SPE 96403

Turning a North Sea Oil Giant Into a Gas Field - Depressurization of the Statfjord Field
R. Boge, SPE, S.K. Lien, A. Gjesdal, and A.G. Hansen, SPE, Statoil

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers

Area of the North Sea, 200 km northwest of Bergen, Norway,
This paper was prepared for presentation at Offshore Europe 2005 held in Aberdeen, straddling the border between the Norwegian and the UK
Scotland, U.K., 6–9 September 2005.
sector, see Figure 1. The field is approximately 27 km long
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
and 4 km wide with a STOIIP of approximately 1 billion Sm3
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to and an estimated ultimate recovery factor for oil of 68%. It is
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at developed with three concrete platforms and each platform is a
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
combined drilling and production unit. In addition, the
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is Statfjord satellite fields (Statfjord Øst, Statfjord Nord and
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous Sygna) and the Snorre Field are connected to the Statfjord
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Field facilities.

Abstract Florø
#

The Statfjord Field has produced about 635 million Sm3 (4 Don

billion bbl) of oil and exported 68 billion Sm3 of gas. This Sygna Mongstad
#
61°30'

Statfjord Nord Snorre

equals to an oil recovery factor of 65% and a gas recovery BERGEN
%

MURCHISON
factor of 48% of volumes initially in place. Currently, the field Vigdis

is producing at an oil rate of approximately 20 000 Sm3/d, Thistle Visund

SF
which is about 17% of the plateau production rate. Dunlin
Øst Tordis

The predominant drainage strategy has been pressure 61°15'

Borg Nøkken
maintenance by water and gas injection. However plans to Statfjord
Statfjord
Statfjord unit
extend production life for the Statfjord Field even longer will Gullveig
Gullfaks

require changing drainage strategy from pressure maintenance Kvitebjørn

Gullfaks Sør
to depressurization. Estimates show that implementation of the Oil
Condensate
Brent
new drainage strategy will lead to an increased ultimate gas Rimfaks
Gullfaks Gamma Gas

recovery from 53% to 74% and an oil recovery factor of 68%. 61°00'

0 10 20 Kilometers 2° 3°
Lifetime for the Statfjord Field will be extended by
arc20 01 0117/ PTT -NK G/V L E

Figure 1 Statfjord Field located in the Tampen Area

approximately 10 years.
A change in focus from oil production to gas production
The Statfjord Field is located on a late Jurassic rotated
has consequences both subsurface and topside. Key elements
fault block. The Statfjord Field’s two main reservoir sand
for implementing the depressurization of the Statfjord Field
stone units, members in the Brent Group and Statfjord
reservoirs are drilling and recompletion of approximately 80
Formation, are divided by the Dunlin Group which mainly
wells which will be equipped with artificial lift and sand
consists of shale. The Brent Group is divided in Upper and
control, as well as topside modifications on the three existing
Lower Brent. The Main Field which contains 85% of the
platforms. This results in a high offshore activity level for
STOIIP consists of a rotated fault block with the Brent Group
several years on a field in production. A new gas export
and Statfjord Formation reservoirs. It has a dip of
pipeline to the UK FLAGS system (Far north Liquid And Gas
approximately 6-7 degrees towards west-northwest. The East
System) is necessary to provide sufficient offtake of the
Flank consists of slump fault blocks generated by gravitational
produced gas.
failure at the crest of the field. The East Flank is structurally
Implementation of a new drainage strategy on the Statfjord
and stratigraphically complex. It is heavily faulted with
Field has also regional effects. Prolonged life time of the
internal faults and small scale structures making reservoir
Statfjord Field installations leads to increased recovery for the
mapping challenging. The communication from the Main
Statfjord Satellites and opens for business opportunities in a
Field to the East Flank is generally good, with some
longer term.
restrictions as one moves to the east of the field.
Introduction
Most reservoirs are of excellent quality. A cross section of
The Statfjord Field is the largest producing oil field in Europe
the field, a stratigrafical column and some basic reservoir
in terms of recoverable reserves. It is located in the Tampen
parameters are found in Appendix A.
2 SPE 96403

The Statfjord Field started production in 1979, and the Current drainage strategy
annual oil production plateau rate at 120 000 Sm3/day was The current drainage strategy for the Statfjord Field is pressure
reached in 1985, see Figure 2. After eight years on plateau maintenance by water and gas injection into the main
production, oil production started declining, and the current oil reservoirs; the Brent Group and the Statfjord Formation.
production level is some 20 000 Sm3/day. Since production The primary drainage strategy for the Brent Group has
startup about 635 million Sm3 of oil has been produced. The been down flank water injection. Plateau production was
remaining economic oil reserves with the current drainage dominated by production from the Main Field followed by
strategy are estimated at 27 million Sm3. In addition to development of the more complex East Flank and drainage of
remaining oil volumes, substantial gas volumes exist in the sands with poorer reservoir quality after water breakthrough.
reservoirs either as gas dissolved in the residual and bypassed Attic volumes are developed by a successful full field WAG
oil, or as free gas injected for pressure maintenance. program that has been ongoing since 1996.8
Upper Statfjord has been drained by miscible gas injection
Rate Cumulative produced oil resulting in a very high recovery. Since 1996, pressure in
140 700
Upper Statfjord has been maintained by gas assisted updip
water injection9. Lower Statfjord is developed by downdip

Cumulative oil production (MSm3

Oil Production (KSm3/d)

