possibl e Reserves

Proved (P90) reserves are estimated quantities of oil and gas that, by analysis of geoscience and

engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible from a given date

forward and recoverable in future years from known reservoirs and under existing economic conditions, operating

methods, and governmental regulations, prior to the expiration of the contracts providing the right to operate, unless

evidence indicates that renewal is reasonably certain. Proved developed reserves are reserves that can be expected

to be recovered through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods, or in which the cost of the

required equipment is relatively minor compared to the cost of a new well, and through installed extraction

equipment and infrastructure operational at the time of the reserves estimate if the extraction is by means not

involving a well. Proved undeveloped reserves are reserves that are expected to be recovered from new wells onundrilled acreage or from existing wells where a relatively major expenditure is required for recompletion. Proved

undeveloped reserves on undrilled acreage are limited to: (i) those directly offsetting development spacing areas that

are reasonably certain of production when drilled, unless evidence using reliable technology exists that establishes

reasonable certainty of economic producibility at greater distances; and (ii) other undrilled locations if a

development plan has been adopted indicating that they are scheduled to be drilled within five years, unless the

specific circumstances justify a longer time.

Probable (P50) and possible (P10) reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be

recovered than proved reserves but which, together with proved reserves, are as likely as not to be recovered. Whendeterministic methods are used, it is as likely as not that actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the sum

of estimated proved plus probable reserves. When probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 50%

probability that the actual quantities recovered will equal or exceed the P50 reserves estimates, and a 10%

probability that the actual quantities recovered will equal or exceed the P10 reserves estimates. Probable and

possible reserves may be assigned to areas of a reservoir adjacent to proved reserves where data control or

interpretations of available data are less certain, even if the interpreted reservoir continuity of structure or

productivity does not meet the reasonable certainty criterion. Probable and possible reserves may be assigned to

areas that are structurally higher than the proved area if these areas are in communication with the proved reservoir.

Probable and possible reserves estimates also include potential incremental quantities associated with a greater

t f th h d b i l th d f d


2/105

t f th h d b i l th d f d

The DirectorsFX Energy Inc.3006 Highland Drive 206Salt Lake City,Utah 84106United States of America

BNP Paribas (Suisse)Place de Hollande 2Ch-1204 GenevaSwitzerland

ING Bank N.VBijlmerplein 8881102 MG

AmsterdamThe Netherlands

ECV2060

25thFebruary 2014

Dear Sirs,


3/105


4/105

Qualifications

RPS is an independent consultancy specialising in petroleum reservoir evaluation and economicanalysis. The provision of professional services has been solely on a fee basis. Mr GordonTaylor, Director, Geoscience for RPS Energy, has supervised the evaluation. Mr. Taylor attendedthe University of Birmingham and graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in GeologicalSciences in 1978 and a Master of Science degree in Foundation Engineering in 1979. Mr. Tayloris a Chartered Geologist and Chartered Engineer in the UK and an AAPG Certified PetroleumGeologist (No 5932); he has in excess of 35 years experience in the hydrocarbon exploration andproduction industry including the conduct of evaluation studies relating to oil and gas fields. Mr.Taylor has not, directly or indirectly, received an interest, and he does not expect to receive aninterest, direct or indirect, in FX Energy, or any associate or affiliate of the company.

M T l i Ch t d G l i t d Ch t d E i ith 30 i i

Gas Price Royalty OPEX

$/Mscf $/Mscf MM $ p.a.

Grabowka 1.61 n/a n/a

Komorze 6.37 0.043 0.140Kromolice-1 6.93 0.043 0.350

Kromolice-South 6.93 0.043 0.350

Lisewo 6.74 0.043 0.561

Roszkow 7.61 0.043 0.808

Sroda 7.29 0.043 0.358

Szymanowice 5.95 0.043 0.140

Winna Gora 6.94 0.043 0.486

Zaniemysl 5.77 0.043 0.602


5/105

RPS Energy FX Energy, Inc. Evaluation of Polish Gas Assets

EVALUATION OF POLISH GAS ASSETS

Prepared for

FX Energy Incorporated

And

BNP P ib (S i )


6/105


Table of Contents

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................1

2. TECHNICAL EVALUATION ......................................................................................4

2.1 Overview and Evaluation Methodology...........................................................4

2.1.1 Geological Setting ...............................................................................4

2.1.2 GIIP and Reserves Estimation Methodology .......................................5

2.1.3 Parameter Inputs to Static GIIP Estimates ..........................................5

2.1.4 Material Balance Calculations .............................................................8

2.2 Zaniemysl Field ..............................................................................................9

2.2.1 Field Description and Static GIIP Estimate..........................................9

2.2.2 Production History ............................................................................ 10

2.2.3 Gas Reserves Estimation ................................................................. 11

2.3 Roszkow Field .............................................................................................. 122.3.1 Field Description and Static GIIP Estimate........................................ 12



2.4 Kromolice-Sroda Field .................................................................................. 14

2.4.1 Field Description and Static GIIP Estimate........................................ 14

2 4 2 P d ti Hi t 15


7/105



2.10 Grabowka Fields .......................................................................................... 27

2.10.1 Field Description and Static GIIP Estimate........................................ 27



3. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... 32

3.1 Assumptions................................................................................................. 32

3.2 Costing ......................................................................................................... 32

3.3 Results ......................................................................................................... 33

4. RESERVES EVOLUTION 2013-2014 ...................................................................... 35

4.1 Proved Gas Reserves .................................................................................. 35

4.2 Proved plus Probable Gas Reserves ............................................................ 35

4.3 Proved plus Probable plus Possible Gas Reserves ...................................... 36

APPENDIX 1: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORZANIEMYSL FIELD ............................................................................... 37

APPENDIX 2: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORTHE ROSZKOW FIELD ......................................................................... 44

APPENDIX 3: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORSRODA-KROMOLICE FIELD ............................................................... 51

APPENDIX 4: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FOR

THE KROMOLICE SOUTH FIELD 58


8/105


List of Figures

Figure 2.1: FX Energy Licence Areas ...............................................................................4

Figure 2.2: Fences Concession: Rotliegend Gas Accumulations ......................................5

Figure 2.3: Lisewo-1: Sw-Height Function ........................................................................7

Figure 2.4: Zaniemysl Field: Top Rotliegend Depth Structure ........................................ 10

Figure 2.5: Zaniemysl Production History and Forecast ................................................. 11

Figure 2.6: Zaniemysl Pressure Match ........................................................................... 12

Figure 2.7: Roszkow Field - Top Rotliegend Depth Structure ......................................... 13

Figure 2.8: Roszkow Production History and Forecast ................................................... 13

Figure 2.9: Roszkow Pressure Match ............................................................................. 14

Figure 2.10: Kromolice-Sroda Field - Top Rotliegend Depth Structure ............................. 15

Figure 2.11: Sroda-4 Production History and Forecast ..................................................... 16

Figure 2.12: Kromolice-1 Production History and Forecast ............................................... 16

Figure 2.13: Sroda - 4 Pressure Match............................................................................. 17

Figure 2.14: Kromolice1 Pressure Match ..................................................................... 17

Figure 2.15: Kromolice South Field: Original & Current Maps .......................................... 18

Figure 2.16: Kromolice South Production History and Forecast ....................................... 19

Fi 2 17 K li S th P M t h 20


9/105


List of Tables

Table 1.1: Gas Reserves attributable to the FX Energy interest (MMscf), as of 31stDecember 2013 ..............................................................................................1

Table 1.2: Reserves Changes from 1/1/2013 to 1/1/2014, 100% Basis ...........................2

