MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1999377543 · doi:10.2118/2000-082

Miscibility Evaluation for Terra Nova Offshore Field

2000· article· en· W1999377543 sur OpenAlexaffabout
D. N. Rao, J.I. Lee

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Établissements canadiensPetro-Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCitationLibrary scienceOil fieldMiscibilityPetroleumOperations researchSubmarine pipelineEngineeringArchaeologyGeographyComputer sciencePetroleum engineeringGeologyOceanographyPhysics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract In early 2001, Terra Nova is expected to start production at an average rate of 115,000 barrels of oil per day. Terra Nova oil pool is the second largest oil pool discovered in the Grand Banks of the Canadian East Coast. As a part of the oil recovery process optimization effort, miscibility conditions were evaluated using different techniques, for Terra Nova oil with various gas streams available from the offshore production facilities. The techniques used consisted of the conventional slim-tube test, the rising bubble apparatus and the recently developed Vanishing Interfacial Tension (VIT) technique. In addition, published correlations were also used in estimating minimum miscibility pressures. This paper presents the results of these experimental studies and compares them with predictions from correlations as well as with visual evidence of miscibility. The VIT technique is based on the fundamental definition of miscibility as the point at which the interface between gas and oil vanishes or the interfacial tension diminishes to zero. A computerized drop shape analysis technique was used to determine gas-oil interfacial tensions. The miscibility pressures obtained from the new VIT technique were 3–5% higher than those from visual observations and agreed well with the slim-tube results as well as with the correlations, at enrichment levels greater than 30 mole% C2+ in the injected gas stream. The rising bubble apparatus yielded significantly higher MMPs. This study demonstrates that the VIT technique is rapid, reproducible and quantitative in addition to providing visual evidence of gas-oil miscibility. Introduction The recent world-wide survey of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) projects conducted by the Oil and Gas Journal1 indicates that even with the uncertainty caused by the oil price collapse prior to mid-1999, operators still see EOR processes as opportunities for increasing recovery factors from known oil accumulations. This survey lists 18 field-wide or pilot gas injection projects planned to start between 2000 and 2001 which includes 7 CO2 miscible projects, 7 hydrocarbon miscible projects, 2 hydrocarbon immiscible WAG projects, and 2 nitrogen projects in the world. The size of these projects range from 10 acres for the Sprayberry Trend in Midland County in Texas to 52,000 acres for the PanCanadian's CO2 flood in the Weyburn Unit in Saskatchewan. The survey concludes that EOR processes have weathered the low oil price environment of the last two years and continue to contribute significant oil production. Terra Nova, discovered in 1984, is the second largest oil pool in the Grand Banks of the Canadian east coast. It is located 350 kilometers south-southeast of St. Johns, Newfoundland in 95 meters of water depth. It is anticipated to start production in early 2001 at about 115,000 barrels per day. The production strategies considered for Terra Nova included waterflood, solution gas injection for gas storage and enriched gas injection for miscible flood. In order to evaluate the potential for carrying out a miscible flood in Terra Nova, miscibility conditions were determined for Terra Nova live oil and several field gas streams of differing compositions using the slim-tube displacement test, rising bubble apparatus and the recently developed Vanishing Interfacial Tension (VIT) technique.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,155
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,988

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0130,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,047
Tête enseignante GPT0,307
Écart entre enseignants0,260 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2000
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian International Petroleum ConferenceMême sujetReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsTravaux en français237 207