Transactions of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers

Mode of access: Internet.

Transactions of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers.

Consists of transactions of various Branches and Divisions of the Institute.

Rossiter Worthington Raymond; a memorial, pub. by the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers,

Mode of access: Internet.

Who drives E&P innovation?

Few would argue that the upstream oil and gas industry has become more technology- intensive over the years. At the same time, the increasing costs and complexity of today’s exploration and production (E&P) technologies are making it increasingly difficult for any one company to support an aggressive research and development (R&D) agenda single handedly. The coming together of these two evolutionary forces gives rise to important questions. How does innovation happen in the E&P industry? Specifically, what ideas and inputs flow from which parts of the industry’s value network, and where do these inputs go? And how do firms and organizations from different countries contribute differently to this process? This survey was designed to shed light on these issues.

Cloud computing : what upstream oil and gas can learn from other industries

The topic of “the cloud” has attracted significant attention throughout the past few years (Cherry 2009; Sterling and Stark 2009) and, as a result, academics and trade journals have created several competing definitions of “cloud computing” (e.g., Motahari-Nezhad et al. 2009). Underpinning this article is the definition put forward by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, which describes cloud computing as “a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction” (Garfinkel 2011, p. 3). Despite the lack of consensus about definitions, however, there is broad agreement on the growing demand for cloud computing. Some estimates suggest that spending on cloudrelated technologies and services in the next few years may climb as high as USD 42 billion/year (Buyya et al. 2009).

How does innovation happen in the upstream oil & gas industry? Insights from a global survey

Few would argue that the upstream oil & gas industry has become more technology-intensive over the years. But how does innovation happen in the industry? Specifically, what ideas and inputs flow from which parts of the sector’s value network, and where do these inputs go? And how do firms and organizations from different countries contribute differently to this process? This paper puts forward the results of a survey designed to shed light on these issues. A joint research initiative between the Society of Petroleum Engineers and the Queensland University of Technology, the survey was sent to 469 executives and senior managers who played a significant role with regards to R&D and/or technology deployment in their respective business units. A total of 199 responses were received from a broad range of organizations and countries around the world. Several interesting themes and trends emerge from the results, including: (1) service companies tend to file considerably more patents per innovation than other types of organization; (2) over 63% of the deployed innovations reported in the survey originated in service companies; (3) neither universities nor government-led research organizations are considered to be valuable sources of new information and knowledge in the industry’s R&D initiatives; and (4) despite the increasing degree of globalization in the marketplace, the USA still plays an extremely dominant role in the industry’s overall R&D and technology deployment activities. By providing a detailed snapshot of how innovation happens in the upstream oil & gas sector, this paper provides a valuable foundation for future investigations and discussions aimed at improving how R&D and technology deployment are managed within the industry.

Perdido : the first Smart Field in the western hemisphere

Located in the Gulf of Mexico in nearly 8,000 feet of water, the Perdido development is the world’s deepest spar and Shell’s first Smart Field in the Western hemisphere. Jointly developed by Shell, BP, and Chevron, the spar and the subsea equipment connected to it will eventually capture approximately an order of magnitude more data than is collected from any other Shell-designed and managed development currently operating in the Gulf of Mexico. This paper will describe Shell’s Smart Fields design philosophy, briefly explain the five design elements that underpin “smartness” in Shell’s North and South American operations—specifically, remote assisted operations, exception-based surveillance, collaborative work environments, hydrocarbon development tools and workflows, and Smart Fields Foundation IT infrastructure—and shed light on the process by which a highly customized Smart Fields development and management plan was put together for Perdido.

Business value from intelligent fields

The Smart Fields programme has been active in Shell over the last decade and has given large benefits. In order to understand the value and to underpin strategies for the future implementation programme, a study was carried out to quantify the benefits to date. This focused on actually achieved value, through increased production or lower costs. This provided an estimate of the total value achieved to date. Future benefits such as increased reserves or continued production gain were recorded separately. The paper describes the process followed in the benefits quantification. It identifies the key solutions and technologies and describes the mechanism used to understand the relation between solutions and value. Examples have been given of value from various assets around the world, in both existing fields and in green fields. Finally, the study provided the methodology for tracking of value. This helps Shell to estimate and track the benefits of the Smart Fields programme at company scale.

The unfinished revolution : what is missing from the E&P industry’s move to “big data”

One cannot help but be impressed by the inroads that digital oilfield technologies have made into the exploration and production (E&P) industry in the past decade. Today’s production systems can be monitored by “smart” sensors that allow engineers to observe almost any aspect of performance in real time. Our understanding of how reservoirs are behaving has improved considerably since the dawn of this revolution, and the industry has been able to move away from point answers to more holistic “big picture” integrated solutions. Indeed, the industry has already reaped the rewards of many of these kinds of investments. Many billions of dollars of value have been delivered by this heightened awareness of what is going on within our assets and the world around them (Van Den Berg et al. 2010).

