Download to read offline
Uploaded byAna Maria Hernandez
Norway2000
This document discusses several projects related to optimizing shale production through oriented perforation based on rock type identification. It proposes analyzing drilling and completion data over time to identify pressure differential issues and potential production compartments. Other projects discussed include evaluating new technologies for offshore developments by analyzing how they may impact development plans and reservoir types, justifying investments in isolated control zones to address reservoir issues, and building physical models of reservoirs to aid in instrumentation and dynamic simulation. The document also discusses regional environmental authorities' visions and a proposed methodology for evaluating production technologies under different environmental regulations.
More Related Content
Norway2000
- 1. Shale Perforation Optimization Orientedperforation (Stress/Strain) + Reservoir Rock Type Identification (FZI) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 gas + clay oil/gas oil + sand B o t t o n H o l e P r e s s u r e Interval with more potential to reduce gas production and decrease production problems in shale reservoirs: Rock type window Production potential Project Objective: to propose a methodology to optimize production thought oriented rock type perforation Reservoir Pressure
- 2. Proposed Rock typeAnalysis Reservoir Pressure Bottom Hole Pressure Rock type window ? Oriented rock type perforation Rock Type Rock Strength Rock type vs. Rock Strength Rock type window
- 3. Pressure Differential Project Toanalyze Drilling & Completion Evolution trough time in the Tectono/stratigraphic & dynamic framework to show up potential compartments Y x y x y x y x y x Y x Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Oil well Gas Water M a p v i e w c r o s s s e c t i o n Shale sand Compartment due to production Potential pressure differential problem A B A B A A C B C B A D C B A D C B Smart well candidate
- 4. Technology Development Project •Review of offshore Exploration & development plans • Technological Risk analysis – To extrapolate exploration geology risk analysis techniques to evaluate production technologies potential application – Identify variables (technology & reservoir types scenarios) that will have technical/economical impact in their development plans Technology A Technology B Technology C High Risk Example Development Plan Technology vs. Reservoir type framework 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0 3 5 4 0 scena.1 scena.2 scena.3 v a r . 1 v a r . 2 v a r . 3 Sce. 3 Sce. 2 Sce. 1
- 5. 1,866’ 1,320’ Development Plan withNew Technology 1,866’ 100 1000 10000 100000 RESERVES (MMBOE) 100%:11.1 CAPEX (MM$):35.2 DCFROI (%):24 F & D COST ($/BOE):3.15 BWPD BOPDB OPD MCFPD MULTILATERAL DRILLING CO2 INJECTION Conventional wells Multilateral Wells New Development Plan with New Technology MTL Case Study Carbonate reservoir
- 6. Intelligent Wells. IsolatedControl Zone (ICZ) Project • How to justify Investment? – Evaluation of current reservoir problems that may be prevent/reduce using ICZ – Well design. ICZ size & placement possibilities – Evaluation of risk factors (choke erosion, formation strength variability, asphaltenes, sand production, perforation design) – ICZ cost/benefit & reliability analysis Reservoir Reservoir Without ICZ With ICZ + $$$ To show technical/economical benefits of the ICZ in the same reservoir type scenario > Technical Benefits Discounted Cash flow < Technical Benefits < Discounted Cash flow
- 7. Instrumented Oilfield Project Ifwe have a 3D cube with good resolution, may we build a transparent physical model at scale that represent the reservoir and their internal heterogeneities? In this way: •We can see the physical dimension and distribution of the objects and we may see the fluid contacts moving •We may reduce uncertainty in the static model •We may instrumented the reservoir using its truly shape and heterogeneities. •Operators may build their own particular static model •It can be used to simulate 4D (Drilling Simulator) and dynamic process Reservoir Gas contact Oil rim Water Contact
- 8. Drilling cost Completion cost Simple waterfr ont moveme ntmodel SIP 2.4 Valves/chokes: Lifecycle reliability model, SIP 1.4 +pressure drop Random geological surprises Simple gasfront moveme nt model SIP 2.4 Resid ual oil mode l? SIP 2.4 LWD information Surprise handling (FN) Water breakout (SM) Smart Assets Value Evaluation tool - Geological surprises evaluation using Monte Carlo simulation Techno-Economic Decision support tools for technology assessment Injector Producer Target Fore cast: Surprise handling rockstrength .54 Rocktypes .52 Rockwettability .49 layers .05 internal barriers .01 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 Measured byRank Correlation Sensitivity ChartDecision variables Assumptions Variability Uncertainty Forecast Injector Injection points Valves/chokes Zonal flow sensors Producer Drainage point Valves/chokes producer Permanent resistivity sensors Interwell data Distance between wells Completed interval Perforation rock types rock wettability rock strenght pore pressure barriers layers Surprise handling Water Breakout
- 9. Authorities Vision Regional EnvironmentalImpact – Region I UNEP (United Nations environmental Program): • Oil Pollution has a moderate impact on food security, quantification and monitoring of this impact is needed to avoid human health impact • To Improve accidental response impact analysis of toxic substances NPD (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate), Ministry of Environment: • Clean Technologies will be rewarded with subsidies and tax allowances, main goal: zero discharge of solids • To reduce water production to 50% with new technology • Tools to measure, control and monitor environmental impact OSPAR (Oslo-Paris environmental legislation): • Improvement in each cycle of Offshore technology management ( avoidance, reduction, re-use, recycling, recovery, residue disposal) • Waste management SFT (Norwegian Pollution Control Authority): • Prioritisation or substitution of hazardous substances • Better quality control of local spills, reduce contamination of estuaries and artic zones
- 10. Production Geology Approachapplied to Environmental Risk Assessment • Reduction of Number of Wells • Review of technological options and development plans to reduce the environmental impact of •Production /injection management • Water / Gas Handling • Zero Discharge Policy • Improvement in the technology Management Life cycle ( avoidance, reduction, re-use, recycling, recovery, disposal) • Novel control, monitoring and measurement environmental Oil & Gas Solutions
- 11. Production Technology EvaluationMethodology Alaska, USA Development plans under environmental regulations GOM Improve productivity in Salt tectonic Hidrates, Ultradeep water development Mutilayer with pressure differential CANADA North Sea ,UK (Pressure maintenance, oil rims, drainage optimization, contact movement monitoring, water/gas coning, hydrates) Improvement drainage strategies, gas development, L/V pressure distribution and transmissibility,WAG, deeper waters, water/gas coning,sand control) North and Norwegian Sea, Norway Deepwater Exploratory NIGERIA VENEZUELA WAG, potential offshore development Pressure maintenance, gas development,monitoring water cuts, ANGOLA CONGO Deep water sand reservoirs Deepwater plans GUINEA Fractured reservoir,ITALY Deepwater Development plans, BRAZIL AUSTRALIA Environmental regulations Heavy oil underlying by strong aquifers Oman Production Geology Approach Technical/Economical Ranking matrix (Technology vs. Reservoir/Geology Scenarios)