Overcoming Challenges in ESP Operation in Ultradeepwater Heavy-Oil Atlanta Field
Authors: Carpenter Chris 
Published: April 2021

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper SPE 201135, “Challenges in ESP Operation in Ultradeepwater Heavy-Oil Atlanta Field,” by Alexandre Tavares, Paulo Sérgio Rocha, SPE, and Marcelo Paulino Santos, Enauta, et al., prepared for the 2020 SPE Virtual Artificial Lift Conference and Exhibition - Americas, 10-12 November. The paper has not been peer reviewed.

Atlanta is a post-salt offshore oil field in the Santos Basin, 185 km southeast of Rio de Janeiro. The combination of ultradeep water (1550 m) and heavy, viscous oil creates a challenging scenario for electrical submersible pump (ESP) applications. The complete paper discusses the performance of an ESP system using field data and software simulations.

Introduction

From initial screening to define the best artificial-lift method for the Atlanta Field’s requirements, options such as hydraulic pumps, hydraulic submersible pumps, multiphase pumps, ESPs, and gas lift (GL) were considered. Analysis determined that the best primary system was one using an in-well ESP with GL as backup.

After an initial successful drillstem test (DST) with an in-well ESP, the decision was made, for the second DST, to install the test pump inside the riser, near seabed depth. It showed good results; comparison of oil-production potential between the pump installed inside a structure at the seabed—called an artificial lift skid (ALS)—and GL suggested that the latter would prove uneconomical. The artificial lift development concept is shown in Fig. 1.

ESP Design

ESP sizing was performed with a commercial software and considered available information on reservoir, completion, subsea, and topsides. To ensure that the ESP chosen would meet production and pressure boosts required in the field, base cases were built and analyzed for different moments of the field’s life. The cases considered different productivity indexes (PI), reservoir pressures, and water production [and consequently water cut (WC)] as their inputs.

The design considers using pumps with a best efficiency point (BEP) for water set at high flow rates (17,500 B/D for in-well and 34,000 B/D for ALS). Thus, when the pumps deal with viscous fluid, the curve will have a BEP closer to the current operating point.

Design boundaries of the in-well ESP and the ALS are provided in the complete paper, as are some of the operational requirements to be implemented in the ESP design to minimize risk.

Field Production History

In 2014, two wells were drilled, tested, and completed with in-well ESP as the primary artificial lift method. Because of delays in delivery of a floating production, storage, and offloading vessel (FPSO), the backup (ALS) was not installed until January 2018. In May 2018, Atlanta Field’s first oil was achieved through ATL-2’s in-well ESP. After a few hours operating through the in-well ESP, it prematurely failed, and the ALS of this well was successfully started up.

Fifteen days after first oil, ATL-3’s in-well ESP was started up, but, as occurred with ATL-2, failed after a short period. Its ALS was successfully started up, and both wells produced slightly more than 1 year in that condition.