Offshore Forum Programme 2015

Transcription

1 Offshore Forum Programme Welcome Søren Juel Hansen, Energinet.dk Gas quality and the prospects of on/offshore optimisation Jesper Bruun, Energinet.dk Gas quality and potential gas treatment at Nybro Peter Schroll Christiansen, DONG Energy A/S Study on offshore electrification in Norway Morten Mønster, KPMG P/S Electrification of the North Sea production Bjarne Brendstrup, Energinet.dk Norwegian experience with electrification in practice Asmund Maland, ABB Norway Norwegian tie-in by 2020 Jess B. Jensen, Energinet.dk Baltic Pipe by 2022 Søren Juel Hansen, Energinet.dk What measure of flexibility can onshore gas storage facilities offer? Hans-Åge Nielsen, Energinet.dk Gas Storage Optimisation through technology Bo Cerup-Simonsen, Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU End of programme 1

2 2nd annual Offshore Forum Maximising Off-Onshore Optimisation 1 September

3 About Energinet.dk Energinet.dk 3

4 About Energinet.dk Energinet.dk 4

5 Electricity grid Energinet.dk 5

6 Gas grid Energinet.dk 6

7 In dialogue with all parts of the value chain Offshore Forum Focus on recovery maximisation North Sea Producers System Operators Stakeholders Authorities Shippers Forum Focus on whole sale gas market function Shippers Gas Suppliers Authorities and interest organisations Retail Market Focus on retail gas market function Distribution companies Interest organisations Authorities Industri Forum Focus on large consumers Industry users Large consumers Authorities and interest organisations Grøn Gas Forum (Green Gas Forum) Focus on making gas part of a more renewable Danish energy future Biogas producers Certificate holders Gas suppliers and distribution companies Authorities and interest organisations 7

8 Energinet.dk 8

9 E.g. security of supply following from a Norwegian North Sea tie-in? Energinet.dk 9

10 E.g. energy efficency following from North Sea electrification? Energinet.dk 10

11 E.g. a sound investment climate for maximising Danish North Sea production? Energinet.dk 11

12 Large-scale investments - stable tariff Energinet.dk 12

13 Read more at energinet.dk Energinet.dk 13

14 Focus of Today Maximising Off-Onshore Optimisation 14

15 Focus of Today Gas Quality Optimisation what are the perspectives? Treatment can potentially be cheaper onshore Blending can potentially remove cost barriers Offshore Electrification is there a business case for it? Increase efficiency Provide more sale gas Future Perspectives for Off-Onshore Optimisation Prospects for a potential Norwegian tie-in and a Baltic Pipe? Gas storage flexibility Optimisation through technology 15

16 Gas quality and the prospects of on/offshore optimisation 1 September 2015 Jesper Bruun, JBR 16

17 Agenda Back Ground Gas Quality Data Method New Fields Results Summary and Perspectives 17

18 Back Ground Earlier study for Maersk about the possibility of using Energinet.dk s compressors on shore to lower the pressure in the off shore pipelines Energinet.dk presented the results at Offshore forum May 2014 In phase 2 the mixing of gas quality have been studied Focus on new and marginal fields Link: OS/Konferencer/Sider/Off-shore-forum.aspx 18

19 Gas Infrastructure Source: Oil and Gas Production in Denmark 2013 Dato - Dok.nr. 19

20 Gas quality Focus on: Wobbe index (Safe use and operation at end consumers) CO2 (Integrity of infrastructure) H2S (Integrity of infrastructure) Relative density (Safe use and operation at end consumers) Assumption: limits as today (lower limit of wobbe at 13.9 kwh/nm3 for WI at Ellund Border for north bound flow). Component/ parameter Type of limit value unit value unit H2S max 5 mg/nm3 WI min MJ/Nm kwh/nm3 max 55.8 MJ/Nm kwh/nm3 RD min max 0.7 CO2 max 2.5 mole-% 20

