Reservoir Management of Mature Oil Fields by Integrated Field Development Planning

1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Fabel ◽  
T. Neunhöffer ◽  
D. Rudschinski ◽  
J. Sasse ◽  
T. Scheer
2003 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 401
Author(s):  
R. Seggie ◽  
F. Jamal ◽  
A. Jones ◽  
M. Lennane ◽  
G. McFadzean ◽  
...  

The Legendre North and South Oil Fields (together referred to as the field) have been producing since May 2001 from high rate horizontal wells and had produced 18 MMBBL by end 2002. This represents about 45% of the proven and probable reserves for the field.Many pre-drill uncertainties remain. The exploration and development wells are located primarily along the crest of the structure, leaving significant gross rock volume uncertainty on the flanks of the field. Qualitative use of amplitudes provides some insight into the Legendre North Field but not the Legendre South Field where the imaging is poor. The development wells were drilled horizontally and did not intersect any fluid contacts.Early field life has brought some surprises, despite a rigorous assessment of uncertainty during the field development planning process. Higher than expected gas-oil ratios suggested a saturated oil with small primary gas caps, rather than the predicted under-saturated oil. Due to the larger than expected gas volumes, the gas reinjection system proved to have inadequate redundancy resulting in constrained production from the field. The pre-drill geological model has required significant changes to reflect the drilling and production results to date. The intra-field shales needed to be areally much smaller than predicted to explain well intersections and production performance. This is consistent with outcrop analogues.Surprises are common when an oil field is first developed and often continue to arise during secondary development phases. Learnings, in the context of subsurface uncertainty, from other oil fields in the greater North West Shelf are compared briefly to highlight the importance of managing uncertainty during field development planning. It is important to have design flexibility to enable facility adjustments to be made easily, early in field life.


1994 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 92
Author(s):  
G. B. Salter ◽  
W. P. Kerckhoff

Development of the Cossack and Wanaea oil fields is in progress with first oil scheduled for late 1995. Wanaea oil reserves are estimated in the order of 32 x 106m3 (200 MMstb) making this the largest oil field development currently underway in Australia.Development planning for these fields posed a unique set of challenges.Key subsurface uncertainties are the requirement for water injection (Wanaea only) and well numbers. Strategies for managing these uncertainties were studied and appropriate flexibility built-in to planned facilities.Alternative facility concepts including steel/concrete platforms and floating options were studied-the concept selected comprises subsea wells tied-back to production/storage/export facilities on an FPSO located over Wanaea.In view of the high proportion of costs associated with the subsea components, significant effort was focussed on flowline optimisation, simplification and cost reduction. These actions have led to potential major economic benefits.Gas utilisation options included reinjection into the oil reservoirs, export for re-injection into North Rankin or export to shore. The latter requires the installation of an LPG plant onshore and was selected as the simplest, safest and the most economically attractive method.


Author(s):  
S. V. Matkivskyi

To increase the efficiency of appraisal and development of hydrocarbon fields, the most effective technology is the integration of geological and field information into modern software systems for reservoir simulation, starting from the input of seismic data to field development planning based on a reservoir models. Building a three-dimensional geocellular models is an integral part of hydrocarbon reservoir management. After all, the reservoir model built to solve the main tasks of reservoir management such as: achieve the highest recovery and maximum economic effect. The modern level of software and the advances in computer processing power and graphics allows you to operate with big data, provides an opportunity for its systematization, statistical processing and detecting the basic laws between them. The availability of reliable data plays important role in the creation of a database for reservoir models. The input data for reservoir modelling of the fields, which were discovered in the 1960s, are the results of complex studies, characterized by insufficient accuracy and low quality. Lack of reliable and high-quality data brings significant uncertainty in all stages of modelling from volumetric estimation to the history match and forecasting. The necessity of using available geological and field information has led to the development of new methodological principles and approaches to reservoir modelling in conditions of limited initial information. According to the results of numerous studies, a significant number of methods have been developed, which are successfully used in the design of simulation models of hydrocarbon reservoirs of JSC “Ukrgazvydobuvannya”. Thanks to the use of new approaches to the building of 3D-models, high accuracy and reliability of the simulation results under such conditions is achieved.


2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 523-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. V. Herwanger ◽  
C. R. Schiøtt ◽  
R. Frederiksen ◽  
F. If ◽  
O. V. Vejbæk ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Atheer Dheyauldeen ◽  
Omar Al-Fatlawi ◽  
Md Mofazzal Hossain

AbstractThe main role of infill drilling is either adding incremental reserves to the already existing one by intersecting newly undrained (virgin) regions or accelerating the production from currently depleted areas. Accelerating reserves from increasing drainage in tight formations can be beneficial considering the time value of money and the cost of additional wells. However, the maximum benefit can be realized when infill wells produce mostly incremental recoveries (recoveries from virgin formations). Therefore, the prediction of incremental and accelerated recovery is crucial in field development planning as it helps in the optimization of infill wells with the assurance of long-term economic sustainability of the project. Several approaches are presented in literatures to determine incremental and acceleration recovery and areas for infill drilling. However, the majority of these methods require huge and expensive data; and very time-consuming simulation studies. In this study, two qualitative techniques are proposed for the estimation of incremental and accelerated recovery based upon readily available production data. In the first technique, acceleration and incremental recovery, and thus infill drilling, are predicted from the trend of the cumulative production (Gp) versus square root time function. This approach is more applicable for tight formations considering the long period of transient linear flow. The second technique is based on multi-well Blasingame type curves analysis. This technique appears to best be applied when the production of parent wells reaches the boundary dominated flow (BDF) region before the production start of the successive infill wells. These techniques are important in field development planning as the flow regimes in tight formations change gradually from transient flow (early times) to BDF (late times) as the production continues. Despite different approaches/methods, the field case studies demonstrate that the accurate framework for strategic well planning including prediction of optimum well location is very critical, especially for the realization of the commercial benefit (i.e., increasing and accelerating of reserve or assets) from infilled drilling campaign. Also, the proposed framework and findings of this study provide new insight into infilled drilling campaigns including the importance of better evaluation of infill drilling performance in tight formations, which eventually assist on informed decisions process regarding future development plans.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. V. Alferov ◽  
A. G. Lutfurakhmanov ◽  
K. V. Litvinenko ◽  
S. E. Zdolnik

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document