Release Notes

Release Notes
QUE$TOR
2013 Q1 Release
May 2013
QUE$TOR is a registered trademark of

IHS. Windows is a registered trademark
of Microsoft Corporation.
Contents
Introduction 1
Version Compatibility 3
Installation Instructions 4
General Upgrades in QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 6
Cost Database Upgrade 11
Benchmarking Comparison: Offshore Projects 20
Benchmarking Comparison: Onshore Projects 25
Other IHS Products 30
Software Support Contacts 33
Sales and Commercial Contacts 35
IHS Corporate Website 36
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 Release Notes
Introduction
We are pleased to provide the 2013 Q1 release of the QUE$TOR cost estimating
software.
All cost databases have been reviewed and updated to incorporate current unit
rates, exchange rates and man-hour costs for all regions, to reflect first quarter
2013 prices.
The main technical enhancements made to QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 are:
Production Profile Changes (wells per year)

o Improved calculation for the estimated number of wells drilled per
year
o Now possible to edit the number of wells per year per operation
and the concurrent drilling operations
o Improved accuracy of the production profile and the resultant cost
estimate for onshore and offshore
Standard pipeline diameters
o Pipeline and flowline diameter can be selected using a dropdown

list of standard sizes
GRP (Glass Reinforced Polyester) is now available as a material for

onshore pipelines and wellpad group flowlines
o Two types considered - sand core un-restrained GRP (buried) and
glass core self-restrained GRP (surface/elevated)
o Cost is defined by the diameter and the pressure rating for the
pipe (with fixed ratings) rather than the wall thickness
o QUE$TOR will display a warning when this material is selected but
unsuitable for the operating pressure
Updated pigging and repair intervals for pipelines

o Pigging and repair intervals for non-carbon steel pipeline materials
in OPEX are longer than for carbon steel pipelines, so the
calculated repair costs now reflect the actual values
Onshore road construction types

o Four different road types can now be selected (dirt, gravel,
concrete and asphalt)
o Appropriate unit rates have been added to the regional cost
databases
IHS May 2013 Page 1

Investment and production profile (IPP) is dynamic

o If a component is removed/added the IPP automatically updates
the scheduled costs accordingly
Changes in OPEX for drilling and subsea

o Operating costs come from the drilling well-count, not the linked
subsea components leading to more accurate OPEX reports when
drilling components are ghosted
Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) Bulk Changes

o Bulk material quantities for FPSOs are updated and increased due
to the topsides equipment being more spread out on the deck.
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 May 2013 IHS

Version Compatibility
QUE$TOR v8.0 and later are fully compatible with QUE$TOR 2013 Q1. However,
projects created in QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 cannot be opened in earlier versions.
On opening an earlier version of a project in QUE$TOR 2013 Q1, 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$TOR 2013 Q1 CD-ROM contains the following:
QUE$TOR (2013 Q1) installation files
An Application directory containing QUE$TOR (2013 Q1) 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 May 2013 Page 3

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 2013 Q1
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$TOR CD, and
can be installed in addition to the Client Profile.
The .NET 4 installer requires the system to have Windows Installer 3.1 or
later installed. If this is not present then run the file Windows Installer
31.exe located in the Windows Installer sub-folder of the QUE$TOR CD-
ROM
Page 4 May 2013 IHS

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 sub-
folder 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$TOR 2013 Q1 run the file setup.exe in the root folder of the
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 CD-ROM
Once installed, an icon for QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 will appear on your desktop. A
group will also appear on the start menu under All Programs\IHS\QUE$TOR
2013 Q1 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$TOR 2013 Q1 supersedes previous versions but can be installed
alongside them.
You are now ready to run QUE$TOR providing your dongle has been updated to
run QUE$TOR Offshore or Onshore 2013 Q1.
Note: If your dongle has not been updated to run QUE$TOR 2013 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 2013 Q1 directory or double-click the icon created on
your desktop.
IHS May 2013 Page 5

General Upgrades in QUE$TOR 2013 Q1

In response to user and internal feedback the following features have been
implemented in QUE$TOR 2013 Q1.
Production Profile Changes (Wells per Year)
It is now possible to edit the number of wells per year per operation and the
concurrent drilling operations. This improves the accuracy of the production
profile and the resultant cost estimate. The changes have been applied to both
onshore and offshore, with appropriate differences in the calculations.
Projects saved in earlier versions of QUE$TOR will retain any locked values in
the production profile edit form when opened.
Page 6 May 2013 IHS

Standard Pipeline Diameters
All offshore and onshore steel pipeline and flowline diameters are now selected
from a dropdown list of standard API 5L nominal pipe sizes so that the linepipe
unit rates are accurately calculated based on known pipe dimensions. In
previous versions non-standard wall thickness could be entered, but the linepipe
unit rate was based on the next standard pipe size up.
Subsea flowlines have maximum diameters of 24" for rigid steel and 16" for
flexibles. For all other steel pipelines the maximum nominal diameter is 72".
Steel GRP
Inches mm cm Inches mm cm
2 50.8 5.08 2 50 5
3 76.2 7.62 3 75 7.5
4 102 10.2 4 100 10
6 152 15.2 6 150 15
8 203 20.3 8 200 20
10 254 25.4 10 250 25
12 305 30.5 12 300 30
14 356 35.6 14 350 35
16 406 40.6 16 400 40
18 457 45.7 18 450 45
20 508 50.8 20 500 50
22 559 55.9
24 610 61 24 600 60
26 660 66
28 711 71.1 28 700 70
30 762 76.2 30 750 75
32 813 81.3 32 800 80
34 864 86.4
36 914 91.4 36 900 90
38 965 96.5
40 1020 102 40 1000 100
42 1070 107
44 1120 112 44 1100 110
46 1170 117
48 1220 122 48 1200 120
50 1270 127
52 1320 132 52 1300 130
54 1370 137
56 1420 142 56 1400 140
58 1470 147
60 1520 152 60 1500 150
62 1570 157
64 1630 163
66 1680 168
68 1730 173
70 1780 178
72 1830 183
Projects from previous versions that included non-standard diameters for

pipelines or flowlines (e.g. an 11" offshore pipeline) will have the values
unlocked by QUE$TOR 2013 Q1. This applies to non-standard diameters in any
component.
IHS May 2013 Page 7

