Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

CHAPTER 5
PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Six (06) drainage points have been identified to achieve a plateau production rate
of 5000 bbl/day based on the results of reservoir simulation model. One (01)
Vertical, Three (03) Deviated and Two (02) horizontal production wells will be
drilled together with 2 water injectors with the highest recovery factor of 14.3 %,
obtained from reservoir simulation.

The MDT survey of the Gelama Merah shows that all sand units are in the same
pressure system. The producers and injectors will be completed as single string
and unit-9.0, 9.1 & 9.2 will be produced commingled. Different sand exclusion
techniques are considered and is modeled but will not be installed initially due to
high pressure drop however, if required, Wire Wrapped Screen will be used. It has
been identified that there will be no immediate need of artificial lift from the
initial production at the field but the wells ceases to flow at early water cut
therefore, considerations for future artificial lifting will be included to facilitate
future need when reservoir pressure has declined with increasing water cut.

5.2 DATA AVAILABILITY

The well deliverability analyses were carried out on the basis of performance
during Drill Stem Testing (DST) of the exploration well Gelama Merah-1, with
the help of EPS Wellflo software. One DST was carried out on Unit-8.0 using 3
½” string. Well model is based on the results from DST and PVT fluid samples
collected during the test as shown in Table 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3.

5-1
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Table 5.1: Gelama Merah-1 DST Results Summary

Period Main Flow Max Flow

Duration, hr 8 3:58
Choke (1/64’’) 32 128
FBHP, psi @ 1496.1 m-MDRKB 1,753 1479
FBHT, degF @ 1496.1 m- MDRKB 155 151
WHP, psia 390 156
WHT, deg F 97 104
Separator pressure, psi 155 139
Separator temp, deg F 94 99
Oil rate, stb/d 1378 2745
Gas rate, MMSCFD 0.39 0.73
Water rate, bbl/d 0 0
GOR, scf/stb 283 267
Gas Gravity, Air=1 0.65 0.65
Oil Gravity, Deg Api 23.7 23.6
H2S, ppm 0 0
CO2, % 0 0
BS & W, % 0 0

Table 5.2: Direct Interpretation from DST

Skin -2.1
Kh, md-ft 4130
Effective Permeability, md 140
Effective Thickness, ft 29.5
Initial Reservoir Pressure, psi 2151

Table 5.3: PVT Results of Fluid Sample from Gelama Merah-1

Datum Pressure, Psi 2151

Bubble Point Pressure, Psi 2116
Oil Gravity, deg API 23.7
Gas Gravity 0.650
GOR, scf/stb 326
Bo, bbl/stb 1.168
Oil Viscosity, cp 1.337

5-2
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

5.3 COMPLETION STRING DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

The completion string for Gelama Merah development wells will be designed on
the basis of MDT data, as shown in Table 5.4, which indicates that all the
hydrocarbon bearing zones in GM structure are from one pressure system.

Table 5.4: MDT Result of Gelama Merah-1

Gelama Merah - 1 MDT RESULTS

Pressure Pressure
ZONE MD (m) TVD (m) (Psia) (Psia)
From To From To Top Bottom
1332 1587 1332 1587 2092.6 2238.7

The production strategy will be to produce the oil commingle from different sand
units with hydraulic retrievable packer for zonal isolations. Production from all
the units will be through perforations. Provision of gas lift mandrels will also be
provided in the vertical section of the wells for the future need of gas lifting.

5.3.1 Well Completion Matrix

A total of 08 development wells are proposed for Gelama Merah field

development, based on the reservoir simulation results which consist of 01
vertical, 03 deviated and 02 horizontal oil producers and 02 water injectors as
shown in Table 5.5. All of oil producers will be completed as cased hole.

Table 5.5: Well Completion Matrix

Well
Well Type Perforated Sand Description Remarks
Name
Commingled flow from different
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Single Oil
GLA Vertical units casedhole
9.2 Producer
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Commingled flow from different Single Oil
GLB Deviated
9.2 units casedhole Producer

5-3
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Commingled flow from different Single Oil

GLC Deviated
9.2 units casedhole Producer
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Commingled flow from different Single Oil
GLD Deviated
9.2 units casedhole Producer
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Commingled flow from different Single Oil
GLE Horizontal
9.2 units casedhole Producer
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Commingled flow from different Single Oil
GLF Horizontal
9.2 units casedhole Producer
Single
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Single perforated
WIA Vertical Water
9.2
Injector
Single
Unit-9.0, 9.1 and Single perforated
WIB Vertical Water
9.2
Injector

5.3.2 Wellhead and Casing Hanger

For the designed casing configuration i.e 26” conductor casing, 13 3/8”
surface casing and 9 5/8” production casing a conventional spooled wellhead
is proposed where head housing is either screwed or welded to the top joint of
the casing. Each housing will have an internal profile to accommodate casing
hanger to hang the casing.

The basic criteria for wellhead and Christmas tree equipments are:

5.3.3 Christmas Tree Design

All wells are proposed to use the standard cross piece X-Mas Tree where a
series of valves which control physical or hydraulic access into the tubing
and/or annulus. The access capabilities are normally required for:

 Vertical access to lower down wireline tools.

 Capability to inject into the tubing.
 Capability to completely close off the well.

5-4
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Christmas tree design will conform to the standard specifications of API 6A

Latest Edition.

Critical design features incorporated will include the following:

 Christmas trees will comprise of 1 lower master valve, 1 upper master

valve with pneumatic actuators, 1 swab valve and 1 wing valves.
 Bottom flange of Christmas tree and Tubing Hanger will be prepared
for Continuous Control Line option to avoid potential leak/damage of
Hanger Neck seal problem.
 Bottom flange of Christmas tree and Tubing Hanger will be modified
to accommodate Permanent Downhole Gauges (PDG) cable.

5.3.4 Completion Accessories

The completion strings are designed to provide flexibility on production

program for better reservoir management and Technically and Economically
viable. Appendix 5-1 shows typical configuration of proposed producers and
injectors. Following are the design summary:

i. Single oil Producer in 9-5/8” OD casing

ii. String will consist of 2 7/8” OD completion. Optimum tubing size selected
after running sensitivities for different tubing sizes in the generated wellflo
model as this will give us the desired rate.

iii. Downhole pressure gauges (PDG) will be installed in both producers and
injectors that will transmit real time pressure data for better reservoir
management. An important justification for PDGs is close reservoir
monitoring, production optimization and reduce intervention cost.

iv. A hydraulic retrievable packer and tailpipe is included in the design to:

5-5
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

 Allow for the formation to be isolated from the workover fluids in

order to avoid well impairment during workover operation.

 Protect casing and wellhead from formation fluids.

 Improve flow stability

v. Provision for tubing annulus communication above the packer will be

provided through sliding side door (SSD). The annulus/tubing
communication is required to:

 Allow displacement of brine with packer fluid.

 For unloading purposes to kick off the well.

vi. Gas lift mandrels with dummy valves will be installed in the completion
string to enable future installation of gas lift valves.

vii. 2 7/8” OD tubing retrieval flapper “Surface controlled subsurface safety

valve (SCSSSV)” with feature to accept wireline (WR) secondary valve
will be installed for well control purposes.

viii. Selective landing nipples will be installed to provide receptacle for wireline
tool and equipment to perform well servicing or pressure testing jobs.

ix. No-go nipple with smaller ID compared to others will be installed at the
bottom of the string to avoid any wireline tool from dropping off the string.

5.3.5 Tubing and Accessories Material Selection

Material for well completion equipment has been evaluated to ensure

completion string integrity throughout the production life.

Based on the PVT report, the CO2 content is 0.94 - 2.85 mole %. No H2S
found in the reservoir. Table 5.6, tabulated related parameters evaluated to
determine the material selection for the tubing and completion accessories.

5-6
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Table 5.6: Basic Data for Material Selection

Bottom CO2 CO2 H 2S H2S Bottom hole

Sand Hole Content Partial Content Partial Temperature
Group Pressure (%) Pressure (PPM) Pressure (OF)
(PSIA) (PSIA) (PSIA)

Unit 9.0, 2116 2.85 60 0 0 155

9.1 and
9.2

The CO2 partial pressure of the sands fall in the wet CO 2 domain, which
disqualifies the use of carbon steel and necessitates the use of CRA material.
Use of L-80 Carbon steel with Super 13Cr for tubing will be considered.
Please refer to Appendix 5-2, used for material selection, published chart by
Kawasaki and Sumitomo.

