See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/300077969

Petrobras Approach to FPSO Cost Reduction

Conference Paper · January 2016

DOI: 10.4043/27288-MS

CITATIONS READS
0 1,127

5 authors, including:

Giovani Cavalcanti Nunes Luiz Lopreato

Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.
15 PUBLICATIONS   29 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Eduardo Vilameá
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.
10 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hub Platform With an Internal Dock View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Eduardo Vilameá on 12 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

OTC-27288-MS

Petrobras Approach to FPSO Cost Reduction

Giovani Cavalcanti Nunes, Luiz Guilherme Roquette Lopreato, Marcos Donato Auler Da Silva Ferreira,
Eduardo Marcal Vilamea, and Galileu Paulo Henke Alves De Oliveira, Petrobras

Copyright 2016, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 2–5 May 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
The standardization process was initiated nearly a decade ago under a thriving scene of the oil industry.
At that time, Petrobras had already had a long experience designing, contracting and participating in
offshore production units. This vast experience showed that eventual optimization obtained with tailor
made solutions tended to lose attractivity, regarding schedules and costs, when compared with identical
projects. This perception motivated a movement towards standardization and a radical change in design
philosophy. This initiative has proven to be applicable to a wide range of crudes and several units have
been contracted since. The first standardized projects developed by Petrobras, were the P-58 and P-62
FPSOs, two similar units to operate at Baleia Azul and Roncador fields, respectively. These units are
operating with very good results. Since then, eight ⬙Replicants⬙ were contracted to Brazilian shipyards and
the first unit should be producing next year.
Despite the success of standardization, in current scenario of cost reduction, incrementing the capacity
of new FPSO units is a major option to be evaluated. In this context, this paper will present Petrobras
strategy towards EPC of its FPSOs and how cost reduction is planned. Future trends will also be discussed.

Introduction
Petrobras vast experience in designing, contracting and participating in offshore production units shown
that eventual optimization obtained with tailor made solutions tended to lose attractivity, in relation to
schedules and costs, when compared with twin projects. This perception motivated a movement towards
standardization.
The initial target of the standardization process was to develop the conceptual design of topside
modules that could be used at different fields. The task was to devise the flow diagrams and define the
equipment size of process plants that could deal with large range of crudes, flow rates and export
requirement. To achieve this purpose, an integrated simulator with reservoir models, flow and process
plant was assembled to evaluate the many different scenario considered, as well evaluate the performance
of the proposed standard concept under this conditions.
Based on Petrobras expected projects portfolio at the time, the following scenarios were established for
the standardization:
2 OTC-27288-MS

Table 1—Parameters considered as standardization scenarios

Parameter Minimum value Maximum value

° API 13 40
Gas-oil Ratio (GOR) (m3/m3) 0 220
Oil flow rate (bpd) 100 000 180 000
CO2 content in the produced gas (%v/v) 0 25
H2S content in the produced gas (ppmv) 0 200
Produced Water salinity (mg/L) 65 000 200 000

Those scenarios were considered to be exploited by FPSOs, SSs and Fixed units. However, this paper
will focus only in the results for FPSOs standardization, where Petrobras has it major expertise. The main
guidelines for the conceptual design were:
● Module oriented design.
● Adjustable temperature to different crudes and, consequently, heat exchanger areas, to achieve oil
specification.
● Resizing separators and treaters should be avoided.
● Parallel Standard equipment to accommodate different crudes and flow rates.
● Empty slots would be acceptable. Total equipment amount would be decided upon the flow rate
of each project.
Once the conceptual designs had been developed, Petrobras would be able to place an order for a large
number of similar units and reduce construction schedules and CAPEX.
Based on the key goals, three main concepts were developed for the oil process plant: (i) one for high
salinity and/or high viscosity crudes; (ii) one for lighter, less viscous and with low salinity crudes; and (iii)
one for high initial watercut.
As regards the gas process plant, the concepts were developed by combining the standard modules of
each unit operation, leading to five different concepts: (i) one for sweet natural gas; (ii) one for natural
gas with H2S; (iii) one for natural gas with high contend of CO2; (iv) one for natural gas with relatively
high contents of CO2 and H2S, simultaneously; and (v) another one for natural gas with relatively low
contents of CO2 and H2S.
The following text presents the main characteristics and challenges that were overcome in the
development of standardized concepts for the oil and the gas processing plants. Next, a brief history of
the units built based on standardization principles is present. To conclude, a hypothetical costs reduction
study for new development is discuss. It is noteworthy that these new studies use the standardization
concepts as part of a more comprehensive assessment of a cost reduction strategy.
Oil Process Plant
In all configurations the feed streams are heated by recycling produced water discharged at the oil treaters,
instead of using heat exchangers. Avoiding the use of heat exchange upstream the three phase separator
is desirable, as this equipment has shown to be a major source of operational problems due to fouling, tube
perforation etc.
A high flow rate plant (180.000 bpd) processing heavy crudes with high salinity was considered as the
worst case scenario. Heavy crudes usually have very high viscosities, which require high temperature
treatment. On the other hand, this crude normally present low gas oil ratios (GOR), leading to usually
small compression system and, as consequence, the exhaust gases from the turbines (drivers of electric
power generators) fail to meet the heat duty required to reach the treatment temperature of the oil.
Washing the crude with dilution water is an alternative option to reduce the salt concentration in cases
oil specification is 1% BS&W. With this strategy, the oil treatment temperature and, consequently, the
OTC-27288-MS 3

thermal power demand are reduced. However, to enable oil dehydration with a minimum amount of
dilution water, a pre-dehydration equipment must be placed upstream the main dehydrator.
As an example, consider the 17 °API Jubarte crude oil, a giant offshore field in the coast of Espirito
Santo state. For such heavy crude, 1% water cut specification can be met with a treatment temperature of
120 °C, if a large size treater is used. However, to meet the salinity specification of 570 mg/L this crude
would have to be further dehydrated to 0.7%. In this case, the required temperature for the same treater
would be 140 °C.
For this case, the configuration is shown in Figure 1, composed by two treaters in series, to enable
specifying the oil at 120°C. Bear in mind that higher temperatures require cladded vessels, and that the
cost of such vessels can be three times that of carbon steel. Based on that, we have defined 120°C as the
maximum temperature for any crude treatment.

Figure 1—The First Concept: High Salinity Crudes.

For lighter oils, a simpler process diagram is able to specify the products. A three phase separator
substitutes the degasser and pre-treater as shown in Figure 2. This configuration can also be used for heavy
crudes with low salinity water.
4 OTC-27288-MS

Figure 2—Second Concept: Low Salinity Crudes.

Based on Petrobras onshore previous experience with wash tanks, a third concept, where cargo tanks
are used for bulk water removal, was also developed. Two stages of degassing vessels are placed upstream
those tanks to help stabilize the crudes and avoid significant gas routing. Laboratory tests executed at
R&D Center showed that for extra-heavy crudes (the worst case scenario) a maximum of 20 % (v/v) water
cut could be expected for the outlet stream of the wash tanks. As a result, the heat duty to achieve the
required process temperature was significantly reduced when compared to the other concepts. A simpli-
fied process diagram is present at Figure 3.

Figure 3—the third concept: wash tank.

Gas Processing Plant

The main purpose of the gas treatment and compression plant is to gather, dehydrate, reduce contaminant
levels and raise the pressure of the produced gas to meet the requirements for the following possible
applications:
OTC-27288-MS 5

● Transport to shore, through a gas pipeline system;

● Injection of the natural gas stream into a reservoir for enhanced oil recovery;
● Injection of the CO2 stream into a reservoir or aquifer to minimize greenhouse gases emission;
● Lift gas for the production wells;
● Fuel gas.
The main contaminants present in produced gas streams are carbon dioxide (CO2) and H2S. There is
a variety of technologies available to remove these contaminants from natural gas streams such as fixed
bed H2S removal, absorption with amines, absorption with hot potassium carbonate and membrane
permeation.
For high CO2 contents, membrane permeation was the selected technology. Compared to amines,
membranes are capable to process a larger range of inlet CO2 concentration and can be easily modular-
ized, which makes them the appropriate choice for standardization. In order to allow gas injection with
both high and low levels of CO2, the topside facilities were designed with a CO2membrane system that
provides two streams: a treated gas with low CO2 content (3% vol/vol maximum) and a stream with very
high CO2 content (up to 90% vol/vol). For fields with low CO2 content, where membrane units are not
feasible, a more tradition approach with amine absorption shall be used.

