Energy infrastructure is the lifeblood of our modern world and economic competitiveness in nations worldwide. But daunting challenges stand in the way of providing systems capable of delivering needed energy infrastructure services.The nation’s energy infrastructure systems must adapt to meet dynamic evolving needs placed on them, and they must do so in an environment characterized by serious limitations on available resources, especially financial capital, structural safety, and sustainability goals.
The urgent needs of the aging energy infrastructure have long been pointed out by many professional societies and agency such as the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). There is a need for research and development activities to address such national problems. In fact, the safety and resilienceof energy infrastructure systems is considered as one of the fourteen global grand challenges for engineering by US National Academy of Engineering(NAE).
With over two decades of experience in lifecycle petroleum asset structural healthmonitoring, assessment, and management, Engr. Felix Appah is recognized as a thought leader in addressing the current and future needs of energy infrastructure research, technology and innovation.In this exclusive interview, he shares deep insights into the importance of retrofit actions, the role of technologies, and key lessons from working on high impact projects in Nigeria Exploration and Production Industry.
Interview with Engr. Felix Appah
What does retrofit actions and decisions mean in the context of aging petroleum assets?
Retrofit actions refer to targeted upgrades or reinforcements made to existing petroleum infrastructure — whether it’s offshore platforms, flowstations, or subsea pipelines — to restore their performance, structural integrity, and compliance with modern standards. Retrofit decisions, on the other hand, involve determining what to fix, how to fix it, and when it’s worth doing, based on technical, economic, and safety considerations.
Why are these retrofit decisions becoming more critical today?
Many of our oilfields, especially in Nigeria, were designed decades ago with a 20- or 30-year production horizon. However, due to increased demand, economic constraints, and untapped reserves, operators want to extend field life. Without retrofit actions, aging facilities pose safety hazards, production inefficiencies, and environmental risks.
What are the key factors that influence whether to invest in a retrofit?
First is asset integrity — if a structure is severely corroded or compromised, it must be prioritized. Next is remaining reserves — we won’t retrofit a field that’s nearing exhaustion. Then there’s regulatory compliance, cost-benefit projections, and the potential for improved recovery through technologies like Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR).
Could you share how Chevron and others have approached this in practice?
Certainly. In the Meren and Okan fields, for instance, Chevron implemented modular retrofits to support modern separation units and corrosion-resistant risers. They also used digital monitoring to track structural health in real time. This allowed for proactive maintenance, reduced downtime, and maximized asset uptime. It’s a solid example of integrated planning at work.
How do optimization models help with retrofit decision-making?
Optimization models allow us to simulate different retrofit scenarios, forecast production gains, and assess risk. For example, we can run cost-benefit analyses across multiple platforms and prioritize retrofits based on structural need, expected recovery, and budget constraints. These tools also support “what-if” analysis, helping us decide the best time to intervene.
What are the biggest risks involved in retrofitting aging petroleum infrastructure?
Risks range from structural failures during retrofit work, to unexpected cost overruns, to regulatory delays. There’s also safety exposure, especially when retrofits are done on live facilities. And let’s not forget market risk — oil price drops can suddenly make a retrofit economically unviable.
How are these risks managed in practice?
By thorough pre-retrofit assessments, engaging multi-disciplinary engineering teams, and planning phased retrofits. We also use real-time monitoring systems during execution, maintain strong contingency buffers, and work closely with regulatory bodies to ensure compliance. Safety, of course, is non-negotiable — we never compromise on that.
As an engineer working in the Nigerian oilfields, what investment drivers do you consider when retrofitting?
For me, it’s six things: (1) Remaining reserves, (2) Structural condition, (3) Strategic asset location, (4) Regulatory mandates, (5) OPEX reduction potential, and (6) Opportunities for digitization. If these align, a retrofit usually makes sense.
Are there examples of indigenous operators successfully adopting retrofitting strategies?
Yes — quite a few. Operators like Seplat and First E&P are retrofitting aging flowstations and integrating smart sensors for production optimization. They’ve shown that with good engineering and strong financial planning, retrofitting is not just for IOCs.
Finally, what advice would you give to operators hesitant about retrofitting aging assets?
I would say: don’t wait until failure forces your hand. A proactive retrofit plan can save lives, protect the environment, and unlock production you didn’t think was possible. Use the data. Use the models. And partner with experienced professionals who understand both local realities and global standards.
- Engr. Felix Appah’s insights remind us that with the right decisions, even the oldest petroleum assets can find new life. In an era where sustainability, safety, and cost-efficiency define competitiveness, optimizing retrofit decisions may just be the smartest move an operator can make.
ALSO READ:
