Liquids measurement in the oil patch is suddenly getting a lot of attention. Some are dismayed at the low level of technology used to measure liquids. Today, custody transfer of 80 to 85% of onshore crude and condensate production is still documented by a hauler climbing to the top of the tank and strapping it. “That would be a fair estimate,” concurs Mark Davis Staff Engineer Shell Exploration and Production. The hauler straps the tank before loading his truck and again when he finishes. The producer is paid on whatever that hauler writes on the ticket.

“I did not realize it was that immature,” remarked Grant Farris, Vice President Producer Services, CIMA Energy.

So, why it is that immature? Simple, really. The United States is experiencing the highest level of active liquids exploration and production in 40 years. Five years ago finding an oil play at NAPE was almost impossible. While the industry was diligently automating gas measurement to the digital world via electronic flow measurement, oil at $30/bbl and 15bbls/day was not given the same level of attention nor effort. These dynamics have changed.

With the recent release of the Green House Gas Regulations, the increased visibility of flaring natural gas and increased awareness of royalty owners, the ability to accurately measure and account for the amount of product flared from a facility has become increasingly important to regulators, royalty owners and operators. In the past, flare gas was not considered a necessary measurement, so the measurement of flared product has often been overlooked or not given the same attention as custody transfer measurement. As such API published API MPMS Chapter 14.10, Measurement of Flow to Flares, in June of 2007. This paper will provide a quick overview of the contents of API MPMS 14.10 but is encouraged to obtain 14.10 if more detailed information is desired. In addition, a brief discussion on the importance of calibrating flare flow meters is also discussed.

The data produced by Gas Chromatograph (GC) laboratories is used for many purposes, including product specification, accounting, safety and environmental compliance issues. The accuracy of this data has direct impact on all of these areas. Auditing laboratories responsible for producing this data is prudent business practice. The audit will provide a means of process improvement, through proper identification of deficiencies and a precise plan for corrective action. The level of confidence in analytical results will increase when the appropriate corrective actions are implemented. The amount of financial and legal exposure can be reduced from a properly executed audit program.

When Should We Audit?

Audits should be performed on a scheduled frequency, typically once a year for laboratories, and quarterly or semi-annually for online analyzers. If a discrepancy arises, or there is concern about the accuracy of analytical data, an audit should be performed. If there has been a change in personnel or equipment an audit may be warranted. After corrective action has been taken, an audit may be performed to determine the level of improvement.