Figure 4 —CO2 removal membranes module

Handling fluids with high CO2 concentrations demands a stricter specification for humidity, since
corrosion control in risers and pipelines became a critical issue. This very low water dew point
requirement makes adsorption with molecular sieves the selected technology, instead of the traditional
triethylene glycol absorption. For fields with low CO2 content, TEG absorption should be used.
Membranes for CO2 removal are sensitive to heavy hydrocarbon condensates and aromatics such as
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX). In order to assure good membrane performance,
heavy hydrocarbons must be removed from the gas stream, hence it is needs a hydrocarbon Dew Point
Control Unit. The selected process is based on a heat exchanger and a Joule-Thompson valve.
Regarding H2S removal, when membranes technology is employed, a dedicated process is required.
Solid fixed beds were the selected technology, where the H2S chemically reacts with a blend of oxides,
in a batch process. For fields with low CO2 content, a more traditional scheme with amine unit should be
preferred.
Having defined the necessary gas treatment units, the next step was to design the compression system.
Compressors were standardized, initially, for gas flow rates of 2.0 MM m3/d, a maximum of three units,
being one standby. As high GOR field was discovered, high flow rates shall be allowed for the
6 OTC-27288-MS

compression system. The power generation system was standardized with four gas turbine packages, each
one rated 25 MWe, in a configuration of three running plus one stand-by. Thus the maximum electric
power available is limited to 75 MW.
The standardized gas processing plant to develop reservoirs with high CO2 content is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5—gas processing plant standardization

Gas gathered from the three phase separator and the vapor recovery unit is fed into the Main
Compression unit, which pressurizes it to the level required by the membrane unit, including a slight
overpressure to account for the pressure drop across the gas treatment units. From the main compression
the gas stream is then directed to the Dehydration unit, Dew Point control unit and Membrane unit. The
treated gas is further compressed in the export compression unit or used as fuel gas. The gas stream can
then be used for lift-gas, export or reinjection into the reservoir. For reinjection purpose, the gas stream
is routed to the gas injection compression unit, which pressurizes it to the pressure level required for the
injection well.
The CO2 rich stream exits the membrane at a very low pressure and has to be compressed before being
injected into a reservoir. To design the compression system, different flowrates and CO2 content had to
be taken into account as these may vary from field to field and along the years.
Since the plant has two gas injection headers, which allow the injection of a high CO2 stream to some
wells and a low CO2 content to others, some operation modes are possible. This flexibility impacts the
compressor design since, case all the produced gas is reinjected, the membrane can be partially bypassed.
Thus, the export compressor must be able to handle variable flow rates and CO2 contents. Therefore, the
gas injection compressor shall also be capable of handling CO2 rich streams as well as natural gas streams.
In one of the operational modes, natural gas is exported and the CO2 rich stream is reinjected into the
reservoir. In this mode, reinjection can be done by two segregated streams in different wells. In another
operational mode, when all produced gas is reinjected into the reservoir, the membranes are bypassed and
one export gas compressor train can be used to increase the pressure of the natural gas with lower CO2
concentration. This innovative scheme allows the system to deal with the entire molecular weight range
and different operational points.
OTC-27288-MS 7

The number of machines to be installed in the modules will depend on each specific application. In
order to give some flexibility to compressor manufacturers, a study was conducted to determine the outlet
pressure required for different reinjection gas flow rates and CO2 concentrations. Flow simulations
showed that CO2 has a high density above its critical pressure, increasing proportionally the fluid head
pressure at the injection riser. This characteristic allowed lower compressor discharge pressures for high
CO2 fields.
Compressors can be driven by turbines or electrical motors. The task of the design team was to devise
the system in a way to maximize the use of electric motors, limited to the standards already established.
The following restrictions were considered:
● Total maximum power demanded should not exceed 75 MW.
● Maximum usage of electrical drivers due it lower CAPEX and OPEX, as well as highest efficiency
and reliability
● The maximum electric motor power rate of 11 MW, due to electrical system limitations, like
voltage sag during start up.
However, for the flowrates considered, the total power demand exceeded the 75 MW limits, which
made the application of electric motor drivers for all compressors impossible. For that reason turbines
were selected as drivers of the CO2 Compressor.
For compressor capacity control, variable speed drivers were the only option able to accommodate for
the proposed gas compression conditions and the limitations stated for the electrical system. Compressor
speed variation allows the system to cope with varying molecular weight that results from different CO2
contents and still meet the 11 MW motor driver limitation. Thus motors rating at 11 MW and variable
speed devices were standardized for all compressors.
As described for the oil process plant configuration, the gas process plant equipment sizes (molecular
sieve vessels, absorption towers, gas scrubbers, etc.) were also standardized.
Extensive simulations were performed to test the integrated (oil and gas processing, compression
systems, electric generation, water injection, etc.) plant under different conditions. The results were very
robust and showed that building FPSOs as building block type systems gives it the necessary flexibility
to reach a wide range of scenarios, while still maintaining the standards.

Application of the Standardization Process

Standardization was established gradually, since it could not be imposed but rather suggested to chartered
units, and could only be fully applied to Petrobras owned units, in case where Petrobras is the main EPC
Company. The strategy comprised local content maximization.

2008 P-57
The very early - and partial - use of standardization concepts was at P-57 FPSO, a chartered unit in which
the bid winner chose to use the wash tank concept suggested by Petrobras. The main project characteristics
are present in Table 2.

2009 P-58 and P-62

The first standardized projects developed by Petrobras were the P-58 and P-62 FPSOs, two similar units
to operate on Baleia Azul and Roncador fields, respectively. The project team task was to apply and check
the robustness of the proposed standardization. Similarly to P-57, the concept with wash tank was chosen
for the oil process plant and a traditional gas treatment plant, with amine and TEG unit, was used.
The main characteristics for the three projects are presented in Table 2 below:
8 OTC-27288-MS

Table 2—Main characteristics for P-57, P-58 and P-62

FPSO P-57 FPSO P-58 FPSO P-62

Field Jubarte Baleia Azul Roncador

°API 17,2 ~ 25 ~ 18.8

Year 2007 2009 2009
Oil Flowrate (bpd) 180000 180000 180000
Liquid Flowrate (bpd) 300000 300000 220000
BS&W (%) 0 to 95 0 to 95 0 to 95
Gas Flowrate (MM Sm3/d) 2.0 6.0 6.0
Injection Water Flowrate (bpd) 360000 360000 260000
Treatment Temperature (°C) 120 90 120
Produced Water Salinity (mg/L) 250000 250000 109400

Figure 6 —P-58 FPSO

For P-58 and P-62 FPSOs, the crude oil treatment process fully used the standardized concept, with a
single treatment train, composed of a production separator, an atmospheric separator, a settling tank and
a single electrostatic treatment stage to meet the oil specifications BS&W of 0.5% (vol/vol), salinity of
570 mg/L and Reid Vapor Pressure of 10 Pisa. The standardized dimensions of 4.3 m diameter and 16 m
length for the separator and 4.3 m diameter and 22 m length for the electrostatic vessel, were considered
suitable for the separators vessels.
Despite a 6 months difference in the schedule, the standardization allowed EPC contract submission
at the same time. Furthermore, the experience accumulated in the project phase of P-58 was applied for
P-62, once both projects had a standard configuration.
It is important to emphasize that, although these units have different oil characteristics, the standard
process configuration and dimensions remains the same, once oil heating temperature is the tuning
variable. The lighter oil treated by P-58 unit required a maximum temperature of 90°C, in the electrostatic
treaters, while the suitable temperature for P-62 heavier oil was around 120°C.
Until 2010, P-58 and P-62 units were the Petrobras projects that effectively used the standardization
concept. The experience gained confirmed the robustness of this concept and gave momentum to the idea
of purchasing a larger number of units.
OTC-27288-MS 9

2010 Replicants (pre-salt)

The so called Replicants are a series of 8 FPSO whose design is fully based on standardization concepts.
Although these eight FPSOs will be located in different areas of Santos Basin Pre-Salt, they have the same
nominal process capacity as present in Table 3

Table 3—pre-salt FPSOs main characteristics

FPSO Standard

Field Presalt

°API 27-30
Oil Flowrate (bpd) 150 000
Liquid Flowrate (bpd) 150 000
BS&W (%) up to 80
Gas Flowrate (MM Sm3/d) 6.0
Injection Water Flowrate (m3/d) 28 500
Treatment Temperature (°C) 85
Produced Water Salinity (mg/L) 240 000

The crude processing plant was based on high salinity standard concept and it was carried out through
one production train, which comprises a free water knock-out drum and two electrostatic treaters, in order
to meet the crude final specifications of 0.5% (vol/vol) BS&W 270 mg/L of NaCl.
Different from the P-58 and P-62, the high CO2 concentration did not allow for traditional gas
treatment plant. For these FPSOs, the gas treatment consists of a molecular sieve unit to dehydrate the gas,
a Joule Thomson valve as a hydrocarbon dew point control unit, and a CO2 membrane removal unit to
reduce CO2 content to a maximum of 3% vol/vol.
The discovery of the Pre-Salt fields gave Petrobras the opportunity for an extensive use of this standard
concept. The strategy was to contract eight units (P-66, P-67, P-68, P-69, P-70, P-71, P-72, P-73) at a hull
factory, constructed specifically for this purpose. Additionally a standardization program for hulls, wells
and subsea hardware (trees, lines, manifolds) was implemented.

Larger Capacity FPSOs

The standardization process was initiated nearly a decade ago under a thriving scene of the oil industry.
In current scenario of cost reduction, incrementing the capacity of new FPSO units is a major option to
be evaluated. However, the challenges to enable any capacity increase go beyond a simple increase in
topside facilities size, since it also involves an integrated assessment of well distribution, optimal position
of the FPSO, flowline length, diameter, thermal insulation etc. Even so, there are several ongoing studies
aiming at understanding the best strategy for the integrated development of oil fields.
As an example of an ongoing investigation, Figure 8 and Figure 9 presents the configuration used in
the analysis of two hypothetical scenarios considered for this development: (i) the use of two FPSO
positioned apart approximately 10 km; (ii) a single higher capacity FPSO, positioned at the geometric
center of these two regions.
10 OTC-27288-MS

Figure 8 —FPSO and well position for scenario with 2 FPSO.

Figure 9 —FPSO and well position for scenario with a single FPSO.

The well distribution used is hypothetical and considers two units with equivalent total distance to its
wells (total flowline length). Ten production wells were considered for each of the two units and twenty
wells for the alternative case of using one larger unit. The same number of injection wells was considered
for each scenario. Simulations were executed to determine weight and area occupied by the topside plant,
as well as to analyses the viability of the new hull based on the topside and oil storage capacity. Some
key characteristics of these units, as well economic data, are presented in the Table 4.
OTC-27288-MS 11

Table 4 —Characteristic and economical aspects of evaluated scenarios. The cases are named based on the number of FPSO
followed by the flowline diameter.
1 FPSO 6ⴖ 1 FPSO 8ⴖ 2 FPSO 6ⴖ 2 FPSO 8ⴖ

FPSO Quantity. 1 1 2 2
Oil Capacity per FPSO (kbpd) 290 320 150 190
Gas Capacity per FPSO (MM Sm3/d) 10,0 12,0 6,0 7,0
Topside Weight per FPSO (103 ton) 29,0 30,0 24,0 25,0
Total Flowline length (km) 348 348 214 214
Well ⫹ Christmas Tree (Billion US$) 6,0 6,0 6,0 6,0
Flowline total cost (Billion US$) 1,8 2,0 1,5 1,7
FPSO total cost (Billion US$) 2,0 2,3 2 x 1,7 2 x 1,8
CAPEX (Billion US$) 9,8 10,3 10,9 11,3
OPEX (Present value) (Billion US$) 0,5 0,5 1,0 1,0
Total Cost (Billion US$) 10,3 10,8 11,9 12,3

