See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331312045

Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead Oil Well

Article  in  International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology · November 2018

DOI: 10.14741/ijcet/v.8.6.5

CITATION READS

1 6,337

5 authors, including:

Imran ahmed Hullio Khalil Rehman Memon

Mehran University of Engineering and Technology Mehran University of Engineering and Technology
4 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    27 PUBLICATIONS   245 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sohail Nawab
Mehran University of Engineering and Technology
5 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Durability and reheological evaluation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sohail Nawab on 18 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology E-ISSN 2277 – 4106, P-ISSN 2347 – 5161
©2018 INPRESSCO®, All Rights Reserved Available at http://inpressco.com/category/ijcet

Research Article

Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead
Oil Well
Imran A. Hullio*, Sarfraz A. Jokhio, Khalil Rehman Memon, Sohail Nawab and Khair Jan Baloch

Institute of Petroleum & Natural Gas Engineering, Mehran University of Engineering & Technology, Jamshoro, 76062, Sindh, Pakistan

Received 04 Sept 2018, Accepted 06 Nov 2018, Available online 08 Nov, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)

Abstract

Owing to the increasing water cut and decreasing in reservoir pressure of the well, the oil production of the well has
seized and the well has become dead. This research study evaluates the implementation of the artificial lift methods
ESP and Gas Lift- economically and technically on the well by using the production performance software (PROSPER)
and economical yardsticks (NPV & ROI). The theory, design, production forecast, capital and operating expenditures
of the electric submersible pump and gas lift are discussed for the appropriate selection of any of two options. The
PROSPER software is used as the simulation tool for the design and production forecasting of the ESP and Gas Lift
based. The ESP and Gas Lift methods have been simulated for the design and production forecast by entering the
reservoir and completion inputs in the software. Subsequently, the software has been simulated to run on different
sensitivities of the variables such as water cut, wellhead pressure setting depth, operating frequency and gas injection
rates to check the production rates at different scenarios. Having performed the production performance simulation
on the selected artificial lift methods, the methods have been investigated by capital budget-ing. In capital budgeting,
the capital and operating expenditures of both lift methods were evaluated by determining their discounted value
(NPV) and re-turn on investment (ROI). The prime objective of the research is to accomplish maximum production
rates and profitability by selecting the most appropriate artificial lift method for the well; as a consequence it is
concluded that the suitable artificial lift method for a well can be selected by applying the simulation and economical
schemes.

Keywords: Artificial lift methods, Inflow Performance Relation, Vertical Lift Performance, Net-present value, Return
on investment

1. Introduction of the production economics also increases (Petroleum

Experts, 2009). The gas lift and electric submersible
1 The petroleum industry encounters a great many pump (ESP) are employed to optimize the well
challenges in the exploration, drilling, production and production. For the evaluation of the two approaches
management of the hydrocarbons found beneath the in the perspective of production rates and economics,
surfaces of the earth. Notwithstanding voluminous the special oil and gas industry software- PROSPER- is
obstacles, the petroleum engineering is capable of used. The energy efficiency, lift time cost, operational
producing the oil and gas from the risky and hazardous costs and capital investment are used to make the
conditions. There are several artificial lift methods decision trees and these graphs helps to evaluate the
including some new artificial techniques which are selection of the artificial lift method for a well (Heinze
making parallels with the older artificial lift Lloyd R. et al, 1996). The selection process of the
technologies (Electric Submersible Pump, Sucker Rod artificial lift process is totally based only the
Pump, and Progressive Cavity Pump) and how they expenditure factors like: investment costs, operational
have evolved (Abdel Ben Amara et al, 2016). costs and revenue costs (Akchay L. Pandit et al, 2015).
In this research, two options are evaluated for a The NPV and ROI methods provide the facility of using
pilot well through the PROSPER software and feasible and economical method for a well. These
economic yardsticks. The PROSPER is a PROduction economic yardsticks do the calculation and selection of
and Systems PERformance analysis software. The the screened method what the company actually
production of a well can be optimized by critically requires for the business (Clegg J.D., 1988).
analyzing the performance of a well with the purpose There are three main factors for the selection of an
artificial lift method (James F. Lea, 1999):
*Corresponding author’s ORCID ID: 0000-0002-0305-1749
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14741/ijcet/v.8.6.5 i. Production rate
1548| International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)
Imran et al Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead Oil Well