Glass Reinforced Polyester (GRP) Pipelines
It is now possible to select GRP as a material for any onshore pipeline or wellpad
group flowline within QUE$TOR.
Industry standard wall thicknesses are selected based on the GRP type (sand
core or glass core), nominal diameter and the pressure rating, i.e. 6, 10, 16, 20,
25 and 32 barg. QUE$TOR will display a warning if GRP material is selected but
unsuitable, e.g. when the design pressure is over 32 barg.
The cost of GRP pipes is defined by the type, the diameter and the pressure
rating for the pipe (with fixed ratings) rather than the wall thickness. Two
types are considered;
sand core un-restrained GRP, for buried applications
glass core self-restrained GRP, for surface or elevated applications.
GRP fluid lines are sized to have a nominal diameter from the definitive
standard list with a maximum diameter of 60". The calculated inner diameter
will be matched to the next largest diameter from the standard list (see
previous table). Wall thickness and corrosion allowance boxes are greyed out,
as they are not relevant for GRP pipeline cost estimation in QUE$TOR.
QUE$TOR projects will now show the benefits of lower lifecycle costs in GRP
pipelines when compared to steel. This includes specific GRP data for pipeline
inspection/repair intervals.
Page 8 May 2013 IHS

Updated Pigging and Repair Intervals for Pipelines
In previous versions there was a single intelligent pigging interval, initial year,
unit rate etc. for all the pipeline materials. In QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 the OPEX has
been updated to include the different strategies of maintaining various
materials for pipelines. Pipeline repair and intelligent pigging intervals are now
pipeline material dependent. If any of these values are locked in projects from
previous versions and imported into QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 the locked values will be
dropped as they are now linked to individual pipelines. The OPEX analysis and
locked values report sections have new layouts showing which values apply to
individual pipelines.
The repair interval for a non-carbon steel pipeline in OPEX is now longer than
for carbon steel pipelines, so the calculated repair costs reflect the actual
values.
Onshore Road Construction Types
Now it is possible to select from four different types of road for each section
from a dropdown list, increasing the accuracy of the associated costs. The road
types are:
Dirt
Gravel
Concrete
Asphalt
The selection of the road type is derived from the regional technical data for
the project. The unit rate for each road type is dependent on the terrain over
which the road is constructed.
IHS May 2013 Page 9

Dynamic Investment and Production Profile

The Investment and Production Profile (IPP) is now dynamically updated so that
it is always correct for the current project configuration and schedule while
retaining all relevant changes you make to the IPP sheet. It is no longer
necessary to have to choose whether to retrieve a saved IPP or create a new
one. The retrieve/create IPP option form that appeared in all earlier versions
of QUE$TOR will no longer feature. All changes to values in the IPP are now
listed in the locked values report.
Deleting a component will cause the scheduled costs of any dependent
components to be adjusted accordingly (e.g. deleting the main production
facility in an onshore project will cause most of the remaining components to
start in month zero). Adding a component, then linking it to other components
will cause the scheduled costs of any newly dependent components to be
adjusted accordingly (e.g. adding a production facility and linking it to a
terminal via a pipeline).
There is now an icon to unlock all changed values, quickly restoring the IPP
to its original state. To aid clarity the Project>IPP menu will display a check
mark when there are user edits to the profile.
Any IPP changes made in previous QUE$TOR versions will be lost when opened in
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1. To see the IPP changes in these projects open them in an
earlier version of QUE$TOR.
Page 10 May 2013 IHS

Changes in OPEX for Drilling and Subsea

The operating costs now come from the drilling well-count rather than the
linked subsea components, leading to more accurate OPEX reports when drilling
components are ghosted.
If there are multiple drilling components and not all of them have their OPEX
ghosted, then the subsea well-count in the Well costs section of the OPEX sheet
only reflects the wells for the un-ghosted drilling components.
Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) Bulk Changes

If the selected substructure is a tanker (i.e. substructure for an FPSO) then the
bulk material quantities are increased as the topsides equipment will typically
be more spread out on the deck and there is a piperack running the length of
the vessel. The topsides primary and secondary steel weight factors are
dependent on the topsides deck configuration type for FPSOs, i.e. pre-
assembled units (PAUs) or a pancake. The piping, electrical, instrumentation
and other FPSO bulk material factors are independent of the deck configuration
type. These updated bulk factors apply to all types of tanker (conversion, new
build custom and new build ship-shape).
Select Other Technical Revisions
Changing the maximum drilling stepout value had no effect on drilling inputs
or costs, so it has been removed from both offshore and onshore drilling
input forms. This makes the interface clearer and less confusing.
The description for Panamax tankers and offshore loading is now more
accurately shown as 50-73 kdwt instead of 0-73 kdwt.
When a project with IPP data is opened in the Project Viewer, the projects
tab and the comparison tab will now contain project cost data at the top of
the investment profile section (to match the actual IPP sheet in QUE$TOR
more closely).
The wellpad construction type on the onshore Flowlines form can now be
edited. The dropdown box contains three options - buried, elevated and
surface (currently this always defaults to surface). The construction type
now influences cathodic protection. If the material selection of at least one
of the flowlines is carbon steel or clad stainless steel and the construction
type is buried, then cathodic protection is applied. If construction type is
elevated or surface then cathodic protection is not selected.
IHS May 2013 Page 11

Cost Database Update
Substantial effort has gone into reviewing all cost databases to bring them in
line with first quarter (Q1) 2013 costs.
Note: On saving the project, the QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 cost estimate will overwrite
earlier costs except where those costs were locked on the cost sheet or in the
database. Therefore if you wish to retain a copy of your original estimate you
should first create a duplicate of the project before opening and saving it in
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1.
The following section outlines where the most significant changes to the
regional cost databases have been made.
General
For the last few years the global economy has faced continued uncertainty.
Growth has been progressing at a slow pace with fiscal and financial risks
persisting in Europe and, to a lesser extent, in the United States. Increased
optimism on the Eurozone future boosted the Euro, but the recent bailout of
Cyprus again weakened investor confidence.
On the other hand, the current economic scenario seems to offer more positive
news when compared to the situation one year ago when the risk of a global
double-dip recession was still likely. Developing nations have shown signs of
more stable growth following a slowdown in 2012. Economies in the Asia Pacific
region have continued to outpace the US and Europe. The Chinese economy has
improved with growth having accelerated for several quarters, supported by a
strong domestic demand and robust exports. In the US positive employment
data and a likely imminent improvement in the housing market seem to be
indicating a faster recovery. In summary, while global economic growth is still
facing uncertainty, recent data as well as sentiments are showing positive signs.
Worldwide, relatively strong oil prices, a high level of shale oil activity and
major projects in several regions have continued to drive a healthy Exploration
and Production (E&P) industry. The crude oil market has remained tight
supporting oil prices in the band that we have now seen since 2011. For
unconventional resources, North America has remained the centre of activity
with light tight oil being the primary objective. Production from deepwater
fields has grown following the successful exploration activities of recent years.
Central to the deepwater activity is the drive towards increased recovery
through more sophisticated subsea developments involving closer integration
between reservoir, wells and subsea facilities.
Globally, the different oil and gas market segments have shown mixed trends as
a result of an increasing optimism fighting against old threats and difficulties.

Steel
2013 started with the three main regions - North America, Europe and Asia
showing different trends. The US market looked to be the strongest as a result
of a healthy demand and a controlled supply. China and Europe still had
substantial problems linked to the balance between supply and demand, with
supply too strong in China and demand too weak in Europe. The Asian market
appeared to be more balanced than Europe which looks destined to have
another negative year.
Overall, the global steel market has not shown a definite trend. There have
been some positive signs, but these have been compensated by concerns over
the global economic recovery. This uncertainty has led buyers to be cautious.
However, recently some optimism for the future of steel demand has started to
appear in the market.
February and March saw the steel market holding back. In Southeast Asia the
market was quiet because of the limited activity due to the Chinese New Year.
In Europe and North America the New Year restocking was largely completed a
little earlier than in previous years, leaving the market players focused on
underlying demand. Europe appeared to be the weakest region, the United
States continued its slow path to recovery and China looked a little more stable
but still had some volatility in steel demand.
In the last two quarters prices of carbon steel hot rolled coil and plate
decreased in all regions, especially in Europe due to weak demand. Rebar
prices were kept down by weak construction in Europe and oversupply in North
America.
The Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) and linepipe markets continued to
weaken, mainly due to the decrease of raw material prices and to slower end
markets that put downward pressure on prices.
The stainless steel market has seen a low level of demand keeping market prices
low. The United States had some positive price movement whilst prices in other
regions have been held near the bottom.
Raw material markets have continued to recover. Iron ore saw its price picking
up above $140/metric tonne, as a result of swings in the stocking cycle more
than constant demand. Global demand for iron ore was behind the pace of
supply, although Chinese iron ore demand was higher than expected. European
steel production, which represents a significant share of global iron ore demand,
was still down due to the unresolved debt crisis. Ore demand in North America
was stable.
Australian coking coal spot prices continued to rise, narrowing the gap with
Chinese prices. Tropical cyclone Rusty did not have much impact on
metallurgical coal mines, located in the north-eastern part of the country. In
China, competition from Australian and Mongolian coal reduced the price
advantage of Chinese suppliers.

Topsides, Production Facilities and Terminals

Equipment costs were mostly stable or slightly decreased as a result of the
counteracting effect of lowered raw material prices and increased labour costs.
Heat exchanger costs were slightly up as a consequence of rising labour and
non-ferrous metal costs and increased new orders. Suppliers reported
increasing demand for heat exchangers and their backlogs were on an upward
trend with the average lead time being almost constant over the last six
months. Asia-Pacific was the most dominant market with rising demand from
the LNG liquefaction and refinery sectors primarily in Australia, Indonesia, China
and India.
Pressure vessel costs recorded a downward trend with prices decreasing due to
lower demand and decreased raw material costs. Demand from emerging
markets was weak but continued to outpace the requirements from the rest of
the developed world, especially Europe and Japan. Steel prices were down
again affecting mostly large vessel items and marginally affecting rotating and
heat exchange equipment.
Rotating equipment costs globally increased slightly primarily due to increased
activity and higher labour costs, after a negative start. In the last quarter of
2012 suppliers reported declining new orders because of slowing world
economies, with modest growth in North and South America. Some growing
optimism appeared in the first quarter of 2013 with suppliers expecting a
significant wave of new orders from several worldwide projects progressing to
the engineering phase.
The market for gas turbines applied to the upstream, midstream and refining
sectors of the oil and gas industry saw only a marginal increase both for
mechanical drives and power generators as the demand was held back by the
economic uncertainty and delays in anticipated orders.
Bulk Materials
The global civil and construction market ended 2012 still suffering from the
uncertain financial climate especially in Europe where both residential and non-
residential construction activity continued to be weak. A growing confidence in
the 2013 outlook however, has positively affected the first quarter costs.
Concrete prices were up marginally worldwide as the concrete industry
remained optimistic that the worst of the construction recession was over.
Reinforced concrete prices were still on the low side reflecting the drop in steel
costs.
Petroleum product prices in general were mixed, with insulation prices on the
rise due to sustained level in crude oil prices but tempered by sluggish demand.
Control valve costs were up marginally. Valve manufacturers saw higher activity
with increasing delivery times, driven by increased demand especially from the
shale gas industry.
Wire and cable costs for electrical equipment were almost unchanged as
demand continued to be flat. The copper market remained tight, keeping
upward pressure on prices. Demand from the hydrocarbon process industry was

stable, especially for low and medium voltage cable used in controls and
instrumentation.
Electrical equipment for power distribution such as switchgear and transformers
were up a little due more to inflation than increased demand.
Offshore Drilling Rigs

In the last six months, the offshore rig market has seen an increasing interest in
Arctic drilling programmes. A limited number of operators have been
attempting to conduct exploration drilling in extreme Arctic locations
encountering various obstacles that resulted in postponement. Interest in the
region has grown as well as the general effort to work together to improve rig
design to make Arctic drilling safer and more environmentally sensitive.
Several discoveries in ultra and deepwater areas were announced off the coast
of Australia, Brazil and in West Africa. In Europe, Norway saw a few new
offshore discoveries while gas was found off the Romanian coast in the Black
Sea.
In general, the global market of floaters and jackups saw high demand and
utilization for all types of rigs, pushing rates higher in all regions.
In the Gulf of Mexico the market has seen several floaters stationed in the Gulf,
few of which are stacked. Most contracted rigs, especially deepwater units, are
committed into long term contracts, making availability in 2013 quite tight.
Although contracting activity was low over the past few months, the US Gulf
deepwater segment still remains a crucial location for future newbuild charters.
Operators in the region have shown a strong preference for newbuild drillships
over newbuild semis and only a small number of drillships scheduled for delivery
this year remain uncommitted.
In West Africa deepwater rig day rates rose driven by the high level of demand
and limited availability in the region. The West African floater market has
tightened in recent months with the award of new contracts and the extension
of likely campaigns. There is no rig availability in the standard water (<3,000ft)
sector until 2014 and the ultra-deepwater (>7,500ft) market has seen a rise in
the total number of units set to enter the region over the next few years.
Northwest Europes floater sector remained extremely tight with high floater
demand and minimal availability throughout the remainder of 2013. Recent
rates surpassed the previous record highs, but this extreme tightness is now
causing the reactivation and relocation of standard UK semis halting the
escalation in day rates.
Another interesting area for deepwater rigs was Brazil. Several rigs are
currently under contract in the region, but contractors are considering
marketing the units in other regions once they become free, after Petrobras
made the decision to replace international rigs with units built by local yards.
Jackup price movements were significant in all regions. The largest rate
increases were for the Gulf of Mexico (GOM), North Sea and the Middle East &
Caspian region. In the GOM rig owners have maintained favourable market
conditions by cold stacking nearly half of the regions jackups, most of which

