Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The Decline of the Production Curve and MRE

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

The Decline of the Production Curve and MRE

Unread postby Permanently_Baffled » Thu 30 Jun 2005, 16:52:30

Good evening all.

Right, I need to ask some more questions. These are genuine questions as I do not fully understand the process of oil extraction. Please do not flame me to death , I'm just trying to learn (I feel like a Burger king burger sometimes :-D )

From what I read on this site (and others) one of the biggest fears is that oil producers like SA, Iran , Kuwait , UAE etc etc will face rapid decline rates because of using MRE methods to extract their oil. This allows maximum short term production, but then the field declines faster and reduces the URR of the field. This means that post peak we could be facing Year on Year decline rates of 10% +! 8O Which in short , means we are all screwed... :cry:

Now this is where I have the problems understanding. Apart from the last 2 years or so , many oil producers (mainly OPEC) were producing way under there production maximums because of the slump in the price throughout he 80's and 90's. So why would they use MRE methods? Surely if oil producers are producing way below there capacity, by definition, they are not using MRE? If this is the case, the decline rate would be slower post peak?

My next query is that of the US. Now I can understand that there average decline rate since 1970 has been aided by new GOM and Alaskan production. However both of these areas have been in decline for sometime and yet decline rates have still been in the 1.5-3% rate per year. This is despite the US pumping at FULL CAPACITY throughout the 80's and 90's UNLIKE OPEC producers!

Lastly, why doesnt the US use MRE and the other producers do?

I am not challenging the mighty Simmons , I am just trying to understand.

I hope I am asking question others were to afraid to ask ! :razz:

PB :-D
User avatar
Permanently_Baffled
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: England

Unread postby Permanently_Baffled » Sat 02 Jul 2005, 16:05:50

FFS no responses? :lol: :razz:

Cmon Aaron , I know you must have the answer to this one !(if you don't mind :) )

PB
User avatar
Permanently_Baffled
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: England

Unread postby Hawkcreek » Sat 02 Jul 2005, 16:40:15

--
Last edited by Hawkcreek on Sun 09 Sep 2007, 18:16:02, edited 1 time in total.
Hawkcreek
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun 15 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Washington State

Unread postby Antimatter » Sat 02 Jul 2005, 23:03:03

MRE is a bit of a broad brush - the Saudi's do use branced horizontal wells and water flood but this is nothing unusual. Horizontals allow you to contact more of the reseivour and hence extract more oil with less wells (usually lower capital cost and much lower footprint than drilling lots of verticals). 4D seismic allows you to track the flow of oil in the reservior and perform infill drilling to catch pockets that would otherwise have been bypassed. Water injection typically adds several percentage points to ultimate recovery especially peripheral injection (as the Saudi's claim they do). Technology does allow a feild to be drained faster but i don't know where the idea that it decreases ultimate recovery comes from.
User avatar
Antimatter
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue 04 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Australia

Unread postby Aaron » Sun 03 Jul 2005, 00:04:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Permanently_Baffled', 'F')FS no responses? :lol: :razz:

Cmon Aaron , I know you must have the answer to this one !(if you don't mind :) )

PB


Sorry PB... I was out dancing with painted women.

And now I'm watching PBS Austin City Limits.

For all our members who don't enjoy this programming, it's a non-commercial music show here. And it's mostly excellent.

It's Dire Straits tonight... sweet.

As far as your questions... there are quite reasonable answers, which I'll be happy to share... tomorrow... :)

The short answer is:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')ay under there production maximums


There is no transparency in SA reporting.

These fake maximums are no better a measure than their fake announcements of production increases.

These guys make ENRON look like saints.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'd')ecline rates have still been in the 1.5-3% rate per year.


Because the vast majority of these fields have been in production since Moses wore short pants. What we see in terms of decline in the US fields, is a textbook example of natural depletion.

In addition MRE is all about the geology... some fields can support pressure extraction & some are less conducive to these techniques.


Man sorry... Michael McDonald just came on... gotta bolt. :)
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Unread postby shakespear1 » Tue 05 Jul 2005, 04:35:51

The Ultimate Recovery is not a fixed number which we aim and reach. If you look at how it is arrived at and what controls it you will be amazed that we even come close to what we predict.

Assuming we know this number from God and produce the field at OPTIMUM RATES at each well we will hit this number.

What does OPTIMUM mean? This will be a TOTAL rate that will allow you to produce oil for the longest time before water/gas starts to come into the flow stream at the well. Remember, there is always water around ( bottom ) and there may be gas ( above ). These phases want to flow also and will eventually.

The rates of the oil/water/gas phases will vary depending on the bottom hole pressure you are maintaining at the well. If you lower this pressure below OPTIMUM then water/gas will start to flow faster toward the well. This is because of viscosity differences and something we call relative permeability of the particular phase.

Viscosity is easy to understand but the relative permeability may be harder. The word relative implies permeability the phase sees due to interference of the other phase next to it. In simple words, when oil and water flow together they bump each other like people on a plaza and thus slow each other down.

So ramping up rates can move you away from the OPTIMUM Recovery and you may never get back to it even if you turn the rates down after a year or two of doing this. Why? Because once water or gas creates its channels of preferred flow the oil left behind will not easily come to the well any more. It is LOST behind. Maybe after a million years this will all come to a new equilibrium and then you can start again, but by that time we will have figured out how to live on air alone.
:-D
Men argue, nature acts !
Voltaire

"...In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation."

Alan Greenspan
shakespear1
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00


Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron