In most peer reviews, due diligence is usually the underlying motivation: have all the significant aspects of development plans been adequately thought out and problems anticipated?
Realistically, it is not likely that a technical expert can replace man-years of work in a few short days. However, an outside person has experience gained from how other companies have dealt with similar issues, is independent of internal politics and, because they are external, can help find the holes that are difficult to spot when immersed in a project.
Having one’s work peer reviewed is (at least for me) always somewhat stressful. Yet there are very few projects where some constructive suggestions cannot be made. In ARE’s view, providing a balanced experienced analysis with a cooperative and constructive approach is key to these projects.
Past Peer Review Projects
- Reviewed operating companies’ development plans for financing, for a bank client
- Reviewed progress to-date on development plans for a SAGD project, for a US-based oil company client
- Reviewed an ERCB SAGD commercial application; for an oil company client
- Conducted a technical review of work done to-date on a mature Siberian oil and gas field in Tyumen, Russia
- Conducted a major property review – Petro-Canada
- Part of a Decision Cycle Compression advisory in Abu Dhabi
- Conducted reservoir simulation reviews in the following fields:
- Benson Midale Beds
- Midale Ordovician Yeoman
- Loon Lake Slave Point G
- Valhalla Doe Creek T, U and BB Pool
- Material Balance Studies
- Sylvan Lake Pekisko B
- Manyberries Sunburst Q Pool