Houston London Paris Stavanger Aberdeen Singapore Moscow Baku Perth Rio de Janeiro Lagos Luanda

For continuous news & analysis

www.offshore-mag.com
March 2018

World Trends and Technology for Offshore Oil and Gas Operations

Asia/Pacific update
Seismic market review
Decommissioning
Well intervention
Flow assurance
HIOS pipeline history

d
E : an
g r
S ID stin ste
o
IN boo g p
a in
b se ess
Su proc

1803OFF_C1 1 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 A global leader in
engineering, project
and technical services.
www.woodplc.com

1803OFF_C2 2 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 OFFSHORE
ENERGY? WWE’RE BIGGFA
FANS!
ANS!

HOUSTON
SEPT TEXAS
13–14 NORRIS CONFERENCE CENTERS
HOUSTON/CITYCENTRE

WWW.OFFSHOREWINDSUMMIT.COM

Owned & Produced By: Presented & Supported By:

#OWES18
1803OFF_1 1 2/28/18 1:40 PM

Celebrating 60 Years of Trends, Tools, and Technology
19
SEISMIC SURVEY MARKET OUTLOOK
Seismic survey contractors hoping for turnaround ............... 19
Of all the sectors affected by the downturn, the marine seismic survey
market has perhaps been perhaps the hardest hit. Companies that have
served the market for years have declared bankruptcy, and others have
announced their intention to exit the market. But a number of marine
seismic survey companies have taken steps to significantly reduce their
cost base and are now reporting increased levels of tendering activity.
Still, with the rebound in oil prices of recent months, some companies
are hopeful that the market will turn around this year.
ASIA/PACIFIC
Project activity ramping up across Asia/Pacific .................... 22
Recently operators have brought many oil and gas projects to sanction
and first production throughout the Asia/Pacific region.
DRILLING & COMPLETION
Automation advance delivers
safer, more certain casing connections ................................. 24
Weatherford approached the challenge of connection-integrity mistakes
by taking what is currently a manpower-intensive process and automat-
ing it. The company developed its AutoTong system to deliver connection
integrity with robot-like control and precision. By adding automation to
connection makeups, the system nearly removes any human influence,
and associated human error, from the casing running process.
ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION,
& INSTALLATION
Six key issues underpin
successful decommissioning strategy ................................... 26
Offshore exploration and production of oil and gas is one of the most
prominent business activities across the globe. Many of these assets are
now reaching the end of their useful lives. For the oil and gas industry,
this end-of-life stage will involve reinvestment to extend operations; or
the plug and abandonment of wells, followed by decommissioning. The
confluence of physical, regulatory, economic, and logistic difficulties
makes decommissioning both technically and financially challenging.
Offshore® (ISSN 0030-0608). Offshore is published 12 times a year, monthly, by PennWell® Corporation, 1421 S. Sheridan, Tulsa, OK 74112. Periodicals postage paid at Tulsa, OK 74112 and at
additional mailing offices. SUBSCRIPTION PRICES: US $123.00 per year, Canada/Mexico $145.00 per year, All other countries $202.00 per year (Airmail delivery $283.00). Worldwide digital
subscriptions: $123.00 per year. POSTMASTER: Send address corrections to Offshore, P.O. Box 3264, Northbrook, IL 60065-3264. Offshore® is a registered trademark. © PennWell Corporation
2018. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. We make portions of our subscriber list available to carefully screened companies that offer products
and services that may be important for your work. If you do not want to receive those offers and/or information via direct mail, please let us know by contacting us at List Services Offshore, 1421
S. Sheridan Rd., Tulsa, OK, 74112. Printed in the USA. GST No. 126813153. Publications Mail Agreement no. 40612608.
1803OFF_2 2
International Edition
Volume 78, Number 3
March 2018
CONTENTS
35
De-risking decommissioning:
predicting performance in aging offshore assets .................. 30
As an unrecoverable cost, identifying the right time, method and model
for decommissioning aging offshore assets is essential to minimizing
financial exposure for operators. By harnessing the growing body of
precedential data alongside consideration of market conditions, the
industry can de-risk programs and optimize performance.
Review of shallow water GoM structure inventory
offers preview of decommissioning requirements ................ 33
The shallow water Gulf of Mexico has witnessed significant changes
over the past decade and will continue to be subject to significant
changes in the future. Dwindling commercial prospects, sustained low
oil and gas prices, reduced budgets, operator bankruptcies, and the suc-
cess of onshore shale development means that drilling and installation
activity in the shallow water has been dramatically curtailed in recent
years. In the first of a six-part series, the active structure inventory
circa 2017 is examined.
PRODUCTION OPERATIONS
Cantilever extends workover
reach for GMS jackup barges.................................................. 35
Offshore construction/brownfield maintenance specialist Gulf Marine
Services is expanding the intervention capability of its self-propelled, self-
elevating support vessels in the Middle East and North Sea.
New POB approach enhances efficiency, reduces costs ....... 37
The time and cost of offshore activities are often underestimated. Even if
those activities are executed on time, they may experience unplanned cost
overruns. Realistic planning can help significantly mitigate these issues, as
many of them can be foreseeable if the right analysis is conducted.
SUBSEA
Subsea monitoring data improves
riser-wellhead system design and operation ......................... 40
The authors present some of the findings from subsea monitoring of
marine riser and wellhead systems, which were gleaned over many
deployments in various conditions.
2/28/18 1:40 PM
 May 22-24, 2018 #PNEC2018
MARRIOTT HOUSTON WESTCHASE
HOUSTON, TEXAS, USA
WWW.PNECCONFERENCES.COM

REGISTER EARLY AND SAVE!

Save $150 on Full Conference Registration when you register by April 20, 2018.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON REGISTRATION TYPES AND

RATES, VISIT WWW.PNECCONFERENCES.COM.

OWNED & PRODUCED BY: PRESENTED BY: SUPPORTED BY: HOSTED BY: CONNECT WITH US ON:

1803OFF_3 3 2/28/18 1:40 PM

 International Edition
Volume 78, Number 3
March 2018

COVER: Offshore E&P activity has been ramping up across the Asia/
Pacific region in recent months, with numerous development projects
under way in areas off Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam. Oil and gas ex-
ploration and drilling is also heating up off Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar,
and the Philippines. Offshore Australia, work is wrapping up on the mega
LNG projects Wheatstone and Ichthys. As part of the work on the Ichthys
project, McDermott deployed its Lay Vessel 108 for subsea umbilical,
riser, and flowline installation work (cover). For an update on E&P activity
in the Asia/Pacific region, see Jessica Stump’s article starting on page
22. (Photo courtesy McDermott International, Inc.)

SUBSEA
Subsea boosting advances reduce cost, lower risk.......................... 42 D E P A R T M E N T S
Operators are investing in the future of all subsea processing systems but have

12
primarily focused on subsea boosting due to the field proven status and clear
benefits of the technology. The authors discuss advancements in subsea boost-
ing systems which enable lower capex, greater capability, and lower risk.

PIPELINES & FLOWLINES

Electrically heated pipe system delivers
thermal efficiency, redundancy gains................................................ 44
Electrically Heat-traced Pipe in Pipe provides one of the more effective ap-
proaches to flow assurance for long-distance subsea tiebacks due to its high
level of heating efficiency. Saipem has adapted the technology for more cost-
effective installation via the J-lay method.

OFFSHORE HISTORY
High Island Offshore System brought
several ‘firsts’ to pipelining in the Gulf of Mexico ............................ 46
In 1975, a group of four major gas pipeline companies made plans to build a
203-mile, large diameter pipeline network to bring gas reserves discovered in
the High Island area offshore Texas into onshore markets. That September,
affiliates of American Natural Gas Co., United Gas Pipe Line Co., Texas Gas
Transmission Co., Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, and Transco an-
nounced plans to build the High Island Offshore System pipeline, one of the
largest natural gas pipeline systems in the Gulf of Mexico.
EQUIPMENT & ENGINEERING
Compensated coiled tubing lift frame
increases safety, flexibility................................................................. 49
Gangway system adapted for personnel
transfers in Arctic conditions ............................................................ 50
Caterpillar produces automated speed
control for well service transmission ................................................ 51
Wellsite deploys IQ Scan technology
for tracking durable assets ................................................................ 51
Online .................................................................6
Comment ............................................................7
Data ....................................................................8
Global E&P .......................................................10
Offshore Europe ...............................................12
Gulf of Mexico ..................................................13
Subsea Systems ..............................................14
Vessels, Rigs, & Surface Systems ...................15
Drilling & Production .......................................16
Geosciences .....................................................17
Regulatory Perspectives..................................18
Business Briefs ................................................60
Advertisers’ Index............................................63
Beyond the Horizon .........................................64

4 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_4 4 2/28/18 1:40 PM

 NETWORK AND GROW PROFESSIONALLY AT THE PREMIER EVENT FOR
TRANSPORTATION PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS AND INTEGRITY.

10th Annual

REGISTER NOW!

April 3-5, 2018

Cox Business Center, Tulsa, OK
www.PipelineEnergyExpo.com

Join over 1,200 ATTENDEES

#PipelineExpo
FROM 34 STATES AND 15 COUNTRIES

The 10th annual Pipeline + Energy Expo will take place April 3-5, 2018, at the Cox Business Center in
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Since 2009, this premier event has grown into the most comprehensive energy event in the region. In its second year, with support
from industry powerhouses like PennEnergy, Oil & Gas Journal, Oil, Gas & Petrochem Equipment, and Industrial WaterWorld, this
annual conference and exhibition will continue to grow. Transportation pipeline professionals from leading companies will gather
to hear the views of North American experts addressing the important technical and regulatory developments in construction and
operational management, equipment, and practices including:

• Automated Pigging • Directional Drilling • Line Pipe

• Cathodic Protection Leak Detection • Documentation/Record Keeping • Measurement and Instrumentation
• Commissioning • Environmental Remediation • Regulatory/Permitting
• Compression • Expansion • Rehabilitation
• Consequences of Failure • Hot Tapping • Risk Assessment
• Corrosion Control • Health and Safety • ROW
• Cybersecurity • Hydrotesting • SCADA
• Data Management • IM System Integration • Trenching
• Direct Assessment • Inline Inspection • Valve Automation

FOR MORE INFO, VISIT WWW.PIPELINEENERGYEXPO.COM.

OWNED & PRODUCED BY PRESENTED BY SUPPORTED BY

OIL, GAS
&petrochemequipment
¨

1803OFF_5 5 2/28/18 1:40 PM

 VICE PRESIDENT and
GROUP PUBLISHER
Paul Westervelt pwestervelt@pennwell.com

CHIEF EDITOR/
CONFERENCES EDITORIAL DIRECTOR Available at
David Paganie davidp@pennwell.com

MANAGING EDITOR
Bruce A. Beaubouef bruceb@pennwell.com
Offshore-mag.com
EDITOR-EUROPE
Jeremy Beckman jeremyb@pennwell.com Latest news
ASSISTANT EDITOR The latest news is posted daily for the offshore oil and gas industry covering
Jessica Tippee jessicat@pennwell.com
technology, companies, personnel moves, and products.
POSTER EDITOR
E. Kurt Albaugh, P.E.
Kurt.albaugh@yahoo.com
New maps, posters, and surveys
ART DIRECTOR • 2018 Worldwide Survey of Subsea Processing Poster
Josh Troutman
• 2018 Gulf of Mexico Map
PRODUCTION MANAGER • 2017 Environmental Drilling & Completion Fluids Directory
Kimberlee Smith ksmith@pennwell.com • 2017 Worldwide Survey of Floating Production, Storage and Offloading Units
MARKETING MANAGER
• 2017 MWD/LWD Services Directory
Myla Lowrance mylal@pennwell.com • 2017 Worldwide MODU Construction/New Order Survey
• 2017 Offshore Mexico Map
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER • 2017 Deepwater Solutions & Records for Concept Selection
Emily Martin emilym@pennwell.com
http://www.offshore-mag.com/maps-posters.html

OFFSHORE EVENTS
David Paganie (Houston) davidp@pennwell.com
Gail Killough (Houston) gailk@pennwell.com
New on-demand webcasts
➤ Best of Deepwater Operations
Deepwater operators are challenging their project teams to lower opera-
tional costs while improving platform safety, reliability, and efficiency. A key
enabler is an effective chemical management and flow assurance strategy.
www.pennwell.com In this special webcast presentation, the award-winning presenters from the
Deepwater Operations Conference & Exhibition share new strategies for
EDITORIAL OFFICES improving operational performance.
OFFSHORE http://www.offshore-mag.com/webcasts/offshore/2018/01/best-of-
1455 West Loop South, Suite 400, Houston, TX 77027 U.S.A.
Tel: (01) 713 621-9720 • Fax: (01) 713 963-6296 deepwater-operations.html
www.offshore-mag.com

➤ Increase production and reliability

CORPORATE OFFICERS
CHAIRMAN: Robert F. Biolchini 1939-2017
VICE CHAIRMAN: Frank T. Lauinger
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER:
Mark C. Wilmoth
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,
CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGY:
Jayne A. Gilsinger
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER:
Brian Conway
SUBSCRIBER SERVICE
To start a free subscription, visit www.offshoresubscribe.com.
Contact us for subscription questions,
address changes and back issues
Tel: (800) 869-6882 • Fax: (866) 658-6156
Email: os@kmpsgroup.com
in upstream operations using AspenTech’s
advanced process control solution
Most upstream assets have large untapped benefits that AspenTech’s ad-
vanced process control technology can unlock through mitigation of slugging
effects, optimizing well production, and improving energy efficiency. These
benefits range from 2-5% improvement in production and up to 10% reduction
in energy usage. Customers using the technology in upstream assets report
multi-million-dollar savings per year in benefits from a single application. In
this webcast, produced and sponsored by AspenTech, Mike Piccolo, founder
of Piccolo Control Services, discusses the benefit opportunities and application
examples of advanced process control in upstream processes.
http://www.offshore-mag.com/webcasts/offshore/2018/03/increase-
production-and-reliability-in-upstream-operations-using-aspentechs-
advanced-process-control-solution.html

CUSTOM PUBLISHING
Roy Markum roym@pennwell.com Submit an article
Tel: (713) 963-6220
Offshore magazine accepts editorial contributions. To submit an article,
REPRINT SALES please review the guidelines posted on our website by following this link.
Jill Kaletha jkaletha@mossbergco.com
Tel: (800) 428-3340, ext. 149 www.offshore-mag.com/index/about-us/article-submission.html

6 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_6 6 2/28/18 1:39 PM

 TAKE
David Paganie • Houston COMMENT

Growing decommissioning requirements THE

prompt capability assessment
Globally there are thousands of offshore wells and related infrastructure that have reached
the end of their useful life. Some areas such as the US Gulf of Mexico and UK and Norwegian
PLUNGE!
North Sea have government regulations that require the removal of the infrastructure in
compliance with set guidelines.
In other areas such as Asia/Pacific, the regulatory
environment and supply chain for decommissioning
will need to improve to support upcoming activ-
ity. Wood Mackenzie estimates that nearly 2,600
platforms and 35,000 wells in the region may need
to be decommissioned in the years ahead, with a
total bill of over $100 billion. Some analysts expect
the size of the decommissioning market globally to
exceed $200 billion.
Inside this issue, Offshore assesses government
and industry capabilities to handle the expected
growth in decommissioning requirements.
For operators, decommissioning is about regula- Best-Selling
tory compliance and meeting shareholder expecta- 2nd Edition!
tions. There is no financial incentive to remove and
clear obsolete infrastructure. Thus, estimating and
controlling the cost of the endeavor is critical.
There are very few historical benchmarks for the 372 Pages/Hardcover/2011
cost, schedule, and scope of decommissioning proj-
ects, due to the infancy and size of the market, says
Anthony Caletka and Casey Carringer with PwC, on The six key issues critical to decommis-
page 26 inside this issue. The authors suggest that sioning success. (Image courtesy PwC) Deepwater Petroleum Exploration
failure to accurately estimate the timeline and costs & Production is the most
for a decommissioning project poses significant risks to organizations.
One approach to minimize costs and risk is to tailor a decommissioning program to comply
comprehensive and authoritative
with government regulations, the authors explain. Governments are evolving to meet the text available on the business,
growing requirements, and beginning to hold operators more accountable. “Governments engineering, science, and technology
are beginning to adopt best management practices, quantify, and interpret presumed decom-
missioning exposures through probabilistic cost estimates, and collaborate with industry to of this multibillion-dollar industry.
determine viable decommissioning alternatives (i.e. the Rigs-to-Reef program in the GoM
gaining international notoriety) with the dual mandates to safeguard their environmental NEW TO THE SECOND EDITION:
assets and taxpayers’ dollars.” • New chapters on geology and
Digital technologies may also help reduce risk. “The use of ‘digital twin’ technology,
geophysics, rigs, and service vehicles
including drones and Lidar (Light Detection and Ranging) may be required to digitize exist-
• Greater coverage of engineering and
ing infrastructure, to properly reverse engineer and scope the decommissioning sequence
and timing to ensure that a project complies with safety, environmental, and regulatory scientifc schemes used in deepwater
constraints,” the authors suggest. • Final chapter presents the latest
Meanwhile, the supply chain is adapting to the growing market. “Several operators have technology used in the “third wave”
said they would like to see partnerships in the services industry that can provide consistent of industry evolution
turnkey solutions but still allow them to maintain oversight of the operation,” the authors
observe. Turnkey decommissioning is a strategic partnership between EPCI and OFS
companies to create holistic “one-stop shop” services. The EPCI companies provide the
jacket, topsides, and subsea removal services; and the OFS companies perform the P&A
work on the well and subsea infrastructure.
ORDER TODAY!
This emerging market is a bright spot for the oilfield services sector. It should provide VISIT WWW.PENNWELLBOOKS.COM
OR CALL 800-752-9764!
opportunities to reengage some personnel and equipment while the pipeline of new explora-
tion plans and field development projects builds back up.

FIND US:

To respond to articles in Offshore, or to offer articles for publication,

contact the editor by email (davidp@pennwell.com).
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 7

1803OFF_7 7 2/28/18 1:39 PM

 G L O B A L D ATA

Worldwide offshore rig Worldwide offshore rig count & utilization rate (Feb. 2016 Ð Jan. 2018)
count and utilization rate
In a change of pace, the offshore 1,000 100
rig market saw small improvements in Total util % Total supply Total contracted Working
January. While none of the changes are 900 90

Fleet utilization rate %

all that substantial, it is a break from the
previous, mostly downward trend of the 800 80
past couple of years. The total number

No. of rigs
of rigs under contract rose by five rigs, 700 70
taking the number of jackups, semis, and
drillships under contract from 415 to 420. 600 60
Meanwhile, the total supply of units fell by
one to 799. Those two factors combined to 500 50
give a slight boost to utilization with the
rate going from 52.0% to 52.6%. Finally, 400 40
the number of rigs working also experi-
enced a modest improvement, going from 300 30
371 in December to 376 in January. 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 17
b ril ne g ct c b ril ne g ct c
– Justin Smith, IHS Markit Petrodata Fe Ap Ju Au O De Fe Ap Ju Au O De

Source: IHS Markit RigPoint Notes: Rig types included are jackups, semis, and drillships.

Rig market gets a boost

from Mexico Round 2.4 Rig contract backlog for operators in Mexico
The success of Mexico’s second deep-
20
water licensing round, when 19 blocks Petronas
were awarded to numerous international 18
and domestic players, is poised to spark Repsol
a resurgence of offshore drilling activity 16
in the sector. International rig contractors Pemex
14
Rig supply years

will now have a golden opportunity to lock

Eni
in floaters for medium- to long-term con- 12
tracts in Mexico. There are currently only Chevron
three floating rigs in Mexico, all of which 10
are sixth-generation semisubmersibles Shell
8
controlled by local company Grupo R.
Most of the incremental demand for 6
floaters in Mexico will therefore likely
come from operators that previously have 4
not had much deepwater exposure and 2
that do not currently have much floater
backlog, such as Lukoil, Cairn Energy, 0
Petronas, and Repsol. 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Source: Rystad Energy RigCube. Note: Excluding harsh environment rigs.
–Jo Friedmann, Analyst, Rystad Energy

Oil supply demand balance 2015-2022

Analyst forecasts
$1.7 trillion of upstream Oil demand additions Onshore oil supply additions
3.0 3.0
capex in next five years Implied balance with no extension Implied oversupply
Offshore oil supply additions
Net supply-demand change (mmbbl/d)

Westwood Global Energy Group’s latest 2.5 2.5

Upstream Investment Outlook (1Q 2018)
2.0 2.0
Implied balance (mmbbl/d)

suggests a dramatic shift in the oil market

over the past 12 months. Offshore order- 1.5 1.5
ing has benefited from the higher oil price,
with 15 new floating production systems 1.0 1.0
ordered last year. However, the lack of 0.5 0.5
sanctioning activity since the downturn
will likely lead to a shortfall in project 0.0 0.0
executions early in the 2020s. It believes
-0.5 -0.5
the oil market will develop a sustained
undersupply from 2021, accompanied by -1.0 -1.0
high oil prices and a surge in sanctioning
of new, fasttracked projects. The analyst -1.5 -1.5
estimates $1.7 trillion of upstream capex -2.0 -2.0
from 2018-2022.
Source: Westwood Energy

8 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_8 8 2/28/18 1:39 PM

 TM
I NCLUDI NG

SAVE THE DATE

SEPTEMBER 11-13, 2018

THE WESTIN GALLERIA HOUSTON | HOUSTON, TEXAS USA | WWW.PIPELINEWEEK.COM

YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO MISS THIS IMPORTANT EVENT! #PipelineWeek

OWNED & FLAGSHIP

PRESENTED BY:
PRODUCED BY: MEDIA SPONSORS:
¨

1803OFF_9 9 2/28/18 1:39 PM

 GLOBAL E&P
North America
Mexican regulator Comisión Nacional de
Hidrocarburos has authorized TGS to process
data from its library of over 30,000 wells drilled
across Mexico’s offshore and onshore basins.
The first phase will focus on exploration and
appraisal wells and stand-out development
wells, with the results offered to bidders as-
sessing future Mexican lease rounds.
South America
Total has taken equity in two exploration
blocks off Guyana following separate farm-in
deals. One is the ultra-deepwater Canje conces-
sion, operated by ExxonMobil, where the com-
pany has acquired a 35% stake. The other is the
shallow-water, Repsol-led Kanuku (Total 25%).
•••
Petrobras has extended its charter with
MODEC of the FPSO Cidade de Niteroi by
a further six years. The vessel, which has
operated at the Marlim Leste oilfield in the
Campos basin since early 2009, is moored in
1,400 m (4,593 ft) of water, and can process
100,000 b/d of crude. To date it has produced
and offloaded around 120 MMbbl.
Aker Solutions has secured a $101-million
contract from Petrobras to perform repairs
and upgrades to three FPSOS serving the Al-
bacora Leste, Barracuda and Caratinga fields
in the same basin. Work will be executed at
the C.S.E. Mecanica e Instrumentação service
base in Macaé, Rio de Janeiro.
•••
Premier Oil has awarded Diamond Drill-
ing a letter of intent (LoI) to provide a rig
for the Phase 1 wells for the Sea Lion oilfield
development in the offshore North Falkland
basin. Further LoIs are due to follow for the
subsea equipment.
West Africa
BW Offshore and Ocean Installer may have
started decommissioning of the FPSO Berge
Helene at the Petronas-operated Chinguetti
field, 80 km (50 mi) offshore Mauritania. The
vessel has been in service since production
started in 2006.
•••
Cairn Energy and its partners are aim-
ing for approval by year-end from Senegal’s
government for their first-phase plan for the
deepwater SNE oilfield development. This
will entail drilling up to 25 wells connected
to an FPSO, targeting around 240 MMbbl of
the field’s 563 MMbbl resource base. Start-
up should follow some time during 2021-23.
The governments of Senegal and Maurita-
nia (to the north) have signed a co-operation
agreement that allows BP and Kosmos Energy
to proceed with the cross-border ultra-deep-
water Tortue gas field/LNG development.
Assuming a positive final decision late this
year, first gas should flow in 2021.
10 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_10 10
•••
BP and Kosmos are also partners with state-
owned Petroci in five newly awarded blocks
offshore Côte d’Ivoire. Tullow Oil too has
agreed to terms for two new Ivorian explora-
tion licenses, one of which – CI-524 – is close
to the company’s TEN fields development
offshore neighboring Ghana.
In Ghana, the government has granted
ExxonMobil an 80% operated interest in the
Deepwater Cape Three Points block, 57 mi
(92 km) offshore, in water depths ranging
from 5,085-9,350 ft (1,550-2,850 m). The work
program, due to start later this year, includes
seismic acquisition.
•••
Erin Energy has proven oil with a well on
the deepwater Oyo-NW prospect, 9.5 km (5.9
mi) northwest of the company’s Oyo Central
field in Nigerian offshore block 120. Erin said
the result de-risks numerous other major
Miocene prospects on blocks 120 and 121.
•••
Vantage Drilling’s jackup Topaz Driller will
undertake a 150-day program for New Age on
the gas-rich Etinde lease offshore Cameroon,
starting with the IM-6 appraisal well. To the
south off Gabon, Borr Drilling’s jackup Borr
Norve has begun development drilling on the
Tortue oilfield, part of the Dussafu Marin
production-sharing contract.
•••
ExxonMobil is set to take a 40% interest in
deepwater Petroleum Exploration License 82
in the Walvis basin offshore Namibia. Galp
Energia will remain operator, with Namcor
and Namibian company Custos each retain-
ing 10% stakes.
Offshore South Africa, Qatar Petroleum
has agreed to terms with Total to take a 25%
stake in block 11B/12B in the Outentiqua
basin, 175 km (109 mi) off the southern coast
of South Africa. The two companies are al-
ready partners in projects offshore Republic
of Congo and Qatar.
Mediterranean Sea
Eni has delivered a favourable verdict on
its Calypso gas discovery, the company’s
second gas find offshore southern Cyprus.
The Calypso 1 NFW well was drilled in 2,074
m (6,804 ft), encountering hydrocarbons in
Miocene and Cretaceous rocks. The results,
the company claimed, confirm an extension of
the play containing the giant Zohr discovery
in the Egyptian ultra-deepwater sector.
•••
Total, Eni and Novatek have signed Leba-
non’s first offshore exploration and production
agreements, for blocks 4 and 9, and have
agreed to drill at least one well on each block
during the first three years. The first will likely
be on block 9 next year: although the southern
tip of this concession is within waters disputed
Jeremy Beckman • London
Blocks offshore Lebanon. (Map courtesy Total)
by Israel, the main prospects are over 25 km
(15.5 mi) outside the disputed area, Total said.
•••
Energean has extended its offtake agree-
ment with BP for all oil produced from the
Prinos basin offshore northern Greece until
end-July 2021. Energean is also expanding
production by drilling up to 25 wells on the
Prinos, Prinos North and Epsilon fields and
adding two new platforms.
Offshore neighboring Israel, the company
has contracted Stena Drilling to drill at least
three development wells early next year on
the Karish gas field, probably using the DP-3
ultra-deepwater drillship Stena Forth. The
wells will be connected to a newbuild FPSO at
Karish, 90 km (56 mi) offshore, with produc-
tion due to start in 2021.
Noble Energy has signed agreements with
Delphinus Holdings to supply gas to Egypt
over a 10-year period from the Tamar and
Leviathan fields offshore Israel, subject to
government approval. For both fields, the
initial rate contracted will likely be around
350 MMcf/d.
•••
BP has produced first gas from its Atoll
Phase One project in the North Damietta
offshore concession in Egypt’s East Nile
Delta, seven months ahead of schedule. The
early production scheme – a near $1-billion
investment – called for recompletion of the
discovery well as a producer and drilling of
two further producer wells. Production of 350
MMcf/d of gas and 10,000 b/d of associated
condensate is sent to the onshore West Harbor
gas processing plant.
Middle East
McDermott International has a new EPCI
contract from Saudi Aramco to supply 13 plat-
2/28/18 1:39 PM

form jackets for ongoing development of the
Abu Safah, Berri, Marjan and Zuluf fields
offshore Saudi Arabia. Combined weight of
the structures, to be constructed at McDer-
mott’s in-Kingdom and UAE yards, will be
over 220,462 tons (200,000 metric tons). The
company’s vessels will perform the offshore
installations.
•••
ADNOC has granted Indian E&P com-
panies ONGC Videsh, BPRL and IOCL a
combined 10% share of the Lower Zakum
concession offshore Abu Dhabi. This is the
first time Indian groups have been admitted
to development of the emirate’s hydrocarbon
resources - the agreement runs until 2057.
ADNOC, which will retain a 60% inter-
est, planned to award the remaining
30% to other international companies.
ExxonMobil, which partners with
the state-owned company in the Upper
Zakum project, stated in a recent review
that investigations last year proved over
800 MMbbl of extra oil in the field.
•••
Iran Offshore Oil Company has in-
stalled the new A20 and A21 platforms at
the Abouzar field, 76 km (47 mi) south-
west of Kharg Island in the Persian Gulf.
Once operational, the facilities should
boost production (currently 200,000
b/d) by a further 20,000 b/d.
Asia/Pacific
Owners of offshore fields in the Asia/
Pacific region face a total decommis-
sioning bill of over $100 billion, accord-
ing to analyst Wood Mackenzie. It has
identified nearly 2,600 platforms and
35,000 wells that may need to be decom-
missioned in coming years, and claims
that most parties in the region are not
prepared for the task ahead.
Problems include a lack of experience
in the sector and insufficient clarity of
government regulations.
Wood Mackenzie suggests various
solutions, including the establishment
of a regulatory framework based on
guidelines and processes in place in
areas such as the North Sea and Gulf
of Mexico. Operators with extensive
offshore asset retirement experience
could also help draft regulations – Chev-
ron and Shell are already collaborating
with respectively Thai and Bruneian
regulators through knowledge transfer
and pilot projects, the analyst points
out. For areas involving large numbers
of aging wells and platforms, it adds,
batch decommissioning could be the
way forward, involving different opera-
tors co-operating across various blocks,
thereby reducing costs.
1803OFF_11 11
•••
L&T Hydrocarbon Engineering has a
$229-million EPCI contract from ONGC for
the Bassein Development 3 well platform and
pipeline project offshore western India. The
scope includes supply of three new wellhead
platforms, a 23-km (14.3-mi) subsea pipeline,
and modifications to 10 existing platforms.
The development covers three small fields in
blocks B-146, BSE-11 and NBP-E, and should
be completed by May 2019.
•••
Shell has agreed to sell its 22.2222% inter- fabricating a skid-mounted Crystallizer vessel
est in the giant Bongkot gas-condensate field
offshore Thailand and adjoining acreage to
PTTEP for $750 million. Following comple-
Mascarene Plateau
2D seismic coverage.
(Map courtesy
Spectrum Geo)
East Africa
SpectrumGeo has agreed to acquire and process
20,000 km (12,427 mi) of new 2D broadband seismic
over the Joint Management Area (JMA) covering
the offshore Mascarene Plateau between Mauritius
and the Seychelles. The data-set will cover explora-
tion blocks delineated by the Joint Commission that
administers the JMA under an Open Door licens-
ing system. Despite the location in the heart of the
Indian Ocean, 20% of the JMA area is in water depths
of less than 1,000 m (3,281 ft), with potential for oil
from pre-volcanic source rocks based on evidence of
slicks captured on satellite images.
GLOBAL E&P
tion of the transaction, PTTEP will operate
with a two-thirds interest, the remainder held
by Total.
The sale will help Shell achieve its target of
raising $30 billion from divestments to focus
on core E&P areas.
•••
Petronas and Twister are collaborating to
apply the latter’s technology for processing
acid gas fields in the Malaysian sector that
contain large quantities of carbon-dioxide
(CO2). Their program involves developing and
(similar to the Twister hydrate separator) for
testing the concept of melting CO2 solids and
producing liquid CO2 for reinjection.
•••
CNOOC expects to bring onstream
four new projects offshore China this
year: the Dongfang 13-2 gas fields, the
Penglai 19-3 oil field 1/3/8/9 compre-
hensive adjustment project, the Weizhou
6-13 oil field, and the Wenchang 9-2/9-
3/10-3 gas fields. Globally the company
expects to operate or participate in 132
exploration wells this year and to ac-
quire around 19,000 sq km (7,336 sq
mi) of 3D seismic.
•••
Premier Oil and partners Mubadala
Petroleum and KrisEnergy have se-
cured the Andaman II license under
Indonesia’s 2017 License Round. This
is in the barely explored North Sumatra
basin offshore Aceh – based on direct
hydrocarbons indicators from existing
2D seismic, Premier views this as a
potentially strong play. Any discover-
ies that follow could be developed to
service the company’s clients in North
Sumatra. Initial plans call for acquisition
of 3D seismic.
Australia
National Energy Resources Austra-
lia has agreed to provide $115,000 of
funding for the Transforming Australia
Subsea equipment Reliability (TASER)
project, which Wood is leading on behalf
of Chevron, Shell and Woodside. This
is a follow-up to the Subsea Equipment
Australian Reliability (SEAR) JIP, also
fronted by Wood.
Main aims are to improve subsea
equipment design and to reduce the
need for interventions in Australia’s
challenging warm water offshore en-
vironment: off Northern Australia,
marine fouling is a persistent problem
affecting subsea equipment. TASER will
investigate novel coatings, materials
and technologies to address calcareous
deposition and growth of marine organ-
isms on subsea facilities. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 11
2/28/18 1:39 PM
 OFFSHORE EUROPE
The Phase 1 Johan Sverdrup field center in the North Sea. (Image courtesy Statoil)
Sverdrup drilling
ahead of schedule
Phase 1 of the Johan Sverdrup field devel-
opment – Norway’s largest new North Sea
project for decades – is around 70% complete,
and costs continue to fall. Operator’s Statoil
latest capex estimate is $11.21 billion, down
30% on the original figure when the project was
approved in August 2015, and the breakeven
price is now below $15/bbl.
Margaret Øvrum, the company’s EVP for
Technology, Projects & Drilling, said more
wells have been drilled than planned at this
stage, and this had helped bring down overall
costs. Increased use of digital and automated
solutions has been another factor. At the same
time, drilling results have improved the un-
derstanding of the reservoir, leading Statoil
to upgrade the Phase 1 recoverable resource
range to 2.1-3.1 Bboe.
Phase 1 is due onstream in the second half
of 2019. Later this year, the company expects
to submit its proposals for Phase 2, involving
the addition of a fifth platform and more sub-
sea wells: the current price tag is just under
$5.73 billion, which as things stand would
mean a breakeven for the full-field develop-
ment of less than $20/bbl.
Rystad Energy analyst Matthew Fitzsim-
mons described the Phase 1 reductions as a
“remarkable achievement,” bearing in mind
that the recent breakeven price for North
American shale was over $40/bbl.
BP positive on
North Sea area finds
BP has confirmed three discoveries in Nor-
wegian and UK waters, although two were
drilled last summer.
The semisub Paul B Loyd Junior encoun-
tered oil while drilling the Achmelvich
prospect in block 206/9b, close to the giant
BP-operated Clair field, and light oil and gas-
condensate at Capercaillie in block 29/4e in
the UK central North Sea. BP, which is the
sole licensee in this block, said it would re-
12 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_12 12
view options to develop Capercaillie through
infrastructure in the area.
In the Norwegian North Sea, Aker BP
confounded its own expectations with its oil
discovery in the Frosk prospect in license
PL340, close to the company’s Alvheim com-
plex. It estimates potential resources in the
range 30-60MMboe, well above the pre-drill
estimate, and the fresh insight provided into
geological conditions in the area result may
encourage the partners to pursue other tar-
gets.
Throughout 2018, Aker BP expects to
participate in 12 exploratory wells offshore
Norway, seven as operator, at a total cost to
the company of $350 million, with the main
focus being on the Barents Sea.
An infill well from the Chiswick platform is
one of Spirit Energy’s drilling targets this year.
(Photo courtesy Spirit Energy)
Jeremy Beckman • London
Spirit Energy, the new E&P company
formed last year which combines the offshore
E&P interests formerly held by Centrica and
Bayerngas Norge, has spud its first well in the
Norwegian Sea, appraising the Fogelberg gas-
condensate discovery, northwest of Statoil’s
Asgard complex. One of the main aims is
to narrow Fogelberg’s recoverable reserves
range, previously estimated at 19-116 MMboe.
The company will have five rigs on hire in
the North Sea area this year for a program
that includes exploratory drilling and P&A.
One of the rigs, Noble’s jackup Hans Deul,
will drill a new infill well this spring on Spirit’s
Chiswick gas field in the UK southern North
Sea, which exports gas via a minimal platform
to the J6-A complex on the Dutch side of the
median line.
Kvaerner to extend
Stord quay
Statoil has also issued more major contracts
for its multi-field Johan Castberg project in the
southern Norwegian Barents Sea, designating
Kvaerner for construction of the topsides for
the newbuild FPSO, and subsequent hookup
and integration with the hull; while Siemens
will provide the compression train, compris-
ing a 41-MW SGT-750 gas turbine driving two
Datum compressors in a tandem arrangement.
Partly in preparation for this job, Kvaerner
plans to invest $47 million in an extended,
deeper water quay, 266 m (873 ft) long at its
fabrication complex in Stord, western Norway,
also expanding the construction area and
lengthening the crane lane in order to provide
increased coverage from a 1,050-metric ton
(1,157-ton) gantry crane installed at the site
in 2012. Beyond Castberg, Kvaerner is eyeing
outfitting/upgrade work for other deepwater
floating platforms, a market it sees as taking
off over the next few years.
This summer, Stord will take delivery from
Saipem of the topsides, mono-tower and piles
from the decommissioned Varg A platform
in the southern Norwegian North Sea, for
subsequent recycling/disposal.
TAQA eyes new role
for Eider Alpha
Many of the UK’s older production platforms
are destined for the scrap yards, but Abu Dhabi
National Energy Company (TAQA) has a dif-
ferent future in mind for Eider Alpha, 184 km
(114 mi) northeast of the Shetlands. Produc-
tion from the Eider oil field ceased in January,
nearly 30 years after start-up. Late last year
TAQA completed a bypass project to redirect
production from the Otter field – previously
sent to this facility – to the North Cormorant
platform. It now plans to convert Eider Alpha
to a utility platform to extend the lives of other
fields in the area, while continuing to provide
power, chemical and system support to Otter. •
2/28/18 1:39 PM
 Bruce Beaubouef • Houston GULF OF MEXICO

New deepwater discoveries restore sense of optimism to Gulf E&P

A sense of optimism returned to US offshore oil and gas industry
in late January, as both Shell and Chevron announced notable new
discoveries in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico.
Shell Offshore Inc. announced what it says is one of its largest US
GoM exploration finds in the past decade with its Whale deepwater
well. The well encountered more than 1,400 net ft (427 m) of oil
bearing pay. Evaluation of the discovery is ongoing, and appraisal
drilling is underway to further delineate the discovery and define
development options. 
“Deepwater is an important growth priority as we reshape Shell into
a world-class investment case,” said Andy Brown, Upstream Director
for Royal Dutch Shell. “Today’s announcement shows how, through
exploration, we are sustaining a strong pipeline of discoveries and
The Ballymore well was drilled by Pacific Drilling’s Pacific Sharav deepwa-
future projects to sustain this deepwater growth.” ter drillship. (Courtesy Chevron)
Whale is operated by Shell (60%) and co-owned by Chevron U.S.A.
Inc. (40%). It was discovered in the Alaminos Canyon block 772, ad- agreement to sell its deepwater Gulf of Mexico assets to Fieldwood
jacent to the Shell-operated Silvertip field and approximately 10 mi Energy LLC for a total value of $710 million. Noble also said that its
(16 km) from the Shell-operated Perdido platform. board of directors had authorized a $750-million share repurchase
“Whale builds on Shell’s successful, nearly 40-year history in the program. 
deepwaters of the Gulf of Mexico and is particularly special in that it David L. Stover, Noble Energy’s Chairman, President and CEO,
offers a combination of materiality, scope and proximity to existing said: “While continuing to deliver outstanding performance and ex-
infrastructure,” said Marc Gerrits, Executive Vice-President Explo- ecution across the business, we have strategically repositioned our
ration for Royal Dutch Shell. “The result is another opportunity to portfolio over the last couple of years. The sale of our Gulf of Mexico
think differently about ways we can com- business represents the last major step
petitively develop deepwater resources.” in our portfolio transformation. This has
Shell says that the Whale discovery been done to focus our go-forward efforts
adds to the company’s Paleogene explora- on those assets that will rapidly grow our
tion success in the Perdido area. Through cash flows and margins, primarily the US
exploration, Shell says it has added more onshore business and the Eastern Medi-
than 1 Bboe resources in the last decade terranean. I appreciate the efforts of the
in the Gulf of Mexico. many employees who have contributed to
Shell currently has three GoM deep- our strong legacy of exploration discovery
water projects under construction – Ap- and successful resource development in
pomattox, Kaikias, and Coulomb Phase the Gulf of Mexico. Going forward, we are
2 – as well as investment options for addi- concentrating the company’s exploration
tional subsea tiebacks and Vito, a potential capabilities on higher-impact opportuni-
new hub in the region.  Above: Shell says that its Whale deepwater
ties that can drive substantial long-term
Meanwhile, Chevron announced that it had discovery well, located in Alaminos Canyon value creation.”
made a significant oil discovery at the Bal- block 772, is one of its largest US GoM explora- Cash proceeds included in the transaction
lymore prospect in the deepwater US Gulf. tion finds in the past decade. (Courtesy Shell) total $480 million, and Fieldwood will assume
Ballymore is located in the Mississippi Can- Below: Chevron subsidiary Chevron U.S.A. Inc. all abandonment obligations associated with
yon area of the US Gulf, approximately 3 mi is the operator with a 60% working interest in the properties, which Noble recorded at a book
(5 km) from Chevron’s Blind Faith platform, the Ballymore prospect. The co-owner is Total value of approximately $230 million as of Dec.
in water depth of 6,536 ft (1,992 m). The initial E&P USA Inc. (40%). (Courtesy Total) 31, 2017. In addition, a cumulative contingent
Ballymore well reached total measured depth payment of up to $100 million is payable to
of 29,194 ft and encountered more than 670 ft Noble Energy from closing of the transaction
net oil pay with good reservoir and fluid char- through the end of 2022, determined quarterly
acteristics, Chevron says. A side track well is at a rate of $2/bbl produced when the aver-
currently being drilled to further assess the age Light Louisiana Sweet oil price exceeds
discovery and begin to define development $63/bbl.
options. The effective date of the transaction is Jan.
“The Gulf of Mexico deepwater is an integral 1, 2018, with closing anticipated during 2Q
part of our company’s long-term strategy,” said 2018, contingent upon Fieldwood successfully
Jeff Shellebarger, president of Chevron North implementing its contemplated restructuring
America Exploration and Production. “This dis- process. Included in the transaction is Noble’s
covery is an important addition to our portfolio, interest in six producing fields and all unde-
especially with its combination of size, quality veloped leases. 
and proximity to existing infrastructure.” Noble Energy estimates net production from
Yet, there were still signs of gloom in the these assets for 2018 to average slightly more
Gulf, as Noble Energy announced its intention than 20,000 boe/d for the year. Total proved
to divest its US Gulf of Mexico assets. In mid- reserves in the Gulf of Mexico as of year-end
February, the company said it had executed an 2017 for Noble were 23 MMboe. •

