The ROGTEC Interview: Martin Rylance, BP Engineering Manager, Fracturing & Stimulation, and Global Senior Advisor
Your title would suggest an active role in all play types as well as BP´s exploration activities. Please describe your role in the company and your goals.
My role can be summarised as ensuring that all of BP’s pumping operations, fracturing, stimulation, chemical, intervention e.t.c. are coordinated within one team and that this influence extends to all BP operations, JV companies as well as OBO (Operated By Others). This ranges from our exploration activities, through appraisal programmes and into development programmes.
In terms of goals, with a remit as outlined above my primary goal is to establish ‘pumping services’ as a sub-discipline across BP. We have a team that is globally distributed, but works to the same template, is a learning organisation and presents us with an opportunity to progress the careers of Individuals, while benefitting BP with an increasingly efficient and optimal set of solutions to well fracturing and stimulation. This is already paying substantial dividends to the individuals, the BP regions and BP as a whole.
It seems that “fracturing” is the industries buzz word, with one engineer recently telling me: “we frac everything… Then we frac it again!” But what happens when a frac job goes wrong? What are some of the key lessons and best practices you have learned from fracs which haven’t gone according to plan?
Ok, let’s have some fun. Definitely there are many many key lessons to be learned and unfortunately mistakes are made time and time again, from one part of the globe to another; they tend to fall in the same categories and so with coordinated and coherent learning they are easily avoided, but I will just discuss two of these.
Top of the list is the assessment of formation properties (chiefly permeability or indeed kh), permeability is meaningless unless the conditions under which it was measured are quoted (i.e. it has to be referenced) and adjusted to in-situ behaviour. All too often, outside BP, I see examples of permeability/kh numbers being bandied about that are merely log derived (remember logs don’t ‘measure’ permeability). Until a well-test (and associated PTA) or some form of transient test such as a DFIT/ACA, has been performed then kh estimates are just that. It is not unusual to see initial estimates reduced by an order of magnitude, once appropriate data is available (that obviously directly impacts productivity and Frac & Stim delivery).
The second biggest lesson is operational QA/QC. Now for operational QA/QC a lot of people might think “oh that means that when fracs go wrong it is because the fluid is bad”, in fact it is very difficult to create a fluid that will ‘gunk-up’ or ‘limit’ frac behaviour, but it is very easy to create a fluid that will not allow the correct fracture geometry/conductivity to be placed. Operational QA/QC is the key to consistency and consistency is the key to understanding; all operations should be managed coherently, all parties benefit. For example, when BP created the TNK-BP Frac Team (2003), we wrote a standard that is still used in Russia today and was welcomed by the Service Sector as a watershed in Russian Frac operational QA/QC behaviour.
Alongside the environmental concerns, one of the major concerns with fracturing is the association with tremors and quakes. What is your view on this and the environmental concerns? How can the risk be minimised?
There is no doubt that fracturing results in seismic activity during the pumping/closure phase, this is the entire basis for the micro-seismic industry. However, pump durations are short and the energy packets that are released are tiny in comparison to convential seismic (earthquake) behaviour and careful candidate selection and respect for faults can minimise any events. The likely true culprit for increased (measurable) seismic activity in some US States, is probably the increased use of Class II water disposal wells for waste fluids. These wells are pumped on over very long periods, are used by many many industries (not just petroleum), it’s likely that the increased frac activity (and hence associated increased water disposal) has resulted in more activity from these long duration pumping wells.
With BP having a significant stake in Rosneft, what levels of strategic and technical cooperation are we currently seeing between both companies? How will this relationship develop in the future?
Certainly, from my own perspective, I would like to see us working very closely with Rosneft on their fracturing operations, specifically multi-fractured horizontal wells in tight-oil and HPHT tight-gas opportunities. As Rosneft have seen, with TNK-BP, we have a lot to offer in this space and with the level of activity that Rosneft have I am sure that it will only be a matter of time before this gets underway. Given the current depression in oil-price, traditionally as oil-price drops new well delivery reduces, however frac activity (re-fracturing) in old wells starts to increase and we have been very active in certain parts of the globe already in re-fracturing. This might be one of the first areas that we can start to assist with.
Regarding the region’s tight-oil/tight-gas reserves; how will you utilize your worldwide experience to ensure Rosneft maximizes its regional potential?
That’s a very good question and very pertinent right now. What I have seen quite a bit of so far, with tight-oil development, is the misapplication of a number of technologies that were designed for very, very low permeabilities being used in formations with much better matrix permeability. It is quite concerning, as these technologies simply don’t apply and the industry runs the risk of under-evaluating global opportunities because of such misapplications; it’s a real issue and one that I published on just last year (SPE 170773, Rylance & Martin, 2014).
Therefore, I see one of our opportunities, with Rosneft, is to help steer them away from some of these technologies (which are oversold) and towards solutions that are appropriate and effective for the formation conditions that they have. Such a co-operative relationship will potentially reap great rewards for both parties, as BP have similar acreage in Alaska to Rosneft’ acreage in Siberia. Additionally, over time I have no doubt that the very innovative Russian oilfield will develop and apply technologies that we can take elsewhere as well.
Do you see Russia following the North American model, with an associated upswing in activity, around enhanced development of its own oil and gas deposits any time soon?
I do see the likely increased application of multi-fractured horizontal wells, however as with my answer to the last question, with the caveat that the appropriate solutions are applied. The key to effective deployment is actually going to be around the drilling costs and efficiencies, let me explain. If we can achieve an uplift in production of say 2 to 3 fold with a multi-fractured Horizontal vs. a Vertical then we would potentially be interested in pursuing this depending upon the associated drilling costs. For example, if the associated drilling cost factor of a Horizontal vs. a Vertical were say 1.5 then it is likely a good choice, if it is a factor of 2 then there is less incentive and if it is a factor of 2.5 then there is little benefit. We have to ‘move’ Russian horizontal well drilling costs into the 1.5 times a Vertical arena, and we will be in good shape.
Biography :
Martin Rylance is the Senior Advisor and the Engineering Team Leader for Fracturing & Stimulation within BP. He has worked with BP, their partners and JV’s for 30 Years, since graduating with a BSc in Pure Mathematics. Technically, he is involved in all aspects of pumping operations and implementation of numerous campaigns, pilots and exploration programmes, across more than 30 countries. Additionally, he has specialised in unconventionals, tectonic regimes and HPHT environments. Active with SPE, ASME and various Numerical and Geological Societies, Distinguished Lecturer Fracturing 2007 and 2013, he is also a Fellow
of the Institute of Mathematics in London.
