Release Notes

QUE$TOR
2012 Q3 Release
Nov 2012

QUE$TOR is a registered trademark of

IHS. Windows is a registered trademark
of Microsoft Corporation.

Contents

Introduction

Version Compatibility

Installation Instructions

General Upgrades in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3

Cost Database Upgrade

14

Benchmarking Comparison: Offshore Projects

23

Benchmarking Comparison: Onshore Projects

28

Other IHS Products

33

Software Support Contacts

36

Sales and Commercial Contacts

38

IHS Corporate Website

39

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Introduction
We are pleased to provide the 2012 Q3 release of the QUE$TOR cost estimating
software.
All cost databases have been reviewed and updated to incorporate current unit
rates, exchange rates and man-hour costs for all regions, to reflect third quarter
2012 prices.
The main technical enhancements made to QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 are:
OPEX
o When working with OPEX it is no longer necessary to choose
between the changes you have made previously and having OPEX
correctly reflect the project configuration. QUE$TOR will
automatically ensure that OPEX is updated while keeping all of
your changes
o Changes you make to OPEX will appear in the locked values report
o Molecular sieve dehydration consumables are broken out into a
separate section
o Facility to unlock all values and restore OPEX to its original state
o Improvements to pagination of printed OPEX reports
o Two spare rows for entering CO2 emissions user values
Subsea
o Installation calculations are now much more detailed
o Editing of flying leads attached to an item of equipment is now
possible
o Input reports, including subsea schematic graphics, can be
exported to Excel
Offshore drilling components
o Subsea floater categories are based upon their water depth
capability, rather than generation number

IHS

November 2012

Page 1

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Pipelines and subsea flowlines

o Lay rate data has been reviewed and extrapolated to deeper
waters and larger diameters to give more realistic lay spread
durations
o Pipeline installation dialog has been expanded to include separate
dredging and rock install vessels
Water disposal
o Water disposal to a well in the concept selector now adds a water
pipeline to the schematic
o Flowrate of pipeline is determined by the water export rate within
the associated production facility
Infrastructure, road & rail
o Terrain can be set independently for each road or rail line
o 3 user defined roads and rail lines allow for extra flexibility
Drilling facilities on topsides
o Option added for a permanently installed self-contained workover
rig
o There are now additional inputs to improve calculation of the dry
and operating rig weight.
The above changes as well as numerous other improvements and minor bug fixes
have been made at the request of users and through internal review. We
actively encourage feedback from users as a means of improving the accuracy,
ease of use and flexibility of the program.

Page 2

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Version Compatibility
QUE$TOR v8.0 and later are fully compatible with QUE$TOR 2012 Q3. However,
projects created in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 cannot be opened in earlier versions.
On opening an earlier version of a project in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3, costs and
technical calculations will be automatically updated except where unit rates or
results have been locked when creating the original project. Saving the
project will make these changes permanent. It is therefore advisable to make a
copy of your project file before opening it in the new version.
QUE$TOR allows multiple versions of the program to be installed side by side in
order to view projects created using earlier databases.
Whats on the CD-ROM
The QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 CD-ROM contains the following:
QUE$TOR (2012 Q3) installation files
An Application directory containing QUE$TOR (2012 Q3) program files
A Documents directory containing a copy of the full help file, the quick
start guide and a copy of the full and short release notes in portable
document format (.pdf)
A dotNET Framework 4 directory containing the executable to install .NET
Framework version 4 on your machine if it is not already installed
A FlexNet directory containing the executables and installation instructions
necessary to set-up and manage a network licence server
A Sentinel SuperPro Driver directory containing the executable to install
the licence security key (dongle) driver (for single user licence dongles) on
your machine if it is not already installed
A Utils directory containing a set of utilities to assist IHS support staff with
troubleshooting should any problems arise whilst installing or running the
application
A Windows Imaging Component directory containing Windows Imaging
Component executables for 32-bit and 64-bit systems
A Windows Installer directory containing the executable to install Windows
Installer 3.1. This is required to install .NET Framework 4 on Windows XP but
may already be installed.

IHS

November 2012

Page 3

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Installation Instructions
Pre-installation notes
Before starting to install the software please ensure:
All applications on the target machine have been closed down (this includes
any Office applications, toolbars, mail programs etc.)
You are logged on to the machine with full administration privileges.
Note: QUE$TOR requires the .NET Framework 4 full profile be installed on your
machine. Please see the instructions below for installing this if it is not already
installed.
System requirements
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3
Operating system

Windows XP/ Windows Vista/ Windows 7

Minimum CPU

1 GHz Pentium IV

Disk Space

250 MB

Minimum Memory

512 MB

Minimum Resolution

1024 x 768

Licensing

Network or USB port

Installing the software from the QUE$TOR installation CD-ROM

The software on the QUE$TOR CD-ROM can only be run if you have a valid
security key (dongle) or access to a network licence but these are not
required when installing the software
Load the CD-ROM into your CD drive
The setup program will automatically detect if you dont have Microsoft .NET
Framework 4.0 already installed and provide a warning. It can be
downloaded from Microsofts website by clicking on the Yes option.
Alternatively run the file dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64.exe located in the
dotNET Framework 4 sub-folder of the QUE$TOR CD-ROM
Note: The Client Profile version of the .NET framework 4 is not sufficient for
QUE$TOR to run. The full profile install is supplied on the QUE$TOR CD, and
can be installed in addition to the Client Profile.
The .NET 4 installer requires the system to have Windows Installer 3.1 or
later installed. If this is not present then run the file Windows Installer

Page 4

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

31.exe located in the Windows Installer sub-folder of the QUE$TOR CDROM

The .NET 4 installer requires the system to have the Windows Imaging
Component installed. If this is not present then for 32-bit systems run the
file wic_x86_enu.exe located in the Windows Imaging Component subfolder of the QUE$TOR CD-ROM. For 64-bit systems use wic_x64_enu.exe in
the same sub-folder
To install the Sentinel SuperPro dongle driver (if not already installed) run
the Sentinel System Driver Installer 7.5.7.msi located in the Sentinel
SuperPro Driver sub-folder of the QUE$TOR CD-ROM. Reboot your machine
to complete the installation of the Sentinel driver. Note, this step is only
required for single user / standalone licensing.
Note: You should install the Sentinel security key software before the dongle is
plugged in.
To install QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 run the file setup.exe in the root folder of the
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 CD-ROM
Once installed, an icon for QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 will appear on your desktop. A
group will also appear on the start menu under All Programs\IHS\QUE$TOR
2012 Q3 containing shortcuts for the Database editor, the Project editor, the
Project viewer, the main QUE$TOR application, and the Unit editor
If you get any warnings during the installation then please contact the
QUE$TOR support desk, support_questor@ihs.com.
Note: QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 supersedes previous versions but can be installed
alongside them.
You are now ready to run QUE$TOR providing your dongle has been updated to
run QUE$TOR Offshore or Onshore 2012 Q1. QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 does not need an
additional licence update.
Note: If your dongle has not been updated to run QUE$TOR 2012 Q1 (and Q3),
contact the QUE$TOR licensing desk (questor_licensing@ihs.com) to get an
email update for your dongle licence. If you use a network licence please ask
your licence administrator to contact the QUE$TOR licensing desk.
Application execution
To run the software select the QUE$TOR icon created in the All
Programs\IHS\QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 directory or double-click the icon created on
your desktop.

