Tupi, the new kid in town
Posted by Luis de Sousa on November 22, 2007 - 11:00am in The Oil Drum: Europe
Topic: Geology/Exploration
Tags: exploration, Jack 2, offshore, petrobras, pre-salt, tupi [list all tags]
|
On the morning of November 12th a friend called me saying that the largest oil field in the world had just been found off Brasil. I then explained to him what the largest oil field in the world was like, and how implausible that information was. In fact since the late hours of the previous day the media was reporting “the largest world oil find in the last 20 years". Once again our energy problems were over, goodbye 90 dollar oil and so on. Déja vu? Didn't this all happen last year with the Jack field in the Gulf of Mexico? |
![]() |
Jack was a media stunt that mistaken an assessment of an entire layer corresponding to the Lower Tertiary with a single field. Fireworks came and went, oil prices came down and went up to stay one year later 20 dollars above the price just prior to Jack's announcement. As of now it is unknown when production from that layer will start.
Last week the name was Tupi, a field found by Petrobras in the Campos Basin off Brasil; with prospects of 5 to 8 Gb of intermediate gravity oil (28º API) and gas, it boosted the country's reserves of hydrocarbons by 50%. A remarkable find (for today's standards) announced again in a period of high prices.
It took some days for the dust to settle down and for a clear picture to emerge from the various and sometimes contradictory reports circling in the press; something reminiscent of the lack of preparation by some journalists to deal with this kind of information.
What is it?
First of all, does 5 to 8 Gb refer to oil in place or recoverable reserves? During the first reports the field was given as capable of producing 100 Kb/d, a number that indicated lower reserves making those 8 Gb sound like oil in place. Later in the week the production target was given as high as 4 Mb/d then settling at 400 Kb/d, reassuring that the numbers given were in fact recoverable reserves. Petrobras' officials were stated as directly using those terms.
Is Tupi a single field? The information available at the moment and the quotes from Petrobras' geologists point to that. Tupi is either a single field or a complex of closely lying reservoirs in an area some 800 Km long by 200 Km wide of pre-salt rock formations under a column of water ranging from 2000 to 3000 meters deep.
What's the oil to gas ratio? An important question, given the field's depth the temperatures could be high enough to form gas, and most media reports refer to “oil and gas reserves". It is likely that at this stage the company itself may not know exactly what's this ratio and hence the large reserves interval given.
As for the production schedule, first oil is placed in different places in time by different media sources, but none points to earlier than 2011. There's an obligatory two year gap to get the equipment from the current tight rig market and at least two more years to get commercial oil flows. A possible calendar:
| First drilling | 2009 |
| First production at 100 Kb/d | 2011 - 2013 |
| Peak/plateau production at 400 Kb/d | 2015 |
At some point there were reports of production reaching 4 Mb/d, which were likely confusing the overall company targets with the field's target. Recent reports state a company target of 4.5 Mb/d and 400 Kb/d for Tupi in 2015. Khebab made the following calculations using the Pickering relation:
| Region | Parameters | Max. Production (Kb/d) |
| World (Small Fringe) | 0.0435 / 0.0418 | 260 - 390 |
| Cantarell (Mexico) | 2.1 / 11 | 1000 - 1500 |
| Statfjord (Norway) | 0.637 / 5.53 | 580 - 920 |
| Ekofisk (Norway) | 0.299 / 5.10 | 290 - 470 |
These numbers put in perspective what Tupi represents globally, at its peak the field will produce less than half a percent of the world oil production. Even if the higher estimate of 8 Gb is confirmed, the field's reserves represent 14 weeks of world oil consumption.
The Challenge
Nonetheless, with the information gathered Tupi looks for real and not just another media stunt. A major piece of insight was published in the journal O Estado de São Paulo this weekend, were several experts were interviewed. Tupi is a real technological challenge, lying in a geological setting never before approached in Brasil.
The pre-salt layer is found under water depths that vary between 2000 and 3000 meters, after which there's a layer of 2000 meters of rock. The salt layer itself is also some 2000 meters deep and only after that is found the reservoir.
Sketch of the pre-salt layer setting.
Petrobras is today exploring fields over 5000 meters deep from water line to the reservoir; Tupi's depth by itself does not frighten the world leader in offshore exploration. The problem is the salt layer through which it has to be drilled. Nelson Ebecken from the Coordination of Post-Doctoral Engineering Programmes (COPPE) of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) had this to say:
We have to develop that technology. [...] If that layer was onshore it would be difficult. Imagine then at three or four thousand meters deep.
