Geosteering Workflow Considerations of How and Why? Alan D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Petroleum Extension-The University of Texas at Austin ROTARY DRILLING SERIES
Petroleum Extension-The University of Texas at Austin ROTARY DRILLING SERIES Unit I: The Rig and Its Maintenance Lesson 1: The Rotary Rig and Its Components Lesson 2: The Bit Lesson 3: Drill String and Drill Collars Lesson 4: Rotary, Kelly, Swivel, Tongs, and Top Drive Lesson 5: The Blocks and Drilling Line Lesson 6: The Drawworks and the Compound Lesson 7: Drilling Fluids, Mud Pumps, and Conditioning Equipment Lesson 8: Diesel Engines and Electric Power Lesson 9: The Auxiliaries Lesson 10: Safety on the Rig Unit II: Normal Drilling Operations Lesson 1: Making Hole Lesson 2: Drilling Fluids Lesson 3: Drilling a Straight Hole Lesson 4: Casing and Cementing Lesson 5: Testing and Completing Unit III: Nonroutine Operations Lesson 1: Controlled Directional Drilling Lesson 2: Open-Hole Fishing Lesson 3: Blowout Prevention Unit IV: Man Management and Rig Management Unit V: Offshore Technology Lesson 1: Wind, Waves, and Weather Lesson 2: Spread Mooring Systems Lesson 3: Buoyancy, Stability, and Trim Lesson 4: Jacking Systems and Rig Moving Procedures Lesson 5: Diving and Equipment Lesson 6: Vessel Inspection and Maintenance Lesson 7: Helicopter Safety Lesson 8: Orientation for Offshore Crane Operations Lesson 9: Life Offshore Lesson 10: Marine Riser Systems and Subsea Blowout Preventers Petroleum Extension-The University of Texas at Austin Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Vieira, João Luiz, 1958– Controlled directional drilling / by João Luiz Vieira. — 4th ed. p. cm. — (Rotary drilling series ; unit 3, lesson 1) Rev. ed. of: Controlled directional drilling. 1984 Includes index. ISBN-10 0-88698-254-5 (alk. paper) ISBN-13 978-0-88698-254-6 (alk. -
The Context of Public Acceptance of Hydraulic Fracturing: Is Louisiana
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2012 The context of public acceptance of hydraulic fracturing: is Louisiana unique? Crawford White Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation White, Crawford, "The onc text of public acceptance of hydraulic fracturing: is Louisiana unique?" (2012). LSU Master's Theses. 3956. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/3956 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING: IS LOUISIANA UNIQUE? A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Environmental Sciences by Crawford White B.S. Georgia Southern University, 2010 August 2012 Dedication This thesis is dedicated to the memory of three of the most important people in my life, all of whom passed on during my time here. Arthur Earl White 4.05.1919 – 5.28.2011 Berniece Baker White 4.19.1920 – 4.23.2011 and Richard Edward McClary 4.29.1982 – 9.13.2010 ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my committee first of all: Dr. Margaret Reams, my advisor, for her unending and enthusiastic support for this project; Professor Mike Wascom, for his wit and legal expertise in hunting down various laws and regulations; and Maud Walsh for the perspective and clarity she brought this project. -
Advancing Understanding of Resource Recovery and Environmental Impacts Via Field Laboratories
Advancing Understanding of Resource Recovery and Environmental Impacts via Field Laboratories Jared Ciferno – Oil and Gas Technology Manager, NETL Upstream Workshop Houston, TX February 14, 2018 The National Laboratory System Idaho National Lab National Energy Technology Laboratory Pacific Northwest Ames Lab Argonne National Lab National Lab Fermilab Brookhaven National Lab Berkeley Lab Princeton Plasma Physics Lab SLAC National Accelerator Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Lawrence Livermore National Lab Oak Ridge National Lab Sandia National Lab Savannah River National Lab Office of Science National Nuclear Security Administration Environmental Management Fossil Energy Nuclear Energy National Renewable Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Los Alamos Energy Lab National Lab 2 Why Field Laboratories? • Demonstrate and test new technologies in the field in a scientifically objective manner • Gather and publish comprehensive, integrated well site data sets that can be shared by researchers across technology categories (drilling and completion, production, environmental) and stakeholder groups (producers, service companies, academia, regulators) • Catalyze industry/academic research collaboration and facilitate data sharing for mutual benefit 3 Past DOE Field Laboratories Piceance Basin • Multi-well Experiment (MWX) and M-Site project sites in the Piceance Basin where tight gas sand research was done by DOE and GRI in the 1980s • Data and analysis provided an extraordinary view of reservoir complexities and “… played a significant role -
Drilling and Completion Services Cost Index Q2 2015
