Mustafa Onur, Istanbul Technical University
Well! This is my last executive summary for SPE Journal. My 3-year term will have come to an end with this October 2015 issue. I must certainly say that it has been an extraordinary privilege for me to serve as the executive editor of this journal, and I am grateful to SPE for giving me this great opportunity and recognition.
For the past few years (from September 2012 to October 2015), I have learned a great deal and gained great experience by handling, reading, and reviewing papers that have covered a wide spectrum of subjects that reflect the fundamental and applied research areas of the last 3 years of activity and interest in the industry and academia. The information sent to me by Stacie Hughes, SPE Peer Review Administrator, shows that I have handled 1,025 paper submissions from a total of 2,072 original and revised submissions managed by the executive editors and the editor-in-chief from 11 September 2012 to date. 958 of the total 2,072 submissions was handled by the co-executive editor Yucel Akkutlu, 75 by the previous executive editor Tony Kovscek, and 14 by the editor-in-chief Dean Oliver. These figures clearly show that SPE Journal receives a large number of submissions, which clearly indicates that it has become more attractive for the authors. The main reason that the journal has received “so many” submissions over the last 3 years is that SPE Journal was converted to bimonthly from quarterly when Yucel and I began our terms as co-executive editors.
While I may remain an associate editor for the journal, it will be a relief to know that I no longer need to think about the assignment of papers when I go home in the evening and to work over the weekends. And most importantly, I will not be in a position to send decline and major-revision letters to friends and colleagues. When Yucel and I step down, Knut-Andreas Lie of SINTEF and Randall S. Seright of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology will begin their terms as the new executive editors. They are great scientists, and I have no doubt that they will bring a fresh perspective to SPE Journal and that the journal will continue to flourish under their combined leadership.
If we are successful as executive editors, that is mainly because of the hard and dedicated work of the associate editors, technical editors, and the staff at SPE who are, in my view, the core of the entire review process. I am grateful for the associate and technical editors’ efforts to obtain high-quality reviews. I am also grateful to the staff at SPE who make our job easy. I cannot pass without mentioning Stacie Hughes, who has always been there when I needed help. I have never worked with a person like her who is so dedicated, responsible, and punctual in performing her duty. I truly could not have performed this job without her frequent help. My special thanks also go to Coty Parr (Peer Review Coordinator), Judith Martis (Staff Editor), Jennifer Wegman (Editorial Services Manager), and Rebekah Stacha (Technical Publications Manager).
I would like to present the SPE Journal performance statistics covering the time period from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015, as provided to us by Jennifer Wegman.
Most of these figures are similar to those of the previous year. It is nice to see that our impact factor number has increased slightly over the year, with no indications of decreasing quality in our publications. Actually, for the last 3 years, our impact factor has been steadily increasing.
I can say in confidence that the performance of SPE Journal over the last 3 years is quite satisfactory, and SPE Journal is becoming more and more attractive for authors and readers.
My last issue brings you 20 outstanding papers in the following areas: History Matching and Optimization (five papers), Well Test and Production-Data Analysis (five papers), Reservoir Description and Dynamics (three papers), Production and Operations (four papers), and Enhanced Oil Recovery (three papers).