1887

Abstract

Summary

Developed oil fields often present challenges for further exploitation owing to existing production facilities. Frequently with a long production history, new wells cannot be drilled as freely when compared to earlier phases. As more knowledge is acquired along the course of field development, there is less room for changes, with a potential end point for data acquisition. This paper is based on a workflow originally conceived for quantifying the chance of success (CoS) of a four-dimensional (4D) seismic project for an oil field at the beginning of the development phase, when a complete infrastructure must be defined. Here, we apply this workflow to a developed oil field combined with an assisted production strategy optimization process proposed to optimize large-scale problems using a multilevel approach, allowing to estimate CoS, within a global and integrated decision analysis framework The optimization process is composed of steps to define and optimize decision variables of an oil production strategy, involving a given set of uncertain reservoir models, within a viable number of simulation runs through the use of automatic methods and reservoir engineering analyses. The information provided by 4D seismic data can be used to identify the most-likely reservoir model and, combined with numerical reservoir simulation, to optimize the control and field revitalization variables of the production strategy. This work compares the chance of success and the expected value of information (EVoI) methodologies. We use representative models selected from an ensemble of reservoir models based on cross plots of technical and economic objective functions, the associated risk curves and the probability distribution function of the uncertain attributes. The use of representative models makes the production strategy optimization and CoS and EVOI quantification processes practical, considering all the uncertainties and decision variables involved in the same run, where limiting computational costs is essential. We also analyze the influence of the number of representative models on these estimates. The results of this study showed that, although this oil field presented limited room for changes because of the late stage of development, 4D seismic information effectively impacted decisions regarding production strategy. Besides, our methodology showed that the expected economic gains from improved decisions are higher than the acquisition and processing costs related to information acquisition.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202035144
2020-09-14
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adebayo, A., Al-YousefH.Y., Mahmoud, M.
    [2014] An Experimental Investigation of the Use of Combined Resistivity and Temperature Logs for Scale Monitoring In Carbonate Formations during CO2 Sequestration. ASME Journal of Energy Resourses Technology, 137(3).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AL-Ameri, W., Abdulraheem, A., Mahmoud, M.
    [2015] Long-Term Effects of CO2 Sequestration on Rock Mechanical Properties. ASME Journal of Energy Resourses Technology, 138(1).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. la Almeida, R.F., Davolio, A., Schiozer, D.J.
    [2014] A New Approach to Perform a Probabilistic and Multi-Objective History Matching. Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 27–29 October.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Avansi, G.D., Schiozer, D.J.
    , [2015] UNISIM-I: Synthetic Model for Reservoir Development and Management Applications. International Journal of Modeling and Simulation for the Petroleum Industry, 9, pp. 21–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barros, E. G. D., Leeuwenburgh, O., Eindhoven, v.d.H., Jansen, J.D.
    [2015] Value of Multiple Production Measurements and Water Front Tracking in Closed-Loop Reservoir Management. Proceedings of the SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and Exhibition, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 14–16 September.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Botechia, V.E., Gaspar, A.T.F.S., Schiozer, D.J.
    [2013] Use of Well Indicators in the Production Strategy Optimization Process. Proceedings of the EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition incorporating SPE Europec., London, United Kingdom, 10–13 June.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. ChenB, XuJ.
    [2019] Stochastic Simplex Approximate Gradient for Robust Life-Cycle Production Optimization: Applied to Brugge Field., ASME Journal of Energy Resourses Technology, 141(9).
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Fanchi, J.
    , 2010. Integrated Reservoir Asset Management — Principles and Best Practices. Gulf Professional Publishing - Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ferreira, C.J.
    [2014] Methodology to estimate the chance of success of a 4D seismic project from the reservoir perspective. Doctoral dissertation. Campinas, São Paulo — Brazil: Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, State University of Campinas.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gaspar, A.T.F.S., Avansi, G.D., Maschio, C., Santos, A.A.S, Schiozer, D.J.
    [2016] UNISIM-I-M: Benchmark Case Proposal for Oil Reservoir Management Decision Making, SPE180848. SPE Trinidad and Tobago Section Energy Resources Conference - Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, 13 – 15 June.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gaspar, A.T.F.S, Barreto, C.E.A.G, Schiozer, D.J.
    [2016b] Assisted Process for Design Optimization of Oil Exploitation Strategy. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 146, 473–488.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hong, A.J., Bratvold, R.B., Thomas, P., Hanea, R.G.
    [2018] Value-of-information for model parameter updating through history matching. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 165, 253–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Johnston, D.H.
    (1997). A Tutorial on Time-Lapse Seismic Reservoir Monitoring. Offshore Technology Conference. — Houston, Texas, 5–8 May.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Meira, L. A.A., Coelho, G. P., Santos, A.A.S., Schiozer, D.J.
    [2016] Selection of Representative Models for Decision Analysis Under Uncertainty, Computers & Geoscience, 88, 67–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Ravagnani, A. T. F. S. G.; Muñoz Mazo, E. O., Schiozer, D. J.
    [2011] A Case Study of the Structure of the Process for Production Strategy Selection. International Journal of Modeling and Simulation for the Petroleum Industry. Vol. 4–5, 9–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Santos, S. M. G., Botechia, V. E., Schiozer, D. J., Gaspar, A. T. F. S.
    [2017] Expected Value, Downside Risk and Upside Potential as Decision Criteria in Production Strategy Selection for Petroleum Field Development. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 157, 81–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Schiozer, D.J., Santos, A.A.S., Santos, S.M.G., Hohendorff Filho, J.C.
    [2019]. Model-Based Decision Analysis Applied to Petroleum Field Development and Management, Oil & Gas Science and Technology — Rev. IFP.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Schiozer, D. J.; Avansi, G. D.; Santos, A. A. S.
    [2017] Risk Quantification Combining Geostatistical Realizations and Discretized Latin Hypercube, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 39(2), 575–587.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Waggoner, J.R.
    [2002] Quantifying the economic impact of 4D seismic projects. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 5(2), 111–115.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. [2000] Lessons Learned from 4D Projects. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 3(4), 310–318.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Yang, C., Nghiem, L., Card, C., Bremeier, M.
    [2013] Reservoir Model Uncertainty Quantification through Computer-Assisted History Matching”. SPE 109825. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Anaheim, California, U.S.A., 11–14 November.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Yue, W., Wang, J.Y.
    [2015] Feasibility of Waterflooding for a Carbonate Oil Field through Whole-Field Simulation Studies. ASME Journal of Energy Resourses Technology, 137(6).
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202035144
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202035144
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error