10.07.2015 Views

Prospectus re Admission to the Official List - Heritage Oil

Prospectus re Admission to the Official List - Heritage Oil

Prospectus re Admission to the Official List - Heritage Oil

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

RPS Energy<strong>Heritage</strong> <strong>Oil</strong> – Competent Persons ReportFigu<strong>re</strong> 21:Average Reservoir P<strong>re</strong>ssu<strong>re</strong> from Full Field Simulation22FEB200803404094<strong>Heritage</strong> has used a ‘‘downside’’ geological scenario in <strong>the</strong> simula<strong>to</strong>r, as is necessary for <strong>the</strong> developmentplan submitted <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> authorities. The above output shows oil rate building up <strong>to</strong> some 1,200 m 3 /d(7,548 stb/d) following water injection which builds <strong>to</strong> a peak rate of 2,800 m 3 /d (17,611 bbl/d). This rateeventually far exceeds voidage and <strong>the</strong> <strong>re</strong>servoir is <strong>re</strong>-p<strong>re</strong>ssurised (Figu<strong>re</strong> 21), although in practice it is notnecessary <strong>to</strong> exceed initial <strong>re</strong>servoir p<strong>re</strong>ssu<strong>re</strong>. This case consists of a <strong>to</strong>tal of 49 producers, and 32 injec<strong>to</strong>rs,as shown below in <strong>the</strong> drilling schedule for <strong>the</strong> Company’s ‘‘p90’’ and ‘‘p50’’ cases.2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015p90New Producers ....................... 2 4 8 16 16 2Cumulative Producers .................. 3 7 15 31 47 49New Injec<strong>to</strong>rs ........................ 4 8 8 12Cumulative Injec<strong>to</strong>rs ................... 0 0 4 12 20 32Total in Year ..................... 2 4 12 24 24 14p50New Producers ....................... 2 4 8 16 14 14 13 10 2Cumulative Producers .................. 3 7 15 31 45 59 72 82 84New Injec<strong>to</strong>rs ........................ 4 8 8 8 9 8 1Cumulative Injec<strong>to</strong>rs ................... 0 0 0 8 16 24 33 41 46Total in Year ..................... 0 4 12 24 22 22 22 18 3Table 19:The p90 and p50 Drilling Schedule for Zapadno ChumpasskoyeThe simulation work is <strong>re</strong>asonable, but of course is not matched <strong>to</strong> a sustained period of his<strong>to</strong>ry (and isthus less <strong>re</strong>liable than it will be once mo<strong>re</strong> performance data become available). The two producers have(<strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> effective date) produced some 0.048 MMstb. Some of <strong>the</strong> rates achieved by wells in <strong>the</strong> simula<strong>to</strong>rsurpass those rates seen in <strong>the</strong> field <strong>to</strong> date, albeit in just two wells. We have used <strong>the</strong> above drillingschedule, <strong>the</strong> rate build-up from <strong>the</strong> simula<strong>to</strong>r, but <strong>re</strong>duced rates <strong>to</strong> construct a production profile for our1P case; we have also allowed for downtime that is likely <strong>to</strong> occur <strong>to</strong> well, pump, facility, and pipelineavailability.102

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!