#Julia Field Economics Report
Development: Julia (tieback15) · Lease: G20351 · First oil: 2016-03-01 · Discount rate: 10% annual
Data window: 2000-09 -> 2026-04
#Summary
On public BSEE production + cost data, Julia is NPV-negative at 10% life-to-date: terminal cumulative NPV $-482.8 M.
- 77.5 MMbbl oil produced from 4 producing wells (9 total wellbores), generating $5,168 M gross revenue.
- A high-capex, deepwater signature: $2,725 M of one-time D&C + facilities capital is the dominant driver of the NPV.
- The cumulative-NPV path bottomed at $-1,154.1 M in 2017 and has since recovered $+671.3 M as production paid back capital.
Generated from public BSEE OGOR-A production and drilling/WAR records run through a monthly cashflow + trimmed-discount model (build_field_npv_timeline), covering field life through the latest available BSEE OGOR-A month. The NPV timeline below is an additive presentation layer over that model; it does not alter the computed final NPV.
#NPV Timeline
Cumulative discounted NPV evolution over field life, with critical well operations annotated. Terminal cumulative NPV = $-482.8 M.
Cumulative NPV path (by year): ██████▇▇▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▄▄▅▅ start $-76M → trough $-1,154M (2017) → latest $-483M
| Year | Net Cashflow ($MM) | Cumulative NPV ($MM) | Critical Operations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | -76.8 | -75.8 | Drilling (spud): JU102 Temporary abandonment: JU102 (608124003300) |
| 2009 | 0.0 | -75.8 | |
| 2010 | 0.0 | -75.8 | |
| 2011 | 0.0 | -75.8 | |
| 2012 | 0.0 | -75.8 | |
| 2013 | 0.0 | -75.8 | |
| 2014 | -92.8 | -125.5 | Drilling (spud): DC101 Temporary abandonment: DC101 (608124009400) |
| 2015 | -164.0 | -204.8 | Drilling (spud): JU102 Completion: JU102 (608124003301) Drilling (spud): JU103 |
| 2016 | -1,931.3 | -1,099.6 | Plug & abandon: JU103 (608124010200) Drilling (spud): JU104 Temporary abandonment: JU104 (608124010800) Well online (first production): API 608124003301 Completion: DC101 (608124009400) Well online (first production): API 608124009400 Drilling (spud): JU105 |
| 2017 | -132.9 | -1,154.1 | Drilling (spud): JU105 Completion: JU104 (608124010800) Well online (first production): API 608124010800 |
| 2018 | 242.4 | -1,064.1 | |
| 2019 | 59.3 | -1,043.3 | Drilling (spud): JU106 |
| 2020 | 113.6 | -1,009.0 | Well online (first production): API 608124012701 |
| 2021 | 425.1 | -890.5 | |
| 2022 | 623.6 | -731.7 | |
| 2023 | 433.9 | -631.5 | |
| 2024 | 360.9 | -555.4 | |
| 2025 | 278.4 | -502.1 | |
| 2026 | 108.0 | -482.8 |
#Critical Operations Detail
| Date | Operation | Well | Cumulative NPV at event ($MM) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008-02-17 | Drilling (spud) | JU102 | -10.4 |
| 2008-06-22 | Temporary abandonment | JU102 (608124003300) | -75.8 |
| 2014-07-10 | Drilling (spud) | DC101 | -85.4 |
| 2014-11-02 | Temporary abandonment | DC101 (608124009400) | -125.5 |
| 2015-01-20 | Drilling (spud) | JU102 | -130.5 |
| 2015-04-05 | Completion | JU102 (608124003301) | -140.7 |
| 2015-10-21 | Drilling (spud) | JU103 | -153.1 |
| 2016-02-07 | Plug & abandon | JU103 (608124010200) | -322.8 |
| 2016-02-13 | Drilling (spud) | JU104 | -322.8 |
| 2016-02-21 | Temporary abandonment | JU104 (608124010800) | -322.8 |
| 2016-03-01 | Well online (first production) | API 608124003301 | -1,053.0 |
| 2016-04-04 | Completion | DC101 (608124009400) | -1,076.1 |
| 2016-05-01 | Well online (first production) | API 608124009400 | -1,097.1 |
| 2016-09-03 | Drilling (spud) | JU105 | -1,103.3 |
