by TheDude » Tue 27 May 2008, 12:57:24
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KillTheHumans', 'H')ow the heck would any of us know that? Their information is their information, if you suspect everyones information, then its pretty easy to make up your own and declare whatever scenario you'd like I suppose.
Thanks for the insight, David Hume.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Colin Campbell', '1')6 Reserve Reporting
· The industry has systematically under-reported the size of discovery for a host of good commercial and regulatory reasons. It understandably prefers to revise the reserves upwards over time than book them all up front. It is not its job to forecast the future.
· For most purposes, it does not matter, but we need to know the real record of the past if we are to use the trend to forecast the future.
· Governments variously under-report or over-report, or simply fail to update their estimates. As many as 70 countries reported unchanged numbers in 1999, which is utterly implausible.
· We need the "best estimate". It is often called Proved & Probable, such that any revisions are statistically neutral
17 Dating Revisions
· An oilfield contains what it contains because it was filled in the geological past, but knowledge of how much it contains evolves over time.
· If we want a genuine discovery trend, we need to backdate revisions to the discovery of the field.
· Failure to backdate gives the illusion that more is being found than is the case. It is a cause of great misunderstanding

18 BP Reserves
This demonstrates how BP reports reserves, failing to backdate the revisions. It has misled many analysts. The large increases in the late 1980s were simply due to the OPEC quota wars. Nothing was actually added, as I will explain.
I should explain this large increase in greater detail.
· Kuwait added 50% in 1985 to increase its OPEC quota, which was based partly on reserves. No corresponding new discoveries had been made. Nothing particular changed in the reservoir.
· Venezuela doubled its reserves in 1987 by the inclusion of large deposits of heavy oil that had been known for years.
· Note too how the numbers have changed little since despite production..
But it is not quite as simple as that, because the early numbers were too low, having been inherited from the companies before they were expropriated. Some of the increase was justified but it has to be backdated to the discovery of the fields concerned that had been found up to 50 years before.
The failure to backdate gives this misleading popular image of growing reserves. It is widely used by flat-earth economists in support of classical economic theories of supply and demand
I hasten to add that by no means all economists believe in a flat-earth. There are enlightened economists who now relate economics with resources, and they are coming to the fore.