DOCSLIB.ORG

WORKSHOP on GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR ENGINEERING* Paul

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

WORKSHOP ON GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR ENGINEERING* Paul Kruger and Henry J. Ramey, Jr. Stan ford Geo the rma 1 Program Stanford University Stanford, California Workshop Report December 1 5- 1 7, 1975 J; Conducted under Grant No. NSF-AER-72-03490 sponsored by the RANN program of the National Science Foundation. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Summary of the Workshop - P. Kruger .................. 1 Rapporteur Reports Reservoir Physics - P. A. Witherspoon ............... 4 Well Testing - H. J. Ramey, Jr. ................ 6 Field Development - G. Frye .................... 8 Well Stimulation - M. Nathenson .................. 9 Model ing - J. W. Mercer .................. 12 Overv iews A Programmatic View of Geothermal Reservoir Engineering - R. Coryell 16 The Birth of Geothermal Reservoir Engineering - H. J. Ramey, Jr. .. 20 Reservoir Phvsics Summary Description of Research Activities - D. R. Kassoy ...... 23 Heat and Fluid Flow Experiments to Measure Geothermal Reservoir Physical Parameters - W. E. Brigham ............... 26 An Attempt to Correlate Kh Distribution with Geological Structure of Larderello Geothermal Field - R. Celati, G. Neri, F. Perusini, and P. Squarci ......................... 37 Fluid Flow in Geothermal Reservoirs - J. C. Martin ......... 42 Fracture Flow in Geothermal Reservoirs - G. Bodvarsson ....... 45 Reservoir Factors Determining the Fraction of Stored Energy Recoverable from Hydrothermal Convection Systems - M. Nathenson . 50 Utilization of Gravimetric Data for Estimation of Hydrothermal Reservoir Characteristics in the East Mesa Field, Imperial Valley, California - T, Meidav, R. James, and S. Sanyal ........ 52 An Investigation of Screening Geothermal Production We1 1s from Effects of Reinjection - C. F. Tsang and P. A. Witherspoon ... 62 Land Surface Subsidence Associated with Geothermal Energy Production - S. K. Garg ..................... 65 Well Testing Pressure and Temperature Buildup in Geothermal Wells - M. S. Gulati . 69 Well Log Analysis and Well Testing in the Heber Geothermal Field - L. Mann ................... 74 I Geothermal Well Testing at Roosevelt KGRA, Beaver County, Utah - D. C.Harban . 77 Shell's Activity in The Geysers Area - E. L. Fehlberg . 84 Water Entry Below Steam Production: A Case History at The Geysers - G. Frye . , . 89 An Interference Test in Alfina Geothermal Field (Northern Latium, Italy) - A. Barelli and G. Manetti . 93 Horner Method Applied to Build-Up Tests on Travale 22 Well - A. Barelli, R. Celati, G. Manetti, and G. Neri . 101 Study of a Geothermal Field in the Asal Active Volcanic Rift Zone (French Territory of Afars and Issas, East Africa) - A. C. Gringarten and L. Stieltjes . 113 Raft River Geothermal Reservoir Engineering and Well Stimulation - J. F. Kunze, L. G. Miller, and R. C. Stoker . 117 Initial Results of Reservoir Production Tests, Raft River Geothermal Project, Idaho - T. N. Narasimhan and P. A. Witherspoon . 124 Field Development An Approach to Geothermal Development - R. A. Wooding . 126 Geopressured Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Research at the University of Texas - R. M. Knapp, M. H. Dorfman, 0. F. Isokrari 130 SDGEE Pioneering Geothermal Test Work in the Imperial Valley of Southern California - G. L. Lombard and J. M. Nugent . 135 Niland Reservoir Monitoring and Evaluation Operating Program - T. C. Hinrichs . 143 East Mesa Reservoir - T. L. Gould . 146 The PG&E Geysers Power Plant - A Utility Company's Viewpoint - L. J. Woitke . I , . 153 Geothermal Reservoir Pressure Requirements for Production - J. T. Kuwada . 156 On the Optimal Rate of Geothermal Energy Extraction - C. R. Scherer . 161 Economic Modeling for Geothermal Reservoirs and Power Plants - C. H. Bloomster . 167 We1 1 Stimulation Physical Models of Stimulated Geothermal Reservoirs - P. Kruger . I69 Hydraul ic-Fracture Geothermal Reservoir Engineering - H. D. Murphy . 174 Model Experiments in Hydraulic Fracture - J. Dundurs . 178 Analytical Study of Crack Growth and Shape by Hydraulic Fracturing of Rocks - T. Mura, L. M. Keer, and H. Ab6 . 180 Control of Silica Scaling - H. L. Barnes and J. D. Rimstidt . 185 Predicting Explosion-Generated Permeability around Geothermal Wells - C. R. McKee and M. E. Hanson . 192 ii Model ing Summary of our Research in Geothermal Reservoir Simulation - C. R. Faust and J. W. Mercer - ................. 198 The Princeton Geothermal Research Program - George Pinder ...... 199 Numerical Calculation of Multiphase Fluid and Heat Flow in Hydrothermal Reservoirs - J. W. Pritchett ............ 201 Methods of Solution of the Equations for Convection in Porous Media, with Geothermal Applications - R. A. Wooding ....... 2 06 A Hele-Shaw Model of Heat Convection in Porous Media under Geothermal Conditions - H. W. Shen ............... 213 Numerical and Analytical Studies on Heat and Mass Transfer in Volcanic Island Geothermal Reservoirs - Ping Cheng ....... 219 Research on Numerical Modeling of Liquid Geothermal Systems - blichael Sorey .......................... 225 Finite Element Solution of Geothermal Energy Extraction - Z. P. Ba?ant, S. Nemat-Nasser, and H. Ohtsubo .......... 232 Numerical Model ing of Hydrothermal Reactions in Geothermal Reservoirs - C. G. Sammis .................... 240 Progress Report on a Mathematical Model of a Parallelepiped Reservoir with No Penetrating Wellbore and Mixed Boundary Conditions - A. Barelli, G. Manetti, R. Celati, and G. Neri ......... 242 Fundamental Study of Changing of Phase in Porous Materials - Serge Bories .......................... 247 Thermal Depletion of Liquid-Dominated Geothermal Reservoirs with Fracture and Pore Permeability - P. W. Kasameyer and R. C. Schroeder ......................... 249 Geothermal Energy from a Borehole in Hot Dry Rock - A Preliminary Study - D. Sharma and T. Maini .. , .............. 2 58 The Use of General Sensitivity Theory to Analyze the Geothermal Reservoir Model's Sensitivity to the Permeability Functions - R. W. Atherton ......................... 2 67 iii 1 NTRODUCT ION Although geothermal energy was first converted to electricity more than 70 years ago, until recently little public demand for its widespread use existed. Geothermal energy has been considered an attractive alternate source of energy for more than a decade in many developed as well as un- developed countries and the international awareness of the growing deficit of fossil fuels has sparked accelerated interest in determining national resources and utilization technologies. As of 1976, the total world generating capacity for generating electricity from geothermal resources is about 1100 MW (equal to that of one modern nuclear power plant) and more than 3/4 of it is produced at only two sites, The Geysers in California and the Tuscany fields in Italy. Many problems have been identified which beset the rapid development of geothermal resources, covering the entire "fuel cycle" from exploration through conversion and residuals control. The major problem is the in- flexity of natural geothermal resources which occur in a wide variety of hydrogeologic, thermal, and chemical qualities. Utilization must be designed to fit the specific characteristics of individual resources. Since the thermal efficiencies for conversion to electric energy are very low even for the two known highest quality hydrothermal resources, in- dustrial development awaits greater economies in resource exploration and evaluation, energy extraction, and utilization technologies. To compound the problems, development is occurring in an era of increased public aware- ness about institutional and environmental concerns. As a result, a formidable array of legal, social, and regulatory problems also requires resolution. As the developnent of a geothermal industry proceeds, these many problems are being evaluated generally by the sector of the national economy that has had experience in solving similar problems for other resources. The exploration for geothermal resources has been undertaken largely by the energy resource companies that use subsurface geosciences and the drill rig as their mode of operation. Conversion to electricity, presently the major utilization of geothermal resources, has been under- taken by the private and public utility industry. And the institutional problems are within the domain of the several levels of public administration ranging from the Federal government to county and township agencies. It can be assumed that as the public demand for energy to be supplied by geothermal resources increases, accommodations between suppliers, regulators, and the public will be achieved. It can also be assumed that adequate technology will be developed to utilize "commercial" resources for both electrical and direct thermal applications. Thus, the major area for concern in the accelerated development of a geothermal industry is the definition of what constitutes a "commercial" resource. From a pragmatic point of view, a "commercial" resource is one from which a sufficient amount of geothermal resource can be extracted to sell to a willing buyer at a profitable price over some reasonable period of time. Exploration for geothermal resources, in spite of the aforementioned institutional difficulties, is underway. Recent estimates by the U. S. -1- Geological Survey indicate a large number of potential areas of geothermal resources in the U. S. alone. The assessment of "commercial" viability of these resources is the difficult task, due in part to the small number of existing operational fields, and also in part to the empirical history of geothermal power plant development,
Recommended publications
  • SPE 112246 Rapid Model Updating with Right-Time Data