| 2017-01-24 | Drilling (spud) | JU105 | -1,098.1 |
| 2017-09-21 | Completion | JU104 (608124010800) | -1,143.8 |
| 2017-11-01 | Well online (first production) | API 608124010800 | -1,160.0 |
| 2019-05-10 | Drilling (spud) | JU106 | -1,038.9 |
| 2019-10-29 | Drilling (spud) | JU106 | -1,042.1 |
| 2020-02-01 | Well online (first production) | API 608124012701 | -1,047.7 |
Operations are derived deterministically from BSEE Well Activity Reports (bin/war/) and OGOR-A first-production dates (BSEE OGOR-A pickled .bin DataFrames (zip archives absent in checkout)). Activity codes: DRL=drilling, COM=completion, WO=workover, REC=recompletion, ST=sidetrack; re-entries detected via API completion-suffix changes on a shared wellbore. Markers are annotations only and do not feed the cashflow model.
#Well-Level NPV Stackup
Field terminal NPV decomposed into per-well contributions that sum exactly to the field total. Field NPV = $-482.8 M; sum of per-well net NPV = $-482.8 M (residual $0.0000).
| Rank | Well (API) | Name | Oil (MMbbl) | Gross well NPV ($MM) | Allocated shared cost ($MM) | Net well NPV ($MM) | % of field NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 608124010800 | JU104 | 30.87 | 314.6 | -476.2 | -161.6 | 33.5% |
| 2 | 608124009400 | DC101 | 14.67 | 98.9 | -226.3 | -127.4 | 26.4% |
| 3 | 608124003301 | JU102 | 12.57 | 89.2 | -194.0 | -104.8 | 21.7% |
| 4 | 608124012701 | JU106 | 19.37 | 209.8 | -298.8 | -89.0 | 18.4% |
Reading the ranking. Under production-pro-rata allocation, the largest producer absorbs the most shared capital — so the highest-output well can show the *most negative* net NPV. The Gross well NPV column reflects standalone operating performance; the Net well NPV column reflects each well's share of the fully-loaded field (which is NPV-negative overall, so every well's net is negative). Bottom line: a negative *net* NPV here is an allocation outcome on an NPV-negative field, not a verdict on the well's own performance — read the Gross well NPV column for standalone results.
Per-well net NPV (signed bars; █ = value-additive, ▓ = drag):
JU104 -161.6 M ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ DC101 -127.4 M ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ JU102 -104.8 M ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ JU106 -89.0 M ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
Interactive NPV waterfalls → — two views: an over-time NPV bridge (each year's change in cumulative NPV, with the biggest swings annotated by the events that drove them) and this per-well stackup (each well's net NPV stepping to the field total). Hover any bar for detail. Rebuild with uv run --with plotly python scripts/lower_tertiary/build_npv_stackup_chart.py --dev Julia.
Block scope: Single OGOR block (WR 584) for this development; block-level NPV decomposition is not applicable (identical to the field total).
The stackup covers the 4 producing wells. The field's 9 total wellbores also include appraisal and sidetrack/re-drill bores; their drilling & completion capital is part of the shared cost allocated pro-rata (it is not attributed to a single producer).
Allocation assumption. Shared field costs (facilities, fixed opex, host) and the drilling/completion cost of non-producing bores (appraisal/sidetrack wells with no production to stand against) are pooled and allocated to the producing wells pro-rata by each well's share of total field oil production. Each producing well's own revenue, royalty, variable opex, and directly-resolvable D&C are attributed to it. Per-well NPVs sum to the field NPV.
