Reserves to Production Ratios and Present Value Relationships
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reserves to Production Ratios and Present Value Relationships I. G. Hayhow; I. G. Hayhow National Energy Board Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar J. A. Lemee J. A. Lemee National Energy Board Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE/CERI Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2000. Paper Number: SPE-59783-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/59783-MS Published: April 03 2000 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share MailTo Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Hayhow, I. G., and J. A. Lemee. "Reserves to Production Ratios and Present Value Relationships." Paper presented at the SPE/CERI Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2000. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/59783-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Unconventional Resources Conference / Gas Technology Symposium Search Advanced Search Abstract Reserves to production ratio (R/P) is equivalent to the inverse of an exponential decline rate which is commonly used to forecast production rates. For a tank type gas reservoir, adding wells will increase the pool's producing rate and reduce the reserves life and R/P. Therefore, R/P indirectly represents the amount of development. For this analysis the optimum R/P is the value which results in the highest present value.An approximation of present value for a single pool is represented by a single equation which takes into account the number of wells in the pool, initial productivity, capital cost per well, decline rates, discount factors and the netback received. A second equation has been derived to calculate the optimum R/P or the amount of development, which will yield the maximum present value. The results from these equations are not precisely the same as those determined by the cash flow model, but they are useful for checking sensitivities to various input parameters. The equations show that every pool has a unique maximum present value which is dependant on pool size, productivity, capital cost, number of wells, etc. However, the R/P at which the maximum present value occurs is only dependant on the ratio of individual well productivity to its capital cost (q/c). The equations also show that the optimum R/P decreases for pools with higher q/c ratios. This dependency to q/c ratios suggests that the optimum R/P for recently discovered pools will likely be lower than for older pools of equivalent reservoir quality because of improvements to the q/c ratio. New producing techniques such as horizontal wells and the utilization of an established infrastructure have increased productivity relative to the capital invested.The optimum R/P's have been determined for a number of pools using the equations and these results have been compared to values derived from a cash flow model. Keywords: discount rate, producer, production monitoring, producing rate, spe 59783, project valuation, equation, wcsb, production ratio, reservoir surveillance Subjects: Well & Reservoir Surveillance and Monitoring, Formation Evaluation & Management, Reserves Evaluation, Asset and Portfolio Management, Project economics/valuation Copyright 2000, 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 ».