are the oldest rigs. For the Middle East jackup market, year 2012 closed out
with a record-high contract backlog and recent fixtures have demonstrated that
the region is still a place where term work can be found for jackups. Jackup
market activity in Northwest Europe remained vigorous. More charters were
confirmed over the last month, further reducing the pool of available rigs. In
Mexico PEMEX began a programme to develop and build a fleet of jackup and
platform rigs in order to secure its shallow-water drilling activities.
A spider diagram showing the percentage change in the regional rig day rate in
the last six months by rig type is given below.
OFFSHORE RIG RATE CHANGES Floater <1500ft
Africa Floater 1501-3001 ft

S North Sea 50%
Australia Floater 3001-5000ft
(Norway)
45%
Floater 5001-7500ft
S North Sea 40%
Caspian
(UK) Floater > 7500 ft
35%
Jackup
30%
25%
S America GoM
20%
15%
10%
SE Asia 5% GoM Shelf
0%
Russia Canada
Netherlands Indian
N North Sea
Meditterean
(Norway)
N North Sea
Middle
(UK)

Subsea Equipment
The subsea equipment market has experienced a flattening demand in the last
two quarters. Activity has remained at high levels, although still lower than the
record peak recorded in mid-2012. New unconventional opportunities,
international project delays and uncertainties due to the global economy
contributed to reducing the number of contract awards at the end of last year.
Subsea umbilicals, risers and flexibles costs were stable or slightly increased (up
4-7%) depending upon specific availability. Material costs were relatively stable
whilst operational costs, especially for skilled labour, continued to rise. The
backlog appeared to be relatively stable, however, with a slight increase in
longer horizon projects than what the market had seen during the last few
years.
The four major suppliers operating on a worldwide basis Aker Solutions,
Cameron, FMC Technologies and GE Oil & Gas have continued to dominate the
supply side of this market segment. The buyers side looked to be much more
fragmented compared to the suppliers side, with a large number of oil and gas
companies having installed subsea equipment in offshore projects. The largest
buyer, Petrobras, had the biggest market share while the second and third
largest buyers, Total and Statoil, concentrated on developments offshore in
West Africa and the Norwegian North Sea respectively.
Globally subsea equipment registered an average increase of 5% mainly driven
by market demand and increased labour costs.
Offshore Support and Construction Vessels

The past two quarters have seen mixed success for the Offshore Supply Vessel
(OSV) market, with some regions and certain market segments performing
better than others. Oversupply was a constant feature in the past year,
affecting even the first months of 2013. Southeast Asia and Northwest Europe
had the biggest rise in their fleets due to a significant addition of newbuilds.
The offshore vessel market in the US Gulf of Mexico had a positive end of the
year with very little availability for Platform Supply Vessels (PSV) of any size.
Day rates remained fairly steady with operators holding on to these vessels on
long-term contracts. Most of the major oil and gas companies have rushed to
get any high-spec tonnage available in anticipation of growing demand.
Conventional PSV vessels without dynamic positioning were less in demand due
to decreased shallow-water activity and operators preference for more
sophisticated and larger vessels. The Anchor Handling Tug Supply (AHTS)
market strengthened as vessels were busy with drilling support, construction
support and general supply work. Most AHTS vessels in the US Gulf were active
in long-term contracts or on the spot market due to the increasing number of rig
moves and anchor-handling jobs.
2012 was no doubt a very challenging year for vessel owners and managers in
Northwest Europe. The winter months saw a heavily oversupplied market
keeping both PSV utilisation and day rates relatively low. Only recently there
were some positive signs for vessel owners of increasing new term fixture
activity. The AHTS vessel spot market continued to show its extremely volatile
nature with a wide range of day rates. A combination of low vessel availability

caused by poor weather conditions and an increase in rig moves caused the day
rates to peak in late January.
The West African market has seen a busy start in 2013 in terms of new fixtures,
especially vessels contracted in short-term deals. Several episodes of piracy
involving hijack and kidnapping have made working conditions in this area very
difficult. In early January the European Union approved a new project with the
objective to combat piracy and improve safety of maritime routes in the Gulf of
Guinea.
The South American market has experienced a relatively long flat water
period due to the change in the Petrobras tendering process, now requiring
approval by the Petrobras board of directors. Tender results have been delayed
resulting in several vessel owners mobilising their vessels to West Africa and the
Mediterranean Sea rather than waiting. The Mexican supply vessel market has
been quiet but there are positive prospects for PEMEXs deepwater drilling
programme which have generated renewed optimism in the offshore market.
The OSV market in the Asia-Pacific region remained fairly healthy despite having
gone through some difficult times in the first half of 2012. Vessel oversupply
caused a reduction in day rates, but now utilisation appears to be picking up
and day rates are improving.
Offshore construction and installation vessel rates increased with some regional
variation due to supply and activity levels. As the offshore activity increased in
most regions, especially in Asia, South America, West Africa, and North America
most of the vessels utilised in exploration and drilling projects, such as diving
support vessels and remotely operated vehicle support vessels, saw an increase
in their day rates. The Subsea Umbilicals, Risers and Flexibles (SURF)
installation market recorded a rise in demand leading to an increase in
utilisation and day rates of heavy lift and pipe-lay vessels.
Labour
The energy sector saw its global construction activity increase during the last
two quarters, supported by widespread optimism and a more positive economic
outlook. Upstream labour wages went up both in USD and local currency terms.
The shortage of skilled workers and strong demand in most geographic regions
led to an increase in labour costs.
The biggest increases were seen in Africa, Russia and Asia. Canada also showed
a rise in labour rates due to the lack of adequate local content labour for the
numerous oil sands projects, although pushback of several LNG projects reduced
the demand for Canadian oil workers.
Despite slowing in 2012, the Asia-Pacific area was still in the spotlight as the
global economic emerging market. While China was the leading country, recent
data on India have been strongly positive on growth. Other economies, such as
Indonesia, the Philippines and Taiwan, are either holding up at a strong rate or
accelerating.
In Australia new LNG projects have become less attractive recently as some
projects have been postponed and some under construction have reported cost

