Forum Included Q&A From Public

Shortly after lunch on Oct. 14 people began filing into the ballroom of the Tulsa Marriott Southern Hills Hotel. They included attendees of the 2009 AAPG Mid-Continent Section meeting, members of the general public and two busloads of students from local high schools.

They were there to participate in a conversation about energy – its past and its future.

At 1 p.m. the panelists were on the rostrum, I was at the podium, and the microphones went live.

It was in April 2008 at the AAPG convention in San Antonio when Edith Wilson first told me about the idea to host a public forum on energy as part of the Mid-Continent Section meeting. In a follow-up phone conversation later that month, she asked if I would be willing to assist her and the committee in developing the event and moderate the forum.

The forum’s purpose was to engage “business professionals, scientists, students and members of the general public in a discussion of energy challenges and opportunities facing the mid-continent region.”

Tulsa is widely considered the first oil capital, and therefore perhaps an odd place to hold a public event on energy. Doesn’t everyone in Tulsa already understand the energy business?

Well, no, they really don’t. And the energy business is changing. New oil and natural gas plays, such as shale gas, demonstrate the continued vitality of the petroleum industry.

At the same time, society is pushing the advancement of alternative energy sources. Meanwhile, much of the discussion about energy is framed in an “either-or” context – fossil fuels or alternatives – which is a false choice. We need fossil fuels and alternatives.

The theme for the forum, “America’s Energy Heartland, America’s Energy Future”, expresses the fact that energy has historically played a critical role in the economic development of the midcontinent, and will remain vital to the region long into the future.

We wanted to present useful information to the approximately 350 attendees at a level that would be informative and stimulate questions from the audience.

Getting the right panelists to participate – individuals who could deliver the necessary technical information in an engaging manner – was paramount. And we were fortunate to find four individuals who met the criteria: James Smith, an economist and the Carey M. Maguire Chair in Oil and Gas Management at Southern Methodist University’s Cox School of Business; AAPG member Rod Nelson, vice president of communications and vice president of innovation and collaboration for Schlumberger; AAPG member Art Green, retired chief geoscientist for ExxonMobil Exploration Company; and AAPG member Pete Stark, vice president of industry relations for IHS.

We divided the forum into a first session, “Energy From the Heartland,” where we focused on the role energy plays historically and today with these presentations:

  • World Oil: Market or Mayhem (Smith).
  • Not Your Father’s Oil Patch – How Technology Changes the Industry (Nelson).
  • A Look at Global Supply and Demand (Green).
  • The Mid-Continent Shale Gas Boom (Stark).

The first session concluded with a question and answer period, and audience members were able to ask their questions in person or text them to a phone number provided.

After a brief intermission, the second session considered energy for the future and where the energy business is heading:

  • The Portents of Peak Oil (Smith).
  • Natural Gas – Key to Our Energy Future (Stark).
  • A Future With Fewer Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Nelson).
  • Tomorrow’s Energy Explorers (Green).

The forum concluded with a 40-minute conversation between the panelists and the audience – and we had more questions than time to address them all.

The presentations made by the panelists in both sessions will be posted at AAPG’s online e-magazine Search and Discovery as they become available from the authors.

It is always difficult to tell the impact of a public event such as this forum. But the substantive nature of the questions suggests that the audience did engage on the topic of energy during the course of the afternoon. And such conversations, informing the public about the energy geosciences and the environment, are an important task for AAPG.

Thanks to our sponsors for making the event possible: IHS, Tulco Oils Inc., Tallgrass Energy, AAPG, Schlumberger, OERB – Oklahoma’s Oil and Natural Gas Producers and Royalty Owners, and the Friends of Finance.

A special thanks also is due to our four panelists for their time and effort that made the forum a success.

Finally, this event would have merely been a “nice idea” without the steering committee, which had the vision to develop it and the tenacity to pull it off. Thanks to Edith Wilson, Shane Matson, Mike Thompson and Rick Fritz for their commitment and leadership.

Comments (0)


Washington Watch

Washington Watch - David Curtiss

David Curtiss served as the Director of AAPG’s Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. from 2008-11.

Washington Watch

Washington Watch - Creties Jenkins

Creties Jenkins is a past president of the EMD.

Washington Watch

Washington Watch - Peter MacKenzie

 Peter MacKenzie is vice chair of the Governance Board. 

Washington Watch

Washington Watch - Dan Smith

Dan Smith is chair of the Governance Board.

Policy Watch

Policy Watch is a monthly column of the EXPLORER written by the director of AAPG's  Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. *The first article appeared in February 2006 under the name "Washington Watch" and the column name was changed to "Policy Watch" in January 2013 to broaden the subject matter to a more global view.

View column archives

See Also: Book

The purpose of this Seals Atlas is to present the microstructural, petrophysical, and geomechanical properties of selected examples of cap rocks and fault seals for use as analogs in the prediction of seal capacity or containment potential.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/book-s60-Atlas-of-Australian-and-New-Zealand-Hydrocarbon-Seals.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3956 Book
Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4356 Book

See Also: Bulletin Article

This article describes a 250-m (820-ft)-thick upper Eocene deep-water clastic succession. This succession is divided into two reservoir zones: the lower sandstone zone (LSZ) and the upper sandstone zone, separated by a package of pelitic rocks with variable thickness on the order of tens of meters. The application of sequence-stratigraphic methodology allowed the subdivision of this stratigraphic section into third-order systems tracts.

The LSZ is characterized by blocky and fining-upward beds on well logs, and includes interbedded shale layers of as much as 10 m (33 ft) thick. This zone reaches a maximum thickness of 150 m (492 ft) and fills a trough at least 4 km (2 mi) wide, underlain by an erosional surface. The lower part of this zone consists of coarse- to medium-grained sandstones with good vertical pressure communication. We interpret this unit as vertically and laterally amalgamated channel-fill deposits of high-density turbidity flows accumulated during late forced regression. The sandstones in the upper part of this trough are dominantly medium to fine grained and display an overall fining-upward trend. We interpret them as laterally amalgamated channel-fill deposits of lower density turbidity flows, relative to the ones in the lower part of the LSZ, accumulated during lowstand to early transgression.

The pelitic rocks that separate the two sandstone zones display variable thickness, from 35 to more than 100 m (115–>328 ft), indistinct seismic facies, and no internal markers on well logs, and consist of muddy diamictites with contorted shale rip-up clasts. This section is interpreted as cohesive debris flows and/or mass-transported slumps accumulated during late transgression.

The upper sandstone zone displays a weakly defined blocky well-log signature, where the proportion of sand is higher than 80%, and a jagged well-log signature, where the sand proportion is lower than 60%. The high proportions of sand are associated with a channelized geometry that is well delineated on seismic amplitude maps. Several depositional elements are identified within this zone, including leveed channels, crevasse channels, and splays associated with turbidity flows. This package is interpreted as the product of increased terrigenous sediment supply during highstand normal regression.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/sequence-stratigraphy-of-the-eocene-turbidite.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5773 Bulletin Article

See Also: CD DVD

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4453 CD-DVD

See Also: Workshop

Make plans to attend the AAPG Workshop called, "Geochronology Applied to Petroleum Geology" on November 23-25, 2015 at the University of in Geneva, Switzerland. The workshop provides 2 days of lectures, one half-day with lab tours and a round-table discussion.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/er-ws-geochronology-applied-hero-geneva.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 22041 Workshop