IHS

November 2012

Page 5

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

General Upgrades in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3

In response to user and internal feedback the following features have been
implemented in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3.
OPEX
When working with OPEX it is no longer necessary to choose between the
changes (locked values) you have made and having OPEX correctly reflect the
current project configuration. QUE$TOR will now automatically ensure that
OPEX is updated while keeping all of your changes. The retrieve/create OPEX
option form that appeared in all earlier versions of QUE$TOR will no longer
feature. All of the changes to values in the OPEX will now be listed in the
locked values report.
Saved OPEX changes from previous versions are no longer supported.
OPEX now has an option to unlock all values restoring OPEX to its original state
quickly. To aid clarity the Project>OPEX menu will display a check mark when
there are user edits to OPEX.

Page 6

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

The consumables for molecular sieve gas dehydration and gas dehydration
chemicals are displayed separately in OPEX so that projects containing both
methods can be accommodated.

The pagination of printed OPEX reports has been improved to make them more
readable.
There are now two spare rows for entering user values for sources of CO2
emissions. These can be renamed by the user.

Any changes made to the OPEX in projects saved with earlier versions of
QUE$TOR will be lost when opened in 2012 Q3. To see the OPEX changes in
these projects open them in an earlier version of QUE$TOR.

IHS

November 2012

Page 7

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Subsea
It is now possible to edit the number of flying leads for subsea installations,
both electrical and hydraulic. This includes cluster wells, well templates and
satellite wells.
There are two main types of flying leads hydraulic and electrical. Hydraulic
(or steel) flying leads are used to connect hydraulic/chemical lines between
subsea distribution units (SDUs) and subsea trees/manifolds. Electrical flying
leads are used to connect electrical/power/communication from the SDU to the
manifold and subsea control modules.
Previously in QUE$TOR 12.1, clusters included the associated costs for the flying
leads from the umbilical termination assembly (UTA) to the wells. However, it
left out the leads associated with the new SDU components and the number of
flying leads was not editable. The inclusion of an SDU is now assumed, installed
on the sea floor as an intermediary between the UTA and the wells. The SDU
accepts electrical input, hydraulic and chemical flows from the UTA via flying
leads then distributes the flow and electrical input to any connected wells or
other subsea equipment via more flying leads.

Page 8

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

The subsea input report, including the schematic graphic, can now be exported
to Excel as well as printed reports.
Offshore Drilling Components
Subsea floater categories are no longer named according to generation numbers.
They are now categorised based on their water depth capability. Projects from
older versions of QUE$TOR imported into QUE$TOR 12.3 will have any floater
rigs re-categorised appropriately:
2nd generation Floater 1500 ft (Water depth 1500 ft)
3rd generation Floater 3000 ft (1500 < Water depth 3000 ft)
4th generation Floater 5000 ft (3000 < Water depth 5000 ft)
5th generation Floater 7500 ft (5000 < Water depth 7500 ft)
Floater > 7500 ft (Water depth > 7500 ft)
Semi-submersible rigs are now called floaters in the rig category dropdown.

IHS

November 2012

Page 9

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Pipelines and Subsea Flowlines

Lay rate data has been reviewed and extrapolated to deeper waters and larger
diameters to give more realistic lay spread durations.
The pipeline installation dialog has been expanded to include separate dredging
and rock install vessels. This has replaced the combined dredging/rock
installation vessel from previous versions. There is a transit time calculation for
each of the vessels.

Page 10

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Water Disposal
When a water disposal well is chosen in the onshore concept selector, a water
pipeline will be added to the project from the main production facility to a sink.
The flowrate for a water disposal pipeline will come from the associated
production facility water export flowrate. The export flowrate is based on the
produced water flow.

IHS

November 2012

Page 11

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Infrastructure - Road & Rail

More details can now be added to the road or rail facilities in the infrastructure
component. There are now five standard categories for road sections and three
additional sections which can be named by the user. Each section has
customisable lengths and terrains.

The rail facilities have two standard sections, with three additional user defined
sections.

Page 12

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Drilling Facilities on Topsides

It is now possible to select fixed platform workover rigs. Appropriate weights
and power requirements according to the measured depth are now included in
the technical database for all rig types. Selecting a workover rig alters the
quarters / manning drilling crew number.

The following additional inputs are displayed to improve calculation of the rig
dry and operating weight
Maximum measured depth: this is the measured depth from the rig floor
of the longest well for any linked drilling component drilled using the
topsides drill rig
Dry weight: the weight of all the drilling facilities on the platform
excluding all fluids and drilling materials. This is dependent on the rig
type and the maximum measured depth
Operating weight factor: the dry weight is multiplied by this factor to
calculate the operating weight of the drill rig and associated equipment.
It varies by rig type, and when a full rig is selected by the reservoir
pressure gradient, i.e. reservoir pressure/true vertical depth of the
deepest well.

IHS

November 2012

Page 13

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Select Other Technical Revisions

Production facility water injection pressure calculations have been
standardised and improved
Locked values reports are now available in the report builder and can be
exported to Excel
Decommissioning editing error (switching to the cost sheet on editing)
resolved
Offshore pipeline vessel mob / demob durations have merged into activity
durations on the cost sheet as the values can be edited on the installation
forms
Acid gas selection is now consistent throughout QUE$TOR

Page 14

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Cost Database Upgrade

Substantial effort has gone into reviewing all cost databases to bring them in
line with third quarter (Q3) 2012 costs.
Note: On saving the project, the QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 cost estimate will overwrite
earlier costs except where those costs were locked on the cost sheet or in the
database. Therefore if you wish to retain a copy of your original estimate you
should first create a duplicate of the project before opening and saving it in
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3.
The following section outlines where the most significant changes to the
regional cost databases have been made.
General
The general situation of the global economy remains unsettled. Uncertainties
driven by the on-going Eurozone crisis, sluggish recovery in the US and slowing
growth in China have made the recovery in the global economy slow. Despite
this stagnant situation, the supply and demand balance of the oil market has
continued to be tight. The decline of global production from existing fields has
continued to require significant investment especially as future reserves involve
more challenging surface and reservoir conditions.
In the last six months the US dollar strengthened against the Euro and was
mixed versus most other major currencies. Crude oil prices have fluctuated
moderately around current levels and remained closely correlated to global
spare capacity. Natural gas market trends were more regional. Demand for
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) extended across the globe with more and more
countries importing or exporting liquefied gas, driving investments in new LNG
projects in a number of regions.
Although the economy has continued to face macro uncertainty and volatility in
the global financial markets, the demand for oilfield equipment and services in
the international market was strong. New project activity continued to occur
globally with robust growth in Australia, West Africa, the Middle East and South
America. The global market saw a rapid growth in deepwater drilling activity
and an extensive use of horizontal drilling in unconventional land wells. These
sectors have represented more complex and challenging drilling operations
requiring new standards for operational integrity. This has led to increasing
demand for quality and efficiency from the drilling service providers.
Despite this strong stimulus, the different market segments did not all move in
the same direction. For example, whilst the subsea drilling sector saw a firm
growth in the number of offshore developments using advanced subsea
technology, the steel tubular and oil country tubular goods (OCTG) markets
experienced a slowdown and a drop in price around the world, mainly because
too much steel was produced for the current level of global economic activity.
The following reviews will provide a more detailed description of the market
trends supporting the oil and gas industry in the last six months.
IHS

