TIMBUNAN

ENERGY

Field Development Plan

Gelama merah field

Safety Moment

Company Profile
Shazreena

TIMBUNAN
ENERGY

Team Leader

Shazreena

Nur Syuhada

Khairul Haziq

Faisal

Geology & Geophysics

Department

Petrophysics Department

Reservoir Department

Drilling Department

Shazreena

Muhsin

Faisal

Nur Syuhada

Production Department

Facilities Department

Economic Department

HS&E Department

MISSION

To deliver the safest, most economical and reliable engineering solutions in developing Gelama Merah
field to its maximum extent.
To provide the team members a steady platform for a knowledgeable, creative and competitive working
environment.

VISION
Delivering Solutions

Presentation Outline

GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS

PETROPHYSICS
RESERVOIR ENGINEERING
DRILLING ENGINEERING
PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY
FACILITIES ENGINEERING
ECONOMICS
HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

Geology &
Geoscience
5

Introduction

Gelama
Merah

Coordinate : 0503349.98N, 11405906.34E

Specifically located in the sub block 6S-18
Block SB 301
Located in the West Labuan-Paisley syncline,
defined by NS growth Morris fault
Characterised by trending anticline with
steep flank and strong faulted crest
SABAH BASIN

Source : http://www.offshoreenergytoday.com

Formed as a result of uplift and exhumation

of Crocker-fold thrust belt, since Middle
Miocene
Depositional environment : prograding delta
and coastal
Sand packages : Interbedded sand shale,
coarsening upwards
6

Reservoir Geology
Formation Unit
U3.2
U4.0
U5.0
U6.0
U7.0
U8.0
U9.0
U9.1
U9.2

Fluid Type
gas
gas
gas
gas
gas
gas
oil
oil
oil

HORIZONTAL CROSS SECTION GELAMA MERAH

274000
1200

275000

276000

277000

278000

1300

279000

280000

1329.7

1400

1495.3

1500

Depth (m)
1600

1700

1800

1900

LAST TO BE
DEPOSITED

2000

DEPOSITED LATER,
UPLIFTED,EROSION OCCURS
CAUSING UNCOMFORMITY

Length (m)

DEPOSITED
FIRST

Petroleum System of Gelama Merah

Siliclastic reservoir
ranging from
coastal/ shallow
marine to deep
marine turbidites.
Interbedded
sandtone with
minor dolomite.

Terrigeneous
organic matter
mainly from
stage IVA, IVC
and IVD

Anticlinal features,
stratigraphic traps,
unconformity
trapping
mechanisms

Migration along faults, and

through sedimentary
facies

No major seal but

shale and mudstone
units throughout the
stratigraphic column
provide effective top
8

Well to Well Correlation Gamma Ray

Log

U3.2 to U8.0 were identified

from GM-1 but not in GM-ST1

Both logs show the existence

of U9.0 to U9.2

Depositional Environment
Shale

Fining up
sandstone

Silt/fine
sand

Fluvial to deltaic depositional

environment

10

Volumetric Calculation
Area VS Depth
0

2000000 4000000 6000000 8000000 10000000

1150
1200
1250

top
bottom

1300

goc

1350

woc

1400

sp

1450
1500
1550
1600

STOIIP and GIIP for Gelama Merah

STOIIP = 7758 x GRV x NTG x x (1-Sw)

/ Bo in STB
GIIP = 43560 x GRV x NTG x x (1-Sw) /
Bg in SCF
11

Conclusion
ZONE OF INTEREST

1495.3m 1329.7m TVDSS

DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENT

Deltaic environment

SOURCE ROCK

Terrigeneous organic matter

RESERVOIR ROCK

Interbedded sandtone with minor

dolomite

STOOIP

215 MM STB

GIIP

71.4 B SCF

12

Petrophysics

13

Log Interpretation
Hydrocarbon Zone of Gelama Merah 1

ga
Gas zone
(1413m-1495m)

Oil zone
(1495m-1535m)
Water zone
(1535m-1575m)

Log Interpretation
Hydrocarbon Zone of Gelama Merah ST1

Gas zone
(1591m-1663m)

Oil zone
(1666m-1717m)

Water zone
(1718m-17623m)

Pressure Plot Analysis

Pressure (psia)

gas gradient =0.051 psia/ft

GOC = 4904.86 ft
oil gradient =0.375
psia/ft
water gradient =0.413
psia/ft

WOC = 5037.07 ft

Depth (ft)

Sensitivity Analysis
Gelama Merah

Porosity cut of

pb

Vshale cut of

GR log

Net To Gross
(NTG)

U3.2

0.10

2.48

0.30

65.95

0.000

U4.0

0.18

2.48

0.50

88.50

1.0000

U5.0

0.19

2.33

0.50

88.50

0.9565

U6.0

0.19

2.33

0.50

88.50

1.0000

U7.0

0.19

2.33

0.50

88.50

0.8131

U8.0

0.19

2.50

0.50

88.50

1.0000

U9.0

0.10

2.48

0.50

88.50

1.0000

U9.1

0.19

2.33

0.40

77..22

0.9674

U9.2

0.19

2.33

0.30

65.95

0.6386

Gelama Merah

Porosity cut off

pb

Vshale cut off

GR log

Net To Gross

ST1

Sandstone

Limestone

(NTG)

U9.0

0.01

2.62

0.20

75.06

0.97

U9.1

0.10

2.48

0.30

79.80

0.53

U9.2

0.10

2.48

0.30

79.80

0.80

Sandstone

Conclusion
Porosity

Porosity

Porosity

Porosity

Sw (min)

Sw (ML)

Sw (max)

Sw (average)

(min)

(ML)

(max)

(average)

0.1539

0.2262

0.2913

0.1993

0.2130

0.3068

0.4000

0.3228

0.1588

0.2948

0.4307

0.2899

0.0173

0.1635

0.3097

0.1226

0.1407

0.2801

0.4193

0.2855

0.0250

0.2222

0.4194

0.1329

0.1887

0.3121

0.4355

0.3255

0.0250

0.1242

0.2234

0.0931

0.1412

0.2902

0.4391

0.2230

0.0358

0.1988

0.3619

0.2198

0.1304

0.3254

0.5204

0.3308

0.0121

0.2057

0.3993

0.1302

0.1096

0.3185

0.5275

0.3424

0.0117

0.2204

0.4292

0.0823

0.1390

0.2663

0.3935

0.2821

0.0436

0.1957

0.3478

0.1012

0.1066

0.2090

0.3113

0.2186

0.0823

0.3185

0.5548

0.3149
18

Reservoir
Engineering
19

Reservoir & Hydrocarbon Classification

Compositional Analysis:

Reservoir Fluid Study Report:

Reported Reservoir Conditions
Reservoir
Pressure ................................
Reservoir Temperature

2116 psia
115 F

Constant Composition Expansion

Bubble Point
Pressure .........................

2014 psig

Differential Vaporization Test

(at 2014 psig and 115 F)
Oil Formation Volume
Factor ............
Solution Gas Oil Ratio

i
Oil Density

P > Pb

1.169
bbl/stb
336 scf/stb
0.828 g/cc

Undersaturated Oil
Reservoir

Component

Mole %

N2

2.43

CO2

0.94

C1

26.50

C2

2.63

C3

0.45

i-C4

0.15

n-C4

0.22

i-C5

0.13

n-C5

0.13

C6

0.43

C7

2.95

C8

4.18

C9

2.90

C10

4.48

C11+

51.49

Total

100.00

Gas Condensate
20

Fluid contact & Datum depth

Depth ft

MDT Pressure
Plot

GOC = 4904.86 ft @ 1495 m

Datum:
4971 ft
@
1515.3
m

WOC = 5037.07 ft @ 1535.3 m

Pressure psia

21

Reservoir Fluid & Rock Study

Oil
Oil
Density
Specific gravity
o
API
Viscosity
Compressibility
Formation volume

Gas
Gas
0.829 g/cc
0.83
39.71
1.35 cp
7.225E-06 psi-1
1.1678 bbl/stb

factor
Solution

Density
Specific gravity
Viscosity
Compressibility
Formation volume

336 scf/stb

6.82 lb/ft3
0.65
0.18 cp
6.58E-4 psi-1
7.438E-3

factor
Solution Gas/Oil

Gas/Oil

Water
Water

336 scf/stb

Water formation

1.0138

volume factor
Gas solubility in

20.2327

water
Water

2.99556E-

compressibility
Water viscosity

06
0.4434

Ratio

Ratio
Properties
Porosity
Permeability, md
Sw, fraction VP
Compressibility,

Minimum
0.182
81.7
0.1027
3.36 X 10-6

Most Likely
0.352
140
0.4353
4.69 X 10-6

Maximum
0.394
1170
0.7679
7.5 X 10-6

Skin factor

-2.1

1/psi

22

Well Development Planning

Drainage radius
Possible well placement
Number of well

Bubble map

18 possible
wells

Creaming curve

8 wells

Creaming curve
40
30
Cumulative Production (MMSTB)

20
10
0

6 10 14 18
0 4 8 12 16

Number of well

Well Development Planning

STRATEGY 1
Plan
No. of well
FOPT, MMstb
FGPT, MMMscf
Pressure @
2038

8 production
wells location
A
8
29.7
208
1516

B
8
30.5
206
1530

STRATEGY 2
C
8
28.9
211
1536

3 injection wells
location

Option
No. of producing

A
8

B
8

C
8

well
No. of injection

52.2
285

50.7
289

47.3
264

well
FOPT MMstb
FGPT MMMscf

Sensitivity Analysis
3 different scenarios
CASE 1

CASE 2

CASE 3

No of production well

No of injection well

Drainage radius

745

745

745

Type of Injection

water

water

gas

FOPT (MMSTB)

51.6

52.9

52.2

Oil flowrate STB/d

3000

3000

3000

FGPT (MMMscf)

24.3

28.3

28.5

Gas flowrate MMscf/d

10

14

13

Recovery factor %

24

25

25

SCENARIO

Production
Forecast

Pressure profile

25

Drive Mechanism
Rock & Liquid Expansion

Pressure profile

Water
Drive

Expansion of the individual rock grains

Formation compaction

Combination Drive
Water production
Production profile

Gravity
Drainage
26

Reservoir Simulation
Static
Static Model
Model

Dynamic
Dynamic Model
Model
Number of
cell

Grid Block
Size

NX : 66

1000

NY : 58

1000

NZ : 1
Simulator: Eclipse
100

50

27

Conclusion
Optimum well: 8 production well, 3 injection
well
Recovery factor: 25%
Oil estimated recoverable: 5.29E+07 STB
Water injection at 3rd year of production life
EOR may needed to enhance production

28

Drilling
Engineering
29

Rig Selection
Jack-up is recommended because it can operate at shallow depth since Gelama merah
water depth is 42.8 m and has lower cost than other rigs.
Rig type

Depth
Cost (USD)

Semisubmersible

Jack-up

Drillship

Up to 3000 m
(Deep water)

Up to 150 m
(shallow and
moderate )

610-3,048 m
(Deep water)

200000

180000

237,900
420,324

Spider Plot Well Location

Spider Plot Well Location
P1

15 P2

P4
P3

-25

P8
-20

-15

P6

-10

-5

10
5

I1

0
0

-5

P7

10

P5

15

20

I2

-10
-15
I1

P3

P1

P2

P4

P5

-20
-25P6

P7

P8

I1

I2

I3

Well Trajectory
Maximu
Build Up
m
Measure
Rate, Degree
Depth, ft
/100ft Inclinati
on,

Well

Horizont
al
TVD, ft
Distance
, ft

Kickoff
Point, ft

P1

4,971.00 3,158.46

600.00

2.00

44.68

P2
4,971.00 2,938.19
P3
(Centre) 4,971.00
0.00

600.00

2.00

41.90

0.00

0.00

0.00

P4

4,971.00 2,855.41

600.00

2.00

40.83

P5

4,971.00 4,803.04

600.00

2.00

60.72

P6

4,971.00 3,073.81

600.00

2.00

43.63

P7

4,971.00 5,292.37

600.00

2.00

64.00

P8

4,971.00 5,346.47

600.00

2.00

64.33

I1

4,971.00 1,402.28

600.00

2.00

19.93

I2

4,971.00 2,328.00

600.00

2.00

33.58

I3

4,971.00 4,514.80

600.00

2.00

58.50

Shape

6,148.73 L-Shape
5,997.66 L-Shape
4,971.00

Vertical

5,942.94 L-Shape
7,464.71 L-Shape
6,089.76 L-Shape
7,898.35 L-Shape
7,947.05 L-Shape
5,207.32 L-Shape
5,623.85 L-Shape
7,216.02 L-Shape

Casing and Cementing

Casing Setting Depth
Pressure Profile

0.00
0.00
500.00

500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 4000.00 4500.00

Formatio
n
Pressure
(psi)

Kick Tolerance 100 bbl

Full gas at 24''

1000.00
Full gas at 17 1/2''

1500.00
2000.00

Kick Tolerance 50 bbl

Full gas at 12 1/4''

2500.00

Depth (ft)

3000.00

Fracture
Pressure
(psi)
Kick
Margin
(psi)

3500.00
Kick Tolerance 50 bbl

4000.00
4500.00
5000.00
5500.00

Trip
Margin
(psi)

Pressure (psi)

Casing and Cementing

Casing Type

OD (in)

Conductor

26

Casing
Setting
Depth
(ft)
600

Surface

20

1500

Intermediate

13 3/8

2600

Production

9 5/8

4971

Casing and Cementing

Casing Design Selection

Type of casing

Grade

OD, in

ID, in

Hole Size, in

Nominal Weight

Thickness
Burst Burst Pressure

Design Factor
Collaps
Collapse
e
Pressure

Design Factor
Tensile
tensile

Design Factor

Joint

Joint Strength

Pressure

Design Factor (DF)

Tensile

1.3

Burst

1.1

Collapse

1.0

Surface
K-55
20.00
18.28
24.00
169.00
0.81
1953.88
1.78

Intermediate
N-80
13.38
12.33
17.50
72.00
0.51
2690.09
1.52

Production
N-80
9.625
8.25
12.25
43.50
0.44
3163.64
1.15

2500.00

2670.00

3810.00

2.02
797989.62
1.76
STC
1402000.00

1.62
408916.03
2.54
STC
1040000.00

1.06
247053.44
3.34
LTC
825000.00

Casing and Cementing

Casing

Cementing Selection
Type of Cement: Class G, 2% cement
Type of Additives: Bentonite
Surface Casing
Surface
No of sacks of
cement, Nc
22145.44
No sacks of
additives, Na
442.91
Total Weight of
Additive
Required, Wa
(lb)
41633.43
Total Volume of
Water
Required, Vw
(gal)
2066.01

Excess Volume

Surface

30%

Intermediate

10%

Production

10%

Intermediate

Production

16907.94

18449.65

338.16

368.99

31786.93

34685.34

20506.04

22375.83

Drill String Design

Grade
OD
ID
Min. Tensile
Min. Yield
Collapse Pressure
WOB
Length DP
Length DC
BF
Desired MOP
Margin Of Overpull,
MOP
Total Load
Tensile Strenght DP

