This paper presents the lessons learnt during an intervention to remove a gas hydrate blockage and reinstate oil production from an oil well in Field D. It also uses economics to justify facilities projects for hydrate prevention and flow assurance. Field D is a deep water oil field with 10 subsea production and water injection wells tied back to a floating, production, storage, and offloading (FPSO) vessel.
Field D was shut down for turnaround maintenance work during the summer of 2016. After the field was brought back online, one of the production wells (D2) failed to flow. An evaluation of the pressure and temperature data suggested that the well had a tubing restriction. This was attributed to hydrate formation and blockage caused by limited methanol injection capacity.
A number of attempts were made to induce the well with no success. A subsea intervention vessel was then hired to execute a clean out intervention operation, and this restored oil production from the D2 well. To minimise hydrate blockage and oil production losses, the asset team completed a feasibility study to evaluate the viability of installing a second methanol umbilical and a test separator.
The hydrate clean-out intervention reinstated oil production from the D2 well, and the feasibility study suggested that installing a second methanol umbilical and a test separator are economically attractive as standalone or joint projects. It is recommended that flow assurance strategies are regularly updated as production fluids change over the lives of petroleum fields, from dry oil production to high water cut production.
This paper presents hydrate remediation steps in a producing oil field, and outlines practical methods to justify methanol umbilical capacity enhancement projects.