Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
[1]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
TAQA Bratani Limited and INEOS Clipper South C Limited
UKCS Licence P1634
Block 211/27e
Relinquishment Report
May 2016
[2]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Table of Contents
1. Licence Information ......................................................................................................................... 3
2. Licence Synopsis ............................................................................................................................. 3
3. Work Programme Summary ........................................................................................................... 6
4. Database ........................................................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Seismic ........................................................................................................................................ 7
4.2 Wells .......................................................................................................................................... 10
4.3 Production ................................................................................................................................. 12
4.3.1 Darwin (NW Hutton) Field ................................................................................................... 12
5. Prospectivity Update ..................................................................................................................... 13
5.1 Field Description ...................................................................................................................... 13
5.2 Darwin (Static) Field Modelling .............................................................................................. 16
5.3 Darwin (Dynamic) Field Modelling ........................................................................................ 17
6.0 Further Technical Work Undertaken ......................................................................................... 18
7.0 Resource and Risk Summary .................................................................................................... 20
8.0 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 21
9.0 Clearance ...................................................................................................................................... 22
[3]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
1. Licence Information
Licence P1634
Licence Round 25th Round
Block 211/27e All (P1634)
Licence Type Traditional
Licence Operator TAQA Bratani Limited
Licence Partners TAQA Bratani Limited (50%)
INEOS Clipper South C Limited (50%)
2. Licence Synopsis
Block 211/27e (Figure 2a), licence P1634 was considered by TAQA Bratani Limited (TAQA)
and Fairfield Cedrus Limited (Fairfield) to contain a southern extension of the North West
Hutton Field (NW Hutton) known as Darwin.
Darwin is the field name attributed to the same Brent reservoir oil accumulation that was
previously developed as NW Hutton field by Amoco and subsequently BP, (licences P184,
(Block 211/27a) and P474 (Block 211/27c)). The P184 and P474 licences were acquired by
Fairfield from BP in 2009.
Fairfield acquired licence P1634 in the 25th round on 12th February 2009. The full licence
expires on 12th February 2035. The P1634 second exploration licence term is due to expire
on 31st January 2017.
In January 2012 TAQA farmed in to all three Fairfield Darwin/NW Hutton licences, P184,
P474 and P1634 in return for a firm drilling programme, with the anticipation that 3 well
penetrations would be drilled in Q2/Q3 2012. Two additional wells (contingent upon
success/development options), were included in the carry subject to an overall cost cap.
TAQA earned 50% equity in the Darwin and NW Hutton licences as a consequence of the
farm-in, with Fairfield initially remaining as Operator and retaining the remaining 50% equity.
As part of the terms of the farm-in deal, TAQA assumed Operatorship of the Darwin and NW
Hutton licences on 1st January 2013.
In October 2015 Fairfield was sold to INEOS Clipper South C Limited (INEOS) who then
held 50% of all three licences P184, P474 and P1634.
[4]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Figure 2a: Location map showing the P1634 Licence coverage with respect to other Darwin
(NW Hutton) Licences P185 and P474.
INEOS Capital
INEOS Capital
INEOS Capital
[5]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
TAQA farmed-in to the P1634 acreage on the basis that:
There were still undeveloped discoveries in the central region (Darwin North)
There were unexplored fault blocks (Darwin South) that could be oil bearing,
dependant on reservoir properties and Brent-Brent fault seal, Figure 2b.
There was still potential for production from the southern sector of NW Hutton
Figure 2b: Map showing areas considered prospective by TAQA in 2012. Both wells
211/27a-13 and 211/27a-13Z lie within Licence P1634.
Subsequent to the Farm-in TAQA/Fairfield drilled three exploration wells which revealed that
Brent-Brent fault seal does not work in Darwin South and that the Brent reservoir rock
properties (particularly the Etive permeability) were much poorer than predicted. This
combined with extensive reservoir modelling and prediction showed that despite there still
being up to 500MB oil in place across NE Hutton/Darwin, it was divided up into multiple,
very small, discreet, fault bound accumulations.
