Agbami Field Development Concept Selection: Evaluating Facility and Field Development Alternatives in an Environment of Significant Subsurface Uncertainty

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kendall C. Reynolds ◽  
Dave Brennan ◽  
John Spokes ◽  
Lars Seeberg
Keyword(s):  
Concept Selection ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Development Concept ◽  
Development Alternatives

Offshore concept field development

2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 454
Author(s):  
Greg Saunders ◽  
Matthew Poole
Keyword(s):  
Management Strategy ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Final Solution ◽  
Concept Selection ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Subsequent Investigation ◽  
Design Perspective ◽  
Technical Study ◽  
Development Concept ◽  
Selection Phase

This extended abstract describes the field development concept selection process for Karoon Gas Australia, as part of the appraisal and commercialisation of an oil resource in offshore Brazil. From an engineering design perspective, the concept selection phase offers the greatest opportunity to create project value. Options must be carefully considered before rigorous investigation to provide a firm foundation for key decisions. The concept selection study and option consideration began with a two-day framing and option identification workshop. Nine key decisions were identified as having significant impact on the feasibility and cost of the development. These included the wellhead type, hydrate management strategy, floating production storage and offloading vessel (FPSO) capacity, FPSO location, mooring type, subsea architecture, product export and expansion provisions. Assessment criteria were agreed on for each of the key technical decisions; these were applied in the evaluation of options defined. This workshop facilitated definition and agreement for the technical study scope. The subsequent investigation and selection process focused on the key development decisions that needed to be made immediately, compared to those that could be made at a later stage of the development. These decisions encompassed technical viability, dry trees versus wet trees, flow assurance, mooring type and processing capacity. A geologically complex reservoir drove many elements of the development selection process. This extended abstract highlights that the final solution balances risk management with maximising project value. The recommended base development concept is analogous to many developments already implemented in Brazil and is flexible enough to accommodate a realistic range of outcomes from future appraisal wells.

The Role of Geophysical Uncertainty in Field Development Concept Selection

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daria Krasova ◽  
Sverre Tresselt ◽  
Ivar Meisingset ◽  
Thomas Forde ◽  
Stale Romundstad
Keyword(s):  
Concept Selection ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Development Concept

Caveats and Pitfalls of Production Forecast Uncertainty Analysis Using Design of Experiments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boxiao Li ◽  
Hemant Phale ◽  
Yanfen Zhang ◽  
Timothy Tokar ◽  
Xian-Huan Wen
Keyword(s):  
Design Of Experiments ◽  
Uncertainty Analysis ◽  
History Matching ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
Production Forecast ◽  
Forecast Uncertainty ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Development Alternatives ◽  
Modeling Principles ◽  
Made In

Abstract Design of Experiments (DoE) is one of the most commonly employed techniques in the petroleum industry for Assisted History Matching (AHM) and uncertainty analysis of reservoir production forecasts. Although conceptually straightforward, DoE is often misused by practitioners because many of its statistical and modeling principles are not carefully followed. Our earlier paper (Li et al. 2019) detailed the best practices in DoE-based AHM for brownfields. However, to our best knowledge, there is a lack of studies that summarize the common caveats and pitfalls in DoE-based production forecast uncertainty analysis for greenfields and history-matched brownfields. Our objective here is to summarize these caveats and pitfalls to help practitioners apply the correct principles for DoE-based production forecast uncertainty analysis. Over 60 common pitfalls in all stages of a DoE workflow are summarized. Special attention is paid to the following critical project transitions: (1) the transition from static earth modeling to dynamic reservoir simulation; (2) from AHM to production forecast; and (3) from analyzing subsurface uncertainties to analyzing field-development alternatives. Most pitfalls can be avoided by consistently following the statistical and modeling principles. Some pitfalls, however, can trap experienced engineers. For example, mistakes made in handling the three abovementioned transitions can yield strongly unreliable proxy and sensitivity analysis. For the representative examples we study, they can lead to having a proxy R2 of less than 0.2 versus larger than 0.9 if done correctly. Two improved experimental designs are created to resolve this challenge. Besides the technical pitfalls that are avoidable via robust statistical workflows, we also highlight the often more severe non-technical pitfalls that cannot be evaluated by measures like R2. Thoughts are shared on how they can be avoided, especially during project framing and the three critical transition scenarios.

Impacts of Cold Climate Environmental Conditions on a Riser System Design and Installation

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adekunle Peter Orimolade ◽  
Ove Tobias Gudmestad
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Conditions ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Cold Climate ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Climate Region ◽  
Probability Of Occurrence ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Development Concept

Interests in exploration and production of oil and gas in cold climate areas has increased in recent times. This can be attributed to the continual depletion of reserves in mature fields, and recent discoveries of large quantities of oil and gas in the cold climate region, including the more recent discovery of the Alta Reservoir, in the Barents Sea. However, marine operations in this region are faced with challenges resulting from its arctic conditions. Knowledge of the physical environment is important in designing offshore structures, and in planning, and executing marine operations. Selection of a suitable field development concept may be influenced by the probability of occurrence of rare events, such as drifting icebergs. Furthermore, occurrence of mesoscale phenomenon such as polar low pressures may adversely affect planned marine operations. In addition, uncertainties in weather forecasting will reflect on the available weather window to perform installation and interventions works. This paper presents some of the challenges in designing and planning for marine operations in the cold climate region. A possible field development concept for the open water areas of the Norwegian sector of the Barents Sea is discussed. The current research work considers the need for further assessment of the probability of occurrence of drifting icebergs as of importance when selecting field development concept. The Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) is proposed, and this should be designed with an internal turret system that can be disconnected and reconnected. Some of the challenges associated with riser systems design when considering a turret system with the capability to disconnect and reconnect are discussed. This paper also propose the use of ensemble forecasts as an alternative to the use of alpha factors to estimate operational weather window when planning for marine operations in the Barents Sea. The unpredictability nature of the environmental conditions, especially in the early winter is considered a challenge to marine operations.

scholarly journals Concept Selection for Hydrocarbon Field Development Planning

Engineering ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 04 (11) ◽  
pp. 794-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Efrain Rodriguez-Sanchez ◽  
J. Martin Godoy-Alcantar ◽  
Israel Ramirez-Antonio
Keyword(s):  
Development Planning ◽  
Concept Selection ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Hydrocarbon Field

Offshore Economic Field Development Concept - Step Change

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. N. Prescott ◽  
S. Paramsook ◽  
W. Mohammed ◽  
F. Mejia
Keyword(s):  
Step Change ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Development Concept
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document