|
HDESP versus Water Well ESP
Summary of Results
This paper will highlight the
economic advantage of using a Hydraulic Diaphragm Electric Submergible Pump in
a Powder River Basin Coal Bed Methane (CBM) well with an average daily production
of 75MSCF/Day and 100 barrels of water per day and a pump set depth of 650 feet
in 7” casing and 1.9” tubing.
The operator saved over $19,000
using the HDESP. This does not include
power cost savings which are being confirmed.
Details supporting the economic summary data are included on the
following page.
|
Items in US Dollars per
annum
|
HDESP
|
ESP
Pump
|
|
Production
|
$219,000
|
$209,400
|
|
Repair or Replacement Cost
|
$2,500
|
$7,200
|
|
Pulling Cost
|
$400
|
$2,400
|
|
Net
|
$216,100
|
$199,800
|
|
Savings
|
$16,300
|
|
|
Cost comparison*
|
$9,525
|
$1,200
|
|
Cost Differential
|
$8,325
|
|
Driver to select HDESP
The operator was experiencing
short run life with ESP pumps in certain wells due to problems associated with solids
and/or scale. In a 12 month period, the ESP
pump failed 6 times.
A Hydraulic Diaphragm Electric
Submersible Pump (HDESP) was selected to reduce problems associated with scale and
extend run times. The HDESP was installed
on Aug 3rd, 2004 and pulled Aug 12th, 2005. Even though the unit ran more than one year,
the cost summary above includes a pull and repair for illustrative purposes.
Application Review
An operator in the Powder
River Basin has over 300 active wells making on average 100 MMCF of Natural Gas
per day.
Application Profile
|
Well Type
|
CBM
|
|
Predominate Production
Method
|
Water Well type ESP running full time
|
|
Well Profile
|
Vertical
|
|
Average Water Production
|
108 BPD
|
|
Average Gas Production
|
75 MCF/ day
|
|
Power Supply
|
3 phase, 480V
|
|
Surface Controls
|
Across the line starter/controller
|
|
Tubing Size
|
1.9” OD, 2.75lb/ft,1.6” ID
|
|
Casing Size: 0 to 600 ft
|
7” , 6.1” ID
|
|
Under Ream: 600 to 665 ft
|
16”
|
|
Pump Set Depth
|
650 feet
|
|
BHT
|
65o F
|
Production improvement
Over a 12 month period, there
was 12 days of downtime associated with waiting on a pulling unit after the ESP
failed (average of 2 days per pull).
|
Total downtime over a 12
month period
|
12 days
|
|
Average Daily Gas Production
(per day)
|
75 MMCF
|
|
Gas Price ($/MCF)
|
$8
|
|
Cost of Lost Production per
failure (12 days)
|
$9,600
|
Pulling Cost
|
Pulling Cost per workover
|
$400
|
|
Failures over a 12 month
period with esp Pumps in subject well
|
6
|
|
Annual cost
|
$2,400
|
Power
The HDESP and water well ESP
both run continuously in this application and produce the same amount of fluid
but the HDESP uses a 3HP motor and the ESP uses a 5HP motor. Assuming both motors are fully loaded, the
following table highlights the power cost savings:
|
|
HDESP
|
ESP
|
|
Motor size:
HP and KW
|
3HP = 2.24KW
|
5HP = 3.73KW
|
|
Yearly Power consumption at $0.07 / KW-HR
|
$1,374
|
$2.287
|
|
Power savings with HDESP
|
$913
|
|
Replacement Cost
The average replacement cost
of an ESP in this area is $1200. The
annual replacement cost associated with ESPs on this well was $7200 (6 x $1200)
* = Cost comparison in
summary table is for pump only as electric cable and surface controls are
similar for both systems.
|