In February 2016 TAQA decided that as a result of the above studies it wished to relinquish
its share of all three Darwin/NW Hutton licences (P184, P474 and P1634). INEOS decided
to take over TAQA’s share in Licences P184 and P474. Both TAQA and INEOS agreed to
relinquish Licence P1634.
TAQA Farm-in History
• 2012 FOCUS: ‘Darwin South’ blocks: proving up potential by drilling 3 wells in previously unexplored southern fault blocks, down-dip from the former NWH Field
• Key themes:
• Brent-Brent fault seal
• Depth to top reservoir (Brent Group)
North West Hutton Field (NWH)
Undeveloped Discoveries (‘Darwin North’)
Exploration Area (‘Darwin South’)
2012 / 13 planned Exploration wells
Well Block Depth tvdss
211/27e-13 (SHE Seg 1 Block): 11300 ft
211/27e-13z (SHW Seg 3 Block): 12100 ft
211/27a-14 (A34 Nose Block): 11800 ft
[6]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
3. Work Programme Summary
Licence P1634 was acquired by Fairfield in 2009 on the basis of a work programme that
included
(re)processing 37 sq kms of 3D seismic
the drilling of one commitment well to a depth of 3400m or 50m into the Lower
Jurassic Dunlin Group.
Both of these commitments have been fulfilled. Seismic was reprocessed as well as new 3D
seismic data over all three licences being purchased from PGS in 2009, Figure 3.
Two Brent exploration wells 211/27e-13 and 13z were drilled in 2013 and were plugged and
abandoned.
Figure 3: Map showing areas of reprocessed and new seismic and wells drilled to fulfil
P1634 licence obligation. Wells are marked as yellow circles.
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
PHASE 3
Fairfield
New Seismic
Esb09 area
Licence
P184
Licence
P474
Licence
P1634
Fairfield Seismic
Re-processing area
PGS esb09 Seismic SurveyAcquisition area
[7]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
4. Database
This document represents a relinquishment report for the recent Darwin phase of re-
development study/appraisal work. Although the Darwin accumulation includes part of the
previously developed NW Hutton field, NW Hutton has already been fully abandoned with all
wells plugged and the platform removed (by the then operator, BP).
4.1 Seismic
As part of the P1634 licence requirement Fairfield reprocessed an area of the old 1979/1984
Amoco surveys covering block 211/27e, in 2009. However at the same time PGS were
acquiring a large non-proprietary seismic survey that covered the NW Hutton and Darwin
area which Fairfield bought in to, Figure 3. The newly acquired PGS esb09 3D survey was
processed using Pre-Stack Time Migration (PSTM). It showed a vast improvement in
seismic data quality compared to the previous reprocessed Amoco 1979/84 data, Figure
4.1a. There was clearer resolution of the reservoir section particularly over the crest, both
Top and Base Brent being interpretable, and fault imaging was significantly clearer,
particularly at depth. The 2009 PSTM seismic was used throughout the initial Fairfield/TAQA
Darwin subsurface study which commenced in 2009.
The Top Brent surface and most of the key faults were picked on the 2009 PSTM 3D seismic
volume and formed the basis of the NW Hutton/Darwin field mapping. However Fairfield
concluded that the Base Brent resolution was improved on a PSI(+50deg) pre-stack
inversion volume generated from the 2009 PSTM in 2011.
Faults were still difficult to interpret and position with a high degree of confidence. In
2013/14 the esb09 seismic data was re-processed to Pre–Stack Depth Migration (PSDM)
with the objective of better fault definition and a new interpretation was created. A pre-stack
inversion of the PSDM dataset was also generated in 2014.
In general, the reprocessed PSDM dataset shows increased quality compared to the original
PSTM dataset and allows a more consistent well to seismic tie across the Darwin Field, such
that Base Brent could be picked equally well on the reflectivity volume, Figure 4.1b. The
depth conversion method remained unchanged and it was observed that the final 2014 Top
and Base Brent depth maps were typically within 50ft of the older (PSTM) interpretation.
Also the PSDM fault pattern that emerged was very similar to the PSTM interpretation which
increased confidence in it. It was concluded that there was no need to update the structural
fault model.