120 600
water injection assisted by limited WAG injection.
100 500 Gas export started in 1986 with export through pipelines in
80 400
the Statpipe and the UK FLAGS system. As the oil production
has been declining, associated gas production has been
60 300
reduced. Limited access to gas has resulted in reduced gas
40 200 export rate and implementation of the updip water injection in
20 100 Upper Statfjord in order to conduct the WAG program.
0 0
A key to the already high oil recovery factor achieved at
the Statfjord Field has been use of multidisciplinary teams and
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005

a systematic work process for identification and evaluation of

Figure 2 Historical production targets for infill drilling. This process and a high focus on
keeping drilling costs and well intervention costs low have
Throughout the more than 25 years since production allowed for an aggressive drilling program and a high well
startup, oil production has been optimized by pressure intervention activity level, resulting in reduced field decline
maintenance, drilling of deviated and horizontal wells, and improved recovery.10-11 The recent years, the annual
continued infill drilling, WAG injection and various facility activity level on the field has been as high as 15-20 sidetracks
modifications. and approximately 50 well interventions.
As previously reported1, the SFLL (StatFjord Late Life) With the current drainage strategy, the sales gas reserves
main objective is to maximize value creation beyond what can are 74 GSm3, of which 68 GSm3 have already been exported.
be achieved by the current reservoir drainage strategy. By Without the change in drainage strategy, gas export was
depressurizing the reservoir, significant additional gas expected to end late 2007. In addition to export, produced gas
volumes can be produced and exported, resulting in extended has been used for pressure maintenance and fuel and flare. An
production life and higher value for the Statfjord Field. overview of the distribution of the gas at the onset of the
Not many examples exist of depressurization of a field of depressurization is shown in Figure 3.
the size and complexity as the Statfjord Field. The best analog
is the Brent Field2-5 where the depressurization started in 1997.
Technical evaluations concerning a depressurization have also
been undertaken for the Miller and South Brae Fields.6-7

The SFLL project consists of three major building blocks:

• A comprehensive well investment program in
order to produce with the reduced reservoir
pressure.
• Offshore installation modifications both to
facilitate low pressure production and to be able
to handle the 10 year extended life time of the
field.
• A new gas export pipeline to UK FLAGS system
to provide additional offtake possibility for the
produced gas.

The cost split of the total SFLL investment of 15 billion

NOK is approximately 30% for well investment, 60% for
topside modifications and 10 % for the new gas export
pipeline.
SPE 96403 3

Distribution of GIIP at SFLL startup Statfjord Late Life

Depressurisation
Start start–-up
depressurisation Depressurisation start-up Oil/Liq. Prod.
Gas/Liq. Prod.
Free gas Liquid Prod.

15%
EF

Brent

Exported
43%
Dunlin/Cook

Statfjord
Dissolved in Oil
Stop all injection Flooded oil
remaining oil Oil/Liq. Prod.
Start
Start gas
gas production from SF Fm.
fromStatf. fm.
Gas/Liq. Prod. Gas
33% Aquifer
Liquid Prod.
Prod
Start pressure depletion
Aquifer

Statfjord
Some2-3 Late
2 years Life
later … – Two years later Oil/Liq . Prod.
Gas/Liq . Prod.
Fuel and Liquid Prod.

Flare
9% EF

Figure 3 Current distribution of the gas initially in place in the

reservoir
Brent

With a current recovery factor for oil of 65% and expected

ultimate recovery of 68% the opertuneties of further increased Dunlin/Cook

oil recovery is believed to be limited. With the expected oil

profile, operation of the field is expected to become marginal Statfjord
Oil
around 2010. By implementation of the new drainage strategy, Oil/Liq . Prod. Flooded oil
the additional revenue from gas export allows for extension of Gas/Liq . Prod. Gas
Gas is
deliberates
released from
fromoil
oiland
and Gas
Aquifer
Liquid Prod.
Prod migrates up-dip Aquifer
the production period until 2018.
Statfjord
Another 2-3Late
yearsLife
… – Another three years
later Oil/Liq. Prod.
New drainage strategy Gas/Liq . Prod.
Liquid Prod.
The change in reservoir drainage strategy from pressure
maintenance to depressurization will require an extensive EF
pressure reduction in both the Brent Group and the Statfjord
Formation. Water and gas injection is planned to be stopped in
Brent
2007, phased on each platform according to the planned shut-
downs in 2007. Active depressurization is not planned for the
Dunlin reservoir, due to its very limited potential. Dunlin/Cook

The planned depressurization process is illustrated in

Figure 4. As reservoir pressure falls below bubble point Statfjord
Start gas production from Brent Gp.
pressure, gas will be released from the remaining oil. The gas Gasiscap
Gas establishedreleased
continuously in Brentfrom
fm. Oil
Flooded oil
Oil/Liq. Prod. oil andgas
Start migrates -updipfrom Brent fm.
production
will then migrate towards the crest, from where it will be Gas/Liq . Prod. Aquifer producers
Gas continues
liquid production
help maintaining
to deliberate from oil Gas
Aquifer
Liquid Prod.
Prod and migrates up-dip Aquifer
produced.
The gas production from the Statfjord Formation will Statfjord
Final
Another 2-3Late
period yearsLife
… – Another three years Oil/Liq. Prod.
primarily be from existing, secondary gas caps, created as a Gas/Liq . Prod.
Liquid Prod.
result of gas injection. Most of this gas is currently trapped in
the water flooded zone due to large amounts of water being EF
injected at the crest during history. This trapped gas will
expand and become mobile as reservoir pressure drops.
Brent
During the first years of depressurization, the Statfjord
Formation will provide the majority of the produced gas. The
Brent Group will gradually take over as main gas supplier Dunlin/Cook

when the reservoir pressure drops below bubble point pressure

and gas is liberated from the oil in Brent. Statfjord

Gas cap established in Brent fm. Oil

Oil/Liq. Prod. Start
End of gas production
pressure fromperiod
depletion Brent fm. Flooded oil
Gas/Liq . Prod. Aquifer producers
Gas continues to contribute
deliberate to most
from oil Gas
Aquifer
Liquid Prod.
Prod of themigrates
and liquid production
up-dip Aquifer

Figure 4 Illustration of the depressurization process

4 SPE 96403

The Brent Group and Statfjord Formation have relatively Several depletion experiments with initial saturations
similar values of initial GOR; 180 and 157 Sm3/ Sm3, corresponding to virgin conditions, a limited waterflood and
respectively, see Appendix A. Initial bubble point pressure for an extensive waterflood were conducted. Different
oil in the Brent Group was 270 bar while initial bubble point depressurization rates were used on the same core samples to
pressure in the Statfjord formation was 200 bar. Hence, measure critical gas saturation and determine relative
solution gas is most important for the Brent Group. permeability functions. Rate dependent critical gas saturations
were used to give trends that could be extrapolated to field
Reservoir studies conditions.
The reservoir evaluation of the SFLL project is based on a Figure 5 shows a plot of pressure decline rates versus
combination of simulation models and a decline type measured critical gas saturation at virgin conditions. The
approach. Two independent reservoir simulation models exist results are in good agreement with the reference Brent UK
for the Brent Group and the Statfjord Formation. The Brent data. A trendline has been drawn through the experimental
simulation model was built and history matched in 2003/2004 data to a field pressure decline rate of 40 bar/year giving a
and the Statfjord model was updated in 2004. To achieve critical gas saturation estimate of 5 percent.
consistency with the common platform capacities and
construct the full field production profiles, the simulation
models are run within a reservoir-coupling scheme.
The simulation models are considered to be reliable for
1.E+01
providing the gas and liquid production profiles. However, the Virgin A
simulation models proved not to be suitable for oil production Virgin B
prognoses. An alternative procedure was developed that Ref 3 and 4
conditions the SFLL oil production profile to the prognosis for 1.E+00

Depletion Rate (bar/h)

Trend line
the current drainage strategy which is based on decline
analysis.
New full field simulation models for the Brent and 1.E-01
Statfjord reservoirs are under development. The dynamic
process in the reservoir with three phase flow, critical gas Approxim ate field
saturation and hysteresis processes is complex. Gas liberation decline rate (40 bar/year)
1.E-02
and migration in particular, is difficult to model with tools
other than reservoir simulation models. For reservoir Recommend Sgcr
optimization and management and production prognosis it is at Reservoir Rate
very important to establish reliable simulation models. 1.E-03
Previous technical studies and experience from the Brent 0.01 0.1 1
field12 in the UK show that multiphase flow parameters Sgc (frac.)
represent an important element of overall uncertainty of a
depressurization project. The following parameters and critical Figure 5 Critical gas saturation under virgin conditions
13

issues were identified for the Statfjord Field depressurization:

Figure 6 shows a plot of normalized pressure decline rates
• Critical gas saturation (Sgcr) versus measured critical gas saturation at waterflooded
• Relative permeability of gas (krg) conditions. The pressure decline rates have been normalized
• Relative permeability of oil to gas (krog) by the bubble point pressures. We observe that the critical gas
• Residual oil saturation after gas flood (Sorg) saturation is slightly lower for the waterflooded case than for
• Scaling up multiphase flow parameters to a full field the virgin case. Included in Figure 6 are also relevant
model scale reference data carried out on North Sea core samples.
A comprehensive experimental and research program was Compared to the reference data the Statfjord-Brent critical gas
launched to address these issues. The program can be saturation stabilised at significantly lower values than for the
subdivided into two major activities: reference data. This can readily be explained in terms of
• Performing laboratory studies on representative core wettability.
material. Numerical simulation was used to history match the
experimental output to gain information about relative
• Developing a workflow that would allow performing
permeability during the depressurization and to quality assure
consistent upscaling of multiphase flow parameters
the data. The experiments were modelled using a one
from the scale of a core plug through facies
dimensional Black-Oil simulation model. Best fit Corey
association to a full field simulation model scale.
exponents of around 3.5 were determined for the gas phase for
Laboratory studies were conducted to establish predictions for
both virgin and waterflooded core experiments.
critical gas saturation and relative permeabilities for the
The multiphase flow parameters from core experiments
Statfjord Field.13 This included using representative reservoir
cannot be used directly in simulation models without proper
core material, reservoir fluids, expected wettability, low
verification.
depletion rates, varying degrees of waterflood and use of
history matching to obtain high quality depletion parameters.
SPE 96403 5

permeability functions in the geological model were chosen

according to results obtained from upscaling of SBED models
(the first upscaling step). Corey exponents in the simulation
1.E-01
models were adjusted to match production profiles from the
Normalised Pressure Decline Rate (1/h)

geological model. The study yields a set of Corey exponents

1.E-02 for simulation models that are recommended to estimate
production profiles for the Statfjord late life project; critical
Limited WF A
gas saturation of 5%, Corey for krg of 2.5 for Brent Group and
1.E-03 Sor A 2.0 for Statfjord Formation, Sorg=Sorw/2 and Corey for krog of
Limited WF B 2.0.
Sor B

1.E-04 Ref 1
Ref 11 Reservoir management
Trend line To secure the gas production rate and profile, the
1.E-05 reservoirs will be depleted at a rate of approximately 30-40
Recom m end Sgcr at Reservoir Rate bars per year. Figure 8 shows the planned development in
Water flooded condition
average reservoir pressure. Simulation shows that the liberated
1.E-06 gas migrates to the crestal areas of the field.
0.01 0.1 1
350
Sgc (frac.)
300
13
Figure 6 Critical gas saturation under waterwet conditions

Average reservoir pressure, Bar

250

The multiphase multistage upscaling work flow14 has been 200

developed and tested in the Statoil Research Centre in order to
implement scaling up of multiphase flow parameters from a 150

core plug scale through facies association up to a full field 100

simulation model scale, see Figure 7 for illustration.
On the basis of representative cores some lithofacies 50

models were developed using e.g. SBEDTM15-16 software. Each 0

lithofacies model consists of several rock-types. Based on 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Brent pressure Statfjord pressure
representative thin sections, reconstruction techniques are
utilized in order to generate flow parameters for each rock Figure 8 Average reservoir pressure profile
type. Effective flow parameters for each lithofacies are then
obtained through steady-state upscaling. Reservoir pressure will be closely monitored to ensure that
an appropriate depletion rate is obtained in all flow units.
Well-picks, Simulation model Wells will be equipped with permanent downhole pressure
Data inputs seismic
Core, gauges to assist monitoring of reservoir pressure, and for well
SCAL,
Thin sections, mini-k
Geological model diagnostic purposes.
logs, SCAL In the Brent Group most of the gas will be produced
Facies models
immediately, without allowing for gas caps to be generated.
Rock types
However, some gas caps will be established and an extensive
Steady state
upscaling
effort on data acquisition will be conducted to identify and
monitor the size of these accumulations. The generation of gas
caps will be monitored by GOR development in wells,
Pore-to-core
network modelling Upscaling steps saturation logging and 4D seismic.
Management of low pressure and water handling capacity
utilization is of vital importance to optimize the balance
Figure 7 Overview of work flow for two – stage multiphase between liquid production, required to achieve pressure
upscaling depletion, and water cuts as low as possible in individual
producers. Location of drainage points and selection of
Several lithofacies models were created for the upscaling downhole completion will be important for controlling water
study. The models aim to represent typical small-scale cuts.
heterogeneities in the different formations and are used to Well decline rates and watercut development will be
predict multiphase flow behavior on the lithofacies scale closely monitored. A reservoir behavior with slower decline
To quantify upscaling effects, a dynamic upscaling study than expected could indicate a substantial incremental oil
was performed. The upscaling work was limited to obtaining potential by continued pressure maintenance in Brent for a few
relative permeability functions for gas. Here, simple relative more years. The option to defer depressurization of Brent, and
permeability functions of Corey type were implemented both extract more oil before reduced liquid production, shrinkage
on fine scale geological models and on the corresponding and more unfavorable oil viscosity start to impact the oil
upscaled simulation models. Corey exponents for relative production, is subject to further evaluation.
6 SPE 96403

Managing limitations with respect to sand production and Brent Statfjord

erosion/corrosion control in topside piping will be important 25
for maximizing the production. Equally important is
balancing gas vs. liquid production potential within the
20
platform processing capacities.

Oil Production rate, kSm3/cd

The timing of and number of wells as well as completion
solutions for these wells will be important in this respect. The 15

three main short term goals for the drilling program are to:
10
1. Create gas production potential sufficient to deliver a
daily gas rate of 14 million Sm3/d in late 2007. 5
2. Implement gas lift and sandcontrol in at least 35 wells
by the end of 2007 to be able to sustain liquid
0
production level as the reservoir pressure starts to 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
fall.
3. Maximize oil production.
Figure 10 Field oil production profile

Additional recovery
Implementing the new drainage strategy increases the ultimate
Brent liquid producers Statfjord liquid producers
recovery of gas from 53% to 74%. During the first years of Brent Aquifer producer Statfjord Aquifer producer
depressurization, the Statfjord Formation will provide the
140
majority of the produced gas. However the Brent Group will
gradually take over as main gas supplier when the reservoir 120
Water production rates, kSm3/cd

pressure drops below bubble point pressure and free gas is

100
liberated. Oil recovery increases slightly compared to the
current drainage strategy due to prolonged economical life of 80
the field.
60
The gas and oil production profiles are presented in Figure
9-10 below. The importance of the aquifer producers for 40

continued high liquid offtake is demonstrated in the water

20
production plot in Figure 11. In 2014 50% of the water
produced comes from aquifer producers, while in 2020 almost 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
all water production comes from aquifer producers.
The additional economical reserves are estimated to 4
Figure 11 Field water production profile
million Sm3 oil, 31.8 billion Sm3 dry gas and 8.2 million tons
of NGL.
Implementation of the new drainage strategy
The platforms will be modified and adjusted to low pressure
inlet production in two phases. In the first phase (until late
16 2007) preparations will be made to stop gas and water
injection and gas lift will be installed in some wells. Gas cap
14
production and gas export to UK will start in late 2007 after
Gas production rates, MSm3/cd

12 completion of the new gas transportation system. In the second

phase (until late 2009), the remaining modifications to
10
processing trains and other platform systems for low pressure
8 production will be made.
The area around the Statfjord A platform is the most
6
mature and has the least potential for prolonged oil production.
4 In addition the top structure has a saddle point below Statfjord
A, which makes this area less promising for gas production
2
compared to the Statfjord B and C areas. Consequently a
0 limited investment in terms of wells and platform
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
modifications on SFA has been decided upon. The main
Brent Statfjord
function for the SFA platform will be to deliver Statfjord
Figure 9 Field gas production profile
Formation gas production and Brent Group oil and water
production during the first few years of the depressurization.
The current plan is to produce from SFA until 2012.
A significant reduction in operating costs for the Statfjord
Field is a pre-requisite for being able to justify the SFLL
SPE 96403 7

project. A separate project is currently close to achieving these injectors in their current position is not advised for reasons
necessary cost reductions. described below.
Aquifer producers will be drilled below the original oil
Subsurface water contacts, both to limit H2S production associated with
As previously discussed, an extensive re-completion and injected seawater, and to avoid gas production which can
drilling program is necessary to implement the deep dramatically reduce pump life. In addition, the aquifer
depressurization on the Statfjord Field. It is assumed that most producers will be drilled at a minimum distance of 400 m from
available slots will be utilized at the Statfjord B and Statfjord former water injectors to avoid cooled reservoir zones around
C platforms, which means that some of the injector slots will these wells. Low fracture initiation pressure causing severe
be converted to producers. On the Statfjord A platform, a lost circulation problems has been experienced close to former
limited program for re-completion and drilling of new wells is water injectors.19
planned for. The current drilling program includes 12 ESP wells, 2 in
A total of 76 wells are planned to be re-completed or the Statfjord Formation and 10 in the Brent Group. As the
drilled according to the current plan. 50 of these wells are aquifer producers will produce no hydrocarbons but act as
already located in suitable positions near the creastal area of pressure reducers, they will be drilled as late as possible, i.e.
the field, but they need sand control and gas lift to ensure when the gas lifted wells can no longer maintain the liquid
sufficient rate as reservoir pressure declines. The remaining 26 production. Our current estimate is that the first ESP will be in
wells are sidetacks to new locations, in order to obtain a good operation from 2010. A mean average pump life time of the
coverage of outtake points. The current drilling and ESPs of 18 months has been used for planning and budgeting
recompletion plan requires two drilling crews until the end of purposes. However, due to the importance of pump life time
2007, and one crew until 2011. for the project economy, attention will be put on increasing the
To be able to produce at the reduced reservoir pressure, average pump life time.
gas lift and sand control is required in almost all wells.
Aquifer producers with downhole pumps are implemented Production chemistry Scale predictions indicate that both
later in the depressurization period in order to provide sulphate and calcium carbonate scale will occur more
sufficient liquid production, as gas lift becomes less effective frequently than with today’s fairly mild scale potential.
at low reservoir pressures. Problems associated with sulphate scale are expected to
A sand production study17 concludes that the critical increase in the near wellbore area mainly due to the change in
pressure drawdown will decrease as a result of depletion. For completion strategy. A history-based productivity evaluation
wells operated according to the tested maximum sand-free study for similar open hole sand control solutions resulted in
rate, the liquid production rates will be strongly reduced. an expected reduction in productivity of up to 60 % at low sea
Currently, 60% of our wells are restricted by sand water cut (sw < 50%). This possible reduction has been
production.18 For all main formations, the study shows that the incorporated in the production predictions as one of the factors
reduction in sand free rates as reservoir pressure is reduced affecting the pressure profile.
will result in unacceptably low liquid rates. Wells completed Frequent scale inhibition and scale dissolver treatments are
in these formations will need downhole sand control to be able planned to reduce the scaling effects. Downhole scale
to deliver sufficient production rates. Sensitivities have been inhibition is included in the design to protect the gas lift
run to optimize the number of wells requiring downhole sand valves, downhole pumps (ESP) and the upper completion.
control equipment, resulting in the planning of downhole Predictions of H2S level is based on production profiles
sandcontrol in almost all producers. and results from a comprehensive data acquisition program
Gas lift is required to obtain production as reservoir involving backflow of three water injectors. Produced water
pressure declines. It is an effective lift method for reservoir reinjection (PWRI) has been carried out in parts of the field
pressures down to approximately 130 bar, dependent on the since 2003, resulting in increased souring20 Due to the
gas liquid ratio. Average gas lift rates of 80000 Sm3/d are negative impact on souring; the PWRI was stopped in March
expected, but will be optimized on an individual well basis. 2005. Individual well predictions with up to 2000 ppm H2S in
The gas lift design chosen is a conventional gas lift with three the gas phase have not triggered any need for wellhead
side pocket mandrels and an annular safety valve. An option to injection of scavenger. Treatment of separated gas with
use retrofit gas lift in some of the wells is currently being scavenger is found satisfactory to obtain sales gas
investigated. specifications.
Aquifer producers equipped with electrical submersible
pumps (ESP) will be drilled into the aquifer in both the Brent Compaction Early on reservoir compaction and resulting
and Statfjord reservoirs. Aquifer producers will be required to subsidence and well integrity were identified as key items to
maintain the pressure depletion rate as gas lift becomes less address. The current subsidence prognosis predicts one meter
effective at low reservoir pressures. Their importance can be assuming 250 bar depletion. This prognosis combined with the
clearly seen in Figure 11 where the water production profile 10 000 years wave return has resulted in requirements for
from ESP and all other liquid producers is separated. ESPs are minor modification to platform steel structures. A time
very important for achieving the last 40-50 bar of pressure dependent subsidence prognosis for all three platform areas
reduction. will be made based on core data and by utilizing Brent field
All aquifer producers will be drilled as one or two section subsidence data. The effect of reservoir compaction on the
sidetracks from the current water injectors. Recompleting the well integrity due to sand production will also be evaluated.
8 SPE 96403

The plan is to monitor the subsidence by installing GPS

(Global Positioning System) receivers on all platforms prior to LEGEND
Existing Gas pipeline
Statfjord Satellites

depressurization, and monitor the in-situ compaction by New Gas pipeline

SFC
utilizing radioactive marker in key producers. X-over
Northern Leg From Snorre A
Gas Pipeline Statfjord Intrafield
(NLGP) Pipeline System
(SIPS)
Platform modifications SFA From Gullfaks

The platform modification scope is classified in three main 12” NLGP Spur SFB
categories; concept scope defined by change in drainage Pipeline End 10” export riser
strategy, HSE scope defined by more stringent HSE (mainly Manifold
(PLEM) Hot-tap on Intrafield
Brent B
environmental) requirements and technical condition scope Inline
Tee
X
defined by increased life time to meet sufficient safety and X-over to Gassled Area A, to be closed

regularity level. The amount of scope within the categories Brent A

Gassled Area A
varies for the different platforms; however, the total scope is Hot-tap on Flags New pipeline, ”Tampen Link” (Statpipe)
Statfjord – Flags, ~23 km, 32”
split into 60% for concept, 25% for HSE and 15% for
technical condition scope. FLAGS Pipeline End Manifold
(PLEM)

An investment of 9 billion NOK is planned over a 4 year Figure 12 Statfjord field lay out with new gas export routing
period from 2006 throughout 2009. The three platforms will
be upgraded and modified with minor impact on production.
Only one turnaround of 21 days per platform per year is HSE scope Equipment to clean produced sand before
planned. disposed to sea, upgrade of cleaning equipment of the
produced water system, i.e. CTour21, and fire water
Concept scope Arrangements for gas lift and electrical modifications (deluge) will be implemented on all platforms.
submersible pumps, and modification of compressors to obtain On SFB and SFC new free fall life boats and additional escape
low inlet pressure are the main elements triggered by the chutes are planned installed, together with re-injection system
increased gas production combined with an increased number for H2S waste products.
of producers result in a significant replacement and
modification scope in the inlet piping arrangement. Technical condition scope The extended life time of the
Up to 2009 the existing low pressure capacity will be platforms will require some systems to be replaced or
utilized with only small increases in LP (Low Pressure) modified due to their technical condition. The age of the
capacity and flexibility. Current inlet pressure is around 65 platform equipment, lack of spare parts or competent service
bars on all three platforms and LP production is operated at personnel have added to this scope.
pressures from 23 to 28 bar. From 2009 all producers will The drilling facility upgrade scope is quite comprehensive.
produce against 23-28 bar. Installation work implies up to one year stop in drilling
High gas rates and low pressures result in high velocities, activities on each of the Statfjord B and C platforms in the
and a flow line replacement scope is required to avoid period 2006-2008. The Statfjord A platform was subject to a
exceeding the velocity limit in the existing carbon steel similar drilling facility upgrade in 2004.
material piping. Modification of former injection manifolds
for production is planned to keep the investments low and Uncertainties
facilitate flow from an increased number of producers on the B A value chain (from reservoir to commercial issues)
and C platforms. uncertainty analysis has been performed in order to quantify
Gas export facilities to the FLAGS system will be the major uncertainty elements on the project NPV (Net
implemented topside on SFB, since export from SFA and SFC Present Value). The relative contributions to the uncertainty
will after modifications subsea go to FLAGS via the new for the project NPV are shown in Figure 13.
pipeline “Tampen Link” as shown in Figure 12. The The gas production rate is the most important parameter,
investment for “Tampen Link” is of the order of 1.5 billion followed by the oil production prognosis. The SFLL is a very
NOK. complex modification project with an offshore work program
Gas export for the UK owners of Statfjord will remain as of approximately 3 million manhours over a period of 4-6
per today, exported via the Spur line to the Northern Leg Gas years. Due to this, the SFLL investment program is the third
Pipeline. The Norwegian owners are cooperating in the most important contributor to project uncertainty. The
Tampen Link Joint venture to install the 23 km Tampen Link operating cost and the cost of abandonment is of less
pipeline between Statfjord and the FLAGS pipeline. This importance. A simulation study has been performed to identify
pipeline has a 32” diameter and is sized to export potential the major contributors to the subsurface uncertainty. From the
third party volumes, in addition to the Statfjord volumes, and Tornado plot in Figure 14 the uncertainty parameters with the
therefore represents a business opportunity. largest effect on the cumulative gas production can be
In order to meet an expected increase in H2S content, a identified.
H2S removal system will be upgraded. Some modifications
and new equipment are planned to ensure the required
capacities are obtained and to be able to jet the separators after
stop of water injection.
SPE 96403 9

are only slightly larger in Brent Group than in Statfjord

Relative contribution to Uncertainty Formation (22.3 G Sm3 vs. 19 G Sm3 wet gas).
The uncertainty in the oil production profile has two major
Gas production contributors.
1. The behaviour of the oil production at high
Oil production
watercuts assuming continued waterflood. This
CAPEX has been expressed as uncertainty in oil to water
relative permeabilities.
Abandonment
cost 2. The performance of the oil production when gas
is liberated in all parts of the reservoir expressed
OPEX
as uncertainty in the oil to gas relative
permeability.
Predicting the future oil production with a high accuracy is
a challenging task. The estimated uncertainty in oil production
corresponds to less than +/- 1% change in total oil recovery
Figure 13 Relative contributions to the uncertainty of the project factor, but still it remains one of most important uncertainties
NPV.
for the project.
Gas sensitivities
Project schedule
The current project execution plan has the following major
Pressure Profile
milestones:
STOOIP Brent • PDO approval June 2005
Cr Gas Brent • Start offshore installation October 2005
STOOIP SF
• Installation of Gas Lift June 2006
• Stop water and gas injection Mid 2007
Krg Brent
• Start Gas export October 2007
Krg SF • Start low pressure production October 2009
Vertical perm • Implementation of ESP 2010-2012
Cr Gas SF
As there is a large uncertainty related to the reservoir
Change in technical gas reserves
behavior, the optimum timing of the depressurization in Brent
Figure 14 Contributors to the uncertainty in gas reserves Group and the modification on old platforms, a large degree of
flexibility is needed during the execution of the project.
The main gas uncertainty parameters listed in order of their
importance are: Pressure Profile, STOIIP Brent, Critical gas Some examples of the flexibility build into the plans are:
saturation for gas (Sgcr) in Brent, STOIIP Statfjord, Relative • Gas lift installation has been made independent of the
permeability to gas (krg) in Brent and Statfjord gas injection system to be able to accelerate the
Our ability to create the optimal pressure profile is the implementation of gas lift.
most important parameter. Among the factors affecting the • Flowline replacement and modifications and topside
pressure profile are aquifer response, reduction in productivity gas lift scope is not defined to specific slots but will
due to scale, uncertainty in topside constraints and uncertainty be notified as required. This helps to keep the overall
in lift curves. The pressure profile is equally important in both scope as low as possible while maintaining
the Brent Group and the Statfjord Formation. A too slow possibility to optimize the drilling and intervention
pressure decline will result in slower gas generation, but it can schedule.
be compensated by increasing the offtake with more ESP • A possible flexibility to continue water injection in
wells, or increased well investments program on the Statfjord the Brent Group is subject for further evaluations
A platform. The STOIIP is far more important in Brent Group involving updated profiles and topside cost
because most of the gas produced from the Statfjord implications.
Formation comes from a secondary gas cap not affected by a
change in STOIIP, while most of the Brent Group gas is Regional effects
liberated from remaining oil and is sensitive to the amount of Implementation of the SFLL project will have some effect on
oil present prior to depressurization. adjacent fields, both as a result of prolonged life time of the
The critical gas saturation is also much more important in Statfjord Field and as a consequence of reduced reservoir
Brent Group compared to Statfjord Formation. The pressure in the area.
explanation is that most of the Statfjord Formation reservoir is The longer production life for Statfjord C will give a
already above critical gas saturation. The total uncertainty in prolonged production period for the connected third party
Brent Group gas production is approximately twice as large as fields: Statfjord Nord, Statfjord Øst and Sygna fields.
in the Statfjord Formation even though the technical reserves In order to estimate potential effects of pressure reduction,
a pressure and communication study has been performed for
10 SPE 96403

the Tampen area. Regional geological studies, covering LP = Low Pressure

regional seismic interpretation and fault seal analysis, have mD = Permeability, Milli Darcy
also been performed. The pressure and communication studies Mill Sm3 = million Standard Cubic Meter
indicate that the Statfjord Field may be in pressure MSFLR = Maximum Sand Free Liquid Rate
communication with Statfjord Øst, Vigdis Vest and Borg/Borg MSL = Mean Sea Level
Nordvest (Upper Jurassic, Munin) at Brent level. At Statfjord NPV = Net Present Value
Formation level communication has not been observed nor is PDO = Plan for Development and Operations
expected in the future between the Statfjord field and SFLL = Statfjord Late Life
surrounding fields. Sgcr = Critical gas saturation
Based on the results from these studies, a regional Sorg = Residual oil saturation after gasflooding
simulation model has been built, covering the affected area. Sorw = Residual oil saturation after waterflooding
The model was used for pressure prediction, which then was STOIIP = Stock Tank Oil Initially in Place
used to estimate potential reserve losses in affected fields. TVD = True Vertical Depth
The positive effect of the extended life for the Statfjord WAG = Water Alternating Gas
Field and the Statfjord Satellites is significantly larger than the
negative effect of depressurization in Vigdis Vest, Borg and
Borg Nordvest. Compensating measures are being pursued in References
the relevant licenses to reduce this loss. 1. Agaev G. S. et al.: “Reservoir drainage strategy for the
Statfjord Field depressurization”, presented at 1-st
International Conference and Exhibition Modern
Challenges in Oil Recovery, Moscow, Russia, 19-23 May
Conclusions
2003.
1. To maximize value creation, the drainage strategy for 2. Christiansen, S.H. and Wilson, P.M.: “Challenges in the
the Statfjord Field is planned changed from pressure Brent Field: Implementation of Depressurization,” paper
maintenance to depressurization. SPE 38469 presented at Offshore Europe, Aberdeen,
2. Extended life time of the Statfjord Field will lead to Scotland, 9-12 September 1997.
increased recovery both on the Statfjord Field and in 3. Schulte, W.M., Hugo van Rossem and Walter van de
the greater Tampen Area. Vijver: “Current Challenges in the Brent Field,” paper SPE
3. A comprehensive well program is required to achieve 26788 presented at Offshore Europe, Aberdeen, Scotland,
the depressurization of the Statfjord Field. 7-10 September 1993.
4. Braithwaite, C.I.M. and Schulte, W.M.: “Transforming the
4. The topside modifications will be performed with
Future of the Brent Field: Depressurization – The Next
minor impact on production. Development Phase,” paper SPE 25026 presented at
5. A more limited investment program on Statfjord A Europec, Cannes, France, 16-18 November 1992.
than on Statfjord B and Statfjord C is beneficial for 5. Coutts, S.D.: “The behaviour of the aquifer during Brent
the project. depressurization,” paper SPE 38470 presented at Offshore
6. Reservoir uncertainties are dominating the overall Europe, Aberdeen, Scotland, 9-12 September 1997.
project uncertainty. 6. Beecroft W.J., Mani V., Wood A.R.O., Rusinek I.,
7. Flexibility in the implementation plan is important to “Evaluation of Depressurization, Miller Field, North Sea”,
be able to optimize the hydrocarbon recovery. SPE 56692, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, 3-6 October 1999.
7. Drummond, A., Fishlock, T., Naylor, P. and Rothkopf, B.:
Acknowledgment “An evaluation of post-waterflood depressurization of the
The authors wish to thank the Statfjord Unit license owners; South Brae field, North Sea”, paper SPE 71487 presented at
ExxonMobil Exploration and Production Norway A/S, Norske SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
ConocoPhillips AS, A/S Norske Shell, Enterprise Oil Norge Orleans, Louisiana, 2001.
AS, ConocoPhillips UK, BP, Centrica Resources Limited and 8. Crogh, N.A., et.al:”WAG Injection at the Statfjord Field, A
Statoil ASA, for permission to publish this paper. Success Story”, paper SPE 78348 presented at the Europec
2002, 29-31 October 2002.
9. Hegre E., Dalen V. and Strandenaes H.O:”IOR Potential
with Updip Water Injection in the Statfjord fm at the
Nomenclature
Statfjord Field”, paper SPE 28841 presented at the
°C = Celsius Temperature European Petroleum Conference, London, 25-27 October
ESP = Electrical Submersible Pump 1994.
FLAGS = Far North Liquid and Gas System 10. Hansen, A.G., et al:”Optimisation of an Aggressive Drilling
FVF = Formation Volume Factor Program at the Statfjord Field- Maximizing Production in a
GOR = Gas Oil Ratio Mature Field”, paper SPE 78347 presented at the Europec
GPS = Global Positioning System 2002, 29-31 October 2002.
GSm3 = billion Standard Cubic Meter 11. Aadland, A.: “Statfjord towards Year 2020”, presented at
HSE = Health, Environment and Safety the 22nd Annual Workshop and Symposium Collaborate
Project on Enhanced Oil Recovery International Energy
krg = Relative permeability to gas
Agency, Vienna Austria, September 9-12, 2001.
krog = Relative permeability to oil in the 12. Ligtheim, D.J., Reijnen, G.C.A.M.: “Critical Gas Saturation
presence of gas During Depressurization and its Importance in the Brent
kSm3/day = Thousand Standard Cubic Meter per Day
SPE 96403 11

