Pops wrote:ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:The arguement over how to "grow" the volumes itself would lead to a pretty wild discussion I'm betting.
So I assume that (and the rest of the thread) means there isn’t agreement here as well.
The complement of "reserve growth" is called "backdating". Discovery curves are not static beasts, many would think set in stone long ago and never updated; in fact discovery curves are living beasts that continually get updated. Backdating gets applied to the USA discovery curves so when you apply that time translation it does indeed look like the discovery mirrors the production curves.
I think the basic disagreement is on the level of transparency in how backdating gets applied. I would suggest that discovery curves get plotted as a family of curves, with each curve showing a specific age progression. Some people think backdating does not get applied at all, leading to a more cornucopian view of 10x reserves than what the discovery curves show.
Below is an example of USA fractional growth over aged discoveries from the Attanasi and Root data.
It's very noisy but the effect of as-defined reserve growth is there.