[8]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Figure 4.1a NW Hutton cross-section from the 1979&1984 merged seismic compared
to the 2009 PSTM seismic. Type Line
Improved resolution of deep & steeply dipping reflectors
Possible to pick both Top and Base Brent and resolve small faults
Higher frequency content allows resolution of Brent over crest
[9]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Figure 4.1b Comparison of the 2009 PSTM processed 3D seismic data set with the
2014 PSDM re-processed 3D seismic data. Type Line.
2012 esb09 PSDM processing
2009 esb09 PSTM processing
The uplift between the PSTM and the PSDM processing at this scale is not dramatic.
However there is considerably better fault plane resolution and a better signal to noise
ratio which gives increased confidence in the structural mapping in such a faulted area.
Data supplied courtesy of PGS and TGS
[10]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
4.2 Wells
In 2012/13 three new wells were drilled by TAQA/Fairfield into separate fault bound
compartments on Darwin, adding to the 17 exploration and 53 appraisal and development
wells (plus 18 sidetracks) originally drilled by BP/Amoco in support of NW Hutton, .
Figure 4.2a Darwin/NW Hutton field map showing locations of the NW Hutton
development wells, since abandoned. Of the 53 wells, 12 were water injectors
converted from earlier producers. The red dashed circle shows the maximum drilling
reach from the original, now fully abandoned NW Hutton platform. The red well
symbols were original exploration or appraisal wells. The 3 new TAQA/Fairfield wells
drilled in 2012/13 are highlighted.
211/27a-14
211/27e-13z
211/27e-13
[11]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
In 4Q 2012, Fairfield and TAQA simultaneously drilled wells 211/27e-13 and 211/27a-14,
Figure 4.2a. The 13 well and its subsequent sidetrack 13z met the well requirement of the
P1634 licence commitment.
The well objectives were:
to evaluate the reservoir potential and presence of hydrocarbons in the southern
area of the Darwin field that lay beyond the NW Hutton field, Figure 2b,
to test whether Brent to Brent fault seal works in this area
to determine the OWC(s) in each fault block
The well results are summarised in Figure 4.2b and below.
Figure 4.2b Exploration well results 211/27a-14, 211/27e-13 and 211/27e-13z
Well 211/27e-13 drilled a downthrown fault block in the south east of Darwin. The
well found water bearing sands indicating that the proposed Brent to Brent fault seal
scenario had failed and that the Darwin South potential highlighted in Figure 2b only
extended into Block SHW Seg 3. The other blocks in P1634 were considered dry.
• 211/27e-13 water-bearing (fault seal
failure)
• 211/27a-14 & 211/27e-13z oil bearing in
upper parts of the Brent only (i.e. faults
blocks not full of oil, as predicted pre-drill)
• 211/27a-14 oil bearing in Upper and Lower
Ness, with separate oil columns above
and below the Mid Ness Shale (MNS),
illustrated by pressures and PVT
• 211/27a-14 and 211/27e-13z Upper Ness
oil columns in pressure communication
• Etive downgraded significantly. NB: Very
hard to distinguish oil versus water bearing
Etive, as formation so tight
Upper Ness
Etive
211/27a-14 (A34 Nose) 211/27e-13z (SHW) 211/27e-13 (SHE)
W
a
t
e
r
Oil
2
Oil
2
Oil
3
MNS
GR Den Res
MDT pressures
1
Tarbert
W
a
t
e
r
W
a
t
e
r
2012/2013 Darwin Exploration Drilling Results
[12]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
211/27e-13 was sidetracked to a second downdip target fault block. The 13z well
penetrated fully oil bearing Tarbert and Upper Ness with porosities in the 14-18%
range. This was above pre-drill expectations. The Lower Ness and Etive were water
bearing and the Etive very tight. The well was plugged and abandoned.
4.3 Production
4.3.1 Darwin (NW Hutton) Field
There has been no production from the Darwin Field during the TAQA/Fairfield operating
period. The NW Hutton Field was produced by BP Amoco from 1983 to 2002, during which
time c.125 mmbbls of oil (~17% of initial oil in place) were extracted, Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.3 NW Hutton Field: summary of Production Phase
Decommissioning of NW Hutton Field started in 2003 and has been completed.
No development plan has been produced or submitted for the Darwin area.
