Preliminary Technical Agenda
TUESDAY March 23, 2010
Session 1 – Plenary Session “State expertise requirements for geological and hydrodynamic models used for calculation of reserves and field development planning for oil and gas fields”
Session Managers: V. Shelepov, A. Shandrygin
In the Russian Federation the state expertise of geological and hydrodynamic field models is a compulsory stage of hydrocarbon reserves calculation and oil & gas reservoir management. During the expertise process, the following aspects are evaluated: quality of developed 3D geological and dynamic models; their relevance to real reserves estimation and reservoirs under development; the completeness of data and records in the reservoir models.
Workshop participants will discuss the major objectives and concerns with regard to complex reservoir modeling as well as share their experience in expertise of geological and dynamic models. The following main issues will be brought up for consideration:
- Role and objectives of geological and dynamic modeling for reserves estimation and oil and gas reservoir management
- Quality assessment of 3D geological and dynamic models
- Common mistakes during geological modeling
- Controlled upscaling of geological models
- Issues for process of dynamic models development and expertise
- Determination of oil recovery as per various reserves’ categories
WEDNESDAY March 24, 2010
Session 2 - Innovations in Static and Dynamic Modeling Methods
Session Managers: V. Baikov, M. Tokarev
A hydrodynamic model is based on a trusted subsoil model built on complete and reliable data available from preceding G&G surveys. The reliability and scope of the data is mainly defined by the correctness of set objectives and chosen reasonable methods including new ones, as well as the complete solutions. The agenda will include seismic survey task definition and planning, related structural imaging credibility and background electrical resistivity over the geological model. In modeling, especially hydrodynamic, high importance is given to fascial sedimentation. This session will discuss this in the context of cyclostratigraphic sedimentation analysis and facies pattern recovery based on core and logging data and the seismic facies analysis. Going from the geological to a hydrodynamic model the priority is given to the credibility of reservoir filtration properties, fluid contact location, relative permeability and fluid composition. These issues will be covered together with core analysis and data interpretation methods.
Session 3 - Selection of Modeling Strategy and its role in decision making
Session Managers: V. Krasnov, Y. Volokitin
During this session it is proposed to discuss the choice of modeling approach or strategy as a function of final objectives or decisions. When should one choose a traditional methodology of stepping through all the stages of static (ie seismic, logs, etc) and dynamic (history matching) modeling or in some cases coarse one-layer models with average properties seem to be sufficient? Alternatively, in some cases does the application of simple analytical calculation meet our targets? What governs the choice of model complexity and what is the simplest possible model appropriate to make specific business decisions? What are the philosophy and tools utilized by the different companies that enable faster and more robust exploration of uncertainty? When the model are used to make operational decisions during ongoing field development activities, what are the best ways to keep such models up-to-date?
The aim of this session is to extend the meaning of “model” beyond the present default grid-based approach, by including any alternative calculations and approaches that help in making decisions.
THURSDAY, March 25, 2010
Session 4 - Work Flow and Synergy of Modeling
Session Managers: E. Birun, T. Graf
One of the most significant issues in the area of hydrocarbon field studies is related to the integration of different data types into one consistent model forming the basis onto which the optimum development decision can be derived. The integration of the information and data implies combining different methods, which all have their own limitations. The synergies gained from the integration of all the necessary processes allows to overcome the pitfalls of some methods and strengthen the decision making process.
Synergies in the workflow may come from streamlining of common tasks and closing the information loop between the various sciences, the automation of standardized tasks or just simply improving and accelerating the knowledge gain from the tasks-at-hand. The main objective of this session is to demonstrate successful solutions and methodologies for integrating geological and engineering problem solving.
The speakers in this session will cover all workflows from seismic to reservoir engineering, the potential for automation, application in real-time processes and the integration of uncertainty to allow top-down approaches.
It is anticipated that our speakers will present and discuss the following topics at this session: 1) Gates of the ‘Hell’ – seismic, logging, geology, reservoir development: admission to the ‘Heaven’; 2) Seismic to reservoir engineering – modeling of seismic attribute changes; 3) Uncertainty handling from top-down approaches and decision making (data quality, data handling, integration of all uncertainties for the objective functions); 4) Automation in the process with brute force; 5) Model update in real time, production forecast while drilling; 6) Integrated adjustment of geological and filtration models.
Session 5 - Roundtable Discussions. Team presentations
Session Managers: M. Krylova, A. Gladkov
The goal of this session is to allow views and evaluations of the current relationship between static and dynamic models as key integrated-project stages, as well as look into the future to suggest and brainstorm of such models to be developed.
This session will be broken into several roundtables with individual agendas. The participant groups are to identify the areas of concerns in integrated-project execution and management, personnel education and development, and to share ideas for improvement of future modeling processes.
Each group will be given 30-40 minutes to reach consensus on a parity basis, the common knowledge gained from the previous conference days, and on their own experience. Each group will present a brief summary of their discussion, or make a short presentation.