overruns. As a consequence, the labour rate increase was relatively limited by

the reduced demand from the LNG market.
In South America labour rates increased both in local and USD terms. Several
important projects made the market very strong in Panama, Brazil, Peru and
Argentina. The region is experiencing a construction boom due to the Panama
Canal expansion project and preparations for the Olympic Games and the FIFA
World Cup in Brazil.
Engineering and project management rates have increased globally. Most
projects have continued to be awarded on a cost-plus basis rather than a fixed-
cost basis given the upward trend in labour rate. Some projects in the US Gulf
had staff shortage issues, particularly for engineers and project managers. Many
clients have required firms to employ permanent personnel rather than contract
workers to ensure staff continuity for the whole project duration, from front-
end design to completion of construction.
Onshore Rigs
In the last few years the global spread of unconventional projects has started to
change the look of the onshore rig market. The capability to provide more and
more sophisticated drilling rigs has increasingly become a differentiating factor.
In North America onshore rig contractors have started retiring and scrapping the
older units from their fleets and investing in higher-spec rigs. Overall the actual
fleet size is not expected to show a big variation as newbuilds are largely
offsetting the scrapping. Land rig rates decreased in North America due to a
drop in activity levels due to the lower gas price. Contractors have continued to
move their rigs to oil rich plays, which have remained active. Land rig rates
have been protected from a further reduction through placement of long term
contracts.
In the Middle East rates slightly increased due to the boost in activity in Saudi
Arabia as well as escalating labour rates throughout the region. Saudi Arabia
experienced a shortage in labour force after the reduction of expatriates
receiving their work visa due to implementation of stricter local content laws in
the region.
Rig day rates remained almost flat in the Commonwealth of Independent States
(CIS) countries of Russia and in the Russian Federation. Horizontal drilling has
become more common providing new life to fields that had declining production
rates. Russian land rigs are mostly aged. Russian rig contractors have shown the
interest to upgrade their fleet instead of retiring and scrapping although the
current replacement rate is very low when compared to other countries.
In South America day rates went up as a result of the increase in unconventional

projects, although logistic and labour issues have caused delays or halting of
activity. Labour costs have increased as many operators have made use of
expatriate skilled workers more familiar with the rigs until local crews are able
to replace them. Logistical issues were related to customs and permitting
delays.

Benchmarking Comparison: Offshore Projects
A series of 12 offshore projects were run in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 and QUE$TOR

2013 Q1. 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 Project 1 Project 2 Project 3 Project 4 Project 5 Project 6

CURRENCY US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar UK Pound
EXCHANGE RATE (US$) 1 1 1 1 1 0.66
DEVELOPMENT TYPE 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
PEAK WELL FLOW 6 Mbbl/d 6 Mbbl/d 6 Mbbl/d scf/bbl
6 Mbbl/d 6 Mbbl/d 6 Mbbl/d
16 16 16 16 16 16
PRODUCTIVITY
MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well MMbbl/well
RESERVOIR DEPTH 3000 m 3000 m 4000 m 3000 m 3000 m 3000 m
RESERVOIR PRESSURE 405.6 bar 405.6 bar 405.6 bar 405.6 bar 405.6 bar 405.6 bar
RESERVOIR WIDTH 3 km 4 km 4 km 2 km 4 km 3 km
RESERVOIR LENGTH 5 km 8 km 9 km 4 km 9 km 6 km
CRUDE API 30 30 30 35 30 30
H2S 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm
CO2 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
WATER DEPTH 90 m 450 m 800 m 800 m 600 m 90 m
MAX DRILLING STEPOUT 3 km 1.26 km 1.26 km 1.26 km 1.26 km 1.46 km
INFRASTRUCTURE 120 km 120 km 120 km 15 km 120 km 120 km
ONSTREAM DAYS 350 350 350 350 350 350
FIELD LIFE 10 13 13 10 13 13
YEARS TO PLATEAU 1 3 2 1 2 2
PLATEAU DURATION 4 3 4 4 4 4
PLATEAU RATE 60 Mbbl/d 114 Mbbl/d 150 Mbbl/d 30 Mbbl/d 150 Mbbl/d 78.0 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTION FLOWRATE 66 Mbbl/d 125 Mbbl/d 165 Mbbl/d 33 Mbbl/d 165 Mbbl/d 86 Mbbl/d
ASSOCIATED FLOWRATE 40 MMscf/d 75 MMscf/d 99 MMscf/d 33 MMscf/d 99 MMscf/d 52 MMscf/d
GAS INJECTION 40 MMscf/d 75 MMscf/d 99 MMscf/d 33 MMscf/d 99 MMscf/d 52 MMscf/d
FLOWRATE
WATER INJECTION FLOW 0 bbl/d 151 Mbbl/d 198 Mbbl/d 40 Mbbl/d 198 Mbbl/d 103 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTION WELLS 10 19 26 5 26 13
GAS INJECTION WELLS 1 3 3 0 3 2
WATER INJECTION 0 8 10 0 10 5
WELLS


CURRENCY US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar Kroner Can Dollar US Dollar
EXCHANGE RATE (per 1 1 1 5.78 $DlarDOLLA 1
1.02
US$) Offshore gas Offshore gas R
DEVELOPMENT TYPE Offshore oil Offshore oil Offshore oil Offshore oil
/condensate /condensate
N. America
N North Sea Indian
REGION Africa Gulf Africa E. Canada
(Norway) Ocean
Mexico
Tension Semi-sub-+
Gravity
Production Leg FPSO-+ Subsea
DESIGN CONCEPT Base Spar buoy
platform Platform Subsea tie back
Structure
(TLP)
RECOVERABLE RESERVES 900 Bscf 150 MMbbl 1500 Bscf 350 MMbbl 200 MMbbl 50 MMbbl
GOR/LGR 15 300 scf/bbl 15 bbl/MMscf 600 scf/bbl 600 scf/bbl 600 scf/bbl
PEAK WELL FLOW bbl/MMscf
29 MMscf/d 6 Mbbl/d 14 MMscf/d 4 Mbbl/d 3 Mbbl/d 6 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTIVITY 80 Bscf/well 10MMbbl/w 40 Bscf/well 12 8 8
RESERVOIR DEPTH 4000 m ell
4000 m 4500 m MMbbl/well
3700 m MMbbl/well
2500 m MMbbl/well
1500 m
RESERVOIR PRESSURE 540.8 bar 540.8 bar 608.4 bar 500.5 bar 338 bar 202.8 bar
RESERVOIR WIDTH 5 km 3 km 6 km 4 km 3 km 2 km
RESERVOIR LENGTH 9 km 5 km 12 km 8 km 6 km 3 km
CRUDE API 50 35 50 35 35 35
H2S 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm 200 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm
CO2 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0%
WATER DEPTH 200 m 700 m 1200 m 250 m 350 m 600 m
MAX DRILLING STEPOUT 3 km 3 km 3 km 3 km 3 km 3 km
INFRASTRUCTURE 50 km 200 km 190 km 30 km 55 km 750 km
ONSTREAM DAYS 350 350 350 350 350 350
FIELD LIFE 13 9 13 15 13 6
PLATEAU RATE 348 MMscf/d 90 Mbbl/d 532 MMscf/d 120 Mbbl/d 75 Mbbl/d 42 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTION FLOWRATE 452 MMscf/d 99 Mbbl/d 692 MMscf/d 132 Mbbl/d 83 Mbbl/d 46 Mbbl/d
ASSOCIATED FLOWRATE 6800 bbl/d 30 MMscf/d 10400 bbl/d 79 MMscf/d 50 MMscf/d 28 MMscf/d
GAS INJECTION 0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d 0 MMscf/d
FLOWRATE
WATER INJECTION FLOW 0 bbl/d 0 bbl/d 0 bbl/d 158 Mbbl/d 99000 0 bbl/d
PRODUCTION WELLS 13 16 38 30 bbl/d
26 7
GAS INJECTION WELLS 0 0 0 0 0 0
WATER INJECTION WELLS 0 0 0 12 10 0

