在预期的实用程序框架内管理井位优化风险

IF 2.1 4区 工程技术 Q3 ENERGY & FUELS SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.2118/212305-pa
Di Yang, C. Deutsch
{"title":"在预期的实用程序框架内管理井位优化风险","authors":"Di Yang, C. Deutsch","doi":"10.2118/212305-pa","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Well placement optimization is one of the most crucial tasks in the petroleum industry. It often involves high risk in the presence of geological uncertainty due to a limited understanding of the subsurface reservoir. Well placement optimization is different from decision selection as countless alternatives are impossible to be enumerated in a decision model (such as the mean-variance model). In many practical applications, the decision criterion of well placement optimization is based on maximizing the risk-adjusted value (mean-variance optimization) to capture different risk attitudes. This approach regards variance as the measure of risk, and it is performed under the expected utility framework. However, investors only dislike the downside volatility below a certain benchmark. The downside-risk approach has been discussed in previous studies, in this paper, it will be introduced in the well placement optimization and discussed under the expected utility framework. It is demonstrated in a synthetic reservoir model with the consideration of spatial heterogeneity, and the comparison between the downside-risk optimization and mean-variance optimization is also presented in this example. The observation implies that well placement optimization is heavily influenced by individuals’ preference to risk. The downside-risk optimization outperforms the mean-variance optimization because it explicitly assesses risk and does not penalize high outcomes.","PeriodicalId":22066,"journal":{"name":"SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing Risk in Well Placement Optimization within an Expected Utility Framework\",\"authors\":\"Di Yang, C. Deutsch\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/212305-pa\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Well placement optimization is one of the most crucial tasks in the petroleum industry. It often involves high risk in the presence of geological uncertainty due to a limited understanding of the subsurface reservoir. Well placement optimization is different from decision selection as countless alternatives are impossible to be enumerated in a decision model (such as the mean-variance model). In many practical applications, the decision criterion of well placement optimization is based on maximizing the risk-adjusted value (mean-variance optimization) to capture different risk attitudes. This approach regards variance as the measure of risk, and it is performed under the expected utility framework. However, investors only dislike the downside volatility below a certain benchmark. The downside-risk approach has been discussed in previous studies, in this paper, it will be introduced in the well placement optimization and discussed under the expected utility framework. It is demonstrated in a synthetic reservoir model with the consideration of spatial heterogeneity, and the comparison between the downside-risk optimization and mean-variance optimization is also presented in this example. The observation implies that well placement optimization is heavily influenced by individuals’ preference to risk. The downside-risk optimization outperforms the mean-variance optimization because it explicitly assesses risk and does not penalize high outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/212305-pa\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/212305-pa","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

井位优化是石油工业中最重要的任务之一。由于对地下储层的了解有限,在存在地质不确定性的情况下,它往往涉及高风险。井位优化不同于决策选择,因为在决策模型(如均值-方差模型)中不可能枚举无数的备选方案。在许多实际应用中,井位优化的决策标准是基于风险调整值的最大化(均值方差优化),以捕捉不同的风险态度。该方法将方差视为风险的度量,并在预期效用框架下执行。然而,投资者只不喜欢低于某一基准的下行波动性。在之前的研究中已经讨论了下行风险方法,在本文中,它将被引入到井位优化中,并在预期的实用框架下进行讨论。在考虑空间异质性的综合储层模型中进行了验证,并对下行风险优化与均值方差优化进行了比较。观察结果表明,个体对风险的偏好严重影响了井位优化。下行风险优化优于均值方差优化,因为它明确评估风险,不惩罚高结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Managing Risk in Well Placement Optimization within an Expected Utility Framework
Well placement optimization is one of the most crucial tasks in the petroleum industry. It often involves high risk in the presence of geological uncertainty due to a limited understanding of the subsurface reservoir. Well placement optimization is different from decision selection as countless alternatives are impossible to be enumerated in a decision model (such as the mean-variance model). In many practical applications, the decision criterion of well placement optimization is based on maximizing the risk-adjusted value (mean-variance optimization) to capture different risk attitudes. This approach regards variance as the measure of risk, and it is performed under the expected utility framework. However, investors only dislike the downside volatility below a certain benchmark. The downside-risk approach has been discussed in previous studies, in this paper, it will be introduced in the well placement optimization and discussed under the expected utility framework. It is demonstrated in a synthetic reservoir model with the consideration of spatial heterogeneity, and the comparison between the downside-risk optimization and mean-variance optimization is also presented in this example. The observation implies that well placement optimization is heavily influenced by individuals’ preference to risk. The downside-risk optimization outperforms the mean-variance optimization because it explicitly assesses risk and does not penalize high outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Covers the application of a wide range of topics, including reservoir characterization, geology and geophysics, core analysis, well logging, well testing, reservoir management, enhanced oil recovery, fluid mechanics, performance prediction, reservoir simulation, digital energy, uncertainty/risk assessment, information management, resource and reserve evaluation, portfolio/asset management, project valuation, and petroleum economics.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Diffusion on Reservoir Performance in Underground Hydrogen Storage Experimental Measurements and Molecular Simulation of Carbon Dioxide Adsorption on Carbon Surface Measurement of Effective Hydrogen-Methane Gas Diffusion Coefficients in Reservoir Rocks Flow-Through Experiments of Reactive Ba-Sr-Mg Brines in Mons Chalk at North Sea Reservoir Temperature at Different Injection Rates Evaluation of Effects of Waterflooding-Induced Bilayer Fractures on Tight Reservoir Using Pressure-Transient Analysis Method
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1