Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: The

126 Pages·1996·3.53 MB·English

Oil Production in the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge: The Technology and the
Alaskan Oil Context
February 1989
NTIS order #PB89-169239
Recommended Citation:
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Oil Production in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge: The Technology and the Alaskan Oil Context,
OTA-E-394 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1989).
Library of Congress Card Catalog Number 88-600565
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402-9325
Foreword
This OTA assessment responds to requests from the House Committee on Merchant Marine
and Fisheries and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for an examination
of some technical issues concerning the potential future development of oil resources within the
coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in northeastern Alaska. Because
geologists suspected that large quantities of oil might lie beneath the coastal plain, Congress had
earfier exempted the plain from a Federal Wilderness designation given to about 8 million acres
within ANWR. The U.S. Department of Interior has released a “legislative environmental impact
statement” recommending the immediate leasing of the entire coastal plain for oil exploration
and development. Upon release of that report, the plain’s future became the focus of a high-
stakes debate among a variety of environmental, business, Alaskan native, and government
groups with greatly conflicting views of the appropriate balance of commercial, environmental,
and other values of the plain. Differing hopes for the plain’s future have emerged, ranging from
full-scale oil development to wilderness designation and protection from man-caused change.
In deciding the future of the ANWR coastal plain, Congress must address a wide variety of
issues ranging from the environmental impacts of oilfield exploration, development, and produc-
tion in an Arctic environment to the economic and national security benefits of potential addition-
al oil production in Alaska. These issues have been explored in a wide-ranging series of congres-
sional hearings sponsored by four House and Senate committees, reports issued by business
and environmental groups, executive branch reports, and a series of studies conducted by the
Congressional Research Service and the General Accounting Office.
This report presents the results of an assessment of a subset of these issues focusing in par-
ticular on: the oilfield technology being used to develop the Alaskan North Slope’s oil resources
and the likely configuration of that technology as it might be applied in the future to the coastal
plain; and the prospects for future North Slope oil production, especially the likelihood that the
flow of oil through the Trans Alaskan Pipeline System will suffer a serious decline during the next
decade.
A forthcoming OTA assessment, scheduled for release in the fall of 1989, will assist Congress
in addressing a third issue--ANWR’s potential role in future U.S. liquid fuel supplies. The assess-
ment (entitled Technological Risks and Opportunities for Future U.S. Energy Supply and Demand)
will examine, among other subjects, trends in future U.S. oil production and use, and the poten-
tial to reduce oil use by substituting alternative fuels and improving energy efficiency.
OTA is indebted to the numerous individuals who contributed substantial time to this report,
providing information and advice and reviewing drafts.
OTA Project Staff
Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Lionel S. Johns, Assistant Director, OTA
Energy, Materials, and International Security Division
Peter D. Blair
Energy and Materials Program Manager
Steven E. Plotkin, Project Director
Project Staff
Peter Johnson, Arctic Oilfield Technology
William Westermeyer, /Vorth Slope Production
Contributors
Lynn M. Powers, Editor
Administrative Staff
Lillian Chapman, Administrative Assistant
Linda Long, Administrative Secretary
Phyllis Brumfield, Secretafy
iv
Reviewers of OTA’s Draft ANWR Report
ARCO Alaska, Inc. (Mr. U.J. Baskurt, Mr. D.V. Mr. W.A. Harms, Exxon Company U.S.A.
Johnson, Mr. Victor Manikian, Mr. Rich Ogar, Ms. Leone Hatch, Trustees for Alaska
Mr. Steven B. Porter, Mr. J. M. Posey)
Dr. Robert Hirsch, ARCO Oil and Gas Company
Mr. Dave Beecy, U.S. Department of Energy
Mr. Donald E, Hyer, Texaco U.S.A.
Mr. Earl H. Beistline, Fairbanks, Alaska
Mr. R. Ken Knight, UNOCAL Corporation
Ms. Kristine Benson, Alaska Center for the
Dr. David Lee Kulp, Ford Motor Company
Environment
Ms. Judy Lakind, U.S. Environmental Protection
Mr. Jan Beyea, National Audobon Society
Agency
Mr. Rex Blazer, Northern Alaska Environmental
Mr. J. E. Little, Shell Oil Company
Center
Dr. Jessica Mathews, World Resources Institute
Mr. Mike Bradshaw, CONOCO, Inc.
Mr. Edward H. Mergens, Shell Oil Company
Ms. Lynne Corn, Congressional Research Service
Ms. Sharon Newsome, National Wildlife Federation
Mr. William DietzmannEnergy Information Ad-
l
ministration, Dallas Texas Dr. Richard Rowberg, Congressional Research
Service
Mr. Roger Doughty, ARCO Oil and Gas Company
Ms. Lisa Speer, Natural Resources Defense
Dr. Daniel A. Dreyfus, Gas Research Institute,
Council
Mr. Brock Evans, National Audobon Society
Mr. Steven Taylor, Standard Alaska Production
Mr. Chris Flavin, Worldwatch Institute
Company
Mr. Don Forcier, General Accounting Office Mr. Bill Van Dyke, Alaska Department of Natural
Mr. Brad Fristoe, Alaska Dept of Environmental Resources
Conservation Dr. John Wood, Energy Information Administration
Dr. W. Tom Georold, Wilderness Society Mr. Brooks Yeager, Sierra Club
Mr. Ozzie Girard, U.S. Geological Survey Dr. Robert Williams, Princeton University
Many other individuals reviewed and made comments on sections of the report. In particular, OTA wishes
to thank Carl Behrens, Congressional Research Service, David Campbell, National Wildlife Federation,
Paul Deissler, Houston, Texas, E. Kaarlela, Bureau of Land Management, Lawrence Kumins, Congres-
sional Research Service, Helmut Merklein, Energy Information Administration, James Mielke, Congres-
sional Research Service, John Moore, Congressional Research Service, John Pearson, Energy Information
Administration, Joseph Riva, Congressional Research Service, Milton Russell, University of Tennessee, Wil-
liam Sackinger, University of Alaska, Fred Sissine, Congressional Research Service, Arlon Tussing, ARTA,
Inc., Seattle, Washington, Michael Utt, Unocal Corporation, and David Watts, Office of the Solicitor, U.S.
Department of the Interior.
ANWR WORSKHOP
November 4,1987
Anchorage, Alaska
Mr. U.J. Baskurt Mr. Robert Nagel
ARCO Alaska, Inc. Amoco Production Co.
Ms. Lynn Billington Mr. Richard Ogar
Standard Alaska Production Co. ARCO Alaska, Inc.
Mr. Wes Black
Standard Alaska Production Co. Mr. Lyle Perrigo
Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center
Mr. Mike Bradshaw University of Alaska
CONOCO, Inc.
Mr. Steven B. Porter
Mr. Rod Branch ARCO Alaska, Inc.
Standard Alaska Production Co.
Dr. Max Brewer Mr. J.M. Posey
Staff Geologist/Geophysicist ARCO Alaska, Inc.
US Geological Survey
Mr. David Pritchard
Mr. Tom Cook
Standard Oil Production Co.
Chevron USA, Inc.
Executive Offices
Mr. Fred Crory
Research Civil Engineer
Mr. Blair Reber
U.S. Army Cold Regions Research Exxon Production Research Co.
and Engineering Lab
Mr. Dick Roberts
Mr. Rob Dragnich
Minerals Management Service
Exxon
Alaska OCS Region
Mr. Brad Fristoe
Alaska Department of Environmental ConservatioDnr. William Sackinger
University of Alaska
Geophysical Institute
Mr. Paul Grimmer
CONOCO, Inc.
Mr. Robin Senner
Senior Vice President
Mr. Stu Gustafson
LGL Alaska Research Assn.
EXXON Co. USA
Mr Rupert (Bucky) G. Tart
Mr. Victor Manikian
Dames & Moore, Inc.
ARCO Alaska Inc.
