Brent Field Reservoir Modeling: Laying
the Foundations of a Brown Field
Redevelopment
S.J. James, Brent Field Unit, Shell U.K. Exploration and Production
Summary
The Brent Field was discovered in 1971. It is now a mature asset
and, in order to increase oil and gas ultimate recovery, will com-
mence depressurization in 1997. The redevelopment of the field
has been underpinned by extensive static and dynamic modeling
studies. Developments in geological computing and the numerical
processing power of reservoir simulation platforms significantly
improved the quality of the Brent Field static and dynamic mod-
els. The static models have been used for a range of studies in-
cluding gas cap volumetrics and bypassed oil investigations. Their
functionality provides significant scope for target sizing as a basis
for selecting the appropriate reservoir access well technology.
Introduction
The Brent Field, located 100 miles north east of Lerwick, Shet-
land Islands ~Fig. 1! was discovered by well 211/29-1 in 1971.
With total hydrocarbons initially in place of some 3.8 MMMbbl
oil and 7.5 Tscf gas, the Brent Field ranked as one of the largest
fields in the northern North Sea. Following 20 years of produc-
tion, remaining reserves are estimated to be some 400 MMbbl oil
and 2.6 Tscf gas and in these terms the Brent Field continues to
rank as the largest field in the U.K. Sector of the North Sea.
The Brent Field is a mature asset. Facilities comprise four plat-
forms providing a total of 154 well slots. Oil export is via the
Brent systems pipeline to Sullom Voe and gas export via the
FLAGS line to St. Fergus. Production from the extensive West
Flank area commenced in 1976 and by January 1997 cumulative
production amounted to 1.6 MMMbbl oil, some 80% of antici-
pated waterflood ultimate recovery, and 3.2 Tscf gas. In order to
significantly increase ultimate recovery through field depressur-
ization, an extensive brown field redevelopment project, costing
£1.3 billion, was initiated in 1994. This is now reaching comple-
tion with depressurization commencing in 1997 and low-pressure
operation in the year 2000. This project has extended the life of
the field and increased ultimate recovery.
The redevelopment of the Brent Field involved extensive static
and dynamic reservoir modeling studies,1 which will continue to
guide reservoir management during depressurization. This paper
reviews the development of the current generation of static reser-
voir models and illustrates their use, not only as the basis for
dynamic studies but also in delineating areas of bypassed oil and
monitoring gas cap volumetrics.
Geological Summary
The Brent Field is a north–south oriented, westerly dipping fault
block about 10.633.1 miles in size, located within the central part
of a fault terrace on the western margin of the Viking Graben
~Fig. 1!. The terrace can be traced over some 40 miles from the
North Alwyn Field in the south to the Statfjord Field in the north.
Copyright © 1999 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 54700) was revised for publication from paper SPE 38472, first presented
at the 1997 SPE Offshore Europe Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland, 9–12 September.
Original manuscript received for review 10 September 1997. Revised manuscript received
1 October 1998. Paper peer approved 9 November 1998.
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng. 2 ~1!, February 1999 1094-6470/99/2~1!/104/8/$3.5010.15
It is some 12 miles wide from the western boundary, the Hutton–
Dunlin–Murchison fault zone, to the eastern boundary, which is
defined by a series of faults just to the east of the crestal slump
area of the field.
The field comprises two crestally eroded reservoirs, the Upper
Triassic/Lower Jurassic Statfjord Formation and the Middle Juras-
sic Brent Group, which are separated by the nonreservoir shales of
the Lower to Middle Jurassic Dunlin Group ~Fig. 2!. The Statfjord
reservoir, which is about 1,000 ft in thickness, is composed of a
lower fluvial jigsaw/labyrinth reservoir-type2 interval ~the Eiriks-
son and Raude Members! and an upper layer-cake shoreface sand
interval ~the Nansen Member! ~Fig. 3!. The Brent reservoir, which
is about 1,000 ft in thickness, is composed of the Tarbert, Ness,
Etive, Rannoch, and Broom formations of which the Ness forma-
tion is mainly a delta plain jigsaw/labyrinth reservoir-type2 and
the others are shallow marine layer-cake and jigsaw types ~Fig. 4!.
Two different structural styles are superimposed on the Brent
Field reservoir sequence ~Fig. 2!. The gently dipping West Flank
area forms the up-dip eastern margin of the fault terrace. A series
of steeply dipping west–east faults segment the West Flank and
define the Main, Graben, and Horst Block elements of the Brent
Field and partially delimit the Brent North area, Brent South, and
Strathspey Fields ~Fig. 1, Fig. 5!. The development of the eastern
terrace margin fault system was associated with the collapse
of gravitationally unstable fault scarps and the formation of the
crestal slope degradation complexes ~which are referred to as
slumps in field terminology!. Separate slump systems formed
within the Brent Group, where the master listric faults sole out in
the Dunlin Group, and in the Statfjord formation where they sole
out in the shaly lower part of the formation ~Fig. 2!.
The combination of reservoir sequence and structural style has
resulted in the four different reservoir entities that comprise the
main Brent Field; the West Flank Statfjord, the West Flank Brent,
the Statfjord Slumps, and the Brent Slumps. A similar combina-
tion is also present in the Brent South Field and the Brent North
area.
Field Development Summary
Development of the Statfjord and Brent West Flank reservoirs
commenced in 1976. Both were developed with north–south rows
of producers, those dedicated to the Statfjord being crestally po-
sitioned and those to the Brent targeted in mid-oil column posi-
tions at the top of each of the major reservoir units ~Fig. 6!.
Pressure support for both reservoirs was provided by down-dip
water injection wells. Gas produced excess to export requirements
was reinjected into the reservoirs. This development strategy and
the highly stratified nature of both reservoirs led to the evolution
of numerous thin oil rims which, with continuing production, have
become thinner and moved upwards into the originally gas-
bearing crest of the West Flank. The future development of the
West Flank reservoirs is focused on the depressurization and low-
pressure operation.1,3
The development of the crestal Brent Slumps area was initiated
in 1994.4 The overall structural configuration of thin, north–south
oriented slump fault blocks dictated a requirement for west–east
104
 Fig. 1–Brent Field location.

