Offshore Hydrocarbon Prospects: Aruba’s Untapped Resources

GLIAG · STRATEGIC PETROLEUM INTELLIGENCE

GLIAG · STRATEGIC PETROLEUM INTELLIGENCE ESSAY

PETROLEUM PROSPECTIVITY OF ARUBA

From Exposed Caribbean Plateau Basement to an Unproven Offshore Oligocene–Miocene Petroleum Fairway

A plate-tectonic, stratigraphic and petroleum-systems comparison with Curaçao, the Falcón–La Vela Basin and the Perla giant gas field

By Drs. Marcel P. T. Chin-A-Lien, MBA, M.Sc., Ing., CPG (AAPG), EurGeol (EFG)

Principal Founding Partner & Chief Architect
GLIAG N.V. — Golden Lane Investments Advisory Group

Publication ID: GLIAG-ARUBA-2026-001 · 29 July 2026 · Delft, The Netherlands

EXECUTIVE VERDICTAruba is not presently a proven petroleum province. Its onshore geology is dominated by exposed Late Cretaceous Caribbean plateau–arc basement and a thin, discontinuous Cenozoic cover, so it cannot be treated as a direct outcrop analogue of the productive Falcón Basin or the Perla reservoir. The defensible exploration case lies offshore: buried fault-bounded depocentres on the Aruba flank may preserve Paleogene–Neogene source, reservoir and seal intervals removed by uplift or never deposited on the island. The strongest play concepts are Oligocene–Lower Miocene carbonate banks on structural highs, coeval syn-rift siliciclastics, and younger Miocene clastic reservoirs. The largest uncertainty is not reservoir presence but effective source-rock presence, maturity, charge access and trap timing.

1. Scope, Method and Evidentiary Standard

This study is a frontier petroleum-systems screening, not a reserves opinion. It integrates the supplied geological map of the Paraguaná Peninsula, the Geological Survey of the Netherlands map of Aruba, published island geology, Caribbean plate reconstructions, Falcón Basin stratigraphy, field and well analogues, and Perla reservoir studies. Correlations are ranked as: (1) direct age–facies analogue, (2) depositional-system analogue, (3) tectonostratigraphic proxy, or (4) weak/non-transferable analogy.

Source: TNO Geological Map of the Kingdom of the Netherlands — Official overview map; Aruba, Curaçao and Bonaire are shown using harmonised island stratigraphy.

Source: Beets, Metten & Hoogendoorn (1996), Geological Map of Aruba — Foundational detailed mapping referenced by TNO and subsequent tectonic studies.

Source: User-supplied geological map of the Paraguaná Peninsula — Regional surface-geology framework used as a visual comparator; exact original cartographic provenance should be independently verified.

2. Geological Maps: What They Show—and What They Do Not

Figure 1. Geological map of the Paraguaná Peninsula supplied for this study. It emphasises Neogene carbonate abrasion surfaces, coastal deposits, faults and isolated older basement windows.

Figure 2. Simplified geological map of Aruba. The island is dominated by exposed Late Cretaceous Caribbean plateau–arc basement, including the Aruba Lava Formation, granitoid batholith and intrusive complexes, with younger Neogene–Quaternary carbonates and coastal deposits concentrated mainly along the margins. This GLIAG redrawing is an interpretive summary, not a substitute for the original RGD 1:50,000 map or TNO-GDN GIS data.

Sources: RGD/Beets, Metten & Hoogendoorn (1996), Geological Map of Aruba · TNO-GDN Geological Map of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

Figures 1 and 2 are regionally related but are not stratigraphically interchangeable. Paraguaná exposes a Cenozoic sedimentary and geomorphic archive on the South American margin, whereas Aruba primarily exposes uplifted Cretaceous plateau–arc basement. Figure 3 therefore does not project the modern surface geology of Paraguaná directly beneath Aruba; it tests whether buried offshore fault blocks could have preserved Cenozoic depocentres and carbonate factories that are absent, eroded or only thinly represented onshore.

3. Common Geological History: Late Cretaceous to Present

Time	Regional process	ABC-island expression	Petroleum consequence
~95–85 Ma	Caribbean large igneous province / oceanic plateau and arc modification	Aruba Lava Formation and intrusive complex; related but not identical basement histories on Curaçao.	Provides structural basement highs and fractured igneous objectives, but generally poor matrix reservoir and no indigenous source.
Late Cretaceous–Paleocene	Arc collision, uplift, erosion and local sedimentation	Subaerial erosion and divergent island stratigraphies; Curaçao preserves a better Cretaceous–Danian sedimentary record.	Creates unconformities, relief and possible weathered/fractured basement reservoirs.
Eocene	Oblique collision/accretion along northern South America; ABC islands in close palaeogeographic proximity	Aruba, Curaçao and Bonaire occupied neighbouring fault blocks along the plate boundary, but experienced different subsidence histories.	Potential local depocentres and Eocene clastics; correlation must be block-specific.
Late Eocene–Early Miocene	Tectonic collapse, transtension/back-arc or pull-apart subsidence in Falcón–La Vela domain	Major syn-rift accommodation; Oligocene siliciclastics and Early Miocene carbonate platforms developed on fault-block highs.	Principal analogue window for Aruba offshore carbonate and clastic plays.
Middle Miocene	Basin inversion and transpression	Falcón structures inverted; carbonate platforms drowned/buried; migration and trap formation intensified.	Critical for charge timing, fault-seal risk and preservation.
Late Miocene–Recent	Continued eastward Caribbean motion and strike-slip deformation; uplift and marine terraces	ABC islands uplifted and tilted episodically; coastal carbonate terraces developed.	Shallow Neogene carbonates are useful facies/process analogues, but generally too young and too exposed to be direct deep-reservoir equivalents.

Source: Wright & Wyld — Late Cretaceous subduction initiation and Leeward Antilles geology — Demonstrates that Aruba and Curaçao share plateau/arc basement affinity but diverged stratigraphically after Late Cretaceous erosion.

Source: Beardsley & Avé Lallemant (2007) — Oblique collision and accretion — Structural and palaeomagnetic framework for Leeward Antilles deformation and rotation.

Source: Hippolyte & Mann (2011) — Neogene–Quaternary tectonic evolution — Fault-kinematic synthesis for Aruba, Bonaire and Curaçao under continued Caribbean–South America plate motion.

Source: Barrera-Lopez et al. (2022) — Regional geophysics of the Caribbean and northern South America — Modern geophysical synthesis supporting eastward Caribbean plate migration and present crustal architecture.

4. Aruba–Curaçao Correlation: Neighbours, Not Twins

During the Eocene and younger Cenozoic, Aruba and Curaçao were palaeogeographic neighbours within the same broad plate-boundary corridor. Yet each island occupied a distinct fault block. Curaçao preserves a more extensive Cretaceous–Paleogene volcano-sedimentary succession and thick Neogene Seroe Domi carbonates; Aruba exposes more intrusive and volcanic basement and discontinuous younger cover. Accordingly, Curaçao is a useful process analogue for carbonate-platform development and island-flank subsidence, but it is not a one-to-one stratigraphic template for Aruba.

Source: Beets (1972) — Lithology and stratigraphy of the Cretaceous and Danian succession of Curaçao — Classic Dutch Ph.D.-level reference for Curaçao’s older sedimentary framework.

Source: De Buisonjé (1974) — Neogene and Quaternary geology of Aruba, Curaçao and Bonaire — Regional comparison of uplifted carbonate terraces and younger island geology.

Source: TNO Geological Map — Aruba, Curaçao and Bonaire — Official harmonised map showing the contrasting distribution of basement and Cenozoic sedimentary cover.

Regional reconstruction and evidentiary boundary

Documented: Perla contains a productive Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene isolated carbonate platform; Falcón contains coeval carbonate platforms and syn-rift depocentres; Aruba and Curaçao expose Cretaceous basement highs and younger carbonate cover. Interpreted: similar offshore accommodation and carbonate-bank development may have occurred on buried flanks. Unproven: effective source rock, maturity, migration pathways, sealing and hydrocarbon accumulation offshore Aruba.

Figure 3. Conceptual Oligocene–Early Miocene paleogeographic reconstruction of the Falcón–La Vela–Paraguaná–Aruba–Curaçao corridor during Perla carbonate-platform time. Proven carbonate systems (Perla and Falcón platforms) are distinguished from hypothetical carbonate-bank fairways on submerged Aruba and Curaçao basement highs. The reconstruction is a regional petroleum-systems interpretation: island positions, depocentres and facies belts are schematic and should not be read as a measured plate reconstruction or evidence of hydrocarbons offshore Aruba.

Principal sources: Pomar et al. (2015), Oligocene–Miocene Carbonates of the Perla Field · Baquero et al. (2009), Polyphase Development of the Falcón Basin · Hippolyte & Mann (2011), Neogene–Quaternary Tectonic Evolution of the Leeward Antilles

5. Perla Reservoir Time Slice versus Aruba and Curaçao

Perla’s reservoir is an approximately 300 m-thick Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene isolated carbonate platform dominated by larger benthic foraminifera and red algae, with depositional architecture controlled by antecedent relief, relative sea level, internal waves and subsequent burial diagenesis. In palaeogeographic terms, this carbonate factory developed south of the ABC island chain while Aruba and Curaçao were emergent to shallow-marine fault blocks along the same broader southern Caribbean margin. The correct comparison is therefore not ‘Perla Formation equals Aruba Formation,’ but ‘coeval carbonate-factory potential on structurally elevated, sediment-starved highs within a warm oligophotic tropical seaway.’

Attribute	Perla	Aruba	Curaçao	Exploration meaning
Age	Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene	Equivalent section mostly absent/eroded onshore; may exist offshore	Neogene carbonates present, but much is younger	Offshore seismic stratigraphy must establish age; surface analogy alone is insufficient.
Setting	Isolated carbonate platform on antecedent relief	Basement high with submerged flanks and possible adjacent depocentres	Island platform and terraces around volcanic basement	Basement relief may localise carbonate banks but also create bypass/erosion.
Reservoir fabric	Larger-foram–red-algal carbonates; diagenetically enhanced locally	Unknown offshore; onshore young carbonates are not direct equivalents	Seroe Domi carbonates provide facies/process analogues	Reservoir quality requires primary facies plus burial-dissolution/fracture model.
Source/charge	Deep adjacent kitchens inferred; gas charge proven	No proven local source or charge pathway	No commercial petroleum system proven	Source presence and maturity are the principal chance factors.
Trap/seal	Structural-stratigraphic closure with effective top/side seal	Potential fault-block, drape, pinch-out and reef-margin traps	Comparable structural relief but different burial history	3D seismic and fault-seal analysis are mandatory.

Source: Pomar et al. (2015) — Oligocene–Miocene Carbonates of the Perla Field — AAPG depositional model and facies architecture of the giant Perla carbonate reservoir.

Source: Castillo et al. — Perla Field: The Largest Discovery Ever in Latin America — Field-scale summary of the approximately 17 Tcf giant gas discovery and development context.

Source: Valencia et al. (2020) — Deep-burial dissolution in the Perla reservoir — Shows that reservoir quality is strongly modified by burial diagenesis; depositional analogy alone is inadequate.

6. Proven Falcón Basin Petroleum-System Elements

The Falcón Basin is a polyphase Cenozoic basin formed by Late Eocene–Early Miocene extension and later Middle Miocene inversion. Its petroleum system contains both Cretaceous inheritance and Cenozoic source, reservoir and seal intervals. The basin is therefore a valuable proxy for what might occur in offshore depocentres south and southeast of Aruba—but not proof that the same kitchens extend beneath Aruba acreage.

Unit / play	Age	Lithology / environment	Proven role	Fields / evidence	Value as Aruba proxy	Main limitation
La Luna / equivalent Cretaceous marine shale	Late Cretaceous	Organic-rich marine carbonate shale	Regional source; locally overmature in Falcón	Regional oil-source framework; Patao High well reports	Possible deep regional charge end-member	May be absent, tectonically displaced, too deep or overmature beneath Aruba.
Agua Clara Formation	Oligocene–Lower Miocene	Marine shale, marl and local sandstone/carbonate	Principal Cenozoic source/seal; local reservoir	Falcón production and basin models	Strong source/seal proxy for coeval offshore depocentres	Requires sufficient thickness, anoxia and maturity; unproven near Aruba.
Pedregoso Formation	Early Miocene	Organic-rich marine carbonate/reef-associated facies	Type II gas-prone source where overmature	Urumaco Trough geochemistry	Demonstrates local Miocene source potential	Highly facies- and burial-dependent; onshore studied samples may not represent offshore.
San Luis Formation	Early Miocene	Foram–red algal carbonate ramps/banks	Reservoir and analogue	Northern Falcón outcrops	Best exposed carbonate-process analogue to Perla-style banks	Smaller, more siliciclastic and structurally different from Perla.
Churuguara Formation	Early Miocene	Mixed carbonate–siliciclastic ramp	Reservoir analogue	Southern Falcón outcrops	Useful for drowning, ramp and shale-interfinger models	Architecture and scale differ from isolated offshore Perla platform.
Socorro Formation	Lower Miocene	Calcareous shallow-marine sandstone	Proven reservoir	Cumarebo Field	Strong clastic-carbonate transitional reservoir proxy	Shallow onshore field; provenance and burial may differ offshore Aruba.
Caujarao Formation	Middle Miocene	Sandy limestone / shallow marine	Proven reservoir	Cumarebo Field	Potential younger carbonate-siliciclastic reservoir model	Post-dates main Perla reservoir and may be thin or eroded on Aruba high.
La Puerta Group	Middle–Upper Miocene	Deltaic to shallow-marine lenticular sandstone	Proven reservoir	Tiguaje and Hombre Pintado fields	Clastic play analogue for basinward Aruba depocentres	Requires continental sediment supply and preserved migration pathways.
Fractured igneous / metamorphic basement	Cretaceous and older	Basalt, dolerite, plutonic and metamorphic rocks	Locally productive in La Vela analogues	Basement-hosted shows/reservoir examples	Directly relevant to Aruba basement highs	Porosity is fracture/weathering dependent; seal and charge are high risk.

Source: Baquero et al. (2009) — Polyphase development of the Falcón Basin — Integrated tectonic, geochemical and thermal model; documents extension, inversion and source-rock maturity.

Source: Montero-Serrano et al. (2010) — Pedregoso source-rock potential — Geochemical evidence for marine Type II organic matter and dry-gas maturity in the Urumaco Trough.

Source: Albert-Villanueva et al. — Geology and Lower Miocene carbonate platforms of the Falcón Basin — Modern field-based synthesis of San Luis and Churuguara carbonate systems and comparison with Perla.

Source: AAPG Memoir 123 — Subsurface Geology of the La Vela Basin — Offshore western Venezuelan examples of carbonate- and basement-hosted petroleum reservoirs.

