12. implementing foam off-shore in the southern …€¦ · implementing foam off-shore in the...

1

Shell Exploration & Production

File Title

Copyright: Shell Exploration & Production Ltd.

Implementing foam off-shore in the southern north sea

“Bubble bubble bubble and your gas production just might double”

4th European Conference on Gas Well Deliquification – 29th September 2008

Danial Leybourne and Gert De Vries

Production chemistry


Cautionary StatementThis [presentation, report or speech] contains forward-looking statements concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Royal Dutch Shell. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Royal Dutch Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘intend’’, ‘‘may’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘will’’, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘risks’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘should’’ and similar terms and phrases. Also included as a forward looking statement is our disclosure of reserves, proved oil and gas reserves, proven mining reserves, organic reserves, net reserves and resources. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Royal Dutch Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this [presentation, report or speech], including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for the Group’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserve estimates; (f) loss of market and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, fiscal and regulatory developments including potential litigation and regulatory effects arising from recategorisation of reserves; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; and (m) changes in trading conditions. All forward-looking statements contained in this [presentation, report or speech] are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional factors that may affect future results are contained in Royal Dutch Shell’s 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov ). These factors also should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of [insert date of presentation, report or speech]. Neither Royal Dutch Shell nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this [presentation, report or speech].

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proved reserves that a company has demonstrated by actual production or conclusive formation tests to be economically and legally producible under existing economic and operating conditions. We use certain terms in this [presentation, report or speech] that SEC's guidelines strictly prohibit us from including in filings with the SEC. U.S. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov. You can also obtain these forms from the SEC by calling 1-800-SEC-0330.

Also in this [presentation, report or speech] we have aggregated our equity position in projects for both direct and indirect interest. For example, we have aggregated our indirect interest in the Pluto project via our 34% shareholding in Woodside Energy Ltd.

2


Contents

• Foam � what can it do for us?

• Where have we applied foam off-shore?

• We have a potential well… so what next?

– Key production chemistry issues off-shore

– From white coats to orange overalls

• What have we found out?

• Where are we now?

• Way forwards


What can foam do for us?

Add slide from Joeri’s presentation

Onset of Onset of Onset of Onset of liquid liquid liquid liquid loadingloadingloadingloading

Intermittent productionIntermittent productionIntermittent productionIntermittent production

Typical gas Typical gas Typical gas Typical gas well production well production well production well production profileprofileprofileprofile

Production

Time

• Decreases surface tension between water and gas

• Lowers density of the fluids

• Lowers critical gas flow rate � lift liquids at lower flow rate

• Increase lifespan of well

3


Southern north sea


Well selected

ContinuousIncrease in

Gas Production?Can we handle the liquids?Batch

YY

N N

Batch foam trials

Cap-string trial

Continuous foam• Staircase

• Maximise application

• Ensure sustainability

4


Key issues

• Product specifications

– Stability (winterized, non-viscous)

– Non-corrosive

– Compatible (i.e. solids, emulsion)

– Does it foam?

– Is there an anti-foamer?

– Minimal impact on quality Water Overboard (WOB)

– Minimal impact on quality condensate

• Registration/Permits

– CEFAS/MSDS

– Location specific


White coats – Foam chemical selection

Poor>120

Moderate80 < x < 120

Good < 80

ResultFoam build up time (s)

Poor>120

Moderate80 < x < 120

Good < 80

ResultFoam build up time (s)

PoorModerate �� PoorProduct E

Moderate �� PoorModerate �� PoorProduct D

GoodModerate �� PoorProduct C

GoodGoodProduct B

GoodGoodProduct A

> 100.000 mg/L Cl-< 5.000 mg/L Cl-Salinity

High salinityLow salinity

PoorModerate �� PoorProduct E

Moderate �� PoorModerate �� PoorProduct D

GoodModerate �� PoorProduct C

GoodGoodProduct B

GoodGoodProduct A

> 100.000 mg/L Cl-< 5.000 mg/L Cl-Salinity

High salinityLow salinity

5


White coats – anti-foam chemical selection

PoorPoorPoorPoorProduct E

PoorPoorPoorModerateProduct D

PoorPoorPoorPoorModerateProduct C

PoorPoorPoorPoorGoodProduct B

ModerateGoodPoorPoorModerateProduct A

Product 5Product 4Product 3Product 2Product 1Anti-foamer

Foamer

PoorPoorPoorPoorProduct E

PoorPoorPoorModerateProduct D

PoorPoorPoorPoorModerateProduct C

PoorPoorPoorPoorGoodProduct B

ModerateGoodPoorPoorModerateProduct A

Product 5Product 4Product 3Product 2Product 1Anti-foamer

Foamer

Poor>50

Moderate>30 < x < 50

Good<30

Indicator% Performance


White coats – clarifier chemical selection

• Tests using fluid from the field

• Screened chemical �selected best fit

• Field trial � chemical tested on location by dedicated field engineer

BlankBlank + cond Clar. 1

Clar. 2 Clar. 3 Clar. 4

6


Orange overalls � application in the field

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

AME102 AME107 (2007) AME107 (2008) AME104 AME107

Before treatment Gains

Dedicated team � clear communication with operations

Well A Well B (07) Well B (08) Well C (cap) Well B (cap)



But what about the oil in water?

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

Av

. G

as

Flo

wra

te (

TJ

/da

y)

Leman B285 Leman B290 Leman C305

Before treatment Gain

Well D Well E Well F (cap)

7



Leman Q2 2009 av. Oil in Water (OIW)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

8004

-Ap

r-0

9

5-A

pr-

09

6-A

pr-

09

7-A

pr-

09

8-A

pr-

09

9-A

pr-

09

10

-Ap

r-0

9

11

-Ap

r-0

9

12

-Ap

r-0

9

13

-Ap

r-0

9

14

-Ap

r-0

9

15

-Ap

r-0

9

16

-Ap

r-0

9

17

-Ap

r-0

9

18

-Ap

r-0

9

19

-Ap

r-0

9

20

-Ap

r-0

9

21

-Ap

r-0

9

22

-Ap

r-0

9

23

-Ap

r-0

9

24

-Ap

r-0

9

25

-Ap

r-0

9

26

-Ap

r-0

9

27

-Ap

r-0

9

28

-Ap

r-0

9

29

-Ap

r-0

9

30

-Ap

r-0

9

Time (days)

OIW

(m

g/L

)

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Av. OIW (mg/L) Legal limit (30 mg/L) water discharged (m3/day)

Trail

beginsTrial

ends

Well D and E batch trials average daily oil in water OIW



Leman cap-string foam trial OIW results

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

22

-Ma

y-0

9

22

-Ma

y-0

9

23

-Ma

y-0

9

23

-Ma

y-0

9

24

-Ma

y-0

9

24

-Ma

y-0

9

25

-Ma

y-0

9

25

-Ma

y-0

9

26

-Ma

y-0

9

26

-Ma

y-0

9

27

-Ma

y-0

9

27

-Ma

y-0

9

28

-Ma

y-0

9

28

-Ma

y-0

9

29

-Ma

y-0

9

29

-Ma

y-0

9

30

-Ma

y-0

9

30

-Ma

y-0

9

31

-Ma

y-0

9

31

-Ma

y-0

9

1-J

un

-09

1-J

un

-09

2-J

un

-09

2-J

un

-09

3-J

un

-09

3-J

un

-09

4-J

un

-09

4-J

un

-09

5-J

un

-09

5-J

un

-09

6-J

un

-09

6-J

un

-09

OIW (mg/L)

Tim

e (

da

ys

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

OIW (mg/L)

Max daily discharge (100mg/L)

Foam injected (L/day)

Clarifier injected (L/day

Clarifier

over

injected

OiW peak due to

clarifier over

injection

Trial

started

Well F cap-string trial average daily oil in water OIW

8


What have we found out?

Batch Capillary

Successful trials (%) 64 75Av. Increase in gas (%) 70 112

Av. flow rate increase (Mm3/day) 0.04 0.151

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

KP

I (e

conom

ically v

iable

)

Lem

an B

285

Lem

an B

290

K14-F

A-1

01

K14-F

A-1

06

K14-F

A-1

07

AM

E1-1

02

AM

E1-1

07

K7-F

D-1

02

K7-F

D-1

02

Well D

Well E

Well G

Well H

Well I

Well A

Well B

Well J

Well K


Conclusions

• Foam can be applied extremely successfully off-shore

• Gains can potentially be in the region of 100% if applied continuously

• Foam and anti-foam impact on oil in water is a major concern

• Oil in water with batch foam treatments is very unpredictable

• A Capillary string trial allows better control of the oil in water

• Application is limited to locations with produced water re-injection wells

9


Where does it leave us?

• The potential of the application is huge

• Batch trial give us an idea of the potential gains

• Continuous application is the sustainable way forwards

• Focus on oil in water

• Is it possible to apply this technology without impacting the oil in water?


What are the next steps?

• Engage with vendors � we must solve the oil in water issue

• Do we really understand what we are doing?

• Are we really applying the best chemicals � or just the ones that work?

• Can we translate this understanding into the field…

The holy grail

Application of foam off-shore to multiple wells without having a detrimental effect on the oil in water

10


Many thanks to

Gert De Vries

Mark Akhshi

Jeltje Schouwstra

Joeri Dieltjens

Majeed Yousif

Charles Mombo

Peter De Boer

Ewout Biezen

Kees Veeken

Well Services

Operations


Questions

[email protected]

Tel: +31 (0)592 363942

12. implementing foam off-shore in the southern …€¦ · implementing foam off-shore in the...

Documents