Drilling through layers of salt has been done in other places, but not at that depth, neither through such thickness.
At such depths, under immense pressure and warmed by the planet's internal heat the salt behaves more like a fluid than a rock. It is like drilling through jelly, a hole is opened but closes immediately after. Well maintenance in these conditions can be problematic; Edison Prates de Lima, also from the UFRJ:
The rock is hard but stable. The salt isn't as hard but it's unstable.
A difficult task, but at the reach of Brasilian engineering. Giuseppe Bacoccolli from COPPE's Laboratory of Computational Methods in Engineering put it this way:
I don't see a paradigm break, it is another evolution.
But there's a problem: cost, that grows exponentially with depth. Bacoccolli again:
We may reach the conclusion that we can, but we shouldn't. Defeating the salt layer implies a considerable additional cost.
COPPE has presently three hyperbaric chambers that allow to replicate the operating conditions at depths up to 6000 meters, were the equipment used in drilling is tested. A fourth chamber that will be able to replicate operating conditions up to 7000 meters deep is being built, that will start operating by the beginning of 2009. Drilling at the mentioned depths has to be made entirely by robots operated remotely. “It's like driving a Formula 1 car entirely from the pit box" said Segen Estefan also from COPPE.
Other problems include the thermal shock oil endures when it gets out of the rock layer, in the reservoir temperatures could be close to 100 º C and at the ocean floor crude meets temperatures as low as 4 º C. The crude can create high density bulbs that block the flow to the surface. This problem can be mitigated with pipe heating or insulation. The pipes themselves can be problematic due to their weight in steel, making the experts from COPPE contemplate the use of titanium.
The question comes down to cost, as Segen Estefan puts it:
We are operating in the limits of technology. The problem is cost, if it will be too expensive or not.
The first well drilled in the Tupi field cost 240 million dollars, a number that fell to 60 million in later field assessments. A total of 15 wells were drilled through the salt layer with 8 of these reaching the hydrocarbon reservoir. Giuseppe Bacoccolli expects the costs to fall even further to 30 million dollars per well during commercial operation. Still a number that implies a base price of at least 30 dollars per barrel of oil produced, four times Petrobras' present cost of deep offshore production and not factoring in equipment costs. Bacoccolli thinks that the operations will require between 6 and 12 FPSO platforms, each connected to 10 to 15 wells.
Also according to Giuseppe Bacoccolli further volumes of recoverable reserves can be confirmed, depending on new assessments to be made on the remaining of the pre-salt layer where Tupi was found.
Conclusion
All things considered, Tupi seems a markedly different case from last year's announcement of Jack. Scrutinizing the information circulated by the media leads to a sound picture of a field buried at the current technological offshore exploration frontier. Judging by the Brasilian academics' excitement, cost can in fact be the limiting factor but not technology by itself.
A final question should be answered, was Petrobras needing this kind of media attention? In reality it doesn't look so. Petrobras is the most profitable private company (of all commercial sectors) in South America, posting almost 9 billion dollars solely in the first nine months of this year.
Current reliable world 2P crude reserves lay somewhere around 800 Gb; given that:
a) 1000 Gb of crude have already been produced and
b) most reliable models point to a crude URR of 2000 Gb or higher,
there are still at least 200 Gb of crude oil yet to find. This implies that entire oil regions the size of the North Sea are yet to be discovered. The pre-salt layer of the Campos Basin off Brasil, where Tupi was found, may well be one of those.
The press release by Petrobras can be read here.
Further information in the brasilian media (in portuguese):
Luís de Sousa,
The Oil Drum: Europe




Interesting. So Tupi represents something more real than Jack. However it still
which is the key metric.
If you were to reverse the marketing spin effect, that suggests you would need to hear claims of reserves in the +20Gb range to relate to a find which could hit the 1Mbpd level needed to make a change to the price of fish?
Plus "800 Km long by 200Km wide" suggests a fragmented field, pushing up costs.
Tupi does not cover that area entirely, it is just a small part of it and most likely a single reservoir.
That's why there's so much excitement about it, this could be just the first field of a larger complex.
Regarding "I then explained to him what the largest oil field in the world was like, ...," I would like to read your explanation. What was the largest oil field in the world like?
Cannot find much on the geology.
Just this so far.
http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/11/19/business-week-brazil-the-new-oi...