7. Field and Well Evidence: What Is Actually Proven

Field / well	Location	Reservoir	Fluid / result	Why relevant	Transferability to Aruba
Perla discovery and appraisal wells	Gulf of Venezuela, Cardón IV	Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene carbonate platform	Giant dry-gas accumulation (~17 Tcf reported)	Proof that giant coeval carbonate reservoirs and effective gas charge exist regionally	High as play concept; low as direct stratigraphic correlation.
Cumarebo-1 and Cumarebo Field	Eastern Falcón coast	Socorro calcareous sandstone; Caujarao sandy limestone	Light oil; historic commercial production	Proves shallow-marine Miocene reservoirs and charge	Moderate; requires equivalent depositional fairway and source access.
Tiguaje Field	Southwestern Falcón	La Puerta Group lenticular deltaic sandstones	Commercial oil	Proves younger Miocene clastic reservoirs	Moderate-low; depends on sediment routing toward offshore Aruba.
Hombre Pintado Field	Southwestern Falcón	La Puerta Group sandstones	Commercial oil	Confirms deltaic sandstone play repeatability	Moderate-low for same reason.
Mene de Mauroa / Mamón area fields	Western Falcón	Multiple Cenozoic clastic intervals	Oil production / seeps	Demonstrates active Cenozoic petroleum system on basin flanks	Moderate as charge/trap analogue, not direct formation tie.
La Vela Basin wells	Offshore Falcón	Early Miocene carbonates and fractured basement	Oil and gas discoveries/shows reported	Closest offshore structural-depositional analogue	High priority analogue, but proprietary well data remain essential.

Source: AAPG Explorer (2026) — From Geology to Opportunity in Venezuela — Recent AAPG overview identifying Perla and the underexplored Venezuelan offshore petroleum systems.

Source: LSU Venezuela Reservoir Report — Falcón Basin reservoirs — Summarises proven Socorro, Caujarao and La Puerta reservoir intervals and historic field performance.

Source: AAPG DataPages — Record and constraints of the eastward advance of the Caribbean Plate — Regional tectonostratigraphic context for the Gulf of Venezuela and Caribbean–South America boundary.

8. Aruba Play Portfolio

Play A — Oligocene–Lower Miocene carbonate bank on basement high

Current rank: Moderate geological plausibility; unproven

Geological basis: Perla and San Luis/Churuguara demonstrate warm-water oligophotic carbonate production on structural relief. Aruba’s submerged basement flanks could have supported isolated banks.

Decisive test: 3D seismic mounded geometry, platform-margin progradation, internal seismic facies, drowning surface, effective top seal, nearby mature kitchen.

Play B — Syn-rift Oligocene–Lower Miocene siliciclastic reservoirs

Current rank: Moderate

Geological basis: Falcón extension generated half-grabens containing sandstone, shale and carbonate packages. Similar fault-bounded accommodation may occur offshore Aruba.

Decisive test: Growth strata, fan/delta geometries, fault-dependent thickness changes, source-prone lacustrine/marine shales and migration updip.

Play C — Middle–Upper Miocene deltaic/shallow-marine sandstone

Current rank: Low to moderate

Geological basis: La Puerta, Socorro and Caujarao prove regional Miocene reservoir effectiveness.

Decisive test: A credible sediment-delivery route, adequate burial, lateral seal and traps preserved from later transpression.

Play D — Fractured/weathered Cretaceous basement

Current rank: Low to moderate, high uncertainty

Geological basis: Aruba exposes abundant igneous basement, and La Vela analogues show that basement can host hydrocarbons.

Decisive test: Buried palaeotopography, weathering profile, fracture corridors, direct juxtaposition to source and robust seal.

Play E — Young Neogene platform carbonate

Current rank: Low for conventional deep petroleum; local niche

Geological basis: Aruba and Curaçao preserve young carbonates and terraces with primary porosity.

Decisive test: Sufficient burial and seal are unlikely onshore; offshore fault blocks could preserve thicker equivalents, but source access remains weak.

9. Risk Matrix and Chance-Factor Logic

Element	Current evidence	Principal risk	Required de-risking
Reservoir	Strong regional analogues; onshore Aruba carbonates and basement visible	Offshore age, thickness, facies and diagenesis unknown	Reprocessed seismic, inversion, seismic geomorphology, targeted coring.
Source	Falcón Cenozoic and regional Cretaceous sources proven	No demonstrated mature kitchen in Aruba offshore acreage	Long-offset seismic, basin modelling, geochemical sampling, heat-flow calibration.
Migration	Faulted basin margins offer pathways	Faults may leak, compartmentalise or post-date charge	Fault-seal analysis, pressure prediction and charge modelling.
Trap	Basement highs, drape, reef margins and inversion structures plausible	Late strike-slip reactivation may breach closures	3D structural restoration and trap timing.
Seal	Agua Clara-type shale and drowning shales are regional analogues	Thin or absent seal over exposed highs	Seismic facies, regional well ties, capillary-seal assessment.
Timing/preservation	Multiple Cenozoic charge and deformation phases	Uplift/erosion and transpression may have destroyed accumulations	Integrated burial, thermal and palaeostress history.

10. GLIAG Strategic Interpretation

Aruba should not market itself as a proven extension of Perla or the Falcón fields. That claim would be geologically indefensible. The stronger proposition is that Aruba occupies a strategic basement high at the northern margin of a region where the required petroleum-system components are proven in adjacent basins, but their coincidence beneath Aruba remains untested.

VALIDATES: the need to treat exposed island geology as calibration for basement architecture, uplift and carbonate-factory potential—not as a complete petroleum-system record.

MODIFIES: the simplistic idea that the ABC islands were static modern neighbours. They were neighbouring mobile fault blocks whose relative relief, subsidence and depositional histories diverged through time.

THREATENS: any acreage-marketing narrative based only on geographic proximity to Perla. Without source maturity, migration and seal evidence, reservoir analogy has little commercial value.

CREATES: a credible frontier work programme centred on offshore data reimaging, basin modelling, regional well calibration and targeted geochemical acquisition.

11. Recommended Exploration Programme

1. Compile a single georeferenced Aruba–Curaçao–Bonaire–Paraguaná–Falcón–La Vela database, including all public wells, seismic, gravity, magnetics, bathymetry, outcrop ages and geochemistry.

2. Reprocess legacy 2D seismic using modern broadband, multiple attenuation, depth imaging and basement-focused velocity modelling.

3. Acquire gravity–magnetic data and construct a crustal/depocentre map separating exposed Aruba basement from buried sedimentary lows.

4. Build a sequence-stratigraphic framework from Eocene to Recent, explicitly testing for Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene carbonate mounds and drowning surfaces.

5. Construct 1D/2D petroleum-system models using end-member heat-flow scenarios derived from Falcón syn-rift history and Caribbean lithosphere.

6. Undertake seabed geochemistry, piston coring and slick/remote-sensing studies, with strict contamination control.

7. Rank prospects using independent chance factors for reservoir, source, charge, trap, seal and timing; do not allow Perla proximity to inflate source or charge probability.

8. Design the first exploration well to test the petroleum system, not merely the largest structural closure: it should penetrate seal, reservoir, source-prone section and basement calibration objectives.

12. Conclusion

Aruba’s prospectivity is real as a frontier hypothesis, not yet as a proven petroleum province. The island records the elevated basement part of a mobile Caribbean plate-boundary system; the potentially prospective sedimentary record is more likely to be preserved offshore in adjacent fault-bounded lows. Perla supplies a world-class analogue for coeval Oligocene–Lower Miocene carbonate reservoirs, while the Falcón and La Vela basins prove Cenozoic source rocks, carbonate and clastic reservoirs, inversion traps and locally basement-hosted accumulations. Yet none of these analogues can substitute for direct evidence of a mature Aruba kitchen and an effective charge system. The exploration proposition is therefore strongest when framed as a disciplined data-driven test of a regional petroleum-system extension—not as a geographical extrapolation from neighbouring discoveries.

Annotated Trusted Source Register

1. TNO-GDN, Geological Map of the Kingdom of the Netherlands — Official current overview map and explanatory basis for Aruba, Curaçao and Bonaire geology.

2. RGD / Beets, Metten & Hoogendoorn (1996), Geological Map of Aruba — Foundational detailed island map cited by TNO and modern tectonic studies.

3. Central Bureau of Statistics Aruba, Review of Geology, Climate and Hydrology — Accessible synthesis of Aruba’s geological units and geomorphology.

