Review of statistical probabilities from technologies used for pre-drill hydrocarbon prediction

References

1. AAPG Wiki
   [2019]. Risk: Expected value and chance of success.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Abrams, M.A.
   [1996]. Distribution of subsurface hydrocarbon seepage in near-surface marine sediments. In: Schumacher and Abrams (eds), Hydrocarbon migration and its near-surface expression: AAPG Memoir66.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Beghtel, F.W., Hitzman, D.O. and Sundberg, K.R.
   [1987]. Microbial oil survey technique (MOST): Evaluation of new wildcat wells in Kansas. Association of Petroleum Geochemical Explorationists Bulletin, 3 (6), 1–14.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Curry, W.H.III
   [1984]. Evaluation of surface gamma radiation surveys for petroleum exploration in the deep Powder River basin, Wyoming. In: Davidson and Gottlieb , (eds.), Unconventional Methods in the Exploration for Petroleum and Natural Gas, 3: Dallas, Texas. Southern Methodist University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Dangel, S., Schaepman, M., Stoll, E., Carniel, R., Barzandji, O., Rode, E. and Singer, J.
   [2003]. Phenomenology of tremor-like signals observed over hydrocarbon reservoirs. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 128, 135–158.
   [Google Scholar]
6. De Beukelaer, S.M.
   [2003]. Remote sensing analysis of natural oil and gas seeps on the continental slope of the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Master thesis, Texas A&M University.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Fahmy, W.A.
   [2006]. DHI/AVO best practices methodology and applications: A historical perspective. SEG/EAGE Distinguished Lecture presentation.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Foote, R.S.
   [1996]. Relationship of near-surface magnetic anomalies to oil- and gas-producing areas. In: Schumacher and Abrams (eds.), Hydrocarbon Migration and its Near-Surface Expression. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir66, 111–126.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Gerivani, H., Haghshenas, E., Hafezi Moghaddas, N. and Rejaie, F.
   [2012]. Ambient noise study over a gas field in Qeshm Island (IRAN). 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Abstracts.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Hesthammer, J., Stefatos, A., Boulaenko, M., Vereshagin, A., Gelting, P., Wedberg, T. and Maxwell, G.
    [2010]. CSEM technology as a value driver for hydrocarbon exploration. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 27, 1872–1884.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Hesthammer, J., Stefatos, A. and Sperrevik, S.
    [2012]. CSEM efficiency – evaluation of recent drilling results. First Break, 30 (6), 40–55.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Jones, V.III and LeBlanc, R.
    [2004]. Moore-Johnson (Morrow) field, Greeley County, Kansas: A successful integration of surface soil gas geochemistry with subsurface geology and geophysics. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Search and Discovery Article #20021.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Karman, G.P., Ramirez, D., Voon, J. and Rosenquist, L.M.
    [2013]. More than a decade of CSEM in Shell: a global look back study. NGF Abstracts and Proceedings, 3.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Karlstram, E.
    [2013]. North Energy at Pareto Securities- 20th annual Oil & Offshore Conference. Oslo, 5 September.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Leaver, J. and Thomasson, M.
    [2002]. Case studies relating soil iodine geochemistry to subsequent drilling results. In: Leaver, J. and Schumacher and LeSchack (eds.), Surface Exploration Case Histories: Applications of geochemistry, magnetic, and remote sensing: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology 48, and Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Geophysical Reference Series 11, 41–57.
    [Google Scholar]
16. LeSchack, L.A. and Van Alstine, D.
    [2002]. High-resolution ground magnetic (HRGM) and radiometric surveys for hydrocarbon exploration: Six case histories in western Canada. In: Schumacher and LeSchack (eds.), Surface Exploration Case Histories: Applications of geochemistry, magnetic, and remote sensing: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology, 48, and Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Geophysical Reference Series, 11, 67–15.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Lopez, J.P., Hitzman, D. and Tucker, J.
    [1994]. Combined microbial and seismic surveys predict oil and gas occurrences in Bolivia. Oil and Gas Journal, 24 October, 68–70.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Løseth, L.O., Hansen, J.O., Wiik, T., Roudot, M., Dubois, B., Nguyen, A.K. and Henriksen, L.B.
    [2015]. CSEM Pre-well prediction in the Johan Castberg Area, Barents Sea. 77th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Expanded Abstracts, N105.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Maver, K., Hargreaves, P., Klubika, A. and Ivanov, S.
    [2015]. Using induced polarization measurements to derisk hydrocarbon exploration in the Fingerdjupet-Hoop area, Barents Sea, Norway. First Break, 33 (7), 63–66.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Mello, M.R., Concalves, F.T.T., Babinski, N.A. and Miranda, E.
    [1996]. Hydrocarbon prospecting in the Amazon rain forest: Application of surface geochemical, microbiological, and remote sensing methods. In: Schumacher and Abrams (eds.), Hydrocarbon Migration and its Near -Surface Expression. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir66, 401–411.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Meyer, W.T.
    [1983]. Detection of concealed mineral and energy resources by vapor geochemistry. In: Thornton and Howarth (eds.), Applied Geochemistry in the 1980s.London, Graham and Trotman, 86–102.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Mogilewskii, G.A.
    [1940]. The bacterial method of prospecting for oil and natural gases. Razvedka Nedr, 12, 32–43.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Nixon, S., Hallam, T. and Constantine, A.
    [2018]. Ranking DHI attributes for effective prospect risk assessment applied to the Otway Basin, Australia. ASEG, abstract, W9.4C.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Peel, F.J. and Brooks, J.R.V.
    [2017]. A practical guide to the use of success versus failure statistics in the estimation of prospect risk. AAPG Bulletin, 100 (2), 137–150.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Pilot Exploration
    [2018]. Downloaded from: www.pilotexploration.com.
26. Potter, R.W.II, Harrington, P.A., Silliman, A.H. and Viellenave, J.H.
    [1996]. Significance of geochemical anomalies in hydrocarbon exploration: one company’s experience. In: Schumacher and Abrams (eds.), Hydrocarbon Migration and its Near-Surface Expression, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 66, 431–439.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Ridyard, D. and Hesthammer, J.
    [2011]. Value creation using electromagnetic imaging. World Oil, March, 51–54.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Roden, R., Forrest, M. and Holeywell, R.
    [2012]. Relating seismic interpretation to reserve/resource calculations: Insights from a DHI consortium. The Leading Edge, 31 (9), 1066–1074.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Roden, R., Forrest, M., Holeywell, R. Carr, M. and Alexander, P.
    [2014]. The role of AVO in prospect risk assessment. Interpretation, 2 (2), SC61–SC76.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Rudolph, K.W.
    [2001]. DHI/AVO analysis best practices. A worldwide analysis. Distinguished lecture SEG/AAPG.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Schumacher, D.
    [2010]. Integrating hydrocarbon microseepage data with seismic data doubles exploration success. Indonesian Petroleum Association, Thirty-Fourth Annual Conference and Exhibition, Proceedings, PA10-G-104.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Schumacher, D.
    [2011]. When Seismic is not enough: Improving Success by Integrating High-Resolution Surface Geochemical data with Seismic data. AAPG Southwest Section Meeting, Expanded Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Schumacher, D.
    [2012]. Hydrocarbon Microseepage-A Significant but Underutilized Geologic Principle with Broad Applications for Oil/ Gas Exploration and Production. AAPG Annual Convention and Exhibition, adapted from poster presentation.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Schumacher, D. and Foote, R.S.
    [2006]. Seepage-induced magnetic anomalies associated with oil and gas fields: onshore and offshore examples. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention, Abstracts, 96.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Sealy, J.R.
    [1974]. A geomicrobial method of prospecting for oil. Oil and Gas Journal, 15, 98–102.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Sharapov, I.R., Shabalin, N.Y., Birialtsev, E.V., Feofilov, S.A., Ryz, V.A.
    [2015]. Innovative passive microseismic method6s in oil and gas industry - application experience in Russia. Downloaded from: www.gradient-geo.com.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Veeken, P.C.H., Legeydo, P.J., Davidenko, Y.A., Kudryavceva, E.O., Ivanov, S.A. and Chuvaev, A.
    [2009]. Case History. Benefits of the induced polarization geoelectric method to hydrocarbon exploration. Geophysics, 74 (2), B47–B59.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Wagner, M., Piske, J. and Smit, R.
    [2002]. Case histories of microbial prospection for oil and gas, onshore and offshore in northwest Europe. In: Schumacher and LeSchack (eds.), Surface exploration case histories: Applications of geochemistry, magnetics, and remote sensing. AAPG Studies in Geology 48 and SEG Geophysical References Series 11, 453–479.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Weart, R.C. and Heimberg, G.
    [1981]. Exploration radiometrics: post-survey drilling results. In: Gottlieb, R. (ed.), Unconventional Methods in the Exploration for Petroleum and Natural Gas, 2,Southern Methodist University Press, 116–123.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Williams, A.
    [2010]. Satellite Seep Detection of Leaking Deep Water Oilfields, Fact or Fantasy?Finding Petroleum.UK, May 26. Presentation.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Woods, D.A. and Olson, R.
    [2018]. Exploration use of high resolution magnetotellurics. Downloaded from: www.southportexploration.com.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Wyman, R.E.
    [2002]. From skeptic to believer. In: Schumacher and LeSchack , (eds.), Surface Exploration Case Histories: Applications of geochemistry, magnetic, and remote sensing. AAPG Studies in Geology 48 and SEG Geophysical Reference Series 11, Foreword, x-xi.
    [Google Scholar]