For one, the oil lies some 4.5 miles beneath the ocean’s surface. To reach it, Petrobras will have to run lines through 7,000 feet of water and then drill up to 17,000 feet through sand, rock, and a massive salt layer. A decade ago, geologists lacked the tools to glimpse beneath these salt layers, which can be more than a mile thick offshore Brazil. Today, with the help of data-crunching supercomputers, 3D imaging of ultradeep subsalt layers is illuminating billions of barrels of new oil. Geologists say the discoveries challenge one of the notions of the peak oil theory, which claims oil companies already have found nearly all of the world’s usable oil.
Note the snide dig at peak oil.
This bit is interesting:
Geologist Roberto Fainstein, whose seismic imaging work at oil-field services company Schlumberger helped Brazil to discover its massive new reserves, says the subsalt find will “lead to a rush in this kind of drilling worldwide.” Brazil’s discovery may quicken subsalt drilling in the Gulf of Mexico by oil majors and Mexico’s state-run oil giant Pemex. A salt layer offshore West African countries including Angola, Gabon, and Equatorial Guinea is “virtually identical to Brazil’s,” Fainstein says, “so companies will race to begin drilling it.”
What to say?
1. Well first of all congratulations to Petrobras and the People of Brazil!
2. Eight billion is nice and handy, but it is not big (just big by modern standards)
3. Maybe more on both sides of the Atlantic and some possibly useful finds in the future
4. Massive technical challenges and costs.
5. Although anti Peakists will use this as ‘evidence’ that PO is not here, Tupi changes nothing in reality. By the time Tupi oil is flowing, Production flows elsewhere will have dropped, offsetting Tupi gains.
Paulah:
For size comparisons go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_fields
Ghawar is an outlier. It's like “huge”. The reservoir is almost an aberration.
The probability to find something like it again is zero. To put it in contest, another field like Ghawar would cut in half the “yet to find” reserves, from 200 Gb to 100 Gb.
Luis - just to remind everyone not eating Turkey, Ghawar has a fabulous seal - able to hold back a 1300 ft oil column - that is the secret. And 2000 m of salt is also a fabulous seal - if the salt does seal the structure.
The layer where Tupi was found has more than enough area to harbour a reservoir the size of Ghawar (800Km x 200Km). But Tupi's reservoir is much smaller (if in fact it's only one).
Beyond the seal that holds a deep oil column, Ghawar is even more impressive because of the incredible extent of the reservoir, a cavity almost 300 Km long.
The reservoir is a cavity? I never realised that.
If you mean an open space filled only with oil, its not.
As I recall, Prudhoe Bay was ~13 GB, half again the estimated size of Tupi, and this in an onshore operation without the deepwater technological challenges.
I can see, at least in the first few years after the first oil gets flowing, a process similar to that which has taken place with Thunderhorse. Production by fits and starts as the realities of each challenge are met and resolved - or not.
It will be an interesting process given the 'limits of technology' and also that as the next few years go by a number of chaotic things will be happening including crazy oil prices and technological and logistical bottlenecks.
Purdhoe Bay is a interesting field.
http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=968
In a sense it straddles the time between old technology and new. The original estimates using primitive to us technology and with production upgraded with newer technology including water injection.
http://www.aspousa.org/assets/pdf/Peak_Oil_Review_30_Jan_06.pdf
I wonder what the URR claims would be if the field was found today ? I happen to treat it and the North Sea production as straddling the cusp between estimates we can feel comfortable with and ones that are suspect. In general the trend seems to be to use OIP numbers as URR since about 1980 or so onwards and in some cases inflated OIP estimates.
http://science.reddit.com/info/61799/comments/
thanks for your support...
I guess it would be wishful thinking on our part to hope that the MSM would gain the expertise and wisdom to put these discoveries in context. As long as our discovery rate is not keeping up with our production rate and given our continuing increase in demand, perhaps at an accelerated rate, narrowly focusing on each discovery just serves to confuse the issue and confuse the public. Until we discover another easily accessible planet with lots and lots of oil, we should proceed under the conviction that oil cannot keep up with demand, leaving aside the eternal debate about whether we have peaked or when we will peak.
We are left, however, to drunkenly stagger and swagger into the future under the apparent conviction that divine intervention will give us the oil necessary to, for example, fuel automobiles for at least half of the Chinese population and much of India and the rest of the world. The Chinese, Indians, Americans, and others need to be given the message:
With a nod to Kunstler "Above all else, make other arrangements"
But nooooo!!!
An excellent piece, Luis. Thank-you.
