Forecasting Energy Demand, Emissions and Discharges for the Petroleum Industry - Examples and Experiences
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Forecasting Energy Demand, Emissions and Discharges for the Petroleum Industry - Examples and Experiences Kristin Keiserås Bakkane; Kristin Keiserås Bakkane Novatech a.s Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Geir Husdal; Geir Husdal Novatech a.s Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Marta S. Linde Melhus; Marta S. Linde Melhus The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Toril Røe Utvik Toril Røe Utvik Norsk Hydro Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, March 2004. Paper Number: SPE-86606-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/86606-MS Published: March 29 2004 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Bakkane, Kristin Keiserås, Husdal, Geir, Linde Melhus, Marta S., and Toril Røe Utvik. "Forecasting Energy Demand, Emissions and Discharges for the Petroleum Industry - Examples and Experiences." Paper presented at the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, March 2004. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/86606-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability Search Advanced Search AbstractThis paper presents state of the art methodology for establishing reliable fuel consumption and emissions to air forecasts for the offshore petroleum business in Norway. The methodology is applicable for any operation within the upstream oil and gas industry. It is unique due to a combination of simple input, simple algorithms and accurate output results.The general forecasting method is established as a process between the operators and Norwegian Authorities, under the management by FUN (Forum for Forecasting and Uncertainty Evaluations). The accuracy is proven by simple calibration techniques, comparing measured fuel consumption against calculated demands from using the forecasting method.Forecasts have been established by Novatech on behalf of the operator Norsk Hydro. Results for the Troll oil field are shown as a sample case. The case verifies the ability to forecast fuel consumption within an accuracy of 2–3% when the forecasting model is checked by use of actual activity level input data.Also by the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD)'s experience the precition of reported fuel and emission forecasts has been gradually improved as the methodology as described below has been implemented by the operators.Background and ApplicationsEach year the operators on the Norwegian Continental Shelf prepare fuel and emission forecasts to be reported to the Norwegian authorities, as input to the Revised National Budget (RNB). The data from the upstream oil and gas industry are received and evaluated by the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD).Similar forecasts are required for a number of reasons, as for instance as input to field development and operational planning; company internal, field licensee or shareholder reporting; emission permit applications and other environmental concessionary requirements set by the authorities, and for OPEX forecasting if any national taxes or carbon trading systems apply.All these purposes meet in a desire to make realistic quantification of future fuel and energy demands, greenhouse gas emissions etc. But for these forecasts to have any value, they must be fairly accurate. For the oil and gas industry this would as a minimum require a correlation to the activity levels; i.e. basically the drilling level and the throughput of oil, gas and water handled on an offshore installation or field. Preferably it should also reflect any major production philosophies and the technical design and constraints, or perhaps rearrangements/replacements that may be foreseen during the field production lifetime (or the forecasted period).Ref. [1] describes a general methodology for doing all this, and with means of relatively easily attainable information. The method relates future emissions, fuel consumption and energy needs to each other and to the oil, water and gas production, injection and deliveries as well as the drilling activities measured in number of wells drilled. Such forecasts are normally readily available. Furthermore, the accuracy of the fuel forecasts can be checked and the calculation models involved may be calibrated to improve the accuracy if required. Information from the forecasting model established may even be used actively for operational optimization purposes for a given case. This may actually identify potentials for a reduction in fuel demand, reduced expenditure by lower fuel consumption and possibly lower taxes, minimised maintenance down-time, improved efficiencies, reduce losses like for instance by flaring, etc.The methodology is presented in the next chapter, followed by a sample case and experiences gathered by the second largest operating company on the Norwegian Continental Shelf, Norsk Hydro, as well as by the Norwegian Authorities, represented by the NPD who receives and evaluates the annual RNB reporting from the operators. Keywords: emission factor, emission forecast, energy demand, air emission, operator, input data, throughput, fuel consumption, calculation, upstream oil & gas Subjects: Environment, Air emissions This content is only available via PDF. 2004. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».