About This Item

Share This Item

The AAPG/Datapages Combined Publications Database

CSPG Bulletin

Abstract


Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology
Vol. 27 (1979), No. 3. (September), Pages 267-272

The Petroleum Geologist -- Scientist or Technician?

Andrew D. Baillie

ABSTRACT

The petroleum industry provides the largest market for B.Sc. Earth Science graduates from Canadian universities ... The adequacy of the B.Sc. degree as preparation for the demanding role of a professional petroleum geologist is questioned. A more suitable preparation is considered to be an M.Sc. degree. In recent years lucrative job opportunities and a lack of petroleum-oriented research programs in universities have resulted in a drastic decline in the number of M.Sc. graduates. Both industry and academic sectors must concern themselves with this problem and increase their efforts to encourage graduate studies and research relevant to the needs of the industry.

In recent years the petroleum industry has provided by far the largest market for earth-science graduates from Canadian universities, the majority of whom hold a bachelor's degree. It also seems likely this industry will continue to provide most of the job opportunities for B.Sc. earth-science graduates for some years to come.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of the geologist in the petroleum industry to determine whether this product of Canadian universities is adequately equipped at the B.Sc. level to fill that role. I don't want to suggest that the university should cater to the demands of the market, but it does seem appropriate that it should be more aware of the needs of the market that absorbs so many of its graduates.

In return, the industry should concern itself with the academic training the B.Sc. graduate is receiving to ensure that it is adequate, and to determine what supplementary training should be given to further the development of the professional petroleum geologist.

The role of the petroleum geologist has changed profoundly from what it was in the 50's and 60's. Then, a geologist's task was one where well-developed observational and analytical skills were all-important and could generally get the job done. Now, however, the problems facing the geologist commonly can be solved only by synthesizing much information from diverse sources, often from more than one discipline. Furthermore, besides coping with such data, geologists today are faced with the knowledge that much of it requires sophisticated processing by computers before it can be interpreted. The explorationist of today, both the geologist and the geophysicist dealing with the subsurface, seldom if ever can collect his own data. He must therefore be knowledgeable enough to appreciate the reliability as well as the limitations of the data that are going into the synthesis. Certainly today the explorationist has available a much more complex and varied array of data to interpret and synthesize than did his counterpart of earlier years.

Thus, we can question whether the earth-science B.Sc. graduate of today has the required technical knowledge and skills to cope with all this information and bring about its synthesis.

1 This paper was presented at the CSPG-CSEG Joint Convention -- Exploration Update '79, Calgary. June 13th. 1979.

End_Page 267------------------------

What do Canadian earth-science B.Sc. graduates bring to the job when they enter the petroleum industry? Has their education provided an adequate grounding in the principles and philosophy of geology, a broad enough background in related disciplines, and a rigorous enough training in the fundamental sciences? Or has it provided merely a sound technical knowledge with little or no exposure to problem-solving, development of critical and analytical skills, and the ability to work conceptually with data which are such essential parts of a petroleum geologist's job?

In recent years the exponential increase in knowledge and the development of new concepts and analytical tools has made exceptional demands on university educators who must attempt to keep abreast of this new knowledge. Many of these new developments and concepts in earth science are exciting, and one can see by reviewing modern curricula from Canadian universities the attempts that are being made to keep up-to-date.

Now, in a four-year time span we find available to undergraduates such courses as plate tectonics, geostatistics, facies models, geochemistry, hydrogeology and seismic stratigraphy, to name just a few of the courses that have proliferated as the universities endeavour to keep up-to-date. In many instances, however, the attempt to crowd these new courses into the undergraduate curriculum has been at the expense of either the more traditional courses which have been "trimmed to the bone", or the fundamental sciences of mathematics, physics and chemistry. To teach these new courses, departments have hired additional staff, and this has resulted in considerable overlap and fragmentation of the over-all program. The undergraduate cannot take all the courses offered, so the tendency to early specialization has become prevalent and a choice of several different "streams" is permitted. With such a crowded and fragmented curriculum it has become increasingly difficult to fit into the undergraduate program any courses that require integration and synthesis of data, the development of skills in problem solving, or the handling of data from more than one discipline.

The undergraduate student has become a listener with too little opportunity for dialogue. Lectures are slickly packaged and supplemented by video Previous HittapeNext Hit, reproduced handouts and voluminous notes. If the student can feed back an appropriate part of that material he can pass on to the next semester with a B average and a record of being a good student. The result is that the young graduate entering the work force has accumulated a tremendous amount of technical knowledge but in many instances has only poorly developed critical and analytical skills. He does not have the confidence to speculate on the unknown, or to interpret new sets of data which are essential ingredients of exploration.

In my view, which is shared by many, the present four-year program containing the elements just described is not an adequate preparation for entrance into the demanding role of a professional petroleum geologist. The Master of Science program, complete with a thesis, is considered to be a much more suitable preparation for a career in industry. It exposes a student to the conceptual aspects of geology, provides practical experience in solving problems, and affords the opportunity of conducting research. In my experience, geologists entering the industry with an M.Sc. degree bring to the job confidence and competence far exceeding that of their B.Sc. counterparts.

If we look to other professions we find that becoming a professional is somewhat more exacting. Lawyers, chartered accountants and the medical profession all require post-graduate study and rigid internship before acceptance as a fully-fledged professional. It is also interesting to compare the academic training of geologists who come from Europe or the United Kingdom. These geologists are eagerly sought after by industry, and if it weren't for restrictive Canadian immigration laws there would be more of them here. In most European countries, notably Germany, France, Holland and Denmark, there is no B.Sc. degree and one attains professional status only after 7-8 years of academic study and extensive field work. In the United Kingdom the B.Sc. is granted, but it is not normally considered a qualification for employment as a professional.

End_Page 268------------------------

Many of these geologists from the United Kingdon and Europe are employed, together with Canadian geologists with advanced degrees, as specialists in geological laboratories or Research and Services groups which many companies maintain. These groups handle special projects which require detailed interpretation or synthesis of the data. With such groups of specialists there is little need for the operating geologist to do much interpretation. When a core is pulled it is taken to the sedimentologist or petrologist for his opinion; when age determinations and interpretations of depositional environments are required they go to the biostratigrapher, and when logs are run the formation-evaluation specialist or the petrophysicist makes the interpretation. In this situation the operating geologist doesn't even have to look down a microscope or interpret a log, so that he loses the confidence to make a decision regarding much of the material he handles.

Exploration plays based on concepts derived from interpretation of data are not made by these specialists. The actual oil finder is the operating geologist, the explorationist, the "general practitioner" of the industry. They are the ones who should assemble the material, critically appraise and interpret it and put it all together to come up with the play.

If that is the proper process, then it is of utmost importance to have this geologist adequately equipped and trained to do the best job possible in that role. The operating geologist must be more than a technician. He must have the ability to work conceptually and apply scientific methods to his analysis.

It has been suggested by some that the bachelor's degree with a major in geology be abolished in recognition of the fact that it is no longer a qualification for work as a professional geologist. I am not advocating so drastic a step. However, I do feel that the additional year or two spent in university and the completion of a master's thesis is a much preferred qualification for employment as a professional in our industry.

If this is so, one would expect that young geologists planning a career in the petroleum industry would be anxious to enrol in a graduate program and undertake a thesis project which would help to develop those essential skills mentioned earlier. Also, one would expect that recruiters would be encouraging promising students to enter graduate school. However, when graduate-school enrolments in earth science in Canada are examined, it is found that in the last several years fewer and fewer Canadian students have been taking M.Sc. degrees.

