It may be semantics, but some of the initiative appear to be branded “Smart” and some “Smarter” – I think the oilfields should be “Smarter”, with the goal of reduction, while cities should be “Smarter” with the goal of leveraging analytics for risk and cost reduction (from food safety to police) and productivity improvement (education, transportation…). Not sure where I’d use “Smart”, which indicates to me that we’re closer to a goal than a problem statement.

For example, I hate “Smart cars” – to me it is like trying to give a discipline – prematurely – credibility by appending “science” or “engineering”. (this from someone who taught “software engineering” long before it was an appropriate course name)

aj

However, I still question branding anything as Smart which helps suck oil out of the ground more efficiently.

The US has spent over $100bn a year in what some would argue is merely an attempt to secure oil resources in Iraq and Afghanistan with very little to show for the investment. Had that money (or even a fraction of it) been spent on research into renewables, Smart Oilfields might at this stage refer to the efficient shutting down of drilling operations!