Deepwater Asset Optimization using Performance Forecasting PETRONAS-PETRAD-INSTOK-CCOP Deepwater Workshop Alex Tan
PERFORMANCE FORECASTING 2
What is Performance Forecasting? Reliability Equipment performance data i.e. Mean Time To Failure (MTTF), Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) System configuration & redundancy e.g. 2 x 50%, 2 x 100% Availability Equipment / System Uptime e.g. 95% Maintainability No. of maintenance resources Shift constraints Mobilization delays Spares constraints Operability Production Efficiency Achieved production Production losses Criticality Contract shortfalls Flared volumes Net Present Value Ramp-Up / Restart times Flaring constraints Production / Sales demand Storage size Tanker Fleet and Operations Unit Costs/Revenue Product price Manhour / spares costs Transport costs Discount rates Lost Profit Opportunity 3
What is Production Efficiency? Actual Volume PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY = Pump on Pump off Pump on Pump on Pump off Actual Production Potential Production x 100% Potential Volume Pump always on Production Rate Time 4
Why Performance Forecasting? 1. Predict achieved production and deferment over life 2. Predict intervention requirements and maintenance utilisation over life Optimum development option should not just be decided by CAPEX! Through- Life NPV CAPEX Maintenance Expenditure Actual Volume Pump on Pump off Pump on Pump off Pump on 5
Why use dynamic simulation for Performance Forecasting? Timing of failure may affect repair duration Reflect system changes over time Track use & availability of spares with potential delays Capture probability of multiple failures in 2x100% systems Use any type of failure distribution for equipment items Why Use Dynamic Simulation? Explicit modelling of weather impacts depending on season Reflect actual intervention strategy: when do you intervene? Correctly reflect delayed production impact of certain failures Potential delay of repairs because of back-log 6
When can it be applied? Concept Design Operations Optimisation Compare performance of various development options New technology (e.g. subsea separation vs. multiphase pumping) Impact of spare wells Subsea to beach vs. Subsea to shallow water platform Define minimum availability targets for specific equipment to meet project target OPEX forecasting for project economics Intervention vessel workload for medium to long term planning What is the optimum intervention strategy? What is the impact of improving intervention response times? How many capital spares should I keep? What will be the impact of ageing facilities / wells on achieved performance? 7
DEEPWATER CASE STUDY 8
Deepwater Case Study Overview Development located at 800 m water depth Production to host facility Conventional subsea production wells Flowlines, risers and control umbilicals Sand control subsea production wells 9
Deepwater Case Study Objectives What questions need to be answered? - What is the expected production efficiency and associated revenue loss? - What are the major contributors to production deferment? - What are the expected intervention vessel requirements and associated OPEX throughout field life? - Should we drill an additional well to achieve N+1 configuration? - Should we install redundant control jumpers? What data do we need? - Equipment performance data i.e. failure and repair data - Well production forecast - Intervention vessel data e.g. response times, ad-hoc vs. contract - Economic parameters e.g. vessel day rates, oil price - Others e.g. weather impacts, operational philosophy, planned intrusive maintenance 10
Deepwater Case Study Input: Subsea Subsea Sand Control Well Umbilical & Riser Subsea Production Manifold & PLET Dry Tree Unit 11
Oil production rate (Mbbls/d) Deepwater Case Study Input: Production Profile 120 Oil production profile Total recoverable reserves: 394 MMbbls 100 80 60 P10 P9 P8 P7 P6 P5 P4 P3 P2 P1 40 20 0 2006 2003 2004 200720052008 2006 2007 200920082010 2009 2010\ 2011 2011 2012 2013 201320142014 2015 2016 2015 2017 2018 2016 2019 2017 2020 2021 2018 2022 2019 2023 2024 2020 Year All wells are online and producing throughout field life Assume equal production from all wells no spare capacity i.e. system is well constrained Assume that oil deferment results in plateau & field life extension 12
Deepwater Case Study Input: Topsides Dry Tree Unit Systems 13
Deepwater Case Study Input: Intervention Subsea Equipment Tubing SCSSV Sand Screen Tree Valves Choke Valves Jumpers Subsea Control Module Flying Leads etc. Intervention Vessels Drilling Rig Remote-Operated Vessels (ROVs) Diving Support Vessel (DSV) Light Weight Intervention Vessel (LWIV) Multipurpose Support Vessel (MSV) etc. 14
Deepwater Case Study Input: Reliability Data for Subsea Equipment Challenges exist in obtaining best-in-class reliability data: - Low failure rates (equipment designed to last field life / fault tolerant) - Not all failures require intervention function of failure impact and intervention cost - Most detailed databases are not public domain Typical data sources: - Subsea subsurface generic well data can be considered - Wellmaster (SINTEF / EXPROSOFT) - SINTEF reports (SSSV, completions, well valves) - In-house operator databases - Subsea surface facilities: - OREDA VII Subsea / OREDA 2009 - Subsea Master - In-house operator databases 15
