cover: the independence hub semisubmersible is the world’s ... · 2003 matterhorn totalfinaelf mc...
TRANSCRIPT
-
Cover: The Independence Hub semisubmersible is the world’s deepest production platform, located in 8,000 feet of water. It is designed to process up to one billion cubic feet of gas per day. Independence Hub began production in 2007. Photo courtesy of operator, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. Other owners and subsea operators include: Devon Energy Corporation, ENI Petroleum Company, StatoilHydro USA E&P, Inc., Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc.
-
MMS Report MMS 2009-012
Gulf of Mexico
Oil and Gas Production Forecast:
2009 – 2018
Asani Brewton Richie Baud Frank Yam Lee Almasy Thierry M. DeCort Michelle Uli Thomas Riches Jr. Eric G. Kazanis Angela G. Josey Roy Bongiovanni
U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service New Orleans Gulf of Mexico OCS Region May 2009
-
iii
Contents
Table of Abbreviations .......................................................................................... iv
Introduction............................................................................................................. 1
Forecast Method: Committed Scenario ................................................................. 2
Forecast Method: Full Potential Scenario............................................................ 10
Factors Affecting the Forecast .............................................................................. 12
Conclusions........................................................................................................... 14
Contributors .......................................................................................................... 20
References............................................................................................................. 21
Notice.................................................................................................................... 23
Figures
Water-depth and completion-depth divisions. ........................................................ 2
Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Oil Production.................................................. 17
Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Gas Production................................................. 19
Tables
Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects ........................... 4
Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Oil Rates (Thousand Barrels/Day)................... 16
Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Gas Rates (Billion Cubic Feet/Day) ................ 18
-
iv
Table of Abbreviations BCFPD billion cubic feet per day
FPS Floating Production System
GOM Gulf of Mexico
MMBOE million barrels of oil equivalent
MMBOPD million barrels of oil per day
MMS Minerals Management Service
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
TVD true vertical depth
-
1
Introduction This report provides a daily oil and gas production rate forecast for the Gulf of Mexico
(GOM) Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for the years 2009 through 2018. The forecast
shows average daily oil and gas production estimates for each calendar year. In this
report, daily oil production rates include oil and condensate production, and daily gas
production rates include gas-well gas and associated gas production.
This report refers to various deepwater development “projects.” In most cases, the
project names and their lateral extents are defined by operators. Hydrocarbon
accumulations developed via a common surface facility or a common subsea system are
typically considered to be a single project. Note that the water depth of a subsea project,
or that of an undeveloped project, refers to the deepest water depth at a well location
within that project.
The classifications used throughout this report are illustrated in Figure 1. Projects in less
than 1,000 ft (305 m) water depths are considered to be shallow-water projects and those
in greater than 1,000 ft (305 m) are considered to be deepwater projects. For gas
production, the shallow water is further subdivided according to the true vertical depth
(TVD) of the producing zones and the water depth. The “shallow-water deep” zone
refers to gas production from well completions at or below 15,000 ft (4,572 m) TVD
subsea and in water depths less than 656 ft (200 meters). All other shallow-water
completions are referred to as part of the “shallow-water shallow” zone.
-
2
Figure 1. - Water-depth and completion-depth divisions.
Forecast Method: Committed Scenario The committed scenario includes projects that are currently producing and those that
operators have committed to producing in the near term. The 2008 production volumes
have been estimated by using the data available at the time of this publication. The
certainty of our forecast beyond 2008 is based, in part, on the accuracy of this 2008
estimate. Our committed scenario production estimates beyond 2008 are derived by
forecasting GOM production in two major components. These components include the
shallow-water trends and the deepwater projection (industry and MMS). Our method
does not explicitly forecast production that may result from the passage of the Gulf of
Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, which among other things entails:
1.) a mandate calling for the Eastern Gulf Lease Sale 224 that includes a part of
the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area more than 125 miles off the Florida
coast and completely west of the Military Mission Line.
-
3
2.) the opening of 5.8 million acres of offshore Louisiana known as 181 South
Area, part of the Central Planning Area, for lease for the first time since 1988.
MMS Shallow-water Projection and Shallow-water Deep Gas Projection
The forecast of shallow water oil and gas production was developed using historical
production volumes dating back to 1983 for shallow water areas in the GOM. The 2004,
2005, 2006, and 2008 oil and gas volumes are anomalous (because of recovery from
hurricane activity) and, therefore, not used to develop the forecast. The results of our
analysis indicate a 13-percent effective annual decline for shallow-water oil and a 17.5-
percent effective annual decline for shallow-water gas. The shallow-water deep gas
production forecast incorporates a sustained production volume equal to the volume seen
in 2007 for the first three years of the forecast period followed by a 9 percent effective
annual decline for the remainder of the period to most closely simulate the historical
production trends and to account for the high level of drilling recently observed on
existing leases for deep gas. The method used to develop the shallow-water forecast and
shallow-water deep gas forecast differs slightly from previous years in that we include
only production from currently producing fields and existing discoveries. Production
from future discoveries on existing leases and from leases not yet awarded are now
accounted for in the undiscovered resources portion of the report.
Deepwater Projection - Industry and MMS
Deepwater GOM operators were surveyed in order to project near-term deepwater
activity. This method of surveying operators to forecast production was analyzed in our
2004 report (Melancon et al., 2004) and confirmed the ability of operators to project
future deepwater production accurately. Operators were asked to provide projected
production rates for all deepwater projects online or planned to come online before
yearend 2014. The names and startup years of the publicly releasable projects are shown
in Table 1. The deepwater oil and gas production estimates (based on the operator
survey) are assumed to have an effective annual decline rate of 12 percent each year (an
assumption based on historic deepwater decline rates) from 2014 through 2018.
