My take is that RF over the life of the field probably isn’t...

My take is that RF over the life of the field probably isn’t that important. And as such I agree, can’t see the point of quoting this 13% figure?
With a 100,000 bbl per day FSPO, the size of the field and the RF in 500 sands, 30-40% is is going to be a very long time, that is years down the track before production is going to fall below this level.
By that time production is likely to be augmented by tie back in nearby fields. Fans, SNE North possibly maintaining the 100,000 bbl per day figure.
Probably too focused on size of SNE bbls in place and RF as though it were all “linear”.
Of course it isn’t, and so sum what academic.
As said it will be a way down the track before we have to worry about this stuff and lots of other things more important are going to come into play, eg tie backs etc
What slightly surprises me is the FSPO. Limited to 100,000 quoted albeit that could probably operate at greater than nameplate?
Initial field production, I suspect could sustain higher production rates?
I wonder if this has more to do with the Govt take that is on a sliding scale based on production rate with a step at 100,000 bbls per day?
Is this the real reason they keep they keep quoting this maximum figure?