MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059132779 · doi:10.2118/98096-pa

Low Sulfate Seawater Injection for Barium Sulfate Scale Control: A Life-of-Field Solution to a Complex Challenge

2008· article· en· W2059132779 on OpenAlexaff
M. M. Jordan, I. R. Collins, Eric Mackay

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Production & Operations · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
FundersUniversity of EdinburghBP Exploration Operating Company LimitedHeriot-Watt University
KeywordsBrineSeawaterPetroleum engineeringSubseaSulfateWater injection (oil production)SupersaturationInjection wellEnvironmental scienceScale (ratio)Produced waterEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringGeologyChemistryMarine engineeringMaterials scienceOceanographyGeographyMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The injection of seawater into oil-bearing reservoirs to maintain reservoir pressure and improve secondary recovery is a well-established, mature operation. Moreover, the degree of risk posed by deposition of mineral scales to the injection and production wells during such operations has been much studied. The current deepwater subsea developments offshore West Africa and Brazil have brought into focus the need to manage scale in an effective way. To this end, the challenge of scale control during the lifecycle of water injection, production, and produced-water reinjection (PWRI) has been reviewed for a number of fields by the authors. This paper outlines the risk assessment process that should be undertaken to select the most economical and effective scale control methodology (which for sulfate-based scale could be seawater injection with scale inhibitor squeeze treatments to maintain production, or sulfate reduction of the injection water with or without the need to scale inhibitor squeeze). In the case of sulfate reduction, parameters to be investigated include the degree of desulfation required to minimize the scale risk of downhole scale formation, the impact the degree of fluid mixing will have on the resulting brine (from injection to production), and the impact the desulfated brine will have on scale control during PWRI. The paper draws on a wide range of technical inputs to make scale management decisions including: computer modeling techniques (e.g., deposition models that incorporate the kinetics of sulfate scale formation at low supersaturation ratios), reservoir simulation of fluid mixing and reaction; the resulting produced brine chemistry, laboratory-generated coreflood data to assess chemical selection for scale inhibitor squeeze and produced water application; and field results that will demonstrate the impact of the type of injection water source on the long-term manageability of such deepwater projects. Finally, the paper outlines in detail the particular issues associated with the full economic assessment of low-sulfate water injection vs. full sulfate seawater injection.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.270
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Production & OperationsSame topicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207