November 2012

Page 15

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Steel
Over the past two quarters both carbon steel and stainless steel prices have
declined worldwide as a result of global oversupply and very weak steel demand
in many regions of the world. Europe, Asia, and North America experienced
significant drops in prices for primary and secondary steel, between 3.5% and
5%. Chinese producers continued selling carbon steel at a loss internationally.
This aggravated price competition especially in the United States where local
producers could not keep up with lower priced imports. As a result several mills
in the US were closed between Q1 and Q3 2012.
Raw materials, such as iron ore and coking coals, had weaker demand in many
regions due to economic instability and global political fears. This led to an
average 10% reduction in price. Scrap steel prices also registered significant
drops over the six month period. While demand from the industrial, automotive
and non-residential construction sectors slipped, scrap steel demand decreased
even further leaving the prices at the low end of the recent range.
OCTG prices demonstrated a global decrease of approximately 4%. The global
OCTG market remained oversupplied and downward pressure on prices in North
America and Europe has been also attributed to a decreased overall demand
owing, in part, to weaker natural gas drilling activity in the US over the past six
months.
However, commodity grade OCTG experienced more significant
decreases compared to specialty products. The worldwide complex specialty
products market remained tighter as mills had to compete with a reduced
amount of low priced imports from China and South Korea due to local content
requirements and trade restrictions.
Topsides, Production Facilities and Terminals
Many companies with global operations reported higher capital expenditure
plans for 2012. This has significantly impacted the overall equipment supplydemand balance, causing stronger demand primarily from emerging markets.
Over the past six months despite steel raw material prices dropping, equipment
costs increased globally between 3%-4%. This upward trend has been mostly
driven by high ongoing activity especially in North America and emerging
markets. With lots of new orders coming in, shops continued operating at full
capacity and experienced higher backlogs and stretched lead times.
Manufacturers also reported escalated labour costs that contributed to slight
increases in almost all equipment prices.
Driven by high global market demand, overall rotating equipment costs rose 3%
on average. Heat exchanger and pressure vessel prices increased by 3% and 4%
respectively. The pressure vessel supply remained tight with a smaller number
of manufacturers able to provide customised high-specification solutions for the
oil and gas industry. Lead times for both heat exchangers and pressure vessels
increased moderately. Higher raw material costs coupled with higher labour
rates increased rotating equipment prices.

Page 16

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Turbo machinery equipment costs rose by 2% as a result of ongoing worldwide

trade growth from LNG as well as increased demand primarily in the Middle East
and South America.
The continued Eurozone crisis and softer Chinese growth in 2012 have decreased
non-ferrous, e.g. aluminium, zinc, nickel and copper, material prices since Q1
2012 due to a decrease in global consumption. Although there are lower
material costs the fabricated wire and cable rates have not registered any
significant changes.
Bulk Materials
Over the past six months bulk material prices remained unchanged or registered
very moderate changes driven by anaemic demand. Globally the non-residential
construction sector has not improved appreciably since Q1 2012, as spending on
highway and street projects has been under pressure due to the ongoing
economic situation. As a result concrete and other construction material prices
remained flat on lower input costs, softer demand and declined levels of
production.
Decreased crude oil prices resulted in lower paint and asphalt costs in North
America. However the emerging markets registered some increasing cost trends
for paint and insulation mainly due to high shipbuilding and automotive
activities.
The global electrical equipment market has been under pressure from a lower
overall demand due to lasting effects from the economic downturn. Costs for
transformers, switchgears and generators remained flat between Q1 and Q3
2012.
Copper costs were volatile over the preceding 6 months; producers reported
very moderate profit margins and erratic price shifts.
Offshore Drilling Rigs
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 has changed the rig classification used in previous versions of
QUE$TOR. The classification is now based on water depth capability rather than
generation. In previous release notes a spider diagram was always included in
the description of this market showing the percentage change in the regional rig
day rate in the last six months by rig type. This time it has been decided to
omit this diagram as it would be confusing and instead show the approximate
correspondence between the old and the new rig classes.

IHS

November 2012

Page 17

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Globally the offshore rig market is still affected by the delayed consequences of
the Macondo incident. The industry and governments around the world are
actively implementing preventive measures and regulations demanding more in
terms of rig capability, capacity and maintenance, to avoid repeating the
Macondo tragedy. This has led to a general upgrading of the working fleet,
pushing more old rigs out of drilling. Almost all of the major offshore rig
contractors have undertaken vigorous measures to improve the specification of
their rigs, with the jack-up sector being the most affected.
The worldwide offshore rig market has experienced limited availability and a
rise in dayrates in most of the regions.
The West African market has remained a strong market for deepwater rig
contractors, with high demand in all floater sectors, but especially for ultradeepwater fixtures reaching high dayrates. The jack-up market has also been
extremely tight, with very few rigs available before the end of 2012.
In Latin America the semi-submersible rig market continued to be extremely
tight, with all units in the fleet currently contracted. Petrobras signed long
term contracts for deepwater floaters with a number of drilling contractors,
while in Mexico PEMEX continued to dominate the jack-up market with its
attempts to increase its jack-up fleet to 40 rigs this year.
In the Asia-Pacific area, the jack-up market remained firm and tendering
activity has reduced slightly due to operators pushing outstanding programmes
into 2013. Few jack-up units were recently retired from drilling, as is
happening in other regions, and a few cold-stacked floaters were reactivated to
be converted into higher specification vessels.
The Middle East jack-up market had the largest contract backlog worldwide with
the highest demand from Saudi Arabia. The region is recovering in terms of rig
utilisation after the sanctions affecting the Iranian sector. The Mediterranean
market showed some floater surpluses but most of this availability is expected
to tighten over the near term.
In the Gulf of Mexico, ultra-deepwater utilisation remained strong whilst the
majority of jack-ups were in short-term contracts and tied to the spot market.
The market has been also impacted by the hurricane season which has brought
drilling to a standstill.
Page 18

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

In Europe the availability of floaters in the Northwest sector was restricted,

with most of the units placed in long term commitments. The reason behind
this current tight market has been a rise in contract backlogs, giving contractors
enough confidence to demand longer terms. The jack-up market saw a lack of
availability with newbuild units due to be delivered in 2013.
Subsea Equipment

The subsea market demonstrated record activity with escalated supplier margins
over the six months period. Brazil has shown the strongest growth in subsea
demand as Petrobras continued its successful exploration and development
efforts this year. With high ongoing development activity, Europe, UK and
Norway have been the second largest subsea markets. Major suppliers are also
expecting increased demand driven from a number of upcoming projects in West
Africa.
Installation activity in North America kept increasing as subsea
operations slowly recovered after the 2010 Macondo incident.
Due to the high demand for deepwater equipment there has been a fall in the
number of competitors for each project, leading to increased margins and
escalated costs for equipment and services. Aker Solutions, FMC Technologies,
Cameron and GE Oil & Gas remained the major subsea suppliers operating
worldwide. Countries continued increasing local content requirements; many
subsea suppliers adjusted their business models accordingly. For example,
Cameron opened a subsea tree plant in Nigeria. With more than 200 local
employees, the plant is producing injection trees for the Usan project to meet
Nigerian local content regulations.
As subsea operations got another boost, demand for flexible risers and flowlines
rose as well. Lead times were stretched resulting in an average cost increase of
7%. The strong deepwater market caused increased costs for umbilicals and
risers. This equipment registered 4% to 6% increases depending on the raw
materials involved. Duplex and super duplex umbilicals climbed slightly higher
compared to the same carbon steel and thermoplastic units.
Offshore Support and Construction Vessels

