Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

Kalaekule OML72 Field Development

Presentation by Viking Field Development Solutions

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

Kalaekule OML72 Field Development

Viking Field Development Solution is pleased to offer a fully

integrated turnkey operated solution to WAEP that
entails production, separation (oil, gas, water), storage of
clean crude and export to shuttle vessel.

• Scope includes hoses, manifolds, and all related systems,

and full operation of field and logistics.
• Equipment and systems can be mobilised for
operation within 4 months from signing of contract.

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

Update following 4th September conference call:

1. Proposal for EPF

2. Outline of options for the development
3. Nigerian production facility experience

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

1. Proposal for EPF

Turn key solution for full operation including O&M

Proposed day rate: 100,000 USD/day. Including:

• Hoses from Platform to MOPU
• MOPU
• Export hose from MOPU to FSO
• FSO

Day rate excludes:

• Installation costs
• Mobilisation/Demobilisation

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

Proposed Development Solution

Alternative to larger EPV:

For 30,000 BPD, install MOPU with export via hose to spread
moored FSO

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

MOPU Configuration

Unit Description Capacity

Separation 30,000 BPD Liquids
Crude Export 2 x 6,000 + 10,000
Produced Water 20,000 BWPD
Treatment
Gas Compression 37.5 MMSCFD
Gas Processing 37.5 MMSCFD
Gas Lift 20 MMSCFD

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

MOPU Process Module Layout

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

MOPU Process Deck Layout

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

FSO Details

• Panamax Size
• Up to 400,000
barrels storage
• Heating coils to
handle waxy crude
• Spread moored

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

The bid is based on the following assumptions and exclusions and can be revised once these matters are clarified

1. Seafloor clear of debris, canyons and any substantial issues for anchors, mat or legs;
2. Well controls and trees are operative and inspected, industry standard and capable of emergency shutdown as required by the production facilities;
3. Crude oil is not waxy such that the well fluids and related separated fluids will flow into transfer pumps without requiring special treatment
4. The EPF is connected to wells on Platform A
1. which has a certified boat landing facility
2. That a fixed bridge can be installed onto Platform A
3. That a well manifold for the specified number of wells can be installed on Platform A
5. That the minimum contract period is 18 months
6. Net of import duties
7. Operations upstream of the chokes including all well operations are excluded
8. That a single flowline can be used to transfer fluids from the Platforms to the EPF

Questions relating to the bid which could help refine the facilities design and performance:‐

1. How many wells would be ready for production on day 1 from Platform A and platform B
2. Status of the wells ready for production
3. Expected shut‐in and flowing pressure, sand production and oil and gas and water composition of each of the wells ready for production
4. Timing and length of any EWT period for Platform A and B
5. Expected timing of production ready facility and wells from Platform B
6. Requirement for simultaneous production from Platform A and B wells
7. Required inspections including DPR inspections for the EPF (for each of Jackup, FPSO and FSO)
8. Expected maximum surge rate and pressure
9. Expected maximum sand production
10. PVT data showing any Co2, H2S, metals and other complicating materials
11. Gas composition
12. Maximum uptime and minimum downtime
13. Expected gas flare permit rate and period
14. Any other ‘Integration Services’ including production well management, reservoir management, field management, oil sales and marketing, gas management etc

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

2. Options: there are a number of design options which can optimize cost and cashflow

Option Description Advantages Disadvantages

1. Single MOPU/FPV for EPS at
30,000blpd
2. Single MOPU/FPV for EWT
and EPS at 30,000blpd
3. Separate EWT vessel at
15,000blpd and MOPU/FPV for
EPS at 30,000blpd
4. As 3 with EWT vessel moved
to Platform B as EPS
MOPU/FPV moved onto wells
at Platform A
5. As 4 with FPV/MOPU EPS
located/relocated mid
distance between Platform A
and B
6. As 1 and 2 with EPS mid way
between Platforms A and B
Single facility for single EPS phase
EWT for >=6months followed by
production phase using the same vessel
Smaller facility with lower uptime
specification for the EWT phase then
replaced with larger EPS
As 3 plus EWT for Platform B to prepare
wells and collect data . Will require a
second FSO for the oil from the second
EWT
As 4 with one FSO and longer floating
hoses from platforms to EPS and more
complex remote well control and ESD that
can be operated from the EPS with
independent power/hydraulics on
platforms
Simplicity and cost
Simplicity and earlier production. DPR likely
to give 6+ month of testing permits ahead of
main production phase and permits.
Lower cost and earlier production. DPR likely
to give 6+ month of testing permits ahead of
main production phase and permits. EWT
data used to refine the design of the EPS.
Access to more production, earlier oil from
Platform B and additional data for planning
and adding extra wells.
AS 4. and with lower costs
As with 4
Longer lead time to first oil to
secure permits. DPR may insist on
testing wells before signing off
production permit. Additional
downtime to solve well issue
Vessel deployed before full EPS
permit awarded
Vessel change over downtime.
Added cost of extended EWT vessel
and additional FSO
Downtime to relocate the EPS
which will need to be an FPV. Cost
of added floating hoses.
As with 1,2

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

2. Options: there are a number of design options which can optimize cost and cashflow

Option Description Advantages Disadvantages

1. Single MOPU/FPV for EPS at
30,000blpd
2. Single MOPU/FPV for EWT
and EPS at 30,000blpd
3. Separate EWT vessel at
15,000blpd and MOPU/FPV for
EPS at 30,000blpd
4. As 3 with EWT vessel moved
to Platform B as EPS
MOPU/FPV moved onto wells
at Platform A
5. As 4 with FPV/MOPU EPS
located/relocated mid
distance between Platform A
and B
6. As 1 and 2 with EPS mid way
between Platforms A and B
Single facility for single EPS phase
EWT for >=6months followed by
production phase using the same vessel
Smaller facility with lower uptime
specification for the EWT phase then
replaced with larger EPS
As 3 plus EWT for Platform B to prepare
wells and collect data . Will require a
second FSO for the oil from the second
EWT
As 4 with one FSO and longer floating
hoses from platforms to EPS and more
complex remote well control and ESD that
can be operated from the EPS with
independent power/hydraulics on
platforms
Simplicity and cost
Simplicity and earlier production. DPR likely
to give 6+ month of testing permits ahead of
main production phase and permits.
Lower cost and earlier production. DPR likely
to give 6+ month of testing permits ahead of
main production phase and permits. EWT
data used to refine the design of the EPS.
Access to more production, earlier oil from
Platform B and additional data for planning
and adding extra wells.
AS 4. and with lower costs
As with 4
Longer lead time to first oil to
secure permits. DPR may insist on
testing wells before signing off
production permit. Additional
downtime to solve well issue
Vessel deployed before full EPS
permit awarded
Vessel change over downtime.
Added cost of extended EWT vessel
and additional FSO
Downtime to relocate the EPS
which will need to be an FPV. Cost
of added floating hoses.
As with 1,2

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)

 Viking Field Development Solutions – OML72 Development

3. EBOK OPERATION

DANGOTE E&P – KALAEULE FIELD DEVELOPMENT (OML72)