SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIESis funded principally

through a grant of the

SPE FOUNDATIONThe Society gratefully acknowledges

those companies that support the programby allowing their professionals

to participate as Lecturers.

And special thanks to The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,and Petroleum Engineers (AIME) for their contribution to the program.

Innovative Integrated Modeling Technology

Michael LitvakMichael LitvakReservoir Engineering Advisor, BPReservoir Engineering Advisor, BP

Innovative Integrated Modeling Technology

Present Present innovative technologyinnovative technology forfor–– Static reservoir modellingStatic reservoir modelling–– Model validation with 4Model validation with 4--D seismicD seismic–– Integrated reservoir/facility modellingIntegrated reservoir/facility modelling–– Field development optimizationField development optimization

Demonstrate Demonstrate added business valueadded business value

Main Messages

Develop and apply powerful integrated Develop and apply powerful integrated modeling technologymodeling technologySave millions of dollars with the developed Save millions of dollars with the developed technology applicationstechnology applications

Details in our SPE Publications

Static Modeling and Model Validation with 4Static Modeling and Model Validation with 4--D D SeismicSeismic–– SPE 90059, SPE 84370SPE 90059, SPE 84370

Integrated Reservoir and Facility ModelingIntegrated Reservoir and Facility Modeling–– SPE 56621, SPE 48859, SPE 38885SPE 56621, SPE 48859, SPE 38885

Production Optimization and Uncertainty Production Optimization and Uncertainty Estimations Estimations –– OTC 18526, SPE 106426, SPE 90506, SPE 77643, SPE OTC 18526, SPE 106426, SPE 90506, SPE 77643, SPE

77658, SPE 9314677658, SPE 93146

Major Challenge

Very difficult discover large conventional Very difficult discover large conventional oil/gas reservoirsoil/gas reservoirs–– Improve recovery from existing fieldsImprove recovery from existing fields

Integrated Modeling Workflow

Facies Modeling Technology

Facies Modeling Technology

Facies Well Logs

Geostatistical Facies 3-D Model

Sand/Shale 3-D Volume Derived from

Seismic

Advantages of Facies Modeling Technology

Match well log/core dataMatch well log/core dataConstrain by sand/shale features derived Constrain by sand/shale features derived from seismicfrom seismicRepresent shale barriers which are below Represent shale barriers which are below seismic resolutionseismic resolutionConsistent with depositional environmentConsistent with depositional environment

Rock Property Modeling Technology

Correlations between Seismic Attributes and Rock Properties

+ >>

Rock Properties Fluid Properties

Seismic Attributes

Calibration of Correlations between Seismic Attributes and

Rock PropertiesEffective Porosity Derived from

Seismic and Well Logs

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35

Log Effective Porosity

Effe

ctiv

e Po

rosi

ty fr

om

Seis

mic

Statistically Good Correlation Statistically Good Correlation -- Large UncertaintiesLarge Uncertainties

Rock Property Modeling TechnologyWell Logs

Facies Seismic

Seismic-Rock

Property

Effective Porosity

Advantages of Rock Property Modeling Technology

Robust Static Model => Success in Field Robust Static Model => Success in Field Development OptimizationDevelopment OptimizationMatch well dataMatch well dataConsistent with seismic and depositional Consistent with seismic and depositional environmentenvironment

Model Validation with 4-D Seismic

Model Validation with 4-D Seismic

Incorporate fluid flow barriers based on 4Incorporate fluid flow barriers based on 4--D D seismicseismicMatch fluid flow movements derived from Match fluid flow movements derived from 44--D seismicD seismicMatch measured and synthetic 4Match measured and synthetic 4--D seismicD seismic

History Matching with Fluid Flow Barriers from 4-D Seismic

BHP (PSI)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

5/96

11/96 5/9

711

/97 5/98

11/98 5/9

911

/99 5/00

11/00 5/0

1

NoTun Tun Obs

Fluid barriers

from 4-D seismic

Bottomhole

Pressure Match

Water Cut Match

WCT (Ratio)

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

5/96

11/9

6

5/97

11/9

7

5/98

11/9

8

5/99

11/9

9

5/00

11/0

0

5/01

NoTun Tun Obs

Matching Fluid Flow Movement from 4-D Seismic

Pre-production Oil-Water Contact

(OWC)

Original OWC New OWC

After Three Years

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Time (Days)

Wat

er C

ut (F

ract

ion)

Water CutTrend of Water Cut

Excellent

Water Cut Match

Integrated Reservoir and Facility Modeling

Integration of Reservoir and Facility Models

Reservoir Model

Oil

Well 383-K1

Risers

Well Tubing

Well 383-K2

Pipelines

Gas-Lift Gas

Gas

Water

Oil/Gas Reservoir

Separators

Integration Objectives

Robust Production Predictions from Facility Robust Production Predictions from Facility and Reservoir Constraintsand Reservoir ConstraintsEvaluations of Facility Modification Evaluations of Facility Modification Impacts on Oil/Gas RecoveryImpacts on Oil/Gas Recovery

Integration of All Full Field Models in CompanyIntegration of All Full Field Models in Company

Examples for Gulf of Mexico (GOM) Oil Fields in USA

GOM Example: Added Business Value with Infill Drilling

Drill infill well between best two producersDrill infill well between best two producersBase on predictions of remaining oilBase on predictions of remaining oilImpacts of fluid flow barriers derived from Impacts of fluid flow barriers derived from 44--D seismicD seismicIncrease oil reserves by Increase oil reserves by 8%8%

