In the previous article, we looked at 6 Key Well Abandonment and Decommissioning Challenges and I promised to share with you some of the latest decommissioning technologies and strategies which are in use or being developed and tested today in the Oil & Gas sector.
But first, I think it is important to explain the importance of the need for innovation to tackle the enormous challenges we face with decommissioning in the coming years. Let's do that by looking at a case study of the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS)..
Case Study - UKCS Decommissioning Challenge
The UKCS Decommissioning 2017 Cost Estimate Report provided a cost estimate for offshore oil and gas decommissioning in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) of £59.7 billion in 2016 prices. The Oil & Gas Authority (OGA) has set an ambitious target to reduce these costs by at least 35%.
“The two biggest things that will get the North Sea through the next five years are genuine collaboration and the development and application of technology ... that strategy can halve the cost of well plugging and abandonment” Sir Ian Wood
In a recent interview with Energy Voice, Sir Ian Wood summarised the way forward for decommissioning very well, highlighting a need for improvements in technology and also improved collaborations to reduce costs. In this article I will discuss both the latest decommissioning technologies and decommissioning strategies..
LATEST DECOMMISSIONING TECHNOLOGIES
1. Melting the Cap Rock
Melting the cap rock is a method of decommissioning which uses a thermite plug to seal off the well by melting both the well components and the rock formation around them to recreate the cap rock, i.e. Caprock barrier
The low-cost method of rigless well P&A was trialed onshore by Centrica in Canada in 2016, the trial results demonstrated that this technology could potentially reduce well P&A costs by more than 50%.
2. Resin Plugs
Resin has the ability to formulate completely free of solids, allowing it to penetrate microchannels and effectively seal leaks which may not be possible to seal with cement due to it’s particle size.
Resin Application in P&A includes squeezing for annular fluid flow; shut-off gas source and squeezing a previously leaking plug.
Oceaneering recently conducted the Gulf of Mexico’s first permitted lower abandonment using resin. Because there was a downhole obstruction, the operator of this particular field determined that it could not reliably carry out a lower temporary abandonment with cement.
3. Underwater Drones to Monitor Abandoned (P&A) Wells for Potential Hydrocarbon Leaks
Praxis Energy Partners have proposed an innovative cost-saving solution for postoperative surveillance to ensure a leak-free subsea well abandonment over time.
The project proposes to build an underwater drone, using passive acoustics (to "listen" for leaks), and/or sonar (to "ping" for leaks), and/or a camera (take pictures of “bubbles”).
4. Well Barrier Monitoring System
The Stuart Wright Right Time Barrier Condition (RTBC) proprietary wellbore monitoring software can be used in both the well P&A planning and execution phases to accurately capture the condition of the well prior to and during the well abandonment.
During the planning phase, RTBC can be used to create accurate as built wellbore diagrams with critical barrier integrity validation information captured through the generation of Daily Integrity Reports (DIR) performed retrospectively. The DIRs will incorporate key information from the drilling, completions, production and intervention phases to accurately capture the condition of the well and any potential barrier risks that require consideration prior to commencing the well P&A.
During the well execution phase, RTBC will create accurate as built wellbore diagrams with critical barrier integrity validation information captured through the generation of Daily Integrity Reports during the actual wells abandonment. The Daily Integrity Reports will be captured in a secured cloud database that tracks the progression of the abandonment from the perspective of ensuring the abandonment of well barriers are conducted in accordance to corporate or good abandonment practices.
(Disclaimer: I am a consultant employed by Stuart Wright)
5. Suspended Well Abandonment Tool (SWAT)
Claxton have developed a Suspended Well Abandonment Tool (SWAT) which is deployed through the moonpool, landed on the wellhead and then used to conduct casing perforation and placement of the required cement barriers in the well. It can be deployed from a vessel, removing the need for a drilling rig.
6. Gator Perforator
Lee Energy Systems have created this "REPEATABLE HYDRO MECHANICAL MULTI-USE PERFORATING SYSTEM" which can be used to perforate casing without the need for explosives. The video above demonstrates really well how the tool operates, please watch it at your convenience to find out more about this technology.7. Latest P&A Technology
Archer and Hydrawell both offer systems which can offer significant time savings, compared to a typical well P&A, by eliminating the need to perform a milling section and performing the perforation and cementing in a single trip.
"HydraWell’s technology enables plugging of each well in 2-3 days instead of 10-14 days with conventional section milling methods. This means that the operator could save up to 200 rig days on a 20-well field,” says Mark Sørheim, CEO of HydraWell.