21 Data Data from Wood Mackenzie/KPMG for expected production divided by fields for Danish off shore sector Period to 2023 with data on yearly basis. Gas quality: Historical data used for fields producing today For new and potential fields: Data book Own estimates 21

22 Method Model primarily based on flow scenario In the off shore infrastructure Modelling of the mixing of gas quality from all fields connected to DK via Tyra or Syd Arne pipelines. Assumption om at all amounts is delivered to DK. Yearly amounts for fields from data from producing fields. Gas quality can be chosen for each fields and can manually be altered the year. 22

23 Example on key issues High CO2 from e.g. the fields Luke and Elly High wobbe index in the fields in the sector most north close to Syd Arne. These fields will not be able to produce gas of sales gas quality without gas treatment or mixing. Source: Oil and Gas Production in Denmark 2013 Perspectives in the gas quality mixing. 23

24 Assumption Gas qualities Production for Luke and Elly moved back in time (from 2024 to 2020) The amount of associated gas for selected fields have been assumed to follow other fields In general gas is assumed to be delivered in the period of the analysis (optimistic). Example on a profile 24

25 Modelling of new fields Examples of background data and production profile Calculation and assumptions in orange New Fields Production split in percent Technical Technical Expected Depth to reserves production sea bed Reservoir sales gas reserves sales start (m) depth (m) (MMBOE) gas (Nm3) Field Solsort % 20% 20% 20% 10% 10% Svane* ,985,814,880 0% 0% 0% 0% Broder Tuck ,545,035,208 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% Hibonite ,716,298 20% 20% 20% 20% 10% 10% Lille John % 20% 20% 20% 20% Rau* % 0% 25% 25% Amalie ,077,730,381 0% 0% 0% 0% Elly* ,895,744,464 25% 25% 25% 25% Gita* ,492,907,440 0% 0% 0% 0% Luke* ,246,453,720 25% 25% 25% 25% Source: Wood Mackenzie/KPMG 25

26 Visualisation of key issues High CO2 content 26

27 Colour coding for the graphs Tyra pipe quality 27

28 Example of results 28

29 Perspectives Sensitivity analysis Different scenarios More and better data Gas quality data especially of off spec. gas Gas compositions Hydro carbon dew points Contaminations Operational aspects Peak values will to some extend be handled operational Possibilities of gas treatment at Nybro Gas Treatment Plant Amounts from Trym (Norwegian Sector) 29

30 Summary Positive synergies in solving key gas quality issues in the gas infrastructure Possible cost reduction due to less need for gas treatment Increased potential for development and production from marginal fields that may not be developed otherwise. Limitations Gas may not be delivered to the Danish market change mixing capacity Peak values and fluctuations not studied 30

31 Offshore Forum Gas Quality and Potential Gas Treatment at Nybro 1 September 2015 Peter Schroll Christiansen

32 Gas Quality and Potential Gas Treatment at Nybro DONG Energy s Gas/Oil Transportation Systems Gas export to market Lulita Trym Hejre Harald South-Arne Tyra East Tyra West Crude Oil Pipe Nybro gas treatment plant Fredericia Oil terminal and LPG fragmentation plant Oil and LPG export to market Aerial view of Nybro Gas Treatment Plant F3 DONG Energy s Gas Transportation System Gas Pipeline to be used in an Emergency Supply Situation Gas export platform Sub-sea tie-in to gas export platform 32

33 Gas Quality and Potential Gas Treatment at Nybro Mission: Mission, Vision and Strategy to provide cost efficient gas transportation and gas treatment from producing gas fields in the North Sea to the market. Vision: to support development of oil and gas reserves in the Danish sector and adjacent areas. Strategy: to attract tie-in of new gas fields to the upstream transportation system in order to keep unit costs modest. to provide gas treatment services at Nybro (either as back-up to offshore treatment or on a continuous basis) at competitive costs compared with similar costs offshore Pipelines: Available Assets i. Plenty of surplus transportation capacity ii. Nybro: Flexible tie-in options (either sub-sea or at existing platforms) Back-up gas treatment capacity on an intermittent basis: i. Hydrocarbon dew point adjustment ii. iii. iv. by means of cooling in a chiller system with subsequent incineration of extracted NGL s H 2 S cleaning by means of absorption by an amine with subsequent incineration of H 2 S CO 2 cleaning by means of absorption by an amine with subsequent emission to atmosphere Water dew point adjustment by means of absorption by glykol 33

