Field Development Plan

UiTM Seminar

26 April 2017

Strategy AcquisitionExploration Appraisal DevelopmentProduction Relinquishment Abandonment

 Rosly Mohd Nor

B Sc. Applied Geology ( Hons). University Malaya

Work Experience
Current : Freelance
2012- 2014 : Head Geocsience, Punchak Oil & Gas
2010 2012 : Freelance
1980 2010 : 30 yrs PETRONAS / PETRONAS Carigali
General Manager, Reservoir Geoscience Dept Petroleum
Engineering Division, PCSB
Geophysicist, geologist, trainer
Exploration, Field development, production
Some projects area
Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Brunei.
Pakistan , Sudan, Egypt , Syria, Mauritania,
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Iraq, Yemen, Oman,
USA
Presentation Outline
overview
 Geoscience Assessment Characteristic

Not an exact science estimation

Geological Process - Present reflects Past

Field Outcrop as Analog tends, patterns

Macro to Micro measurements tools & technology driven

Extensive Geostatic Application range of values

Quantify Uncertainty and Risk - project management

Geological / Reservoir model common model

Make many Assumptions data dependent

Start and End with DATA knowledge management

 Key References

The Petroleum Geology & Resources of

Malaysia, (1999) Petronas

Petroleum Geology Conference & Exhibition

(papers & posters)

Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia

 Generalized Geoscience WorkProcess

Geophysicist

Data Review, Data Data

Work Plan, Acquisition/ Processing / Interpretation Integration
Strategy Gathering Analysis FDP

Geologist

Review
 Generalized Geoscience Work Flow
Iterative Process
Other Disciplines

Data Review, Data Data

Work Plan, Acquisition/ Processing / Interpretation Integration FDP
Strategy Gathering Analysis

Data,
Knowledge
Base

Technical Review
 Methodology : Integration Information & People

Regional Setting
Seismic Attributes
Geologist Geophysicist

Geological/Reservoir Model

Volumetric

Well Correlation
Test Data
Petrophyiscist Reservoir Engineer

Facilities Engineer

Drilling Engineer Production Technologist

Drilling / Facilities Production history

Log Evaluation
 Petroleum Geology

Trap

Reservoir

Migration

Source Rock

AAPG
 Geoscience Key Results / Contributions
2D/3D structural , reservoir , attribute maps,
reservoir properties ,cross sections ,
Common Earth Model

Geological / Reservoir Model

New Asset Acquisition

Resource assessment
Hydrocarbon-In-Place
Petroleum Arrangement
Full Field Potential
STOIIP, GIIP
FDP Discovered , Undiscovered
Specialized studies
Abandonment
Remaining potential
Safety Hazard Production
Maximize recovery
Optimized well / platform location
Geo Hazard / HSE Reserves Addition Reservoir model update
EUR
Surface facilities location. Upside potential
Drilling planning & execution Near Field Exploration
Facilities abandonment Development Appraisal program
 Result : Development Planning Optimization
In a field all the resource category must be assessed for optimal FDP evaluation
Reserves
Developed
Undeveloped
Reserves

CONTIGENT
RESOURCE
* Discovered
* Recoverable but
not producible PROSPECTIVE
RESERVES due to sub commercial, RESOURCES
* Discovered political, environment Undiscovered
* Commercial or technological reasons Prospect

Production Pre Development Exploration

Technical Risk Low Medium High

Capital Investment High Medium Low

Pay Back Time Short Medium Long

Operational Complexity High Medium Low

 Result :Hydrocarbon In Place
A. Discovered
OIL ( MMstb) GAS ( Bscf)

Reservoir Proved Proved + Proved + Proved Proved + Proved +

Probable Probable + Probable Probable +
Possible Possible

R10 , Block 10 20 40 20 30 70
1
R10, Block 2 20 30 50 100 250 350
R30 40 60 100 0 0 0
TOTAL 70 110 190 120 180 420

B. Undiscovered ( Deeper potential)

OIL ( MMstb) GAS ( Bscf)

Reservoir Low Most High Low Most Likely High

Likely

R50 30 70 100 10 30 70
J 10 10 20 50 100 300 400
K50 0 0 0 300 500 900
TOTAL 40 90 150 410 830 1370
 Result : New Reserves Addition
2 1