Archer Stronghold™ Systems
Archer's Stronghold™ Barricade™ is designed to perforate selected casing or liner sections; wash and clean the perforated zone completely; then enable permanent rock-to-rock cement plugging—all during a single trip.
The HydraHemera™ system was developed to enable plugging a well across multiple annuli without performing a section milling operation.
The system consists of two components, a HydraHemera™ Jetting Tool and a HydraHemera™ Cementing Tool. The HydraHemera™ Jetting Tool is used to wash and clean out debris in the annuli behind perforated casings. It features jet nozzles which are positioned at irregular angles and engineered for optimum configuration and exit velocity. The jets penetrate and clean thoroughly behind multiple perforated casings.
The HydraHemera™ Jetting Tool ensures optimum conditions in the casing annuli prior to placing the plugging material in the cross section. Debris, old mud, barite and old cuttings are replaced by clean mud.
Using a ball drop mechanism after jetting, the HydraHemera™ Cementing Tool is activated, and combined with the HydraArchimedes™ tool enable placing plugging material in the entire cross section of multiple annuli, and hence, establishing a proper barrier in the well for P&A or sidetrack purposes.
You can view a video of the HydraHemera™ system here.
LATEST DECOMMISSIONING STRATEGIES
Historically, the oil and gas industry has not been particularly strong in collaborating and cross-sharing information. In today's low oil price environment, especially in the area of decommissioning where cost saving is paramount, there is now an increased impetus towards collaboration. Below are some examples of collaborations focused around decommissioning and well abandonment.
1. OGA Well Plug and Abandonment (P&A) Optimisation Programme
In February 2017, the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA) launched a search for operators to voluntarily participate in a multi-operator, well P&A optimisation programme.
The objective of the pilot programme is to demonstrate the cost savings which can be achieved through collaborative working, stimulate work-sharing campaigns and adopt improved execution and contracting models.
It will be interesting to see how successful this initiative is and how many Operators opt to sign up for the programme.
2. Integrated Consortiums
In answer to Operator's desire to have a single point solution for decommissioning, a number of consortiums have formed to provide such an offering. One such example is the Bureau Veritas - Stuart Wright consortium which was recently formed to support clients in the North Sea, Asia-Pacific and beyond.
Tackling the enormous challenge of decommissioning will require not only advances in technology but also smarter strategies on how to collaborate to improve efficiency, knowledge sharing and reduce costs.
I have highlighted a few examples of the latest decommissioning technologies and strategies in this article as a starting point for discussion, it would be great to use this platform to hear from you on other technologies and strategies which you have knowledge of or experience with - PLEASE COMMENT BELOW..
Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory
In both 2019 and 2020, project developers in the United States installed more wind power capacity than any other generating technology. According to data recently published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) in its Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory, annual wind turbine capacity additions in the United States set a record in 2020, totaling 14.2 gigawatts (GW) and surpassing the previous record of 13.2 GW added in 2012. After this record year for wind turbine capacity additions, total wind turbine capacity in the United States is now 118 GW.
The impending phaseout of the full value of the U.S. production tax credit (PTC) at the end of 2020 primarily drove investments in wind turbine capacity that year, just as previous tax credit reductions led to significant wind capacity additions in 2012 and 2019. In December 2020, Congress extended the PTC for another year.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly
Texas has the most wind turbine capacity among states: 30.2 GW were installed as of December 2020. In 2020, Texas generated more electricity from wind than the next three highest states (Iowa, Oklahoma, and Kansas) combined. However, Texas generates and consumes more total electricity than any other state, and wind remains slightly less than 20% of the state’s electricity generation mix.
In two other states—Iowa and Kansas—wind is the most prevalent source of in-state electricity generation. In both states, wind surpassed coal as the state’s top electricity generation source in 2019.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly
Nationally, 8.4% of utility-scale electricity generation in 2020 came from wind turbines. Many of the turbines added in late 2020 will contribute to increases in wind-powered electricity generation in 2021. EIA expects wind’s share of electricity generation to increase to 10% in 2021, according to forecasts in EIA’s most recent Short-Term Energy Outlook.
It was a good run while it lasted. Almost exactly a decade ago, the military junta in Myanmar was dissolved, following civilian elections. The country’s figurehead, Aung San Suu Kyi, was released from house arrest to lead, following in the footsteps of her father. Although her reputation has since been tarnished with the Rohingya crisis, she remains beloved by most of her countrymen, and her installation as Myanmar’s de facto leader lead to a golden economic age. Sanctions were eased, trade links were restored, and investment flowed in, not least in the energy sector. Yet the military still remained a powerful force, lurking in the background. In early February, they bared their fangs. Following an election in November 2020 in which Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) won an outright majority in both houses of Parliament. A coup d’etat was instigated, with the Tatmadaw – the Burmese military – decrying fraud in the election. Key politicians were arrested, and rule returned to the military.
