Implementation of an Engine Management Solution for the Field

A SUSTAINABLE EMISSIONS REDUCTION STRATEGY FOR A DRILLING CONTRACTOR

By Sonny Auld, Helmerich & Payne

Every company has its own cultural and strategic strengths from which it builds.

One of Helmerich and Payne’s (H&P) core values is to Actively C.A.R.E. (Controlling and Removing Exposure) for ourselves and others. This development of an Actively C.A.R.E. focus within the organization is a positive example of how a company can effectively lead its employees in doing the right thing.

Carbon emissions reduction requires solutions that are both cost effective and scalable across a large global rig fleet to reduce excess fuel and associated emissions. As our industry and others address the need for sustainable environmentally responsible choices, we can leverage our culture to reinforce the importance of understanding how H&P can positively contribute and lead the process of reducing emissions while drilling a well.

Not every well is drilled the same. Some operators choose more aggressive well construction parameters as a result of technical need or a desire to push technical limits. These differences make it challenging to decide and agree on a baseline for performance with most of the debatable topics being outside the control of the field crews.

Without debate, the most direct way to reduce emissions is to reduce fuel consumption for the same task. H&P’s emphasis on reducing excess engine hours, and associated fuel consumption, is a foundational step of which the field crews themselves can take ownership. This focus is also applicable for all engine types or fuel mixtures chosen by the operator.

Objective

H&P desires to reduce emissions associated with a rig’s activity while maintaining flexibility for our customers and growing shareholder value. The first step to accomplish this is for our rig crews to provide the most fuel-efficient operations possible. A system was designed and implemented to provide sustainable benefits for all parties by focusing on the foundational concept of excess engine hour reduction. Excess engine hours is explained as the combination of engine count and engine load that can safely be reduced by at least one engine without power limiting the rig.

Process

The first step to developing our solution was analyzing carbon reduction techniques available on the market and the relative carbon footprint of all the available rig power options.

Providing electrical power to the rig via highline was the clear winner, but most of today’s wellsites do not have this infrastructure in place and are powered by gensets (engine + generator) on location.

Relative carbon impact of a diesel engine versus a dual fuel or natural gas engine was analyzed and verified with the original equipment manufacturers. There were cases for each engine type. Generally speaking, the most effective rig power option with the smaller carbon footprint and cost to deploy was the diesel engine.

H&P wanted a solution that field crews could own. Therefore, the program needed to be free of time-intensive tasks of isolating variables associated with a given rig activity or other complexities that field crews do not have control over.

As previously stated, the most direct way to reduce emissions is by reducing fuel, specifically by reducing excess engine hours for rig activities. Using engine load thresholds to decide when to turn an engine on or off proved to be a universal solution to provide carbon reduction in an efficient manner and is not dependent on a rig type or specification.

Results

Analyzing our engine data was the first step in the process. We observed an opportunity to improve fuel efficiency, and we found rigs and wells with higher and lower potential gains but for which there was a common level of improvement to be targeted. A “field first” approach was developed to implement a sustainable solution to reduce excess engine hours that field crews would own.

Two wells were analyzed, comparing fuel consumption and emissions benefits. The first well had unplanned trips that were corrected for in the analysis.

Well 1 was drilled without any focus on engine management and operated with at least one excess engine online 44.6% of the time. After correcting for unplanned trips, a potential savings of 1,434 gallons of diesel and 14.9 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) was indicated in post-well analysis.

Well 2 was drilled the next month with a conscious effort to reduce excess engine hours and had 10.2% percent of the well drilled with at least one excess engine online. A potential savings of 533 gallons of diesel and five tons of CO2e was indicated in post-well analysis.

By focusing on excess engine hour reduction alone, the gains from Well 1 to Well 2 were 902 gallons of diesel and almost 10 tons of CO2e. Annualized, this is an equivalent 16,500 gallons of diesel and 181 tons of CO2e per rig. The field implementation achieved significant and sustainable improvements by reducing underloaded engines throughout the well cycle.

Field crews were able to deliver this improvement from one well to the next as indicated by the date range at the bottom of the figures.

Further gains can be realized with additional enabling technologies often accompanied by additional costs. The improved baseline performance achieved with engine management as demonstrated in this example will allow for proper evaluation of additional technologies and drive fit-for-purpose solutions that solve the outcome needs of the industry.

Another benefit of excess engine hour reduction is the conversation that occurs with customers about how to make further improvements. Since these talks are occurring at a near optimized fuel and emissions state, more meaningful conversations on parameter selection and their impacts on fuel consumption and emissions are possible.

H&Ps culture to Actively C.A.R.E. enabled implementation of an accepted field solution by both field crews and customers alike. It takes the first step toward being environmentally responsible while delivering value to our customers and shareholders in the form of a cost-effective method to reduce fuel and emissions.

Figure 1: Well 1, underloaded engine time periods represented with red bars on the top part of the chart, properly loaded with green bars, yellow bars represented periods of time with small gains more impacted by parameter selection than field driven choices. Solid blue line of bottom track represents actual engine count, dashed line represents the corresponding recommended engine count.

Figure 2: Well 2, underloaded engine time periods represented with red bars on the top part of the chart, properly loaded with green bars, yellow bars represented periods of time with small gains more impacted by parameter selection than field driven choices. Solid blue line of bottom track represents actual engine count, dashed line represents the corresponding recommended engine count.

Sonny Auld is a Product Manager for Helmerich and Payne with Rig Power Solutions being a major portfolio component. With more than 23 years oilfield experience including service company, manufacturing and rig contractor roles, creating customer and shareholder value. Sonny earned a Geologic Engineering degree from the University of Waterloo.