Lecture 14

Alpha Beta

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Objectives & Relevance

• Objective:
Introduce the types of considerations
necessary to get a prospect ready for
management approval

• Relevance:
Demonstrate some the tasks that go into
determining the size of the ‘prize’ and the
risk associated with a prospect

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Overview of Prospect Analysis

Given the geologic framework and the results of our data

analysis, our next task is to analyze and assess viable
prospects:
• Analyze prospect elements
• Source, Migration, Reservoir, Trap, Seal
• Consider the most-likely scenario
• Consider other cases - the range of possibilities
• Assess the prospect
• What volumes of HCs can we expect?
• Will it be oil or gas?
• Risk the Prospect
• What is our level of confidence that all the prospect elements
work?

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Outline

1. Define prospect elements

}
2. Estimating trap volume
3. HC Type
4. Assessment
5. Risk

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Outline

1. Define prospect elements

2. Estimating trap volume Correctly
Placed

3. HC Type Wells

4. Assessment A “Container”
From Which
5. Risk “Plumbing” To Connect
the Container to the Kitchen
Oil & Gas
Can Be
Produced

A “Kitchen”
Where Organic
Material Is
Cooked

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

A Real HC System
Draupne Shale
organic rich
serves as a source rock

Heather Shale
Sognefjord Shale
both organic poor

Oil
Spill
Facies
Point Change
Fault
Leak
Point

HC Generation & Expulsion

Brent Sandstone
acts as a reservoir
Courtesy of ExxonMobil
oil & gas from the Draupne, gas from coals in the Brent
HC Migration
into Brent carrier beds and up faults
HC Fill & Spill
late gas displaces early oil
FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Most-Likely Scenario

Alpha Beta

Sea Water

Oil Overburden
Fill & Spill
Seal

Reservoir
Oil
Migration
Source

Basement

Oil
Generation 18 Ma

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Most-Likely Scenario

Alpha Beta

Sea Water

Overburden
Oil
Migration Seal

Reservoir
Oil
Migration
Source

Basement

10 Ma
Oil
Generation

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Most-Likely Scenario

Alpha Beta

Sea Water

Overburden
Oil
Migration Seal

Reservoir
Oil & Gas
Migration
Source

Basement

Oil
Generation Present
Gas
Generation
Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Most-Likely Scenario

Alpha Beta

Oil

Oil

18 Ma
Map of the Reservoir Unit
Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Most-Likely Scenario

Alpha Beta

Oil
Oil

10 Ma
Map of the Reservoir Unit

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Most-Likely Scenario

Alpha Beta

Gas

Oil Oil

Present
Map of the Reservoir Unit

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Exploration’s Task

Identify
Opportunities Capture
Prime Areas
Acquire
Seismic Data Drill
Process Wildcats
Seismic Data
Interpret
Failure Success
Seismic Data
Assess Confirmation
Prospects Well

1. Volume
Uneconomic Success
2. HC Type
3. Assessment To EMDC
Drop
4. Risk Area or EMPC
Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Outline

1. Define prospect elements

2. Estimating trap volumes
3. HC Type
4. Assessment
5. Risk

Let’s start an exercise

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Exercise 12 – Parts 1 - 6

We will do some quick estimates using a

series of simplifying assumptions

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Consider This ….

Let’s say our trap in

cross-section view
looks like this….

How can we get a

rough estimate of Height 1
the cross-sectional Height 2

area? Base 2

Base 1

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

From Area to Volume

Alpha Beta
Volume of a Cone = 1/3 Π r2 *h

r r

Consider the trap to be

approximately ½ a cone

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Outline

1. Define prospect elements

2. Estimating trap volumes
3. HC Type
4. Assessment
5. Risk

• DHI Analysis
• AVO Analysis
• HC Systems Analysis

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Oil or Gas???

• Should there be a difference in seismic

response (AVO) between an oil-filled

Quantitative
reservoir and a gas-filled reservoir?
– Model response with different rock & fluid
properties

• If there should be a difference, which fluid

type does the seismic data support?
– Extract amplitudes from near- and far-angle
stacks

• From our basin modeling & HC systems

Qualitative
analysis, which fluid type should we expect
– What did the source generate
– What did the trap leak or spill

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Model Seismic Responses - Input

10% 20% 30%

Porosity Porosity Porosity

Gas

Oil

Brine

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Model Seismic Responses - Output

10% Porosity 20% Porosity 30% Porosity

Offset Offset Offset

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Model Seismic Responses - Output

AVO Crossplot
0.4 Gas
Oil
10%
Brine
0.2 Shale

20%
Slope

0.0

30%
-0.2

-0.4
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Intercept

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Questions???

Many times the seismic data

will give us clues!

• How can we verify this scenario?

• To what level are the traps filled with oil & gas?
• What would be the value ($) if our scenario is correct?
• How much more/less HC could there be?
• How risky is this prospect (chance that we are totally
wrong)?
Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Seismic Line Across ‘Alpha’

Alpha

Fluid Contact?
Gas over Oil?

Fluid Contact?
Oil over Water?

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Outline

1. Define prospect elements

2. Estimating trap volumes
3. HC Type
4. Assessment
5. Risk

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Types of Assessments
Once a lead has been high-graded into a prospect,
we have to assess its potential value

• Deterministic Assessment
– One value for each parameter
– One final number, e.g., 200 MBO
• Probabilistic Assessment
– A range of values for each parameter
– A range of outcomes, e.g. 200 ± 50 MBO

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Scenarios & Probabilities

Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Alpha Alpha

Gas Cap & Oil Leg Gas Only

40% Chance of Occurrence 20% Chance of Occurrence

Scenario 3 Scenario 4
Alpha Alpha

Oil Only Low Gas Saturation

30% Chance of Occurrence 10% Chance of Occurrence

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Deterministic Prospect Assessment

To Assess a Prospect, We Assign Numbers

to the Parameters related to HC Volumes
ESTIMATES Alpha Beta
1. Gross Rock 2.91 km3 2.12 km3
In our exercise, Volume
2. Reservoir 1.02 km3 0.66 km3
we have assumed Volume

the all oil case 3. Pore Volume 0.25 km3 0.15 km3

(Scenario 3) 4. In-Place 0.20 km3 0.12 km3

Volume
5. In-Place – 1280 MBO 735 MBO
Barrels
6. EUR – 288 MBO 132 MBO
Unrisked
7. EUR – Risked MBO MBO

Unrisked means everything in the HC System has worked!

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Alpha Prospect Assessment Results

Oil Gas Oil-Equivalent

Million Barrels Oil Billion Cubic Ft Gas Million Oil Equivalent Barrels

Scenario 1 162 MBO 97 GCF 178 MOEB

Oil & Gas 6 GCF = 1 MBO

Scenario 2 0 MBO 515 GCF 86 MOEB

Gas Only Uneconomic
Scenario 3 288 MBO 0 GCF 288 MOEB
Oil Only

Scenario 4 0 MBO 0 GCF 0 MOEB

Low Gas Saturation
Uneconomic
Assuming 100 MOEB is needed to make prospect economic

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Probabilistic Assessment

• The Goal is to Get A Number and a Range of

Possible Outcomes
• We Input a Range of Values for Each
Assessment Parameter
– usually minimum, most-likely, maximum
Area Thickness Net:Gross Porosity

Min ML Max

12 20 27

HC Sat. FVF Recovery

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Unrisked Results

Alpha Prospect – Unrisked

100%
Excedance Probability

100
80%

60% Economic Minimum

40%

20%

0%

0 100 200 300 400

Million Barrels of Oil

50% Chance of finding 200 MBO or more

75% Chance of finding the economic minimum

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Outline

1. Define prospect elements

2. Estimating trap volumes
3. HC Type
4. Assessment
5. Risk

25% Risk

75% Chance of Success

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

9 Key Elements of the HC System

Source Reservoir Trap

Quality Presence Quality

Source Reservoir Seal

Maturation Quality Adequacy

HC Biodegra- Not Low Gas

Migration dation Saturation

• A team of experts consider these key elements for each prospect.

• They rate the chance of success (COS) for each on a scale of 0 to 1

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

COS for Alpha

• Alpha’s biggest risk is that the fault does not seal.

• There is also some risk that the trap holds low gas
saturation and that reservoir quality is poor

• Reservoir Presence - - - - 1.0 Some Risk

• Reservoir Quality - - - - 0.85

• Trap Quality - - - - 1.0 chance of success

• Seal Adequacy - - - - 0.8 (COS)

• Source Quality - - - - 1.0 0.61

• Source Maturation - - - - 1.0
Highest Risk
• HC Migration - - - - 1.0
• Not Low Gas Saturation - 0.9
• Biodegradation - - - - 1.0 Some Risk

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis

Risked Probabilistic Assessment Results

Alpha Prospect – Main Compartment - Risked

1.0
100
0.8
Gas Only
61 % COS
Economic Minimum

0.6 Gas Cap & Oil Leg

51 % Chance of
Finding More
0.4
Than the
Oil Only Economic
0.2 Minimum

0.0

0 100 200 300 400 500

Million Oil Equivalent Barrels

72% Chance to find any hydrocarbons

58% Chance to find 100 MBOE
5% Chance to find 400 MBOE
Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis
Exercise 14 – Part 7

In the exercise we will use

• A COS of 61%
• An economic minimum of 100 MBOE

Courtesy of ExxonMobil FWS 2005 L14 – Prospect Analysis