2015ARKH-P5-Field Development Evaluation(80s)

PROJECT SANCTION :

KEY CHALLENGES

Geosciences aspects: Reservoir development plan, development phasing, possible upsides, reserves booking, reserves certification,

Technical: Production facilities selection, expected plant performances, site study, access to site, logistics, project schedule, innovations, use of associated gas…

Environmental: Environmental Baseline Study (EBS) & Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), access to site, existing facilities or fabrication yards in the area,

Economics: cost estimate, OPEX, CAPEX, cost reduction analysis, market conditions, NPV (Net Present value), IRR (Internal Rate of

Return)…

Financing scheme: Project financing, banks loans, Partners financing, Credit Export Agencies loans..;

PROJECT SANCTION :

KEY CHALLENGES

Contractual: Contractual strategy selection, Local content, insurance scheme, constrained timing,

Legal: Taxation scheme, applicable laws and regulations, land acquisition or lease…

Social: Economical & social impact study, Local manpower availability, training programs,

Risk management: Risks analysis, market evolution, currency fluctuation, suppliers and contractor track records, security aspects…

PROJECT SANCTION :

KEY CHALLENGES

Host Government contract requirements

Fiscal terms

Associate gas requirements/flaring

Local content requirements Local market and skills

Training requirements:

Host country potential challenges

Local currency fluctuation

Local PIB growth

Security aspects

PROJECT SANCTION CHALLENGES:

KEY CRITERIA: PROJECT ECONOMICS EVALUATION

SANCTION PACKAGE is FORMALISED:

To have the monetary value of a project & to analyse the project value drivers (partners may have different target for Project IRR)

To compare technical alternatives

To forecast cashflows and to prepare budgets

To track on going project performances versus budget and forecast

To evaluate tenders and to prepare negotiation positions

Risks & sensitivities analysis

Risk analysis is performed to assess the impact of:

	Reservoir uncertainties Reserves ?
	Tight market		 Costs ? Added value ?
	New technology		 Costs ? Added value ?
	‘’	‘’	 Schedule? Production delay ?
	Lower oil/gas prices		 Project revenue

64

FIELD EVALUATION PROCESS – EXAMPLE

SOUTH PARS 2 & 3 DEVELOPMENT

CONCEPTUAL STUDIES: SOUTH PARS 2&3 PROJECT (1)

66

CONCEPTUAL STUDIES: SOUTH PARS 2&3 PROJECT (2)

SOUTH PARS (Iran) and NORTH FIELD (Qatar) are the largest nonassociated gas field in the world

• SOUTH PARS characteristics
- Area		3,700 SQ KM
-	Gas in place	460 TCF
-	Condensate in place	17,100 MMBbl

• Phases 2 & 3 characteristics
-	Gas Production	2,000 MMSCFD
-	Condensate Production	77,000 Bbl/d
-	Sulphur Production	500 t/d

67

CONCEPTUAL STUDIES: SOUTH PARS 2&3 PROJECT (3)

North Field general map	South Pars 2&3 wet scheme

RAS LAFFAN

1 BScfd	1 BScfd

0.9 BScfd

Qatargas I « dry scheme »

CONCEPTUAL STUDIES: SOUTH PARS 2&3 PROJECT (4)

General Principle

All possible technical solutions are envisaged

Best development scheme is selected

South Pars

Fluid transfer system from offshore: Mono phase or multiphase flow ?

Wet or Dry?

Constraints:

Viscosity

Pipe Corrosion due to the water Pipe length: 105 km

Studies result:

The multiphase WET scheme cost is lower (30% of Surface Facilities costs savings)

CONCEPTUAL STUDIES: SOUTH PARS 2&3 PROJECT (5)

COMMON FACILITIES: (DEVELOPED BY NIOC)

56” EXPORT LINE

SULPHUR HARBOUR CONDENSATE EXPORT SYSTEM

		ONSHORE GAS TREATMENT PLANT
		GAS LIQUID SEPARATION
		4 PROCESS TRAIN						2 SUB SEA PIPELINES
		2 BSCFD PROCESSING CAPACITY
								32” AND 104 KM LONG
		77,000 b/d CONDENSATE
								WET SCHEME FOR RAW GAS
		500 t/d SULPHUR
2 OFFSHORE PLATFORMS :								TRANSPORTATION
70 M. WATER DEPTH								41/2” PIGGY BACK LINE FOR MEG
NOT NORMALLY MANNED								TRANSPORTATION
								MEG INJECTION OFFSHORE FOR
REMOTE FLARES
								CORROSION CONTROL
10 DEVELOPMENT WELLS EACH
			SPD3
						SPD4