DOCSLIB.ORG

IOR2016 NEWS Volume 6, Number 1, 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IOR2016 NEWS Volume 6, Number 1, 2016 IOR2016 NEWS Volume 6, Number 1, 2016 Register NOW April 9-13, 2016, Tulsa, Oklahoma and $AVE TWENTIETH SPE IMPROVED see page 4 OIL RECOVERY CONFERENCE NEW CHALLENGES, NEW SOLUTIONS Five iOR 2016 PiOneeRs selected from crowded, distinguished Field There was an embarrassment of riches for the committee tasked with selecting the IOR Pioneer awardees for the 2016 SPE Improved Oil Recovery conference. As was the case in SPE IOR 2014, five candidates made the final cut to be named an IOR Pioneer and to be honored at the 20th SPE Improved Oil Recovery conference, scheduled for April 9–13, 2016, in Tulsa, Okla. In all, 19 distinguished nomi- nees were on the “short” list for SPE IOR 2016, compared with 11 for SPE IOR 2014—which itself was deemed a substantial number of candidates 2 years ago. The SPE IOR 2016 Pioneers are Richard Hutchins, Sada Joshi, Jenn-Tai Liang, Lanny Schoeling, and Ali Yousef. These five IOR Pioneers will be feted at a special recognition luncheon on April 11, 2016, at Cox Business Center in downtown Tulsa— also the site for the conference. Articles on each of the 2016 IOR Pioneers follow this one. The biennial conference, sponsored by the Mid-Continent Section of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, is the world’s larg- est gathering of petroleum scientists and oil and gas industry professionals focused on advancing knowledge and technology to improve and enhance oil and gas recovery. Since the inception of the IOR Pioneer award in 1984, “I think that improved oil recovery pro- when the inaugural Pioneer class of 10 was selected, there cesses will continue to be important for have been only five other instances when there were five the longer term. The selection of honorees—and only one such quintet occurred prior to deserving candidates, along with the 2000. Now it’s happened for two consecutive SPE IOR publicity that surrounds these awards, conferences—repeating the trend of 2006 and 2008, the will help to put a focus on IOR and only other time that trend has occurred. also encourage others in their involve- ment in the technology.” Over the past 32 years, 72 individuals have been recog- nized as IOR Pioneers, including this year’s group (see Dwight Dauben, Chairman IOR 2016 Pioneer Committee table, next page). Dauben Noteworthy is the fact that some of the 2016 Pioneers have performed groundbreaking work outside the confines of the more narrowly defined area of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) that historically has dominated the Pioneer awards. Advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, included under the broader umbrella term of improved oil recovery (IOR), have revolutionized the oil and natural gas industry by ren- dering hitherto intractable “tight” resources recoverable at viable rates. The five honorees will be recognized at IOR 2016 for their significant contributions to IOR and EOR, according to Dwight Dauben, chairman of the IOR 2016 Pioneer Awards committee. While the number of awardees typically ranges from three to five, the inclusion of 19 nominees apparently helped support a number of awards at the higher end of the range. “All of the 19 candidates had excellent credentials and will once again be considered for 2018, if he or she did not receive the award this time,” Dauben said. He noted that the award recognizes and expresses special appreciation to individuals who have pioneered and made signifi- cant advancement in the technology for improving oil recovery. “I think that improved oil recovery processes will continue to be important for the longer term. The selection of deserving candidates, along with the publicity that surrounds these awards, will help to put a focus on IOR and also encourage others in their involvement in the technology.” Volume 6, Number 1, 2016 Page 2 Award’s criteria Dauben, a Tulsa-based petroleum consultant and a 2002 IOR Pioneer honoree, described the basic criteria for being nominat- ed as an IOR Pioneer as early and long-term involvement in the development and/or application of IOR and EOR: “[The term] ‘IOR’ implies processes that improve oil recovery during the secondary and tertiary phases of recovery. It includes the classic…EOR processes that are designed to improve displacement or sweep. These EOR processes include the injection of chemicals, gas, polymers, or the generation of heat into the reservoir. IOR is a broader term that includes not only the classic EOR processes but also any process that results in the improvement of recovery beyond that achieved by standard methods. These include improved waterflooding techniques, use of horizontal wells to improve secondary recovery performance, pres- sure maintenance, gravity-assisted gas- or water-injection, water shut-off, cold production of heavy oil, and the in-situ upgrading of heavy oil. The drilling, logging, and completion of wells are excluded from consideration even though that can impact recovery.” Additionally, according to Dauben, nominees must be involved in and enjoy industry recognition for their involvement in one or more phases of IOR activity, including laboratory testing, software development or application, project design, field appli- cation, and monitoring of field performance. A prospective IOR Pioneer must also be a member of SPE during that IOR activity and generally have established two to four decades of their career to the development and application of leading-edge technology designed to increase recovery from older oil fields. 32 YEARS OF IOR PIONEERS Year IOR Pioneers 1984 Francis R. Conley, Lloyd E. Elkins, Ted M. Geffen, L.M. Holm, Howard A. Koch, Jr., Fred H. Poettmann, R. Vincent Smith, P.L. Terwilliger, L.W. Welch, Jr., Phillip D. White 1986 Robert J. Blackwell, Ben H. Caudle, Lincoln F. Elkins, Claude R. Hocott, Michael Prats 1988 E.R. Brownscombe, Elmond L. Claridge, H. Robert Froning, R.L. Reed 1990 W. Barney Gogarty, John P. Heller, Joseph J. Taber 1992 Ted R. Blevins, R.C. Earlougher, Henry J. Ramey, Jr., Arlie M. Skov 1994 J.C. Melrose, Necmettin Mungan 1996 Robert S. Schechter, Lowell R. Smith, Ben Sloat, Fred I. Stalkup 1998 William E. Brigham, C. Robert Fast, George J. Hirasaki, Thomas K. Perkins 2000 Bob Barnett, Larry W. Lake, Richard Nelson, Burton B. Sandiford 2002 Howard Ferrell, S.M. Farouq Ali, W.C. Hardy, W.L. Martin, George L. Stegemeier 2004 Philip J. Closmann, Harry Surkalo, G. Paul Wilhite 2006 Jae H. Bae, Don W. Green, Hossein Kazemi, Franklin M. Orr Jr., Gary Pope 2008 Dwight L. Dauben, Kishore Kumar Mohanty, Kenneth Sorbie, Randall Scott Seright, Michael R. Todd 2010 Wang Demin, Jeffrey A. Jones, Gordon Moore, David Zornes 2012 Chun Huh, Brij Maini, Malcolm Pitts, William Rossen 2014 Betty Felber, Sudarshan Mehta, Karl Miller, Ahmad Moradi, and Norman Morrow 2016 Richard Hutchins, Sada Joshi, Jenn-Tai Liang, Lanny Schoeling, Ali Yousef Volume 6, Number 1, 2016 Page 3 iOR PiOneeR PROFiles PiOneeR hutchins deemed a tOP exPeRt in wateR shutOFF, cOnFORmance Richard Hutchins, Technical Advisor in Schlumberger Ltd.’s Stimulation Fluids Engineering Group, has been lauded as a leading expert in water shutoff and conformance improvement by his peers. He has expertise in polymer and foam-fracturing fluids, fracture conductivity, fluid loss measurement, fracture cleanup, and both lab and field aspects of water control. “For many years, (Hutchins) has been, without question, one of the very top experts in the world in the area of water shutoff and conformance improvement using polymers and gels,” Randy Seright, Senior Engineer at the New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology and a 2008 IOR Pioneer, wrote in his IOR Pioneer letter of nomination for Hutchins. “In my mind, he is certainly Schlumberger’s top asset in these areas.” Hutchins, who started his career at Unocal in 1975, made extensive advances in the development and application of gels for conformance improvement, especially for high-temperature applications, according to Seright. He also is the inventor of the HPAM-hydroquinone-HMTA gel system. Additionally, Seright noted, Hutchins’ development of delaying gelation of aqueous polymers at elevated temperatures using novel organic crosslinkers is widely respected throughout the industry. He has also published highly regarded papers in the areas of: • Polymer flooding. “For many years, Richard Hutchins has • Inter-well tracer studies. been, without question, one of the very • Fracture-face damage by polymers and fracture clean-up. top experts in the world in the area of • Use of foams for well stimulation. water shutoff and conformance improvement using polymers and “I have known Rick for 35 years, which is basically his ten- gels.” ure in the IOR area. He is a remarkably humble, open, and helpful person, Seright commented. “I have regularly sought Randy Seright, and appreciated his advice and knowledge in the area of IOR 2008 Pioneer using polymers and gels for enhanced oil recovery over the past 30+ years. He has also regularly played helpful roles in Hutchins organizing SPE conferences, forums, and workshops. “Most of Rick’s work has been directly relevant to field applications, and indeed, many of his papers report results of field application of his ideas. I know that Rick has been extensively involved in field applications throughout the world, both dur- ing his time at Unocal and at Schlumberger.” Career path In his 19 years with Unocal, initially in California, Hutchins focused on production chemistry and EOR research (foam, steamflooding, pressure transient measurements, inter-well and single-well chemical tracers, polymer flooding, and water shutoff). Of his Unocal tenure, he spent 2 years in technology support groups (Texas) servicing worldwide requests. Hutchins’ current projects for Schlumberger in Sugar Land, Texas, are in product development and include managing the water control portfolio, developing new products for water control and frac fluids, and mentoring in his areas of expertise.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Approach to the Classification of Potential Reserve Additions of Giant Oil Fields of the World
    An Approach to the Classification of Potential Reserve Additions of Giant Oil Fields of the World Open-File Report 2007–1438 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey An Approach to the Classification of Potential Reserve Additions of Giant Oil Fields of the World By T.R. Klett and M.E. Tennyson Open-File Report 2007–1438 U. S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2008 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. Suggested citation: Klett, T.R., and Tennyson, M.E., 2008, An approach to the classification of potential reserve Additions of giant oil fields of the world: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007-1404, 28 p. 2 An Approach to the Classification of Potential Reserve Additions of Giant Oil Fields of the World By T.R. Klett and M.E. Tennyson Foreword This report contains notes for slides in a presentation given to the Committee on Sustainable Energy and the Ad Hoc Group of Experts on Harmonization of Fossil Energy and Mineral Resources Terminology on 17 October 2007 in Geneva, Switzerland.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinder Morgan, Inc. 2006 Form 10-K
    KMI Form 10-K UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ; ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 or TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _____to_____ Commission File Number 1-06446 Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Kansas 48-0290000 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 500 Dallas Street, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas 77002 (Address of principal executive offices, including zip code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (713) 369-9000 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Name of each exchange Title of each class on which registered Common stock, par value $5 per share New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act: Preferred stock, Class A $5 cumulative series (Title of class) Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act: Yes ; No Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act: Yes No ; Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days: Yes ; No Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.
