Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE 37026
Reservoir Simulation Modeling of Natuna Gas Field for Reservoir Evaluation and
Development Planning
D. J. Fenter, Exxon Production Research Company, and D. Hadiatno, Pertamina
Copyright 1996, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
This paper was prepered for presentation at the 1996 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas
Conference held in Adelaide, Australia, 28-31 October 1996.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstrect submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s}. The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, ~s officers, or members. Pepers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words. Illustrations mey not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous
acknolwedgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 633636, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-214-952-9435.
Abstract
In the development planning studies of the Natuna gas project,
a three-dimensional, two-phase reservoir simulation model of
the Natuna gas field was used for evaluation of the gas
reservoir and as a planning tool. A detailed sequence
stratigraphic study of the gas field that incorporated seismic,
well log and core data provided the basis for the geological
model used in the reservoir simulation model. The objective
of the development planning studies was to determine
production well locations, production well drilling schedules,
the total number of wells required, the timing for the
installation of wellhead compression equipment and the gas
production profile for the field as a function of time. The
reservoir is estimated to be able to sustain a 2,400 million
standard cubic feet per day (Mscf/d) methane production rate
for 30 years or more.
Introduction
The Natuna gas field, located in Indonesian waters in the
Natuna Sea, is estimated to have an original raw gas-in-place
volume of over 200 trillion standard cubic feet (Tsct) making
Natuna the largest undeveloped gas reserve in South East
Asia. A three-dimensional, two-phase (gas and water)
reservoir simulation model of the Natuna gas field was used
for evaluation of the gas reservoir and as a basis for planning
of the Natuna project. A detailed geological model of the
carbonate formation provided the reservoir description used in
the simulation model. The simulation model was used in
567
development planning studies to determine production well
locations, the well requirements versus time, total number of
wells required, the timing for the installation of wellhead
compression equipment and the gas production profile for the
field as a function of time. Both initial field development and
full-field development options were investigated with the
reservoir simulation model. These studies are also the basis
for the estimated ultimate recovery from the Natuna field.
Field Overview
The Natuna gas field lies approximately 140 miles northeast
of Natuna Island and 218 miles northwest of Kalimantan
(Fig. 1). Natuna Island is about 375 miles northeast of
Singapore and 700 miles north of Jakarta. The water depth in
the field area is approximately 475 feet. The discovery well,
AL-l X, was drilled on the crest of the AL-Structure in 1973
by the Italian oil company AGIP and encountered
approximately 5,250 feet of porous, gas-bearing carbonate
section. After acquiring the concession for the area in 1980,
Esso conducted a 2-D seismic survey over the D-Alpha Block
and drilled four additional wells on the AL-Structure: wells
L-2X, L-3X, L-4X, and L-5X (Fig. 2). The crest of the gas
reservoir is at a depth of approximately 8,625 feet subsea. A
gas-water contact was established by three wells (L-2X, L-3X,
and L-5X) at a depth of 14,000 feet. The total volume of gas
in the reservoir is estimated to be 222 Tscf. The composition
of the gas is about 71 % carbon dioxide, 28% methane plus
heavier hydrocarbons, 0.5% hydrogen sulfide and 0.5 %
nitrogen. The estimated gas recovery from the field is about
75% which would yield 46 Tscf of recoverable hydrocarbon
gas.
Reservoir Description
The Natuna gas reservoir is interpreted to be an isolated,
dome-shaped carbonate build-up structure (carbonate platform
and reef complex) approximately 15 miles long and 9 miles
wide. The Natuna gas field is contained within the Miocene-
aged Terumbu Formation, which comprises a broad based
carbonate platform overlain by more areally restricted
2 D. J. FENTER, D. HADIATNO
carbonate build-ups. A total of five exploration and appraisal
wells have been drilled in the field.
The general stratigraphy of the Natuna field area is
illustrated by the simplified cross section in Fig. 3. The oldest
strata that sit on the basement are the Oligocene to early
Miocene shales, sands and coals of the Arang and Gabus
formations. These are overlain by the shallow water
carbonate buildup deposits of the Miocene to Pliocene
Terumbu formation that are the reservoir rocks of the Natuna
field. These carbonate reservoir buildups are surrounded by
tight, fine grained carbonates and shales deposited around
their margins. The Terumbu is overlain by thick upper
Pliocene to recent marine shales, silts, and sands of the Muda
formation which provide the top seal for the Natuna reservoir.
In order to evaluate the reservoir properties of the Terumbu
formation in detail, it was subdivided it into nine units of the
same age, called sequences shown by the lines through the
Terumbu on the cross section. Each sequence was defined on
well logs and from seismic data using a technique called
sequence stratigraphy. Within the field, two important
subdivisions have been made, one by area and one by vertical