4. Wright & Wyld, Late Cretaceous subduction initiation — High-level reconstruction of Leeward Antilles plateau and arc evolution.

5. Beardsley & Avé Lallemant (2007), Oblique collision and accretion — Structural and palaeomagnetic evidence for deformation of Aruba and adjacent islands.

6. Hippolyte & Mann (2011), Neogene–Quaternary tectonic evolution — Fault kinematics, uplift and plate-boundary deformation across the ABC islands.

7. Barrera-Lopez et al. (2022), Regional Geophysics — Modern crustal and geophysical synthesis of Caribbean–northern South America.

8. Zapata et al. (2014), Provenance of the Eocene Soebi Blanco Formation — Post-Eocene provenance and tectonic ties between Bonaire, Guajira and northern South America.

9. Baquero et al. (2009), Polyphase Falcón Basin development — Key tectonic and petroleum-generation model for the Falcón Basin.

10. Montero-Serrano et al. (2010), Pedregoso Formation source rock — Organic-geochemical assessment of Early Miocene marine source potential.

11. Albert-Villanueva et al., Lower Miocene carbonate platforms — Detailed San Luis and Churuguara carbonate-platform framework and Perla comparison.

12. Pomar et al. (2015), Perla carbonates — AAPG facies architecture and depositional model for Perla.

13. Castillo et al., Perla Field — Field discovery, scale and development overview.

14. Valencia et al. (2020), Deep-burial dissolution at Perla — Diagenetic controls on reservoir sweet spots.

15. AAPG Memoir 123, La Vela Basin — Closest published offshore analogue for carbonate and basement reservoirs.

16. AAPG Explorer (2026), Venezuela offshore opportunity — Recent professional overview of Perla and Venezuelan offshore exploration maturity.

17. LSU Reservoir Report, Falcón Basin — Reservoir-level summary for Cumarebo, Tiguaje and Hombre Pintado.

18. AAPG DataPages, Eastward advance of the Caribbean Plate — Regional plate-motion and Gulf of Venezuela tectonostratigraphic context.

Strict Copyright, Intellectual Property & Non-Reliance Notice

© 2026 Drs. Marcel P. T. Chin-A-Lien, MBA, M.Sc., Ing., CPG (AAPG), EurGeol (EFG) / GLIAG N.V. — Golden Lane Investments Advisory Group. All rights reserved worldwide. This document, including its title, structure, analytical framework, correlations, interpretations, tables, play concepts, prospectivity ranking, recommendations and GLIAG terminology, constitutes protected intellectual property. No part may be reproduced, adapted, distributed, commercially used, incorporated into licensing materials, investment promotion or technical submissions, or used to train or prompt an artificial-intelligence system without prior written authorisation.

This publication is strategic geological intelligence based on public-domain information and the cited map supplied by the client. It is not a competent-person reserves report, securities recommendation, legal opinion, environmental approval, drilling prognosis or substitute for proprietary seismic, well, geochemical and engineering data. Geological correlations are hypotheses subject to revision. Geographic and stratigraphic positions shown in third-party and AI-assisted graphics may be approximate or incorrect and must be independently verified.

About the Author

Drs. Marcel P. T. Chin-A-Lien, MBA, M.Sc., Ing., CPG (AAPG), EurGeol (EFG), is Principal Founding Partner & Chief Architect of GLIAG N.V. He brings approximately five decades of petroleum-sector experience across exploration, petroleum systems, contract strategy and sovereign energy development, including extensive work in Venezuela, Suriname and the wider Caribbean.

About GLIAG

GLIAG N.V. is a boutique Strategic Petroleum Intelligence platform integrating geology, petroleum systems, exploration, contracts, law, economics, capital architecture, gas monetisation, industrial policy and sovereign development. GLIAG’s purpose is to convert information into decision-ready intelligence—from geology to sovereignty.

GLIAG-ARUBA-2026-001 · 29 July 2026 · Delft, The Netherlands