Drilling and Completion Services Cost Index Q2 2015 Prepared by Spears and Associates, Inc. 8908 S. Yale, Suite 440 Tulsa, OK 74137 www.spearsresearch.com July 2015 Drilling and Completion Services Cost Index: Q2 2015 Introduction The Drilling and Completion Services (DCS) Cost Index tracks and forecasts price changes for products and services used in drilling and completing new wells in the US. The DCS Cost Index is a tool for oil and gas companies, oilfield equipment and service firms, and financial institutions interested in benchmarking and forecasting well costs. Methodology Spears and Associates undertakes a quarterly survey of independent well engineering and wellsite supervision firms to collect “spot market” drilling and completion services price information for a specific set of commonly drilled wells in the US. The information in the “well profile” survey is collected in the form of detailed drilling and completion services cost estimates based on current unit prices and usage rates in each location at the end of the quarter. The well profiles are equally-weighted in calculating an average price change per quarter for the drilling and completion services cost components. A “total well cost” price change is calculated for each well profile covered by the survey which reflects the weighted average price change for each component of the well’s cost. An overall “total well cost” price change is calculated, with each well profile equally weighted, to determine the “composite well cost” index shown in this report. All cost items are indexed to 100 as of Q1 2008. “Spot” prices tracked by the DCS Cost Index are those in effect at the end of each quarter and as such may differ from prices averaged across the entire quarter. -
Best Research Support and Anti-Plagiarism Services and Training
CleanScript Group – best research support and anti-plagiarism services and training List of oil field acronyms The oil and gas industry uses many jargons, acronyms and abbreviations. Obviously, this list is not anywhere near exhaustive or definitive, but this should be the most comprehensive list anywhere. Mostly coming from user contributions, it is contextual and is meant for indicative purposes only. It should not be relied upon for anything but general information. # 2D - Two dimensional (geophysics) 2P - Proved and Probable Reserves 3C - Three components seismic acquisition (x,y and z) 3D - Three dimensional (geophysics) 3DATW - 3 Dimension All The Way 3P - Proved, Probable and Possible Reserves 4D - Multiple Three dimensional's overlapping each other (geophysics) 7P - Prior Preparation and Precaution Prevents Piss Poor Performance, also Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance A A&D - Acquisition & Divestment AADE - American Association of Drilling Engineers [1] AAPG - American Association of Petroleum Geologists[2] AAODC - American Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors (obsolete; superseded by IADC) AAR - After Action Review (What went right/wrong, dif next time) AAV - Annulus Access Valve ABAN - Abandonment, (also as AB) ABCM - Activity Based Costing Model AbEx - Abandonment Expense ACHE - Air Cooled Heat Exchanger ACOU - Acoustic ACQ - Annual Contract Quantity (in reference to gas sales) ACQU - Acquisition Log ACV - Approved/Authorized Contract Value AD - Assistant Driller ADE - Asphaltene -
Approach Optimizes Well Geosteering
SEPTEMBER 2018 The “Better Business” Publication Serving the Exploration / Drilling / Production Industry Approach Optimizes Well Geosteering By Christopher Viens When a change in total gamma is not based 3-D geosteering solution rather and Mark Tomlinson associated with an up or down movement than conventional 2-D geosteering soft- through stratigraphy, it indicates faulting, ware. By integrating multiple well and HOUSTON–Geosteering in horizontal a depositional anomaly, heterogeneity, or seismic surface inputs, this approach wells involves correlating logging data bedding that is not laterally continuous gives the geosteering geologist the infor- to a type log from a nearby offset well to or stratified. Because the fundamental mation to confidently resolve abrupt bed characterize the zone of interest. Corre- basis of geosteering is correlating to dip changes, identify faults, identify areas lating against a type log requires the bed- marker beds that have lateral continuity, of lateral continuity/discontinuity, identify ding thickness and gamma character of in situations where lateral continuity is stratified/unstratified zones and understand the target well to be close to that of the absent, only a low level of interpretation formation-related directional drilling tra- type log, which can be offset by miles in confidence can be achieved using tradi- jectory phenomena, etc. some cases. If not, the resulting geosteering tional correlation methods. interpretation will have unreasonable bed To maximize the benefits of azimuthal Laterally Continuous Bedding dips that do not accurately reflect the gamma imaging, a protocol has been de- In areas with laterally continuous target lithology being drilled, leaving the veloped to identify and handle challenging strata, the gamma character in the type geosteering geologist running multiple geosteering situations using a model- well typically will be present at the simultaneous interpretations in the hope that one will start to make sense as new data come in during drilling. -
Trends in U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Upstream Costs
Trends in U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Upstream Costs March 2016 Independent Statistics & Analysis U.S. Department of Energy www.eia.gov Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA’s data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in this report therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or other federal agencies. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Trends in U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Upstream Costs i March 2016 Contents Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Onshore costs .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Offshore costs .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Approach .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Appendix ‐ IHS Oil and Gas Upstream Cost Study (Commission by EIA) ................................................. 7 I. Introduction……………..………………….……………………….…………………..……………………….. IHS‐3 II. Summary of Results and Conclusions – Onshore Basins/Plays…..………………..…….… -
Value Creation with Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Geosteering Operations
International Journal of Petroleum Technology, 2016, 3, 15-31 15 Value Creation with Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Geosteering Operations K. Kullawan1,*, R. B. Bratvold1 and J. E. Bickel2 1University of Stavanger, Department of Petroleum Engineering, 4036 Stavanger Norway 2Graduate Program in Operations Research, 1 University Station, C2200, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, 78712-0292, USA Abstract: Due to escalated drilling costs, the petroleum industry has been attempting to access the largest possible hydrocarbon resources with the lowest achievable costs. Multiple well objectives are set prior to the start of drilling. Then, a geosteering approach is implemented to help operators achieve these objectives. A comprehensive literature survey has been performed on geosteering case histories, including many cases with multiple objectives. We found that the listed objectives are often conflicting and expressed in different measures. Furthermore, none of the cases from the reviewed literature has discussed a systematic approach for dealing with multiple objectives in geosteering contexts. Without implementing a well-structured approach, decision makers are likely to make judgments about the relative importance of each objective based on previous experiences or on approximate methods. Research shows that such decision-making approaches are unlikely to identify optimal courses of action. In this paper, we propose a systematic method for making multi-criteria decisions in geosteering context. The method is constructed such that it is applicable for real-time operations. Results show that different decision criteria can have significant impact on well success as measured by its trajectory, future production, cost, and operational efficiency. Keywords: Geosteering, real-time well placement, geosteering decision, multi-objective decision, decision making. -
Downhole Sensors in Drilling Operations
PROCEEDINGS, 44th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford University, Stanford, California, February 11-13, 2019 SGP-TR-214 Downhole Sensors in Drilling Operations Nathan Pastorek, Katherine R. Young, and Alfred Eustes 15013 Denver West Blvd., Golden, CO 80401 [email protected] Keywords: MWD, LWD, Rate of Penetration, Drilling Data, Geothermal, Telemetry ABSTRACT Before downhole and surface equipment became mainstream, drillers had little way of knowing where they were or the conditions of the well. Eventually, breakthroughs in technology such as Measurement While Drilling (MWD) devices and the Electronic Drilling Recorder system allowed for more accurate and increased data collection. More modern initiatives that approach drilling as manufacturing— such as Lean Drilling, Drilling the Limit, and revitalized Drilling the Limit programs—have allowed petroleum drilling operations to become more efficient in the design and creation of a well, increasing rates of penetration by more than 50%. Unfortunately, temperature and cost limitations of these tools have prevented geothermal operations from using this state-of-the-art equipment in most wells. Today, petroleum drilling operations can collect surface measurements on key drilling data such as rotary torque, hook load (for surface weight on bit), rotary speed, block height (for rate of penetration), mud pressure, pit volume, and pump strokes (for flowrates). They also can collect downhole measurements of azimuth, inclination, temperature, pressure, revolutions per minute, downhole torque on bit, downhole weight on bit, downhole vibration, and bending moment using an MWD device (although not necessarily in real time). These data can be used to calculate and minimize mechanical specific energy, which is the energy input required to remove a unit volume of rock. -
World Oil Outlook 2040
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries 2019 World Oil Outlook 2040 2019 World Oil Outlook 2040 Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries Digital access to the WOO: an interactive user experience 24/7 OPEC’s World Oil Outlook (WOO) is part of the Organization’s commitment to market stability. The publication is a means to highlight and further the understanding of the many possible future challenges and opportunities for the oil industry. It is also a channel to encourage dialogue, cooperation and transparency between OPEC and other stakeholders within the industry. As part of OPEC’s ongoing efforts to improve user experience of the WOO and provide data transparency, two digital interfaces are available: the OPEC WOO App and the interactive version of the WOO. The OPEC WOO App provides increased access to the publication’s vital analysis and energy-related data. It is ideal for energy professionals, oil industry stakeholders, policymakers, market analysts, academics and the media. The App’s search engine enables users to easily find information, and its bookmarking function allows them to store and review their favourite articles. Its versatility also allows users to compare graphs and tables interactively, thereby maximizing information extraction and empowering users to undertake their own analysis. The interactive version of the WOO also provides the possibility to download specific data and information, thereby enhancing user experience. Download Access the OPEC WOO App interactive version Available for Android and iOS OPEC is a permanent, intergovernmental organization, established in Baghdad, Iraq, on 10–14 September 1960. The Organization comprises 14 Members: Algeria, Angola, Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela. -
Geosteering Improves Bakken Results
JANUARY 2012 The “Better Business” Publication Serving the Exploration / Drilling / Production Industry Geosteering Improves Bakken Results By Kevin O’Connell, NPE is drilling and developing two blocks, in Divide, Williams and McKenzie coun- David Skari, aggregating approximately 50,000 net acres ties. Wells are being drilled to target zones Aaron J. Wheeler in the heart of the Bakken Shale in Divide, located between 9,000 and 11,000 feet and Allan Rennie Williams, Dunn and McKenzie counties, true vertical depth. The horizontal pro- N.D. (Figure 1). Led by a highly experienced, ducing sections of the wells average 8,000 DENVER–Developing tight oil and technologically focused management team, feet of lateral, which is cased, perforated gas-bearing formations often requires a the company prides itself on customizing its and fractured in multiple stages. The two dense pattern of wells with long lateral drilling and completion methods to the primary intervals targeted within the oil sections. To produce such fields econom- unique geological and geophysical charac- reservoir are a clean dolomite member of ically, producing sections of wells must teristics of its core project blocks. the Three Forks formation and a 15-foot be positioned accurately within the targeted zone below a tight limestone within the Drilling History intervals, while drilling costs are kept to Bakken Middle Member. a minimum. Since early in 2010, Ensign Rigs Nos. Initially, the horizontal production wells A cost-effective solution has been de- 89 and 118 have been working for NPE required drilling a vertical pilot hole that veloped that includes predrill modeling was sidetracked, deviated from vertical of logging-while-drilling measurements FIGURE 1 to build the curve, then drilled laterally along the trajectory of a planned well to North Plains Energy LLC Area of within the producing zone. -
Drilling Technology and Costs
CHAPTER 6 Drilling Technology and Costs 6.1 Scope and Approach _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _63 6.2 Review of Geothermal Drilling Technology _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _64 6.2.1 Early geothermal/EGS drilling development _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _64 6.2.2 Current EGS drilling technology _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _65 6.3 Historical WellCost Data _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _68 6.3.1 General trends in oil and gas wellcompletion costs _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _69 6.3.2 MIT Depth Dependent (MITDD) drillingcost index _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _612 6.3.3 Updated geothermal well costs _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _617 6.4 Predicting Geothermal Well Costs with the Wellcost Lite Model _ _ _ _ _ _618 6.4.1 History of the Wellcost Lite model _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _618 6.4.2 Wellcost Lite model description _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _619 6.5 DrillingCost Model Validation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _619 6.5.1 Basecase geothermal wells _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _619 6.5.2 Comparison with geothermal wells _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _622 6.5.3 Comparison with oil and gas wells _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _622 61 6.5.4 Model input parameter sensitivities and drillingcost breakdown _ _ _ _ _ _ _623 6.6 Emerging Drilling Technologies _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _