RE: RE: RE: RE: IHS 2009 O&G M&A reportGood40,
Your reference is from a Geoffrey Styles blog in which he wrote about the possibility of keeping oil in the ground by selling carbon offsets as a possible future green measure. (link below)
In order to determine how many tons of co2 would be saved, he says one would have to determine quality, quantity and value of the oil in the ground.
The writer suggests that quality can be determined by oil in the area and seismic data could quantity the size of the potential reserves.
He decides to use the IHS M&A reports 2p "proved plus probable" figure to value the oil for the lack of anything more accurate.
He seems to imply that the 2p "proved plus probable" value in the IHS 2008 M&A report is for mergers and acquisitions of companies with oil in the ground only.
This guy is just wrong.
The IHS report, (Link below), is a comprehensive analysis of 280 significant 2008 global upstream O&G M&A's and at no time mentions companies with oil in the ground only, in fact upstream by definition would include both companies that have oil in the ground as well as those with reserves that are developed and producing.
The writer later says, that the whole idea is flawed and generally impractical. The methods used to calculate are inaccurate and for the sake of argument only.
So all this time Good40, you've been using this blog as your source for stating that the IHS report was for oil in the ground only.
That's a new low even for you.
Both the 2008 IHS and the 2010 PLS inc. reports are referring to a 2p value for companies with oil in the ground, as well as companies with reserves that are developed and producing. The environment has dramatically improved since the turmoil of 2008 and early 2009 and so has the value.
https://energyoutlook.blogspot.com/2009_05_01_archive.html
https://press.ihs.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=4004