SPE 106888

Field Operations Strategy Under Uncertainty in El Carito Field, North of Monagas,

Venezuela
Khan, K., SPE, Arcia, L., SPE, Quijada, Q., SPE, Rodrguez, J., SPE, Monterola, L., SPE, Otaiza, O., SPE,
Noriega, R., SPE, Vsquez, Y., Machin, J., Gonzlez, A., SPE, Figuera, L., SPE, Garca, A., SPE, Chacn, J., SPE,
Lpez, L., SPE, and Guarique, J., SPE, PDVSA, and Quiroz, F., SPE, Chacon, A., SPE, Alvarado, M., SPE, and
Saputelli, L., SPE, HalliburtonLandmark

Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and
Exhibition held in London, United Kingdom, 1114 June 2007.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract 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, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, Texas 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
El Carito field is a giant, deep onshore reservoir in East
Venezuela; and it is the second largest field in the north of
Monagas basin. Field exploitation started in 1986, and it has
been subject to a huge gas injection project to maintain 100%
fluid replacement as the optimal exploitation strategy.
Market thrust, gas utilization guidelines, and production
increase expectations were the drivers calling for
implementaation of an in-depth analysis of the reservoirs
history and forecast performance. The proposed analysis
would require the application of novel methodologies for
modeling uncertainty and for analyzing optimium scenarios.
A multi-disciplinary team for El Carito field business unit
implemented an integrated asset modeling (MIAS)
methodology for selecting the optimal field exploitation
strategy. The objective was to assure optimal short-term field
operating strategies in agreement with long-term reservoir
management objectives with social and environmental
responsibility.
This paper describes the methodology used for developing
a field operating strategy and a long term field exploitation
plan based on the analysis of historic production profiles,
drilling and workover success statistics, production
enhancement practices, and worldclass best practices
available for modeling uncertainty and for optimizating
scenario.
The applied methodology established fast and consistent,
integrated support for decisions and identified quick,
constructive actions for immediate implementation in the
field. These actions were consistent with optimal long-term
reservoir management strategy that best utilizes the subsurface
resources and the surface facilities.

Introduction
El Carito field is a giant, deep, high-pressure, onshore
reservoir in East Venezuela (Fig. 1), and it is the second
largest producing oil field in the north of Monagas basin It
contains a complex hydrocarbon column with depth-varying
composition: from free gas to condensate, volatile, black oil,
and a tar mat zone. Field exploitation started in 1986, and it
has been subject to a huge high-pressure gas injection project
since 1996 to maintain 100% fluid replacement as the optimal
exploitation strategy. This field accounts for more than 15% of
Venezuelas daily oil production and holds approximately
27% of northern Monagas Districts oil-in-place.
There were two main drivers for the execution of this
study. The first was the desire to satisfy increasing demand for
gas from the field to maintain and perhaps increase the fields
production plateau. The second was to prepare for a possible
request to increase field production from well known zones as
well as from more indeterminate, virgin zones. On the other
hand, natural gas has been found to be the most precious fuel
of the new century [Economides, 2004; Rojas, et al., 2005],
with an increasing number of market possibilities for the uses
of gas. Gas is required for social development, less expensive
environmental-friendly transportation, industrial uses, and to
fulfill neighbor countries needs.
The main challenge for this project was the determination
of a field exploitation plan that could satisfy both the shortterm operational objectives and the long-term maximization of
hydrocarbon resources. The project was to use all available
multi-disciplinary knowledge and consider all feasible
exploitation scenarios in the shortest period of time.
The main objective of this paper is to present a summary
of the applied methodology for obtaining the 20-year field
exploitation plan, considering simultaneously: (a) multidisciplinary risk and uncertainty analysis, (b) minimum
environmental risk, (c) endogenous social development, and
(d) maximum net present value created.
El Carito Field.
El Carito field is located 3 km northeast of Punta de Mata,
which is located about 50 km west of Maturin (Fig. 1). It has
an approximated area of 150 km2, and its limited by El
Furrial field on the northeast and Pirital-Santa Barbara field on

