Methodology and Equations of Mineral Production Forecast. Part II. The Fundamental Equation. Crude Oil Production in USA

Sergio Pérez Rodríguez

Petro Invest Energy, Houston, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ojg.2013.36044                

Abstract

The fundamental equation of mineral production allows to model and design the dynamics of mineral production, however complex they are or could be. It considers not only the case of a constant production to reserves ratio for given intervals of time, but with a piecewise approach, it is also enabled to account the variation on time of this ratio. With a constant production to reserves ratio, the limit expression of the fundamental equation takes the form of an Erlang distribution with a fixed shape parameter. The rate parameter equals the scale factor. The discrete piecewise version, instead of considering the reserves and the production to reserves ratio being constant through certain intervals of time, updates both variables by units of time. This version, using either lineal or non lineal functions for the variables involved, let to model known production profiles or to forecast them by experimental design. The Hubbert’s linearization updated with recent data and the p-box method applied to determine ultimate recovery of U.S. crude oil reserves indicate official accounts underestimate them. The analysis of the ideal model of production based on Hubbert’s linearization and curve, can be made by decomposing it in the distribution with time of the reserves and of the production to reserves ratio. The distribution of reserves with time is synchronized for both the ideal Hubbert’s curve and real profiles, disregarding whether they match or not. The departure of real profiles from the ideal Hubbert’s curve lies on the differences or correspondences of the distribution with time of the production to reserves ratio. The MonteCarlo simulation applied to forecast US crude oil production for the next five years points to a slow decline, with average annual yields presenting a difference lower than 10% between the start and the end of the simulation.

Keywords

Mineral; Mining; Metal; Oil; Gas; MonteCarlo Simulation; Production Models; Hubbert Curve

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	S. Perez Rodriguez, “Methodology and Equations of Mineral Production Forecast. Part I. Crude Oil in the UK and Gold in Nevada, USA. Prediction of Late Stages of Production,” Open Journal of Geology, September 2013.
[2]	M. K. Hubbert, “Techniques of Prediction as Applied to Production of Oil and Gas,” US Department of Commerce, NBS Special Publication 631, 1982.
[3]	K. Deffeyes, “Beyond Oil,” The View from Hubbert’s Peak. Hill and Wang, 2006.
[4]	S. H. Mohr and G. M. Evans, “Combined Generalised Hubbert-Bass Model Approach to Include Disruptions When Predicting Future Oil Production” Natural Resources, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2010, pp. 28-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/nr.2010.11004
[5]	M. Bertrand, “Oil Production: A Probabilistic Model of the Hubbert Curve,” Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, Vol. 27, No. 4, 2011, pp. 434-449.
[6]	L. D. Roper, “Where Have All the Metals Gone?” 1976. http://www.roperld.com/science/
[7]	K. Ferguson, “Fire in the Equations, The Science, Religion, and the Search for God,” Templeton Press, West Conshohocken, 2004.
[8]	R. M. Stark and R. L. Nicholls, “Mathematical Foundations for Design: Civil Engineering Systems,” Dover Publications, Dover, 2005.
[9]	G. P. Wadsworth and J. Bryan, “Applications of Probability and Random Variables,” 2nd Revised Edition, Mc-Graw-Hill Inc., New York, 1974.
[10]	A. C. Edwards, “Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve Estimation: The AusIMM Guide to Good Practice,” Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2001.
[11]	M. Bohmer and M. Kucera, “Prospecting and Exploration of Mineral Deposits,” Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1986.
[12]	A. Kazhdan, “Prospeccion de Yacimientos Minerales,” Ed. MIR Moscu, 1982.
[13]	A. Journel, “Evaluation of Mineral Reserves: A Simulation Approach,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004.
[14]	J. Harbaugh, J. Doveton and J. Davis, “Computing Risk for Oil Prospects: Principles and Programs,” Elsevier, Pergamon, 1995.
[15]	J. A. Murtha, “Decisions Involving Uncertainty—An @RISK Tutorial for the Petroleum Industry,” The Author, Houston, 1993.
[16]	D. Berleant and C. Goodman-Strauss, “Bounding the Results of Arithmetic Operations on Random Variables of Unknown Dependency Using Intervals,” Reliable Computting, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1998, pp. 147-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1009933109326
[17]	D. Karanki, H. Kushwaha and A. Verma, “Uncertainty Analysis Based on Probability Bounds (p-box) Approach in Probabilistic Safety Assessment,” Risk Analysis, Vol. 29, No. 5, 2009, pp. 662-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01221.x
[18]	Mohr, S. and Evans, G. The Generalized Hubbert Curve. The Oil Drum. 2010
[19]	US Energy Information Administration. US Production of Crude Oil. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/
[20]	J. Müller and H. Frimmel, “Numerical Analysis of Historic Gold Production Cycles and Implications for Future Sub-Cycles,” The Open Geology Journal, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2010, pp. 29-34.
[21]	I. Nashawi, A. Malallah and M. Al-Bisharah, “Forecasting World Crude Oil Production Using Multicyclic Hubbert Model,” ACS Publications, Washington DC, 2010.
[22]	I. Sominsky, “Method of Mathematical Induction,” D C Heath & Co., Lexington, 2000.