    [Show full text]
  • Zukunft Der Weltweiten Erdölversorgung
    Supported by Ludwig Böl kow Stiftung Zukunft der weltweiten Erdölversorgung Überarbeitete, deutschsprachige Ausgabe, Mai 2008, mit freundlicher Unterstützung des Club Niederösterreich (www.clubnoe.at) Autoren: Dipl.-Kfm. Jörg Schindler Dr. Werner Zittel Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH, Ottobrunn/Deutschland Wissenschaftlicher und parlamentarischer Beirat: siehe unter www.energywatchgroup.org © Energy Watch Group / Ludwig-Bölkow-Stiftung Zitieren und auszugsweiser Abdruck bei ausführlicher Quellenangabe und gegen Belegexemplare erlaubt. Energy Watch Group Zukunft der weltweiten Erdölversorgung Mai 2008 Über die Energy Watch Group Energiepolitik braucht objektive Informationen. Die Energy Watch Group ist ein internationales Netzwerk von Wissenschaftlern und Parlamentariern. Träger ist die Ludwig-Bölkow- Stiftung. In diesem Projekt werden unabhängig von Regierungs- oder Unternehmensinteressen Studien erarbeitet über die Verknappung der fossilen und atomaren Energieressourcen, Ausbauszenarien für die Regenerativ-Energien sowie daraus abzuleitende Strategien für eine langfristig sichere Energieversorgung zu bezahlbaren Preisen. Die Wissenschaftler erheben und analysieren nicht nur ökologische, sondern vor allem geologische, technologische und ökonomische Zusammenhänge. Die Ergebnisse dieser Untersuchungen werden in die Parlamente und in die politisch interessierte Öffentlichkeit transportiert. Objektive Informationen brauchen unabhängige Finanzierung. Ein großer Teil der Arbeit im Netzwerk geschieht ehrenamtlich. Darüber hinaus finanziert
    [Show full text]
  • Card 32: Scope of Performance Assessments (PDF)
    CARD No. 32 Scope of Performance Assessments 32.A.1 BACKGROUND The radioactive waste disposal regulations at 40 CFR Part 191 include requirements for containment of radionuclides. The containment requirements specify that releases from a disposal system to the accessible environment must not exceed the release limits set forth in Appendix A, Table 1 of 40 CFR 191.13. Assessment of the likelihood that the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) will meet EPA’s release limits is conducted through the use of a process known as a “performance assessment” (PA). The WIPP PA essentially consists of a series of computer simulations that attempt to describe the physical attributes of the repository (site, geology, waste forms and quantities, engineered features) in a manner that captures the behaviors and interactions among its various components. The results of the simulations show the potential releases of radioactive materials from the disposal system to the accessible environment over the 10,000-year regulatory time frame. The PA must include both natural and man-made processes and events that have an effect on the disposal system (61 FR 5228). Section 194.32, “Scope of Performance Assessment,” stipulates that the PA must include both natural and man-made processes and events that may affect the disposal system over the regulatory time period. Section 194.32 requires that the PA include the effects of excavation mining, drilling, fluid injection and future development of leases. The PA also must include the effects of current activities such as secondary oil recovery methods (waterflooding), disposal of natural brine, solution mining to extract brine, etc., in the vicinity of the repository.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exxon-Mobil Merger: an Archetype
    Forthcoming Journal of Applied Finance, Financial Management Association The Exxon-Mobil Merger: An Archetype J. Fred Weston* The Anderson School at UCLA University of California, Los Angeles [email protected] January 31, 2002 * Fred Weston is Professor of Finance Emeritus Recalled, the Anderson School at the University of California Los Angeles. Thanks to Matthias Kahl, Samuel C. Weaver, Juan Siu, Brian Johnson, and Kelley Coleman for contributions. The paper also benefited from comments at its presentation to the 1999 Financial Management Association Meetings (Orlando). The Exxon-Mobil Merger: An Archetype ABSTRACT: In response to change pressures, the oil industry has engaged in multiple adjustment processes. The 9 major oil mergers from 1998 to 2001 sought to improve efficiency so that at oil prices as low as $11 to $12 per barrel, investments could earn their cost of capital. The Exxon-Mobil combination is analyzed to provide a general methodology for merger evaluation. The analysis includes: the industry characteristics, the reasons for the merger, the nature of the deal terms, discounted cash flow (DCF) spreadsheet valuation models, DCF formula valuation models, valuation sensitivity analysis, the value consequences of the merger, antitrust and competitive reaction patterns, and the implications of the clinical study for merger theory. JEL classification: G34, G20 Keywords: Mergers; Acquisitions; Alliances The Exxon-Mobil Merger: An Archetype The high level of merger activities throughout the world between 1994 and 2000 reflected major change forces. These shocks included technological changes, globalization of markets, intensification of the forms and sources of competition leading to deregulation in major industries, and the changing dynamics of financial markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitan Reef Complex Structure and Stratigraphy
