Innumerable systems and methods have been employed in efforts to find and recover hydrocarbon reserves around the world. At first, such efforts were limited to land operations involving simple but effective drilling methods that satisfactorily recovered reserves from large, productive fields. As the number of known producing fields dwindled, however, it became necessary to search in ever more remote locales, and to move offshore, in the search for new resources. Eventually, sophisticated drilling systems and advanced signal processing techniques enabled oil and gas companies to search virtually anywhere in the world for recoverable hydrocarbons.
Initially, deepwater exploration and production efforts consisted of expensive, large scale drilling operations supported by tanker storage and transportation systems, due primarily to the fact that most offshore drilling sites are associated with difficult and hazardous sea conditions, and thus large scale operations provided the most stable and cost-effective manner in which to search for and recover hydrocarbon reserves. A major drawback to the large-scale paradigm, however, is that explorers and producers have little financial incentive to work smaller reserves, since potential financial recovery is generally offset by the lengthy delay between exploration and production (approximately 3 to 7 years) and the large capital investment required for conventional platforms and related drilling and production equipment. Moreover, complex regulatory controls and industry-wide risk aversion have led to standardization, leaving operators with few opportunities to significantly alter the prevailing paradigm. As a result, offshore drilling operations have traditionally been burdened with long delays between investment and profit, excessive cost overruns, and slow, inflexible recovery strategies dictated by the operational environment.
More recently, deepwater sites have been found in which much of the danger and instability present in such operations is avoided. For example, off the coast of Brazil, West Africa and Indonesia, potential drilling sites have been identified where surrounding seas and weather conditions are relatively mild and calm in comparison to other, more volatile sites such as the Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea. These recently discovered sites tend to have favorable producing characteristics, yield positive exploration success rates, and admit to production using simple drilling techniques similar to those employed in dry land or near-shore operations.
However, since lognormal distributions of recoverable reserves tend to be spread over a large number of small fields, each of which yield less than would normally be required in order to justify the expense of a conventional large-scale operation, these regions have to date been underexplored and underproduced relative to its potential. Consequently, many potentially productive smaller fields have already been discovered, but remain undeveloped due to economic considerations. In response, explorers and producers have adapted their technologies in an attempt to achieve greater profitability by downsizing the scale of operations and otherwise reducing expense, so that recovery from smaller fields makes more financial sense, and the delay between investment and profitability is reduced.
For example, in published Patent Application No. US 2001/0047869 A1 and a number of related pending applications and patents issued to Hopper et al., various methods of drilling deepwater wells are provided in which adjustments to the drilling system can be made so as to ensure a better recovery rate than would otherwise be possible with traditional fixed-well technologies. However, the Hopper system cannot be adjusted during completion, testing and production of the well, and is especially ineffective in instances where the well bore starts at a mud line in a vertical position. The Hopper system also fails to support a variety of different surface loads, and is therefore self-limiting with respect to the flexibility drillers desire during actual operations. The Hopper system also fails to contemplate any significant safety measures to protect the welfare of operating crews or the capital expenditure of investors.
In U.S. Pat. No. 4,223,737 to O'Reilly, a method is disclosed in which the problems associated with traditional, vertically oriented operations are addressed. The method of O'Reilly involves laying out a number of interconnected, horizontally disposed pipes in a string just above the sea floor (along with a blow out preventer and other necessary equipment), and then using a drive or a remote operated vehicle to force the string horizontally into the drilling medium. The O'Reilly system, however, is inflexible in that it fails to admit to practice while the well is being completed and tested. Moreover, the method fails to contemplate functionality during production and workover operations. As would therefore be expected, O'Reilly also fails to teach any systems or methods for improving crew safety or protecting operator investment during exploration and production. In short, the O'Reilly reference is helpful only during the initial stages of drilling a well, and would therefore not be looked to as a systemic solution for safely establishing and maintaining a deepwater exploration and production operation.