Table 1.3: Reserves Changes from 1/1/2013 to 1/1/2014, Net interest ...........................3

Table 2.1: REP Input Parameters ...................................................................................6

Table 2.2: Comparison of Log and volumetric Average Sw .............................................7Table 2.3: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for the Zaniemysl Field at 31st December 2013,

100% Basis .................................................................................................. 12

Table 2.4: Reserves (MMscf) for the Roszkow Field at 31st December 2013, 100%Basis ............................................................................................................ 14

Table 2.5: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for the Kromolice - Sroda Field at 31st December2013 100% Basis ......................................................................................... 18

Table 2.6: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for the Kromolice South Field at 31st December2013, (100% basis) ...................................................................................... 20

Table 2.7: Reserves (MMscf) for the Winna Gora Field at 31st December 2013100% Basis .................................................................................................. 22

Table 2.8: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for the Lisewo Field at 31st December 2013 100%Basis ............................................................................................................ 23

Table 2.9: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for Komorze Field at 31st December 2013 100%B i 25


10/105


1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

RPS Energy has performed a technical and economic evaluation of FX Energys assets in

Poland. This is an update of a similar evaluation performed by RPS Energy at the end of2012 but accommodating changes that have occurred during 2013.Principally these includeadditional production from the Zaniemysl, Roszkow, Kromolice-Sroda, Kromolice South,Winna Gora, Lisewo and Grabowka fields, and the new discovery Szymanowice. 2013pressure surveys in Zaniemysl, Roszkow, and Kromolice-Sroda provide further data forevaluating GIIP estimates for these fields.

All producing fields and new discoveries were evaluated, including Komorze-3 andSzymanowice. Revised product prices and operating and development costs have been

included in determining asset values as of 31st December 2013.

Our evaluation of Remaining Reserves at 31stDecember 2013 is given inTable 1.1.

Field

Proved Proved +

Probable

Proved + Probable +

Possible Proved

Proved +

Probable

Proved + Probable +

Possible

Grabowka 100.0% 292 1,168 2,081

Zaniemysl 24.5% 793 1,454 2,179Roszkow 49.0% 4,789 6,539 11,272

Sroda-Kromolice 49.0% 12,099 16,878 26,325

Kromolice South 49.0% 1,551 2,629 3,982

Winna Gora 49.0% 4,075 6,869 11,208

Lisewo 49.0% 12,079 19,723 31,620

Komorze 49.0% 2,385 4,135 6,878

Szymanowice 49.0% 3,947 7,275 12,984

Total 41,219 65,216 106,350 793 1,454 2,179

FX Energy Gas Reserves (MMscf)

UndevelopedFX Energy

Interest

Developed


11/105


ECV 2060 2 February 2014

Table 1.2: Reserves Changes from 1/1/2013 to 1/1/2014, 100% Basis

Reserves at 1/1/2013 Production Additions Revisions Reserves at 1/1/2014

Zaniemysl Proved 4,512 370 (904) 3,238

Proved + Probable 9,161 370 (2,858) 5,933Proved + Probable + Possible 14,545 370 (5,281) 8,895

Sroda-Kromolice Proved 26,152 2,838 1 ,379 24,693

Proved + Probable 45,440 2,838 (8,157) 34,445

Proved + Probable + Possible 55,255 2,838 1 ,309 53,725

Winna Gora Proved 10,324 643 (1,363) 8,317

Proved + Probable 17,009 643 (2,347) 14,018

Proved + Probable + Possible 27,495 643 (3,979) 22,873

Roszkow Proved 13,420 3,262 384- 9,773

Proved + Probable 16,984 3,262 (378) 13,345

Proved + Probable + Possible 31,761 3,262 (5,495) 23,004

Grabowka Proved 1,413 99 (1,022) 292

Proved + Probable 7,569 99 (6,302) 1,168Proved + Probable + Possible 19,724 99 (17,545) 2,081

Kromolice South Proved 3,775 1,245 636 3,166

Proved + Probable 5,015 1,245 1,594 5,365

Proved + Probable + Possible 9,421 1,245 (48) 8,128

Lisewo Proved 26,512 88 (1,772) 24,652

Proved + Probable 43,158 88 (2,818) 40,252


Komorze Proved 4,721 - 147 4,868

Proved + Probable 7,153 - 1,286 8,439

Proved + Probable + Possible 11,146 - 2,891 14,037

Szymanowice Proved - - 8,055 - 8,055

Proved + Probable - - 14,847 - 14,847Proved + Probable + Possible - - 26,497 - 26,497

Totals Proved 90,828 8,545 8,055 (3,285) 87,054

Proved + Probable 151,489 8,545 14,847 (19,980) 137,812

Proved + Probable + Possible 238,548 8,545 26,497 (32,730) 223,770

FX -ENERGY: POLISH INTEREST

RESERVE CHANGES FROM 1/1/2013 TO 1/1/2014

100 % INTEREST

GAS (MMSCF)


12/105



Table 1.3: Reserves Changes from 1/1/2013 to 1/1/2014, Net interest

Reserves Production Additions Revisions Reserves

at 1/1/2013 at 1/1/2014

Zaniemysl Proved 1,105 91 (221) 793

Probable 1,139 - - (479) 660

Proved + Probable 2,244 91 (700) 1,454


Sroda-Kromolice Proved 12,815 1,391 676 12,099

Probable 9,451 - - (4,673) 4,778

Proved + Probable 22,266 1,391 (3,997) 16,878

Proved + Probable + Possible 27,075 1,391 641 26,325

Winna Gora Proved 5,059 315 (668) 4,075

Probable 3,276 - - (482) 2,794

Proved + Probable 8,334 315 (1,150) 6,869


Roszkow Proved 6,576 1,598 188- 4,789

Probable 1,747 - - 3 1,750

Proved + Probable 8,322 1,598 (185) 6,539

Proved + Probable + Possible 15,563 1,598 (2,693) 11,272

Grabowka Proved 1,413 99 (1,022) 292

Probable 6,156 - - (5,280) 876

Proved + Probable 7,569 99 (6,302) 1,168


Kromolice South Proved 1,850 610 311 1,551

Probable 608 - - 470 1,077

Proved + Probable 2,458 610 781 2,629

Proved + Probable + Possible 4,616 610 (24) 3,982

Lisewo Proved 12,991 43 (868) 12,079

Probable 8,157 - - (513) 7,644

Proved + Probable 21,148 43 (1,381) 19,723


Komorze Proved 2,313 - 72 2,385

Probable 1,192 - 558 1,750

Proved + Probable 3,505 - 630 4,135

Proved + Probable + Possible 5,462 - 1,417 6,878

Szymanowice Proved - - 3,947 - 3,947

Probable - - 3,328 - 3,328

Proved + Probable - - 7,275 - 7,275Proved + Probable + Possible - - 12,984 - 12,984

Totals Proved 44,121 4,147 3,947 (1,909) 42,012

Probable 31,724 - 3,328 (10,395) 24,658

Proved + Probable 75,845 4,147 7,275 (12,304) 66,670

Proved + Probable + Possible 123,384 4,147 12,984 (23,692) 108,529

FX -ENERGY: POLISH INTEREST

RESERVE CHANGES FROM 1/1/2013 TO 1/1/2014

NET INTEREST

GAS (MMSCF)


13/105


2. TECHNICAL EVALUATION

2.1 Overview and Evaluation Methodology

2.1.1 Geological Setting

The Zaniemysl, Roszkow, Winna Gora, Kromolice-Sroda, Kromolice South, Lisewo, Komorzeand Szymanowice gas accumulations are located in the Fences concession area (Figure2.1)where the Rotliegend sandstone is the reservoir unit; the Grabowka fields are located25km to the southwest in Block 287, in Zechstein dolomites and limestones.


14/105


Figure 2.2: Fences Concession: Rotliegend Gas Accumulations

2.1.2 GIIP and Reserves Estimation Methodology

RPS has reviewed all aspects of the geology, geophysics, petrophysics and structuralmapping of each accumulation in order to define a range of input parameters for aprobabilistic (static) calculation of GIIP.


15/105



FIELD DIMENSIONS REP INPUT PARAMETERS REP OUTPUT

Name ReservoirSegmen

tArea(km2)

Vert.Relief(m)

Area Uncertainty (%) Gas-Water-Contact (m TVDSS) Net-to-gross (%) Porosity (%) Sw (%) FVF (1/Bg) GIIP (bcf)

Distr. P90 P50 P10 Distr. P90 P50 P10 Distr. P90 P50 P10 Distr. P90 P50 P10 Distr. P90 P50 P10Sw

Vol AvDistr. P90 P50 P10 P90 P50 P10 Mean P10:P90

Grabowka

Zechstein West 3.9 50 N 85 100 115 Single 1565 1565 1565 Single 100.0 100.0 100.0 TR 1.0 4.3 7.0 TR 20.0 43.3 70.0 48.3 TR 150 152 154 3.6 12.6 25.2 13.6 7.00

Zechstein East 1.9 45 N 85 100 115 Single 1550 1550 1550 Single 100.0 100.0 100.0 TR 3.0 5.0 7.0 TR 20.0 43.3 70.0 47.8 TR 141 143 145 1.0 2.2 3.9 2.4 3.90

4.6 14.8 29.1 16.0 6.33

Zaniemysl Rotliegend 2.8 54 LN 70 102 150 Single 2889 2889 2889 Single 1000 1000 1000 N 19.0 21.0 23.0 Single 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 N 259 262 265 29.8 44.9 68.1 30.3 2.29

Roszkow Rotliegend 2.4 47 LN 70 102 150 N 2826 2829 2832 Single 100.0 100.0 100.0 N 17.0 20.0 23.0 Sw-Height Function 52.3 N 259 262 265 30.2 46.6 71.9 49.2 2.38

KromoliceSroda

Rotliegend Kr-1 4.3 55 LN 80 110 150 N 3518 3521 3525 N 80.0 84.0 88.0 N 12.0 15.0 18.0 Sw-Height Function 54.6 N 252 257 262 30.5 46.1 69.4 48.4 2.28

RotliegendCentralHorst

1.1 43 LN 80 110 150 N 3518 3521 3525 N 80.0 90.0 100.0 N 12.0 17.0 22.0 Sw-Height Function 57.4 N 252 257 262 7.4 12.3 19.7 13.1 2.65

Rotliegend Sr-4 1.4 53 LN 80 110 150 N 3518 3521 3525 N 95.0 97.3 99.6 N 15.0 18.5 22.0 Sw-Height Function 59.9 N 252 257 262 19.9 29.4 43.6 30.8 2.19

RotliegendSr-4North

0.7 13 LN 80 110 150 N 3518 3521 3525 N 95.0 97.3 99.6 N 15.0 18.5 22.0 Sw-Height Function 65.8 N 252 257 262 2.5 4.2 7.0 4.5 2.87

60.3 92.0 139.7 96.8 2.32

KromoliceSouth

Rotliegend 1.0 41 LN 80 110 150 Single 3496 3496 3496 N 88.0 93.7 99.4 N 11.0 14.0 16.9 Sw-Height Function 57.2 N 252 257 262 5.1 7.6 11.3 8.0 2.22

WinnaGora

Rotliegend 1.1 64 LN 80 110 150 Single 3486 3486 3486 Single 100.0 100.0 100.0 N 14.0 16.0 18.0 Sw-Height Function 44.6 N 259 262 265 16.1 22.7 32.1 23.5 1.99

Lisewo Rotliegend 2.3 87 LN 80 110 150 Single 3637 3637 3637 N 94.0 97.0 100.0 N 13.0 14.5 16.0 Sw-Height Function 42.0 Single 252 252 252 44.1 61.5 86.3 63.6 1.96

Komorze Rotliegend 1.5 75 LN 80 110 150 Single 3760 3760 3760 N 78.0 83.0 88.0 N 13.0 15.0 17.0 Sw-Height Function 61.4 N 252 257 262 10.7 15.3 21.8 15.9 2.04

Szymanowice

Rotliegend

(lowporosity

1.8 87 LN 55.3 78 110 N 3604 3607 3610 N 24.0 52.0 80.0 N 7.0 11.0 15.0 Sw-Height Function 53.2 N 225 230 235

17.8 26.9 40.9 21.6 2.42Rotliegend

(highporosity

1.8 87 LN 55.3 78 110 N 3604 3607 3610 N 95.0 97.0 99.0 N 14.0 16.0 18.0 Sw-Height Function 63.3 N 225 230 235

Table 2.1: REP Input Parameters


16/105


Sw Parameters

A review of log data suggests that the previous use of a range of Sw values centred on theaverage well Sw from the pay interval is not a true reflection of the volumetric average valueof Sw. The reservoir interval in most of the fields has a distinctive Sw-Height profile due tolow structural relief and moderate permeability. In such cases, a Sw-Height function shouldbe used in REP to ensure that the varying Sw is correctly weighted in a volumetric sense.

RPS has undertaken a review of the log data from Kromolice-1, Lisewo-1, and Komorze-3. ASw-Height function has been derived from Lisewo-1 (Figure 2.3)which closely matches theSw log profiles in Kromolice-1 and Komorze-3 when using the deepest GWC in each well.These generic Sw-Height functions are also considered to be representative of the Sw log

profiles in Sroda-4, Roszkow-1, Winna Gora-1 and Kromolice South. Another height functionhas been derived from the Szymanowice-1 well, and provides a volumetrically representativeSw profile for the Szymanowice field. Sw-Height functions have been used in REP inpreference to Sw distributions on all fields, with the exception of Zaniemysl (see Section2.3.1 below).The volume averaged Sw values associated with Sw-Height function and thecorresponding log calculated Sws are shown inTable 2.2.

FIELD/WELL Sw COMPARISON

Vol Av. Sw-Height Fn. Log Calculation

Roszkow 52.3 39.9

Kr-1 54.6 42.0

Sr-4 59.9 51.3

Kr-2 57.2 41.0

Winna Gora 44.6 47.5

Lisewo 42.0 45.0

K 61 4 47 0


17/105


GRV Parameters

The use of a Sw-Height function in REP requires GRV input in the form of area-depth pairs,rather than the previous three parameter GRV distributions. As noted above, volumetricestimates are sensitive to the velocity model used for depth conversion, and GRV uncertaintyin REP can be captured by inputting an area uncertainty distribution.

Previous RPS work has evaluated the volumetric uncertainty resulting from different velocitymodels, particularly over the Kromolice-Sroda field. A review of this work demonstrates thatGRV uncertainty can be modelled by a log-normal area distribution (P90 80% P10 150%,see Table 2.1). This distribution has been used for all fields mapped on 3D seismic data,where the volumetric uncertainty is primarily velocity-related; for fields mapped on 2D

seismic data (Zaniemysl and Roszkow) the P90 value is reduced to account for additionalmapping uncertainty.

2.1.4 Material Balance Calculations

Based on the available data by field (PVT, well test and production history data) we haveused a material balance program (Mbal) to get the producing estimation of Gas in place(GIIP) and compare it with the volumetric GIIP results using traditional p/z analysistechniques. The Mbal program was also used to predict the future reservoir performance and

well production forecast for a given production schedule and matched well inflow and liftperformance where available. FX Energy has also specified some reservoir managementrate constraints, as advised by Operator, for the forecast by field.

