Interesting bit of trivia that Cantarell is named after a guy - an otherwise very ordinary, very anonymous guy. I wonder if he even made a penny off of it for his luck?

How would you like to be immortalized by having a mega-oilfield named after you?

Cantarell was the name of a fisherman who discovered the field - his nets kept getting coated with oil, he kept complaining to Pemex about it, and Pemex finally investigated and found the field.

See my post yesterday for a couple of additional graphics:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2434#comment-176409

This might be the best article in WSJ's Cantarell series yet. The author extends the discussion of Cantarell to the status of the worlds super giant fields, quoting Simmons at one point:

The demise of Cantarell highlights a global issue: Nearly a quarter of the world's daily oil output of 85 million barrels is pumped from the biggest 20 fields, according to estimates from Wood Mackenzie, a Scotland-based oil consulting firm. And many of those fields, discovered decades ago, could soon follow in Cantarell's footsteps.

It's widely believed that the world's biggest oil fields have already been found. In the decades leading up to the 1970s, the world discovered eight big fields that produced between 500,000 to one million barrels a day, according to Matthew Simmons, a veteran oil industry banker. During the 1970s and 1980s, only two were found. Since then, only one -- the Kashagan field in Kazakhstan -- has the potential to easily top the 500,000 barrel-a-day mark.

Two decades ago, about a dozen fields produced more than a million barrels a day. Now there are only four, one of which is Cantarell. The future of two others, discovered more than 50 years ago, remains in question. Some analysts speculate Saudi Arabia's Ghawar, the biggest field by far, could begin a gradual decline within a decade or so. Another, Kuwait's Burgan, is showing signs of maturity. In November of 2005, Kuwait Oil Co. lowered its estimate of the field's sustainable production level to 1.7 million barrels a day from 1.9 million a day.

Replacing big gushers is difficult. Industrialized countries, which tapped out their big fields years earlier, haven't been able to maintain output despite finding large numbers of smaller fields and investing heavily in technology. Alaska production, hurt by declines at the giant Prudhoe Bay field, dropped from 2 million barrels a day in 1988 to a current rate of about 900,000 a day.

"The world faces a situation where we have production from smaller and smaller fields trying to keep up with declines from the big fields like Cantarell," says Mike Rodgers, a partner at industry consulting firm PFC Energy in Houston. "You're on a treadmill trying to keep up, and you get to a point where you can't make any more forward progress."

There are also some online-only quotes from a few oil experts. For example:

Matthew Simmons, oil industry banker and author of "Twilight in the Desert," which questions whether the Saudis have as much oil as they claim:

"Given that peak oil might be the biggest issue we face this century, it's very unfortunate that we don't have the data from the fields."

"The age-old mistake in the oil industry is being in denial when a field goes down. Usually you can't tell until after the fact. The irony of Cantarell is [that it is] the only super-giant field that we're going to watch from a front-row seat as it declines, because of the visibility of the month-by-month production data."

David Victor, director of Stanford University's Program on Energy and Sustainable Development:

"We're going to continue develop new technologies that will make most out of the big fields, and we'll move to smaller fields. Together, that will create much more supply."

"The people who worry about peak oil are worrying about the wrong problem. There isn't, in some fundamental sense, some problem under the ground about not enough oil. But there is a big problem above ground with some of the key firms that control much of the resource. Most of the fields are under control of the national oil companies, like Pemex. And those firms vary enormously in their compentence."

"The shift from Cantarell as the elephant of Mexico to perhaps a dozen projects, most of which are complex, means Pemex will have to develop capabilities it doesn't have. You can't contract that out. You as the company, as controller of the resource, still need to make decisions about how you can develop that resource."

There is a I guess a mistake by the writer because it says "Some analysts speculate Saudi Arabia's Ghawar, the biggest field by far, could begin a gradual decline within a decade or so."

Then the chart starting in 2007 shows a 10% decline for Ghawar to 2010. That Woods Mackenzie (a big outfit) is predicting a decline at all is the important thing to me.

The WSJ would seem to be well aware of Peak Oil even though they don't come right out and say so.
Ricko

Yes, the understatement in that article was killing me. They gotta tip toe around so the cornucopians can still ignore peak energy (finite resources), while the realists can extract the implicit truth...

The online version of the same chart has different rounded figures: Ghawar -11%, Burgan +1.6.