It wasn't difficult to come up with several reasons for this decrease in enrolments. Firstly, in today's lucrative job market and with the high cost of living, a student looks at the economics. Entering the industry this year with little or no experience, the B.Sc. graduate commands a starting salary of between $1400 and $1600 per month or upwards of $18,000 per year. In contrast, funds avaliable to graduate students in the form of teaching assistantships and scholarships range from $400 to $700 per month. After two years, with progression increases and promotions the B.Sc. graduate may be earning as much as $20,000 per year, whereas the M.Sc. graduate starting employment probably will start at a lesser figure. As one of my students put it: "not an attractive alternative to compensate for two more years of Kraft dinners!"

Secondly, students are concerned about the job market and whether job opportunities will still be there two years hence when the M.Sc. is obtained. This is a pertinent question in this very cyclical industry.

A third point of concern to the student when deciding whether to take graduate work in preparation for a career in petroleum geology is the obvious lack of petroleum-oriented research being done in earth-science departments in Canada, and the scarcity of thesis topics relevant to his career interests. Coupled with that, very few earth-science professors in Canada have any modern industry experience, so the student has difficulty in obtaining counsel to help with career decisions. This is surprising when one realizes that more than half of the students enter the industry upon graduation.

End_Page 269------------------------

Fourthly, the industry recruiter does little nowadays to encourage students to take graduate work even though his company would prefer M.Sc. graduates. The competition for the good students is keen; they are told a postgraduate degree is not necessary and that the company training program will provide all that is required for development as a petroleum geologist.

This combination of factors -- the lucrative job market, the uncertainties of the future, the lack of relevant research in the university and the recruiter's "pitch" -- makes for a less-than-desirable scenario with the following consequences:

  1. Most geologists now entering the petroleum industry work force have only minimal qualifications for their role as professional petroleum geologists.
  2. Enrolment in Canadian graduate schools has declined drastically and the supply of M.Sc. graduates falls far short of the demand.
  3. Petroleum-oriented earth-science research in Canadian universities is minimal and is not increasing to any great extent.
  4. The industry training programs must offer a viable alternative to the M.Sc. program and thesis.

Perhaps I am painting too gloomy a picture that somehow seems to belie the present rosy and exuberant outlook our dynamic and thriving industry presents.

Today, with high cash flows and government incentives to explore, it is easy to drill wells with minimal geology and, at today's oil and gas prices, maintain a reasonable success ratio. However, with rapidly escalating finding costs, a well-conceived geological play supported by all the data that can be mustered soon will be a necessary prerequisite to selling an exploratory venture.

Many, both in academia and industry, share my concern about these developments and realize that any corrective measures will require a co-operative effort of the two sectors. If promising students seeking a career in the petroleum industry are to encouraged to take postgraduate work and complete an M.Sc. thesis, then several things must happen.

The industry must examine its salary structure to ensure that, when the M.Sc. comes on the job market a year or two later than his B.Sc. counterpart, he is suitably compensated for the additional training he has received. In turn, and with industry support, the University must come up with more realistic funding for graduate students to narrow the income gap mentioned earlier.

The university should expand its effort to provide research that has more relevance to the needs of the industry, and that will attract students into graduate work and research.

In Canada, where petroleum resource development is so important to the nation's economy and where so many earth-science graduates are employed by the petroleum industry, it is surprising that there is so little petroleum-oriented earth-science research being done in the universities.

The National Research Council awards operating grants totalling almost 5 million dollars annually to around 450 professors for earth-science research. Of this number only a handful are engaged in research considered relevant to the petroleum industry. The little that is being done is largely in biostratigraphy. With few exceptions there is scant research being done in such fields as thermal history of sedimentary basins, basin analysis, clay mineralogy and its effect on reservoir quality, diagenetic phenomena, organic geochemistry of petroleum and source rocks, or the generation, migration and accumulation of hydrocarbons.