-
4
Table 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects
Year of First Production Project Name2 Operator Block
Water Depth
(ft) System Type 1979 Cognac Shell MC 194 1,023 Fixed Platform 1984 Lena ExxonMobil MC 280 1,000 Compliant Tower 1988 GC 291 Placid GC 29 1,540 Semisubmersible/Subsea
1988 GC 311 Placid GC 31 2,243 Subsea 1989 Bullwinkle Shell GC 65 1,353 Fixed Platform 1989 Jolliet ConocoPhillips GC 184 1,760 TLP 1991 Amberjack BP MC 109 1,100 Fixed Platform 1992 Alabaster ExxonMobil MC 485 1,438 Subsea 1993 Diamond1 Kerr McGee MC 445 2,095 Subsea 1993 Zinc ExxonMobil MC 354 1,478 Subsea 1994 Auger Shell GB 426 2,860 TLP 1994 Tahoe/SE Tahoe Shell VK 783 1,500 Subsea 1994 Pompano/ Pompano II BP VK 989 1,290 Fixed Platform/ Subsea 1995 Cooper1 Newfield GB 388 2,097 Semisubmersible
1995 Shasta1 ChevronTexaco GC 136 1,048 Subsea 1995 VK 862 Walter VK 862 1,043 Subsea 1996 Rocky1 Shell GC 110 1,785 Subsea 1996 Popeye Shell GC 116 2,000 Subsea 1996 Mars Shell MC 807 2,933 TLP/Subsea 1997 Troika BP GC 200 2,721 Subsea 1997 Mensa Shell MC 731 5,318 Subsea 1997 Neptune Kerr McGee VK 826 1,930 Spar/Subsea 1997 Ram-Powell Shell VK 956 3,216 TLP 1998 Oyster Marathon EW 917 1,195 Subsea 1998 Morpeth Eni EW 921 1,700 TLP/Subsea 1998 Arnold Marathon EW 963 1,800 Subsea 1998 Baldpate Amerada Hess GB 260 1,648 Compliant Tower 1999 EW 1006 Walter EW 1006 1,884 Subsea 1999 Penn State Amerada Hess GB 216 1,450 Subsea 1999 Dulcimer1 Mariner GB 367 1,120 Subsea 1999 Macaroni Shell GB 602 3,600 Subsea 1999 Angus Shell GC 113 2,045 Subsea 1999 Genesis ChevronTexaco GC 205 2,590 Spar 1999 Allegheny Eni GC 254 3,294 TLP 1999 Gemini ChevronTexaco MC 292 3,393 Subsea 1999 Pluto Mariner MC 674 2,828 Subsea 1999 Ursa Shell MC 809 3,800 TLP 1999 Virgo TotalFinaElf VK 823 1,130 Fixed Platform 2000 Allegheny South ENI GC 298 3,307 Subsea 2000 Hoover ExxonMobil AC 25 4,825 Spar
-
5
Table 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects - continued
Year of First Production Project Name2 Operator Block
Water Depth
(ft) System Type 2000 Diana ExxonMobil EB 945 4,500 Subsea 2000 Black Widow Mariner EW 966 1,850 Subsea 2000 Northwestern Amerada Hess GB 200 1,736 Subsea 2000 Conger Amerada Hess GB 215 1,500 Subsea 2000 King Shell MC 764 3,250 Subsea 2000 Europa Shell MC 935 3,870 Subsea 2000 Petronius ChevronTexaco VK 786 1,753 Compliant Tower 2000 Marlin BP VK 915 3,236 TLP 2001 Pilsner Unocal EB 205 1,108 Subsea 2001 Marshall ExxonMobil EB 949 4,376 Subsea 2001 Prince El Paso EW 1003 1,500 TLP 2001 EW 878 Walter EW 878 1,585 Subsea 2001 Ladybug ATP GB 409 1,355 Subsea 2001 Serrano Shell GB 516 3,153 Subsea 2001 Oregano Shell GB 559 3,400 Subsea 2001 Brutus Shell GC 158 3,300 TLP
2001 Typhoon7 Helix GC 237 2,679 TLP 2001 Mica ExxonMobil MC 211 4,580 Subsea
2001 MC 681 Walter MC 68 1,360 Subsea 2001 Crosby Shell MC 899 4,400 Subsea 2001 Einset1 Shell VK 872 3,500 Subsea 2001 Nile BP VK 914 3,535 Subsea 2002 Madison ExxonMobil AC 24 4,856 Subsea 2002 King's Peak BP DC 133 6,845 Subsea 2002 Lost Ark Nobel EB 421 2,960 Subsea 2002 Nansen Kerr McGee EB 602 3,685 Spar
2002 North Boomvang4 Kerr McGee EB 643 3,650 Spar 2002 Navajo Kerr McGee EB 690 4,210 Subsea 2002 Tulane Amerada Hess GB 158 1,054 Subsea 2002 Manatee Shell GC 155 1,939 Subsea
2002 Sangria1 Hydro GOM GC 177 1,487 Subsea 2002 Aspen BP GC 243 3,065 Subsea 2002 King Kong Mariner GC 472 3,980 Subsea 2002 Yosemite Mariner GC 516 4,150 Subsea 2002 Horn Mountain BP MC 127 5,400 Spar 2002 Aconcagua TotalFinaElf MC 305 7,100 Subsea 2002 Camden Hills Marathon MC 348 7,216 Subsea 2002 Princess Shell MC 765 3,642 Subsea 2002 King9 BP MC 84 5,418 Subsea 2002 East Boomvang4 Kerr McGee EB 688 3,795 Subsea 2003 Falcon Marubeni EB 579 3,638 Subsea
-
6
Table 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects - continued
Year of First Production Project Name2 Operator Block
Water Depth
(ft) System Type 2003 Tomahawk Marubeni EB 623 3,412 Subsea
2003 West Boomvang4 Kerr McGee EB 642 3,678 Subsea 2003 Habanero Shell GB 341 2,015 Subsea 2003 Durango5 Kerr McGee GB 667 3,105 Subsea 2003 Gunnison Kerr McGee GB 668 3,100 Spar 2003 Dawson5 Kerr McGee GB 669 3,152 Subsea 2003 Boris BHP Billiton GC 282 2,378 Subsea 2003 Matterhorn TotalFinaElf MC 243 2,850 TLP 2003 Pardner Anadarko MC 401 1,139 Subsea 2003 Zia Devon MC 496 1,804 Subsea 2003 Herschel/ Na Kika Shell MC 520 6,739 Semisubmersible/Subsea3 2003 Fourier/ Na Kika Shell MC 522 6,940 Semisubmersible/Subsea3 2003 North Medusa Murphy MC 538 2,223 Subsea 2003 Medusa Murphy MC 582 2,223 Spar 2003 East Ansley/Na Kika Shell MC 607 6,590 Semisubmersible/Subsea3 2004 Devil's Tower Eni MC 773 5,610 Spar 2004 South Diana ExxonMobil AC 65 4,852 Subsea 2004 Hack Wilson Kerr-McGee EB 599 3,650 Subsea 2004 Raptor Pioneer EB 668 3,710 Subsea 2004 Harrier1 Pioneer EB 759 4,114 Subsea 2004 Llano Shell GB 386 2,340 Subsea 2004 Magnolia Conocophilips GB 783 4,674 TLP 2004 Red Hawk Kerr-McGee GB 877 5,300 Spar 2004 GB 208 McMoran GB 208 1,275 Subsea 2004 Glider Shell GC 248 3,440 Subsea 2004 Front Runner Murphy GC 338 3,330 Spar 2004 Marco Polo Anadarko GC 608 4,300 TLP 2004 Holstein BP GC 645 4,340 Spar