www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 13

1803OFF_13 13 2/28/18 1:39 PM

 SUBSEA SYSTEMS
Subsea 7, Schlumberger
start joint venture negotiations
Subsea 7 S.A. and Schlumberger have entered into negotiations to
form a joint venture that builds on their Subsea Integration Alliance,
which was established in 2015. Currently that alliance combines
OneSubsea’s subsurface, subsea production systems and subsea
processing systems capability with Subsea 7’s subsea umbilical, riser
and flowline systems offering.
The proposed joint venture will place emphasis on strengthened
front-end engineering, design and execution of integrated projects,
creating a life of field package that will include autonomous subsea
technology; digitally enabled remote surveillance and production
monitoring; and inspection, maintenance and repair services.
In addition to contributing resources for early engagement and ten-
dering, the two companies plan to assign their respective Life of Field
businesses to the joint venture, which will be owned on a 50:50 basis.
Clients will remain free to purchase non-integrated products and
services from any manufacturer and vendor.
Olivier Le Peuch, president, Cameron Group, Schlumberger, said:
“Subsea Integration Alliance has already provided our customers with
industry leading innovation and value. The proposed joint venture
will give us the opportunity to capitalize on the synergies already
established and significantly improve subsea economics over the
lifetime of the field.”
Also, Subsea 7 has agreed to acquire a 60% interest in consultants
Xodus Group from Chiyoda, with the latter remaining a 40% joint
venture partner. Xodus will continue to operate independently of its
parent companies, providing what Subsea 7 said would be unbiased
engineering and advisory services to the energy industry and objective
advice to help clients maximize returns from their projects.
Masaji Santo, president and CEO of Chiyoda, said: “Subsea 7’s ex-
perience and scale in offshore energy services will enhance Xodus’s
capability and its global reach…”
Xodus says that it started the year off well, picking up more than £6
million ($8.3 million) of contracts and noting resurgence in front-end
engineering projects as the North Sea undergoes continued recovery.
The company recently expanded into the Egyptian market and man-
ages various life-of-field projects through its London, Aberdeen, and
international operations.
Small pools initiative delivering
subsea solutions for UK fields
Wood Mackenzie and the Oil & Gas Technology Centre believe
subsea advances and approaches could boost development of marginal
fields on the UK continental shelf (UKCS).
According to the Centre, there are 3.4 Bboe in the UK’s undeveloped
‘small pool’ fields (discoveries containing less than 50 MMboe/P50
technically recoverable). This accounts for more than 10% of the 27
Bboe of small pools globally. At the current oil price, 1.5 Bboe of this
resource could be potentially economic.
The Centre’s ‘Tie-back of the Future’ initiative, which aims to
halve the cost and time taken to develop small pools, would make an
additional 400 MMboe. It brings together 25 operators, supply chain
firms and technology developers, all focused on transforming the cur-
rent approach to developing marginal fields, with subsea equipment
is designed for disassembly and subsequent re-use.
Five technology projects are under way, with 13 technology propos-
als under review and six integrated studies completed.
Chris Pearson, Small Pools Solution Centre Manager for the Cen-
tre, said: “We are seeing developments in mechanical hot taps, me-
chanically connected pipelines, multi-use pipelines, the integration of
renewable energy systems and unmanned facilities.”
Mhairidh Evans, principal analyst for Wood Mackenzie, said: “At
current exploration rates, it would take 14 years and 500 wells to find
14 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_14 14
Jessica Tippee • Houston
EC-OG’s Subsea Power Hub is an example of the technology being devel-
oped to unlock small pools. (Courtesy Oil & Gas Technology Centre)
the same volumes that have already been discovered in small pools.
As a mature basin, these barrels can no longer be ignored.
“As well as providing much-needed new investment, unlocking
small pools is key to extending the life of existing infrastructure.
“The UK industry, with the Technology Centre’s backing, is at the
forefront of these new technologies. Approaches taken here will be
much-watched and learned from around the globe.”
Operators supporting subsea equipment
reliability project in Australia
National Energy Resources Australia (NERA) is providing A$145,000
($115,000) of funding for the Transforming Australia Subsea Equip-
ment Reliability (TASER) project. Wood is leading the program in
collaboration with Chevron, Shell, and Woodside.
TASER is a follow-up to the Subsea Equipment Australian Reli-
ability joint industry project also led by Wood and supported by
various operators.
The main goals are sharing knowledge to improve subsea equipment
design and reducing the need for costly and time-consuming interven-
tions in Australia’s challenging offshore, warm water environment.
Offshore northern Australia, marine fouling impacts the perfor-
mance of subsea equipment, probably due to the combination of the
water composition, light, oxygen, and temperature. TASER will cre-
ate a ‘living laboratory’ to assess the effectiveness of novel coatings,
materials, and technologies against calcareous deposition and marine
organism growth on subsea equipment.
Robin Watson, Wood’s chief executive, said: “The project will enable
a better understanding of subsea equipment failures and intervention
requirements and has the potential to offer significant cost savings
to operators by maximizing equipment reliability, availability and
therefore production uptime.”
NERA chief executive Miranda Taylor added: “Digital technolo-
gies and ‘living laboratories’ allow faster, safer adaption, testing and
application of the technologies needed to optimize performance of
the oil and gas industry’s subsea equipment.
“NERA is supporting the TASER project as it will bring operators
and vendors together to share, collaborate, and address industry
challenges in real life conditions.”
Various vendors are loaning equipment to be tested underwater over
a three-year period, with University of Western Australia researchers
validating the results. •
2/28/18 1:39 PM
 Jessica Tippee • Houston
Borr continues
to consolidate jackup
drilling rig market
By the end of the month, Borr Drilling’s
acquisition of Paragon Offshore Ltd. for an
estimated $232.5 million should be finalized.
The addition of Paragon’s 31 jackups (and
one semisubmersible) will make Borr the
largest jackup owner in the world, with 57.
It will also be the second-largest provider
of offshore rigs, measured in fleet size, just
four units behind the newly-merged Ensco-
Atwood, according to analyst firm Rystad
Energy. This move brings together the fourth
and sixth largest jackup providers to create an
entity controlling 10% of the world’s jackups.
However, Borr is expected to scrap many of
the acquired rigs.
Oddmund Føre, vice president of oilfield
service research at Rystad Energy, said:
“Borr’s strategy has always been to consoli-
date the jackup market and focus on operating
modern high-spec rigs. Hence, they put a very
low value on the older rigs which is reflected
in the transaction price.”
Upon completion, Borr will own 24 pre-
mium jackups built after 2000.
“The timing is perfect for Borr Drilling as
the signs of a recovering market are starting
to appear,” said Føre. “Contracted utilization
for jackups has been holding steady at the low
to mid-50% level since early 2017, but during
fourth quarter 2017 we saw an increase in
new mutual contracts, contract durations, and
leading-edge day rates for premium jackups.”
Arctech delivers fourth
icebreaker to Sovcomflot
A new multi-purpose icebreaking supply
vessel was named Yevgeny Primakov during a
recent ceremony in St Petersburg, Russia. The
vessel was constructed under the supervision
of the Russian Maritime Register of Shipping
(RS) at the Arctech Helsinki Shipyard.
The Yevgeny Primakov, named after the
Russian statesman, is the last of a series of four
ships built to the RS class under a long-term
collaboration agreement with Sovcomflot and
Sakhalin Energy to operate in the Sea of Ok-
hotsk offshore northeast Russia. It is designed
to provide safe operation for offshore oil and
gas platforms, including those operating in
ice conditions, and to prevent accumulation
of ice ridges and heavy ice floes, or to break
off the ice generated.
The vessel can provide year-round stand-by
duty, responding quickly to potential emer-
gencies and, if necessary, undertake subsea
engineering and repair works. It features two
Azipod-type azimuth thrusters with aggregate
capacity of 15 MW that can increase icebreak-
ing capability when operating in ice up to
1.5 m (4.9 ft) thick and covered with 20 cm
(7.9 in.) of snow. The 104.4-m (342-ft) long,
1803OFF_15 15
VESSELS, RIGS, & SURFACE SYSTEMS
The Russian Maritime Register of Shipping assigned an ice class of Icebreaker 6 to the Yevgeny
Primakov. (Courtesy Sovcomflot)
21-m (69-ft) wide, 3,670-dwt vessel can in an
emergency accommodate up to 150 people.
It will operate under the flag of the Russian
Federation.
Wärtsilä, Maersk enter
thruster maintenance
collaboration
Wärtsilä is collaborating with Maersk Drill-
ing on a 25-year thruster maintenance strategy
for the contractor’s three semisubmersibles
and four drillships. The two parties have al-
ready completed strategic work on the D-rigs
and started a similar task on the V-Drillships.
By reducing thruster exchange time, Wärt-
silä says, the rigs should need to spend less
time in sheltered waters for thruster main-
tenance. The joint strategy defines planning
procedures for scheduled maintenance and
thruster services/equipment exchange in
emergency scenarios. They claim that the
resultant understanding of each other’s op-
erations and needs will help them plan and
further develop more efficient ways of per-
forming thruster maintenance, in addition
to optimizing logistics.
Wärtsilä’s scope includes provision of spare
thrusters and long-term storage maintenance
for the semisubs Maersk Developer, Maersk
Discoverer and Maersk Deliverer, which are
each equipped with eight LMT-FS3501 thrust-
ers. Four new spare thrusters will be delivered
this year and added to the four existing spare
units. With a full set of eight spare thrusters
it should be possible to reduce the shutdown
period significantly, Wärtsilä claims, by hot
swopping all eight thrusters with the spare
units. This should provide greater flexibility
for planning shutdowns with clients to ensure
minimal impact on their operations.
Petrobras extends Marlim
Leste FPSO charter
Petrobras has extended its charter of the
FPSO Cidade de Niterói MV18 with MODEC’s
Dutch subsidiary until March 2024. The ves-
sel has been operating at the Marlim Leste
oil field in the Campos basin offshore Brazil
since February 2009. The vessel, moored in
around 1,400 m (4,593 ft) of water, can process
100,000 b/d of crude oil and 3.5 MMcm/d of
gas per day, and has a crude storage capacity
of 1.6 MMbbl. It has produced and offloaded
nearly 120 MMbbl.
Prior to the start of the time charter, MO-
DEC had performed engineering, procure-
ment, construction, installation and commis-
sioning of the FPSO, with SOFEC designing
and supplying the spread mooring system.
In addition, Petrobras has awarded Aker So-
lutions a four-year, NOK800-million ($101-mil-
lion) contract to provide maintenance and
modifications services for three FPSOs at
fields offshore Brazil. The services involve
renovation, repair, and upgrades to the fa-
cilities serving the Barracuda, Caratinga and
Albacora Leste fields in the Campos basin, and
management at the yard where replacement
parts and other equipment will be fabricated.
Aker Solutions plans to execute the work
from its C.S.E. Mecânica e Instrumentação
services base in Macaé, Rio de Janeiro. The
company acquired a controlling stake in C.S.E.
in December 2016. Work is due to start this
month, with final deliveries scheduled for
1Q 2022. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 15
2/28/18 1:39 PM
 DRILLING & PRODUCTION
Drilling results indicate lowered
exploration costs, says report
Last year may have been the most profitable for the oil and gas ex-
ploration sector since 2010, according to analyst firm Wood Mackenzie.
Dr. Andrew Latham, VP-Exploration Research, said: “Explorers in-
vested only around $40 billion in conventional exploration and appraisal,
down from $95 billion in 2014. This reduced spend focused on making
discoveries with a good chance of early commercialization [with] more
emphasis on high-impact exploration in ultra-deepwater and frontier
basins after a period of focusing on low-risk, small-prospect drilling.”
Exploration proved more than 12 Bboe of conventional new field
volumes in 2017, he added, with oil accounting for 7 Bbbl, and nine
of the top 10 largest discoveries being oil-weighted.
“These volumes are currently the smallest annual total for a decade,
but we expect that they will be boosted by further disclosure and
appraisal,” Dr. Latham said.
“This resource creep has averaged around 40% over the decade.
If repeated for 2017, total discoveries for the year will amount to
16-18 Bboe.”
He added: “Exploration well success rates of 36% are the highest
since 2013. Operators are being rewarded for refocusing their port-
folios and high-grading prospects. The average new field discovery
size held up at 63 MMboe compared with 57 MMboe in 2016.”
During 2017 there were six giant (>500 MMboe) and 15 large (>100
MMboe) discoveries, which collectively accounted for 78% of the
total discovered resources. The largest was Kosmos/BP’s 2.6 Bboe
ultra-deepwater Yakaar gas find off Senegal.
Latham says he expects that the giant oil discoveries Zama, off-
shore Mexico, and Whale, in the US Gulf of Mexico, to be declared
commercial in the near term, while Amoca Deep (Mexico), Snoek
(Guyana) and MRL-231 (Brazil) are close to existing or emerging
infrastructure and could therefore be near-term phased developments.
HP/HT, sour gas field activity pushing
demand for exotic alloys
There is growing demand in the offshore market for corrosion
resistant alloys (CRAs), according to analyst Westwood Global Energy,
with a growing proportion of field developments requiring high-quality
downhole tubulars.
Sour gas fields and high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT)
wells need stainless, duplex, or nickel alloys to reliably transport
production from reservoir to surface facilities.
Westwood associate director Matt Loffman said that the backlog of
projects in this category includes Buckskin in the US Gulf of Mexico
and Dongfang in the South China Sea, while many more sour gas
projects will approach a final investment decision (FID) in the next
three years - all likely to consume large volumes of high quality oil
country tubular goods (OCTG).
The North Sea CRA sector has suffered more substantial losses in
percentage terms than any other major region since the commodity price
downturn, Loffman continued, with demand in 2016 of 2,000 metric tons
(2,204 tons) representing less than 50% of the equivalent 2014 market.
This has led to reports of a widespread reduction in inventories
across the region as suppliers incrementally cut regional production
and imports.
Of the minimum 11 UK North Sea fields expected to pass the FID
stage this year, at least five appear to be strong candidates for CRA
tubulars, including Blythe and Apache’s Seagull, while Maersk Oil’s
Culzean HP/HT development and Serica Energy’s Rhum gas field will
probably also require additional volumes of CRA OCTG.
Westwood anticipates upward pressure on pricing for the required
grades as new projects pass FID.
The Middle East remains the largest market for CRA products and
there is increasing competition to supply good-quality nickel alloys
16 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_16 16
Bruce Beaubouef • Houston
Stena Drilling says it has signed a contract with Nexen Petroleum
U.K. Ltd. for the semisubmersible drilling rig Stena Spey. The drilling
campaign is estimated to take 110 days with a potential additional
option well on the Golden Eagle field in the UK central North Sea. It
will commence on completion of the current well with Repsol-Sinopec.
(Courtesy Stena Drilling)
to sour gas field developments in the region, not just in the more
established tubular markets, but also to E&P operators in Egypt,
Libya, and Iran.
In the more established countries – Saudi Arabia and the UAE –
gaining qualification for the required grades will likely be a focus for
those suppliers not yet qualified, Hoffman said.
Deepwater capex still
impacted by lower rig rates
Westwood Global Energy expects global deepwater expenditure
during 2018-2022 to total $136.8 billion, 4% lower than in 2013-2017.
According to the analyst’s World Deepwater Market Forecast 1Q
report, last year’s upturn in orders should continue into 2018, improv-
ing the outlook for installation investment.
The upturn has been driven by lower supply chain costs and a
higher oil price, while many projects have been re-engineered or
even re-tendered.
However, expectations for supply chain pricing over the forecast
period look relatively flat, due to persisting over-supply in the rig and
vessel markets.
Among the main findings of the report are:
• Africa and the Americas will continue to lead the deepwater market,
accounting for 79% of forecast expenditure.
• FPSOs will continue to dominate the floating production systems
marketxvsqdbewzs, accounting for 33 of the total of 41 deepwater
units expected to be installed during 2018-2022 period.
• Total drilling and completion expenditure over the next five years
will decline by 26% compared to 2013-2017 due to suppressed
rig day rates.
• Line pipe will account for 10% of global deepwater expenditure
over 2018-2022, driven by large export gas pipelines, although
this market remains susceptible to geopolitical tensions.
The increased spend in 2017-2018 period is due to a combination
of various fasttrack projects, installation of some large pipelines,
and delivery of delayed floating units such as Total’s Kaombo and
Petrobras’ P-74, P-75, and P-76 FPSOs.
Westwood says it foresees more stable expenditure post-2020, with
an increase in FEED and tendering activities. •
2/28/18 1:39 PM

TGS details progress
on Atlantic Margin
seismic programs
TGS has issued updates on its recent and
current offshore seismic acquisition programs.
Last October, the company completed the first
season of data acquisition on the 40,000-sq km
(15,444-sq mi) Atlantic Margin 3D AM17 project
in the central-southern Norwegian Sea. Good
progress means that only around 7,500 sq km
(2,896 sq mi) of the committed area remains
for the 2018 season. The project is the single
largest 3D survey carried out by any company
in northern Europe, the company claims, and
covers largely open blocks in a relatively under-
explored area with limited drilling to date.
Clients have received fasttrack data, and
final results should be available next year.
In October, TGS completed the four-month
5,400-sq km (2,085-sq mi) Crean 3D survey in
the Irish Atlantic Margin, designed to illumi-
nate multi-level targets in an area of increasing
exploration interest.
Last year’s program offshore eastern Can-
ada, completed in October, comprised 22,000
km (13,670 mi) of 2D data and four 3D projects
of around 18,000 sq km (695 sq mi). This was
TGS’ seventh consecutive season working in
partnership with PGS in the region, and the
partnership’s most active year to date.
Their combined library for the region will
exceed 175,000 km (108,740 mi) of 2D data
and 29,250 sq km (11,293 sq mi) of 3D data.
In addition, TGS has 83,700 km (52,009 mi)
of vintage 2D data.
The company’s 289,000-sq km (111,583-sq
mi) Otos seep and geochemistry program
over the US Gulf of Mexico is designed to
mirror its Gigante seep study in the Mexican
sector, acquired during 2016.
Extended sea seep coring operations fin-
ished in early 4Q, with final available soon
afterward.
Going forward, TGS notes that most of
the oil companies that have commented on
prospects for 2018 have signalled continued
caution on the extent of exploration spending.
Demand for new seismic data will therefore
likely remain weak this year, from a histori-
cal perspective, although there could be an
upturn if the oil price remains at the current
level or rises as the year progresses.
Polar Empress goes
to work offshore Myanmar
Total and Eni have awarded Shearwater Ge-
oServices a 10,000-sq km (3,861-sq mi) marine
seismic acquisition services contract for their
2018 exploration program offshore Myanmar.
Shearwater is deploying the vessel Polar
Empress for the six-month survey, which was
due to start in January, over blocks YWB and
MD-04, 300 km (186 mi) offshore. The Polar
Empress, built in 2015, has a capacity of up to 22
1803OFF_17 17
Built in 2015, the Polar Empress has a capacity
for up to 22 streamers. (Image courtesy Shear-
water GeoServices)
streamers, and is claimed to be one of the world’s
most powerful and efficient seismic vessels.
NPD awards OfD seismic/well
data support contract
The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
(NPD) has awarded Geofysikar Tømmerbakke
and Moveout Data a two-year framework agree-
ment. The two companies will provide assistance
and training for storage and administration of
physical media containing geophysical, seismic
and well data for the NPD’s Oil for Development
(OfD) Program. This includes any requirements
for reformatting and transcription services to
newer media.
OfD is designed to help manage petroleum
resources in a sustainable manner and to as-
sist economic and social development.
UK-based Moveout Data specializes in qual-
ity control of seismic acquisition, processing
and G&G data management, using the com-
pany’s proprietary Metaseis software. It claims
that its ‘re-mastering’ solution helps streamline,
cleanse, and standardize clients’ data media
count. In addition, the company’s cloud‐based
management services allow clients to view,
access, and share data in real time worldwide.
Tullow, Eco progress
reviews of offshore
Guyana block potential
Tullow Oil and Eco (Atlantic) Oil & Gas
have identified various leads on their Orinduik
block offshore Guyana that could contain
more than 1 Bboe. The leads are drawn from
studies of several thousand kilometers of 2D
data, regional well logs and seismic correla-
tions to ExxonMobil’s nearby Stabroek block
wells. Some of the leads appear to be equiva-
lent in age to the Liza reservoir.
Last year WesternGeco completed a 2,550-
sq km (984-sq mi) 3D seismic survey over
Orinduik, and PGS is currently processing
the results in the UK.
GEOSCIENCES
Eco has contracted Gustavson Associates
in Colorado to provide independent inter-
pretation services. Gustavson will also pro-
vide a competent persons report under AIM
Guidelines and an NI-51-101 report under
TSX Guidelines: the consultant has previous
experience in the Guyana basin.
In addition, Eco has received the initial,
conditioned PreSTM and fasttrack 3D data
sets and has forwarded these to Total, which
is considering farming into Orinduik, for its
own interpretation.
CGG GeoSoftware
updates reservoir
characterization software
CGG GeoSoftware has released updates
across its entire geoscience portfolio. Recent
developments bring new capabilities within each
individual solution while offering increasingly in-
tegrated workflows from geology and geophysics
to reservoir engineering. For example, the new
‘Load-Once-Use-it-Everywhere’ capability en-
ables Jason users to operate on HampsonRussell
seismic stores and vice versa without the need
to duplicate, move, or reload seismic volumes.
Jason 9.7.1 extends and enhances reservoir
characterization capabilities with the integration
of a rock physics template in Jason crossplots
and interpretation as well as a new functionality
for Bayesian facies classification and inversion
analysis in facies and fluids probabilities. Ad-
vanced geostatistical reservoir characterization
is also now available to extract the full value from
seismic data, whether 4D, multicomponent,
depth or wide-azimuth.
For geophysical interpretation and analysis,
HampsonRussell 10.3 offers much faster load-
ing and processing of huge data volumes than
previous versions, while pre-stack inversion
now requires fewer iterations, which reduces
turnaround. Other features include new func-
tionality for quick AVO modeling with rock
physics inputs, horizontal well correlation, a
new process for de-spiking, and new advanced
spectral decomposition attributes for pre-inver-
sion analysis and improved resolution.
PowerLog 9.7.1, GeoSoftware’s petrophysi-
cal solution for well log analysis, includes
an improved well selector and better data
management. Windows-linking lets users set
up preferred interpretation workflows includ-
ing multiple viewers and processors to vastly
improve analysis of large data sets. Implemen-
tation of a Python Extensions plug-in architec-
ture is, the company claims, a game-changer
for developing custom interpretation modules.
InsightEarth 3.4 allows streaming of large
seismic volumes, so that users can work on
large data sets. Other enhancements include
a redesigned trim-and-seal process, new spec-
tral decomposition algorithms, and better
quality and tightness of fault images from
Automated Fault Extraction. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 17
2/28/18 1:39 PM
 R E G U L AT O R Y P E R S P E C T I V E S
Court issues new test for determining whether an offshore
oilfield services contract constitutes a maritime contract
Andrew M. Stakelum
King & Spalding LLP
Maritime laws developed for the blue-
water shipping industry have always been
an imperfect fit for the offshore oil and gas
industry. While both industries face the perils
of the sea, what constitutes a vessel and who
does a seaman’s work are constant questions
for the offshore oil and gas industry. Simi-
larly, for the past 25 years courts employed
a fact intensive six-factor test to determine
if an offshore oilfield services contract was
a “maritime contract.” In January 2018, the
US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit en
banc took a significant step toward simplifying
this analysis by applying a new two-part test
that focuses on the parties’ expectations at the
time of contracting. See In re Larry Doiron,
Inc., 879 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 2018).
The Larry Doiron test likely should be welcomed
by most practitioners as a simpler, more intuitive
test for determining when an offshore oilfield
services contract is a maritime contract.
This is an important issue to those who
draft offshore oilfield ser vices contracts
and those who litigate claims arising out of
their performance. If a contract is a maritime
contract, the courts will enforce the parties’
choice of the general maritime law. But if
the contract does not qualify as a maritime
contract, courts will reject the parties’ choice
of general maritime law and apply the appli-
cable state law—most often Texas or Louisi-
ana. Why is this important? Both states have
anti-indemnity statutes that will void certain
of the parties’ indemnity obligations if state
law applies. Put another way, this issue could
determine who bears the risk of loss during
an offshore casualty.
In 1990, the US Fifth Circuit began applying
the six-factor Davis & Sons analysis to deter-
mine when an offshore oilfield services con-
tract constitutes a maritime contract. See Davis
& Sons, Inc. v. Gulf Oil Corp., 919 F.2d 313
(5th Cir. 1990). This test was often criticized
for its complicated, fact intensive analysis. In
its place, the court has developed a simpler
two-part test intended to provide the parties
greater certainty at the time of contracting as
to the nature of their contract. First, the court
will determine whether the contract is “one
to provide services to facilitate the drilling or
18 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_18 18
production oil and gas on navigable waters.”
In re Larry Doiron, Inc., 879 F.3d at 576. If no,
the contract is non-maritime and there is no
need to consider the second part. But if the
answer is yes, the court will then determine
whether “the contract provide[s] or do the par-
ties expect that a vessel will play a substantial
role in the completion of the contract.”
As the test suggests, it is limited to con-
tracts involving the exploration, drilling, and
production of oil and gas—but the court does
indicate that it would expect this test to be
helpful beyond this limitation. The important
feature of this test is its focus on the parties’
expectations of a vessel’s substantial involve-
ment potentially to the exclusion of how the
contract was performed. In Larry Doiron,
the court ultimately held that a vessel whose
involvement was limited to transporting and
transferring equipment to the platform for use
by the crew was “insignificant.” But the court
also noted that the parties never anticipated
the use of the vessel in performing the work
when the contract was signed. This leaves
open the question of whether the vessel’s
involvement would have been more signifi-
cant if the parties had always expected its
involvement.
The emphasis on the parties’ expectations
raises interesting drafting questions. Should
parties begin including language in their con-
tracts affirmatively declaring their expectation
that the contract will or will not substantially
involve a vessel? The legal effect of such an
expression is uncertain. Arguably, a hollow
representation that the parties expect a vessel
to be significantly involved in the performance
of the contract to support the parties’ choice
of maritime law would be void as an attempt to
circumvent Louisiana or Texas’ public policy.
But where reasonably supported, it likely
would be relevant to the parties’ intent at the
time of contracting. While steering a contract
more toward or away from a maritime contract
may favor some parties and disadvantage oth-
ers, it does provide greater certainty. And with
this greater certainty, parties are better able to
manage risk through revised indemnities, in-
surance, or adjustments to the contract price.
Most disputes in applying this test likely
will involve whether the expected involvement
of the vessel is significant enough. The court
has already indicated that anticipating a vessel
for “transportation” to and from a platform is
not significant. Left undeveloped is whether
transportation is limited to crew travel or also
involves transportation of specialty equipment,
which the court also found to be “insignificant”
under the facts of the case.
The test, however, does suggests broad
categories of offshore services that would be
performed under maritime contracts because
of the inherent, significant involvement of a
vessel. This includes nearly all exploration
and drilling activities which are ordinarily
performed aboard a jackup drill barge, drill-
ship, or mobile offshore drilling unit—all of
which are vessels. This may also include well
completions or workovers performed from a
lift-boat. But it would not include work per-
formed on a production platform, where a
vessel is not involved. The uncertainty lies
in those contracts where work is performed
aboard a platform or other fixed structure, but
where a vessel is involved in the operations
to varying degrees. This vessel involvement
could be to assist in the well operations or even
serve as a floatel for crew when not working.
The possibilities are endless for the offshore
oil and gas industry.
The Larry Doiron test likely should be wel-
comed by most practitioners as a simpler, more
intuitive test for determining when an offshore
oilfield services contract is a maritime contract.
Like most tests, however, its true utility will be
demonstrated in how the district courts apply
it to the varying disputes. •
The author
Andrew Stakelum is a partner in King & Spalding’s
Houston office who focuses on tort and commercial
disputes involving the onshore and offshore energy
industry. His practice spans domestic oil and gas
producing states, Latin America, Asia, Africa, and
their surrounding waters. Andrew also counsels energy
industry clients on pre-litigation issues, including
contractual risk allocation, domestic oil and gas
regulations and compliance with offshore and marine
regulations.
2/28/18 1:39 PM

Demand for new
seismic data could
increase if oil prices
remain at current levels
or rise. (Courtesy CGG)
O
f all the sectors affected by the down-
turn, the marine seismic survey market
has perhaps been the hardest hit. Com-
panies that have served the market for
years have declared bankruptcy, and
others have announced their intention to exit
the market.
CGG filed for bankruptcy in France and
the US in 2017 in a move to eliminate $1.95
billion in debt from its balance sheet. Global
Geophysical Services filed for bankruptcy in
2016, its second time in two years. Seismic
surveyor Dolphin Group filed for bankruptcy
in 2015. Many companies in the market have
seen their share prices crash since 2015, in
some cases by over 90%. And in January, Sch-
lumberger announced that its WesternGeco
business unit would exit the land and marine
acquisition business.
But a number of marine seismic survey
companies have taken steps to significantly
reduce their cost base and are now reporting
increased levels of tendering activity. With the
recent rebound in oil prices, contractors and
service providers are hopeful that the market
will turn around this year.
Polarcus and PGS officials have indicated
that there could be improved tender activity in
1Q and 2Q 2018, with even greater utilization
in the second half of the year. Both companies
have noted that improved demand for marine
1803OFF_19 19
SEISMIC SURVEY MARKET OUTLOOK
Seismic survey
contractors hoping
for turnaround
Outlook for this year mixed, uptick possible
Bruce Beaubouef
Managing Editor
seismic projects often signals the beginning
of an upturn in the market.
Speaking at the Pareto Securities Oil &
Offshore conference last September, Polarcus
officials said that overall marine seismic activ-
ity is picking up. PGS officials said that they
are seeing growing demand for multi-client
activity and in production seismic projects.
With the stabilization of oil prices, opera-
tors and E&P firms are beginning to sanction
projects based on their capex guidance issued
at the beginning of 2017. As a result, Polarcus
says that tender activity has increased from
its historically low levels; and in 3Q 2017,
the company received the greatest number
of tenders it had seen since 2Q 2015. There
has been a 50% increase in sq km of surveys
tendered in 2017 compared to 2016, Polarcus
officials said. Activity is returning to new and
dormant basins, with work being especially
active offshore West Africa and the Guyana-
Suriname basin. There are some signs of re-
surgence in the Asia/Pacific region as well. In
December, the Polarcus Naila left Singapore
for a seismic survey job in the Bonaparte
basin, off Australia’s northwest coast.
For its part, PGS said that its focus on multi-
client surveys had brought greater stability
to its business despite the cyclical nature of
the market. Company officials say that the
proportion of its work that is multi-client will
continue to increase going forward. PGS also
said that it anticipates the number of produc-
tion seismic (4D) projects to increase further
in 2018. Notable areas of growing 4D activity
are the North Sea, West Africa, and Brazil.
Multi-client surveys
Multi-client surveys may in fact represent
the bulk of seismic survey work taking place
in the offshore market these days. In De-
cember, TGS reported that it will expand its
3D seismic coverage in the deepwater Gulf
of Mexico with the Alonso 3D multi-client
survey. This will be a survey of 6,172 sq km
(2,383 sq mi) located in the Atwater Valley
and Lloyd Ridge protraction areas of the US
Gulf of Mexico. Multi-level targets exist, from
Miocene to Jurassic.
This project, the company claims, allows it
to extend coverage from a core area in Mis-
sissippi Canyon into a more frontier area that
is experiencing renewed interest from E&P
companies. TGS will acquire new 3D data to
provide the higher spatial resolution required
to delineate multiple plays at multiple levels.
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 19
2/28/18 1:40 PM
 SEISMIC SURVEY MARKET OUTLOOK

PGS says that it expects the number

of production seismic (4D) projects to
increase in 2018. (Courtesy PGS)

vessel commitment with Polarcus to the end

Acquisition activities were expected to be-
gin in February 2018. Data processing will
be performed by the company using its Clari-
FiTM broadband technology. This survey is
supported by industry funding.
Other marine seismic companies are par-
ticipating in multi-client surveys as well. Ear-
lier this year, Polarcus announced that it had
extended its collaboration agreement with
TGS-NOPEC by a further year. The companies
will continue to jointly develop selected 3D
multi-client projects, and TGS will prolong its
of 2018 for up to 10,000 sq km (3,861 sq mi).
One project covered under this commit-
ment is the recently announced XArray project
in the Gulf of Mexico. For this project, Polar-
cus acquired over 15,000 sq km (5,791 sq mi)
of broadband 3D seismic data for TGS during
2017. The collaboration will further drive ves-
sel utilization in 2018, Polarcus officials say.
Spectrum, on behalf of the Institute of Na-
tional Petroleum, says it has started a 2D
multi-client seismic survey offshore Mozam-
bique. This new 2D seismic program of up
to 19,000 km (11,806 mi) will be undertaken
using a 10,000-m (32,808-ft) offset with con-
tinuous recording to enable extended record-
ing lengths and high fold data. Gravity and
magnetic data will be acquired in conjunction
with seismic data to allow for independent
verification of structure.
The survey is specifically designed to im-
age the subsurface potential in the southern
Rovuma basin and the western flanks of the
Kerimbas Graben, west of the Davie Fracture
Zone, providing a more detailed understand-

Time, cost and safety efficient

leakagetest solutions

KaMOS® Kammprofil Gasket

KaMOS® Gaskets for sealing and surveillance
- the efficient solution for flanged connections
KaMOS® Gaskets verifies correct installation by pressure
testing the ring room in flanges.

Selected references:
BP, ExxonMobil, Total, Saipem, Shell, Hyundai, ConocoPhillips,
Chevron, PTTEP, Halliburton, AMEC Paragon, Technip Offshore UK Ltd

“KaMOS® Gaskets to be used, when having too many leakages in flanged connections...”
KaMOS® RTJ Gasket
P.O.Box 484, N-4291 Kopervik, Norway • Tel +47 52 84 43 40 • Fax +47 52 84 43 41 • offshore@kamos.no • www.kamos.no

1803OFF_20 20 2/28/18 1:40 PM


ing of the prospectivity in this region. Potential
targets, identified following recent studies in
the area, include Cretaceous and Tertiary
turbidites and buried canyon plays.
The survey will also image the syn-rift struc-
tures and Late Cretaceous pro-delta stacked
turbidite sequences in the northeast Zambezi
Depression. The data will be processed with
PSTM, PSDM, and broadband products with
first deliveries in early 2Q 2018. This sur-
vey will be carried out in partnership with
WesternGeco and is supported by industry
funding. The survey is being acquired to
complement existing 2013 seismic located
in the Mozambique Channel area.
Difficulties remain
But while work is underway on several proj-
ects, dark clouds still hover over the seismic
survey market. Analyst firm Wood Mackenzie
says that exploration investment is expected
to remain suppressed and exploration budgets
tight in 2018 despite a brighter price outlook.
In a recent report focused on the deepwater
US Gulf, the firm wrote that “while 2018 prom-
ises to be a record-setting one for the region
in terms of production, exploration activity is
expected to remain flat.”
For Schlumberger, it was this type of
ENVENTURE. PUNCHING THROUGH.
When you’re pushing the limits of
exploration and development, you need
extreme technology. Enventure’s proven
ESET® solid expandable liner technology
is engineered for toughness and reliability
to help you reach Total Depth while
minimizing NPT.
Here’s how:
• Rotate across ledges and through
tortuous wellbores
• Rotate and reciprocate to improve
cementation of expanded liner
Add more punch to your process with
ESET® technology from Enventure.
To find out more, visit us at:
www.EnventureGT.com/ESET
1803OFF_21 21
SEISMIC SURVEY MARKET OUTLOOK
market outlook that led it to exit the seismic
survey marketplace. The company made the
announcement regarding its WesternGeco
business unit while reporting its 4Q 2017
financial results in mid-January. In the an-
nouncement, chairman and CEO Paal Kib-
sgaard noted that “geophysical measurement,
survey design and seismic operations have
been an essential part of Schlumberger and
our R&E [research and engineering] efforts
for more than 30 years.” But as the downturn
entered a sixth year for the seismic data ac-
quisition business, Kibsgaard said that “the
present outlook provides no line of sight for
the market recovery.”
Kibsgaard said that he believed that Sch-
lumberger’s seismic acquisition business
could not provide the desired full-cycle returns
or compete internally for funding. “Based on
this in-depth analysis,” Kibsgaard commented,
“the only product line that does not meet
our return expectations going forward, even
factoring in an eventual market recovery, is
our seismic acquisition business.”
Schlumberger says that going forward, its
WesternGeco unit will adopt an asset-light
model based on its multi-client data processing
and interpretation businesses. The company
says it plans to honor its existing contracts
and customer commitments and cold stack
equipment as it evaluates divestment options.
The squeeze in the seismic survey market
comes as the industry continues to make ma-
jor technological strides, including advances
in high-performance computing, nodal tech-
nology, broadband seismic, data analytics,
and machine learning. This may be more
than just coincidence – these advances are
enabling operators and developers to extract
higher value from acquired data. Given the
current emphasis upon capital efficiency, this
trend may help create an expectation of get-
ting the same or better information in a more
cost-effective way. It would seem that the
advance of technology, along with the market
downturn, is working to keep the market tight
and opportunities light.
Going forward, some analysts have noted
that operators are signaling continued caution
on the extent of exploration spending in 2018.
Demand for new seismic data will therefore
likely remain weak this year, from a histori-
cal perspective, although there could be an
upturn if the oil price remains at the current
level or rises as the year progresses. Seismic
survey companies can only hope that projec-
tions of better times later this year and into
next come to fruition. •
2/28/18 1:40 PM
 ASIA/PACIFIC

Central processing facility for

the North Malay Basin full-field
development. (Courtesy Hess)

Project activity
ramping up across Asia/Pacific
Cambodia sanctions first offshore development

F
ifty oil and gas fields, with collective
resources of 4 Bboe, in Southeast Asia
are expected to be approved for develop-
ment between 2018 and 2020, according
to a recent forecast from Rystad Energy.
Some of the 50 projects are later phases of ear-
lier developments, with the largest infrastruc-
ture already in place. Gas is set to comprise
85% of the resources reaching final investment
decision (FID) over the full period - the largest
volume in 2018 coming from Vietnam’s Block
B project. Most of the gas to be developed in
Indonesia and Malaysia will head to existing
LNG plants.
The analyst estimates associated greenfield
capex of $28 billion from FID to first produc-
tion along with higher overall investments in
brownfield, maintenance, and infill drilling
activities at existing projects.
With 19 fields, Indonesia is the dominant
country in the region’s FID forecast, but Ma-
laysia accounts for the largest percentage
of overall resources to be developed (37%)
Jessica Stump
Assistant Editor
and required capex (42%). Here, the analyst
expects Mubadala Petroleum’s Pegaga field
development to go forward soon, potentially
the largest individual field FID in the region
this year.
Readul Islam, research analyst at Rystad
Energy, said: “Strong economic growth has
led to burgeoning domestic gas demand
throughout the region. The resulting uptick
in local gas prices as well as the pollution
profile of the fuel compared to alternatives
means both operators and governments are
incentivized to push natural gas projects.
“Countries such as Myanmar, with offshore
gas discoveries and a still emerging local gas
market, look set for an export boom.”
Operators have brought many projects to
sanction and first production throughout the
Asia/Pacific region.
KrisEnergy Ltd. has sanctioned Apsara, the
first oil field development offshore Cambodia.
Located in block A of the Khmer basin in the
Gulf of Thailand, Phase 1A calls for a single
unmanned minimum facility 24-slot wellhead
platform connected to a moored production
barge capable of processing up to 30,000 b/d
of fluids. The vessel will also feature gas, oil,
and water separation facilities. Oil will be ex-
ported through a 1.5-km (0.9-mi) pipeline for
storage to a permanently moored floating,
storage and offloading vessel. Initially it is
envisaged that 20 development wells will be
drilled in Phase 1A.
KrisEnergy operates Cambodia block A
with a 95% working interest, with the General
Department of State Property and Non Tax
Revenue of the Ministry of Economy and
Finance holding the remaining 5%.
The block A contract area covers 3,083 sq
km (1,190 sq mi), with water depths ranging

22 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_22 22 2/28/18 1:40 PM


from 50-80 m (164-262 ft).
Once the initial Phase 1A platform is on-
stream, there will be a period of monitoring
reservoir performance – up to six months
– before the partners commit to Phase 1B.
This will likely entail up to three additional
platforms producing to the Phase 1A facilities.
Beyond that, Phase 1C could potentially add
a further six platforms for the full 10-platform
Apsara development.
BP and Reliance Industries Ltd. (RIL)
have sanctioned development of the R-Series
deepwater gas field in block KG D6 offshore
eastern India. The R-Series (D34) project is a
dry gas development in water depths of more
than 2,000 m (6,562 ft), about 70 km (43 mi)
offshore. It will be developed as a six-well
subsea tieback to an existing control and riser
platform. The project is expected to start up
in 2020 and produce up to 12 MMcm/d (425
MMcf/d).
This is the first of three planned projects
in block KG D6 that are expected to be de-
veloped in an integrated manner, producing
from about 3 tcf of discovered gas resources.
Development of the three projects, with total
investment of about $6 billion, is expected to
bring a total about 30-35 MMcm/d (1 bcf/d)
of new domestic gas production onstream,
phased over 2020-2022.
According to BP, India consumes more than
5 bcf/d of natural gas and aspires to double
gas consumption by 2022. Gas production
from the integrated development is expected
to help reduce India’s import dependence and
amount to more than 10% of the country’s
projected gas demand in 2022.
RIL has contracted WorleyParsons to
provide project management consultancy
services, which will be led and executed
by the company’s Advisian Houston office.
OneSubsea has received an EPC contract
for the supply of the subsea production sys-
tem which includes trees, subsea manifolds,
control system, tie-in system, multi-phase
meters, intervention tooling and test equip-
ment. The contract also includes installation
and commissioning support and life-of-field
services. The operator also has issued a
letter of award to McDermott International
whereby the contractor will be responsible
for engineering, procurement, installation,
and pre-commissioning of subsea flowlines,
vent lines, and a pipeline-end manifold for
connection with six subsea wells. Its scope
includes in-field pipelines, a Monoethylene
Glycol line, pipeline-end terminals, jumpers,
risers, the umbilicals system, and modification
of the control riser platform to interface with
the new facilities.
Reliance has an option to extend the pro-
gram to five to seven more subsea wells for
the Satellite-Cluster (S-Cluster), with two ad-
ditional subsea structures and flowlines in
1803OFF_23 23
Expected 2018-2020 Southeast Asia FIDs (as of January 2018).
2018
Resources (million boe)
Country Count Liquids Gas
Malaysia 11 61 512
Indonesia 19 34 61
Vietnam 10 53 680
Myanmar 4 0 58
Thailand 4 86 52
Brunei 1 19 7 0
Philippines 1 0 0 0
50 253 1,370
(Source: Rystad Energy UCube)
water depths of 1,400-1,800 m (4,593-5,905 ft).
McDermott’s Engineering Center in Chennai
will provide engineering and project manage-
ment oversight, supported by the company’s
branch in Kuala Lumpur and vessels from its
global fleet. Work on the base scope should
be completed by 2Q 2020, and the optional
scope in 1Q 2021.
Last October, Indonesia’s government ap-
proved Premier Oil’s BIGP project in Na-
tuna Sea block A. All major contracts have
been awarded and the company is targeting
first gas in 2019. Production will backfill the
company’s existing Singapore and domestic
market contracts.
In the Madura Strait off Indonesia, Husky-
CNOOC Madura has started production from
the BD gas/condensate field development.
The facilities comprise an unmanned wellhead
platform, an FPSO, and four production wells.
Water depth is 55 m (180 ft).
Offshore China, this year CNOOC expects
to start up the Weizhou 6-13 oil field; the Peng-
lai 19-3 oil field 1/3/8/9 comprehensive adjust-
ment project; the Dongfang 13-2 gas fields;
and the Wenchang 9-2/9-3/10-3 gas fields.
Late last year, CNOOC started production
from the Weizhou 12-2 oil field Phase II project
in the Beibu Gulf in the South China Sea.
Water depths average around 35.7 m (117
ft). Development, which is linked to exist-
ing facilities on the Weizhou 12-2 oil field,
called for construction of a wellhead plat-
form. Seven wells are currently in service,
producing around 6,400 b/d. This year the
operator expects to attain peak production
of 11,800 b/d.
Last July, Hess started production from
the North Malay Basin full-field development
in the Gulf of Thailand, in partnership with
Petronas. This covers nine fields in block PM
302 with combined recoverable resources
of more than 1.5 tcf of gas and 20 MMbbl
of condensate. Facilities include one central
processing and four wellhead platforms with
ASIA/PACIFIC
FID year
2019 2020
Liquids Gas Liquids Gas Sum
17 66 38 770 1,464
165 540 80 130 1,010
30 83 9 0 855
0 379 0 0 437
0 0 3 16 157
0 0 0 26
0 16 0 16
212 1,068 146 916 3,965
14 shallow production wells, and a floating
storage and offloading unit. The location is
300 km (186 mi) offshore the Tregganu Gas
Terminal in 55 m water depth.
In southeast Australia, Cooper Energy
reached FID on the Sole gas project in the
Gippsland basin offshore Victoria. Estimated
capex is $605 million, comprising $355 million
for development of the offshore Sole field and
a $250-million upgrade of onshore Orbost gas
processing facility. Sole will be developed
via two production wells (to be drilled later
this year) with subsea wellheads, connected
through a 65-km (40-mi) pipeline and a control
umbilical to Orbost. Production is expected
to begin in mid-2019.
Offshore Western Australia, Woodside Pe-
troleum Ltd. has reported that the Greater
Enfield project is 43% complete, and remains
on budget and on schedule for first oil in
mid-2019. In 1Q 2018, the two-year drilling
campaign and subsea installation are expected
to begin.
The Greater Western Flank Phase 2 project
is 74% complete, according to Woodside, and
on schedule for start-up in the first half of 2019.
This project involves eight production wells
tied back to the existing Goodwyn A platform
by a 35-km (22-mi) subsea pipeline. Offshore
construction activities are planned to begin
in the first half of the year. Subsea installa-
tion and commissioning of infrastructure is
expected to begin in the second half of 2018
and take about five months to complete.
The company also brought the Persephone
project, a two-well subsea tieback to the North
Rankin complex, online six months ahead of
schedule and more than $300 million under
budget.
As for the country’s mega LNG projects,
Wheatstone delivered first production from
Train 1 last October. Operator Chevron ex-
pects LNG Train 2 to start up in 2Q 2018. As
for the Ichthys LNG project, operator INPEX
targeted start up by the end of this month. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 23
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 DRILLING & COMPLETION

Automation advance delivers safer,

more certain casing connections
Industry’s first automated makeup and autonomous evaluation technology
Scott McIntire
Weatherford The AutoTong’s computer-

C
regulated makeup and built-
onventional wisdom has taught operators that while mistakes in evaluation combine to
during casing and completion-string makeup are unacceptable, improve connection integrity.
(All images Weatherford)
they still do occur regularly. It is common, and almost expected,
to have a few rejected connections—those that for one reason
or another do not meet the required makeup parameters—dur-
ing a casing running job.
Even simple errors, such as misreading a torque-turn graph, keying
in a wrong data entry, or exceeding the reference torque value during
spin in, raise the opportunity for an improper connection makeup. Any
risk to connection integrity ultimately risks the integrity of the well,
forcing the operator to deploy time-consuming and costly remediation
solutions that delay production.
Weatherford approached the challenge of connection-integrity
mistakes by taking what is currently a manpower-intensive process
and automating it. The company developed its AutoTong system—the
industry’s first automated makeup and autonomous evaluation tech-
nology—to deliver connection integrity with robot-like control and
precision. By adding automation to connection makeups, the system
nearly removes any human influence, and associated human error,
from the casing running process.

Today’s connection challenges

A common operator complaint about current connection makeup
processes relates to operational inefficiencies. Multiple individual
components must be assembled on the rig floor and connected
through both hardware and software communication, which translates
to lengthy rig-up and rig-down times.
Current casing running operations also suffer from slow joint run
rates, thanks largely to the role that people have to play in making
connections. Rig personnel are responsible for manually entering
tong-specific data, and a missed keystroke can result in a catastrophic
connection failure because of over- or under-torqued pipe. In addition,
an operator has to manually operate the tong—when it starts and
stops, how fast it rotates to make the connection—which introduces
additional risks of shooting past or falling short of the target torque.
Inconsistent interpretation of the torque-turn graph is also a common
occurrence, with different operators on different shifts responsible
for reading the graphs and assessing if connections have been made
up properly.
Personnel requirements are another common concern. Conventional
casing running processes are largely manual, with four to five people
moving around on the rig floor at the same time. This not only raises
serious HSE risks, but it adds significant costs when one factors in day
rates, onsite accommodations, and transportation to and from the rig.
An improper makeup can add significant costs to well construction,
with a price tag that varies depending on when and where the problem
was caught. Even if a nonconforming makeup is identified as soon as
it is completed on the rig floor, operational efficiency is still negatively
impacted. The onsite operator has to evaluate the graph, the rig crew
has to break out the connection and lay out the upper joint, and the
lower joint has to be pulled and replaced—all of which contribute to
lost time and a loss of operational momentum.
The problem becomes more costly and complicated if the non-
conforming makeup is improperly evaluated and the connection
makes its way downhole as part of the completion string. A leaking
completion connection impacts well integrity and requires costly
intervention and recovery efforts that could include running a log to
identify the precise position of the leak, deploying a workover rig to
perform the intervention services to seal the leak. Worse yet would
be pulling the completion and recompleting the well. The cost to the
operator climbs exponentially when one factors in the revenue losses
in deferred production when the well is offline.
Revolutionizing connection makeups
The automated system makes up connections in a more controlled
manner and evaluates each make up with increased accuracy which
vastly improves connection integrity.

