For a long time, many people have discussed and debated the issue of oilfield part standardization as a method of overall cost reduction for drilling. So much, in fact, that in January of this year, the heads of Saudi Aramco, BP Plc, Statoil ASA, and Repsol SpA, as well as senior executives from Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Total SA, and Chevron Corp met behind closed doors at Davos in a push to cut costs by standardizing some of the equipment used in exploration and production. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-20/in-private-davos-meeting-oil-chiefs-push-plan-to-reduce-costs). Few people seemed to notice. This was a signal the industry may be looking to move away from the bespoke kit designed on a project-by-project basis that currently dominates our industry. These industry leaders seem to believe they can reach a technical consensus with their suppliers so everyone in the industry uses the same kind of kit in some areas thereby reducing costs for new wells.
Oil Companies have been experimenting with this type of standardization on their own. For example, Anadarko used its “design one, build two” philosophy for its Lucius and Heidelberg spars in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. Replicating the design reduced engineering man-hours and the cycle time to first production. LLOG also used a similar platform design for its sequential deepwater GoM projects - Who Dat and Delta House - to reduce costs and accelerate cycle time. While the Anadarko and LLOG approaches are different, they share design efficiency as a key project enabler. In fact, Almost half (44 percent) of the upstream companies responding to a recent survey said they would increase standardization in 2016 (http://www.automationworld.com/lower-prices-push-oil-and-gas-industry-further-standardization-big-data).