2004 Kepler/Na Kika BP MC 383 5,759 Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2004 Ariel/Na Kika BP MC 429 6,240 Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2004 Coulomb/ Na Kika Shell MC 657 7,591 Semisubmersible/Subsea3 2004 Ochre Mariner MC 66 1,144 Subsea 2004 MC 837 Walter MC 837 1,524 Subsea 2005 GC 137 Nexen GC 137 1,168 Subsea 2005 Citrine LLOG GC 157 2,614 Subsea 2005 Baccarat W and T Offshore GC 178 1,404 Subsea 2005 K2 Anadarko GC 562 4,006 Subsea 2005 Mad Dog BP GC 782 4,420 Spar 2005 Triton/Goldfinger Eni MC 728 5,610 Subsea 2005 Killer Bee Walter MC 582 Subsea 2005 Swordfish Noble VK 962 4,677 Subsea
-
7
Table 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects - continued
Year of First Production Project Name2 Operator Block
Water Depth
(ft) System Type 2006 SW Horseshoe Walter EB 430 2,285 Subsea 2006 Dawson Deep Kerr McGee GB 625 2,965 Subsea 2006 Lorien Noble GC 199 2,315 Subsea 2006 K2 North Anadarko GC 518 4,049 Subsea 2006 Constitution Kerr McGee GC 680 4,970 Spar 2006 Ticonderoga Kerr McGee GC 768 5,272 Subsea 2006 Rigel Eni MC 252 5,225 Subsea 2006 Gomez ATP MC 711 2,975 Semisubmersible 2006 Seventeen Hands Eni MC299 5,881 Subsea
2007 Vortex/Ind. Hub Anadarko AT 261 8,344 FPS/Subsea6
2007 Jubilee/Ind. Hub Anadarko AT 349 8,825 FPS/Subsea6
2007 Merganser/Ind. Hub Anadarko AT 37 8,015 FPS/Subsea6
2007 San Jacinto/Ind. Hub Eni DC 618 7,850 FPS/Subsea6
2007 Spiderman/Ind. Hub Anadarko DC 621 8,087 FPS/Subsea6 2007 Cottonwood Petrobras GB 244 2,130 Subsea
2007 Shenzi8 BHP Billiton GC 652 4,300 Subsea 2007 Atlantis BP GC 787 7,050 Semisubmersible
2007 Mondo NW/Ind. Hub Anadarko LL 1 8,340 FPS/Subsea6
2007 Cheyenne/Ind. Hub Anadarko LL 399 8,951 FPS/Subsea6
2007 Atlas-Atlas NW/Ind. Hub Anadarko LL 50 8,934 FPS/Subsea6 2007 Wrigley Newfield MC 506 3,911 Subsea 2007 Deimos Shell MC 806 3,106 Subsea
2007 Q/Ind. Hub Hydro MC 961 7,925 FPS/Subsea6 2007 Anduin ATP MC 755 2,904 Subsea 2007 Tiger Deep Gulf Energy GC 195 1,900 Subsea 2008 Neptune BHP Billiton AT 575 4,232 TLP 2008 MC 161 Walter MC 161 2,924 Subsea 2008 Raton Nobel MC 248 3,290 Subsea 2008 Blind Faith ChevronTexaco MC 696 6,989 Semisubmersible 2008 Valley Forge LLOG MC 707 1,538 Subsea 2008 Thunder Horse BP MC 778 6,037 Semisubmersible 2008 Bass Lite Mariner AT 426 6,634 Subsea 2009 Pegasus Eni GC 385 3,498 Subsea 2009 Mirage and Morgus ATP MC 941 4,000 Mini TLP 2009 Dorado BP VK 915 3,236 Subsea 2009 Unreleasable10 2009 GB 302 Walter GB 302 2,410 Subsea 2009 Tahiti ChevronTexaco GC 640 4,000 Spar 2009 Longhorn Eni MC 502 2,442 Subsea 2009 Isabela BP MC 562 6,500 Subsea
-
8
Table 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects - continued
Year of First Production Project Name2 Operator Block
Water Depth
(ft) System Type 2009 Thunder Hawk Murphy MC 734 6,050 Semisubmersible 2009 Clipper ATP GC 299 3,452 2009 MC 72 LLOG MC 72 2,013 2009 MC 583 Walter MC 583 2,487 2009 Thunder Horse North BP MC 776 5,660 2009 Geauxpher Mariner GB 462 2,823 2009 Unreleasable10 2009 Unreleasable10 2009 Unreleasable10 2010 Telemark ATP AT 63 4,385 Mini TLP 2010 Great White Shell AC 857 8,000 Spar 2010 MC 241 Walter MC 241 2,415 2010 Caesar Tonga Anadarko GC 683 4,672 Subsea 2010 Silvertip Shell AC 815 9,226 Subsea 2010 Tobago Shell AC 859 9,627 Subsea 2010 Cascade Petrobras WR 206 8,143 FPSO/Subsea 2010 Chinook Petrobras WR 469 8,831 FPSO/Subsea 2010 Droshky Marathon GC 244 2,900 2010 Unreleasable10 2010 Unreleasable10 2011 Ozona Marathon GB 515 3,000 2012 Unreleasable10 2012 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Unreleasable10 2013 Puma BP GC 823 4,129 2014 Unreleasable10 2016 Unreleasable10
1 Indicates projects that are no longer on production. 2 The previous edition of this report listed deepwater fields, whereas this version lists deepwater projects. 3 Na Kika FPS is located in Mississippi Canyon Block 474 in 6,340 ft (1,932 m) of water. 4 2004 Report referred to entire area as Boomvang 5 Included in 2004 Report with Gunnison 6 Independence Hub FPS will be located in Mississippi Canyon Block 920 in 7,920 ft (2,414 m) of water. 7Formerly known as Typhoon under ChevronTexaco operation, now named Phoenix under Helix operation.
