Field Development Plan

Team (A) AQUA

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 1

 Contents:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FIELD DESCRIPTION
DEVELOPMENT AND MANGEMENT PLAN
CONCLUSION

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 2

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
First Oil Q3
FPSO + Tie 2017
to existing Oil Pipeline
HSE Standard
Pipelines

20 Slots
SubSea Recovery Factor
Template 47.8 %
Gas Pipeline
Water
Injection
Technique
10 New Production
NPV (0.10)
Wells + 6 New Injection
$2014 7,727
Wells (16 Wells)
STOIP: 806 MM MM USD
bbl Stock
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 3
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Seismic Interpretation

Seismic plot used for basic interpretation of the reservoir, structure.

An anticline, with possible syn-depositional faults
Pinching out of the main sands and the Ribble sands towards NNW

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 4

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
3-D Model of X-Field, with Faulting Visible in Blue

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 5

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Severity of the edges

Severity of the edges, in

the top structure of the
X-Field, which can be
used for detection of
possible faulting from
the Top Structure.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 6

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
2D Contour of X-Field

2-D Contour of X-Field with

Possible Faulting directions
highlighted in blue and pink,
the extent of the faulting is
approximated by the
distance to the nearest fault
from well test
interpretations, visible as
red circles.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 7

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
OWC (Oil Water Contact)
Well-X1 Well-X2 Well-X3 Well-X4 Well-X5 Well-X6

The wells X1, X2, X3 and X4 lie in the region with the lower
OWC at 10850 ft. TVD SS, and the Well X5 and X6 lie in the
region with the shallower OWC, at 10560 ft. TVDSS, with 2
Wells seeing opposite trends, X2 being almost all water, and
X6 being all oil.
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 8
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Conceptual Explanation for Different Oil-Water Contacts observed in the X-Field

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 9

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Field Stratigraphic Correlation

Full Field Stratigraphic Correlation for the X-Field,

with all the wells in the section, and in order
X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6, with no preferred direction.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 10

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Stratigraphic Correlation Panel (1) for Wells X2, X1, X6 and X5

Stratigraphic Correlation for Wells X2,

X1, X6 and X5, in the direction SE-NW,
with faults shown in red.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 11

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Conceptual Geological Model from Stratigraphic Correlation Panel (1)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 12

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Stratigraphic Correlation Panel (2) for X4, X6, X1 and X3

Stratigraphic Correlation for Wells X4, X6,

X1 AND X3, in the direction NE-SW, with
the fault across well X-6 shown in Red.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 13

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Conceptual Geological Model from Stratigraphic Correlation Panel (2)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 14

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Core Image Analysis

Oil-Stained Cores

Sand-Filled Mud
Lined Burrows

Interbedding
with Mudstones

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 15

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Palaeocurrent Direction of Interpreted Sediment Supply

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 16

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Interpreted Geological Sequences of Evolution of the field

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 17

 FIELD DESCRIPTION

Indicators for Shallow Marine Environment

The Main Jurassic Sand Units thins out towards the east because of sedimentary input

from the SW-NE direction.

Core image samples that shows the bioturbated mudstone lamina and trace fossils

present.

A general coarsening up texture of rock.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 18

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
GEOLOGY AND RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION

The Formations in the X-Field can be classified into five diff types of sub-units.

Ribble Sand which is highly permeable (1000mD) and porous representing very

good to excellent reservoir characteristics.

Clyde is very low permeability (10-50 mD) with poor reservoir characteristics.

Lydell, Mersey and Usk Sands show permeabilities that are varying from very-

high to moderate values (average 670 mD) resulting in a reservoir unit that is

good to moderate in quality.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 19

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Multi-Well Histogram for Core Derived Porosities for X1, X4 and X5

Porosity X1 X4 X5

Minimum 3.6 % 10.2 % 3.7 %

Maximum 33.3 % 32.4 % 28.8 %

Std. Deviation 5.92 % 3.23 % 5.21%

Mean 22.32 % 24.65 % 20.8 %

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 20

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Multi-Well Histogram for Core Derived Permeability for X1, X4 and X5

K X1 X4 X5

Minimum 0.01 mD 0.05 mD 0.01 mD

Maximum 4500 mD 2900 mD 3600 mD

Std. 801.91 mD 734 mD 789.54 mD

Deviation
Mean 733.12 mD 767.2 mD 564.53 mD

Cutoff 1 mD 1 mD 1 mD

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 21

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Cross Plot Multi Wells (Core Permeability Core Porosity) for X1, X4 and X5

Porosity and Permeability, plotted on a semi-log graph, showing two different trends for Well X1, and
Wells X4 and X5, thereby hinting that the main reservoir units, in Well X1 is different from Wells X4
and X5.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 22

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
The Permeability and Porosity profiles for the Well X5
The Permeability and
Porosity profiles for
the Well X5, hint at the
existence of possible
layering within the
reservoir section, with
layers of very high and
very low
permeabilities, which
is also being confirmed
in the Lorentz Plot (in
the next slide)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 23

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Lorenz Plot and Semivariogram for Core of well X5

Well X5, was chosen for core analysis, as it has all three sets of data, with sufficient sample
sizes for each of the four distinct zones , along with core photographs, and RFT data.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 24

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Core Derived Porosity and Permeability Cross plot for Core-Data in Well X5

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 25

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Cross Plot Multi-Wells (Porosity Formation Resistivity) for X3, X4 and X5

For the estimation of Rw, both Pickett Plot and Rwa method have been used, and the value of
Rw, in the field was approximated at 0.03 OHMM. Values of Rm and Rmf are from the log headers.

Porosity
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 26
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Facies identification
Well-X1 Well-X2 Well-X3 Well-X4 Well-X5 Well-X6

For our facies identification , we decided to go for a sand/shale system, and used the ROCK_NET flag
generated from the summaries section in Techlog.

For estimation of Water Saturation (Sw), we used was the Indonesia Equation, as the Archies
Equation is only for clean sands.

For Vshale, cutoffs from Histogram, and Clavier Equation.

KMOD for Permeabilities.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 27
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Cross Plot (Neutron-Porosity Bulk Density) for wells X1-X6
Density-Neutron Cross
plots for all Wells, the
main outlying points,
belong to the bottom
most Non-Reservoir
Unit, Sand-5 (Very-
Shaly Sand), and
excluding those
outlying points, the
entire lithology falls
along similar trends,
agreeing with our
interpretation of a
sand & shale system.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 28

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Multi-Well Gamma-Ray Histogram for Wells X1-X6

Higher than
normal Gamma
Ray Values for
the Reservoir
Sands especially
in Wells that lie
within the area
under the Clay
Seals (Wells- X1,
X2)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 29

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
HYDROCARBONS IN PLACE; Deterministic Reserve Estimation

WORST MOST PROBABLE BEST

Area (acres) 2425.5 2425.5 2825.5
Thickness (feet) 100 340 580
Porosity (%) 0.18 0.23 0.33
Water Saturation (%) 0.4 0.2 0.1
Form. Volume Factor (bbl/stb) 1.49 1.43 1.33
NTG 0.89 0.98 0.99
STOOIP (MMSTB) 121.386 806.7262111 2810.62

Deterministic Reserve Estimation, using parameters from the Petrophysical Analysis

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 30

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
HYDROCARBONS IN PLACE; Probabilistic Reserve Estimation
(Latin Hypercube Method)

STOOIP (MMSTB)
Probabilistic Reserve
Estimation, using
P10 1,274.80
parameters from the
P50 859.69
Petrophysical Analysis,
P90 517.70 and Latin Hypercube
Sampling.
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 31
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Sensitivity Analysis for STOIP; Tornado Chart
Sensitivity Analysis for Field-X STOOIP (MMSTB)
The range of values
0.00 500.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 used for the Input
Thickness (FT.) 207.33 472.67 Parameters are taken
from the generated
Porosity (%) 0.21 0.29
summary of the six
Water Saturation (%) 0.32 0.15
wells, varying from the
best to worst values,
Area (Acres) 2,465.50 2,785.50 with the median
values assumed for the
Form. Volume Factor (bbl/stb) 1.46 1.37
base case, for
NTG 0.92 0.98 sensitivity analysis.

Upside Downside

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 32

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
Sensitivity Analysis for STOIP; Spider Diagram
Sensitivity Analysis for Field-X STOOIP (MMSTB)
1,400.00

1,200.00

1,000.00

800.00

600.00

400.00
27.67%

48.55%

69.44%
10.00%
11.61%
13.21%
14.82%
16.43%
18.03%
19.64%
21.24%
22.85%
24.46%
26.06%

29.28%
30.88%
32.49%
34.10%
35.70%
37.31%
38.92%
40.52%
42.13%
43.73%
45.34%
46.95%

50.16%
51.77%
53.37%
54.98%
56.59%
58.19%
59.80%
61.41%
63.01%
64.62%
66.22%
67.83%

71.04%
72.65%
74.26%
75.86%
77.47%
79.08%
80.68%
82.29%
83.90%
85.50%
87.11%
88.71%
Thickness (FT.) Porosity (%) Water Saturation (%) Area (Acres) Form. Volume Factor (bbl/stb) NTG

The range of values used for the Input Parameters are taken from the generated summary of the six wells, varying from
the best to worst values, with the median values assumed for the base case, for sensitivity analysis.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 33

 PVT ANALYSIS
PROPERTY MEASURED

API 40

Initial Reservoir Pressure (psi) 5745

Temperature (F) 250

Bubble Point (psi) 1785

GOR (scf/stb) 351

Density (lb/ft3) 41.51

Viscosity (cP) 0.34

Oil Compressibility , 1/psi X10^-5 1.3

Oil Formation Volume Factor 1.41

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 34

 CAPILLARY PRESSURE
Pressure(oil water) vs pore Log Fitted Leverett-J Function for Field-X Capillay Pressure Core Data
log10(J(sw)) = 2.525 - 1.723 log10(Sw %)
space % 160
S 0.336483
100 R-Sq 80.8%

Pressure, Psia
140
R-Sq(adj) 80.7%

120
10
100

80

J(sw)
60 1
Pressure(oil
water)
40

20 0.1
porosity % 22.9
0 permeability MD
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 49 Depth (Ft)
10330.4 0.01
1 10 100
Sw %

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 35

 RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
Mersey and Lydell Sands Usk Sands
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.8
0.7 0.5
0.6 0.4
Permeability

0.5
0.3
Relative

0.4
0.3 0.2

0.2 0.1
0.1 0
0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0 0.5 1 KR1
Water Saturation, Sw T0 KRHT
0.8 KRIT
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
ClydeSands 0.2
0.1
0
0 0.5 1
KR1T
KRHT
IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 36
 RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
Ribble sands Forth Sand & Ush Sand

0.6
0.9

0.8 0.5

0.7
0.4
0.6

0.5 0.3

0.4
0.2
0.3

0.2 0.1

0.1
0
0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

KR1T
KR1T
KRHT
KRHT

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 37

 Well-Test Analysis
Log-Log Diagnostic(X2) Results (Oil Zone)
Reservoir Parameter Results

Permeability (mD) 250

Skin 1.25

Wellbore Storage Coefficient 0.0349

(bbl/psi)

Well Thickness (ft) 130

Extrapolated Pressure (psia) 5680

Reservoir Interval (ft TVDSS) 10637 - 10672 & 10688

10700

Productivity Index(bbl/d/psi) 35

Distance from Fault (ft) NA

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 38

 Well-Test Analysis
Log-Log Diagnostic(X3) Results (Oil Zone)
Reservoir Parameter Results

Permeability (mD) 215

Skin -3.5

Wellbore Storage Coefficient 0.0349

(bbl/psi)

Well Thickness (ft) 100

Extrapolated Pressure (psia) 5246

Reservoir Interval (ft TVDSS) NA

Productivity Index(bbl/d/psi) 70

Distance from fault (ft) 220

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 39

 Well-Test Analysis
Log-Log Diagnostic(X5) Results (Oil Zone)
Reservoir Parameter Results

Permeability (mD) 820

Skin 22

Wellbore Storage 0.2

Coefficient (bbl/psi)

Well Thickness (ft) 273

Extrapolated Pressure (psia) 4350

Reservoir Interval (ft TVDSS) 10264-10332

Productivity 64.2

Index(bbl/d/psi)

Distance from fault(ft) 467 and 600 ft. (Interesting

Fault) - BU
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 40
 Well-Test Analysis
Log-Log Diagnostic(X6) Results (Oil Zone)
Reservoir Parameter Results

Permeability (mD) 500

Skin 43.6

Wellbore Storage Coefficient 0.241

(bbl/psi)

Well Thickness (ft) 467

Extrapolated Pressure (psia) 4837

Reservoir Interval (ft TVDSS) 10264 10309

Distance from fault (ft) 325 and 325 ft. (Interesting

Fault) - BU

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 41

 Well-Test Analysis
Well Test Summary Table
Well Name Well X2 Well X3 Well X5 Well X6

K(mD) 249.7 - 270.30 214.7 692.80 - 820 338.8 - 500

Kh(mD Ft) 32460 - 35143 21470 204400 - 223000 158200 - 211500

P* (psia) @
5680 - 5700 5246 4304 - 4350 4826 - 4837
10500 ft TVDSS

S (Total Skin) 0.9989 - 1.5 -3.5 20.83 - 22 43.6 - 60

Fault Detection 467 and 600 ft. 325 and 325 ft.
N/A 220 ft.
Distances (Interesting Fault) - BU (Interesting Fault) - BU

Permeability values from all the well test shows high heterogeneity in the reservoir.
Formation damage(Skin) in the range -3.5 45.
IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 42
 Well-Test Analysis
Well Test Interpretations
Fault Signatures are identified in Wells X2, X5,
X6.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 43

 Well-Test Analysis
Well-Test Interpretations
Semi steady state regimes are not found in
any log-log plots, therefore:
Drainage area & Shape factor were not calculated
using pan system.
Pmbh & Pavg could not be calculated.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 44

 Well-Test Analysis
RFT Analysis
for X1, X2,
X3 and X5

Two OWCs
identified @ 10560
and 10840 ft. TVD SS

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 45

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Number of wells Case Number of Plateau Recovery
no. wells Production Factor
The selection of the number of wells (years) (fraction)
was determined on the basis of the
combination of:
Base 4 Producers and 12.6 0.26
(1)Economic factor Case 2 Injectors
(2)Recovery Factor
(3)Plateau production period Case 1 9 Producers and 5 0.46
5 Injectors

Case 2 10 Producers (1 4.8 0.47

Optimum Case (Case-3) Horizontal) and
5 Injectors
Producer Injectors
Existing 4 2 Case 3 14 Producers 3 0.478
and 8 Injectors
New 10 6
IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 46
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Optimum tubing diameter Worst Case Scenario
4.5 in OD
Layer Water Cut Oil rate OD ID
The selection criteria: Pressure
Oil rate (bopd) @ (psia) (fraction) (bopd) (in) (in)
Water cut = 0.9 (fraction)
1900 0.9 389.2 4.5 3.958
Layer Pressure = 1900 psia
1900 0.9 403.1 5.5 4.8

The difference between the oil rates is very low,

thus, we go for the smaller tubing size

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 47

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Natural Flow of well:-
The well flows naturally at
the Optimum Oil rate for 3
years
The corresponding Layer
pressure, Water cut and
Recovery Factor are shown in
the table, also their
relationship

Plateau Recovery Water Cut Layer

Period Factor Pressure
(years) (fraction) (fraction) (psia)
Case 3 3 0.478 0.35 5720
IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 48
 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Artificial Lift Selection is Dual ESP.

Gas Lift was not used because:

The reservoir does not produce gas
Quantity of gas available after
separation is not sufficient
Uneconomical to import gas from the
closet facility available

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 49

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Selection of the Pump
Available options:
Specifications HN 21000 (HS) Reda KC 20000 Centrilift

Motor 562 Series Reda KMH-J 562 Reda

Min Liquid rate 20416 20416

Max Liquid rate 28000 28000

Stages 14 88 2 98

(The pump selection is based on the performance at the worst case scenario
The pumps that were available for these conditions are shown in the table)

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 50

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Selection of the Pump
Comparison of the performances of the pumps are shown in
the table
Pump Name Layer Pressure Water Cut Oil Rate
(psia) (fraction) (bopd)
HN 21000 (HS) Reda
1900 0.9 363.8

KC 20000 Centrilift 1900 0.9 464.6

Based on the performance @ worst case scenario:

KC 20000 Centrelift is selected as the ESP

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 51

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Performance of the pump
The table shows the point, i.e. water and Layer pressure, till
where the ESP can provide the Optimum Oil Rate
Layer Pressure Water Cut Oil Rate
(psia) (fraction) (bopd)
5720 0.35 15297.9
5000 0.41 10173.6
5000 0.47 8501.9
4600 0.35 10021.2
1900 0.2 9597.3

From the above table we can see that the pump will be able to produce at
Optimum rate till 5000 psia and water cut ranging from 0.41 to 0.47

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 52

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Formation Damage
The Formation Damage caused by:
a) Drilling
b) Cementing
c) Perforation
d) Production
Fine movement
Scales(organic and inorganic)
Pressure Reduction
Stimulation

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 53

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE

Production Zone maintenance

Re-perforation for water Shut-offs.

The technical well treatment solutions to remove the

Formation Damage are as follows:

Matrix.

Hydraulic Fracturing.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 54

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Selection Criteria for Well Treatment method:
Treatment Type Skin Permeability

Propped Hydraulic Fracture Low Low

Propped Hydraulic Fracture High Low

Frac and Pack High Medium

Matrix High Medium/High

Treatment not required Low Medium/High

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 55

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Selection of Well Treatment Method
Matrix v/s Hydraulic Fracturing
Parameters Matrix Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydrocarbon Saturation 40% 40%

Water cut 30% 30%

Permeability 20 mD 1-50mD

Reservoir Pressure 70% depleted 70% depleted

Based on the above table, Matrix method is chosen.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 56

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
WELL PERFORMANCE
Sand Control
Typical Allowable Sand Production Levels are mentioned in the table below:

Produced Fluid Production Rate Allowable Sand Level

Light Crude Oil <5000bopd 30lb/1000bbls

5000-15000 10 lb/1000bbls

>15000 5 lb/1000bbls

Initially, the sand production is 2.79 103 lb/barrel" at the production rate
of 10,000, thus we dont need to worry about Sand production
But, in the future with the increase in the water cut, it will be expected to get an
increase in sand production.
At that period Internal Gravel Pack will be used.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 57

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION.
GEOLOGY AND RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION.
PETROPHYSICS AND RESERVOIR FLUIDS.
HYDROCARBON IN PLACE.
WELL PERFORMANCE.
RESERVOIR MODELLING APPROACH.
DYNAMIC MODEL.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 58

 MODELLING APPROACH
Static reservoir model :
Created from contour map provided.
Top & bottom Surfaces created from contours.
Well locations were defined .
Well logs and deviation data were input.
Corner point gridding used to define grid, allows addition of fault.
Horizons and layers added based on well tops created in well correlation.
For wells where porosity and permeability data was available, it was up-
scaled.
Properties were then distributed across the cells based on stochastic
techniques.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 59

 MODELLING APPROACH
Permeability Distribution

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 60

 MODELLING APPROACH
Cross section of model with pore distribution

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 61

 MODELLING APPROACH
Porosity distribution

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 62

 FIELD DESCRIPTION
STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION.
GEOLOGY AND RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION.
PETROPHYSICS AND RESERVOIR FLUIDS.
HYDROCARBON IN PLACE.
WELL PERFORMANCE.
RESERVOIR MODELLING APPROACH.
DYNAMIC MODEL.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 63

 DYNAMIC MODEL
Reservoir simulation input parameters:
A 3-D two phase Black oil model.
Grid Cells of 73*57*50 (NX*NY*NZ) are exported from Static model.
Only one OWC is considered at 10840 ft. TVDSS.
OIIP calculated by Eclipse-100 is 1.078 Billon bbls.
Initial Reservoir Pressure is 5745 psi.
Bubble Point Pressure is 1785 psi.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 64

 DYNAMIC MODEL
Optimum Case (Case-3)
Fluid properties for oil and water
were entered (i.e. oil formation
volume factor, relative
permeability, water-oil capillary
pressure data and Rock
compressibility).

Oil-water contacts were defined.

Model was quality checked by

comparing GRV.

Model generated with 208,050

cells.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 65

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 66

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 67

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
Reservoir development strategies:
Several development plan cases were considered
with various sensitivities on liquid flow rates and
water injection rates.

Four scenarios were chosen for detailed

investigation as follows:
Base case
Case 1: 9 producers & 5 injectors
Case 2: 10 producers(1 horizontal) & 5 injectors
Case 3: 14 producers & 8 injectors

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 68

 BASE CASE
Natural depletion case.

4 of appraisal wells will be producer wells,

while two of the wells will be converted to
water injection wells.

Wells are completed in (Layers (DZ): 1-5).

Control mode - BHP limit of 1900 Psi is set.

Reservoir evaluation period : 30 years.

Recovery factor 26 %.

Water cut 43 %.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 69

 CASE 1
9 producers and 5 injectors.
Injectors completed in low
permeable zones.
Control mode Reservoir
Oil rate of 90,000 STB/day.
Recovery factor of 46%
is achieved.
Reservoir is energized
with water injectors.
Oil recovery is increased
due to high sweep efficiency.
Sensitivities were run on the
locations of wells and timing
of water injectors.
Water cut is around 88.9%.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 70

 CASE 2
10 Producers(1 horizontal) and
5 injectors.
1 Horizontal wells of
2000 ft. laterals are placed.
Reservoir Oil rate of 100,000
STB/day.
5 injectors will be drilled and
completed in low permeable
zones.
Various sensitivities were run
to optimize the location and
length of the horizontal wells.
Recovery of 47.1 %.
Water cut is 88%.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 71