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$TOR 2012 Q3 and
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1. The percentage variation reflects the overall difference
between the total project 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$TOR 2012 Q3
and QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 and the results are shown graphically in Figure 1.
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 QUE$TOR 2013 Q1

Project (US$ millions) (US$ millions) Variance
1 610.722 630.001 3.2%

2 1,261.637 1,274.498 1.0%
3 3,084.587 3,243.928 5.2%
4 570.260 648.288 13.7%
5 2,914.312 2,964.159 1.7%
6 1,370.814 1,435.684 4.7%
7 793.453 806.918 1.7%
8 1,411.582 1,420.456 0.6%
9 3,536.232 3,625.409 2.5%
10 4,252.874 4,526.920 6.4%
11 4,006.953 3,901.275 -2.6%
12 1,267.437 1,278.249 0.9%

5,000 15%
4,500
4,000 10%
3,500
US $ Millions
3,000 5%
2,500
2,000 0%
1,500
1,000 -5%
500
0 -10%
Project 10
Project 11
Project 12
Project 1
Project 2
Project 3
Project 4
Project 5
Project 6
Project 7
Project 8
Project 9
QUE$TOR 12.3 QUE$TOR 13.1 Variance
Figure 1 - Comparison of 2012 Q3 and 2013 Q1 offshore project costs
The changes in the project capital costs between QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 (v12.3) and
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 (v13.1) are the result of a combination of technical changes
and cost databases updates. Technical modifications have had an impact on
some specific components, such as topsides for FPSOs. Other components such
as drilling and subsea have been affected by a field level change (modified
production profile calculation). The cost changes have impacted components
fairly broadly although some projects have been impacted more than others.
Cost estimates using Canadian dollars or British pounds have changed by a few
percent due to exchange rate fluctuations. The benchmarked projects have
resulted in an average increase of about 3%; however some projects and
components have seen more significant differences.
Drilling costs have changed to varying degrees in the different projects although
the average is about 5%. Projects 1, 4, 10, and 12 have increased by about 10%
due to slight increases in the default number of wells QUE$TOR calculates, this
increase is a result of the changes made to the production profile calculations.
The drilling cost for project 6 increased the most at 14% due to a significant
increase in the jackup rig rate in the North Sea. This increase has been
somewhat offset by an effective decrease in other costs due to the weakening
of the British pound against the US dollar. Project 9 has shown a decrease in
drilling cost in the range of 2% due to a drop in the semi-sub rig rate. This
decrease has been offset by increases in equipment and labour costs in the Gulf
of Mexico region.
Topsides has increased in the 2% range for most of the projects due to the
general updates in cost. Projects 3 and 9, however, have seen a rise of 19% due
to a technical change allowing extra steel, piping and electrical bulks for an
FPSO topsides to account for the piperack running the length of the vessel and
the spread out equipment layout. Project 6 has seen an increase of almost 9%
in the main processing topsides cost due to a change in the estimated
wellstream fluid arrival temperature for remote wells.

Substructures have increased on average by a little over 1% although individual

structures have changed independently. Tankers have increased by about 5%
primarily driven by an increase in elevated deck steel due to the increased
topsides weight from the additional piperack allowances. Jackets have seen an
increase in the range of 2% due to a general increase in material and labour
costs, although project 6 has seen a decrease in cost in the range of about 7%
due to weakening of the British pound. GBS costs have decreased by about 3%
mainly due to the weakening of the Canadian dollar against the US dollar and
the resultant effective decrease in costs in US dollar terms.
Pipelines have seen a decrease in the range of 1%. This is largely due to the
decrease in linepipe material costs, which in some regions has been offset by
increases in installation and labour costs. Projects 6 and 11 have shown a larger
decrease of 6% and 3% respectively due to weakening of the British pound and
the Canadian dollar resulting in an effective cost decrease in US dollar terms.
Subsea shows a cost increase of 6% on average. This is partially driven by an

increase in the default number of wells due to the changes in the production
profile calculations. Contributing to the increases are the general increases in
equipment, material and installation costs.

Benchmarking Comparison: Onshore Projects
A series of 12 onshore projects were run in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 and QUE$TOR

2013 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.