For the completion accessories, all equipment will be of the same material as
of production tubing to avoid galvanic corrosion due to dissimilar metals. For
the particular internal parts that require high strength, such as SCSSSV,
consideration for using higher-grade material will be made. The elastomer will
be selected to withstand anticipated problems related to exposure to high
temperature and amine-based fluids.

5.3.6 Perforation Techniques

The gun used in Gelama Merah-1 i.e Tubing Conveyed Perforation (TCP) gun
4 5/8”, 12 Shot Per Foot (SPF) with 23 gm RDX explosive has been proven to
be effective with a negative skin of -2.1, as evidenced from DST results.
Therefore, the same is suggested for all the development wells.

5.4 INFLOW PERFORMANCE PREDICTION

5-7
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Based on the interpretation of Gelama Merah exploration well DST results, actual
PI of Unit-8.0 sand is 3.4819 bpd/psi. Low skin value of -2.1 was calculated from
the test that could have been caused by better underbalance achieved during
perforation. A model in Wellflo was generated utilizing the DST data. The
anticipated Productivity Index (PI) from the Wellflo model for unit-8.0 is 3.64
bpd/psi as shown in Figure 5.1 using skin value of S= -2.1 and effective
permeability value of 140 mD from well test analysis. Estimation PI was
calculated using Vogel correlation. However, we know that the wellflo model
created using DST results of exploration well can not be used to represent the
actual development wells, planned for GM field, since the exploration well was a
conventional vertical well whereas planned development wells include vertical,
deviated and horizontal wells. Therefore, well model is modified for further
studies/sensitivities.

Figure 5.1: Composite Performance of Unit-8.0

5.5 OUTFLOW PERFORMANCE PREDICTION

5-8
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

The first step carried out was to identify the correct flow correlation that match
and represent the actual well behavior as observed in DST as shown in Table 5.1
and 5.2. A “Hagedorn and Brown (mod)” correlation was found to best match the
DST data. However, model did not match 100 % with the DST data and an error
of 0.7 & 5 % in pressure and rate was observed respectively. Results for the
matching of the DST data and selecting appropriate inflow and outflow
correlations are attached as Appendix 5-3.

The sensitivity outflow prediction plots on tubing sizes of 2 3/8’’, 2 7/8’’ and 3
1/2’’ for base case and various reservoir parameters scenarios are plotted as in
Appendix 5-4 and the results are summarized in Table 5.7 to Table 5.9.

Table 5.7: Tubing Performance at Different Wellhead Pressure

FTHP (psi) with 40% Water Cut 150 200 300

Completion options Tubing Size QO (bopd) QO (bopd) QO (bopd)
Deviated well with 60o 2 3/8’’ 1418 1312 1050
inclination 2 7/8’’ 2030 1865 1448
3 1/2’’ 2624 2379 1752

Table 5.8: Tubing Performance with Increasing Water Cut

Oil Rate (bopd)

Water Cut % 0 30 45
Tubing Size
2 3/8’’ 1768 1003 548
2 7/8’’ 2474 1351 677
3 1/2’’ 3081 1582 746

Table 5.9: Tubing Performance with Varying GOR

5-9
 Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

GOR (scf/stb) With 45% WC 500 1200 1500

Completion options Tubing Size QO (bopd) QO (bopd) QO (bopd)
o
Deviated well with 60 2 3/8’’ 940 1163 1150
inclination 2 7/8’’ 1279 1689 1707
3 1/2’’ 1531 2223 2301

A 2 7/8’’ tubing size is proposed for the optimum vertical flow as the size is more
than enough to produce the desired rate. With this tubing size well can produce
naturally upto 45% Water cut without any artificial lift assistance and field
maximum possible GOR of 1500 scf/stb. As shown in Table 5.8 and 5.9.

5.6 ARTIFICIAL LIFT SELECTION

It has been observed from sensitivities run in wellflo that field development wells
will cease to flow at 46 % water cut and it is predicted that artificial lift will be
required at an early stage of field life. Therefore, consideration for future artificial
lift will be included to facilitate future selection. Selection of the artificial lift
method shall take following in to account:

 High GOR of the produced fluids

 Huge amount of gas / gas cap available
 Potential of sand problems due to presence of unconsolidated sand
 Uncertainty in availability of reliable power supply

Keeping above points in mind gas lift is the preferred choice for Gelama Merah
development wells. Other artificial lifting method i.e. Electric Submersible Pump
(ESP) is not favorable option due to unavailability of power at offshore and due to
high GOR exceeding 500 scf/stb later in field life.

5-10
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Wellflo modeling was also carried out to simulate vertical lift performance on
tubing sizes of 2 3/8’’, 2 7/8’’ and 3 1/2’’ and the results are summarized in Table
5.10 to 5.11.
A continuous gas lifting mode however, might not be required initially, unless
early water breakthrough occurs (more than 45% water cut) or reservoir pressure
depletes to less than 1,500 psi. The attempt to model the production rate by
introducing lift gas to boost-up production during the initial stage has resulted in
an adequate improvement on oil production rate. Sensitivities were run for
different parameters such as declining wellhead pressure, increasing water cut,
increasing GOR and declining layer pressure shown in Appendix 5-6.

The lifting gas for development wells will be obtained from the associated gas
produced from the field. If the produced gas from development wells is not
sufficient for gas lifting arrangement can be made from near by field or from gas
bearing sands of the developing field in future. Provision for future gas-driven
gaslift compressor should be made either on the drilling platform.

Table 5.10: Summary: Production Profile Natural Flow Vs. Gas Lift
Injection (Water Cut)

Without GLI With GLI

Oil Rate (bopd) Oil Rate (bopd)
Water Cut
0 30 45 0 30 45
%
Tubing Size
2 3/8’’ 1768 1003 548 1766 1003 543
2 7/8’’ 2474 1351 677 2478 1351 921
3 ½’’ 3081 1582 746 3117 2146 1656

5-11
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Table 5.11: Production Profile Natural Flow Vs. Gas Lift Injection (Reservoir
Pressure Depletion)

Without GLI With GLI

Tubing Size Oil Rate (bopd) Oil Rate (bopd)
2 3/8’’ 2 7/8’’ 3 1/2’’ 2 3/8’’ 2 7/8’’ 3 1/2’’
Pr (psia)
2000 1166 1540 1814 1168 1690 2633
1500 NOP NOP NOP 529 1037 1473
1000 NOP NOP NOP 68 241 295

5.6.1 Gas Lift Volume and Design

A preliminary injection rate of 1.98 MMSCF/D is suggested for each of the

well should the gas lifting is required in the future. This is based upon
sensitivity analysis conducted in the Wellflo. Figure 5.2 below shows the
optimum gas lift injection rate and will only be beneficial at higher water cuts
and reservoir pressure depletion.

Figure 5.2: Injection gas volume against produced oil flow rate

5-12
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

5.6.2 Gas Lift Valve and Side-Pocket Mandrel arrangement

Based upon Wellflo simulation, the Side Pocket Mandrels (SPM) shall be
placed between 3000 and 3900 ft TVD in the tubing for future installation of
gas lift valves. As shown in Appendix 5-5. At initial production condition,
one gaslift valve placed in each string should be able to improve the oil
production. To ensure optimized setting depth of the valves, further study
should be conducted prior to final design and selection of gas lift system.

5.7 SAND EXCLUSION

5.7.1 Sand Failure Prediction

Drill Stem Testing (DST) carried out on Gelama Merah-1 did not show any
indication of sand production problem. Since core analysis from the same well
is not available while completing this Field Development Plan (FDP)
therefore, the sand failure prediction model in GM field is based upon the
Sonic Transit Time and offset wells record.

5.7.2 Offset Well Data

1
2Well site interpretation of Side wall core recovered from nearby fields
Gelama and Gelama Putih show unconsolidated sand formation therefore, this
can be a candidate for future sand production with increasing Water cut and
reservoir depletion.