New appraisal / infill drilling

+ + +
+ +
Uncertain fluid type
( not logged)

Prospect
After 2 D seismic and two exploration well : marginal field / small reserves
 Result : New Reserves Addition
2 5 1 4 3

+ + +
+ +

New 3D seismic , appraisal & development wells or production data , new technology
Petrophysical reevaluation, seismic reprocessing , update reservoir model
 Result : Reservoir Correlation

Correlation Result 1 Correlation Result 2 Correlation Result 3

A A C A
C C

Datum Datum Datum

Dependent on Depositional environment and other geophysical and engineering data

 Results : Depth Structure Map

Est . OWC

ODT
2
OUT
2060

3 1

2040 2020

GOC
Potential new
ODT appraisal well
location

R10 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP N

N
Contour Interval : 25 m
Date :
Author :
Scale : 1:25,000

1 KM
 Result : Structural Cross section
w 3 1 2 E
Depth

Proven Gas

Proven Oil
 Result Map : Reservoir Map

10 10
20 10

2
20

10

3 1

Potential
Production well
location

R10 Gross Thickness Map N

Contour Interval : 25 m
Date :
Author :
Scale : 1:25,000
30 30 20
10 20 10 1 KM
 Result : Geological /Reservoir Model (2D/3D)

(Workstation application )
Reservoir Properties
Fault & Horizon Framework Gridding Population & Integration
 Result : Maximize Recovery /Production

Ist 3D

2nd 3D
( few years later )

New infill wells

 Result : Site Survey (Geomatics)

LINE SA 201678
Site Survey

LINE SA 201676
LINE SA 201618

1
LINE SA 201620

LINE SA 201022

Fault
Abandoned well head
LINE KA 198522
Shallow gas
Optimal location of future platforms
Abandoned channel Site Survey
Propose new pipeline Interpretation
Scale 1:25000
Carbonate streak
Object not in historical record 1 KM
 Result : Geo Hazard / HSE

Sinking of a drilling rig

due to gas hazard
PETROPHYSIC
 Basic Pretrophysics Workflow
Data QC & Enhancement

Environmental Correction

Lithology & Reservoir Analysis

Fluid Types & Contact analysis

Petrophysical Modelling

Reservoir Model Integration

 Log Interpretation flow
Probabilistic Deterministic
Cross Plot
 2D Vs 3D Porosity Estimation
Core porosity in 2D Core porosity in 3D

Total Porosity = 20 %
Total Porosity = 23 %

PGCE 2010
 Key Petrophysical Challenges

Fluid Contact

Water Saturation

Net pay
 Key Challenges : Fluid Contact Uncertainty
Long oil column, no gas cap Long gas & oil column

Long 0il column

Channel reservoir
(Stratigraphic trap)

Spill point

Small gas cap & shot oil coloum

 Fluid Contact Estimation: Half Way Concept
The half way
CREST
concept for
probable and
Proved possible category
Gas
GDT can be
CREST
Probable Gas
overridden by
Possible Gas or some other
Possible Oil
WUT geological ,
Proved Gas geophysical and
CREST engineering
GDT data, of which the
Possible Oil or
Possible Gas
Probable Gas basis and
GDT
Probable Oil
assumption must
OUT
Probable Oil
be clearly stated.
OUT Proved Oil
Proved Oil

GAS ODT
ODT Probable Oil
Proved
Probable Probable Oil
Possible Oil
Possible SPILL /WUT
Possible Oil
OIL SPILL / WUT
Proved
GDT Gas -Down To
Probable
OUT Oil Up To
Possible
ODT Oil Down- To
WATER WUT Water Up - To
 Fluid Contact Estimation: Pressure , Well Test
Case 1
GR Well 3 GR Well 1 GR Well 2

1a 2a
3a
1b
2b
1c
3b
1d

3c Pressure

1a
**
1b
GOC
1c
Depth **1d
2a
If Production Test = No flow :
No Net Pay for that tested zone ** 2b
3a
** 3b
*
3c
Tight
(Invalid test)
 Fluid Contact : Pressure Data ( MDT)
w 3 1 2 E
Case 1
Depth

