Liwan Field Development: The First Deepwater Gas Field in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract LW3-1 gas field is located approximately 310 km southeast of Hong Kong in water depths ranging from 1300 to 1500m. It was first discovered in August 2006. The development of this field aims to achieve optimum recovery factor by concurrent depletion strategy and meet the peak gas nomination of downstream demand. This paper is to present the philosophy and methods used in the overall development plan and the practices during the field production period. LW3-1 has developed 3 main sands with 9 subsea directional wells including two appraisal wells. Each well has been perforated in single sand to avoid interference among the sands through the wellbore. Balanced depletion strategy has been used to optimize ultimate recovery factor, which was estimated by reservoir simulation, analogue and empirical methods for this field. Before all the wells were put on line, the clean-up operation was carried out to determine the well deliverability after completion. LW3-1 first gas was on March 31, 2014, almost 8 years after its discovery. The reservoir and production teams have worked closely to generate and implement the initial start-up procedures to meet flow assurance and safety requirements. In order to monitor reservoir and production performance, two down-hole gauges and wet gas flow-meters were installed in each well. A real time production surveillance system and database have been also set up to help efficient reservoir management. The actual reservoir and production data so far has met the expectations in the overall development plan. Good communications within Sand 1 and between Sand 2 and Sand 3 have been observed. LW3-1 is the first deepwater gas field in China and this paper provides valuable information and experiences of the reservoir management and production monitoring of this field.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".