Assurance Increased for Drill Cuttings Re-Injection in the Panuke Field Canada: Case Study of Improved Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assurance Increased for Drill Cuttings Re-Injection in the Panuke Field Canada: Case Study of Improved Design Q. Guo; Q. Guo TerraTek Inc. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar L.J. Dutel; L.J. Dutel DFH Engineering Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar G.B. Wheatley; G.B. Wheatley PanCanadian Resources Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar J.D. McLennan; J.D. McLennan TerraTek Inc. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar A.D. Black A.D. Black TerraTek Inc. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000. Paper Number: SPE-59118-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/59118-MS Published: February 23 2000 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Guo, Q., Dutel, L.J., Wheatley, G.B., McLennan, J.D., and A.D. Black. "Assurance Increased for Drill Cuttings Re-Injection in the Panuke Field Canada: Case Study of Improved Design." Paper presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/59118-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractDisposal of oil-contaminated cuttings has become increasingly important from both economic and environmental perspectives. Re-injection through hydraulic fracturing can provide a zero discharge solution and eliminate future cleanup liabilities. The development of best practices and practical solutions for predicting fracture growth during slurry injection has accelerated the economic disposal of oily cuttings from drilling operations.One such case is for Panuke wells, in Nova Scotia, Canada. For sections deeper than 1290 m MD, these wells are drilled with oil based mud. In the past, drilling waste was injected into an existing well, Well PI-1. A total cuttings slurry volume of 96,000 bbls had been injected through casing into well PI-1 before an additional well was planned in early 1999. Well PP3C was identified as a candidate injection well through the 11¾" (9 5/8" casing annulus. In order to assure the containment of fractures arising from injection, investigations were conducted on the design of the injection process using a fully three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing simulator. This paper assesses the affects of formation layering, varying permeability and elastic modulus, injection rate, and other operational procedures on the injection fracture geometry and containment.Significant to the injection recommendations were lessons learned from a recent joint industry project on 'drilling waste disposal' (DEA #81). The ability to verify multiple fractures in DEA #81 from post laboratory test examination suggests that the analyses and design are adequate to assure safe containment of injected drill cuttings. The case study showed that interaction among the various factors can result in very complex fracture geometry and a true three-dimensional fracturing simulator must be used to assess fracture containment. The results provide insight into best practices for the containment of fractures, designs for successful re-injection, selection of candidate injection zones, and quality assurance.IntroductionRe-injection of oil-contaminated drill cuttings is attracting considerable attention as a cost-effective means of complying with environmental legislation concerning discharges of drilling waste. Cuttings slurry re-injection through casing annulus was established in Alaska (Abou-Sayed et al.), 1 the Gulf of Mexico (Malachosky et al.,2 and Louviere and Reddoch3), the Gyda/Ula field in Norway (Willson, Rylance and Last)4 and in many other parts of the world.5 Oily-cuttings slurry re-injection techniques using hydraulic fracturing have been successful and have led to the adoption of the technique as a routine disposal method. For a twenty well program in the Gyda/Ula Field, economic analysis showed that, re-injection of cuttings slurry would cost approximately $9.6 million versus $18 million for onshore processing and $39 million for using water-based mud (Minton and Last).6To ensure that cuttings re-injection through hydraulic fracturing is environmentally safe, containment of injected waste must be assured. Careful evaluations must be carried out to determine where to inject the drill cuttings slurry and how much slurry can be injected into each well. A fully three-dimensional fracturing simulator is necessary for characterizing different factors such as in-situ stress, Young's modulus, leakoff, location of injection or location of initial fracture, as well as the influence of injection rate on fracture dimensions and consequently the maximum allowable slurry volume. Keywords: feasibility study, injection well, wyandot chalk 0, fracture height, iadc spe 59118, injection, drilling fluids and materials, scenario, upstream oil & gas, well pp3c Subjects: Drilling Fluids and Materials, Hydraulic Fracturing, Drilling fluid selection and formulation (chemistry, properties) This content is only available via PDF. 2000. IADC/SPE Drilling Conference 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".