Fault
not sealing

Pressure

1a
1. One reservoir unit
**
1b
GOC
1c
**
Depth

1d
2a
** 2b
3a
** 3b
*
3c
Tight
(Invalid test)
 Fluid Contact : Pressure Data ( MDT)
w 3 1 2 E
Case 2
Depth

Barrier ,Sealing
Fault
Fault or different
sealing
reservoir unit

Pressure

1. Multiple reservoir unit

1 2. May have separate GOC / OWC
**
a1b
GOC Pressure data is a critical data :
1c
** Confirm fluid contact
Depth

1d
2a Confirm fluid types
** * 2b 3a
3b
3c
Reservoir continuity & quality
Fault / geological barriers
** Tight
(Invalid test)
Geopressure
 Net pay
Besides Porosity, shale and Water Saturation cut off , Core data, Pressure , Production test data could be
critical in estimating Net Pay
GR LOG

VSH POR SW

CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 3

Cutoff parameters : Vsh = 0.5, POR = 0.15, Sw = 0.7

VSH CUT OFF Gross Sand =10.7m, Net Sand =8.9m, Net Pay = 7.8m
Av POR= 0.27, Aw =0.45
 Net Pay : Integrated Evaluation
Integrated Log evaluation improves accuracy and quality of evaluation

PGCE 2010
GEOPHYSICS
DATA Acquisition & Processing
Satellite / Remote Sensing

Geomorphology

Structural trend

Sedimentation pattern

Hydrocarbon seepage

Advantages
- Faster areal coverage
- Overview of the area
- Regional trend established
- Planning tool
 Land Seismic Acquisition Technology
Land Seismic Survey : Energy Source

Dynamite Vibrosis
2D/3D Seismic Acquisition Technology
 2D/3D Seismic Acquisition

Boat

Sea Surface

Source
(Airguns) Cable with hydrophones

Incident Reflected
waves waves

Sea bed
 SEISMIC TRACE
Composition of reflections Geology, Impedance, Seismic trace relationship

Laver 1: p1V1 PV
R= P2 V2 P1V1 Approx P = density
P2 V2 + P1V1 2PV V = velocity
Laver 2: p2V2
 Seismic Reprocessing Technology

Normal 3D Time Processing 3D Pre Stack Depth Migration ( PSDM) Processing

PGRM 1999
200

250

300
Shot
Point
0
0
200

0.5
0.5

Seconds
Secon
d
1.0
1.0

1.5
1.5

LINE SA 201620
SEISMIC INTERPRETATION
Basic Seismic Interpretation Workflow
Data QC & Enhancement

Well Seismic Calibration

Horizon, Fault Pick & Attribute Analysis

Velocity Analysis & Time Depth Conversion

Geo Hazard Analysis

Geophysical Modelling

Reservoir Model Integration

 LINE SA 191990

LINE SA 201678
LINE SA 201O82

LINE SA 201680

LINE SA 201676
LINE SA 201682

LINE SA 201618

LINE SA 201620

Well 2
Well 1 LINE SA 201022

LINE KA 198522

Base Map
Scale 1:25000

1 KM
200

250

300
Shot
Well 1 Well 2 Point
0
0
200

0.5
0.5

Seconds
Secon
d
A /B 1.0
1.0

1.5
1.5

LINE SA 201620
 Well Seismic Calibration
Well 1 Well 2

Reservoir A

Reservoir B Reservoir A

Shale out
 Well 1 Well 2

A /B
 Fault Interpretation Uncertainties

Interpretation No : 1
Many major
Major faults only & minor faults

Interpretation No : 1

Interpretation No : 2 Interpretation No : 3

Same data different fault interpretation

 Seismic Interpretation

Flattened Seismic Horizon Well

Channel like feature

prospect

Flattened Section

PGCE 2010
 Interpretation Technics
1) A,B,C, D, E : Internal reflection patterns (seismic facie )
2) F : Bedding and reflection termination patterns

F
 3D Interpretation Technology

3D Volume Seismic Interpretation 3D Visualization Technology

Vertical slice

Horizonslice

Fault
 Attribute Analysis

Gas Well Dry Well

3D Horizon Slice & Attribute Analysis

Gas discovery well Channel features
 Attribute Analysis
4D Seismic / Time Lapse : Prediction of by pass Hydrocarbon