RPS has created various cases based on either single or multiple tanks with transmissibilityconnections between the tanks to reflect potential compartmentalization or later contributionfrom tight pay. These models were used to establish a range of scenarios which aresummarized below for the producing fields:

P90 minimum case- generally based on the P90 volumetric GIIP or less where the p/zd t d t t d ll t d GIIP I if i fl d ll d


18/105


require the inclusion of compression at some stage in a number of the fields to gain entry tothe main export pipeline operating at c.900 psi. The tubing curves should allow the impact ofany future water production to be modelled. A number of the forecast profiles terminate

relatively rapidly as a result of water loading in the tubing.

For those models with aquifers, the gas leg pore volume water influx was modelled using theassumption of vertical equilibrium, where the gas-water contact will rise uniformly across thefield and water production would commence when it is at the bottom perforation. Thisattempts to model the encroachment of potential aquifer water to the gas leg and allows Mbalto reflect the impact of water production on the lift curves. It is anticipated this will provide auseful history matching tool in the event of more of the fields starting to produce water in thefuture.

Well performances were forecast including the production and downtime constraintsspecified by FX Energy. The models will allow for better integration of the future flowing wellperformance data and any WGR trends. Individual well target rates are as follows:

Zaniemysl 3: Well on production 1/1/2015 after sidetrack at initial rate of 2.2MMscf/d.

Sroda 4: 2.5 MMscf/d.

Kromolice 1: 5.4 MMscf/d.Kromolice 2: 3.2 MMscf/d.

Roszkow: 7.6 MMscf/d.

Winna Gora: 2.1 MMscf/d.

Lisewo 1: 5.4 MMscf/d.

Lisewo 2: 3.5 MMscf/d from 1/10/2014 when placed on production.


19/105


Figure 2.4: Zaniemysl Field: Top Rotliegend Depth Structure

Zaniemysl-3 was drilled in a near-crestal location and encountered a 38m gas column with aclear GWC at -2888.8m TVDSS. Zaniemysl is the only Rotliegend field where the genericSw-Height function does not reasonably model the log Sw profile, and so for volumetricestimates a single value Sw of 41% (from the Operators field report) was used.The current

G 2 1


20/105


0

40

80

120

160

200

0

4

8

12

16

20

Oct-06

Feb-07

Jun-07

Oct-07

Feb-08

Jun-08

Oct-08

Feb-09

Jun-09

Oct-09

Feb-10

Jun-10

Oct-10

Feb-11

Jun-11

Oct-11

Feb-12

Jun-12

Oct-12

Feb-13

Jun-13

Oct-13

WGR(bbl/MMscf)

Ga

srate(MMscfd)

Zaniemysl Production data

Daily prod. WGR

2000

2500

3000

3500

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

(MMscfd)

Z3ST Production data


21/105


Figure 2.6: Zaniemysl Pressure Match


22/105


Figure 2.7: Roszkow Field - Top Rotliegend Depth Structure

Roszkow-1 is located down flank from the crest of the structure and encountered a 29.5mgas column to a depth of -2825.8m TVDSS, with a possible deeper contact (WUT) at -2831.9m TVDSS. A range of possible GWCs has been used in the volumetric assessment.The current Volumetric GIIP estimates are given in Table 2.1.


23/105


24/105


conversion uncertainties, this is still feasible, though the possibility of separate and hencedisconnected closures cannot be dismissed.

As a result of RPS investigation of the Sw-Height issue, a potentially deeper GWC has beenrecognized in Kromolice-1 (-3540.1m TVDSS). It is difficult to reconcile this with the spillpoints on the current mapping, or on earlier versions of the Top Rotliegend depth map.However, a potentially deeper spill to -3525m TVDSS could be accommodated on thecurrent mapping and this has been used to provide a depth range for GWC uncertainty.

For this exercise, GIIP has been estimated for each anticlinal segment, and the P90 P50 andP10 values summed arithmetically (seeTable 2.1) to give a total GIIP range for the entirefield.Table 2.1 shows the GIIP by individual segments.


25/105


Figure 2.11: Sroda-4 Production History and Forecast

Kromolice-1

Production started in June 2011, produced intermittently until October 2011, and has beenon continuous production since that time; seeFigure 2.12.

In 2013 the well commenced producing at a rate of 6.7MMscf/d to mid-August when the ratewas reduced to 5.4MMscf/d in response to an increase in produced water salinity. However,water production has remained at condensed water levels, < 2Bbls/MMscf, through to end of

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

0

1

2

3

4

5

Dec-10

Dec-13

Dec-16

Dec-19

Dec-22

Dec-25

Dec-28

Dec-31

Dec-34

Dec-37

Dec-40

Dec-43

Dec-46

Dec-49

Dec-52

Dec-55

Dec-58

WHP(Psia)

Gasrate(MMscfd)

Sroda 4 Production data

Daily prod. P90 Prediction P50 Prediction P10 Prediction FWHP P50 Prediction FWHP


26/105


Figure 2.13: Sroda - 4 Pressure Match


27/105


The recovery factor derived from the P50 Mbal model is 48% of volumetric GIIP. Figure 2.13andFigure 2.14 show the Pressure Match for the Mbal analysis. The remaining gas reservesas of 31st December 2013 for this field, based on the existing wells are summarized inTable

2.5.The gas production forecasts are shown inFigure 2.11 andFigure 2.12 and in Appendix3.

Table 2.5: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for the Kromolice - Sroda Field at 31st December 2013100% Basis

2.5 Kromolice South Field

2.5.1 Field Description and Static GIIP Estimate

The Kromolice South structure was tested by the Kromolice-2 well. The well was located in a

near-crestal location and encountered a 35m gas column with a clear GWC identified at -3496m TVDSS.

RPS evaluation of Kromolice South is based on the current Top Rotliegend depth map(Figure 2.15). The current Volumetric GIIP estimates are given Table 2.1.

Remaining Reserves (MMscf) Evaluation Production Remaining Economic Limit Evaluation

1stJan 2013 during 2013 31stDec 2013 in year 1stJan 2013

Proven 26,152 2,838 23,314 2031 24,693

Proven+Probable 45,440 2,838 42,602 2090 34,445

Proven+Probable+Possible 55,255 2,838 52,416 2090 53,725

2013 2014


28/105


2.5.2 Production History

The Kromolice South field was brought on production on July 6th 2011 (Figure 2.16). In 2013the well commenced production at 3.5 MMscf/d to early Sept when the rate was reduced to

3.2 MMscf/d in response to an increase in produced water salinity. Observation oftubing/casing annulus pressure indicated a leak to tubing of high salinity annulus fluid. Aworkover is scheduled to repair the tubing leak in 2014. However, water production hasremained at condensed water levels, < 2Bbls/MMscf, through to end December. The well hasa total gas cumulative production of 2.38 Bscf at 31stDecember 2013.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

0

1

2

3

4

5

Jul-11

Mar-12

Nov-12

Jul-13

Mar-14

Nov-14

Jul-15

Mar-16

Nov-16

Jul-17

Mar-18

Nov-18

Jul-19

Mar-20

Nov-20

Jul-21

Mar-22

Nov-22

Jul-23

Mar-24

Nov-24

Jul-25

WHP(Psia)

Gas

rate(MMscfd)

Kromolice South Production data

Daily prod. P90 Prediction P50 Prediction P10 Prediction FWHP P50 Prediction FWHP


29/105


Figure 2.17: Kromolice South Pressure Match

2013 2014



30/105


Figure 2.18: Winna Gora: Top Rotliegend Depth Structure

The current Volumetric GIIP estimates are given in Table 2.1.


