A Reversed Geo-Dynamic Approach for Brownfield Rejuvenation
- Mahmoud Ibrahim (Wintershall) | Gregor Hollmann (Wintershall)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- February 2018
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 215 - 224
- 2018.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- brownfield,, geodynamic modelling, History match
- 0 in the last 30 days
- 210 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Brownfields in this paper are defined as mature fields where production declined to less than 35–40% of the plateau rate and where primary and secondary reserves have been largely depleted. Big data, high field complexity after a long production history, and slim economicmargins are typical brownfield challenges.
In the exploration-and-production (E&P) industry, “sequential” field-evaluation approaches (first “static,” then “dynamic”), have proved successful for greenfield development, but often do not achieve satisfying results for brownfields. This paper presents a new work flow for brownfield re-evaluation and rejuvenation. The “reversed” geo-dynamic field modeling (GDFM) rearranges existing elements of reservoir evaluation to obtain a purpose-driven, deterministic reservoir model, which can be quickly translated into development scenarios.
The GDFM work flow is novel because (1) it turns upside down the discipline-driven sequential work flow (i.e., starts with the history match) and (2) it uses dynamic data as input to calibrate seismic (re-) interpretation that acts as a main integration step. It combines all available data already during horizon and fault mapping. Field diagnosis, flow-unit identification, well-test reanalysis, and petrophysical and geological interpretations are all combined in a cross-discipline interaction to guarantee data consistency. This directly ensures a fully integrated, “geo-dynamic” model that forms the basis for reservoir modeling. The full dynamic/static data coupling at an early stage is the main strength of the GDFM. It reduces the model complexity, and narrows the uncertainties. Project-execution time is considerably shortened by avoidance of the characteristic full-cycle loop iterations of the sequential approaches.
A brownfield example illustrates the benefits of GDFM: a consistent history match with high model accuracy and confidence. In the field example, the GDFM work flow has facilitated a turnover at only 70% of the original time budget. The ongoing drilling has confirmed model validity (“attic oil” predictions), thus further postponing the economic limit of the brownfield.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||10|
Bentley, M. and Smith, S. 2016. Scenario-Based Reservoir Modelling: The Need for More Determinism and Less Anchoring. University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK. http://sp.lyellcollection.org. [Also, Bentley, M. and Smith, S. 2008. Scenario-Based Reservoir Modelling: The Need for More Determinism and Less Anchoring. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 309 (1): 145–159. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP309.11.
Bhushan, V., Akiode, B., and Lee, R. 2007. Advanced Logging Applications for Brownfield Optimization. Presented at the IPTC Conference, Dubai, 4–6 December. IPTC-11384-MS. https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-11384-MS.
Bunt, R. 2015. The Use of Seismic Attributes for Fan and Reservoir Definition in the Sea Lion Field, North Falkland Basin. Petroleum Geosciences 21: 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2014-055.
Cancelliere, M., Verga, F., and Viberti, D. 2011. Benefits and Limitations of Assisted History Matching. Presented at the SPE Offshore Europe Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Aberdeen, 6–8 September. SPE-146278-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/146278-MS.
Cuauro, A., Izat Ali, M., Bin Jadid, M. et al. 2006. An Approach for Production Enhancement Opportunities in a Brownfield Redevelopment Plan. Presented at the SPE Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition, Moscow, 3–6 October. SPE-101491-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/101491-MS.
Delfiner, P. 2006. Three Statistical Pitfalls of Phi-K Transforms. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 24–27 September. SPE-102093-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/102093-MS.
Fanchi, J. R. 2006. Principles of Applied Reservoir Simulation, third edition. Elsevier.
Garcia Ruiz, F., Ponce, G., Silva, M. C. et al. 2015. Monitoring and Optimizing a Brown Offshore Oilfield With an Integrated Asset Modeling Study. Presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Rio de Janeiro, 27–29 October. OTC-26148-MS. https://doi.org/10.4043/26148-MS.
Gunter, G. W., Hartmann, J. M., and Miller, J. D. 1997. Early Determination of Reservoir Flow Units Using an Integrated Petrophysical Method. Presented at the SPE Annual Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 5–8 October. SPE-38679-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/38679-MS.
Gunter, G. W., Viro, E. J., and Wolgemuth, K. 2012. Identifying Value Added Opportunities by Integrating Well Log Interpretation, Petrophysical Rock Types and Flow Units; Introducing a New Multi-Component Stratigraphic Modified Lorenz Method. Presented at the SPWLA 53rd Annual Logging Symposium, Cartagena, Colombia, 16–20 June. SPWLA-2012-170.
Hawking, S. and Mlodinow, L. 2010. The Grand Design. A Bantam Book: 9780553819229.
Höök, L. 2009. Depletion and Decline Curve Analysis in Crude Oil Production. Licentiate thesis, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University,Sweden.
Ibrahim, M. and Espinosa, I. 2014. How to Derive Permeability in Horizontal Wells From Production Logging and Vertical Flow Units in Carbonate Reservoirs Using Static and Dynamic Data Bridging. Presented at the 20th Formation Evaluation Symposium of Japan, Chiba, Japan, 1–2 October. SPWLA-JFES-2014-W.
McComb, T. and Towler, Brian F. 2013. How to Tackle the Challenge of Mature Field Development. The Way Ahead 9 (3): 18–20. SPE-0313-018-TWA. https://doi.org/10.2118/0313-018-TWA.
Mohaghegh, S. D., Gaskari, R., and Khazaeni, Y. 2014. Data-Driven Reservoir Management of a Giant Mature Oilfield in the Middle East. Presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 27–29 October. SPE-170660-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/170660-MS.
Noller, D., Myren, F., Haaland, O. et al. 2012. Improved Decision-Making and Operational Efficiencies Through Integrated Production Operations Solutions. Presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, 30 April–3 May. OTC-23510-MS. https://doi.org/10.4043/23510-MS.
Ranjan, R., Masoudi, R., Karkooti, H. et al. 2014. History-Matched Models Can Mislead the Forecasting in the Brownfield Redevelopment Projects: HM to Predict Transition. Presented at the IPTC Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 10–12 December. IPTC-17744-MS. https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-17744-MS.
Rodriguez, P., Kindelan, M., Moscoso, M. et al. 2005. History-Matching Problem in Reservoir Engineering Using the Propagation-Backpropagation Method. Inverse Problems 21 (2). Mathematics Department, Universidad Carlos III, Madrid. https://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/21/2/009.
Sayarpour, M., Kabir, C. S., Sepehroori, K. et al. 2010. Probabilistic History Matching With the Capacitance-Resistance Model in Waterfloods: A Precursor to Numerical Modeling. Presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 24–28 April. SPE-129604-MS. https://doi.org/ 10.2118/129604-MS.
Statoil Internal Publication. 2015. The Subsea Factory of Tomorrow, 2015-09-15.
Williams, G. J. J., Mansfield, M., MacDonald, D. G. et al. 2004. Top-Down Reservoir Modelling. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 26–29 September. SPE-89974-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/89974-MS.
Wolff, M. 2010. Probabilistic Subsurface Forecasting—What Do We Really Know? Distinguished Author Series. J Pet Technol 62 (5): 86–92. SPE-118550-JPT. https://doi.org/10.2118/118550-JPT.
Worthington, P. F. 2010. Net Pay—What Is It? What Does It Do? How Do We Quantify It? How Do We Use It? SPE-123561-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/123561-MS.
Yemez, I., Singh, V., Orellana, N. H. et al. 2014. Factors Contributing to Uncertain Production Forecasts: 3D Reservoir Modelling Perspective. Presented at the IPTC Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 10–12 December. IPTC-18196-MS. https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-18196-MS.