The objective of the paper is to compare and contrast the progress made in the implementation of IO in mining and oil and gas. IO or Digital Oilfield (DOF) has been a major performance improvement initiative in the oil and gas sector for over ten years with many examples now in place. IO for mining has seen a slower uptake with relatively few examples over the last five years. This paper will cover IO implementation examples from Mining in Australia and Chile and in Oil and Gas from Australia, Canada and Europe.
This paper will explore the similarities and difference in approach for the implementation of IO in mining and Oil and Gas. Specifically it will discuss:
Common drivers for IO in mining and oil and gas.
Similarities between the application of IO
Differences in the application of IO
Single site versus a value chain approach.
Remote control versus an operational support model.
Characteristics of a successful implementation in both Mining and Oil and Gas.
Key common lessons learned.
The results will be drawn from IO implementations in Iron Ore and Copper mining and from land based LNG and oil sands operations. The following items will be covered:
The use of remote collaboration, operations and engineering support in both mining and oil and gas.
The use of remote control in land based operations in both mining and oil and gas.
A comparison of the LNG value chain with the Iron Ore value chain.
A comparison of the water cycle management in copper mining with the steam management in SAGD operations.
Key conclusion on the similarities and difference of IO in mining and oil and gas.