Economic And Geologic Conditions Pertaining To Occurrence Of Oil In North Argentine-Bolivian Field Of South America - Discussion

D. B. DOWLING,* Ottawa, Ont.-I do not propose to start any argument, but really there is a comeback to what Mr. Coste says.1 Geography is probably not geology, but geology is geography. You cannot regard structure as geography on the surface, but it is geology as soon as you get under the surface. In Canada, it is quite true that they went too close to the Rocky Mountains. When boring in the foothills, as Mr. Coste says, they were too close to the mountains where they got into a faulted area, and if there had been storage, it probably would have lost a good deal of the oil. The situation in the Calgary field is one that might be interpreted in many ways, but in front f the foothills there is a very deep syncline. The gas and oil that is recovered on the edge of the, foothills is of such a nature that we must assume that it is not the pure crude oil. It seems to be somewhat refined, or a condensation product. The solution, or at least the argument that appeals to me, is that as the deeper part of that basin is, say, 6000 ft. below sea level, there must have been some breaking up of the oil on account of pressure and of the heat, and we are getting gas, traveling up toward the surface in the foothills; and as it comes up, it probably condenses again, and is caught in folds on the edge of the syncline so that we have a natural condensing machine there. The oil is not found on the eastern side of the folds, it is found on the western side. On the eastern side and on the summit there is a little light oil, gasoline, we will say, blowing into the well once in a while; now that looks like a natural condensation of the gas and a storage behind the summit.