#TITLE_ALTERNATIVE#
X South field, producing gas from retrograde gas reservoir, has less than 15 years remaining contract to be completed with rate constraints. Three years from now, plateau rate has to be reached at 61 MMSCFD for whole field and after that rate over 15 MMSCFD as an economic limit has to be reached. Ma...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Final Project |
| Language: | Indonesia |
| Online Access: | https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/13279 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Institut Teknologi Bandung |
| Language: | Indonesia |
| Summary: | X South field, producing gas from retrograde gas reservoir, has less than 15 years remaining contract to be completed with rate constraints. Three years from now, plateau rate has to be reached at 61 MMSCFD for whole field and after that rate over 15 MMSCFD as an economic limit has to be reached. Material Balance analysis X field showed that contribution from X South field is needed to completed the contract by reducing tubing head pressure. Therefore, final goal from this study is to determine optimum scenario to produce X South field integrated to surface model. Reservoir simulation, the first step of this study, began with simulation using two different set, the lightest composition (optimistic) and the weightest composition (pessimistic). Simulation continued with observation of effect from the wells increment to cumulative gas production so that optimum well numbers to produce X South field is determined. Then, well production schedules from the scenario are suggested to fulfill the X South field rate target. The best scenario will be integrated to surface facilities model. The result shows that the optimum number of wells are three, using S2, S1, and infill well INF2. The best scenario is produce the 2x at first with limited rate, then reopen South1 at September 2016, and produce the infill well INF2 at November 2017. Optimum tubing head pressure with this scenario is 200 psia. Comparison of reservoir fluid composition set data shows insignificant different. Also resulted there is gas rate differences between subsurface model forcast and surface model forcast and below the rate constraints from the contract which targeted. |
|---|