Remaining OilRemaining Oil

GOM Example: Impacts of Electric Submersible Pump (ESP)

on RecoveryOil Production Rate Increase

0

1500

3000

4500

6000

2477 2658 2842 3023 3207Time (days)

Oil

Rat

es (S

TB/D

)

Bottomhole Pressure Decrease

01000200030004000

2477 2658 2842 3023 3207Time (days)

BH

P (p

si)

Gas-oil Ratio Increase

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2477 2658 2842 3023 3207Time (days)

GO

R (S

CF/

STB

)

Water Cut Increase

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

2477 2658 2842 3023 3207

Time (days)

Wat

er C

ut (f

ract

ion)

Incremental Oil Recovery: from Well Incremental Oil Recovery: from Well ~~1,000 1,000 MstbMstb, from Field , from Field ~~300 Mstb300 Mstb

Field Production Optimization

Approaches

Short Term Field Production OptimizationShort Term Field Production Optimization–– EE--Field Production Optimization System in Field Production Optimization System in

Prudhoe Bay Oil Field (Alaska, USA)Prudhoe Bay Oil Field (Alaska, USA)

Long Term Field Development PlanningLong Term Field Development Planning–– Field Development Optimization in Giant Oil Field Development Optimization in Giant Oil

FieldField

Prudhoe Bay Oil Field Background

Largest Oil Field in North AmericaLargest Oil Field in North AmericaOriginal Oil In Place ~ 24,000,000 MstbOriginal Oil In Place ~ 24,000,000 MstbProduction Start in 1977Production Start in 1977Peak Oil Production ~ 1,400 Mstb/dayPeak Oil Production ~ 1,400 Mstb/dayCurrent Production ~ 400 Mstb/dayCurrent Production ~ 400 Mstb/day>800 Wells>800 Wells

Prudhoe Bay Integrated Reservoir and Facility Model

Reservoir

Low Pressure Flowlines

High Pressure FlowlinesOil

Water

MiscibleInjectant

NGL

CentralGas

Facility

GasWell Pads Drill Sites

Separator Banks

Lean Gas

Automation and Flexibility of Surface Pipeline Network

Prudhoe Bay E-Field Production Optimization System

UserUser--Friendly Friendly system for the optimization system for the optimization ofof–– well rates and choke settingwell rates and choke setting–– well connections to headers and separator bankswell connections to headers and separator banks–– gasgas--lift rateslift rates

Maximizing field oil production matching Maximizing field oil production matching facility constraintsfacility constraints

Production Optimization System Elements

SCADAData Acquisition and

Historian System

Data PreparationProcedure

ModelTUNING OPTIMIZER

Integrated ModelRunning in Background

SETCIMUser-Friendly Interface

Simulation DisplayControl Results

Automatic Tuning Procedure

Compare simulation results with field Compare simulation results with field measurements of pressure and ratesmeasurements of pressure and ratesAdjust model parameters Adjust model parameters Identify problems in simulation models Identify problems in simulation models and/or field measurementsand/or field measurements

Well Connection Optimization

Long Term Field Development Optimization

Optimize Optimize drilling/infilldrilling/infill--drilling program drilling program water/gas injection strategy water/gas injection strategy facility modification program facility modification program

Maximizing Maximizing some economic indicatorsome economic indicatorMatching field development constraints Matching field development constraints

Field Development Optimization Procedure

Multiple Reservoir Models

Field Development Rules

Potential Field Development Options

Optimizer

Select Field Development OptionCheck Constraints

Update and Run Prediction Reservoir Models

Determine Economic Indicator/Recoverable Reserves

Converge?No

Yes

Optimum Field Development Plan

Field Development Optimization in Giant Oil Field

Optimise:Optimise:–– locationslocations of 23 new wellsof 23 new wells–– drilling scheduledrilling schedule–– water water injection strategyinjection strategy

number of water injectors, their locations and drilling number of water injectors, their locations and drilling scheduleschedulewater injection rates water injection rates

–– locations and drilling schedule of locations and drilling schedule of sidetrack wellssidetrack wellsMaximizing Maximizing Net Present ValueNet Present Value

Generation0 20 40 60 80 100 120

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

NPV Changes in Optimization ProcedureNPV Changes in Optimization Procedure

Base CaseBase Case

Optimum Optimum CaseCase

Field Development Optimization Benefits37% Increase in NPV

Field Development Optimization Benefits

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000Days

Rel

ativ

e In

crem

enta

l Oil

Rec

over

y (%

)

12% Additional Oil Recovery

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Time (Days)

Incr

emen

tal W

ater

Inje

ctio

n (%

)

5% Reduction in Water Injection

Drilling Time (Days from Start)500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

NorthCenter

NorthEast

NorthWest

SouthCenter

SouthEast

SouthWest

Proposals for Water Injection Optimization

Move Two Water Injectors from South to North

Drilling Time (Days from Start)500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

NorthCenter

NorthEast

NorthWest

SouthCenter

SouthEast

SouthWest

Base CaseLater Water

Injection in Five Injectors

Early Water Injection

in Five Injectors

Optimum Case

Summary

Develop and apply Develop and apply innovative innovative technologytechnology forfor–– Static reservoir modellingStatic reservoir modelling–– Model validation with 4Model validation with 4--D seismicD seismic–– Integrated reservoir/facility modellingIntegrated reservoir/facility modelling–– Field development optimizationField development optimization

Add Add significant business valuesignificant business value with with the technology applicationsthe technology applications