31/105


2.6.3 Gas Reserves Estimation

The first static pressure measurement was carried out in Winna Gora in June 2013; it wasincluded in the Mbal model to establish the dynamic GIIP. However, it is too early to establish

the trend from p/z plot. No aquifer has been included in the Mbal model analysis for this field.The Winna Gora forecast estimated a recovery factor of 71% of the volumetric GIIP for theP50 case.

The remaining gas Reserves, at 31st December 2013 for this field are summarized inTable2.7.The gas production forecasts are shown inFigure 2.19 and in Appendix 5.

Table 2.7: Reserves (MMscf) for the Winna Gora Field at 31st December 2013 100% Basis

2.7 Lisewo Field

2.7.1 Field Description and Static GIIP Estimate

Lisewo-1 was drilled as a deviated well to a TD of 3946m MD in late January 2011 to test afault and dip controlled anticlinal structure mapped at Top Rotliegend. The well encounteredthe Top Rotliegend sands at 3814m MD, and a gross, gas-bearing Rotliegend interval of69m. The current depth map is shown inFigure 2.20.

A second well Lisewo-2 was drilled last year which was tested. No pressure gauges were runbut a final gradient survey was made at end of clean up. Preliminary results from the Lisewo-


1st

Jan 2013 during 2013 31st

Dec 2013 in year 1st

Jan 2014Proven 10,324 643.4 9,680 2043 8,317

Proven+Probable 17,009 643.4 16,365 2062 14,018

Proven+Probable+Possible 27,495 643.4 26,852 2090 22,873

2013 2014


32/105


Log analysis indicates possible GWCs at either -3617.5m TVDSS or -3636.7m TVDSS.Previous evaluations have favoured the deeper contact, as it coincides with the spill point onone of the main controlling faults (Fault A), and in the absence of additional data, the deeper

contact has been retained in this years GIIP estimate.The current Volumetric GIIP estimatesare given in Table 2.1.

2.7.2 Production History

Lisewo 1 commenced production in Dec 2013. The average rate for the month was 4.2MMscf/d. Water production has remained at condensed water levels, < 2Bbls/MMscf, at endyear. The well has a total gas cumulative production of 88.1 MMscf at 31 stDecember 2013.Figure 2.17 shows the Production Forecast.

0

1250

2500

3750

5000

0

3

5

8

10

Dec-13

Dec-14

Dec-15

Dec-16

Dec-17

Dec-18

Dec-19

Dec-20

Dec-21

Dec-22

Dec-23

Dec-24

Dec-25

Dec-26

Dec-27

Dec-28

Dec-29

Dec-30

Dec-31

Dec-32

Dec-33

Dec-34

Dec-35

WHP(Psia)

Gasrate(MMscfd)

Lisewo Production data


33/105


TVDSS. RPS analysis of the log data indicates a likely GWC at -3751.4m TVDSS, but with apossible deeper contact at -3759.6m TVDSS.

RPS generated two alternative depth maps for comparison:

Residual correction applied (gridded) to pre-drill depth structure map

Update of RPS 2-layer model with additional velocity control (a simplified version of theOperators 11-layer velocity model developed from a previous evaluation of the Lisewoarea)

The resulting depth maps are similar and generate identical GIIP distributions. The depthmap from the 2-layer model is shown inFigure 2.22.


34/105


Table 2.9: Gas Reserves (MMscf) for Komorze Field at 31st December 2013 100% Basis

Remaining Reserves (MMscf) Evaluation Economic Limit Evaluation

1stJan 2013 in year 1stJan 2014

Proven 4,721 2029 4,868Proven+Probable 7,153 2047 8,439

Proven+Probable+Possible 11,146 2085 14,037

20142013

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

Jan-14

Jan-17

Jan-20

Jan-23

Jan-26

Jan-29

Jan-32

Jan-35

Jan-38

Jan-41

Jan-44

Jan-47

Jan-50

Jan-53

Jan-56

Jan-59

Jan-62

Jan-65

Jan-68

Jan-71

Jan-74

Jan-77

Jan-80

Jan-83

Jan-86

WHP(Psia)

Gasrate(MMscfd)

Komorze Production data

Daily prod. P90 Prediction P50 Prediction P10 Prediction P50 Prediction FWHP


35/105


36/105


P10 GIIPsbecause of the relatively low relief structure. The forecast assumption for the P10case considers an extra well, which would be on stream in 2018 producing at the same rate1.3 MMscf/d to accelerate the production.

Figure 2.25: Szymanowice Production Forecast

The total Szymanowice Gas Reserves are summarised in Table 2.10. The gas productionforecasts are shown in Error! Reference source not found.and in Appendix 8.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

Dec-15

Dec-17

Dec-19

Dec-21

Dec-23

Dec-25

Dec-27

Dec-29

Dec-31

Dec-33

Dec-35

Dec-37

Dec-39

Dec-41

Dec-43

Dec-45

Dec-47

Dec-49

Dec-51

Dec-53

Dec-55

Dec-57

Dec-59

Dec-61

Dec-63

Dec-65

Dec-67

Dec-69

WHP(Psia)

Gasrate(MMscfd)

Szymanowice Production data

P90 Prediction P50 Prediction P10 Prediction P50 Prediction FWHP

P10 case , considering an

extra well in 2018


37/105


Figure 2.26: Grabowka Fields: Zechstein Ca1 Depth Structure

Due to poor quality log data, a GWC could not be determined for either field. In GrabowkaWest, structural spill is estimated at 1565m TVDSS, consistent with test data from the G-5and G-7 wells. Similarly, on Grabowka East, a structural spill point of 1550m TVDSS isestimated from mapping rather than from log analysis.

No changes to previous years GIIP estimates have been evaluated which are given in Table2.1. Most of the volume is located in the Grabowka West structure which commencedproduction in 2013 from G-6. The initial production results from G-6 and G-8 suggest asignificant reduction in Grabowka Reserves and a preliminary examination of the prior


38/105


Figure 2.27: Grabowka Fields - Production Data

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Jul-09

Sep-09

Nov-09

Jan-10

Mar-10

May-10

Jul-10

Sep-10

Nov-10

Jan-11

Mar-11

May-11

Jul-11

Sep-11

Nov-11

Jan-12

Mar-12

May-12

Jul-12

Sep-12

Nov-12

Jan-13

Mar-13

May-13

Jul-13

Sep-13

Nov-13

WGR(bbl/MMscf)/WHP(Ps

ia)

G

asrate(MMscfd)

Grabowka Production data

Daily prod. FWHP WGR

25002.5

Grabowka Production data (Forecast)


39/105


assumption, NTG and possibly the level of the GWC, all contributing to a significantly smallerGIIP.

y = -40x + 2501.50

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

P/z(psia)

Gp (MMscf)

Flowing Material Balance Grabowka

Pi/Zi

Flowing P/z


40/105


Figure 2.30: Grabowka Fields Flowing Material Balance

0.000

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.002

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Productivit

yIndex

Gp (mmscf)

Flowing Material Balance Grabowka-6


41/105


3. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

3.1 Assumptions

An economic analysis of the Polish Assets of FX Energy was undertaken based on thefollowing price and royalty assumptions (seeTable 3.1). These data have been supplied byFX Energy in US Dollars and are based on Polish Zloty gas prices and exchange rates,taken as the average of the 1stday of the month values throughout 2013.

