This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
SPE-ATW on Artificial Lift, Mumbai,
Session- 5 & 6 •System Optimization o Integrated Artificial Lift Systems – Gauge Types o Real Time Monitoring ,SCADA, Control and Optimization •Selection Methodology o Candidate Well Selection o Selection Process and Methodology o Cost Benefit Analysis Mr. Shekhar started a live discussion over the candidate well selection. He was forthright in telling that we should adopt the system like technology 1, technology 2, technology 3 and so on for a particular well with respect to its suitability rather than choosing well1, well 2, well 3 and so on for a given technology. The discussions followed thereafter. It emerged that there are many types of artificial lift methods thereby giving a spoilt for choice. Selecting the ‘right’ method may not be straight-forward and Selecting the ‘wrong’ method will significantly impact project economics. All agreed to the opinion that we should spend more time to evaluate artificial lift during feasibility phase in all oil projects. We should understand to it whether our reservoir depletion strategy is robust enough to plan for any artificial lift selection methods. The discussion group agreed that case histories solves only a limited purpose as far guiding is concerned. Thereafter it requires the outlining and ranking of all attributes / elements / selection criteria for each method. We need to involve all the parties and we should first build Integrated Production System Model to quantify the value. Finally, it emerged that any exercise towards Candidate Well Selection and Selection Process and Methodology, and Cost Benefit Analysis must screen for project’s life before deciding upon ant strategy. Shri Shekhar appraised the house about some common mistakes: • Anchoring on a particular model based on past experience • Lack of reservoir understanding likes that of GOR, depletion mechanism, sand productions and so on.
• Compromise on well integrity • No input from the people who will eventually operate the system • No consideration of life cycle cost • Ignoring flow assurance mistakes • Lack of integration in the field • Late engagement of experts • Wrong mindset of “ one solution solves all wells” • Disregarding the well design. Candidate well selection had undergone good discussion with sharing of experiences by Shell, Saudi Aramco, ONGC and others. Discussed what should be the Development Concept? A thorough understanding of Reservoir Data is very important before starting discussion on candidate well selection. Source of power is very important issue that requires comprehensive preplans. Other issue discussed was about the “Interchangeability” of artificial lift systems or designs. This warrants incorporating a certain level of flexibility in design for effecting any such changes Other important issue was about the “Geographical locations” where we want a certain technology to deliver its potential. We have to see whether requisite infrastructure, supports and services available. House deliberated and concluded that putting up the right surface infrastructure and maintaining it in proper shape is the key for any brownfield developments. And here lies much of the success of any artificial lift system any where. House also deliberated quite a bit over the “ Cost Benefit Analysis” and concluded a real exercise, repeat the word real, must be ensured before putting in place any artificial lift system.
Another study that requires a good understanding is the “fluid separation” phenomenon because it’s going to affect the performance of system designed and put in place. With respect to “Expertise and Advise”, house deliberated and advised that we should go for these, if indeed required, in early phases and at the earliest. Finally, it emerged that we need to convert our “intermittent data base” into a “continuous one” to undertake troubleshooting in right shape & perspectives. House also vouched for “ Smart Partnerships” for ensuring win-win situations for all concerned. This requires a lot of introspection in an environment having multiple-service providers and multiple-operating equipment. Mr. Chimalgi, the Discussion leader House discussed quite in length the various case histories for SRPs. For short radius wells, house advised that we should put in place an artificial lift system with in the deviated section. Prioiritize the individual well requirement and undertake project cost benefit analysis. Mr. B.V.R.V Prasad, The Discussion leader
“Risk Factor” is a very important aspect in artificial lift design and
selection. House deliberated upon it in detail and one thing that required an answer was “ how to factor a risk” in any proposal. Two case histories, one from marginal fields and other from small offshore platforms, were deliberated in the light of how to factor a risk. The other important dimension in this direction is the “Time”. Too much delays can put us nowhere. Periodic reviews are important to facilitate optimal working of any artificial lift systems.
System optimization Mr. Steve, Weatherford…the Discussion Leader Definitions as varied as number of papers & projects. Any definition must look over “field-wide” and “enterprise-wide” basis. While defining, invite maximum participation by those who have maximum of inputs. Strategy must be a focus on “ SCADA and Real-time use of data on any well on artificial lift. For Well Optimisation, some suggestions : For wells on ESP … Operate close to BEP