Matching Technical Solutions to the Lifecycle Phase is the Key to Developing a CBM Prospect
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Matching Technical Solutions to the Lifecycle Phase is the Key to Developing a CBM Prospect Matthew E. Blauch; Matthew E. Blauch Halliburton Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Dana Weida; Dana Weida Halliburton Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Mike Mullen; Mike Mullen Halliburton Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar B. W. McDaniel B. W. McDaniel Halliburton Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2002. Paper Number: SPE-75684-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/75684-MS Published: April 30 2002 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Blauch, Matthew E., Weida, Dana, Mullen, Mike, and B. W. McDaniel. "Matching Technical Solutions to the Lifecycle Phase is the Key to Developing a CBM Prospect." Paper presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2002. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/75684-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Unconventional Resources Conference / Gas Technology Symposium Search Advanced Search Abstract The early stages of a coalbed methane (CBM) project development often require more extensive use of currently available technologies than can be economically justified when approached from a conventional oil and gas drilling focus. As a result, key evaluation tools and technologies are either omitted or not considered before significant decisions are made regarding viability of a CBM play. Understanding that the various lifecycle phases will each affect different objectives and decision points is important. Following site acquisition and estimating basic drilling costs, at least five lifecycle phases can be identified: (1) Regional Resource Reconnaissance, (2) Local Asset Evaluation, (3) Early Development, (4) Mature Development; and (5) Declining Production.A systematic review of current and recently developed enabling technologies is presented in the context of their potential use and applicability. Environmental risk and other constraints that can impact development vary globally, as do economics and production forecasting. New and emerging chemical technologies, as well as hydraulic fracturing refinements, play key roles in various lifecycle phases and decision making to identify successful CBM development projects as early as possible. The paper presents strategies that can reduce development phase failure risk and help predict or rank production potential. Economic constraints usually become more restrictive as the lifecycle moves to Phase 4 and beyond, but key information needed to enter Phase 4 is often overlooked. Examples of this scenario are presented from a global perspective.Globally, new and existing technologies combined with dynamic gas and electricity markets are changing the nature of CBM development opportunities. More accurate and timely go/no-go information needs to be used in the decision making process. Converting development opportunities to develop-ment successes involves integrating planning and evaluation methods, using targeted development technologies in the proper phase, and managing risk. Keywords: drillstem testing, permeability, completion effectiveness, upstream oil & gas, coal seam gas, hydraulic fracturing, complex reservoir, lifecycle phase, technical solution, mullen Subjects: Drilling Operations, Hydraulic Fracturing, Well & Reservoir Surveillance and Monitoring, Reservoir Characterization, Reservoir Fluid Dynamics, Reservoir Simulation, Formation Evaluation & Management, Reserves Evaluation, Unconventional and Complex Reservoirs, Environment Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».