Anda di halaman 1dari 40

Prospect evaluation, resource

assessment and risking

Prospect evaluation

Knut Henrik Jakobsson


Norwegian Petroleum Directorate

Inger Fjrtoft
Purposes of prospect evaluation
by the government

Basis for recommendation for which blocks


should be awarded and proposals for work
commitment for licenses
4700

Basis for evaluation of applications for 4600

4500

licenses or bidding rounds 4600


4500 4400

A state participation can be decided on basis


4700 4500

4400
4500

of the evaluation carried out by the 4500

government in addition to the 4600

applicants/bidders
0 0,5 1
Km
The Norwegian licensing round

Announcement
Nomination Announcement Application Award

Negotiation

NPD performs own evaluations


of announced areas. This forms
an important basis for the
evaluation of applications.
Volumetric calculation

What is the recoverable hydrocarbon quantities of this accumulation ?


The Volumetric Function

Rvol x N/G x por x Shc x F.v.factor x Rec.f.

Recoverable resources

In-place resources
(HCPV at surface conditions)

HCPV (hydrocarbon porevolume)


HCPV
(hydrocarbon pore volume)

Rockvol x Net/Gross x porosity x Saturationhc

trap reservoir
definition parameters
The rock volume

Interpretation and mapping


Seismic interpretation
Digitizing, map construction
Depth conversion
Geometric description
l Vertical closure
l Spillpoint relations
l Trap fill
l Uncertainties in interpretation, mapping and depth
conversion
The trap

top surface
vertical
closure spillpoint

HC-contact

bottom surface

ROCK VOLUME OF THE TRAP =


The volume between the top surface and the HC-contact
minus
the volume between the bottom surface and the HC-contact
The maps
4700

4600 Top surface


4500

4500 4400
4600

4700 4500

4400
4500

Bottom surface
4500

4600

0 0,5 1
Km

A bottom surface map is not required, when:


- the reservoir thickness > vertical closure
- the reservoir thickness is constant
Gross rock volume,
some North Sea fields
53000
14000
12000
Gross rock volume, mill m3

10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Troll Frigg Heimdal E. Frigg
A.
HCPV
(hydrocarbon pore volume)

Rockvol x Net/Gross x porosity x Saturationhc

trap reservoir
definition parameters
Reservoir description

Simplified litostratigraphy GR Sonic


Reservoir parametres

Reservoir thickness (constant or variable)


Net/gross ratio (average)
porosity (average; > cut-off value)
HC-saturation (average)
Gross thickness

Should be taken care of in the mapping


procedure...

top surface

Gross thickness

bottom surface
Net pay

NET PAY = a
b
The total thickness of c
all reservoir units (a-h) d
with e
f
porosity > threshold value
and
permeability > threshold value g
h
Porosity

Calculated from electric


well logs
Core measurements

Average porosity larger


than cut-off value
Poroperm plot
porosity
30 %
Measured porosities
and permeabilities
25 %
are plotted in a XY-
diagram...
20 %

15 %

10 %
...in order to
5%
establish the cut-off
value of efficient
0% porosity
0,1 1,0 10,0 100,0 1000,0

permeability (md)
HC-saturation

Hydrocarbon saturation is the


pore volume fraction which
contains hydrocarbons
SHC = 1 - Swater

Hydrocarbon saturation (SHC) is estimated


from log analysis
Only zones with efficient porosity are
included
Spread in input data

min. expected max.


rock volume x x x
net/gross ratio x x x
porosity x x x
hydrocarbon saturation x x x

= Hydrocarbon pore volume (HCPV)


In-place resources

Surface conditions (p0, T0)

Reservoir conditions (pR, TR)

When we move hydrocarbons (HCPV) from the reservoir to the


surface, physical conditions as pressure and temperature are
changed...
the oil volume is shrinking, and
the gas volume is expanding
Oil to the surface...
ass. GAS
Surface P (surface)
conditions T (surface)
V (surface)
OIL

P (reservoir)
Reservoir T (reservoir)
conditions OIL V (reservoir)
In-place resources

In-place resources =
HCPV x Formation volume factor

GOIP - Gas Originally in-place


STOOIP - Stock tank Oil originally in-place
Recoverable resources

Recoverable resources =
In-place resources x recovery factor

Depending on drive mechanisms and


production strategy, the recovery factor in
general varies:

between 50 and 80 % for gas


between 25 and 70 % for oil
Recovery factors for some
Norwegian oil fields
70 % 70 %

