Topside payloads range from 5 to 50,000 tons, producing oil, gas, or both. A vast array of production systems is available today (see Figure 1). The concepts range from fixed platforms to subsea compliant and floating systems. In 1859, Col. Edwin Drake drilled and completed the first known oil well near a small town in Pennsylvania, U.S.A. This well, which was drilled with cable tools, started the modern petroleum industry.
Below is a list of basins and fields; however this is a short list since there are more than 65,000 oil and gas basins and fields of all sizes in the world. However, 94% of known oil fields is concentrated in fewer than 1500 giant and major fields. Most of the world's largest oilfields are located in the Middle East, but there are also supergiant ( 10 billion bbls) oilfields in India, Brazil, Mexico, Venezuela, Kazakhstan, and Russia. Add any basins or fields that are missing from this list!
In the early days of the oil industry, saline water or brine frequently was produced from a well along with oil, and as the oil-production rate declined, the water-production rate often would increase. This water typically was disposed of by dumping it into nearby streams or rivers. In the 1920s, the practice began of reinjecting the produced water into porous and permeable subsurface formations, including the reservoir interval from which the oil and water originally had come. By the 1930s, reinjection of produced water had become a common oilfield practice. Reinjection of water was first done systematically in the Bradford oil field of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. There, the initial "circle-flood" approach was replaced by a "line flood," in which two rows of producing wells were staggered on both sides of an equally spaced row of water-injection wells. In the 1920s, besides the line flood, a "five-spot" well layout was used (so named because its pattern is like that of the five spots on ...
To simplify 3D to 2D areal, either the reservoir must be assumed to be vertically a thin and homogeneous rock interval (hence having no gravity considerations) or one of the published techniques to handle the vertical heterogeneity and expected gravity effects within the context of a 2D-areal calculation must be used. The primary areal considerations for a waterflood involve the choices of the pattern style (see Figure 1) and the well spacing. Maximizing the ultimate oil recovery and economic return from waterflooding requires making many pattern- and spacing-related decisions when secondary recovery is evaluated. This has been particularly true for onshore oil fields in the US in which a significant number of wells were drilled for primary production. This article describes various factors that affect waterflood performance and discusses some of the 2D-areal calculation methodologies that have been developed.
San Andres and Clearfork are two carbonate reservoir intervals that are present over a considerable area of the Permian Basin in west Texas. These reservoirs (e.g., Wasson, Slaughter, Seminole) contain several billion bbl of approximately 30 API oil. They are very-layered, heterogeneous carbonates and dolomites that have large variation in permeability from layer to layer. Interestingly, because of the complex hydrocarbon-accumulation history of this basin, much of this area has an underlying interval that contains residual oil saturation. Most of these reservoirs were discovered in the late 1930s and the 1940s.
Seismic data usually has lower vertical resolution than reservoir simulation models so it is a common practice to generate maps of 4D attributes to be used as the observed data to calibrate models. In such a case, simulation results are converted to seismic attributes and a map is generated by averaging the corresponding layers. Although this seems to be a fair practice, here we show that this procedure can present some drawbacks and propose a new approach to ensure a proper data comparison.
The first step of the proposed procedure follows the traditional sequence where seismic attributes are generated by running a petro-elastic model (PEM) with reservoir simulation data, at the simulation scale. Then, instead of averaging the simulation layers, we propose to resample the simulation grid to a seismic grid and filter the seismic impedances to the seismic frequency. Lastly, we extract the map from the regular grid to be compared with the observed 4D seismic. This procedure is performed in the depth domain and allows a straight and fair comparison of the two dataset.
A synthetic dataset based on a Brazilian field produced through water injection is used to validate this procedure. This dataset is composed by a synthetic 4D seismic data (observed data) generated by a consistent seismic modeling and inversion and a set of reservoir simulation models (to be matched). We computed seismic impedance for each simulation model by applying a PEM and two maps were generated for each model: (1) by averaging impedance values throughout the corresponding layers and (2) by applying the proposed procedure. When these maps are subtracted from the observed data (error maps), as would happen in a quantitative seismic history matching, we note a relevant differences. In the dataset used, we observed that if the vertical resolution issue is not considered (Case 1) the error map presents a strong bias that would erroneously force a decrease on the water saturation to match the observed data in a seismic history matching. While the map generated in Case 2 presents the errors better balanced and related to actual water movement differences rather than being a consequence of scale and resolution issues.
The novelty of this work is a quick way to bring simulation data to seismic resolution without going through all seismic modeling process ensuring a proper data comparison, which can be promptly added in seismic history matching process.
The BC-10 asset, located in deep water offshore Brazil, produces heavy oil in the range of 16 to 24 °API. In this article, two examples of production optimization for this field will be provided (further examples are available in the complete paper). This paper evaluates the feasibility of a number of production- and export-riser configurations for ultradeepwater applications.
The growing amount of heavy crude processed worldwide has created additional separation challenges, leading some operators to turn to alternative technologies. In some cases, electrocoalescence has been an effective tool to separate oil from water. As the world's supply of crude becomes heavier, many of the world’s oil producers will have to think more carefully about heavy crudes and the challenges they pose for processing, storage, and transportation. At the end of the day, when you are working with heavy oil, the question is how to design your system, including both the layout and the functional aspects of various equipment. The OTC 2012 Spotlight on Technology awards highlighted subsea separation and boosting and subsea heavy oil and water separation technologies in deep water.
Subsea Production Systems—Will 2019 Be a Tipping Point? The past year ended with a surge of subsea tree awards as E&P operators locked in lower supply-chain cost. Will demand continue to grow in 2019 and allow subsea OEMs to build backlogs and take back pricing power? New local content regulations could speed up the pace of presalt oil production by more than 21 billion bbl by the mid-2020s. Karoon and Parnaíba Gás Natural are the first companies to apply to change their contract terms.
This study examines how subsea processing (SSP) can develop into an important enabling technology for future ultradeepwater-field developments and long-distance tiebacks. Unconventional production patterns in the Permian Basin are leading producers to replace electrical submersible pumps (ESPs) with gas lift, which had been little used there. The sharp downturn in the offshore oil business has sparked interest in using subsea pumps to add production. If those conversations turn into orders, it may convert this rarely used option into a commonly used tool for extending the life of offshore fields. This work experimentally investigates the behavior of an intermittent multiphase liquid/gas flow that takes place upstream of an electrical submersible pump (ESP).