WATERFLO

WATERFLO

2POTENTIA

MATURITY

1

MATURITY ANALYSIS

1

OODING 2.0

OOD AL

NEW IDEAS

3

WATERFLO

WATERFLO

2POTENTIA

MATURITY

1

MATURITY ANALYSIS

1

OODING 2.0

OOD AL

NEW IDEAS

3

BASIN´s LOCAT

1944 1957- 75

Santa Cruz development

Primary Development of Cerro Dragon, development

(Canadon Seco)g ,

Huemul, Zorro, Cdonde La Escondida, Las

ION & HISTORY

1980’s1970’s 1990’s

Waterflooding starts in El Cordon, Piedra

Incipient Waterfloodingstarts in Cdon Leon,

Waterflooding starts in C. Minerales, El ,

Clavada, C. Seco, El Tordillo, Koluel Kaike y

starts in Cdon Leon, Cerro Dragon, Pico Truncado and Ant.

Huemul, Diadema, Los Perales, El Guadal, C. d l E did t

BASIN MAIN CHA

Concessions ds in twods in tworovinces

ARACTERISTICS

GEOLOGYHigly compartimentalized both straigraphically (complex fluvial environment) and structurally (faults)

FLUIDS

fluvial environment) and structurally (faults)

FLUIDSVarious migratory pulses and bio degradation large variability in key properties like viscosities, Rs.

EXPLOITATION5 to 30+ perforations per well, partially tested, many generation tools co existing, mechanical status, etc.

SURFACECorrosion injection pressures treatment capacity waterCorrosion, injection pressures, treatment capacity, water disposal, treatment, environmental issues, high temperature amplitude from summer to winter etc

MATURITY AS

MissingAnalysisor Poor WF??or Poor WF??

Young

SSESSMENT

Mature

% of3P Res

THE “VOICE” ofe than 15 yrs and 100 b

100+ Fields, 20+ yrs50+ WF P j t

e

e than 15 yrs and 100 b

50+ WF Projects

SPE-185585

Slide 6

f EXPERIENCElocks (+6 000 wells) studiedlocks (+6,000 wells) studied

THE “VOICE” ofOOIP follows a similarOOIP follows a similar

20%20%# Reserv

10% 50%10% 50%# Reservoirs OOI

f EXPERIENCEr to PARETO distribution

70% 20%

r to PARETO distribution

% 30%

70% 20%# Reservoirs OOIP

% 30%voirs OOIP

%%IP

THE “VOICE” off Hi t i l W

tor #1

ormance of Historical W

y Recovery Factor

ytion

SecondaryProduction

tion

time

Slide 8

f EXPERIENCEW t fl di P j t i GSJWaterflooding Projects in GSJ

P50= 12 %

Primary Recovery Factor

THE “VOICE” off Hi t i l W

tor #2

ormance of Historical W

ctable fraction (CF)

TotalTotalElegibleElegible

ContactableContactable

Slide 9

f EXPERIENCEW t fl di P j t i GSJWaterflooding Projects in GSJ

P50= 25 %

Contactable Fraction

THE “VOICE” off Hi t i l W

tor #3

ormance of Historical W

ncies (Eff)

Theoretical

1010 M=20M=20

Theoretical

Real Historical

Wpd (MOVs)

Slide 10

f EXPERIENCEW t fl di P j t i GSJWaterflooding Projects in GSJ

P50= 30 %

Sweep Efficiency

THE “VOICE” ofed Fraction d d i l

e Continoused Fraction depends mainly o

12 % 50%#Reservoirs OOIP

220 150 100 75

f EXPERIENCERes Architecture d Well Spacing

Less Continousn Res. Architecture and Well Spacing

20 % 30%#Reservoirs OOIP

100 %

ion

acte

dFr

acti

Con

ta

Current 220 150 100 750 %

Forest and the treesTHE “VOICE” of

Forest and the trees….

roblems OpportunitieOpportunitie

Fluids GFluidsMobility issues

C

Perms

to make a DIMEf EXPERIENCE

DESIGN , IMPLEMENT,

to make a DIME

MONITOR & EVALUATE

eses

GeologySelectivity,

confinement, Fluid Balance & Timing

C t

ConnectivityBalance & Timing

Compart ments

THE “VOICE” ofecovery Factors variation

Final Recovery Facto

ecovery Factors variation

Final Recovery Facto

WFincr =

RFprim=1

f EXPERIENCEn are mainly due to DIME

r @Current Op Conditions

n are mainly due to DIME

Primary

r @Current Op. Conditions

= 4%12%

WATERFLO

WATERFLO

2POTENTIA

MATURITY

1

MATURITY ANALYSIS

1

OODING 2.0

OOD Next section examines the incremental resources potential

ALp

by assuming two reasonable but hypothetical scenarios

NEW IDEAS

3

TWO DEVELOPMEINCREMENTAL RESO

TWO DEVELOPME

TIMIZATION (300 m)TIMIZATION (300 m)

ons (WO, CTI);

ntactable Fraction and

ciencies based on Experience

timization

Slide 15

ENT SCENARIOSOURCES ESTIMATESENT SCENARIOS

Scenario #1

Assumes average key parameters such as Contactable Fractions and S Effi i i I lSweep Efficiencies. It also assumes no drilling (only workovers and conversions))

