MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4247578150 · doi:10.2523/59778-ms

Reservoir Souring in the Caroline Field

2000· article· en· W4247578150 sur OpenAlexaffabout
C. Seto, D. Beliveau

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Établissements canadiensShell (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCitationDownloadLibrary scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reservoir Souring in the Caroline Field C.J. Seto; C.J. Seto Shell Canada Ltd. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar D.A. Beliveau D.A. Beliveau Shell Canada Ltd. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE/CERI Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2000. Paper Number: SPE-59778-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/59778-MS Published: April 03 2000 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Seto, C.J., and D.A. Beliveau. "Reservoir Souring in the Caroline Field." Paper presented at the SPE/CERI Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2000. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/59778-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 AbstractThis paper presents a novel mechanism for reservoir souring which is based on the evolution of acid gas from sour aqueous phases present in the reservoir. Souring is a widespread phenomenon in seawater floods. The accepted mechanism in these cases is biogenic activity of sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB).Field data from the Caroline reservoir indicate that it is souring. What is intriguing about this field is that it is being developed via conventional blowdown depletion, which suggests that SRB is not the cause. The mechanism presented is based on the physical principles of Henry's Law, which govern the solubility of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in water.Through material balance analysis and reservoir simulation, the Caroline field is presented as a case study where this mechanism is plausible. Reservoir simulation which account for this phenomenon was subsequently used to generate more realistic gas composition, thus optimizing the operations of the $1 billion Caroline facility.IntroductionReservoir souring is a term which generally applies to any process which increases the H2S concentration in a reservoir. In this paper, reservoir souring refers to the increase of H2S concentration in the produced fluid.H2S is reactive and highly toxic; increasing amounts of it pose serious health, safety and environmental concerns. Detrimental souring effects include increased corrosion rates of iron and steel, precipitation of ferrous sulfide and contamination of produced fluids. Due to these concerns, reservoir souring can result in significant costs associated with replacement of downhole and surface equipment and increased refining costs due to higher sulfur content of produced hydrocarbons, potentially resulting in early abandonment of the reservoir.From the start of its seven-year production history, the Caroline field has experienced increases in H2S concentration (1–4 mole %). The souring experienced in Caroline differs from that experienced in other fields in that this is a gas condensate reservoir being developed via conventional blowdown. Moreover, the produced fluids are already quite sour (33–39 mole % H2S at discovery).The proposed mechanism for reservoir souring is based on the fact that H2S is more soluble in water than hydrocarbons are (at 36.5 MPa and 106°C: solubility of H2S = 32.8 g/L, solubility of CH4 = 1.2 g/L). As the reservoir pressure is depleted through production, acid gas is liberated from the aqueous phases, be they regional aquifers or connate water, in order to re-establish equilibrium between gaseous and aqueous phases of the reservoir.The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that acid gas liberation from aqueous phases within the reservoir is a potential mechanism for reservoir souring. Shell Canada's Caroline field is provided as a case study where this mechanism could occur.Caroline Reservoir.The Caroline field is located approximately 150 km north of Calgary, in the province of Alberta. Discovered in 1986, and on full scale production since 1993, Caroline is the largest discovery of its kind in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in the past 30 years.1 It is a sour, retrograde condensate reservoir containing 56 BCM of gas initially in place (GIIP). Average reservoir properties are presented in Table 1.The Caroline reservoir is a highly dolomitized, reefal carbonate complex producing from the Swan Hills member of the Devonian Beaverhill Lake formation, located at a depth of approximately 3500 m. The reservoir has a northwest strike and southwest dip of approximately 25 m/km. Gas is stratigraphically trapped updip by the shales and argillaceous limestones of the Waterways Formation (forming the top seal) and the limestone, siltstones and shales of the Calumet and Elk Point Formations (comprising the bottom seal).Caroline Reservoir.The Caroline field is located approximately 150 km north of Calgary, in the province of Alberta. Discovered in 1986, and on full scale production since 1993, Caroline is the largest discovery of its kind in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in the past 30 years.1 It is a sour, retrograde condensate reservoir containing 56 BCM of gas initially in place (GIIP). Average reservoir properties are presented in Table 1.The Caroline reservoir is a highly dolomitized, reefal carbonate complex producing from the Swan Hills member of the Devonian Beaverhill Lake formation, located at a depth of approximately 3500 m. The reservoir has a northwest strike and southwest dip of approximately 25 m/km. Gas is stratigraphically trapped updip by the shales and argillaceous limestones of the Waterways Formation (forming the top seal) and the limestone, siltstones and shales of the Calumet and Elk Point Formations (comprising the bottom seal). Keywords: concentration, aquifer, mechanism, production chemistry, reservoir souring, upstream oil & gas, corrosion inhibition, reservoir simulation, hydrocarbon, oilfield chemistry Subjects: Production Chemistry, Metallurgy and Biology, Reservoir Characterization, Reservoir Simulation, Corrosion inhibition and management (including H2S and CO2) This content is only available via PDF. 2000. 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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,038
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,075

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,001
Communication savante0,0030,003
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0220,002

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 Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,212
Écart entre enseignants0,206 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

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

Citations15
Publié2000
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisTravaux en français237 207