Dynamically Positioned Completion Operations Risk Analysis

Abstract

As the exploration and development of offshore energy reserves moves into ever deeper waters, the use of Dynamically Positioned (DP) vessels to undertake drilling and/or completion work is being considered as an alternative to the more traditional methods. The use of DP vessels is perceived as introducing the additional risk associated with the potential loss of station keeping during drilling or completion operations. At least one major operator is now assessing this risk and the corresponding consequences as part of the decision making process.This paper illustrates a recent study that considered a variety of deepwater completion operations by examining the following key features of the project. • The basis for the risk analysis.• The collection of input data for the model, including the contribution of expert opinion provided by Completion Engineers and DP experts. • The methodology adopted to evaluate the risk costs associated with individual operations. • The interpretation of the model outputs.Finally, examples of points at which the model may be of use within the decision making process throughout the deepwater development cycle are provided.

The impact of weather and ocean forecasting on hydrocarbon production and pollution management in the Gulf of Mexico

“…The occurrence of a hurricane warning or alarm is enough to disrupt drilling operations and a significant amount of operating time can be lost to ''false alarms'' (Barrilleaux et al, 2001;Corona et al, 1996;Rowe et al, 2001). In deepwater operations, loop currents and the eddies may damage drilling strings/risers and impact the drilling schedule (Epps, 1997).…”

An integrated FMEA and MCDA based risk management approach to support life extension of subsea facilities in high-pressure–high-temperature (HPHT) conditions

“…Helmer et al (1994) described how the risks associated with field development in Arctic regions could be minimized by modifying the equipment units. Barrilleaux et al (2001) performed a risk analysis on dynamically positioned (DP) vessels undertaking the drilling and/or completion works in offshore fields. Ward et al (2001) conducted a comprehensive analysis to identify the risks associated with deep-water operations in the GoM.…”

Estimating the economic benefits of regional ocean observing systems

“…Method 2: Non-market Valuation Current total non-market value of water related activities x (additional beach days/ total beach days) = change in non-market value $1 billion 18 x (0.0035) = $3,500,000 18 The estimates of Hanemann et al are not weighted to reflect sampling bias and so should be considered an order of magnitude estimate for non-market swimming values.…”

“…The occurrence of a hurricane warning or alarm is enough to disrupt drilling operations, and a significant amount of operating time can be lost to "false alarms" [18][19][20]. In deepwater operations, loop currents and eddies associated with them are also common phenomena that may damage drilling strings/risers and impact the drilling schedule [21].…”

“…Second, it may be the case that a proportional increase in beach opportunities will not lead to a proportional increase in beach visits of the same size. Therefore, our estimates of the value of a proportional change in beach expenditures also should be considered an upper bound.Method 2: Non-market Valuation Current total non-market value of water related activities x (additional beach days/ total beach days) = change in non-market value $1 billion 18 x (0.0035) = $3,500,000 18 The estimates of Hanemann et al are not weighted to reflect sampling bias and so should be considered an order of magnitude estimate for non-market swimming values. …”