zonation. The area of consistently good reservoir quality in
the central field area is termed the "Main Bank" where all of
the 5 wells in the field are drilled. The areas around the
margin of the field where reservoir quality is less well known,
and is interpreted from geological and geophysical studies to
be lower, is termed the Platform Margin. In the vertical
direction, the sequences of the reservoir were grouped into the
Upper and Lower Terumbu intervals. This subdivision is
based on the "Olive" sequence boundary shown on the cross
section. The better quality reservoir is restricted to the crest of
the field in the Upper Terumbu, but is more widespread in the
Lower Terumbu.
The design gas composition is based on the analyses of gas
produced during ten production tests on the four Esso
delineation wells. On site analyses were performed for carbon
dioxide and hydrogen sulfide using both chromatographic and
chemical tests. Production tests were conducted over a range
of depths in each well, and the similar composition results
from different wells and different depths demonstrate that gas
composition varies little with depth or location. The planning
basis for the Natuna project assumes a uniform gas
composition both areally and vertically within the reservoir
with the full wellstream fluid consisting of about 27%
methane, about 71 % carbon dioxide and 1% nitrogen and
hydrogen sulfide. In addition to methane, there is also about
1% heavier hydrocarbon gases giving the gas a total
hydrocarbon content of 28%.
The key subdivisions of the reservoir that have been used
as components of the field volumetric estimates are shown in
Fig. 4. In the map of each sequence, the reservoir has been
divided areally into the Main Bank and Platform Margin
areas. In the vertical direction, the sequences of the reservoir
were grouped into the Upper and Lower Terumbu intervals.
568
37026
This results in four large component parts of the reservoir that
differ in terms of data control and interpreted reservoir
quality. The gas-in-place volumes for the field were obtained
by adding up the product of volume, times porosity, times gas
saturation for a gridded reservoir model of the entire field.
The Most Likely gas-in-place for the field is calculated as 222
Tscf. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the volume of gas in
each of the four component parts of the reservoir.
Simulation Model Development
The basis for the reservoir description used in the simulation
model of the Natuna field was the sequence stratigraphic
model of the gas field described above that incorporated
seismic, well log and core data. A three-dimensional two-
phase (gas and water) model of the entire carbonate reservoir
was used for the development planning studies of the Natuna
gas field. This model covers an area of about 13 miles in the
east-west (E- W) direction and about 17 miles in the north-
south (N-S) direction using an areal block size of 935 feet
(each direction) in the main portion of the model. This results
in a model with 66 gridblocks in the E-W direction and 83
gridblocks in the N-S direction. In the vertical direction, a
total of 9 layers was used, one for each sequence in the
geological model resulting in a model of almost 50,000
gridblocks (49,302). The properties for each layer in the
simulation model (depth, thickness, porosity, and lateral
extent of each layer) were developed from the sequence-based
geological model.
The PVT (pressure, volume, temperature) data for the
reservoir gas was based on the design gas composition from
the production tests conducted on the four Esso delineation
wells drilled in the field. Wellbore hydraulics calculations
were used to predict individual well gas production rates
based on well tubing size, completion profile, and flowing
wellhead pressure. A review of Natuna well test data was
conducted to provide guidance on horizontal and vertical
permeability estimates to be used in the simulation model. The
approach for developing horizontal permeability values for the
simulation model was to use a relationship between model
porosity and horizontal permeability. A plot of the available
core analysis and well test permeability data is shown in
Fig. 5. The vertical permeability in the model was set to 0.2
times the horizontal permeability based on well log and
production test data. The estimates of initial pressure and
temperature for the Natuna gas reservoir are based on well log
surveys, RFT, DST and production test data from the five AL-
Structure wells (AL-IX, L-2X, L-3X, L-4X and, L-5X). The
volume centroid for the gas reservoir was calculated to be at
12,300 feet. The pressure and temperature for the reservoir at
the centroid depth were estimated from well measurements to
be 5,717 psig and 340°F respectively.
The base field development plan utilizes open-hole
completion of the gas production wells using 7" outside
37026 RESERVOIR SIMULATION MODELING OF NATUNA GAS FIELD FOR RESERVOIR EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
diameter production tubing in the top portion of the reservoir
with a well spacing of 1,320 feet between wells (equivalent to
40 acres/well). This completion technique was chosen
because adequate reservoir deliverability can be achieved
from the top 1,000 feet of the formation, the carbonate
formation has high strength, and model results indicate that
there is adequate vertical permeability to allow the entire
reservoir interval to be drained from wells completed near the
top.
The Natuna field is expected to perform as a volumetric /
pressure depletion gas reservoir because the carbonate
reservoir is surrounded by tight, fine-grained carbonates and
shales deposited on the margins of the field and the restricted