oriented horizontal oil producers. Pressure support is partly ob-

tained from limited communication with the West Flank aquifer
and also provided by several parallel horizontal water injection
wells. A phased approach to this development has been instituted
so that initial reservoir behavior could be used to modify later
drilling and completion policy.
A comprehensive development plan for the Statfjord Slumps
has not yet been implemented, due to uncertainty in communica-
tion both internally and with the West Flank. Future development
will be contingent upon encouraging production results from ex-
isting Statfjord Slump well completions.

Static and Dynamic Modeling

The foundation of the Brent Field redevelopment has been pro-
vided by extensive static and dynamic modeling studies. The
models in use today are far more advanced than the first full-field
simulation model ~FFSM! of the Brent Field. This reflects the
concurrent developments that have since taken place in geophys-
ical and geological computing and the numerical processing
power of simulation program platforms. These tools have not only
allowed studies to progress more quickly but have also signifi-
Fig. 3–Statfjord reservoir-type log and subdivision.
cantly improved the detail, and hence reality, that can be incorpo-
rated in the models. The successively improved history matches
that have been obtained from this process provide the credibility
which is critical in using static and dynamic modeling to address
specific questions which influence investment decisions and res-
ervoir management policy.
Up until 1986, technological restrictions due to the shear size
of the Brent Field had prevented anything other than simulation of
sector models. Three generations of Brent Field FFSM have now
been, or are in the process of being developed.

The First Generation. The objective of the first FFSM, built

Fig. 2–Brent Field reservoir west–east cross section.
between 1986 and 1988, was to determine the distribution of re-
maining reserves and to define an optimal future development
plan. It proved to be an invaluable tool in managing the field and
was used for the preparation of the depressurization development
plan. The technology with which this FFSM was built, however,
did not utilize separate static and dynamic models with an inter-
vening upscaling step. Geological and petrophysical data were
mapped at the scale of the dynamic model. The static model was

S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 105
 Fig. 5–Top Brent reservoir structure map.

Fig. 4–Brent reservoir-type log and subdivision.

used extensively, fulfilling the objectives set out for it, and is
currently the only tool available for full field simulation studies of
the Brent Field.
virtual, being defined by a series of computer files generated in The Third Generation. The release, in 1995, of the Shell pro-
CPS-1 which could not be visualized or operated on as a com- prietary integrated static/upscaling/dynamic modeling system,
bined single entity. These files were imported directly to the Shell GEOCAP/REDUCE/MORES, enabled efficient cycling from the
proprietary reservoir simulation package, BOSIM, that was in use static to dynamic model in response to either primary ~new data!
at the time. As a result of this process, static model updates could or secondary ~dynamic model feedback! updates in the static
not be undertaken without a complete rebuild of the dynamic model. This approach has recently been successfully applied
model. in building the FFSM of the Brent South Field. Although the
current FFSM will continue to be used for some time, the
The Second Generation. Following the decision to redevelop GEOCAP/REDUCE/MORES system is seen as leading to the
the Brent Field it was recognized that an improved FFSM incor- third generation of Brent Field FFSM. This may not entail a com-
porating realistic crestal faulting would be required to tune and plete model rebuild but a replacement of critical areas of the ex-
manage the depressurization. This FFSM, built between 1992 and isting FFSM by segments constructed with GEOCAP/REDUCE.
1994, relied heavily on the experience gained in building the ear-
lier version but took full advantage of software developments
since 1988. Static models for each of the West Flank and Slumps
areas were constructed with the STRATAMODEL SGM ~Strati-
graphic Geocellular Modeling! package, which enabled interac-
tive manipulation of grids and reservoir attributes for the first
time. It allowed rapid real-time modifications to be made to the
model without time-consuming remapping and digitization. This
was fully exploited and separate high- and low-resolution static
models were constructed.
Links provided within SGM and by the Western Atlas
GEOLINK program created a data migration and upscaling route
to the new Shell proprietary reservoir simulation package MORES.
Updates to the static model remained difficult to implement in the
dynamic model owing to the complex and time-consuming nature
of the upscaling process. The resultant FFSM has, however, been Fig. 6–Base development plan well locations.

106 S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999
 TABLE 1– GRIDBLOCK DIMENSIONS

X (W–E) feet Y (N–S) feet

FFSM 1 500 1000

FFSM 2, crest 250 1000
FFSM 2, down dip 500 1000
SGM low res. 164 164
SGM high res. 164 164

Improving Dynamic Model Resolution. In creating the FFSMs,

progressively more geological detail was captured from the static
models. This is partly reflected in the model dimensions ~Table
1!. The first FFSM was designed with 23,000 active gridblocks
and 24 reservoir layers. The second was derived by regridding the
low resolution SGM model, resulting in 54,740 active gridblocks
and 41 reservoir layers, each with an embedded facies template
control. Progressively more geological detail was also incorpo-
rated in developing pseudorelative permeability and capillary
pressure curves. Pseudo’s were obtained for the first FFSM by Fig. 7–Facies template.
detailed two-dimensional ~2D! cross-sectional simulation of per-
meability profile class types, based on an inventory of such pro-
files at each well. In contrast, the geological and petrophysical data and common laterally continuous coal beds to define barriers
detail, captured in the geological facies templates and 2 ft-scale to vertical pressure communication, creating 16 separate layers
layering of the high-resolution SGM model, were used to dis- ~Fig. 4!. In constructing the SGM models considerable further re-
criminate some 500 separate regions of similar flow behavior for finement of this subdivision was necessary for facies mapping
which pseudo’s were automatically generated for input to the sec- purposes and the total number of layers was increased to 27.
ond FFSM. With a total of some 300 wells it was critical for data manage-
ment that the subdivision listing for each well was captured in the
Building the Static Models corporate database. These data were then used to create the SGM
The static models which form the basis for the current FFSM were well models and provided the interval specifications for routine
the end product of an extensive seismic, geological, and petro- petrophysical averaging.
physical review of the West Flank and Slumps areas. This review The reservoir geological review involved an extensive study of
built on and unified the extensive amount of work that had been Brent Field geological core descriptions ~Statfjord 10, Brent 13!
undertaken since the field was discovered in 1971. The experience which were then used to discriminate facies types in uncored
gained from building and using the first-generation FFSM was wells based on their wireline log response. Using these data the
also extremely valuable in focusing on critical areas, particularly facies distribution within each reservoir subdivision was mapped
capturing geological detail and improving the modeling of the manually, thereby introducing an interpretative element based on
crestal West Flank and Slumps area. Overall, the project took four sedimentological knowledge, and used to create a digital facies
professional staff, comprising production and reservoir geologists template ~Fig. 7!.
and a petrophysicist, some 10 man years to complete.
Structural Mapping. The three-dimensional ~3D! seismic sur-
Separate models were built for each of the West Flank and
vey that had been acquired over the field in 1986 was reprocessed
Slumps areas. An areal gridblock size of 164364 ft was used
in 1989 and reinterpreted as the starting point for the remapping
throughout, but a high resolution model with an average gridblock
of the field. For modeling purposes the West Flank and Slumps
thickness of 2 ft, and a low-resolution model with a gridblock
areas were mapped separately using the CPS-3 computer mapping
thickness equal that of the reservoir subdivision, was constructed
package to create depth surfaces.
for each of the West Flank reservoirs. Single models with a grid-
Depth surfaces for each of the West Flank reservoir subdivi-
block thickness of 10 ft were constructed for each of the Brent and
sions were created using seismic maps for the base Brent and top
Statfjord Slumps areas.
Statfjord horizons and reservoir subdivision isochore maps. Addi-
Reservoir Subdivision and Geology. The Statfjord reservoir
was initially subdivided into eight layers, the boundaries being
defined by shale beds forming vertical permeability barriers ~Fig.
3!. Reliable correlation is difficult in fluvial sequences but field
performance data indicated two of these boundaries to be of field-
wide extent and later heavy mineral studies5 provided further vali-
dation. This subdivision was further refined during the geological
review, additional layers being added to capture low net-to-gross
units, channel-dominated units and channel incision/floodplain
remnant units, increasing the total number of layers to 14.
Early in field life the five-fold regional correlation subdivision
of the Brent reservoir was found to be inadequate for field man-
agement purposes. Instead, the reservoir was subdivided into four
genetic units based on geological core description and wireline
log correlation. These were further subdivided, using pressure Fig. 8–Brent Slumps SGM model; W–E cross section.

S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 107
 Fig. 9–Net to gross. Fig. 11–Horizontal permeability „mD….

tional depth surfaces for crestal unconformities, West Flank faults
and the main slump faults were also created. SGM functionality
enabled 3D visualization of these depth surfaces, both individu-
ally and in groups, and was critical in establishing a rigorous error
identification and correction process.
The Slumps models were defined by depth surfaces derived
directly from seismic interpretation and comprised the main slump
fault, an intermediate slump fault, and an unconformity surface
forming the upper limit of the slump envelope. Development of a
representative model of the Brent Slumps was critical since the
inadequate history match for this area in the first FFSM had been
attributed mainly to structural over-simplification. Although the
reprocessed seismic provided improved imaging of the crestal
slump faults, sparse well control prevented a truly realistic model
from being constructed. A combination of CPS-3 and SGM function-
ality overcame this problem. Depth surfaces copied from the main
slump fault and pseudowells, defining reservoir subdivision depth
surfaces, were used to create a schematic model that honored the
observed 400 ft spacing of the downthrown to the east slump
faults, the north–south slump block extent of about 6,000 ft, and
the progressive increase in slump fault block dip from west to east
~Fig. 8!. This approach was validated with balanced cross-section
work.4
Petrophysics. In order to improve the overall reservoir descrip-
tion the calculation of petrophysical properties was completely
revised. A more rigorous approach to porosity calculation was
implemented which overcame problems due to uncertainty in res-
ervoir fluid density. A multivariate neural network methodology
to estimate horizontal permeability was developed using the com-
mercial AIM package. A saturation height function dependent on
both porosity and permeability was also developed. These data
were stored in 0.5 ft increments.
The Final Models. Input to all the SGM models comprised depth
surfaces, well models, petrophysical data, and facies templates.
The depth surfaces together formed the stratigraphic framework
model, delimiting the boundaries of each reservoir subzone. The
well models and petrophysical data were imported into this frame-

TABLE 2– SGM MODEL ATTRIBUTE LIST „PARTIAL…

Wireline numerical data GR, DEN, NEU, DT

Measured petrophysical Net to Gross

properties Porosity
Horizontal permeability

Other Well code

Facies template code
Shale bed count
Subdivision code

Calculated within SGM Original fluid contacts

Saturation height function
PVT properties
Effective vertical permeability
Net thickness averaged
porosity
Net thickness averaged
permeability
Interlayer communication
Fig. 10–Porosity „fractional….

108 S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999
 Fig. 12–High-resolution SGM model; north–south cross section with net-to-gross attribute „red51.0, blue50.0….
work, the petrophysical data being automatically averaged over
the thickness of each gridblock. The framework models were
populated with data by the creation of an attribute model.
Within the high-resolution SGM model each reservoir subdivi-
sion was automatically divided into gridblocks 2 ft thick. Creation
of the attribute model involved the deterministic interpolation of
petrophysical data between wells, using a distance weighted
method. This interpolation was controlled by the facies templates
to ensure that geological variation in the reservoir layers was hon-
ored ~Figs. 9–11!. Additional attributes were subsequently gener-
ated from petrophysical and other data already resident in the
models using the powerful SGM calculation functionality ~Table
2!. This was of particular value in calculating effective vertical
permeability using the Begg–King6 approach. The West Flank
Statfjord and Brent ~Fig. 12! models built in this way each con-
tained 24 million gridblocks.
The same basic input data were used to create the low-
resolution SGM models. Upscaling was achieved by averaging at-
tributes within the high-resolution model and exporting them to
the low. Communication between reservoir layers in the low-
resolution model was established by a binary code derived from
the net sand and permeability of the lowermost gridblock layer in
each reservoir subdivision of the high-resolution model. The final
West Flank Statfjord model contained 1.5 million gridblocks and
the Brent model ~Fig. 13! 2.5 million.
The stratigraphic framework models of the Slump reservoirs
utilized only depth surfaces and pseudowell models. In the ab-
sence of representative well data reservoir subdivision average
properties from nearby West Flank wells were used to generate
the attribute models.
Ongoing and Future Developments
The SGM static models were a vast improvement over their prede-
cessor but the reservoir subdivision facies data were compressed
into a 2D template. This was applied equally to each of the sub-
division gridblock layers, consequently, losing most of the vertical
S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir
component of the facies distribution. The GEOCAP package7
overcomes this problem, enabling the creation of realistic 3D bod-
ies at the subdivision-scale using interactive wireline log correla-
tion and geometry modeling functionality. The individual building
blocks of the resultant model are used to control the distribution
of facies-specific petrophysical properties.
A FFSM of the Brent South Field has now been successfully
completed using GEOCAP modeling and the REDUCE/MORES
package. The Brent South results have given significant confi-
dence in this methodology as an alternative to SGM, and GEO-
CAP modeling work is now proceeding: Preliminary GEOCAP
models of the West Flank Statfjord and Brent reservoirs have been
constructed. With the acquisition of a new seismic survey in 1995
and horizontal well data from the Slumps areas it is now feasible
to build GEOCAP models with realistic fault patterns.
Some 65% of remaining oil recovery is estimated to come from
the West Flank reservoirs and 35% from the Slumps areas. Con-
struction of models which are valid with respect to both reservoir
architecture and structure for simulation and well planning pur-
poses is thus extremely important for safeguarding these reserves.
Static Model Applications
The SGM package has proven immensely valuable, not only in
terms of static model construction but also in its ability to quickly
apply complicated logical expressions to extremely large data ar-
rays. This has been particularly useful in evaluating in place hy-
drocarbon volumes where objective assessments of the impact of
reservoir quality parameters are required. The high resolution
SGM models have thus provided a continuing resource for a va-
riety of independent reservoir and volumetric studies. This has
recently been augmented by the GEOCAP package which has
similar computational functionality.
Gas Cap Volumetrics. Optimization of gas ultimate recovery
during field depressurization is crucial to achieving the goals of
the Brent Field redevelopment. Monitoring gas cap evolution and
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 109
 Fig. 13–Low-resolution SGM model; north–south cross section with net-to-gross attribute „red51.0, blue50.0….

gas cap volumetrics in the years immediately prior to the start of, The high-resolution SGM models were used extensively, pro-
and during, depressurization provides important input to ensuring viding a comprehensive reservoir description which could be
that this objective is met. A gas cap volumetrics study is carried screened against trapping geometry concepts8 to enable prospect
out each year and the results are used as an independent check of identification. Some 32 accumulations of potentially bypassed oil
the FFSM predictions and as input to gas nomination decisions. were identified in this way, and SGM was used to estimate oil
The raw input is provided by routine gas oil contact ~GOC! in-place volumes for each, as a ranking criteria to focus further
surveillance data. This includes direct measurement in open hole work. This work was used to drive a dedicated LTRO activity
with density/neutron wireline logs, in cased hole with the Schlum- campaign during which 16 wells and 8 workovers accessed a total
berger reservoir saturation tool ~RST! or production logging tools, of 48 MMbbl oil reserves.
and from indirect measurements such as the GOR behavior of
individual wells. Since the Brent Field reservoir subdivisions be-
have as independent hydraulic units, these data are used to define
a present GOC for each.
The number of surveillance data available for any one subdivi-
sion is usually small and may cover a significant depth range. The
resultant uncertainty is accommodated by defining a shallow, me-
dium, and deep present GOC value for each reservoir subdivision.
Areal variations, such as between the Main, Graben, and Horst
Blocks, for example, are accommodated by assigning the GOC
values an areal extent. These constants are used in SGM to calcu-
late individual gas cap volumes using the high-resolution SGM
static models. This process inevitably involves many iterations
before a final set of figures, which are in line with production data,
are agreed. The iteration phase is facilitated by the processing
power of the SGM package. Anomalous results can be readily
reviewed against the visualized reservoir properties of the
reduced/increased volume occupied by the present gas cap.

Locate the Remaining Oil „LTRO…. The well spacing and up-
ward recompletion policy used in developing the West Flank re-
serves has resulted in scope for oil to remain in up-dip locations or
to be bypassed as the flood front encounters trapping geometries
in interwell areas. A variety of different geometries resulting in
suboptimal drainage have been found within the Brent Field res-
ervoirs and involve stratigraphic, structural, and sedimentological
elements. Fig. 14–Reservoir architecture classification „Ref. 2….