PTIMIZATION (300 m)( )

Extrefeatu

QliqQoQo

tt

emely hard to infer geological ures with prod-inj. responses

INCREMENTAL RESO

LL + OPTIMIZATION (170 m)

& recompletions; Assumptions

ntactable fractionntactable fraction

ciencies (displacement assumptions)

F Infill DevelopmentF Infill Development

Slide 17

OURCES ESTIMATES

Scenario #2 Scenario #2

A bl b t hi h k)

Assumes reasonable but higher key parameters (Contactable Fractions and Sweep Efficiencies) and injector p ) jinfill drilling + workover + conversions

L + OPTIMIZATIONL OPTIMIZATION

Better Efficiency

QliqQoQo

tt

Larger Contacted Fraction

INCREMENTAL RESOewly” contacted fraction reprewly contacted fraction repr

OURCES ESTIMATIONresents 70% of the total incrementsresents 70% of the total increments

70/3070/30RatioRatio

Of IncrementalEUR

INCREMENTAL RESORESULT

rio #1 WF OPTIMIZAT

RESULT

rio #1- WF OPTIMIZATm3/job as cutoff

elds (out of 140)

MM 3MMm3 of incremental oil re

f t GSJyrs. of current GSJ pro

B $ iBus$ in Conversions + Workov

Slide 20

OURCES ESTIMATIONTS

ATION

TS

ATION

esources

d tioduction

vers

INCREMENTAL RESORESULT

rio #2 INFILL + OPT

RESULT

rio #2 - INFILL + OPTm3/job as cutoff

elds (out of 140)

MMm3 of incremental oi

yrs. of current GSJ pro

Bus$ (Infill Drill + Conversions

Slide 21

OURCES ESTIMATIONTS

IMIZATION

TS

IMIZATION

l resources

duction

+ WO)

Sensitivity on MinimINCREMENTAL RESO

Sensitivity on Minim

SCENARIO 2_INFIL

Slide 22

mum EUR per JobOURCES ESTIMATIONmum EUR per Job

LL + OPTIMIZATION

Fiel

dsS

elec

ted

Fum

bero

f SN

u

INCREMENTAL RESO

ASH FLOW ANALYSISassumptions

MMus$/well + 0.5 MMus$/woMMus$/well 0.5 MMus$/wo

% Incremental Facilities

ental OPEX assumptions

Mus$/well/yr (Semi-FIXED)

Mus$/well/yr (VAR Well)

s$/m3 (VAR Total Fluid)s$/m3 (VAR Total Fluid)

Slide 23

OURCES ESTIMATION

o 30 60o 30-60us$/bbl

)

INCREMENTAL RESO

EAKEVEN PRICES – SH

Increment

EUR

Case notnot badbad 12Mm3/job

best projectsrformrform US US Shale’sShale’s

25Mm3/job

breakeven pricesMm /job

Slide 24

OURCES ESTIMATION

HALE vs Optimized Waterflood

Breakeven

Price

60Us$/bbl

2015

2014

2013

2016

2017

2012

2011

2010 30

Us$/bbl

WATERFLO

WATERFLO

2POTENTIA

MATURITY

1

MATURITY ANALYSIS

1

OODING 2.0

OOD AL

NEW IDEAS

3“ fNext section examines an “out of the

box” idea that might prove beneficial in various ways… could work or not ydepending on many boundary conditions (geological technical legacy issues

EQUENTIAL WFQliqQoQo

tt

Easy to infer geological features with prod-inj. responses

SEQUENTIAL W

CEPTS

o drilldrill a large amount of i

d TOTALTOTAL fifiers need TOTAL TOTAL confinemconfinem

UP UP sweep sequence

IME IME Inj. monitoringmonitoring Oent pressure gauge needent pressure gauge need

OST OST operation (handles lo

WATERFLOOD

injectors LOW COSTLOW COST

ttment ment

NO RIG NO RIG needed in INJ well

Only a flowmeter and well head eded

ower rates and lower Watercuts)

SEQUENTIAL W

S

e in both, Contacted FracContacted Frac

ee developmentdevelopment: can spepp png on marketmarket or project c

“PLATEAU“PLATEAU”” shaped profPLATEAUPLATEAU shaped prof

NANCIAL RISKRISK LoweLowenced

ANTANT ACTIVITY LEVELS

WATERFLOOD

ction ction and Efficiencies Efficiencies (1.5 - 2x)

eed up or slow down (Factory ModeFactory Mode) p ( yy )conditions (Price, costs, etc.)

file Optimize facilitiesfile Optimize facilities

r r Capital ExposuresCapital Exposures, as project is

foreseeable workforce foreseeable workforce needs

is Just a Numbity is a Choice ”o wisely mature our fields

ber…”