|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||
| Petroleum Geoscience |  |
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Original Article |
1 Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College, London SW7 2BP, UK(j.d.matthews{at}imperial.ac.uk)
2 Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH9 9NX, UK
3 Norwegian Computing Center, PO Box 114 Blindern, N-0314 Oslo, Norway
4 Fault Analysis Group, UCD School of Geological Sciences, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
5 Department of Earth Science/Centre for Integrated Petroleum Research, University of Bergen, Allegt. N-5007 Bergen, Norway
Reservoir management is a balancing act between making timely operational decisions and the need to obtain data on which such decisions can be made. There is a further problem: estimates of recovery for prospective development plans are subject to uncertainty because of the uncertainty of the geological description within the simulation model.
The SAIGUP project was designed to analyse the sensitivity of estimates of recovery due to geological uncertainty in a suite of shallow-marine reservoir models. However, although it was generic, it had the hallmarks of active reservoir management, because those members of the team responsible for deriving the notional development plans for individual models via reservoir simulation, and computing the recoveries, had to work in parallel with others under time and budget constraints.
This paper describes the way the reservoir engineering was carried out to achieve these objectives, the assumptions made, the reasoning behind them, and how the principles could be used in other studies. Sample results are also presented, although the bulk of the results are presented in other papers in the project series. One surprising result was that faults that impede flow can improve recovery. The underlying physical explanation for this behaviour is provided.
KEYWORDS: recovery estimates, uncertainty, reservoir engineering, sweep efficiency
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Manzocchi, J. N. Carter, A. Skorstad, B. Fjellvoll, K. D. Stephen, J. A. Howell, J. D. Matthews, J. J. Walsh, M. Nepveu, C. Bos, et al. Sensitivity of the impact of geological uncertainty on production from faulted and unfaulted shallow-marine oil reservoirs: objectives and methods Petroleum Geoscience, February 1, 2008; 14(1): 3 - 15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Skorstad, O. Kolbjornsen, T. Manzocchi, J. N. Carter, and J. A. Howell Combined effects of structural, stratigraphic and well controls on production variability in faulted shallow-marine reservoirs Petroleum Geoscience, February 1, 2008; 14(1): 45 - 54. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Manzocchi, J. D. Matthews, J. A. Strand, J. N. Carter, A. Skorstad, J. A. Howell, K. D. Stephen, and J. J. Walsh A study of the structural controls on oil recovery from shallow-marine reservoirs Petroleum Geoscience, February 1, 2008; 14(1): 55 - 70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. D. Stephen, C. Yang, J. N. Carter, J. A. Howell, T. Manzocchi, and A. Skorstad Upscaling uncertainty analysis in a shallow-marine environment Petroleum Geoscience, February 1, 2008; 14(1): 71 - 84. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. N. Carter and J. D. Matthews Optimization of a reservoir development plan using a parallel genetic algorithm Petroleum Geoscience, February 1, 2008; 14(1): 85 - 90. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Manzocchi, A. E. Heath, B. Palananthakumar, C. Childs, and J. J. Walsh Faults in conventional flow simulation models: a consideration of representational assumptions and geological uncertainties Petroleum Geoscience, February 1, 2008; 14(1): 91 - 110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