Ist 3D

2nd 3D
( few years later )

New infill wells

 Time Depth Conversion : Velocity Survey

Av. Velocity Interval Velocity

*
Depth

Thick gas Interval

** Very hard Formation interval

*
*
Overpressure zone
*
**
*
TD
 Depth Structure Map
3D seismic : Faulted doomal anticline with radial and concentric faults

PGCE 2010
 Depth Structure Map

2060

3 1

2040 2020

R10 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP

Contour Interval : 25 m
Date :
Author :
Scale : 1:25,000

1 KM
 Depth Structure Map

Est . OWC

ODT
2
OUT
2060

3 1

2040 2020

GOC
ODT

R10 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP N

N
Contour Interval : 25 m
Date :
Author :
Scale : 1:25,000

1 KM
GEOHAZARD / HSE
DRILLING & surface facilities
 Site Survey

A site survey will be conducted prior any well drilling or surface facilities installation, which includes acquiring and interpretation
of high resolution shallow seismic data .
Geo Hazard /HSE
Well 1 Well 2
0

0.5

1.0

1.5
 Geomatics

LINE SA 201678
Site Survey

LINE SA 201676
LINE SA 201618

1
LINE SA 201620

LINE SA 201022

Fault
Abandoned well head
LINE KA 198522
Shallow gas
Optimal location of future platforms
Abandoned channel Site Survey
Propose new pipeline Interpretation
Scale 1:25000
Carbonate streak
Object not in historical record 1 KM
 Site Survey
Side-Scan Sonar Images : Seabed obstacles
 Site Survey Impact
Sinking of a drilling rig due to gas hazard
GEOLOGY
DATA ACQUISTION & ANALYSIS
 Reservoir Analog : Outcrop

Sandstone

Shale

Warta Geology 20011 V 37/1

 Reservoir Analog : Core

Samples cut
for further
geological &
engineering
analysis
Oil & Gas Fields (Pen Malaysia )

PGRM 1999
Geological Model : Regional Setting

PGRM 1999
Oil & Gas Fields Distribution

PGRM 1999
Depositional Model

PGCE 2010

PGCE 2010
WELL CORRELATION
 Well Correlation Workflow
Well-Seismic Calibration

Key Markers for Datuming

Quantitative lithology & facies correlation

Stratigraphic & facies model

Fluid types posting

Seismic Attributes & Engineering Data Integration

Depth Structure map & cross section validation

 Core Analysis
Analysis Type Application

Stratigraphic column of deep cored interval of well BA-18 (Late Miocene)

 Stratigraphy

Generalized stratigraphy, hydrocarbon occurrences, and structural history of the Malay Basin ( EPIC 1994)
 Reservoir Analysis
Well Well
Determined
Field Wide

From Well Logs,

Seismic Lines,
100's m
Statistical
Modeling,
etc.

1-10 km
Sandstone
Interwell

Reservoir
10s m

100's m

1-10's m
Well-Bore

10-100's
10-100's mm
microm
Unaided Eye
Hand Lens or
Petrographic or Binocular Microscope
Scanning Electron
Microscope
 Reservoir Correlation Possibility
Correlation Result 1 Correlation Result 2 Correlation Result 3
A A C A
C C

Datum Datum Datum

Dependent on Depositional environment and other geophysical and engineering data

 Reservoir Correlation Uncertainty
Correct reservoir correlation is critical in FDP
More data integrated the more accurate the correlation
Well A Well B Well C Well D

Datum
(Flooding surface)

Barrier /buffer
Fault
 Correlation Validation : Seismic Calibration
Well 1 Well 2

Reservoir A

Reservoir B Reservoir A

Shale out
 Correlation Validation : Seismic Attributes

3 1 2 4

K10
1 2
K20B
4
K20A
K20

3D Horizon Slice & Attribute Analysis

Channel features
 Correlation Validation : (Pressure / Production Test )
GR Well 3 GR Well 1 GR Well 2

1a 2a
3a
1b
2b
1c
3b
1d

3c Pressure Pressure

1 1
**
a1b **
a1b
GOC
GOC 1c
1c
** **

Depth
Critical data :
Depth

1d 1d
Pressure Data & Production Test 2a 2a
Confirm fluid contact ** 2b
3a ** * 2b 3a
3b
3c
Confirm fluid types
Reservoir continuity & quality
** 3b
*
3c
Tight ** Tight
(Invalid test) (Invalid test)
Fault / geological barriers
Geopressure
Case 1 Case 2
 Correlation Validation: Structural Cross section
w 3 1 2 E
Depth

Proven Gas

Proven Oil
 Correlation Validation : Depth Structure Map

Est . OWC

ODT
2
OUT
2060

3 1

2040 2020

GOC
Potential new
ODT appraisal well
location

R10 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP N

N
Contour Interval : 25 m
Date :
Author :
Scale : 1:25,000

1 KM
 Correlation Validation : Reservoir Map

10 10
20 10

2
20

10

3 1

R10 Gross Thickness Map N

Contour Interval : 25 m
Date :
Author :
Scale : 1:25,000
30 30 20
10 20 10 1 KM
 GEOLOGY
Depositional ENVORONMENT
 Depositional Model
Depositional Setting : Reservoir Level

PGCE 2010
RESERVOIR MODELLING
 Reservoir modelling Workflow
Data QC

Fault & Horizon Frame work

Gridding

Petrophysical Integration l

Geophysical Integration

Reservori Engineering integration

Reservoir Model
 Reservoir Modelling Process
(Workstation application )
Gridding
Fault & Horizon Framework

Reservoir Properties Population & Integration

Output
1. 3D Geological /
Reservoir Model

2. Volumetric
 Geological /Reservoir Modelling
Regional Setting Field Analog Seismic
Attributes

Reservoir map
Well Correlation
Core

Geological /
Reservoir
Model

Log Evaluation Drilling performance Production history Test Data

 Depositional Model

Characterization of depositional environments in Malaysia Basins using foraminifera and palynomorphs. (PRGM 1999 )
 Depositional Model
Depositional Model based on Core & Logs

GSM Bulletin No:47, 2003

 Deep Water Environment
Depositional model : Canyon complex pattern from Isopach ( equal thickness) map

PGCE 2010
RESource Estimation
 Resource Estimation Methods

Analogy

Volumetric method :

Depth Area method

Net Hydrocarbon Sand method

Net Hydrocarbon Pore Volume method

Material Balance Method

Decline Curve analysis

Reservoir Simulation
 Probabilistic Method

GBV * N/G * POR * Sh

* FVF

1.0
P(90)

Frequency
Cumulative Probability
Distribution
Cumulative Probability

P(50) Mode
(Most Likely )

Minimum Volume Maximum

N/G
Porosity
P(10) Sh

0
Low Median High Volume
Mode
 Net Hydrocarbon Pore Volume Method
Method 1. EOC Map

GBV X Porosity X Sh = Equivalent Oil column

Method 2. EOC per well / Reservoir

GBV X Porosity X Sh = Equivalent Oil/Gas column

 Volumetric Method: Oil ( Imperial )

STOIIP = 7758 x GRV x N/G x Por x Sh x 1

Boi

Unit
STOIIP : Standard Tank Oil Initial In Place barrels
GRV : Gross Bulk Volume acre ft
N/G : Net / Gross fraction of 1
Por : Porosity fraction of 1
Sh : Hydrocarbon Saturations (1- Sw) fraction of 1
Boi : Intial oil shrinkage factor reservoir barrels / stocktank barrels
 Volumetric Method: Oil ( Metric )

GIIP = GRV x N/G x Por x Sh x 1

Boi

Unit
STOIIP : Standard Tank Oil Initial In Place cubic meter
GRV : Gross Bulk Volume cubic meter
N/G : Net / Gross fraction of 1
Por : Porosity fraction of 1
Sh : Hydrocarbon Saturations (1- Sw) fraction of 1
Boi : Initial oil shrinkage factor cubic meter /stocktank cubic meter
 Volumetric Method: Gas ( Imperial )

