Currently, the methods of marker (tracer) diagnostics, which allow obtaining qualitative and quantitative data on the operation of well intervals without performing downhole operations, are becoming more common in the world. The principal difference between these technologies and traditional well logging methods (GIS) is the ability to monitor the operation of multiple hydraulic fracturing or well intervals over a long period of time with a significant decrease in the resources involved, a reduction in costs and an increase in production safety.
Well studies using marker technologies can improve the efficiency of diagnostics of inflows in wells when developing oil and gas fields and solve a number of important tasks, such as: ∙ evaluation of the well flow profile after the multi-stage hydraulic fracturing; ∙ evaluation of the performance of each step in water and oil; ∙ optimization of technical solutions for well completion in the early stages of field development; ∙ analysis of potential long-term fluid recovery; ∙ obtaining detailed information for analyzing the mutual influence of neighboring wells; ∙ obtaining information on the dynamics of production of the oil reservoir area.
Also, in addition to an alternative GIS method, technologies for marking downhole equipment can be used for flow measurement data in the WEM layouts and in monitoring the integrity of the packers. The key topic of the report is the methodology for integrated assessment of the efficiency, reliability and accuracy of work for various marker technologies available on the market. Often, oil and gas companies decide on the use of marker technologies without any testing or testing, based only on the reputation of the supplier, the duration of its presence in the market or value. The reason for this may be the lack of standardized test methods, as well as experience in sharing best practices between subsoil users. At the same time, marker technologies are a relatively new field of activity in the field of well studies, therefore, it is necessary to approach the assessment of technologies on the basis of objective indicators.The report presents the results and methodology of testing various marker technologies that can be used as technical criteria when choosing a contractor for marker research.
Ovchinnikov Kirill Nikolayevich has extensive experience in the field of downhole operations, coiled tubing services, hydraulic fracturing and oilfield service equipment He is an expert in the field of safety and quality of field operations, standardization of business processes and implementation of quality management systems.
He has many years of industrial experience in leading international service and mining companies in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Egypt, Australia and Russia. MBA with a degree in Management in the Oil and Gas Industry (Curtin University, Australia) and a master’s degree at the RSUGU. Gubkin specialty "Oil and gas business." Member of the Program Committee of the Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference SPE (Society of Petroleum Engineers), member of the Eurasian Union of Subsoil Use Experts (ESAS).
In the current oil and gas environment, operators have focused on production optimization, effectively squeezing every last drop of oil out of their wells. Autonomous Inflow Control Device (AICD) technology has been deployed as part of the completion in old and new wells resulting in increased oil production by reducing water and gas production. For many years, inflow control devices (ICD), which restrict flow by creating additional pressure, have been used to mitigate this problem. They are however, passive in nature and after the onset of water or gas breakthrough, the choke effect cannot be adjusted without intervention.
The AICD is an active inflow control device with a self-adjustable design to self-regulate and provide greater choke when an unfavorable fluid such as gas and water ingress. This prevents the well from being flooded when unwanted fluids breakthrough, therefore providing the advantage of being able to even out the inflow into well. In addition, it will also choke the unfavorable breakthrough sections of the well and producing from remaining sections leading to greater recovery, lower water, and gas production.
This technology has helped improve recovery in horizontal well across the globe by reducing gas-oil ratio or water cut of the well, thus increasing ultimate oil recovery. The key factor to successful application is a systematic approach in prediction modeling and well design workflow to select a well candidate between Passive and Autonomous inflow control device.
Dr. Ismarullizam Mohd Ismail is the Subsurface Engineering Manager for Tendeka based in Aberdeen, United Kingdom. He received a MSc. and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Leeds, United Kingdom. He has been working in sand control and inflow control technology for over 15 years in multiple roles, mainly in offshore operation, project engineering and product development. His current work involves developing new inflow control technology, subsurface modeling and managing an inflow control product line. He has designed and modeled AICD/ICD nozzle completions for more than 100 wells across the globe and he also holds various patents for inflow control design. Prior to joining Tendeka, Dr Mohd Ismail worked for various major service companies and carried out university research.
Hydrocarbons in oil fields are affected by various secondary processes, such as biodegradation, migration of deep-seated gas, movement of formation water, and evaporation. The degree of hydrocarbon changes depends on many factors: reservoir temperature, tectonic activity, dissection of productive strata, activity of water-bearing horizons, etc. In this connection, oil initially migrated from one source rock varies differentially in different reservoirs and parts of deposits. Using high-resolution gas chromatography, it is possible to identify differences between oil samples from different formations and formation sections. Assessing the degree of secondary changes allows you to identify oils of various reservoirs, in other words, to determine the unique appearance of oils - “oil fingerprints” or otherwise the final members. Having a set of unique “oil fingerprints” - the end members representing the reservoirs being developed, it becomes possible to determine the contribution of individual reservoirs to the production of mixed products. This information can be very valuable both for solving current development management tasks and optimizing a long-term oil field development strategy. This paper presents the results of a pilot project on the introduction of geochemical analysis of oil using oil fingerprinting technology based on high-resolution gas chromatography into the development management process of the Astokhsky section of the Piltun-Astokhsky oil and gas condensate field. operating several layers with the subsequent practical implementation in production. In the course of work, the broader possibilities of the method were also identified, namely, monitoring of interfacial flows, clarification of the geological structure of the field, identification of leaks in production wells.