24 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_24 24 2/28/18 1:41 PM


Using AutoTong to control and evaluate the final make-up stage dramati-
cally improves safety by minimizing the number of personnel on the rig
floor and essentially eliminating the risk of connection failures.
The AutoTong simplifies connection makeups in several key ways.
Only one operator is required to manage the tong and the incorporated
torque turns monitoring system. The operator uses the unit’s hand-grip
control, which provides simple operation via a thumb joystick, to spin the
pipe at high speed to an initial, preprogrammed reference torque value.
A tablet mounted on the tong displays a torque/turns graph and system
settings, and enables the operator to input job data, as needed. The unit
automatically stops the tong when that reference torque value is reached,
which is critical with chrome alloy completion strings as it prevents the
operator from galling or potentially over-torqueing the connection.
The operator then changes to the low-speed/high-torque setting and
presses the start button on the hand-grip control, which activates the
tong-mounted computer to automate connection makeup to the final
torque. The computer continually monitors the torque measured by two
electronic load cells and adjusts the rotational speed of the string accord-
ingly to ensure a smooth connection. The values from these two load cells
are compared to one another to ensure they are properly measuring the
torque applied to the connection, which provides sensor redundancy.
The computer is pre-programmed with the optimum makeup torque
for each connection. As the connection approaches final makeup
torque, the computer uses a proprietary speed-control to automati-
cally slow the rotation to stop at the final torque with digital precision.
This smooth, controlled process replaces the traditional way an
operator manually controls the hydraulics powering the tong and
dictates how fast or slow to make the connection. These traditional
power tongs include a hydraulic dump valve which cuts pressure to
the tong when the optimum torque is achieved. This sudden stop
typically raises the risk of over-torqueing the connections and is not
as accurate as the speed-controlled system.
Ensuring connection conformance
As soon as each makeup is completed, the system’s second com-
ponent, the AutoEvaluate software, automatically analyzes connec-
tion data to ensure conformance to OEM specifications. In a matter
of seconds, the software’s proprietary evaluation algorithms verify
connection is properly made up to the OEM criteria, thus eliminat-
ing the human errors and inconsistency associated with subjective
graphical interpretations.
Connections are interpreted using 10 times more data points than
the human eye can see, virtually eliminating any uncertainty about
connection integrity. And if the software does reject a connection, its
troubleshooting advisor application identifies the root cause of the
problem and recommends corrective action.
The system’s automated makeup and evaluation capabilities yield
several distinct benefits, beginning with safety improvements due to the
reduction of personnel on the rig floor. Along with this drop in headcount
also comes a decrease in well construction costs. The system is shipped
1803OFF_25 25
DRILLING & COMPLETION
as an all-in-one unit and installed in a single step, which reduces the
installation time, costs, and complexity of traditional makeup systems.
The precise control and error-free evaluation of string connections
deliver additional cost savings and improve safety by reducing the
number of rig personnel from six to four. And by providing consistent
makeup, accurate analysis, and minimal manual data entry, the system
ensures an overall more efficient and cost-effective makeup process,
with fewer damaged connections and laid out joints.
Ultimately, the greater assurance of consistent connection quality
through automation translates to improved well integrity for the life
of the asset. Operators not only bring their wells into production more
quickly, but also they are assured longer, uninterrupted production
thanks to a low risk of tubing leaks downhole.
Proven on the rig
The AutoTong has been run on a number of rigs around the world
since its introduction in October 2017.
An operator completing an offshore-shelf oil well near Baku was
the first to use the technology as a means of enhancing rig floor safety
and improving makeup efficiency. The operator wanted to minimize
the number of personnel on the floor while running 4½- and 7-in.
premium, chromium-alloy completion tubulars to a target depth
(TD) of 20,341 ft (6,200 m). They aimed for error-free connections
throughout the completion string, which could be confirmed with
accurate connection-makeup graph evaluation. Each connection was
to be made up to OEM specifications, with minimal marking.
A Weatherford field team deployed the full system to the drilling
rig located in 577 ft (176 m) of water, and rigged it up quicker and
more seamlessly than conventional equipment. The system required
only a single operator for the tong, eliminating the need for a separate
joint-analyzed makeup unit and technician.
The technician used the system’s hand-grip control to spin the
connection to the reference torque, after which he changed to the
low-speed/high-torque setting and pressed start. The AutoTong
system took over, automating the final makeup and slowing the rota-
tion of the joint to its final torque target. The integrated evaluation
software then automatically analyzed the makeup data to ensure that
the connection conformed to OEM specifications.
The technician repeated this process to run all 532 premium,
chromium-alloy completion tubulars with zero nonproductive time
related to this equipment. All connections were made up error-free
and to OEM specs, as confirmed by the evaluation software, which
approved the makeup graphs by automatically checking the data
against the OEM criteria. In addition to flagging any non-optimal
connections before they were run downhole, the system increased
tubular-running efficiency over conventional methods.
The system ran each joint with minimal markings and helped the
operator meet its enhanced rig safety metrics. Encouraged by the
success of this initial run, the operator has since used the system
to safely and efficiently speed up its tubular makeup operations on
several other wells.
The success of the AutoTong system on land and shallow-water rigs
has prompted Weatherford to keep innovating. Building on the automa-
tion advances of the original system, the company is now developing
a mechanized AutoTong system for safer and more efficient tubular
running in deepwater operations. Designed for applications on large
offshore rigs and drillships, the new system will integrate more sen-
sors and programing into the tong to enable complete automation of
the makeup process with the press of a button on a remote HMI unit
which could be operated from the driller cabin. Further development
will allow control of the makeup process into the rig’s control systems.
This promises to not only improve the speed of deepwater tubular
running but also enhance safety by reducing required rig personnel
down to just one engineer for the entire casing-running process. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 25
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N
Six key issues underpin successful
decommissioning strategy
Operators increasingly looking for turnkey solutions
O
ffshore exploration and production of
oil and gas is one of the most promi-
nent business activities across the
globe. Capital projects such as offshore
platforms, pipelines, and production
facilities span from North to South America,
Europe, the Middle East, West Africa, and
Asia. For decades, billions of dollars have
been invested in creating the infrastructure
required to extract and transport these re-
sources to global markets.
Many of these assets are now reaching
the end of their useful lives. For the oil and
gas industry, this end-of-life stage will involve
reinvestment to extend operations; or the plug
and abandonment (P&A) of wells, followed by
decommissioning. Across the world, there are
thousands of offshore structures and subsea
systems in mature fields that will need to be
addressed. This effort will require the coop-
eration of E&P operators, oilfield services
(OFS) companies, and regulatory agencies
– many of whom are now focused on this
stage by necessity. The confluence of physical,
regulatory, economic, and logistic difficulties
makes decommissioning both technically and
financially challenging.
26 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_26 26
Anthony Caletka
Casey Carringer
PwC
The world’s most mature offshore fields
have already become eligible for large-scale
decommissioning activities, and forecasts
indicate that there may be as much as $200
billion in decommissioning spend across 20
markets through 2040. Shareholders, em-
ployees, taxpayers, and government bodies
all have a stake in the game and will look
to strategically navigate the financial, opera-
tional, and regulatory complexities involved
in these capital projects.
Six industry challenges
While not all issues will be relevant to opera-
tors, governments, and oilfield services alike,
it is important to understand the relationships
between these parties and how they are collab-
orating to help add structure and certainty to
the decommissioning process. The following
outlines six predominant industry challenges.
Portfolio management
Successful decommissioning programs re-
quire intense planning from strategy through
execution. Forward-thinking organizations
understand that this planning requires moni-
toring pre-defined metrics, such as return on
capital employed (ROCE), against the timelines
to estimated ultimate recovery (EUR) for each
asset. Every E&P company has a different risk
appetite, and each has adopted a trigger point
that signals when an asset may be deemed
“decommissioning eligible” (or “idle iron” as
referred to in the Gulf of Mexico), based upon
commodity prices, operating costs, and remain-
ing reserves. Through this signaling, they
have been able to understand the full range
of options available for each asset including:
Selling the asset. We have seen a number
of novel approaches in the past few years in-
volving combinations of ownership/liability or
license transfers – including some owners de-
ciding to maintain full liabilities, transfer them
to trust funds, or share liability with buyer(s).
In-house decommissioning. The advance no-
tice of an asset’s end-of-life stage allows own-
ers to assess the risk involved and satisfy the
necessary front-end engineering and design
(All images courtesy PwC)
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N

(FEED), regulatory, and logistical require- The six key issues critical
ments to estimate, plan and generally prepare to decommissioning success.
for a smoothly executed project. Some have
developed customized governance and stage-
gating processes to usher these unique projects
throughout the decommissioning process.
Turnkey decommissioning. Strategic part-
nerships are emerging in the service industry
between OFS and EPCI companies to create ho-
listic ‘one-stop shop’ decommissioning offerings.
On the other hand, organizations that have
not clearly defined their decommissioning
strategy or have not prepared in advance for
unforeseen drivers, such as hurricanes, may
not have the luxury of weighing these options.
There are many examples of decommissioning
projects that have experienced cost overruns,
schedule slippage and contract disputes, result-
ing in eroded share price for all stakeholders
involved.

Project excellence
Due to the infancy of the decommissioning
services as an industry, there are very few his-
torical benchmarks for the cost, schedule, and
scope of these projects. Even looking to compa-
rable markets is of limited value because each
decommissioning market has varying depths,
structure types, and climactic conditions.
Yet, the failure to accurately estimate the
timeline and costs for a decommissioning proj-
ect, or campaign, poses two specific risks to
organizations:
• A recent PwC study found that 75% of
companies experienced average share
price deterioration of 12% within 90 days
of reporting a significant negative capital
project event – such as a project delay,
cost overrun, or operability challenge.
• Asset Retirement Obligations (AROs) are a
sizable portion of an upstream company’s
balance sheet: Many of the supermajors
have them in the billions of dollars. Un-
certainty in delivering these projects could
mean that significantly more funds will be
required than estimated.
To combat these risks, organizations will
need to focus on core project management margins of error for project execution. management costs on EPCI projects typi-
capabilities such as forecasting, quantitative Due to the lack of a sizable decommission- cally account for 8% to 12% of project cost, but
risk analysis to set appropriate budgets, based ing market to date, service companies have decommissioning projects have added risks
on risk and scope uncertainty, and “lessons not consolidated their services offerings to related to brownfield projects, discovery work
learned” initiatives to promote continuous accommodate a turnkey solution. But this is and unknowns related to corrosion, hazardous
improvement and project excellence as they changing. We see more offshore EPCI (en- fluids or structural deterioration manifesting
prepare for future decommissioning work. gineering, procurement, construction and both downhole and topsides.
installation) firms providing jacket/topsides/ Several operators have said they would like
Supply chain management subsea removal services, partnering with OFS to see partnerships in the services industry
The inherent complexity of decommission- companies who perform P&A work on the that can provide consistent turnkey solutions
ing capital projects requires many technical well and subsea infrastructure. but still allow them to maintain oversight of the
skills and roles – including operators, oilfield Depending on who you talk to, this frag- operation. For forward-looking service com-
services, subsea diving, inspection, demoli- mented supply chain will be either problematic panies, these gaps in the supply chain present
tion, offshore construction services, regula- or opportunistic. For the operator, the current opportunities to grow organically and/or inor-
tory representatives, and others. This level state requires an increased level of project ganically to capture the addressable market.
of participation yields increased handshakes, management as they deal with numerous As an operator’s appetite for turnkey solutions
coordination and risks, as well as decreased third parties involved in the process. Project grows, the service companies who can fulfill

www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 27

1803OFF_27 27 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N
these holistic needs will see more opportuni-
ties to competitively bid for decommissioning
contracts and eventually develop the level
of client intimacy needed become a trusted
decommissioning partner. These companies
have already initiated market sizing, internal
capability and inorganic growth initiatives in
order to prepare for this opportunity.
Regulatory readiness
To add yet another layer of risk and com-
plexity, operators with a global footprint will
need to understand the various regulatory and
technical standards in the regions where they
operate. As fields mature at different rates, the
regulatory bodies providing governance are
also evolving based upon the imminence of
these decommissioning “waves.” While many
used to believe that decommissioning would
be deferred and that activities would continue
to be pushed out into the future, recent events
suggest that governments are preparing to
hold operators more accountable.
In the past two years, we’ve seen the fol-
lowing activities:
The United States Government Account-
ability Office (GAO) recommended that the
Department of Interior complete plans to
revise its financial assurance procedures to
address risks posed on operators by these pro-
cedures. The GAO calculated approximately
PwC’s Tableau-based
GoM Asset Register.
28 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_28 28
$38 billion in remaining liabilities in the Gulf
of Mexico based on current standards and
cost estimates.
Abolishment of the UK’s Department of
Energy and Climate Change (DECC) as the
Department for Business, Energy, and Indus-
trial Strategy (BEIS) transitions to manage
decommissioning programs with the Oil &
Gas Authority (OGA).
The Russian National Ministry of Energy
issued an RFP for an assessment of decommis-
sioning obligations of offshore fields in Russia.
This RFP includes analysis of cost, schedule,
and scope estimates for decommissioning
projects in the region with benchmarking
analysis based on international practices.
A Netherlands Masterplan for Decommis-
sioning has been drafted to establish 1) an
organization to facilitate the Dutch decom-
missioning agenda, 2) a national decommis-
sioning database with integrated scope and
timelines, 3) effective and efficient regulation
with regulators, and 4) a “lessons learned”
initiative across projects for continuous cost
and performance improvement.
Globally, we are seeing governments begin-
ning to adopt best management practices,
quantify and interpret presumed decommis-
sioning exposures through probabilistic cost
estimates, and collaborate with industry to
determine viable decommissioning alterna-
tives (i.e. the Rigs to Reef program in the GoM
gaining international notoriety) with the dual
mandates to safeguard their environmental
assets and taxpayers’ dollars.
With this in mind, operators who can tailor
their decommissioning programs to comply
with government directives while minimizing
costs are best positioned to separate them-
selves from their competitors.
Talent management
The lifecycle of offshore assets and fields is
long, and there is a wide spectrum amongst
operators in terms of internal capabilities for
managing the decommissioning efforts. We’ve
observed some organizations with entire de-
commissioning business units and others with
only a few dedicated members embedded in a
cross-functional team. While this can be dic-
tated by asset mix and scale, there is no doubt
that operators will need adequate resources to
execute their decommissioning obligations.
One key decision operators will need to
make is whether or not to outsource decommis-
sioning projects. Those looking to remain lean
will opt to allow service companies to perform
much of the work while maintaining some level
of project oversight; others will choose to have
experienced, dedicated teams that can move
across regions to efficiently develop, oversee,
and execute decommissioning projects.
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N
With regards to attracting talent, opera-
tors will need to combat negative notions
about careers in decommissioning – such as
decommissioning is the oilfield equivalent of
“taking out the trash,” as one of our clients
often reminds us.
Information management
When offshore development increased in
the 1970s, well designs, records, and logs were
still on paper. Over the years, ownership may
have changed hands, records may have gone
missing, and even when records are available,
the tests themselves have become dated.
The use of ‘digital twin’ technology, includ-
ing drones and Lidar (Light Detection And
Ranging) may be required to digitize existing
infrastructure, in order to properly reverse
engineer and scope the decommissioning
sequence and timing to ensure that a project
that complies with safety, environmental and
regulatory constraints.
Few companies are willing to bet their
projects on historical well data. In order to
meet current regulatory and environmental
standards, many of them must first perform a
series of well tests to determine downhole con-
ditions. The results of these tests often impact
the scope and timeline of the P&A procedures
Presentations that travel so you don’t have to.
Whether creating your own presentation
or sponsoring an Offshore hosted webcast
event, you’ll be able to interact
with attendees wherever they
are from wherever you are.
Up to one hour in length, Offshore
webcasts provide an interactive
environment as if you were in the room.
Conduct your own Q&A and polls,
personalize your event introduction or
wrap up, share videos, and upload
white papers for guests to take away.
Create your interactive environment today. For upcoming sponsorship opportunities contact: David Davis | 713.963.6206 | DavidD@PennWell.com
1803OFF_29 29
necessary to meet statutory compliance.
For stronger visibility into execution and
compliance, organizations have integrated
project schedule, cost, progress, engineer-
ing and other data into project management
and role-based project collaboration systems
that provide “bit to boardroom” transparency
throughout the decommissioning process.
This ensures that project information related
to the well, infrastructure, or subsea installa-
tions flows between functional groups, across
capabilities, and up the organization to allow
for effective risk management and decision
support throughout execution.
Conclusion
Since decommissioning is a relatively new
strategic business imperative, there is a wide
spectrum of capabilities and talent required
in upstream operators responsible for execut-
ing these projects safely and successfully. In
addition, the third-party service companies
involved are building their own capabilities
and offerings across the decommissioning
life-cycle.
Finally, increased government directives,
domestic and foreign, have put added pressure
on the regulatory and financial reporting as
well as bonding requirements involved with
decommissioning a well. These mandates
have only heightened the obligatory nature
of this capital expenditure for the world’s
offshore well owners.
As go-green initiatives gather momentum,
leaner-for-longer operating models take hold,
and decommissioning becomes more impact-
ful to operators’ performance and financial
health, this stereotype may be overturned.
Eventually, with the large wave of assets be-
coming eligible for decommissioning, the
ability to manage these liabilities efficiently,
and consistently, could be a competitive dif-
ferentiator. •
The authors
Anthony Caletka is a principal with PwC’s Houston
office and serves as the Global Capital Projects & In-
frastructure Energy Leader. He is a Registered Profes-
sional Engineer with 25 years of industry experience in
engineering, construction and program management
executing projects related to capital efficiency, field
development planning and project delivery.
Casey Carringer is a senior associate with PwC’s
Houston office and specializes in the planning, design,
management, and delivery of capital programs in
the oil and gas industry. He has served clients across
all segments by providing advisory services related to
operational excellence, portfolio management, and
capital efficiency.
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N
De-risking decommissioning: predicting
performance in aging offshore assets
Andy Aston
Yvonne Roberts
Turner & Townsend
A
s an unrecoverable cost, identifying the right time, method
and model for decommissioning aging offshore assets is
essential to minimizing financial exposure for operators. By
harnessing the growing body of precedential data alongside
consideration of market conditions, the industry can de-risk
programs and optimize performance.
Aging assets require oil and gas operators to make informed
investment decisions: financially commit to late-life asset manage-
ment, or start to decommission in a safe, environmentally sound and
cost-effective way.
As decommissioning services and technical discipline has grown,
huge strides have been taken toward greater cost predictability –
learning through experience, but also by basing the decision-making
process on an increasingly robust data regime.
With activity continuing in mature markets to close down and re-
move offshore infrastructure, the industry needs to adopt an intelligent
and flexible approach to future decommissioning, where decisions
are informed by data together with an acute understanding of the
impact of market conditions.
Data platform
Compared to other commodity and infrastructure sectors, offshore
oil and gas has the advantage of having recognized early the need for
a global approach to data aggregation as a means to shaping programs
across the asset lifecycle. Through the Performance Forum, which
has been run by Turner & Townsend on behalf of major players across
the sector since the mid-1990s, it has been possible to establish a
series of industry metrics for costs across the upstream oil and gas
industry which can be used to inform critical decisions.
One of the best examples of the centrality of data in informing de-
commissioning decisions is the heavily regulated and mature market
in the North Sea and Norway. Over the next decade, 183 projects in
the field are forecast for decommissioning, with 100 platforms set for
either partial or total removal, 1,800 wells scheduled to be plugged
and abandoned, and 7,500 kilometers of pipelines to be taken offline.
External factors
This data platform provides a substantive base from which to make
decommissioning decisions, but real-world experience is essential to en-
suring it is used effectively. While decommissioning projects have been
successfully delivered for many years and cost data has been collected,
a number of external market factors mean that it remains challenging
to define and benchmark good performance in this evolving sector.
Price
First, an essential factor is commodity pricing. The low oil price
has contributed to significant decreases in supply chain costs, with
the cost of labor and vessels now much lower than when oil was
priced at $100/bbl.
In the UK there is a concerted drive to reduce costs further. The Oil
30 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_30 30
North Sea decommissioning P&A cost
per well vs. number of wells (platform wells).
(All images courtesy Turner & Townsend)
4.00
P&A cost per well (MMUSD/well)
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50 Completed
0.00
Estimate
0 Number of wells decommissioned 30
Source: Performance Forum
& Gas Authority’s Decommissioning Strategy for platforms on the
UK continental shelf is focused on delivering a 35% cost reduction
by 2020 in a technically competent, safe, and environmentally re-
sponsible manner.
It estimates an overall decommissioning price tag of £59.7 billion
($77.5 billion) based on 2016 prices, but if a minimum 35% cost reduc-
tion can be applied, the total cost of decommissioning could come
down to £38.8 billion ($50.6 billion). This strategy is also seeking
to boost supply chain expertise and capability to unlock further ef-
ficiencies, as well as providing British companies with a competitive
and exportable skill set to unlock work in other parts of the world.
However, recent cost analysis by the Performance Forum has
indicated that the bottom of market depreciation was reached around
3Q 2016, which accords with the general industry perception that
costs are back on the rise. Operators are now examining newbuild
projects, which may compete with decommissioning programs, thus
impacting the supply and demand for both people and vessels – and
shifting the economic balance once again.
Such fluctuations in price and cost reflect the need for long-term
planning and a clear understanding of the timeframes involved in
the decommissioning process, so that operators can accurately plan
across a program that could last for over a decade.
Market support
A second group of factors which impact costs includes the regu-
latory framework and any political and economic measures that
support industry.
In the UK, Norway and the US, policymakers have set out clear
guidelines under which operators should deliver decommissioning
projects, but in many other markets such as India and China there is
likely to be a less prescriptive direction. The lack of a consistent global
approach to decommissioning also makes it hard to use expertise
gained in one region to inform decisions in another.
In the UK market, pressure to maintain investment and extend the
life of programs has a major bearing on decommissioning decisions.
Oil & Gas UK, the trade association, has argued against premature
decommissioning when estimates point to 20 Bboe that are yet to be
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N
recovered. Initiatives including the UK Oil & Gas Authority’s maximiz-
ing economic recovery program is actively promoting the improvement
of life extension techniques as a means to keeping platforms live.
Politically, there is stimulus from the UK government in particular
to maintain activity – and therefore the generation of tax receipts – in
a market where there have been few new production facilities coming
forward. The decision last year to offer tax breaks on the transfer of
aging platforms to smaller firms looking to extend their life reflects the
financial imperative for the UK Treasury to encourage ongoing production.
New technology
A greater understanding of cost and program pressures is also
informing investment in new technology. The launch last year of All-
seas’ Pioneering Spirit is acknowledged as a potential game-changer.
The largest construction vessel in the world, it is capable of transporting
the entire topsides of a platform or the steel jackets underneath, before
taking them to shore for dismantling, reuse and recycling of materials.
The super vessel – which is the length of five jumbo jets – was used
to cut and lift Shell’s Delta platform topsides (24,000 metric tons) in the
North Sea Brent oilfield and undoubtedly reduced the time to decom-
mission. There is not yet sufficient industry data available to assess its
cost performance in a wider decommissioning context and it should also
be recognized that Pioneering Spirit may not be the best solution for all
projects. However, if decommissioning rates accelerate across the global
industry, then further innovation of this type is anticipated.
Data regime
These three primary areas of flux remind us that decisions around
decommissioning need to follow an adaptive and flexible methodology
that responds to changing conditions. However, these decisions can
still be strongly backed by data to de-risk the process. In the North
Sea, Performance Forum data has indicated a series of industry trends
which now shape decommissioning strategies to provide greater
certainty of cost and program.
Using the metrics established by the Performance Forum the
key stages in the decommissioning process that most significantly
affect cost performance have been identified. As a result, both the
number of stages, as well as the number in which the operator itself
is involved have been reduced
A key area of change, for example, has been in the timing for the
plug and abandonment (P&A) of platform wells. A greater understand-
ing of cost and program has seen operators shift to a staged process
whereby the P&A starts before a platform becomes designated as a
normally unmanned installation. This reduces servicing costs, includ-
A key objective on Fairfield Energy’s Dunlin decommissioning project in
the North Sea has been to embrace a culture of sharing with other compa-
nies involved in decommissioning.
1803OFF_31 31
ing those for utilities and safety systems – removing the inefficiency
of ceasing production on an operational platform only to maintain it
as a base for well decommissioning.
Another area where experience and cost data is shaping programs is
around investment in platforms to deliver decommissioning. Put simply,
the risks involved with using aging platform infrastructure, which may
have been dormant for a long time, are now better understood, which
is leading to better assessment of the need to provide new equipment.
The data is showing that these insights are anticipated to drive
better cost performance in future P&A for platform wells. Based on
estimate data recently provided to the Performance Forum, operators
in the North Sea anticipate a reduction in future P&A cost per well
values of around 40% relative to historical data for completed projects.
Establishing the benchmark
There are now moves to build on this progress by establishing
a North Sea benchmarking mechanism. Spearheaded by BP with
other major industry players, the Decommissioning Cost Reduction
Opportunity Tool seeks to establish cost sensitivities on a portfolio or
field-wide basis to drive greater understanding and better performance.
Through the experience of the Performance Forum, Turner &
Townsend has been involved in stress testing the assumptions and
basic settings – for example, over the proportion of platform wells that
may have already undergone P&A prior to the cessation of production.
Critically, this tool relies on much greater collaboration between
operators and the supply chain, as it requires contractor base lines
such as vessel rates, crane lift limits and average program timescales
to be fed in at an early stage. Ultimately, this will lead to better work-
ing practices and partnerships at an industry level, to reflect lessons
learned on individual projects.
On Fairfield Energy’s Dunlin decommissioning project in the North
Sea, a key objective has been to embrace a culture of sharing with other
companies involved in decommissioning. Based on this experience,
Turner & Townsend has been able to facilitate knowledge transfer
initiatives and the adoption of industry recognized work breakdown
structures – which will support future benchmarking.
Although the nature of regional markets means that a global ap-
proach to decommissioning is unlikely to be established, the use of
these data-backed tools has the potential to shape regulatory regimes.
Future projects
A better assessment of cost data on decommissioning projects can be
used to inform not only the design and engineering of newbuild oil and
gas assets, but also operators’ business models and execution strategies.
A traditional project approach may not be appropriate for decom-
missioning and many operators have a lack of experience in this
field, which increases risk and uncertainty. Developing fit-for-purpose
planning and cost estimating processes will be required to improve
predictability of costs and set the right strategy for success.
A new focus on allocating risk and reward is required, which means
operators must work closely with the supply chain. When performed
effectively, risk transfer allocates parties according to their ability to
control and insure against it. However, transferring risk from owner
to contractor is not always the most effective option. Incorrect risk
allocation in a contract can result in delivery failure and bring new
risk of a contractual claim.
Maintaining the data regime
The growing body of decommissioning data is already shaping bet-
ter decision-making around aging offshore assets, leading to greater
cost predictability and confidence for operators.
As an industry, we need to continue to increase our efforts to collect
more data as well as share expertise that informs engagement between
operators, regulators, stakeholders, peers and the supply chain. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 31
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 SAVETHEDATE
Hosted by:

SHARE.
LEARN.
CONNECT.
November 6-8, 2018
Moody Gardens Hotel & Convention Center
Galveston, TX, USA

Owned & Produced by: Presented by: Supported by: DEEPWATEROPERATIONS.COM

1803OFF_32 32 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N

Review of shallow water GoM structure

inventory offers preview
of decommissioning requirements
Oil and gas production decline since mid-1980s
Mark J Kaiser Gulf of Mexico outer continental shelf oil production, 1947-2017E.
Siddhartha Narra
Center for Energy Studies,
Louisiana State University

T
he shallow water Gulf of Mexico has
witnessed significant changes over
the past decade and will continue to
be subject to significant changes in the
future. Shelf production is not being
replenished by drilling and many industry
observers believe the GoM shelf is fished out.
Dwindling commercial prospects, sustained
low oil and gas prices, reduced budgets,
operator bankruptcies, and the success of
onshore shale development means that drill-
ing and installation activity in the shallow
water has been dramatically curtailed in
recent years.
Record levels of decommissioning is the Source: Data from BOEM/BSEE, February 2018.
result of the maturity of field production and
tougher regulatory conditions and oversight.
The purpose of this six-part series is to
Gulf of Mexico outer continental shelf
review structure inventories in the shallow natural gas production, 1947-2017E.
water GoM and provide detailed examinations
of producing, idle, and auxiliary structures in
the region. The series concludes with decom-
missioning and installation trends.
In the first part, the active structure inven-
tory is examined. A total of 7,054 structures
have been installed in the GoM since 1947
and 5,049 structures have been decommis-
sioned, leaving an active inventory of 2,005
structures circa 2017.
The number of standing structures in water
depth less than 400 ft (122 m) have been cut
in half since peaking at 3,974 in 2001. Circa
2017, shallow water standing structures num-
bered 1,908.
Future installments of the series will cover:
• GoM inventory
• Classification
• Producing structures
• Idle and auxiliary structures
• Decommissioning and installation trends. Source: Data from BOEM/BSEE, February 2018.

www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 33

1803OFF_33 33 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 E N G I N E E R I N G , C O N S T R U C T I O N , & I N S T A L L AT I O N

Active structures in water depth less than 400 ft, 1942-2017E. Active inventory circa 2017
Installed Removed Active
< 400 ft 6,933 5,025 1,908
> 400 ft 121 24 97
Total 7,054 5,049 2,005

Active structures by type

and water depth circa 2017
Water Caisson/ Fixed Total (%)
Depth (ft) WP Platform
≤ 100 563 727 1,290 (68%)
101-150 17 181 198 (10%)
151-200 10 152 162 (8%)
201-400 7 251 258 (14%)
<400 597 1,311 1,908 (100%)

Active inventory and stock changes,

Source: Data from BOEM/BSEE, February 2018.
2008-2017
Decommis- Decline
GoM production Stock changes Year Installed sioned Active Rate (%)
According to BOEM data reviewed in Febru- The best single summary graph describing 2008 78 154 3,755
ary 2018, the GoM produced 557 MMbbl of oil infrastructure trends in the region is the ac-
and 1.0 tcf of natural gas through October 2017 tive inventory plot. The dynamics of standing 2009 32 234 3,553 5.4
and is estimated to have produced 603 MMbbl of structures can be envisioned using a bathtub 2010 30 220 3,363 5.3
oil and 1.17 tcf of natural gas for the year. About analogy, with stock being fed by new installa- 2011 18 294 3,087 8.2
57 MMbbl of oil and 317 bcf of natural gas was tions and depleted through decommissioning.
2012 11 286 2,812 8.9
produced in water depth <400 ft, representing Active inventory at any point in time repre-
about 10% of the total oil production and almost sents the difference between the cumulative 2013 17 223 2,606 7.3
one-third of the total gas production in the GoM. installed and cumulative decommissioned 2014 21 203 2,424 7.0
Since 1947, the US outer continental shelf structure count. The stock change in the ac-
2015 4 128 2,300 5.1
has produced 20.7 Bbbl of oil and 187 tcf of tive inventory relative to its size characterize
natural gas. More than half of total oil produc- its ‘decline rate’ over time. Since 2009, the 2016 2 200 2,102 8.6
tion (12.2 Bbbl) and over 85% of natural gas decline rate of the active inventory has ranged 2017E 2 99 2,005 4.6
production have been produced in less than between 5% and 9% per year.
400 ft water depth, but the region has been in The decline rate of standing structures constant pace up until about 2006 (notice the
decline since the mid-1980s. Both oil and gas depends on two independent parameters, straight-line nature of the graph) when activity
production have fallen steeply on the shelf. installation and decommissioning activity. rapidly slowed and decommissioning began
Fortunately, the deepwater GoM is a highly The difference between these two factors dominating activity. Three different periods
prospective oil province which has supported impact inventory size, decreasing if decom- are apparent, corresponding to the three dif-
production in the region compensating for the missioning activity exceeds installation in a ferent slopes in the active curve.
decline on the shelf. Crude production from given year, and increasing when installation • Before the mid-1980s, decommission-
2017 is expected to break the 2016 record exceeds decommissioning activity. ing activity was a relatively minor affair
level of 585 MMbbl of oil, but gas finds in with activity levels averaging less than 30
deepwater have not been significant and total Trends structures per year.
gas production in the GoM continues to fall. In 1973, the first structure was decommis- • From the mid-1980s through 2006, cu-
sioned, and in the mid-1980s, removal rates mulative removals approximately track
Active inventory regularly exceeded 100 structures per year cumulative installations, and the two
At the end of 2017, there were 2,005 struc- and began to attract the attention of both state graphs roughly parallel each other and
tures in the GoM associated with oil and gas pro- and federal regulators. However, because the the number of active structures were in
duction. The vast majority of structures reside number of installations normally matched or relative equilibrium.
in water depth less than 400 ft, and circa 2017, exceeded removal rates, the active inventory • Since 2008, installation activity has slowed
there were 1,908 active shallow water structures. remained relatively stable during this time. down considerably while decommission-
Almost 80% of shallow water structures re- For nearly 20 years beginning in the late ing has accelerated, causing the active
side in water depth less than 150 ft (46 m) and 1980s, active inventories held steady between inventory to drop in a fashion that mimics
over two-thirds of structures reside in less 3,800 and 4,000 structures and peaked at 3,974 its rise in the 1970s.
than 100 ft (31 m) water depth. Caissons and in 2001. Over the past decade, removal rates From 1987-2006, there were on average 134
well protectors number less than half of fixed have strongly dominated installation activ- structures installed per year and 122 struc-
platform totals, and fixed platforms represent ity and standing inventories have declined tures removed. From 2007-2017, there were
more than two-thirds of the active inventory rapidly. on average 26 structures installed and 198
circa 2017. Installations accumulated at a relatively structures decommissioned. •

34 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_34 34 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 P R O D U C T I O N O P E R AT I O N S

Cantilever extends workover reach

for GMS jackup barges
Retrofitted system performs full range of intervention tasks
Jeremy Beckman
Editor, Europe

O
f fshore construction/brownfield
maintenance specialist Gulf Marine
Services (GMS) is expanding its in-
tervention capability. The company,
which operates a fleet of self-propelled,
self-elevating support vessels (SESVs), has
co-developed a novel well workover cantilever
system, the first of which has been installed
on the Large-Class SESV GMS Evolution.
GMS was formed in 1977 in Abu Dhabi and
went on to become an established player in
the SESV sector in the Middle East, operating
mainly off the UAE. A transformative process
started in 2007 when a group of investors, led
by Gulf Capital, acquired the company and
appointed a new management team, headed
by the current Chief Executive Duncan Ander-
son. At the time, the company was operating
four SESVs, with a fifth under construc-
tion. The new team decided to modernize
the fleet and expand the geographical
Above: GMS Evolution showcased at ADI-
coverage via a rolling newbuild program
PEC in Abu Dhabi. (All photos courtesy
of Small Class SESVs, and for the first
Gulf Marine Services) Left: The cantilever
time, Large Class SESVs designed to system fitted to GMS Evolution.
operate heavier-duty assignments and
in harsher weather/deeper water en-
vironments. tons (165 tons); while for Small Class
The first of the new Large Class ves- vessels, the water depth limit is 45 m
sels, GMS Endurance, was completed in (147 ft), with crane capacity of up to 45
2010 and made its debut offshore Saudi metric tons (49.6 tons).
Arabia. The second, GMS Endeavour, The company is not an interven-
was completed the following year, mo- tion specialist, Anderson stressed, but
bilizing for its first job to the North Sea. provides the equipment and services
Both markets were new to the company: in and workover programs, and offshore wind needed for most intervention tasks in shallow
2011, GMS also undertook its first offshore turbine installations. water traditionally performed by jackup rigs.
wind power installation campaign off north- “When we started our newbuild program 10
west Europe. Three years later, management Fleet development years ago, the smaller barges were designed
sanctioned construction of a further six ves- The four-legged, self-propelled vessels, to support light intervention, such as wireline
sels, which included the introduction of the otherwise known as jackup barges, all pro- and snubbing, to keep shallow-water wells
new Mid-Size Class SESVs, at the company’s vide a large deck space, crane capacity, and flowing under brownfield maintenance pro-
own yard in Abu Dhabi, all of which have since accommodation for up to 300 people. Large grams,” he explained. “Later we added coil
been delivered. Today the core SESV fleet Class SESVs operate in water depths of up tubing capability, and then with GustoMSC
comprises 13 vessels with an average age of to 80 m (262 ft), with crane capacity of up to in the Netherlands, we designed and built the
seven years (their typical anticipated lifespan 400 metric tons (441 tons); Mid-Size Class Mid-Size and Large Class barges to be more
is 35-40 years) and this supports a wide range vessels operate in up to 55 m (180 ft) water robust, in order to withstand harsh weather
of platform and well maintenance, intervention depth, with maximum craneage of 150 metric operations. These barges could take more

www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 35

1803OFF_35 35 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 P R O D U C T I O N O P E R AT I O N S
weight, and this in turn allowed us
to expand our intervention capability,
the prime example being GMS Evolu-
tion with the 250-metric ton [275-ton]
cantilever system. The Mid-Size and
Large Class barges can also perform
tasks such as P&A, sidetracking and
pulling out of electric submersible
pumps [ESPs].”
The SESVs undertake interven-
tion/workover assignments under
dedicated charter contracts. For
programs in the Middle East North
Africa region, the equipment spread is
installed at GMS’ yard in Abu Dhabi:
in the North Sea, refits can be per-
formed at yards in the UK, Rotter-
dam or elsewhere in the region. In
the Middle East, the company’s main
clients are the NOCs and larger IOCs,
and requirements do vary – typical-
ly, there is greater demand for ESP
change-outs off Saudi Arabia than in
the UAE, Anderson said, due to the
different reservoir pressures (GMS
Evolution is designed to operate in
either pressure regimes, he pointed
out). “Also, the length of programs
offshore the Arabian Peninsular tends
to be larger because the fields are so
massive – the UAE has the world’s
third largest offshore field - and our barges
go around many of the wellheads.”
In the southern North Sea, the company
works more for smaller independents that
have acquired producing fields from larger
companies, and are typically looking to sustain
production from the older wells in order to
defer decommissioning.
Despite the recent pickup in the oil price,
cost containment remains a widespread prior-
ity, and SESVs score heavily in terms of mob/
demobilization over conventional jackups,
GMS claims. This is due to a combination of
their travelling speed (up to 8 knots in the
case of the Large Class vessels) that allows
them to transit quicker between locations, and
the fact that being self-propelled they do not
require tug support. Once at the intervention
site they can also jack down more quickly and
in shorter weather windows.
“When you put a jackup on the seabed,”
Anderson explained, “the action of stabbing
into the soil necessitates pre-loading of the
seafloor area to ensure there is no risk of
push-through, as there could be salt caverns
or other anomalies underneath. Three-legged
jackups can only jack down safely in calm
weather – you can’t risk jacking down on
two legs, because the rig would fall over. A
four-legged SESV in DP mode is designed to
jack down securely in all types of weather,
with the hull absorbing the loads during the
jacking process. We typically pre-load in less
36 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_36 36
than 12 hours, compared with three days for
a three-legged jackup. The shorter duration
makes our procedure much more efficient
for the client.”
Cantilever operations
GMS Evolution is the fourth of the com-
pany’s Large Class, self-propelled DP-2 jackup
barges. It has been designed for well servic-
ing, construction and installation, and can
perform heavy well intervention operations
via its cantilever workover package. The ABS-
certified vessel is 61 m (200 ft) long, with
four 104-m (341-ft) lattice-type legs, and can
operate in water depths of up to 80 m (262 ft).
The (removable) cantilever supports the
well workover unit, co-designed with Nor-
wegian intervention engineering specialist
Dwellop, and hydraulically skids out over
the wellbore. The system is said to provide
a fast, accurate cantilever action up to 15 m
(49 ft) longitudinally and up to 8 m (26 ft) in
a transverse direction, skidding at a rate of
1 m/min (3.3 ft/min), so the drill floor can
be positioned over the furthest slot on the
wellhead platform within 30 minutes.
From the drill floor on the cantilever the
workover unit comprises a tower, a 2,000-HP
top drive with a pull capacity of 551,000-lb
(250 metric tons), an iron roughneck and pipe
handling system (60 pipes/hr, 2 7/8-in. to 14-
in. OD), and a 5,000-psi (345-bar) BOP. It is
fully automated and controlled from the stim
The Mid-Size Class
GMS Scirocco.
line driller’s cabin. The full weight of
the equipment and down-well tubulars
is supported entirely from the barge
and cantilever, allowing the unit to
undertake wide-ranging tasks includ-
ing running completions, ESP change-
outs, cutting and pulling conductor
casing, milling, P&A, slot recovery,
and side-track drilling.
During the design of the system
and subsequent construction and
installation phases, GMS realized it
needed an established drilling con-
tractor to operate the cantilever and
workover unit alongside its own well
ops team, and has since established
a partnership for this purpose with
Odfjell Drilling. The two companies
have been working on arrangements
that will allow them to work in any
offshore regulator y environment,
safely and efficiently. “We have our
own pumping and cementing system and our
own team of 12-20 specialists to operate this
equipment offshore,” Anderson said, while
the company normally outsources clean-up
and well testing to specialists that can provide
the associated equipment.
The cantilever system has been tested and
witnessed in operation by clients onboard
the barge, he added: “In general, they have
been very impressed, and they are evaluating
potential work scopes. One of their typical
concerns is that they have never operated
this type of well workover unit before, being
more used to operating drilling rigs.” The
cantilever system, being removable, can be
retrofitted to other GMS Large Class SESVs,
although the company’s preference is to retain
the system for GMS Evolution. It has also de-
veloped a simplified version for retrofitting to
its Mid-Size Class barges. “Constructing the
cantilever system and all associated equip-
ment takes around 12 months,” Anderson said.
Once removed, the system would be stored at
the company’s quayside base in Abu Dhabi.
GMS also sees potential for the cantilever
system for brownfield maintenance in the Far
East, particularly offshore Thailand, Malaysia,
Brunei, and Indonesia. “Our types of barges
have not been used widely in these regions to
date, the preference being for more expensive
drilling rigs. But operators there too are start-
ing to realize the benefit of the 100% uptime
that our barges bring.” •
2/28/18 1:41 PM

New POB approach enhances
efficiency, reduces costs
Methodology offers realistic offshore campaign plan
T
he time and cost of offshore activi-
ties are often underestimated. Even if
those activities are executed on time,
they may experience unplanned cost
overruns. Realistic planning can help
significantly mitigate these issues, as many of
them can be foreseeable if the right analysis
is conducted.
The goal here is to describe an approach to
incorporate POB limits (Persons on Board)
into the planning process during an offshore
campaign for a facility installation, hook-up
and commissioning in the deepwater Gulf
of Mexico.
The quality of offshore planning can be
adversely affected by the following shortfalls:
Underestimating required man-hours. Good
quality pre-commissioning check sheets pro-
vide the right estimate for required man-hours
and crafts (mix and number) to accomplish
the work. Productivity, on the other hand, is
not easy to estimate. Productivity of previously
executed projects can be a good benchmark.
However, it is important to note that poor qual-
ity planning can result in chaos which would
adversely impact the productivity, hence mis-
leading and running the risk of failure.
System completion strategies not incorporated
into the plan. Hook-up and commissioning of
an offshore facility can be handled differently
depending on strategies and considerations
that system completion team adopts. These
strategies shall be reflected in the schedule
through logical relationship between activi-
ties. One example is commissioning sequence
of some of the systems.
Exclusion zones/hazard area classification
not considered. Due to safety considerations,
there are equipment and systems that can-
not be commissioned at the same time even
if there are no workforce constraints. These
considerations shall be incorporated into the
schedule by allocation of artificial resources
and conducting resource leveling for these
resources.
POB limit has not been properly taken into
consideration. There are laws and regulations
around POB and required lifesaving equip-
ment on a vessel or offshore facility which
are enforced by government agencies. The
United States Coast Guard enforces pertinent
1803OFF_37 37
P R O D U C T I O N O P E R AT I O N S
Shawn Saadipour
Chevron U.S.A Inc.
regulations in the Gulf of Mexico which apply
to offshore facilities with persons onboard dur-
ing sailaway, installation, HUC and operation.
POB limit on an offshore facility is typically
elevated prior to introduction of hydrocarbons,
but is reduced once hydrocarbon is introduced
in the system. Managing different POB limits
during HUC planning process is a challenge.
Lack of POB consideration at various stages in
the schedule usually results in underestimat-
ing the overall duration of HUC activities. By
planning the campaign with consideration of
POB limit, projects can properly plan for a
right size accommodation and construction
support vessels (floatel) which maximize ef-
ficiency and in turn reduces the cost.
Lack of advance resource planning. Avail-
ability of workforce at the right time when
they are needed is one of the key factors for
successful offshore projects. This becomes
more significant when a workforce requires
entry visa or is available for a specific period
due to other commitment, typical example is
vendors’ representatives.
The method that is presented in this article
is only a remedy for last two items addressed
above. However, it is important to mention that
Manpower chart, before and after leveling.
140
120
100
80
Ready for Buyback Oil
before leveling
60
40
20
0
Before leveling After leveling
(All images courtesy Chevron)
applying POB limit to the plan is the last step
in development of a realistic offshore plan.
The starting point for incorporating POB
limit into our plan is utilizing a resource loaded
schedule that addresses the right scope of
work with best estimated man-hours of proper
craft at realistic level of productivity. Thus,
special attention needs to be given to the qual-
ity of HUC (and T&I) work packages as well
as commissioning check sheets.
Using the method presented here, we can:
• Ensure that the plan accommodates POB
limit at different stages of work (if/when
the POB limit changes)
• Verify if the maximum availability of each
craft originally used for planning purposes
satisfies the final plan. Additionally, the re-
sult of this analysis provides a day-to-day
resource plan for each craft to accomplish
the task in hand yet complying with POB
limit
• Run and analyze different scenarios very
quickly, i.e., the tradeoff between cost of
utilizing a floatel and the time saved by
using the vessel.
To manage POB limitations for the offshore
campaign, this author uses the Primavera
Project Manager application for planning pur-
poses, which is to plan the work and resources
within a POB limit. The result of this applica-
tion provides a realistic view of the duration
of offshore campaign. This method can be
applied to any project (or specific scope of
First oil First oil
after leveling after leveling
Ready for
Buyback Oil
after leveling
POB limit POB limit
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 37
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 P R O D U C T I O N O P E R AT I O N S
a project) where resource limitation (people
and space) is a critical issue.
Schedule settings
Use an offshore calendar with seven work-
ing days per week with 12 working hours per
day and no holiday. It is recommended to use
only one calendar for all activities even if some
of the tasks follow different calendar. Use of
different calendars is possible, yet makes the
process and analysis complicated. The most
critical information is the number of people
working per day for each activity.
It is also important to note that night shift
is a further extension of the base principles
discussed in this article.
Resource loaded schedule
As previously mentioned, to utilize this
method, a resource loaded schedule is needed
for the entire offshore campaign including
transportation, installation, and HUC (hook-
up and commissioning) activities. Below are
some key steps.
1. List all the activities related to the scope
from sailaway to first oil date. The level of
details should be aligned with work packages
and check sheets prepared for the entire scope
of work. In development of the schedule do
not use any unnecessary logical relationship
to prepopulate the work sequence. Assuming
no workforce limitation, only reflect logical
sequence of activities, sequence of systems,
and adopted strategies by using logical rela-
tionship in the schedule.
For example, if two gas compressors can be
commissioned simultaneously, do not stagger
them in series due to resource limitation. We
will utilize Primavera to level resources to
POB limit. To identify the duration of each
activity, make sure realistic productivity fac-
tor is incorporated. Basically, for each task,
assign the right number of each resource first
[Budgeted unit/Time] and then adjust the
duration. Total budgeted unit is calculated
accordingly.
2. Prepare a list of resources by crew. If there
are resources that are not interchangeable,
identify them separately as different resource,
e.g., a vendor rep for gas compressor is not
interchangeable with vendor rep for chemical
injection module. For each resource assume
a Max Unit/Time which is the maximum
availability of the resource. Primavera uses
this information to calculate overallocation
during resource leveling process.
For this analysis, we define two types of
resources. (a) Level of Effort (LOE) resource
and (b) regular resource. A Level of Effort
resource is a resource that is on board all the
times (for planning purposes, these resources
are assumed to be on board at all time which
in practice can be translated to majority of the
times). Catering crew, management and super-
38 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_38 38
Resource utilization graphÑGrouping Code.
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Operations Management/Engineering/Admin
Commissioning/Vendor reps
vision, Operations workforce, HES crew, etc.
are a few examples of LOE resources. These
resources are only assigned to LOE activities.
3. Categorize resources. This helps reporting
and data manipulation when analyzing the
results. One grouping categorizes resource
to three types as follows:
• “LOE”: LOE resource which can only be
assigned to LOE activities
• “Others”: A resource that is only assigned
to non-LOE activity
• “Agg”: A dummy “Aggregated” resource
which is only assigned to non-LOE activi-
ties and is used for resource leveling to
manage POB limit.
All resources except “Aggregated” resourc-
es are also grouped in following categories.
These categories can be customized based on
the preference. In our example, we grouped
the resources to:
• Operation
• Management/engineering/admin
• Commissioning/vendor reps
• Construction
• Transportation and installation/subsea.
LOE activities and resources
As explained, an LOE resource, is a re-
source assumed to be onboard all the times.
Configuration of LOE resources (the mix and/
or the number) varies from time to time. For
example, Operations crew is a LOE resource,
however, the number of Operations crew is
much smaller during T&I activities and it
grows as the level of commissioning activities
increases. To incorporate this logic into our
plan we need to define distinct LOE activities
in the schedule that clearly identify different
stages of offshore campaign.
It is important to note that LOE activities
shall be distinct with no overlap at any time as
activities move due to resource leveling effort.
Properly defined milestones are crucial to this
Construction T&I and subsea contractors
process. LOE resources are only assigned to
LOE activities.
Aggregated resources
To manage POB, we need to level resourc-
es. However, leveling all resources only facili-
tate to plan activities to manage the maximum
availability of each resource (Max Unit/Time
in resource list). To use resource leveling for
managing POB, we need to define a dummy
resource which, here, is called “Aggregated”
resource (aka consolidated resource). For
each LOE activity, an “Aggregated” resource
is introduced. In the example presented here
we have define two Aggregated resources in
resource list.
Aggregated resources are only assigned to
non-LOE activities that are under the scope
and boundary of each LOE activity.
The Budgeted Unit/Time and consequently
the Budgeted Units for “Aggregated” resource
is equal to the total of pertinent Budgeted
Unit/Time and Budgeted Units of other re-
sources for the specific tasks (Duration shall
be the same).
Resource leveling priority
Once all aggregated resources are assigned
to activities, it is time to identify the resource
leveling priority. This is where we identify
which tasks should be levelled first and gets
priority for utilizing resources. By resource
leveling on “Aggregated” resources we will
let Primavera to stagger activities due to POB
limitation. But the question would be: which
activity should be levelled first? To answer
this question and to facilitate this process in
Primavera, we need to define leveling priority
for each activity:
• First measure for leveling priority: (a) Top
(b) High (c) Normal (d) Low (e) Lowest
• Second measure for leveling priority: Any
sequence of numbers depending on the
2/28/18 1:41 PM

number of activities in the schedule, i.e.,
1 through 50
Finalizing leveling priority for each task
is an iterative process. First assign “first
measure” to each task. If the objective is to
minimize the overall duration of HUC activi-
ties and/or earliest First Oil milestone, one
approach is to categorize activities based on
total float time. Group the range of total float
time to five categories and assign first measure
to each group. Then assign “second measure”
as a sequencing medium to define priority
within each category. With this logic, all criti-
cal activities [to First Oil] become “Top” and
by sorting them based on start date, the first
critical task become “1,” the second become
“2” and so forth. This method of setting pri-
orities could be a good starting point and
considered as the first iteration. Obviously,
if there are other considerations other than
targeting earliest first oil date, we need to
incorporate that into the plan by adjusting the
leveling priority among activities.
Max unit/time
As described before, to manage POB limit,
only “Aggregated” resources are leveled. Be-
fore we start conducting resource leveling
to manage POB, we need to introduce “Max
Unit/Time” for all “Aggregated” resources.
How is “Max Unit/Time” calculated for each
“Aggregated” resource?
Manning on an offshore facility is deter-
mined by lifesaving equipment, berthing
and sewage capacity. However, to utilize the
maximum accommodation capacity on the
platform, the allowance shall be requested
from regulatory agency which may or may
not be granted as desired depending on the
facility design and configuration.
In the example provided here, it is assumed
that the allowance to utilize full accommodation
is granted. Other assumptions as following:
• Living quarters with the berthing capacity
of X number of people
• Temporary living quarters with the capac-
ity of Y. This temporary accommodation
can exist through HUC activities before
COI (Certificate of Inspection) until hy-
drocarbon is introduced into the system.
For this scenario, it is assumed that man-
ning reduction takes place at introduction
of Buyback Oil.
• Lifesaving boats on each side of facility
with the total capacity of Z where Z≥(X+Y).
Note: Z-(X+Y) is the limit for day time
visitors.
Based on the capacity for accommodation
prior to COI, the number of people on board
is limited to the total capacity of X+Y. Per the
regulation, in this example the limiting factor
after COI is the capacity of lifesaving boats on
one side of the facility. Thus, after COI, the
POB decreases to Z/2. Therefore;
1803OFF_39 39
P R O D U C T I O N O P E R AT I O N S
POB limit before COI = X+Y
POB limit after COI = Z/2
The maximum availability of each “Aggre-
gated” resource [which is associated with
each LOE activity] is calculated based on the
remaining capacity which is the difference
between POB limit and total number of people
assigned to LOE activities.
Before conducting resource leveling, these
calculated values for maximum availability shall
be plugged into “Max Unit/Time” in terms of
[hours/day] for each “Aggregated” resource.
Note: before conducting resource leveling,
total number of resources (crew size) for
each activity needs to be controlled whether
it is less than the remaining capacity of the
pertinent LOE resource. If there is a case that
does not satisfy this rule, we need to make a
trade-off between duration and crew size by
keeping activity total budgeted man-hours
intact. Otherwise during the resource leveling
exercise, Primavera will not be able to move
the activity to honor the POB limit.
Resource leveling
The last step in the process is to level only
“Aggregated” resources. This can be accom-
plished using “Level Resources” window.
However, if there is scarce, indispensable,
and irreplaceable resource involved in more
than one activity, we need to include them
during leveling process. One example could
be a vendor representative that is involved
in commissioning of multiple packages or
systems. In this case, the resource shall be
included in resource leveling exercise in ad-
dition to “Aggregated” resources. It is sug-
gested to limit the resource leveling exercise
only to “Aggregated” resources to prevent
underutilization of allowable POB limit. For
resource leveling, use “Select Resources...”
button, check only aggregated resources for
resource leveling exercise.
Now it is time to start resource leveling and
revise priority settings for tasks to reach the
objectives and desirable plan. As pointed out,
this process is an iterative process. Activity
Detail window showing the relationship with
“Critical” and “Driver” fields helps us to track
activities and find out why and how activities
are moved due to resource levelling effort.
Results
After few iterations of resource leveling
by changing leveling priorities, we reach an
acceptable plan that not only satisfies POB
limit but also accommodates the planning
objectives (i.e., earliest first oil date). Now it
is time to extract, analyze and demonstrate
the results. The source of information for
results is “Resource Assignment” view. (Both
Y axis for No. of People and X axis for Time in
charts presented here has been intentionally
eliminated. The objective is to demonstrate
the idea rather than presenting exact results
for the sample plan provided.)
By transferring the data to a spreadsheet
and drafting a graph, we can demonstrate how
POB limit has been satisfied with levelling
all “Aggregated” resources. As suggested,
categorizing resources are helpful for report-
ing purposes.
Conclusion
Many planners develop a schedule for off-
shore activities based on their experience with-
out paying thorough attention to POB limitation
and resource availability. Even, if they consider
POB limitation, it is an exercise outside of
schedule and at high-level. This method man-
ages POB limit using the detail schedule and
thus, the final plan (after resource leveling)
can be used for day to day planning purposes.
Another benefit of conducting this exercise
is running different what-if scenarios without
re-defining leveling priorities. Leveling priori-
ties are the logic for resource leveling and
once they are set, there is no need to change
them unless there is a change in the logic or
adding activities to the schedule.
What-if scenarios such as changes in pro-
ductivity or utilization of accommodation ves-
sels are very helpful in communicating risk
and trade-off between cost and schedule with
management.
Productivity can be adjusted by changing
the duration. Since activities are set as “Fixed
Units/Time”, change in duration will change
the total budgeted hours for each task.
Utilizing a floatel will increase the POB limit.
Once Max Availability for “with Floatel case” is
calculated, the new numbers shall be plugged
in to “Max Unit/Time” in terms of [hours/day]
and conduct the resource leveling.
This method also verifies the assumption
we made for maximum availability of each
craft (“Max Unit/Time”). For each resource,
we initially assumed a “Max Unit/Time” and
with the result of this exercise, we can verify
whether “Max Unit/Time” satisfies the adjust-
ed plan by looking at resource usage profile.
The benefits of this exercise can be sum-
marized as follows:
• It provides a realistic offshore campaign
plan that satisfies POB limit and prevent
any underestimation of time and resourc-
es required to execute the work.
• It facilitates advance resource plan prior
to start of the work and a daily work plan
for each resource during the execution.
• It facilitates conducting what-if analysis,
i.e., evaluating different level of productiv-
ity or utilization of a floatel.
It is emphasized that the quality of the re-
sults is highly dependent upon the quality of
commissioning checklist and T&I work pack-
ages regarding required resources (craft mix
and number) and the factored productivity. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 39
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 SUBSEA
Subsea monitoring data improves riser-
wellhead system design and operation
Findings from deployments should enable better fatigue loading predictions
Scot McNeill
Daniel Kluk
Kenneth Bhalla
Stress Engineering Services, Inc.
T
he term “monitoring” can elicit thoughts of arrays of sensors,
circuitously routed wiring and convoluted readings, temporarily
installed to support a critical operation. A seasoned engineer may
be conditioned to recall the orphaned machinery of a well-intended
Asset Integrity Management (AIM) system: long-forsaken instru-
mentation, dysfunctional data historians, and Human Machine Interfaces
(HMIs) that are clearly more machine than human.
In the first case, data is used for the sole purpose of supporting
operations, without retention or reuse. In the second case, actionable
insight is not effectively extracted from the data, leading to disuse of
the system. In both cases, learnings are not effectively harvested and
fed-back into the design cycle. This trend, however, is quickly being
reversed in the oil and gas industry.
With the growing percentage of industrial components and processes
being monitored and the enduring drive to increase efficiency, the ap-
petite for unlocking the value concealed within unnumbered petabytes
of raw data is on the rise.
To this end, a convergence of information technology (IT) with opera-
tional technology (OT) must take place. Subject matter expertise is needed
to know what to look for in data and data analysis skills are required to
find it. Once found, the impact can be disruptive. This article discusses
some of the findings from subsea monitoring of marine riser and wellhead
systems, which were gleaned over many deployments in various conditions.
Acceleration Time Frequency Distribution (left), and ADCP Current Data (right).
40 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_40 40
Submerged currents
The subsea wellhead and drilling riser are susceptible to high
fatigue damage rates when vortex induced vibration (VIV) occurs
due to high currents during offshore drilling activities. The most
challenging aspect of VIV analysis is converting currents to riser/
wellhead vibrations, due to the complex fluid-structure interaction.
Employing monitoring systems on the riser and BOP stack provides
a direct window into the response of the system, circumventing this
complexity. Information garnered from monitoring can be used in
planning of drilling operations for future wells as well as improvement
of analytical models.
Wellhead and riser monitoring using subsea vibration data log-
ger (SVDLs) was performed while drilling in 6,000 ft of water in an
environment with high surface and submerged currents. VIV of the
drilling riser resulting from high surface currents was observed in
the moonpool beginning in the latter half of the first month of the
deployment. Observed vibration frequencies were around 0.2-0.3
Hz. A time frequency distribution (TFD) from a logger located on
the BOP stack, is shown in Figure 1 (left). The color represents the
intensity of acceleration “energy.” Two distinct bands of energy are
visible. High frequency energy between 0.18 and 0.30 Hz is outlined
with a red rectangle and lower frequency energy from 0.02 to 0.11 Hz
is depicted with a green rectangle. While the high frequency vibrations
were expected, due to observations of high surface current and riser
motions in the moonpool, the cause of the low frequency vibrations
was, at first, mysterious.
Simultaneously recorded Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP)
data offers an explanation for the presence of the lower frequency vibra-
tions. ADCP velocity data is provided in Figure 1 (right). Comparing
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 SUBSEA

the outlined regions in the left 2 along with the damping enve-
and right figures, it can be con- lope resulting from the identified
cluded that the high frequency damping levels.
vibration is due to the strong Notably, the identified damp-
surface current, while the lower ing levels are substantially
frequency vibration is caused by higher than those used in dis-
the submerged current. Specifi- connected axial riser analysis.
cally, using the ADCP data and If the higher damping values
the Strouhal relation, the vortex are incorporated into analyti-
shedding frequency associated cal simulations, dynamic loads
with the surface current outlined are significantly reduced. This
in red was calculated to be 0.2-0.3 leads to relaxation of riser run-
Hz. Indeed the frequency range ning and retrieval restrictions.
in the TFD outlined in red is However, the level of damping
seen to be the same. Similarly, is still small enough that axial
the shedding frequency calcu- dynamic response will be a sig-
lated for the submerged current nificant consideration for large
outlined in green on the right water depths, and must be care-
figure starts out at around 0.1 fully accounted for.
Hz on the ninth day of the month
and reduced below 0.05 Hz by Model validation
the 20th. This same trend in fre- The two relevant quantities for
quency of vibration is evident in Free-Decay Data with 2.5% Damping Envelope. fatigue are the fatigue loading
the TFD outlined in green in the applied to the system and fatigue
left figure. Importantly, because the wellhead response is larger at lower resistance of structural components. To demonstrate adequate fatigue
frequencies, the low frequency energy turned out to be the primary life in pre-deployment analysis, the fatigue resistance must be shown to
driver for wellhead fatigue. be greater than the fatigue loading.
By using the SVDL data, adequate wellhead fatigue life for continued Shallow-water drilling in harsh environments using floating drilling
drilling was demonstrated when other analysis methods resulted in rigs designed for deepwater conditions can result in large cyclic loads
marginal remaining life. On a longer term, measured data highlighted imparted to the wellhead, due to large BOP stacks driven by vessel
the significance of submerged currents in the region on structural motions and direct wave loading. As a result of the arduous loading
integrity of the wellhead. The findings led to revised wellhead design conditions, fatigue resistance margins are often computed to be very
and drilling operations for the remaining wells at the site, such as slim. Margins can be improved be refining either side of the equation:
selection of fatigue-resistant wellheads and improved fairing cover- predicted loading or calculated fatigue resistance.
age. Furthermore, the measured data allowed for refinement and The loading aspect was recently investigated via a comprehensive
validation of analytical predictions. monitoring program, consisting of BOP stack, riser and vessel motions,
and on-site ocean wave and current measurements. Measured motions
Riser restrictions were compared to predicted motions from analytical simulations, driven
Drilling riser and BOP stack systems (i.e., riser systems) are dynami- by the measured waves and currents. The overall finding was that the
cally excited in the axial direction by vessel heave due to ocean waves. analytical motions matched the measured motions quite well. However,
At water depths of 10,000 ft and beyond, the fundamental natural fre- some discrepancies were identified and investigated.
quency of the riser system becomes close in proximity to the frequency An important disparity, which was also observed in some data sets in
of ocean waves, leading to resonance. deepwater, was related to measured and analytical BOP stack motions.
In this condition, the dynamic loads due to axial riser system response The analytical motions were predicted to be larger than the measured
are a significant fraction of the riser system weight, leading to high motions near the so-called wellhead natural frequency (i.e., natural
combined loads. It is known that resonant dynamic response levels frequency of the wellhead, BOP stack, casing, soil subsystem). Two
are quite sensitive to the amount of damping in the system. Calculated of the possible contributing factors are hydrodynamic damping on
damping values due to known and quantified sources can be quite low, the BOP stack and damping in the soils. Sensitivity checks indicated
significantly less than 1% of critical damping, leading to relatively large that both sources of damping are significant and could account for
dynamic loads in pre-deployment analytical simulations. As a result, low the discrepancy. Investigations are underway to better quantify these
damping levels can lead to significant restrictions on riser running and damping levels. Enhanced estimates of system parameters will improve
retrieval. A little more damping can go a long way in reducing dynamic analytical models. This will enable more refined fatigue loading pre-
loads in analytical predictions. However, data justifying the use of higher dictions, resulting in less operational restrictions and more efficient
damping levels has not been available. wellhead system design.
During deployment of drilling risers from the host vessel, the riser sys-
tem is suspended from the hook as it is being lowered onto the gimbaled Conclusion
spider, following installation of each consecutive riser joint. The vertical There is presently a great deal of excitement in the industry regard-
force comprised of the weight of the riser and BOP stack plus dynamic ing digitalization and many startup companies in this arena are vying for
forces due to vertical oscillations of the riser system is measured by a business. Some recently minted buzzwords include: big data; analytics;
load cell. Several impulse and decay data segments, representing axial machine learning; IoT; digital twin; dashboards; data science; cloud,
free-vibration of the riser system, were obtained from different sets of edge and fog computing; and servitization. While these terms can appear
hook load data. The overall damping level for axial vibration was identi- intimidating to the uninitiated, companies serious about digitalization
fied from the data using modal identification techniques. Normalized need only two basic elements: the right data and the expertise to know
waveforms of the free-decay time segments are superimposed in Figure what to do with it. •

www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 41

1803OFF_41 41 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 SUBSEA
Subsea boosting advances
reduce cost, lower risk
T
he offshore industry has faced an era of increasing challenges,
not only from reduced oil prices but also the need to develop
new methods to enable development of previously inaccessible
reserves. There are currently many common goals among
operators. Reducing costs, increasing operational capability
and reducing risk facilitate more widespread utilization of subsea
processing. Technological advances are being made today with these
key goals as the driving factor. On the forefront of innovation, opera-
tors are investing in the future of all subsea processing systems, but
have primarily focused on subsea boosting due to the field proven
status and clear benefits of the technology.
Status of subsea processing
Since its inception, subsea processing has maintained the primary
goal of enabling operators to develop fields that were previously not
economical, as well as allowing for recovery of additional reserves.
The equipment on the seabed may also reduce topsides facilities
space and weight requirements. Operators have achieved these goals
with the help and technology from subsea pump suppliers, system
integrators, and independent engineering firms. Subsea processing
technology as a whole is considered to be mature, with subsea boost-
ing, gas compression, separation, and flowline heating field proven at
this time. Subsea processing continues to evolve in terms of cost and
capability. Operators considering subsea boosting now significantly
benefit from standardization, new technologies and a more competi-
tive environment among manufacturers.
The development of ultra-deepwater fields; fields with long tiebacks;
or low-pressure reservoirs has pushed the industry to develop cost-
efficient solutions for mitigating hydrostatic head in deepwater and
friction losses of long tiebacks. The industry-accepted solution is
subsea boosting. The capabilities of subsea boosting systems have
increased during recent years. Larger throughput and differential pres-
sure capabilities and wider tolerance for production anomalies have
42 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_42 42
David McLaurin
Rebecca Roth
INTECSEA
lowered both capex and risk associated with subsea boosting systems.
Whether the project is a declining brownfield project or an up and
coming greenfield project, the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) provided
by boosting systems can significantly increase the value of the field,
and does not necessarily require significant up-front investment.
Along with EOR, subsea boosting also provides production, capex,
and flow assurance advantages.
Technology advances
There are a number of advantages that can be derived from the
latest subsea boosting technologies. These include:
Reducing capex. The standardization of pump hardware and simplifi-
cation of equipment specifications have enabled the streamlining of the
design and fabrication process, decreasing lead time and reducing capex.
New technologies such as the high voltage motors currently avail-
able on OneSubsea pumps are enabling boosting systems to be in-
stalled with longer tiebacks, without the use of subsea transformers.
High voltage motors allow for increased voltage between VFDs and
motors, decreasing voltage drop caused by long power conductor
step-outs. Pump hardware has also increased in size and capability
(shaft power, pressure differential and throughput) allowing lower
pump quantities to satisfy project requirements and decreasing cost.
For example, pump systems with 0.8 to 1.5 MW shaft power were
considered high power in the past. Today, 3.0 MW pumps are com-
mon and suppliers are now qualifying equipment to reach as high as
6.0 MW shaft power.
Additionally, advancements in motor drive and pump designs such
as modular pump stages with subsea VFDs have reduced the topsides
real-estate and weight requirements. Innovative barrier fluid solutions
such as water-based barrier fluid systems (for permanent magnet motors)
eliminate the need for barrier fluid dehydration topsides. There are even
qualified pump systems which completely eliminate the need for barrier
fluid and remove all barrier fluid equipment from topsides and subsea.
There has also been an increase in the quantity of subsea
boosting system suppliers. The increase in competition has
been a key facilitator of lower capex.
Up-front planning to enable subsea boosting for a project
can lead to significant capex savings when the boosting sys-
tem is installed. One of the largest challenges for suppliers
developing boosting systems on brownfield projects has
been the lack of real estate, weight capacity and power on
the host facility to install these systems. There are also ben-
efits to enabling tie-in and isolation in the subsea hardware
during front-end design as this could prevent a shutdown
of production when subsea boosting equipment is installed.
Increasing operational tolerance. Increasing boosting system
performance and tolerance to production conditions such as
high gas volume fraction (GVF) or gas slugs has been a pri-
mary goal amongst operators and boosting system suppliers.
The increased motor efficiency of permanent magnet motors
(used on TechnipFMC and BHGE pumps) and increased
motor speed capability of both permanent magnet motors
and high duty induction motors allow pumps to better handle
high GVF. Enhancements in recirculation systems such as
upstream homogenization and downstream compact liquid
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 SUBSEA

Subsea boosting advantages. in the well-stream. Helico-mixed pumps are a new, quali-
Production advantages Capex reduction opportunities Flow assurance advantages fied technology from Aker Solutions which allow for more
• Accelerated production • SURF capex may be reduced • Increased flow assurance pressure to be generated per pump stage.
(increased early life produc- as a dual-pipeline design efficiency vs. a free flowing Reducing risk. Over the past several years, there have
tion without reducing total may be replaced by a single system been large advancements in the reduction and control of risk
recovery) pipeline • Effective management of associated with subsea boosting systems. Standardization
• Increased recovery and • Pipeline sizes may be hydrate formation and wax
extension of field life reduced deposition by increasing pres-
of subsea pump equipment such as rotors, impellors and
sure and temperature seals has allowed for proven understanding of performance.
• Facilitates production from • Manifold size and functional-
low energy reservoirs/wells ity may be reduced • Increased system flow rate At the same time, new developments have been made in
providing the ability to kick reduces temperature drop pump system designs which incorporate lessons learned
• Reduced flowline insulation
off dead wells or draw low requirements across flowline for shorter to as boosting system performance is better understood.
pressure wells medium tiebacks Another enabler for risk reduction is condition monitor-
• Faster and safer start-up of • Increased temperature of ing. New hardware such as proximity probes allow for better
low energy wells flowing system reduces
visibility of subsea pump status and behavior. Proximity
• Enables recovery from chemical injection require-
ments probes are a more capable alternative to accelerometers
marginal, heavy oil and
deepwater fields • More effective management for vibration monitoring. Condition monitoring software
of slugging and service packages, provided by pump suppliers, allow
for in situ performance analysis, trending and predictive
recirculation separators also enable pumps to handle higher GVF. maintenance/intervention at times of opportunity rather than times
The results of all these advancements are multiphase pump systems of failure.
which can operate with production from 0-95% GVF and at 100% GVF
for limited durations. Subsea processing poster
In combination with higher power motors, new innovative subsea This issue of Offshore also contains the 2018 Worldwide Survey of
pump designs allow for enhanced control of pump stages, more Subsea Processing poster, the eleventh installment of this industry
effective pump stages and greater tolerance to changes in the well- resource. The primary aims of this poster are to chronicle the develop-
stream. Modular, compact subsea pumps have been developed by ment and developers of these systems and to document the continued
Baker Hughes, a GE company which include subsea VFDs for each commitment of oil companies to the application of these technologies.
separate, modular stage. This allows for control of each pump stage For online access to view and download all posters, please visit http://
individually and can increase the pump’s ability to handle changes www.offshore-mag.com/maps-posters.html. •

Looking for a new way

to promote your company?
Document your
Look no further than company’s growth
Foster
and history
PennWell custom publishing relationships
with both
current
We provide high quality work from the leading publisher of the Capture your company’s and new
history and highlight customers
oil & gas industry. Put our expertise to work — use our first class
milestones
writers, designers and photographers to create your own publication.

Corporate Profiles History Books

Let us do the work for you!
For details contact:
the world’s natural resource

Roy Markum, VP Custom Publishing

at roym@pennwell.com, 713.963.6220 F. Jay Schempf

1803OFF_43 43 2/28/18 1:41 PM

 MAN Subsea
High Pressure
Introducing MultiBooster Filter Assemblies
■ Superior 6MW subsea boosting pump
■ Next generation condition monitoring
Compression Technology
The Filter of Choice
Innovating together
■ Robust solution for Extreme Environments Our new generation Electrically Trace Heated Pipe-in-Pipe (ETH-PiP) technology provides active heating and
S&P Platts Global Energy Award Winner 2017 a major upgrade in controlling fluid temperature and avoiding hydrate formation and waxing over long distances.
Commercial Application of the Year www.swift-jbinternational.com Discover more. TechnipFMC.com
Made in USA

2018 WORLDWIDE SURVEY

SUBSEA SEPARATION SYSTEM TYPES: Fig. 2: TechnipFMC Conceptual SS Gas/Liquid Fig. 4: Saipem Multipipe Fig. 5: Aker Solutions subsea oil/water SUBSEA SEAWATER TREATMENT AND INJECTION SUBSEA BOOSTING PUMP TYPES GRAPH 1 – GVF vs. DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE - OPERATIONAL AND CONCEPTUAL CAPABILITIES GRAPH 2 – DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE vs. THROUGHPUT - SUBSEA PUMP CAPABILITIES
BOOSTING SYSTEM EXAMPLES (CONCEPTUAL & DELIVERED) Fig. 5: 1 of 3 Jack & St. Malo Pump
Stations in the Factory Test Pit
Separation & Boosting System for Pazflor (Prototype Tested 2-phase separation and injection, featuring 1st and
Gas/liquid Separation and 2nd stage separation, oil boosting and water Fig. 1: Aker Solutions’ Fig. 2: Conceptual Illustration Fig.3: Subsea water injection 350 350 Fig.1: Installation of the Fig. 2: OneSubsea’s Pump Fig. 3: OneSubsea’s Helico- Fig. 4: OneSubsea’s Cen- for SIT Immediately Prior to Water Fill
COURTESY OF
1. GRAVITY SEPARATION SYSTEMS TABLE 2 – PUMP TYPES & APPLICATIONS 5,100 5,100

OF SUBSEA PROCESSING
Boosting System) injection pumps LiquidBooster™ Subsea Raw of Installation of Tyrihans integrated solution - Aker OneSubsea Pump Module Station with Pump Unit and Axial Pump Module for the trifugal Pump Module with

Differential Pressure (Bar/psi)

Differential Pressure (Bar/psi)

Seawater Injection (SRSWI) SRSWI System Solutions LiquidBooster 300 SPP - Single Phase Pump 300 SPP - Single Phase Pump into Pump Station during Mixer for CNR’s Lyell project Total GirRi project handling tool during SIT for
Fig. 1A: TechnipFMC Conceptual Subsea Separation System for the Tordis Project Fig. 3: GE Subsea Separation and TYPE NORM. CONFIG. APPLICABILITY FOR SUBSEA BOOSTING 4,400 SPP (Centrifugal) TSP - Twin Screw Pump
System for Statoil Tyrihans and NOV 4,400 MPP - Multi-Phase Pump SIT for Exxon Julia the Exxon Julia project
Produced Water Reinjection System H Highest differential pressure capability among pump types WGC - Wet Gas Compression
CENTRIFUGAL HORIZONTAL 250 250 SPP ESP - Electrical Submersible Pump
for Troll C H Handles low Gas Volume Fraction (GVF) < 15% at suction DGC - Dry Gas Compression
(SINGLE PHASE) OR VERTICAL 3,625 3,625
STATUS OF TECHNOLOGIES AND SYSTEMS conditions
H Combination of helico-axial and centrifugal impeller stages 200
Helico-Axial
200

MARCH 2018
2,900
H Primarily used downstream of separator or in low GOR 2,900
HYBRID VERTICAL
applications where GVF is consistently < 30% at suction 150 Hybrid 150
conditions 2,175 2,175
H Widely deployed technology used for boosting individual 100 TSP 100
Prepared By: Rebecca Roth, David McLaurin, Mike Paulin, Mac McKee, Sriram Subramanian, Fig. 1B:
Tordis
MUDLINE ESP
HORIZONTAL
OR VERTICAL
wells, caissons, flowline risers, and mudline horizontal
boosting applications
1,450 1,450 Courtesy of OneSubsea
NOV and Aker Solutions ESP MPP Courtesy of OneSubsea
H Tested for conditions up to 70% GVF Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea
Craig Hume, and Veerendhar Ponagandla of INTECSEA, Separator
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Aker Solutions
50
725
50
725 Fig. 9: TechnipFMC MPP
Fig. 10: Seafloor Boosting
Using ESP in Caisson
Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company H Applicable for higher GVF boosting applications; Capable of WGC DGC
E. Kurt Albaugh, Consulting Engineer & Volunteer Poster Editor, Courtesy of Aker Solutions Fig. 6: SWIT™ Technology, a disruptive HELICO-AXIAL
VERTICAL
operating at 0-95% GVF at suction conditions 0 bar 0 bar Courtesy of OneSubsea
Fig. 7: GE Boosting Station Fig. 8: OneSubsea’s Pump Modules for
Total GirRi and Shell Draugen prior to SIT
for BC-10
Courtesy of Saipem (MULTIPHASE) H Most common subsea multiphase pump type 0 psi
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 psi
0 m3/Day 66 662
and David Davis of Offshore Magazine Fig. 4 & 5: Saipem-Veolia-Total Subsea technology for providing tailor-made water with
superior quality at the seabed for improved and
H Moderate particulate tolerance 0 MBLPD 15
133
30
199
45
264
60
331
75
397
90
464
105
530
120
596
135 150 Fig. 6: TechnipFMC
Fig. 7: Saipem SpoolSep (Laboratory Tested 3-phase Fig. 8: NOV Produced Water Separator – meeting Sulphate Removal Prototype - deep water H Good for handling high GVF - up to 98% GVF at suction % GVF LIQUID GAS
Poster Assembled By: Chris Jones of Xenon Group, Inc.; Digital Images by: Sid Aguirre of 3DMM Courtesy of TechnipFMC
Separation and Produced Water Reinjection System) strict reservoir injection or discharge requirements tested at Alima FPU in Congo; whole system enhanced oil recovery. Thorough disinfection by
TWIN SCREW HORIZONTAL conditions Notes: 1. For pump applications, the term differential pressure is used. However, for
3
Throughput (m /Day/MBLPD) SS Multiphase Pumping
Courtesy of TechnipFMC the Seabox™ is a key differentiator for long term Module with Sulzer Pump
E-Mail Comments, Correction or Additions to: ssp@intecsea.com Fig. 6: Aker Solutions’ Hi-Sep, a robust and flex-
by gravity based produced water cleaning industrialization is ongoing; unit capable of
reliable sulphateand/or salt removal and is easily
(MULTIPHASE) OR VERTICAL H Preferred technology for high viscosity fluids. Less efficient compressor applications the term pressure ratio is used. 2. Curves are approximate and COURTESY OF
Notes: Curves are approximate and assume a specific liquid throughput, identical for each
pump type. Values are given on a “per pump” basis.
COURTESY OF
HORIZONTAL SEPARATOR - This type is more efficient for oil/water separation. An treating and injecting up to 80 kbwpd at lower viscosities. assume a specific liquid throughput, identical for each pump type.
For Archived SS Processing Posters: http://www.offshore-mag.com/maps-posters.html example is the orange colored horizontal separator for the Tordis Project shown in Fig. ible solution for CO2 separation and re-injection scalable to required capacity.
For Educational Videos on SS Processing: http://www.offshore-mag.com/learning-center.html 1A above. Membrane feed pump
RO Membranes VERTICAL ESP PUMPS SINGLE PHASE PUMPS (CENTRIFUGAL) HYBRID PUMPS MULTIPHASE PUMPS TWIN SCREW PUMPS
HORIZONTAL/MUDLINE ESP SYSTEM EXAMPLES Courtesy of GE
VERTICAL SEPARATOR – This type is more efficient for gas/liquid separation. The liquid (For GVF < 70%) (For GVF < 15%) (For GVF < 30%) (HELICO-AXIAL/ROTODYNAMIC) (For GVF < 95%) (For GVF < 98%) Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of TechnipFMC
keeps a fluid blanket on the pump and reduces potential pump cavitation. An example is
the Pazflor vertical separator shown in Fig. 2. Courtesy of TechnipFMC Microfiltration Fig. 1: Diagram of Vertically Fig. 2: Horizontal ESP Boosting Station Fig. 4: Vertically Configured Fig. 5: Vertically Configured Fig. 6: Vertically Configured Fig. 7: Vertically Configured Fig. 8: Vertically Configured Fig. 9: Vertically Configured Fig. 10: Twin Screw Pump Cross Fig. 11: Jack & St. Malo Pump Stations Fig. 12: OneSubsea’s SIT Testing of Fig. 13: Aker Solutions
Configured Gas Handling ESP Centrifugal Single Phase Centrifugal Single Phase Hybrid Pump & Motor Hybrid Pump & Motor Helico-Axial Pump & Motor Semi-Axial Pump Section Diagram in the Factory Pit for SIT Total MoHo Subsea Boosting System MultiBooster™ System - Courtesy of Aker Solutions
in a Seabed Caisson Pump & Motor Diagram Pump & Motor Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Pump & Motor Diagram Dual Pump Station
2. CAISSON SEPARATION Fig. 10: Caisson Separation/ Fig. 11: TechnipFMC
ESP Boosting System Vertical Access Caisson Courtesy of Saipem Courtesy of NOV

M A G A Z I N E SYSTEMS INSTALLED with ESP Boosting Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Saipem
Seabox™ Courtesy of Aker Solutions

< 100m INTO SEABED (Gas/ Liquid Separation &

Courtesy of NOV
Fig. 14: Åsgard Single
Boosting System)
Fig. 7: BHGE conceptual Subsea Phase Pump
M 3. COMPACT/DYNAMIC SEPARATION SYSTEMS Fig. 15: ExxonMobil’s SS Compact Separation, Sulphate Removal and Injection Fig.9: OneSubsea’s Testing of the
System, built on a combination of Albacore Raw Seawater Injection Courtesy of Sulzer/
Fig. 12: OneSubsea Conceptual Fig. 13: OneSubsea Conceptual Fig. 14: FMC Technologies 3-Phase Separation Boosting, and Produced WI System Using
ultra-and nano-filtration technologies, System during SIT of Pump and TechnipFMC
Two-Phase Separation System Three-Phase Separation System System with Produced WI Using In-Line Multiple Technologies for 3-Phase Separation
scalable to any capacity Filtration System Courtesy of OneSubsea
Separation Technology for the MarlimProject plus Sand Fig. 15: Courtesy of OneSubsea
Fig. 9: Centrifugal Subsea Submersible Courtesy of Leistritz Courtesy of Aker Solutions
Pump (BCSS) FSubsea’s Omnirise Fig. 16: TechnipFMC Centrifugal Fig. 17: Loadout of the
Fig. 8: OneSubsea Raw Courtesy of TechnipFMC miniBooster Pump Station with Multiphase OneSubsea Pump Station for Fig. 18: OneSubsea – Loadout of 1 of 6,
Seawater Injection System Fig. 11: BHGE Modular Compact Pump
Pump (Exposed) the Total CLOV Project 2.3MW Hybrid Pumps for Pazflor
being installed Fig. 3: POWERJump Boosting System Cross Section –24 stages (6MW)
for Columbia E Field
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE CONTRIBUTORS
INTECSEA and Offshore Magazine wish to acknowledge the following companies and individuals who continue to support our efforts
to educate and inform the oil & gas industry on the status of subsea processing technologies and systems: Courtesy of Aker Solutions

ABB: Rita-Wei Fu, Tor-Eivind Moen; ABS: Smarty John, Jessie Lin, Meng-Lung Liu, Hao Song; Aker Solutions: Marco Gabelloni, Jonah Margulis, Kate Winterton; FSubsea: Alexander Fuglesang; Fig. 22: FSubsea’s
Baker Hughes, a GE company: Alisdair McDonald; ITP InterPipe: Géraldine Salque, Wayne Grobbelaar; ITT Bornemann: Stefan Ladig; Leistritz: Jeffery De Vaul; MAN Diesel & Turbo: Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of Schlumberger Omnirise – barrier-
Roberto Rubichi, Domingo Fernandez and Claudine Bargetzi; Nexans: Angéline Afanoukoe; NOV: Ingjerd Jensen, Svein Fidje, Torbjorn Hegdal, Eirik Dirdal; OneSubsea: Thomas Kajander, Timothy fluid less, integrated VSD
Taylor, Phillip Luce, Grant Harris, Jennifer McMurtry, Lisa Ann Hofmann; Saipem: Alessandro Radicioni, Stephanie Abrand, Chiesa Giovanni, Casotto Marco; Schneider Electric: Kristina Hakala; Courtesy of TechnipFMC Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea ESPs can be installed in a caisson function (1.5MW, 6600V
Shell: Chris Shaw; Siemens: Richard Barratt, Kim Smith; Statoil: Ole Økland, Bjørgulf Haukelidsæter Eidesen, and Atle Harald Børnes; Subsea 7: Michael Firmian, Guy Mencarelli, Sigbjorn to gather and boost flow from SPP prototype ~2019)
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Figs. 2 & 3: Courtesy of OneSubsea
Courtesy Courtesy of OneSubsea
of TechnipFMC CourtesyCourtesy
of OneSubsea
of ExxonMobil Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea
Daasvatn, Martin Goodlad; Sulzer: Mika Tienhaara; TechnipFMC: Janardhan Davalath, Douglas Wiles, Laurent Decoret; Teledyne: Catherine Carlson multiple wells. Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of FSubsea Courtesy of TechnipFMC Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea

Fig. 19: Seafloor Boosting System Using Fig. 20: OneSubsea – Loadout of Fig. 21: BHGE Modular
POSTER COLOR CODE KEY TABLE 1 –2018 WORLDWIDE SURVEY OF SUBSEA GAS COMPRESSION, BOOSTING, WATER INJECTION, AND SEPARATION (AS OF FEBRUARY 2018) (1)(2) COURTESY OF SUBSEA BOOSTING PROJECT TRENDS ADVANCES IN SUBSEA BOOSTING TECHNOLOGY: REDUCING COST AND RISK WHILE INCREASING OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY ESPs in Caissons the Shell Draugen Pump Station Compact Pump (MCP)
The poster is divided into distinct sections
CURRENT STATUS

FRACTION (GVF)
UNIT POWER (3)
and each section is marked by a background GRAPH 3: TIEBACK DISTANCE vs. WATER DEPTH FOR SS BOOSTING SYSTEMS

TOTAL POWER

GAS VOLUME
PROCESSING

CAPEX Reduction Increased Operational Tolerance Risk Reduction

DISCIPLINE

color. The color denotes the type of technology

DEMAND
CURRENT PUMP TYPE 0 (ft) Standardization of Subsea Pump Hardware
COUNT

presented in the section. This color code is FIELD OR PROJECT REGION/ WATER TIEBACK SYSTEM FLOW RATE DIFFERENTIAL SYSTEM NO. OF COMPRESSOR/PUMP IN-SERVICE/OPERATING 0 (m)

(5)
carried throughout the poster. Below are the color COMMENTS OWNER/FIELD or • As More Projects are Executed, Suppliers can provide
(Ordered by Start Date) BASINS DEPTH DISTANCE (@LINE CONDITIONS) PRESSURE PACKAGER PUMPS UNITS MANUFACTURER INFORMATION standardized hardware designs based on past projects.
code designations for each of the seven themes. OPERATOR COMPR. TYPE 1,640 (ft)
500 (m) High Voltage Motor • Standardization of Hardware Like Motors and Impellors Innovative Subsea Pump Designs Enhanced Condition Monitoring
Full Wellstream Subsea Boosting Greater Enfield Enable Long Tie-backs Without the Use of Subsea Transformers Streamlines the Design Process. Advanced Subsea Pump System Designs Allow For Enhanced Condition Monitoring for Subsea Boosting Systems Can Include a Combination of New
M3/Hr. MBOPD % OF PUMPS or START (12) END or 3,280 (ft) • Simplified engineering and fabrication activities may also Control and More Effective Pump Stages, which Allows for Hardware (Such as Proximity Probes), Software and Real-time Monitoring by Suppliers,
Subsea Separation COMPANY Meters Feet Km Miles
(37) MBWPD BAR (4) PSI (4) MW MW
VOL. COMPANY
COMPR. TYPE COMPANY (Month-Year) PRESENT
MTHS 1,000 (m) yield a reduction in risk. Greater Tolerance to Wellstream Changes. Maximizing Uptime through Trending and Predictive Analysis.

Water Depth
Subsea Gas Compression 1 DEMO 2000 Q Statoil K-Lab Test Statoil Offshore Norway 3.60 n/a OneSubsea Counter Axial OneSubsea 2001 Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company
4,920 (ft) Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of FSubsea
Water Injection with Subsea Pumps 2 Ormen Lange Gas Compression Pilot CP Testing 1 train @ Nyhamna, Norway Norske Shell Offshore Norway 10 33 0.0 0.0 25,000 3776 60.0 870 12.50 58.00 n/a Aker Solutions 1 Centrifugal GE Compr/Aker Pump 2011 30-Aug-16 1,500 (m)
Standardization of Subsea Pump Hardware
Dalmation
3 Åsgard - Midgard & Mikkel Fields (7) O Subsea Gas Compression Statoil (18) Offshore Norway 300 984 40.0 25.0 20,000 3,021 50.0 725 11.50 24.40 n/a Aker Solutions (11) 2+1 Spare +1 Centrifugal MAN compr/Aker pump 6-Sep-15 1-Mar-18 18 Jack & St. Malo • In the Past, Complex Operator Requirements have Increased
6,560 (ft)
COMPRESSION

Subsea Active Heating

ACTIVE HEATING SYSTEM TYPES For a list of worldwide Active Heating projects: www.offshore-mag.com/maps-posters.html
SUBSEA GAS

4 Gullfaks South Brent (25) O Subsea Wet Gas Compression Statoil (18) Offshore Norway 135 443 15.5 9.7 9,600 1,450 30.0 435 5.00 10.00 95% OneSubsea (10) 2+1 Spare Counter Axial OneSubsea Jul-2017 2-Nov-15 1 2,000 (m) Lead Time and CAPEX.
Power Transmission/Distribution and Controls 5 Ormen Lange Gas Compression 2 (28) C Subsea Gas Compression Norske Shell Offshore Norway 860 2,822 120.0 75.0 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD n/a TBA 2 Centrifugal TBA 2021 Julia • The Industry is Moving Towards Standardized or Supplier
6 Troll C Subsea Gas Compression Statoil Offshore Norway 340 1,116 4.0 2.5 n/a TBA Undecided TBA TBD 8,200 (ft) Based Subsea Pump Specifications (Example: Subsea TYPE 1A: Direct Electrical Heating (DEH) – Wet insulated rigid pipe with piggyback power cable
Miscellaneous Information/Combination of Technologies 2,500 (m) Processing JIP – Standardization of Subsea Pumping).
7 Peon (35) P/H Subsea Gas Compression Statoil Offshore Norway 385 1,263 TBD TBD TBD TBD Stones Fig. 1: Aker Solutions DEH Cable & Attachment to Flowline
SS Pumps - Conceptual Courtesy of Aker Solutions
8 Snohvit C Subsea Gas Compression Statoil Barents Sea 345 1,132 143.0 89.4 TBD n/a TBA TBA 2020 9,840 (ft) SS Pumps - Awarded and in Manufacturing/Delivered
3,000 (m) Compact Module Pumps Fig. 2: Nexans Conceptual DEH Cable Cross-sections & Attachments
9 Shtokman (36) P/H Subsea Gas Compression Gazprom Barents Sea 350 1,148 565.0 353.1 TBD n/a TBA Centrifugal TBA 2022 SS Pumps - Operational
TABLE 3 – ACRONYMS & 10 Åsgard - Midgard & Mikkel Fields C Subsea Gas Compression - Phase 2 Statoil (18) Offshore Norway 300 984 40.0 25.0 12,000 60.0 11.50 24.40 n/a TBA 2+1 Spare +1 Centrifugal MAN compr/Aker pump 2021 DEH riser cable
ABBREVIATIONS 11,480 (ft)
11 Jansz-Io & Gorgon Fields C Subsea Gas Compression, Alternative to Floating Host Chevron W. Australia 1,350 4,429 130.0 81.3 60.0 Aker Solutions 2021 3,500 (m) 0 (mi) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
AC Alternating Current 1 Prezioso A MPP at Base of Platform ENI Italy 50 164 0.0 0.0 65.0 10 40.0 580 0.15 30-90% Saipem 1 Twin-Screw Nuovo Pignone (9) 1994 1995 0 (km) 3.1 6.2 9.3 12.4 15.5 18.6 21.7 24.9
ASD Adjustable Speed Drive 2 Draugen Field A Hydraulic Drive MPP (17) Norske Shell Offshore Norway 270 886 4.0 2.5 193.0 29 50.0 725 0.75 42% OneSubsea 1+1 Spare SMUBS, 1-MPP SPX ClydeUnion Nov-95 15-Nov-96 12.2 Armored
BCSS Centrifugal Subsea Submersible Pumps 3 Lufeng 22/1 Field A Tieback to FPSO Statoil South China Sea 330 1,083 1.0 0.6 675.0 102 35.0 508 0.40 3% OneSubsea/TechnipFMC 5+2 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea Jan-98 15-Jul-09 138.0 Tieback Distance COURTESY OF
DEH riser cable feeder cable
BPD Barrels per Day Courtesy of Hayward Tyler (for heating one or
4 Machar Field (ETAP Project) A Hydraulic Drive MPP BP UK North Sea 85 277 35.2 21.9 1,100.0 166 22.0 319 0.65 64% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea
Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Feeder cable two segments)
BOPD Barrels of Oil per Day Piggyback
5 Topacio Field O 1 x Dual MPP System ExxonMobil Equatorial Guinea 550 1,805 8.0 5.0 940.0 142 35.0 508 0.86 75% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Aug-00 1-Mar-18 197.1
GRAPH 4: TIEBACK DISTANCE vs. TIME FOR SS BOOSTING SYSTEMS cable
BWPD Barrels of Water per Day
6 Ceiba C3 + C4 O Phase 1 SS MPP Project Hess Equatorial Guinea 750 2,461 7.0 4.3 600.0 91 45.0 653 0.85 75% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Oct-02 1-Mar-18 171.1
40 Standardization
CAPEXCapital Expenditure Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company
DC Direct Current
7 Jubarte EWT A Riser lift to Seillean drillship Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,400 4,593 1.4 0.9 145.0 22 140.0 2,000 0.70 22% TechnipFMC 1 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) Dec-02 1-Dec-06 47.9 24.9
SS Pumps - Conceptual Increased Motor Efficiency and Speed Junction box Piggyback cable
DEH Direct Electrical Heating
8 Ceiba Field (FFD) O Full Field Development (FFD) Hess Equatorial Guinea 700 2,297 14.5 9.0 2,500.0 378 40.0 580 1.20 75% OneSubsea 6+2 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Dec-03 1-Mar-18 157.1 35 SS Pumps - Awarded and in Manufacturing/Delivered Dalmation Options such as Permanent Magnet and High Duty Motor
9 Mutineer / Exeter O 2 x Single MPP Systems Santos NW Shelf, Australia 145 476 7.0 4.3 1,200.0 181 30.0 435 1.10 0-40% OneSubsea 2 MPP Helico-Axial OneSubsea (16) Mar-05 1-Mar-18 142.1 21.7 SS Pumps - Operational Larger Subsea Pumps Courtesy of INTECSEA Technology Facilitates Full Torque at Low Speeds and Greater
DGC Dry Gas Compression Greater Enfield
10 Lyell (Original Install) A SS Tieback to Ninian South CNR UK North Sea 146 479 15.0 9.3 1,100.0 166 18.0 261 1.60 40-70% Aker Solutions 1 Twin Screw Bornemann SMPC 9 Jan-06 Dec-06 11.0 New Pump System Designs Enable Higher Pressure Differential Efficiency at High Speeds.
EFL Electrical Flying Lead 30 and Throughput, Reducing Total Number of Pumps and CAPEX
11 Navajo I, N ESP in Flowline Riser Anadarko US GOM 1,110 3,642 7.2 4.5 24.0 4 40.2 583 0.75 57% Baker Hughes 1 ESP Baker Hughes Feb-07 1-Aug-07 5.5 18.6 Julia

Tieback Distance
EHTF Electrical Heat Traced Flowline Water Based Barrier Fluid
ESP Electrical Submersible Pump 12 Jubarte Field - Phase 1 A Seabed ESP-MOBO, Uses BCSS (14) Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,350 4,429 4.0 2.5 120.0 18 138.0 2,002 0.90 10-40% TechnipFMC 1 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) Mar-07 Aug-07 5.0 25 • Water Based Barrier Fluid Eliminates the Need for Topsides
(NOTE 1. SEABED & RISER ONLY, NOTE 2. EXCLUDES DOWNHOLE ESPs)

ETH Electrical Trace Heating 13 Brenda & Nicol Fields O MultiManifold with 1 MPP Premier Oil UK North Sea 145 476 8.5 5.3 800.0 121 19.0 276 1.10 75% OneSubsea 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Apr-07 1-Mar-18 117.1 15.5 Jack & St. Malo • Dehydration Units and is Applicable to Motors such as CPM = Condition and Performance Monitoring Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Nexans
FFD Full Field Development 14 King (8) A SS Tieback to Marlin TLP Anadarko US GOM 1,700 5,578 29.0 18.0 496.5 75 50.0 725 1.30 0-95% Aker Solutions 2+1 Spare Twin-Screw ITT Bornemann/Loher Nov-07 15-Feb-09 15.0 20 Permanent Magnet Motors Courtesy of TechnipFMC Fig. 3: Aker Solutions DEH Riser Cable
FPS Floating Production System 15 Vincent O Dual MPP System Woodside NW Shelf, Australia 475 1,558 3.0 1.9 2,400.0 363 42.0 609 1.80 25-70% OneSubsea 2+2 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Aug-10 1-Mar-18 77.1 12.4 Rosa/Girassol Fig. 4: TYPE 1B: Pipe-In-Pipe DEH for Two Heated Segments/Flowlines
FULL WELLSTREAM SUBSEA BOOSTING

FPSO Floating, Production, Storage & Offloading 16 Marlim A SBMS-500 SS Field Test Petrobras Campos Basin 1,900 6,234 3.1 1.9 500.0 75 60.0 870 1.20 0-100% Curtiss-Wright / OneSubsea 1 Twin-Screw Leistritz Ceiba Field(FFD)
15 Eliminate Barrier Fluid Topside Power
FPU Floating Production Unit 17 Golfinho Field BCSS O Seabed ESP-MOBO, Uses BCSS (14) Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,500 4,922 11.0 6.8 146.0 22 138.0 2,002 1.20 10-40% TechnipFMC (33) 2 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) (33) Dec-14 4-Jan-18 37.0 9.3 Barrier Fluid System Enhancement Supply

GLR Gas Liquid Ratio • Pump Systems are Under Development Which Eliminate
18 Azurite Field A Dual MPP System Murphy Oil Congo, W. Africa 1,338 4,390 3.0 1.9 350.0 53 41.0 595 0.85 28% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Sep-10 1-Oct-13 36.5 10 the Requirement of Barrier Fluid Barrier Fluid Systems Have Been Improved to Ensure that the Pressure in the Motor and DEH Cable
Wetmate power
GVF Gas Volume Fraction 6.2 Bearing Cavities Exceeds the Process Suction Pressure Avoiding the Ingress of Process Fluid Current in outer
19 Golfinho Field Caissons O MOBO BCSS (ESP) Caissons (14) Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,500 4,922 5.0 3.1 146.0 22 138.0 2,002 1.20 10-40% Aker Solutions 2 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) (33) Dec-14 4-Jan-18 36.1
Into the Barrier Fluid.
connectors
pipe
HPHT High Pressure/High Temperature
20 Espadarte (Field Trial) A Horizontal ESP on Skid Petrobras Brazil 1,350 4,429 11.5 7.1 125.0 19 100.0 1,450 0.90 10-40% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Dec-11 Mar-13 14.5 5
HSP Hydraulic Submersible Pump 3.1
21 Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 1 (20) O Caisson / Artifical Non-Separated Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 9.0 5.6 185.0 28 152 2,205 1.10 40% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Jul-09 1-Mar-18 103.3 Current in inner
Outer Pipe
HV High Voltage pipe

IPB Integrated Production Bundle

22 Parque Das Conchas (BC-10) Phase 2 O 2 additional ESP systems Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 9.0 5.6 185.0 28 152 2,205 1.10 40% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Oct-13 1-Mar-18 52.4 0 (mi)
0 (km)
SS BOOSTING POWER SYSTEM STEP-OUT Insulation

IOR Improved (Increased) Oil Recovery 23

24
Parque Das Conchas (BC-10) MPP Repl.
Jubarte Field - Phase 2
M
O
Replacement MPP system
Tieback to FPSO P-57, Uses BCSS (14) (22)
Shell
Petrobras
Campos Basin
Espirito Santo Basin
2,150
1,400
7,054
4,593
9.0
8.0
5.6
5.0
185.0
1,325.0
28
200 200 3,000 1.20
40%
30-40%
TechnipFMC
Aker Solutions
1
15
Helico-Axial
ESP
TechnipFMC
Schlumberger (REDA)
2018
6-Dec-10 1-Mar-18 86.6
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Present 2020 2025 CAPABILITIES Inner pipe

kW Kilowatt
Km Kilometer 25 Cascade & Chinook I, N Skid BCSS - Horizontal ESP on Skid (6) Petrobras US GOM 2,484 8,150 8.0 5.0 135.0 20 220.0 3,191 1.10 10% TechnipFMC 4+2 Spare ESP Baker Hughes 14-Jul-12 Unkown Year COURTESY OF Fig. 9: TechnipFMC Integrated Production Bundle (IPB) - Electrically Heat Traced Flexible
Conducting Bulkhead
Mid-Line Assembly (MLA)
Conducting Bulkhead
CROSS SECTION

MBLPDThousand Barrels of Liquid Per Day 26 Barracuda O SS MP High Boost Pump System (30) Petrobras Campos Basin 1,040 3,412 10.5 6.5 280.0 42 70.0 1,015 1.50 35-60% OneSubsea 1 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 14-Jul-12 1-Mar-18 67.4 Courtesy of Aker Solutions
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of INTECSEA
MCP Modular Compact Pump 27 Montanazo & Lubina O Single MPP System Repsol Mediterranean 740 2,428 12.3 7.6 80.0 12 65.0 943 0.23 10% OneSubsea 1 + 1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 15-Jan-14 1-Mar-18 49.4 GRAPH 5: SUBSEA BOOSTING – TOTAL THROUGHPUT vs. DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE Courtesy of TechnipFMC
MPP Multiphase Pump 28 Schiehallion I, N 2 x Dual MPP Systems BP UK, West of Shetland 400 1,312 4.0 2.5 2,700.0 408 26.0 377 1.80 74% GE/OneSubsea 4+0 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea 2014 Delayed Start Up 3,990 275
MW Mega Watts 29 CLOV (19) O Subsea MPP System Total Angola, Blk 17 1,170 3,839 11.0 6.8 660.0 100 45.0 652 2.30 50% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea 31-Jul-16 1-Mar-18 19.0 (psi) (bar) Alternative Barrier Fluid Solutions Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of FSubsea TYPE 2: Electrical Trace Heating (ETH) - Pipe-in-Pipe
OPEX Operational Expenditures 3,625 250 Jack & St. Malo SS Pumps - Awarded and in New Pump System Designs are Emerging which Reduce or Recirculation Systems Fig. 5: TechnipFMC Electrically Trace Heated Pipe-in-Pipe (ETH-PiP) Fig. 6: Subsea 7/ITP InterPipe Electrically Heat Traced Pipe-in-Pipe
30 Jack & St. Malo O 3 x Single SPP Systems (JSM) Chevron US GOM 2,134 7,000 21.0 13.0 1,191.0 180 241.3 3,500 3.00 10% OneSubsea 3+2 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 10-May-16 1-Mar-18 21.6
Manufacturing/Delivered
O/W Oil and Water (SPPs) Even Eliminate Barrier Fluid Requirements, Reducing CAPEX. Homogenization and Liquid Recirculation Enables Greater
31 Lyell Retrofit O MPP Retrofit System - Tieback to Ninian CNR UK North Sea 145 476 7.0 4.3 700.0 106 21.0 305 1.00 97% OneSubsea 1 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 21-Aug-14 1-Mar-18 42.2 3,265 225 SS Pumps - Operational Enabling Subsea Pumps – Topsides Specific insulation material with reduced Centralizer
PCM Power Control Module Tolerance to High GVF and Gas Slugs for Subsea Pumps.
32 Rosa/Girassol (24) O Field Expansion Project Total Angola, Blk 17 1,350 4,429 18.0 11.2 600.0 91 130.0 1,885 2.50 20-50% OneSubsea 4+2 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Q2 2015 1-Mar-18 pressure in PiP annulus
Planning for Future Subsea Pumps is Recommended

Differential Pressure
PDG Pseudo Dry Gas 33 Draugen Field (Infill Program) O 2 x Dual MPP Station A/S Norske Shell Offshore Norway 268 879 4.0 2.5 1,710.0 253 47.5 689 2.30 10-31% OneSubsea 2 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 24-Nov-16 1-Mar-18 15.1 2,900 200 Single Well Boosting
Julia (SPPs) Jubarte Field (Phase 2-ESPs) Real-estate (footprint)
Heating Wires
PIP Pipe-in-Pipe Subsea Pumps Have Been Developed to Facilitate Single Well
34 Julia O SS Tieback with Dual SPP Systems ExxonMobil US GOM 2,287 7,500 27.2 17.0 331 50 175.0 2,550 3.00 10% OneSubsea 2 Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 18-Apr-16 1-Mar-18 22.4 2,540 175 and Weight Requirements
PWRI Produced Water Reinjection Boosting With Lower CAPEX.
35 Moho Phase 1bis O Brownfield Tieback to Alima FPU Total Congo, W. Africa 650 2,133 6.7 4.0 400 60 133.5 1,935 3.50 49% OneSubsea 2 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 2016
RWI Raw Water Injection 2,175 150
SIT System Integration Test
36 Stones M Single Phase HPHT Pump System Shell US GOM 2,927 9,600 5.0 3.1 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD <10% OneSubsea 2 +1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 2018
Rosa/Girrassol (MPPs)
37 Appomattox C MPP in future Phases Shell US GOM 2,222 7,290 TBD TBD 1,815 125
SMUBSShell Multiphase Underwater Boost Station Umbilical Tubes
SPP Single Phase Pump 38 Parque Das Baleias O Horizontal ESP on Skid Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,500 4,922 10.0 6.2 125.0 19 140 2,058 1.20 10-25% TechnipFMC 5 +1 Spare ESP Schlumberger (REDA) 3/19/14 1-Mar-18 47.3
1,450 100 Outer Pipe
SRSWISubsea Raw Seawater Injection 39 Greater Enfield M Dual MPP System Woodside W. Australia 850 2,788 32.0 20.0 959.0 145 110.0 1,595 2.60 5.20 81% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Mid-2019
SS Subsea 40 Dalmatian M Single MPP System SS Tieback to Petronius Platform Murphy E & P Co. US GOM 1,779 5,837 35.0 22.0 231.0 35 150.0 2,176 2.20 2.20 65% OneSubsea (34) 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea (34) 2018 1,090 75 Vincent Protection Sheet
SSP Subsea Processing 41 Otter Field M MPP System SS Tieback to North Cormorant Platform TAQA Bratani UK North Sea 184 603 22.0 13.7 853.0 129 48.0 696 2.00 2.00 75% OneSubea 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea 2018 Draugen (MPPs) Fiber Optic Cable
725 50 (MPPs) Ceiba Field Power Generation Inner pipe
SSPU Subsea Separation and Pumping Unit 42 West Hub M Mud Line Boosting Pump ENI Angola Block 15/06 1,000 3,281 TechnipFMC 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial TechnipFMC Q2, 2018 (FFD) (MPPs) Courtesy of INTECSEA
SUBSIS
Subsea Separation and Injection System 43 Vigdis C Subsea Boosting of existing wells Statoil Offshore Norway 280 919 6.5 4.1 50.0 725 2.30 2.30 20-40% TBA 1 TBD TBA 2021 360 25 Courtesy of TechnipFMC/Heat Trace Ltd Courtesy of Subsea 7/ITP InterPipe
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Fig. 8
INJECTION

TLP Tension Leg Platform 1 Troll C Pilot (15) A SUBSIS (SS Sep. and WI Sys.) Statoil Offshore Norway 340 1,116 3.5 2.2 250.0 38 151.0 2,190 1.60 0% GE/OneSubsea 1+1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea Aug-01 1-Mar-18 197.8 0 0 Figs. 7 & 8: Saipem Electrically Heated Pipe-in-Pipe - for
SUBSEA
WATER

TSP Twin Screw Pump 2 Columba E. I, N Dual SPP System CNR North Sea 145 476 7.0 4.3 331.0 50 305.0 4,424 2.30 0% OneSubsea 2+0 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea May-07 1-Oct-13 76.4 (MBLPD) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Enabling Subsea Pumps Courtesy of INTECSEA Pre-Qualified Impellor Ranges
TABLE 4: SS BOOSTING POWER SYSTEM STEP-OUT CONFIGURATIONS TYPE 3: Flexibles with active heating J-lay/S-lay installation; employs a sliding configuration
TRL Technology Readiness Level 3 Tyrihans A 3 SPP & SS RWI Filtration System Statoil Offshore Norway 270 886 31.0 19.3 583.0 88 205.0 2,973 2.70 0% FMC/Aker Solutions 2+1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) Aker Solutions 12-Mar-13 1-Mar-18 59.5 (m³/hr) 0 330 660 995 1,325 1,655 1,990 2,320 2,650 2,980 Pump Impellors Prequalified for Various
Integrating Subsea Pumps with Brownfield Systems That Were Fig. 9: TechnipFMC Integrated Production Bundle
VASPSVertical Annular Separation and Pumping Throughput and Pressure Differential STEP-OUT POWER
4 Albacora L'Este Field (31) O Raw Water Injection to 7 Wells Petrobras Campos Basin, Brazil 400 1,312 4 to 9 2.5-6.0 1125 170 85 1,233 1.2 0% OneSubsea 3+1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 14-Mar-14 1-Mar-18 47.5 Throughput COURTESY OF Not Enabled for Pumps is One of the Leading Challenges for (IPB) - Electrically Heat Traced Flexible

CATEGORY
System Combinations Allows for Well-Known and
(6) ASD XFMRS EXAMPLE
1 Zakum A Shallow Water Test Separation System BP Offshore Abu Dhabi 24 79 1969 1972 36 Subsea Boosting Projects. Demonstrated Pump Tolerances.

TRL
VSD Variable Speed Drive Courtesy of Siemens VOLTAGE & POWER RATING

Topside
Subsea
2 Highlander Field (32) A SS Separator/Slug Catcher Repsol Sinopec (27) UK North Sea 420 1,378 Topside
WD Water Depth
GRAPH 6: SUBSEA SHAFT POWER vs. TIME FOR SS BOOSTING SYSTEMS Radius (1) (Step SS (Step
SUBSEA SEPARATION

WGC Wet Gas Compression 3 Argyll A SS Sep. and Pumping Unit (SSPU) Hamilton Bros UK North Sea 80 262 BOET (See Table 3 Def.) 1989 Larger Quantity of Suppliers D
Up) Core of the IPB
WI Water Injection 4 Marimba Field I, N VASPS Field Test (21) Petrobras Campos Basin 395 1,296 1.7 1.1 60.0 9 52.0 754 0.3 OneSubsea 1 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) Jul-01 1-Jul-08 83.0 3.5
Jack & Reputable Subsea Pump Integrators Have Become Subsea Enabling Subsea Pumps – Subsea
XFMR Transformer 5 Troll C Pilot (15) A Horizontal SUBSIS (SS Sep. & WI Sys.) (23) Statoil Offshore Norway 340 1,116 3.5 2.2 250.0 38 151.0 2,190 1.60 0% GE / OneSubsea 1+1 Spare n/a OneSubsea Aug-01 1-Mar-18 197.8 SS Pumps - Conceptual St. Malo Pump Suppliers and Have Increased Market Competition.
Julia • SS Infrastructure for Future Subsea Pumps is Recommended
COURTESY OF 6 Tordis (13) O Separation, MPP Statoil Offshore Norway 210 689 11.0 6.8 1,500.0 227 27.0 392 2.30 10-68% TechnipFMC 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Oct-07 1-Mar-18 124.3 3.0 SS Pumps - Awarded and in to Prevent Shutdown of Fields During Integration, Tie-Ins,
Electrical heat

Subsea Pump Shaft Power

7 Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 1 O Separation Caisson / Artifical Lift Manifold Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 25.0 15.6 185.0 28 152.0 2,205 1.10 15% TechnipFMC 4 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift Aug-09 1-Mar-18 102.3 Manufacturing/Delivered and Isolation trace cables
SS Pumps - Operational Topsides and Subsea Solutions that Reduce Weight
8 Perdido O Caisson Separation and Boosting (29) Shell US GOM 2,438 7,999 0.0 0.0 132-264 20 - 40 158.8 2,303 1.20 15% TechnipFMC 5 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift Mar-10 1-Mar-18 84.0
2.5 Rosa/Girassol and Space Requirements
Information Accuracy: We have attempted to use Gas lift tubes
correct and current, as of press time, information
9 Pazflor O 3 Gas/Liquid Vertical Separation System Total Angola, Blk 17 800 2,625 4.0 2.5 1,800.0 272 105.0 1,523 2.30 <16% TechnipFMC 6+2 Spare Hybrid H-A OneSubsea Aug-11 1-Mar-18 77.9 New Subsea Pump Solutions are Available Which Decrease
for the subsea processing systems and equipment 10 Marlim SSAO - Pilot O In-Line Separation Petrobras Campos Basin 878 2,881 3.8 2.4 135.0 20 245 3,553 1.9 67% TechnipFMC 1 Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea Mar-13 1-Mar-18 58.9 Topsides and Subsea Real-estate and Weight Requirements.
described herein. No installed, sanctioned, or pending 2.0 This Lowers Topsides Cost and Subsea Installation Cost. Thermal insulation
11 Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 2 M 2 additional ESP systems Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 25.0 15.6 185.0 28 152.0 2,205 1.10 15% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Saipem
application was intentionally excluded. We have Vincent
summarized the capability and operating experience by
12 Corvina (26) CP VASPS w/Horizontal ESP Petrobras Campos Basin 280 919 8.0 5.0 135.0 20 21 305 0.4 <10% TechnipFMC 1 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift
Courtesy of Saipem
Courtesy of TechnipFMC
acting as a neutral party and integrator of information. CURRENT STATUS CATEGORIES NOTES: 1. Qualification Status - As stated in the Information Accuracy statement of this poster, the pumps in the near future. ESPs per well feeding 1 x OneSubsea MPP per asset on seafloor. 23. SUBSIS - The world's longest operating subsea separation system and first subsea water 30. Barracuda - Is the first installation of high boost MPP. Ref. 2013 OTC Paper 24217 for 1.5
Information has been collected from public sources, qualification status information shown in this table, and throughout the poster, are based 9. Nuovo Pignone is now part of GE. 17. Draugen MPP - This was the world's first Multiphase Subsea Pump which was injection pump system. Abandoned and not in operation. additional information about the MPP. Ceiba Field (FFD)
C Conceptual Project Pump Designs For Operation
company brochures, personal interviews, phone
Q Qualified/Testing
on unverified claims from equipment suppliers and field operators. These qualification
status designations are not necessarily derived using technology readiness level (TRL)
10. Gullfaks - OTC Paper 27224 by OneSubsea provides an overview of the Technology
Qualification Program (TQP) completed for Statoil's Gullfaks Subsea Compression (GSC)
installed in 1993. It ran successfully from 1995 for 12 Months (1,000 hours) and was
decommissioned and abandoned due to change in water injection strategy.
24. Rosa/Girassol development project includes the Rosa field with 4 SS boosting pumps.
1st set operational in Sept., 2015 & 2nd set operational in April, 2016.
31. Albacora Field - Ref. 2013 OTC Paper 24167
32. Highlander Field - SS Tieback to the Tartan Field which has a SS separator/slug catcher 1.0 at High GVF TYPE 4: Diverted production flow for heating TYPE 5: Hot Water
interviews, press releases, industry magazines,
vendor-supplied information, and web sites. No M Awarded and in Manufacturing or Delivered
assessments per API RP 17Q, DNV-RP-A203, or ABS Guidance Notes on Qualifying New project. 18. Statoil - See OTC Paper 27201 by Rune Ramberg & other for Statoil's research leading 25. Gullfaks South Brent - was shut down in Nov. 2015. The root cause has been identified installed for the tie-in to the Tartan Platform. See papers: 1994 OTC #7438-MS, 1987 TopacioField Subsea Multiphase Pumps are Now Fig. 10: Saipem Local Heating Station – Retrievable Heated
Technologies. 11. Åsgard Project: See OTC Paper #27197 by Anders Storstenvik: Aker Åsgard Project. up to the Subsea Factory Compressor Stations. It highlights Statoil's future vision. as “AC corrosion in the umbilicals that led to the leakage, ruling out any fault with the SPE #13970-PA, 1987 SPE # 16532-MS
guarantee is made that information is accurate or all- O Installed & Currently Operating 2. Pumping & Boosting: The terms “Pumping” and “Boosting” are used interchangeably 12. START: Month & Year indicates first month and year of operation for the SS processing 19. CLOV - Two (2) MPPs are on the sea floor since Dec. 2015. The seabed MP boosting compressors” according to a Statoil spokesman. Gas compressors where scheduled to 33. Petrobras changed ESP supplier from Baker Hughes to Schlumberger (REDA) January Designed to Handle GVF Ranges of 0-95% Fig. 11: Subsea 7 Pipeline Bundle
inclusive. Neither INTECSEA nor Offshore Magazine throughout this poster and in the industry. system. pumps will boost flow from 4 fields which are: Cravo, Lirio, Orquidea and Violeta. be reinstalled in Aug., 2017. 2015. 1 of each still has a Baker Hughes ESP as of February 2015. 0.5 (for limited times near 100%), Enabling with multiple flowlines, controls,
I,N Installed & Not Currently Operating or In-Active 3. Unit Motor Power: Is the unit motor power for either a pump or compressor assembly. 13. Tordis Field: SS Separation, 1+1 Spare Multiphase Boosting Pumps for production, 20. Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 1 - Composed of 3 reservoirs: Ostra, Abalone and 26. Congro & Corrina SS Boosting Project - This project has been canceled. Petrobras has 34. Dalmatian will be the longest subsea tieback in the GOM with SS boosting (35 KMs / 22 Operation at High GVF or Gas Slugs Without
guarantees or assumes any & active heating inside a carrier
©2018 Offshore

A Abandoned, Removed 4. Differential Pressure: Differential Pressure values are for individual boosting units. Single phase pumps for produced water from subsea separator transported to Gullfaks Argonauta B-West. Argonauta O-North to be added in Phase 2. Awarded to FMC but determined commercially Congro and Corvina are not feasible. Miles). Murphy E & P has awarded the Subsea Integration Alliance (SIA) (OneSubsea +
responsibility or liability for any Causing Pump Shutdowns.
POSTER

131
5. GVF = Gas Volume Fraction at inlet of a boosting assembly. C for further processing. installed by Subsea 7. 27. Repsol Sinopec - full Operator name is REPSOL SINOPEC RESOURCES UK LIMITED. Subsea 7) an EPCIC contract for the subsea multi-phase boosting system. 0.0 pipe (heating using e.g. inhibited
party’s use of the information CP Canceled Project 6. Cascade & Chinook - Utilizes horizontal ESPs on a skid above mudline. It is an alternative 14. BCSS - Centrifugal Subsea Submersible Pumps: Pumps are placed in protective holes in 21. Marimba VASPS - 2000 - First installation in Marimba (JIP Petrobras / Eni-Agip/ Repsol acquired the field through the Talisman acquisition. 35. Peon Development - In March, 2014 Statoil and partners placed the project on hold until
presented. If any information is ESP boosting configuration to caisson in the seabed. This technology is designed to cover the seabed, 200m from producing wells. MOBO - Modulo de Bombas (Pumping Module). ExxonMobil, 2001 - Startup and Operation (July to Dec.) until ESP failure, 2002 End of JIP, 28. Ormen Lange Gas Compression 2 - Currently Norske Shell is working to simplify the they see how SS gas compression is performing on other projects. 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Present 2020 2025 potable water, reinjected
P/H Postponed or On Hold produced water)
found to be incorrect, not current, the low GVF and high DeltaP multiphase flow. 15. Troll C Pilot: Separation began on Aug. 25, 2001. See OTC paper 20619, page 10 for By-pass production, 2003 - Workover Plan (IWP), 2004 - Workover and Re-start on May 8, design, remove unnecessary redundancy, reduce module size and reduce weights by 36. Shtokman Field - In 2014 Gazprom decided not to go ahead with the development of
7. Asgard is the longest subsea tieback in the world with SS gas compression. It is also the further details on operating experience. Note that injection pump data is only shown in 2004. From 2005 until 2008 VASPS operated well until well failure. more than 50%. the Shtokman field.
or has been omitted, please send
SS compression system with the longest track record of successful operation. the subsea water injection section of the table. Abandoned and not in operation. 22. Jubarte Field (Phase 2) - Phased installations from 2010 through 2015. Wells were 29. Peridido - Cassion for separation is 350 feet long drilled into the seabed. Read OTC 37. System Flow Rates - Gas flow rates not reported for Boosting or Separation. Year COURTESY OF Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of INTECSEA NOTE: *The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the
comments to ssp@intecsea.com. 8. King Field MPP are off line. There are no indications that Anadarko will reactivate these 16. Mutineer/Exeter Projects: Manufacturers are: OneSubsea and Centrilift. There are 2 connected to the FPSO P-57. All wells will have gas-lift as a backup. Paper 21716 above technologies vary Courtesy of Saipem Courtesy of Subsea 7

CHART 1 – SUBSEA SUPPLIER MATRIX (As of Feb., 2018) SUBSEA PROCESSING NOTES:
1. Aker Solutions and MAN Diesel & Turbo have SUBSEA POWER CONNECTORS WET-MATE AND DRY-MATE SUBSEA POWER DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT Fig. 3: Siemens SS Transformer
Prototype at Shallow Water Test*
Fig. 4: Siemens Conceptual
SS Variable Speed Drive*
Fig. 5: Siemens Conceptual SS
Switchgear*
Fig. 6: GE 24kV Switchgear Prototype
Tested in Shallow Water
SUBSEA GAS COMPRESSION SYSTEMS Fig. 3: SS Compression Station 2.0 concept
compared to Åsgard SS Compression
Fig. 5: Åsgard Subsea Compression Module
Fig. 6: Åsgard Compressor
module before starting
formed an alliance for the next generation of
subsea compression systems. Fig. 1: GE MECON DM 145/700 Fig. 2: Siemens ElecTRON Fig. 3: Teledyne interconnect system: Fig.4: Teledyne ODI 3-way 10kV, Fig. 1: Subsea 60MVA Power Station with transformer, Fig. 2: Siemens Conceptual Subsea Power Grid* Fig. 1: Ormen Lange Compression Station Test Fig. 2: TechnipFMC Conceptual 2-Train Dry Gas installation
SUBSEA
SUBSEA SEAWATER SUBSEA
SUBSEA GAS
SUBSEA INTEGRATED
HV & CONTROL
OTHER
TESTING 2. GE and Baker Hughes have entered into Dry-Mate connectors - Subsea Instrumentation umbilical terminations, HV wetmate flying 250A wet-mate EFL powers subsea switchgear & VSDs for pumps and compressors up to Compression Station with Replaceable Modules
BOOSTING
TREATMENT & SEPARATION
COMPRESSION
ACTIVE SUBSEA
AC/DC POWER SYSTEMS
SUPPORTING
FACILITIES an agreement to combine GE’s oil and gas Feedthrough Connector leads, and tubing hanger connections to boosting and processing
INJECTION (3) SYSTEMS HEATING (13) SYSTEM SUPPLIERS SYSTEMS business and Baker Hughes, now known as 12.5MW
Baker-Hughes, a GE company. System power ESP’s
Fig. 4
3. Subsea seawater injection refers to only those Fig. 5
PUMP ELECTRIC POWER ASDS/VSDS, HV AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS projects utilizing a subsea pump to inject Fig. 3
PUMP AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS (1) COMPRESSION ABB SAIPEM-AKER SOLUTIONS UMBILICALS PENETRATORS akersolutions.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com
SYSTEM MOTOR COMPRESSORS CABLES X-FORMERS CONNECTORS seawater and does not include typical water
MANUFACTURERS akersolutions.com akersolutions.com SYSTEM abb.com ALLIANCE
PACKAGERS MANUFACTURERS & SWITCHGEAR injection using a pump on a topside facility.
akersolutions.com
saipem.com BAKER HUGHES ALPHA THAMES BAKER HUGHES 4. Liestritz have partnered with Rosetti Marino for
BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES a GE company (2) a GE company (2)
AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS
a GE company (2) a GE company (2)
AKER SOLUTIONS (1) AKER SOLUTIONS ABB AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS ABB (17) ALSTOM BENESTAD (9)
bakerhughes.com
alpha-thames.co.uk
bakerhughes.com potential twin screw marinization. Courtesy of Aker Solutions
akersolutions.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com abb.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com abb.com alstom.com benestad.com 5. Deutsch is part of TE Connectivity.
SUBSEA INTEGRATION Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens
BAKER HUGHES 6. TechnipFMC and Sulzer have formed a long-
BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES
ALLIANCE (15) TechnipFMC (14)
a GE company (2)
FLOWSERVE
term and exclusive collaboration agreement. Fig. 4: NOV Passive Cooler – Field proven
CURTISS WRIGHT ONESUBSEA (8, 15) ONESUBSEA (8, 15) HEAT TRACE LTD. ONESUBSEA, SUBSEA 7, ALCATEL BICC BERCA CORTLAND AKER SOLUTIONS (17) DEUTSCH (5) DEUTSCH (5) fmctechnologies.com flowserve.com
a GE company (2) a GE company (2)
curtisswright.com onesubsea.com onesubsea.com
a GE company (2)
heat-trace.com SCHLUMBERGER alcatel-lucent.com biccberca.com cortlandandcompany.com akersolutions.com te.com te.com
bakerhughes.com
7. PROLAB is a Sulzer company. Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of Siemens The Siemens Subsea Power Grid is shown in Fig. 2, with the main building blocks in Figs. 3, 4, & 5, along with wet-mate 36kV Courtesy of GE technology lowering production temperature Courtesy of Aker Solutions
bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com
8. OneSubsea is a Schlumberger company. Courtesy of Aker Solutions & ABB Alliance for Power & Automation Courtesy of Siemens connectors and control system. (complimentary to compression)
BAKER HUGHES
ONESUBSEA (8, 15) SMARTMOTOR TechnipFMC (14)
9. Benestad is an Aker Solutions company. Fig. 5: GE MECON WM 36/500 Wet-mate connectors Fig. 11: BlueC
ONESUBSEA (8) ClydeUnion (SPX FLOW) FLOWSERVE SAIPEM SAIPEM ONESUBSEA (8, 15) NEXANS TechnipFMC (14) BRUGG FURUKAWA DRAKA DIAMOULD (10) DIAMOULD (10) onesubsea.com smartmotor.no fmctechnologies.com Courtesy of Aker Solutions Fig. 10: BHGE Conceptual Courtesy of Statoil
onesubsea.com spxflow.com flowserve.com saipem.com saipem.com onesubsea.com nexans.com fmctechnologies.com bruggcables.com Furukawa.co.jp draka.com
a GE company (2)
diamould.com diamould.com 10. Diamould is a OneSubsea company. Courtesy of Teledyne Compressor
bakerhughes.com
11. ASCOM re-branded as Sulzer Chemtech. Fig. 7: Åsgard 19 MVA Subsea Transformer Fig. 8: Åsgard 100 KVA Subsea Fig.11: ABB Conceptual Subsea Fig.12: ABB Conceptual Subsea Fig.13: Ormen Lange Pilot Courtesy of TechnipFMC Wet Gas Compression
BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES
SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC ITT BORNEMANN ITT BORNEMANN 12. FSubsea (Fuglesangs Subsea AS) and the Fig. 8: Siemens DigiTRON+ Courtesy of Teledyne Module Control Power Distribution Module Fig. 9: ABB Conceptual Subsea Power Grid Fig. 10: ABB Subsea Transformer Switchgear Variable Speed Drive Subsea Pump VSD Fig. 7: OneSubsea Multiphase Compressor Fig. 8: Subsea HOFIM™ Compressor by MAN System (12.5 MW )
TechnipFMC (6, 14) FLOWSERVE SEABOX Sulzer Chemtech (11) TechnipFMC (14) SAIPEM HITACHI JDR JDR ONESUBSEA (8, 15) schneider-electric.com bornemann.com bornemann.com
a GE company (2) a GE company (2) a GE company (2) German pump company RuhRPumpen collaborate Fig. 7: Siemens SpecTRON 10 - and DigiTRON3 - 1kV and Fig. 12: Pseudo Dry Gas (PDG) in-line
fmctechnologies.com flowserve.com
bakerhughes.com sea-box.no sulzer.com fmctechnologies.com saipem.com hitachi.com jdrcables.com jdrcables.com onesubsea.com bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com to develop advanced subsea centrifugal pump Units for GullfaksField Diesel & Turbo for Åsgard
SIEMENS LEISTRITZ ONESUBSEA (8, 15) solutions as Fuglesangs Subsea. 10kV wet mate connectors for 3kV wet mate controls Fig. 9: Siemens DigiTRONf - High unit (non-compression) reduces
FSUBSEA (12, 18) HAYWARD TYLER TechnipFMC/ TechnipFMC (14) DRESSER RAND
XXXXXXXXX SIEMENS MITSUBISHI NEXANS MFX DO BRASIL SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC XXXXX
SEACON SIEMENS energy.siemens.com leistritzcorp.com onesubsea.com 13. Includes system integrators and specialty subsea pumping systems connectors optical performance wet mate back pressure approx. 60-120 bar;
fsubsea.com haywardtyler.com SULZER (6, 14) fmctechnologies.com dresser-rand.com
XXXXXXXXX siemens.com mitsubishielectric.com nexans.com mfx.com.br schneider-electric.com seaconworldwide.com energy.siemens.com hardware suppliers. Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company connector requires 1MW for 1 BScfdsystem
fmctechnologies.com
14. Technip and FMC have merged to become Courtesy of NOV
sulzer.com PETROBRAS ATALAIA PROLAB (7)
ITT BORNEMANN LEISTRITZ LOHER (16) TWISTER BV BAKER HUGHES
a GE company (2)
SUBSEA 7 (15)/ INTERPIPE
subsea7.com
NKT NSW NEXANS SIEMENS SIEMENS TELEDYNE D.G.O’BRIEN LAB (Brazil) prolabnl.com TechnipFMC. Fig. 6: Siemens SpecTRON 45 - 45kV wet mate
bornemann.com leistritzcorp.com automation.siemens.com twisterbv.com bakerhughes.com itp-interpipe.com nktcables.com nsw.com nexans.com energy.siemens.com energy.siemens.com dgo.com 15. Subsea Integration Alliance (SIA) is a worldwide connectors for subsea power distribution Fig.9: Installation of the OneSubsea
non-incorporated partnership between Multiphase Compressor Station for Gulfaks
SHELL GASMER STATOIL: P-LAB & K-LAB
ONESUBSEA (8, 15) SCHLUMBERGER ONESUBSEA (8, 15) MAN Diesel & Turbo (1) TechnipFMC (14) OKONITE PARKER OCEANEERING SIEMENS TELEDYNE ODI TELEDYNE ODI (Houston, TX) (Norway)
OneSubsea, Schlumberger, and Subsea 7.
onesubsea.com slb.com onesubsea.com mandieselturbo.com fmctechnologies.com okonite.com parker.com oceaneering.com energy.siemens.com odi.com odi.com 16. Loher is a Siemens company.
17. Aker Solutions and ABB have formed an
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH
TechnipFMC (14)/ INSTITUTE
SULZER (6) Alliance for Power and Automation.
TechnipFMC/ ONESUBSEA (8, 15) PRYSMIAN SCHLUMBERGER REDA PARKER TECHNIP UMBILICAL sulzer.com
SULZER (6, 14)
DIRECT DRIVE SYSTEMS
onesubsea.com
swri.org 18. FSubsea won the 2017 OTC Spotlight on
fmctechnologies.com prysmiangroup.com slb.com parker.com technip.com
fmctechnologies.com New Technology Award for their OMNIRISE
sulzer.com MINIBOOSTER subsea processing pump.
SIEMENS INDUSTRIAL SUMITOMO PRYSMIAN UMBILICALS INTERNATIONAL
TURBO MACHINERY
global-sei.com prysmiangroup.com umbilicals.com Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of MAN Diesel & Turbo Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of GE Courtesy of INTECSEA Patent(s) pending
turbomachinerysolutions.com COURTESY OF Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of Aker Solutions

In Collaboration with
M A G A Z I N E

Delivering field-proven digital tools for subsea process Siemens Subsea

MARCH 13-15, 2018
MOODY GARDENS HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER
design and operations. We enhance production. Enabling subsea processing by
connecting innovation with
GALVESTON, TX USA experience
WWW.SUBSEATIEBACKFORUM.COM Free and on demand educational videos, posters, articles, and soon additional supplements,
all for learning more about the offshore oil and gas industry at:
woodplc.com siemens.com\subsea

www.offshore-mag.com/learning-center.html

1803OFFSubsea_1 1 2 26 18 9 43 AM
 MAN Subsea
High Pressure
Introducing MultiBooster Filter Assemblies
■ Superior 6MW subsea boosting pump
■ Next generation condition monitoring
Compression Technology
The Filter of Choice
Innovating together
■ Robust solution for Extreme Environments Our new generation Electrically Trace Heated Pipe-in-Pipe (ETH-PiP) technology provides active heating and
S&P Platts Global Energy Award Winner 2017 a major upgrade in controlling fluid temperature and avoiding hydrate formation and waxing over long distances.
Commercial Application of the Year www.swift-jbinternational.com Discover more. TechnipFMC.com
Made in USA

2018 WORLDWIDE SURVEY

SUBSEA SEPARATION SYSTEM TYPES: Fig. 2: TechnipFMC Conceptual SS Gas/Liquid Fig. 4: Saipem Multipipe Fig. 5: Aker Solutions subsea oil/water SUBSEA SEAWATER TREATMENT AND INJECTION SUBSEA BOOSTING PUMP TYPES GRAPH 1 – GVF vs. DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE - OPERATIONAL AND CONCEPTUAL CAPABILITIES GRAPH 2 – DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE vs. THROUGHPUT - SUBSEA PUMP CAPABILITIES
BOOSTING SYSTEM EXAMPLES (CONCEPTUAL & DELIVERED) Fig. 5: 1 of 3 Jack & St. Malo Pump
Stations in the Factory Test Pit
Separation & Boosting System for Pazflor (Prototype Tested 2-phase separation and injection, featuring 1st and
Gas/liquid Separation and 2nd stage separation, oil boosting and water Fig. 1: Aker Solutions’ Fig. 2: Conceptual Illustration Fig.3: Subsea water injection 350 350 Fig.1: Installation of the Fig. 2: OneSubsea’s Pump Fig. 3: OneSubsea’s Helico- Fig. 4: OneSubsea’s Cen- for SIT Immediately Prior to Water Fill
COURTESY OF
1. GRAVITY SEPARATION SYSTEMS TABLE 2 – PUMP TYPES & APPLICATIONS 5,100 5,100

OF SUBSEA PROCESSING
Boosting System) injection pumps LiquidBooster™ Subsea Raw of Installation of Tyrihans integrated solution - Aker OneSubsea Pump Module Station with Pump Unit and Axial Pump Module for the trifugal Pump Module with

Differential Pressure (Bar/psi)

Differential Pressure (Bar/psi)

Seawater Injection (SRSWI) SRSWI System Solutions LiquidBooster 300 SPP - Single Phase Pump 300 SPP - Single Phase Pump into Pump Station during Mixer for CNR’s Lyell project Total GirRi project handling tool during SIT for
Fig. 1A: TechnipFMC Conceptual Subsea Separation System for the Tordis Project Fig. 3: GE Subsea Separation and TYPE NORM. CONFIG. APPLICABILITY FOR SUBSEA BOOSTING 4,400 SPP (Centrifugal) TSP - Twin Screw Pump
System for Statoil Tyrihans and NOV 4,400 MPP - Multi-Phase Pump SIT for Exxon Julia the Exxon Julia project
Produced Water Reinjection System H Highest differential pressure capability among pump types WGC - Wet Gas Compression
CENTRIFUGAL HORIZONTAL 250 250 SPP ESP - Electrical Submersible Pump
for Troll C H Handles low Gas Volume Fraction (GVF) < 15% at suction DGC - Dry Gas Compression
(SINGLE PHASE) OR VERTICAL 3,625 3,625
STATUS OF TECHNOLOGIES AND SYSTEMS conditions
H Combination of helico-axial and centrifugal impeller stages 200
Helico-Axial
200

MARCH 2018
2,900
H Primarily used downstream of separator or in low GOR 2,900
HYBRID VERTICAL
applications where GVF is consistently < 30% at suction 150 Hybrid 150
conditions 2,175 2,175
H Widely deployed technology used for boosting individual 100 TSP 100
Prepared By: Rebecca Roth, David McLaurin, Mike Paulin, Mac McKee, Sriram Subramanian, Fig. 1B:
Tordis
MUDLINE ESP
HORIZONTAL
OR VERTICAL
wells, caissons, flowline risers, and mudline horizontal
boosting applications
1,450 1,450 Courtesy of OneSubsea
NOV and Aker Solutions ESP MPP Courtesy of OneSubsea
H Tested for conditions up to 70% GVF Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea
Craig Hume, and Veerendhar Ponagandla of INTECSEA, Separator
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Aker Solutions
50
725
50
725 Fig. 9: TechnipFMC MPP
Fig. 10: Seafloor Boosting
Using ESP in Caisson
Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company H Applicable for higher GVF boosting applications; Capable of WGC DGC
E. Kurt Albaugh, Consulting Engineer & Volunteer Poster Editor, Courtesy of Aker Solutions Fig. 6: SWIT™ Technology, a disruptive HELICO-AXIAL
VERTICAL
operating at 0-95% GVF at suction conditions 0 bar 0 bar Courtesy of OneSubsea
Fig. 7: GE Boosting Station Fig. 8: OneSubsea’s Pump Modules for
Total GirRi and Shell Draugen prior to SIT
for BC-10
Courtesy of Saipem (MULTIPHASE) H Most common subsea multiphase pump type 0 psi
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 psi
0 m3/Day 66 662
and David Davis of Offshore Magazine Fig. 4 & 5: Saipem-Veolia-Total Subsea technology for providing tailor-made water with
superior quality at the seabed for improved and
H Moderate particulate tolerance 0 MBLPD 15
133
30
199
45
264
60
331
75
397
90
464
105
530
120
596
135 150 Fig. 6: TechnipFMC
Fig. 7: Saipem SpoolSep (Laboratory Tested 3-phase Fig. 8: NOV Produced Water Separator – meeting Sulphate Removal Prototype - deep water H Good for handling high GVF - up to 98% GVF at suction % GVF LIQUID GAS
Poster Assembled By: Chris Jones of Xenon Group, Inc.; Digital Images by: Sid Aguirre of 3DMM Courtesy of TechnipFMC
Separation and Produced Water Reinjection System) strict reservoir injection or discharge requirements tested at Alima FPU in Congo; whole system enhanced oil recovery. Thorough disinfection by
TWIN SCREW HORIZONTAL conditions Notes: 1. For pump applications, the term differential pressure is used. However, for
3
Throughput (m /Day/MBLPD) SS Multiphase Pumping
Courtesy of TechnipFMC the Seabox™ is a key differentiator for long term Module with Sulzer Pump
E-Mail Comments, Correction or Additions to: ssp@intecsea.com Fig. 6: Aker Solutions’ Hi-Sep, a robust and flex-
by gravity based produced water cleaning industrialization is ongoing; unit capable of
reliable sulphateand/or salt removal and is easily
(MULTIPHASE) OR VERTICAL H Preferred technology for high viscosity fluids. Less efficient compressor applications the term pressure ratio is used. 2. Curves are approximate and COURTESY OF
Notes: Curves are approximate and assume a specific liquid throughput, identical for each
pump type. Values are given on a “per pump” basis.
COURTESY OF
HORIZONTAL SEPARATOR - This type is more efficient for oil/water separation. An treating and injecting up to 80 kbwpd at lower viscosities. assume a specific liquid throughput, identical for each pump type.
For Archived SS Processing Posters: http://www.offshore-mag.com/maps-posters.html example is the orange colored horizontal separator for the Tordis Project shown in Fig. ible solution for CO2 separation and re-injection scalable to required capacity.
For Educational Videos on SS Processing: http://www.offshore-mag.com/learning-center.html 1A above. Membrane feed pump
RO Membranes VERTICAL ESP PUMPS SINGLE PHASE PUMPS (CENTRIFUGAL) HYBRID PUMPS MULTIPHASE PUMPS TWIN SCREW PUMPS
HORIZONTAL/MUDLINE ESP SYSTEM EXAMPLES Courtesy of GE
VERTICAL SEPARATOR – This type is more efficient for gas/liquid separation. The liquid (For GVF < 70%) (For GVF < 15%) (For GVF < 30%) (HELICO-AXIAL/ROTODYNAMIC) (For GVF < 95%) (For GVF < 98%) Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of TechnipFMC
keeps a fluid blanket on the pump and reduces potential pump cavitation. An example is
the Pazflor vertical separator shown in Fig. 2. Courtesy of TechnipFMC Microfiltration Fig. 1: Diagram of Vertically Fig. 2: Horizontal ESP Boosting Station Fig. 4: Vertically Configured Fig. 5: Vertically Configured Fig. 6: Vertically Configured Fig. 7: Vertically Configured Fig. 8: Vertically Configured Fig. 9: Vertically Configured Fig. 10: Twin Screw Pump Cross Fig. 11: Jack & St. Malo Pump Stations Fig. 12: OneSubsea’s SIT Testing of Fig. 13: Aker Solutions
Configured Gas Handling ESP Centrifugal Single Phase Centrifugal Single Phase Hybrid Pump & Motor Hybrid Pump & Motor Helico-Axial Pump & Motor Semi-Axial Pump Section Diagram in the Factory Pit for SIT Total MoHo Subsea Boosting System MultiBooster™ System - Courtesy of Aker Solutions
in a Seabed Caisson Pump & Motor Diagram Pump & Motor Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Pump & Motor Diagram Dual Pump Station
2. CAISSON SEPARATION Fig. 10: Caisson Separation/ Fig. 11: TechnipFMC
ESP Boosting System Vertical Access Caisson Courtesy of Saipem Courtesy of NOV

M A G A Z I N E SYSTEMS INSTALLED with ESP Boosting Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Saipem
Seabox™ Courtesy of Aker Solutions

< 100m INTO SEABED (Gas/ Liquid Separation &

Courtesy of NOV
Fig. 14: Åsgard Single
Boosting System)
Fig. 7: BHGE conceptual Subsea Phase Pump
M 3. COMPACT/DYNAMIC SEPARATION SYSTEMS Fig. 15: ExxonMobil’s SS Compact Separation, Sulphate Removal and Injection Fig.9: OneSubsea’s Testing of the
System, built on a combination of Albacore Raw Seawater Injection Courtesy of Sulzer/
Fig. 12: OneSubsea Conceptual Fig. 13: OneSubsea Conceptual Fig. 14: FMC Technologies 3-Phase Separation Boosting, and Produced WI System Using
ultra-and nano-filtration technologies, System during SIT of Pump and TechnipFMC
Two-Phase Separation System Three-Phase Separation System System with Produced WI Using In-Line Multiple Technologies for 3-Phase Separation
scalable to any capacity Filtration System Courtesy of OneSubsea
Separation Technology for the MarlimProject plus Sand Fig. 15: Courtesy of OneSubsea
Fig. 9: Centrifugal Subsea Submersible Courtesy of Leistritz Courtesy of Aker Solutions
Pump (BCSS) FSubsea’s Omnirise Fig. 16: TechnipFMC Centrifugal Fig. 17: Loadout of the
Fig. 8: OneSubsea Raw Courtesy of TechnipFMC miniBooster Pump Station with Multiphase OneSubsea Pump Station for Fig. 18: OneSubsea – Loadout of 1 of 6,
Seawater Injection System Fig. 11: BHGE Modular Compact Pump
Pump (Exposed) the Total CLOV Project 2.3MW Hybrid Pumps for Pazflor
being installed Fig. 3: POWERJump Boosting System Cross Section –24 stages (6MW)
for Columbia E Field
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE CONTRIBUTORS
INTECSEA and Offshore Magazine wish to acknowledge the following companies and individuals who continue to support our efforts
to educate and inform the oil & gas industry on the status of subsea processing technologies and systems: Courtesy of Aker Solutions

ABB: Rita-Wei Fu, Tor-Eivind Moen; ABS: Smarty John, Jessie Lin, Meng-Lung Liu, Hao Song; Aker Solutions: Marco Gabelloni, Jonah Margulis, Kate Winterton; FSubsea: Alexander Fuglesang; Fig. 22: FSubsea’s
Baker Hughes, a GE company: Alisdair McDonald; ITP InterPipe: Géraldine Salque, Wayne Grobbelaar; ITT Bornemann: Stefan Ladig; Leistritz: Jeffery De Vaul; MAN Diesel & Turbo: Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of Schlumberger Omnirise – barrier-
Roberto Rubichi, Domingo Fernandez and Claudine Bargetzi; Nexans: Angéline Afanoukoe; NOV: Ingjerd Jensen, Svein Fidje, Torbjorn Hegdal, Eirik Dirdal; OneSubsea: Thomas Kajander, Timothy fluid less, integrated VSD
Taylor, Phillip Luce, Grant Harris, Jennifer McMurtry, Lisa Ann Hofmann; Saipem: Alessandro Radicioni, Stephanie Abrand, Chiesa Giovanni, Casotto Marco; Schneider Electric: Kristina Hakala; Courtesy of TechnipFMC Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea ESPs can be installed in a caisson function (1.5MW, 6600V
Shell: Chris Shaw; Siemens: Richard Barratt, Kim Smith; Statoil: Ole Økland, Bjørgulf Haukelidsæter Eidesen, and Atle Harald Børnes; Subsea 7: Michael Firmian, Guy Mencarelli, Sigbjorn to gather and boost flow from SPP prototype ~2019)
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Figs. 2 & 3: Courtesy of OneSubsea
Courtesy Courtesy of OneSubsea
of TechnipFMC CourtesyCourtesy
of OneSubsea
of ExxonMobil Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea
Daasvatn, Martin Goodlad; Sulzer: Mika Tienhaara; TechnipFMC: Janardhan Davalath, Douglas Wiles, Laurent Decoret; Teledyne: Catherine Carlson multiple wells. Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of FSubsea Courtesy of TechnipFMC Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of OneSubsea

Fig. 19: Seafloor Boosting System Using Fig. 20: OneSubsea – Loadout of Fig. 21: BHGE Modular
POSTER COLOR CODE KEY TABLE 1 –2018 WORLDWIDE SURVEY OF SUBSEA GAS COMPRESSION, BOOSTING, WATER INJECTION, AND SEPARATION (AS OF FEBRUARY 2018) (1)(2) COURTESY OF SUBSEA BOOSTING PROJECT TRENDS ADVANCES IN SUBSEA BOOSTING TECHNOLOGY: REDUCING COST AND RISK WHILE INCREASING OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY ESPs in Caissons the Shell Draugen Pump Station Compact Pump (MCP)
The poster is divided into distinct sections
CURRENT STATUS

FRACTION (GVF)
UNIT POWER (3)
and each section is marked by a background GRAPH 3: TIEBACK DISTANCE vs. WATER DEPTH FOR SS BOOSTING SYSTEMS

TOTAL POWER

GAS VOLUME
PROCESSING

CAPEX Reduction Increased Operational Tolerance Risk Reduction

DISCIPLINE

color. The color denotes the type of technology

DEMAND
CURRENT PUMP TYPE 0 (ft) Standardization of Subsea Pump Hardware
COUNT

presented in the section. This color code is FIELD OR PROJECT REGION/ WATER TIEBACK SYSTEM FLOW RATE DIFFERENTIAL SYSTEM NO. OF COMPRESSOR/PUMP IN-SERVICE/OPERATING 0 (m)

(5)
carried throughout the poster. Below are the color COMMENTS OWNER/FIELD or • As More Projects are Executed, Suppliers can provide
(Ordered by Start Date) BASINS DEPTH DISTANCE (@LINE CONDITIONS) PRESSURE PACKAGER PUMPS UNITS MANUFACTURER INFORMATION standardized hardware designs based on past projects.
code designations for each of the seven themes. OPERATOR COMPR. TYPE 1,640 (ft)
500 (m) High Voltage Motor • Standardization of Hardware Like Motors and Impellors Innovative Subsea Pump Designs Enhanced Condition Monitoring
Full Wellstream Subsea Boosting Greater Enfield Enable Long Tie-backs Without the Use of Subsea Transformers Streamlines the Design Process. Advanced Subsea Pump System Designs Allow For Enhanced Condition Monitoring for Subsea Boosting Systems Can Include a Combination of New
M3/Hr. MBOPD % OF PUMPS or START (12) END or 3,280 (ft) • Simplified engineering and fabrication activities may also Control and More Effective Pump Stages, which Allows for Hardware (Such as Proximity Probes), Software and Real-time Monitoring by Suppliers,
Subsea Separation COMPANY Meters Feet Km Miles
(37) MBWPD BAR (4) PSI (4) MW MW
VOL. COMPANY
COMPR. TYPE COMPANY (Month-Year) PRESENT
MTHS 1,000 (m) yield a reduction in risk. Greater Tolerance to Wellstream Changes. Maximizing Uptime through Trending and Predictive Analysis.

Water Depth
Subsea Gas Compression 1 DEMO 2000 Q Statoil K-Lab Test Statoil Offshore Norway 3.60 n/a OneSubsea Counter Axial OneSubsea 2001 Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company
4,920 (ft) Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of FSubsea
Water Injection with Subsea Pumps 2 Ormen Lange Gas Compression Pilot CP Testing 1 train @ Nyhamna, Norway Norske Shell Offshore Norway 10 33 0.0 0.0 25,000 3776 60.0 870 12.50 58.00 n/a Aker Solutions 1 Centrifugal GE Compr/Aker Pump 2011 30-Aug-16 1,500 (m)
Standardization of Subsea Pump Hardware
Dalmation
3 Åsgard - Midgard & Mikkel Fields (7) O Subsea Gas Compression Statoil (18) Offshore Norway 300 984 40.0 25.0 20,000 3,021 50.0 725 11.50 24.40 n/a Aker Solutions (11) 2+1 Spare +1 Centrifugal MAN compr/Aker pump 6-Sep-15 1-Mar-18 18 Jack & St. Malo • In the Past, Complex Operator Requirements have Increased
6,560 (ft)
COMPRESSION

Subsea Active Heating

ACTIVE HEATING SYSTEM TYPES For a list of worldwide Active Heating projects: www.offshore-mag.com/maps-posters.html
SUBSEA GAS

4 Gullfaks South Brent (25) O Subsea Wet Gas Compression Statoil (18) Offshore Norway 135 443 15.5 9.7 9,600 1,450 30.0 435 5.00 10.00 95% OneSubsea (10) 2+1 Spare Counter Axial OneSubsea Jul-2017 2-Nov-15 1 2,000 (m) Lead Time and CAPEX.
Power Transmission/Distribution and Controls 5 Ormen Lange Gas Compression 2 (28) C Subsea Gas Compression Norske Shell Offshore Norway 860 2,822 120.0 75.0 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD n/a TBA 2 Centrifugal TBA 2021 Julia • The Industry is Moving Towards Standardized or Supplier
6 Troll C Subsea Gas Compression Statoil Offshore Norway 340 1,116 4.0 2.5 n/a TBA Undecided TBA TBD 8,200 (ft) Based Subsea Pump Specifications (Example: Subsea TYPE 1A: Direct Electrical Heating (DEH) – Wet insulated rigid pipe with piggyback power cable
Miscellaneous Information/Combination of Technologies 2,500 (m) Processing JIP – Standardization of Subsea Pumping).
7 Peon (35) P/H Subsea Gas Compression Statoil Offshore Norway 385 1,263 TBD TBD TBD TBD Stones Fig. 1: Aker Solutions DEH Cable & Attachment to Flowline
SS Pumps - Conceptual Courtesy of Aker Solutions
8 Snohvit C Subsea Gas Compression Statoil Barents Sea 345 1,132 143.0 89.4 TBD n/a TBA TBA 2020 9,840 (ft) SS Pumps - Awarded and in Manufacturing/Delivered
3,000 (m) Compact Module Pumps Fig. 2: Nexans Conceptual DEH Cable Cross-sections & Attachments
9 Shtokman (36) P/H Subsea Gas Compression Gazprom Barents Sea 350 1,148 565.0 353.1 TBD n/a TBA Centrifugal TBA 2022 SS Pumps - Operational
TABLE 3 – ACRONYMS & 10 Åsgard - Midgard & Mikkel Fields C Subsea Gas Compression - Phase 2 Statoil (18) Offshore Norway 300 984 40.0 25.0 12,000 60.0 11.50 24.40 n/a TBA 2+1 Spare +1 Centrifugal MAN compr/Aker pump 2021 DEH riser cable
ABBREVIATIONS 11,480 (ft)
11 Jansz-Io & Gorgon Fields C Subsea Gas Compression, Alternative to Floating Host Chevron W. Australia 1,350 4,429 130.0 81.3 60.0 Aker Solutions 2021 3,500 (m) 0 (mi) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
AC Alternating Current 1 Prezioso A MPP at Base of Platform ENI Italy 50 164 0.0 0.0 65.0 10 40.0 580 0.15 30-90% Saipem 1 Twin-Screw Nuovo Pignone (9) 1994 1995 0 (km) 3.1 6.2 9.3 12.4 15.5 18.6 21.7 24.9
ASD Adjustable Speed Drive 2 Draugen Field A Hydraulic Drive MPP (17) Norske Shell Offshore Norway 270 886 4.0 2.5 193.0 29 50.0 725 0.75 42% OneSubsea 1+1 Spare SMUBS, 1-MPP SPX ClydeUnion Nov-95 15-Nov-96 12.2 Armored
BCSS Centrifugal Subsea Submersible Pumps 3 Lufeng 22/1 Field A Tieback to FPSO Statoil South China Sea 330 1,083 1.0 0.6 675.0 102 35.0 508 0.40 3% OneSubsea/TechnipFMC 5+2 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea Jan-98 15-Jul-09 138.0 Tieback Distance COURTESY OF
DEH riser cable feeder cable
BPD Barrels per Day Courtesy of Hayward Tyler (for heating one or
4 Machar Field (ETAP Project) A Hydraulic Drive MPP BP UK North Sea 85 277 35.2 21.9 1,100.0 166 22.0 319 0.65 64% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea
Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Feeder cable two segments)
BOPD Barrels of Oil per Day Piggyback
5 Topacio Field O 1 x Dual MPP System ExxonMobil Equatorial Guinea 550 1,805 8.0 5.0 940.0 142 35.0 508 0.86 75% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Aug-00 1-Mar-18 197.1
GRAPH 4: TIEBACK DISTANCE vs. TIME FOR SS BOOSTING SYSTEMS cable
BWPD Barrels of Water per Day
6 Ceiba C3 + C4 O Phase 1 SS MPP Project Hess Equatorial Guinea 750 2,461 7.0 4.3 600.0 91 45.0 653 0.85 75% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Oct-02 1-Mar-18 171.1
40 Standardization
CAPEXCapital Expenditure Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company
DC Direct Current
7 Jubarte EWT A Riser lift to Seillean drillship Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,400 4,593 1.4 0.9 145.0 22 140.0 2,000 0.70 22% TechnipFMC 1 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) Dec-02 1-Dec-06 47.9 24.9
SS Pumps - Conceptual Increased Motor Efficiency and Speed Junction box Piggyback cable
DEH Direct Electrical Heating
8 Ceiba Field (FFD) O Full Field Development (FFD) Hess Equatorial Guinea 700 2,297 14.5 9.0 2,500.0 378 40.0 580 1.20 75% OneSubsea 6+2 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Dec-03 1-Mar-18 157.1 35 SS Pumps - Awarded and in Manufacturing/Delivered Dalmation Options such as Permanent Magnet and High Duty Motor
9 Mutineer / Exeter O 2 x Single MPP Systems Santos NW Shelf, Australia 145 476 7.0 4.3 1,200.0 181 30.0 435 1.10 0-40% OneSubsea 2 MPP Helico-Axial OneSubsea (16) Mar-05 1-Mar-18 142.1 21.7 SS Pumps - Operational Larger Subsea Pumps Courtesy of INTECSEA Technology Facilitates Full Torque at Low Speeds and Greater
DGC Dry Gas Compression Greater Enfield
10 Lyell (Original Install) A SS Tieback to Ninian South CNR UK North Sea 146 479 15.0 9.3 1,100.0 166 18.0 261 1.60 40-70% Aker Solutions 1 Twin Screw Bornemann SMPC 9 Jan-06 Dec-06 11.0 New Pump System Designs Enable Higher Pressure Differential Efficiency at High Speeds.
EFL Electrical Flying Lead 30 and Throughput, Reducing Total Number of Pumps and CAPEX
11 Navajo I, N ESP in Flowline Riser Anadarko US GOM 1,110 3,642 7.2 4.5 24.0 4 40.2 583 0.75 57% Baker Hughes 1 ESP Baker Hughes Feb-07 1-Aug-07 5.5 18.6 Julia

Tieback Distance
EHTF Electrical Heat Traced Flowline Water Based Barrier Fluid
ESP Electrical Submersible Pump 12 Jubarte Field - Phase 1 A Seabed ESP-MOBO, Uses BCSS (14) Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,350 4,429 4.0 2.5 120.0 18 138.0 2,002 0.90 10-40% TechnipFMC 1 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) Mar-07 Aug-07 5.0 25 • Water Based Barrier Fluid Eliminates the Need for Topsides
(NOTE 1. SEABED & RISER ONLY, NOTE 2. EXCLUDES DOWNHOLE ESPs)

ETH Electrical Trace Heating 13 Brenda & Nicol Fields O MultiManifold with 1 MPP Premier Oil UK North Sea 145 476 8.5 5.3 800.0 121 19.0 276 1.10 75% OneSubsea 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Apr-07 1-Mar-18 117.1 15.5 Jack & St. Malo • Dehydration Units and is Applicable to Motors such as CPM = Condition and Performance Monitoring Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Nexans
FFD Full Field Development 14 King (8) A SS Tieback to Marlin TLP Anadarko US GOM 1,700 5,578 29.0 18.0 496.5 75 50.0 725 1.30 0-95% Aker Solutions 2+1 Spare Twin-Screw ITT Bornemann/Loher Nov-07 15-Feb-09 15.0 20 Permanent Magnet Motors Courtesy of TechnipFMC Fig. 3: Aker Solutions DEH Riser Cable
FPS Floating Production System 15 Vincent O Dual MPP System Woodside NW Shelf, Australia 475 1,558 3.0 1.9 2,400.0 363 42.0 609 1.80 25-70% OneSubsea 2+2 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Aug-10 1-Mar-18 77.1 12.4 Rosa/Girassol Fig. 4: TYPE 1B: Pipe-In-Pipe DEH for Two Heated Segments/Flowlines
FULL WELLSTREAM SUBSEA BOOSTING

FPSO Floating, Production, Storage & Offloading 16 Marlim A SBMS-500 SS Field Test Petrobras Campos Basin 1,900 6,234 3.1 1.9 500.0 75 60.0 870 1.20 0-100% Curtiss-Wright / OneSubsea 1 Twin-Screw Leistritz Ceiba Field(FFD)
15 Eliminate Barrier Fluid Topside Power
FPU Floating Production Unit 17 Golfinho Field BCSS O Seabed ESP-MOBO, Uses BCSS (14) Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,500 4,922 11.0 6.8 146.0 22 138.0 2,002 1.20 10-40% TechnipFMC (33) 2 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) (33) Dec-14 4-Jan-18 37.0 9.3 Barrier Fluid System Enhancement Supply

GLR Gas Liquid Ratio • Pump Systems are Under Development Which Eliminate
18 Azurite Field A Dual MPP System Murphy Oil Congo, W. Africa 1,338 4,390 3.0 1.9 350.0 53 41.0 595 0.85 28% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Sep-10 1-Oct-13 36.5 10 the Requirement of Barrier Fluid Barrier Fluid Systems Have Been Improved to Ensure that the Pressure in the Motor and DEH Cable
Wetmate power
GVF Gas Volume Fraction 6.2 Bearing Cavities Exceeds the Process Suction Pressure Avoiding the Ingress of Process Fluid Current in outer
19 Golfinho Field Caissons O MOBO BCSS (ESP) Caissons (14) Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,500 4,922 5.0 3.1 146.0 22 138.0 2,002 1.20 10-40% Aker Solutions 2 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) (33) Dec-14 4-Jan-18 36.1
Into the Barrier Fluid.
connectors
pipe
HPHT High Pressure/High Temperature
20 Espadarte (Field Trial) A Horizontal ESP on Skid Petrobras Brazil 1,350 4,429 11.5 7.1 125.0 19 100.0 1,450 0.90 10-40% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Dec-11 Mar-13 14.5 5
HSP Hydraulic Submersible Pump 3.1
21 Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 1 (20) O Caisson / Artifical Non-Separated Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 9.0 5.6 185.0 28 152 2,205 1.10 40% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Jul-09 1-Mar-18 103.3 Current in inner
Outer Pipe
HV High Voltage pipe

IPB Integrated Production Bundle

22 Parque Das Conchas (BC-10) Phase 2 O 2 additional ESP systems Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 9.0 5.6 185.0 28 152 2,205 1.10 40% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Oct-13 1-Mar-18 52.4 0 (mi)
0 (km)
SS BOOSTING POWER SYSTEM STEP-OUT Insulation

IOR Improved (Increased) Oil Recovery 23

24
Parque Das Conchas (BC-10) MPP Repl.
Jubarte Field - Phase 2
M
O
Replacement MPP system
Tieback to FPSO P-57, Uses BCSS (14) (22)
Shell
Petrobras
Campos Basin
Espirito Santo Basin
2,150
1,400
7,054
4,593
9.0
8.0
5.6
5.0
185.0
1,325.0
28
200 200 3,000 1.20
40%
30-40%
TechnipFMC
Aker Solutions
1
15
Helico-Axial
ESP
TechnipFMC
Schlumberger (REDA)
2018
6-Dec-10 1-Mar-18 86.6
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Present 2020 2025 CAPABILITIES Inner pipe

kW Kilowatt
Km Kilometer 25 Cascade & Chinook I, N Skid BCSS - Horizontal ESP on Skid (6) Petrobras US GOM 2,484 8,150 8.0 5.0 135.0 20 220.0 3,191 1.10 10% TechnipFMC 4+2 Spare ESP Baker Hughes 14-Jul-12 Unkown Year COURTESY OF Fig. 9: TechnipFMC Integrated Production Bundle (IPB) - Electrically Heat Traced Flexible
Conducting Bulkhead
Mid-Line Assembly (MLA)
Conducting Bulkhead
CROSS SECTION

MBLPDThousand Barrels of Liquid Per Day 26 Barracuda O SS MP High Boost Pump System (30) Petrobras Campos Basin 1,040 3,412 10.5 6.5 280.0 42 70.0 1,015 1.50 35-60% OneSubsea 1 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 14-Jul-12 1-Mar-18 67.4 Courtesy of Aker Solutions
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of INTECSEA
MCP Modular Compact Pump 27 Montanazo & Lubina O Single MPP System Repsol Mediterranean 740 2,428 12.3 7.6 80.0 12 65.0 943 0.23 10% OneSubsea 1 + 1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 15-Jan-14 1-Mar-18 49.4 GRAPH 5: SUBSEA BOOSTING – TOTAL THROUGHPUT vs. DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE Courtesy of TechnipFMC
MPP Multiphase Pump 28 Schiehallion I, N 2 x Dual MPP Systems BP UK, West of Shetland 400 1,312 4.0 2.5 2,700.0 408 26.0 377 1.80 74% GE/OneSubsea 4+0 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea 2014 Delayed Start Up 3,990 275
MW Mega Watts 29 CLOV (19) O Subsea MPP System Total Angola, Blk 17 1,170 3,839 11.0 6.8 660.0 100 45.0 652 2.30 50% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea 31-Jul-16 1-Mar-18 19.0 (psi) (bar) Alternative Barrier Fluid Solutions Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of FSubsea TYPE 2: Electrical Trace Heating (ETH) - Pipe-in-Pipe
OPEX Operational Expenditures 3,625 250 Jack & St. Malo SS Pumps - Awarded and in New Pump System Designs are Emerging which Reduce or Recirculation Systems Fig. 5: TechnipFMC Electrically Trace Heated Pipe-in-Pipe (ETH-PiP) Fig. 6: Subsea 7/ITP InterPipe Electrically Heat Traced Pipe-in-Pipe
30 Jack & St. Malo O 3 x Single SPP Systems (JSM) Chevron US GOM 2,134 7,000 21.0 13.0 1,191.0 180 241.3 3,500 3.00 10% OneSubsea 3+2 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 10-May-16 1-Mar-18 21.6
Manufacturing/Delivered
O/W Oil and Water (SPPs) Even Eliminate Barrier Fluid Requirements, Reducing CAPEX. Homogenization and Liquid Recirculation Enables Greater
31 Lyell Retrofit O MPP Retrofit System - Tieback to Ninian CNR UK North Sea 145 476 7.0 4.3 700.0 106 21.0 305 1.00 97% OneSubsea 1 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 21-Aug-14 1-Mar-18 42.2 3,265 225 SS Pumps - Operational Enabling Subsea Pumps – Topsides Specific insulation material with reduced Centralizer
PCM Power Control Module Tolerance to High GVF and Gas Slugs for Subsea Pumps.
32 Rosa/Girassol (24) O Field Expansion Project Total Angola, Blk 17 1,350 4,429 18.0 11.2 600.0 91 130.0 1,885 2.50 20-50% OneSubsea 4+2 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Q2 2015 1-Mar-18 pressure in PiP annulus
Planning for Future Subsea Pumps is Recommended

Differential Pressure
PDG Pseudo Dry Gas 33 Draugen Field (Infill Program) O 2 x Dual MPP Station A/S Norske Shell Offshore Norway 268 879 4.0 2.5 1,710.0 253 47.5 689 2.30 10-31% OneSubsea 2 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 24-Nov-16 1-Mar-18 15.1 2,900 200 Single Well Boosting
Julia (SPPs) Jubarte Field (Phase 2-ESPs) Real-estate (footprint)
Heating Wires
PIP Pipe-in-Pipe Subsea Pumps Have Been Developed to Facilitate Single Well
34 Julia O SS Tieback with Dual SPP Systems ExxonMobil US GOM 2,287 7,500 27.2 17.0 331 50 175.0 2,550 3.00 10% OneSubsea 2 Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 18-Apr-16 1-Mar-18 22.4 2,540 175 and Weight Requirements
PWRI Produced Water Reinjection Boosting With Lower CAPEX.
35 Moho Phase 1bis O Brownfield Tieback to Alima FPU Total Congo, W. Africa 650 2,133 6.7 4.0 400 60 133.5 1,935 3.50 49% OneSubsea 2 Helico-Axial OneSubsea 2016
RWI Raw Water Injection 2,175 150
SIT System Integration Test
36 Stones M Single Phase HPHT Pump System Shell US GOM 2,927 9,600 5.0 3.1 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD <10% OneSubsea 2 +1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 2018
Rosa/Girrassol (MPPs)
37 Appomattox C MPP in future Phases Shell US GOM 2,222 7,290 TBD TBD 1,815 125
SMUBSShell Multiphase Underwater Boost Station Umbilical Tubes
SPP Single Phase Pump 38 Parque Das Baleias O Horizontal ESP on Skid Petrobras Espirito Santo Basin 1,500 4,922 10.0 6.2 125.0 19 140 2,058 1.20 10-25% TechnipFMC 5 +1 Spare ESP Schlumberger (REDA) 3/19/14 1-Mar-18 47.3
1,450 100 Outer Pipe
SRSWISubsea Raw Seawater Injection 39 Greater Enfield M Dual MPP System Woodside W. Australia 850 2,788 32.0 20.0 959.0 145 110.0 1,595 2.60 5.20 81% OneSubsea 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Mid-2019
SS Subsea 40 Dalmatian M Single MPP System SS Tieback to Petronius Platform Murphy E & P Co. US GOM 1,779 5,837 35.0 22.0 231.0 35 150.0 2,176 2.20 2.20 65% OneSubsea (34) 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea (34) 2018 1,090 75 Vincent Protection Sheet
SSP Subsea Processing 41 Otter Field M MPP System SS Tieback to North Cormorant Platform TAQA Bratani UK North Sea 184 603 22.0 13.7 853.0 129 48.0 696 2.00 2.00 75% OneSubea 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea 2018 Draugen (MPPs) Fiber Optic Cable
725 50 (MPPs) Ceiba Field Power Generation Inner pipe
SSPU Subsea Separation and Pumping Unit 42 West Hub M Mud Line Boosting Pump ENI Angola Block 15/06 1,000 3,281 TechnipFMC 2+1 Spare Helico-Axial TechnipFMC Q2, 2018 (FFD) (MPPs) Courtesy of INTECSEA
SUBSIS
Subsea Separation and Injection System 43 Vigdis C Subsea Boosting of existing wells Statoil Offshore Norway 280 919 6.5 4.1 50.0 725 2.30 2.30 20-40% TBA 1 TBD TBA 2021 360 25 Courtesy of TechnipFMC/Heat Trace Ltd Courtesy of Subsea 7/ITP InterPipe
Courtesy of Aker Solutions Fig. 8
INJECTION

TLP Tension Leg Platform 1 Troll C Pilot (15) A SUBSIS (SS Sep. and WI Sys.) Statoil Offshore Norway 340 1,116 3.5 2.2 250.0 38 151.0 2,190 1.60 0% GE/OneSubsea 1+1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea Aug-01 1-Mar-18 197.8 0 0 Figs. 7 & 8: Saipem Electrically Heated Pipe-in-Pipe - for
SUBSEA
WATER

TSP Twin Screw Pump 2 Columba E. I, N Dual SPP System CNR North Sea 145 476 7.0 4.3 331.0 50 305.0 4,424 2.30 0% OneSubsea 2+0 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea May-07 1-Oct-13 76.4 (MBLPD) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Enabling Subsea Pumps Courtesy of INTECSEA Pre-Qualified Impellor Ranges
TABLE 4: SS BOOSTING POWER SYSTEM STEP-OUT CONFIGURATIONS TYPE 3: Flexibles with active heating J-lay/S-lay installation; employs a sliding configuration
TRL Technology Readiness Level 3 Tyrihans A 3 SPP & SS RWI Filtration System Statoil Offshore Norway 270 886 31.0 19.3 583.0 88 205.0 2,973 2.70 0% FMC/Aker Solutions 2+1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) Aker Solutions 12-Mar-13 1-Mar-18 59.5 (m³/hr) 0 330 660 995 1,325 1,655 1,990 2,320 2,650 2,980 Pump Impellors Prequalified for Various
Integrating Subsea Pumps with Brownfield Systems That Were Fig. 9: TechnipFMC Integrated Production Bundle
VASPSVertical Annular Separation and Pumping Throughput and Pressure Differential STEP-OUT POWER
4 Albacora L'Este Field (31) O Raw Water Injection to 7 Wells Petrobras Campos Basin, Brazil 400 1,312 4 to 9 2.5-6.0 1125 170 85 1,233 1.2 0% OneSubsea 3+1 Spare Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea 14-Mar-14 1-Mar-18 47.5 Throughput COURTESY OF Not Enabled for Pumps is One of the Leading Challenges for (IPB) - Electrically Heat Traced Flexible

CATEGORY
System Combinations Allows for Well-Known and
(6) ASD XFMRS EXAMPLE
1 Zakum A Shallow Water Test Separation System BP Offshore Abu Dhabi 24 79 1969 1972 36 Subsea Boosting Projects. Demonstrated Pump Tolerances.

TRL
VSD Variable Speed Drive Courtesy of Siemens VOLTAGE & POWER RATING

Topside
Subsea
2 Highlander Field (32) A SS Separator/Slug Catcher Repsol Sinopec (27) UK North Sea 420 1,378 Topside
WD Water Depth
GRAPH 6: SUBSEA SHAFT POWER vs. TIME FOR SS BOOSTING SYSTEMS Radius (1) (Step SS (Step
SUBSEA SEPARATION

WGC Wet Gas Compression 3 Argyll A SS Sep. and Pumping Unit (SSPU) Hamilton Bros UK North Sea 80 262 BOET (See Table 3 Def.) 1989 Larger Quantity of Suppliers D
Up) Core of the IPB
WI Water Injection 4 Marimba Field I, N VASPS Field Test (21) Petrobras Campos Basin 395 1,296 1.7 1.1 60.0 9 52.0 754 0.3 OneSubsea 1 ESP Schlumberger (REDA) Jul-01 1-Jul-08 83.0 3.5
Jack & Reputable Subsea Pump Integrators Have Become Subsea Enabling Subsea Pumps – Subsea
XFMR Transformer 5 Troll C Pilot (15) A Horizontal SUBSIS (SS Sep. & WI Sys.) (23) Statoil Offshore Norway 340 1,116 3.5 2.2 250.0 38 151.0 2,190 1.60 0% GE / OneSubsea 1+1 Spare n/a OneSubsea Aug-01 1-Mar-18 197.8 SS Pumps - Conceptual St. Malo Pump Suppliers and Have Increased Market Competition.
Julia • SS Infrastructure for Future Subsea Pumps is Recommended
COURTESY OF 6 Tordis (13) O Separation, MPP Statoil Offshore Norway 210 689 11.0 6.8 1,500.0 227 27.0 392 2.30 10-68% TechnipFMC 1+1 Spare Helico-Axial OneSubsea Oct-07 1-Mar-18 124.3 3.0 SS Pumps - Awarded and in to Prevent Shutdown of Fields During Integration, Tie-Ins,
Electrical heat

Subsea Pump Shaft Power

7 Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 1 O Separation Caisson / Artifical Lift Manifold Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 25.0 15.6 185.0 28 152.0 2,205 1.10 15% TechnipFMC 4 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift Aug-09 1-Mar-18 102.3 Manufacturing/Delivered and Isolation trace cables
SS Pumps - Operational Topsides and Subsea Solutions that Reduce Weight
8 Perdido O Caisson Separation and Boosting (29) Shell US GOM 2,438 7,999 0.0 0.0 132-264 20 - 40 158.8 2,303 1.20 15% TechnipFMC 5 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift Mar-10 1-Mar-18 84.0
2.5 Rosa/Girassol and Space Requirements
Information Accuracy: We have attempted to use Gas lift tubes
correct and current, as of press time, information
9 Pazflor O 3 Gas/Liquid Vertical Separation System Total Angola, Blk 17 800 2,625 4.0 2.5 1,800.0 272 105.0 1,523 2.30 <16% TechnipFMC 6+2 Spare Hybrid H-A OneSubsea Aug-11 1-Mar-18 77.9 New Subsea Pump Solutions are Available Which Decrease
for the subsea processing systems and equipment 10 Marlim SSAO - Pilot O In-Line Separation Petrobras Campos Basin 878 2,881 3.8 2.4 135.0 20 245 3,553 1.9 67% TechnipFMC 1 Centrifugal (SPP) OneSubsea Mar-13 1-Mar-18 58.9 Topsides and Subsea Real-estate and Weight Requirements.
described herein. No installed, sanctioned, or pending 2.0 This Lowers Topsides Cost and Subsea Installation Cost. Thermal insulation
11 Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 2 M 2 additional ESP systems Shell Campos Basin 2,150 7,054 25.0 15.6 185.0 28 152.0 2,205 1.10 15% TechnipFMC 2 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of Saipem
application was intentionally excluded. We have Vincent
summarized the capability and operating experience by
12 Corvina (26) CP VASPS w/Horizontal ESP Petrobras Campos Basin 280 919 8.0 5.0 135.0 20 21 305 0.4 <10% TechnipFMC 1 ESP Baker Hughes Centrilift
Courtesy of Saipem
Courtesy of TechnipFMC
acting as a neutral party and integrator of information. CURRENT STATUS CATEGORIES NOTES: 1. Qualification Status - As stated in the Information Accuracy statement of this poster, the pumps in the near future. ESPs per well feeding 1 x OneSubsea MPP per asset on seafloor. 23. SUBSIS - The world's longest operating subsea separation system and first subsea water 30. Barracuda - Is the first installation of high boost MPP. Ref. 2013 OTC Paper 24217 for 1.5
Information has been collected from public sources, qualification status information shown in this table, and throughout the poster, are based 9. Nuovo Pignone is now part of GE. 17. Draugen MPP - This was the world's first Multiphase Subsea Pump which was injection pump system. Abandoned and not in operation. additional information about the MPP. Ceiba Field (FFD)
C Conceptual Project Pump Designs For Operation
company brochures, personal interviews, phone
Q Qualified/Testing
on unverified claims from equipment suppliers and field operators. These qualification
status designations are not necessarily derived using technology readiness level (TRL)
10. Gullfaks - OTC Paper 27224 by OneSubsea provides an overview of the Technology
Qualification Program (TQP) completed for Statoil's Gullfaks Subsea Compression (GSC)
installed in 1993. It ran successfully from 1995 for 12 Months (1,000 hours) and was
decommissioned and abandoned due to change in water injection strategy.
24. Rosa/Girassol development project includes the Rosa field with 4 SS boosting pumps.
1st set operational in Sept., 2015 & 2nd set operational in April, 2016.
31. Albacora Field - Ref. 2013 OTC Paper 24167
32. Highlander Field - SS Tieback to the Tartan Field which has a SS separator/slug catcher 1.0 at High GVF TYPE 4: Diverted production flow for heating TYPE 5: Hot Water
interviews, press releases, industry magazines,
vendor-supplied information, and web sites. No M Awarded and in Manufacturing or Delivered
assessments per API RP 17Q, DNV-RP-A203, or ABS Guidance Notes on Qualifying New project. 18. Statoil - See OTC Paper 27201 by Rune Ramberg & other for Statoil's research leading 25. Gullfaks South Brent - was shut down in Nov. 2015. The root cause has been identified installed for the tie-in to the Tartan Platform. See papers: 1994 OTC #7438-MS, 1987 TopacioField Subsea Multiphase Pumps are Now Fig. 10: Saipem Local Heating Station – Retrievable Heated
Technologies. 11. Åsgard Project: See OTC Paper #27197 by Anders Storstenvik: Aker Åsgard Project. up to the Subsea Factory Compressor Stations. It highlights Statoil's future vision. as “AC corrosion in the umbilicals that led to the leakage, ruling out any fault with the SPE #13970-PA, 1987 SPE # 16532-MS
guarantee is made that information is accurate or all- O Installed & Currently Operating 2. Pumping & Boosting: The terms “Pumping” and “Boosting” are used interchangeably 12. START: Month & Year indicates first month and year of operation for the SS processing 19. CLOV - Two (2) MPPs are on the sea floor since Dec. 2015. The seabed MP boosting compressors” according to a Statoil spokesman. Gas compressors where scheduled to 33. Petrobras changed ESP supplier from Baker Hughes to Schlumberger (REDA) January Designed to Handle GVF Ranges of 0-95% Fig. 11: Subsea 7 Pipeline Bundle
inclusive. Neither INTECSEA nor Offshore Magazine throughout this poster and in the industry. system. pumps will boost flow from 4 fields which are: Cravo, Lirio, Orquidea and Violeta. be reinstalled in Aug., 2017. 2015. 1 of each still has a Baker Hughes ESP as of February 2015. 0.5 (for limited times near 100%), Enabling with multiple flowlines, controls,
I,N Installed & Not Currently Operating or In-Active 3. Unit Motor Power: Is the unit motor power for either a pump or compressor assembly. 13. Tordis Field: SS Separation, 1+1 Spare Multiphase Boosting Pumps for production, 20. Parque Das Conchas (BC 10) Phase 1 - Composed of 3 reservoirs: Ostra, Abalone and 26. Congro & Corrina SS Boosting Project - This project has been canceled. Petrobras has 34. Dalmatian will be the longest subsea tieback in the GOM with SS boosting (35 KMs / 22 Operation at High GVF or Gas Slugs Without
guarantees or assumes any & active heating inside a carrier
©2018 Offshore

A Abandoned, Removed 4. Differential Pressure: Differential Pressure values are for individual boosting units. Single phase pumps for produced water from subsea separator transported to Gullfaks Argonauta B-West. Argonauta O-North to be added in Phase 2. Awarded to FMC but determined commercially Congro and Corvina are not feasible. Miles). Murphy E & P has awarded the Subsea Integration Alliance (SIA) (OneSubsea +
responsibility or liability for any Causing Pump Shutdowns.
POSTER

131
5. GVF = Gas Volume Fraction at inlet of a boosting assembly. C for further processing. installed by Subsea 7. 27. Repsol Sinopec - full Operator name is REPSOL SINOPEC RESOURCES UK LIMITED. Subsea 7) an EPCIC contract for the subsea multi-phase boosting system. 0.0 pipe (heating using e.g. inhibited
party’s use of the information CP Canceled Project 6. Cascade & Chinook - Utilizes horizontal ESPs on a skid above mudline. It is an alternative 14. BCSS - Centrifugal Subsea Submersible Pumps: Pumps are placed in protective holes in 21. Marimba VASPS - 2000 - First installation in Marimba (JIP Petrobras / Eni-Agip/ Repsol acquired the field through the Talisman acquisition. 35. Peon Development - In March, 2014 Statoil and partners placed the project on hold until
presented. If any information is ESP boosting configuration to caisson in the seabed. This technology is designed to cover the seabed, 200m from producing wells. MOBO - Modulo de Bombas (Pumping Module). ExxonMobil, 2001 - Startup and Operation (July to Dec.) until ESP failure, 2002 End of JIP, 28. Ormen Lange Gas Compression 2 - Currently Norske Shell is working to simplify the they see how SS gas compression is performing on other projects. 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Present 2020 2025 potable water, reinjected
P/H Postponed or On Hold produced water)
found to be incorrect, not current, the low GVF and high DeltaP multiphase flow. 15. Troll C Pilot: Separation began on Aug. 25, 2001. See OTC paper 20619, page 10 for By-pass production, 2003 - Workover Plan (IWP), 2004 - Workover and Re-start on May 8, design, remove unnecessary redundancy, reduce module size and reduce weights by 36. Shtokman Field - In 2014 Gazprom decided not to go ahead with the development of
7. Asgard is the longest subsea tieback in the world with SS gas compression. It is also the further details on operating experience. Note that injection pump data is only shown in 2004. From 2005 until 2008 VASPS operated well until well failure. more than 50%. the Shtokman field.
or has been omitted, please send
SS compression system with the longest track record of successful operation. the subsea water injection section of the table. Abandoned and not in operation. 22. Jubarte Field (Phase 2) - Phased installations from 2010 through 2015. Wells were 29. Peridido - Cassion for separation is 350 feet long drilled into the seabed. Read OTC 37. System Flow Rates - Gas flow rates not reported for Boosting or Separation. Year COURTESY OF Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of INTECSEA NOTE: *The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the
comments to ssp@intecsea.com. 8. King Field MPP are off line. There are no indications that Anadarko will reactivate these 16. Mutineer/Exeter Projects: Manufacturers are: OneSubsea and Centrilift. There are 2 connected to the FPSO P-57. All wells will have gas-lift as a backup. Paper 21716 above technologies vary Courtesy of Saipem Courtesy of Subsea 7

CHART 1 – SUBSEA SUPPLIER MATRIX (As of Feb., 2018) SUBSEA PROCESSING NOTES:
1. Aker Solutions and MAN Diesel & Turbo have SUBSEA POWER CONNECTORS WET-MATE AND DRY-MATE SUBSEA POWER DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT Fig. 3: Siemens SS Transformer
Prototype at Shallow Water Test*
Fig. 4: Siemens Conceptual
SS Variable Speed Drive*
Fig. 5: Siemens Conceptual SS
Switchgear*
Fig. 6: GE 24kV Switchgear Prototype
Tested in Shallow Water
SUBSEA GAS COMPRESSION SYSTEMS Fig. 3: SS Compression Station 2.0 concept
compared to Åsgard SS Compression
Fig. 5: Åsgard Subsea Compression Module
Fig. 6: Åsgard Compressor
module before starting
formed an alliance for the next generation of
subsea compression systems. Fig. 1: GE MECON DM 145/700 Fig. 2: Siemens ElecTRON Fig. 3: Teledyne interconnect system: Fig.4: Teledyne ODI 3-way 10kV, Fig. 1: Subsea 60MVA Power Station with transformer, Fig. 2: Siemens Conceptual Subsea Power Grid* Fig. 1: Ormen Lange Compression Station Test Fig. 2: TechnipFMC Conceptual 2-Train Dry Gas installation
SUBSEA
SUBSEA SEAWATER SUBSEA
SUBSEA GAS
SUBSEA INTEGRATED
HV & CONTROL
OTHER
TESTING 2. GE and Baker Hughes have entered into Dry-Mate connectors - Subsea Instrumentation umbilical terminations, HV wetmate flying 250A wet-mate EFL powers subsea switchgear & VSDs for pumps and compressors up to Compression Station with Replaceable Modules
BOOSTING
TREATMENT & SEPARATION
COMPRESSION
ACTIVE SUBSEA
AC/DC POWER SYSTEMS
SUPPORTING
FACILITIES an agreement to combine GE’s oil and gas Feedthrough Connector leads, and tubing hanger connections to boosting and processing
INJECTION (3) SYSTEMS HEATING (13) SYSTEM SUPPLIERS SYSTEMS business and Baker Hughes, now known as 12.5MW
Baker-Hughes, a GE company. System power ESP’s
Fig. 4
3. Subsea seawater injection refers to only those Fig. 5
PUMP ELECTRIC POWER ASDS/VSDS, HV AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS projects utilizing a subsea pump to inject Fig. 3
PUMP AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS (1) COMPRESSION ABB SAIPEM-AKER SOLUTIONS UMBILICALS PENETRATORS akersolutions.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com
SYSTEM MOTOR COMPRESSORS CABLES X-FORMERS CONNECTORS seawater and does not include typical water
MANUFACTURERS akersolutions.com akersolutions.com SYSTEM abb.com ALLIANCE
PACKAGERS MANUFACTURERS & SWITCHGEAR injection using a pump on a topside facility.
akersolutions.com
saipem.com BAKER HUGHES ALPHA THAMES BAKER HUGHES 4. Liestritz have partnered with Rosetti Marino for
BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES a GE company (2) a GE company (2)
AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS
a GE company (2) a GE company (2)
AKER SOLUTIONS (1) AKER SOLUTIONS ABB AKER SOLUTIONS AKER SOLUTIONS ABB (17) ALSTOM BENESTAD (9)
bakerhughes.com
alpha-thames.co.uk
bakerhughes.com potential twin screw marinization. Courtesy of Aker Solutions
akersolutions.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com abb.com akersolutions.com akersolutions.com abb.com alstom.com benestad.com 5. Deutsch is part of TE Connectivity.
SUBSEA INTEGRATION Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens
BAKER HUGHES 6. TechnipFMC and Sulzer have formed a long-
BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES
ALLIANCE (15) TechnipFMC (14)
a GE company (2)
FLOWSERVE
term and exclusive collaboration agreement. Fig. 4: NOV Passive Cooler – Field proven
CURTISS WRIGHT ONESUBSEA (8, 15) ONESUBSEA (8, 15) HEAT TRACE LTD. ONESUBSEA, SUBSEA 7, ALCATEL BICC BERCA CORTLAND AKER SOLUTIONS (17) DEUTSCH (5) DEUTSCH (5) fmctechnologies.com flowserve.com
a GE company (2) a GE company (2)
curtisswright.com onesubsea.com onesubsea.com
a GE company (2)
heat-trace.com SCHLUMBERGER alcatel-lucent.com biccberca.com cortlandandcompany.com akersolutions.com te.com te.com
bakerhughes.com
7. PROLAB is a Sulzer company. Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of Siemens The Siemens Subsea Power Grid is shown in Fig. 2, with the main building blocks in Figs. 3, 4, & 5, along with wet-mate 36kV Courtesy of GE technology lowering production temperature Courtesy of Aker Solutions
bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com
8. OneSubsea is a Schlumberger company. Courtesy of Aker Solutions & ABB Alliance for Power & Automation Courtesy of Siemens connectors and control system. (complimentary to compression)
BAKER HUGHES
ONESUBSEA (8, 15) SMARTMOTOR TechnipFMC (14)
9. Benestad is an Aker Solutions company. Fig. 5: GE MECON WM 36/500 Wet-mate connectors Fig. 11: BlueC
ONESUBSEA (8) ClydeUnion (SPX FLOW) FLOWSERVE SAIPEM SAIPEM ONESUBSEA (8, 15) NEXANS TechnipFMC (14) BRUGG FURUKAWA DRAKA DIAMOULD (10) DIAMOULD (10) onesubsea.com smartmotor.no fmctechnologies.com Courtesy of Aker Solutions Fig. 10: BHGE Conceptual Courtesy of Statoil
onesubsea.com spxflow.com flowserve.com saipem.com saipem.com onesubsea.com nexans.com fmctechnologies.com bruggcables.com Furukawa.co.jp draka.com
a GE company (2)
diamould.com diamould.com 10. Diamould is a OneSubsea company. Courtesy of Teledyne Compressor
bakerhughes.com
11. ASCOM re-branded as Sulzer Chemtech. Fig. 7: Åsgard 19 MVA Subsea Transformer Fig. 8: Åsgard 100 KVA Subsea Fig.11: ABB Conceptual Subsea Fig.12: ABB Conceptual Subsea Fig.13: Ormen Lange Pilot Courtesy of TechnipFMC Wet Gas Compression
BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES BAKER HUGHES
SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC ITT BORNEMANN ITT BORNEMANN 12. FSubsea (Fuglesangs Subsea AS) and the Fig. 8: Siemens DigiTRON+ Courtesy of Teledyne Module Control Power Distribution Module Fig. 9: ABB Conceptual Subsea Power Grid Fig. 10: ABB Subsea Transformer Switchgear Variable Speed Drive Subsea Pump VSD Fig. 7: OneSubsea Multiphase Compressor Fig. 8: Subsea HOFIM™ Compressor by MAN System (12.5 MW )
TechnipFMC (6, 14) FLOWSERVE SEABOX Sulzer Chemtech (11) TechnipFMC (14) SAIPEM HITACHI JDR JDR ONESUBSEA (8, 15) schneider-electric.com bornemann.com bornemann.com
a GE company (2) a GE company (2) a GE company (2) German pump company RuhRPumpen collaborate Fig. 7: Siemens SpecTRON 10 - and DigiTRON3 - 1kV and Fig. 12: Pseudo Dry Gas (PDG) in-line
fmctechnologies.com flowserve.com
bakerhughes.com sea-box.no sulzer.com fmctechnologies.com saipem.com hitachi.com jdrcables.com jdrcables.com onesubsea.com bakerhughes.com bakerhughes.com to develop advanced subsea centrifugal pump Units for GullfaksField Diesel & Turbo for Åsgard
SIEMENS LEISTRITZ ONESUBSEA (8, 15) solutions as Fuglesangs Subsea. 10kV wet mate connectors for 3kV wet mate controls Fig. 9: Siemens DigiTRONf - High unit (non-compression) reduces
FSUBSEA (12, 18) HAYWARD TYLER TechnipFMC/ TechnipFMC (14) DRESSER RAND
XXXXXXXXX SIEMENS MITSUBISHI NEXANS MFX DO BRASIL SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC XXXXX
SEACON SIEMENS energy.siemens.com leistritzcorp.com onesubsea.com 13. Includes system integrators and specialty subsea pumping systems connectors optical performance wet mate back pressure approx. 60-120 bar;
fsubsea.com haywardtyler.com SULZER (6, 14) fmctechnologies.com dresser-rand.com
XXXXXXXXX siemens.com mitsubishielectric.com nexans.com mfx.com.br schneider-electric.com seaconworldwide.com energy.siemens.com hardware suppliers. Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company connector requires 1MW for 1 BScfdsystem
fmctechnologies.com
14. Technip and FMC have merged to become Courtesy of NOV
sulzer.com PETROBRAS ATALAIA PROLAB (7)
ITT BORNEMANN LEISTRITZ LOHER (16) TWISTER BV BAKER HUGHES
a GE company (2)
SUBSEA 7 (15)/ INTERPIPE
subsea7.com
NKT NSW NEXANS SIEMENS SIEMENS TELEDYNE D.G.O’BRIEN LAB (Brazil) prolabnl.com TechnipFMC. Fig. 6: Siemens SpecTRON 45 - 45kV wet mate
bornemann.com leistritzcorp.com automation.siemens.com twisterbv.com bakerhughes.com itp-interpipe.com nktcables.com nsw.com nexans.com energy.siemens.com energy.siemens.com dgo.com 15. Subsea Integration Alliance (SIA) is a worldwide connectors for subsea power distribution Fig.9: Installation of the OneSubsea
non-incorporated partnership between Multiphase Compressor Station for Gulfaks
SHELL GASMER STATOIL: P-LAB & K-LAB
ONESUBSEA (8, 15) SCHLUMBERGER ONESUBSEA (8, 15) MAN Diesel & Turbo (1) TechnipFMC (14) OKONITE PARKER OCEANEERING SIEMENS TELEDYNE ODI TELEDYNE ODI (Houston, TX) (Norway)
OneSubsea, Schlumberger, and Subsea 7.
onesubsea.com slb.com onesubsea.com mandieselturbo.com fmctechnologies.com okonite.com parker.com oceaneering.com energy.siemens.com odi.com odi.com 16. Loher is a Siemens company.
17. Aker Solutions and ABB have formed an
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH
TechnipFMC (14)/ INSTITUTE
SULZER (6) Alliance for Power and Automation.
TechnipFMC/ ONESUBSEA (8, 15) PRYSMIAN SCHLUMBERGER REDA PARKER TECHNIP UMBILICAL sulzer.com
SULZER (6, 14)
DIRECT DRIVE SYSTEMS
onesubsea.com
swri.org 18. FSubsea won the 2017 OTC Spotlight on
fmctechnologies.com prysmiangroup.com slb.com parker.com technip.com
fmctechnologies.com New Technology Award for their OMNIRISE
sulzer.com MINIBOOSTER subsea processing pump.
SIEMENS INDUSTRIAL SUMITOMO PRYSMIAN UMBILICALS INTERNATIONAL
TURBO MACHINERY
global-sei.com prysmiangroup.com umbilicals.com Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of MAN Diesel & Turbo Courtesy of OneSubsea Courtesy of BHGE, a GE company Courtesy of GE Courtesy of INTECSEA Patent(s) pending
turbomachinerysolutions.com COURTESY OF Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Siemens Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of Aker Solutions Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of ABB Courtesy of Aker Solutions

In Collaboration with
M A G A Z I N E

Delivering field-proven digital tools for subsea process Siemens Subsea

MARCH 13-15, 2018
MOODY GARDENS HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER
design and operations. We enhance production. Enabling subsea processing by
connecting innovation with
GALVESTON, TX USA experience
WWW.SUBSEATIEBACKFORUM.COM Free and on demand educational videos, posters, articles, and soon additional supplements,
all for learning more about the offshore oil and gas industry at:
woodplc.com siemens.com\subsea

www.offshore-mag.com/learning-center.html

1803OFFSubsea_1 1 2 26 18 9 43 AM
 PIPELINES & FLOWLINES PIP

Electrically heated pipe system delivers

thermal efficiency, redundancy gains
Vincent C. Duverger
Simon Grevet
Saipem SA

L
ong distance tiebacks provide an at-
tractive economic alternative to dedi-
cated production platforms, but bring
additional flow assurance challenges in
terms of hydrate or wax management,
or more simply, the arrival temperature of the
wellstream. Conventional infield production Overview of an electrically heat traced pipe in pipe. (All images courtesy Saipem)
models are not adequate for long distance step-
outs, and in addition the economics of smaller
or marginal remote reservoirs are increasing
pressures to reduce field capex, notably for the
production pipelines and service line.
Active heating of the flowlines addresses
these issues and has been used widely by
the offshore industry. Among the technolo-
gies under development is Saipem’s Electri-
cally Heat-traced Pipe in Pipe (EHTPiP). This
solution provides one of the more effective
approaches due to its high level of heating
efficiency, in the range of 90-95%. The Pipe in
FDS2, one of Saipem’s J-lay installation vessels.
Pipe design incorporates high-performance
dry insulation, which lessens the amount of vessel to undertake several re-loading trips. High redundancy
heating required and improves the system’s • Reeling also presents limitations in terms As with most equipment installed subsea,
overall performance. EHTPiP combines the of the maximum pipe-in-pipe diameter that the EHTPiP system must operate throughout
best of both worlds in terms of both a passive can be installed, compared with J-lay, due its full design life – which often ranges from 20-
insulated system and a warm-up solution. to the weight and straightening require- 30 years – without the need for maintenance
As the heating cables are placed in direct ment. The typical maximum diameter for or recovery. With electrical heating, reliability
contact with the pipe to be heated below the high reeling is around 18-in., while for J-lay, a is all the more critical because failure of this
performance dry insulation, most of the gener- 36-in. system can be built. system can jeopardize an entire production
ated heat is conveyed to the produced fluid. In • Since a J-Lay-installed EHTPiP does not line, leading to significant downtime and finan-
addition, since the heating cables are operating undergo a reeling cycle, the risk of damag- cial outlay. In addition, if the heating system is
in a dry and secure environment encapsulated ing the heating system during the reeling designed to be used only during the preserva-
in the pipe-in-pipe annular space, standard field- operation is removed. tion and/or start-up phases, it is more difficult
proven onshore cables and electrical connectors The main challenge associated with J-Lay to detect failures before they become critical,
can be employed which have a strong track installation is to provide safe and reliable electrical as most of the time the system is inactive.
record of reliable service in other sectors of connections on every quad joint. It is important Typically, offshore operators will insist on
the oil and gas industry. to note, however, that electrical connectors have 200% redundancy, meaning that where one
To date, subsea EHTPiP systems have been been used for decades in environments much system is needed, three are provided. This in-
developed for installation via the reeled method. harsher than the annulus of a pipe-in-pipe, which troduces pressures to adopt cost-efficient solu-
Today, Saipem can offer the technology for J-lay in- remains a much safer and mire stable environ- tions in order to maintain the economic viability
stallation, which provides several key advantages: ment once installed. To address these challenges, of the overall system. Any improvement that
• No need for a nearby, heavily equipped Saipem has placed heavy emphasis on the fol- enhances redundancy while not impacting the
spoolbase to build and store the pipe-in-pipe lowing key points: cost is definitely a key consideration.
stalks. J-lay will be more effective in remote 1. A high level of built-in heating system Theoretically, the straightforward approach
offshore areas with challenging logistics or redundancy. should be to multiply the number of systems in
site conditions. 2. Continuous quality control through individ- order to increase redundancy. In practice, this is
• As EHTPiP is best suited to long tiebacks, ual and integrated quad joint electrical and not the case. Adding redundant component implies
the advantages provided by reeled pipe-in- optional fiber optics testing, from onshore extra costs, escalating complexity, and issues of
pipe are diluted by the need for the reel lay manufacturing to offshore installation. congestion brought on by working in a confined

44 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_44 44 2/28/18 1:41 PM

PIPELINES & FLOWLINES
space, as is the case for a pipe in pipe system.
With this in mind, Saipem has developed
and qualified an end connector that allows for
increased redundancy while not requiring any
additional components. The connector is de-
signed so that:
• All the cables are electrically connected
together on a dedicated ring:
• The ring features lugs that connect the
entire system to the inner pipe.
• The fact that the system is operating with
three-phase current means that there will be
no current at the end junction. All cables will
therefore behave in a uniform manner and
can be combined without any restrictions,
other than the need to activate a number
of cables (a multiple of three) in order to
maintain the three phases.
This last point results in an improved op-
erational flexibility, and highlights the redun-
dancy generated by each additional cable.
With a conventional EHTPiP system (where
cables are only connected in a three-by-three
arrangement), the number of installed cables
must be a multiple of three, and adding cables
on a one-off basis brings no benefit. Take a
practical example where the field architecture
only requires one set of cables to provide the
required heat input. As the system is based
on three-phase current, at least three cables
are needed for the electrical architecture to
function. With a conventional design where
the cables are connected in a three by three
arrangement, three additional cables must be
installed to achieve a 100% redundancy. But
adding those cables can be detrimental to the
overall insulation performance of the system,
leaving less dry insulation space. This can
necessitate a wider annular space and a larger
outer pipe, hardly an ideal outcome. To achieve
the 200% redundancy commonly stipulated, six
more cables are necessary instead of three.
With Saipem’s end connector design, how-
ever, each additional cable to the original three-
cables set immediately provides a 100% addi-
tional redundancy - so only two additional cables
are required to achieve 200% redundancy. This
is due to the fact that if the operator starts the
system and detects a fault, the faulty cable can
be replaced with any other available cable to
restore the initially wanted power in the system.
However, with the conventional design a full
set of three cables must always be discarded.
Thermal performance then comes into
question, as three cables randomly chosen
around the pipeline might not generate the
same temperature field when compared to
a set (with cables at 120° from each other)
regularly spaced. The system must be able
to generate a temperature field that is homo-
geneous to guarantee an even temperature
of the product.
In this case, a few considerations need to
be taken into account:
1803OFF_45 45
End connector.
• The cables are wound around the pipe with
a pitch, which means that their position on
the pipe section will rotate along the pipe.
Therefore, as the fluid progresses through
the line, the heat flux will not be applied
on the same radial sector – so from afar,
the heat flux will appear as homogeneous.
• Carbon steel exhibits a high thermal
conductivity, which will assist even dis-
tribution of the heat flux along the entire
circumference of the steel pipe.
• Natural convection of the fluid will lead
to the temperature being uniform all over
the cross-section.
A worst-case scenario is a cross-section where
the three active cables are selected to be next to
one another. Even in this case, the steel thermal
conductivity is sufficient to ensure the heat
generated is evenly distributed around the pipe
circumference, meaning that any set of three-off
cables can generate the desired temperature
field. This allows the redundancy level to be
raised from the typical 200% to 600%, without an
impact in terms of cost and complexity.
Quality control
To ensure comprehensive quality control
throughout the pipe fabrication and installation
process, Saipem has developed a dedicated
test ring. Each quad joint is tested individu-
ally onshore, after manufacturing has been
completed (i.e. the inner and outer pipes have
been assembled into quad joints, the electrical
and fiber optic cables installed and insulation
applied). This procedure verifies that all com-
ponents have been properly assembled before
sending them offshore and that the obtained
readings are accurate. Results can be recorded
for quality control.
A second step of testing is performed offshore
each time a new quad joint is added to the line
being installed. Initially as the fiber optic splice is
performed, the connection is tested in order to
assess its quality (the attenuation it generates).
Then, after all connections have been completed,
the full line is tested in order to determine the
overall resistance of the electrical cables, ensur-
ing that the connections have been put together
as planned, and to measure the attenuation in
the complete fiber optic system.
Use of quad joints is another advantage of
Saipem’s J-lay installation method compared to
long reeled stalks. If a quad joint is found with a
defect in the heating system, it can be quaran-
tined: another identical quad joint is immediately
available, so operations can be resumed.
The design of the test ring is very similar to
that of the connector ring. It features the same
capabilities as the connector with additional func-
tions such as power input and data processing
output to test the fiber optic and electrical cables
along the entire line. The connecting ring per-
forms various resistance measurements on each
cable in order to detect a faulty connection. The
measurements are then summarized in a graphi-
cal interface to indicate clearly to the operator
whether the connection is acceptable or not.
Qualification campaign
An extensive qualification campaign has been
conducted on the system since 2014. The main
aims have been to demonstrate that all compo-
nents can be integrated together and work as
expected; that the achieved performance level
is in line with numerical simulations; and to
provide testing of specific components when
required.
All tests have been performed in Saipem’s
workshops or in dedicated laboratories for com-
ponent testing, i.e. for electrical connectors.
The testing scope in 2014 included:
• Electrical heat tracing system test defini-
tion
• Development of design, monitoring sys-
tem and installation principles
• Preparation and manufacturing of test
bench and accessories
• Full-scale manufacturing test
2015 activities were as follows:
• Electrical tests
• Tests of PP and PVDF connectors
• Testing of packers, including characteriza-
tion of EPDM material
2016:
• Onshore fabrication sequence
• Development and testing of a control ring
to check the electrical continuity of all the
cables during installation.
Since then, Saipem has offered the system as
part of its offshore pipeline capability, and nu-
merous offshore operators have scrutinized the
technology in detail, leading to constructive and
marginal improvements of the overall system. •
References
1. Lirola, F. et al, SAIPEM, Technical assessment and
qualification of local and distributed active heating
technologies, OMC 2017.
2. Lirola, F. et al, SAIPEM, Innovative and Cost Effi-
cient Heat Traced Flowline with Improved Reliability,
OTC-27578-MS OTC Conference Paper – 2017.
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 45
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 OFFSHORE HISTORY

High Island Offshore System brought several

‘firsts’ to pipelining in the Gulf of Mexico
Largest-diameter pipeline laid by ‘world’s largest pipelay barge’
Bruce Beaubouef
Managing Editor

Editor’s note: This article is part of

an ongoing series on notable achieve-
ments and milestones in Gulf of Mexico
pipelay history.

T
he decade of the 1970s was a boom time
for offshore pipeline installation activ-
ity in the Gulf of Mexico. Much of this
activity was driven by gas transmission
companies, who were looking for new
sources of natural gas to serve growing on-
shore markets. In the first half of the decade,
the most notable example of this activity was
the construction of the Stingray pipeline sys-
tem, which called for the installation of nearly
256 miles of pipe to gather gas from the West
Cameron area (for more on Stingray, see the
October 2017 issue of Offshore, pp. 56-57).
But the Stingray system could not satisfy
that growing demand all by itself, and other
operators and gas transmission companies
began making plans for a new major pipeline
system in the Gulf of Mexico.
In 1975, a group of four major gas pipeline
companies made plans to build a 203-mile,
large diameter pipeline network to bring gas
reserves discovered in the High Island area
offshore Texas into onshore markets.
In September, affiliates of American Natural
Gas Co., United Gas Pipe Line Co., Texas Gas
Transmission Co., Natural Gas Pipeline Co.
of America, and Transco announced plans to
build one of the largest natural gas pipeline
systems in the Gulf of Mexico.
The same demand for natural gas that had
driven the Stingray project also provided the
incentive for the High Island Offshore System
(HIOS) project. Together, the five partner
companies and their affiliates had advanced
$300 million to producers to stimulate explora-
tion in the far reaches of the High Island area
in the 1973-74 lease sales. The High Island Offshore System was the first subsea pipeline to tap newly discovered gas reserves
HIOS would be the first subsea pipeline in the outer continental shelf in Texas waters. (From Oil and Gas Journal, Jan. 3, 1977, p. 48)
to tap newly discovered gas reserves in the
outer continental shelf in Texas waters. HIOS of the HIOS pipeline would be the 67-mile, Mexico to date. The project, estimated to cost
called for 67 miles of 42-in., 26 miles of 36-in., 42-in. trunkline, and the 42-in. pipe would be $353 million, was scheduled to initially deliver
and 110.5 miles of 30-in. pipe. The main trunk the largest diameter pipe laid in the Gulf of 988 million cubic feet per day from 28 offshore

46 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_46 46 2/28/18 1:41 PM


blocks to onshore markets by No-
vember 1977. Through expansion
and additional compressor facili-
ties, the HIOS system ultimately
could handle 2 bcf/d.
It would do so through a branch-
ing network of three 30-in. pipe-
lines that would pick up gas from
a number of production platforms
and deliver it to a compressor
platform in block A-264, about
80 miles offshore Texas. The
compressor would push the gas
shoreward through the 67-mile
trunkline to a platform in West
Cameron block 167 offshore
Louisiana, where the gas would
then complete its journey to land
via two new pipelines that would
transport it to separate points on
the Louisiana coast.
One of these to-shore lines
was the U-T Offshore System
(also known as the UTOS pipe-
line), a 30-mile, 42-in. system
that ran in a westerly direction
to reach Transco, United Gas,
and Natural Gas Pipeline Co.
facilities on the Louisiana coast.
Another 12-mile, 30-in. pipeline
moved gas to West Cameron
block 171, where it connected
with an existing Michigan Wis-
consin gathering system which
brought the gas to shore.
The Michigan-Wisconsin
Pipeline Co., subsidiary of American Natural
Gas Co., would serve as operator of the new
system. In addition to transporting gas for the
five partners, HIOS would also carry gas for
other producers that had interests in the area.
Lateral pipelines would enable HIOS to
connect to 35 existing and planned platforms;
and to facilitate future connections, double
side-taps would be placed at intervals along
the main trunkline from the compressor com-
plex to a near-shore terminal.
As with the Stingray system, Brown & Root
and J. Ray McDermott won the bulk of the
engineering and construction contracts for
the HIOS project. Brown & Root was selected
to build and install the 67-mile trunkline, and
McDermott was chosen to build 136 miles of
36-in. and 30-in. outlying feeder lines.
HIOS also called for the construction of six
pipeline compressor stations, including the
largest offshore compressor complex in the
Gulf built to date. McDermott was selected
to build this main compressor complex in
High Island block 264, as well as two others
in blocks 343 and 330 in the eastern sector
of the gas gathering system.
Brown & Root built the near-shore station
and two deepwater stations in the western sec-
1803OFF_47 47
tor of the system. The manifold
station at block 573 was installed in 340 ft of
water, the deepest ever for a manifold station
in the Gulf to that point.
The 42-in. pipeline from the compressor
complex offshore would operate at a high
compression level of 1,440 psi, which was
another first in the Gulf. The block 264 station
had three gas turbine compressors which
together had the capacity to move 1 bcf/d.
Construction began on Aug. 1, 1976, one
day after the FPC granted permission to build
the line. By the time that the construction
season had ended in mid-December of that
year, some 77 miles of the 203-mile system had
been built, and four out of eight platform jack-
ets for compressor and manifold stations had
been installed. Brown & Root had installed 51
miles of the 42-in. line, and McDermott had
installed 26 miles of 36-in. line and 15 miles
of 30-in. line.
The second season of construction on HIOS
began in early April 1977. Remaining work
included Brown & Root’s installation of the
northern 16 miles of the 67-mile trunkline.
Construction of the 42-in. line was the first
job for Brown & Root’s new third-generation
lay barge, the BAR 347, which the company
OFFSHORE HISTORY
Construction of the HIOS
42-in. trunkline was the first
job for Brown & Root’s new
third-generation lay barge,
the BAR-347, described as
“the world’s largest pipelay
barge.” (From Brown & Root,
Inc./Marine, 1978 corporate
brochure, p. 40)
described as “the world’s larg-
est pipelay barge.” The vessel
had been originally targeted
to the North Sea market and
designed to endure its harsh
working conditions.
The BAR 347 was capable
of laying double-jointed, large-
diameter pipe in extreme water
depths without the need of a
pipelaying pontoon or extended
stinger. The vessel measured
650 ft in length by 140 ft in
width, with a depth of 50 ft. It
was equipped with a centerline
elevated ramp with three pipe
tensioners that could lay 36-in.
pipe in water up to 1,100 ft deep
– a seemingly unimaginable wa-
ter depth at that time. The barge
was equipped with 12 mooring
anchors weighing 60,000 lbs
each. Each mooring winch had
the capacity for 10,000 ft of 3-in.
diameter wire. This mammoth
vessel dwarfed every other ves-
sel in Brown & Root’s fleet. Thus
the “world’s largest pipelaying barge” was
launched amid much fanfare at Rotterdam
in early 1976.
The christening of the BAR-347 came
amidst a heightened focus on new pipelay
vessel designs. Buoyed by the growth of the
pipelay market in the North Sea and the Gulf
of Mexico, several consortia emerged to build
new pipelay barges, based on new designs. The
semisubmersible design was gaining popularity
for the North Sea market, based on the idea
that the semi design would be more robust
for the North Sea, and able to withstand its
harsh environment. One of these consortia
included Shell, Esso, and Zapata, and it led
to the construction of the Semac-1, which in-
stalled the FLAGGS pipeline in the North Sea
in 1975. The Semac-1 was the second major
semi, although a bit more modestly sized than
the Viking Piper, which had been launched by
IHC Gusto in 1975. Another consortium was
formed by Brown & Root, Oceanics, and Sedco.
But after ordering hull steel and major equip-
ment, the consortium dissolved. Brown & Root
decided to go it alone and built the BAR-347.
For the BAR 347, Brown & Root had elect-
ed to stay with its proven lay barge design,
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 47
2/28/18 1:41 PM
 OFFSHORE HISTORY
Workers aboard the BAR-347
prepare to store the automatic
welding clamp. (Offshore,
February 1977, p. 43)
seeking instead to improve the
vessel by expanding its design
and making it more robust. With
accommodations for a crew of
350 and storage for up to 20,000
tons of pipe, the “superbarge”
was proclaimed by Brown & Root
to be the prototype of the coming
third generation of laybarges. But
by May 1976, only months after its
much-heralded launch, the vessel
had already departed the North
Sea to work in the tamer waters
of the Gulf of Mexico for the HIOS
project.
In the field, the BAR 347 was
able to take advantage of the lat-
est offshore pipeline installation
technologies. During pipe-laying
operations, pipe on the conveyor
was automatically transferred to a
vertical conveyor on the port side
for ward. The vertical conveyor
automatically transferred the pipe
to the beveling conveyor. After it
had been beveled for automatic
welding, the pipe was transferred
toward the ramp. From the bevel-
ing conveyor, pipe was transferred
to a forward, longitudinal conveyor.
Pipe was then moved to a short transverse
conveyor which automatically transferred to
the stalking shoes.
But the “superbarge” was not without its
problems. As recounted in Offshore Pioneers,
a history of Brown & Root’s marine division,
pipeline superintendent “Buddy” Hoke recalled
that “Nobody wanted [the] 347.” While “it
seemed like those old barges had made Brown
& Root fortunes and we had taken them all over
the world and they had done real good, and if
a little bit was good, a whole lot would be real
good. [But] when you ran that 347, you never
got sixth sense of where you were at. It was
kind of like an arm that didn’t have any feeling
in it. The communication was horrible on it. It
had another bad flaw that nobody ever wanted
to talk about and that was the touchdown point
down there, that would buckle the line. At
the touchdown, where the pipe touches the
bottom.” Nor were these the only problems.
According to Willem J. Timmermans, INTEC
Engineering President, the vessel almost sank
while in transit to the Gulf of Mexico. Once on
location, he noted that the vessel “installed a
few pipelines with some difficulty.”
J. Ray McDermott’s Lay Barge 23 com-
pleted about one-third of its 136 miles during
the 1976 season, then installed the rest in the
48 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_48 48
spring and summer of 1977. In fact, to ensure
timely completion of its part of the project,
McDermott deployed its entire Gulf of Mexico
complement of equipment, including its Lay
Barges 23 and 26, on the HIOS project in 1977.
Both the Brown & Root and the McDer-
mott vessels laid single joint pipes during
the 1976 construction season. The BAR 347
was capable of laying double joint piping, but
the urgency of the project did not allow suf-
ficient time for welding double joints onshore.
The BAR 347 used a combination of the CRC
automatic welding process and manual rod
welding while the two McDermott barges
used the manual rod method only.
Construction of the 42-in. trunkline re-
quired continuous inspection by diver crews
before and after the line was laid. The maxi-
mum depth of the 42-in. line was 150 ft at
its terminus in block 264. A combination of
submarine vessels and divers were employed
to inspect the laying of the 36-in. and 30-in.
lines, since these were laid in deeper waters.
The McDermott laybarges employed buck-
le arrestors at intervals of 500 ft on the 30-in.
line at depths greater than 150 ft of water. The
buckle arrestors were used on all 30-in. pipe
south of the block 264 compressor station,
but they were not necessary for portions of
the 36-in. pipe at similar depths.
For corrosion protection, brace-
let-type exterior cathodic protec-
tion was installed along each of
the HIOS pipelines at intervals of
1,000 ft. An inhibitor was added
to the gas stream for internal cor-
rosion protection. The 42-in. pipe
had an asphalt covering and the
36-in. and 30-in. lines were coated
with Somastic, an asbestos type
of coating which was widely used
well into the 1960s, when environ-
mental regulations made its use
prohibitive. Some of the 36-in.
pipe and all of the 42-in. pipe was
spiral welded.
The HIOS pipeline was com-
pleted on schedule and placed
in service in early 1978. It would
go on to gather and move natu-
ral gas from the Gulf of Mexico
to coastal and onshore markets
for years. And it would be con-
nected to the Stingray pipeline
through the HIOS East Exten-
sion, a relatively short 30-in.
pipeline that ran from east to
west through the East Addition
of the High Island Area South
Extension area, from High Is-
land block A343 to A330. With
this connection, both HIOS
and the Stingray pipelines be-
came part of the larger natural gas
gathering and transmission network that was
being built in the Gulf of Mexico in the 1970s.
Like the Stingray pipeline, HIOS would
continue to serve as an important pipeline
artery for moving natural gas from the Gulf
of Mexico well into the 21st century.
HIOS featured a number of firsts for Gulf
of Mexico pipeline installation, including in-
stallation of the largest pipe diameter to that
point; the largest offshore compressor complex
in the Gulf; the highest level of compression
employed upon a Gulf of Mexico pipeline; and
the “world’s largest pipelay barge” – although
that barge evidently had its problems. After
completing its portion of the HIOS project,
the BAR-347 was then transported to South-
east Asia.
In terms of water depths, HIOS reached its
maximum depth at 340 ft in block 573 of the
High Island South Addition Area. That was
short of Stingray’s maximum water depth,
which reached 365 ft in block 639 of the South
Addition of the West Cameron Area. Both were
soon eclipsed by another project which nearly
tripled the maximum depths reached by HIOS
and Stingray. As operators and E&P firms con-
tinued to look for ways to bring natural gas to
onshore markets, Shell’s Cognac project in the
late 1970s would surpass anything built in the
Gulf of Mexico to that point. •
2/28/18 1:41 PM

New tools and technology for the offshore industry
Compensated coiled tubing lift frame increases safety, flexibility
Trey Miller
Rachel Bonnette
NOV
Inclement weather and sea state variations
create safety risks and increase downtime for
offshore projects, including well intervention
operations.
Tide cycle changes create challenges for
passive compensation system operators, who
must make manual adjustments to safely
compensate for weight changes. Readjusting
for these errors in calculation increases opera-
tional time and costs. In addition, maintaining
well integrity and operating within designated
compensation work windows can create
obstacles during operations.
National Oilwell Varco (NOV) Devin tech-
nology has encountered these challenges dur-
ing 13 years of global deepwater completion
and post completion intervention projects.
In 2006, onboard a floating vessel in the US
Gulf of Mexico (GoM), Devin, part of NOV’s
Intervention and Stimulation Equipment
business unit, put into operation a motion
compensation tower for coiled tubing and
wireline services. For this post-hurricane
Katrina project, the operator used the Devin
Dual Inline Motion Eliminator (DIME) Well
Intervention Tower to successfully secure well
integrity.
In 2010, Devin continued post-hurricane
season well securement efforts, working with
another operator onboard a DP-2 class vessel,
performing a 10-month coiled tubing and
wireline plug and abandon (P&A) campaign.
To mitigate against aggressive weather
constraints, Devin installed a cantilevered
compensated well intervention tower portside
of the ship, saving the operator about $300,000
per day on nine wells.
In 2013, Devin provided a compensation
well intervention tower in support of hydraulic
workover operations for a three-well inter-
vention program onboard a floating spar
platform. Following canister failure identifica-
tion, the Devin Motion Buster tower became
the primary compensator during successful
troubleshooting of the buoyancy system,
ensuring safety of the crew, operations, and
well integrity.
In 2014, when Devin was acquired by NOV,
operator demands continued to increase and
Devin was called on to assemble a motion
compensated coiled tubing lift frame (CCTLF)
for operations offshore Nigeria. The CCTLF
was rigged up to meet the Express Class rig
crane capacity of 86,000 lbs and ensured suc-
1803OFF_49 49
EQUIPMENT & ENGINEERING
cessful intervention operations while
working in up to 14-ft heave condi-
tions. Using the system reduced
downtime to 30 minutes, during
more than 1,000 operational
hours, while compensating over
well-center during the four-well
campaign.
Next, NOV Devin focused on
addressing challenges associ-
ated with intervention on floating
vessels and in riser-based subsea
operations to mitigate risks during
offshore projects. Studying the
results of global completion and
post-completion intervention
operations from more than a
decade, Devin enhanced existing
technology, implementing new
motion compensation into the
CCTLF. The new technology de-
livers support for completion and
post-completion deployment in
coiled tubing and wireline op-
erations. Compared to standard
passive compensator systems,
the new lift frame helps
improve safety, reduce hu-
man error, and eliminate
the need for manual
stroke adjustment.
Air over hydraulic and purely
nitrogen passive compensator
systems require manual manipula-
tion of energy associated with
compensation variance manage-
ment parameters, such as tidal
states. Constant communica-
tion must be maintained
with coiled tubing operators
who bleed and feed nitrogen
or hydraulic fluid out of the
compensator system as weight is
increased or reduced. The new lift frame
offers automatic control of tide adjustment
with override capabilities, removing human
calculation and eliminating frequent readjust-
ment according to lunar cycles.
Installed below the top drive and interfaced
with the landing string, the lift frame’s design
enables the unit to be rigged up in multiple
pieces or picked up as one. The frame may be
set up as a backup or primary compensator in
parallel or perpendicular position. Even weight
distribution across the upper frame assembly,
down two legs, and back to the center of the
lower frame assembly, which includes a hy-
draulic elevator door, allows well-center rig up
Rendering of the Devin compensated
coiled tubing lift frame. (Courtesy NOV)
of coiled tubing, wireline,
and slickline. Operators
may adjust according to
rig-specific or application-
specific modification
requirements. The system
features primary and auxiliary
hoist lifting units with man
rider hoist lifting unit options.
Manual activation of onboard
and APV valve systems can be
actuated via remote control.
By eliminating human error,
the CCTLF increases safety
during offshore operations.
The DROPS-compliant system
features remote control hy-
draulic actuation, enabling
hands-free control of
upper and lower bail pins;
primary and auxiliary
hoists; stabilizer arms;
injector table; and lower
frame assembly articulation
with hydraulic elevator door.
The system includes indicator-
monitoring systems in the drill
shack and on the drill floor that
provide real-time monitoring of
exact tide strokes and fluid levels.
When the system detects
leaks and low fluid levels, an
alarm notifies the operator
that the parameters are out of
scope, affording more efficient
trouble-shooting methods.
Devin will implement this new
mode of operation on all newbuild
compensators, including the DIME,
Motion Buster, Gimble Table, and the
Direct Line Compensator.
The design of the lift frame increases
operational flexibility, enabling modification of
climate- and application-specific requirements.
Real-time data monitoring of strokes and fluid
levels allows operators to keep parameters
within scope and eliminates downtime during
inclement weather. The automated features of
the CCTLF will enable operators to improve
safety, increase the weather working window,
and reduce downtime, providing increased
cost savings. •
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 49
2/28/18 1:44 PM
 EQUIPMENT & ENGINEERING
Gangway system adapted
for personnel transfers in Arctic conditions
Arnoud van Leer
Ampelmann
Safe transfer of personnel to and from off-
shore facilities is a high priority for operators,
and in some of the world’s coldest regions,
there is a growing need for robust ‘Walk to
Work’ (W2W) systems.
Using technology inspired by the flight
simulator industry, Ampelmann has enhanced
the design of its conventional W2W system,
employed in relatively benign environments,
to safely transfer workers between offshore
platforms and adjacent vessels in harsher
areas.
The N-type system, otherwise known as
‘Icemann’, addresses the combined challenges
of sub-zero temperatures, snow and sea spray
icing, as well as wind speed, sea state, visibility
and vessel movement. It was developed to
provide safe access for personnel between the
transport vessel and offshore installation in
remote areas such as northern Russia, Norway
and Canada, and parts of the Caspian Sea. The
system underwent rigorous testing prior to
deployment last August for Sakhalin Energy
Investment Company at the Sakhalin-2 field
center in the Sea of Okhotsk offshore northeast
Russia, and has since performed more than
16,000 transfers, and nearly 1,000 landings.
Icemann can transfer crew in extreme
ice states and temperatures down to -28oC
(-18.4°F). With equipment covers, heating and
insulation, the system can operate year-round
in regions where temperatures can plummet
to -40oC (-40°F), in ice and snow conditions,
and is currently the sole gangway system of
its kind in operation. It is fully enclosed and
insulated, can operate in sea states up to 3.5 m
(11.5 ft) significant wave height, and employs
active motion compensation. It features a
transfer deck for up to 20 people, can rotate
360o, and is controlled from the vessel to
ensure flexibility in platform landing locations
and directions. It has a maximum gangway
length of 32 m (105 ft), a telescopic scope of 11
m (36 ft), and a footprint of 11x11 m.
The Sakhalin-2 Icemann has been installed
on the Stepan Makarov, a new ice-class
platform standby vessel built for Sakhalin-2
under a 10-year agreement between Sakhalin
Energy and the vessel operator, Sovcomflot.
This is the world’s first standby vessel to
deploy such a gangway in severe environmen-
tal conditions. The 3,880-t deadweight boat
can accommodate 98 people on board (POB),
including 72 passengers working at the
platforms, and can also serve as a response
vessel for offshore spills. It was certified by
DNV GL under the winterization design code
DNV-GL-OS-A201.
50 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_50 50
In addition, Sakhalin Energy will charter
a standard, non-winterized version of the
motion- compensated gangway for five years,
to be installed on a second ice-breaking sup-
port vessel and to support personnel transfer
requirements during the summer season.
PAmpelmann worked closely with Sakhalin
Energy over a two-year period to adapt the
design to the project’s requirements. It was
designed from the bottom up, with each
component selected for its ability to operate
in severe conditions and temperatures. And in
view of the remoteness of the operation, it was
critical that any maintenance required to the
gangway system was minimized, and this too
was reflected in the design.
Prior to deployment, Icemann’s hydraulic
cylinders and other components were tested
in a cooling unit in temperatures down to -40
oC to determine whether these items could
withstand the extreme temperatures or would
require shielding for protection purposes. All
the hydraulic actuators are heated individually
using heat tracing while hydraulic manifolds
are kept to an optimum working temperature
by means of heating pins. All interconnected
hydraulic piping and hoses are flushed with
heated oil prior to operation, to ensure that
hydraulic oil in the system is at the right
operating temperature to prevent cold shock
in the valves and actuators when starting up
the system.
The gangway is designed to ensure easy
and safe personnel transfer on and off the
platform year-round. It is capable of removing
any relative movement/heave by instantly
First offshore trials at Sakhalin-2
field in the Sea of Okhotsk, Eastern
Russia. (Photos courtesy Ampelmann)
measuring the movement of the vessel and
then compensating for this movement through
the hydraulic cylinders. This means that the
top of the system, employed for personnel
transfer, remains completely stationary in rela-
tion to the platform structure, even in wave
heights up to 4 m (13 ft) and wind speed up to
38 knots. The system’s peak power consump-
tion is 1 MW.
The gangway and transfer deck are fully
protected with an ‘icephobic’ cover to limit the
growth of ice and to reduce the effect of wind
chill (also tested in the cooling unit). Although
this section of the system is not heated,
transferees will only be exposed to extreme
weather conditions for a limited amount of
time, normally between five and ten minutes
per transfer.
The gangway has been a widely used
transportation system for more than a decade,
thanks to calls within the industry for alterna-
tives to rope, basket and helicopter transfer. In
2008, the first full motion competition access
solution for transferring people and small car-
go loads was deployed in the North Sea. The
A-type set a new standard in offshore access in
terms of safety and efficiency, with the ability
to compensate wave heights up to 3 m (9.8 ft).
It also allows for the transfer of up to 20 crew
members in just five minutes. The system has
successfully transferred more than 2.7 million
personnel since its inception and while still
used widely used in W2W operations today,
specialist gangways are required for particu-
larly harsh environments where temperatures
are low and sea states are volatile. •
2/28/18 1:44 PM
 EQUIPMENT & ENGINEERING

Caterpillar produces automated

speed control for well service transmission
Caterpillar Oil & Gas has introduced the
Cat dynamic transmission output control
(DTOC), allowing for manual shift
automated speed control (ASC) of the
Cat CX31-P600 transmission for well
service pumping applications, ce-
menting, and mobile work over rigs.
The new dynamic transmission
output control is an integrated system;
designed with knowledge of the engine
and transmission operating characteristics.
“The primary benefit of the Cat ASC is the
ability to achieve consistent low flow during
critical cementing applications,” said Rodney
Harms, well service manager for Caterpillar Oil &
Gas. “The system controls output speed via the torque
converter lock-up clutch to achieve precise flow control. This
ability to automatically control the output speed to achieve very low
speeds mimics a deep first gear ratio, giving well service operators a
new tool to perform low flow operations.”
The feature is targeted to cementing applications which can require
0.25 BPM flow rate. Cementing applications require precise flow con-
The Cat dynamic transmission output control provides a
safe “soft link” for control of the torque converter lock up.
(Courtesy Caterpillar Oil & Gas)
trol when performing squeeze jobs, which are com-
pleted with very low flow rates. The Cat DTOC
system provides a safe “soft link” for control of
the torque converter lock up which translates
to precise flow control.
“The system works through simplified
operation allowing more precise flow
control and reduced bumping in and
out of gear,” said Harms. “It also allows
for more reliable operation by limiting
heat rejection and increased lube flow for
improved durability.”
The Cat engine and transmission monitoring systems con-
tinuously monitor and report engine performance, enabling operators
to identify inefficiencies, maintenance issues, or engine warnings. The
system monitors transmission oil temperatures to ensure safe and reli-
able completion of jobs without exceeding allowable values maintaining
system life and integrity. •

Wellsite deploys IQ Scan technology

for tracking durable assets
Wellsite Fishing and Rental Services LLC
is now using the IQ Scan technology suite
for streamlining asset management. IQ Scan
Technology LLC’s solution for durable asset
tracking combines a 2D laser-engraved
coding system with a secure cloud-based
software suite to deliver a comprehensive
asset management solution. The package
provides enterprises with crucial data to
make key decisions and gain critical insights
into the usage and life of their durable assets
from cradle-to-grave.
The IQ Scan technology suite features IQ
Scan Field, which uses ubiquitous mobile
technology for scanning, tracking and report-
ing of durable assets; IQ Scan Desk, which
provides the reporting features for tracking
an asset; and IQ Scan Web, a web-based
solution for tracking and reporting on assets
in the field.
Kirby Arceneaux, chairman and CEO
of Wellsite, said: “As well as providing the
ability to monitor wear on tubulars after each
use, with new data loaded after each inspec-
tion, the IQ Scan solution enables users to
know the entire history of the asset and
its use in the field. The innovative 2D laser IQ Scan technology suite for streamlining asset management. (Courtesy Wellsite)
technology means that assets are etched with
a durable universally traceable asset code Glen Clark, CEO of IQ Scan, said: “We are positioned to benefit from our technology-
that can withstand the rigors of the field, and excited to deploy IQ Scan’s technology with driven solution. The IQ Scan technology
information can be quickly and accurately Wellsite. Companies like Wellsite, who man- suite improves both the speed and accuracy
obtained about the asset.” age large numbers of durable assets, are well for tracking these assets in the field.” •

www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 51

1803OFF_51 51 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 Show Guide Sponsor: Hosted by:

SHOW GUIDE

MARCH 13-15, 2018

MOODY GARDENS HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER
GALVESTON, TX USA
WWW.SUBSEATIEBACKFORUM.COM

Owned &
Presented by: Supported by:
Produced by:

1803OFF_52 52 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

MONDAY, MARCH 12
3:00 P.M. - 5:00 P.M. Registration Open Main Lobby
8:00 A.M. - 8:00 P.M. Exhibitor Move-In Exhibit Hall

TUESDAY, MARCH 13
7:00 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. Exhibitor Move-In Exhibit Hall
8:00 A.M. - 7:00 P.M. Registration Open Main Lobby
9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. SUT Workshop (Additional Registration) Ivy Room
5:00 P.M. - 7:00 P.M. Exhibit Hall Opening Reception Exhibit Hall

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14
7:00 A.M. - 8:00 A.M. Delegate Breakfast Floral Ballroom
7:00 A.M. - 8:00 A.M. Women’s Networking Breakfast Ivy Room
7:00 A.M. - 6:00 P.M. Registration Open Main Lobby
8:00 A.M. - 9:30 A.M. OPENING PLENARY SESSION Moody Ballroom
9:00 A.M. - 6:45 P.M. Exhibit Hall Open Exhibit Hall
9:30 A.M. - 10:30 A.M. Coffee Break Exhibit Hall
10:30 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. SESSION 1 Moody Ballroom
12:00 P.M. - 1:30 P.M. Delegate Lunch Floral Ballroom
1:30 P.M. - 3:00 P.M. SESSION 2 Moody Ballroom
3:00 P.M. - 4:00 P.M. Coffee Break Exhibit Hall
3:00 P.M. - 4:00 P.M. Ice Cream Social Intecsea Booth 809
4:00 P.M. - 5:30 P.M. SESSION 3 Moody Ballroom
4:45 P.M. Whiskey Tasting McDermott Booth 415
5:15 P.M. - 6:45 P.M. Exhibit Hall Networking Reception Exhibit Hall

THURSDAY, MARCH 15
7:00 A.M. - 8:00 A.M. Delegate Breakfast Floral Ballroom
7:30 A.M. - 1:00 P.M. Registration Open Main Lobby
8:00 A.M. - 9:30 A.M. SESSION 4 Moody Ballroom
9:00 A.M. - 1:30 P.M. Exhibit Hall Open Exhibit Hall
9:30 A.M. - 10:30 A.M. Coffee Break Exhibit Hall
10:30 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. SESSION 5 Moody Ballroom
12:00 P.M. - 1:30 P.M. Delegate Lunch Floral Ballroom
1:00 P.M. Entry Forms Due for Harley Davidson Exhibit Hall Giveaway PennWell Booth 1119
1:15 P.M. Harley Davidson Exhibit Hall Giveaway ATV Booth 501
1:30 P.M. - 7:30 P.M. Exhibitor Move-Out Exhibit Hall
1:30 P.M. - 3:00 P.M. SESSION 6 Moody Ballroom
3:00 P.M. - 3:15 P.M. Recognition Awards & Closing Remarks Moody Ballroom

1803OFF_53 53 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 2018 Advisory Board

Jon Sonka
Advisory Board Chairman
Engineering Lead
ExxonMobil

David Paganie
Conference Director
PennWell

Bob Carter Ian Ramsay

President Vice President Offshore Development
Vaela Resources Murphy Oil Corporation

Mark Carter Karl Schnakenburg

Vice President, Integrated Solutions Subsea Engineering Advisor
OneSubsea BHP

Bruce Crager Randy Seehausen

Executive VP Subsea Engineering Manager
Endeavor Management INTECSEA

Antonio Critsinelis John Smiley

Pipelines & Installation Senior Subsea Engineer
Engineering Team Manager Shell International E&P, Inc.
Chevron Energy Technology Co.
Pete Stracke
Christopher Curran Offshore Facilities Manager –
Senior Consultant US & Mexico
CJC Enterprises Statoil

Chris Egan Eric Stutes

Program Technical Manager Sr. Staff Facilities Engineer
TechnipFMC Anadarko Petroleum Corporation

Mike Ellis Lisa Winfrey

VP of Subsea Projects Subsea Engineering Service Leader
Oceaneering International, Inc. Baker Hughes, a GE Company

John Fitzgerald James Wiseman

Director of Sales & Marketing Deepwater Project Manager
Universal Subsea Noble Energy

Eric Hevle Mason Wu

Development & Executive Consultant
Production Manager GoM DMAR Engineering
Ecopetrol America, Inc.
George Zener
Chuck Horn GSS Engineering Manager
Sr. Advisor BP
NanoRidge Materials, Inc
Mark Zitterich
Jay Hursh Chief Facilities Engineer & Director,
VP Business Development & Global Subsea Developments
Key Account Management HESS Corporation
Aker Solutions

Jim Macklin
Retired
InterMoor

1803OFF_54 54 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 1st Annual SSTB Women’s Networking Breakfast

Hosted by: Subsea Tieback is excited to announce the addition of its inaugural
Women’s Networking Breakfast at this year’s event. This unique
networking opportunity is open to all Subsea Tieback attendees and
this first year will focus on empowering women in the offshore industry
to get involved as a mentor/mentee.

In Partnership With:
Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Location: Ivy Room, adjacent the Moody Ballroom
Time: 7:00 am – 8:00 am
Cost: Complimentary to all SSTB Registered Attendees
Register: None needed, but space is very limited

Houston Chapter

SCHEDULE
7:00 A.M. - 7:10 A.M. Arrivals and Breakfast
7:10 A.M. - 7:15 A.M. Welcome from Meg Overstake, ExxonMobil Hostess with introductions of Jon Sonka,
SSTB Advisory Board Chair, ExxonMobil and Lisa Gasaway, SSTB Event Director, PennWell
7:15 A.M. - 7:35 A.M. Intros and small group discussion at each table lead by Table Hosts
7:35 A.M. - 7:45 A.M. Brief presentation by Women’s Energy Network on Mentoring Program and Organization
7:45 A.M. - 7:55 A.M. Closing Networking and wrap up by Table Hosts
7:55 A.M. Transition to Opening Keynote

TABLE HOSTS
• Gizem Ersoy Gokal, Ph.D, Lead Flow Assurance Engineer, ExxonMobil Development Company
• Nancy Chafe, Subsea Engineering Supervisor, Anadarko Petroleum
• Kate Tyler, Appomattox Light Construction Lead, Projects & Technology, Deepwater Projects,
Shell International Exploration & Production Inc.
• Prof. Julie Ingram, Director of Subsea Engineering, Texas A&M
• Tina Johnson, Operations Advisor, Endeavor
• Rebecca Roth, Subsea Engineer, INTECSEA
• Audrey Orhon, Subsea Engineering Director, TechnipFMC
• Maria Bulakh, Senior Systems Engineer, Aker Solutions
• Erin Balch, Program Manager, Wood
• Alternate: Amber Sturrock, Interface and Risk Engineer, Chevron North America Exploration and Production Company

https://www.womensenergynetwork.org/houston/houston-chapter-programs/mentoring-program/

1803OFF_55 55 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 CONFERENCE PROGRAM

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2018

7:00 A.M. – 8:00 A.M DELEGATE BREAKFAST – Floral Ballroom

7:00 A.M. – 8:00 A.M WOMEN’S NETWORKING BREAKFAST – Ivy Room

8:00 A.M. – 9:30 A.M. OPENING PLENARY SESSION – Moody Ballroom

ALL REGISTERED ATTENDEES ARE INVITED TO ATTEND!

CONFERENCE MANAGEMENT WELCOME & INTRODUCTION
David Paganie, Conference Director, PennWell
David Paganie is Chief Editor of Offshore magazine and Conferences Director of PennWell’s Offshore Group. Paganie
oversees the Offshore portfolio of print and digital editorial content and global oil and gas conferences. He also writes
the monthly Comment column in Offshore. Paganie has 20 years of experience in the offshore oil and gas industry, and
previously served as Editor of Offshore Field Development International at ODS-Petrodata, and as an Analyst at Baker
Energy. He holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree with a specialty in finance from Ohio University.

CHAIRMAN’S OPENING REMARKS

Jon Sonka, Engineering Lead; ExxonMobil
Jon Sonka is a senior engineer for ExxonMobil Production Company headquartered in Houston, Texas and is
responsible for designing, developing and operating offshore and subsea projects. He joined ExxonMobil in 1985 and
has spent his career developing numerous projects in every major development basin including California, GOM, West
Africa, North Sea, Middle East, Asia and South America. He currently supports the Neptun Deep project in Romania,
the block development planning in Guyana and the global production operational requirements. He graduated in
petroleum engineering from The University of Southern California. He enjoys growing fruits and vegetables for his
family. Ask him about gardening, Trojan football or the design and operation of subsea tiebacks.

Keynote Presentation
Lisa B. Waters, Vice President, Americas; ExxonMobil Development Company
Lisa Waters has more than 30 years of ExxonMobil experience with a wide range of leadership roles in the United
States, Canada, Europe and Africa. She became Vice President, Western Canada, for ExxonMobil Development
Company in February 2014. She was appointed to her current position, Vice President, Americas, in September 2016.
Ms. Waters has worked on the some of the megaprojects within ExxonMobil Development Company, including the
Sakhalin- 1 project in Russia, the Kizomba A and B projects in Angola, and the Adriatic LNG project in Italy. Her current
portfolio includes deepwater projects in the Gulf of Mexico and South America, including Guyana. Her primary areas of
expertise are in capital project management, design supervision, production facilities design, marine engineering and
hazard & risk assessment. Ms. Waters holds a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Texas
at Austin. She is married and has three children.

SCENE SETTING PRESENTATION

Neil Mackintosh, Executive Vice President, Advisian
Neil Mackintosh is Executive Vice President of Advisian. He leads the Advisian organization in all aspects of their
external markets, providing insight, strategic thought leadership, client engagement and operational growth. He is
focused on understanding the rapidly changing business environment, especially in the Hydrocarbons sector, the
impact of “New Energy” and the influence of rapidly emerging digital technologies on the oil and gas industries. Prior
to taking on this role Neil was President of INTECSEA, and he has more than 30 years’ experience in the oil and gas
industry (mainly subsea), with a strong commercial and technical background. Neil earned his BA degree with Honors in
Economics and Economic History, Newcastle University, England, 1980.

1803OFF_56 56 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 CONFERENCE PROGRAM

9:30 A.M. – 10:30 A.M. COFFEE BREAK – Exhibit Hall

Sponsored by:

10:30 A.M. – 12:00 P.M. SESSION 1 - FLOW ASSURANCE / Moody Ballroom

Chair: Antonio Critsinelis, Pipelines & Installation Engineering Team Manager

Co-Chairs: Bob Carter, President; Vaela Resources
Chuck Horn, Sr. Advisor; NanoRidge Materials, Inc.

Methanol Injection in Subsea Systems

Fouad Fleyfel, FA Subject Matter Expert; Shell
Methanol is currently used to treat a tree/jumper and wellbore prior to well start up and at shutdown to prevent hydrate formation,
in this example. Data collated over the years confirmed that the well could stay for about 2 -3 days without treatment with methanol
after shutdown. Though during shutdown, the fluid temperature was in the hydrate zone, no plug was observed during restart of the
wells. The explanation for this phenomenon was that there is segregation of the gas, oil, and water phases that prevent a full growth of
hydrate plugs. It is found that methanol is only critical just prior to startup than at the beginning of shutdown. This results in significant
reduction in methanol consumption should the no –touch time be extended (period of no well treatment with methanol or blowdown/
dead oil of the flowline after shutdown) from 3hrs to 24hrs. A field test with a production well was conducted to further validate the
theory in 2015. The well was shut-in for 36hrs with the tree, jumper, and wellbore not treated with methanol. The well was restarted with
methanol and there was no evidence of hydrate restriction or a plug. To ensure no agitation of fluid in the jumper for a shut-in well that
is hooked up to a live flowline, it is required that the well selector valves be in closed position to ensure no live fluid ingress into the
well jumper. This presentation will discuss the results of the field test.

Dr. Fleyfel has 27 years of experience in the upstream production business, particularly in flow assurance and subsea systems. His
experience extends from R&D, to project delivery and operation support. He is currently the FA Subject Matter Expert for Shell
Subsea Projects.

Technologies for Maintaining Blockage-free Tiebacks

Melissa Gould, Principal; Stress Engineering Services, Inc.
As the length of flowline tiebacks increase, there is greater interest in single flowlines vs. the dual, “looped” flowline approach. The
presentation will address historical GoM blockage data and highlight key existing technologies that can be employed to provide
hydrate and paraffin management. The presentation will also address some of the emerging technologies and technology gaps that
currently exist.

Melissa Gould has worked as a subsea pipeline engineer for over 26 years and is a Principal at Stress Engineering Services, where
she has worked for the past 14 years. She currently leads the subsea pipeline, equipment and controls group in Stress Engineering’s
Upstream Practice. Melissa holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Maritime Systems Engineering from Texas A&M University and is a
registered Professional Engineer in the state of Texas.

Hurry Up & Wait: Executing Successful Hydrate Remediation Projects and Effective Mitigation of
Hydrate Formation in Subsea Flowlines
Bryan Arciero, Process Engineer; Murphy E&P Company - USA
This presentation will outline lessons learned from three separate hydrate remediation projects in subsea flowlines, including planning
and developing an effective execution strategy in order to minimize costs and production impacts. It also provides a basis for potential
improvements in subsea design for future projects.

Bryan Arciero is an engineer with over 10 years’ experience in the upstream oil and gas industry. He is responsible for flow assurance,
production chemistry and process engineering for Murphy’s Gulf of Mexico assets. Bryan is a registered professional engineer in Texas,
Canada, and the UK.

1803OFF_57 57 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 CONFERENCE PROGRAM

12:00 P.M. – 1:30 P.M . LUNCH – Floral Ballroom

Sponsored by:

1:30 P.M. – 3:00 P.M. SESSION 2 - SUBSEA CONCEPT SELECTION / Moody Ballroom

Chair: John Fitzgerald, Director of Sales & Marketing; Universal Subsea

Co-Chairs: Eric Stutes, Sr. Staff Facilities Engineer; Anadarko Petroleum Corp.
Mark Carter, Vice President, Integrated Solutions; OneSubsea

Competitively Scoping the Kaikias Project

Russell Hamerski, Subsea Engineer; Shell
This presentation will provide an overview of how the competitive scoping process was applied to the Kaikias project, enabling the
project team to transform the subsea scope and reduce the associated subsea capex by over 40%. Kaikias is a Shell subsea tieback in
the Gulf of Mexico, currently in the execution phase with first oil targeted for 2018.

Russell Hamerski is a Subsea Engineer who has been working for Shell since 2015 after graduating from Florida State University with a
degree in Mechanical Engineering. He is the Subsea Hardware Lead for the Kaikias project.

Subsea Concept Development for the Sea Lion Phase 1 Development Project
David Hartell, Sr. Development Manager; Premier Oil
This project is in the Define Phase and has involved successful collaboration between multiple contractors and suppliers in order to
reduce break even life cycle costs. From the end of Concept Select up through Define project phases, the business case for the project
has been improved by a collaborative focus on value opportunities and risk mitigations. A key aspect of subsea project cost reduction
has been how the subsea details and architecture were developed to facilitate installability. For this project in a very remote location,
transporting and installing the subsea facilities is a significant challenge considering the logistical constraints along with simultaneous
drilling operations.

David Hartell has extensive onshore and offshore oil and gas developments experience including facilities engineering, construction,
installation, project management, and production operations. His developments experience ranged from onshore remote locations
to offshore deepwater locations. He has been responsible for managing subsurface asset, drilling and completion, and production
operations teams. He is a member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Clustered Gas Development

Dave Mantei, Senior Manager Subsea Engineering; Murphy Exploration & Production Company
This presentation will discuss the process of taking a clustered gas development in a phased approach to make it economical. It also
will review the technical decisions to get the most out of the early capex.

Dave Mantei is Senior Manager Subsea Engineering with Murphy Exploration & Production Company. He has over 35 years in the
subsea industry. Dave was involved in the Malaysian Block H project starting at conceptual design and remains a senior advisor to
the project.

3:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. COFFEE BREAK – Exhibit Hall

Sponsored by:

3:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. ICE CREAM SOCIAL – Booth 809

Sponsored by:

1803OFF_58 58 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 CONFERENCE PROGRAM

4:00 P.M. – 5:30 P.M. SESSION 3 - PROJECTS / Moody Ballroom

Chair: John Smiley, Senior Subsea Engineer

Co-Chairs: Randy Seehausen, Subsea Engineering Manager; INTECSEA
Jay Hursh, Vice President Business Development & Key Account Management; Aker Solutions

King Yellow - Competitively Scoped Umbilical for Expedited First Oil

Andrew Messieha, Subsea Brownfield Project Lead; Shell
King Yellow is a single well tie-in to the King field tying back to the Mars A platform. The premise of the project entering the Select
Phase was to install a new standard sized static umbilical to meet a 2030 end of field life requirement. During the Select Phase, the
team explored the most competitive umbilical option to accelerate schedule, reduce cost, and meet functional requirements. As a
result, the existing King umbilical was utilized to facilitate an expedited first oil, and a competitively scoped umbilical was installed
about 1 year later to meet end of field life requirements.

Andrew Messieha is a Subsea Brownfield Project Lead at Shell, leading multi-disciplined project teams to develop single well
brownfield tie-ins to existing Shell subsea fields. He has worked on numerous subsea developments in brownfield and greenfield,
both in discipline delivery and project management capacities. Before joining Shell in 2012, he worked at Marathon Oil as a Project
Engineer in downstream and upstream. Andrew holds a B.S. from Michigan State University.

Guyana Liza Phase 1 – A Challenging Lazy Wave Riser Design in Frontier Waters
Tyler Visco, Riser & Flowline Engineer; ExxonMobil
The 1st Development phase of the Liza Field, discovered in 2015, is comprised of 17 subsea wells tied-back via 6 steel lazy-wave
risers and flowlines to a spread-moored, tandem-offloaded Floating Production, Storage & Offloading (FPSO) Vessel. In 2015, this fast
tracked project began with a wide variety of development ideas aimed at achieving the primary goal of safely and swiftly bringing first-
ever oil to the country of Guyana. During the accelerated Select and Define Phase, the project team, facing limited & evolving field
definition, weighed the various options and ultimately selected a robust final concept that included, what will become, an industry-first
steel lazy wave riser using continuous, straked buoyancy.

Tyler Visco is a Riser & Flowline Engineer working on Liza Phase 1 currently as the External Interface and Hang-off System Lead
focusing on interface management and Riser Flexible Joint/Basket delivery. In his time at ExxonMobil, he has worked on several
deepwater SURF projects including Kizomba, Julia, & Hadrian. Prior to joining ExxonMobil in 2010, he attended Rice University where
he earned his B.S. in Civil -Structural Engineering and occasionally served as “Sammy – The Owl”, the university mascot.

South Santa Cruz & Barataria Subsea Development

Peter Worman, Development Manager; Deep Gulf Energy
The South Santa Cruz and Barataria Subsea Development is a 2-well tie back to a floating facility, the Chevron Blind Faith semi-
submersible. There were challenges to navigate throughout the execution phase of the project, including the coordination with
multiple host groups, platform weight and space constraints, implementation of company standardization plans, and cost and schedule
requirements. This presentation will discuss the challenges as well as the navigation through to a successful project completion.

Peter Worman is the Development Manager for Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC located in Houston. He has been directly engaged with
the subsea discipline for over 20 years in roles such as engineering, engineering management, business development, and project
management. In these positions, Pete has been a part of numerous subsea developments globally with companies such as Halliburton,
Cameron, Chevron, Oceaneering, McDermott, and now with Deep Gulf Energy.

4:45 P.M. WHISKEY TASTING – McDermott Booth 415

Sponsored by:

5:15 P.M. - 6:45 P.M. EXHIBIT HALL NETWORKING RECEPTION

NETWORK WITH COLLEAGUES Sponsored by:

OVER FOOD AND DRINKS!

Please visit www.subseatiebackforum.com for Thursday conference detail.

1803OFF_59 59 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 BUSINESS BRIEFS

People Phoenix HSEQ manager Preeti Mehta engineer.

BP has appointed has joined the working committee on Steve Gibson has joined Craig Interna-
Starlee Sykes as measuring bar- tional as country manager for the Middle
regional president for rier strength for the East.
the Gulf of Mexico Center for Offshore Singular has hired Lance Nelson as
and Canada. In her Safety. Americas director, Louisa Batten as
new role, Sykes will Oil and Natural EMEA director, and Mike Harper as
serve as the chair- Gas Corp. has EMEA business development manager.
man of BP Explora- appointed Rajesh
tion & Production Kakkar as director Company News
Inc. and will be a (offshore). TechnipFMC has signed an agree-
member of the board Sykes GulfMark Offshore ment to acquire a 51% stake in Island
of directors for BP Inc. has promoted Offshore’s subsidiary Island Offshore
America Inc. She Samuel R. Rubio to Kakkar Subsea AS. The latter provides riserless
also will serve on the board of directors for CFO. light well intervention (RLWI) project
the Center for Offshore Safety and on the Mermaid Maritime management and engineering services for
industry advisory board for Texas A&M’s has appointed Mark plug and abandonment, riserless coiled
Department of Petroleum Engineering. Midgley as COO. tubing and well completion operations,
She succeeds Richard Morrison, who has Brady M. including various proprietary designs.
retired after 37 years of service. Murphy has joined TechnipFMC and Island Offshore plan to
Jan Ar ve Haugan TETRA Technolo- form a strategic cooperation agreement to
has resigned as gies as president and deliver RLWI services worldwide, including
president and CEO of COO. TechnipFMC’s own RLWI capabilities. As
Kvaerner to become Knut Eriksen has a result, Island Offshore Subsea AS will be
CEO of Aker Energy. joined the Fair- rebranded and become the operating unit
Kvaerner has ap- fieldNodal board of Rubio for TechnipFMC’s global RLWI activities.
pointed Idar Eikrem directors. AVEVA has acquired intellectual
as interim CEO. Salah Farid Tantawy has joined Xodus property rights to the engineering design
Tap Oil Ltd. has Group as general manager in Egypt. database and design productivity software
appointed Chris Andy Readyhough has joined Ecosse EDD and PDMSi, developed by Shell
Newton as chairman. Subsea Systems as global business develop- International Exploration and Produc-
Haugan
Chevron Corp. ment manager. tion. EDD is designed to improve project
has appointed Bruce J2 Subsea, an Acteon company, has ap- efficiency by automating design processes,
Niemeyer as corporate vice president of pointed Christian Blinkenberg as general providing time and cost savings. The
Strategic Planning, and has elected Jim manager based in Aberdeen. PDMSi application layer, AVEVA adds,
Umpleby to its board of directors. He will Christian Ber ven cuts drawing production time by up to 85%,
serve on the Board Nominating and Gov- has joined Aquaterra as proven on various Shell deepwater proj-
ernance Committee as well as the Manage- Energy as business ects. AVEVA plans to extend the EDD and
ment Compensation Committee. development director. PDMSi improvements and efficiency gains
Exxon Mobil Corp. has elected Steven SIMMONS to its standard software portfolio, and to
A. Kandarian to its board of directors. EDECO has hired make these available to its EPC client plant
Cluff Natural Resources has appointed Gavin Sherwood operators.
Graham Swindells as CEO. He succeeds as base manager – Cyberhawk has inspected more than
Algy Cluff, who remains chairman. Denmark. 350 risers on 63 offshore platforms for
Graham Martin has joined the United Interventek Dubai Petroleum over a one-month cam-
Oil & Gas plc board of directors as a non- Subsea Engineering paign, as part of a framework agreement.
executive chairman. has appointed Bruce Berven The inspection, performed by the com-
W. Mark Meyer Stuart as sales and pany’s unmanned aerial vehicles, gener-
has joined Apache business development director. ated more than 90 engineering inspection
Corp. as senior vice Oil & Gas UK has appointed Gareth reports. During the campaign the company
president, Energy Wynn as director of the Stakeholder and generated daily reports to notify Dubai
Technology Strate- Communications Team, Matthew Abra- Petroleum of potentially serious defects. It
gies. ham as director of the Supply Chain and also inspected three elevated flare stacks
Tidewater Inc. has Health, Safety and Environment Team, and 24 bridges.
appointed John T. and Karis Thain as membership relations Neptune Energy Group has completed
Rynd as president manager. its acquisition of ENGIE E&P Interna-
and CEO and a Forth Ports has appointed Ryan Porte- tional. Following the transaction, Neptune
member of the board Meyer ous as the new harbour master for the has E&P interests across the North Sea,
of directors. ports of Dundee, Methil, and Kirkcaldy. He North Africa, and Southeast Asia, which in
The Murphy Oil Corp. board of directors is responsible for all marine operations on 2017 produced a net 154,000 boe/d.
has elected David R. Looney to serve the River Tay. Subsea 7 has agreed to acquire a 60%
as executive vice president and CFO. He AgileTek has hired Soo-hyeong Kim interest in consultants Xodus Group from
succeeds John W. Eckart, who has retired as a graduate engineering analyst, and Chiyoda, with the latter remaining a 40%
after nearly 28 years of service. Andrew Olson as business development joint venture partner. Xodus will continue

60 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_60 60 2/28/18 1:44 PM


to operate independently of its parent com-
panies, providing what Subsea 7 stressed
would be unbiased engineering and advi-
sory services to the energy industry and
objective advice to help clients maximize
returns from their projects.
Honeywell has unveiled its first indus-
trial cyber security center of excellence
(COE) at its Middle East headquarters in
Dubai. This features a safe off-process en-
vironment to test and demonstrate process
control network vulnerabilities and threats;
train customers with real-time attack simu-
lations; and provide customer consultations.
The new COE facility provides distributed
control systems, a physical plant process,
data analytics and networking equipment
capable of supporting training sessions,
demonstrations, workshops, and cyber-
attack simulations.
Proforma Safety International and
LOMAK Energy Ser vices Inc. have part-
nered to offer experienced safety, project
management and engineering services to
support the development of the oil and gas
industry in Guyana.
Texo DSI (UKCS), the offshore divi-
sion of unmanned aerial vehicle provider
Texo Drone Sur vey and Inspection, is
teaming up with Integrity XL, a specialist in
integrated solutions for the global oil and
gas industry. The partnership will involve
Texo DSI (UKCS) providing various UAV-
based survey and inspection solutions for
Integrity XL projects.
Enpro Subsea has secured financial
support from EV Private Equity. The
company, formed in 2011, is currently
working on projects offshore the UK, West
Africa, and in the Gulf of Mexico. It aims
to further develop its patented flow access
module technology and to build up its flow
intervention services and decommissioning
capabilities.
The Flow Measurement Institute
(FMI) has merged into the Institute of
Measurement and Control (InstMC) to
form a new flow measurement special inter-
est group (SIG). NEL and Coventry Uni-
versity in the UK established FMI in 2014.
Currently it has more than 550 members
from across the world, including oil and
gas operators, manufacturers, academia,
service companies and laboratories.
FMI is designed to help companies drive
flow measurement developments relevant
to future challenges. The merger with Inst-
MC should provide further opportunities to
contribute to standards bodies, education,
technology development, and government
policy. SIG will continuously review future
priorities for flow measurement research
and infrastructure with end-users, instru-
ment manufacturers, regulators, trade
1803OFF_61 61
bodies and research associations, across a
broad range of flow measurement applica-
tions.
TAQA has awarded Sparrows Group
two five-year contracts to provide crane
operations, maintenance, rigging loft and
fixed lifting inspection services to its UK
northern North Sea facilities. Under one
of the contracts, Sparrows will be respon-
sible for crane operations and maintenance
covering all mechanical, HVAC, electrical,
hydraulic, pneumatic, instrumentation and
structural needs. It will also perform in-
spection, engineering and technical support
across all aspects of TAQA’s mechanical
handling equipment, including crane up-
grade, structural analysis of crane booms,
re-engineering of obsolete components, as-
sembly, and modification and improvement
schemes. The second contract calls for
provision of rigging lofts and fixed lifting
inspection services.
BP has awarded Sparrows Group a
three-year contract to manage crane opera-
tions and maintenance on the Greater Plu-
tonio and PSVM FPSOs offshore Angola. It
will provide crane operators, maintenance,
repair and refurbishment, comprehensive
deck services, and control and certification
of fixed and portable lifting equipment.
It will also be responsible for full project
management, planning and coordination,
technical support, and training.
Repsol Sinopec Resources UK has
awarded Sparrows Group a three-year
contract to provide crane management
services on 10 operated assets in the North
Sea.
Aker Solutions and software provider
Cognite have agreed to collaborate on the
development of digital solutions to improve
efficiency of energy assets. This will involve
Aker Solutions using Cognite’s industrial
data platform to compile and analyze large
volumes of data from offshore installa-
tions, offering the owners suggestions for
performance improvements at any stage of
the asset’s life. Cognite’s platform aggre-
gates and structure large amounts of data
from all types of industrial systems, from
real-time sensors to equipment hierarchies,
maintenance logs, process diagrams and
3D computer-aided design models.
Emerson and AspenTech have teamed
up to deliver asset optimization software
solutions along with global automation
technologies and operational consulting
services.
Waypoint Leasing has opened an office
in Hong Kong to support its operations
and customer base in China and the Asia/
Pacific region.
Madison Industries has acquired drill-
ing component specialist Centek Group.
BUSINESS BRIEFS
Sun Coast Resources Inc. has opened
its newest facility in Broussard, Louisiana.
Chr ysaor has awarded Tenaris a long-
term agreement to provide oil country tubu-
lar goods casing and tubing and associated
services in the UK North Sea. The scope of
the three-year contract includes provision
of Tenaris’ ‘Rig Direct’ model, which covers
a wide range of services from string design
to running assistance on-site.
SpotSee has opened a new facility in
Chihuahua, Mexico.
Unique Group has formed a dealer
agreement for the Middle East region with
Kongsberg Maritime. Under the coopera-
tion, Unique Group’s offices in the region
will offer sale and service of Kongsberg’s
underwater mapping, navigation, acoustics
and camera systems to clients in Bahrain,
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE.
Dril-Quip Asia Pacific Pte Ltd. has
won a contract to supply top tensioned
riser (TTR) systems and related ser-
vices for the Repsol-operated Ca Rong Do
project offshore Vietnam. The company
will provide a drilling TTR system and
multiple TTR systems for the production,
gas injection and water injection wells. The
systems will include tieback connectors,
tapered stress joints, riser joints, riser con-
nectors, keel joints, tensioner joints, spool
joints, flexible jumpers, surface wellheads,
surface trees, control umbilicals, and
tensioner systems.
Noble Energy has contracted Schlum-
berger to engineer and supply a 2,000-ton
single-lift process module for installation
on the Leviathan production platform in
the Eastern Mediterranean. The scope of
the contract includes pretreatment, salt
removal and regeneration of monoethyl-
ene glycol (MEG) for reinjection in the
subsea flowlines for hydrate inhibition.
Schlumberger will supply its PUREMEG
reclamation and regeneration system.
Project management, engineering, fabrica-
tion, installation support, and life of field
activities will be managed by a globally
integrated team.
Kongsberg Maritime has contracted
CMR Group to provide closed circuit
TV (CCTV) systems for two new semi-
submersible heavy-lift, construction and
accommodation vessels under construction
in Shanghai. Kongsberg is responsible
for to supplying and integrating all the
vessels’ electrical, telecommunications,
and integrated control systems. The CCTV
systems, housed within IP-rated, stainless
steel enclosure housings, will monitor
hazardous areas and other components
and machinery, and will be designed to
withstand harsh offshore conditions. CMR
is supplying more than 140 cameras.
www.offshore-mag.com • March 2018 Offshore 61
2/28/18 1:44 PM
 SAVE THE DATE

FEBRUARY 5–7, 2019 GALVESTON, TX USA

MOO DY GA RDEN S H OT EL & CO N V EN T I ON C EN T ER

TOPSIDES OWNED & PRODUCED BY: PRESENTED BY: SUPPORTED BY:

EVENT.COM

1803OFF_62 62 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 ADVERTISERS INDEX

SALES OFFICES
PENNWELL PETROLEUM GROUP
1455 West Loop South, Suite 400, Houston, TX 77027
PHONE +1 713 621 9720 • FAX +1 713 963 6228
David Davis (Worldwide Sales Manager)
davidd@pennwell.com
AZ, CO, IL, OH, LA, ME, MI, MN, MA,
MO, NC, NM, NY, TX, WI
David Davis davidd@pennwell.com
PHONE +1 713 963 6206
AR, CA, CT, DC, FL, ND, NH, NJ, OK,
OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, VA, VT, WA, WV •
CENTRAL AMERICA
Justin Burgess justinb@pennwell.com
PHONE +1 918 831 9852
AK, AL, DE, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY,
MD, MS, MT, NE, NV, TN, UT, WY •
SOUTH AMERICA
Erick Iarrusso ericki@pennwell.com
PHONE +1 918 831 9871
UNITED KINGDOM • SCANDINAVIA •
THE NETHERLANDS • MIDDLE EAST
10 Springfield Close, Cross,
Axbridge, Somerset, United Kingdom BS26 2FE
PHONE +44 1934 733871
Graham Hoyle grahamh@pennwell.com
FRANCE • BELGIUM • PORTUGAL •
SPAIN • SOUTH SWITZERLAND
• MONACO • NORTH AFRICA
961 Camp Redon, 83830 Callas, France
PHONE +33 (0) 4 9470 8263 •
FAX +33 (0) 4 8981 9982
Stefania Piciotti Thompson stefaniat@pennwell.com
E
Enventure Global Technology..............21 Pipeline Week .....................................9
www.EnventureGT.com/ESET www.pipelineweek.com
PNEC Conferences ............................3
K www.pnecconferences.com
Subsea Tieback Forum &
Karmsund Maritime Offshore Exhibition ................................... 52-59
Supply....................................................20 www.subseatiebackforum.com
www.Kamos.no Topsides, Platforms & Hulls
Conference & Exhibition .................62
P www.topsidesevent.com
PennWell T
Deepwater Operations Conference
TechnipFMC ......................................... C4
& Exhibition......................................32
www.deepwateroperations.com TechnipFMC.com
Offshore Group ................... 29, 43, C3
www.offshore-mag.com W
Offshore Wind Executive Summit.....1
www.offshorewindsummit.com Wood ..................................................... C2
Oil & Gas Journal Site License.......63
www.WoodPLC.com
www.ogj.com/site-license-info
PennWell Books.................................7
The index of page numbers is provided as
www.PennWellBooks.com
a service. The publisher does not assume
Pipeline + Energy Expo .....................5
any liability for error or omission.
www.pipelineenergyexpo.com

GERMANY • NORTH SWITZERLAND •

AUSTRIA • EASTERN EUROPE •
RUSSIA • FORMER SOVIET UNION •
BALTIC
Sicking Industrial Marketing
Kurt-Schumacher-Str. 16, 59872 Freienohl, Germany Site License
PHONE +49 (0) 2903 3385 70 •
FAX +49 (0) 2903 3385 82
Andreas Sicking wilhelms@pennwell.com

ITALY • TURKEY • GREECE •

CYPRUS • MALTA
SILVERA MEDIAREP
Viale Monza, 24 - 20127 Milano, Italy
PHONE +39 (02) 28 46716 • FAX +39 (02) 28 93849
Ferruccio Silvera info@silvera.it Sound Knowledge.
CHINA • SOUTHEAST ASIA •
Sound Business Decisions.
AUSTRALASIA • JAPAN
19 Tanglin Road #05-20 Give your employees the tools and information they need to make
Tanglin Shopping Center those tough business decisions in today’s economic environment
Republic of Singapore 247909 with an Oil & Gas Journal Site License. It is a cost-effective
PHONE +65 9616 8080 • resource to communicate the latest industry news, research, and
FAX +65 6734 0655 information throughout your company.
Michael Yee yfyee@singnet.com.sg
For more information, contact:
FOR ASSISTANCE WITH MARKETING
STRATEGY OR AD CREATION, PLEASE Matt Dresher Courtney Ferguson
CONTACT: U.S. Site License Sales O&GJ Site License Sales Mgr
PennWell Marketing Solutions E:: mattd@pennwell.com E:: courtneyf@pennwell.com
David Davis P:: (918) 831-9539 P:: (918) 831-9558
PHONE +1 713 963 6206
EMAIL davidd@pennwell.com

1803OFF_63 63 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 BEYOND THE HORIZON
E&P software can be
profit enabler in tough times
As offshore operators move from portfolio realignment to antici-
pated profit growth in 2018, high quality investment opportunities
are proving hard to come by.
Hundreds of thousands of personnel have left the offshore indus-
try following significant declines in investment in new and existing
assets over the past few years. The result is that operators are now
struggling to both quantify the value of potential opportunities and
put in place the right strategies to deliver profitable production again.
At the same time, they also need to preserve the production gains
and improved margins achieved in response to the oil price decline.
While investments in new and innovative technologies have played
a crucial role in delivering cost savings, strategic E&P software is best
placed to immediately improve returns and help operators allocate capital.
This can be seen in three key areas – brownfield development via
intelligent well planning and cost models; increasing recovery factors
through predictive reservoir models; and expanding production ef-
ficiencies based on a complete overview of the field.
To see the benefits of brownfield investments, look no further than
the North Sea – a region that has seen a production increase of 16%
since 2014, according to Oil & Gas UK. Key to this improvement is
intelligent well planning and its accompanying software innovations.
These technologies allow operators to find and exploit bypassed zones
in the reservoir by allowing engineers to set drilling parameters for
each trajectory and compute well path uncertainty and collision risks.
Cost models can also be included to enable operators to evaluate
different drilling scenarios and ensure the right decisions are made.
Furthermore, engineers can also redesign field production concepts
and parameters to complement new producers and injectors. These
technologies make infill drilling an attractive method for increasing
recovery rates without a major new infrastructure spend.
With average global recovery rates still in the low 30% range, the
smallest percentage improvements can have a huge impact on pro-
duction and the bottom line.
In such cases, accurate predictive reservoir models that realistically
represent the underlying seismic data and incorporate all uncertainties
throughout the reservoir characterization workflow are vital. These
models let operators test their field production concepts and accurately
anticipate the business impact of their infill plans.
Recent technology advances include new workflows that tightly
integrate the static and dynamic modeling domains and propagate
uncertainties from seismic characterization right through to geologi-
cal modeling and simulation.
This means that reservoir uncertainties can be captured and varied
as input parameters, creating an ensemble of realistic reservoir models
that all feed into the reservoir simulator.
Effectively, advanced analysis lets operators convert more of the
resource into producible reserves, adding immediate value to the
company with minimal investment. The result is a better understand-
This page reflects viewpoints on the political, economic, cultural, technological, and environmental issues that shape the future of the petroleum industry. Offshore
Magazine invites you to share your thoughts. Email your Beyond the Horizon manuscript to David Paganie at davidp@pennwell.com.
64 Offshore March 2018 • www.offshore-mag.com
1803OFF_64 64
ing of the reservoir geometry, more robust reserves estimations, and
better-informed decisions for increased recovery.
Emerson has spent the past few years partnering and refining such
a workflow with Statoil – a company with ambitions to increase its
recovery rates on the Norwegian continental shelf to 60%.
Digital technologies incubated in other industries are also seeing
more uptake in offshore oil and gas to improve recovery. Take the
growth of machine learning where computer systems can learn,
improve, and ‘evolve’ when exposed to new and additional data.
Now commonplace in telecoms and financial services (McKinsey’s
State Of Machine Learning And AI, 2017), the upstream offshore oil
and gas market is also starting to see machine learning’s benefits as
part of the E&P software toolkit to predict oil-bearing formations.
Applications include calculating the probability of different rock-type
distributions or incorporating pre-stack and/or post-stack seismic
attributes directly into the workflow.
The same technology transfer from other sectors can be seen with
the evolution of cloud-based collaborative workflows. These are now
used to optimize the design and management of well systems and
enrich production datasets to better forecast future performance.
These technologies greatly increase the efficiency and accuracy of
locating and producing oil and gas reserves.
Finally, there is the need for increased production efficiencies and
the ability for operators to digitally integrate reservoir planning and
management with topsides operations. Such a system provides a
complete overview of the field and contributes vital input into future
production plans and engineering activities.
Again, the latest technologies are delivering, helping operators align
their modeling, uncertainty quantification and simulation data with pro-
duction plans, and creating a broad ecosystem where real-time intelligent
data from the field is combined with reservoir characterization software.
This information is continuously fed back for analysis by geo-
physicists, geologists, reservoir engineers, drillers, asset managers,
production engineers, auditors, and senior managers. Advantages
include increased depletion rates that translate into higher cash flow
today for companies to invest in new projects.
The success of maximizing asset returns and making the right
investment decisions boils down to operators’ ability to characterize
and understand their reservoirs and generate accurate information
to guide production and field decision-making.
The good news is that today’s software technologies are helping
meet the challenges of 2018 and beyond – delivering new and sustained
offshore operator growth.
Garrett Leahy
Emerson Automation Solutions
Indy Chakrabarti
Emerson Automation Solutions
2/28/18 1:44 PM
 Month After Month.
Year After Year. Only the committed and information-hungry have gained
the experience to help you survive over 60 years of
cyclical storms in the marine/offshore industry.
E STA B LI S HE D I N 1 95 4

– The first choice for readers, the right choice for advertisers.

Technological expertise, dedication, and a wealth of knowledge gained in over 60 years makes Offshore
magazine the information source for the marine /offshore oil & gas industry.

Many publications are claiming to be a reliable provider of industry information. Yet to be a stable
information source, a publication must be willing to weather all of the storms in order to consistently
present credible editorial content.

For over 60 years, Offshore magazine has never wavered from being the information source for the
marine/offshore industry, in both the good times . . . and the bad.

Offshore magazine provides more coverage of the world’s major offshore oil and gas producing regions
than any other competitive publication. Timely updates are always accessible through print and digital
magazines, global events, eNewsletters, maps, posters and online. For reliable, informative industry
trends, analysis and insight into the evolving nature of the industry itself, there is still only one choice . . .

1455 West Loop South • Suite 400

Houston, Texas USA 77027
Phone: 713 621 9720
World Trends and Technology for Offshore Oil and Gas Operations www.offshore-mag.com

1803OFF_C3 3 2/28/18 1:44 PM

 Real change
starts here
TechnipFMC is a dynamic force in energy.

We have the size, experience, and capabilities to

transform the industry in pursuit of new possibilities
and improved project economics. Our ability to
innovate is testament to what’s possible when you
shake off the bounds of convention.

We’re thought leaders, but we don’t just think – we act.

Working closely with partners and clients, we leverage
technologies, expertise, and innovation to deliver fresh
thinking, streamlined decisions, and smarter results.

From concept to project delivery and beyond, we’re

driving the change the oil and gas industry needs.

To not just imagine a better way, but to make it happen.

Discover more.
TechnipFMC.com

1803OFF_C4 4 2/28/18 1:44 PM