Developing Scenario on “FDS” Volcanic Sandstone Formation for Gas Supply Demand in “Tga” Gas Field

Authors

  • Dyah Rini Ratnaningsih UPN "Veteran" Yogyakarta
  • Suranto Suranto Minarak Brantas Gas, Inc
  • Fajar Amaniluthfie UPN "Veteran" Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31098/cset.v1i1.335

Abstract

Gas companies in developing the field are strongly influenced by the demand for gas supply from buyers. In this case, the gas supply demand from the buyer of 5 MMSCF/day for 5 years must be met. In order to fulfill the commitments of the Gas Sale and Purchase Agreement and to get the maximum Recovery Factor, simulations are done with various scenarios. The magnitude of the OGIP of the TGA Field in the Sandstone formation is 18.06 BSCF, the cumulative production is 3.21 BSCF and the Recovery Factor (RF) at the time of the study is 17.79%. The Sandstone FDS reservoir is a dry gas reservoir, which generally has an RF range of 80-90%. Based on the results of scenario 1, is optimizing choke 3 existing wells and installing compressors at the beginning of the first year, capable of producing for 3.5 years, a plateau of 5 MMscfd with incremental reserves of 7.06 BSCF with RF reaching 56.87%. Scenario 2, is scenario 1 with the addition of 1 infill drilling at the end of the third year provides incremental reserves of 12.39 BSCF with RF reaching 86.38%. Scenario 3, is scenario 1 with the addition of 2 infill drilling at the end of the third year provides incremental reserves of 12.46 BSCF with RF reaching 86.77%. Scenarios 2 and 3 meet the requirements of the Gas Sale and Purchase Agreement because they are capable of producing 5 MMscfd for 5 years. In terms of the number of wells, scenario 2 provides reserves of 0.7 BSCF less than scenario 3 which has 1 more well.

Downloads

Published

2022-11-15

How to Cite

Ratnaningsih, D. R. ., Suranto, S., & Amaniluthfie, F. (2022). Developing Scenario on “FDS” Volcanic Sandstone Formation for Gas Supply Demand in “Tga” Gas Field. RSF Conference Series: Engineering and Technology, 1(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.31098/cset.v1i1.335