aquifer anticipated to be in contact with the gas reservoir. As
a result, the well production rates will decline with decreasing
reservoir pressure associated with continued production. In
order to achieve high gas production rates per well and
maintain the total field gas production rate during the field's
producing life it will be necessary to reduce the flowing
wellhead pressure (FWHP) with time. Control over the
individual well and platform rates in the simulation model was
implemented using the control levels: well, platform, and
field. Wellbore hydraulics tables were used to predict
individual producing well rates. Production platform and total
field level controls on gas production rate and production
schedules were implemented to control the timing of
production well drilling, producing wellhead pressures, and
total gas production rates. The initial flowing wellhead
pressure (FWHP) for the production wells of 1265 psia is set
by the requirements of the platform processing facilities.
When a platform or the field target gas production rate cannot
be satisfied, additional wells are drilled. After all wells have
been drilled, wellhead compression equipment is added as
necessary to allow the FWHP for the producing wells to be
lowered to maintain the target production rates.
Reservoir Simulation Case Descriptions And Results
During the planning phase of the Natuna Project, reservoir
simulation modeling has been used as a planning tool to
investigate variations in reservoir description, and well and
platform configurations. The objective of this work was to
evolve a flexible development plan for the field from an initial
development to full development that produces large volumes
of gas for long periods of time in a cost effective manner. The
current full-field development configuration determined with
the simulation model studies is based on producing 2,400
Mscf/d of methane (CI) using 5 offshore gas treating
platforms each producing 480 Mscfld CI to supply either
pipeline sales or a LNG plant located on Natuna Island.
The simulation model runs investigated the impact of
horizontal and vertical permeability, well completion
strategies, and the number and location of producing
platforms and wells. For example, if the porosity and
569
3
horizontal permeability are as assumed in the base case
reservoir description, but vertical permeability is lower than
the base case estimate, the simulation model results indicate
that drilling some production wells to deeper target locations
is effective in maintaining high gas production rates. The
model was also used to investigate production complex
configurations (i.e., how many gas treating platforms and
drilling quarters platforms are arranged together in an
integrated complex), the planned gas production rate per
treating platform and/or drilling platform, the number of wells
per drilling platform, and the timing of the installation of
wellhead compression equipment to maintain the target gas
production rates. The integrated production complex
configuration uses bridge connected platforms to eliminate
need for connection of the platforms by subsea pipelines. The
subsurface target locations for the production wells is a
consideration in determining the number of well slots on each
drilling platform. There is a trade-off in drilling reach and
deviation angle versus the number of drilling platforms in
determining a reasonable arrangement of the production wells.
The wellhead pressure for production wells is reduced over
time in order to maintain the total field gas production rates as
reservoir pressure and individual well rates decline with
continued production. When it is necessary to reduce the
wellhead pressure, wellhead compression equipment is added
to the drilling platforms in order to boost the gas pressure
back to the pressure level required by the gas processing
facilities on the treating platforms. The simulation model
results indicate that the preferred strategy is to drill all
production wells before wellhead compression equipment is
installed.
The remaining discussion of the simulation model results
will concentrate on the models used to analyze Natuna field
performance for both initial and full development options
based on producing from offshore gas treating platforms each
with a capacity of 480 million scf/d of methane. Due to high
carbon dioxide content of the raw reservoir gas in the Natuna
field, large volumes of raw gas must be produced to yield the
desired methane production rates as shown in Table 2. This
table relates the design methane (Cl) production rates from
the gas treating platforms to an annual average raw gas
production rate for the field.
Initial Field Development. The offshore platform
configuration for an initial field development consists of two
large gas treating platforms (each having 480 million scf/d CI
capacity) and a single drilling/quarters platform (44 well slots)
as illustrated in Fig. 6. The current reservoir development
plan determined with the simulation model for the initial 960
million scf/d CI development is shown in Fig. 7. On the right
hand side of this figure is a picture of the reservoir simulation
model grid along with an outline of the gas reservoir
indicating the lateral extent of the "Main Bank" area (lighter
color) and the extent of the "Platform Margin" area (darker
4 D. J. FENTER, D. HADIATNO
color). The initial field development will be from the central
"Main Bank" area of the field that has the highest reservoir
quality and best deliverability; the production wells for this
case are shown by the small well symbols. The five wells
currently drilled in the field are shown with the larger well
symbols. All of the planned development well locations can