[13]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
5. Prospectivity Update
5.1 Field Description
The North West Hutton oil field lies approximately 10 km to the east of TAQA Bratani’s
Northern North Sea operated assets of Cormorant North/ South and Pelican.
The Darwin field is a channelised Brent sequence 400-450ft thick which has been
extensively faulted, Figure 5.1a. Different fault blocks have different oil water contacts.
The Tarbert is generally present as a relatively thin fine grained, silty and bioturbated
sandstone package. The Ness is a variable thick sequence of multi-stacked fluvial channels
commonly isolated from each other. The Etive below is around 40 ft thick in the north with a
fining upwards profile (fluvial channel setting) yet over 100 ft thick with a clean aggradational
profile (a more traditional shoreface setting) in the south. Hence the Etive and Ness
isochores are inverse, with thin Etive equating to thick Lower Ness, Figure 5.1b. This
resulted from period of uplift post Etive deposition causing erosion of the Etive in the crestal
area – typical ‘incised valley-fill’ topography. Etive quality varies significantly with depth and
facies type, having significantly poorer permeability and porosity over the Darwin South area,
Figure 5.1b
The Rannoch is a progradation of a linear shoreline system. There is a prominent shale
interval which cleans up into silty sandstone. The Broom is poorly sorted, with sandy and
pebbly deposits and commonly cemented. Much of the Rannoch and Broom is non-reservoir
or lies below the OWCs.
Structurally, the Brent generally deepens towards the south and west and there is a general
reduction in that direction in both porosity and permeability in all units. There is also a clear
degradation effect on permeability with depth due to the presence of illite.
[14]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
NW Hutton: Large oil columns, fault seal on relatively simple NE-SW oriented faults with large offsets.
Darwin Exploration Area: Smaller oil columns, mostly downthrown fault traps with fault seal on multi-
oriented faults with relatively small fault offsets. Different oil pools in Upper and Lower Brent.
Figure 5.1a Darwin Structural Complexity
• The former NW Hutton Field is structurally complex
• All the coloured blocks illustrated right indicate separate oil
columns with different pressures. e.g. NWH West (blue),
NWH Central (yellow), NWH East (orange), QWest (dark
green)
• Oil pools are separated by faults with different offsets. Red
lines indicate full Brent offset (safe). Blue lines indicate Brent-
Brent fault juxtaposition. Fault seal can be a valid sealing
mechanism in this area. However, the presence of some dry
wells (-13) indicates this is not always the case
-13-13z
-14
NWH
DARWIN
2012 / 13 well locations
[15]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Figure 5.1b Variation in Etive thickness, permeability and porosity
Initial interest in the area to the south of the NW Hutton development was triggered by the
down-dip 211/27a-11 exploration well in licence P184, Figure 4.2b, which discovered oil in
the Tarbert and Ness. The well was not tested due to operational complications. The area
(outwith NW Hutton) was anticipated to contain over 500 mmbbls of oil. Based on analogue
studies of NW Hutton well performance it was thought possible of supporting a new, fixed
jacket development that might also access additional recovery from the abandoned NW
Hutton field.
Results from the three 2012/13 exploration wells changed this. Well 211/27e-13 was dry,
and the other two penetrations -13z and 211/27a-14 encountered only partial oil columns.
The 211/27e-13 result was interpreted as indicating that hydrocarbon trapping by Brent-on-
Brent fault seal had failed, and thus STOIIP potential of other relatively shallow fault blocks
to the south-east was severely limited; hydrocarbons would have continued migrating up-dip
to the Hutton oil field. Reservoir quality in the (thick) Etive section of all three penetrations
was also very poor, effectively limiting Darwin to an Upper Brent/ Lower Ness development
only.
Etive Reservoir Quality
Isochore map based on Etive thickness
[16]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Drilling results in 2012/13 were disappointing Figure 5.1c. Pre and post drill expectation
results for the three prospects are shown below. From an almost 200 MMbbls STOIIP
potential, the wells delivered less than 50MMbbls STOIIP (only 22MMbbls in P1634).
Failure of the shallowest target, 211/27-13 eliminated a number of other associated
prospects, with the consequence that a TAQA pre-drill target STOIIP for all Darwin blocks of
659 MMbbls fell to 209 MMbbls STOIIP post drill.
Figure 5.1c ‘Before and After’ STOIIP in the three drilled prospects. (Prospects SHE
and SHW in Licence P1634 detailed in the red box)
5.2 Darwin (Static) Field Modelling
Throughout the re-appraisal period a variety of static models were constructed to honour NW
Hutton production data, and the changing surfaces, fault patterns and geological
understanding as new data arrived. The modelling work was performed in conjunction with a
full interpretation of the (NW Hutton) open and cased hole logs (PLT’s) as well as a review of
the core data. Post drilling incorporation of the 2012/13 well results enabled this work to be
updated with both sets of results described below.
A full field Petrel™ static model covering the entire Brent sequence over NW Hutton and the
P1634 area was constructed. The STOIIP distribution across the field by sector is shown in
Figure 5.2. It should be noted that the figures quoted for the NW Hutton blocks are initial in-
place values, pre-production. There is a significant reduction in Darwin STOIIP values post
2012/13 drilling campaign.
[17]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Figure 5.2 Mid-case STOIIP distribution by sector pre and post 2012/13 drilling results.
5.3 Darwin (Dynamic) Field Modelling
Distribution of oil in place remained a principal uncertainty for Darwin/NW Hutton. Recourse
was made to a full-field Eclipse simulation model delivered to TAQA by Fairfield Energy in
2012.
Unfortunately even an optimistic scenario of a combined NW Hutton/ Darwin fixed platform
development delivering 88 mmboe oil and associated gas via 34 wells returned poor project
economics; the mid and downside cases were NPV negative. Various subsea development
schemes were also investigated, and similarly yielded poor economic returns even when
combined with development of other hydrocarbon accumulations identified in the area.
As a result, a decision was taken by TAQA in August 2013 to suspend further development
studies.
It was felt that the challenges to achieving economic development of the NW Hutton/ Darwin
areas were substantial and included:
18
13
2
8
12
9
16 17
14
15
4
3
10
1
116
15
14
13
4
3
129,12
5
5116
16,717,718,7
22
8
1
Pre-
drill
139
83
67
180
7828
3413
11
21
28
20
0
145
Post-
drill
56
61
205
2940
117
1213
139
83
67
180
78
145
1223 847
7
[18]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Relatively deep (11,500 ft TVDSS) Brent reservoir succession, resulting in generally
poorer reservoir quality, higher drilling costs and limited step-out of platform wells;
Complex structure and faulting, particularly in Darwin, leading to potential reservoir
compartmentalisation and attendant upward pressure on number and/ or completion
complexity of development wells;
Concerns related to longevity, operational efficiency, gas compression capacity (for
gas lift) and power generation capacity of potential host platforms (to a subsea
development of NW Hutton/ Darwin);
Potential formation and precipitation of barium sulphate and calcium carbonate
scales, decreasing well productivity and increasing need for preventative and/ or
remediation treatments (which could be particularly costly in subsea wells).
In 2014 Fairfield carried out a further static modelling study incorporating the latest 2014
PSDM fault pattern and facies based reservoir heterogeneity that had been significantly
understated before. It is likely that the degree of lateral connectivity is still over-estimated
however, which makes prediction of the habitat of remaining oil difficult and adds significant
uncertainty to the optimum placement and likely performance, of future NW Hutton
production and injection wells. Fairfield concluded that there remained an attractive re-
development opportunity in two key areas – the NE area of NW Hutton and the A34
(Western area), both of which lie out with the P1634 licence.
6.0 Further Technical Work Undertaken
Further subsurface technical work outside the original licence remit includes
Purchase of new non-proprietary seismic covering all three licence area (PGS 2009)
Pre-stack seismic inversion of the PSTM, (SIP 2011) and PSDM seismic volumes
(CGG 2014)
Post stack depth migration (GTX 2013/14)
Core description of NW Hutton (Ichron 2010)
Darwin Fault Study (Badley 2011)
NW Hutton (Fluid Inclusion Analyses 2011)
Integrated core description and analysis of Pelican and Darwin wells in order to
develop a methodology for modelling permeability –(Dundas 2014)
An extensive review of all NW Hutton data including well by well analysis of core,
open hole and cased hole log data, well performance data and PVT data.
[19]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
Several static models built using Petrel™ (versions reworked as additional data such
as new seismic became available). These all covered the entire Darwin / NW Hutton
field area and the undeveloped area to the south.
A range of original in-place hydrocarbon volumes was computed.
Several full field and sector dynamic models were built using Eclipse™ and history
matched using the NW Hutton production, pressure and fluid data. Models were then
run in forecast mode to predict the future production potential. Inclusion of the history
phase of NW Hutton meant that account was taken of oil and gas volumes produced
during 1983 – end 2002 when the field was abandoned.
Notional field development plans were envisaged including a large platform including
Pelican Field, small subsea tie-back and FPSO.
Different export routes were considered including the Cormorant North and Dunlin
platforms. These concluded that the cost and impact of utilising these older facilities
could not be justified. Additionally, there have been several market reviews of
FPSO’s in terms of physical needs, availability and cost
A spread of production profiles were generated coupled with economic metrics in the
form of barrels of oil per well.
[20]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
7.0 Resource and Risk Summary
Initial resources for NW Hutton and Darwin were re-evaluated following the drilling of the
three exploration wells in 2012/13. The post-drill STOIIP (i.e. prior to any NW Hutton
production) was significantly reduced from 1225 MMSTb to 847 MMSTb – a reduction of
over 30%, Figure 7.1.
Figure 7.1 Mid-case STOIIP distribution by sector post 2012/13 drilling results.
Further static modelling work incorporating the new seismic fault interpretation and updated
geological understating from core analysis etc. in 2014 concluded that a small focussed re-
development might be possible of two key areas. The A14/A15 area (sector 3) of the ‘old’
NW Hutton Field, and/or the ‘greater’ A34 region (sector 16-18) of Darwin, which both had
slightly better predicted recoverable volumes. However both these areas lie outside the
P1634 licence.
15
14
13
4
3
129,12
5116
16,717,718,7
22
8
1
Post-
drill
139
83
67
180
78
13
145
28
20
0
11
21
28
34
847
13
2
8
12
9
16
14
15
43
10
1
116
57
18
17
[21]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
8.0 Conclusion
The greater Darwin (including NW Hutton) total BRENT sequence of reservoir horizons is
still thought to contain in excess of 500 MM bbls of oil in-place plus associated gas.
However, this accumulation is spread across multiple and hydraulically isolated vertical units
with notably differing reservoir properties (of pressure, porosity, permeability and water
saturation) coupled with a high areal density of partial and wholly pressure sealing fault
boundaries. These combine to distribute this remaining in-place oil volume into potentially
hundreds of discrete or semi-autonomous compartments in a 3 dimensional matrix.
There is insufficient natural pressure support in this reservoir system to facilitate sustained
oil production without also employing continuous water injection. Given the
compartmentalisation of this field, this tends to result in the need for a large number of
development wells (both producers and injectors) and a development scheme which is
capable of managing large produced volumes of water at a time when the oil production is
modest and declining and there will be a need to employ artificial lift system, e.g. gas lift, in
the wells.
It has not been possible to find a development design which would be economically viable to
pursue. While it is possible to identify a few well targets with modest resources of <2 MM
bbls/development well, these are insufficient to justify both the well costs and infrastructure
costs and consequently development still proves to be sub-commercial at this time.
TAQA and Fairfield concluded in 2015 that no further work on the NW Hutton/Darwin
licences can be justified. TAQA has given notice to withdraw from Licences P184 and P474
and both TAQA and INEOS wish to relinquish P1634.
[22]
TAQA Bratani Limited & INEOS Clipper South C Limited Relinquishment Report May 2016 P1634
9.0 Clearance
TAQA and INEOS confirm that the Oil and Gas Association is free to publish the contents of
this report and that all third party ownership rights (on any contained data and/or
interpretations) have been considered and appropriately cleared for publication purposes.
The 2009 ESB09 PSTM seismic survey lines are held under licence and are the property of
PGS and TGS.