The result indicates that a combination of higher capacity FPSO and larger diameter flow lines, may
present economic gains. The use of vessels with 290-320 kbpd total liquid capacity, combined with 6’’
flow line is the lowest cost case.
A single FPSO leads to longer flowlines and consequently to higher pressure drops, which implies a
production decrease for the individual wells. Consequently, an increase in the nominal production lines
from 6⬙ to 8⬙ was also evaluated. Preliminary simulations shown that a production increasing of
approximately 5% can be obtained by increasing the diameter of flowlines from 6⬙ to 8⬙. This assessment,
however, is subject to several limitations, especially regarding reservoir characteristics. For that reason,
we chose to focus the study on the relative cost of production systems with similar capacity. Moreover,
merely increasing the nominal diameter of the production line, keeping the strategy of two vessels with
the capacity of the standard plant, tends to represent an increase in investment proportional to the increase
in produced.
The results presented here should be considered as preliminary and require further investigation to
account for the impact of the number of production units on the subsea gathering network layout, the
effects on the reservoir dynamics, among others. Additionally, the unusual size of the FPSOs (~300 kpd)
and the larger diameter (8⬙) of the flowline being consider require a careful analysis of construction
feasibility as well as delivery timeframes. Failure to meet this can have adverse impact on the project
costs.
Moreover, this evaluation should be extended to other scenarios involving a larger number of units
(e.g., the use of 3 units instead of 4 in a given field), where flowline length may be optimized. Such gains
can be enhanced if a standardization of the topsides is done.

Conclusions
The standardization of FPSOs was a successful strategy applied to the development of the Brazilian
Presalt. The construction of the first of the eight Replicants has been concluded and will soon start
producing.
A study done on a hypothetical field indicates that a combination of higher capacity FPSOs with larger
diameter flow lines could present potential gains when compared to the traditional systems used in the
industry. In the specific case of this theoretical feasibility study, the use of vessels in the range of 320 kbpd
total liquid capacity, combined with 8’’ flow line when compared to the usual 180 kbpd and 6⬙ flowline,
added value to the project. Additionally, merely increasing the nominal diameter of the production line,
keeping the strategy of two vessels with the usual capacity, as defined in the standardization process,
would represent an investment cost increase of the same order as the production increase value.
 12 OTC-27288-MS

The economic advantages of using larger vessels and larger diameter flowlines can be enhanced if
combined with the standardization process.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their appreciation to Petrobras for the permission to publish this paper.
They also acknowledge the support from Vanessa Czeczelski Pereira, Leonardo De Francischi Ferreira
Alves and Paulo Poli, for their important technical contributions.

References
Formigli, J.; Hayashi, M. Y.; Mendes, F. M. A. ; Pinto, M. S. M.; Sampaio, M. C. S.: Brazil Pre-salt: Opportunities and
Challenges. Article published in World Oil, Vol 231, N. 9, September 2010.
Mueller, Wayne; Roobaert, Norb.: Standardization Adds Value to FPSOs Topsides. Article, Offshore Magazine - March,
2008.
Pinto, A. C.; Nunes, G. C.; Ribeiro, J.; Lima, S. T. C.; Salomao, M. C.; Peclat, L. E.; Libera, S. D.: Standardized FPSOs
to Accelerate Presalt Work.. Article published in World Oil, Vol 233, N. 6, June 2012.
Beltrao, RL; Sombra, CL; Lage, A.C; Fagundes Netto, J.R.; Henriques, CCD; Challenges and new technologies for the
development of the Pre-salt cluster, Santos Basin, Brazil; OTC Paper 19880, Houston, Texas, May 2009
Almeida, A.S.; Lima, S.T.C.; Rocha, P.S.; Andrade, A.T.; Branco, C.M.; Pinto A.C.: CCGS Opportunities in the Santos
Basin Pre-Salt Development. Paper SPE-1265-66, presented in SPE International Conference on Health, Safety and
Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, 12-14 April, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Nunes, G. C.; Alves, P. R; Moreira, L. J.; Ribeiro, Leite M. M.; Libera, S. D.: Petrobras experience in the standardization
of FPSOs. Paper Rio Oil &Gas IBP, presented in Rio Oil & Gas Expo 2010, Rio de Janeiro, 13-16 September 2010.

View publication stats