Catalog of recent oil discoveries pt 2

[Keith_McClary]

2010
Total discoveries listed as recoverable: 41.577 billion barrels minimum to 44.873 billion barrels maximum
Total discoveries listed as Oil-In-Place: 91.26 billion barrels minimum to 92.8 billion barrels maximum

Remind me, what were the biggest discoveries contributing to the 2010 blip?

I found 2010 Crude Oil: 50 Billion Barrels Discovered, 30 used
with this Al Fin quote:

With the price of oil hovering above $70 a barrel for over a year -- and around $90 a barrel for several weeks -- oil exploration companies can get to work discovering rich new oil fields. In 2010, more new oil was discovered than was consumed -- and we can expect that trend to continue as long as oil stays high -- above fundamentals. OPEC is sitting on considerable reserve production.

Bluntly put, the world is sitting on far more crude oil than it knows what to do with at this time. Human incompetence, corruption, and lack of skilled manpower and state-of-the-art equipment chokepoints contribute to the real disconnect and lag between moment-to-moment demand and instantaneous supplies.

Political peak oil: The only kind of peak oil you will ever see, except for peak demand, when oil is no longer needed.

[OilFinder2]

^
I posted a (revised) 2010 review back in June:
LINK

[dorlomin]

------------------------------------

Size of discovery: 4.5 - 5 billion barrels recoverable
Date: May 26, 2011
Company(s): Petrobras and Brazilian ANP
Name: Libra
Location: Santos Basin, offshore Brazil
API: No information, typical oil here has been about 30 degrees
Flow rate of test well(s): No information
Estimated production startup date: No information
LINK
LINK

------------------------------------

You have not been double counting now have you.

Size of discovery: 3.7 - 15 billion barrels recoverable
Date: October 29, 2010
Company(s): ANP (and Petrobras)
Name: Libra

Instead of downgrading your estimates from last year counting the downgraded estimate again this year?

Enlighten me to the mistake I have made.

[OilFinder2]

dorlomin, read what I wrote at the top of the post at the link below - and the post immediately after it.

Libra was subtracted from 2010 (which is why I posted a revised 2010 tally), and added to 2011. Notice the new 2010 tally does not contain Libra anymore.

^
I posted a (revised) 2010 review back in June:
LINK

[OilFinder2]

And for reference, the original 2010 year-end tally was on page 26. Notice the recoverable total (especially at the upper end) is considerably higher than the revised total I posted in June.

[dorlomin]

dorlomin, read what I wrote at the top of the post at the link below - and the post immediately after it.

Libra was subtracted from 2010 (which is why I posted a revised 2010 tally), and added to 2011. Notice the new 2010 tally does not contain Libra anymore.

^
I posted a (revised) 2010 review back in June:
LINK

Here it is counted in your 2010 total.

Here it is in your 2011 total.

Same oil discovery just a down grade.

You are padding these lists out by double counting discoveries and hyping already hyped oil.

[dorlomin]

And here a billion barrels of speculating that there maybe could have might be perhaps etc etc etc

So I presume the amount listed in the new field contains some reserves added not just last year but the year before, and maybe the year before that, too. So this entry could be considered a bit of "catch up" from previous years.

1.6 billion barrels of speculation.

[OilFinder2]

Here it is counted in your 2010 total.

Here it is in your 2011 total.

Same oil discovery just a down grade.

You are padding these lists out by double counting discoveries and hyping already hyped oil.

And here it is SUBTRACTED from the 2010 total. You might want to look up the word "subtracted." Since it was SUBTRACTED from the 2010 total, there was no double-counting.

[OilFinder2]

And here a billion barrels of speculating that there maybe could have might be perhaps etc etc etc

So I presume the amount listed in the new field contains some reserves added not just last year but the year before, and maybe the year before that, too. So this entry could be considered a bit of "catch up" from previous years.

1.6 billion barrels of speculation.

No, 1.6 billion barrels of catch-up from a previous year.

[dorlomin]

And here it is SUBTRACTED from the 2010 total. You might want to look up the word "subtracted." Since it was SUBTRACTED from the 2010 total, there was no double-counting.

You showed it at the end of 2010. And then again at the end of 2011.

