Lyell Collection
Geological Society, London, Special Publications
Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help

Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Binns, P. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2006; v. 254; p. 7-26;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2006.254.01.02
© 2006 Geological Society of London

Evaluating subtle stratigraphic traps: prospect to portfolio

P. E. Binns

Consultant, The Old Farmhouse, Broomlee Mains, West Linton, Edinburgh EH46 7BT, UK paul{at}binns.fslife.co.uk

A compilation of 85 stratigraphic traps demonstrates the variety of trapping mechanisms and the scope for developing new concepts by matching geological models with features in 3D seismic volumes. However, aspects of quantitative evaluation may discourage exploration. Investors require assurance in the form of probabilistic evaluations of risk and value but information critical to the evaluation of new stratigraphic concepts is likely to be lacking. As estimates of risk and uncertainty vary with information, prospects evaluated with radically different levels of information must be ranked with care. The requirements for quantitative project ranking and portfolio optimization have to be reconciled with the need to ‘venture into the unknown’. The character of stratigraphic prospects dictates different evaluation methods from those used to evaluate structural prospects. This, together with the high degree of sensitivity of value to evaluation methodology, can also lead to inconsistencies in ranking.

Within the context of a company’s overall strategy and risk tolerance, organizational and cultural factors may influence prospect selection. In particular over-emphasis on quantitative methods may not have the intended effect. A common understanding, amongst technical and commercial disciplines and decision makers, of the background to quantification is essential.

Factors which encourage the progression of stratigraphic prospects include a dedicated geoscience effort, a separate ‘growth’ portfolio of new concepts, a formal structure for progressing these and a stable organization.





This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
M. R. Allen, G. P. Goffey, R. K. Morgan, and I. M. Walker
The deliberate search for the stratigraphic trap: an introduction
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2006; 254: 1 - 5.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
G. P. Citron, J. A. MacKay, and P. R. Rose
Appropriate creativity and measurement in the deliberate search for stratigraphic traps
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2006; 254: 27 - 41.
[Abstract] [PDF]