The global offshore support vessel market experienced a mixed trend,

depending on the region, with the main drivers being vessel oversupply or high
levels of activity and demand.
In the Mediterranean, after a relatively quiet period, offshore activity based in
the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea has become more stable, keeping
dayrates mostly constant.
In the Middle East, the Indian monsoon season has forced a large amount of
vessels inshore, although new Gulf activity is expected to boost the market in
the near future.
In the North Sea, both rates and utilisation have been lower than anticipated
with several newbuild deliveries in the market, while there is little indication
that vessel owners will start scrapping their older tonnage. Vessel oversupply in
the North Sea has resulted in a sustained period of low day rates, with the high
IHS

November 2012

Page 19

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

chance that a large number of vessels will leave the North Sea for work in other
regions.
The West African region saw for the first time the emerging trend of local vessel
owners placing orders with international shipyards for the construction of new
platform support vessels (PSVs) or anchor handling tug supply (AHTS) vessels.
This is moving away from the old trend of local oil and gas companies buying
ageing supply vessels from international vessel owners established in the area,
as this was the quickest way for local companies to build up their own fleet. As
a result, competition increased causing a reduction of dayrates.
In the Gulf of Mexico, the market for large, modern PSVs remains stretched,
with tonnage in short supply. Newbuild deliveries are entering the market
already with term contracts and some vessels currently under construction are
being fixed to long-term contracts well before delivery.
The growing
prevalence of drillships and dynamically-positioned semis has resulted in a
reduced need for AHTS vessels, which are most necessary for supporting moored
semi-submersible drilling platforms.
In Brazil, demand for deepwater exploration support will continue to grow
affecting the majority of the regional offshore supply vessel market. The
rapidly expanding oil industry in Brazil is not free of problems. Offshore service
providers are suffering from very high operating expenses in an extremely
competitive environment. High taxes on income, vessel downtime and repair,
high crew costs, poor exchange rates, contract penalties and lack of
infrastructure are just a few of the factors that made Brazilian dayrates shoot
up.
In the Middle East, many of the vessels contracted by national operators were
busy in seismic, construction and production projects, showing stable or
moderately increased rates.
The construction vessel market globally remained stable or saw a moderate
increase in dayrates. In general these specialised vessels tend to be not as
seasonal and regionally-related as the offshore support vessels. With the level
of activity being firm or on the rise in most regions, especially in the North Sea,
Australia, West Africa and Brazil, most of the vessels involved in exploration and
drilling projects experienced a boost in their dayrates. The subsea installation
market for umbilicals, risers and flexibles also recorded a rise in activity levels,
leading to a slight increase in heavy lift and pipelay vessels dayrates.
Labour
Upstream construction labour rates increased in local currency terms during the
last two quarters in most of the regions, but some of the increases were
relatively moderate when adjusted in US dollar (USD) terms due to the strength
of the USD against several foreign currencies. The global increase was mainly
due to a robust construction activity in most of the regions, in particular South
America, Asia, Middle East, Gulf of Mexico and Northwest Europe.

Page 20

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

In China, labour wages went up although quite moderately due to the recent
slowdown of the local economy. Labour rates still reflected this, despite the
increased demand for construction labour in the country.
India experienced an intensification of construction activities in the energy,
transportation, commercial and residential sectors. The construction labour
rates increased in local currency terms whilst remaining nearly flat when
converted to US dollars.
In Australia, with the increase of liquefied natural gas projects, the workforce is
facing a tight balance between demand and supply. Shortage in local labour is
even more accentuated by the fact that many of the new developments are
located in remote areas of Australia involving difficult transportation and
working conditions. Australian companies are trying to improve this situation by
making visa requirements for foreign workers less strict.
In South America, labour costs rose in local currency terms and went up much
more moderately in US dollar terms, reflecting the relative strength of the US
dollar over the South American currencies. In Brazil, the labour cost increase
was attributed to the construction boom as the country is going to host two
important sport events but also to the high demand of personnel operating in
the offshore pre-salt oil reservoirs. The Brazilian workforce is struggling to keep
up with demand and the country is experiencing a severe shortage of skilled
labour and engineers.
The North American region saw a labour cost increase mainly related to oil
sands activities in the Alberta region.
In Russia the growth in construction activity caused the labour rates to rise both
in local and in US dollar terms.
In Western Europe the increased drilling activity in the North Sea and Norwegian
waters following the quiet winter months contributed to the cost escalation.
Worldwide the major engineering contractors have continued to increase their
workforce and a large number of companies supplying engineering services,
including major EPC firms, have made big acquisitions. The growth is mainly
driven by the strong demand for detailed engineering and project management
services.
The skills shortage continues to be one of the key concerns in the oil and gas
industry; players are now actively looking to recruit resources from other
industries to fill the gap. In order to try to mitigate the skills shortages within
oil and gas, many companies are looking to other industries where engineers
have transferable skills.
Onshore Rigs
The onshore rig market remained mostly unchanged over the past two
consecutive quarters as result of the moderate crude oil fluctuations.
Worldwide, longer term contracts helped prevent rig day rates from sharp
IHS

November 2012

Page 21

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

increases and also held up demand. Even though rig contractors registered
higher costs on wages and drilling equipment, the market has not passed on
these cost increases to end customers.
Newbuild orders continued to increase around the world. Major drilling rig
manufacturers, such as Precision Drilling and Honghua, announced plans to
construct additional newbuilds by the end of 2012. Utilisation rates have varied
depending on type of rig, with high specification rigs registering greater
utilisation compared to lower specification rigs. Also, with increasing drilling
complexity high specification rigs continued driving overall newbuild demand.
Despite the recent lower rig count in North America, drilling activity in other
regions has been maintained at higher levels due to growth in complex
conventional drilling. South America, Russia and Caspian and the Middle East
contributed most to the activity in world onshore drilling operations.
Low natural gas prices resulted in weaker drilling activity in North America
associated with shale gas plays. Recently demand for land rigs and services
became softer as operators adjusted their spending plans accordingly. The
onshore drilling rig market experienced a structural change related to the
recent activity shift from dry gas unconventional plays such as Marcellus to tight
oil plays such as Eagle Ford or Bakken.
Over the past six months Australian drilling activity received further government
support to replace diesel in West Australia with gas. As a result, local operators
have been permitted to use hydraulic fracturing to penetrate the gas shales.
The Middle East remained one of the main growth regions driven primarily by
increased drilling in Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Strong rig counts in Oman and
Kuwait also resulted in moderate increases in day rates. Due to increasing local
content requirement in the Middle East and North Africa, rig drillers have
started experiencing labour shortages that resulted in stronger rig day rates.
Overall, emerging markets experienced the largest rig rate increases. With
rapid complex drilling development high specification rigs experienced stronger
demand globally. Even with newbuilds entering the market, supply shortages
for high specification rigs remained.

