you apparently didn't bother to read anything I wrote.
Thats a silly thing to say considering that I directly quoted from what you wrote in your post, wrote that I agreed with it, and then made further comments on the same subject.
Cheers!
you apparently didn't bother to read anything I wrote.
evilgenius wrote:What happens if there is a revolution in Saudi Arabia, and the overall philosophy behind managing production changes? .... Is it possible to run Ghawar hard, and put it away wet
evilgenius wrote:....wouldn't that make the picture look bleak, perhaps bleaker than it really was? I ask this because I'm trying to get a handle on the implications regarding war, if the US stumbles in the coming decade either with its shale position or its adoption of electric vehicles.
Why did Ghawar’s production decline? Since the field still has 48 billion barrels of proved reserves (according to Aramco’s numbers), maintaining 5 mb/d should be technically easy. However, the field is not a stand-alone operation; Aramco has a choice of investments among numerous fields, and explicitly chose to add capacity elsewhere, as proven by the fact that the national capacity is 12 mb/d, showing no signs of decline.
Why invest in other fields instead of Ghawar? The economically rational explanations would be that the company wanted to exploit more favorable pricing for different crude qualities or that additional capacity in other fields had become cheaper because of geological, engineering, or geographical reasons.
Here is an article written by Michael Lynch for Forbes that states exactly what I had suggested with regards to Ghawar and the MSC.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2019/04/05/declining-production-at-saudi-arabias-largest-oil-field-is-not-cause-for-concern/#19276aa2001bWhy did Ghawar’s production decline? Aramco ....chose to add capacity elsewhere
Both you and Michael Lynch seem unaware of the fact that Saudi Aramco actually did invest new money into Ghawar---they started a new CO2 injection program there in 2015 in an attempt to maintain oil production at Ghawar.
However, in spite of this new program and the increased spending on Ghawar, the recent independent review of Aramco's oil fields shows that oil production has fallen at Ghawar to the point that its now down over 20% from its peak a few years ago.
....carbon storage through CO2 injection....
there should be no problem whatsoever producing at 5 MMB/d ....
You and Michael Lynch are not allowed your own set of facts. Your claim that Ghawar's falling rate of oil production would be reversed if only they spent some money on more drilling and modern EOR recovery methods ignores the fact that Aramco already is doing more drilling and spending more money on a modern CO2 EOR project---and it didn't work well enough to warrant expanding the program.
Saudi Aramco has been actively engaged in carbon management initiatives within the oil industry. A comprehensive research framework has been developed for CCS, including CO2 capture (mobile capture, oxy-fuel combustion, and chemical-looping combustion), storage, and EOR technologies (Al-Meshari, 2011). EOR is of particular interest to Saudi Aramco as it can be a win-win solution to the challenges of rising world energy demand and climate change, by increasing oil production while reducing CO2 emissions. Saudi Aramco is working on the first CO2-EOR demonstration project in Saudi Arabia. This project will be implemented in a small part of the 'Uthmaniyah area of the giant Ghawar field, which was discovered in 1948 and started to produce oil in 1951
While Saudi Arabia has abundant conventional oil reserves and EOR is not required at production scale for decades to come, the main objective of the CO2-EOR project is to assess the applicability to sequester CO2 in a mature zone within an oil reservoir. [/quote]You and Michael Lynch are not allowed your own set of facts. Your claim that Ghawar's falling rate of oil production would be reversed if only they spent some money on more drilling and modern EOR recovery methods ignores the fact that Aramco already is doing more drilling and spending more money on a modern CO2 EOR project---and it didn't work well enough to warrant expanding the program.
Neither of us said anything whatsoever about spending money on EOR in Ghawar. The four wells in the test program were not done to manage production at Ghawar, the increase is so small as to not be noticeable. The type of spending that is needed to have any impact is additional laterals in MRC wells. As various laterals decrease in oil production they need to be shutoff and a new lateral drilled with an expandible liner. Choosing not to do that results in lower production. You suggest the CO2 project was done with the intention of increasing Ghawar production and nowhere has ARAMCO stated that, in fact just trying to imagine that 4 wells in a depleted part of the field could make any difference whatsoever is ridiculous.The field has been producing for over half a century now. Parts of Ghawar now have a 98% water cut. Thats extremely high. That means the Saudis can drill and do CO2 EOR all they want, and they still aren't going to get much oil out of those parts of Ghawar.
It isn't too hard to figure that as parts of Ghawar are depleted of oil, the overall production capacity will fall. And thats just what has been reported.
Except the 48 billion bbls of oil remaining are not in the depleted parts of Ghawar. What part of 48 billion bbls reserves do you not understand?An independent review of Saudi Aramco's oil production facilities just released as part of their current bond proposal reports that the actual current maximum production rate possible at Ghawar today is only 3.8 MMB/d.....and thats far below the number you put forward just above and down more than 20% from estimates of Ghawars production capacity made by the EIA and other analysts just a few years ago.
The type of spending that is needed .... is additional laterals in MRC wells.
Hahahaahahah! Do you really think the armies of engineers and consultants who work for Saudi Aramco haven’t thought of that?
Back here in the real world Aramco has been drilling and completing new MRC wells at Ghawar more or less continuously since at least 2004. AND Satellite surveys show the drilling activity in the Ghawar field has recently increased, suggesting Aramco may be trying to slow the production decline.
However, in spite of all the new drilling, production has now fallen more than 20% at Ghawar.
They were continually drilling new laterals from the MRC wells in order to maintain production .....
Yes, thats what I've just explained to you twice now. I'm glad to see you got it this time.
The four wells in the test program were not done to manage production at Ghawar, the increase is so small as to not be noticeable. The type of spending that is needed to have any impact is additional laterals in MRC wells. As various laterals decrease in oil production they need to be shutoff and a new lateral drilled with an expandible liner.
Your claim that all they need to do to boost production at Ghawar is start drilling MRC wells is silly, since they have been drilling for decades, and yet it hasn't stopped a significant fall in production revealed in the recent bond report.
......
MSC refers to the average maximum number of barrels per day of crude oil that can be produced for one year during any future planning period, after taking into account all planned capital expenditures and maintenance, repair and operating costs, and after being given three months to make operational adjustments. The Company incurs substantial costs to maintain MSC and, although the Company has historically utilised a significant amount of this spare capacity, there can be no assurance that it will do so in the future. In addition, the Government has decided in the past and may in the future decide to increase MSC.
The Company actively manages its prolific reserves base in accordance with the Kingdom’s laws and regulations to maximise long-term value while optimising ultimate recovery from its fields. Because of the size and number of its fields and MSC, the Company is able to maintain its desired level of overall production by tapping into new reservoirs when required to improve long term value through portfolio capacity optimisation. This approach, which differs from the typical industry practice of maximising production rates per field, is more capital efficient given the nature of the resources available and leads to more stable production and higher ultimate oil recoveries.
Furthermore, the Company’s MSC and integrated logistics network allow it to vary crude oil production, which combined with their compatibility with global refining systems, provides the Company with a unique ability to respond to changes in demand for the Company’s crude oil grades.
it isn't MPC it is MSC...maximum spare capacity.
I know all these acronyms can be confusing, but nonetheless it is highly amusing when someone gets on a high horse and pretends to be an expert on a topic then makes a boneheaded error.
... the acronym MSC which is used continuously in the document is not defined as Maximum Sustainable Capacity.....
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests