What's new in exploration

Not here: Given the current climate in the Republic of South Africa, where their constitution and laws do not seem to mean anything to the politics in power, oil investors will be reluctant to conduct exploration, when return on capital, royalty rights and long-term relationships remain in doubt. Namibia, which is much more stable, unfortunately had a recent offshore disappointment. While today it does not look promising, more seismic and a few more wells are needed.

Where else? Try the opinion compiled for the U.S. by the CIA. Can we trust this source? Actually, yes. There is significant input from oil companies around the globe. If you are looking to explore somewhere, stay above their Zero Line. I think they may be wrong about offshore #127 (Ireland) and #141 (Greenland): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2241rank.html.

Fig. 1. Stylized representation of oil and natural gas resource categorizations (not to scale). Source: EIA.

Then there is the opinion of OPEC. Are they sending the world a message? I think they left out Texas/North Dakota in percentages of world reserves: http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/data_graphs/330.html.

However, BP, which owns and operates around the world more than most other companies, has a semi-objective view. South America, they say, is hot for exploration, which really means Colombia and Brazil. But there is still a slight problem. All hydrocarbons are owned by the government. Given problems with super-hyper-inflation and dictators who use the military to enforce their “laws,” you are not likely to hold on to those reserves for long. BP says this in its linked footnote about risk: “Nobody knows, or can know, how much oil exists under the earth’s surface, or how much it will be possible to produce in the future”: https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/oil/oil-reserves.html.

I like the philosophic graphic (Fig. 1) from EIA on this page, because it fits with my prejudices and is endorsed by Wall Street. They know best. I would make the outer egg much larger.

Fig. 2. A model cannot represent reality in all respects and can actually limit progress. Source: Neidell and Charuk, 2018.

Found your x, y? Modeling the area first is the practice. We used to call that preliminary interpretation, sometimes from a couple of well logs, a 2D seis line or one old grav/mag map. Maybe add in some cursory basin analysis and a little geochemistry. You were lucky if you had some paleo. But, I offer a word of caution from a well-known old salt, Norm Neidell, who said, “the model is not the image, and often not the preconceived geology.”

It’s here. In your mind first. Norm reminds us that the laws of physics govern events and processes, and our understanding is always incomplete. So, we build simulation models of those events or processes to improve our understanding. Models can predict behavior successfully but cannot be all-inclusive of every possible outcome.

“If we mistakenly believe that a model truly represents reality in all aspects, and use it to guide information capture and various processes and procedures, we can often unnecessarily limit progress toward some of our desired goals. Some such objectives may even be deemed unattainable,” observed Norm. He points out that a large gap exists between physics and a seismic image, and a larger gap from that image to an accurate interpretation. Oh, the rocks will cry out!

In Fig. 2, from the Geophysical Society of Houston’s GSH Journal, June 2018 issue, we see an example from Reineke field, Borden County, Texas. There is never enough information about an area to drill. The president of Gulf Oil once told me that if Gulf had the entire geologic story, it would be because someone else acquired it. As it turned out, lose your risk tolerance to spend for that knowledge, and someone else buys that information—they get the reserves and you. 

About the Authors

William (Bill) Head

Contributing Editor

William (Bill) Head is a technologist with over 40 years of experience in U.S. and international exploration.