AAPG Annual Convention

Research Committee Meeting Denver, Colorado June 6, 2009 ●7:00-10:00 pm

Report Current co-chairs Ken Peters (Schlumberger) and Ron Nelson (Consultant) of the Research Committee (RC) opened the meeting, which included AAPG President Elect John Lorenz, AAPG liaisons Jim Blankenship and Debbi Boonstra, Bulletin Editor Gretchen Gillis, Education Committee liaison Susan Nash, Division of Environmental Geology (DEG) liaison James Taranik, John Sneider (Chair Reservoir Development Committee) and more than 35 attendees. Eighteen committee members attended (Appendix), together with several new and proposed conference organizers and aspiring members. Since 23 member terms expire on June 30, 2010, Ken Peters asked for recommendations of potential new members (including students). Summary of Action Items

1) Ken Peters will inform the Executive Council (EC) of the perception by RC members that we need to better evaluate and monitor energy-related research in industry, academia, and government. The RC proposes that a subcommittee consisting of Tom Dignes, Nick Harris, and James Taranik determine whether the annual geoscience survey results conducted by the American Geological Institute (AGI) are sufficient for our needs and how to effectively transmit this information to the RC and other AAPG committees. If the current AGI survey is insufficient for perceived RC needs, then Barry Katz may be called upon by the subcommittee to help create a list of appropriate survey questions based on past experience. The EC may need to negotiate with AGI to have these questions included in their next survey.

2) Ken Peters and Ron Nelson will inform the EC of the need for a continuously updated mailing list of major industry, academic, and government contacts for use by Hedberg Conference organizers, the RC, and other AAPG committees.

3) Ken Peters will inform the EC of potential duplication of effort and confusion resulting from the new Geoscience Technology Workshops (GTW). Because Hedberg and GTW meetings are approved by different committees, both the RC and the Education Committee need clear definitions of these conference types from the EC and improved communication is required between these committees.

4) Ken Peters will follow up with all pending or proposed Hedberg Conferences, especially those by Chris Kendall/Dave Barbeau and Dan Jarvie, who agreed to submit final proposals to the RC within one month.

2

5) Debbi Boonstra will provide the Hedberg Organizers Information Kit to Dave Barbeau and Chris Kendall (U. South Carolina).

6) Ron Nelson, Gretchen Gillis, and Jim Blankenship will compile new publication guidelines for research conferences within three months, subject to approval by the RC. Gretchen will attach the final document to all acceptance letters sent to successful applicants for Hedberg Special Publications.

7) Peter Hennings, Jim Anderson, and Barry Katz agreed to form a subcommittee to compile revised guidelines for conference conveners. The document will include tips for running effective conferences. Peter will provide information he prepared for the recent Hedberg Conference on fractures to initiate this process.

8) Ken Peters will talk to Janice Scott (jscott@aapg.org) about adding the RC to the list of reviewers for the new Robert R. Berg Outstanding Research Award.

9) John Lorenz will recommend to the EC that the RC be added to the list of reviewers for AAPG Research Fund grants. The quality of proposals related to petroleum is best evaluated by AAPG experts, particularly when the funds originate from AAPG.

10) Ken Peters will see that future RC meetings use PowerPoint presentations to facilitate distribution of information to interested parties.

Introduction After short introductions by each attendee, Ken Peters opened the meeting with a brief summary of committee goals, tasks, and conference types: Goals:

• Monitor energy-related geologic research • Promote scientific exchange through conferences, symposia • Interact with other AAPG committees on research activities • Work with other organizations to gather data

Tasks: • Review/approve Hedberg Conference proposals • Sponsor joint Hedberg Conferences with other organizations • Recommend symposia for AAPG Annual Meetings • Prepare reports on the status of research for AAPG leadership

Conference types: • Hedberg Research Conferences (3-5/yr, 80-120 participants) • Hedberg Emerging Research Workshops (<20); assess suitability for Hedberg • Joint Workshops (3+/yr, 80-120 participants) with SPE, SEG, EAGE, others • Annual Research Symposia cover earlier Hedberg Conference or Joint Workshop

Invited Presentations by Meeting Organizers

3

Selected potential or approved conference organizers were invited to present 10-minute summary discussions of plans for their meetings (yellow shading in Figure 1). These presentations accomplished two goals: (1) they solidified the commitment by speakers to finalize their proposal and proceed with plans, and (2) they facilitated useful comments and suggestions by RC members on conference content, format, and timing. Based on the high level of interaction between speakers and the committee, these summary discussions will certainly be incorporated into future RC meetings (e.g., New Orleans).

