Abstract The abandoned Innes Field was within Block 30/24 on the western margin of the Central Trough in the UK sector of the North Sea. Hamilton Brothers Oil Company operated the licence, and Innes was the third commercially viable oil discovery in the block after Argyll and Duncan. It was discovered in 1983 with well 30/24-24. Three appraisal wells were drilled, one of which was successful. Oil occurs in the Early Permian Rotliegend Group sandstones sealed by Zechstein Group dolomites and Upper Jurassic shale. The discovery well and successful appraisal well were used for production. Export of light, gas-rich crude was via a 15 km pipeline to Argyll. Innes was produced using pressure decline. It was abandoned in 1992 having produced 5.8 MMbbl of oil and possibly 9.8 bcf of gas. Water cut was a few percent. Innes was re-examined between 2001 and 2003 by the Tuscan Energy/Acorn Oil and Gas partnership with a view to tying the field back to the newly redeveloped Argyll (Ardmore) Field but marginal economics and financial constraints for the two start-up companies prevented any further activity. Enquest currently owns the licence and the company has redeveloped Argyll/Ardmore, as Alma. There are no plans to redevelop Innes.

Abstract Hutton (discovered in 1973) and NW Hutton (discovered in 1975), together with Q-West (discovered in 1994) and Darwin (discovered in 1983, undeveloped), are part of a single petroleum system. The main fields were defined as two separate legal entities. Although Q–West covered multiple blocks, it was wholly developed via the Hutton platform. Together, Hutton and NW Hutton produced 328 MMbbl of oil and a small quantity of associated gas from Middle Jurassic Brent Group sandstones. The trap is a complex series of tilted fault blocks sealed by Mid–Upper Jurassic Heather and Kimmeridge Clay Formation mudstones. Oil was sourced from the Kimmeridge Clay Formation, which is mature for oil generation in the hanging walls to the field-bounding faults and deep on the footwall flanks. NW Hutton underperformed relative to Hutton. In part this was due to the poorer reservoir quality encountered at depth compared with the shallower Hutton Field but a significant component of the underperformance was due to the way in which the field was developed and then operated. Both fields contain areas of unproduced and unswept oil, with the NW Hutton portion having the largest remaining oil in place.