Notes:1. FX receives $1.61 for gas produced but incurs no costs. For the purpose of forecasting the

economic limit, FX advises that it believes that the field's operator receives a price $6.50/ Mscf (netof royalty) and incurs annual opex of $0.300 MM.

2. Opex value excludes an assumed additional $1.20 MM workover to occur in 2014.3. Opex is for all years after 2014; in 2014 it is assumed to be $0.456 MM.4. Opex is for all years after 2015; in 2015 it is assumed to be $0.129 MM.


42/105


Roszkow For all three volumetric cases (i.e., the Proved, Proved plus Probable, andProved plus Probable plus Possible), compression capex of US $1.45 MM has beenassumed to be incurred in 2014.

Szymanowice In all three volumetric cases, a $2.70 MM cost to tie-in to the Lisewofacilities is assumed to be incurred in 2014. In the Proved plus Probable plus Possiblecase, costs of $9.00 MM for a second well and $2.00 MM for a tie-in are assumed to beincurred in 2018. Compression costs of $3.00 MM are assumed to be incurred 2018 inthe Proved case, and in 2021 in the Proved plus Probable and Proved plus Probable plusPossible cases.

Winna GoraFor all three volumetric cases, compression capex of US $3.50 MM hasbeen assumed, to be incurred in 2016 in the Proved case, in 2019 in the Proved plusProbable case, and in 2022 in the Proved plus Probable plus Possible case,

Zaniemysl Sidetrack costs of $3.60 MM are assumed to be incurred in 2014. Nocompression is assumed to be required at Zaniemysl due to pressure maintenance fromwater influx.

Operating and Abandonment Costs

Normal operating costs per well have been provided for all the fields and are tabulated in

Table 3.1.In addition to basic operating costs, there is an additional $0.015/mcf additional compressionopex per license, once compression is required.

Assumed abandonment costs of 0.385 MM per well and $0.250 MM per facility have beenprovided by FX Energy.

3.3 Results

The results of our analysis are shown below inTable 3.2. The Net Present Values are stated


43/105


Table 3.3: Effect of Gas Price Sensitivities on FX Net Reserves (MMscf)

Table 3.4: Effect of Gas Price Sensitivities on NPV10 (Net to FX Energy) in Million USD

1P 2P 3P 1P 2P 3P 1P 2P 3P

Roszkow 4,789 6,483 11,047 4,789 6,539 11,272 4,842 6,590 11,272

Winna Gora 4,002 6,757 11,131 4,075 6,869 11,208 4,141 7,003 11,208

Kromolice South 1,551 2,629 3,982 1,551 2,629 3,982 1,551 2,629 4,006Zaniemysl 793 1,454 2,177 793 1,454 2,177 793 1,454 2,177

Sroda-Kromolice 12,099 16,878 26,325 12,099 16,878 26,325 12,123 16,878 26,325

Grabowka 292 1,168 2,081 292 1,168 2,081 292 1,168 2,081

Lisewo 12,079 19,723 31,620 12,079 19,723 31,620 12,079 19,723 31,620

Komorze 2,385 4,135 6,878 2,385 4,135 6,878 2,385 4,135 6,878

Szymanowice 3,947 7,275 12,984 3,947 7,275 12,984 3,947 7,275 12,984

Total 41,939 66,502 108,225 42,012 66,670 108,527 42,154 66,855 108,551

FieldsNet Reserves 90% Price Net Reserves 110% PriceNet Reserves Base Price

1P 2P 3P 1P 2P 3P 1P 2P 3P

Roszkow 21.67 27.01 34.05 24.55 30.57 38.48 27.44 34.13 42.92

Winna Gora 9.45 13.39 16.64 10.95 15.30 18.89 12.45 17.21 21.13

Kromolice South 7.03 11.12 14.56 7.97 12.57 16.45 8.91 14.02 18.35

Zaniemysl 1.48 3.05 4.22 1.83 3.59 4.91 2.17 4.13 5.60Sroda-Kromolice 43.44 46.94 56.09 48.89 52.83 63.01 54.35 58.72 69.94

Grabowka 0.41 1.30 1.87 0.41 1.30 1.87 0.41 1.30 1.87

Lisewo 38.24 52.72 66.35 43.30 59.38 74.49 48.36 66.04 82.64

Komorze 6.00 7.81 9.13 6.89 8.89 10.35 7.77 9.98 11.57

Szymanowice 5.11 7.03 10 6.02 8.13 12.08 6.93 9.23 13.94

Total 132.83 170.37 213.13 150.81 192.56 240.53 168.79 214.76 267.96

FieldsNPV10 110% PriceNPV10 Base PriceNPV10 90% Price


44/105


4. RESERVES EVOLUTION 2013-2014

4.1 Proved Gas Reserves

Table 4.1: Gas Proved Reserves (MMscf) 100% Basis

Table 4.1 shows the Proved Reserves evolution. In general there are modest reserveschanges (+/- 10-20 %) apart from Grabowka. The inclusion of reserves for the new discoverySzymanowice gives an additional reserves of 8.1 Bscf leading to a net 4.8 Bscf, a 6 %increase in the 2014 evaluation, after 2013 production.

2014Field Evaluation Production Remaining Evaluation MMscf (%)

01-Jan-13 during 2013 31-Dec-13 01-Jan-14

Zaniemysl 4,512 370 4,142 3,238 -904 -22%

Sroda-Kromolice 26,152 2,838 23,314 24,693 1,379 6%

Roszkow 13,420 3,262 10,158 9,773 -384 -4%

Winna Gora 10,324 643 9,680 8,317 -1,363 -14%

Kromolice South 3,775 1,245 2,530 3,166 636 25%

Grabowka 1,413 99 1,314 292 -1,022 -78%

Lisewo 26,512 88 26,424 24,652 -1,772 -7%

Komorze 4,721 0 4,721 4,868 147 3%

Szymanowice 8,055 8,055 0%

Total 90,828 8,545 82,283 87,054 4,771 6%

2013 Variation


45/105


4.3 Proved plus Probable plus Possible Gas Reserves

Table 4.3: Gas Proved plus Probable plus Possible Reserves (MMscf) 100% Basis

Table 4.3 shows the Proved plus Probable plus Possible Reserves evolution. For theproducing fields there is a general downward revision of reserves, mainly due to theconstraints imposed on GIIP estimates from reservoir pressure data. These downwardrevisions and the inclusion of reserves from the new discovery Szymanowice result in 3%less reserves (6.2 Bscf), in the 2014 evaluation, after 2013 production .

2014Field Evaluation Production Remaining Evaluation MMscf (%)01-Jan-13 during 2013 31-Dec-13 01-Jan-14

Zaniemysl 14,545 370 14,176 8,895 -5,281 -37%

Sroda-Kromolice 55,255 2,838 52,416 53,725 1,309 2%

Roszkow 31,761 3,262 28,499 23,004 -5,495 -19%

Winna Gora 27,495 643 26,852 22,873 -3,979 -15%

Kromolice South 9,421 1,245 8,176 8,128 -48 -1%

Grabowka 19,724 99 19,625 2,081 -17,545 -89%

Lisewo 69,200 88 69,112 64,532 -4,581 -7%

Komorze 11,146 0 11,146 14,037 2,891 26%

Szymanowice 26,497 26,497 0%

Total 238,548 8,545 230,003 223,770 -6,233 -3%

2013 Variation


46/105


APPENDIX 1: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORZANIEMYSL FIELD

