Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Pieter K.A. Kapteijn, Smart Fields Coordinator, Shell International Exploration and Production, SEPTAR Rijswijk, The Netherlands Abstract
Over the next decade, the E&P industry will witness a revolution in the development and management of hydrocarbon assets. The integration of time-lapse seismic, subsurface modeling, dynamic reservoir simulation, smart wells and production facilities will yield significant improvements in recovery and productivity as well as a reduction in the environmental impact of oil and gas developments. Increasingly fields will become Smart. Smartness involves the systematic application and integration of control engineering and IT concepts to oil- and gas field management. By combining data gathering, integrated modeling and control elements in so-called value loops, optimization opportunities are created in every phase of the resource lifecycle. Different data sources may be combined to reduce uncertainties in reservoir models. Reservoir management may be improved by controlling individual zones in wells, acting on down-hole flow and pressure information. Another element of smartness is introduced when in future the transport, separation and processing of well fluids can take place at surface, on the seabed or down-hole. This creates additional development options and flexibility. The paper proposes a conceptual framework for the understanding and design of E&P smartness. It covers the fundamental elements of smart developments and discusses Shell case studies and projects to show the value of using Smart Well and Field technology. Shells approach to building an industry leading Smart Fields capability and stimulating the development of key technologies is discussed.
The life-spiral concept allows us to identify areas of improvement and helps understand the critical relationships between successive generations of data, models and decisions. A review of current field development practices in the industry shows that: The requirement to meet hurdle rates and obtain approvals for each development phase drives asset teams and disciplines to optimize individual loops in isolation. Later loops are impacted by early data that is not captured or of poor quality: in some cases there is only one opportunity to capture key data. Too little time is spent on justifying data gathering or additional functionality if the value is only realized in later loops Models may not contain or honor all available data. Discipline based models may not be consistent with models used by other disciplines. Few companies maintain a structured collective memory of key data, decision criteria and assumptions that allows reconstructing the complete field life-spiral. This in turn makes organizational learning and knowledge management difficult. New technology may not be anticipated in long-term development options. The experience gained by staff normally relates to their involvement in either one specific development phase in several different fields or several phases in a single field. Few staff has involvement in the complete life-spiral of a field, from exploration to abandonment, as field lives and oil-field careers are typically of similar duration.
What is even more exciting: the cost of these functionalities is dropping fast while the reliability is steadily improving. We are nearing a point where we can acquire the data we need rather than work with the data we can obtain. This process of structured data acquisition and information management has been termed informatisation (Toffler, 1980) and can be observed to work in all maturing industries. We also have the practical means to translate the improved insight into meaningful action to optimize our oil and gas fields. The impact of smartness is best illustrated using the analogy of the car engine. Only 30 years ago the conventional car engine was essentially a mechanical device. The introduction of motor and car electronics coupled with a multitude of new electro-mechanical sensors and actuators have transformed engine and car performance. Ignition timing is optimized continuously, the fuel mixture is controlled responding to catalytic converter performance, suspension characteristics and brake modulation (ABS) may be adjusted to driving styles and road conditions etc. At the same time engine specific power has gone up and fuel consumption has improved dramatically while emission levels are down. Smart Fields has the potential to do for the oil industry what motor and car electronics did for the car industry: enable a step change in performance and value extraction.
Fig. 4 The high-level field development process is fundamentally iterative In the subsurface domain sparse (seismic) data sets on large scales are processed and combined with localized small-scale (well test and log) information. The G&G/Petroleum Engineering work-process is essentially inductive, relying on modeling, the use of geological analogues and heavy application of simulation and visualization tools. Uncertainty, reflected in subsurface realizations, and the handling of risk are key issues in the sub-surface domain. The wells and surface facilities domain on the other hand represents the true engineering part of the E&P business. Provided with a clear specification the well and facility/process engineers design and construct the production system. Cost-efficiency and good project management are essential.
Across the interface between these two domains a phase change in uncertainty takes place. A subsurface development scenario may be translated in well locations and production forecasts. Well/facility engineers design and cost a facility/production system to meet this specification. The project economics are then run to evaluate the viability of the development. This process is repeated until an optimum economic result is obtained or a hurdle rate is met. The result is then tested for robustness against subsurface risks and uncertainties or changes in project variables. The high-level field development process described is fundamentally an iterative process. Successive iterations are tested against economic objectives e.g. maximization of net present value (NPV). Probabilistic models may be used to evaluate and handle uncertainties, but in the end a single development design must be approved and executed. If that development design is smart it will allow acquiring early performance data and have the functionality to respond to performance deviations e.g. through smart wells. This may serve to improve the quality of subsurface modeling or optimize the production performance of the field, closing the loop again. This simple model highlights a number of issues: To design for maximum lifecycle value, a large number of development options has to be generated and evaluated: the iterative process has to be efficient to allow that With new smart well functionalities and data gathering opportunities, the number of iterations grows rapidly: there are now multiple well/facility realizations to evaluate We may also observe that from a fluid processing and control engineering point-of-view both well and facilities engineering are converging towards a single domain: integrated production system design and construction. In the future many fluid processing steps such as separation, treatment, conversion and metering may be carried out down-hole or on the sea floor. This new processing flexibility forces design choices that can only be made when well and facility engineers work in a truly integrated and smart manner. Experience and learning from other process industries are particularly relevant for the E&P well/facility engineering domain.
Based on an analysis of performance improvements resulting from individual loops and extrapolating results from other industries, a preliminary estimate can be made of the potential value of Smart Fields. Early indications are that: Field design cycle times may be reduced by some 75% Production from existing and new fields may be improved by more than 10% Recovery from new fields may be increased by at least 5% Estimates do not yet include the other, admittedly difficult to value, potential benefits of Smart Fields such as improved staff training and more effective knowledge management. An important benefit of going smart could lie in restoring the image of the oil industry as a truly high-tech industry, attracting young engineers from non-E&P disciplines that are not normally drawn to a career in the oil industry.
Conclusions
A step-change in field performance can be achieved by applying Smart Fields concepts and technology. Significant value potential is being identified through dedicated case studies. Shells approach to the Smart Fields concept involves the building of novel management and optimization value loops through integration of data, models and decision processes. New technology allows these loops to be constructed cost-effectively. The field life-spiral model can be used to analyze critical links and dependencies between successive loops. Smart Fields critically depends on having or developing the right skills and putting appropriate workprocesses in place. For the concept to take off the industry will have to adopt a value- rather than a cost focus. Novel cooperative models should be considered to stimulate the development of the key enabling technologies. Last but not least Smart Fields offers an exciting high tech vision for the industry that will help attract young staff.