Figure 1. Upcoming and pending Hedberg Conferences and Joint Symposia. Speakers in yellow presented their ideas for planned or proposed conferences at the Denver meeting. Discussion and Details of Action Items Open discussion was conducted throughout the presentations and in a session at the end of the meeting that compiled action items. Some of the major topics/issues raised include: Nick Harris recommended that the committee revisit the need to evaluate and monitor energy-related research in industry and academia. He suggested that this type of information is vital to AAPG and the future of academic departments who rely on support from AAPG and other organizations for research. After discussion, it was decided that that the organizations needed to be polled about their research.

4

Information gathered should include not only current research areas, but the level of funding. An RC survey conducted in the late 1990’s was discontinued due to perceived overlap with the AGI survey. Barry Katz pointed out that the survey conducted by the RC required a huge time investment. Major effort was required to (i) create updated mailing lists for key industry executives and (ii) assimilate feedback. The RC agreed that survey results would be a worthwhile tool for AAPG leadership, but that we have neither the time nor the resources for the effort. James Taranik (DEG Liaison) indicated that AGI conducts a survey of geoscience departments similar to that once conducted by the RC.

• Action item: Ken Peters will bring this issue to the attention of the EC and propose that a new subcommittee be formed comprised of Nick Harris, Tom Dignes, and James Taranik. They will examine the AGI poll to determine whether this information is suitable for our needs and will discuss ways that this information can provided on a regular basis to both the EC and the RC. If it is determined that we need to create an AAPG geoscience survey, then Peters and Nelson (with the support of Blankenship and Gillis) will inform the EC of the need. Perhaps funding could allow an AAPG employee to create and maintain a mailing list, circulate the survey, and compile the responses for AAPG leadership. Barry Katz may be called upon to create a list of appropriate survey questions based on past experience

Bob Shoup (e-mail to KEP 6/4/09) indicated that better communication with affiliated societies, AAPG departments, and committees would have improved the success of their recent Hedberg Conference. They recommend that a comprehensive mailing list be a made available to all conveners.

• Action item: Ken Peters and Ron Nelson will inform the EC of the need for a continuously updated mailing list of major academic, industry, and government contacts for use by the RC and other AAPG committees.

John Sneider (Figure 1, pending conference 10; pdf available from Ken Peters) described “Geological Aspects of Estimating Petroleum Resources and Reserves”, which was originally approved by the RC as a Hedberg Research Conference, but was converted to a Geoscience Technology Workshop (GTW, approved by Education Committee). GTWs are a new AAPG conference type designed for education and direct applications, unlike Hedbergs, which focus on cutting-edge research. As pointed out by Barry Katz, the distinction between these two conference types is vague. The purpose of this workshop will be to discuss geologic aspects of estimating petroleum reserves with particular emphasis on how new FCC rules impact reserve calculations. Topics include ethics, uncertainty, petrophysics, mapping, modeling, and unconventional resources.

• Action item: Ken Peters will inform the EC of need for (i) clear definitions of GTWs and Hedbergs because they are approved by different committees, and (ii) improved coordination between the Education and Research Committees in order to avoid duplication of effort.

Chris Kendall and David Barbeau (U. South Carolina) described their preliminary proposal for a Hedberg Conference on “Eustasy, Tectonics and Climate: What Drives the Stratigraphic Pulse?” (Figure 1, pending conference 1; pdf attached). They provided a preliminary proposal for a 5-day Hedberg Conference on mixed clastic and carbonate systems, which includes oral, poster, field, and working group discussions. The venue has note been decided, but the plan aims for summer of 2010. There was general agreement that the topic is excellent and that the conference should include a field component. Concerns expressed by Lee Krystinik and other RC members included the breadth of topic, group size

5

(with field component), and the need for a clear statement of how the topic impacts applied science. For example, the number of trip attendees could present logistic problems. The organizers agreed to submit a formal proposal within a month. Dan Jarvie (IFP) described his plans for “Understanding, Advancing, and Researching Unconventional Shale Resource Plays” (Figure 1, pending conference 3; pdf attached). The venue will depend on access to appropriate shale outcrops (e.g., Austin, Houston). Eight organizers were identified from AAPG, SPE and SEG for this conference. A Gordon Conference format was proposed that includes morning and evening talks and afternoon posters, and a core workshop or field trip to a Barnett Shale quarry. A venue in Texas is likely, either in late 2010 or early 2011. Dan expects a large turnout (200-300) with participants required to submit an abstract or participate as session chairs. Slides from the talks will not be distributed. RC concerns included the group size (particularly, for the field trip) and the need for a remote location in order to maintain a captive audience. Debbi Boonstra recommended considering other locations, such as Snowbird. Dan agreed to talk to all organizers and submit a final proposal to the RC within a month.

• Action item: Ken Peters will follow up with Kendall, Barbeau, and Jarvie, who all agreed to submit final proposals within a month.

Ron Nelson described the need to formalize the responsibilities of authors and conveners with respect to Bulletin theme issue or Hedberg special publications (pdf available from Ken Peters). The RC agreed that we need to (1) preserve flexibility in the organization and format of Hedberg meetings, but (2) establish more formal rules for creating Hedberg manuscripts. For example, conveners need to consider creating an introductory article for each volume that includes a glossary and history of the topic. In addition, authors need to prepare stand-alone papers and not simply a written form of the oral presentation that assumes readers are already experts in the topic. Ron recommends that the RC clarify publication options for organizers, ranging from no notes (e.g., SPE research forums) to a Geological Society of London model, which requires a special publication. At this time, the only requirement for Hedberg Conferences is that there be a written post-meeting summary. Conference organizers can decide whether to publish a post-conference volume, how many papers to include, size of papers, and quality. Reviews are typically done by participants who attended the conference, but it was suggested that non-participant reviewers also be considered. If the papers submitted do not meet AAPG standards, the RC agreed that they should be rejected, although dedicated organizers may decide to salvage certain contributions by means of extra editorial help. In summary, there is a need for updated publication guidelines. Gretchen Gillis described the prototype electronic review system for Hedberg special publications. This system will be available for the first “guinea pig” conference proceedings in July. The deadline for submittal of manuscripts for the Napa Hedberg Basin and Petroleum System Modeling Conference (Figure 1, item 2) is July 31, so these conveners will likely be the first users of the system. The system is being tested and is scheduled for rollout in July, 2009. The Rapid Review system used for manuscripts is not appropriate for books. It is anticipated there will be some initial problems, but the system will eventually facilitate the book review process. A copy of the existing document “Avoiding Common Manuscript Problems” updated by Gretchen from an original document by Neil Hurley was provided to the RC (pdf available from Ken Peters).

6

• Action item: Ron Nelson and Gretchen Gillis will work together to prepare a draft document on responsibilities of Hedberg organizers and authors when writing special publication contributions. This draft will contain recommendations to authors on how to avoid common manuscript problems similar to that of the document by Neil Hurley modified by Gretchen. Gretchen will attach the final document to all acceptance letters sent to successful applicants for Hedberg special publications.

Jean-Yves Chatellier (Vice Chair Joint Meetings) presented a snapshot of the state of our Joint Research Meetings (AAPG-SEG-SPE). He conducted a poll of meeting attendees and created a four-component ranking system to help evaluate the good and bad aspects of each conference. This post-mortem information can be used by the RC to provide advice and feedback to the organizers of new conferences. Timely advertising by AAPG was one of the major issues identified by the survey. The RC agreed that this information would be helpful to future organizers and a subcommittee was identified to implement use of the poll for each Joint Meeting (Jean-Yves Chatellier, Ken Peters, and Ron Nelson).

• Action item: The survey of good and bad aspects of each meeting needs to be refined by Jean-Yves Chatellier, reviewed Peters and Nelson, and then provided to all conveners of new conferences by the Co-Chairs as part of the information kit to help them plan their meetings.

• Action item: Ken Peters will see that future RC meetings will use PowerPoint presentations.

This will facilitate distribution of presentations Ken Peters and Ron Nelson, Co-Chairs Joann Welton, Vice Chair Appendix

7