[tdrive]

Fresh from the press...$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here were no fields with 1 billion boe recoverable confirmed to have been discovered in 2005, but the world’s operators more than replaced the year’s production by bringing previously discovered fields on production and revising reserves upward in existing fields, IHS Energy reported.

The average world new field discovery size appears to have declined again in 2005, said Sandy Rushworth, IHS senior global data advisor. Potentially producible volumes from world discoveries in 2004 and 2005 were the lowest since World War II, Rushworth said.

[seahorse2]

Did Campbell start working for IHS? Sounds like this came from the ASPO webpage.

[nero]

Can you provide a link please?

[Ancien_Opus]

Cornucopians, freemarket enthusiast and abiotic oil promoters can not let a simple fact like this get in their way!

[mididoctors]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', 'C')an you provide a link please?

[pup55]

All I want to know is "the number".

[Antimatter]

Is this from Oil and Gas Journal?

[Leanan]

On a related note...

ExxonMobil 2005 Reserves Dominated by Qatari Natural Gas

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')OUSTON - ExxonMobil Corp. (XOM) booked more hydrocarbon reserves than it extracted in 2005 - but almost all of the additions come in the form of natural gas from Qatar.

ExxonMobil added 1.7 billion barrels of oil equivalent to its reserves, 1.6 billion boe of which come from Qatar, where the company operates the world's largest liquefied natural gas facility.

[rockdoc123]

I believe the article in question is from an interview conducted by AAPG Explorer with Sandy Rushworth and Ken Stark from IHS Energy. It is not proprietary and the whole article is located here

explorer article

Nice cherry picking by the way....post a small chunk of an article that points one way when in fact the entire article is saying the exact opposite. The fact that discovery rates on average are lower is mainly due to the fact that the supergiants and megagiants were discovered in the sixties...it skews the stats.

Here is some more quotes from the article that perhaps shows where they are leading with their analysis:


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')oes this mean the gauge on the global tank is heading toward empty?
Rushworth doesn't think so.
"We're very good at finding oil," she noted, "and we're getting better at increasing recovery rates in fields. We have data that shows more resources have been located in place since 1995 than found in the last 10 years."
Pre-1995 world liquids resources growth was 457 billion barrels. Discoveries since 1994 tallied 144 billion barrels, which replaced 61 percent of consumption, according to Stark. He noted field growth, mostly in giant historic fields, and increased recoveries in Canadian and Venezuelan oil sands added between 175 and 190 billion barrels of liquids.
Since 1994, giant fields represent only two percent of the discoveries -- but almost half of the resources added.
"Over the past decade, by new information, classic technology and field growth, the combination of new discoveries -- which is less than consumption -- plus the addition of reserves to older fields, by whatever means, greatly exceeds consumption," Stark noted

[AirlinePilot]

rockdoc,

There you go with that unbridled optimism again, I think your squarely in the cornucopian camp! Seriuosly, I don't quite see where this article is anything new.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', 'T')he fact that discovery rates on average are lower is mainly due to the fact that the supergiants and megagiants were discovered in the sixties...it skews the stats.

[tdrive]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mididoctors', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', 'C')an you provide a link please?

[rockdoc123]

Airline Pilot

I am definitely not a cornocopian but I do realize the facts, given I make my bread and butter in the industry, at least for a few more years. What Ken has been saying for the past couple of years ( if you go to the IHS energy website you can find some of his presentations) is that we have moved into an era where we are improving our understanding of how much is in the ground in previously discovered fields, and improving the means by which we recover the most hydrocarbons from what is in place. His other point which he has made on several occassions is that there is virtually no exploration happening out there compared to past decades...this is important inasmuch as even with better technology you have to drill a lot of wells to find hydrocarbons given the average success rate in the industry is not much better than 1 in 10.
So my view is we aren't going to find anymore Ghawars but we will find a number of billion barrel plus fields and many 500 mmb plus fields and scads of fields above 100 MMb but most are going to be between 50 and 100 mmb. But you need to remember if you can improve the recovery rate in a field the size of lets say Al Shaheen (last number I heard was 25 billion in place) by 20% with careful reservoir management that ends up being a few billion barrels.
Yes it isn't saving our lifes 40 years out....not my point, my point is that contrary to what was the intent of the poster the IHS people are not predicting doom and gloom.
By the way the 2005 information from IHS has not been updated as yet (at least on my computer), generally when they have the work completed Ken or one of the other folks at IHS will give a presentation somewhere and they always post those on their website (that's how they attact additional subscribers).