Other offshore operators have attempted to solve the problems associated with deepwater drilling by effectively “raising the floor” of an underwater well by disposing a submerged wellhead above a self-contained, rigid framework of pipe casing that is tensioned by means of a gas filled, buoyant chamber. Generally, this type of solution falls in the class of self-standing riser systems, since it typically includes a number of riser segments fixed in a rigid, cage-like structure likely to remain secure or else fail together as a integrated system. For example, as seen in prior U.S. Pat. No. 6,196,322 B1 to Magnussen, the Atlantis Deepwater Technology Holding Group has developed an artificial buoyant seabed (ABS) system, which is essentially a gas filled buoyancy chamber deployed in conjunction with one or more segments of pipe casing disposed at a depth of between 600 and 900 feet beneath the surface of a body of water. After the ABS wellhead is fitted with a blowout preventer during drilling, or with a production tree during production, buoyancy and tension are imparted by the ABS to a lower connecting member and all internal casings. The BOP and riser (during drilling) and production tree (during production), are supported by the lifting force of the buoyancy chamber. Offset of the wellhead is reasonably controlled by means of vertical tension resulting from the buoyancy of the ABS.
The Atlantis ABS system is relatively inefficient, however, in several practical respects. For example, the '322 Magnussen patent specifically limits deployment of the buoyancy chamber to environments where the influence of surface waves is effectively negligible, i.e., at a depth of more than about 500 feet beneath the surface. Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that deployment at such depths can be an expensive and relatively risk-laden solution, given that installation and maintenance can only be carried out by deep sea divers or remotely operated vehicles, and the fact that a relatively extensive transport system must still be installed between the top of the buoyancy chamber and the bottom of an associated recovery vessel in order to initiate production from the well.
The Magnussen system also fails to contemplate multiple anchoring systems, even in instances where problematic drilling environments are likely to be encountered. Moreover, the system lacks any control means for controlling adjustment of either vertical tension or wellhead depth during production and workover operations, and expressly teaches away from the use of lateral stabilizers that could enable the wellhead to be deployed in shallower waters subject to stronger tidal and wave forces. The Magnussen disclosure also fails to contemplate any safety features that would protect the crew and equipment associated with an operation in the event of a sudden, unintended release of the fluid transport cage.
In published Patent Application US 2006/0042800 A1 to Millheim, et al., however, a system and method of establishing an offshore exploration and production system is disclosed in which a well casing is disposed in communication with an adjustable buoyancy chamber and a well hole bored into the floor of a body of water. A lower connecting member joins the well casing and the chamber, and an upper connecting member joins, the adjustable buoyancy chamber and a well terminal member. The chamber's adjustable buoyancy enables an operator to vary the height or depth of the well terminal member, and to vary the vertical tension imparted to drilling and production strings throughout exploration and production operations. Also disclosed is a system and method of adjusting the height or depth of a wellhead while associated vertical and lateral forces remain approximately constant. A variety of well isolation members, lateral stabilizers and anchoring means, as well as several methods of practicing the invention, are also disclosed. There is, however, little detailed discussion of safety features useful in the event of an unintended release of system components.
Thus, presently known offshore exploration and production systems, especially those relying on the so-called self-standing riser type configuration, can be susceptible to a variety of potentially catastrophic system failures that could lead to damage or destruction of the drilling platforms and surface vessels disposed overhead (e.g., a pontoon type drilling rig floating on the surface of the ocean and disposed in communication with the riser system).
For example, casing connections, wellhead connections, buoyancy chambers connected to the riser stack, etc., can all fail, thereby creating an unsafe condition in which buoyancy and tension forces are suddenly released from a submerged captured system toward the surface of the water. When such a release of forces occurs, the components of the system—for example, a buoyancy chamber disposed in communication with several thousand feet of casing riser—are released toward the surface and can impact the rig and/or associated surface vessels servicing an offshore well. For purposes of this disclosure, it should be noted that while many of the detailed embodiments described below relate specifically to a single riser system and its functional equivalents, those of ordinary skill in the art should appreciate that aspects of the present invention are applicable to virtually any type of subsurface exploration and production system insofar as they relate to features drawn to limiting and controlling the deleterious effects of system components suddenly and unexpectedly released from tension.