Automation in Oilfield Production Operations

Abstract

Distinguished Author Series articles are general, descriptive representations that summarize the state of the art in an area of technology by describing recent developments for readers who are not specialists in the topics discussed. Written by individuals recognized as experts in the area, these articles provide key references to more definitive work and present specific details only to illustrate the technology. Purpose: to informthe general readership of recent advances in various areas of petroleum engineering. Introduction The great variety and complexity of oil field operations makes it difficult to define what a paper such as this should cover. Certainly, the automation ofa two- or three-well lease in west Texas is nothing like that of a 20- to 30- well platform in the North Sea, with its attendant power generation, heating, ventilating, and other life support systems. Although this paper covers all production systems, it does not include technical details and stresses the more directly related oil-producing systems rather than the support systems. To automate simply means to use equipment which is self-operating to replace low-level or repetitive human tasks. Since oil andgas production is a process, the control of this is often called "process process, the control of this is often called "process control." In its highest form, an oil field automation system is often called a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. In this paper I use the term 'automation" torefer to all of these. Why Automate? In the 1950's, proposals for oilfield automation often were accompanied by elaborate studies and other justifications to convince skeptical managers that spending hard cash for automation projects would really "pay out." This was difficult because there was very little documented evidence that these conceptsreally would be economic. However, as projects were implemented and became operational, it became obvious that well-planned and -executed systems were, indeed, cost effective. The first, and main, justification for oilfieldautomation was the increase in productivity resulting from either doing the same jobs with fewer people or more jobs with the same number of people. This was because early projects (and many current ones) concentrated on designing systems to duplicate current human activities. However, there came an increasing realization that automation could not only duplicate these activities but in many cases could do a better job than could be done manually. Thus increased efficiency and process optimization became important justifications for automation. Offshore Gulf of Mexico leases distinctly benefited from automation because of their particular environment and operatingmode. Many gulf platforms are manned continuously but are evacuated when ahurricane approaches. Many automation projects were justified because of theirability to decrease or eliminate the production lost when manually operated platforms were shut down during an evacuation. platforms were shut down duringan evacuation. Automated platforms proved capable of staying on production muchlonger, showing dramatic, verifiable production much longer, showing dramatic, verifiable savings. Perspective Within Industry Perspective Within Industry Oil production automation techniques tend to lag behind their implementation in other process industries by several years. JPT p. 1239