34 Gas Quality and Potential Gas Treatment at Nybro Nybro: Available Assets (continued) Possible continuous gas treatment capacity: i. Hydrocarbon dew point adjustment ii. iii. requires investment in export of NGL s to the crude oil pipe for LPG fragmentation at the oil terminal in Fredericia, which has the capacity after the Hejre field gets off plateau production H 2 S cleaning requires investment in sulphur precipitation facilities CO 2 cleaning requires investment in convertion of a desulphurisation train into CO 2 cleaning Potential future continuous gas treatment capacity: i. Wobbe-index adjustment ii. requires investment in nitrogen injection facilities Other processes if demanded by the oil/gas industry Competitive advantages of Nybro gas treatment plant 1. The majority of the investments are completed and only smaller additional investments are required 2. The Nybro facilities are well preserved and has a long remaining useful life. 3. The running expenditures of operating and maintaining on-shore facilities at Nybro are considerably lower than operations off-shore. 4. The Nybro facilities have plenty of space for expansions with future gas treatment facilities. This may contribute to: A. extending the production life time of existing oil/gas fields B. the economical viability of developing new marginal oil/gas fields 34

35 Power from Shore Experiences from the Norwegian Shelf 1. September 2015

36 Key arguments for electrification of offshore platforms from shore is lower maintenance costs, better safety and lower emissions More sales gas Fewer emissions (CO2, NOx) Increased safety due to fewer ignition sources Lower maintenance costs Positive Experiences Higher utilization in energy production Better control and faster response Increased stability in the energy system - higher uptime Source: KPMG-analyse, ABB and BP 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. 36

37 The desire to lower rising CO2-emissions and a high degree of authority involvement has been the key drivers for the Norwegian offshore electrification debate 1997: Kyoto Protocol: Norway will be allowed to increase emissions by 1% by 2012 compared to : Stortinget adopts a law, which states that the operator must evaluate the possibility of electrification from shore on all field developments 2010: GDF Suez completes power from shore project on Gjøa 2000: The Bondevik government stats that it would be possible to reduce offshore emissions by 1.5 million. tonnes of CO2. The announcement has full support from Parliament 2014: Statoil starts the second phase of Troll A electrification 2015: Goliat will be partly electrified by ENI : Johan Sverdrup expected on stream with power from shore : Stortinget adopt a stabilization of emissions (at 1990 levels) by the year : ABB is awarded the first power from shore contract, which gives them the responsibility to establish a solution for the Troll A-platform 2005: Power from shore to the Troll A platform is completed 2012: ConocoPhillips deselect electrification of Ekofisk from shore 2016: Martin Linge expected electrified with TOTAL as operator. 2013: BP completes electrification of Valhall Source: Regjeringen.no, Wood Mackenzie and KPMG-analyse 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. 37

38 With the completion of power from shore to Johan Sverdrup and Utsirahøyden, 11 Norwegian installations will be partially or completely provided with power from shore Northern part of Norway Field Operator Production start Year of power from shore MW (peak) KM from shore Ormen Lange Shell Snøhvit Statoil (LNG onshore) Troll A Statoil Gjøa GDF Suez Valhall BP (gns.) 292 Martin Linge Total Goliat Eni (gns.) 85 Johan Sverdrup 140 Statoil Edvard Grieg Lundin (inkl. Draupne) Ivar Aasen Det Norske Gina Krog Statoil Source: KPMG-redesign, NPD.no 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. 38

39 Onshore processing facilities for subsea-installations with power from shore Ormen Lange/Nyhamna The onshore facility at Nyhamna receives natural gas for processing from Ormen Lange through 30 "pipelines. The gas is exported to the market in the UK through Langeled pipe via Sleipner platform. The plant treatment capacity is approximately 70 million Sm3 gas per. day The energy demand at max. production is 153 MW supplied from the power grid and 20 MW supplied from a gas fired boiler. CO2 and NOx emissions are estimated at respectively tonnes and 88 tonnes. Snøhvit//Melkøya The onhore processing facility Melkøya receives natural gas from Snøhvit, Askelad and eventually Albatross for treatment through a multiphase 26.8 "pipeline. At full production, the plant supplies 5.67 billion. Sm3 LNG to market. CO2 from the wells is expected to be reinjected thus expected 23 million. tonnes of CO2 deposited over the field life. Energy demand is respectively 152 MW to three cold compressors driven by electric motors and 116 MW heat demand coming from 5 gas turbines. Emissions of CO2 and NOx emissions from the plant are estimated at respectively tonnes / year and 635 tons / year (5 gas turbines). Source: Shell and Statoil 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. 39

40 In the southern part of the Norwegian shelf, Valhall is the only platform that is provided with power from shore, while electrification of the Ekofisk field has been rejected Source: KPMG-analysis, NPD and Wood Mackenzie 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. 40

41 Lessons learned in a Danish perspective 1 Power from shore to offshore platforms should be assessed in connection with the development solution for the platform - it should be seen in a 10-year perspective 2 Downtime, timing and complexity by replacing non-electric equipment made providing Ekofisk with power from shore not viable 3 The power from shore solution to Valhall is an interesting case in a Danish context due to comparable water depth, platform solution and distance from shore Source: KPMG-analysis 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. 41

42 2015 KPMG P/S, a Danish limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ( KPMG International ), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name, logo and cutting through complexity are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International.

43 Socio-economic aspects of electrification Offshore Forum 2015 Bjarne Brendstrup System analysis Offshore forum 43

44 Main elements of the socio-economic analysis Electrification Direct gas usage Offshore forum 44

45 Socio Economics - Break-even - Illustration Break-even - Capacity versus CAPEX CAPEX, mio. DKK Capacity offshore, MW Offshore forum 45

46 Identified Barriers Reliability and redundancy Financing of the installation Timing of the investments Quality of the gas Sale price of the gas Taxes and tariffs Offshore forum 46

47 Upcoming process Interview with stakeholders to identify the potential for electrification. Analyze the feasible technical solution and estimate whether such a solution is within the socio-economic break-even area. Then a further refinement of the socio-economic analysis Offshore forum 47

48 Asmund Mæland, Group Vice President, Oil Gas & Chemical, Sept 1, 2015 Power from shore on the Norwegian continental shelf Energinet.dk

49 Why Power From Shore Avoiding emissions 20 % of Norway s greenhouse (CO 2 ) emissions comes from the Oil industry Significant contribution to fulfill international and national commitments if the best projects is electrified. Large point emissions Easier to remove CO 2 from these, then smaller emissions across industries Cost of owner ship Capex cost pr/yr (turbine vs el) Opex cost pr/yr (turbine vs el) Production value lost (due to outage/rebuild) Fuel value (gas vs el) CO2 tax Health Safety and Environmental impact No gas turbines will reduce risk Less helicopter transport No Noise pollution

50 Technology Selection: GT vs. AC vs. DC Power (MW) An Example of Economical Window of Opportunity for Power From Shore 2 AC Transmission DC Transmission Gas Turbines 150 km P < 100MW Distance (km)

51 Technologies for power from shore Three alternatives : AC has physical limitations (reactive power) Alternating Current (HVAC) Power system Onshore Cables Power distribution offshore Alternating Current (HVAC) with compensation Power grid Onshore Compensation Cables Power distribution offshore Direct Current (HVDC) Power grid Onshore ~ = Converter Cable Cable = ~ Converter Power distribution offshore

52 Energy efficiency & Power from shore Power from shore efficiency approx. 90% ABB Group September 2, 2015 Slide 52

53 Gjøa(Statoil) HVAC Cable (dynamic) 400 m depth 40MW, 100km In operation 2010 Goliat (ENI) HVAC Cable (dynamic) 400 m depth 60MW, 90km Martin Linge(Total) 145 kvac cable incl. fibre optic Lenght 170 km Design load 55 MW Troll 1+2&3+4 Troll, HVDC-Light Pre-Compressors 2x40MW, ca. 80 km, In operation x50 MW, ca 80 km, In operation 2014 Johan Sverdrup (Statoil, Lundin,Det Norske) HVDC platform Hub MW In execution Valhall Offshore and Onsore HVDC light station 292 km HVDC Cable, P= 78 MW

54 Troll A 1&2 and 3&4 Norway Customer: Statoil Year of commissioning: 2005 & 2015 Customer s need Enable power supply from mainland to platform to minimize emission of large amounts of CO2 and unnecessarily high fuel consumption ABB s response Turnkey 2x44 MW ±60 kv HVDC Light offshore transmission system Turnkey 2x50 MW ±66 kv HVDC Light offshore transmission system DC sea cables VHF (Very high frequency) motors Customer s benefits Lower CO2 emissions Better and safer work environment on platform ABB Group September 2, 2015 Slide 54

55 Troll A Electric Drive Systems Single Line Diagram pr. drive system 132 kv Switchboard Kollsnes station HVDC Light Rectifier Subsea Cable HVDC Light Cable Troll A station HVDC Light Inverter VHV Motor Compressor 70 km ±60 kv 44 MW 56 kv Gear ABB Scope

56 Module close up

57 TPC34 Project Haugesund June 2014

58 TPC34 Project Kollsnes October 2014

59 Gjøa Power from Shore 100km Shore 132kV Transformer Sub Sea Cable Transformer 11kV Supply 90kV Onshore Sub sea Offshore Tampen ÅTS Langeled Camilla&Belinda Vega Gjøa Florø Kvitebjørn Valemon Huldra Mongstad Hild Oseberg Oseberg Troll Sture Kollsnes

60 Dette billede kan ikke vises i øjeblikket. Dette billede kan ikke vises i øjeblikket. Dette billede kan ikke vises i øjeblikket. Qualification of Dynamic cable for Gjøa Configuration for Gjøa Long static cable Short dynamic cable Transition joint Dynamic cable in a configuration Transition joint

61 Johan Sverdrup first phase in execution

62 Hub solution implemented in Phase 2

63 Barriers Capex Manipulation of the capex calculation Fields in Production interruption of cash flow People Lets do it the old way «that works» See the whole picture e.g. energy efficiency Some people simply do not believe in «climate change» What has given success Pressure for reducing emissions, cooperation with environmental organization Beneficial life-cycle cost for redevelopment and greenfield projects, both in Norway and Middle East. Studies in Asia; China, Malaysia

64 Outlook - trends Market growing in Oil & Gas and wind connections around the globe Princess Amalie 120 MW AC Borwin MW HVDC Dolwin Beta 900 MW HVDC Valhall 80 MW HVDC Safaniyah 340 MW AC Gjøa 40MW AC, 100km Troll * 43/50 MW HVDC 2 * 20 MW AC Martin Linge 55 MW, 162 km AC Goliat 60MW AC 100km ABB Group September 2, 2015 Slide 64

65 Thank you for listening

66 Coffee break See you again at Offshore forum 66

67 Offshore Forum Programme Welcome Søren Juel Hansen, Energinet.dk Gas quality and the prospects of on/offshore optimisation Jesper Bruun, Energinet.dk Gas quality and potential gas treatment at Nybro Peter Schroll Christiansen, DONG Energy A/S Study on offshore electrification in Norway Morten Mønster, KPMG P/S Electrification of the North Sea production Bjarne Brendstrup, Energinet.dk Norwegian experience with electrification in practice Asmund Maland, ABB Norway Norwegian tie-in by 2020 Jess B. Jensen, Energinet.dk Baltic Pipe by 2022 Søren Juel Hansen, Energinet.dk What measure of flexibility can onshore gas storage facilities offer? Hans-Åge Nielsen, Energinet.dk Gas Storage Optimisation through technology Bo Cerup-Simonsen, Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU End of programme 67

68 Offshore Forum Norwegian tie-in by 2020 Jess Bernt Jensen, 1 September

69 Security of Supply challenge after 2020 Supply from Nybro is decreasing as the North Sea production declines N-1 criteria: The EU Security of Supply (SoS) Regulation requires that in case the supplies from Germany fails another source must be able to substitute the missing supply and the North Sea can t alone Supply from Germany is increasing and is becoming the main supply source A Norwegian connection can solve the SoS challenge after

70 Supplies to Denmark and Sweden after 2020 N-1 criteria: If supply from Germany fails, supply can be substituted by supplies from the Danish North Sea, storages and Norway X Main supply source 70

71 Norwegian Tie-in - where and how? 71

72 Norwegian Tie-in 1. 3 BCM Statpipe/Norpipe - Harald BCM North of Sleipner Harald/Tyra BCM North of Sleipner Nybro 72

73 Gassco Gassco will be asked to perform a feasibility study for a Norwegian tie-in in 2015/

74 Perspectives in a Norwegian connection Baltic Pipe 74

75 Baltic Pipe by 2022? Maximising Of-Onshore Optimisation 2nd Annual Offshore Forum 75

76 EU CEF support for a N-DK-PL feasibility Gaz System and Energinet.dk perform a feasibility study in 2015/16 Applied with the national Polish TSO Gaz System Supported by EU CEF programme Possible Mile stones, IF feasible - Feasibility study period Business case development in ?? - Norwegian connection possible before Baltic Pipe possible before

77 5 Feasibility Study Activities 1. Market model analysis What is required? What can be achieved with a N-DK-PL? 2. Economic analysis Security of Supply effects? Price and market effects? 3. Technical solutions to Baltic Pipe and reinforcements 3 alternatives ranging from app bcm/y 4. Technical solutions to upstream tie-in (not supported by CEF) 5. Introductory dialogue with environmental agencies and stakeholders 77

78 Baltic Finnish gas market (8 bcm) Combined Polish-Nordic Gas market (22bcm) BEMIP demand 78

79 The simplest solution Norwegian Upstream Tie-in Baltic Pipe Transmission Interconnector 79

80 Many alternatives ranging from 3 10 bcm/y Sleipner / Draupner? Ekofisk? Harald? Tyra? Nybro? Egtved South of Køge? Avedøre? Baltic Pipe Niechorze Confidential Titel 80

81 The Tariff Pancaking Death R.i.P. Baltic Pipe

82 The Market Zone Alternative 82

83 Possible Gains from an Offshore Perspective Direct access to: Gas Storage Access 1 bcm on shore gas storage flexibility GTF Gas Transfer Facility Gas Point Nordic Trading possibilities +20 active traders +400,000 Danish Consumers Sweden, Germany and Poland Daily balancing? Maybe blending with Norwegian gas? Direct Consumer Access Export Markets Maybe lower tariffs?? 83

84 Offshore Forum Energinet.dk Gas Storage Hans-Åge Nielsen 84

85 Gas System Energinet.dk 85

86 Large and flexible Balances the system 1 BCM volume 16 MCM/day withdrawal rate 8,4 MCM/day Injection rate Full within day flexibility 86

87 Reliable and lifetime extended Single storage point - backed by two facilities Only 3-4 days of unplanned reduced capacity in 20 years NO un-planned complete shut downs Volume: 435 MCM 575 MCM In : 3,6 MCM/d 4,8 MCM/d Out : 8 MCM/d 8 MCM/d Both facilities top-sites are as new Wells in Lille Torup are being re-completed. All maintenance is done by or under supervision of the staff on site -> Very high in-house skills on all critical components 87

