MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036131224 · doi:10.2118/117489-pa

SAGD Gas Lift Completions and Optimization: A Field Case Study at Surmount

2009· article· en· W2036131224 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. C. Handfield, T. Nations, Shauna Noonan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
FundersConocoPhillips
KeywordsGas liftArtificial liftPetroleum engineeringLift (data mining)EngineeringCompletion (oil and gas wells)NozzleSluggingNatural gas fieldOil fieldNatural gasEnvironmental scienceWaste managementMechanical engineeringFlow (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gas lift completions for steam-assisted gravity-drainage (SAGD)(1) producers are unique. Conventional gas lift valves and mandrels with a packer completion cannot be used because of the extreme temperatures of the downhole environment. Most lift gas enters the production stream downhole through open-ended tubing or nozzles, which if not properly sized can result in operational issues such as fluid/gas slugging and pressure instabilities that negatively impact the overall lift efficiency. In 2006, ConocoPhillips conducted a study to design a gas lift system for the Surmont SAGD development that would allow better control of lift gas into the production string. In late 2007, the wells completed with gas lift were placed on production. This paper covers the data-collection effort and analysis completed to determine the efficiency of the two types of gas lift nozzles used in the completions, the methodology for optimization of SAGD gas-lift systems, and recommendations for future improvement. Background Surmont, an in-situ oil-sands project, is located approximately 60 km southeast of Fort McMurray in the Athabasca oil sands (Figure 1). This multiphase SAGD project is a 50:50 joint venture between ConocoPhillips Canada Ltd. (CPC) and Total E&P Canada Ltd., with CPC as the operator. The Surmont pilot began injection of steam in 1997. The pilot comprises three SAGD well pairs that use a variety of artificial-lift methods. These wells have been tested to determine the preferred method of artificial lift for the first commercial phase. Steam injection, for Phase 1A of the commercial development, was initiated in mid-2007. Conversion to full SAGD production followed in late 2007. Phase 1A comprises 20 well pairs in which all the producers have been completed to produce through gas lift for the initial life of the well. Phase 1 (A, B, and C) has a capacity of 3,975 m3/d (25,000 B/D) and is expected to reach peak production in 2012. A second phase is slated for commercial startup before the middle of the next decade. Upon completion and full ramp-up, it is estimated to bring peak production from both phases to 15,899 m3/d (100,000 B/D). Additional phases at Surmont are also under study.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207