Unit
Surface
Intermediate Production

G105
G105
S135
in
5.00
5.00
5.00
in
4.28
4.28
4.28
psi
115000.00 115000.00 145000.00
psi
105000.00 105000.00 135000.00
psi
701.26
1283.05
2582.20
lb
11023.10
24250.82
50706.26
ft
1400.00
2440.00
4681.00
ft
60.00
120.00
250.00
dimensionle
ss
0.86
0.85
0.85
lb
100000.00 100000.00 100000.00
lb
lb
lb

525016.80
55229.84
603411.96
Design Factor
dimensionle
Static Tension DF
ss
54.74
dimensionle
Dynamic Tension DF
ss
10.93
dimensionle

500073.10
80173.53
295130.63

382582.59
606224.27
132259.36

24.88

15.00

7.53

5.75

Drill Bit Selection

Type of
Casing

Casing OD
(in)

Bit
Diameter
(in)

Bit Type

Conductor

26

Piling

Piling

24

Milled Tooth
Bit

17 1/2

Milled Tooth
Bit

12 1/4

Milled Tooth
Bit

Surface
20
Intermediate
13 3/8
Production
9 5/8

Drilling Fluid Selection

Depth (ft)

Mud weight
(ppg)

Casing

Mud Base

0 600

Conductor

Piling

600 1500

Surface

Seawater + Hi
Vis Sweeps

1500 2600

9.5

Intermediate

Potassium
Chloride, KCL

2600 4971

10

Production

Potassium
Chloride, KCL

Well Control
Blowout Preventer (BOP) is used to seal the annular space between the
surface and hole when there is a pressure kick inside the wellbore.
The minimum requirement for the BOP system must meet the
specification of API RP 53.
The requirement for BOP used is a diverter system, annular preventer, an
8 spool equipped with full remote control valves, a pipe ram and a blind
ram.
Type of
Depth, ft
Maximum
Gas
Pressure
Casing
Reservoir Hydrostat rating, psi
Pressure,
ic
psi
Pressure,
psi
Conductor

600

300

30

3000

Surface

1500

680

68

3000

Intermediat
e

2600

1220

122

3000

Production

4971

2270

227

3000

Time-Depth Chart
Depth (m)

Rig Move
&
0.00
Position
Drill 24'' hole

500.00

run casing and cement

20'' surface
Drill 17 1/2'' hole
run casing and cement 13
5/8'' intermediate
Drill 12 1/4''
hole

1000.00

run casing and cement 9

5/8'' production
Days
1500.00
0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Depth vs Days
(Gelama Merah Well)

30.00

35.00

40.00

Well Cost Estimate

Terms

Cost (USD Million)

Tangible

1.045

Intangible

2.512

Contracted

8.503

Allocations

2.074

Total Cost (15% contingency)

16.263

Conclusion
Rig Selection: Jack-up rig
Cost Estimation : 1 Well = USD 16.26 Million
Surface

Intermediate

Production

Casing
K-55
N-80
N-80
Selection
Cementing
(sacks)
24158.66
18445.02
15617.44
Drill String
G-105
G-105
S-135
Selection
Drill Bit
Milled Tooth Bit Milled Tooth Bit Milled Tooth Bit
Selection
Drilling Fluid Seawater + Hi
Potassium
Potassium
Selection
Vis Sweeps
Chloride, KCL
Chloride, KCL

Production
Technology
44

Inflow Performance Curve and Tubing

Performance Curve
FUTURE IPR

IPR

Pr = 2151
psi
2500

2500

2000

2000

1500

1500

Qmax= 4134
bopd

Pwf (psia) 1000

Pb
= 2087
500
psi
2000

3000

4000

1500
Pwf (psia)
1000
500
0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Flowrate (bbl/d)

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Flowrate (bbl/d)

TPC with diferent tubing size

2000

1520
0

Flowrate (bbl/d)

1600

5000

2500

2100
1800

500

1000

PRESENT
2000

Pwf (psia) 1000

Pmin = 1500
psi

PRESEN
T
2100
psia
2000
psia
1800
psia
1600
psia
1520
psia

Flowrate rate vs Tubing Size

3000
2500
2000
Flowrate (bbl/d)

1500
1000
500
0
2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6
Tubing size (inch)

45

Sensitivity Analysis GLR and THP

TPC with varying GLR - 3.5 inch
2500
2000

INCREASING
1500
GLR
Pwf (psia) 1000
500
0
0

2000

4000

6000

Flowrate (bbl/d)

PRESEN
T
2100
2000
1800
1600
1520
GLR
200
GLR
400

2500

Pwf (psia) 1000

500
0
0

2000 4000 6000

Flowrate (bbl/d)

Max THP = 390 psi

Min THP = 156 psi

2500
2000
1500
Pwf (psia) 1000
500
0
0

2000 4000 6000

Flowrate (bbl/d)

TPC with varying wellhead pressure - 3.5 inch

INCREASING
2000
WHP
1500

TPC with varying GLR - 4.5 inch

PRESENT
2100
2000
1800
1600
1520
150 psia
250 psia
350 psia
390 psia

PRESEN
T
2100
2000
1800
1600
1520
GLR
200
GLR
400

TPC with varying wellhead pressure - 4.5 inch

2500
2000
1500
Pwf (psia) 1000
500
0
0

2000 4000 6000

Flowrate (bbl/d)

PRESE
NT
2100
2000
1800
1600
1520
150
psia

TUBING SELECTION 4.5

inch
More than enough to
produce, allow well to
produce naturally under all
varying conditions
No tubing replacement is
needed in the future since
this size can cater
production at the lowest
expected reservoir
pressure REDUCE COST
Tubing 5.5 inch and 7 inch
are too costly compared to
4.5 inch

46

Completion String Design

Conventional Spooled Wellhead and standard
cross piece Xmas Tree
Screwed or welded to casing top joint
Surface is located at the platform
Strong anti corrosion material

Gas lift
valve

4.5
production
tubing

Packer

Slotted Liner

Completion Fluid
Brine with NaCl (8.5-9.5 ppg)
Packer Fluid
Brine with NaCl minimize clay swelling,
assist in lowering corrosion rate
Perforation
Not applicable open hole completion
Artificial Lift Selection Gas Lift
Low initial reservoir pressure 2151 psi, need
artificial lift to maintain desired production
rate
Gas lift is chosen because Gelama Merah has
high GOR and a steady amount of gas for
reinjection
Cost effective and easy installation

47

Material Selection
CO2 = 2 %/100
= 2151 0/100
= 0 psia

H2S = H2S %/100

= 2151 0/100
= 0 psia
H2S (ppm)

CO2 (mole)

Pressure (psi)

1753

Temperature (degree F)

155

CO2 (psi)

H2S (psi)

13
Cr

48

Production Problem and Control

Highly unlikely to occur, but
injection points for wax dispersion
should be included

No signs of deposition
asphaltene
Apply asphaltene inhibitor

13 Cr alloy for material

selection
Use neutralizing inhibitors
and reduce hydrogen ion in
environment

WAX
DEPOSITION

CORROSION

ASPHALTEN
E

SCALE
FORMATION

of

Occurs as formation water is

produced
Carry out further studies after
water starts to be produced to
implement the best mitigation ways
49

