MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246628668 · doi:10.2523/107633-ms

Managing Formation Damage Risk From Scale-Inhibitor Squeeze Treatments inDeepwater Subsea Fields in the Campos Basin

2007· article· en· W4246628668 on OpenAlexaff
M. M. Jordan, Dario M. Frigo, Philip Bogaert, Bill Bryson, Celso Toschi, Macros Afonso, Marcos Berredo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
FundersShell Brasil
KeywordsCitationSubseaComputer scienceLibrary scienceEngineeringMarine engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing Formation Damage Risks from Scale-Inhibitor Squeeze Treatments in Deepwater, Subsea Fields in the Campos Basin Philip Bogaert; Philip Bogaert Shell Brasil E&P Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Marcos C. Berredo; Marcos C. Berredo Shell Brasil E&P Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Celso Toschi; Celso Toschi Shell Brasil E&P Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Bill Bryson; Bill Bryson Shell Brasil E&P Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Myles M. Jordan; Myles M. Jordan Nalco Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Dario M. Frigo; Dario M. Frigo Shell Intl. E&P Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Macros Afonso Macros Afonso Nalco Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the European Formation Damage Conference, Scheveningen, The Netherlands, May 2007. Paper Number: SPE-107633-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/107633-MS Published: May 30 2007 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Bogaert, Philip, Berredo, Marcos C., Toschi, Celso, Bryson, Bill, Jordan, Myles M., Frigo, Dario M., and Macros Afonso. "Managing Formation Damage Risks from Scale-Inhibitor Squeeze Treatments in Deepwater, Subsea Fields in the Campos Basin." Paper presented at the European Formation Damage Conference, Scheveningen, The Netherlands, May 2007. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/107633-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE European Formation Damage Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search Abstract This paper describes field experience and lessons learned from bullhead deployed scale-control operations in a deepwater subsea development in the Campos Basin, Brazil; specifically, deploying such treatments from the FPSO host, along the production flowlines, into four low-watercut, horizontal subsea wells, completed with sand control.The relatively small number of high-cost, highly productive wells, coupled with a very high barium-sulfate scaling tendency upon breakthrough of injection water, meant not only was effective downhole scale management critical to achieve high hydrocarbon recovery, but even wells at low water cuts were deemed to be at sufficient risk to require squeeze application.Initial bullheaded scale treatments comprised mutual solvent preflush, a water-based mainflush, and diesel overflush;so-called "hybrid" treatments.As water production rates rose, so did the treatment volumes required.To improve the logistics of these treatments and to mitigate issues arising from poor injectivity of diesel in these wells, core studies were conducted to investigate the option of exchanging the overflush fluid from marine diesel to injection-quality seawater.This change also introduced the possibility of forming a gas-hydrates plug during shut-in, but this was managed using a thermodynamic hydrate inhibitor and by replacing the flowline contents to flashed crude during the shut-in period.The operational aspects and the response of the wells to the modified treatments will both be compared with those previously deployed, in particular, in terms of the injectivity of the wells during treatment and well clean-up rates and productivity afterwards.The core studies also highlighted a formation-damage mechanism caused by incompatibility between mutual solvent and the produced oil, which required modification of the treatment. Keywords: paraffin remediation, Hydrate Remediation, hydrate inhibition, scale remediation, Production Chemistry, enhanced recovery, oilfield chemistry, wax remediation, wax inhibition, asphaltene remediation Subjects: Production Chemistry, Metallurgy and Biology, Improved and Enhanced Recovery, Inhibition and remediation of hydrates, scale, paraffin / wax and asphaltene Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207