Khan, K. and others

the southwest. The field includes two reservoirs: one giant

reservoir, El Carito. El Carito reservoir is sub-divided into
three partially independent areas (North, West and Central
Carito). The field also includes a small reservoir, SBC-10, that
is also known as South Carito.
Fluid Column. The hydrocarbon column for El Carito
reservoir contains fluids with a saturation pressure and
composition that varies with depth. These fluids include gas
condensate, volatile oil, black oil, and a tar mat zone. SBC-10
reservoir fluid includes only fluid with black oil behavior.
Secondary Recovery Strategy. El Carito was discovered in
1986 and exploited by natural depletion until 1996. After
1996, a high-pressure gas injection project was adopted as the
main secondary recovery strategy.
Reservoir voidage replacement strategy is mainly
supported by one of the world largest high-pressure gas
compression project (PIGOP). These facilities inject about 980
MMSCF/D through twelve high-pressure gas injection wells.
Waterflooding has also been practiced in the North Carito
flanks.
Maintaining pressure above 7,500 psia is the key to
avoiding retrograde condensation, liquid evaporation, and
asphaltene precipitation within the reservoir levels. For these
reasons, pressure maintenance is necessary to maximize
reserve recovery.
Surface Production Facilities. Field production is
processed in four gathering stations: Muri, Musipn, Carito
and Amana. Crude oil, may have up to three operating
production trains (1200, 550 and 60 psia) with two-stage
separation for each production train. The process also includes
crude oil stabilizers, oil storage, and gas transfer pipelines.
Reservoir Liquid Recovery Efficiencies. Gas injection has
been certainly the most efficient exploitation strategy. Injected
gas maximizes oil recovery. The gas is injected into athe freegas zone and, with assistance from a favorable gravity
drainage effect, has resulted in both excellent macroscopic
and microscopic (miscible) oil sweep efficiency. However, as
oil is drained from the liquid zone, the gas cap expands and
moves downwards increasing a wells gas-oil-ratio (GOR) and
reducing macroscopic sweep efficiency. Permeable streaks are
also responsible for premature gas channeling or coning.
Limited
Injection
Gas
Availability
Constrains
Production. Limited supplies of gas and water for replacing
voidage constrain prospects for boosting oil production. Wells
with very high producing GOR are shut-off as a common
practice to maximize reservoir energy and daily production. In
addition, frequent well clean-up jobs are performed to
maintain field production at its peak potential.

MIAS El Carito
PDVSA implemented a planning methodology for selecting
the optimal field exploitation strategy. The strategy is called
MIAS (sustainable integrated asset modeling) [Khan K., 2006]
and is based on front-end-loading (FEL) methodology and risk
analysis.
Objectives. The objective of the project were twofold: (1) to
assure optimal decision making to fulfill expectations for
production increases, and (2) to optimize short-term field

SPE 106888

operating strategies in agreement with long-term reservoir

management objectives for social and environmental
responsibility.
NORTH OF MONAGAS DISTRICT

PUNTA DE MATA

MATURIN

MONAGAS STATE

EL FURRIAL

CARITO

NORTH
WEST

CENTRAL

PIRITAL

SOUTH

Fig. 1El Carito Field location and reservoirs.

