SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction
Volume 6, Number 4, December 2011, pp. 239-247

SPE-134678-PA

Modeling Facility-Expansion Options Under Uncertainty

View full textPDF ( 1,277 KB )

DOI  More information 10.2118/134678-PA http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/134678-PA

Citation

  • Jablonowski, C., Ramachandran, H., and Lasdon, L. 2011. Modeling Facility-Expansion Options Under Uncertainty. SPE Proj Fac & Const  6 (4): 239-247. SPE-134678-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/134678-PA.

Discipline Categories

  • 4.11 Fundamental Research in Projects, Facilities and Construction
  • 3.1.5 Field Development Optimization and Planning
  • 3.1.6 Integrated Asset Modeling
  • 3.2.1 Risk, Uncertainty, and Risk Assessment

Keywords

  • Expansion options, Flexibility, Integrated asset models, Uncertainty analysis

Summary

During the concept comparison and selection phase of capital projects, decision makers compare development options and select one option to carry forward to detailed engineering. This effort is often complicated by uncertainty in one or more of the critical inputs. Therefore, project teams typically investigate how different assumptions about the uncertainty influence optimal decisions. In cases where initial investment decisions are costly to change, the analysis of facility flexibility increases in importance. The goal is to find the optimal balance between initial capacity and the allocation of space and other resources for future expansion. This paper reports the results of a research project in which the authors develop an integrated asset model for a hypothetical deepwater asset and use the model to investigate various aspects of facility design under uncertainty. The method produces estimates for the optimal initial capacity, the likelihood of expansion, the expected size of expansion, and the willingness to pay for the option to expand. The approach is systematic; the model solves quickly and, thus, enables a wide scope of uncertainty analysis. The graphical output is intuitive and facilitates communication between the facility engineer, subsurface engineers, and management.

View full textPDF ( 1,277 KB )

History

  • Original manuscript received: 31 October 2010
  • Meeting paper published: 20 September 2010
  • Revised manuscript received: 22 March 2011
  • Manuscript approved: 26 April 2011
  • Published online: 14 December 2011
  • Version of record: 16 December 2011