MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070670815 · doi:10.4043/13024-ms

Reservoir Development Plan for the Terra Nova Field

2001· article· en· W2070670815 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Skaug, Kathleen Kerwin, J. Katay

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubmarine pipelineGeologyPetroleum engineeringSubseaDrillingFault blockDevelopment planNatural gas fieldFault (geology)Injection wellPetroleumInjectorReservoir engineeringWater injection (oil production)Natural gasEngineeringOceanographyCivil engineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Terra Nova Oilfield located offshore Newfoundland, Canada, is currently under development according to a subsea layout with 4 "drill" centres and a floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) vessel. First Oil is planned for mid 2001. The base case reservoir development requires a total of 24 development wells plus flexibility to develop additional upside potential. Reservoir flexibility management requires waterflood and gas injection capability. The options of changing to water-alternating-gas (WAG) later in field life as well as converting certain producers to injectors are also a feature of the reservoir management plan. The development plan requires that 6 wells be pre-drilled prior to the arrival of the FPSO vessel. Results from these wells have confirmed the vertically layered reservoir and the need for horizontal as well as vertical and highly deviated wells. The presence of faults that potentially may ompartmentalize the reservoir has resulted in a development plan where the early wells are laid out as producer - injector pairs within individual fault blocks. Each fault block has been designated for either gas injection or water flooding. However, as new information about the reservoir, its geology and degree of compartmentalization becomes available through the drilling of the development wells and early production experience, the location and type of later wells will ensure that the all parts of the field are being produced in an optimized way. Introduction The Terra Nova Oilfield is situated offshore on the Grand Banks, 350 km east-southeast of St. John's, Newfoundland, Eastern Canada (Fig. 1). Water depth in the area is about 95 m. The field is estimated to contain over 150 million cubic meters (one billion barrels) of oil in place, of which around 58 million cubic meters (370 million barrels) are expected to be recovered. Based on a daily production rate of up to 23,850 cubic meters (150,000 barrels) per day, the field would produce for about 12 to 15 years, beginning in mid 2001. Terra Nova was discovered in 1984 with the drilling of the K-08 discovery well. A total of nine wells were drilled in and around the field between 1984 and 1988. Terra Nova is the second major oil field discovered on the Grand Banks, the first field being Hibernia which was put on production in 1997. In August 1996 a Development Application for Terra Nova was submitted to the Canadian-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NOPB). The application outlined a subsea development with up to six "drill" centres and a Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel. A total of 32 development wells was included for the delineated area of the field, covering both producer and injector wells. It was anticipated that 10 wells would be drilled and completed before production of First Oil. The selected facility had flexibility to develop additional upside potential in the field provided by non-delineated areas, and another 12 wells were foreseen for these areas.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOffshore Technology ConferenceSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207