MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4242842720 · doi:10.2118/2003-208

Design and Performance of a Water Disposal Well Stimulation Treatment in a High Porosity and Permeability Sand

2003· article· en· W4242842720 sur OpenAlexaff
T.G. Harding, J. Varner, L.A. Flexhaug, D.B. Bennion

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Établissements canadiensNexen (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesConsolidated Contractors Company
Mots-clésPermeability (electromagnetism)PorosityGeologyEnvironmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringChemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Injectivity problems associated with produced water disposal have been on going in the Masila project in Yemen. Disposal wells experience an immediate low injectivity upon commencement of injection as compared to the productivity measured during pumping clean up of the wells. It has been hypothesized that this behaviour, referred to as the check-valve effect, is caused mainly by mobile formation fines in the near-well vicinity. Injectivity often declines further because of plugging by impurities in the disposal water. Laboratory and field work has been done to test several methods of improving water disposal well performance including the application of horizontal wells and proppant fracture stimulation of vertical wells. Another technique tried in the field was a stimulation treatment involving HCl/HF acid followed by a thin-film polymer. The intent of the treatment was to destroy potentially mobile formation fines in the near wellbore area and then to stabilize those that remained in an attempt to reduce the check-valve effect. The acid and polymer treatment was developed through laboratory core testing and was employed on a newly drilled water disposal well. The procedures and results of the laboratory work are described along with the design and implementation of the stimulation treatment. The injection performance of the well is examined relative to other disposal wells in the field. Initial results of the stimulation treatment were disappointing but the well has improved over time to become a moderately good injector. However, the results of the test have not provided enough encouragement to date to warrant further work in the field. Introduction The disposal of produced water in the Masila project in the Republic of Yemen has been the subject of a number of earlier papers1–3. Field water production has been rising steadily in recent years due to the strong aquifer support in the Upper Qishn reservoir section. These reservoirs are high porosity and permeability and exhibit superior production characteristics. Current oil and water production levels are 230,000 BOPD and 1,250,000 BWPD, respectively. All of the produced water is disposed of through reinjection into the producing formations. Injectivity problems continue due to the nature of the formations and the quality of the disposal water. Details of the injectivity problems and investigations as to their causes have been discussed previously1. The performance of four horizontal disposal wells and the results of four proppant fracture stimulated vertical disposal wells have been presented2. In addition, a study has been published of continuous high-pressure injection above formation parting pressure as an aid to injectivity3. Laboratory and field trials have indicated that injectivity problems are caused by a combination of native reservoir fines migration, formation plugging by injected solids and oil, and the formation of calcite scale downhole. Several authors have discussed such injectivity problems and their causes in some detail4–8. In addition to the use of horizontal wells and proppant fractured stimulated vertical wells, a field trial was conducted of an acid stimulation technique designed in the laboratory. This technique was intended to first destroy reservoir fines in the near wellbore area and then to stabilize those that remained.

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: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,052
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,995

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 Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,200
Écart entre enseignants0,190 · 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'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

Citations3
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian International Petroleum ConferenceMême sujetHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisTravaux en français237 207