-
9
8 Formerly known as Genghis Khan/Ind. Hub 9 Includes King South 10 Unreleasable – operator has commitment to produce and/or is planning develope project but has not publicly released project information.
AC = Alaminos Canyon AT = Atwater Valley DC = De Soto Canyon EB = East Breaks EW = Ewing Bank GB = Garden Banks GC = Green Canyon LL = Lloyd Ridge MC = Mississippi Canyon VK = Viosca Knoll WR = Walker Ridge
-
10
Forecast Method: Full Potential Scenario The Full Potential Scenario adds potential oil and gas production from industry-
announced deepwater discoveries and undiscovered resources in all water depths. This
part of the production forecast is more speculative than the committed scenario.
Industry-Announced Discoveries
Gulf of Mexico operators have announced numerous deepwater discoveries that were not
reported in the operator survey, possibly because these projects have not been fully
assessed and operators have not yet committed to development schedules. Many of these
industry-announced discoveries are likely to begin production within the next 10 years.
Some may even begin production within the next 5 years.
The industry-announced component is based on the following assumptions:
1.) Ultimate recoverable volumes from the industry-announced discoveries are
taken from independent, proprietary MMS assessments whenever available;
otherwise, the industry-announced volumes are used.
2.) During the first year of production, each project is assumed to produce at half
its peak rate.
3.) Projects with discovered resource volumes over 200 MMBOE are assumed to
reach peak production in their second year, sustain that peak rate for a total of
4 years, then decline at an effective annual 12 percent rate from that time
forward.
4.) The estimated peak production rate for each project is based on the estimated
recoverable reserves as follows:
Peak Rate = (0.00027455)*(ult rec rsvs) + 9000
where the peak rate is in barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) per day and the
ultimate recoverable reserves (ult rec rsvs) are in BOE. This relationship was
-
11
derived by plotting maximum production rates of known fields against the
ultimate recoverable reserves of those fields and performing a linear
regression. Note that MMS reserve estimates are on a field basis, so we
assume here that this relationship based on historic field trends can be applied
on a project basis.
5.) Projects announced as gas discoveries are assumed to be 100-percent gas.
Projects in the subsalt Miocene and Lower Tertiary plays are assumed to be
84-percent oil and 16-percent gas based on the average production capacities
of facilities slated to accommodate these projects. It should be noted that
percentage of oil for some of these plays reaches into the high 90-percent
range. The reserves of all other projects are assumed to be 61-percent oil and
39-percent gas, on the basis of an average of historic deepwater production.
6.) The year when each industry-announced discovery is expected to begin
production is estimated by using available information.
7.) All industry-announced discoveries with resource estimates greater than
20 MMBOE are assumed to begin production within the next 10 years.
Undiscovered Resources
This section of the forecast represents oil and gas production volumes that exist in yet-to-
be discovered fields that are anticipated to commence production during the forecast
period. These resources exist primarily on GOM acreage that is expected to be leased in
future Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease sales. The production volumes forecast from
these yet-to-be discovered fields is derived from: GOM tracts scheduled to be leased
during the remaining lease sales in the 2007-2012 Five-Year Oil and Gas Leasing
Program, future GOM lease sales that are projected to be held between 2012-2018, and
future discoveries that will be made on existing leases. The production volumes forecast
from the undiscovered fields do not include areas in the GOM currently under moratoria.
The forecast methodology assumes that the volumes of oil and gas produced from
acreage leased during the forecast period will be within the range of historically
-
12
discovered reserve volumes for each sale and will exhibit similar production profiles.
Previously discovered volumes and production profiles from each individual lease sale
held between 1983 and 2008 are used to develop production profiles for both oil and gas
that are representative of a characteristic sale for each Planning Area. These profiles are
developed by aggregating lease-sale specific historical production volumes on an annual
basis, setting each sale date to time-zero, and calculating an average production volume
for each time period. An average annual GOM production profile is then calculated
using the oil and gas production profiles for each Planning Area. The 10-year forecast of
undiscovered production is developed using the annual GOM production profile in a time
series and shifting each profile one year forward from the previous profile such that time-
zero for each of the ten profiles corresponds to each year of the forecast period. The
production volumes are then aggregated on an annual basis to determine the total volume
by forecast year.
The model used is constrained by:
1.) Observed range of historical production volumes resulting from acreage
leased in all previously held GOM Lease Sales.
2.) Reported volumes of oil and gas that are anticipated to be leased, developed,
and produced as a result of a single sale in each Planning Area.
The reported volumes are those published in the “Proposed Final Program Outer
Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program 2007 - 2012” which are based, in part, on
data from MMS’ 2006 “Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and
Gas Resources of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf.”
Factors Affecting the Forecast The Gulf of Mexico Oil and Gas Production Forecast provides the public with our view
of what the production from the Gulf of Mexico will be over the next ten years.
However, at any time there are a number of factors which may alter the forecast or
contribute to whether the projects listed in Table 1 are able to begin production on
schedule.
-
13
Technology Challenges
Much of the new development within the Gulf of Mexico is in water depths greater than
1000 ft and often targeting prospects beneath salt. There are a limited number of rigs
capable of drilling at these depths and under these conditions. Demand for rig time has
outstripped the supply, causing delays. Fluctuation in oil prices, equipment failures, rises
in the costs of equipment and materials, as well as a shortage of skilled labor are also
common obstacles to current and future oil and gas production within the Gulf of
Mexico. Additionally, drilling conditions vary greatly over the Gulf. For example,
projects grappling with drilling in high-pressure zones face different technological
challenges than projects drilling in ultra-deepwater. Addressing these challenges requires
that companies stay on the cutting edge of drilling and production technology, increasing
the risk involved in these ventures.
Hurricanes
An uncontrollable factor in the forecast is hurricanes. Hurricanes cause short-term delays
by forcing the removal of personnel from offshore sites before and during the storms,
leaving most production facilities shut-in during these times. Hurricanes may lead to
damage at production facilities or to the thousands of miles of pipeline used to transport
the hydrocarbons to land. Repairs for this type of damage take time and may lead to
delays regarding upcoming projects or result in temporarily lowered production volumes
for currently producing projects. While hurricanes are not an uncommon occurrence in
the Gulf of Mexico the majority of them do not impact long-term production
significantly. This is because most hurricanes cause relatively minor damage to
infrastructure and production can be restored quickly. It is only those hurricanes that
cause severe infrastructure damage within the Gulf, such as Ivan in 2004, Katrina and
Rita in 2005, and Gustav and Ike in 2008, that cause anomalous decreases in the overall
yearly production rates. These decreases do not reflect the overall trends seen within the
Gulf of Mexico oil and gas production and thus data from these years is not used in the
projections.