Table A1.1: Gas Production Forecasts for the Zaniemysl Field

Year Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

2015 2.1 21.57 2.1 21.57 2.1 21.57

2016 2.1 22.34 2.1 22.34 2.1 22.342017 2.1 23.11 2.1 23.11 2.1 23.11

2018 2.1 23.88 2.1 23.88 2.1 23.88

2019 0.4 24.04 2.1 24.65 2.1 24.65

2020 2.1 25.42 2.1 25.42

2021 2.1 26.19 2.1 26.19

2022 1.5 26.74 2.1 26.96

2023 2.1 27.73

2024 2.1 28.502025 2.1 29.27

2026 1.1 29.69

Zaniemysl

Proved Proved+Probable Proved +Probable+Possible


47/105




48/105




49/105




50/105




51/105




52/105




53/105


APPENDIX 2: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORTHE ROSZKOW FIELD

Year Gas Rate

(MMscfd)Cumulative

Production (Bscf)Gas Rate(MMscfd)

CumulativeProduction (Bscf)

Gas Rate(MMscfd)

CumulativeProduction (Bscf)

2014 7.27 21.53 7.27 21.53 7.27 21.532015 6.27 23.81 6.93 24.05 7.21 24.16

2016 4.20 25.35 5.17 25.95 5.88 26.312017 2.78 26.37 3.78 27.33 4.56 27.972018 1.87 27.05 2.76 28.33 3.63 29.302019 1.32 27.53 2.06 29.09 2.93 30.372020 0.96 27.89 1.59 29.67 2.42 31.262021 0.73 28.15 1.27 30.13 2.07 32.012022 0.56 28.36 1.03 30.51 1.81 32.672023 0.45 28.52 0.86 30.82 1.61 33.262024 0.36 28.65 0.73 31.09 1.45 33.79

2025 0.30 28.76 0.63 31.32 1.33 34.272026 0.25 28.85 0.54 31.52 1.22 34.722027 0.21 28.92 0.48 31.69 1.14 35.132028 0.18 28.99 0.42 31.85 1.06 35.522029 0.15 29.04 0.38 31.99 1.00 35.882030 0.13 29.09 0.34 32.11 0.94 36.232031 0.11 29.13 0.31 32.23 0.89 36.552032 0.10 29.17 0.29 32.33 0.84 36.862033 0.09 29.20 0.26 32.43 0.80 37.15

Roszkow

Proved Proved+Probable P roved +Probable+Possible

RPS E FX E I E l ti f P li h G A t


54/105



RPS Energy FX Energy Inc Evaluation of Polish Gas Assets


55/105





56/105





57/105





58/105





59/105




60/105


APPENDIX 3: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORSRODA-KROMOLICE FIELD

YearGas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production

(Bscf)

2014 7.55 9.78 7.55 11.96 7.55 11.96

2015 7.58 12.55 7.58 14.72 7.58 14.72

2016 7.58 15.32 7.58 17.50 7.58 17.50

2017 7.58 18.08 7.58 20.26 7.58 20.26

2018 7.03 20.65 7.31 22.93 7.58 23.03

2019 5.39 22.62 5.78 25.04 6.86 25.53

2020 4.35 24.21 4.70 26.76 5.60 27.58

2021 3.74 25.58 4.04 28.23 4.84 29.352022 3.35 26.80 3.65 29.57 4.38 30.94

2023 3.06 27.91 3.39 30.80 4.08 32.43

2024 2.47 28.82 3.20 31.97 3.90 33.86

2025 2.39 29.69 3.05 33.09 3.77 35.24

2026 1.85 30.37 2.89 34.14 3.68 36.58

2027 1.26 30.83 2.16 34.93 3.61 37.90

2028 0.90 31.15 1.63 35.53 3.56 39.20

2029 0.67 31.40 1.34 36.02 3.51 40.48

2030 0.51 31.59 1.14 36.43 3.48 41.75

2031 0.40 31.73 1.03 36.81 3.45 43.01

2032 0.13 31.78 0.93 37.15 3.42 44.26

2033 0.78 37.43 3.40 45.50

2034 0.67 37.68 3.30 46.71

2035 0.57 37.89 2.89 47.76

2036 0.33 38.01 2.61 48.722037 0.33 38.13 2.43 49.60

2038 0.33 38.25 2.18 50.40

2039 0.33 38.37 2.07 51.15

2040 0.31 38.49 1.92 51.85

2041 0.33 38.61 1.27 52.32

2042 0.31 38.72 0.85 52.63

2043 0.33 38.84 0.84 52.93

2044 0.32 38.96 0.82 53.23

2045 0.31 39.07 0.81 53.53

2046 0.31 39.19 0.80 53.82

2047 0.31 39.30 0.78 54.11

2048 0.31 39.42 0.77 54.39

2049 0.30 39.53 0.75 54.66

2050 0 31 39 64 0 74 54 93

Sroda Kromolice

Proved Proved+Probable Proved



61/105

gy gy,



62/105



63/105




64/105



65/105



66/105



67/105


APPENDIX 4: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORTHE KROMOLICE SOUTH FIELD

Year Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production(Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production(Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production(Bscf)

2014 3.06 3.50 3.06 3.50 3.06 3.502015 3.07 4.62 3.07 4.62 3.07 4.62

2016 2.55 5.55 3.07 5.74 3.07 5.74

2017 2.84 6.78 3.05 6.852018 1.58 7.35 2.39 7.73

2019 0.82 7.65 1.75 8.36

2020 0.26 7.75 1.34 8.85

2021 1.05 9.242022 0.84 9.54

2023 0.69 9.792024 0.56 10.00

2025 0.47 10.17

2026 0.39 10.312027 0.32 10.43

Kromolice_South




68/105




69/105




70/105




71/105




72/105




73/105


RPS E FX E I E l ti f P li h G A t


74/105


APPENDIX 5: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORTHE WINNA GORA FIELD