Page 22

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Benchmarking Comparison: Offshore Projects

A series of 12 offshore projects were run in QUE$TOR 2012 Q1 and QUE$TOR
2012 Q3. These projects were selected to cover a range of geographical areas
and alternative field development plans. The input parameters can be seen in
the table below. No other data, apart from the information below, was entered
in each of the cost estimates.
TITLE
CURRENCY
EXCHANGE RATE (US$)
DEVELOPMENT TYPE

Project 1
Project 2
Project 3 Project 4
Project 5
Project 6
US DOLLAR US DOLLAR US DOLLARS US DOLLARS US DOLLARS UK POUNDS
1
1
1
1
1
0.62
Offshore oil Offshore oil Offshore oil Offshore oil Offshore oil Offshore oil
N. North Sea
REGION
Gulf Mexico Far East
Africa
Australia
S. America
(UK)
Tension Leg
Semi-sub+ Production
Production
FPSO+Subse Subsea
DESIGN CONCEPT
Platform
Subsea
platform+
platform
a
tie-back
(TLP)
tie back
Wellhead(s)
RECOVERABLE RESERVES 150 MMbbl 300 MMbbl 400 MMbbl 70 MMbbl
400 MMbbl 200 MMbbl
GOR/LGR
600 scf/bbl 600 scf/bbl 600 scf/bbl 1000
600 scf/bbl 600 scf/bbl
scf/bbl
PEAK WELL FLOW
6 Mbbl/d
6 Mbbl/d
6 Mbbl/d
6 Mbbl/d
6 Mbbl/d
6 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTIVITY
RESERVOIR DEPTH
RESERVOIR PRESSURE
RESERVOIR WIDTH
RESERVOIR LENGTH
CRUDE API
H2S
CO2
WATER DEPTH
MAX DRILLING STEPOUT
INFRASTRUCTURE
ONSTREAM DAYS
FIELD LIFE
YEARS TO PLATEAU
PLATEAU DURATION
PLATEAU RATE
PRODUCTION FLOWRATE
ASSOCIATED FLOWRATE
GAS INJECTION
FLOWRATE
WATER
INJECTION FLOW
PRODUCTION WELLS
GAS INJECTION WELLS
WATER INJECTION
WELLS

IHS

16
16
16
16
16
16
MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well
3000 m
405.6 bar
3 km
5 km
30
0 ppm
0%
90 m
3 km
120 km
350
10
1
4
60 Mbbl/d
66 Mbbl/d
40 MMscf/d
40 MMscf/d
0 bbl/d
10
1
0

3000 m
405.6 bar
4 km
8 km
30
0 ppm
0%
450 m
1.26 km
120 km
350
13
3
3
114 Mbbl/d
125 Mbbl/d
75 MMscf/d
75 MMscf/d
151 Mbbl/d
19
3
8

4000 m
405.6 bar
4 km
9 km
30
0 ppm
0%
800 m
1.26 km
120 km
350
13
2
4
150 Mbbl/d
165 Mbbl/d
99 MMscf/d
99 MMscf/d
198 Mbbl/d
26
3
10

November 2012

3000 m
405.6 bar
2 km
4 km
35
0 ppm
0%
800 m
1.26 km
15 km
350
10
1
4
30 Mbbl/d
33 Mbbl/d
33 MMscf/d
33 MMscf/d
40 Mbbl/d
5
0
0

3000 m
405.6 bar
4 km
9 km
30
0 ppm
0%
600 m
1.26 km
120 km
350
13
2
4
150 Mbbl/d
165 Mbbl/d
99 MMscf/d
99 MMscf/d
198 Mbbl/d
26
3
10

3000 m
405.6 bar
3 km
6 km
30
0 ppm
0%
90 m
1.46 km
120 km
350
13
2
4
78.0 Mbbl/d
86 Mbbl/d
52 MMscf/d
52 MMscf/d
103 Mbbl/d
13
2
5

Page 23

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

TITLE
CURRENCY
EXCHANGE RATE (per
US$)
DEVELOPMENT TYPE
REGION

DESIGN CONCEPT
RECOVERABLE RESERVES
GOR/LGR
PEAK WELL FLOW
PRODUCTIVITY
RESERVOIR DEPTH
RESERVOIR PRESSURE
RESERVOIR WIDTH
RESERVOIR LENGTH
CRUDE API
H2S
CO2
WATER DEPTH
MAX DRILLING STEPOUT
INFRASTRUCTURE
ONSTREAM DAYS
FIELD LIFE
YEARS TO PLATEAU
PLATEAU DURATION
PLATEAU RATE
PRODUCTION FLOWRATE
ASSOCIATED FLOWRATE
GAS INJECTION
FLOWRATE
WATER INJECTION FLOW
PRODUCTION WELLS
GAS INJECTION WELLS
WATER INJECTION WELLS

Page 24

Project 7
US DOLLAR
1
Offshore gas
/condensate

Project 8
Project 9 Project 10
US DOLLAR US DOLLAR KRONER
1
1
5.71
Offshore gas
Offshore oil
Offshore oil
/condensate
N. America
N North Sea
Africa
Gulf
Africa
(Norway)
Mexico
Tension
Semi-sub-+
Production Leg
FPSO-+
Subsea
platform
Platform
Subsea
tie back
(TLP)
900 Bscf
150 MMbbl 1500 Bscf
350 MMbbl
15
300 scf/bbl 15 bbl/MMscf 600 scf/bbl
bbl/MMscf
29
MMscf/d 6 Mbbl/d 14 MMscf/d 4 Mbbl/d
80 Bscf/well 10MMbbl/w 40 Bscf/well 12
ell
MMbbl/well
4000 m
4000 m
4500 m
3700 m
540.8 bar
540.8 bar 608.4 bar
500.5 bar
5 km
3 km
6 km
4 km
9 km
5 km
12 km
8 km
50
35
50
35
0 ppm
0 ppm
0 ppm
200 ppm
0%
0%
0%
3%
200 m
700 m
1200 m
250 m
3 km
3 km
3 km
3 km
50 km
200 km
190 km
30 km
350
350
350
350
13
9
13
15
2
2
2
3
4
2
4
4
348 MMscf/d 90 Mbbl/d 532 MMscf/d 120 Mbbl/d
452 MMscf/d 99 Mbbl/d 692 MMscf/d 132 Mbbl/d
6800 bbl/d 30 MMscf/d 10400 bbl/d 79 MMscf/d
0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d
0 MMscf/d
0 bbl/d
0 bbl/d
0 bbl/d
158 Mbbl/d
13
16
38
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12

November 2012

Project 11 Project 12
CAN
US DOLLAR
DOLLAR
0.98
1
Offshore oil Offshore oil
E. Canada

Indian
Ocean

Gravity
Base
Structure

Spar buoy

200 MMbbl 50 MMbbl

600 scf/bbl 600 scf/bbl
3 Mbbl/d 6 Mbbl/d
8
8
MMbbl/well
MMbbl/well
2500 m
1500 m
338 bar
202.8 bar
3 km
2 km
6 km
3 km
35
35
0 ppm
0 ppm
0%
0%
350 m
600 m
3 km
3 km
55 km
750 km
350
350
13
6
2
1
4
2
75 Mbbl/d 42 Mbbl/d
83 Mbbl/d 46 Mbbl/d
50 MMscf/d 28 MMscf/d
0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d
99000
0 bbl/d
bbl/d
26
7
0
0
10
0

