It is inevitable that during a wells life cycle there will be failures or degradation that introduce risk. By applying process safety principles, there are three questions that an operator should ask themselves:

  1. Do we understand what could go wrong?

  2. What systems remain to prevent this happening?

  3. Are we getting the right information to assure us that these systems are working effectively?

In terms of well integrity management, questions one and two are dealt with in major accident hazard reviews, leading to well designs that ensure there are adequate barriers between the hazards in the well and the environment.

Question three is managed by the verification and assurance of the identified barriers and systems that are aligned with corporate or industry performance standards.

This paper suggests a fourth question:

4. Is risk communicated to the relevant people to ensure effective decisions are made, and that the risk is understood and mitigated?

Traditionally, a well failure model approach can be used to optimise the risk assessment process with recommended response times to repair specific failures. However, it does not account for the whole asset and the overall level of risk is posed to the installation. Further, the scoring methodology needs to be understood by a specialist and aligned with the corporate risk matrix used by asset managers.

This paper describes how software systems can be leveraged to provide effective communication in the organisations "language of risk" and helps to visualise the accumulation of risk from wells that are aligned with the corporate matrix. This small step change vastly improves the understanding and communication of well integrity risk throughout the organisation enabling installation management early challenge, better resource utilisation and the monitoring of creeping accumulative change.

You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.