5-13
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

5.7.3 Sonic Transit Time and Depth Relationship

Based on analogy to PCSB’s field development strategy, sand exclusion is

required where sonic transit time is above 100 μs/ft. The sonic transit time vs
Depth for Gelama Merah is shown in Figure 5.3 and is between 110-125 μs/ft,
which is higher than threshold value of 100 μs/ft. Hence, sand exclusion is
proposed for all completions.

5-14
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Figure 5.3: Depth vs Sonic Transit Time for Gelama Merah-1

5-15
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

5.7.4 Sand Exclusion Selection

Keeping in view unconsolidated sands, based on the sonic log reading and off-
set wells data, some form of sand control measure is required for Gelama
Merah development wells. There are essentially two types of sand exclusions.

1. Mechanical Techniques where “Gravel” particles, a few times larger than

the formation sand grains are used to retain the formation in place by
forming a filter through which the formation sand can not pass. The gravel
is itself held in place by a screen. In the simplest form gravel is omitted
and screen alone “holds back” the formation.
2. Chemical Techniques where chemical cement increases the strength of the
formation while retaining a permeable pore structure.

Following are the available options however they will be evaluated by

observing advantages and disadvantages of these options.

 Slotted Pipe Liners

 Wire Wrapped Screens
 Pre-Packed Screen (Resin coated sand)
 Gravel Pack

Tables 5.12 to 5.13 shows comparison of different options available for sand
exclusion.

Table 5.12: Wire Wrapped and Slotted Liners

SLOTTED WIRE WRAPPED PRE-PACKED

ITEM LINER SCREEEN SCREEN
(Mild Steel) (Stainless Steel) Resin Coated Sand
Gravel sandwiched
Rectilinear slots/ Wire welded to longitudinal
Description between two wire
machined in pipe rods
wrapped screens

5-16
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Wellbore
reinforcement, sand Formation sand exclusion or Gravel provide sand
Concept
bridges around gravel retention exclusion
slots
Stainless steel on mild steel Stainless steel on mild
Material Mild steel
base pipe steel base pipe
Sand Poor: 0.012” slot Better than slotted liner since Excellent: as with gravel
Exclusion width minimum slot width 0.006” – 0.040” pack
Works with Yes, but should not be
Yes Yes
gravel pack necessary
Flow Low, = 10 times flow area of High, as for wire
High
restriction slotted liner wrapped screen
Poor to collapse/tension if base
Mechanical Fair: base pipe reinforces
Good pipe omitted. Also susceptible
resistance structure
to erosion
Low (Too wide to High: Fine + mud cake.
Plugging
retain to formation Moderate Also impairment while
tendency
sand) RIH
2 – 3 x wire wrapped
Cost Cheapest 2 -3 x slotted liner screen, but often less
than gravel pack
Borehole  High productivity wells
Retains sand grains of all
reinforcement medium grained
Application sizes
coarse grained formation.
formation  Allows fines production

Table 5.13: Advantages / Disadvantages of Gravel Packs

Advantages
Effective overlong intervals
Copes with varying rock properties
Employs simple, non-toxic material
Disadvantages
Mechanical restriction in wellbore
Workover difficult
Expensive for multiple intervals
Diminished workover options
Sensitive to poor completion practices
Comments
> 100 m operationally possible
Clay / sand particles can pass through if large
enough
Gravel placed with water based fluids
e.g. Production logging not possible
Requires removal (Fishing of packers/
screens etc.)
Consider commingled production
Difficult to identify source as well as shutoff
indescribable water and gas
Many points where permeability damage can
be created

Based on the above mentioned merits and demerits of different sand exclusion
methods, stand alone screens the best option to be installed. The installation of

5-17
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

these types of screens is expected to be more cost effective, more productive

and operationally more efficient.

The stand alone screen proposed is basically Wire Wrapped Screen (WWS),
which is surface filter screen. But in this case, the type of WWS being chosen
is the one which is robust (rotatable and high tensile-compressive strength),
having high accuracy of slot opening and proven track record.

5.7.5 Screen Specification

The sand grain distribution is characterized by the Uniformity Co-efficient

(C), defined as:
C = D40 / D90
Where,
C<3 Well sorted, highly uniform
3<C<5 Uniform sand
5<C<10 Moderate/poorly sorted sand
C>10 Poorly sorted highly non-uniform sand
Plot of cumulative distribution for the formation sand is attached as Appendix
5-7.
Three samples were provided for sieve analysis however, one sample (SM-
3M7.0) was found representative and was examined by the lab. Value of
Uniformity co-efficient obtained was 8 which is less 10 therefore, identified as
poorly sorted highly non-uniform sand.
Schwartz criteria is therefore used for the selection of gravel size since this
criteria is being used for poorly sorted sand. The criterion is as follows:
D70 {Gravel} = 6 x D70
D70 {Formation sand} = 88 (from cumulative distribution plot)
Therefore,
D70 {Gravel} = 6 x 88 = 528
The properties of the standard gravel pack sands are listed in Table 5.14.

5-18
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Table 5.14: Properties of Standard Gravel Pack Sands

Median
Range Typical
US Gravel
Gravel Size Permeability Remarks
Mesh Diameter
(μm) (D)
(μm)
40/60 425 – 250 340 55 -
Since “528” exist between
“850-425” therefore,
20/40 850 – 425 640 170
permeability selected as
170 D.
12/20 700 – 850 1275 600

5.7.6 Gravel Pack Design Sensitivity

After selection of gravel size wellflo model was generated for gravel pack. Table
5.15 shows a comparison between with and without gravel pack with (50 – 60)%
loss in production as shown in Appendix 5-8, and wells ceases to flow at an early
water cut.

Keeping higher loss in production in mind and since no sand production has been
observed from the well testing it is proposed to live with sand or not to install
sand exclusion. However a strategy will be developed for the wells prone to sand
production such as to:

 Produce below the critical rate

 Bean up wells slowly

5-19
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

Table 5.15: Summary: Production Profile Natural Flow Vs. Gas Lift
Injection (Water Cut)

Without Gravel Pack With Gravel Pack

Oil Rate (bopd) Oil Rate (bopd)
Water Cut
0 30 45 0 30 45
%
Tubing Size
2 3/8’’ 1768 1003 548 1227 663 NOP
2 7/8’’ 2474 1351 677 1513 766 NOP
3 1/2’’ 3081 1582 746 1687 799 NOP

5.8 POTENTIAL PRODUCTION PROBLEMS

5.8.1 Scale Formation

Scale is organic or inorganic material which precipitates in the well itself,

surface flowline, surface facilities and/or near the wellbore formation. This
precipitation or scale deposition usually occurs with the presence of minerals
from water however, no formation water sample analysis was available from
the producing zones. It is therefore suggested to take water samples and
analyzed for scale tendency which will help in the determination of the
suitable preventive actions that can be put in place to avoid scale depositions.

5.8.2 Wax Deposition

Many crude oils will form a solid precipitate when they are cooled. This solid
is known as WAX. Wax varies in the form of soft to a brittle solid. The solid
wax is dissolved in the crude oil at reservoir temperature and forms a
crystalline precipitate when the temperature reduces below the cloud point
(The temperature at which the first seed crystal appear). Since pour point data
is not available for Gelama Merah field it is therefore suggested that analysis
of the fluid sample be carried out to observe the tendency for wax deposition.

5-20
Universiti Teknologi Petronas Production Technology 5

However, Provision of injection points for pour point depressant (PPD) and
wax dispersant shall be provided at the production header and at the pipeline
launcher to allow contingency action in case wax deposition is observed to
have occurred.

5.8.3 CO2 Content and Sweet Corrosion

Compositional analysis of stock tank and wellstream samples of unit-8.0

shows 2.85 and 0.94 mole % CO2 respectively. Moreover, with the initial
GOR of 326 scf/stb and no water production, no sweet corrosion is expected
to occur initially. However, this problem would become severe after water
breakthrough, mainly due to the water injection for pressure maintenance. The
13-Chrome material will offer sufficient corrosive resistance for all downhole
equipment.

5.8.4 H2S Content and Sour Corrosion

H2S content from available results of unit-8.0 chromatography has been

observed as 0 ppm therefore, there is no harm of sour corrosion.

5.8.5 Emulsion formation

Emulsion formation from Gelama Merah crude oil is uncertain. To manage

this uncertainty provision of emulsifier injection points at the production
header shall be included in the facilities detail engineering.

5-21