#Well Geometry (3D)
Interactive 3D well-path views — minimum-curvature trajectories from BSEE directional surveys, rendered with Plotly and Three.js — are in development for this field. When verified they will live at:
reports/bsee/julia_well_path_plotly.htmlreports/bsee/julia_well_path_threejs.html
They are intentionally not linked yet: the geometry render must first be confirmed to cover the same lease-resolved producers shown in the NPV stackup above (same APIs, same field), so the economics and the well paths never describe different wells.
_Julia status: the current demo render (scripts/bsee/demo_well_path_julia.py) selects wells by WELL_NAME prefix and picks up unrelated shelf wells, with an API collision on 608124009400 (DC101 here vs. JU101 in the well catalog). Tracked in worldenergydata#493 — re-select by lease G20351, then embed._
#Financial Summary
Life-to-date field economics on public BSEE data (2000-09 -> 2026-04). D&C and facilities are one-time capital already incurred; revenue, royalty and opex accrue with production.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Revenue | $5,168.4 M |
| Royalty | $969.1 M |
| Variable opex | $464.9 M |
| Fixed opex | $762.5 M |
| D&C cost | $1,349.6 M |
| Facilities cost | $1,375.0 M |
| Net cashflow (undiscounted) | $247.4 M |
| NPV @ 10% | $-482.8 M |
| MIRR (annual) | 6.91% |
| Producers | 4 |
| Injectors | 0 |
| Wellbores | 9 |
Return metric: MIRR is the return measure used for these developments, not IRR. Deepwater Lower-Tertiary cashflows are heavily front-loaded (large D&C + facilities outflows, then a long production tail), so the net-cashflow sign changes more than once and the IRR polynomial can have multiple — or no — real roots; MIRR (single reinvestment/finance rate at the 10% discount rate) is well-defined and unambiguous. NPV @ 10% remains the primary value metric.
Source-of-record: public BSEE OGOR-A production, drilling and WAR records, run through the field cashflow model.
#Price Sensitivity
NPV is linear in the oil price deck: each +$1/bbl on the realized oil price moves field NPV by $+17.2 M. Life-to-date NPV reaches zero at a flat-equivalent realized WTI of $95/bbl, versus the actual volume-weighted realized $67/bbl over the window.
| Flat-equivalent realized WTI ($/bbl) | NPV @ 10% ($MM) |
|---|---|
| 47 | -827.4 |
| 57 | -655.1 |
| 67 ← actual | -482.8 |
| 77 | -310.5 |
| 87 | -138.2 |
Exact, not sampled: NPV is affine in a uniform price multiplier (revenue and royalty scale with price; variable/fixed opex, D&C, facilities and discounting do not), so one base run plus one scaled run define the entire line. 'Flat-equivalent realized WTI' is the volume-weighted average price; the underlying deck is the historical monthly WTI path.
#Next Steps
- Get a tailored analysis. Want this for your own assets — a different field, a custom price deck, sensitivities, or a partner-level working-interest view? AceEngineer builds traceable field economics from public data. Contact vamsee.achanta@aceengineer.com to scope an engagement.
- Explore the full play. Julia is one of 10 Lower Tertiary (Wilcox) fields covered by this model. Regenerate any field with
--dev <Field>, or ask for the portfolio economics report for the whole-play NPV view (Jack/St. Malo, Stones, Big Foot, Anchor, Cascade/Chinook, and more). - See the methodology. Every number here traces to public BSEE OGOR-A production + drilling/WAR records run through a transparent cashflow model — no black box. The pipeline (BSEE public data → parsed
.bin→ NPV) is reproducible end-to-end. - Run it yourself. Refresh the data and regenerate this report:
# 1. refresh the latest BSEE OGOR-A production (2025 + current year) uv run python scripts/refresh_bsee_ogor_recent.py # 2. regenerate this report (latest window is the default; # leases are auto-derived for the field) uv run python scripts/lower_tertiary/generate_field_economics_report.py --dev Julia