Glenn Sounds like BP could afford to ask questions & then find answers to those questions that mining companies can’t even envision exist. I recall a Star Teck episode where the Enterprise encountered a race who had a low intellectual endowment; thinking of them now as the Mining Guild of Alpha Proxima.
Ken Sent from my iPhone Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 14, 2019, at 1:35 PM, Glenn Wilson via SEGMIN > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I want to add some color to the BP reference... Back in mid-2000s, deepwater, > subsalt exploration in GOM, Brazil, and Angola was the primary driver for IOC > reserve replacement. BP had developed an FWI, but noticed that performance > was compromised due to the relatively high frequency content of air guns; a > lower frequency, high power source was required. Thus, Wolfspar was launched; > and progressed in tandem to FWI - taking over a decade to realize. To be > successful, the hardware had to developed to fulfill 3D inversion > requirements that were (are) specific to an exploration play. Otherwise, > simply throwing bigger and bigger computers at FWI with existing acquisition > hardware was never going to solve the actual problem. > > > > > >> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 10:44 PM Chris Wijns via SEGMIN >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Ken, I don’t think it’s true that geologists (exploration teams) must >> recuse themselves, and I believe drilling is indeed the way. But: >> >> (1) Exploration geologists must be thinking metallurgically from the very >> first exploration holes that start returning economic intercepts (or bring >> in met help). >> >> (2) A plan must immediately be developed to test the size of a potential >> deposit in the most judicious way possible. >> >> (3) Simultaneously with the progress of (2), the team must be thinking >> about available infrastructure and whether this will sink a project that’s >> too small, or whether the project is big enough to sustain its own >> infrastructure development. >> >> >> >> There will be more things to add to this list, but the point is that there >> should be no buck-passing for a team that truly wants to find and develop a >> deposit (as opposed to those who want to sell an economic-looking intercept >> and buy a boat). >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Chris >> >> >> >> From: SEGMIN [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken >> Witherly via SEGMIN >> Sent: Sunday, 14 July 2019 09:30 >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: Ken Witherly >> Subject: [SEGMIN] Tough Love >> >> >> >> Dear Colleagues >> >> >> >> The attached piece (2019_07_13_071546_2.pdf) was tucked away in one of those >> trade magazines that seems to be getting thinner and thinner with time. I >> still look at it however, as they sometimes score a piece I have not seen >> elsewhere which often these days, is the same material re-broadcast time and >> time again. >> >> >> >> The title of this piece “REPORT: URGENT NEED FOR MORE GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR >> CANADA'S MINING INDUSTRY” did not really thrill me as it seemed a yet >> another call from the private sector for government support; are we not >> supposed to be in an industry that can compete globally and return taxes and >> jobs for the country? (pardon the Canada bias here). The stats they list >> seem clear but how much the government can do in the face of such a >> difficult economic picture? >> >> >> >> Two things came to mind and both relate to geoscience. Central to the idea >> is that we need to make a concerted effort to focus on finding “good” >> deposits and as soon in the discovery cycle as possible. By ‘good’, I mean >> ones that when mined, stand a decent chance of making money over the life of >> the deposit. Finding these deposits sooner than later also allows for >> greater flexibility in the required planning stages, permitting companies to >> make better assessments as to what deposits they should develop and when. >> >> >> >> How do we achieve this? In minerals exploration literature or convention >> forums, there seems to be very little discussion about how to discriminate >> the quality of a deposit in the discovery stages before there has been a lot >> of drilling. At the individual deposit scale, geologists likely don’t see >> any means to define deposit quality without a lot of drilling, so they >> typically recuse themselves from the discussion focused on how to define >> deposit quality in the early stages of exploration. Most likely, they will >> say ‘it can’t be done’ and drilling is the only want to establish deposit >> ‘quality’ in an unequivocal way. This pushes what could be considered a de >> facto truth that there is only one way to do things which is the way we >> always have. This approach is no longer viable. >> >> >> >> If such a ranking is to be done, then some form of remote sensing involving >> either geophysics or geochemistry or both is likely required. However, >> neither discipline seems able to get engaged in pushing their discipline >> outside of quite narrow boundaries, maybe for fear of being branded a >> purveyor of ‘voodoo science’. >> >> >> >> If there is a technological answer, we also need to ask the question if we >> have enough innovative people to fuel the idea chain? Groups engaged in >> “pure” geophysical R&D are very few but this is where innovation or looking >> at what others are doing in related fields, can contribute a huge amount of >> additional resources. However, we need ‘scouts’ who can recognize these >> ideas/concepts/approaches and facilitate to bring these ideas into the >> exploration space. >> >> >> >> If new ideas can be brought to old problems, the results can be impressive. >> I attached a piece (After Billion-Barrel Bonanza, BP Goes Global with >> Seismic Tech.pdf) that came out earlier this year about a new means to >> process seismic data that seems to have transformed the value of this >> information. This in a industry that has spent huge sums of money over >> decades and yet major advancements are still possible. An interesting >> companion piece was sent to me by a colleague that cited the French oil firm >> Total had made a major investment in a new super computer as part of their >> strategy to help find more oil faster. >> >> >> >> A second branch to the idea of defining the better deposits sooner is invest >> more effort to utilize the data we have. One observation I can make after 20 >> years consulting and working on literally 1000s of projects for 100s of >> companies is that a large amount of the survey data acquired is only ever >> partially assessed and very often only in the most mechanical way, very >> often will little or no consideration of the actual deposit model that >> applies to the survey in question. Whether such data ever gets assessed is >> never certain; quite often old surveys even if never assessed are deemed to >> have ‘expired’ and groups would rather acquire a entirely new data set as >> this makes from more appealing press releases. >> >> >> >> A proposal is suggested that for every $1 spent on data that $0.15 be spent >> on the assessment of this data and this cost be accredited for assessment >> value at twice the money spent ($0.30) if a group separate from the survey >> company undertakes the assessment. This would help insure that an group >> independent of the survey company assess that data and provides the client >> with what more likely will be an impartial assessment of the data. >> >> >> >> So to improve the quality of the deposits the industry has to assess, we >> need either to develop or find better discovery technology or we need to >> make better use of the data we acquire. As the MAC article suggests, >> continuing on the current path is not sustainable. >> >> >> >> Ken >> >> >> >> http://mining.ca/resources/mining-facts >> >> >> >> https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/business/oil-group-total-hopes-new-supercomputer-will-help-it-find-oil-faster-and-more-cheaply-323449/ >> >> >> >> https://gcaptain.com/after-billion-barrel-bonanza-bp-goes-global-with-seismic-tech/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Gcaptain+%28gCaptain.com%29&goal=0_f50174ef03-2b9514b956-169911317&mc_cid=2b9514b956&mc_eid=f922026fb5 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2019-Condor’s 20th Anniversary >> >> >> >> Condor Consulting, Inc >> >> St 150 2201 Kipling St >> >> Lakewood CO 80215 USA >> >> T: 303-423-8475 >> >> >> >> Condor North Consulting >> >> St 1112 1030 West Georgia St >> >> Vancouver BC V6E 2Y3 >> >> T: 604-630-8334 >> >> >> >> E: [email protected] >> >> C: 303-520-5732 >> >> Skype-ken.witherly1 >> >> www.condorconsult.com >> >> >> >> ----------------------- >> SEGMIN community mailing list service ([email protected]). >> Change your personal options here: >> https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/options/segmin/glenn.a.wilson%40gmail.com >> Colleagues can join here: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/segmin >> Archives: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/private/segmin/ >> NOTE that <Reply> will reply to all members of the list. > ----------------------- > SEGMIN community mailing list service ([email protected]). > Change your personal options here: > https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/options/segmin/ken%40condorconsult.com > Colleagues can join here: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/segmin > Archives: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/private/segmin/ > NOTE that <Reply> will reply to all members of the list.
----------------------- SEGMIN community mailing list service ([email protected]). Change your personal options here: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/options/segmin/archive%40mail-archive.com Colleagues can join here: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/segmin Archives: https://lists.geosoft.com/mailman/private/segmin/ NOTE that <Reply> will reply to all members of the list.
