Talk:Burgan field

Energy High‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Western Asia: Kuwait Mid‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Kuwait (assessed as High-importance).

Peak Production[edit]

Looking at the wood makenzie data the peak production was back in 1972 when it hit just over 2.4 Mbbl/d, just wondering where the data saying it was in 2005 came from. Cheers Philbentley 09:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updating production and reserve data[edit]

I've made a try at this, but publicly available information is sparse, sometimes contradictory, and often has internal inconsistencies. Here are some details, for future efforts:

The Great Burgan Field, Kuwait by Rasoul Sorkhabi, GeoExpro Volume 9, Issue 1, 2012. This is a new resource and has some good, well-sourced information new to the article -- but also troubling evidence of sloppiness: Sorkhabi quotes a Foreign Policy article (14 August 2006) [1] ( free account required) as Burgan having 66.72 bbo, but the actual figure in the article is 66 to 72 -- and that is unsourced by FP, and looks to me more like an estimate of the total recoverable resource (see article and List of oil fields ). Sorkhabi is an experienced and credible source [2]; this shouldn't have gotten past him.

The caveat that "the reserves and production data for Burgan are shrouded in a cloud of secrecy, uncertainty, and controversy" is from Sorkhabi.

Note that the recoverable resource, production estimates, and remaining reserve estimates currently in the article won't reconcile.

Disclosure: I'm a mining geologist, so I may be missing obvious things in the petroleum-geology world.And this review took way longer than I expected :-[ --Pete Tillman (talk) 23:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

INSTRUCTOR COMMENT[edit]

You don't seem to have done anything to the existing page so I can't give you any credits at this point which is a pity. please make sure to describe the geological setting of the sedimentary basin as well as significant amounts of detail concerning the major components of the hydrocarbon system including source, seal, reservoir and trapping mechanism. Stratigraphic diagram or table would probably be a bonus. Pclift (talk) 16:47, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Burgan field. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:46, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]