3 jules schoenmakers shell

1 - DEA(E) Q210 Hamburg 3-4 June 2010 OGUK WG5 Well Abandonments

Oil and Gas UK Decommissioning Workgroup WG5

Well Abandonments

DEA(E) Q2-2010 Meeting3rd 4th June 2010

Jules Schoenmakers, on behalf of WG5


(PILOT) Decommissioning Steering Group(DSG)Operator/Supply Chain/DECC

Develop cost effective and efficient approachLeverage Industry Capability

Vision*Strategy*Legislation*Economic*Technical

Norwegian/UKLiaison

TEDSDTF

EventsWorkshops

ConferencesLectures

SNSea Sub GroupOperators with

Common InterestsRegulatory Simplification

Guidance pipeline/lifting/mattresses

WG2Market Engagement

DecomNSContracting

Market AnalysesCommunications

WG4Facilities

Technical GuidanceOSPAR Support

TechnologyCost Improvements

WG5Wells

GuidanceTechnology

BenchmarkingImprovements

WG3Environment

EIAOSPAR Review

Legislation(NORM;Energy)

WG1Commercial/Legal

SecuritiesDSA

Residual Liabilities

Oil & Gas UK Decommissioning Initiative

Materials QualificationGuidance document

Cost estimatingGuidance document


Well Abandonment Workgroup WG5Purpose and Objectives

Enhance capabilities for Well Abandonments and provide up-to-date guidelines for the industry.

Create opportunities to make well abandonments more efficient and effective, and improve the health, safety and environmental aspects, by facilitation of technology development, trials, and promotion of commercial initiatives.

Liaise with DECC and other regulators on technical issues specific to well abandonments.


16 Workgroup Members

Jules Schoenmakers (Shell) Workgroup chair

Peter Irvine (ConocoPhillips)

Max Baumert (ExxonMobil)

Andrew McHardy (Total E&P UK Plc)

Martin Mosley (Talisman Energy (UK) Limited)

Bill Inglis (BP)

Garry Skelly (CNRI)

Colin Wight (Halliburton)

Frank Calder (Schlumberger)

Donald Dobson (HSE)

Phil Chandler (Acteon)

Steve White (Hess)

Stan Bain (ADTI)

Simon Hough (Chevron)

Ryan McPherson (ITF)

Steve Kirby (Sasok)


2009 Progress Well Abandonments (1)

1. North Sea well abandonment study complete and issued as package with Guidelines. Issued March 2009.

Study results - recap:Well abandonment expenditure 5-15 billion for 4635 wells on UKCS3725 platform and 910 subsea wells to be abandoned80% of the platform wells could be done rigless

60 years of work for abandonment teams70 % of subsea wells could be done with intervention vessel

22 years of work for intervention vessels


2009 Progress Well Abandonments (2)

2. Guidelines for Suspension and Abandonment of Wells issued.

3. A Benchmarking service, established with Rushmore Reviews.

May 2010 data:2000-2007 136 wells2008 7 wells2009 38 wells2010 39 wells expected

Members to date:ShellBP ChevronTotalHessLundinTalismanTullowFairfieldExxonMobilStatoilWintershallDONG (t.b.c.)


Work Group WG5 ToR

Milestones to be defined in topic framing.

Identify improvements. Prioritise, frame and seek partners to progress.

Seek and develop opportunities to improve well abandonments

D

On-goingGrow the number of wells submitted to the database.

Promote BenchmarkingC

Milestones to be defined in topic framing.

Identify topics for improvements in Guidelines. Prioritise, frame and seek partners to progress.

Initiate studies, tests, trials to address specific prioritised topics in support of the update of the Guidelines.

B

Next update 1.1.2012

Target 1.1.2011

Target 1.1.2011

- Every 3 yrs issue update of Guidelines Suspension/Abandonment

- Establish guidelines for material qualification

- Establish estimating guidelines

Establish Guidelines for well abandonment. Update on a regular basis.

A


Oil & Gas UK Guidelines for the Suspension and Abandonment of Wells

Next update of Guidelines due 2012

Agenda topics : Cement plug length Qualification of Formations as part of a barrier Verification Materials others

Barrier Elements

Height of 500ft MD, containing at least 100ft MD of Good Cement.

Plug Depth determined by formation (impermeability and strength) and primary cementation

Permanent Abandonment Barrier schematicRestoring the Cap Rock

Best Practices

Figure 1

Pipe stand-off

Good bond, clean surfaces, water wet

Support to prevent cement movement, slumping and gas migration while setting

Sealing Abandonment plug

Casings, tubing embedded in cement

Sealing primary cementations

Formation:Impermeable &adequate strength to contain future pressures

Tubing sealed with cement, in cement

Barrier Elements

Height of 500ft MD, containing at least 100ft MD of Good Cement.

Plug Depth determined by formation (impermeability and strength) and primary cementation

Permanent Abandonment Barrier schematicRestoring the Cap Rock

Best Practices

Figure 1

Pipe stand-off

Good bond, clean surfaces, water wet

Support to prevent cement movement, slumping and gas migration while setting

Sealing Abandonment plug

Casings, tubing embedded in cement

Sealing primary cementations

Formation:Impermeable &adequate strength to contain future pressures

Tubing sealed with cement, in cement


2>100/500 ft)>100/500 ft UK

1~100 ftMalaysia

150 ft100 ftUSA (MMS)

1~100 ftMexico

150 ft100 ftAustralia

1~75 ftRussia

1~25 ftCanada (Alberta)

1~150 ft~300 ftGermany

1~150 ft~300 ftNetherlands

2~150 ft~300 ftNorway

Nr of BarriersMin Length if on Bridge Plug

Min length of cement plug

Cement plug length : different requirements around the world

Industry Workshop (Nov 2009) unable to identify criteria for a min. plug length.Recommendation was to establish a hazard/mitigation table for Guidelines.


Qualification of formation as barrier element

Certain formations (e.g. certain shales) are known to move as a result of stress differences. These formations are able to close an annulus space where cement is lacking. The moving formation is a geological feature that is observed field-wide and is not limited to one well. The resulting seal may be qualified as an acceptable replacement for a good annulus cement bond.

Industry workshop held in March Considering a proposal for the Guidelines describing qualification requirements


New Guidance: Well Abandonment Materials (replacing cement)

Establish guidelines for the qualification of materials Cement is currently accepted as the primary material for well abandonment, but has its limitations.

Alternative are being developed, but have found littleapplication due to uncertainty of the long-term integrity

Guidelines will provide a framework for qualification testing.

Members of sub-committee

Jules Schoenmakers Shell, Europe (NL, UK), ChairCarl Johnson Schlumberger, Aberdeen (UK)Andr Garnier Total, Pau (F) Tron Kristiansen BP, Stavanger (N)Tom Dyer University of Dundee (UK)Frans Jansen Shell Global Solutions, Amsterdam (NL) Inge M. Carlsen SINTEF Petroleum Research, Trondheim (N)Preben Randhol SINTEF Petroleum Research, Trondheim (N) Simon Hough Chevron, Aberdeen (UK)


A. Cements, ceramics (setting). Porouse.g. Portland Class H and G cement, (Pozmix, Slag)

B. Grouts (non-setting), Porous.e.g. sand or clay mixtures

C. Polymers thermal-setting & composites, Not Porous.e.g. resins, incl fibre reinforcements

D. Polymers thermoplastics & composites, Not Porous.e.g incl fibre reinforcements

E. Polymers elastomers & composites, Not Porous.e.g silicon rubber, incl fibre reinforcements

F. Formation, Not Porous.e.g. shale, salt

G. Gels, Not Porous.e.g. bentonite gels, clay gels, polymer gels

H. Glass, Not PorousI. Metals, Not Porous.

e.g. steel, alloys, bismuthJ. Hybrides, combinations of materials, Porous or Not Porous.

e.g. expanding cement, fillers, geopolymers

Well Abandonment Materials - Classes


Establish industry guidelines for cost estimating the liability of well abandonments (Asset Retirement Obligations; ARO).

Structured approach to support cost estimates for: Financial statements Asset sales SecuritiesNot for AFE or detailed estimates.

Members of Sub-Committee:

Martin Mosley (Talisman Energy (UK)) Workgroup chair

Jules Schoenmakers (Shell)

Steve Kirby (Sasok)

Phil Chandler (Acteon)

Max Baumert (ExxonMobil)

Garry Skelly (CNRI)

New Guidance: ARO Cost Estimating of Well Abandonment


ITF Theme Day for subsea wells has addressed:

1. Removing deep downhole cables (see pictures).

2. Through-tubing logging to establish well status (incl cement)

JIP proposals received, being assessed by ITF members.

New Technology


1- Joint-industry contract model for campaigns.

2- Prepared Activity Survey Format, to be issued to OGUKmembers. Objective is to share upcoming activities andestablish campaign synergies.

3- Use of supply boats for well abandonments (moving bridge)Looking for a company to champion a seminar

Supply chain improvements


1. Is there consensus on the support of the workprogramme of WG5 ?

2. Comments on the presented topics ?

3. Other topics for WG5 ?

4. In which areas are you willing to give support ?

Thank you for your support

DEA(E) Conference

3 jules schoenmakers shell

Documents

oguk wg5

abandonment of wells

subsea wells

platform wells

wells expectedmembers

number of wells

abandonment teams70

abandonment expenditure