selected workshop highlights - workshop attendance statistics - conversation … prm... ·...

March 2015 3rd EAGE PRM Workshop, Oslo 16-19 March 2015

Selected Workshop Highlights - Workshop attendance statistics - Conversation Café feedback - PRM Questionnaire results

(Information is provided to Delegates on a best-endeavour basis; its accuracy can not be guaranteed)


117 registered delegates 48 organizations 32 Service companies 14 Operators 2 Academia


1. The future of Frequent 4D in a low oil price world

• Do the present economic challenges in the oil and gas industry provide opportunities for PRM?

• Which Frequent 4D concepts will be more ‘acceptable’ and why?

• PRM has evolved since the first workshop in 2011, what does the road ahead look like for PRM?


Show of hands favoured “YES” • A difficult environment drives innovation (“necessity is the mother of

invention”) – Despite oil price changes, the PRM business case does not change

• There is a clear need for new commercial models/offerings, especially in the

presence of CAPEX constraints

• PRM is seen as an enabler for additional (IOR) oil with a lower risk profile than most Exploration volumes

• Current environment is focused on cost/bbl. Cutting costs helps. PRM can help in getting the produced volumes up, or lower the number of wells (cost) needed

• PRM should be introduced early in field life; it is easier to integrate from scratch, and early data will lead to more effective de-risking of decisions when uncertainties are still high

Do the present economic challenges in the oil and gas industry provide opportunities for PRM?


What are “acceptable” solutions ? What does “Frequent” mean ? • Frequent = 6 months – 2 years • Acceptable = “affordable”. Acceptable is project-specific

• We need adaptable technology solutions, perhaps even a mixture

“right size, right price” – For example, partial repeats – Partial instrumentation ? – “Frequent” 4D through low-cost shooting ? – Cables, retrievable cables, nodes, streamers, mini-streamers, non-seismic – Permanent sources ?

• There are many acceptable PRM concepts • PRM = Pro-active Reservoir Monitoring

• In Statoil, every field has to have a 4D strategy

Which Frequent 4D concepts will be more ‘acceptable’ and why?


Replies varied from NONE to FAVOURABLE Evolution since 2011: Optical systems are working. Deepwater deployments done Barriers: • Low oil price is a critical issue for PRM, given “hard cash” needed • There are competing solutions (eg in-well DAS in every well ? “permanent” nodes ?) • PRM technology still fragmented – hindrance to adoption • High internal cost to reach a decision on PRM Neutral: • Business case has been partially made for PRM Positives: • New installations – DW Brazil, and Snorre/Grane coming “on stream” • Technology starting to mature (Valhall = 2003); decision process is shortening • Low oil price environment is a micro-fluctuation relative to the PRM cycle • Opportunity to cooperate between companies eg sharing source vessels • North Sea fibre-optic comms network (“rigline”) enables easy access to PRM data • Cable based PRM not necessarily the best for some assets, compared to nodes (eg.

sporadic drilling in DW assets) • We see more sharing of success stories & associated industry learning • PRM more greenfield friendly than brownfield

PRM has evolved since the first workshop in 2011, what does the road ahead look like for PRM ?


2. Articulating the PRM Business Case

• What are the main barriers to the adoption of PRM

• How should the value of PRM be calculated and what should be the metrics

• What are the key elements of the business case


What are the main barriers to adopting PRM ? What are the key elements of the business case ?

• Better Business Case – Long term payback vs short term demands

– Clear understandable metrics required

– Make it specific to activities link to FDP

– PRM operators should document value & publish

– Three business cases: oil company, contractor and country

• Cost – Entry costs should be lower

– Complex interfaces – link equipment with installation

– New business models

• Integration – People, disciplines, unifying champion/mgmt supporter

– Integrate seismic measurements in the reservoir model

– Lack of Industry Standards and Metrics

– Environmental constraints: Limited oil we can burn within CO2 limits


How should the value of PRM be calculated and what should be the metrics ?

• Calculating Value – As for other investment metrics – use NPV, breakeven

– Value of information that is frequent, fresh and high quality

– Main value is new wells and optimising existing wells

– Not valuable unless affecting decisions

– Value of HSE may be the key

– Value is always comparative against some other option

– PRM more valuable early in life more harder to estimate

– Quantify what you can but specify the qualitative value as well

– Calculate the value of not doing PRM

• Keeping your value estimate credible – Have conversation with decision maker and keep them happy

– Need someone to challenge you


3. Accelerating Adoption and Acceptance of PRM

• What are the key learnings from the successful case studies ?

• How could we shorten the cycle from idea to execution ?

• How could the leaders help the followers on the PRM learning curve ?


What are the key learnings from the case studies ? How can the leaders help the followers up the curve ?

• Positive – Almost all installed equipment working very well

– 3 installations early/on time, 1 delayed but learnings valuable

– “Deepwater PRM now a reality” (BC-10 and Jubarte)

– Turnaround time falls significantly with time

– Fantastic data quality (tiny events after short time)

– Great examples where data impacts decisions (but need more)

– Everybody agrees frequent data brings more value

– HSE can be the key to justifying PRM

– PRM workshop is living example of effective tech transfer

• Not Seen – No concrete assessment of value or cost yet – early days

– Want more from passive seismic & geomechanics

– No examples from Canadian steam flood and land


How to shorten the cycle from idea to execution ?

• Decision Making Process – Need to provide information the decision maker needs

– Must get top management buy-in early

– Need to find out and follow the process

– Engage other stakeholders sooner

• Project Management – Start working on the idea earlier

– Use standardised equipment pre-qualified

– Use standardised processes vs be flexible and adaptable

– Need to review, learn and publish the learnings

– Broadcast the successful cases and the failures

– Fast track projects are possible but need huge support

– Early involvement of facilities, projects and logistics people


Activity

Maturity

Level

(1-10)

Importance

(1-10) Comments

1 Quantifying VOI / Making the Business Case

2 Sharing of analogue Value of Information cases

3 PRM Project planning and Risk Mitigation

4 Defining and delivering realistic project schedule

5 PRM System Design

6 PRM System Supply

7 PRM system Installation

8 Acquisition - Active

9 Acquisition - Passive

10 PRM Data Processing

11 PRM Data Analysis

12 Workflows to integrate and utilise PRM Data in

Reservoir Management Decisions

13 Sharing of learnings from actual projects

14 Data Management

3rd EAGE PRM Workshop, Oslo 16-19 March 2015 PRM2015 Questionnaire – report-out 2015 questions list


Most important


Least mature


(difference between max and min scores between all respondents)

Most controversial


2013 results (n=34)


2015 results (n=15)


Difference 2015 – 2013


2015 PRM Questionnaire – SUMMARY Only 15 respondents (versus 34 in 2013), better advertising is required Most IMPORTANT PRM activities: • Quantifying VoI/Making the Business Case • Workflows to utilize/integrate the data in reservoir management

decisions Least MATURE PRM activities: • Acquisition – passive • Sharing analogue VoI cases Widest DIVERGENCE of views in industry on importance of: • Acquisition – passive • PRM system supply From 2013 to 2015, assessment of Importance of most activities has decreased, except in Quantifying VoI, Processing, Workflows, Data Management From 2013 to 2015, assessment of Maturity of Installation has increased, but has decreased for Data Management

selected workshop highlights - workshop attendance statistics - conversation … prm... ·...

Documents