110 S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999
 The majority of bypassed oil prospects identified with this
methodology involved structural and/or stratigraphic trapping
components; a minority involved a sedimentological control. Both
the Statfjord and Brent reservoirs include significant proportions
of jigsaw and labyrinth reservoir types2 ~Fig. 14!, which are very
difficult to capture accurately with the SGM modeling concept.
This has since been revisited using the West Flank Brent reservoir
GEOCAP model. The application of a permeability clustering
technique has led to the identification of significant volumes of
apparently bypassed oil associated with sedimentological trapping
within the Ness Formation.9 These are currently being further
evaluated against well surveillance data prior to a further round of
infill drilling and workover activity.
Target Sizing. As the redevelopment of the Brent Field pro-
ceeds, the infill targets required to drain the last oil will become
progressively smaller. The economics of the drilling activity are
such that the reserves of many of these smaller targets could not
be drilled using the platform main rig. A range of comparatively
new well engineering techniques that provide much cheaper ac-
cess to the reservoir from a nearby mother well are now available
and are being applied in the Brent Field. Two horizontal coiled
tubing ~CT! sidetrack wells, BD38S1 and BD46S1, both with a
total along hole length of around 1600 ft, have now been success-
fully drilled to access Statfjord reservoir reserves. Detailed plan-
ning of inclined and horizontal through-tubing sidetrack wells has
been undertaken and will be used to access reservoir targets re-
quiring a greater displacement. Through-tubing workover activity
has always been used in the Brent Field for upward recomple-
tions. This will continue to be used as before and also to access
very low volumes and for selective completions to prevent or
reduce bypassing.8 Since early 1997 much of this work has been
performed under live well conditions using a snubbing or hydrau-
lic workover unit, thereby reducing deferment10 and improving
activity economics.
In order to define well engineering requirements it is very im-
portant that targets are accurately sized, both in terms of recover-
able volumes and in reservoir penetration, so that the appropriate
access technique can be selected. Reservoir modeling technology,
such as provided in SGM or GEOCAP,7 provides the functionality to
rigorously evaluate the full range of in-place fluid volumes based
on the distribution of modeled reservoir properties. This approach
was followed in designing well BD38S1. While this type of work
can be undertaken using models such as the SGM high-resolution
static models, it is preferable to use a subset in which more geo-
logical detail can been incorporated. Various realizations of such
models can then provide the basis for designing an optimum well
path.
Conclusions
Brent Field depressurization began in early 1997 and will con-
tinue until 2000, increasing ultimate oil and gas recovery from the
West Flank Statfjord and Brent reservoirs. Field life will be ex-
tended, increasing the ultimate recovery from the Slumps areas
and the Brent South Field. The current generation of static reser-
voir models has provided the basis for the full-field simulation
model that will be used to manage the field during depressuriza-
S.J. James: Brent Field Reservoir
tion. The static models have also been used extensively in volu-
metric assessments of gas cap size and in bypassed oil studies.
The currently available combination of static/dynamic reservoir
modeling and subsurface access technology comes at a critical
time in the overall development of the Brent Field and faces pe-
troleum and well engineers with a vast challenge to use it to
realize the remaining reserves of the field.
Acknowledgments
Shell U.K. Exploration and Production and Esso Exploration and
Production, U.K. are thanked for their permission to publish this
paper. The modeling work was undertaken over several years by
John Whitworth, Aaron Hildebrandt, Alex Wetzelaer, Cato Berge,
Thomas Kuud, Ap van der Graaf, and Colin Bruce.
References
1. Schulte, W.M. et al.: ‘‘Current Challenges in the Brent Field,’’ J. Pet.
Technol. December, 46 ~1994!.
2. Weber, K.J. et al.: ‘‘Framework for Constructing Clastic Reservoir
Simulation Models,’’ J. Pet. Technol. October, 42 ~1990!.
3. Braithwaite, C.I.M. et al.: ‘‘Transforming the Future of the Brent
Field: Depressurisation—The Next Development Phase,’’ Presented
at Europec Cannes, France, November 1992.
4. Coutts, S.D. et al.: ‘‘Development of the Slumped Crestal Area of the
Brent Reservoir, Brent Field: An Integrated Approach,’’ Petroleum
Geosci. August, 2 ~1996!.
5. Morton, A.C. et al.: ‘‘Heavy Mineral Suites in the Statfjord and
Nansen Formations of the Brent Field, North Sea: A New Tool for
Reservoir Subdivision and Correlation,’’ Petroleum Geosci. Novem-
ber, 1 ~1995!.
6. Begg, S.H. et al.: ‘‘Modeling the Effects of Shales on Reservoir Per-
formance: Calculation of Effective Vertical Permeability,’’ SPE Pa-
per No. 13529, Presented at the SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simu-
lation held in Dallas, 10–13 February 1985.
7. Taylor, S.R.: ‘‘3D Modeling to Optimise Production of the Succes-
sive Stages of Field Life,’’ SPE Form. Eval. December, 11 ~1996!.
8. Wetzelaer, A.: ‘‘Locating the Remaining Oil in the Brent Field Prior
to Depressurisation,’’ Presented at Europec Milan, September 1996.
9. Abbots, F.V.: ‘‘Using 3D Geological Modelling and Connectivity
Analysis to Evaluate Remaining Oil in the Brent Reservoir of the
Mature Brent Field,’’ paper SPE 38473, Presented at Offshore Europe
Conference 97, September 9–10 1997.
10. Sas-Jaworsky, A.: ‘‘Live-well Intervention: State of the Art,’’ J. Pet.
Technol. February, 49 ~1997!.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
bbl 3 1.589 873 E201 5 m3
ft 3 3.048 E201 5 m
mile 3 1.609 344 E100 5 km
SPEREE
Stephen J. James is a senior development geologist with BP
Amoco in Aberdeen, U.K. Previously, he was a senior produc-
tion geologist with the Brent Field Unit of Shell U.K. E&P in Ab-
erdeen, and he has held various production and reservoir ge-
ology positions in The Netherlands, Nigeria, and the U.K. He
holds a BS degree in geology from U. College London, and a
PhD degree in sedimentology from the U. of Aston in Birming-
ham.
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 111