Field”, paper SPE 38475 presented at Offshore Europe,

Aberdeen, Scotland, 9-12 September 1997.
13. Petersen E.B et al: “Determination of Critical Gas
Saturation and relative permeabilities relevant to the
Depressurization of the Statfjord Field,” Paper presented at
the International Symposium of the Society of Core
Analysts held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 5-9 October, 2004
14. Lerdalh T. R. et al: Pore- to Field-Scale Multi-Phase
Upscaling for IOR, paper SPE/IADC 94191 prepard for
14th Europec Biennial Conference in Madrid, Spain, 13-16
June 2005.
15. Wen R.-J., Martinius A.W., Næss A. and Ringrose P.:
Three-dimensional simulation of small-scale heterogeneity
in tidal deposits - A process-based stochastic method. In:
Buccianti, A., Nardi, G. and Potenza, R. (Eds) Proceedings
of the 4th Annual Conference of the International
Association of Mathematical Geology (IAMG), Ischia,
129-134
16. Ringrose, P. S., Skjetne, E. and Elfenbein, C. 2003.
Permeability Estimation Functions Based on Forward
Modeling of Sedimentary Heterogeneity. SPE paper 84275,
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in Denver, Colorado, U.S.A., 5 - 8 October
2003
17. Hettema M. et al: “The relative importance of drawdown
and depletion in sanding wells – predictive models
compared with data from the Statfjord field”, abstract
submitted to the SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA,
15-17 Feb. 2006.
18. Andrews J. et al: “Production Enhancement from sand
management philosophy. A case study from Statfjord and
Gullfaks”, SPE 94511.
19. Andrews J. et al: “Injection wells: a case study from the
Statfjord Field”, SPE 90949, SPE Annual Technical
Conference and exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA, 24-29
Sept. 2004.
20. Bjørnestad E. Ø., Dinning A. J. and Sunde E.: ”The effect
of produced water reinjection on reservoir souring in the
Statfjord field”, ISBN publication presented at the 16th
International Oil Field Chemistry Symposium, Geilo,
Norway, 13-16 March 2005.
21. Torvik H. et al: “One year of operational experience with
CTour at Statfjord C”,3rd Produced Water Workshop
organized by National Engineering Laboratory (NEL),
Aberdeen, Scotland, 20-21 April 2005.
12 SPE 96403

Appendix A General field data

Figure A-1 Field cross section focused on the creastal area and
the East Flank

Depositional
Zonation Permeabilit South Stratigraph North Environment
y (mD) 20000
Draupne Fm. 2
Heather Fm. y Marine
VIKING Gp.
Reworked

5
Tarbert Fm. 4 Estuarine/
3
2 Shallow Marine
BRENT Gp.

Ness Fm. 2
STAT
STAT

Coastal Plain/
Alluvial Plain
Ness Fm. 1

Etive Fm.
Marginal to
Rannoch Fm.

Shallow Marine
2

1
Broom
Fm. Shallow Marine
Drake Fm.

Offshore to
2 Shallow Marine
Cook Fm.
DUNLIN Gp.

1B
700 m

1A

Burton Fm. Open Marine

Amundsen Fm.

2
Shallow Marine

1
Shallow Marine
Nansen Mbr.
Eiriksson Mbr.

Alluvial Plain
2
Statfjord Fm.

1
5 Alluvial Plain

4
Raude Mbr.

2 Alluvial Plain
Sand
1
HEGRE Lunde Fm. Shale/Coal/Cemen
Gp. t

Figure A-2 Stratigraphical column showing depositional

environment and permeabilities
SPE 96403 13

Brent Statfjord
Parameter
Group Formation
STOIIP Mill Sm3 ~650 ~200
Average N/G 78 % 55 %
Average porosity 27 % 21 %
Depth to crest, m TVD
2360.0 2575.0
MSL
2829.9/
Initial oil-water contact,
2586.3 2814.0/
mTVD MSL
2806.3*
Gross thickness, m 156 123
Datum Depth, m TVD
2469.0 2701.0
MSL
Datum Pressure, bar 383.4 404.3
o
Oil gravity, API 41 38
Datum Temperature, °C 88.9 96.7
Bubble-point pressure,
270.0 200.0
bar
GOR, Sm³/Sm³ 185.0 156.6
Oil viscosity, mPa*s 0.37 0.36
3
Oil FVF, m3/ Sm 1.53 1.48
Oil gradient, bar/m 0.0645 0.0655
Figure A-3 Basic reservoir properties