Reservoir Simulation and Near-Well Bore Modelling to Aid Scale Management in a Low Temperature Development with Multilateral Wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents results of a reservoir and near wellbore modelling study to assist with the evaluation of inorganic scale risk management for a cold sandstone reservoir in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea. Reservoir temperature is in the range 32-48°C and poses a challenge to manage the scale risk. The field is heavily supported by aquifer water, and the development includes five production wells and seven seawater injection wells. The small number of high-cost, highly productive subsea multilateral wells with long horizontal sections, some with sliding sleeves to enhanced flow management, coupled with a high barium sulphate scaling tendency (up to 350ppm barium concentration in the formation water) requires effective scale management. This paper addresses questions of timing and nature of seawater breakthrough, when scale inhibitor squeeze treatments will be required, what is the impact of any reservoir reactions between the formation water and injected seawater on the scale risk at the production wells, what squeeze placement profiles look like under a range of squeeze treatment scenarios (various injection rates and sleeve position options). The treatment of multilateral wells by bullhead scale squeeze treatments is not a subject extensively covered in the literature, so the focus of this paper is to understand the impact on squeeze treatment life of bullhead deployment as a function of pump rate with both laterals open and the impact on treatment lifetime and treatment cost of selective placement into each lateral by treating one lateral at a time via activation of the sliding sleeve mechanism. The paper draws on a wide range of technical inputs to make scale management decisions including: thermodynamic modelling techniques, reservoir simulation of fluid mixing and reaction, laboratory-generated coreflood data to assess chemical selection for scale inhibitor squeeze, and squeeze treatment design drawing on all the information outlined above. Sharing the scale management technical challenges associated with such low temperatures and treating multilateral wells provides an example of the factors that should be taken into account during project design in similar fields under development in Northern Norway, offshore West Africa and offshore Brazil.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".