OTC. 12 offers full program of offshore technology

2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 471-473
Author(s):  
Charles Knobloch
Keyword(s):  
Offshore Technology

Offshore technology—advances at the dawn of the new millennium reviewed from a UK perspective

2000 ◽  
Vol 214 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
G J Lyons
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Offshore Technology ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The World ◽  
New Millennium ◽  
Technology Advances

This paper considers the technologies that have enabled offshore hydrocarbons production to reach the existing limits, and what may be required realistically to extend these limits further at the beginning of the new millennium. Advances are considered which relate to many parts of the world. Each has its own particular challenges. The viewpoint presented here is, however, from the United Kingdom.

Digital Deployment Lessons From Early Adopters

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (05) ◽  
pp. 52-53
Author(s):  
Judy Feder
Keyword(s):  
Data Privacy ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Digital Transformation ◽  
Automotive Manufacturing ◽  
Early Adopters ◽  
Offshore Technology ◽  
Offshore Oil And Gas ◽  
Offshore Oil

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Judy Feder, contains highlights of paper OTC 30794, “Digitalization Deployed: Lessons Learned From Early Adopters,” by John Nixon, Siemens, prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference, originally scheduled to be held in Houston, 4–7 May. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. With full-scale digital transformation of oil and gas an inevitability, the industry can benefit by examining the strategies of industries such as automotive, manufacturing, marine, and aerospace that have been early adopters. This paper discusses how digital technologies are being applied in other verticals and how they can be leveraged to optimize life-cycle performance, drive down costs, and decouple market volatility from profitability for offshore oil and gas facilities. Barriers to Digital Adoption Despite the recent dramatic growth in use of digital tools to harness the power of data, the industry as a whole has remained conservative in its pace of digital adoption. Most organizations continue to leverage technology in disaggregated fashion. This has resulted in an operating environment in which companies can capture incremental inefficiencies and cost savings on a local level but have been largely unable to cause any discernible effect on operating or business models. Although the recent market downturn constrained capital budgets significantly, an ingrained risk-averse culture is also to blame. Other often-cited reasons for the industry’s reluctance to digitally transform include cost of downtime, cyber-security and data privacy, and limited human capital. A single offshore oil and gas facility failure or plant trip can result in millions of dollars in production losses. Therefore, any solution that has the potential to affect a process or its safety negatively must be proved before being implemented. Throughout its history, the industry has taken a conservative approach when adopting new technologies, even those designed to prevent unplanned downtime. Although many current technologies promise increases of 1 to 2% in production efficiency, these gains become insignificant in the offshore industry if risk exists that deployment of the technology could in any way disrupt operations. Cybersecurity and data privacy are perhaps the most-significant concerns related to adoption of digital solutions by the industry, and they are well-founded. Much of today’s offshore infrastructure was not designed with connectivity or the Internet of Things in mind. Digital capabilities have simply been bolted on. In a recent survey of oil and gas executives, more than 60% of respondents said their organization’s industrial control systems’ protection and security were inadequate, and over two-thirds said they had experienced at least one cybersecurity attack in the previous year. Given this reality, it is no surprise that offshore operators have been reluctant to connect their critical assets. They are also cautious about sharing performance data with vendors and suppliers. This lack of collaboration and connectivity has inevitably slowed the pace of digital transformation, the extent to which it can be leveraged, and the value it can generate.

Nanotechnology Helps Decrease Pressure, Increase Injection in Offshore China Oil Field

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (09) ◽  
pp. 58-59
Author(s):  
Chris Carpenter
Keyword(s):  
Water Injection ◽  
Injection Pressure ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Oil Field ◽  
Water Flooding ◽  
Injection System ◽  
Bohai Bay ◽  
Reservoir Properties ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Offshore Technology

