...
首页> 外文期刊>The APPEA Journal >ADVANCES IN RISKING EXPLORATION PROSPECTS
【24h】

ADVANCES IN RISKING EXPLORATION PROSPECTS

机译:勘探前景的进展

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Assessment of prospect risk is a vital exploration activity, but technical literature on the subject shows few advances in methodologies in the last 20 years. Origin Energy has found that published procedures are not always adequate. Three perceived shortcomings are examined and techniques are proposed to overcome them. 1. Cases where prospect risk is dependent on reserve size. Traditional methodologies assume the two are independent This assumption is clearly inappropriate for, say, a prospect for which the success case value is based on the mapped closure, but which has suspect seal capacity that may limit the column height to something less than full-to-spill. A way forward is to build a variable risk array for a range of column heights and calculate the incremental risked NPV for each layer. The expected monetary value (EMV) is computed for a range of column heights based on the NPV of cumulative risked reserves; 2. Cases where the estimation of chance of success (COS) based on traditional geological information needs to be combined with direct hydrocarbon indicators (DHIs) from seismic data. DHIs are not infallible indicators, however, and cannot be used to set the COS for elements such as charge to say 100%. Bayes' Theorem can be used to combine the two sets of uncertain information. 3. Cases where prospects are risked on very limited data. Traditional risking does not adequately incorporate the level of knowledge on which risk assessments are made. Inadequacies are identified in existing methodologies, but no simple and satisfactory solutions can be identified. We do suggest a way forward, however, for a related problem—testing the sensitivity of the EMV calculation for an exploration prospect for uncertainties in COS.
机译:评估潜在风险是一项至关重要的勘探活动,但是有关该主题的技术文献显示,在过去的20年中,方法学方面几乎没有进展。 Origin Energy发现已发布的程序并不总是足够的。研究了三个可察觉的缺点,并提出了克服这些缺点的技术。 1.潜在风险取决于储备量的情况。传统方法假设这两种方法是独立的。例如,对于成功案例值基于映射封口但具有可疑密封能力的潜在前景,该假设显然是不合适的,这可能会将色谱柱高度限制为小于满量程。 -洒。前进的方法是为一定范围的柱高建立可变风险阵列,并计算每一层的增量风险NPV。根据累积风险准备金的净现值,计算一系列柱高的预期货币价值(EMV); 2.需要将基于传统地质信息的成功机会估算(COS)与地震数据中的直接碳氢化合物指标(DHI)结合起来的情况。 DHI不是绝对可靠的指标,但是不能用于将诸如费用之类的元素的COS设置为100%。贝叶斯定理可用于合并两组不确定信息。 3.在非常有限的数据上有潜在风险的情况。传统风险未充分纳入进行风险评估的知识水平。现有方法中存在不足之处,但无法找到简单而令人满意的解决方案。但是,对于确实存在相关问题,我们确实提出了一种解决方案-测试EMV计算的敏感性,以探索COS中不确定性的前景。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号