88 Regulated? Commercial? Yes! Regulated by EU and Danish law on un-bundling from production and trading TPA, transparency and non discrimination No price, tariff or income regulation No regulation on sales mechanisms, products, duration etc. No state subsidies We deliver flexibility to a price formula that is relevant for our costumers. = (,, ) We sell customized storage products with a flexibility and duration that suits our customers needs at the time they need it. 88

89 Energinet.dk Gas Storage: Call us. Hans-Åge Nielsen Business Development / Sales: Bjørn Denninger / Illana Nygaard /

90 Increased Recovery in the Danish North Sea through Technology Innovation and Research Bo Cerup-Simonsen Center for Olie og Gas DTU

91 DHRTC Challenges and opportunities with urgency Source: OGD/Quartz&Co 2013 Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March September, 2015

92 DHRTC Challenges and opportunities with urgency 1. Exploration 2. Access to marginal fields 3. Increased recovery from existing fields Cost (OPEX and CAPEX) 2. Efficiency Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March September, 2015

93 Centre Basics Background The centre is part of the Danish long-term national strategy on energy production. Objectives Research to identify and qualify new ways to enable increased oil and gas recovery in the Danish North Sea. Integration, alignment towards application. Attract and educate professionals to the industry. Resources 1 BDKK (~130MEUR) over 10 years, donation by DUC Data and interaction with DUC and other industry Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March September, 2015

94 Technology management Maximize business performance by planning, implementing and monitoring/following-up of technology solutions OPTIMIZE CURRENT OPERATION PLAN IMPROVEMENTS BY TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTIN G/EXECUTING MONITORING FOLLOW-UP ASSESS BUSINESS IMPLICATION IDENTIFY TECHNOLOGY OPPORTUNITY ANALYSING & PLANNING TEST AND VERIFY TECHNOLOGIES 2 Septem ber, 2015 Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

95 DHRTC Research and technology maturation Hypothesis of increased recovery Innovation: Technology and services Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March /2/2015

96 Flagship Programmes Technology maturity path Reservoir Characterization EOR Drilling Production Technology Material Facility Offshore field implement ation Offshore pilot testing Industry as driver Collaboration with DHRTC Onshore pilot testing Prototype simulation model Lab experiment /testing Proposed pilot projects. Patents. Spin-offs. Industry cofunding. Progression on TRL scale PhDs. Publications. Citations. KPI Basic Research Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

97 Collaboration: From Idea Generation to Project Termination Other universities Partners Centre Core DUC/Maersk Companies Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

98 Processes. Management of Resources, Portfolio, Programmes, Projects 98 Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

99 Incremental improvements in the production system AND Radical Innovations Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

100 First Flagship Programme: Advanced Waterflooding in Dan, Halfdan, Kraka Objective: Increased recovery Graphics: SLB Status: First public version of Advanced waterflooding in Dan, Halfdan and Kraka to be released. Next: An underlying portfolio of projects to be defined across disciplines from reservoir to facilities. 100 Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

101 DHRTC status and 2015 plan Status 1 July 2015 Strategy v 1.0 established Centre Core established with 20+ employees Main processes established First Flagship selected: Advanced Water Flooding in Dan, Halfdan, Kraka Key activities Q3, Q Projects for Dan/Halfdan/Kraka to established Flagship longlist being developed Partnerships with universities are being mobilized Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

102 DHRTC Application for tangible societal value New Science & Technology People in collaboration Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March September, 2015

103 Started with a long way to go Centre for Oil and Gas - DTU, Technical University of Denmark 03 March 2015

104 Closing Thank you for participating today Please do not hesitate to provide: your feedback and your proposals to next steps to secure an appropriate off/onshore optimisation We look forward to hearing from you! Søren Juel Hansen Martin Gram September 2015 Offshore Forum 104