Quarterly Produced Volumes (MMbbls) Oli Production Efficiency (%) Deepwater Case Study Deliverables: Production Efficiency Through-life performance: 96.3% (174.4MMbbls/year) As result of deferment, the decline profile is delayed and production must continue for further 1.5 years to recover all oil from base case profile 25 Quarterly Production Efficiency and Produced Oil Volumes Quarterly Production Efficiency and Produced Oil Volumes 100% 20 Deferred Production 90% 15 Deferred Volume (MMbbls) Produced Volume (MMbbls) Oil Production Efficiency (%) Oil Production Efficiency Without Recovery (%) 80% 10 70% 5 60% - 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Year 50% 16
Deepwater Case Study Deliverables: Equipment Criticality Equipment criticality: 3.7% absolute losses (6.7MMbbls/year) What are the causes of these losses? Subsurface 75.20% Subsea Manifold 8.0% Others 6.5% SCSSV 22.2% Control Jumper 10.3% Tree 10.4% Sand Control 14.7% Surface 24.80% Tubing 14.2% Choke Module 13.7% 17
Deepwater Case Study Deliverables: Rig Utilization Number of drilling rig utilization days per year by equipment type translates into OPEX through vessel day rates. Rig utilization increases gradually up to 75 days per year as well equipment items wear-out. Predicted Drilling Rig Utilization Tubing Tree SCSSV Sand Control Completion 18
Vessel Days Deepwater Case Study Deliverables: ROV Utilization Predicted ROV Vessel Utilization 35 30 25 20 15 10 inspection flowmeter flowline jumper Control Pod control jumper Choke Average predicted annual OPEX for subsea interventions (ROV and drilling rig) is $11million 5 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Year Predicted Average Utilization per Annum Vessel Nr of Mobilisations Nr of Activities Annual Days Rig 0.74 1.7 51.0 ROV 2.5 5.0 26.1 Increases gradually from $6million / year at start of life until $15million/year later in life 19
Deepwater Case Study Sensitivity Case 1 Base Case: - Non-redundant subsea control jumpers Sensitivity Case: - Dual redundant control jumpers. Control pods able to switch supplies automatically +0.2% in production efficiency (~ +0.04MMbbls/yr) due to reduced downtime associated with failed control jumper Reduction in the predicted number of ROV interventions Savings far exceed the increase in CAPEX associated with installing new control jumpers. 20
Deepwater Case Study Sensitivity Case 2 The base case assumes no spare well capacity - Pro: Minimum CAPEX - Con: Any production well outage results in immediate deferment i.e. system is well constrained What would be the impact on project economics if a spare production well could be included at a cost of $20 Million? Define identical production well to achieve N + 1 configuration 21
Deepwater Case Study Sensitivity Case 2 Sensitivity model with spare well predicts: Cost Benefit Initial CAPEX investment of $20 million OPEX increases marginally by 8% due to increased intervention Average production efficiency increases by 3.3%, effectively mitigating for all single production well outages. Overall project NPV improves by $35 Million (including impact of upfront $20million well cost). In conclusion, addition of spare well at $20 Million is a robust improvement option at given oil price: - Only with oil price less than $50/bbl can the spare well no longer be justified 22
Summary Subsea performance forecasting using dynamic simulation (MAROS) is a proven technique. It has been successfully applied by DNV for more than 10 years: - BP (all UKCS and GoM subsea assets) - Shell (GoM, WoA, Malampaya) - ChevronTexaco (most WoA & GoM assets) - ExxonMobil (WoA assets, Bass Strait) Even with data uncertainty, methodology can still be applied successfully in comparative analysis Performance forecasting can provide operators with innovative, value added solutions to asset and risk management problems from concept selection through detailed design. 23
DNV Subsea PF Experience BP - Thunder Horse Development BP - Atlantis Development BP - Mad Dog Development BP - Neptune Development BP - Mica Topsides BP - Marlin Area BP - King / Kings Peak BP - Shell Na Kika Development BP - Holstein Development BP - Horn Mountain Development BP - Foinaven BP - Schiehallion Chevron - Agbami Development Chevron - Tahiti Chevron - Benguela Belize Chevron - Lobito Tomboco Chevron - Jack/St Malo Chevron - Hebron Development Chevron - Frade Development Chevron - Kuito Development ConocoPhillips - Belanak Development ExxonMobil - Erha Development ExxonMobil - Yoho Development ExxonMobil - Kizomba A & B ExxonMobil - Pluto Shell - Bonga Main Shell - Bonga South West Shell - Malampaya Shell - Osprey Shell - Gannet Shell - Pelican Shell - BC10 Shell - Gumusut Shell - Malikai Statoil / Hydro - Ormen Lange Statoil / Hydro - Asgard Statoil / Hydro - Gjoea Enterprise - Corrib Enterprise - Bijupira Salima Petrobras - Chinook/Cascade 24
Safeguarding life, property and the environment www.dnv.com 25