scholarly journals Second Conference of Computational Methods in Offshore Technology and First Conference of Oil and Gas Technology (COTech & OGTech 2019)

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (05) ◽  
pp. 52-53
Author(s):  
Judy Feder

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Judy Feder, contains highlights of paper OTC 30794, “Digitalization Deployed: Lessons Learned From Early Adopters,” by John Nixon, Siemens, prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference, originally scheduled to be held in Houston, 4–7 May. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. With full-scale digital transformation of oil and gas an inevitability, the industry can benefit by examining the strategies of industries such as automotive, manufacturing, marine, and aerospace that have been early adopters. This paper discusses how digital technologies are being applied in other verticals and how they can be leveraged to optimize life-cycle performance, drive down costs, and decouple market volatility from profitability for offshore oil and gas facilities. Barriers to Digital Adoption Despite the recent dramatic growth in use of digital tools to harness the power of data, the industry as a whole has remained conservative in its pace of digital adoption. Most organizations continue to leverage technology in disaggregated fashion. This has resulted in an operating environment in which companies can capture incremental inefficiencies and cost savings on a local level but have been largely unable to cause any discernible effect on operating or business models. Although the recent market downturn constrained capital budgets significantly, an ingrained risk-averse culture is also to blame. Other often-cited reasons for the industry’s reluctance to digitally transform include cost of downtime, cyber-security and data privacy, and limited human capital. A single offshore oil and gas facility failure or plant trip can result in millions of dollars in production losses. Therefore, any solution that has the potential to affect a process or its safety negatively must be proved before being implemented. Throughout its history, the industry has taken a conservative approach when adopting new technologies, even those designed to prevent unplanned downtime. Although many current technologies promise increases of 1 to 2% in production efficiency, these gains become insignificant in the offshore industry if risk exists that deployment of the technology could in any way disrupt operations. Cybersecurity and data privacy are perhaps the most-significant concerns related to adoption of digital solutions by the industry, and they are well-founded. Much of today’s offshore infrastructure was not designed with connectivity or the Internet of Things in mind. Digital capabilities have simply been bolted on. In a recent survey of oil and gas executives, more than 60% of respondents said their organization’s industrial control systems’ protection and security were inadequate, and over two-thirds said they had experienced at least one cybersecurity attack in the previous year. Given this reality, it is no surprise that offshore operators have been reluctant to connect their critical assets. They are also cautious about sharing performance data with vendors and suppliers. This lack of collaboration and connectivity has inevitably slowed the pace of digital transformation, the extent to which it can be leveraged, and the value it can generate.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (09) ◽  
pp. 50-50
Author(s):  
Ardian Nengkoda

For this feature, I have had the pleasure of reviewing 122 papers submitted to SPE in the field of offshore facilities over the past year. Brent crude oil price finally has reached $75/bbl at the time of writing. So far, this oil price is the highest since before the COVID-19 pandemic, which is a good sign that demand is picking up. Oil and gas offshore projects also seem to be picking up; most offshore greenfield projects are dictated by economics and the price of oil. As predicted by some analysts, global oil consumption will continue to increase as the world’s economy recovers from the pandemic. A new trend has arisen, however, where, in addition to traditional economic screening, oil and gas investors look to environment, social, and governance considerations to value the prospects of a project and minimize financial risk from environmental and social issues. The oil price being around $75/bbl has not necessarily led to more-attractive offshore exploration and production (E&P) projects, even though the typical offshore breakeven price is in the range of $40–55/bbl. We must acknowledge the energy transition, while also acknowledging that oil and natural gas will continue to be essential to meeting the world’s energy needs for many years. At least five European oil and gas E&P companies have announced net-zero 2050 ambitions so far. According to Rystad Energy, continuous major investments in E&P still are needed to meet growing global oil and gas demand. For the past 2 years, the global investment in E&P project spending is limited to $200 billion, including offshore, so a situation might arise with reserve replacement becoming challenging while demand accelerates rapidly. Because of well productivity, operability challenges, and uncertainty, however, opening the choke valve or pipeline tap is not as easy as the public thinks, especially on aging facilities. On another note, the technology landscape is moving to emerging areas such as net-zero; decarbonization; carbon capture, use, and storage; renewables; hydrogen; novel geothermal solutions; and a circular carbon economy. Historically, however, the Offshore Technology Conference began proactively discussing renewables technology—such as wave, tidal, ocean thermal, and solar—in 1980. The remaining question, then, is how to balance the lack of capital expenditure spending during the pandemic and, to some extent, what the role of offshore is in the energy transition. Maximizing offshore oil and gas recovery is not enough anymore. In the short term, engaging the low-carbon energy transition as early as possible and leading efforts in decarbonization will become a strategic move. Leveraging our expertise in offshore infrastructure, supply chains, sea transportation, storage, and oil and gas market development to support low-carbon energy deployment in the energy transition will become vital. We have plenty of technical knowledge and skill to offer for offshore wind projects, for instance. The Hywind wind farm offshore Scotland is one example of a project that is using the same spar technology as typical offshore oil and gas infrastructure. Innovation, optimization, effective use of capital and operational expenditures, more-affordable offshore technology, and excellent project management, no doubt, also will become a new normal offshore. Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. SPE 202911 - Harnessing Benefits of Integrated Asset Modeling for Bottleneck Management of Large Offshore Facilities in the Matured Giant Oil Field by Yukito Nomura, ADNOC, et al. OTC 30970 - Optimizing Deepwater Rig Operations With Advanced Remotely Operated Vehicle Technology by Bernard McCoy Jr., TechnipFMC, et al. OTC 31089 - From Basic Engineering to Ramp-Up: The New Successful Execution Approach for Commissioning in Brazil by Paulino Bruno Santos, Petrobras, et al.


