MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2045433489 · doi:10.2118/0208-0016-jpt

Comments: Big Spenders

2008· article· en· W2045433489 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Donnelly

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueMarine and Offshore Engineering Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBoomUpstream (networking)StaffingInvestment (military)Capital expenditureBusinessWork (physics)Agricultural economicsFinanceEconomicsEngineeringPolitical scienceManagement

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Editor's column The upstream boom may one day come to an end, but it doesn't look like that will happen this year. Forecasts for E&P spending predict another bullish year, with global demand continuing to drive efforts to increase supply, but access to resources and deciding exactly how to spend the money remain challenges. The industry's technical-staffing shortages also may be constraining efforts to increase output. Global E&P expenditures should show another year of double-digit growth this year, according to a Lehman Brothers survey, one of the oldest and most widely followed annual upstream spending reports. The survey of 344 companies found that collective spending will rise 11% to USD 369 billion, the sixth consecutive year of double-digit increases. Excluding North America, spending will increase 16% to USD 267 billion. Some of the big spenders this year will be Total (a 25% increase in upstream spending), BP (up 21%), Shell and Hess (up 15%), and Chevron (up 7%). Other big spenders are predicted to be companies from Russia, the Middle East, and Africa, along with North American independents, which are increasingly looking outside North America for reserves. Similarly, a December survey by Citi Investment Research predicts a 9.3% increase in capital and exploration spending to USD 354 billion. Other upstream sectors also look bright. The offshore oilfield services sector is facing unprecedented levels of business, says Douglas-Westwood, an industry research firm. Companies that normally might have a 6-month backlog are now booking work for 2011, the firm says in its annual forecast. "Virtually the only place where giant fields will be found in future years is in deep water, with Brazil's recent Tupi elephant find testament to that. Douglas-Westwood expects world deepwater production to grow from 6 million BOE/D in 2007 to 11 million BOE/D in 2011," the The World Deepwater Report says. Almost USD 25 billion will be spent annually in deepwater capital expenditure by 2012, representing 30% growth for the 2008–2012 period in comparison with the previous 5 years. That is particularly driving demand for deepwater rigs, floating production systems, and subsea production hardware. "This drive to produce, what is very high-cost oil, from deep water is the oil companies’ response to declining production in offshore continental shelf areas such as the North Sea and Gulf of Mexico" as well as the lack of access to onshore reserves controlled by national oil companies, the report said. The promise of Arctic waters, with estimates of up to 300 billion BOE, has resulted in a "great subsea land claim" involving Russia, Canada, and the US, the report says. Companies may soon be struggling to keep up with global demand growth, fueled by the rapidly growing economies of China and India. Energy growth in those two countries seems to have led to the rise in worldwide energy consumption the past few years and the resultant rise in oil prices to near USD 100/bbl. Several other challenges appear on the horizon beyond the unprecedented demand growth in Asia. The issue of climate change will almost certainly affect government energy policies over the next several years. And the relationship between international oil companies and national oil companies and what that means for access to reserves and speed of project development will certainly come into play. Perhaps the most critical issue to address is the looming retirements of industry staff in the coming years and the industry's ability to find, train, and retain talent.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,501
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,417

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,191
Écart entre enseignants0,180 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Petroleum TechnologyMême sujetMarine and Offshore Engineering StudiesTravaux en français237 207