    Capitan Reef Complex Structure and Stratigraphy Report by Allan Standen, P.G. Steve Finch, P.G. Randy Williams, P.G., Beronica Lee-Brand, P.G. Assisted by Paul Kirby Texas Water Development Board Contract Number 0804830794 September 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive summary....................................................................................................................1 2. Introduction................................................................................................................................2 3. Study area geology.....................................................................................................................4 3.1 Stratigraphy ........................................................................................................................4 3.1.1 Bone Spring Limestone...........................................................................................9 3.1.2 San Andres Formation ............................................................................................9 3.1.3 Delaware Mountain Group .....................................................................................9 3.1.4 Capitan Reef Complex..........................................................................................10 3.1.5 Artesia Group........................................................................................................11 3.1.6 Castile and Salado Formations..............................................................................11 3.1.7 Rustler Formation
    [Show full text]
  • Three Approaches for Estimating Recovery Factors in Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery
    Three Approaches for Estimating Recovery Factors in Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Three Approaches for Estimating Recovery Factors in Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery Mahendra K. Verma, Editor Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey William H. Werkheiser, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2017 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Verma, M.K., ed., 2017, Three approaches for estimating recovery factors in carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062–A–E, variously paged, https://doi.org/10.3133/ sir20175062. ISSN 2328-0328 (online) iii Preface The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 authorized the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct a national assessment of geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO2) and requested the USGS to estimate the “potential volumes of oil and gas recoverable by injection and sequestration of industrial carbon dioxide in potential sequestration formations” (42 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of Decline Curve Analysis to Estimate Recovery Factors for Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery
    Application of Decline Curve Analysis To Estimate Recovery Factors for Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery By Hossein Jahediesfanjani Chapter C of Three Approaches for Estimating Recovery Factors in Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery Mahendra K. Verma, Editor Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062–C U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey William H. Werkheiser, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2017 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Jahediesfanjani, Hossein, 2017, Application of decline curve analysis to estimate recovery factors for carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery, chap. C of Verma, M.K., ed., Three approaches for estimating recovery factors in carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062, p. C1–C20,
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 95/Monday, May 18, 1998/Rules
    27354 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Rules and Regulations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION section 18 of the WIPP Land B. Performance Assessment: Modeling and AGENCY Withdrawal Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102± Containment Requirements (§§ 194.14, 579), as amended by the WIPP LWA 194.23, 194.31 through 194.34) Amendments (Pub. L. 104±201). 1. Introduction 40 CFR Part 194 2. Human Intrusion Scenarios FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT [FRLÐ6014±9] : (a) Introduction Betsy Forinash, Scott Monroe, or Sharon (b) Spallings RIN 2060±AG85 White; telephone number (202) 564± (c) Air Drilling 9310; address: Radiation Protection (d) Fluid Injection Criteria for the Certification and Division, Center for the Waste Isolation (e) Potash Mining Recertification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Mail Code 6602±J, U.S. (f) Carbon Dioxide Injection Pilot Plant's Compliance With the Environmental Protection Agency, 401 (g) Other Drilling Issues 3. Geological Scenarios and Disposal Disposal Regulations: Certification M Street S.W., Washington, DC 20460. Decision System Characteristics For copies of the Compliance (a) Introduction AGENCY: Environmental Protection Application Review Documents (b) WIPP Geology Overview Agency. supporting today's action, contact Scott (c) Rustler Recharge (d) Dissolution ACTION: Final rule. Monroe. The Agency is also publishing a document, accompanying today's (e) Presence of Brine in the Salado SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection action, which responds in detail to (f) Gas Generation Model Agency (``EPA'') is certifying that the significant public comments that were (g) Two-Dimensional Modeling of Brine Department of Energy's (``DOE'') Waste and Gas Flow received on the proposed certification (h) Earthquakes Isolation Pilot Plant (``WIPP'') will decision.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Jean Laherrère 24 May 2015 Some Examples of Oil & Gas Production Linear Extrapolation to Estimate Ultimate When Estimates