It's natural that most folks don't want peak oil to happen. So they look for hope in the oddest places. Americans will demand oil from those horrible oil companies because there is obviously lots of oil in the ground and those companies are just hiding it to jack the prices up. After all, it is there for the taking only 3 miles deep through water, salt and rock. Peak oil is part geology, part economics and a lotta politics to come. There may be huge deposits of oil available which will not be tapped because the costs will exceed financial returns. A going rate of $500/barrel may be inadequate to recover the cost of drilling deep.
God I hope we find a bunch of North Seas!!
That will help us to kill off the planet in STYLE!!!
I see these people who wish for more and more oil as nothing less than arms dealers, enablers of mass murder, cheerleaders of planetary death.
No, Cherenkov, tell us what you really think!! Okay, I will.
People who wish for more oil may as well be pleading for all serial killers and child rapists to be released from prison, be given immunity from prosecution, and relocated into housing near schools.
Wishing for more oil is shamelessly sociopathic behaviour given what we know about fossil fuel's effect upon the global environment.
If not for all the decent people out there who truly want to stop this runaway train, I would simply say, good enough, let the humans kill off the human plague. Perhaps the rest of the Earth's biota will be able to carry on in this world we have so successfully damaged.
http://www.populistamerica.com/stop_calling_me_a_doomer
What Cherenkov said.
Dude, humanity occupies a blip on a pinhead on the scale of cosmic chronology. We're riding a mote of dust floating directionless in the universal gymnasium.
Why does it matter what we do to the planet?
Hmmm...well said...reality is a matter of perspective.
Why does it matter what we do to the planet?
This is a seriously great line.
It would be perfect on my neighbor's HUMMER. Not the bush bars either, right on the freaking door.
Heck... might as well put it on the F-250 too.
Why does it matter what we do to the planet?
'cos we could be dancing //
on the only green world//
that's turning //
around a sun //
Find me some aliens and I'll be a little less fussed.
--
Jaymax (cornucomer-doomopian)
You see, this is where the logic loops.
1. Cherenkov jumps up and down like an idiot, shouting we have a duty to preserve the biota of the Earth.
2. Then someone asks just why is the Earth so special, out of the billions of planets in the Universe?
3. The Earth is special we are told, because it harbors intelligent life - i.e. humans.
You often see the same loop in environmental arguments -
"we need to preserve the environment"
"why?"
"because it supports human life".
So as you follow the circle from gung-ho capitalist cornucopian around to rabid eco-facist doomer Cherenkov the end point is the same: they all want to perpetuate human life as long as possible.
The Earth can easily absorb anything that humans can throw at it, there is no need to worry in that regard. Just don't fool ourselves that anyone cares about the Earth other than for the fact it happens to be the seat of the human race.
Ever hear of catastrophic positive feedback loops? The kind that releases methane from the permafrost releasing more methane from permafrost that . . .
So no Earth. just another Venus. or is it Mercury?
The Venus thing is pure BS, can't happen. People who say that are completely ignorant about geoscience, and that unfortunately includes certain people who should know better shooting their mouth off.
All the methane etc, is sequestered carbon that has all been in the atmosphere at some point already. The Earth has been far warmer in the past, you do know we live in an Ice Age?
A map for the lost
Wikipedia
So, are you are implying an earlier species on this planet burned up a major portion of stored carbon on this rock?
Carbon gets recycled all the time. Currently, the bulk of the worlds carbon endowment is locked into Carbonate rocks such as chalk and limestone, and in truly massive quantities.
The uniqueness of the last 3000 years (an augenblik for geological time) is that humans have put a pulse of carbon into the atmosphere. BUT vulcanicity has and still could beat man's puny attempts. But we have pulsed carbon and at a very high rate over the last 200 years, more so in the last 50.
Is AGW a worry? course it is, assuming we survive PO.
I will worry about AGW if we get through the next 15 years without a major civilisation killer like PO.
Hey, I like your priorities ;)
For those interested, here's some of that chalk
That's about 35 million years there, I guess the chalk layer goes deeper than you can see here. I think it's amazing that all that chalk was dumped by trillions of microscopic marine organisms - the remains of their "shells" made from calcium carbonate.
Buried carbon looks quite spectacular.
Yes, it is very impressive. Makes us pale in insignificance by comparison. But what would happen if the mechanism that trapped all of that carbon, lets say a great reduction in sea animals such as corals and plankton, broke down? Good thing the oceans are in perfect condition to recycle all of that carbon.
"all of that carbon" has already been trapped.