ii. Downhole flowing pressure methods are used to lift the fluid from the wellbore to
iii. Gas-liquid ratio the surface by using pump pressure at the bottom of
the well or injecting the pressurized gas. This method
Rarely, the selected method does not function fit on the inspects the availability of the resources for the
well; hence it increase the services costs, workover selected methods. For ESP pump requires huge amount
costs and drastically reduces the production rates and of electric while gas lift method does not require any
the net present value of the company (J.F. Lea, et al, electric power for the injection of the gas (M. A. Naguib,
1994). et al, 2000).

2. Artificial Lift There are two key choices to increase pressure (Clegg,
J.D., 1988):
In the beginning when a well is tapped into the
reservoir, it has massive energy to drive the oil to the • A pump is run into well which increase the pressure
surface. At this phase, the initial reservoir pressure of the fluid to push it to the surface.
manages to produce the oil from reservoir to the sand- • Gas injection at a certain pressure into the well to
face and from sand-face to the well completion jewelry decrease the density of fluid and increase the pressure
and from the completion to the separator. However of the fluid to produce the fluid to the surface.
with the production, the natural reservoir pressure
depletes owing to reservoir fluids production and the 2.1 Electric Submersible Pumps (ESP)
wellbore pressure increases due to the water loading
in the wellbore and increases the overall density of The electric submersible pump system which is
fluid. Successively, the desired production rates cannot configured very simply consists of a centrifugal pump
be obtained at the surface merely with the natural and electric pump unit. They are run down in
energy of reservoir. The performance of well can be completion assembly and connected electrically
estimated by the concept of inflow performance through cables to the surface control system and
relationship (IPR) and vertical lift performance (VLP). transformer. The TOPSIS is one the great method of
The IPRs are used to analysis the performance of a selecting the artificial lift method from the limited
well, diagnosing the problems of a well and solving information of choices (Alemi M., et al, 2010). The
their problems in an efficient way. The vertical lift production tubing hangs the down hole equipment of
performance (VLP) is affected by such factors; tubing the ESP above the perforations of well. Generally the
size, liquid rate, fluid type, gas-oil ratio, water cut and motor of the pump is positioned on the end of the
fluid properties. Currently, it has been reported that string. The pump, the intake or gas separator and seal
about 95% of oil and gas well on run any of the section are situated above the motor. The power cable
artificial lift method and only 5% well are producing is fastened to the tubing. API RP11S3 provides the
with the natural flow. The following is generalized fig.1 guidelines for the proper installation and handling of
which shows the six artificial lift methods. an ESP system. Several resources are available in the
menu which provides empirical means to prolong the
life of ESP which includes the numerous formulation,
fabrication and operational mechanisms (Baillie,
2002).

2.2 Continuous Gas Lift

In the process of gas lift, the gas is injected into the well
through the annulus and then the gas enters into the
tubing by the means of gas lift valve which seated in
the side pocket. The gas mingles with the reservoir
fluid collected in the wellbore and diminishes the
bottom hole pressure. Then the column fluid
encounters the least impedance in the flow; hence the
well produces high flow rates of oil. The gas lift is
majorly broken into two sub types in the petroleum
industry; the continuous gas lift method and
Fig. 1 Schematic of primary six artificial lift methods. intermittent gas lift method.
For a successful gas lift operation, there are many
In such conditions, the reservoir needs an artificial parameters are taken into considerations. The
means to produce the oil to the desired rates. In optimum parameter makes the high production and
offshore applications, ESP and Gas Lift significantly generates more monetary. There are many parameters
dominate the market of Artificial Lift, with smaller in the gas lift but among them the most vital one is
proportion of PCP and Jet Pumps. The artificial lift injection rate of gas. Therefore, optimum amount of
1549| International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)
Imran et al Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead Oil Well

injection gas ought to be to found in order to get because IPR and VLP curves do not intersect each
improve production rates because the addition other; hence the well is dead.
injection of gas causes decrease in production owing to
more slippage between liquid and gas (Ebrahimi,
2010).

3. Prosper Modeling

The simulated model of the well is prepared on

PROSPER software for modeling the natural flowing
well, ESP and Gas Lift method. The model of the well is
developed by entering the basic well characteristics
such as: PVT properties, reservoir properties,
downhole equipment detail and production data.

3.1. Base Case Modeling

The base case modeling is developed by enter the basic

well characteristics such as: PVT properties, reservoir Fig.2 IPR vs. VLP of the well without any artificial
properties, downhole equipment detail and production support
data. In this case, no artificial lift method is selected
from the System Summary section. Therefore, Black Oil 3.3. ESP Case Modeling
Model is selected with oil and water as the flowing
fluids. The PVT properties of the reservoir fluid are PROSPER helps us to install the ESP on a well as
given in the Table 1. artificial lift method. In this case, ESP is selected from
the system summary section as the artificial lift
Table 1 PVT properties of the reservoir fluid
method.
PVT Properties Value Unit Now for design the ESP, the software provides the
Solution GOR 500 Scf/stb selection pump, motor and cable for the well. Thus, it is
Oil gravity 38 API very simple to select the all three parts from the
Gas gravity 0.749 database of the PROSPER. The pump, motor and cable
Water salinity 85600 ppm are selected from the database which shows maximum
Mole percent of H2S 0 % performance of the ESP as shown in the fig.3
Mole percent of CO2 3.5 %
Mole percent of N2 5.6 %

When the PVT data has been properly matched, one

can start making the IPR curve. PROSPER provides
many types of reservoir models for generating the IPR.
In this case, the reservoir model for the well is Darcy
and mechanical/ geometrical skin is entered by hand.
Other reservoir and wellbore parameters are given in
the Table 2.

Table 2 The reservoir and wellbore properties for IPR

data
Properties Value Unit
Reservoir pressure 1490 Psi
Reservoir temperature 210 °F
Water cut 35 %
Total GOR 552 scf/stb Fig.3 Performance curve of the ESP for the well
Reservoir permeability 95 md
Reservoir thickness 45 ft
Drainage area 20 acre
3.4. Results of ESP
Dietz shape factor 30.99
Wellbore radius 0.354 Ft The PROSPER calculates the ESP system analysis at the
Skin 2.88 pump discharge (outlet of pump). The fig.4 shows that
the inflow performance curve is represented by the
3.2. Results of the base case green curve which shows the bottom of the well. The
pump discharge pressure is depicted by the blue curve.
The fig.2 shows the inflow and outflow curves, and the And the vertical lift performance curve is shown by the
PROSPER shows that the well is not producing the oil red curve. The red and green intersect each other
1550| International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)
Imran et al Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead Oil Well

means the well is flowing and produced some liquid

rates. 3.6. Results of Gas Lift

The results show that the well gets a significant

increase in production from gas injection. The system
calculation reveals that IPR and VLP intersect each
other and the well produces 1011.2 STB/D oil rate,
1555.7 STB/D liquid rate, 544.5 STB/D water rate and
0.55818 MMscf/D gas rate at the 200 Psi top node
pressure, and 35% water cut shown in the fig.6.

Fig.4 Pump discharge pressure vs. VLP pressure of the

well

3.5. Continuous Gas Lift Case Modeling

The Gas Lift artificial lift method is selected from Fig.6 IPR vs. VLP of the well with gas lift
System Summary screen.
For design gas lift, the design section requires 4. Economical Evaluation
maximum liquid rate, maximum gas available, flowing
top node pressure, maximum depth of injection, Having carried out the simulation work and getting the
operating injection pressure, kickoff injection pressure, production profile of both the methods, is the firstly
desired dP across valve, water cut, minimum spacing, portion of this research. The second portion of the
total GOR and etc. research is the complete economic evaluations of the
Now the PROSPER calculates the gas lift artificial methods used for the well. In the economic
performance curve shown in the fig.5. assessment, the capital costs, operating costs,
workover costs and income costs are taken into the
consideration. Before making a final decision a
thorough economic analysis has to be done. As
described, it is the profitability of a project that has to
be the final decision criteria.
The following Table 3 and 4 are showing the capital
expenditure and operating expenditure of ESP and Gas
Lift of the well.

Table 3 CapEx of ESP and GAS LIFT

Services Cost of ESP ($) Cost of Gas Lift ($)

Artificial Lift Equipments 120,30 165,387
Installation/Workover 42,000 29,000
Surface Equipments 150,800 182,100
Fig.5 Performance curve of the gas lift for the well Electric Surface
84,000 96,300
Equipments
The performance curve shows the relationship Metering 0 62,000
between the volumes of gas injection to the oil
produced. This graph is used to select the optimum gas
injection rates where maximum oil production can be Table 4 OpEx of ESP & Gas Lift
obtained. Looking at the performance plot, it can be
Services Cost of ESP ($) Cost of Gas Lift ($)
calculated that, the well is not producing any oil Horse Power per
without gas injection. The plot shows that as the Annum
1,051,200 705,600
injection volume is increasing the production of oil is Running Cost 700,000 700,000
also increasing. The maximum oil can be produced Maintenance cost 833,333 600,000
form the well by injection 2.44 MMscf/d gas in the well. Water Treatment 550,000 550,000

1551| International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)
Imran et al Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead Oil Well

The following Table 5 is showing volume of oil Conclusion

produced by each method in day and in a year. Then,
the income of one year of oil is calculated and finally After the simulation and economical evaluation of the
the profit oil is calculates in dollars by subtracting the ESP and Gas Lift on the well, the oil production rates
CapEx and OpEx from the income of one year of oil. discounted values of both lift methods has been
obtained. The oil production rate of the ESP is 1310.3
Table 5 Oil production & profit oil of ESP and GAS LIFT STB/D at 35 % water cut while the oil production rate
of the Gas Lift is 1011.5 STB/d at 35 % water. Further,
Method Stb/day Stb/year
Income of oil Profit oil the NPV and ROI of the ESP for year are $28,969,723
per year ($) per year ($) and 9.12; while the NPV and ROI of Gas Lift are
ESP 1310.3 479,062.5 39,283,125 35,751,492 $20,942,933. In the light of above results, it is
GAS concluded that ESP is better than Gas Lift for the well
1011.2 369,088 29,527,040 26,436,653
LIFT
in terms of the production and economics.
4.1. Net-present value of ESP and Gas Lift Recommendations
The NPV is economic yardstick which is used to The selection of the artificial lift can performed
evaluate the profitability of the project and it can be through simulation of the production performance and
calculate from discounted value of the both projects economics of the method on the well. In addition to
ESP and Gas Lift. Following is basic equation (1) of the above criteria, the following factors should also be
NPV: considered for final selection:

