ESP Technology Challenges for Ultra-Deepwater in Gulf of Mexico

Transcription

1 ESP Technology Challenges for Ultra-Deepwater in Gulf of Mexico EuALF 2014 Author: Carlos Lopez Sr. Application Engineer C&P GOM B A K E R H U G H E S I N C O R P O R A TED. A LL R I G H TS R E S E R V E D. TERMS A N D C O N D I TI O N S O F U S E : B Y A C C E P TI N G THIS DOCUMENT, THE RECIPIENT A G R E E S THAT THE DOCUMENT TOGETHER W I TH A LL I N FORMATI O N I N C LUDED THEREIN I S THE C O N FI D E N TI A L A N D P R O P R I E TARY PROPERTY OF B A K E R H U G H E S I N C O R P O R A TED AND INCLUDES VALUABLE TRADE SECRETS AND/OR PROPRIETARY INF ORMA TI O N O F B A K E R H U G H E S (C O LLECTI V E LY "I N FORMATI O N "). B A K E R H U G H E S R E TAINS A LL R I G H TS U N D E R C O P Y R I G H T LAW S A N D TRADE SECRET LAW S O F THE U N I TED STATES OF A M E R I C A A N D O THER COUNTRIES. THE RECIPIENT FURTHER A G R E E S TH A T THE D O C U M E N T M A Y N O T B E D I S TRIBUTED, TRANSMITTED, C O P I E D O R R E P R O D U C E D I N W H O LE O R I N P A R T B Y A N Y M E A N S, E LECTRONIC, MECHANICAL, O R O THERWISE, W I THOUT THE EXPRESS PRIOR WRITTEN C O N S E N T O F B A K E R H U G H E S, A N D M A Y N O T B E U S E D D I R E C TLY O R I N D I R E C TLY IN A N Y W A Y D E TRIMENTAL TO BAKER HUGHES INTEREST.

2 Agenda Lower Tertiary Trend Overview Reservoir Characteristics Objectives & Methodology Results Analysis ESP Completion Options Summary 2

3 The Value Proposition - Lower Tertiary Trend GOM Lower Tertiary is thought to contain 15 billion barrels of oil in reserves Current known extent is approx. 80 mi wide and 400 mi long LT consists of older geological period, more compact sediments High density crude with low GOR and bubble point Highly fractured reservoirs rapid pressure depletion Reservoir pressure to 20,000 psi, Temperature to 300º F 3

4 Regional Discontinuity Major depth shift across discontinuity 12,000 24,000 Walker Ridge PERIOD EPOCH TIME SCALE 20,000 T E R T I A R Y N E O G E N E P A L E O G E N E 2 MM Years Ago PLIOCENE 5 MM Years Ago MIOCENE TREND OLIGOCENE 34 MM Years Ago EOCENE LOWER TERTIARY TREND PALEOCENE 65 MM Years Ago 35,000 4 Graph courtesy MMS

5 Objectives Model anticipated Lower Tertiary reservoir to evaluate production potential Compare the production expectations to understand the economic viability of ESP completion design options Evaluate ESP challenges to meet the completion needs of Lower Tertiary wells 5

6 Methodology Nodal Analysis - Petroleum Experts Prosper Software ESP Production Modeling - Baker Hughes AutographPC Compare various reservoir performance characteristics 6

7 Natural Flow Scenario No Subsea Boosting No In-Well ESP 250 psi Separator Pressure Step out 14 Miles Water depth 8,000 ft Flowline ID 6 Productivity Index (PI) of 1.0 to 3.0 bpd/psi FACILITIY PRODUCER WELL 7

8 Subsea Booster Pump Scenario Subsea Boosting No In-Well ESP 1,250 psi Min. Subsea Tree Pressure PI = 1.0 to 3.0 bpd/psi SUBSEA BOOSTER PUMP 8 PRODUCER WELLS

9 Combined Artificial Lift Scenario Near-Reservoir ESP, maximizing reservoir drawdown Subsea Boosting 1,250 psi Min. Subsea Tree Pressure 1,250 psi minimum Pump Intake Pressure PI of 1.0 to 3.0 bpd/psi IN-WELL ESP SUBSEA BOOSTER PUMP ` Baker Hughes Incorporated. All Rights

10 Reservoir Characteristics Water Depth ft 8,000 Reservoir Depth (TVD) ft 28,000 Reservoir Temperature ºF 275 Initial Reservoir Pressure psi 20,000 Water cut % 30 Permeability md 10 Productivity Index bpd/psi Oil Viscosity cp 3 Oil API gravity ºAPI 28 Bubble point Pressure psi 1,250 Gas Oil ratio (GOR) scft/sbbl

11 Production Profile PI=3 bpd/psi Natural Flow Subsea Booster Pump Drawdown limited to 5,000 psi In-Well ESP 5,200 6,000 psi 0 bpd 0 bpd 11

12 Production Profile PI=2 bpd/psi Natural Flow Subsea Booster Pump Drawdown limited to 5,000 psi In-Well ESP 3,500 6,000 psi 0 bpd 0 bpd 12

13 Production Profile PI=1 bpd/psi Natural Flow Subsea Booster Pump Drawdown limited to 5,000 psi In-Well ESP 1,800 6,000 psi 0 bpd 0 bpd 13

14 ESP Pump Performance PI 2 bpd/psi PI 1 bpd/psi 14

15 ESP Completion Options Deployment Multiple ESP Systems to Maximize Time Between Interventions Design Completion to avoid interventions for at least 8 to 10 years Use Conventional Drilling Rig Intervention with a Riser Coiled Tubing Deployed ESP System to Minimize Time and Cost for an Intervention Design Completion to keep Intervention Time at 30 Days or less Use Emerging Medium Intervention Vessel Technology 15

16 Deployment Multiple ESP Systems Challenges ` Production casing larger than standard GOM ESP CAN/Pod must be large Tubing hanger design Subsea Tree ESP power penetrator design CAN/Pod hanger design for high pressure ESP CAN power penetrator design Automatic diverter valve design for high volume ESP pump design for widest production range ESP qualification for extremely high pressure High pressure completion components: Safety Valve Reservoir isolation Barrier valve Chemical Injection system 16

17 Coiled Tubing Deployed ESP System Challenges Coiled Tubing Hanger design Production Tubing Hanger design SubseaTree ESP power penetrator CT with Power Cable technology limits to 10,000 ft CT collapse pressure limitations ESP pump design for widest production range ESP qualification for extremely high pressure Length and weight of the ESP system Coiled tubing size Bypass Valve Design High pressure completion components: Deepset Safety Valve Reservoir isolation Barrier valve Chemical Injection system 17

18 Summary Available reserves will keep the GoM as one of the world s premier oil and gas basins for the oil industry Sensitivity analyses for LTT shows that potential oil increase per well would be more than 50% over the life of the field by adding an ESP along with the SSB system Deployment of multiple ESP systems is the conventional approach which has previous and successful run history. The current technology should be adapted to this application CT deployed ESP systems in subsea and deepwater applications would be challenging and development of the components would require extensive engineering time, testing and qualification 18

19 Acknowledgements Andres Cardona Applications Engineering Advisor Baker Hughes, Gulf of Mexico Region Raymond O Quinn Project Manager Baker Hughes, Gulf of Mexico Region 19

20 Questions Carlos Lopez Baker Hughes, Gulf of Mexico 20