GIIP = 43560 x GRV x N/G x Por x Sh x 1

Bg
Unit
GIIP : Standard Tank Oil Initial In Place barrels
GRV : Gross Bulk Volume acre ft
N/G : Net / Gross fraction of 1
Por : Porosity fraction of 1
Sh : Hydrocarbon Saturations (1- Sw) fraction of 1
Bgi : Initial gas expansion factor reservoir barrels / stocktank barrels

Bgi = Psc x Tf x Zi
Tsc Pi

Psc - pressure at standard condition ( Psia)

Tsc - tempreature at standard conditions (( R)
Tf - temperature of formation ( R)
Pi - Initial reservoir pressure ( Psia )
Zi - gas compressibility factor at Pi and Tf and R = F+ 460
 Volumetric Method: Gas ( metric )

GIIP = GRV x N/G x Por x Sh x 1

Bg
Unit
GIIP : Gas Initial In Place cubic meter
GRV : Gross Bulk Volume cubic meter
N/G : Net / Gross fraction of 1
Por : Porosity fraction of 1
Sh : Hydrocarbon Saturations (1- Sw) fraction of 1
Bgi : Initial gas expansion factor cubic meter / stoktank barrels

Bgi = Psc x Tf x Zi
Tsc Pi

Psc - pressure at standard condition (kPa)

Tsc - tempreature at standard conditions ((K)
Tf - temperature of formation ( K
Pi - Initial reservoir pressure ( kPa )
Zi - gas compressibility factor at Pi and Tf and K = C+ 273
 Boi and Bgi

Boi
Oil shrinkage at surface condition
- Solution gas
- Temperature

Derived from analysis of fluid sample (preferably subsurface sample )

Bgi
Gas expands as pressure reduce to surface condition

Derived from:
- Reservoir pressure
- Reservoir compressibility factor
 Resource Estimation Uncertainty

Hydrocarbon In -Place
60%

40%

20%

-20%

-40%

-60%

Gross Net Water Porosity Formation Recovery

Bulk Reservoir Saturation Volume
Volume Factor
 Resource Estimation Uncertainty

Exploration Development / Production Exploration Development / Production

Uncertainty
range Field
Volume

Volume
Abandonment
Best
Field
estimate
Abandon
ment

(A large complex Oil fields )

Years Years

Theory Actual
 Contribution to Assessment Quality
Data Quantity
Eg : Well , logs , pressure , test data ,

Data Quality
Eg : Tool failure , formation damage, tool accuracy / limitation

Human Factor
Eg : Experience , Knowledge , Interpretation bias

Cost
Eg : data acquisition /analysis
 Good Evaluation Practices

Consistent assessment QC & panel review

methodology

Seek experienced / expert views

Identify & quantify key
uncertainties early
Avoid personal biasness

Update geological model with

field production or performance Team effort

Multi discipline / integrated team QC all data

Common earth / geological

model

Use fit for purpose technology

 Resource Category
In a field all the resource category must be assessed for optimal FDP evaluation
Reserves
Developed
Undeveloped
Reserves

CONTIGENT
RESOURCE
* Discovered
* Recoverable but
not producible PROSPECTIVE
RESERVES due to sub commercial, RESOURCES
* Discovered political, environment Undiscovered
* Commercial or technological reasons Prospect

Production Pre Development Exploration

Technical Risk Low Medium High

Capital Investment High Medium Low

Pay Back Time Short Medium Long

Operational Complexity High Medium Low

 Resource Reporting

Reserves (MMSTB) 1P Test of project robustness

Block 1 1P 2P* 3P
2P - Field Development Planning
L 1O 130 250 600
J 20 20 70 300 3P Future / Up side planning
Total 150 320 900

Contingent Resources (MMSTB) Speculative Resources (MMSTB)

Block 2 1C 2C 3C Block 3 1C 2C 3C

L 10 3 5 10 L 10 130 250 600

J 20 2 5 15 J 20 20 70 300
Total 5 10 25 Total 150 320 900
VOLUMETRIC ESTIMATION

DEPTH AREA METHOD

 Volumetric : Depth Area Method
Area Area
Crest

A1
Crest
A1 CF = Vol / sq. unit area

Average * A1
Reservoir A2
Thickness

A2

* A3
GOC
* A2
Depth

Depth
*
A3 OWC
* * A3

* BR
TR

A1 A2 A3
 Conclusion
KEY LEARININGPOINTS
 Geoscience Key Deliverables / Contributions
2D/3D structural , reservoir , attribute maps,
reservoir properties ,cross sections ,
Common Earth Model

Geological / Reservoir Model

Surface facilities location. STOIIP, GIIP ,

Drilling planning & execution Discovered , Undiscovered
FDP
Geo Hazard / Safety Resource Assessment

Reserves Addition Maximize Recovery

Upside potential,
Optimized well / platform location
Appraisal program,
Reservoir model update
Full field review
Specialized studies
EUR
 Integration : Information & People
Regional Setting
Seismic Attributes
Geologist Geophysicist

Geological/Reservoir Model

Volumetric

Well Correlation
Test Data
Petrophyiscist Reservoir Engineer

Facilities Engineer

Drilling Engineer Production Technologist

Drilling / Facilities Production history

Log Evaluation
BACK UP
GEOSCIENCE CONTRIBUTION

CASE STUDY :
Kinabalu Field , Sabah

Water injection plan

 Kinabalu Field, Sabah

More than 200 hydrocarbon bearing reservoir.Many contacts are inferred

GSM Bulletin No:47, 2003
3D Seismic Attribute analysis
Reservoir Continuity Analysis

GSM Bulletin No:47, 2003

 Kinabalu Field

East West Cross Section

Top L2 Reservoir
GSM Bulletin No:47, 2003
 3D Seismic Attribute analysis
Amplitude Versus Offset Analysis: Fluid Effect

GSM Bulletin No:47, 2003

Depth Structure Map

PGCE 2010
Temana : Seismic Section

Original Section

PGCE 2010
 Temana : Seismic Interpretation

Flatterned Seismic Horizon Well

Channel like feature

prospect

Flattened Section

PGCE 2010
Temana : Amplitude Analysis

PGCE 2010
 Case Study : Resource/ Reserves Growth
Untested Fault Block : Near Field Appraisal Potential

PGRM 1999
IMPACT
Prolong field life
Maximize production facilities usage
Maximise production wells usage
 Betty Field, Sarawak
Map & Schematic Cross Section

PGRM 1999
Kinabalu Main Field : North South Section

GSM Bulletin No:47, 2003

 Result : Resource Classification

Production

DISCOVERED RESERVES
TOTAL PETROLEUM

1P 2P 3P
DISCOVERED
COMMERCIAL
INITIAL- IN - PLACE

INTIAL IN -
PLACE CONTINGENT RESOURCE
DISCOVERED Low Best High
SUB COMMERCIAL
Unrecoverable
UNIDISCOVERED

PROSPECTIVE RESOURCE
Low Best High
INITIAL IN -

UNDISCOVERED
Unrecoverable
PLACE

Reserves Summary
Discovered ,Remaining quantities Probability
Commercial
(1P) Proved > 90 %
Specific date
Established operating practices (2P) Proved + Probable > 50%
Existing economic conditions (3P) Proved + Probable + Possible > 10%
Current government regulations
Reserves = Ultimate Recovery - Production
SPE-WPC-AAPG (2000)
 Resource Estimation Uncertainties
Contributing Factors
Quality of Information
Quantity of Information
Assessment Methodology used
Experience Level of Assessor
Assumptions made
Technology Advancement
 Geoscience Assessment Characteristic

Geological process - Present reflects Past

Field Outcrop as Analog

Macro to Micro measurements

Geostatic Application

Uncertainty and Risk quantification

Geological / Reservoir modeling

Assumptions

Start and End with DATA

 Geophysical QC Checklist

Well- Seismic calibration & Cross Section across field

Time & Depth structure map of reservoir

Structural Analysis

Velocity Analysis & Time Depth conversion

Reservoir Attribute analysis , map & Cross Section

Geophysical uncertainty, risk & mitigation proposal

Geo hazard analysis , map & section

 Geological QC Checklist

Stratigraphic column, geological setting & tectonic history

Reservoir level correlation & facies analysis

Reservoir special studies e.g. core

Reservoir model , map & cross section

Input parameter for volumetric and justification

Volumetric result and uncertainty range

Geological uncertainty, risk & mitigation proposal