You lied.

The oil was already on your list and you lied by showing it on the year end total for a second time.

[dorlomin]

No, 1.6 billion barrels of catch-up from a previous year.

Nope here are your words

So I presume

You presume the oil is 'catch up'.

Yet more padding.

I wonder how many fields have been declared more than once over the couple of years you have been running this.

[OilFinder2]

And here it is SUBTRACTED from the 2010 total. You might want to look up the word "subtracted." Since it was SUBTRACTED from the 2010 total, there was no double-counting.

You showed it at the end of 2010. And then again at the end of 2011.

You lied.

The oil was already on your list and you lied by showing it on the year end total for a second time.

I don't know if you're being deliberately dense or not, but in case you aren't and your reading comprehension is on the low side today, here is what I did, 7 months ago:

So, I am going to subtract the 3.7 - 15 billion barrels from last year's totals, and add 4.5 - 5 billion to this year's total.

I would suggest you employ a dictionary to look up the meaning of "subtract."

[dorlomin]

I don't know if you're being deliberately dense or not,

Nope. You unfurled a big figure last year with the usual noise and hullaballoo. Then took some of the oil from that figure and added to this years.

So now we now that when you show a figure for a year, it is likely to drop as you take it from that year to a more recent one to bulk up your big numbers list.

Your annual total is a sham.

[OilFinder2]

I could have subtracted the difference in the estimates from last year's number instead of adding it to this year's number, but when I read the article I realized it was really a 2011 discovery as they had not even finished drilling in 2010, so thus, I made it a 2011 discovery instead. I'm sorry that has you confused.

[dorlomin]

Shamelessly inflated this years numbers with a number you had to downscale for last year.

Shameless.

[OilFinder2]

Shamelessly inflated this years numbers with a number you had to downscale for last year.

Shameless.

At the time I did that, it was early June, less than halfway through the year. I had no idea at that time what the year-end total for the year would be, so I thus had no idea whether the additional 4.5-5 billion barrels would be a big deal or not.

If I had merely subtracted the difference in the estimates from 2010's total, you would have complained about that, too. So no matter what I did, you'd be griping about something.

[dorlomin]

If I had merely subtracted the difference in the estimates from 2010's total, you would have complained about that, too. So no matter what I did, you'd be griping about something.

Inventing sad stories about how mean I would have been is not going to change the fact you have been caught reporting the same sizable chunk of oil in two consecutive year end figures.

Your whole catalogue is a sham and always has been. But its of value to catch you so blatantly trying to double count a discovery and very telling in your reaction, presenting yourself as the victim.

[OilFinder2]

Inventing sad stories about how mean I would have been is not going to change the fact you have been caught reporting the same sizable chunk of oil in two consecutive year end figures.

Continuing to repeat the same claim over and over again does not change the fact that I revised one of those years, as any good statistician would have had he/she discovered something belonged in one category and not another.

Please repeat after me: "I, dorlomin, have never put something somewhere, only to decide later on it should have been placed somewhere else. I am always right the first time. Thus, I expect others to be exactly right the first time, as I am."

Your whole catalogue is a sham and always has been. But its of value to catch you so blatantly trying to double count a discovery and very telling in your reaction, presenting yourself as the victim.

I am sooooo sorry to inform you that billions and billions of barrels of oil are being discovered every year. So sorry.

[dorlomin]

Continuing to repeat the same claim over and over again does not change the fact that I revised one of those years, as any good statistician would have had he/she discovered something belonged in one category and not another.

But it did not suddenly belong in catagory 2011.
How much of the oil you have declared for 2011 will you be counting again in 2012.

I am sooooo sorry to inform you that billions and billions of barrels of oil are being discovered every year. So sorry.

You are as honestly sorry as you are honestly showing new oil.
How much of the oil you have declared for 2011 will you be counting again in 2012.

[OilFinder2]

But it did not suddenly belong in catagory 2011.

Yes it did. And I explained why it did.

And ... Bump.

Please repeat after me: "I, dorlomin, have never put something somewhere, only to decide later on it should have been placed somewhere else. I am always right the first time. Thus, I expect others to be exactly right the first time, as I am."