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Overall Cost Summary Comparison

The table below shows the overall capital costs for each project and the
percentage variation between the capital costs from QUE$TOR 2012 Q1 and
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3. The percentage variation reflects the overall difference
between the total capital costs of the two versions and includes the impact of:
Updates to the cost databases
Modifications to the logic, algorithms and enhancements to the program
Fluctuations in currency exchange rates.
The table below compares total costs for all scenarios run in QUE$TOR 2012 Q1
and QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 and the results are shown graphically in Figure 1.
Project
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q1
(US$ millions)
592.714
1,243.268
3,222.804
592.063
3,073.060
1,336.373
768.923
1,378.830
3,700.776
3,823.836
3,872.905
1,264.463

November 2012

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3
(US$ millions)
610.722
1,261.637
3,265.960
570.260
3,070.714
1,370.814
793.453
1,411.582
3,760.622
4,429.031
4,006.953
1,267.437

Variance
3.0%
1.5%
1.3%
-3.7%
-0.1%
2.6%
3.2%
2.4%
1.6%
15.8%
3.5%
0.2%

Page 25

5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0

15%
10%
5%
0%
-5%
-10%

QUE$TOR 2012 Q1

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3

Project 12

Project 11

Project 10

Project 9

Project 8

Project 7

Project 6

Project 5

Project 4

Project 3

Project 2

-15%

Project 1

US $ Millions

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Variance

Figure 1 - Comparison of 2012 Q1 and 2012 Q3 offshore project costs

As in previous benchmarking comparisons, project cost changes are the
combined result of the technical modifications and cost variations described
earlier in these release notes. Drilling, subsea, topsides, jacket, pipelines,
tanker and offshore loading components have been impacted the most. The
benchmarked projects showed an average increase of approximately 3%.
However, individual projects and components have seen more significant
variations in cost, both in positive and negative directions.
Topsides costs have increased in the majority of the above projects by an
average of 4% as result of the general cost database update. Projects 3 and 9
have shown the highest increase in topsides costs of about 12% due to a
significant correction in the productivity and labour cost in Africa.
Drilling costs have shown mixed changes. Projects 1, 2, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12 have
on average increased by approximately 8% driven by the rise in equipment and
installation costs although there were some decreases in raw material costs.
Project 10 has seen the largest increase in drilling costs of almost 37% since a
higher dayrate 1500ft floater has replaced a 2nd generation semi-submersible
rig. Projects 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 have seen a decrease in drilling costs in the range
of 11% mainly due to the re-categorisation of the floating drilling rigs. This
resulted in reduced installation unit rates as a 1500ft floating rig has been used
in projects 3, 4 and 5 and a 5000ft floating rig has replaced a 4th generation rig
in project 9. Project 6 has seen a decrease in drilling costs due to the lower
dayrate for jack-up platform rigs in the North Sea.
Pipeline costs have increased by approximately 7% but project 7 showed a an
increase of +11%. This general increase is attributable to the improvement in
the pipeline installation durations which has lead to increases in pipelay
durations and installation costs. Pipelay vessel rates have also been increased
according to recent market trends.
Page 26

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

TLPs and Spars have seen a slight decrease in cost in some regions due to a
correction in labour rates.
Tanker component costs went up by approximately 12% for the two African
projects, i.e. Projects 3 and 9. This was mainly driven by the increase in
fabrication costs and more moderately by a rise in the materials and equipment
costs. Fabrication rates increased in Africa due to a correction in productivity.
Materials costs like mooring chains, mooring wires and mooring terminations
recorded a rise as well as some equipment costs like anchors. Vessel purchase
prices were stable or decreased depending on the tanker size.
The increase in mooring costs also resulted in an increase of offshore loading
costs in the range of 3%.
Subsea costs increased almost 10% due to higher cost for subsea equipment and
major technical changes in the installation duration calculation, which now
includes weather downtime and transit loadout.

IHS

November 2012

Page 27

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Benchmarking Comparison: Onshore Projects

A series of 12 onshore projects were run in QUE$TOR 2011 Q3 and QUE$TOR
2012 Q1. These projects were selected to cover a range of geographical areas.
The input parameters used in the projects can be seen in the table below.
Where the pipeline length exceeds 200 km, booster stations have been excluded
for this analysis. No other data, apart from the information below, was entered
in each of the cost estimates.
TITLE
Project 1
CURRENCY
US DOLLARS
DEVELOPMENT TYPE Oil
REGION
North
COUNTRY
America
Mid
West
TERRAIN
PROCUREMENT
STRATEGY
Equipment
Materials
Linepipe
Prefabrication
Construction
Design/Project
Management
Contingency
Certification
OPEX
RECOVERABLE
RESERVES
GOR/LGR
PEAK WELL FLOW
PRODUCTIVITY
RESERVOIR DEPTH
RESERVOIR
OVERPRESSURE
RESERVOIR
WIDTH
RESERVOIR LENGTH
CRUDE API
H2S (ppm in gas)
CO2 (mol % in gas)
DEVIATED WELLS
MAX-DEVIATION
ANGLE
DISTANCE
# ONSTREAM DAYS
FIELD LIFE (years)
YEARS TO PLATEAU
PLATEAU DURATION
PLATEAU RATE
DESIGN
PRODUCTION
ASSOCIATED
FLOWRATE
WATER INJECTION
PRODUCTION WELLS
WATER INJECTION

Page 28

Project 2
US DOLLARS
Oil
Russia
Eastern
Siberia
ArcticTundra

Project 3
US DOLLARS
Oil
S. America
Colombia

Project 4
US DOLLARS
Oil
Middle East
Oman

Project 5
US DOLLARS
Gas
Middle East
Oman

Project 6
US DOLLARS
Oil
Africa
Algeria

Jungle

Desert

Desert

Desert

N. America
N. America
N. America
N. America
N. America
N. America
N. America
N. America
N. America
50 MMbbl
500 scf/bbl
1 Mbbl/d
3 MMbbl/well
2500 m
338 bar
1.5 km
3.0 km
39
0 ppm
0
Yes
90
30 km
350
12
1
5
15.0 Mbbl/d

Russia
Russia
Russia
Russia
Russia
W. Europe
Russia
Russia
Russia
200 MMbbl
1000 scf/bbl
2 Mbbl/d
8
MMbbl/well
3000
m
273 bar
3.0 km
6.0 km
30
0 ppm
0
Yes
60
200 km
350
17
2
6
50.0 Mbbl/d

N. America
S&C America
N. America
S&C America
S&C America
N. America
N. America
S&C America
S&C America
120 MMbbl
400 scf/bbl
5 Mbbl/d
8
MMbbl/well
2000
m
270 bar
2.5 km
5.0 km
39
0 ppm
0
Yes
90
80 km
350
11
2
1
70.9 Mbbl/d

W. Europe
W. Europe
S. E. Asia
S. E. Asia
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
500 MMbbl
350.3 scf/bbl
5 Mbbl/d
15 Mbbl/well
2300 m
311 bar
5.0 km
10.0 km
31
500 ppm
0.03
No

W. Europe
America
W.
Europe
America
S.
E. Asia
S. E. Asia
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
500 Bscf
10 bbl/MMscf
9 MMscf/d
30 Bscf/well
2500 m
270 bar
3.5 km
7.0 km