An Integrated Approach. MIAS Carito integrated all

multi-disciplinary elements of the asset value chain to allow:
(a) visualization and conceptualization of multiple production
scenarios, (b) early identification of reservoir and production
operations uncertainties, and (c) well-informed optimum field
development scenario selection based on value creation and
minimum risk.
FEL Methodology. The methodology followed during
application of MIAS was based on world-class principles on
capital project planning and front-end-loading (FEL).
However, it encompassed only the visualization and
conceptualization phases of field exploitation, from reservoir
to surface. MIAS initiatives have also been applied to other
fields in northern Monagas: El Furrial [Acosta, et al., 2005]
and Orocual fields.
Alternate Feasible Scenarios. All conceptualized
scenarios satisfied expectations for production increases while
also maximizing asset value. Conceptualized scenarios
included: short-term plan optimization, additional gas
injection, nitrogen injection, nitrogen and gas mixture
injection, water and gas injection, and water-alternate-gas
(WAG) injection.
Project Duration. MIAS Carito project was developed in a
five months. Depending on the number of scenarios to
evaluate and on field complexity, the duration for
development may vary in other projects. Traditionally,
considering old organizational structures and methods, this
kind of study would have taken 12 to 18 months.
Multidisciplinary Team Collaboration. A full-time multidisciplinary team was put together to develop the MIAS Carito
project in conjunction with many part-time supporters from
other disciplines. The team was provided with cutting edge
technology to integrate data from multiple data sources
(Landmark Graphics, 2005).
The full-time team included one leader, one geologist, two
reservoir development engineers, three simulation engineers,
one production engineer, one drilling engineer, two process

SPE 106888

Field Operations Strategy under Uncertainty in El Carito Field, North of Monagas, Venezuela

engineers, one economist, one facilitator, and one integration

engineer.
The team was isolated from day-to-day work and focused
in the MIAS effort only. The team had continuous awareness
of daily field performance. They benefited from continuous
team building activities and daily face-to-face meetings.
MIAS Carito Methodology. MIAS philosophy can be
applied to any field exploration, field development, or field
production optimization challenge. It assumes that all
reservoir characterization (3D geo-cellular models) and
dynamic reservoir history-match tasks have been completed.
For El Carito field, MIAS project started with some
growth expectations from management (Fig. 2).
The extended MIAS team (full and part time members)
gathered initially to brainstorm on current field status facts
and opportunities that would lead to the visualization of
potential scenarios. This meeting kicked off the visualization
phase.
After reviewing all scenarios generated during
brainstorming, all identified risk and uncertainties are
evaluated, documented, resolved, or quantified with respect to
their impact over the overall project outcomes. Peer review
meetings were executed periodically to validate MIAS project
deliverables with outside experts.
Quantification of scenarios was performed with simulation
models, that had been previously history-matched. Asset
performance was captured by a subsurface-to-surface
operations model that considers all the components of the
production chain from all the wellheads to the transfer points.
Results from item 3) (see Fig. 2, point 3) are then
reviewed, approved, optimized, and enhanced by further
iterations of the 1-2-3 workflow. A number of scenarios are
then selected and taken to conceptualization. Here, the
objective is to evaluate a smaller number of scenarios and to
discard the less feasible ones.
1) Brainstorm potential scenarios
Growth
Expectations

Review, approve,
optimize and
continue

Review and
validate
Focus in Fast and Exact
decisions not in
precision
2) Evaluate risk and
uncertainties

3) Multiple Scenario
Economic Evaluation

Peer Reviews

Fig.2MIAS Carito methodology.

El Carito Field Uncertainties

In planning and developing a number of hydrocarbon fields,
operators face a number of questions that will influence their
decisions [Solis, et al., 2004]. These questions are:
How will reservoir property uncertainties affect the oil
production plateau for the period specified?
And how will those properties affect project economics?
Do we know the associated risks of the investments?
Which information is more critical for project success?
What is the optimum development scenario?
Associated Uncertainties To Project Execution. Project
execution bottlenecks need to be considered during any
project planning [Saputelli, et al., 2002]. Uncertainty analysis
must consider internal and external factors. Internal factors
include static and dynamic subsurface uncertainty, geology
and engineer engineering study readiness, material
procurement, and training of specialized software personnel.
External factors may include rigs availability, project
financing, compliance of contractors and suppliers, cancelled
tendering processes, legal regulations of federal governments,
inflation, exchange rate fluctuation, fiscal liabilities, market
conditions, finance uncertainty, manpower uncertainty,
environmental impact, and adverse weather conditions.
MIAS Carito Uncertainties. Uncertainties analyzed in the
MIAS Carito project are listed in Table 1.
Consistent Uncertainty Analyses. MIAS Carito completed
a systematic and consisten analysis of the above mentioned
uncertainties. This analysis required the application of novel
methodologies for uncertainty modeling and scenario
optimization analyses [Cullick, et al., 2003; Narayanan, et al.,
2003], as well as the application of integrating technologies
[Landmark Graphics, 2005].