Dmitry Pavlov in 1999, he graduated from Kazan State University with a degree in Geology of Oil and Gas. In 1999 - 2004 he worked in a number of service companies in the oil and gas sector. He was engaged in geological and hydrodynamic modeling of oil fields in the Ural-Volga region and Western Siberia. In 2005 he worked as a development engineer in the service company TGT Oil & Gas Service. He was engaged in research of optimization of the waterflooding scheme of the Lehvayr oil field (Sultanate of Oman). In 2005-2007 Worked as Lead Development Engineer at TNK-BP Management. He was engaged in the optimization of waterflooding schemes for the Orenburgneft fields. From 2007 to the present, he has been working as a lead development engineer for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd. (Sakhalin Energy). He is responsible for managing the current development, as well as optimizing long-term development plans for the Piltun-Astokhsky oil and gas condensate and Lunsky gas and condensate fields located on the shelf of Sakhalin Island (RF). His area of interest is the development of oil rims, modern methods for monitoring and managing the development of oil and gas condensate fields, improving efficiency and methods for improving the development of offshore fields.
We invite you to SPE young professionals meeting on "Digital Core: State of the Art Tool for Multiphase Reactive Flow Simulation at Pore Scale".
What is the one idea you would like the members to take away from this lecture?
Various Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) methods have been used to increase oil production and reserves. However, implementing such projects is challenging owing to the higher complexity and larger uncertainty of EOR projects compared with conventional water flooding.
To implement EOR technologies, first, the portfolio of the company should be screened for applicability of the various EOR methods. Next, an appropriate field needs to be chosen for pilot testing of the selected technology. Laboratory experiments are required to determine ranges for the injected EOR fluid properties and fluid-rock-interaction. Pilot testing leads to reducing the subsurface uncertainties but also improves the operating capabilities of the company and economic understanding of EOR projects.
At the example of a polymer EOR project, it is shown that within the last years, significant improvements in predicting polymer EOR performance have been achieved. Injectivity can be assessed using coupled geomechanical-fluid flow models and polymer injection incremental oil recovery can be simulated and optimized taking uncertainty into account. Also, pilot interpretation was advanced by applying the latest tracer technology for reservoir characterisation and monitoring.
In addition to the subsurface assessment, a more holistic view on EOR pilot projects including surface challenges is required to ensure conclusive pilot test results to either implement or drop EOR full-field implementation. A long-term commitment is needed for EOR implementation as well as seamless cooperation between staff operating pilot tests and staff involved in pilot test interpretation.
Dr. Torsten Clemens is a Senior Reservoir Engineering Adviser with OMV Upstream. He used to work in Shell on EOR projects and fractured reservoirs and joined OMV in 2005. In OMV, he is covering EOR/IOR as well as fractured reservoirs and uncertainty management. Torsten published more than 70 technical papers, is a member of various conference committees (SPE, EAGE, WPC), technical editor of several journals and is chairing the IEA EOR Technology Cooperation Program.
This paper discusses the integrated interpretation of PLT data collected in horizontal production (injection) wells with low flow rates and non-uniform inflow (injection) profiles. A factor analysis is performed and normativity of these methods in horizontal wells is defined.
Unlike vertical wells, production logging tool (PLT) techniques (even if adapted to specific conditions) turn to be inefficient in horizontal wells because of stratified flow in case of multiphase (water-oil-gas) fluid and the influence of wellbore trajectory features; this inefficiency is especially obvious in medium- and low-rate wells. It is believed that obtaining accurate and reliable phase profiles in a considerable number of horizontal wells using PLT techniques is very problematic.
Besides, it is only in rare occasions that one of the most important tasks of the PLT survey, which is finding the source of water inflow/breakthrough, can be solved in a horizontal oil well with non-uniform flow profile, even as a mater of quality. Keeping this in mind, gas breakthroughs due to significant negative throttle factor are more reliably identified both by non-stationary temperature logging records and a number of other well logging methods (e.g. SNL, spectral noise logging).
Under these conditions, efficiency of one of the main logging methods – well flow (spinner) measurement – becomes very low. However, alternative geophysical methods (first of all, temperature and water holdup logging) offer a number of additional opportunities. To implement them, the logging technology should include monitoring of well startup and drive change periods. To this end, the logging technology should be designed to allow a series of multi-temporal measurements during these periods.
The role of well testing is to diagnose the flow patterns that are not typical for a classical horizontal well model and estimated reservoir permeability.
Thus, in case of non-uniform low-rate inflow most of the useful information can be obtained by such methods as temperature logging, well testing and partly wellbore fluid analysis methods, which allows to:
Thus, a comprehensive interpretation of results of the above mentioned methods allows us to make quite an accurate assessment of the inflow profile and working zones of the reservoir. On the basis of this information we can optimize regimes of the well and reduce the water inflow and gas breakthrough risks.
Melnikov Sergey Igorevich - Ph.D., Head of International Projects Support Department, Gazprom Neft Scientific and Technical Centre. He has been working in the STC since 2010, specializing in the tasks of integrated monitoring of field development. He supervised surveys on new projects of the Company, including in Eastern Siberia and offshore projects, as well as foreign assets. He is currently heading the department that provides geological support for the Company's foreign assets. In 2015, Sergey got PhD degree in Geophysics. He is the author of more than 30 papers.
Kremenetskiy Mihail Izrailevich. Higher Engineering Education (diploma with distinction) Russian State Oil and Gas University
Doctor of Engineering Science, Professor. Author of more than 170 papers, including monographs, patents for inventions, and two recently published books on the theory and practice of production logging and well-test. Works in the oil and gas industry since 1973, since 2000 research and analytical department specialist of the Sibneft company, since 2008 – expert LLC «GAZPROMNEFT SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CENTRE».
Oleg Ushmaev, Head of Geology, Gazpromneft Development.
Dmitry Bazhenov, Chief Geologist Gazpromneft Yamal.
Evgeny Zagrebelnyy, Chief Geologist Gazpromneft Badra.
Denis Sugaipov – Gazprom neft Major Projects Director.