CURRENCY US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar
DEVELOPMENT TYPE Oil Oil Oil Oil Gas Oil
REGION North Russia S. America Middle East Middle East Africa
COUNTRY America
Mid West Eastern Colombia Oman Oman Algeria
Siberia
Arctic-
TERRAIN Grassland Jungle Desert Desert Desert
Tundra
PROCUREMENT
STRATEGY
Equipment N. America Russia N. America W. Europe W. Europe N. America
Materials N. America Russia S&C America W. Europe America
W. Europe S. E. Asia
Linepipe N. America Russia N. America S. E. Asia America
S. E. Asia S. E. Asia
Prefabrication N. America Russia S&C America S. E. Asia S. E. Asia S. E. Asia
Construction N. America Russia S&C America Middle East Middle East Africa
Design/Project N. America W. Europe N. America Middle East Middle East W. Europe
Management
Contingency N. America Russia N. America Middle East Middle East W. Europe
Certification N. America Russia S&C America Middle East Middle East Africa
OPEX N. America Russia S&C America Middle East Middle East Africa
RECOVERABLE 50 MMbbl 200 MMbbl 120 MMbbl 500 MMbbl 500 Bscf 130 MMbbl
RESERVES
GOR/LGR 500 scf/bbl 1000 scf/bbl 400 scf/bbl 350.3 scf/bbl 10 bbl/MMscf500 scf/bbl
PEAK WELL FLOW 1 Mbbl/d 2 Mbbl/d 5 Mbbl/d 5 Mbbl/d 9 MMscf/d 2 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTIVITY 3 MMbbl/well 8 8 15 Mbbl/well 30 Bscf/well8 MMbbl/well
RESERVOIR DEPTH 2500 m MMbbl/well
3000 m MMbbl/well
2000 m 2300 m 2500 m 1500 m
RESERVOIR 338 bar 273 bar 270 bar 311 bar 270 bar 203 bar
OVERPRESSURE
RESERVOIR WIDTH 1.5 km 3.0 km 2.5 km 5.0 km 3.5 km 2.5 km
RESERVOIR LENGTH 3.0 km 6.0 km 5.0 km 10.0 km 7.0 km 5.0 km
CRUDE API 39 30 39 31 35
H2S (ppm in gas) 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm 500 ppm 500 ppm 500 ppm
CO2 (mol % in gas) 0 0 0 0.03 0.03 0.03
DEVIATED WELLS Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
MAX-DEVIATION 90 60 90 60
ANGLE
DISTANCE 30 km 200 km 80 km 100 km 60 km 90 km
# ONSTREAM DAYS 350 350 350 350 350 350
FIELD LIFE (years) 12 17 11 20 15 16
PLATEAU RATE 15.0 Mbbl/d 50.0 Mbbl/d 70.9 Mbbl/d 150 Mbbl/d 153.MMscf/d 34.0 Mbbl/d
DESIGN
15 Mbbl/d 55 Mbbl/d 78 Mbbl/d 165 Mbbl/d 153 MMscf/d 37.4 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTION
ASSOCIATED 7.5 MMscf/d 55 MMscf/d 31.2 57.8 MMscf/d 1.53 Mbbl/d 18.7 MMscf/d
FLOWRATE MMscf/d
WATER INJECTION 18 Mbbl/d 66 Mbbl/d 93.6 Mbbl/d 198 Mbbl/d 0 bbl/d 44.9 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTION WELLS 17 25 15 34 17 30


CURRENCY US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar US Dollar
DEVELOPMENT TYPE Gas Oil Gas Oil Gas DOLLARS
Oil
Russia & North
REGION Australasia Middle East West Europe S America
FSU America
Russia Canada
COUNTRY Australia Saudi Arabia Netherlands Mexico
Central Asia Alaska
TERRAIN Desert Desert Grassland Arctic/Tund Grassland Grassland
PROCUREMENT ra
STRATEGY
Equipment N. America W. Europe Russia N. America W. Europe N. America
Materials S. E. Asia W. Europe Russia N. America W. Europe S&CAmeric
Linepipe Australasia S. E. Asia Russia N. America W. Europe a
N. America
Prefabrication S. E. Asia S. E. Asia Russia N. America W. Europe S&CAmeric
Construction Australasia Middle East Russia N. America W. Europe a
S&CAmeric
Design/Project Australasia Middle East W. Europe N. America W .Europe a
N. America
Management
Contingency Australasia Middle East Russia N. America W. Europe N. America
Certification Australasia Middle East Russia N. America W. Europe S&CAmeric
OPEX Australasia Middle East Russia N. America W. Europe a
S&CAmeric
RECOVERABLE 1000 Bscf 800 MMbbl 2000 Bscf 30 MMbbl 1000 Bscf a MMbbl
80
RESERVES
GOR/LGR 10bbl/MMscf 349 scf/bbl 5 bbl/MMscf 800 scf/bbl 5 bbl/MMscf 800
PEAK WELL FLOW 6 MMscf/d 2 Mbbl/d 9 MMscf/d 1 Mbbl/d 9 MMscf/d scf/bbl
2 Mbbl/d
PRODUCTIVITY 22 Bscf/well 8MMbbl/wel 10 3 30 Bscf/well 8MMbbl/w
RESERVOIR DEPTH 2200 m l
2300 m Bscf/well
3000 m MMbbl/well
1500 m 2000 m ell m
3300
RESERVOIR 270 bar 311 bar 405 bar 203 bar 270 bar 446 bar
OVERPRESSURE
RESERVOIR WIDTH 5.0 km 6.5 km 7.0 km 1.0 km 5.0 km 2.0 km
RESERVOIR LENGTH 10.0 km 13.0 km 14.0 km 2.0 km 10.0 km 4.0 km
CRUDE API 31 39 39
H2S (ppm in gas) 100 ppm 500 ppm 100 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm 0 ppm
CO2 (mol % in gas) 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.02
DEVIATED WELLS Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
MAX DEVIATION 90 90 90 90
ANGLE
DISTANCE TO 100 km 250 km 250 km 30 km 100 km 30 km
TERMINAL
# ONSTREAM DAYS 350 350 350 350 350 350
FIELD LIFE (years) 17 26 30 12 15 17
PLATEAU RATE 276 MMscf/d 131 Mbbl/d 500 10 Mbbl/d 306 MMscf/d 20Mbbl/d
DESIGN PRODUCTION 276 MMscf/d 144 Mbbl/d MMscf/d
650 11 Mbbl/d 398 MMscf/d 22 Mbbl/d
ASSOCIATED 2.76 Mbbl/d 50 MMscf/d MMscf/d
3.25 Mbbl/d 8.8 MMscf/d 2 Mbbl/d 17.6MMscf
FLOWRATE
WATER INJECTION 0 bbl/d 173 Mbbl/d 0 bbl/d 0 bbl/d 0 bbl/d /d
26.4
PRODUCTION WELLS 46 100 200 10 34 Mbbl/d
10

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$TOR 2012 Q3 and
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1. 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$TOR 2012 Q3
and QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 and the results are shown graphically in Figure 2.
Projec QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 QUE$TOR 2013 Q1

(US$ millions) (US$ millions) Variance
t
1 181.695 185.984 2.4%
2 1,474.293 1,481.214 0.5%
3 297.949 298.533 0.2%
4 619.017 655.235 5.9%
5 278.170 294.245 5.8%
6 466.477 469.176 0.6%
7 1,044.539 1,056.690 1.2%
8 1,426.901 1,431.611 0.3%
9 2,605.237 2,658.056 2.0%
10 55.889 62.618 12.0%
11 581.394 604.128 3.9%
12 238.477 242.048 1.5%

