Transcript Presentation

1
Harmonization of Fossil
Energy and Mineral Resource
Classifications
Sub-soil assets subgroup issue paper prepared by:
Julie L. Hass and Kristine E. Kolshus
Division for Environmental Statistics
Statistics Norway
London Group meeting, New York, 19-21 June 2006
1
Issue to be addressed:
Harmonisation of subsoil asset classification
- new UN Framework Classification
• One of the issues addressed to be considered in the
revision of ch. 8 of the SEEA-2003 (Definition of physical
reserves)
• There has now been developed a harmonized system that
we should be aware of:
United Nations Framework Classification for Fossil Energy
and Mineral Resources (UNFC).
2
Background
• Many different classification systems for physical
subsoil assets in use.
• If we are to have comparable international statistics
on subsoil assets, there is also a need to have a
consistent starting point for making the
calculations.
3
Treatment in the SEEA-2003 (1)
• Takes the existence of the physical assets as a
“given” and then focuses on different ways to
calculate the value of the assets.
• Does not discuss in detail the different classification
systems used by countries with regards to the
physical amounts of petroleum resources….
• But refers only to the McKelvey diagram.
4
Treatment in the SEEA-2003 (2)
• Converting country systems to the McKelvey system
requires interpretations to be made by each country, which
may not be made in a consistent or comparable way.
• Different definitions of the physical petroleum resources
then mean that there is not a consistent starting point for
making the value calculations.
• Classification of petroleum assets in physical units is not
given in a way to secure harmonization among countries.
• Unclear what assets to include in valuation calculations
5
Selected country practices:
Country
Reserve Definitions
Discovered
Undiscovered
Physical stock used in
stock value estimates
SEEA?
SNA?
DK
Sum of expected proven,
probable & possible
No data available
Discovered reserves
SEEA
Germany
Un-weighted sum of proven
and probable
No data available
no information available
?
France
Includes proven reserves only
No data available
Proven reserves
SNA
NL
Remaining expected reserve
Future additions to
natural gas reserves
from exploration
Estimated based on
government
appropriation of resource
rent.
?
Austria
Weighted sum of proven
developed (weight=1), proven
undeveloped (0.9), probable
(0.5) & possible (0.1) reserves
No data available
Discovered reserves
SEEA
with
weights
UK
Un-weighted sum of proven
and probable
Upper and lower
range of estimated
undiscovered
Discovered and (lower
range of) undiscovered
reserves
>SNA
but
<SEEA
Norway
Expected level of discovered
reserves
Expected level of
undiscovered
Discovered & (expected
level of) undiscovered
SEEA
6
New since SEEA-2003 was in editing phase
• United Nations Framework Classification for Fossil Energy
and Mineral resources (UNFC).
• UNECE Ad Hoc Group of Experts on Harmonization of
Fossil Energy and Mineral Resources Terminology.
• http://www.unece.org/ie/se/pdfs/UNFC/UNFCemr.pdf
7
Total Remaining Resources are
Categorized by Three Criteria
E Economic and
commercial viability
F Field project status and
feasibility
GGeological knowledge
8
Categories
Economic and commercial viability:
E1: Economic
E2: Potential economic
E3: Intrinsically economic
E1, F1, G1
Field project status and feasibility
F1: Justified
F2: Contingent
F3: Undefined
Geological knowledge
G1: Reasonable assured
G2: Estimated
G3: Inferred
G4: Potential
E3, F3, G4
9
Norway’s Resource Account Presented in the UNFC
Classification
NPD
Discoveries
Fields
Ty
pe
Prospective
resources
Contingent resources
Reserves
Class
UNFC
0
Mill
Sm 3
o.e.
3779
1
2A
2F
2837
36
387
3A
3F
412
402
Sum
4074
111-2
4A
4F
5A
5F
7F
7A
274
49
120
55
3
400
121
122
221
222
332
331
4F
5F
7F
297
401
66
122
223
333
Sum
1665
8&9
3400
Category
3779
4074
274 346
120
55
401
400
3
66
3400
Account as of 31.12.2003
Figures in million Sm3 o.e.
334
10
UNFC and the McKelvey Diagram
No conversion between the two systems!
11
Proposed next step & points for discussion (1)
• Should this be included in the SEEA or in the new
Guidelines for subsoil assets? And if so how?
• Should the UNFC be used as the basis or simply referred to
as yet another classification system without further
recommendations?
• If the UNFC system becomes the basis for physical assets,
which of the classification system (blocks) should be
included in the calculations for valuation?
• Who should give advice on this? UNFC? Don't need any
further advice, the London Group can simply make a
decision?
12
Proposed next step & points for discussion (2)
• We would suggest that the experts from the UNFC need to
be consulted regarding which of the assets should be
included before the London Group can make their final
recommendations in the new manual/compilation guidelines
for subsoil assets.
13