3333rdrd IEAEOR SymposiumIEAEOR Symposiumy py pA u g u s t   2 6 ‐ 3 0 ,   2 0 1 2

Presenter’s Name Paper Title & Session Date

1 Jonathan Thomas*1. Jonathan Thomas*2. Phil Sutcliffe**

North Sea EOR –Accessing the Prize

*UK Department of Energy & Climate Change

Session 5: Theme E – Reservoir Characterization

Change**Senergy Ltd. Tuesday, August 28th, 20912

North Sea EOR –North Sea EOR –Accessing the Prize

J th Th * & Phil S t liff **Jonathan Thomas* & Phil Sutcliffe**August 2012

*UK Department of Energy & Climate Change**Senergy Ltd

Why do we need a UK EOR Strategy?

– Production from existing fields is declining

– The EOR “Prize” is huge

BUTBUT

– The “window-of-opportunity” is closing

Why do we need a UK EOR Strategy?

– EOR projects are few and far betweenEOR projects are few and far between

– Operators are generally EOR risk-dadverse

– Brown field EOR needs a new level of inter-operator and Government cooperationp

Why do we need a UK EOR Strategy?

– EOR projects are few and far betweenEOR projects are few and far between

– Operators are generally EOR risk-dadverse

– Brown field EOR needs a new level of inter-operator and Government cooperationp

Existing production is declining

Remaining Oil Resources at planned COP: fifty largest UKCS fields(excluding Clair field)

2000.0

1000.0

1500.0

0.0

500.0

-1000.0

-500.0

-2000.0

-1500.0 Oil Remaining Resources at planned COP

Oil Possible Reserves

Oil 2P Reserrves

-3000.0

-2500.0

Oil Production to end 2010

Remaining Oil Resources at planned COP: fifty largest UKCS fields

The majority (80%) of these fields are operated by 8 companies:• Talisman (9 Fields)• BP (8 Fields)• CNR (7 Fields)• Shell (5 Fields)• TAQA (4 Fields)• Nexen (3 Fields)• Chevron (2 Fields)• Apache (2 Fields)

Remaining 20% operated by Total, ConocoPhillips, Enquest, Fairfield,Marathon & BG

Existing production is declining

The “Window of Opportunity”

2010 2025

What are we leaving behind if we ignore EOR “The Size of the Prize”ignore EOR – “The Size of the Prize”

– DECC have re-screened EOR potentialDECC have re screened EOR potential of the entire UKCS

Th S i d i ti– The Screening was done in co-operation with BP & “Reality-Checked” against detailed data for BP operated Fields

– Used a new screening tool taking into g gaccount field maturity & current sweep.

The “SENEOR” EOR Screening Tool

The “SENEOR” EOR Screening Tool

28th August 2012gPhil Sutcliffe

www.senergyworld.com

What is behind it?

• It is an Excel-based EOR screening tool which incorporates the criteria developed by Larry Lake & co at U. of Texas and uses many of the same ranges.

The Tool and Screening Parameters

• The EOR process are screened against several parameters:• Initial columns – based on the U. Of Texas criteria• Further extended to devise additional criteria for ‘newer’ EOR

processes (though these not applied to all processes e.g. Wettability only applied to low salinity flooding).

TECHNICAL PARAMETERS FIELD MATURITYm

D)

P) degC

)

mg

KOH

/g)

Wet

ting

Inde

x

none

, 1 lo

t)

salin

ity

Field X Dep

th (f

t)

Pres

sure

(psi

a)

Perm

eabi

lity

( m

Oil

Visc

osity

(cP

Tem

pera

ture

(d

Acid

num

ber (

m

Amot

t-Har

vey

W

Frac

Cla

ys

Het

roge

neity

(0

Inje

ctio

n w

ater

s

Result RF

to d

ate

EUR

F

Fiel

d M

atur

ity

Result

4686 2017 1700 2.3097 59 0.1 -0.05 0.01 0.2 125000 0.3 0.55 0.54545Hydrocarbon miscible 0.5 0.5 1 0.8 1 0.2 1 1 0.5Nitrogen and flue gas 0.5 0 1 0.8 1 0 1 1 0.5CO2 miscible 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.25 1 1 0.5Surfactant/polymer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5Polymer 1 1 0.5 1 1 0.5 0.25 1 1 0.5Alkaline 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0.5In situ combustion 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0.5Steam drive 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0.5Bright Water ('strong gel') 1 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 0.5Low salinity 1 1 0.5 1 0 0 1 1 0.5CDG/LPS ('weak gel') 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0.5

Scoring System

• Scoring system makes use of 4 discrete values – lower limit, min. value, max. value & upper limit., pp

• > min value & < max value – scores green.• < min value & > lower limit – scores amber• > max. value & < upper limit – scores amber• < lower limit or > upper limit – scores red

Traffic Light System

• Value of each parameter is scored red, amber or green.g

• Scores are aggregated to give an overall red, amber or green score for each process.