YearGas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

2014 2.01 1.37 2.01 1.37 2.01 1.37

2015 2.01 2.11 2.01 2.11 2.01 2.11

2016 2.01 2.84 2.01 2.84 2.01 2.84

2017 1.91 3.54 2.01 3.58 2.01 3.58

2018 1.62 4.13 2.01 4.31 2.01 4.31

2019 1.38 4.64 2.01 5.05 2.01 5.05

2020 1.20 5.08 1.88 5.74 2.01 5.79

2021 1.05 5.46 1.69 6.35 2.01 6.522022 0.94 5.80 1.53 6.91 2.01 7.26

2023 0.84 6.11 1.39 7.42 2.01 7.99

2024 0.75 6.38 1.27 7.89 1.95 8.71

2025 0.68 6.63 1.17 8.31 1.82 9.37

2026 0.62 6.86 1.08 8.71 1.71 9.99

2027 0.57 7.06 1.01 9.08 1.60 10.58

2028 0.52 7.26 0.94 9.42 1.51 11.13

2029 0.48 7.43 0.87 9.74 1.42 11.65

2030 0.44 7.59 0.82 10.04 1.35 12.14

2031 0.41 7.74 0.77 10.32 1.28 12.61

2032 0.38 7.88 0.72 10.58 1.21 13.05

2033 0.36 8.02 0.68 10.83 1.15 13.47

2034 0.34 8.14 0.64 11.06 1.10 13.87

2035 0.31 8.25 0.61 11.28 1.05 14.262036 0.29 8.36 0.57 11.50 1.00 14.62

2037 0.28 8.46 0.55 11.69 0.96 14.97

2038 0.26 8.56 0.52 11.88 0.92 15.31

2039 0.25 8.65 0.49 12.06 0.88 15.63

2040 0.23 8.73 0.47 12.24 0.84 15.93

2041 0.22 8.81 0.45 12.40 0.81 16.23

2042 0.21 8.89 0.43 12.56 0.78 16.51

2043 0.20 8.96 0.41 12.71 0.75 16.79

2044 0.19 9.03 0.39 12.85 0.72 17.05

2045 0.18 9.10 0.38 12.99 0.69 17.30

2046 0.17 9.16 0.36 13.12 0.67 17.55

2047 0.16 9.22 0.35 13.24 0.65 17.78

2048 0 16 9 28 0 33 13 36 0 62 18 01

Winna Gora



75/105

RPS Energ FX Energ Inc E al ation of Polish Gas Assets


76/105




77/105




78/105




79/105




80/105




81/105


APPENDIX 6: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORLISEWO FIELD

YearGas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

2014 6.00 2.28 6.00 2.28 6.00 2.28

2015 8.53 5.40 8.53 5.40 8.53 5.40

2016 8.52 8.51 8.53 8.52 8.53 8.52

2017 7.92 11.40 8.53 11.63 8.53 11.63

2018 6.47 13.76 8.43 14.71 8.53 14.75

2019 5.06 15.61 7.93 17.60 8.53 17.86

2020 4.09 17.11 7.18 20.23 8.53 20.99

2021 3.38 18.34 6.09 22.45 8.31 24.02

2022 2.83 19.37 5.25 24.37 7.97 26.93

2023 2.38 20.24 4.58 26.04 7.65 29.72

2024 2.03 20.98 4.04 27.52 6.99 32.28

2025 1.74 21.62 3.59 28.83 6.30 34.58

2026 1.49 22.16 3.21 30.00 5.73 36.67

2027 0.98 22.52 2.88 31.05 5.23 38.58

2028 0.89 22.85 2.58 32.00 4.79 40.33

2029 0.81 23.14 2.33 32.85 4.42 41.94

2030 0.81 23.44 2.11 33.62 4.09 43.44

2031 0.75 23.71 1.92 34.32 3.80 44.82

2032 0.69 23.97 1.75 34.96 3.54 46.12

2033 0.63 24.19 1.60 35.54 3.30 47.32

2034 0.57 24.40 1.45 36.07 3.08 48.442035 0.51 24.59 0.99 36.43 2.87 49.49

2036 0.46 24.76 0.94 36.78 2.68 50.47

2037 0.15 24.81 0.89 37.10 2.51 51.39

2038 0.06 24.84 0.84 37.41 2.36 52.25

2039 0.03 24.85 0.80 37.70 2.22 53.06

2040 0.82 38.00 2.09 53.82

2041 0.79 38.29 1.97 54.54

2042 0.74 38.56 1.85 55.22

2043 0.70 38.82 1.75 55.85

2044 0.67 39.06 1.65 56.46

2045 0.63 39.29 1.56 57.03

2046 0.60 39.51 1.48 57.57

2047 0 56 39 71 1 19 58 01

Lisewo



82/105



83/105



84/105



85/105




86/105




87/105

gy gy



88/105

APPENDIX 7: PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORKOMORZE-3 FIELD

Year Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

2014 1.25 0.42 1.25 0.42 1.25 0.42

2015 1.25 0.87 1.25 0.87 1.25 0.87

2016 1.25 1.33 1.25 1.33 1.25 1.33

2017 1.21 1.77 1.25 1.78 1.25 1.78

2018 1.09 2.17 1.24 2.23 1.25 2.24

2019 0.98 2.53 1.17 2.66 1.25 2.69

2020 0.89 2.86 1.08 3.06 1.24 3.15

2021 0.82 3.15 1.01 3.43 1.19 3.58

2022 0.75 3.43 0.94 3.77 1.12 3.99

2023 0.69 3.68 0.88 4.09 1.06 4.38

2024 0.64 3.91 0.83 4.39 1.01 4.752025 0.60 4.13 0.78 4.67 0.96 5.10

2026 0.56 4.33 0.73 4.94 0.92 5.43

2027 0.52 4.52 0.69 5.19 0.88 5.75

2028 0.49 4.70 0.66 5.44 0.84 6.06

2029 0.46 4.87 0.62 5.66 0.80 6.35

2030 0.59 5.88 0.77 6.63

2031 0.56 6.08 0.74 6.90

2032 0.54 6.28 0.71 7.16

2033 0.51 6.47 0.68 7.41

2034 0.49 6.65 0.66 7.65

2035 0.47 6.82 0.63 7.89

2036 0.45 6.99 0.61 8.11

2037 0.43 7.15 0.59 8.332038 0.42 7.30 0.57 8.53

2039 0.40 7.44 0.55 8.74

2040 0.39 7.59 0.53 8.93

2041 0.37 7.72 0.52 9.12

2042 0.36 7.85 0.50 9.30

2043 0.35 7.98 0.49 9.48

2044 0.33 8.10 0.47 9.65

2045 0.32 8.22 0.46 9.82

2046 0.31 8.33 0.45 9.98

2047 0.30 8.44 0.43 10.14

2048 0.42 10.30

2049 0.41 10.45

Komorze




89/105




90/105




91/105



92/105



93/105


94/105



95/105

APPENDIX 8 PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORSZYMANOWICE FIELD

YearGas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production (Bscf)

2015 1.25 0.42 1.25 0.42 1.25 0.42

2016 1.25 0.87 1.25 0.87 1.25 0.87

2017 1.25 1.33 1.25 1.33 1.25 1.33

2018 1.25 1.78 1.25 1.78 2.49 2.24

2019 1.21 2.22 1.25 2.24 2.49 3.152020 1.12 2.63 1.25 2.69 2.49 4.06

2021 1.04 3.01 1.25 3.15 2.49 4.97

2022 0.97 3.37 1.25 3.60 2.49 5.88

2023 0.91 3.70 1.22 4.05 2.45 6.77

2024 0.86 4.02 1.17 4.48 2.34 7.63

2025 0.81 4.31 1.13 4.89 2.24 8.44

2026 0.76 4.59 1.09 5.29 2.14 9.23

2027 0.72 4.85 1.05 5.67 2.05 9.97

2028 0.69 5.11 1.01 6.04 1.97 10.69

2029 0.65 5.34 0.98 6.40 1.89 11.38

2030 0.62 5.57 0.95 6.74 1.82 12.05

2031 0.59 5.78 0.92 7.08 1.75 12.69

2032 0.56 5.99 0.89 7.40 1.69 13.30

2033 0.54 6.19 0.86 7.71 1.63 13.90

2034 0.52 6.37 0.83 8.02 1.57 14.47

2035 0.49 6.56 0.81 8.31 1.52 15.02

2036 0.47 6.73 0.78 8.60 1.47 15.56

2037 0.45 6.89 0.76 8.88 1.42 16.08

2038 0.44 7.05 0.74 9.15 1.38 16.58

2039 0 42 7 21 0 72 9 41 1 33 17 07

Szymanowice




96/105




97/105




98/105




99/105




100/105




101/105


RPS Energy


102/105

APPENDIX 9 PRODUCTION FORECASTS AND CASHFLOW ANALYSIS FORGRABOWKA FIELD

Table A8.1: Gas Production Forecasts for Grabowka

Year Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production

(Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production

(Bscf)

Gas Rate

(MMscfd)

Cumulative

Production

(Bscf)

2014 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.6

2015 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.72016 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.3 0.8

2017 0.6 1.0 0.3 0.9

2018 0.6 1.3 0.6 1.2

2019 0.6 1.5 0.6 1.4

2020 0.3 1.6 0.6 1.6

2021 0.2 1.7 0.6 1.8

2022 0.6 2.02023 0.6 2.3

2024 0.6 2.5

2025 0.3 2.6

2026 0.1 2.6

Grabowka




103/105




104/105




105/105

fx energy 2013 reserve report for poland

Documents