MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4247421245 · doi:10.2523/59118-ms

Assurance Increased for Drill Cuttings Re-Injection in the Panuke Field Canada: Case Study of Improved Design

2000· article· en· W4247421245 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Q. Guo, L. J. Dutel, G. B. Wheatley, J.D. McLennan, A.D. Black

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings of IADC/SPE Drilling Conference · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueDrilling and Well Engineering
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDrill cuttingsDrillField (mathematics)CuttingEngineeringDrillingGeologyMechanical engineeringMathematicsBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Assurance Increased for Drill Cuttings Re-Injection in the Panuke Field Canada: Case Study of Improved Design Q. Guo; Q. Guo TerraTek Inc. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar L.J. Dutel; L.J. Dutel DFH Engineering Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar G.B. Wheatley; G.B. Wheatley PanCanadian Resources Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar J.D. McLennan; J.D. McLennan TerraTek Inc. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar A.D. Black A.D. Black TerraTek Inc. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000. Paper Number: SPE-59118-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/59118-MS Published: February 23 2000 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Guo, Q., Dutel, L.J., Wheatley, G.B., McLennan, J.D., and A.D. Black. "Assurance Increased for Drill Cuttings Re-Injection in the Panuke Field Canada: Case Study of Improved Design." Paper presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/59118-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractDisposal of oil-contaminated cuttings has become increasingly important from both economic and environmental perspectives. Re-injection through hydraulic fracturing can provide a zero discharge solution and eliminate future cleanup liabilities. The development of best practices and practical solutions for predicting fracture growth during slurry injection has accelerated the economic disposal of oily cuttings from drilling operations.One such case is for Panuke wells, in Nova Scotia, Canada. For sections deeper than 1290 m MD, these wells are drilled with oil based mud. In the past, drilling waste was injected into an existing well, Well PI-1. A total cuttings slurry volume of 96,000 bbls had been injected through casing into well PI-1 before an additional well was planned in early 1999. Well PP3C was identified as a candidate injection well through the 11¾" (9 5/8" casing annulus. In order to assure the containment of fractures arising from injection, investigations were conducted on the design of the injection process using a fully three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing simulator. This paper assesses the affects of formation layering, varying permeability and elastic modulus, injection rate, and other operational procedures on the injection fracture geometry and containment.Significant to the injection recommendations were lessons learned from a recent joint industry project on 'drilling waste disposal' (DEA #81). The ability to verify multiple fractures in DEA #81 from post laboratory test examination suggests that the analyses and design are adequate to assure safe containment of injected drill cuttings. The case study showed that interaction among the various factors can result in very complex fracture geometry and a true three-dimensional fracturing simulator must be used to assess fracture containment. The results provide insight into best practices for the containment of fractures, designs for successful re-injection, selection of candidate injection zones, and quality assurance.IntroductionRe-injection of oil-contaminated drill cuttings is attracting considerable attention as a cost-effective means of complying with environmental legislation concerning discharges of drilling waste. Cuttings slurry re-injection through casing annulus was established in Alaska (Abou-Sayed et al.), 1 the Gulf of Mexico (Malachosky et al.,2 and Louviere and Reddoch3), the Gyda/Ula field in Norway (Willson, Rylance and Last)4 and in many other parts of the world.5 Oily-cuttings slurry re-injection techniques using hydraulic fracturing have been successful and have led to the adoption of the technique as a routine disposal method. For a twenty well program in the Gyda/Ula Field, economic analysis showed that, re-injection of cuttings slurry would cost approximately $9.6 million versus $18 million for onshore processing and $39 million for using water-based mud (Minton and Last).6To ensure that cuttings re-injection through hydraulic fracturing is environmentally safe, containment of injected waste must be assured. Careful evaluations must be carried out to determine where to inject the drill cuttings slurry and how much slurry can be injected into each well. A fully three-dimensional fracturing simulator is necessary for characterizing different factors such as in-situ stress, Young's modulus, leakoff, location of injection or location of initial fracture, as well as the influence of injection rate on fracture dimensions and consequently the maximum allowable slurry volume. Keywords: feasibility study, injection well, wyandot chalk 0, fracture height, iadc spe 59118, injection, drilling fluids and materials, scenario, upstream oil & gas, well pp3c Subjects: Drilling Fluids and Materials, Hydraulic Fracturing, Drilling fluid selection and formulation (chemistry, properties) This content is only available via PDF. 2000. IADC/SPE Drilling Conference 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)0,001
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 enseignants0,140
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,991

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
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 Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,214
Écart entre enseignants0,197 · 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

Citations16
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueProceedings of IADC/SPE Drilling ConferenceMême sujetDrilling and Well EngineeringTravaux en français237 207