The Use of Reservoir Simulation in Deterministic Proved-Reserves Estimation
- Alistair D W Jones (BP Exloration) | Frank R Denelle (Shell Exploration & Production Co) | William John Lee (University of Houston) | David MacDonald (BP Exploration) | Bernard J Seiller (Total S A)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- July 2016
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 358 - 366
- 2016.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Simulation, Reserves, PRMS, Reliable Technology, SEC
- 11 in the last 30 days
- 691 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
This paper proposes an approach for assessing a reservoir-simulation model for use in estimating reserves. A simulation model can integrate complex static data, the physical description of displacement processes, production constraints, and schedules. Hence, it can provide important information for business decisions and reserves estimation. Confidence in simulation predictions depends on the strength of evidence for the input data, quality control of the model, robustness of the history match, and whether there is independent evidence supporting predictions. We explain the principles for evaluating a simulation model and propose requirements for simulation predictions to be considered as proved reserves. This involves evaluation against different strands of evidence, such as static and dynamic characterization, wells and facilities description, reservoir performance, and analogs. Simulation models are often built to support business decisions by use of the best technical estimates for inputs. There can be instances where a simulation model may be reasonable and reliable but it only represents a “best technical” outcome. There may not be sufficient evidence to count the whole predicted recovery as proved reserves. We propose how such a model may be modified to also provide proved-reserves estimates. The approach can be used with different available data and at different stages of field life. It is illustrated through a case study that shows how the principles may be applied.
|File Size||590 KB||Number of Pages||9|
Dromgoole, P. and Speers, R. 1997. Geoscore: A Method for Quantifying Uncertainty in Field Reserves Estimates. Petrol. Geosci. 3 (1): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/petgeo.3.1.1.
Lee, W. J., Sidle, R. E. and McVay, D. A. 2011. Reservoir Simulation: A Reliable Technology? Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 30 October–2 November. SPE-146524-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/146524-MS.
Petroleum Resource Management System (PRMS). 2007. Sponsored by the Society of Petroleum Engineers, the World Petroleum Council, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, and the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers, http://www.spe.org/industry/docs/Petroleum_Resources_Management_System_2007.pdf
(accessed 12 February 2012).
Rietz, D. C. and Usmani, A. H. 2005. Reservoir Simulation and Reserves Classifications – Guidelines for Reviewing Model History Matches to Help Bridge the Gap Between Evaluators and Simulation Specialists. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 9–12 October. SPE-96410-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/96410-MS.
Rietz, D. C. and Usmani, A. H. 2009. Case Studies Illustrating the Use of Reservoir Simulation Results in the Reserves Estimation Process. SPE Res Eval & Eng 12 (1): 149–158. SPE-110066-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/110066-PA. US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2008. Modernisation of Oil and Gas Reporting. Conforming Version, 17 CFR Parts 210, 211, 229, and 249 (Release Nos. 33-8995; 34-59192; FR-78; File No. S7-15-08). Washington, DC, December 2008.