Facility
Engineering
50

Oil and Gas Properties

GPM calculation
Componen
t

Mol%

Mole
Molecula
fraction,
r wt ,Mi
Yi

Yoi

GPM

N2

2.85

0.0285

44.01

0.82

0.48

CO2

7.39

0.0739

28.01

0.81

0.81

C1

80.52

0.8052

16.04

0.00

C2

0.08

30.06

0.36

2.11

C3

0.78

0.0078

44.1

0.51

0.21

I-C4

0.16

0.0016

58.12

0.56

0.05

N-C4

0.18

0.0018

58.12

0.58

0.06

I-C5

0.05

0.0005

72.15

0.63

0.02

N-C5

0.04

0.0004

72.15

0.63

0.01

C6

0.02

0.0002

86.17

0.66

0.01

C7

0.01

0.0001

185

0.69

0.01

H2S

Total

100

By referring to Reservoir Engineering

Handbook by Tarek Ahmad
GPM = 11.173 (Psc/Tsc) (i Mi)/oi)
Psc= Standard pressure, psia
Tsc = Standard temperature, R
i = mole fraction of component i in
the gas phase
Mi = molecular weight of component
i
oi = specific gravity of component i
as a liquid at standard conditions
(refer to Reservoir Engineering Handbook
Book by Tarek Ahmed)

3.77

51

Surface Processing Facilities

Process Flow Diagram

52

Platform Selection
Consideration

Water depth
Cost
Sea condition and
environment
Lifespan
Stability

Steel Jacket
Platform

FPSO

Shallow

Concrete
Gravity Base
Structure
Platform
Medium

Low

Moderate

high

Good

Good

Moderate

>20 years

>20 years

<20 years

Good

Good

Moderate

deep

* Steel Jacket Platform is chosen as production platform

53

Platform Layout
Drilling rig
Crane

Flare

Helideck

Power
generati
on
Quarters

Top side

Top deck
Bottom deck

Jacket

Top view of platform

Side view of platform

54

Crude oil Transportation

Option 1

Pipeline tie in to Semarang CPP

Option 2

Pipeline direct to LCOT and LGAST

Option 3

FSO + oil tanker

55

Crude oil Transportation

56

Conclusion

Fixed Jacket platform is selected as it suitable to be in used in Gelama Merah

Field
The best transportation of oil and gas will be via tie-in pipeline to CPP Semarang.

57

Economics

58

Economic Assumption
Terms

Value

Oil Price

USD 48/bbl

Gas Price

USD 2.5/MMbtu

Base year

2016

Price Increment

3% on Oil and Gas Price

Company Policies
Terms

Value

Internal Rate of Return (IRR)

Above 15%

Payback Period

Less than 10 years

Net Present Value (NPV)

Profit Index Ratio (PIR)

Above 100 Million

Above 2

Project Costs
Option 1
CAPEX
(USD
Million)
Based of
MOD
(5%
escalation )
OPEX
(USD
Million)

Option
2

Option
3

Fixed Structure

142.49

142.49

350.49

Pipeline and Tangible

198.16

285.6

197.35

(Well)

15.87

17.45

17.45

Intangible

356.52

445.54

565.29

17.8

22.28

28.26

Total Cost
5 % fixed of Total
CAPEX

Economic Model
Terms

Value (Based of PSC

1997)

Royalty

10% of Gross Revenue

Taxes

38% of Taxable Income

Research Cess

0.5% of Profit

Export Duty

10% of Profit

Supplementary Payment

Project Cash Flow

Project Cash Flow Option 1

TCS=1495.85 Mil

Payback Period: 6 years

NCF
CNCF

Million USD

Year

MCO=-373.02 Mil

Project Cash Flow Option 2

TCS=1601.57 Mil
Payback Period: 6.5 years

NCF
CNCF

Million USD

Year

MCO=-466.51 Mil

Project Cash Flow Option 3

TCS=1453.84 Mil

Payback period: 7.5 years

NCF
CNCF

Million USD

Year

MCO=-592.22 Mil

Project NPV Profile

Project NPV Profile

$1,800.00
$1,600.00
$1,400.00
$1,200.00

Option 1:
367.80 Million

$1,000.00

Option 2:
335.12 Million

Option 3:
220.29 Million

Option 1
Option 2

$800.00
NPV Million
$600.00

Option 3

$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
0
-$200.00

10

20

Optio
n 1:
30
23%40

Option
2: 20%
50

-$400.00
Percentage %

60

70

Option 3: 15%

80

90

100

Summary For Economy Analysis

From summary, we decide to choose Option 1 because it have higher NPV,IRR and ROI
and lower payback period.
Terms

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

NPV
(USD
Million)

367.80

335.12

220.29

IRR
(%)

23

20

15

Payback
period
(years)

6.5

7.5

PIR

4.01

3.43

2.45

Sensitivity Analysis
The Oil price, oil production and CAPEX are the most sensitive and
any changes on these parameters will affect the sensitivity of
project.
Spider Plot For NPV Option 1
450
Oil Production
400

Oil Price

NPV (million)

Price Increment
350
OPEX
CAPEX

300

Gas Production

-15%

250
0%
Percentage change

15%

Gas Price

Sensitivity Analysis
The CAPEX, oil price, and oil production are the most sensitive and
any changes on these parameters will affect the sensitivity of
project.
Spider Plot For IRR Option 1
30
Oil Production
Oil Price
25
Price Increment
OPEX
20
CAPEX
Gas Production

-15%

15
0%
Percentage change (%)

15%

Gas Price

Sensitivity Analysis
The oil price, oil production and CAPEX are the most sensitive and
any changes on these parameters will affect the sensitivity of
project.
Tornado Diagram For NPV Option 1
Oil Production
Oil Price
CAPEX
-15

Gas Price

15

Gas Production
Price Increment
OPEX
250

300

350
NPV (million)

400

450

Sensitivity Analysis
The CAPEX, oil price, and oil production are the most sensitive and
any changes on these parameters will affect the sensitivity of
project.
Tornado Diagram For IRR Option 1
CAPEX

Oil Production

Oil Price
-15
15

Gas Price

Gas Production

Price Increment
19

20

21

22

23

Percentage (%)

24

25

26

27

Health, Safety &

Environment
69

HSE Policies and Scopes

Internation
al
standards
benchmark
Stringent
regulatory

Personnel
welfare

Workplace
safety

Environmen
tal concerns

HSE legislations, regulations and standards

Petroleum Development
Act (PDA) 1974

Environmental
Quality Act 1974
HSE
Legislation
s

Occupational
Safety and
Health Act
1994

HSE
Regulatio
ns
OSHA
1994

Factories and Machinery

Act 1967

International
Organisation
for
Standards
(ISO)
HSE
Standards

Petroleum(Safety
Measure Act) 1984
International
Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC)

The American
Petroleum
Institute (API)

Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Control

Timbunan Energy

Nur Syuhadah bt Abdul Fatah

(HSE Officer)

Environmental Management and Control

Activities
magnetic

Exploration gravimetric
Surveying seismic
Development and
Production

more wells were drilled after the

size of oil field is known

rig movement
Exploration rig building
Drilling

Appraisal

drill more wells

removal of the equipment

restoration of the site to
environmentally sound conditions
Decommissioning
continually monitoring after the
and
closure
Rehabilitation

Environmental Management and Control

Control & Preventive Measures
appropriate international and national laws, regulations and
guidelines
coherent procedures for decisions on project or activities
enforceable standards for operations
clear legislations
performance reporting
appropriate monitoring procedures and protocols

HSE Planning and Procedure

Asses and Analyse HSE Risk

Emergency Response Plan

(ERP)

Evaluate HSE Capability Questionnaire

Plan

Evaluate Historical Performance

Permit To Work Form

Practic
e

Adjust

Evalua
te

HSE Planning and Procedure

Evacuation Route

HSE Implementation, Performance Monitoring and

Management Review
Indicators on
environment, health
and safety

Documented
statistics

KPI on safety
performance

Conclusion
Timbunan Energy has put all aspects of company parts as crucial
aspects for health and safety environment
We believe that HSE plays an important roles for a success
exploration and production of oil and gas
With that, we know a safe and healthy environment is a key for
optimum production and low risk in our business to ensure our
goals achieved.

Overall Conclusion
Total oil production = 51.6 MM STB in 20 years with 24%
RF
NPV = 367.8 million USD

THANK YOU
Q&A SESSION

80