Author(s):  
B.A. Trifonov ◽  
◽  
S.Yu. Milanovsky ◽  
I.A. Mindel ◽  
V.V. Nesinov ◽  
...  

In recent years the world has been actively developing oil and gas fields on the shelf, including in seismically active areas. On the seabed it is very difficult to carry out qualitative geological and geophysical studies and seismological observations in full, which are a part of seismic microzoning works. Programs for computational methods during seismic microzoning allow taking into account nonlinear soil properties. In the article the experience of studies on seismic microzoning (2012–2015) for the installation area of offshore structures on the shelf of the Middle Caspian Sea is considered. In conditions of absence of observations by bottom seismic stations the possibility of seismic hazard assessment by computational methods taking into account local soil conditions is shown. Thus the obtained values of seismic intensity are lower in comparison with the results of estimations by method of engineering and geological analogies and method of seismic rigidity. Maximal impacts from zones of possible earthquake sources most dangerous for Middle Caspian Sea have been taken into account by peculiarities of spectral composition of vibrations of ground bases in the form of reaction spectra.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1201 (1) ◽  
pp. 011001

Third Conference of Computational Methods & Ocean Technology and Second Conference of Oil and Gas Technology (COTech & OGTech 2021) November 25 - 27, 2021, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway and Russian State Gubkin University of Oil and Gas, Moscow, Russia This conference is organized as a joint event of the COTech (Computational Methods & Ocean Technology) and OGTech (Oil and Gas Technology) conferences. The COTech conference started as part of the research and dissemination activities of the Program Area for research "COTech - Computational methods in Offshore Technology" at Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger (UiS). This Program Area for Research was founded in 2015 with seven professors, four associate professors, two adjunct professors and five research (PhD) students from the Department of Mechanical and Structural Engineering and Materials Science (IMBM), whose expertise and competence lies primarily within use of computational methods such as finite element methods, boundary and volume element methods, computational fluid dynamics and the like in marine and subsea technology, marine operations, design and analysis of mechanical systems, integrity and reliability of offshore structures and mechanical systems, renewable energy and wind engineering. In the ocean-related engineering area in particular, numerical computation approach is nowadays not only serving as a means to cultivate and realize innovative ideas, but also it is becoming the primary choice to solve complex engineering problems for the harsh and unfriendly environment in the Arctic. List of Conference Organizing Committee, Topic Area Coordinators and Track Chairs, Invited Keynote Speakers, Technical Committee Members and Reviewers are available in this pdf.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (09) ◽  
pp. 53-54
Author(s):  
Chris Carpenter

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper OTC 31250, “Wandoo B: Application of Advanced Reinforced Concrete Assessment for Life Extension for Non-Jacket Structures,” by Robert Sheppard, Spire Engineering; Colin O’Brien, Vermilion Oil and Gas; and Yashar Moslehy, Spire Engineering, et al., prepared for the 2021 Offshore Technology Conference, originally scheduled to be held in Houston, 4–7 May. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2021 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. Wandoo B is a concrete gravity-based structure (GBS) and is the main production facility for the Wandoo field offshore northwest Australia. It was installed in 1997 with a design life of 20 years. The structural assessments discussed in this paper are part of a comprehensive life-extension project encompassing wells, subsea systems, marine and safety systems, and topsides facilities and structures to demonstrate fitness for service through the end of field life. Background The GBS serves as the support structure for the Wandoo B facility and provides oil storage for the Wandoo field. The structure has four shafts approximately 11 m in diameter that support the top-sides facilities and a base structure with permanent ballast and oil storage cells (Fig. 1). It was originally developed as an ExxonMobil-led project and now is owned and operated wholly by Vermilion Oil and Gas Australia. The reinforced concrete (RC) shafts and the base top slab are pretensioned. In the shafts, tendons are enclosed in 20 ducts distributed around the circumference. The top of the shafts provides a mating point with the steel topsides structure with the connection formed by embedded anchor bolts in a bulge in the shaft cross section. The topsides structure is a three-level braced steel frame system supporting production operations for 12 well conductors contained within the northeast shaft and three outboard well conductors. Life-Extension Project The facility was designed with a target life of 20 years. The life-extension project was intended not only to satisfy the operator’s responsibility to continue safe operations and adhere to their safety case but also to meet the expectations of the regulator. The structural aspects of the project included four phases, the first two of which are detailed in this synopsis: - Design assessments per latest standards and modifications where required - Ultimate capacity assessments with retrofit modifications where required - Risk studies and workshops to demonstrate that risk is as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) - Integrity-management manual and inspection plan The first two phases were addressed using the latest condition-assessment, weight, and environmental data available. The phased approach allowed the assessment team to use basic linear approaches to demonstrate code compliance and only use the more-advanced analysis techniques to evaluate the critical components that did not satisfy code or were needed to provide input to the ALARP assessment and establish target reliability for the facility.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (04) ◽  
pp. 37-38
Author(s):  
Judy Feder

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Judy Feder, contains highlights of paper OTC 30425, “Innovative Asset-Integrity Management To Drive Operational Effectiveness,” by Danny Constantinis and Peter Davies, EM&I, prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference Asia, originally scheduled to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 17–19 August. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. While the focus on the growing floating gas industry is firmly on output, the industry needs to ensure safety, compliance, and profitability of high-value, complex, floating gas assets, some of which operate close to high population densities. Effective asset-integrity programs are a key part of such an effort, and it is widely agreed that better use of data and robotics will help reduce unnecessary work and human risk. The complete paper describes a joint industry approach for addressing asset-integrity management challenges that has proved successful for floating production, storage, and offloading vessels (FPSOs). Introduction Managing the integrity of offshore, near-shore, and berthed floating oil and gas assets faces numerous challenges, including the following: - Long service lives - The need to cut operating costs - Varying asset-integrity requirements of marine and process equipment - Growing global demand for gas - Increasing requirement to drive down carbon emissions - The need for enhanced sustainability Traditional cost-reduction strategies of prior lean market periods are no longer accepted by the industry, which the authors say needs to implement permanent cost reductions, increased sustainability and efficiency, and improved safety. These can be achieved only by new ways of managing asset integrity, targeted at consistent low price and efficiencies and developed, supported, and accepted by all sectors of the industry. Role of the Joint Industry Project (JIP) The Hull Inspection Techniques and Strategy (HITS) JIP has encouraged such innovations. The complete paper describes new methods facilitated by HITS that include diverless inspections of hulls and mooring systems and remote, unmanned methods of inspecting confined spaces such as cargo and water ballast tanks. Organizations such as the HITS JIP, whose membership includes oil majors, service providers, classification societies, and regulators, and the FPSO Research Forum, of which HITS is a part, have helped define the direction for improvements in inspecting, maintaining, and repairing floating production assets. These organizations have encouraged the development of new technologies that have improved safety and reduced operational costs. According to the paper’s authors, this direction has also shaped the drilling sector, can do the same for floating liquified natural gas (FLNG) and floating storage and regasification units (FSRU), and could potentially expand into floating renewable-energy-production assets. These and similar concepts are now being taken forward in a floating gas (FloGas) JIP.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document