be drilled from these drilling platform locations with a
maximum well deviation angle of about 60° from vertical.
This configuration for the initial development allows for
future expansion to a larger gas development utilizing gas
treating platforms each having 480 million scf/d Cl capacity.
Fig. 8 shows a plot of production rate for the initial field
development indicating that the total field gas production rate
of 960 million scf/d Cl was be maintained for over 30 years
without the need for wellhead compression equipment.
Full-Field Development. The full development of the field is
an expansion of the initial two gas treating platform plan. The
full-field development is based on producing 2,400 Mscf/d of
methane (Cl) using 5 offshore gas treating platforms each
producing 480 Mscf/d C I to supply either pipeline sales or a
LNG plant located on Natuna Island. The full-field
development within the central "Main Bank" area consists of
five gas treating platforms and five associated drilling/quarters
and drilling platforms as illustrated in Fig. 9. The drilling and
treating platforms for the Central Area development are
arranged in two production complexes. The first complex is
based on the two gas treating platforms from the initial field
development with the addition of a drilling platform.
Production complex # 2 consists of three gas treating
platforms, one drilling/quarters platform and two drilling
platforms. The locations of these production complexes are
shown by the rectangles on the field map in Fig. 10.
Although the Central Area development, in which the
production complexes are located only in the "Main Bank"
Area, is successful in achieving the gas production rates
necessary for the target 30 years production period, there is a
large pressure gradient of over 3500 psia between the central
producing area and the western flank of the field as illustrated
in Fig. 11. The reservoir pressures near the production
platforms in the central field area have declined about 4000
psia after 30 years of production while the pressures in the
northwestern area of the field have only declined about 500
psia. The geological model of the Natuna field indicates that
there is the possibility of some good quality rimming banks in
the northwest area of the field (NW Bank Area), however, no
wells have been drilled yet in this area of field. In order to
attempt to improve the areal drainage of the reservoir, an
alternative development plan was investigated that involved
placing one gas treating platform and one drilling quarters
platform in the NW Bank Area. This results in a three
production complex configuration as illustrated in Fig. 12.
Production Complexes # 1 and # 2 are located in the Central
Area while Complex # 3 is located in the NW Bank area.
570
37026
Both Complex # 1 and # 2 consist of two gas treating
platforms, one drilling/quarters platform and one drilling
platform. The addition of the production complex to the NW
Bank Area significantly reduces the pressure gradient between
the producing area and the western flank of the field as shown
on Fig. 13. The reservoir pressures near the production
platforms in the central field area have declined about 3500
psia after 30 years of production and now the pressures in the
northwestern area of the field have declined about 3600 psia.
Although the NW Bank Area is a more expensive
development option due to drilling production wells with
deeper subsurface targets, and the need for a third production
complex, the model results show how this alternative
development plan more effectively drains the gas volume in
the western flank of the field and extends the production
plateau for about 5 years relative to the base development plan
as shown on the comparison plot in Fig. 14.
A summary of gas recovery from the simulation model
cases after 30 years of production is shown in Table 3 for the
Central Area full-field development option and Table 4 for the
Central and NW Bank Area full-field development option.
The gas recovery as a percent of OGIP is shown for the "Main
Bank" ("Bank"), "Platform Margin" ("Margin"), and "Total"
field areas. It is summarized for the Upper Terumbu
("Upper"), Lower Terumbu ("Lower") and Total Terumbu
("Total") zones of the reservoir. For the Central Area only
development cases, the "Bank" area recovery is much higher
than the "Margin" area recovery (48% vs. 21%). The addition
of production wells to the NW Bank Area improves the gas
recovery from the "Margin" area by about 7% from 21% to
28%.
As mentioned previously, due to the limited aquifer size,
the Natuna gas field should perform as a volumetric/pressure-
depletion gas reservoir. The estimated recovery factor for the
reservoir has been derived from analysis of the pressure
depletion behavior of the field simulation model. The gas
recovery for the field is estimated to be approximately 75 %
for an average reservoir abandonment pressure of 1500 psia as
illustrated in the p/z analysis on Fig. 15.
Conclusions
1. The reservoir simulation model was an effective tool in
analyzing various development options for the Natuna gas
field.
2. The reservoir simulation results confirm that the Natuna
field is capable of supplying large volumes of gas for
long periods of time. The field should be capable of
sustaining a 2,400 million scf/d methane production rate
for 30 years or more.
3. The alternate development plan that includes wells
located in the NW Bank Area indicate that this
development plan produces the gas volumes located in the
western and northwestern field areas more effectively.
37026 RESERVOIR SIMULATION MODELING OF NATUNA GAS FIELD FOR RESERVOIR EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING 5

4. The selected Natuna development options allow

flexibility in progressing from an initial field TABLE 3 - Natuna Most Likely Gas Recovery, %
development to a full field development in a cost Central Area Development at 30 Years
effective manner utilizing either a Central Area or a
combination Central and NW Bank Area development. Reservoir Zones
5. Ultimate gas recovery for the field has been estimated I Area Upper
Terumbu I Lower
Terumbu I Total
based upon an analysis of the pressure depletion behavior
Main Bank 48.8 48.0 48.4
of the reservoir simulation model at about 46 trillion scf
(75% recovery factor). Platform Margin 22.9 20.2 21.5

Total 40.3 38.7 39.5

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Pertamina and Esso Exploration
and Production Natuna, Inc. for permission to publish this TABLE 4 - Natuna Most Likely Gas Recovery, %
paper. Central & NW Bank Area Development at 30 Years

51 Metric Conversion Factors Reservoir Zones

ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
3
= I Area Upper
Terumbu I
Lower
Terumbu I
Total

ft3 x 2.831 685 E-02 = m

Main Bank 47.2 42.8 45.0
in. x 2.54* E+OO = cm
mile x 1.609 347 E+03 = m Platform Margin 30.0 26.8 28.4
psi x 6.894 757 E+OO = kPa
Total 41.6 37.4 39.5
• Conversion factor is exact

TABLE 1 - Natuna Most Likely Gas-in-Place

Estimate, Tscf

Reservoir Zones
I Area Upper
Terumbu I
Lower
Terumbu I
Total

Main Bank 62.0 76.5 138.5

Platform Margin 48.0 35.7 83.7

Total 110.0 112.2 222.2

TABLE 2 - Natuna Gas Field Treating Platform

Installation Timing andTarget Gas Production Rates

Design Rate * Annual Average ••

Treating Model Dry C1 Dry C1
Platform Year Raw Gas Mscf/d Raw Gas Msd/d
Mscf/d Msd/d
1 0 1962 480 1888 462
2 1 3924 960 3777 924
3 3 5886 1440 5665 1386
4 4 7848 1920 7554 1848
5 6 9810 2400 9442 2310

* Design Rate - Facility design capacity limits (operating day basis)

•• Annual Rate - Design rate adjusted for facility uptime (96.25 %) --
calendar day basis

571
 Estimated Recovery p/z Plot
6,000

5,000

Model
4,000
ftS •
1~ 3,000 ~ Recovery Factor
Trend
~ Estimate 75%

~
Co
EUR
2,000
----------------
Abandonment Pressure
1,000 - 1500 psi

OC---"--_-'--_-'--_-'--_...L.-_...L.-_....l...-_--'--_--""'-_-'
o 50 100 150 ~~R 200 250
Cumulative Raw Gas Production, Tscf
OGIP 222 Tscf

Fig. 15 • Estimated recovery from p/z plot for full-field development of the Natuna Gas Field

579