<em>Actgeo, Different Conclusion from Withdrawn Australian Company... Cross-Verification is Key</em>

President Yoon Suk-yeol announced on the 3rd at the National Briefing held in the briefing room of the Presidential Office building in Yongsan, Seoul, regarding the oil and gas deposits in the East Sea. The photo shows an image indicating the promising structural extraction areas revealed during the briefing. (Source=Yonhap News)

원본보기 아이콘

Amid various suspicions surrounding the press conference held by Vitor Abreu, an advisor from the U.S. consulting firm Actgeo, which conducted a detailed analysis of deep-sea oil exploration data in the East Sea, a geology expert also expressed curiosity about “the reason for the difference in interpretation between Woodside and Dr. Abreu.”

On the 10th, Professor Choi Kyung-sik of the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Seoul National University appeared on ‘SBS Kim Tae-hyun’s Political Show’ and said, “The press conference provided relatively detailed explanations about the selection of drilling sites and the background of the promising structure protrusion, but it remains a question what differences exist compared to Woodside’s previous interpretations and to what extent and on what content the verification was conducted.”

Woodside, which explored the deep-sea area of the East Sea for 15 years before Actgeo, is known to have withdrawn considering business feasibility and economic viability. Woodside is regarded as Australia’s largest oil company with the best understanding of South Korea’s continental shelf. Professor Choi mentioned, “Woodside and the Korea National Oil Corporation (KNOC) drilled two wells and failed, and KNOC drilled one more well and also failed. They tested three wells in the same block, but all failed.” He added, “Woodside spent a huge amount of money and was the main operator of the project, while Actgeo is a simple consulting firm, so although they will speak confidently, they might present a much more proactive narrative.”

On the 5th, Dr. Vitor Abreu of Act-Geo from the United States, who arrived through Incheon International Airport, is answering reporters' questions. He is expected to explain his analysis of the possibility of oil deposits during his visit to Korea. Photo by Jo Yongjun jun21@

원본보기 아이콘

However, regarding the government’s basis for judgment (the emergence of new 3D exploration data during the one year after Woodside’s withdrawal), he said, “Because there is a significant difference in resolution, if Woodside did not sufficiently review that 3D data, it is possible that Actgeo, which reviewed the 3D data under Dr. Abreu, derived a new structure.” Nevertheless, public opinion holds that to secure trust in this, Actgeo should have entrusted the exploration data that served as the basis for ‘deriving the new promising structure’ to another credible company for proper cross-verification of business feasibility, and the scope of verification should be clarified to ensure reliability.

Regarding the ‘20%’ success probability of oil field development announced by Actgeo, he responded, “It is a fairly subjective number.” He explained, “The evaluation is qualitative depending on the entity, perspective, and strategy of the evaluating company. It involves judgment based on worst-case scenarios, best-case scenarios, and experience, so in reality, nothing can be known before drilling.”

Dr. Choi added, “No oil field on Earth is developed without bearing risks,” and “That is why the typical phrase ‘high risk, high return’ is used.” However, about the estimated block revenue of 2,000 trillion won evaluated in this announcement, he said, “It is difficult to discuss actual economic value because it is a valuation based on estimates upon estimates.”

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.