-
14
Conclusions Historic oil production in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) increased steadily from 1993
through 2002, leveled off in 2003, and declined in 2004 and 2005. The sharp decline
seen was caused in large part by Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and hurricanes Katrina and Rita
in 2005. During 2006 and 2007 oil production remained steady, but had not reached pre-
hurricane Katrina production volumes. The 2008 oil production volumes again show a
sharp decline, due in large part to damage from hurricanes Gustav and Ike. Shallow-
water oil production declined steadily since 1997, but was offset by increasing deepwater
oil production during most of that period. Historic gas production in the GOM followed
similar trends. While shallow-water deep-gas production generally increased during the
period 1993 through 2002, the shallow-water gas production dropped steadily from 1996
though 2008. Although deepwater gas production increased during much of that period,
it was not sufficient to prevent an overall decline in total GOM gas production through
2008.
The anticipated increase in production for the year 2009 reflects not only production from
the many projects slated to come online in this year, but also the addition of volumes that
were shut-in during 2008 as a result of hurricane activity. For the oil, 75-percent of the
increase in production is a reflection of shut-in volumes coming back online in early
2009. Seventy-two-percent of the increase of gas production results from shut-in
volumes coming back online.
Within the next 10 years, total GOM oil production is expected to exceed 1.6 million
barrels of oil per day (MMBOPD) based on existing shallow and deepwater operator
commitments as shown in Table 2 and Figure 2. If industry-announced discoveries and
undiscovered resources realize their full potential, production could reach 1.9 MMBOPD.
Once a peak is reached, oil production may level off or begin to show a slight decline
depending on whether industry-announced discoveries and undiscovered resources are
maximized.
Based on existing shallow and deepwater operator commitments, GOM gas production is
expected to reach about 7 billion cubic ft per day (BCFPD) as shown in Table 3 and
-
15
Figure 3. In the committed scenario, a decline in production is seen beyond 2009.
However, if contributions from industry-announced discoveries and undiscovered
resources reach their full potential, the GOM gas production decline could level off or
show a small reversal within the forecast period. Realization of this full potential
scenario will depend on operator commitments to develop these resources within the next
10 years. The small contribution to gas production from industry-announced discoveries
reflects the overall trend of lower gas-oil-ratios anticipated in the subsalt Miocene and
Lower Tertiary plays, found in deepwater Gulf of Mexico.
Each component described in this report adds potential GOM production to the forecast
and the uncertainty increases with each subsequent component. The data from each
component used in this report are presented in Tables 2 and 3 so that the reader may
decide the degree of certainty that he or she deems appropriate. Whatever degree of
certainty used, one can conclude that GOM oil production is expected to increase within
the forecast period and GOM gas production is expected to remain below rates seen in
the 1990’s.
-
Table 2. - Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Oil Rates (Thousand Barrels/Day)
Year Shallow-water
MMS Shallow-water Projection Deepwater
Industry Deepwater Projection
MMS Deepwater Projection
Committed Scenario-Total GOM
Industry-Announced Discoveries
Undiscovered Resources
Full Potential Scenario- Total GOM
1993 745 101 845 1994 746 115 860 1995 792 151 943 1996 813 198 1010 1997 830 296 1126 1998 781 436 1217 1999 738 615 1353 2000 690 743 1433 2001 667 864 1531 2002 601 955 1556 2003 577 957 1534 2004^ 513 953 1466 2005^ 387 892 1279 2006^ 357 929 1286 2007 381 895 1276 2008^ 313* 829* 1142* 2009 288 925 1213 0 2 1215 2010 251 1140 1391 7 7 1405 2011 218 1417 1635 13 18 1667 2012 190 1418 1608 94 33 1735 2013 165 1393 1558 241 80 1879 2014 144 1226 1369 341 138 1849 2015 125 1079 1204 425 205 1833 2016 109 949 1058 463 288 1809 2017 95 835 930 431 399 1760 2018 82 735 817 410 508 1735
^Indicates years with known anomalous data due to hurricane affected shut-in *Estimate
16
-
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
Year
Undiscovered ResourcesIndustry Announced DiscoveriesMMS Deepwater ProjectionIndustry Deepwater ProjectionDeepwater (historical)MMS Shallow-water ProjectionShallow-water (historical)
Thou
sand
Bar
rels
/Day
Committed Scenario
Full Potential Scenario
Indicates years with known anomalous data due to hurricane affected shut-in
Figure 2. - Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Oil Production.
17
-
Table 3. - Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Gas Rates (Billion Cubic Feet/Day)
Year
Shallow-water Shallow
MMS Shallow-water Shallow Projection
Shallow-water Deep
MMS Shallow-water Deep Projection Deepwater
Industry Deepwater Projection
MMS Deepwater Projection
Committed Scenario-Total GOM
Industry-Announced Discoveries
Undiscovered Resources
Full Potential Scenario- Total GOM
1993 11.89 0.51 0.33 12.73 1994 12.20 0.60 0.44 13.24 1995 11.79 0.81 0.49 13.09 1996 12.17 0.93 0.76 13.86 1997 11.87 1.23 1.05 14.15 1998 11.11 1.19 1.54 13.84 1999 10.44 1.06 2.31 13.81 2000 9.84 0.96 2.74 13.54 2001 9.42 1.18 3.23 13.83 2002 7.56 1.31 3.53 12.40 2003 6.97 1.23 3.89 12.09 2004^ 6.04 1.10 3.83 10.97 2005^ 4.58 0.80 3.26 8.64 2006^ 4.19 0.81 2.98 7.98 2007 4.09 0.79 2.79 7.67 2008^ 3.29* 0.55* 2.59* 6.43* 2009 2.78 0.79 3.4 6.97 0.03 0.03 7.03 2010 2.29 0.79 3.3 6.38 0.12 0.23 6.73 2011 1.89 0.79 3.01 5.69 0.17 0.55 6.41 2012 1.56 0.72 2.72 5.00 0.26 0.96 6.22 2013 1.29 0.65 2.68 4.62 0.42 1.53 6.57 2014 1.06 0.60 2.36 4.02 0.51 2.29 6.82 2015 0.88 0.54 2.08 3.49 0.58 3.12 7.20 2016 0.72 0.49 1.83 3.04 0.61 3.9 7.55 2017 0.60 0.45 1.61 2.65 0.56 4.71 7.93 2018 0.49 0.41 1.41 2.32 0.53 5.42 8.27
^Indicates years with known anomalous data due to hurricane affected shut-in *Estimate
18
-
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017Year
Undiscovered ResourcesIndustry-Announced DiscoveriesMMS Deepwater ProjectionIndustry Deepwater ProjectionDeepwater (historical)MMS Shallow-water Deep ProjectionShallow-water Deep (historical)MMS Shallow-water Shallow ProjectionShallow-water Shallow (historical)
Bill
ion
Cub
ic F
eet/D
ay
Full Potential Scenario
Committed Scenario
Indicates years with known anomalous data due to hurricane affected shut-in
Figure 3. – Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Gas Production.