100 km
350
20
2
4
150 Mbbl/d

N. America
S. E. Asia
S. E. Asia
S. E. Asia
Africa
W. Europe
W. Europe
Africa
Africa
130 MMbbl
500 scf/bbl
2 Mbbl/d
8 MMbbl/well
1500 m
203 bar
2.5 km
5.0 km
35
500 ppm
500 ppm
0.03
0.03
No
Yes
60
60 km
90 km
350
350
15
16
2
1
5
6
153.MMscf/d 34.0 Mbbl/d

15 Mbbl/d

55 Mbbl/d

78 Mbbl/d

165 Mbbl/d

153 MMscf/d 37.4 Mbbl/d

Grassland

7.5 MMscf/d 55 MMscf/d 31.2

MMscf/d
18 Mbbl/d
66 Mbbl/d 93.6 Mbbl/d
17
25
15
7
10
6

November 2012

57.8 MMscf/d 1.53 Mbbl/d 18.7 MMscf/d

198 Mbbl/d
34
14

0 bbl/d
17
0

44.9 Mbbl/d
30
7

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

TITLE
Project 7
CURRENCY
US DOLLARS
DEVELOPMENT TYPE Gas
REGION
Australasia
COUNTRY

Australia

TERRAIN
PROCUREMENT
STRATEGY
Equipment
Materials
Linepipe
Prefabrication
Construction
Design/Project
Management
Contingency
Certification
OPEX
RECOVERABLE
RESERVES
GOR/LGR
PEAK WELL FLOW
PRODUCTIVITY
RESERVOIR DEPTH
RESERVOIR
OVERPRESSURE
RESERVOIR WIDTH
RESERVOIR LENGTH
CRUDE API
H2S (ppm in gas)
CO2 (mol % in gas)
DEVIATED WELLS
MAX DEVIATION
ANGLE
DISTANCE
TO
TERMINAL
# ONSTREAM DAYS
FIELD LIFE (years)
YEARS TO PLATEAU
PLATEAU DURATION
PLATEAU RATE
DESIGN PRODUCTION
ASSOCIATED
FLOWRATE
WATER
INJECTION
PRODUCTION WELLS
WATER INJECTION

Desert

IHS

N. America
S. E. Asia
Australasia
S. E. Asia
Australasia
Australasia
Australasia
Australasia
Australasia
1000 Bscf
10bbl/MMscf
6 MMscf/d
22 Bscf/well
2200 m
270 bar
5.0 km
10.0 km
100 ppm
0.06
Yes
90
100 km
350
17
3
5
276 MMscf/d
276 MMscf/d
2.76 Mbbl/d
0 bbl/d
46
0

Project 8
USDOLLARS
Oil
Middle East

Project 9 Project 10 Project 11

US DOLLARS US DOLLARS US DOLLARS
Gas
Oil
Gas
Russia &
North
West Europe
FSU
America
Russia
Canada
Saudi Arabia
Netherlands
Central Asia Alaska
Desert
Grassland Arctic/Tund Grassland
ra

Project 12
US
DOLLARS
Oil
S America

W. Europe
W. Europe
S. E. Asia
S. E. Asia
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
Middle East
800 MMbbl
349 scf/bbl
2 Mbbl/d
8MMbbl/wel
l
2300
m
311 bar
6.5 km
13.0 km
31
500 ppm
0.03
No

N. America
S&CAmeric
a
N. America
S&CAmeric
a
S&CAmeric
a
N. America
N. America
S&CAmeric
a
S&CAmeric
a MMbbl
80
800
scf/bbl
2
Mbbl/d
8MMbbl/w
ell m
3300
446 bar
2.0 km
4.0 km
39
0 ppm
0.02
Yes
90
30 km
350
17
2
6
20Mbbl/d
22 Mbbl/d
17.6MMscf
/d
26.4
Mbbl/d
10
4

250 km
350
26
4
8
131 Mbbl/d
144 Mbbl/d
50 MMscf/d
173 Mbbl/d
100
40

Russia
N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
W. Europe N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
Russia
N. America W .Europe
2000 Bscf 30 MMbbl
1000 Bscf
5 bbl/MMscf 800 scf/bbl 5 bbl/MMscf
9 MMscf/d 1 Mbbl/d
9 MMscf/d
10
3
30 Bscf/well
Bscf/well
MMbbl/well
3000
m
1500
m
2000 m
405 bar
203 bar
270 bar
7.0 km
1.0 km
5.0 km
14.0 km
2.0 km
10.0 km
39
100 ppm
0 ppm
0 ppm
0.06
0.01
0.02
No
Yes
Yes
90
90
250 km
30 km
100 km
350
350
350
30
12
15
5
1
2
1
5
5
500
10 Mbbl/d 306 MMscf/d
MMscf/d
650
11 Mbbl/d 398 MMscf/d
MMscf/d
3.25
Mbbl/d 8.8 MMscf/d 2 Mbbl/d
0 bbl/d
0 bbl/d
0 bbl/d
200
10
34
0
0
0

November 2012

Mexico
Grassland

Page 29

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Overall Cost Summary Comparison

The table below shows the overall capital costs for each project and the
percentage variation between the capital costs from QUE$TOR 2012 Q1 and
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3. The percentage variation reflects the overall difference
between the total capital costs of the two versions and includes the impact of:
Updates to the cost databases
Modifications to the logic, algorithms and enhancements to the program.
The table below compares total costs for all scenarios run in QUE$TOR 2012 Q1
and QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 and the results are shown graphically in Figure 2
Project
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Page 30

QUE$TOR 2012 Q1
(US$ millions)

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3
(US$ millions)

Variance

181.695
1,474.293
297.949
619.017
278.170
470.384
1,044.539
1,426.901
2,605.237
55.889
581.394
238.477

0.8%
2.3%
0.8%
1.4%
1.5%
10.2%
0.6%
1.6%
1.5%
1.2%
1.2%
1.0%

180.232
1,441.516
295.516
610.368
274.031
426.951
1,037.887
1,404.887
2,565.952
55.231
574.374
236.182

November 2012

IHS

3,000

15%

2,500

10%

2,000

5%

1,500

0%

1,000

-5%

QUE$TOR 2012 Q1

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3

Project 12

Project 11

Project 10

Project 9

Project 8

Project 7

Project 6

Project 5

-15%
Project 4

0
Project 3

-10%
Project 2

500
Project 1

US $ Millions

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Variance

Figure 2 - Comparison of 2012 Q1 and 2012 Q3 onshore project costs

The variations in onshore benchmark project costs are largely based on the cost
updates and a few technical changes. Overall, onshore costs have shown
increases of about 2%.
In general onshore drilling costs have risen by less than 1%. This increase is
primarily due to updates to the equipment cost, an overall increase in the
material cost, and updates to the labour rates and construction costs which
have impacted all the projects. The material cost has increased overall due to
higher cement, mud, brine and bits costs although the steel prices went down.
Wellpads have seen an average increase of about of 3%. The rise has been
primarily due to general increases in equipment, materials, labour and
construction costs. The increase in fabrication costs had a more significant
impact than the decreased steel costs, causing an overall increase in the
material costs.
Production facilities costs increased on average by 3% due to general cost
updates. The equipment, material, prefabrication and construction costs went
up. Prefabrication and construction costs generally increased due to increases
in labour and unit rates. This also had an impact on terminal facilities, which
have seen a cost increase of about 1.2%.
Pipeline costs have increased by an approximately 2% due to general updates in
linepipe and construction costs. Onshore linepipe costs were slightly corrected
to be more in line with the corresponding offshore linepipe prices. Project 6
was the only example that showed a small decrease in linepipe costs, due to the
correction of the linepipe cost in Western Europe.
Infrastructure costs have increased by an average of 2%. This was as a result of
increased road and rail construction costs along with an increase in general
construction costs.

