Petroleum Development and Production Nunavut Petroleum Workshop
Oct-2012
Geir Utskot Arctic Manager
Overview
Arctic resources Forecasted activity 2012 to 2017 Existing Arctic Developments What does this mean in our part of the world? Some Discovery to Production timelines Some new technologies The northern sea routes Summary
2
Arctic Resources
Statoil 2009
Forecasted offshore activity 2012 to 2017
Wells per region & type NAM Exploration NAM Development Norway Exploration Norway Development Russia Exploration Russia Development Wells per year
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 4 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
2012 4 0 8 3 0 5 20
2013 6 0 8 12 4 8 38
2014 12 0 10 17 6 11 56
2015 10 0 10 17 6 10 53
2016 12 0 10 25 12 11 70
2017 14 0 10 28 14 7 73
Total # of wells 58 0 56 102 42 52 310
Russia Development Russia Exploration Norway Development Norway Exploration NAM Development NAM Exploration
Where will the activity be?
Norway, Barents Sea oil
First oil development is the Goliat by ENI/Statoil
Subsea production, Sevan Production Storage Unit, tankers to market, Gas reinjection, Electrical power from land to run the platform to reduce CO2 emissions from platform Est. Cost $6.4 B
Norway, Barents Sea gas
Snohvit
Subsea to beach (140km), CCS, LNG Est. Cost > $12 B Snohvit LNG expansion put on hold 3.5 Tcf needed for a
Russia, Shtokman
Gazprom 51%, Total 25%, Statoil 24% Super Giant Gas Field - 135 Tcf (USGS) Est. cost >$20 Billion Phase 1 of 3: 16 - 20 subsea wells Floating LNG Production Unit 550km subsea pipeline
Delayed due to low gas prices
Russia, Yamal peninsula
Bovanekovskoye
Gazprom 175 TCF of gas 240 wells drilled 1,240 km pipeline Railroad to main Russian system built
Yamal LNG
Total and Novatek Tambeyskoye field 55 TCF of gas Est. cost $20 B Start in 2018 at 650 mmcf/d and triple to 2 bcf/d by 2020
Russia, Pechora Sea
Prirazlomnoye (Offshore)
1st development project in Russian Arctic offshore 340 MM bbl (P90), 20 m water depth, Production starts in 2013? 36 wells by 2019, Development CapEx of $4B To be followed by development of the larger Dolginskoye oilfield nearby
10
What does this mean in our part of the world?
11
What does this mean in our part of the world?
12
Some Discovery to Production timelines
Country Field
Canada Canada Norway Norway Norway Russia Russia Russia Norman Wells Amauligak Snohvit Goliat Skrugard/Havis Shtokman Bovanenkovskoye Tambeyskoye
Discovery Start Development Start Production Discovery to Production
1921 1984 1984 2000 2011 1988 1971 1974 1980 2023 2001 2012 2016 2016 2008 2011 1985 2027 2006 2014 2018 2022 2012 2018 64 43 22 14 7 34 41 44
Red numbers are guesses
13
New technologies
Seabed Rig
Under water drilling rig
Badger Explorer
Rig less drilling
North Energy
Tunnel to Oilfield
Boeing & SkyHook
Airships
14
Minimum sea ice extent and its implications
The changes
The North East Passage has been open since 2008 (a.k.a. Northern Sea Route) 34 ships went through the NE passage in 2011, over 70 expected in 2012 The North West Passages northern route has been open since 2010. 22 vessels passed through in 2011 compared to 69 in the first 100 years from 1906 to 2005. We can expect to see more commercial shipping in the NW passage in the next few years. All Arctic nations are now looking at improving emergency preparedness and search and rescue capacity.
15
Summary
The Arctic activity is increasing
Existing Gravity Based Structure (GBS) platform solutions can be used in up to 100 meters of water depth New re-floatable GBS platforms are being developed for exploration in heavy ice Floating options exist for mild ice conditions Subsea technology improvement allows 3 phase flow over 145 km to avoid floating production New technology is being developed to explore and produce in harsh ice conditions
16
gutskot@slb.com
Backup slides
The challenges in the Arctic, continued
The operating conditions vary from area to area
GOM
Shallow hazards will be a challenge in many areas for both onshore and offshore exploration and production
28
permafrost Free gas Gas Hydrates
600 m
1000 m
Oil-Gas
Financial climate in the Arctic
1. 2. 3. 4. Canada Greenland Norway Alaska
Russia not mapped out in original study by IHS Energy because of uncertainties on financial regime. Recent agreements with Total and others would indicate improved financial regime.
29