 CASE 3
OPTIMUM
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CASE
14 producers and 8
injectors.
Reservoir Oil rate of
132,000 STB/day.
8 Injectors will be drilled in
low permeable zones.
Various sensitivities were
run to optimize the location
and length of the wells.
Recovery of 47.8 %.
Water cut is 88%.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 72

 SIMULATION RESULTS
TOTAL OIL
OIL RECOVERY PLATEAU
CASES PRODUCTION (MILLION MAX WATERCUT
EFFICIENCY (%) PERIOD (YRS)
BBLS)

BASE CASE
(4 P + 2 I)
26 280 0.43 12 * P - Producer Wells;
CASE 1 I Injector Wells
46 499 0.89 5
(9 P + 5 I)
CASE 2
47.1 509 0.88 4.8
(10 P + 5 I)
CASE 3
47.8 510 0.88 3
(14 P + 8 I)

FOE vs TIME

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 73

 SIMULATION RESULTS
FOPR (Field Oil Production Rate)

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 74

 SIMULATION RESULTS
FOIP (Field Oil In Place)

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 75

 SIMULATION RESULTS
FWCT (Field Water Cut)

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 76

 UNCERTAINTIES
Uncertainties and limitation of reservoir model:
All the faults have not been incorporated in this
model given the uncertainty of the location and
transmissibilitys.
For simplicity, only one oil-water contact has been
considered.
Property variation across the fault is uncertain as
the layers pinch out.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 77

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 78

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 79

 INTRODUCTION
The drilling program is
designed to drill 16 new
development wells in X field
penetrating the upper Jurassic
Sandstone formation located in
offshore Northern North Sea of
water depth 150 meters.

The wells are intended to

penetrate the X field structure
at the designated locations from
reservoir simulation.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 80

 Offset Well Analysis
The offset wells
analysis have been
conducted for the
available data for
wells X2 and X3.

The offset well

analysis is used for
casing point selection
and the mud design.
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 81
 Well Design Summary

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 82

 Subsea Template Location

The program
includes the
selection of the
center of the
subsea platform to
achieve all the
proposed wells
from single subsea
template.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 83

 Directional Well Program for the
longest well (J-Type)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 84

 Geological Prognosis

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 85

 Pressure, psi
Pore Pressure, 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Fracture 1000

2000
LOT / FIT is planned
for drilling wells to
Pressure and 3000

4000
update the fracture
gradient and casing
Overburden TVD ft, RKB
5000

6000
design.
7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

PORE PRESSURE
MUD ACTUAL DATA (WELL X3)
OVERBURDEN PRESSURE (1 Psi/FT)
FRACTURE PRESSURE (EATON METHOD)_Various Poisson Ratio
FRACTURE PRESSURE (EATON METHOD)_Max Poisson Ratio (0.50)
FRACTURE PRESSURE (0.85 psi/ft)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 86

Casing Setting
Depths,
Bottom-Up
Design To isolate the
reservoir
section

Obtained LOT / FIT will

be used to review the
is planned for drilling
wells to update the
casing design.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 87

 Casing summary Table
Hole Size Casing Casing Setting Depth Casing Setting Casing Setting Depth Casing Seating Depth Criteria
OD Depth (*)
In In ft., MD ft., TVD-SS
ft., TVD-RKB

Set 123 ft. below the seabed (As per offset well X3).
Seal off unconsolidated formation at shallow depths
36 30 693 693 615 which, with continuous mud circulation, would be
washed away.

Seal off any fresh water sands.

Case and cement off unconsolidated shallow sediments.
26 20 1383 1382 1304 Provide Structural support for the subsea Wellhead and
BOPs.

To isolate troublesome formations between production

and surface casing (unstable shale and lost circulation (i.e.
17.50 13.375 8282 6549 6471 Chalk).
Cased off Tertiary formations and usually set in top upper
Cretaceous
Set above the pay zone to isolate the production interval
from other formations and/or act a conduit for the
12.25 9.625 14054 10112 10034 production tubing.
Cased off top Cretaceous chalk and Lower Cretaceous
siltstones.
Set across the reservoir to allow selective access for
8.50 7 15555 11039 10961 production / injection/ control the flow of the fluids from
or into the reservoir.
(*) RKB-MSL = 78 ft.
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 88
 Rig Selection Criteria
Criteria Selected Design Criteria Source of Design Criteria

Water Depth 150 m Given for Group A

HP = Q x P / 1714
1600 HP
Mud Pumps
Three Mud Pumps (2 + 1 Back Ups)
For 8 , 1600 HP

The total vertical load on the rig when pulling the string = 382,036 Ib

Buoyant Weight = 15,000 ft * 22.50 Ib/ft * 0.85 = 300,000 Ib

Derrick, Draw works, fast line, dead line, travelling
Hoisting System block, crown block, Reserve Drum, Drilling Hook and Tension in the fast line = 300,000 / 8 * 0.842 = 44,536 Ib
Elevators
Tension in the dead line = 300,000 / 8 = 37,500 Ib

The maximum expected Burst surface pressure from gas kick off is 4700 psi

The Maximum Pressure to surface (In case of Gas Migration to Surface) is

BOPs 10,000 Psi
5800 psi

The Abnormal high pressure BOP rated as 10,000 psi.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 89

 Rig Selection
Rig Name Providers Water Depth Mud Pumps Hoisting System BOPs

West Alpha Seadrill 60 600 m 3, 1600 HP N/A 15 K

Cameron 18
10,000 psi four-ram
3 x National 12-P-
Ocean Ambassador DIAMOND OFFSHORE 335 m 1000 KIb preventer
160, 1,600hp, 5,000
2 x Shaffer 18
psi
5,000 psi annular
preventers

Cameron 18
10,000 psi four-ram
Ocean Yorktown DIAMOND OFFSHORE 868 m 3 x Oilwell A1700-PT, 1000 KIb preventer
1,000hp, 5,000 psi 2 x Shaffer 21
5,000 psi annular
preventers

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 90

 BHA Design
Hole Size Vertical / Anticipated Drilling Primary BHA Design Secondary BHA Design
Deviated Problems RSS BHA
36 Hole Vertical BHA Wash out, Losses 36 Pendulum BHA N/A
Or
26 Hole Opener Rotary BHA

26 Hole Nudge Losses 26 Nudge Motor BHA N/A

Directional BHA

17 Hole Directional BHA Slow ROP 17 Motor BHA (For First Well) 17 RSS BHA (Rotary Steering
BHA) will be evaluated after
drilling the first well

12 Hole Directional BHA Losses in Chalk 12 Motor BHA (For First Well) 12 RSS BHA will be evaluated
formation and shale after drilling the first well
instability problems
(In case of no losses in Chalk
formation), this BHA can be used
to drill the shale section in lower
cretaceous.
8 Hole Directional BHA Kicks, stuck 8 Motor BHA (For First Well) 8 RSS BHA will be evaluated
after drilling the first well

Motor BHA

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 91

 Drilling Parameters
Hole Size Vertical / Deviated WOB, Ibs Flow Rate, GPM (*) Surface rpm Drilling Problems

36 Hole Vertical BHA 35,000 45,000 1000 60 Wash out

26 Hole Nudge Directional BHA 35,000 45,000 1300 1820 60 Losses

17 Hole Directional BHA 35,000 45,000 875 1225 60 Slow ROP

(1100 1200) from

Offset Well X-3

12 Hole Directional BHA 25,000 35,000 612 857 60 Losses in Chalk

formation.
(+/- 750 GPM) from
the Offset Well X-3 Shale instability
problems

8 Hole Directional BHA 15,000 25,000 425 600 60 Kicks, stuck

(Min 500 PM) for the

offset well X-3

(*) The designed flow Rate is between 50 70 x Hole Size (Rule of Thumb)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 92

 Bit Design

Depth Depth Rationale

Hole Size Formation In, ft. out, ft. Bit Type Bit Picture
MD MD
Mill tooth can be used to drill soft formation in top hole in
Tertiary.
36 Hole Sandstone 571 693 Mill Tooth Bit
Mill tooth bit cost relatively cheaper than the Insert/ PDC
bits.
Mill Tooth can be used to drill soft formation in top Tertiary,
Mud and
26 Hole 693 1383 Mill Tooth Bit Mill tooth bit cost relatively cheaper than the Insert/ PDC
Siltstone
bits.
Insert bit can drill all the formation include the Chert.
Insert Bit
The insert bit will help to kick off using motor BHA (creates
(In case of
steady tool face for orienting the motor).
presence of
The insert bit disadvantage is the limited life by bearing
Siltstone, Chert)
wear, increase the bit trips to drill the section, and increase
17 Hole Sandstone, 1383 8282
the rig time and cost.
Anhydrite
PDC Bit
If geologists confirm the non-presence of the chert, PDC bit
(In Case of no
will be used (with directional drilling features).
chert)

PDC bit can drill moderately hard formations (not chert);

Chalk and ROP varies depending on the formation.
12 Hole 8282 14054 PDC Bit
Siltstone The PDC bit should provide higher ROP than the tricone bit.

PDC bit can drill moderately hard formations (not chert);

8 Hole Sandstone 14054 15555 PDC Bit ROP varies depending on the formation.
The PDC bit should provide higher ROP than the tricone bit.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 93

 Casing Design Table
Hole Size Section Depth Setting Depth Setting Depth Casing Weight, Ib-ft Grade
OD
In Ft, MD Ft, TVD-RKB Ft, TVD-SS In

26 1383 1382 1304 20 106 J-55 and/or K-55

Due to high collapse

Load in this design
No standard (Non
17.50 8282 6549 6471 13.375 (The Collapse
API Casing)
resistance required
is > 3044 Psi

47 and 53.50 (Special

12.25 14054 10112 10034 9.625 Drift ID for 53.5 L80 / N-80
Ib/ft)

8.50 15555 11039 10961 7 29 L-80 / N-80

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 94

 Example for Casing Design
9 5/8 Production Casing Design

9.625 PRODUCTION CASING DESIGN BURST PLOTS

Burst Load:-
Pb = Pi - Pe
Pressure, psi Pressure, psi
Assumptions: Pe= Normal Pore Pressure 0.00 2000.00 4000.00 6000.00 8000.00 10000.00 12000.00 0.00 2000.00 4000.00 6000.00 8000.00 10000.00
Pi= Gas well, well closed at surface, leak in tubing under tubing hanger at surface, annulus 0.00 0.00
above packer is full of packer fluid 1000.00 1000.00
2000.00 2000.00
3000.00 3000.00
(i) Internal Loads:
4000.00 4000.00
Pi @ perforations top = 5800 psi

TVD ft, RKB

TVD ft, RKB
5000.00 5000.00
Pi @ surface = 4750 psi
6000.00 6000.00
7000.00 7000.00
Pi @ Top of Liner= 10990 psi
8000.00 8000.00
9000.00 9000.00
(ii) External Loads:
10000.00 10000.00
Pe @ surface = 0 psi
Pe @Top of Liner = 6240 psi 11000.00 11000.00
12000.00 12000.00
SUMMARY Pe Pi Pb Pb x D.F. Pb x D.F. Pb 47, L-80/N-80 53.5, L-80/N-80
Depth Pi Pe Pb Pb x D.F.
Surface 0.00 4750.00 0.00 4750.00 5225.00
Top of Liner 9600.00 10990.00 6240.00 4750.00 5225.00
COLLAPSE PLOTS
Collapse Load:-
Pc = Pe-Pi
Assumptions: Pe= Normal pore pressure Pressure, psi Pressure, psi
Pi= Casing empty, due to gas being switched off after gas lifting, assume well in producing 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
0 0.00
well
1000 1000.00

(i) Internal Loads: 2000 2000.00

Pi @ surface = 0 psi 3000 3000.00
Pi @ packer top = 0 psi 4000 4000.00

TVD ft, RKB

TVD ft, RKB

5000 5000.00
(ii) External Loads:- 6000 6000.00
Pe @ surface = 0 psi 7000 7000.00
Pe @ packer top = 6240 psi 8000 8000.00
9000 9000.00
10000 10000.00
SUMMARY 11000 11000.00
Depth Pi Pe Pc Pc x D.F. 12000 12000.00
Surface 0 0 0 0 0 Pe Pi Pc Pc x D.F. 53.5, L-80/N-80 Pc 47, L-80/N-80
Top of Liner 9600 0 6240 6240 6240

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 95

 Cementing Program
Casing Design Considerations Technique TOC

Inner String Cementing

Design for the
Hydrostatic Pressure < Fracture Pressure (During the (A Stinger Cement Job) 20" CSG
30 CMT Job) To Surface
CMT is up to Surface to support the Subsea WH and Is to cement the casing through DP
BOP.

Inner String Cementing (A Stinger Cement

Design for the
Job)
Hydrostatic Pressure < Fracture Pressure (During the
Is to cement the casing through DP
20 CMT Job) To Surface

CMT is up to Surface to support the Subsea WH and

BOP.
Design for the 13 3/8" CSG
TOC @ 200 ft. above the previous
13.375 Hydrostatic Pressure < Fracture Pressure
Single Stage Cement casing

Design for the

Hydrostatic Pressure < Fracture Pressure (During the
TOC @ 200 ft. above the previous
9.625 CMT Job) Two Stage Cement
casing

DV tool between the chalk and Shale to reduce the

hydrostatic head in the chalk while cementation

Design for the 9 5/8" CSG

Hydrostatic Pressure < Fracture Pressure (During the Linear will be cemented over their
7 CMT Job) Liner Cementation entire length, all the way from the
liner shoe to the liner hanger. 7" LNR
Design for the reservoir pressure and Temperature

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 96

 Mud Program
Hole Size Formation Mud Type Mud Weight (*), ppg Technical Functions of the fluids Issues (Cost, Environments)

Drill the Top hole and the return to the sea bed.
WBM
Having drilled to the required depth, the hole is displaced to Environmentally friendly.
36 Sandstone 8.94
mud to prevent debris from settling onto the bottom of the
(Sea Water)
hole when running the 30 Conductor.

WBM

Mud and (Sea Water) with viscous Drill the top hole w/ sea water. Environmentally friendly.
26 8.94- 9.23
Siltstone pills Spot 9.23 ppg mud prior to running 20 casing

Siltstone (Shale), WBM

Environmentally friendly.
17 Hole Sandstone, SUPER SHALE TROL / KCL 10.19 11.92 Help to reduce the shale swelling.
Anhydrite Polymer

WBM
Chalk and Environmentally friendly.
12 Hole SUPER SHALE TROL / KCL 12.31 12.50 Help to reduce the shale swelling.
Siltstone (Shale)
Polymer

Help to reduce the shale swelling.

Super Environmentally friendly.
8 Hole Sandstone 12.50 The skin obtained from the offset well X3 is between 0.9 2.5.
Shale TROL (Semi-Disperse)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 97

 Sub Sea Drilling Challenges

The rig may disconnect from the well or even

move off location due to bad weather.

More complex equipment such as guide frame,

marine riser, telescopic joints, riser tensioners,
and flex joints.

Well intervention is a major technical and

economical challenge in deep water, and lack of
well maintenance can easily risk flow assurance.
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 98
 Production and Production
Facilities
Challenges in the field:
Pipework in subsea, place-surface and down-hole
Corrosion/Erosion
Not an issue initially as CO2 content is initially less
Internal external corrosion of production facility
Coatings/materials to avoid corrosion
Scaling
Asphaltenes
Production platform
Bottom-hole completion
7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 99
 Well completion design

4.5in VAM Tubing

4.5in X Nipple

Crossover 6.5in x 4.5in

4.5in Hydril EU Tubing Tailpipe

4.5in X Nipple

4.5in X Landing Nipple

Wire-line Entry Guide

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 100

 PRODUCTION AND PROCESS
FACILITIES
Floating Production Storage and Offloading Unit (FPSO)
Main Functional Requirements:
Production of crude oil;
Processing of produced crude for oil, water, gas and sand separation;
Treatment of produced water prior to disposal or re-injection;
Provision of utility systems for LPF topsides and subsea operations;
Provision of space, weight and basicutilities for potential retro-fitting of
water injection facilities;
Space and weight provision for potential future additional produced
water treatment facilities.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 101

 Surface Processing
Topsides Facilities
Schematic facility design

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 102

 Surface Processing
Topsides Facilities
Facilities:
Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) will be use for
the production of crude oil and associated gas product.
The well fluid will be process in a single three stage gas-oil
separation train.
The gas is compressed to the export pipe line and treated to remove
water vapour and heavier hydrocarbons.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 103

 Surface Processing
Topsides Facilities
Produced water disposal
Induced Gas floatation Unit

Corrugated Plate Interceptor

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 104

 Surface Processing
Topsides Facilities
Main Utility Systems: The main utility systems associated with the
topsides operations consist of:
Chemical injection
Emergency power generation
Electrical power generation
Cooling and Heating medium
Relief and Flare facilities
Diesel and Potable water

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 105

 SUBSEA PRODUCTION AND
ASSOCIATED FACILITIE

Well Completions
The wellhead will be a conventional manufacturers standard
product rated according to Closed In Tubing Head Pressures
(CITHP).
Allowing the use of any mobile drilling rig (MODU).
Completions will be single string.
Sub-assemblies and material selection specified to minimise
planned work-over operation.
Down-hole monitoring equipment will be used for all producers
and injectors.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 106

 SUBSEA PRODUCTION AND
ASSOCIATED FACILITIE

Subsea Trees and Controls

The wellheads will be design to resist 65 tonnes snag loads and a
safety margin will be imposed.
Subsea Manifolds
Provision for manifold will be provided for the future use of
water injection for the two required functions of water injection
and control.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 107

 SUBSEA PRODUCTION AND
ASSOCIATED FACILITIE

Subsea Flow-lines

The design will allow for hydraulic and thermodynamic regimes to

be adjusted during start up and shut down.

The flow line will be run to the FPSO via flexible risers.

The system design will allow circulation and pigging operation.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 108

 PRODUCTION EXPORT
SYSTEM
Oil Export

The crude oil produced will be exported from floating production storage
and offloading unit (FPSO) via tie back to the existing pipeline facility.

The presence and proximity of existing pipeline which is about 70km

which currently serve Clair field is our selection (Assuming the existing
pipeline are capable to handle the production from our field).

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 109

 PRODUCTION EXPORT
SYSTEM
Gas Export

The gas export will be carried out via existing gas pipe-line facility.

The nominal pipe-line diameter will be 12in from the FPSO to the deep gas diverter.

The discrete segment of the gas export pipe-line comprises:

A rigid carbon steel pipe-line to the Deep Gas Diverter;

An expansion spool-piece and tie-in facilities at the Deep Gas Diverter;

Flexible riser from the FPSO to a Pipe-line End Manifold (PLEM) (which will also
house a Subsea Isolation Valve (SSIV));

An expansion spool-piece connecting the pipe-line to the PLEM/SSIV.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 110

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 111

 RESERVOIR MANGEMENT &
MONTIORING

Typical Well test. Reservoir Management

Process
Production profile
management.
Downhole permanent
Sensors:
Optical Sensing System.
Flow Meters.
4D seismic
Surveillance program.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 112

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 113

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 114

 ABANDONMENT

Cessation of the production of 1,027 BPD is

determined using economic screening criteria.

All reasonable provisions will be made during the

design construction and operational phases of the
development to facilitate abandonment.

Technique for all aspects of abandonment and

removal will be reviewed from time to time during
the project life.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 115

 DEVELOPMENT AND
MANGEMENT PLAN
o DEVELOPMENT PLANS, RESERVES AND PRODUCTION
PROFILES.
o DRILLING FACILITES.
o PRODUCTION AND PROCESS FACLITLES.
o RESERVOIR MANGEMENT & MONTIORING (I.e. Production
Plan).
o ENVIROMENT IMPACT AND ABATEMENT.
o ABONDAMENT.
o COST.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 116

 ECONOMICS
Key Assumptions

Oil price (2014): $103.25/bbl

Gas price (2014): $10.95/bbl
Discount Factor: 10% (Constant) (industry standards)
Field considered as standalone, for taxation purposes
Tax: 62% (corporate tax 30% + supplementary tax 32%)
Opex and Capex: Simulated using IHS-Questor economics
software

(Woodmackenzie UK Country Report)

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 117

 Uncertainties

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 118

 Concept Scenarios
1. FPSO + Subsea
2. Production Platform + Subsea Tieback
3. Semi-submersible + Subsea Tieback

For 10 producer wells and 6 injector wells the three cases were
simulated.
Parameters to be satisfied for a project to be viable:
NPV[i] > =0
NPVI[i] > = 0
IRR > = i

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 119

 Development Options
OPTIMUM CASE

Parameters FPSO + Subsea via Platform + Subsea Semi-submersible

existing pipeline Tieback via existing + Subsea via
pipeline existing pipeline
MCO (MM$) -535 -522 -552

Payback (years) 3 3 3

NPV[0.10] 7727 7696 7709

NPVI[0.10] 14.42 14.74 13.97

IRR (%) 150 129 145

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 120

 Optimum Case
NPV vs. Discount Factor
NPV Profile
20000

18000

16000

14000

12000
NPV, MM USD

10000
NPV Profile
8000

6000

4000

2000

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Discount Factor

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 121

 Optimum Case
Cumulative Discounted
Cash Flow
9000

8000

7000

6000

5000
CUM DCF

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-1000
Year

Payback period = 3 Years

MCO = $535 MM
TCS = $7,727 MM

Used to determine the size and profitability of the project.

IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 06/19/14 122
 Optimum Case
Sensitivity Analysis
Field Spider Diagram Taxation has the
12500 highest effect in
11500 NPV value
10500

9500

8500
NPV

7500 Capex
opex
6500
Tax
5500
Oil Price
4500

3500

2500
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Proportional Change

Spider Diagram is showing variation in capex, opex, tax and oil price.

Varying one parameter at a time.

7/11/2016 IPE FDP 2014 - Team A 123