НЕФТЯНАЯ ПРОВИНЦИЯ

Abstract

​

Today, a large variety of petroleum reserves and resources classifications exist in the oil and gas industry, and each of them has its benefits and drawbacks. This paper presents analysis, comparison, and correlation of the results obtained from otherwise different methods of hydrocarbon reserves and resources estimation. The objective of this paper is to discuss details of reserves estimation by different methods and examine the possibility and practicability of application of probabilistic approach to reserves estimate. Oil reserves have been estimated by volumetric method based on the geological model generated by IRAP RMS software. Variation of volumetric parameters was assigned in Uncertainty module, which makes it possible to build a geologic model with equally probable implementations with limited data on key reservoir characteristics. In estimating the uncertainty, variations were assigned for the following parameters: oil-water level, correction factor, porosity and water saturation. After calculations and search of possible implementations, the software generated the result in three parameters: P10 (possible), P50 (probable), and P90 (proved). To compare the results of reserves estimation, generated net pay maps were used that allow analyzing distribution of in-situ reserves. The research suggests that input variables and different methods of 3D geological modelling affect the results in distribution of reservoir properties and key parameters for volumetric estimation of reserves. Multi-variant distribution of volumetric parameters in the geological environment provides consistent estimates of reserves (resources).

Key words:

​

risk, probabilistic-statistical estimate, Monte Carlo method, Classification System for Oil and Combustible Gas Reserves and Resources (2013), Petroleum Resources Management System (SPE-PRMS), comparison of Russian and international reserves estimation methods

References

​

1. Vasquez H. et al. The Diagnosis, Well Damage Evaluation and Critical Drawdown Calculations of Sand Production Problems in the Ceuta Field//SPE 54011, 1999.

2. Атлас газовых проектов ПАО «НК «Роснефть», 2017.

3. Григорьев С.Е. «Проблемы и рекомендации по методике проведения исследований пескопроявления и самозадавливания скважин на примере разработки Медвежьего месторождения Западной Сибири».

4. М 01.00241-2013/28-200-2-16. Методика измерений деформационно-прочностных свойств пород при объемном сжатии статическим и динамическим методами в термобарических условиях на образцах слабоконсолидированных пород.

5. Abbas Khaksar et al. Rock Strength from Core and Logs: Where We Stand and Ways to Go//SPE 121972, 2009.

​

Authors

​

Subbotin M.D., ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: mdsubbotin@tnnc.rosneft.ru

​

Melikov R.F., ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: rfmelikov@tnnc.rosneft.ru

​

Pavlov V.A., PhD, ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: vapavlov4@tnnc.rosneft.ru

​

Ptashnyi A.V., ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: avptashnyi@tnnc.rosneft.ru

​

Kudymov A.Yu., ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: aykudymov@tnnc.rosneft.ru

​

Yushkov A.Yu., PhD, ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: ayyushkov@tnnc.rosneft.ru

​

Korolev A.Yu., ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: KorolevAYu@kchn.ru

​

Yagudin R.A., ООО Tyumen Petroleum Research Center, Tyumen, Russia E-mail: YagudinRA@kchn.ru

​

For citation:

​

M.D. Subbotin, R.F. Melikov, V.А. Pavlov, А.V. Ptashnyi, А.Yu. Kudymov, А.Yu. Yushkov, А.Yu. Korolev, R.А. Yagudin Ocenka bezopasnoj depressii dlja predotvrashhenija peskoprojavlenija gazonasyshhennyh intervalov senomanskih zalezhej [Evaluation of safe drawdown pressure for preventing sand production from gas-saturated cenomanian strata]. Neftyanaya Provintsiya, No. 3(15), 2018. pp. 52-63. https://doi.org/10.25689/NP.2018.3.52-63 (in Russian)