How innovation and R&D happen in the upstream oil & gas industry : insights from a global survey

Few would disagree that the upstream oil & gas industry has become more technology-intensive over the years. But how does innovation happen in the industry? Specifically, what ideas and inputs flow from which parts of the sector׳s value network, and where do these inputs go? And how do firms and organizations from different countries contribute differently to this process? This paper puts forward the results of a survey designed to shed light on these questions. Carried out in collaboration with the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), the survey was sent to 469 executives and senior managers who played a significant role with regard to R&D and/or technology deployment in their respective business units. A total of 199 responses were received from a broad range of organizations and countries around the world. Several interesting themes and trends emerge from the results, including: (1) service companies tend to file considerably more patents per innovation than other types of organization; (2) over 63% of the deployed innovations reported in the survey originated in service companies; (3) neither universities nor government-led research organizations were considered to be valuable sources of new information and knowledge in the industry׳s R&D initiatives, and; (4) despite the increasing degree of globalization in the marketplace, the USA still plays an extremely dominant role in the industry׳s overall R&D and technology deployment activities. By providing a detailed and objective snapshot of how innovation happens in the upstream oil & gas sector, this paper provides a valuable foundation for future investigations and discussions aimed at improving how R&D and technology deployment are managed within the industry. The methodology did result in a coverage bias within the survey, however, and the limitations arising from this are explored.

Data as an asset : what the upstream oil & gas industry can learn about ‘big data’ from companies like Facebook

The upstream oil & gas industry has been contending with massive data sets and monolithic files for many years, but “Big Data”—that is, the ability to apply more sophisticated types of analytical tools to information in a way that extracts new insights or creates new forms of value—is a relatively new concept that has the potential to significantly re-shape the industry. Despite the impressive amount of value that is being realized by Big Data technologies in other parts of the marketplace, however, much of the data collected within the oil & gas sector tends to be discarded, ignored, or analyzed in a very cursory way. This paper examines existing data management practices in the upstream oil & gas industry, and compares them to practices and philosophies that have emerged in organizations that are leading the Big Data revolution. The comparison shows that, in companies that are leading the Big Data revolution, data is regarded as a valuable asset. The presented evidence also shows, however, that this is usually not true within the oil & gas industry insofar as data is frequently regarded there as descriptive information about a physical asset rather than something that is valuable in and of itself. The paper then discusses how upstream oil & gas companies could potentially extract more value from data, and concludes with a series of specific technical and management-related recommendations to this end.

Comparison of stabilised/solidified mixes of model drill cuttings based on the North Sea and Red Sea Areas

Following the global stringent legislations regulating the wastes generated from the drilling process of oil exploration and production activities, the management of hazardous drill cuttings has become one of the pressing needs confronting the petroleum industry. Most of the prevalent treatment techniques adopted by oil companies are extremely expensive and/or the treated product has to be landfilled without any potential end-use; thereby rendering these solutions unsustainable. The technique of stabilisation/solidification is being investigated in this research to treat drill cuttings prior to landfilling or for potential re-use in construction products. Two case studies were explored namely North Sea and Red Sea. Given the known difficulties with stabilising/solidifying oils and chlorides, this research made use of model drill cutting mixes based on typical drill cutting from the two case studies, which contained 4.2% and 10.95% average concentrations of hydrocarbons; and 2.03% and 2.13% of chlorides, by weight respectively. A number of different binders, including a range of conventional viz. Portland cement (PC) as well as less-conventional viz. zeolite, or waste binders viz. cement kiln dust (CKD), fly ash and compost were tested to assess their ability to treat the North Sea and Red Sea model drill cuttings. The dry binder content by weight was 10%, 20% and 30%. In addition, raw drill cuttings from one of the North Sea offshore rigs were stabilised/solidified using 30% PC. The characteristics of the final stabilised/solidified product were finally compared to those of thermally treated cuttings. The effectiveness of the treatment using the different binder systems was compared in the light of the aforementioned two contaminants only. A set of physical tests (unconfined compressive strength (UCS)), chemical tests (NRA leachability) and micro-structural examinations (using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and X-ray diffraction (XRD)) were used to evaluate the relative performance of the different binder mixes in treating the drill cuttings. The results showed that the observed UCS covered a wide range of values indicating various feasible end-use scenarios for the treated cuttings within the construction industry. The teachability results showed the reduction of the model drill cuttings to a stable non-reactive hazardous waste, compliant with the UK acceptance criteria for non-hazardous landfills: (a) by most of the 30% and 20% binders for chloride concentrations, and (b) by the 20% and 30% of compost-PC and CKD-PC binders for the Red Sea cuttings. The 20% and 30% compost-PC and CKD-PC binders successfully reduced the leached oil concentration of the North Sea cuttings to inert levels. Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers.