MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986847163 · doi:10.2118/0714-0119-jpt

Fracture Stimulation in the First Joint-Appraisal Shale-Gas Project in China

2014· article· en· W1986847163 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chris Carpenter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil shaleShale gasChinaGeologyHydraulic fracturingPetroleum engineeringNatural gasMining engineeringGeochemistryEngineeringGeographyWaste managementArchaeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper IPTC 16762, ’Successful Fracture Stimulation in the First Joint-Appraisal Shale-Gas Project in China,’ by Liang Jin, Changlong Zhu, Yong Ouyang, Ming Zhou, Qingguang Qu, Fei Li, Roger Yuan, Chris Wu, Zhiyi Zhang, Yan Wang, and Fa Dwan, Shell China Exploration & Production; Sanjay Vitthal, Shell Canada; and Shiqian Wang, PetroChina Southwest, prepared for the 2013 International Petroleum Technology Conference, Beijing, 26-28 March. The paper has not been peer reviewed. This paper discusses fracture stimulation in the first joint-venture shale-gas project with foreign companies in China. The block is in Sichuan province, and the target zone is Longmaxi hot shale, a Silurian formation. Its matrix permeability is extremely low (100 to 300 nanodarcies), but it is rich in natural fractures. Hydraulic fracturing has been shown to be critical to enhancing production. A collaborative approach was applied to the completion of the shale gas wells during appraisal. Introduction Most of China’s proved shale-gas resources are in the Sichuan, Tarim, and Ordos basins. China’s technically recoverable shale-gas resources are estimated at 1,275 Tcf. The operator jointly appraised a shale-gas block in Sichuan with PetroChina. The project team needed to make several determinations in the early phase of the project, such as whether there is sufficient gas in the shale formation and whether the gas can be extracted at a high-enough (commercial) rate. From the production technologists’ perspective, the technical objectives of the early wells included the following: Test the ability of the Longmaxi hot-shale interval to be fractured under high formation pressure. Establish baseline fracture designs for the Longmaxi hotshale interval, at greater than 3500-m true vertical depth (TVD), and systematically evaluate the design parameters. Establish an effective multidisciplinary workflow. Gather fracture-stimulation-performance data and subsurface-pressure information. Determine the productivity of the gas from the appraisal wells to prove the presence of a shale-gas play. The joint-appraisal phase began in November 2010. While planning the drilling of deep wells to evaluate the Longmaxi formation, data were obtained from several shallow wells at a location close to the surface. Extensive laboratory tests were conducted to evaluate the geochemical properties of the rock. In addition, some rock-mechanics properties were measured. The drilling of the first well (Well A) began in December 2010, and hydraulic fracturing began once the well reached designed depth. To date, five wells have been drilled; two are vertical, and three are horizontal.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207