    Jean Laherrère 24 May 2015 Some examples of oil & gas production linear extrapolation to estimate ultimate When estimates of reserves from the operator are not available (usually confidential), it is possible from production data to estimates the ultimate reserves by extrapolating the annual production decline (or the percentage annual over cumulative = HL) versus the cumulative production. When the annual or percentage production reaches zero, it means that the production is terminated and that the cumulative production equals the ultimate. The Hubbert linearization (HL) as described by Deffeyes (in his 2001 book “Hubbert’s peak”) is often described as unreliable to estimate oil ultimate reserves. The problem is that in many cases the trend displays several linear different periods and that the linear trend is only for few years. It is true that for conventional fields (where the area, net pay and porosity are well known) the geological estimate of oil in place with a reliable recovery factor is a good way to estimate 2P (equals to the mean value) ultimate recovery, followed by production simulation (with large computer with long Monte Carlo runs for huge grid (100 millions for Ghawar)) before the development of the field and after, using physical data (from well production & log tied to seismic surveys). In the US, reserves are in fact remaining reserves at a certain date, but the date is rarely given. Reserves without date should be remaining reserves at a certain year plus the cumulative production up this year: they are called initial reserves or ultimate reserves or EUR (Estimated Ultimate Reserves). Uncertainty of the estimate is huge and reserves value can be proved (or proven), probable or possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Crude Oil: the Supply Outlook
    C R U D E O I L T H E S U P P L Y O U T L O O K Report to the Energy Watch Group October 2007 EWG-Series No 3/2007 Crude Oil – the Supply Outlook Final Draft 2007/10/13 LBST ABOUT ENERGY WATCH GROUP This is the third of a series of papers by the Energy Watch Group which are addressed to investigate future energy supply and demand patterns. The Energy Watch Group consists of independent scientists and experts who investigate sustainable concepts for global energy supply. The group has been initiated by the German Member of Parliament Hans-Josef Fell. Homepage: www.energywatchgroup.org Responsibility for this report: Dr. Werner Zittel, Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH Jörg Schindler, Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH This report is sponsored by Ludwig-Bölkow-Stiftung, Ottobrunn, Germany Ottobrunn, October 2007 Page 2 of 101 Crude Oil – the Supply Outlook Final Draft 2007/10/13 LBST CONTENT About Energy Watch Group.......................................................................................................2 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................18 Scope and methodology ...........................................................................................................20 Types of oil...........................................................................................................................20 Conventional oil ...............................................................................................................20
    [Show full text]
  • THE TRANS-PECOS; a HISTORICAL SURVEY and GUIDE to HISTORIC SITES by BARRY V/ADE HUTCHESON, B.A
    THE TRANS-PECOS; A HISTORICAL SURVEY AND GUIDE TO HISTORIC SITES by BARRY V/ADE HUTCHESON, B.A. A THESIS IN HISTORY Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Technological College in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS Approved 1949 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Without the aid of several Individuals, the prepara­ tion of this thesis would have been Immeasurably more difficult. A special word of thanks goes to the director of my committee. Dr. Seymour V. Connor, who Introduced me to the skills of historical writing, gave me confidence In my work, and was a constant source of encouragement. I would also like to thank the other committee members: Dr. James V. Reese, for his Interest In the Trans-Pecos, and Professor Elo J. Urbanovsky, for the research grant which made this thesis possible. To the staff of the Southwest Collection, I extend my gratitude for their cheerful assistance In locating materials for research; to my cohorts on the State Park Study, I offer a note of thanks for two years of enjoyable association. And finally, I am sincerely grateful to my wife Charlotte whose typing and unwavering moral support were respon­ sible for the completion of this thesis. 11 •«lf TABLE OP CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENT 11 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS v INTRODUCTION 1 PART I A HISTORICAL SURVEY OF TRANS-PECOS TEXAS CHAPTER I. EARLY LIFE 5 II. SPANISH INFLUENCE l6 III. ENTRY OF AMERICANS ^^ IV. PROTECTION, COMMUNICATION, AND WAR ... 71 V. RECOVERY AFTER WAR 90 VI. RAILROADS, RANCHING. AJND MINING 11^ VII. PROBLEMS AND PROSPERITY 1^5 PART II HISTORIC SITES IN TRANS-PECOS TEXAS VIII.
    [Show full text]