JPT Technology Minute Poll: Which Technology Would You Choose for Offshore Compression?

If you could only choose one of these technologies with which to optimize your next offshore compression, which would it be?


During many years of service as a member of the JPT Editorial Committee, and in previous duty as an Associate Editor/Technical Editor for both the Projects, Facilities & Construction and the Production & Operations journals, I have reviewed a substantial number of SPE technical papers each year, selecting them for publication. Currently, I review papers for inclusion as synopses in the Offshore Production and Flow Assurance feature. These synopses appear both in print and JPT Online, with the full paper available for download by SPE members for approximately 2 months.

The papers I review cover current and cutting-edge technologies and keep the readers informed on the latest developments in this area of interest. In an attempt to highlight key technologies for which I've had international experience, and to bring them to a wider audience including SPE’s younger members, I am continuing a recent initiative, the SPE Technology Minute, to write short, interactive blogs to disseminate important technical content and, in this case, to highlight new offshore compression technology. These blogs are intended to discuss SPE technical papers, and, when they can, will link back to synopses published in JPT.

In continuing this blog series, I’ll provide a summary of some interesting changes in offshore compression technology from the '80s until now. When my career started in the offshore Brent field, the state of the art involved designing and using onshore reciprocating compression to 4,500 psig for gas injection. While it may seem archaic compared with today's technology, trying to operate and maintain a 10,000-hp recip offshore reliably was a difficult task at that time. As efforts to optimize the compression were made, many key uncertainties needed resolution, not the least of these being the excessive equipment weight, the dynamic module structural response that kept bending the crankshaft, and the varying specific gravity of the gas. Fast-forward to today: Multiple technologies now exist to deliver reliable offshore compression and to make design choices. These technologies are outlined in the following papers:

  1. OMC 2017-806: Subsea compression recognized as an upcoming, important technology for future production of offshore gas reserves

  2. OTC 27890: Overview of a hybrid topsides and subsea boosting facility that reduces risk, weight, and cost

  3. OTC 28097: Minimizing total cost by developing technologies focused on (1) reducing equipment footprint/weight and (2) increasing performance, reliability, and availability

  4. OTC 28658: Technologies to increase oil-recovery rates using subsea boosting

  5. OTC 28593: Extended analysis on the performance of helicoaxial pumps for high-boost multiphase for heavy oil

If you could only choose one of these with which to optimize your next offshore compression, which would it be?
Vote below and compare your choice with others:


Galen Dino, SPE, is senior consultant and project manager with Dino Engineering. He has more than 37 years of experience in international and domestic project management, project engineering, process design, supervision, fabrication, and construction. Dino holds a BS degree in chemical engineering from Louisiana State University and is a registered professional engineer in Texas.  He founded the Production Facilities Study Group with the SPE Houston Section and has held associate-editor and technical-editor positions for SPE Project, Facilities, & Construction and SPE Production & Operations. Dino serves on the JPT Editorial Committee and can be reached at