Application of Inflow Well Tracers for Permanent Reservoir Monitoring in North Amethyst Subsea Tieback ICD wells in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract North Amethyst is the first subsea tieback field development for Husky Energy’s White Rose project, located off the East Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. The geographical location presents some of the harshest weather conditions in the world due to the elevated sea states and ice conditions. The North Amethyst field achieved first oil in 2010 and at the end of December 2011, had three production wells and three water injectors. Further wells are planned as part of the development. To counter imbalance in the horizontal flow profile that can lead to early water or gas breakthrough, the field development strategy employed Inflow Control Device (ICD) technology. The ICD technology application was the first offshore on the East Coast of Canada. A method of proving effective horizontal clean-out and flow distribution for the ICD technology was necessary. However, due to the subsea configuration complexity, semi-submersible rig costs and delays due to unfavorable weather conditions, the prospect of production logging the horizontal wells was deemed a high risk and expensive operation. To overcome these hurdles, unique inflow tracer technology was used in tandem with the ICDs to provide validation of clean-out and horizontal flow distribution. The North Amethyst producers were equipped with unique oil and water soluble tracers placed along the horizontal, embedded in the ICD screens. The tracer technology’s objectives were to monitor the zonal contributions during clean-out and during the production phase. Water tracers were to monitor and identify the location of zonal water breakthrough. Topside fluid samples were analyzed, and tracer concentrations provided the basis for extracting well inflow information. The utilization of inflow tracer systems in collaboration with other reservoir engineering tools has provided validation of horizontal contribution and feedback about individual ICD nozzle placement. This paper will document the design, execution, and analysis of the tracer results in two initial North Amethyst ICD producers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".