For many Burmese, this was a return to a dark past that many thought was firmly behind them. Widespread protests erupted, quickly turning violent. The Tatmadaw still has an iron grip, but it has created some bizarre situations – ordinary Burmese citizens calling on Facebook and foreign governments to impose sanctions on their country, while the Myanmar ambassador to the United Nations was fired for making an anti-army speech at the UN General Assembly.
The path forward for Myanmar from this point is unclear. The Tatmadaw has declared a state of emergency lasting up to a year, promising new elections by the end of 2021. There is little doubt that the NLD will win yet another supermajority in the election, IF they are fair and free. But that is a big if. Meanwhile, the coup threatens to return Myanmar to the pariah state that it was pre-2010. And threatens to abort all the grand economic progress made since.
In the decade since military rule was abolished, development in Myanmar has been rapid. In the capital city Yangon, glittering new malls have been developed. The Ministry of Energy in 2009 was housed in a crumbling former high school; today, it occupies a sprawling complex in the new administrative capital of Naypyidaw. While not exactly up to the level of the Department of Energy in Washington DC, it is certainly no longer than ministry that was once reputed to take up to three years to process exploration licences for offshore oil and gas blocks.
And it is that very future that is now at stake. Energy has been a great focus for investment in Myanmar, drawn by the rich offshore deposits in the Andaman Sea and the country’s location as a possible pipeline route between the Middle East and inland China. Estimates suggest that – based on pre-coup trends – Myanmar was likely to attract over US$1.1 billion in upstream investment in 2023, more than four times projected for 2021 and almost 20 times higher than 2011. The funds would not only be directed at maintaining production at the current Yadana, Yetagun, Zawtika and Shwe gas fields – where offshore production is mainly exported to Thailand, but also upcoming megaprojects such as Woodside and Total’s A-6 deepwater natural gas and PTTEP’s Aung Sinka Block M3 developments.
The coup now presents foreign investors in Myanmar’s upstream energy sector with a conundrum and reputational risk. Stay, and risk being seen as abetting an undemocratic government? Or leave, and risk being flushing away years of hard work? The home governments of foreign investors such as Total, Chevron, PTTEP, Woodside, Petronas, ONGC, Nippon Oil, Kogas, POSCO, Sumitomo, Mitsui and others have already condemned the coup. For now these companies are hoping that foreign pressure will resolve the situation in a short enough timeframe to allow business to resume. Australia’s Woodside Petroleum has already called the coup a ‘transitionary issue’ claiming that it will not affect its exploration plans, while other operators such as Total and Petronas have focused on the safety of their employees as they ‘monitor the evolving situation’.
But the longer the coup lasts without a resolution satisfactory to the international community and the longer the protests last (and the more deaths that result from that), the more untenable the position of the foreign upstream players will be. Asian investors, especially the Chinese, mainly through CNPC/PetroChina, and the Thais, through PTTEP - will be relatively insulated, but American and European majors face bigger risks. This could jeopardise key projects such as the Myanmar-to-China crude oil and natural gas pipeline project (a 771km connection to Yunnan), two LNG-to-power projects (Thaketa and Thilawa, meant to deal with the country’s chronic blackouts) and the massive Block A-6 gas development in the Shwe Yee Htun field by Woodside which just kicked off a fourth drilling campaign in December.
It is a big unknown. The Tatmadaw has proven to be impervious to foreign criticism in the past, ignoring even the most stringent sanctions thrown their way. In fact, it was a huge surprise that the army even relinquished power back in 2010. But the situation has changed. The Myanmar population is now more connected and more aware, while the army has profited off the opening of the economy. The economic consequences of returning to its darker days might be enough to trigger a resolution. But that’s not a guarantee. What is certain is that the coup will have a lasting effect on energy investment and plans in Myanmar. How long and how deep is a question that only the Tatmadaw can answer.
Submit Your Details to Download Your Copy Today
The year 2020 was exceptional in many ways, to say the least. All of which, lockdowns and meltdowns, managed to overshadow a changing of the guard in the LNG world. After leapfrogging Indonesia as the world’s largest LNG producer in 2006, Qatar was surpassed by Australia in 2020 when the final figures for 2019 came in. That this happened was no surprise; it was always a foregone conclusion given Australia’s massive LNG projects developed over the last decade. Were it not for the severe delays in completion, Australia would have taken the crown much earlier; in fact, by capacity, Australia already sailed past Qatar in 2018.
But Australia should not rest on its laurels. The last of the LNG mega-projects in Western Australia, Shell’s giant floating Prelude and Inpex’s sprawling Ichthys onshore complex, have been completed. Additional phases will provide incremental new capacity, but no new mega-projects are on the horizon, for now. Meanwhile, after several years of carefully managing its vast capacity, Qatar is now embarking on its own LNG infrastructure investment spree that should see it reclaim its LNG exporter crown in 2030.
Key to this is the vast North Field, the single largest non-associated gas field in the world. Straddling the maritime border between tiny Qatar and its giant neighbour Iran to the north, Qatar Petroleum has taken the final investment decision to develop the North Field East Project (NFE) this month. With a total price tag of US$28.75 billion, development will kick off in 2021 and is expected to start production in late 2025. Completion of the NFE will raise Qatar’s LNG production capacity from a current 77 million tons per annum to 110 mmtpa. This is easily higher than Australia’s current installed capacity of 88 mmtpa, but the difficulty in anticipating future utilisation rates means that Qatar might not retake pole position immediately. But it certainly will by 2030, when the second phase of the project – the North Field South (NFS) – is slated to start production. This would raise Qatar’s installed capacity to 126 mmtpa, cementing its lead further still, with Qatar Petroleum also stating that it is ‘evaluating further LNG capacity expansions’ beyond that ceiling. If it does, then it should be more big leaps, since this tiny country tends to do things in giant steps, rather than small jumps.
Will there be enough buyers for LNG at the time, though? With all the conversation about sustainability and carbon neutrality, does natural gas still have a role to play? Predicting the future is always difficult, but the short answer, based on current trends, it is a simple yes.
Supermajors such as Shell, BP and Total have set carbon neutral targets for their operations by 2050. Under the Paris Agreement, many countries are also aiming to reduce their carbon emissions significantly as well; even the USA, under the new Biden administration, has rejoined the accord. But carbon neutral does not mean zero carbon. It means that the net carbon emissions of a company or of a country is zero. Emissions from one part of the pie can be offset by other parts of the pie, with the challenge being to excise the most polluting portions to make the overall goal of balancing emissions around the target easier. That, in energy terms, means moving away from dirtier power sources such as coal and oil, towards renewables such as solar and wind, as well as offsets such as carbon capture technology or carbon trading/pricing. Natural gas and LNG sit right in the middle of that spectrum: cleaner than conventional coal and oil, but still ubiquitous enough to be commercially viable.
So even in a carbon neutral world, there is a role for LNG to play. And crucially, demand is expected to continue rising. If ‘peak oil’ is now expected to be somewhere in the 2020s, then ‘peak gas’ is much further, post-2040s. In 2010, only 23 countries had access to LNG import facilities, led by Japan. In 2019, 43 countries now import LNG and that number will continue to rise as increased supply liquidity, cheaper pricing and infrastructural improvements take place. China will overtake Japan as the world’s largest LNG importer soon, while India just installed another 5 mmtpa import terminal in Hazira. More densely populated countries are hopping on the LNG bandwagon soon, the Philippines (108 million people), Vietnam (96 million people), to ensure a growing demand base for the fuel. Qatar’s central position in the world, sitting just between Europe and Asia, is a perfect base to service this growing demand.
There is competition, of course. Russia is increasingly moving to LNG as well, alongside its dominant position in piped natural gas. And there is the USA. By 2025, the USA should have 107 mmtpa of LNG capacity from currently sanctioned projects. That will be enough to make the USA the second-largest LNG exporter in the world, overtaking Australia. With a higher potential ceiling, the USA could also overtake Qatar eventually, since its capacity is driven by private enterprise rather than the controlled, centralised approach by Qatar Petroleum. The appearance of US LNG on the market has been a gamechanger; with lower costs, American LNG is highly competitive, having gone as far as Poland and China in a few short years. But while the average US LNG breakeven cost is estimated at around US$6.50-7.50/mmBtu, Qatar’s is even lower at US$4/mmBtu. Advantage: Qatar.
But there is still room for everyone in this growing LNG market. By 2030, global LNG demand is expected to grow to 580 million tons per annum, from a current 360 mmtpa. More LNG from Qatar is not just an opportunity, it is a necessity. Traditional LNG producers such as Malaysia and Indonesia are seeing waning volumes due to field maturity, but there is plenty of new capacity planned: in the USA, in Canada, in Egypt, in Israel, in Mozambique, and, of course, in Qatar. In that sense, it really doesn’t matter which country holds the crown of the world’s largest exporter, because LNG demand is a rising tide, and a rising tide lifts all 😊