labradore

"We can't allow things that are inaccurate to stand." — The Word of Our Dan, February 19, 2008.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Data acquisition

The Telegram editorialist today makes an interesting and familiar comment which absolutely does not come straight out of an Eighth Floor polling-period talking point:

Even if the drilling turns out to be a bust, the core samples alone will provide invaluable geographic information.
A slight, if inadvertent, nuance from the official position of nominal Natural Resources Minister Kathy Blunderdale, who just a few days ago confouted traducers and counter-span negativity along much the same lines:

Minister Counters Liberal Criticism on West Coast Oil Exploration

Even if they don't find oil on the Northern Peninsula, the geological information will be very useful. That's the word from the Minister of Natural Resources in the wake of criticism from the Liberals that the province should not be risking taxpayers' money.
Who herself was echoing the sentiments of oil magnate and wind owner, Ed Martin:


(It) will provide access to new, valuable information and further assess the petroleum potential in this area
All of which is true: drilling a hole in the ground will yield valuable data on the stratigraphy and petroleum deposits (if any) in that area. That’s the geological information.

And by the time you’re done drilling that intellectually interesting hole, you should also have a pretty good idea where your drill rig is. That would be the invaluable geographic information that the Tellytorialist so looks forward to receiving.

Ed Martin looks forward to receiving data, too. To him, it’s imperative:

We know there’s oil there. We know there’s source there. We know from our seismic work that there are formations that should support oil. And the only thing we need now is information down-hole. We need to drill to get that data.
But you see, here’s the question which some people, though not, apparently, the optimistic and positive Tellytorialist, are asking themselves:

Is the expenditure of $20-million in public money the only way to obtain this geological (and geographical) information?

Do the magical animistic pixie-rocks near, and underneath, Parsons Pond, somehow know when it’s private money operating the rig, and, true to their socialist principles, clam up about their own stratigraphic history and petroleum potential?

Who is the “we” who needs to drill to get that data?

3 Comments:

At 9:45 AM, August 21, 2009 , Blogger Peter said...

The fact is, the government has jumped into the exploration business. They're not hiding that. Ed Martin's overemphasis notwithstanding, the data collected from drilling is not the primary impetus. Maybe "invaluable" is too strong a word, but the benefits of core data are still worth mentioning. You put the cart before the horse.

 
At 11:47 AM, August 21, 2009 , Blogger WJM said...

Maybe "invaluable" is too strong a word, but the benefits of core data are still worth mentioning.

"Still worth mentioning"?

That — along with the make-work angle — has been the main focus of the public pronouncements from Ed Martin and the nominal natural resources minister, to say nothing of the shills and plants, all along.

I ask again: is this government intervention the ONLY way such data could be acquired?

(Hint: the answer is no.)

 
At 11:58 AM, August 21, 2009 , Blogger Edward G. Hollett said...

Not really, Peter.

Government isn't; NALCO has decided in this case to step in for some reason. There are lots of ways it could have acted if it was interested in getting into exploration per se. This Leprechaun play isn't one of them.

The reference to what NALCO will get if the wells are dry is telling. It likely reflects an expectation that there will be three dusters or any show will be less than commercial. That could be why Leprechaun apparently wasn't successful in raising the needed capital in the first place.

There is more to this story than what has first appeared or was first presented. The rest may emerge over time.

Whatever the real story is, it certainly isn't about NALCO getting into the "exploration business" or spending $20 million to get "core data" invaluable or not.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home