60 % 60 % Ekofisk
Eldfisk
Valhall
50 % 50 %

40 % 40 %

30 % 30 %

20 % Statfjord 20 %
Gullfaks
10 % Oseberg 10 %

0% 0%
76 80 82 85 91 94 73 76 80 82 85 91 94

Middle Jurassic sandstones Cretaceous chalk


(carbonates)
Recoverable and in-place
resources
mill Sm 3 o.e.
1200

1000
resources remaining in res.
recoverable resources
800

600

400

200

0
HCPV - prognosis vs result
There is clearly a tendency
to overestimate HCPV
The same conclusion can be
109 made for BRV, HCCOL, and
reservoir thickness
The wider result distribution
Results (Sm3)

108 as compared to prognosis


distribution indicates that
industry estimates a too
107 narrow range of most likely
outcomes
106

HCPV
30

106 107 108 109 25


Prognosis
Prognosis (Sm3)

No. of Prospects
20

15 Result

10

106 107 108 109


Conclusions,
- volume assessments
As explorers, we find less than we predict.
Explorationists put too narrow ranges on possible
outcomes for field sizes and volumetric parameters.
The above statements are generally valid for any
play and trap type, phase, pre-drill probability of
discovery and distance to nearest well, however
there is a tendency to do better in regions of longer
exploration history.
Bulk Rock Volume (and behind that hydrocarbon
column) is clearly the parameter explaining most of
the differences between pre- and post-drill
hydrocarbon pore volume.
Recommendations,
- volume assessments
We need to improve our volume and parameter
estimations!

Expand ranges of possible outcomes for the volumetric


parameters. Our prediction capabilities are poor.
Uncertainties related to seismic interpretation, depth
conversion, and petrophysical parameter prediction are
larger than what is generally perceived

Spend the time evaluating a prospect according to the


importance of the parameters.

Bulk Rock Volume should get the highest attention


Risking resources
- geological risk
analysis
Inger Fjrtoft
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
Petrad course: Policy and management of petroleum sector development,
Stavanger
September 2006
Risk analysis

What is the chance of finding the


minimum amount of recoverable
hydrocarbons as estimated in the
prospect assessment ?
Some Definitions

There is a RISK that I


am going to fall off this
cliff and I am
UNCERTAIN how far it
is to the bottom!
Risk - Probability

probability

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1

risk

Probability = 1 - Risk
Success rate

no. of hits
Success rate = no. of trials = 8/14 = 0.57
Probability categories

Stochastic probabilities
- measured values
- success rates, etc
Objective probabilities
- logical arguments,
- analogue events, etc
Subjective probabilities
- beliefs,
- guts feeling, etc
The independent risk factors
- NPDs risk factors

Probability of discovery:
P = P1 x P2 x P3 x P4

...where:
P1 - probability of efficient reservoir
P2 - probability of efficient trap
P3 - probability of efficient source &
migration
P4 - probability of efficient retention after
accumulation
Probability of discovery

The estimated prospect probability is


not the probability of making a
discovery, but:

The probability of finding at least the


minimum quantity of hydrocarbons we
estimated in the resource assessment.
Reconstruction of the
hydrocarbon accumulation process
time

P1:
deposition
of reservoir

P2:
trap
formation

P3:
generation,
migration and
accumulation
of hydrocarbons P4:
retention of
hydrocarbons
burial
after accumulation
Sum up - Main
principles
Independent risk factors for:
The probability of finding at least the
minimum quantity of hydrocarbons we
estimated in the resource assessment.
Probability of discovery
SUCCESS RATE
100 %

High risk prospects


are risked too low 80 %

Low risk prospects are OPTIMISTIC


60 %
risked too high

FUNNFREKVENS
40 %

20 %

PESSIMISTIC
0%
(0-19%) (20-39%) (40-59%) (60-79%) (80-99%)

FUNNSANNSYNLIGHET

PROBABILITY OF DISCOVERY
Prospect prognosis and drilling results:
Analysis of discoveries from 1990-2002

50%
In place (Mill. b o.e.)

45,000

40,000
Prognosis prior to drilling Status 2002
35,000

30,000

25,000
50%
20,000

15,000
35% 85%
10,000

5,000

0
Total Oil Gas