Generated by the worldenergydata field-development playbook
(epic #567). Recommendation is heuristic (Concept Select / FEL-1 fidelity),
not a sanctioned design.
Engineering rationale
The engine's top recommendation (Subsea Tieback) matches the concept actually built (Subsea Tieback). The recommendation is produced on a blind probe — the as-built concept is stripped before scoring — so the agreement reflects the depth, basin and host-proximity signal, not the answer.
Field parameters
Water depth
2438.0 m
Concept
subsea_tieback
Fluid
oil
Operator
Shell
Wells
30
Plateau
—
Tieback
—
First oil
—
Recommended concept shortlist
Concept
Score
Trees
Rationale / flags
subsea_tieback ★
0.874
wet
typical of gom development practice; host within 60 km with spare capacity
semisub_fps
0.787
wet
typical of gom development practice
spar
0.771
dry
typical of gom development practice
subsea_to_shore
0.688
wet
—
fpso
0.602
wet
— atypical concept for gom
★ = the concept actually selected for
this field (where known).
Economics & execution (engine estimate)
Dev system
subsea20
Est. CAPEX
810.0 $MM
Est. NPV
—
Install vessels
9
Max crane
5000.0 t
Hardware
RJ-08-HYD-15K
As built (actuals)
Block
Alaminos Canyon 857
BSEE code
AC857
Operator
Shell
Concept (as built)
Subsea Tieback
Engine top pick
Subsea Tieback
Match
✓ match
Architecture & layout (subsea_tieback)
Subsea architecture block diagramPlan-view field layout (to scale)
Sources: SubseaIQ field catalog (~2014) + BSEE + curated vessel/
subsea catalogs. Schematics are deterministic, generated from the field concept.