Dr. Maureen McCrea Mr. Bill Van Dyke
Minerals Management Service Petroleum Manager
Alaska OCS Region Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources
vi
Workshop on North Slope Enhanced Oil Recovery Technologies
Houston, Texas
December 8, 1987
Mr. Roger Doughty Dr. Harry A. Deans
Arco Oil and Gas Company Professor of Chemical/Petroleum
Engineering
University of Houston
Mr. Lyle Henderson
Manager
Enhanced Recovery Research
Shell Development Company Dr. Elmond Claridge
Assoc. Professor of Chemical
Mr. Arshad Khan Engineering/Director of
Reservoir Engineer Petroleum Engineering
Chevron USA, Inc. Graduate Program
University of Houston
Mr. R. Ken Knight
Supervisor, Recovery Methods
Dr. Paul F. Deisler, Jr.
UNOCAL Science and
College of Business
Technology Division
Administration
University of Houston
Mr. J.M. Posey
Manager, Issues Advocacy
ARCO Alaska, Inc.
Mr. R.J. Byrd
Manager, Reservoir Planning
Mr. David Pritchard
Amoco Production Company
Vice President, Technology
Standard Oil Production Co
Mr. Thomas A. Harting
Senior Petroleum Engineer
Mr. W.D. Smith
Amoco Production Company
Alaskan Interest
Production Coordinator
Exxon Company, USA Mr. Ed Holstein
Reservoir Engineering
Dr. James Smith Coordinator
Director Exxon Company, USA
Center for Public Policy
University of Houston Mr. Mike Morrison
Director, Operations Planning
Ms. Jill Hafner Exploration, Production
Director of Operations and Natural Gas-North America
Center for Public Policy Conoco, Inc.
University of Houston
Mr. Robert O. Hubbell
Mr. Vello Kuuskraa Vice President Reservoir
Vice President Engineering
Lewin/lCF Golden Engineering, Inc.
Fairfax, Virginia
vii
Contents
Page
Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Chapter 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Chapter 2. Technologies for Oiland Gas Development on the North Slope of Alaska . . . . . . . 31
Chapter 3. Oil and Gas Production on the North Slope of Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Appendix A. Methods of Estimating Discovered In-Place Resources and Reserves . . . . . . . . . .109
Appendix B. Estimation Methods for Undiscovered Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113
Appendix C. Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121
,..
!/1//
List of Figures
Figure No. Page No.
1. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Projected TAPS Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3. North Slope Oil fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1-1. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Its Relationship to Alaska and Location of the Coastal
Plain . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2-1. Alaskan North Slope Producing Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2-2. Prudhoe Bay Facilities Map . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2-3. Individual Facilities at Prudhoe Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2-4. Drilling Mud Flow Pattern in a Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2-5. Reserve Pit Operations During Drilling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2-6. Reserve Pit Operations During Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 47
2-7. Outline of a Prudhoe Bay Horizontal Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2-8. Transportation Options Associated With Changing North Slope Physical Environment . . . . . . 49
2-9. A Comparison in Road Length Between Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2-1 o! Development Scenario for Three Major Prospects on the ANWR Coastal Plain . . . . . . . . . . 65
2-11, OTA ANWR Development Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
3-1. North Slope Oil Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3-2. Projected TAPS Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3-3. Alaska North Slope Production: Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3-4. Alaska North Slope Production: Lisburne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3-5. Alaska North Slope Production: Endicott and Milne Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3-6. Alaska North Slope Production: West Sak and Seal Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3-7. Exploratory Wells in the Beaufort and Bering Seas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
B-1 . Flow Chart of Simulation Method for Play Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116
B-2. Flow Chart of Analytic Method of Play Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .118
List of Tables
Table No. Page No.
1. Summary Field Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2-1. North Slope Petroleum Development Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2-2. Arctic Oil and Gas Technology: Composite List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2-3. Typical Development Schedules , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
2-4. OTA ANWR Development Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3-1. Minimum Remaining In-Place Oil of Major North Slope Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3-2. Estimated Recoverable Gas in Known North Slope Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
3-3. Estimated Remaining Recoverable Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3-4. Projected TAPS Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3-5. Some Enhanced Recovery Techniques Possibly Applicable to North Slope Fields . . . . . . . . 91
3-6. Problems Limiting North Slope Recovery and Technologies Which May Improve Recovery . . . 92
3-7. Proposed Alaska OCS and State of Alaska Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
3-8. Estimates of Undiscovered, Economically Recoverable Oil in Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3-9. Comparison of Estimates for Undiscovered In-place Oil in ANWR . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 99