19
-
20
Contributors The Minerals Management Service acknowledges Mr. Kevin Karl for his continued
support of this project and Mike Prendergast for his many contributions. We would also
like to thank the following deepwater operators for their cooperation in this report:
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation ATP Oil and Gas Corporation
BHP Billiton Petroleum (Americas) Inc. BP America Production Company
ChevronTexaco Inc. Conoco Philips
Deep Gulf Energy LP ENI Petroleum Company ExxonMobil Corporation Marathon Oil Corporation
Mariner Mauribeni
Murphy Oil Corporation Newfield Exploration Company
Nexen Noble Energy, Inc.
Petrobras America Inc. Shell Offshore Inc.
StatoilHydro USA E&P, Inc. Walter Oil & Gas
-
21
References U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, 2006, “Assessment of
Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of the Nation’s
Outer Continental Shelf.” MMS Fact Sheet RED 2006-01b, February 2006, 6 p.
Karl, K. J., R.D. Baud, A.G. Boice, R. Bongiovanni, T.M. DeCort, R.P. Desselles, and
E.G. Kazanis, 2007, Gulf of Mexico Oil and Gas Production Forecast from 2007
Through 2016, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service,
Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS Report MMS 2007-020, New Orleans, 19 p.
Melancon, J. M., R.D. Baud, A.G. Boice, R. Bongiovanni, T.M. DeCort, R.P. Desselles,
and E.G. Kazanis, 2004, Gulf of Mexico Oil and Gas Production Forecast from
2004 Through 2013, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management
Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS Report MMS 2004-065, New
Orleans, 27 p.
Melancon, J. M., R. Bongiovanni, and R.D. Baud, 2003, Gulf of Mexico Outer
Continental Shelf Daily Oil and Gas Production Rate Projections from 2003
Through 2007, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service,
Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS Report MMS 2003-028, New Orleans, 17 p.
Melancon, J. M., R. Bongiovanni, and R.D. Baud, 2002, Gulf of Mexico Outer
Continental Shelf Daily Oil and Gas Production Rate Projections from 2002
Through 2006, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service,
Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS Report MMS 2002-031, New Orleans, 26 p.
Melancon, J. M., R. Bongiovanni, and R.D. Baud, 2001, Gulf of Mexico Outer
Continental Shelf Daily Oil and Gas Production Rate Projections from 2001
Through 2005, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service,
Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS Report MMS 2001-044, New Orleans, 20 p.
Melancon, J. M. and R.D. Baud, 2000, Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf Daily Oil
and Gas Production Rate Projections from 2000 Through 2004, U.S. Department
-
22
of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS
Report MMS 2000-012, New Orleans, 20 p.
Melancon, J. M. and R.D. Baud, 1999, Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf Daily Oil
and Gas Production Rate Projections from 1999 Through 2003, U.S. Department
of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS
Report MMS 99-016, New Orleans, 20 p.
Melancon, J. M. and D.S. Roby, 1998, Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf Daily Oil
and Gas Production Rate Projections from 1998 Through 2002, U.S. Department
of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, OCS
Report MMS 98-0013, New Orleans, 16 p.
Proposed Final Program Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program 2007 -
2012, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of
Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, 146 p.
-
23
Notice Our goal is to publish a reliable production forecast based on the data available.
Therefore, we periodically review our methodology to improve our process and provide
accurate information. Please contact the Regional Supervisor, Production and
Development, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Minerals Management Service, 1201
Elmwood Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70123, to communicate any
questions you have or ideas for consideration in our next report. The telephone number is
(504) 736-2675.
