首页> 外文会议>2005 SPE annual technical conference and exhibition (ATCE 2005) >The Material Issues Involved in the Discussion Surrounding the Virtues of theSPE/WPC Definition of Proved Oil and Gas Reserves vs. the CorrespondingDefinition Set Out by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
【24h】

The Material Issues Involved in the Discussion Surrounding the Virtues of theSPE/WPC Definition of Proved Oil and Gas Reserves vs. the CorrespondingDefinition Set Out by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

机译:围绕SPE / WPC探明油气储量定义与美国证券交易委员会(SEC)提出的相应定义的美德的讨论中涉及的实质性问题

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Among the more contentious issues discussed within the oilrn& gas industry recently are:rn?Are the United States Securities and ExchangernCommission (SEC) definitions of Proved oil and gasrnreserves obsolete, too narrow and/or unrealistic forrntoday's oilfield technology?rn?Are the SPE/WPC definitions of Proved oil and gasrnreserves much more realistic and responsive torntoday's comparable reporting needs?rn?Has the meaning of the word 'Proved' changed overrnthe last twenty-five years?rn?Has the meaning of the expression 'ReasonablernCertainty' changed over the last twenty-five years?rnThe contention here is that the answers to each of these fourrnquestions is 'No'. This paper advances the idea that there are nornmaterial differences between the Proved oil and gas definitionsrnpromulgated by the two organizations if the original commonrncornerstones are honored within the true spirit of the words engaged inrnthose definitions.rnThe allegation that the SEC definitions for Proved oil and gasrnare in some way out-of-date in terms of the application of modernrnoilfield technology is examined and found to be without legitimaternfoundation. The distinctive variation between the two organizations isrndiscussed; the SEC as a regulatory authority with responsibilities forrnensuring comparable reporting by listed corporations within itsrnjurisdiction versus the SPE as a Technical Society without suchrnresponsibilities or the structure for offering guidance regardingrndefinitional compliance.rnAs the 'interpretation drift' in the application of the SPE/WPCrnProved reserve definition continues unabated, the search for anrnInternational Standard by other organizations (particularly the UnitedrnNations) only further complicates the matter. The question is posed asrnto whether the lack of proactive contributions in this regard from thernSPE, as an organization, places the very integrity of the Society's broader reserve definitions at stake. The SPE membership arernreminded that very few years ago, the SPE/WPC/AAPG definitionsrnwere very credibly put forth for adoption as the essential InternationalrnPetroleum Industry Standard.
机译:最近在石油天然气行业内讨论的更具争议的问题包括:美国证券交易委员会(SEC)对已探明石油和天然气的定义是否过时,太狭窄和/或不切实际的当今油田技术?SPE / WPC对已探明石油和天然气的定义保留了更现实,更能响应当今可比较的报告需求?-在过去的25年中,``已探明''一词的含义已更改吗?最近25年?这里的争论是,对这四个问题中的每一个的回答都是“否”。本文提出了这样的想法,即如果两个组织发布的石油和天然气证明定义之间没有实质性的区别,前提是原始的普通磨石是在涉及这些定义的词语的真实精神范围内兑现的。在现代诺菲尔菲尔德技术的应用方面,某种方式已经过时了,人们对此进行了检查,发现这没有合法依据。讨论了两个组织之间的独特差异;美国证券交易委员会(SEC)作为监管机构,负责确保其管辖范围内的上市公司进行可比报告,而美国证券交易委员会(SPE)作为技术协会则没有这种责任或提供有关定义合规性指导的结构。继续进行下去,其他组织(尤其是联合国)对国际标准的搜寻只会使事情变得更加复杂。提出的问题是,作为一个组织,SPE缺乏在这方面的积极贡献是否会危及协会更广泛的储备金定义的完整性。提醒SPE成员是在几年前,非常可靠地提出了SPE / WPC / AAPG定义,以作为基本的国际石油工业标准采用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号