GEL Track Record
The GEL system is one of the few SGE methods with a proven track record. This track record is not achieved from well-by-well counting and statistics, but from the record of prospects drilled on their geologic/seismic merits alone and GEL surveyed and GEL-assessed before drilling. In this way positive, negative and null results can be objectively recorded.
The (pseudo-) literature and brochures on SGE methods are full of examples of "80% correct prediction" stories. It is beyond the scope of these brief notes to illustrate and fully document the statistical nonsense associated with these claims since drilling decisions are usually heavily based on subsurface data but seldom or never exclusively on surface data.
Thus, rather then doing the "count job" in some odd statistical manner, the GEL system success and record is based on:
Seismic/Geology
vs.
Seismic/Geology & GEL
vs.
Seismic/Geology & GEL
The graphs below lists the test case studies with the drilling results. From the 89 prospects that were drilled over the years, 30 were successful. A success rate of 34% was achieved using on conventional exploration wisdom. Had the drilling decision been based on Seismic / Geology & GEL, a substantial number of prospects would have never been drilled because of the lack of a surface GEL response. Out of the 89 prospects 24 would have been recommended for drilling, with a drilling success rate of 70%. Substantial costs savings can be achieved as well: incorporating GEL would have reduced the number of wells drilled from 89 to 24. Thus, incorporating GEL into exploration programs leads to increased drilling success by rejecting GEL negative cases and focusing on positive Seismic/Geology & GEL cases.
Translated into a common formula, the message from the GEL technology is that a given conventional exploration success rate should almost double if GEL is incorporated in the exploration decision process: e.g. if the exploration success is 30%, the GEL system can boost this success rate to 50-60%. If the (frontier) exploration success record is 2%, incorporating GEL should result in a 3-4% success rate.
The GEL track record also indicates missed opportunities. These are successful wells drilled which had insufficient micro-seepage. Contrary to suggestions from a number of surface explorationists, some fields do not seep (see SGE FAQ) or have no seepage at a level detectable above noise gases.
There are also failures (false positives) associated with GEL seepage signatures: reservoir quality or economics could play a role here. However, the overall success rate is substantially increased when GEL surface information is incorporated into the exploration decision process.
Web site developed and maintained by Spiderling Inc.