Development Scenarios for El Carito

Decisions during Field Development. Integrated asset
management is the recurring process in which field operators
use data and expertise to optimize the reservoir profitability or
some other stated objective about the fields performance. A
common list of objectives of reservoir management may
include items such as decreasing risk, increasing oil and gas
production, increasing oil and gas reserves, maximizing
recovery, and minimizing capital expenditures all done to
minimize operating costs and maximize profitability.

Khan, K. and others

SPE 106888

Static Subsurface Uncertainties

Dynamic Subsurface Uncertainties

Surface Uncertainties

Reservoirs vertical and area limits

Productivity and injectivity

Facilities uptime and availability

Abnormal pore pressure

Equation of State validity for N2

Drilling rig availability

North-Central-West Communication

Gas injection in the liquid zone

Project execution time

Rock wettability

p to avoid asphaltene precipitation

Well intervention success

Pore throat radius distribution

Max.m watercut for natural flow

Actual well start date

Tar mat characterization

Induced fracture characterization

Alternate uses of gas

Pirital field fault extensions

Wellhead pressure and flow rates

Gas availability

Cretaceous sedimentology characteriz.

Alternate recovery methods eff.

Water availability

South Carito porosity distribution

Aquifer support

Prospectivity under the tar mat

New wells potential

Table 1MIAS Carito analyzed uncertainties.

In managing reservoirs, operators are concerned about the

financial environment (oil price, market access, and available
capital), the limitations of the current infrastructure and
physical properties of the subsurface-surface system, the
confidence in the reservoir model upon which decisions are to
be based, and the intrinsic risks of the operations.
In managing oilfields, it is paramount to understand the
decision making process and time scales involved, from
exploration to production development and operations.
Decisions made during exploration phases include: to
acquire (or not to acquire) seismic and leases, to drill
exploration wells, and to reduce the uncertainties of a
subsurface model for determining commerciality and for
providing production forecasts. During field development
decisions are made on well location and number, secondary
recovery project strategy, field target rates, infill drilling
opportunities, well intervention plan, and on plans to optimize
portfolio and resources. During project execution, decisions
are made on the activities for constructing wells and facilities
while optimizing project execution time and cost, reducing
overruns and non-productive-time, and increasing project
effectiveness.
And finally, during production operations, decisions are
made on delivering integral value from separators, pipelines,
compressors, and the reservoir with its wells. Continuously
maintaining an optimum field operating point, implementing
well productivity enhancement practices, minimizing
maintenance scheduling impact and plant failures, and
maximizing plant capacity availability involve basic decisions
in delivering value.
Because of the uncertainties and risks involved in the
project execution, a risk mitigation approach is necessary to
plan for these events. We should plan for those risks that are
under our control and have a plan to mitigate those risks and,
at the same time, maximize economic value of the project.
Multi-scenario modeling considers both reservoir uncertainty
and development scenario options [Cullick, et al., 2003;
Narayanan, et al., 2003].

MIAS Carito Decisions Framework. MIAS Carito

developed a decision framework that allowed the generation
and evaluation of multiple feasible scenarios. Table 2 shows a
summary of the decisions to be made to conform to one
exploitation scenario.
Many of these decisions are exclusive-alternate scenarios
(either one or the other), and some of them are inclusive and
dependent. For example, one reservoir strategy is to maintain
the current gas injection, develop areas with uncertainties,
keep well spacing, use vertical wells while, in addition,
maintaining well productivity and maintaining existent
decisions about surface operations.
Optimal Exploitation Strategy Scenarios
Alternate Scenarios for El Carito Field. A number of
scenarios that would satisfy expectations for increased
production while maximizing asset value were conceptualized.
Fig. 3 shows the names of all evaluated scenarios including:
the base case (red), optimized short-term plan (black) with
massively completing wells in various zones, additional gas
injection (yellow), water and gas injection (blue), nitrogen
injection (cyan), nitrogen/gas mixture injection (light blue),
and water injection (green.
Notice that every scenario may not have only one strategy
but may a have combination of exploitation strategies that best
fit for every zone of the reservoir.
Probabilistic Results. Associated risk to each scenarios is
reported as percentiles: P10 (square), P50 (Circle), P90
(triangle), and the unaltered simulated data (stars).