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper OTC 30407, “Case Study of Nanopolysilicon Materials’ Depressurization and Injection-Increasing Technology in Offshore Bohai Bay Oil Field KL21-1,” by Qing Feng, Nan Xiao Li, and Jun Zi Huang, China Oilfield Services, et al., prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference Asia, originally scheduled to be held in Kuala Lumpur, 2–6 November. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. Nanotechnology offers creative approaches to solve problems of oil and gas production that also provide potential for pressure-decreasing application in oil fields. However, at the time of writing, successful pressure-decreasing nanotechnology has rarely been reported. The complete paper reports nanopolysilicon as a new depressurization and injection-increasing agent. The stability of nanopolysilicon was studied in the presence of various ions, including sodium (Na+), calcium (Ca2+), and magnesium (Mg2+). The study found that the addition of nanomaterials can improve porosity and permeability of porous media. Introduction More than 600 water-injection wells exist in Bohai Bay, China. Offshore Field KL21-1, developed by water-flooding, is confronted with the following challenges: - Rapid increase and reduction of water-injection pressure - Weak water-injection capacity of reservoir - Decline of oil production - Poor reservoir properties - Serious hydration and expansion effects of clay minerals To overcome injection difficulties in offshore fields, conventional acidizing measures usually are taken. But, after multiple cycles of acidification, the amount of soluble substances in the rock gradually decreases and injection performance is shortened. Through injection-performance experiments, it can be determined that the biological nanopolysilicon colloid has positive effects on pressure reduction and injection increase. Fluid-seepage-resistance decreases, the injection rate increases by 40%, and injection pressure decreases by 10%. Features of Biological Nanopolysilicon Systems The biological nanopolysilicon-injection system was composed of a bioemulsifier (CDL32), a biological dispersant (DS2), and a nanopolysilicon hydrophobic system (NP12). The bacterial strain of CDL32 was used to obtain the culture colloid of biological emulsifier at 37°C for 5 days. DS2 was made from biological emulsifier CDL32 and some industrial raw materials described in Table 1 of the complete paper. Nanopolysilicon hydrophobic system NP12 was composed of silicon dioxide particles. The hydrophobic nanopolysilicons selected in this project featured particle sizes of less than 100 nm. In the original samples, a floc of nanopolysilicon was fluffy and uniform. But, when wet, nanopolysilicon will self-aggregate and its particle size increases greatly. At the same time, nanopolysilicon features significant agglomeration in water. Because of its high interface energy, nanopolysilicon is easily agglomerated, as shown in Fig. 1.

Technology Focus: Offshore Facilities (September 2021)

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (09) ◽  
pp. 50-50
Author(s):  
Ardian Nengkoda
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Energy Transition ◽  
Oil Price ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
The Past ◽  
Offshore Technology ◽  
Net Zero ◽  
Offshore Oil And Gas ◽  
Offshore Oil ◽  
Low Carbon Energy

For this feature, I have had the pleasure of reviewing 122 papers submitted to SPE in the field of offshore facilities over the past year. Brent crude oil price finally has reached $75/bbl at the time of writing. So far, this oil price is the highest since before the COVID-19 pandemic, which is a good sign that demand is picking up. Oil and gas offshore projects also seem to be picking up; most offshore greenfield projects are dictated by economics and the price of oil. As predicted by some analysts, global oil consumption will continue to increase as the world’s economy recovers from the pandemic. A new trend has arisen, however, where, in addition to traditional economic screening, oil and gas investors look to environment, social, and governance considerations to value the prospects of a project and minimize financial risk from environmental and social issues. The oil price being around $75/bbl has not necessarily led to more-attractive offshore exploration and production (E&P) projects, even though the typical offshore breakeven price is in the range of $40–55/bbl. We must acknowledge the energy transition, while also acknowledging that oil and natural gas will continue to be essential to meeting the world’s energy needs for many years. At least five European oil and gas E&P companies have announced net-zero 2050 ambitions so far. According to Rystad Energy, continuous major investments in E&P still are needed to meet growing global oil and gas demand. For the past 2 years, the global investment in E&P project spending is limited to $200 billion, including offshore, so a situation might arise with reserve replacement becoming challenging while demand accelerates rapidly. Because of well productivity, operability challenges, and uncertainty, however, opening the choke valve or pipeline tap is not as easy as the public thinks, especially on aging facilities. On another note, the technology landscape is moving to emerging areas such as net-zero; decarbonization; carbon capture, use, and storage; renewables; hydrogen; novel geothermal solutions; and a circular carbon economy. Historically, however, the Offshore Technology Conference began proactively discussing renewables technology—such as wave, tidal, ocean thermal, and solar—in 1980. The remaining question, then, is how to balance the lack of capital expenditure spending during the pandemic and, to some extent, what the role of offshore is in the energy transition. Maximizing offshore oil and gas recovery is not enough anymore. In the short term, engaging the low-carbon energy transition as early as possible and leading efforts in decarbonization will become a strategic move. Leveraging our expertise in offshore infrastructure, supply chains, sea transportation, storage, and oil and gas market development to support low-carbon energy deployment in the energy transition will become vital. We have plenty of technical knowledge and skill to offer for offshore wind projects, for instance. The Hywind wind farm offshore Scotland is one example of a project that is using the same spar technology as typical offshore oil and gas infrastructure. Innovation, optimization, effective use of capital and operational expenditures, more-affordable offshore technology, and excellent project management, no doubt, also will become a new normal offshore. Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. SPE 202911 - Harnessing Benefits of Integrated Asset Modeling for Bottleneck Management of Large Offshore Facilities in the Matured Giant Oil Field by Yukito Nomura, ADNOC, et al. OTC 30970 - Optimizing Deepwater Rig Operations With Advanced Remotely Operated Vehicle Technology by Bernard McCoy Jr., TechnipFMC, et al. OTC 31089 - From Basic Engineering to Ramp-Up: The New Successful Execution Approach for Commissioning in Brazil by Paulino Bruno Santos, Petrobras, et al.

Fast-Tracking an FLNG Relocation in Malaysia

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (04) ◽  
pp. 39-40
Author(s):  
Judy Feder
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Cost Minimization ◽  
Flow Assurance ◽  
Transient Operation ◽  
Fast Tracking ◽  
Engineering Studies ◽  
Offshore Technology ◽  
State Study ◽  
Common Support ◽  
Minimal Modification

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Judy Feder, contains highlights of paper OTC 30440, “Floating LNG 1 Relocation: Another World’s First,” by Muhammad Fakhruddin Jais, Wan Mahsuri Wan Hashim, and Ariff Azhari Ayadali, Petronas, et al., prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference Asia, originally scheduled to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 17–19 August. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. Floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) allows LNG to be processed hundreds of kilometers away from land to unlock gas reserves in remote and stranded fields previously uneconomical to monetize. The complete paper describes the operator’s fast-tracking of a 450-km FLNG unit relocation from Sarawak to Sabah offshore Malaysia. The time from selecting the new field to unloading LNG at the new location was 13 months. The complete paper discusses pre-execution and engineering studies, relocation preparation and execution, and challenges encountered, including timeline, cost minimization, and manning. Introduction Since 2016, Petronas has operated its first floating LNG production, storage, and offloading facility offshore Sarawak. During the tenure of operation, cargo was delivered successfully to customers worldwide. An opportunity to help a different gas supplier monetize another stranded field offshore Sabah, approximately 450 km away from the unit’s original location, presented itself. The new opportunity was deemed feasible for several reasons. - The identified location is still within Malaysian waters and thus is subject to similar authority and regulations. - Operation within the same country ensures common support from vendor and contractors to some extent. - The two fields have similar gas profiles and water depth. The project team determined that these factors would result in minimal modification at both FLNG and up-stream facilities to meet minimum shut-down from project sanction until first LNG cargo was produced. Pre-Execution and Engineering Studies To fast-track the project, an evaluation was conducted of the new feed-gas composition and modification of both up-stream and FLNG facilities. Long-lead items (LLIs) were identified, and studies were conducted to secure the items. One of the identified LLIs was the flexible pipeline from the upstream facilities to the FLNG. A flow-assurance study covered the steady-state and transient operation for the flexible line. This study confirmed the size of the pipeline and defined the functional requirement for the flexible pipeline procurement. Among the key parameters identified were the pipeline’s thermal conductivity and design pressure. During the feasibility stage, a steady-state study was conducted to determine the length of the flexible line in order to meet the landing pressure and temperature at the FLNG. Instead of requiring additional cooler, the flexible line was extended 2 km to take advantage of the Joule-Thomson cooling effect resulting from the pressure drop across the pipeline. In addition to defining the LLI properties, the flow-assurance study also examined the transient operation for both upstream and FLNG upon the closure of the riser shutdown valve. The study assessed flow-assurance issues, such as hydrates and adequacy of the slug receiver during the transient operation, that might arise, and defined the start-up and commissioning sequence for the facilities.

Strategy Targets Risk Management for CO2 Waterless Fracturing

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (11) ◽  
pp. 62-63
Author(s):  
Chris Carpenter
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
High Pressures ◽  
Safety Management ◽  
Co2 Storage ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Offshore Technology ◽  
Liquid Co2 ◽  
Process Work ◽  
Pump Testing ◽  
Waterless Fracturing

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper OTC 30437, “Risk Management and Control for CO2 Waterless Fracturing,” by Siwei Meng, Qinghai Yang, SPE, and Yongwei Duan, PetroChina, et al., prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference Asia, originally scheduled to be held in Kuala Lumpur, 2–6 November. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. Given shortages and uneven distribution of water resources in China, efforts must be made to develop waterless fracturing techniques. The fluid experiences high pressures and low temperatures during carbon dioxide (CO2) waterless fracturing operations, which can lead to accidents and environmental pollution. In the complete paper, a safety-management approach and a contingency plan for such operations are developed. At the time of writing, this CO2 waterless fracturing methodology has been completed successfully more than 20 times. Surface Process Work Flow of CO2 Waterless Fracturing The basic process of a CO2 waterless fracturing operation is shown in Fig. 1. First, several CO2 storage tanks are connected in parallel. The booster, sealed blender, fracturing pump (all mounted on trunks), and wellhead equipment are connected. The measuring trunk communicates with each vehicle to monitor operation status. Proppant is put into the sealed blender, into which liquid CO2 is injected for pre-cooling. Pump testing is conducted on the high-pressure line and the wellhead and the low-pressure liquid supply line is pressure-tested. Operation does not proceed until pressure-testing results are positive. Afterward, liquid CO2 is injected into formations to fracture them and, moreover, extend created fractures. The sealed blender is enabled to inject prop-pants, and displacement begins after the end of proppant injection. Finally, a series of tasks, including well shut-in for soaking and flowback, is carried out successively.

Sour-Service Risers and Accessories for HP/HT Application in the Gulf of Mexico

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (03) ◽  
pp. 60-61
Author(s):  
Judy Feder
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Yield Strength ◽  
Gulf Of Mexico ◽  
Wall Thickness ◽  
Large Diameter ◽  
High Strength ◽  
Thick Wall ◽  
Offshore Technology ◽  
Riser Pipe ◽  
Sour Service

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Judy Feder, contains highlights of paper OTC 30558, “Development and Implementation of Heavy-Wall, High-Strength, Sour-Service Accessory and Risers for HP/HT Application in the Gulf of Mexico,” by Carine Landier, Jonathas Oliveira, and Christelle Gomes, Vallourec, et al., prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference, originally scheduled to be held in Houston, 4–7 May. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. As oil and gas development in the Gulf of Mexico increasingly requires high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT) applications, the need for sour-service (SS) resistance also has grown. To meet these needs, continual innovation and improvement is needed in SS-grade materials from a technical and cost-effectiveness perspective. The complete paper discusses the material properties achieved with several large-diameter, heavy-wall SS pipes. The complete paper presents a detailed, illustrated discussion of the applications for the high-strength SS pipe and its manufacturing process. Applications The authors write that improved materials to meet HP/HT requirements such as those in the Gulf of Mexico are needed particularly for two applications: for risers, which require high-strength, thick-wall sour service; and as a substitute for corrosion-resistant alloy (CRA) with sour carbon material on defined accessories. Vallourec has developed high-strength [125,000-psi specified minimum yield strength (SMYS)] and resistant carbon steel pipes in sizes with outer diameter (OD) up to 23 in. and wall thickness up to 2.5 in. These sizes are common in lower-strength material, but meeting the high-pressure requirements with higher-grade material enables cost savings and eliminates some CRA components. It also enables the use of much-lighter-weight pipe than the 80,000-psi SMYS material that is standard for SS applications in oversize OD and heavy wall. Risers. Most deepwater drilling is performed with classic subsea blowout-preventer (BOP) systems. Access to the well through the BOP is accomplished with low-pressure, large-diameter (19-in. internal diameter) drilling riser pipe. Pipes are supplied in weldable grades (API 5L X65–X80). Large-diameter forged flanges are then welded onto the tubes. Connections are made by multiple bolts. High pressures, required as part of the drilling process, are supplied by small-diameter choke-and-kill lines. This system has served the industry well, but, as well pressures increase, so have cost and feasibility requirements of subsea BOP technology. These costs, driven by the complexity of redundant systems, have driven a desire to explore an alternative solution—a surface BOP with high-pressure drilling riser pipe. Using a surface BOP reduces the complexity and cost of the system significantly because of the ability to inspect it. The drilling riser then carries the pressure to the surface and must be able to contain it. The high-pressure environment that instigated a new solution was based on a 15,000-psi well pressure with NACE Region 2 SS performance. Because of the requirement for weldable grades for attaching the flange as well as SS, the maximum yield strength has been limited to 80,000 psi. At that strength, a very high wall thickness is required to meet 15,000 psi and greater. This becomes very heavy and can be limited by the rig hook-load capacity. Alternatives in weldable grades are nickel-based alloys with SS performance. A full string, however, is prohibitively expensive.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document