Does any of this ring a bell?

[sartesian <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Columbia, reports the Financial Times of  07-19-04 has "put itself back on the oil maps" due to "improved security" and revised tax laws.  The Clinton-era military aid, along with the assassination of  workers' leaders, high prices, and reduced taxes have brought ExxonMobil, Burlington Resources, and Shell back to the offshore Tayrona bloc and the onshore Magdalena Valley. 

 

The number of new exploration wells is the highest drilled since 1990. 1990?  Does that year ring a bell with anyone? 

 

Speaking of bells, Columbia's production hasn't exactly followed the Hubbert's bell curve, remaining relatively static until 1995 when daily output jumped some 40 percent, jumping another 33 percent from 1997 to 1999, then dropping 12 percent in 2000.  Oh well, those pesky details.

 

Here's another one for those who got their Jones on..., this one about the elasticity of "reserves."

 

Columbia's proven reserves in 1990 measured 3.2 billion barrels; in 2003, 1.6 billion barrels. Oh my God.........the party's over; the hydrocarbon era is done.....wait a minute.....

 

Between 1990 and 2003, Columbia produced 2.9 billion barrels of oil.  How can we subtract 2.9 billion from 3.2 billion and still have 1.6 billion?   Because reserves are an economic, not geological, calculation.