SPE 106888

Field Operations Strategy under Uncertainty in El Carito Field, North of Monagas, Venezuela

Reservoir Exploitation Strategy

Well productivity

Surface Operations

Maintain vs. increase injected

4-in. vs. 5-in. monobore completion

Optimal separation pressures

Substitute gas by N2 injection

Optimal p to avoid asphaltene

Traditional vs. Cyclone separation

Substitute gas by Gas+N2 injection

Massive vs. selective perforations

Electrostatic dehydration

Substitute gas by water at the flanks

Multi-stage stimulation

Re-inject effluents back to reservoir

Inject water-alternate-gas at the flanks

Artificial lift Strategy

Minimize gas emissions

Produce from gas condensate zone

Oriented perforations

Minimize surface fingerprint

Develop areas with uncertainties

Inject bottomhole chemical

Minimize environment affectation

Keep well spacing vs. infill drilling

Use of automated drilling rigs

Recycle, re-inject produced water

Multilateral, deviated vs. verticals

Use of under balance drilling

New technologies for cuttings disposal

Optimum oil production plateau

Lay well tie-back during drilling

More community involvement

Promote more environmental issues

Table 2MIAS Carito Decisions Framework.

1.6

Efficient Frontier

Relative Net Present Value

Relative Oil Production (with respect to current Oil Production)

1.6

1.4

1.2

Gas Injection

Water Injection + Infill

1.4
Water Injection

Water+Gas Injection
Base+Massive
Perforations

1.2

N2 Injection
Gas + N2 Injection

1.0
Base

1.0

0.8
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Risk (%)

0.6

Fig. 4Relative net present value vs. risk for eight alternative
development scenarios.

0.4

Year

Fig. 3Relative oil production forecasts for eight alternative

development scenarios under uncertainty.

Efficient Frontier and Portfolio Analysis. Fig. 4 shows

the benefit-vs.-risk results relationship for every alternative
development scenarios under uncertainty. For massively
completed wells (yellowish green), additional gas injection
(red), water and gas injection (pale blue), nitrogen injection
(yellow), nitrogen and gas mixture injection (orange), and
water injection (light blue), and water injection (blue) with
infill drilling . Bubble size is related to cumulative reserves in
the 20-year period. A dashed, light-grey line indicates the
efficient frontiers of the project. The bubbles close to this
boundary are the more financially efficient.

Optimal Exploitation Strategy Scenarios. As a result of the

risk-based scenario ranking on this project, El Carito optimal
exploitation plan will increase current production potential by
29% in the next five years and maintain that plateau for
another six years.
The plan is based on the 40% increase of gas injection in
Central, West, and North Carito and the implementation of
one water injection project in flanks of Central Carito and
South Carito.
Major Capital Projects. In the 2007-2013 period, roughly
75 new wells must be drilled. The associated surface pipeline
network and water and gas plants must also be modified or
built. Table 3 summarizes the strategy for optimal field
development.
Bottom Line. As a result of the applied methodology,
investment efficiency was in the order of 5.4 $/$, field net
present value increased about 50% (with respect to the base
case) with an associated risk (standard deviation) of 25%.
Success Factors. The success of the proposed El Carito
integrated field exploitation plan is based on a number of
considerations. They include the early data capture to
minimize the identified uncertainties, early start of basic and

Khan, K. and others

SPE 106888

South
Carito

Additional
Gas &
Water

Additional
Investment

Additional Infrastructure

WI

WI

Yes

Yes

PIAMO is fully operating for North Carito

New water injection plant for South.

