Aberdeen, UK


Aberdeen Formation Evaluation Society



Minutes of Meeting

Thursday 29th October 2020

Agenda for Meeting

Meeting held at 17:00 via Zoom:

Minutes compiled by Vani



Greg, Stephen, Chee Kong, Girvani, Neil, Daniel, Ed, John, Tegwyn, Damien, Chris Blair, Jeremy

Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 984 2423 4637
Passcode: 162501
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/aXNMpxTOx




  • AGM was held online, along with technical talk from Probe, on 7th
    • New committee members Daniel, Chris, and Vani was introduced to the committee.
    • The last AGM had the best attendance in the last 10 years.
  • Xmas quiz 2019 raised a little under £1000 for Archie charity.  We have not made an Archie donation this year – because Devex was delayed/held on line.   Ed suggested to bring a representative from Archie foundation for the webinar for a brief talk and then hand over the money electronically.  Greg will email Archie to request this.
  • 2020 Christmas Quiz  –  committee agreed to not hold due to uncertain CV19 situation.  John suggested an Easter Quiz instead of a Christmas quiz, but depends on the COVID19 situation. Ed has suggested speaking to Richard whether he wants to prepare the Quiz like last year or whether he wasn’t to delegate that to someone?
  • Next talk is 11th and then 18th November.  The email has been sent out about the upcoming webinars on the 11th and 18th of November. Chee Kong Chen has confirmed that the talks are lined up until January 2021. Vani was asked to send a reminder email a few days before the webinars.


  • Full day seminar 2nd and 9rd September “Core: the most valuable asset in your reservoir

A core company [grievance company] raised a grievance against a presentation and this has been channeled through AFES:

To the Mr G Blower, AFES president, Mr Chee Kong, VP Technology and Mr Stephen Morris, VP Seminar,

First of all, we would like to thank AFES for being an active chapter of the SPWLA and a provider of quality events for our business community. We’ve attended the AFES 2020 webinar on cores on September 9th and thoroughly enjoyed most of it.

During this webinar, Mr XX from XX  triggered our attention with his presentation on DECT capabilities for digital rock characterization.

Although we do consider Core DECT a useful component in the chain of core analysis methods and tools, we believe this or any other technology should not be sold as the final and unique answer to the question of early core description, especially if defending such a position should require more a marketing effort relying on unfounded and biased statements than a sound and honest technical presentation.

As experienced professionals, we believe we do share a responsibility towards the community of core analysts and especially towards its new professionals in keeping impeccable standards in the quality of technical arguments made to address the competition and for the evaluation of new concepts.

The core principle for a correct evaluation of data acquisition methods and tools should in fact root in an objective balance of costs in time and material vs the value of the information.

It is [grievance company’s] opinion that Mr XX talk failed to address the above, relaying instead a large number of inaccurate statements and biases, which cast a doubt on the technical validity of most of his conclusions. His conclusions were indeed at 180° degrees from the ones of YY from YY. YY is a third party data user with no interests in selling measurements, which has an unbiased opinion.

As a stakeholder in the community of core analysts, we believe this is in our interest to respond to this presentation and to draw the attention of the community on such malpractice. We discussed the matter internally in order to define an appropriate reaction, and decided to consult the board of AFES on the possibility of an official communication.

Please find a slide pack documenting our reaction to Mr XX  presentation.

Could you revert back to us with some information about our options to post a rebuttal note to Mr XX presentation via AFES most appropriate channel and about your formal requirements for such a reaction?

We thank you for your attention.

Best regards.


I [Greg] have sent a brief reply, which thanked them for their interest in AFES and then suggested we ask Mr XX to contact [grievance company]. (23rd September):

Firstly, thank you for your interest in AFES, our recent Seminar, and also your clear support for AFES in general.  Without this type of support and encouragement AFES would struggle to operate, being a volunteer Committee of around 15 members

Moving on, obviously AFES cannot be held liable or responsible for the detailed contents of presentations.  We offer out regular technical talk and full day Seminar ‘slots’ which allow speakers to come forwards and present, however we don’t (and won’t) dissect these prior to airing

Would you like me to put [grievance company’s ]  nto contact with Mr XX?

As you mention in your closing slides, healthy debate is desirable, however AFES would insist on staying a neutral party of course

Would [grievance company’s ]like to present for AFES at a technical talk in the near future?   The theme could be based on your rebuttal maybe?


The final email reply to AFES is (29th Sept):

Sorry for the long delay in responding but we took the time to discuss internally the way we wanted to handle this problem and the official reaction of AFES.

First, it has never been our intention to suggest that AFES was liable of anything. Nevertheless, we would have hoped that the presenters were invited to follow the code of ethics of SPWLA:

  1. Petrophysics is a profession, and the privilege of professional practice requires professional morality and professional responsibility;
  2. Honesty, integrity, loyalty, fairness, impartiality, candor, delity to trust, and inviolability of confidence are incumbent upon every member as professional obligations;
  3. Each member shall be guided by high standards of business ethics, personal honor, and professional conduct. The word “member” as used throughout this code includes all classes of membership;

Either Mr. XX was not invited to follow those rules or he deliberately ignored them.

I do not think that complaining directly to XX(company)  would make any difference. When someone promotes openly such a large quantity of fake and biased comments, reporting that to him would be like talking to an empty closet.

If you accept to leave us presenting case studies on the acquisition and integration of numerous continuous high resolution core measurements, I would prefer to use this opportunity to focus on a positive message rather than demonstrating repeated unbiased and unethical behavior of a representant of CompanyXX.  

AFES (Greg) has not replied to the above message.


AFES’s Committee meeting (Sept 28th) discussed this situation:

  1. AFES are not responsible for minute content of presentations
  2. Stephen will email all attending delegates to the Core seminar with speakers lides, but NOT yotube vidoe links (which will be retained with AFES). This is in an effort to mitigate any issue between the two parties in this grievance
  3. AFES will use a disclaimer – which is borrowed from SPWLA:


None of the technical information arising from the meetings and discussions
can be considered confidential.  It is the responsibility of each person to
contribute or withhold information according to the authorization delegated
to him by his company or institution.  The statements and opinions expressed
by a contributor should not be construed as an official action or opinion of
the Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts, Inc.”


(on 29th October):  Regarding the email conversations, it was decided to give them a couple of dates to give a technical talk after February 2021.

  • Devex is a Aberdeen based 2 day conference run by a Devex Committee.  Devex Committee is supported by PESGB, SPE and AFES, so AFES members and committee are encouraged to partake on Devex Committee
  • DEVEX 2020: Devex recently hosted from  September 21st for that week.  100% web based.  Devex Committee had their wash up Thursday 29th October.   AFES need to pay for the cost of the Venue (£1000). Ed suggested taking the money from the seed fund to the cost. This year we will not receive any money from DEVEX but next year there we might get double the amount from DEVEX.  In summary AFES should not see any significent profit or loss from this year’s Devex.
  • DEVEX 2021 is possibly another virtual event (8th/9th of June 2021). Ed is looking for anyone to join the Devex committee to help. Neil and Greg (and Ed) are happy to continue on the Devex committee.   Greg will ask for Devex Committee members at the next AFES event
  • 2020 Technical Talks (“evening” talks)  –  Chee Kong.  SPWLA DS most of next year:
      • 11th November    –  Nixan Saxena / Matthias Appel (Shell)  –  Digital rock technology for accelerated RCA & SCAL: Application envelope and required corrections
      • 18th November    –  Read Cased Hole  –  Topic TBD
      • 9th December       –  Vassilios SPE distinguished speaker.  drilling
      • 13th January         –  Paul Craddock Schlumberger  –   Thermal maturity-adjusted log interpretation (TMALI) in organic shales


  • Speakers to be confirmed:
  1. Greg has verbal interest from PetroMac (PetroMac do a SPWLA presentation on their wireline rollers). Also a potential for HLB wireline imaging tool (StrataXaminer)
  2. Chen has confirmed that 2021 technical talks are in good shape. He also has a new list of distinguished speakers.

Students and Universities:

  • Kazeem Odunlami has applied for PhD grant.  Application for the Ph.D. grant is approved by the committee members and Neil will organize the transfer of £1000, and also request he performs AFES talk sometime.
  • UofA best student for 2019/20: 4x top students have been awarded £500 each instead of £250 (GB:  maybe £500 should be the prize money as £250 a bit lean..?):
    • Haigh, Gregory (Pgt)
    • Gerrard, Stuart (Pgt)
    • Abdullahi, Misbahu (Pgt)
    • Dayang, Hafizatul (Pgt)


  • Vagia – grant of £500 (we found her at last!) The MSc grant winner’s bank details are from Greece. Therefore it was advised to reach out to the recipient and ask whether she has any UK account, if not, check for the possibility of having a transferware account or Paypal transfer.
  • Daniel was asked to contact the university, if possible, to retrieve the winner’s trophy to engrave new winners’ names.



  • Neil has summarised the current account and savings account details. Balances available on request


  • John is finding it difficult to reach the current sponsors due to the current CV19 situation and local industry slump. It was decided to keep the sponsors on board and he will do the rounds and let us know the outcome.
  • Greg has potential with SLB (SLB wireline) and will work this one with John

Website / IT

  • Linked in –                               . It was decided to have multiple admins for the LinkedIn account..
  • Facebook –                               Jeremy is updating Facebook
  • Website                 –                               Alex is managing the website The website host (1&1 ionos) expires on the 7th/8th of November. Blue Mountain was suggested as a possible new supplier? It was asked to look for a platform where we can send an email from, and refresh our website. Ed asked the members to search for Constant Contact.   Tegwyn has set up whatsapp chat group to discuss this


  • SPWLA     Next year the SPWLA conference is in Boston. They are planning online exhibitions, workshops, and talks. We do not know about the fee at the moment. Greg will inform the community about the SPWLA update on the next webinar. The possibility of a local event for SPWLA is suggested.
  • We have a total of 281 members. The roughly breaks up into:
    • Operators                                                                                                              –               17%
    • Academic                                                                                                              –               10%
    • Service companies                                                                                             –               37%
    • Private email addresses (i.e unable to determine affiliation)                –               36%
  • General thoughts on how to proceed with AFES – during CV19 (which appears to be continuing wit restrictions) we’ll proceed in our virtual world for the foreseeable.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

60 ÷ = twenty

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.