3,000 15%
2,500 10%
2,000
US $ Millions
5%
1,500
0%
1,000
500 -5%
0 -10%
Project 1
Project 2
Project 3
Project 4
Project 5
Project 6
Project 7
Project 8
Project 9
Project 10
Project 11
Project 12
QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 Variance
Figure 2 - Comparison of 2012 Q3 and 2013 Q1 onshore project costs
The changes in the project capital cost between QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 (v12.3) and
QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 (v13.1) are the result of a combination of the technical
changes and cost changes described earlier in these release notes. Overall,
onshore costs have shown on average an increase of about 3%.
In general onshore drilling costs have risen by 1-2%. This upward trend is
reflecting variations in the land rig day rates and increases in equipment and
material cost.
Wellpads have seen an average increase of about of 2%. This increase is due to
general increases in equipment, materials and construction labour costs
although adjustments in the power generation and emergency power systems
have provided significant support to the rise in cost.
Production facilities costs increased on average by about 2% mostly due to
general cost updates. The equipment, material, prefabrication and construction
costs have all gone up, with some items such as emergency power generation
increasing more than others in part due to correction adjustments.
Prefabrication and construction costs generally increased due to increases in
labour unit rates.
Terminal facilities costs have increased by approximately 2% on average.
Increases in equipment, materials and labour contributed to this increase with
the power system unit the most affected. Some improvements to the
estimation of the number of loading arms will also impact some projects.
Pipeline costs have increased by approximately 3% although there is some
variability between projects. This increase is primarily in linepipe, coatings and
construction costs. Onshore linepipe unit costs were corrected to have a closer
match with the offshore unit rates.
Infrastructure costs have increased in this release due to the changes in the
calculation of infield road construction costs. A specific road type (Dirt, Gravel,
Concrete or Asphalt) can be selected and its cost estimated. The type of road is
based on the region where the project is located. In previous releases the road
construction costs were based on simpler types of roads such as dirt or gravel.
Therefore this change could result in some large increases in road costs if in a
region the new road selection will change from a basic gravel road to a concrete
or asphalt road. These infrastructure costs have limited effect on the final
capital cost as they do not represent a significant portion of the overall project
cost.
Project 10 is showing a particularly large increase due to the changes in the
roads. The project is small with only drilling and wellpad groups; therefore the
infrastructure is a more significant part of the project. This project is also
based in the Arctic terrain of North America, which has had one of the largest
increases in road construction costs in this release.

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.

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 whole-
life-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

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.

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

The IHS software support team key contacts are:
North, Central & South America

Abhishek Verma, Andre Costa, Jonathan Stephens
e-mail: abhishek.verma@ihs.com, andre.costa@ihs.com,
jonathan.stephens@ihs.com
Europe, Africa, Middle East

John Helliwell, Rita Antonelli, Matthew Butcher
e-mail: john.helliwell@ihs.com, rita.antonelli@ihs.com,
matthew.butcher@ihs.com
Russia
Artyom Malov, Karel Valouch
e-mail: artyom.malov@ihs.com, karel.valouch@ihs.com
S.E. Asia & Australia

Robert Chambers, Lo Tze Yan
e-mail: robert.chambers@ihs.com, tzeyan.lo@ihs.com
China
Yaxing Wang
e-mail: yaxing.wang@ihs.com

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.
Beijing
Tel: (+86) 10 5633 4567
Fax: (+86) 10 5633 4500
London
Tel: (+44) 20 3159 3300
Fax: (+44) 20 3159 3299
Geneva
Tel: (+41) 22 721 1717
Fax: (+41) 22 721 1919
Houston
Tel: (+1) 713 840 8282
Fax: (+1) 713 559 9101
Moscow
Tel: (+7) 495 937 77 24
Fax: (+7) 495 937 77 25
Singapore
Tel: (+65) 6576 5300
Fax: (+65) 6225 9694
Tetbury
Tel: (+44) 1666 501 200
Fax: (+44) 1666 504 704
Tokyo
Tel: (+81) 3 5791 9530
Fax: (+81) 3 5791 9662

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 world-
wide 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

Release Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Release Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Release Notes

QUE$TOR is a registered trademark of

The main technical enhancements made to QUE$TOR 2013 Q1 are:

Production Profile Changes (wells per year)

Standard pipeline diameters

o Pipeline and flowline diameter can be selected using a dropdown

GRP (Glass Reinforced Polyester) is now available as a material for

Updated pigging and repair intervals for pipelines

Onshore road construction types

IHS May 2013 Page 1

Investment and production profile (IPP) is dynamic

Changes in OPEX for drilling and subsea

Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) Bulk Changes

Page 2 May 2013 IHS

Whats on the CD-ROM

QUE$TOR (2013 Q1) installation files

An Application directory containing QUE$TOR (2013 Q1) program files

A dotNET Framework 4 directory containing the executable to install .NET

A FlexNet directory containing the executables and installation instructions

A Sentinel SuperPro Driver directory containing the executable to install

A Windows Imaging Component directory containing Windows Imaging

A Windows Installer directory containing the executable to install Windows

IHS May 2013 Page 3

Before starting to install the software please ensure:

Operating system Windows XP/ Windows Vista/ Windows 7

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

Page 4 May 2013 IHS

IHS May 2013 Page 5

General Upgrades in QUE$TOR 2013 Q1

Production Profile Changes (Wells per Year)

Page 6 May 2013 IHS

Standard Pipeline Diameters

Projects from previous versions that included non-standard diameters for

IHS May 2013 Page 7

Glass Reinforced Polyester (GRP) Pipelines

Page 8 May 2013 IHS

Updated Pigging and Repair Intervals for Pipelines

Onshore Road Construction Types

IHS May 2013 Page 9

Dynamic Investment and Production Profile

Page 10 May 2013 IHS

Changes in OPEX for Drilling and Subsea

Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) Bulk Changes

Select Other Technical Revisions

IHS May 2013 Page 11

Cost Database Update

Page 12 May 2013 IHS

IHS May 2013 Page 13

Topsides, Production Facilities and Terminals

Page 14 May 2013 IHS

Offshore Drilling Rigs

IHS May 2013 Page 15

OFFSHORE RIG RATE CHANGES Floater <1500ft

Africa Floater 1501-3001 ft

SE Asia 5% GoM Shelf

Page 16 May 2013 IHS

Offshore Support and Construction Vessels

IHS May 2013 Page 17

Page 18 May 2013 IHS

overruns. As a consequence, the labour rate increase was relatively limited by

In South America day rates went up as a result of the increase in unconventional

IHS May 2013 Page 19

Benchmarking Comparison: Offshore Projects

A series of 12 offshore projects were run in QUE$TOR 2012 Q3 and QUE$TOR