• Green score is achieved by green scores• Green score is achieved by green scores and possibly a single amber score.

• More than one amber results in amber score.

• Single red score results in a red score.

Field Maturity

• The final 3 columns relate to field maturity & attempt to gauge how worthwhile is EOR at this stage in field life.

• 1st column – Recovery Factor (RF) to date• 2nd column – Estimated Ultimate Recovery Factor (EURF)• 3rd column – Ratio of above numbers – “field maturity” score3 column Ratio of above numbers field maturity score• Traffic light system applied to both EURF and field maturity.• Overall green light if EURF < 0.7 and field maturity between 0.2 &

0.7.• Best to have baseline recovery, against which to benchmark EOR.• Best not leave too late or EOR potential may be compromisedBest not leave too late or EOR potential may be compromised.• IF EURF > 0.7 by primary / secondary, probably not too much EOR

potential.

Quantitative Estimation of “Size of Prize”

• Recently incorporated into screening tool• For each process require estimation of incremental oil (%OIIP)For each process require estimation of incremental oil (%OIIP).• This is stated as a range for each EOR process.• The precise quantity is related to EURF on a sliding scale, i.e.

higher incremental recovery for lower EURF & vice versa.• Incorporated into the screening tool via a simple logical

spreadsheet function.p

Ranges for Incremental Recovery

• Miscible gas → 5 – 15% OIIP• Polymer → 3 10% OIIP• Polymer → 3 – 10% OIIP• Surfactant /alkaline (with polymer) → 5 – 15% OIIP• Low Salinity → 3 – 8% OIIPLow Salinity 3 8% OIIP• Bright water / CDG/LPS → 3 – 10% OIIP

Multiple Field Screening Tool

• Allows easy to use screening of multiple fields• Improved end user interface enabled by visual basic• Allows easy collation of results - “slicing & dicing”Allows easy collation of results slicing & dicing• Focus on individual field, if required.

• Total EOR size of prize estimated as over 6 billion barrels

Field X – Screening Result

Central North Sea – EOR Breakdown by Process

CNS ‐ EOR Incremental Recovery

HC Miscible

Low Salinity(459 MMstb) CDG/LPS

(1021 MMstb) HC Miscible(1980 MMstb)

Nitrogen/Flue(182 MMstb)Bright Water

(1133 MM b)

( )

CO2 Miscible(2002 MMstb)

Insitu

Steam Drive(165 MMstb)

(1133 MMstb)

Surfactant / Polymer

(1654 MMstB)Polymer(479 MMstb)

Insitu Combustion(165 MMstb)

( )

Note: Incremental recoveries are not additive as there are often multiple processes for each field

Central North Sea Area – EOR Bubble Map Example (Low Salinity)

ScottB t i

KinnoullTelfordScott

B t iKinnoullTelford

Buzzard

Beatrice

Golden EagleBuchanEttrickTweedsmuir Andrew

CyrusTelford

Buzzard

Beatrice

Golden EagleBuchanEttrickTweedsmuir Andrew

CyrusTelford

Mungo

Nelson

Gannet AGannet D Monan

Mungo

Nelson

Gannet AGannet D Monan

PierceGannet AMadoes

Blane

PierceGannet AMadoes

Blane

ClydeClyde

Northern North Sea: EOR Bubble Map Example (CO2 Miscible)

MagnusPenguin Cluster

Thistle

S. Cormorant

N. CormorantTernThistle

DunlinOsprey

NinianHeather

Alwyn

Lyell

Dunbar

y

CheviotColumba B,D

Summary

• An EOR screening tool has been developed which provides high• An EOR screening tool has been developed which provides high level screening utilising a traffic-light concept to present the results.

• An estimate of incremental recovery for each process is included which takes account of EURF by conventional processes.

• This tool only provides high level screening. Further in-depth y p g g panalysis is recommended to fully evaluate the applicability of any EOR process(es) on a particular field.

• The results represent a high side idealised estimate Issues such• The results represent a high side idealised estimate. Issues such as facilities constraints, economics are not taken into account.

Summary - Continued

.• The results have been presented in terms of pie charts which

show the breakdown of incremental recovery by process and also bubble maps which show the geographical spread of potentialbubble maps which show the geographical spread of potential projects, highlighting geographical hubs.

• The overall EOR size of prize for the North Sea has been ti t d 6 billi b l (1 fi ld)estimated as over 6 billion barrels (1 process per field).

Screening results

•DECC have identified candidate assets and maps showing locations will now be used to understand synergiesy g•Potential EOR volumes have been estimated for each technology•Volumes are not additive as different technologies target same oil, but application of single best technology to each field yields a maximum recovery potential from the basin of ~ 6 bnbbls.•For the first time allows DECC to compare all North Sea assets on a like-for-like basis•For the first time, allows DECC to compare all North Sea assets on a like-for-like basis

Top 20 Central North Sea EOR candidatesEOR Process Estimated Recovery (mmstb)

Miscible H drocarbon flood 5400Brae SouthBrae South

Miscible Hydrocarbon flood 5400

N2 & Flue gas 500

Miscible CO2 5700

Surfactant/Polymer 4800

Claymore

CaptainScott

Alba

Piper

Beatrice

Golden Eagle

Blake

Buchan

TartanClaymore

CaptainScott

Alba

Piper

Beatrice

Golden Eagle

Blake

Buchan

Tartan

Surfactant/Polymer 4800

Polymer 2100

In-situ combustion 700

Steam drive 600

Forties

Pierce

Mungo

Buzzard

Nelson

Arbroath

Forties

Pierce

Mungo

Buzzard

Nelson

Arbroath

Brightwater 3100

Low salinity 2000

Colloid Dispersal Gel (CDG) 3100Clyde

Auk

Fulmar

ClydeAuk

Fulmar

How will we use the “Size of the Prize” database ?Prize” database ?

– Have presented first outputs to industryp p y

– We will “reality-check” data with key operatorsoperators

– We will then select one potential “EOR Cluster” for one EOR technique & set up an industry led work-team to examine potential for cooperative development

How will we use the “Size of the Prize” database ?Prize” database ?

– We would like the industry to look at ypotential EOR cluster development as if they were owned by a single operatorthey were owned by a single operator

– Identify areas where better cooperation l EOR d l tcan leverage new EOR developments

(e.g. using shared infrastructure)

How will we use the “Size of the Prize” database ?Prize” database ?

– Typical work-streams could include low ypsalinity EOR in the Northern North Sea or CO2-EOR in the Central North SeaCO2 EOR in the Central North Sea.

– Industry input is being led by Trevor G li k (BP R i l Vi P id t UKGarlick (BP Regional Vice President – UK & Norway)

What types of issue do we expect to look at for potential EOR clusters?look at for potential EOR clusters?

– Low Salinity EOR y• Technical workshops to raise understanding

• Shared core flood programmes

• Look at scope for shared offshore desalination plant

– CO2-EOR• Link between UK CCS Policy & CO2-EOR

• Understanding the CCS value chain

• Facilities issues for managing offshore CO2

Clair Ridge – A Huge Project

EOR - Conclusions

Conclusion• Offshore EOR is technically & economicallyOffshore EOR is technically & economically

complex

EOR i i b t ti l b t li it d• EOR prize is substantial, but a limited window-of-opportunity remains

• Government & industry needs to work more cooperatively to deliver North Sea EOR p y

Potential Areas for International O CEOR Cooperation

• Shared workshops on key topics (e.g. low salinity EOR – how it works)salinity EOR how it works)

• Joint conference on EOR in the North Sea, t ti fi ld l dconcentrating on field examples and scope

for cooperation

• Comparing screening methods & identifying shared challenges we can jointly work on.g j y

Contact for further Questions

Jonathan ThomasSenior Reservoir Engineer – EOR & CO2 StorageEnergy Development UnitUK Department of Energy & Climate ChangeE il j th th i kEmail: jonathan.thomas.gsi.gov.uk