MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018356098 · doi:10.2118/100313-pa

Production-Data Analysis of Single-Phase (Gas) Coalbed-Methane Wells

2007· article· en· W2018356098 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaConocoPhillips (Canada)
FundersConocoPhillips
KeywordsCoalbed methanePetroleum engineeringCoalGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)Coal miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Coalbed-methane (CBM) reservoirs commonly exhibit two-phase-flow (gas plus water) characteristics; however, commercial CBM production is possible from single-phase (gas) coal reservoirs, as demonstrated by the recent development of the Horseshoe Canyon coals of western Canada. Commercial single-phase CBM production also occurs in some areas of the low-productivity Fruitland Coal, south-southwest of the high-productivity Fruitland Coal Fairway in the San Juan basin, and in other CBM-producing basins of the continental United States. Production data of single-phase coal reservoirs may be analyzed with techniques commonly applied to conventional reservoirs. Complicating application, however, is the unique nature of CBM reservoirs; coal gas-storage and -transport mechanisms differ substantially from conventional reservoirs. Single-phase CBM reservoirs may also display complex reservoir behavior such as multilayer characteristics, dual-porosity effects, and permeability anisotropy. The current work illustrates how single-well production-data-analysis (PDA) techniques, such as type curve, flowing material balance (FMB), and pressure-transient (PT) analysis, may be altered to analyze single-phase CBM wells. Examples of how reservoir inputs to the PDA techniques and subsequent calculations are modified to account for CBM-reservoir behavior are given. This paper demonstrates, by simulated and field examples, that reasonable reservoir and stimulation estimates can be obtained from PDA of CBM reservoirs only if appropriate reservoir inputs (i.e., desorption compressibility, fracture porosity) are used in the analysis. As the field examples demonstrate, type-curve, FMB, and PT analysis methods for PDA are not used in isolation for reservoir-property estimation, but rather as a starting point for single-well and multiwell reservoir simulation, which is then used to history match and forecast CBM-well production (e.g., for reserves assignment). CBM reservoirs have the potential for permeability anisotropy because of their naturally fractured nature, which may complicate PDA. To study the effects of permeability anisotropy upon production, a 2D, single-phase, numerical CBM-reservoir simulator was constructed to simulate single-well production assuming various permeability-anisotropy ratios. Only large permeability ratios (>16:1) appear to have a significant effect upon single-well production characteristics. Multilayer reservoir characteristics may also be observed with CBM reservoirs because of vertical heterogeneity, or in cases where the coals are commingled with conventional (sandstone) reservoirs. In these cases, the type-curve, FMB, and PT analysis techniques are difficult to apply with confidence. Methods and tools for analyzing multilayer CBM (plus sand) reservoirs are presented. Using simulated and field examples, it is demonstrated that unique reservoir properties may be assigned to individual layers from commingled (multilayer) production in the simple two-layer case.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.275 · 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