Validating co-ordinates of old wells
|
Challenge ID |
OTM:077 |
||||
1 |
Title |
Validating co-ordinates of old wells |
||||
2 |
Theme ID |
ON 5.1: Logistics planning and operations - Baseline mapping of terrain and infrastructure |
||||
3 |
Originator of Challenge |
Onshore: OTM |
||||
4 |
Challenge Reviewer / initiator |
Exxon, Petronas |
||||
|
General description |
Overview of Challenge |
||||
5 |
What is the nature of the challenge? (What is not adequately addressed at present?) |
Old well records are commonly inaccurate because the final well location has not been recorded correctly. In some instances, the record does not even exist because it has been lost or destroyed. It would be beneficial to have a way of remotely validating the location of the well e.g. through the identification of disturbed ground, the presence of historical roads or other infrastructure |
||||
6 |
Thematic information requirements |
9. Obtain detailed imagery of assets, 12. Identify the presence of sub-surface or covered infrastructure, 14. Obtain detailed imagery of the surface, |
||||
7 |
Nature of the challenge - What effect does this challenge have on operations? |
Risk of being seen as negligent. Also cost implications if existing infrastructure is not used. Biggest implication is that wells cannot be brought back on line, and profit subsequently not realised. |
||||
8 |
What do you currently do to address this challenge?/ How is this challenge conventionally addressed? |
Company records, together with mapping, but both may be inaccurate / not fully inclusive. |
||||
9 |
What kind of solution do you envisage could address this challenge? |
|
||||
10 |
What is your view on the capability of technology to meet this need? – are you currently using EO tech? If not, why not? |
|
||||
|
Challenge classification |
|
||||
11 |
Lifecycle stage |
Pre license |
Exp. |
Dev. |
Prod. |
Decom. |
Score from impact quantification [1] |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
12 |
Climate classification |
NOT CLIMATE SPECIFIC |
||||
13 |
Geographic context/restrictions |
Generic onshore (Unspecified) |
||||
14 |
Topographic classification / Offshore classification |
Generic onshore (Unspecified) |
||||
15 |
Seasonal variations |
Any season |
||||
16 |
Impact Area |
HSE, operational cost reduction and efficiency |
||||
17 |
Technology Urgency (How quickly does the user need the solution) |
Immediately (0-2 years) |
||||
|
Information requirements |
|
||||
18 |
Update frequency |
Not important |
||||
19 |
Data Currently used |
|
||||
20 |
Spatial resolution |
|
||||
21 |
Thematic accuracy |
|
||||
22 |
Example formats |
|
||||
23 |
Timeliness |
Reference data - timeliness not important |
||||
24 |
Geographic Extent |
District area |
||||
25 |
Existing standards |
|
[1] Impact quantification scores: 4 – Critical/ enabling; 3 – Significant/ competitive advantage; 2 – Important but non-essential; 1 – Nice to have; 0 – No impact, need satisfied with existing technology
There is no content with the specified labels