Verbrec Insights

Rethinking Maintenance Strategies for Late-Life Assets

Share This:

Late-life asset management introduces a different set of challenges — where decisions must balance long-term optimisation with the realities of remaining asset value.

As onshore oil & gas facilities approach end-of-field life, something interesting happens. The economics change. But the maintenance strategy often doesn’t. And that’s where value quietly leaks.


The shift No One Talks About

In early life, the goal is clear:

  • Maximise availability
  • Extend asset life
  • Improve reliability
  • Protect long-term capital

However, as assets move into late life, the objective shifts to:

  • Extract remaining value safely
  • Avoid stranded capital
  • Manage decline deliberately
  • Prepare for decommissioning

The uncomfortable truth is that a 99.5% availability target near closure may destroy value rather than create it.


Reliability Has a Price Tag

In late-life operations, reliability investment must be justified against remaining asset value.

Every preventative task, overhaul, and strategic spare represents an investment. When production is declining and remaining reserves are finite, we must ask:

Does this intervention return value within the remaining operating window?

Late-life asset management is not about cutting corners. It’s about repricing reliability.


Where Value Can Be Unlocked

In our experience, five levers consistently emerge:

Lever 1: Reassessing asset criticality

Most criticality assessments were completed during design, early, or at mid-life enhancement. But bottlenecks shift. Equipment redundancies become unnecessary. Consequence profiles change. Running late-life criticality assessments often reveal:

    • Opportunities to pivot maintenance strategies. For some assets, run-to-failure may now be viable
    • PM intervals that can be extended
    • Systems, or sub-systems, that can be retired early

Lever 2: Structured Maintenance De-Intensification

This might include:

    • Extending non-SCE PM intervals
    • Converting any remaining time-based tasks to condition-based
    • Avoiding life-extension overhauls unless ROI stacks up

The key is structured risk modelling, not broad-brush cost cutting.

Lever 3: Spares & Inventory Run-Down

Late-life facilities often hold:

    • Insurance spares for systems scheduled for retirement
    • Strategic items sized for a production profile that no longer exists

Working capital release here can be significant.

Lever 4: Aligning Maintenance with Decommissioning

One of the biggest missed opportunities is failing to integrate maintenance strategy with closure planning.

Why maintain systems at full intensity if they are scheduled for phased decommissioning?

The aim must be to prevent overspending.

Lever 5: Predispose assets for safe and efficient disposal

During the ‘last touch’ at conclusion of operations plan in the reverse of a successful commissioning process, prepare to:

    • Ramp down and safely de-energise
    • Document pressure and electrical checks, clean and prove decontamination
    • Assemble ITR’s and compile system handover readiness
    • Make sure a clear handover certification process is in place

The aim is to allow for efficient disposal that leads to lower cost outcomes.


The Balance: Cost vs Reliability Risk

Cut too deep, and reliability collapses. Reliability collapses, and production drops faster than planned. Closure accelerates, but you’re not ready and value is lost.

The balance comes from reframing the question: Instead of “What availability target do we want?” Ask: “What level of availability maximises net cash extraction over remaining life?”

That requires production-value-at-risk thinking. It’s strategic rebalancing.

The objective shifts from:

  • Maximising asset life
  • Protecting long-term capital
  • Investing for growth

To:

  • Extracting remaining value safely
  • Avoiding stranded capital
  • Managing controlled decline
  • Preparing for decommissioning

That shift requires deliberate change, not incremental trimming.


What Should Not Change

Importantly, optimising for late-life value does not mean compromising on fundamentals.

Let’s be clear. Late-life optimisation must not compromise:

  • Safety instrumented systems
  • Pressure equipment integrity
  • Environmental compliance
  • Regulatory commitments

The optimisation frontier sits outside safety-critical boundaries. Safety integrity remains non-negotiable.


The Cultural Shift

Late-life asset management is not just a technical adjustment; it is a mindset shift.

Engineers are trained to improve reliability. Late-life asset management requires something harder:

  • Accepting controlled decline.
  • Success is no longer measured by pushing availability from 96% to 99%.

It’s measured by maximising safe economic extraction while preparing for closure.

Remember, maturing assets are not failing assets. They are assets in transition.

When that transition isn’t recognised, value doesn’t fail loudly — it quietly disappears.


A Different Way of Thinking About Maintenance

If maintenance strategy remains unchanged as assets approach end-of-life, operators may be optimising for a business case that no longer exists.

For organisations managing ageing assets, the challenge is not how to sustain peak performance, but how to extract maximum value safely while preparing for what comes next.


About the Author

This article is based on the experience of Tim Coltzau, Operations Manager at Verbrec, alongside Verbrec’s broader engineering team working across asset management and maintenance strategy.

Related News