Offshore Data-Files - Thunder Said Energy

Water injection at oil fields: the economics?

This model captures the energy economics of a conventional waterflooding project in the oil industry, in order to maintain reservoir pressure and productivity at maturing oilfields.

Our base case calculations suggest strong economics, with 30% IRRs at $40/bbl oil on a project costing $2.5/boe in capex and $1/bbl of incremental opex.

Please download the data-file to stress-test parameters such as commodity prices, water injection rates, reservoir pressure, electricity prices and other economic assumptions.

Energy Costs of Constructing Wind Assets

This data-file reviews 10 technical papers, in order to estimate the energy costs of manufacturing 1kW of wind turbines (in MWH/kW), the payback time to recoup that energy (in years) and the ultimate energy return on energy invested (EROEI).

The average CO2 intensity of wind turbines is suggested at around 13g/kWh, based on papers that disclosed this number.

Although one observation from reviewing the papers is that their methodologies are rough and may have under-estimated total energy intensities, especially around waste materials.

Comparable data for solar assets is linked here.

Floating production systems versus subsea tiebacks: the costs?

This model estimates the line-by-line costs of an FPSO project, across c45 distinct cost lines, in order to quantify the potential savings of a tieback or a ‘fully subsea’ development.

Our estimates drawing on four technical papers, as illustrated in the backup tabs of the model. For a full discussion, see our recent note ‘The future of offshore: fully subsea‘.

We estimate c$750M of cost savings for a tieback, and c$500M of cost savings for a fully subsea development, as compared against a traditional project with a traditional production facility. Please download the model to see the different cost drivers, line-by-line.

Platform supply vessels: what contribution to CO2?

This data-model calculates the contribution of Platform Supply Vessels (PSVs) to an offshore oil and gas asset’s emissions profile, as measured in kg/boe.

Our base case estimate is 0.1kg/boe for a productive asset in a well-developed basin. The numbers can be increased c4x in a remote basin, or by another c4x for smaller fields, so emissions >1kg/boe are possible.

Initatives to lower these emissions by 10-20% through LNG-fuelling or hybridization are described in the final tab. They will likely save 0.01-0.02kg/boe from most PSVs and other supply vessels.

Fully subsea offshore projects: the economics?

This model presents the economic impacts of developing a typical, 625Mboe offshore gas condensate field using a fully subsea solution, compared against installing a new production facility.

Both projects are modelled out fully, to illstrate production profiles, per-barrel economics, capex metrics, NPVs, IRRs and sensitivity to oil and gas prices (e.g. breakevens).

The result of a fully offshore project is lower capex, lower opex, faster development and higher uptime, generating a c4% uplift in IRRs, a 50% uplift in NPV6 (below) and a 33% reduction in the project’s gas-breakeven price.

Please download the model to interrogate the numbers and input assumptions.

Offshore wind costs are inflating?

This data-file tabulates the capex costs of 35 offshore wind projects in the UK, with 8.5GW of capacity, which have been installed since the year 2000.

We model the incentive price for each project, i.e., the power price that is needed to earn a 10% levered but unsubsizided. There is little evidence for deflation. Rather, breakevens appear to have risen at a 2.5% CAGR over the past decade.

Please download the data-file to interrogate the findings, or view the individual project parameters. Continued technical innovation is needed in the wind industry. We find new airship concepts could help deflate logistic costs.

Offshore Wind Patents: Majors and Services?

This data-file tracks wind patents, across 20 traditional energy companies, comprising cap goods conglomerates, Oil Majors and Offshore Oil Services. The aim is to assess which companies have differentiated IP to benefit from the scale-up of offshore wind.

Traditional offshore-focused energy companies (ie Majors and Oil Services) are not generally found to have differentiated wind IP, comprising <2% of the offshore wind patents since 2000. 2 Majors and 2 Service companies have, however, made interesting inroads.

Covered companies include: ABB, Aker, Alstom, Aramco, BP, Cameron, Chevron, Eni, Equinor, ExxonMobil, GE, OneSubsea, Saipem, Shell, Siemens, Subsea 7, Technip, TOTAL and Vestas.

Subsea Services: Patent Leaders?

This data-file captures all the subsea-focused patents from ten of the largest subsea service providers around the industry, to quantify who has a technical edge (chart above).

The balance has been shifting. During the oil downturn, large, industrial conglomerates effectively halved their pace of technology development, while some subsea service companies accelerated (chart below).

The relative rankings are interesting. The data-file shows clear leaders in the categories such as subsea pumps, wellheads or umbilicals. Other areas are more competitive, with 2-3 companies vying for leadership in, flexible risers, subsea power or pipe-lay. One large subsea EPC screens as ‘Top 5’ on most categories, but is facing strong competion across the board.

Covered companies include: ABB, Aker, Cameron, FMC, GE, OneSubsea, Saipem, Siemens, Subsea7, Technip.

US CO2 and Methane Intensity by Basin

CO2 and methane intensities are tabulated for 300 distinct company positions across 9 distinct basins in this data-file. Using the data, we can aggregate the total CO2 in (kg/boe) and methane leakage rates (as a percent of natural gas production) across the US’s different basins.

Covered basins include the Permian, Bakken, Eagle Ford, Marcellus/Utica, Alaska, GoM, Powder River, San Juan, Anadarko basin and DJ basin (chart above).

It is possible to rank the best companies in each basin, using the granular data, to identify industry leaders and laggards (chart below).

Power from Shore: the economics?

We model the economics of powering an oil platform from shore, using cheap renewable power instead of traditional gas turbines. This can lower upstream CO2 emissions by 5-15kg/bbl, or on average, around 70%; for a base case cost of $50-100/ton.

Our numbers are derived from reviewing technical papers, plus ten prior projects (mostly in Norway), which are tabulated in the data-file, including capex figures (in $M and $/W) where disclosed.

The costs of CO2 abatement can be flexed by varying inputs to the model, such as project size, gas prices, power prices and carbon prices.

Cookies?