IHS

November 2012

Page 31

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Project 6 displayed the highest increase in facilities cost since labour rates and
construction manhours in Africa were corrected to reflect the latest norms and
rates.

Page 32

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Other IHS Products

The following products are also available from IHS:
Global Window
Global Window is an upstream tool used to support strategic planning, business
development and new ventures teams. This product complements and supports
other energy products and offers valuable insights to key risks and investment
drivers within which groups can frame high level investment decisions. Clients
of Global Window use the tool to support reviews of the strategic intent of their
organisation, looking at opportunity characterisation and how they might wish
to prioritise opportunities to maximise value.
Global Window is a forward looking application which combines a
comprehensive suite of value models characterising opportunity level in basins
across the globe, with an interactive screening and ranking process which draws
together economic, technical, commercial, and strategic business threads. The
tool contains more than 350 location overviews, each of which includes play
summaries, maps, news synopses and fully risked economic models.
Exploration, exploitation, and unconventional locations are addressed. Above
and below ground issues are scored according to rigidly defined criteria
facilitating identification of critical drivers. Users can edit the parameter
weightings thus accommodating the natural bias and competitive advantages
within organisations. New locations may also be added and subsets of locations
can be extracted and inspected using smart filter software.
Key Benefits of Global Window include:
Draws together a 360 view capturing all critical factors likely to impact the
relative attractiveness of investment opportunities in different locations
Highly visual enabling a board-level audience to focus instantly on key risks
and drivers
Promotes effective communication between technical and commercial
functions without decision-makers needing to become experts in every area
Reduces the lead time on high level decisions and allows management to
demonstrate how such decisions relate to corporate strategy
Provides a credible forward-looking view of upstream locations within a
consistent framework, with flexibility to bias assumptions according to the
clients competitive advantages
The location overviews benefit from access to Janes security information
and use the latest cost information from QUE$TOR. Fiscal terms are from the
PEPS database and maps are aligned with the IHS mapping system.

IHS

November 2012

Page 33

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

OPE$T
OPE$T is a powerful and innovative program designed to aid asset managers and
strategic cost planners drive down costs and continuously optimise the wholelife-cycle performance of assets.
OPE$T provides a comprehensive, dynamic whole-life-cycle model of all the cost
drivers associated with an asset. It allows changes to its operation to be
assessed by analysing their respective cost benefits. Its power comes from the
integration of all costs into a single environment, drawing together all
functional budgets and activities.
Through the operating and capital investment phases of an asset, OPE$T makes
it possible to:
Forecast operating expenditure (OPEX) to aid investment decisions
Facilitate business decisions by simulating their impact on cost
Challenge current assumptions
Allow analysis of CAPEX and OPEX interaction
Produce a live cost-benefit analysis model
Seek and measure improvements generated by change
Provide an auditable approach to the analysis of operating costs
Assist with budgeting and benchmarking.

OPE$T employs several key elements, which allows the user to capture costs
(CAPEX/OPEX) and where needed production/ consumption of a product.
The ABP (Asset Business Plan) is the creation of a dynamic asset model that can
be used to analyse the effect of change. ABP provides a dynamic and proactive
tool to search for improvements to the economic performance of an asset,
through operating cost reduction or increased production revenues.
OPE$T uses activity-based costing, which provides significant advantages:
Cost can be seen at the lowest or highest level of an asset
Analyses directly the impact of an activity on one or more assets
Allows generic cost allocation to assets
Simplifies the structure of the model
Dual report structures facilitate reporting to different disciplines

Page 34

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

OPE$T can be used to analyse:
Down manning and other operational studies
Maintenance strategy changes
Capital investments, e.g. CAPEX / OPEX trade-offs
Facility enhancements
Consultancy services.

IHS

November 2012

Page 35

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Software Support Contacts

If you have any problems or questions relating to any of the QUE$TOR suite
applications, please contact the Software and Engineering Support Desk.
Support e-mail address:
support_questor@ihs.com (Note: s rather than $)
Licensing support e-mail:
questor_licensing@ihs.com
Support telephone and fax:
North, Central & South America
Tel: (+1) 713 840 8282
Fax: (+1) 713 995 8593
Europe, Africa, Middle East
Tel: (+44) 20 3159 3300
Fax: (+44) 20 3159 3299
Russia
Tel: (+7) 495 937 77 24
Fax: (+7) 495 937 77 25
S.E. Asia & Australia
Tel: (+65) 6576 5300
Fax: (+65) 6225 9694
China
Tel: (+86) 10 5633 4567
Fax: (+86) 10 5633 4500

Page 36

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

The IHS software support team key contacts are:

North, Central & South America
Abhishek Verma, Andre Costa, Lena Milstein, Jonathan Stephens
e-mail: abhishek.verma@ihs.com, andre.costa@ihs.com, lena.milstein@ihs.com,
jonathan.stephens@ihs.com
Europe, Africa, Middle East
John Helliwell, Rita Antonelli
e-mail: john.helliwell@ihs.com, rita.antonelli@ihs.com
Russia
Karel Valouch
e-mail: karel.valouch@ihs.com
S.E. Asia & Australia
Robert Chambers, James Blanchard, Lo Tze Yan
e-mail: robert.chambers@ihs.com, james.blanchard@ihs.com,
tzeyan.lo@ihs.com
China
Yaxing Wang
e-mail: yaxing.wang@ihs.com

IHS

November 2012

Page 37

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

Sales and Commercial Contacts

If you have any questions or would like any further information regarding IHS
software or services please contact your Account Manager or your local IHS sales
office.

Page 38

Beijing
Tel:
Fax:

(+86) 10 5633 4567

(+86) 10 5633 4500

London
Tel:
Fax:

(+44) 20 3159 3300

(+44) 20 3159 3299

Geneva
Tel:
Fax:

(+41) 22 721 1717

(+41) 22 721 1919

Houston
Tel:
Fax:

(+1) 713 840 8282

(+1) 713 559 9101

Moscow
Tel:
Fax:

(+7) 495 937 77 24

(+7) 495 937 77 25

Singapore
Tel:
Fax:

(+65) 6576 5300

(+65) 6225 9694

Tetbury
Tel:
Fax:

(+44) 1666 501 200

(+44) 1666 504 704

Tokyo
Tel:
Fax:

(+81) 3 5791 9530

(+81) 3 5791 9662

November 2012

IHS

QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 Release Notes

IHS Corporate Website

The IHS corporate website is located at http://www.ihs.com
The website contains information on all IHS software, data and services worldwide and hosts several applications as well as the IHS daily alert news service.
The site provides general customer support and contacts for IHS products and
services.
This site also contains product information for the following cost and economics
products:
Global Window
OPE$T

IHS

November 2012

Page 39