I'm more concerned about the effects of global warming. Peak oil I can personally prepare for (and I have as I am fairly well ensconced on my small self sufficient farm in a sparsely populated area). But global warming could be the double whammy that wipes out many of the survivors, some of which could carry on the culture which is worth saving.
The other way round. Carbon that was present in the primeval biosphere is employed in organic processes, creating carbon compounds, some of which get buried (or end up in deep ocean). Over millions of years the amount of carbon in the biosphere goes down.
Volcanic processes recycle the buried carbon eventually, but this is a slow process and life has been quicker at burying it. Vulcanism has reduced as the Earth cools. Occasionally the process gets a big kick and a lot of carbon is dumped back into the biosphere, possibly by massive meteorite strikes.
A Brief History of Earth: A guide for recent arrivals
another GW denier. hardly worth a debate.
For the record, I fully agree with all the past and current climate science in the IPCC reports.
Where I would differ is the projections of the IPCC on CO2 emissions do not take into account PO, or any declining availability of FF, and are therefore seriously flawed in that respect. James Hansen has published his own paper on the subject which I regard as realistic. It still gives cause for concern, but even Hansen says that the high estimates of the IPCC are very unlikely.
On Venus, this is what RealClimate (real climate scientists, not deniers) have to say:
It is easy to cast ad homs, but anyone can read an accurate take on the science at RealClimate. There is no excuse for ignorance.
Two comments:
1) Can you give a reference to Hansen's discussion in re. limits to atmospheric CO2?
2) Earth differs significantly from Venus in that on Earth life has developed. Life forms have developed that have sequestered vast amounts of CO2 in carbonate rocks. If there were some reason for mankind to mine all the limestone deposits, and turn them to quicklime (using nuclear power as the energy source, maybe) THEN we would have real problems with atmospheric CO2!
I think BobCousins is refering to Hansen's paper we discussed here?
Implications of "Peak Oil" for Atmospheric CO2 and Climate
Cement production is already a big source of CO2 emissions.
Nuh uh, you have a logical flaw in your argument, the one I was trying to point to...
NOT i.e. humans. e.g. humans maybe a little
Three separate points:
1) Some of this is about terran biodiversity generally. something like 200 species a day (mostly beetles, admitted) going extinct. One argument, in line with what I said but contrary to your rebuttal, is the www.vhemt.org approach. That recognizes the potentially unique situation of the earthen biosphere, while regarding humanity as utterly dispensable (only one species vs millions). Can the current, potentially unique 'green' biosphere survive "Why does it matter what we do to the planet?" [no one really knows the answer to that - we're all agreed life will hang on somehow though]
2) This is a matter of philosophy, and therefore not necessarily something to be agreed, but when a planet or a solar system gains the ability to reach out and communicate with other planets/solar systems - that is not, qualitatively, something that need be distinctively 'human' - but as yet, we've no proof one way or the other that it's been achieved elsewhere - therefore it would be 'wrong' to set the universe back a few millenias development, to wipe out the like of local-galactic-area radio communications which may well be unique (or even near-unique) in the universe - we don't have that right.
3) finally, I think you miss the point about evolution - we're programmed, since long before we were human - to promote our genetics, our life, our continuation. That's NOT about being human, it's about being ALIVE - whatever than means - and supporting the biosphere helps support us, not as humans, but just as living things doing what living things OUGHT (especially ones claiming to be 'rational')
You saying "that's circular" has even less validity than the circular argument itself, unless you can present some argument beyond "The Earth can easily absorb anything that humans can throw at it" - which is both a truism, and irrelevant to the point being made, which is goes much deeper than "the fact it happens to be the seat of the human race"
--
Jaymax (cornucomer-doomopian)
Being alive is about energy storage. Life forms are batteries which store energy (indirectly) from the source of all life on this planet, the sun, for later use. And succesful life forms are able to replicate that ability. The reward for being alive is that stored energy is available when needed to perpetuate life. The meaning of life is to replicate and pass on the magic programming code (DNA) to enable perpetuation of energy storage. Evolution occurs to ensure that life fills every possible niche energy gathering habitat on the planet, diversification of the portfolio if you will. A comet may destroy dinosaurs and humanity, but life will survive in smaller, less energy intensive niches, thanks to diversification. It was inevitable that some species would be become as dominant as the naked ape because the need for energy storage (life) is programmed, ie. there's nothing that can stop the programmed need to store the sun's energy. You want to understand the meaning of life? Think energy storage.