One would expect that funding for research in these areas would be provided by the petroleum industry. This is not the case. Direct financial support to Canadian universities

End_Page 270------------------------

for earth-science research by industry is minimal, amounting to about $200,000 annually. That is not much when spread over more than 30 degree-granting universities. Most of this support comes from the large multinational companies who already enjoy the benefits of centrally located research laboratories that serve their worldwide operations. I would suggest to the industry, and particularly to those Canadian companies who have limited research facilities, that they would do well to take steps to avail themselves of the wealth of research talent in universities by encouraging and supporting research relevant to the industry and their own needs.

Although financial support for research is important, the industry also must attempt to increase its dialogue with the university to better determine the research areas or projects that could be implemented and the types of data that are so readily available. To effect such a dialogue will certainly take more than that once-a-year hurried visit by a recruiter to the university.

In a like manner academia must be more receptive to these overtures and open the gates of the ivory tower a little. It could be a rewarding experience.

In an effort to increase interaction between the industry and the university the Federal Government has generous incentive programs in the form of Senior Industrial Fellowships and Industrial Co-operative Fellowships. These awards provide either for university staff to spend a sabbatical in industry or for an industry scientist to conduct research in a university at little or no cost to the individual, company or institution. In the earth-science field there unfortunately has been little or no response to these programs.

To complete this commentary on the development of a petroleum geologist, there are two additional important aspects that must be considered: company training and development programs, and the field school.

Few universities teach much about petroleum geology or about the utilization of subsurface data in the solution of geological problems peculiar to the petroleum industry. Development of these skills is the responsibility of the company, and most of the larger companies have training programs designed for that purpose. By and large, however, the industry training programs are actually extensions of the undergraduate curriculum with a variety of courses, many offered commercially by academics and consultants from outside the country who have little or no local knowledge. Actually, there is very little development of problem-solving skills in company training programs. In my view, the industry is deluding itself if it believes its training programs are realistic alternatives to the broader exposure to science and opportunity to do independent research that the M.Sc. degree program affords.

Finally, I want to comment on the field school. Petroleum geologists who deal almost exclusively with subsurface data badly need field training to give the proper perspective and dimension to their subsurface experience. Field schools should be designed to integrate the knowledge obtained from the compartmentalized courses of the classroom, and to teach the fundamental skills of observation, interpretation and prediction. Classroom geology and subsurface geology are dominated by sketches, maps and sections, and field experience is necessary to provide an essential sense of reality and scale.

In past years a job with the Geological Survey of Canada, or sometimes with the petroleum industry, helped to fill this need for field experience. Unfortunately, too often this is no longer a field job where mapping and interpretation of field data are involved. Collecting samples for geochemical analysis or helping out at the well site does not provide the needed field experience.

In Canadian universities earth-science graduates have attended one or, at most, two 3-week field schools where they might have had some exposure to mapping and independent interpretation. For the geologist entering the petroleum industry and dealing

End_Page 271------------------------

almost exclusively with the abstractions of subsurface data, this preparation is entirely inadequate for the reasons stated earlier. However, universities would have considerable difficulty both economically and logistically to extend their field schools beyond what they are now.

The industry has an important responsibility in this area and should, I believe, supplement the field-school training of the University with field schools of its own, designed specifically for the subsurface geologist and geophysicist. Certainly in Calgary we have the opportunity to provide exposure to diverse field relationships and to demonstrate the subsurface Previous HitanalogTop. I am not speaking of traditional field trips but of actual schools, where the geologist or geophysicist can map or otherwise observe and interpret field data to solve specific problems and to understand causal relationships, both so essential when dealing with subsurface data.

This message is directed to the universities and the petroleum industry, who jointly share the responsibility for the training and development of the petroleum geologist. The discoveries of the next decade will increasingly be found in subtle and elusive traps. The challenge of their finding will best be met by explorationists who bring to the job broadly based scientific training and the ability to apply the scientific method to their investigations.

End_of_Record - Last_Page 272-------

Pay-Per-View Purchase Options

The article is available through a document delivery service. Explain these Purchase Options.

Watermarked PDF Document: $14
Open PDF Document: $24