MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4241059401 · doi:10.2523/102441-ms

Technologies for Arctic Offshore Exploration & Development

2006· article· en· W4241059401 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dmitri Matskevitch

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings of SPE Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArcticCitationExhibitionPermafrostSubmarine pipelineThe arcticComputer sciencePetroleumEnvironmental scienceOperations researchOceanographyLibrary scienceEngineeringGeographyArchaeologyGeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Technologies for Arctic Offshore Exploration & Development Dmitri Matskevitch Dmitri Matskevitch ExxonMobil Upstream Research Co. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition, Moscow, Russia, October 2006. Paper Number: SPE-102441-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/102441-MS Published: October 03 2006 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Matskevitch, Dmitri. "Technologies for Arctic Offshore Exploration & Development." Paper presented at the SPE Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition, Moscow, Russia, October 2006. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/102441-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference Search Advanced Search AbstractExploration and development of hydrocarbon reserves in the Arctic seas are challenged by a harsh environment including presence of ice and icebergs, permafrost, low temperatures, and extended periods of darkness. Remoteness and ecological considerations make activities in the Arctic even more difficult. Advanced technologies, non-traditional technical solutions and flawless execution are required to make any major project in the Arctic a success.Understanding the difficulties associated with implementing an offshore project in the Arctic comes with experience. In ExxonMobil's case, this results from 40 years of Arctic field operations and associated research. This paper discusses the Arctic technologies developed to support ExxonMobil exploration and development activities in the Arctic seas.ExxonMobil's Arctic offshore activity started in 1966 with the installation of the ice-resistant Granite Point offshore platform, which is still producing oil in Cook Inlet, Alaska. Since then ExxonMobil has constructed and drilled from artificial islands in shallow arctic waters, drilled in iceberg prone regions off Greenland, Canada and Norway, designed and installed the first iceberg-resistant gravity-based platform on the Grand Banks, installed an ice-resistant production platform and the first in-ice SPM offshore loading facility offshore Sakhalin Island, and continued to develop methodology to provide rational design criteria for ice-resistant production platforms. Development of design criteria and the selection of the most reliable and cost-effective technical solutions for arctic offshore projects required data from numerous field expeditions, model tests programs, field measurements, and observations from existing offshore structures. These studies were carried out under the supervision of ExxonMobil research staff.Arctic marine transportation systems are also an important element for many offshore and near-shore projects in remote areas where the construction of export pipelines is prohibitively expensive. The "Manhattan" tanker trials in 1969–70 in the US and Canadian Arctic and the 2002 "Primorye" trials in the Tatar Strait have helped ExxonMobil develop safe and reliable technologies for hydrocarbon transportation in ice-infested waters.IntroductionThe oil and gas industry has relatively little experience with exploring and developing hydrocarbon resources in cold, ice-covered offshore areas. This is mainly because conventional offshore technologies developed by the industry over the years for the ice-free seas have a limited application in the Arctic seas. One can use conventional techniques to drill exploration and production wells or acquire seismic in Arctic seas during the summer-fall ice-free season. However, in many areas of interest such season is fairly short (two to three months or less). If the lease owners rely on conventional technologies only, the pace of Arctic offshore exploration and development will be extremely slow adversely affecting project economics. The ability to conduct year-around or nearly year-around operations in the Arctic is thus essential to overall project success. To do this effectively, new technologies had to be developed and tested. The present paper discusses some of the ExxonMobil Arctic technologies originally developed and used in the Beaufort Sea, technologies also applicable in similar environments elsewhere is the world, including Russia.Arctic offshore exploration in North AmericaOver the last 37 years, more than 200 exploration and delineation offshore wells have been drilled in the US and Canadian Arctic north of the Bering Strait. Five of these wells were drilled in the Chukchi Sea, about 90 in the Canadian Beaufort Sea and Mackenzie Delta, about 70 in the US Beaufort Sea near the Alaska coast (including 31 wells in Federal waters), and about 40 in the straits and channels between the Canadian High Arctic Islands. The first Arctic offshore wells in North America were drilled in 1969 from natural islands, and the peak of exploration activities occurred in the 1970's and 1980's, with only a few wells drilled after 1993. Good summaries of North America Arctic exploration activities up to the early 1990's are available in [1] and [2]. Keywords: strategic planning and management, subsea system, FPSO, Upstream Oil & Gas, platform, Norman Well, project management, tanker, operation, Beaufort Sea Subjects: Offshore Facilities and Subsea Systems, Strategic Planning and Management, Floating production systems, Exploration and appraisal strategies, Project management This content is only available via PDF. 2006. 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 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 candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,642
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,580

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)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,214
Écart entre enseignants0,196 · 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.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
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

Citations2
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueProceedings of SPE Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and ExhibitionMême sujetOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesTravaux en français237 207