-
Table of AbbreviationsIntroduction Figure 1. - Water-depth and completion-depth divisions.Forecast Method: Committed ScenarioTable 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM ProjectsForecast Method: Full Potential ScenarioFactors Affecting the ForecastConclusionsTable 2. - Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Oil Rates (Thousand Barrels/Day)Figure 2. - Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Oil Production.Table 3. - Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Gas Rates (Billion Cubic Feet/Day)Figure 3. – Gulf of Mexico Average Annual Gas Production.ContributorsReferencesNotice
Table 1
Table 1 - Development Systems of Productive Deepwater GOM Projects
Year of First ProductionProject Name2OperatorBlockWater Depth (ft)System Type
1979CognacShellMC 1941,023Fixed Platform
1984LenaExxonMobilMC 2801,000Compliant Tower
1988GC 291PlacidGC 291,540Semisubmersible/Subsea
1988GC 311PlacidGC 312,243Subsea
1989BullwinkleShellGC 651,353Fixed Platform
1989JollietConocoPhillipsGC 1841,760TLP
1991AmberjackBPMC 1091,100Fixed Platform
1992AlabasterExxonMobilMC 4851,438Subsea
1993Diamond1Kerr McGeeMC 4452,095Subsea
1993ZincExxonMobilMC 3541,478Subsea
1994AugerShellGB 4262,860TLP
1994Tahoe/SE TahoeShellVK 7831,500Subsea
1994Pompano/ Pompano IIBPVK 9891,290Fixed Platform/ Subsea
1995Cooper1NewfieldGB 3882,097Semisubmersible
1995Shasta1ChevronTexacoGC 1361,048Subsea
1995VK 862WalterVK 8621,043Subsea
1996Rocky1ShellGC 1101,785Subsea
1996PopeyeShellGC 1162,000Subsea
1996MarsShellMC 8072,933TLP/Subsea
1997TroikaBPGC 2002,721Subsea
1997MensaShellMC 7315,318Subsea
1997NeptuneKerr McGeeVK 8261,930Spar/Subsea
1997Ram-PowellShellVK 9563,216TLP
1998OysterMarathonEW 9171,195Subsea
1998MorpethEniEW 9211,700TLP/Subsea
1998ArnoldMarathonEW 9631,800Subsea
1998BaldpateAmerada HessGB 2601,648Compliant Tower
1999EW 1006WalterEW 10061,884Subsea
1999Penn StateAmerada HessGB 2161,450Subsea
1999Dulcimer1MarinerGB 3671,120Subsea
1999MacaroniShellGB 6023,600Subsea
1999AngusShellGC 1132,045Subsea
1999GenesisChevronTexacoGC 2052,590Spar
1999AlleghenyEniGC 2543,294TLP
1999GeminiChevronTexacoMC 2923,393Subsea
1999PlutoMarinerMC 6742,828Subsea
1999UrsaShellMC 8093,800TLP
1999VirgoTotalFinaElfVK 8231,130Fixed Platform
2000Allegheny SouthENIGC 2983,307Subsea
2000HooverExxonMobilAC 254,825Spar
2000DianaExxonMobilEB 9454,500Subsea
2000Black WidowMarinerEW 9661,850Subsea
2000NorthwesternAmerada HessGB 2001,736Subsea
2000CongerAmerada HessGB 2151,500Subsea
2000KingShellMC 7643,250Subsea
2000EuropaShellMC 9353,870Subsea
2000PetroniusChevronTexacoVK 7861,753Compliant Tower
2000MarlinBPVK 9153,236TLP
2001PilsnerUnocalEB 2051,108Subsea
2001MarshallExxonMobilEB 9494,376Subsea
2001PrinceEl PasoEW 10031,500TLP
2001EW 878WalterEW 8781,585Subsea
2001LadybugATPGB 4091,355Subsea
2001SerranoShellGB 5163,153Subsea
2001OreganoShellGB 5593,400Subsea
2001BrutusShellGC 1583,300TLP
2001Typhoon7HelixGC 2372,679TLP
2001MicaExxonMobilMC 2114,580Subsea
2001MC 681WalterMC 681,360Subsea
2001CrosbyShellMC 8994,400Subsea
2001Einset1ShellVK 8723,500Subsea
2001NileBPVK 9143,535Subsea
2002MadisonExxonMobilAC 244,856Subsea
2002King's PeakBPDC 1336,845Subsea
2002Lost ArkNobelEB 4212,960Subsea
2002NansenKerr McGeeEB 6023,685Spar
2002North Boomvang4Kerr McGeeEB 6433,650Spar
2002NavajoKerr McGeeEB 6904,210Subsea
2002TulaneAmerada HessGB 1581,054Subsea
2002ManateeShellGC 1551,939Subsea
2002Sangria1Hydro GOMGC 1771,487Subsea
2002AspenBPGC 2433,065Subsea
2002King KongMarinerGC 4723,980Subsea
2002YosemiteMarinerGC 5164,150Subsea
2002Horn MountainBPMC 1275,400Spar
2002AconcaguaTotalFinaElfMC 3057,100Subsea
2002Camden HillsMarathonMC 3487,216Subsea
2002PrincessShellMC 7653,642Subsea
2002King9BPMC 845,418Subsea
2002East Boomvang4Kerr McGeeEB 6883,795Subsea
2003FalconMarubeniEB 5793,638Subsea
2003TomahawkMarubeniEB 6233,412Subsea
2003West Boomvang4Kerr McGeeEB 6423,678Subsea
2003HabaneroShellGB 3412,015Subsea
2003Durango5Kerr McGeeGB 6673,105Subsea
2003GunnisonKerr McGeeGB 6683,100Spar
2003Dawson5Kerr McGeeGB 6693,152Subsea
2003BorisBHP BillitonGC 2822,378Subsea
2003MatterhornTotalFinaElfMC 2432,850TLP
2003PardnerAnadarkoMC 4011,139Subsea
2003ZiaDevonMC 4961,804Subsea
2003Herschel/ Na KikaShellMC 5206,739Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2003Fourier/ Na KikaShellMC 5226,940Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2003North MedusaMurphyMC 5382,223Subsea
2003MedusaMurphyMC 5822,223Spar
2003East Ansley/Na KikaShellMC 6076,590Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2004Devil's TowerEniMC 7735,610Spar
2004South DianaExxonMobilAC 654,852Subsea
2004Hack WilsonKerr-McGeeEB 5993,650Subsea
2004RaptorPioneerEB 6683,710Subsea
2004Harrier1PioneerEB 7594,114Subsea
2004LlanoShellGB 3862,340Subsea
2004MagnoliaConocophilipsGB 7834,674TLP
2004Red HawkKerr-McGeeGB 8775,300Spar
2004GB 208McMoranGB 2081,275Subsea
2004GliderShellGC 2483,440Subsea
2004Front RunnerMurphyGC 3383,330Spar
2004Marco PoloAnadarkoGC 6084,300TLP
2004HolsteinBPGC 6454,340Spar
2004Kepler/Na KikaBPMC 3835,759Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2004Ariel/Na KikaBPMC 4296,240Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2004Coulomb/ Na KikaShellMC 6577,591Semisubmersible/Subsea3
2004OchreMarinerMC 661,144Subsea
2004MC 837WalterMC 8371,524Subsea
2005GC 137NexenGC 1371,168Subsea
2005CitrineLLOGGC 1572,614Subsea
2005BaccaratW and T OffshoreGC 1781,404Subsea
2005K2AnadarkoGC 5624,006Subsea
2005Mad DogBPGC 7824,420Spar
2005Triton/GoldfingerEniMC 7285,610Subsea
2005Killer BeeWalterMC 582Subsea
2005SwordfishNobleVK 9624,677Subsea
2006SW HorseshoeWalterEB 4302,285Subsea
2006Dawson DeepKerr McGeeGB 6252,965Subsea
2006LorienNobleGC 1992,315Subsea
2006K2 NorthAnadarkoGC 5184,049Subsea
2006ConstitutionKerr McGeeGC 6804,970Spar
2006TiconderogaKerr McGeeGC 7685,272Subsea
2006RigelEniMC 2525,225Subsea
2006GomezATPMC 7112,975Semisubmersible
2006Seventeen HandsEniMC2995,881Subsea
2007Vortex/Ind. HubAnadarkoAT 2618,344FPS/Subsea6
2007Jubilee/Ind. HubAnadarkoAT 3498,825FPS/Subsea6
2007Merganser/Ind. HubAnadarkoAT 378,015FPS/Subsea6
2007San Jacinto/Ind. HubEniDC 6187,850FPS/Subsea6
2007Spiderman/Ind. HubAnadarkoDC 6218,087FPS/Subsea6
2007CottonwoodPetrobrasGB 2442,130Subsea
2007Shenzi8BHP BillitonGC 6524,300Subsea
2007AtlantisBPGC 7877,050Semisubmersible
2007Mondo NW/Ind. HubAnadarkoLL 18,340FPS/Subsea6
2007Cheyenne/Ind. HubAnadarkoLL 3998,951FPS/Subsea6
2007Atlas-Atlas NW/Ind. HubAnadarkoLL 508,934FPS/Subsea6
2007WrigleyNewfieldMC 5063,911Subsea
2007DeimosShellMC 8063,106Subsea
2007Q/Ind. HubHydroMC 9617,925FPS/Subsea6
2007AnduinATPMC 7552,904Subsea
2007TigerDeep Gulf EnergyGC 1951,900Subsea
2008NeptuneBHP BillitonAT 5754,232TLP
2008MC 161WalterMC 1612,924Subsea
2008RatonNobelMC 2483,290Subsea
2008Blind FaithChevronTexacoMC 6966,989Semisubmersible
2008Valley ForgeLLOGMC 7071,538Subsea
2008Thunder HorseBPMC 7786,037Semisubmersible
2008Bass LiteMarinerAT 4266,634Subsea
2009PegasusEniGC 3853,498Subsea
2009Mirage and MorgusATPMC 9414,000Mini TLP
2009DoradoBPVK 9153,236Subsea
2009GB 302WalterGB 3022,410Subsea
2009TahitiChevronTexacoGC 6404,000Spar
2009LonghornEniMC 5022,442Subsea
2009IsabelaBPMC 5626,500Subsea
2009Thunder HawkMurphyMC 7346,050Semisubmersible
2009ClipperATPGC 2993,452
2009MC 72LLOGMC 722,013
2009MC 583WalterMC 5832,487
2009GeauxpherMarinerGB 4622,823
2009Thunder Horse NorthBPMC 7765,660
2009Unreleasable10
2009Unreleasable10
2009Unreleasable10
2010TelemarkATPAT 634,385Mini TLP
2010Great WhiteShellAC 8578,000Spar
2010MC 241WalterMC 2412,415
2010Caesar TongaAnadarkoGC 6834,672Subsea
2010SilvertipShellAC 8159,226Subsea
2010TobagoShellAC 8599,627Subsea
2010CascadePetrobrasWR 2068,143FPSO/Subsea
2010ChinookPetrobrasWR 4698,831FPSO/Subsea
2010DroshkyMarathonGC 2442,900
2010Unreleasable10
2010Unreleasable10
2011OzonaMarathonGB 5153,000
2012Unreleasable10
2012Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013Unreleasable10
2013PumaBPGC 8234,129
2014Unreleasable10
2016Unreleasable10
1 Indicates projects that are no longer on production.
2 The previous edition of this report listed deepwater fields, whereas this version lists deepwater projects.
3 Na Kika FPS is located in Mississippi Canyon Block 474 in 6,340 ft (1,932 m) of water.
4 2004 Report referred to entire area as Boomvang
5 Included in 2004 Report with Gunnison
6 Independence Hub FPS will be located in Mississippi Canyon Block 920 in 7,920 ft (2,414 m) of water.
7Formerly known as Typhoon under ChevronTexaco operation, now named Phoenix under Helix operation.
8 Formerly known as Genghis Khan
9 Includes King South
10 Unreleasable – operator has commitment to produce and/or is planning to develope project but has not publicly released project information.
AC = Alaminos Canyon
AT = Atwater Valley
DC = De Soto Canyon
EB = East Breaks
EW = Ewing Bank
GB = Garden Banks
GC = Green Canyon
LL = Lloyd Ridge
MC = Mississippi Canyon
VK = Viosca Knoll
WR = Walker Ridge
Table 2 Oil
YearShallow-waterMMS Shallow-water ProjectionDeepwaterIndustry Deepwater ProjectionMMS Deepwater ProjectionCommitted Scenario-Total GOMIndustry-Announced DiscoveriesUndiscovered ResourcesFull Potential Scenario- Total GOM
1993745101845
1994746115860
1995792151943
19968131981010
19978302961126
19987814361217
19997386151353
20006907431433
20016678641531
20026019551556
20035779571534
20045139531466
20053878921279
20063579291286
20073818951276
20083138291142
20092889251213021215
201025111401391771405
20112181417163513181667
20121901418160894331735
201316513931558241801879
2014144122613693411381849
2015125107912044252051833
201610994910584632881809
2017958359304313991760
2018827358174105081735
Table 3 Gas
YearShallow-water ShallowMMS Shallow-water Shallow ProjectionShallow-water DeepMMS Shallow-water Deep ProjectionDeepwaterIndustry Deepwater ProjectionMMS Deepwater ProjectionCommitted Scenario-Total GOMIndustry-Announced DiscoveriesUndiscovered ResourcesFull Potential Scenario- Total GOM
199311.890.510.3312.73
199412.200.600.4413.24
199511.790.810.4913.09
199612.170.930.7613.86
199711.871.231.0514.15
199811.111.191.5413.84
199910.441.062.3113.81
20009.840.962.7413.54
20019.421.183.2313.83
20027.561.313.5312.40
20036.971.233.8912.09
20046.041.103.8310.97
20054.580.803.268.64
20064.190.812.987.98
20074.090.792.797.67
20083.290.552.596.43
20092.780.793.46.970.030.037.03
20102.290.793.36.380.120.236.73
20111.890.793.015.690.170.556.41
20121.560.722.725.000.260.966.22
20131.290.652.684.620.421.536.57
20141.060.602.364.020.512.296.82
20150.880.542.083.490.583.127.20
20160.720.491.833.040.613.97.55
20170.600.451.612.650.564.717.93
20180.490.411.412.320.535.428.27