( ) ( ) ( )
..( )
(1) 1) Planning and administrative resources: Gas lift is
simple and easy to manage after implementation;
By using the above equation, the net present value of while the ESP method is very complex and difficult
both can be found easily. Hence the net present value to plan and implement.
of ESP is far greater than the NPV of gas lift which 2) The ESP has a very short lift in the well. The
impudently shows that ESP is the better option to be common lift expectancy of ESP is 2- 3 years.
chosen for the well because it will give huge sum 3) The Gas Lift method requires full workover on the
income by producing more oil and less expenditure. well; therefore few number of wells or individual
The NPV of the ESP and GAS LIFT is given in the Table well are not economical for gas lift method.
6.
References
Table 6 NPV of ESP and Gas Lift
Abdel Ben Amara, Silverwell, (2016). Gas Lift - Past & Future,
Method NPV of year ($) SPE 184221-MS presented at the SPE Middle East Artificial
Lift Conference and Exhibition held in Manama, Kingdom
GAS LIFT 20,942,933
of Bahrain, 30 November-1 December 2016, doi:
ESP 28,969,723 10.2118/184221-MS.
Petroleum Experts (2009). User Manual, Prosper, version 11.
Heinze Lloyd R., Herald W. Winkler, James F. Lea, (1996).
4.2. Return on investment
Decision Tree for Selection of Artificial Lift Method, SPE
29510- MS Presented at production operation symposium
ROI is also another economic yardstick which held at Oklahoma City, USA, 2-4 April, 1995. Doi:
determines the profitability of the project by 10.2118/29510-MS.
estimating the net profit and total investment of the Akchay L. Pandit, Issa Yasser Mohamed Abdelaziz, Mahmoud
project. The following is basic equation (2) of ROI: Bakr Khamis, Riyad Quttainah, and Al-Ajmi Rakan N, 2015.
Economic Comparison between ESP and Rod Pump for
Same Rate Wells, SPE-176386-MS presented at the
(2) SPE/IATMI Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and
Exhibition held in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, 20–22
October 2015, doi: 10.2118/176386-MS.
From the calculation of ROI, it has been found that the Clegg, J.D. (1988). High-rate Artificial Lift, Journal of
ROI of ESP is also greater than that of gas lift; Petroleum Technology, SPE#17638- MS.
consequently it can surely judge that the performance James F. Lea and Henry V. Nickens, (1999). Selection of
and profitability of ESP is far better than that of gas lift. Artificial Lift, SPE 52157-MS, Presented at the 1999 SPE
The ROI of the ESP and Gas LIFT are given in the Table Mid-Continent Operations Symposium held in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma, March 28-31, 1999. Doi: 10.2118/52157-
7. MS.
Table 7 ROI of ESP and GAS LIFT J.F. Lea, M.R. Wells, J.L. Bearden, L. Wilson, R. Shepler, and R.
Lannom, (1994). Electrical Submersible Pumps, SPE
Method Return on investment 28694-MS, Presented at the SPE International Petroleum
GAS LIFT 7.55 Conference & Exhibition of Mexico held In Verasruz,
ESP 9.12 Mexico, and 10-13 October 1994.doi: 10.2118/28694-MS.
1552| International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)
 Imran et al Design and Economic Evaluation of the ESP and Gas Lift on the Dead Oil Well

https://www.slb.com/services/production/artificial_lift.aspx API RP 11S3 (1999). Recommended Practice for Electrical

http://www.scmdaleel.com/category/artificial-lift- Submersible Pump Installations, second edition,
summary/200 Washington, DC: API.
M. A. Naguib, A. Bayoumi, N.El-Emam and A.El Battrawy,
Baillie, A. (2002). Optimizing ESP Run Life—A Practical
(2000). Guideline of Artificial Lift Selection for Mature
Field, SPE 64428-MS, SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Checklist. Paper presented at the 2002 European ESP
Conference and Exhibition held in Brisbane, Australia, 16– Roundtable, Aberdeen, and 6 February.
18 October 2000, doi: 10.2118/64428-MS. Halliburton (2008). Basic Artificial Lift, Canadian Oil Well
Clegg, J.D., (1988). High-rate Artificial Lift, Journal of Systems Company Ltd., pp. 2-8.
Petroleum Technology, SPE 7638-MS. Ebrahimi, M. (2010). Gas Lift Optimization in one of Iranian
Alemi M, Jalalifar H, Kamali G and Kalbasi M., (2010). A South Western Oil Fields, SPE Trinidad and Tobago Energy
prediction to the best artificial lift method selection on the
Resources Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineers,
basis of TOPSIS model, Journal of Petroleum and Gas
Engineerin, Vol. 1(1), pp. 009-015. Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, SPE 133434-MS, June 27-30, 2010,
pp. 1-2.

1553| International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol.8, No.6 (Nov/Dec 2018)

View publication stats