WI

WI

Yes

Yes

PIGAP III is fully operating for Central

and West Carito

Year

Central
Carito

West
Carito

North
Carito

2006

GI

GI

WI

2007

GI WI

GI

2009+

GI+ WI

GI+

WI Water Injection

GI

Gas Injection

GI+

Increased Gas Injection

Table 3Optimal field development strategy for El Carito Field.

detailed engineering about procurement and construction of

major projects, on early contracting and procurement of
drilling rig services. They also include the implementation of a
field production, optimization plan to minimize operational
problems that affect daily deferred production.
Discussion and Conclusions
This projects objective will achieve success by assuring
optimal decisions to fulfill expected production increases and
by optimizing short-term field operating strategies in
agreement with long-term reservoir management objectives in
a socially and environmentally responsible way.
MIAS Carito integrated all multi-disciplinary elements of
the asset value chain to allow: (a) visualization and
conceptualization of multiple production scenarios, (b)
identification of reservoir and production operations
uncertainties, (c) well-informed optimum field development
scenario selection based on value creation and risk reduction
and (d) plans and recommendations with high level of consent
within the organization.
Early identification of alternative plans allows for
efficient, constructive influence of the net present value of the
asset, the maximization of reserves, and, often, the reduction
of environmental impacts
Lessons learned.
As for a lesson learned the time needed for certain critical
items, such as characterizing the reservoir, simulating
reservoir performance, evaluating reserve estimates, must be
carefully planned. Otherwise, delays in their delivery may
easily cause slippage of the delivery date of an entire project.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank PDVSA for supporting this
project and permitting the publication of data.
References
Acosta L., Jimenez J., Guedez A., Ledezma E., Bello J., Millan A.,
Guzman M., Marin E., Gomez F., Herrera I., and Cordoba P.,
Integrated Modeling of The El Furrial Field Asset applying risk

and uncertainty analysis for the Decision Making, SPE Paper

No 94093, Presented at the 14th Europec Biennial Conference
held in Madrid, Spain, 13-16 June 2005
Cullick A. S, Heath D., Narayanan K., April J., Kelly J. Optimizing
Multiple-Field Scheduling and Production Strategy with
Reduced Risk, SPE 84239 presented at SPE ATCE 2003, 5-8
Oct 2003, Denver
Economides M.J., Demarchos A.S., Saputelli L., Energy Sources
and Energy Intensity for the Twenty-First Century, SPE Paper
No 75504, presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium
held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30 April2 May 2002
Khan K., Quijada D., Arcia L., Otaiza O., Noriega R., Rodrguez
J.C., Machin J., Velsquez Y., Monterola L., Saputelli L.,
Chacon A., Alvarado M.., Modelaje Integral del Activo Al
Soberano El Carito, PDVSA Internal Report, Puerto La Cruz,
Venezuela, March 2006.
Landmark Graphics, DecisionSpace Asset View, Release Notes,
2005
Narayanan K., Cullick A. S., and Bennett M., Better Field
Development Decisions from Multiscenario, Interdependent
Reservoir, Well, and Facility Simulations SPE Paper No.
79703, presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium
in Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 35 February 2003
Rojas S., Saputelli L., Economides M.J., Mexicos Influence in the
Worlds Oil and Gas Supply and Demand, SPE Paper No
93301, Presented at the 14th Europec Biennial Conference held
in Madrid, Spain, 13-16 June 2005
Saputelli L. A., Cherian B., Gregoriadis K., Nikolaou M., Oudinot C.,
Reddy G., Economides M.J., and Ehlig-Economides C.,
Integration of Computer-Aided High-Intensity Design with
Reservoir Exploitation of Remote and Offshore Locations SPE
Paper No. 64621, presented at the SPE International Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition, China, 710 November 2000
Solis R., Rojas S., Bernal G., Saputelli L, and Narayanan K., Risk,
Uncertainty and Optimization for Offshore Gas Asset Planning
in Litoral Tabasco SPE Paper No. 90177, presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Houston,
Texas, U.S.A., 2629 September 2004