Lifecycle Cost of Deepwater Production Systems

Abstract

Many cost components must be considered to determine the most cost effective deepwater production system for a particular site. Too often, only the well systems CAPEX 1 is adequately included in field development alternative studies. OPEX, RAMEX and RISKEX depend largely on reservoir characteristics, specific well system designs and operating procedures. The effect of these factors nearly always outweigh differences in well system CAPEX. Optimization of total lifecycle cost of deepwater production systems must include all of these factors.The risks associated with blowouts are often an important factor in choosing one dry tree tieback well system over another. Another important factor often overlooked is the cost of well system component failures. As oil exploration and production moves into deeper and deeper water, the costs to repair well system component failures escalate dramatically. This paper presents the methodology developed by a Joint Industry Project to quantify capital, operational, blowout risk and reliability costs associated with deepwater well systems. Five well systems have been modeled to demonstrate the methodology: a dual casing dry tree system, a single casing dry tree system, a tubing riser dry tree system, a conventional tree subsea system and a horizontal tree subsea system. Case examples demonstrate the model for these five well systems.The methodology, results and main conclusions from this Joint Industry Project are presented.

Cost benefit analysis of applying PHM for Subsea Applications

“…However, a joint industry project (JIP) analyzed these four types of expenditures for two types of subsea systems configuration (conventional trees (CTX), and horizontal trees (HTX)), for four and six subsea wells at water depths of 4000 and 6000 feet respectively, over a 10-year period. Figure 1 highlights an estimate of lifecycle cost for the eight cases of subsea field development (with CAPEX, OPEX, RISKEX, and RAMEX contributions) (Goldsmith & Ericson, 2000). The results clearly show that CAPEX and RAMEX are two major costs in the 10 years period under investigation.…”

Maintenance of subsea petroleum production systems: a case study

“…It may be necessary to shut down part of the production system due to the too high costs of the associated failure. Mainly there are two costs: the cost of maintaining the component including the vessel costs, 132 JQME 19,2 spare parts and personnel, and the loss of production associated with one or more wells (Goldsmith et al, 2001).…”

Identifying Challenges in the Maintenance of Subsea Petroleum Production Systems

“…Sometimes it is necessary to shut down part of the production system due to the associated failures costs being too high. Mainly there are two costs: the cost of maintaining the component including the vessel costs and the cost of spare parts and personnel, and the loss of production from one or more wells [18].…”