    SPE 112246 Rapid Model Updating with Right-Time Data

    SPE 112246 Rapid Model Updating with Right-Time Data - Ensuring Models Remain Evergreen for Improved Reservoir Management Stephen J. Webb, David E. Revus, Angela M. Myhre, Roxar, Nigel H. Goodwin, K. Neil B. Dunlop, John R. Heritage, Energy Scitech Ltd. Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers evergreen and providing the most up-to-date basis for the This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE Intelligent Energy Conference making of important reservoir management decisions. and Exhibition held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 25–27 February 2008. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper Introduction have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to Since the early days of reservoir simulation, history correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the 1 Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, matching has been identified as one of the best methods distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an of validating a reservoir model’s predictive capabilities. abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must Often long periods of time have been spent adjusting the contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright. reservoir description so that the reservoir simulator’s calculated results match the observed data from the reservoir.
  • Best Research Support and Anti-Plagiarism Services and Training

    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
  • Drill Stem Test Database (UBDST) and Documentation: Analysis of Uinta Basin, Utah Gas-Bearing Cretaceous and Tertiary Strata

    Drill Stem Test Database (UBDST) and Documentation: Analysis of Uinta Basin, Utah Gas-Bearing Cretaceous and Tertiary Strata

    Principal drill stem test database (UBDST) and documentation: analysis of Uinta Basin, Utah gas-bearing Cretaceous and Tertiary strata by J. Ben Wesley, Craig J. Wandrey, and Thomas D. Fouchl U.S. Geological Survey, Lakewood, CO Open-File 93-193 Work Performed under contract No.: DE-AI21-83MC2042 for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy Morgantown Energy Technology Center, Morgantown, West Virginia This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards, (or with the North American Stratigraphic Code.) Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this program has been used by the U.S. Geological Survey, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS as to the accuracy and functioning of the program and related program material, nor shall the fact of distrubution constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by the USGS in connection therewith. 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO 80225 Introduction................................................................................................................2 METHODS ......................................................................................................................5 Data Base Structure.....................................................................................5 Drill Stem Tests.........................................................................................................?
  • Reservoir Simulation-Based Modeling for Characterizing Longwall Methane Emissions and Gob Gas Venthole Production

    Reservoir Simulation-Based Modeling for Characterizing Longwall Methane Emissions and Gob Gas Venthole Production

    Reservoir simulation-based modeling for characterizing longwall methane emissions and gob gas venthole production C.O. Karacan , G.S. Esterhuizen, S.J. Schatzel, W.P. Diamond National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), PiPinsburgh Research Laboratory, United States Abstract Longwall mining alters the fluid-flow-related reservoir properties of the rocks overlying and underlying an extracted panel due to fracturing and relaxation of the strata. These mining-related disturbances create new pressure depletion zones and new flow paths for gas migration and may cause unexpected or uncontrolled migration ofgas into the underground workplace. One common technique to control methane emissions in longwall mines is to drill vertical gob gas ventholes into each longwall panel to capture the methane within the overlying fractured strata before it enters the work environment. Thus, it is important to optimize the well parameters, e.g., the borehole diameter, and the length and position of the slotted casing interval relative to the hctured gas-bearing zones. This paper presents the development and results of a comprehensive, "dynamic," three-dimensional reservoir model of a typical multipanel Pittsburgh coalbed longwall mine. The alteration of permeability fields in and above the panels as a result of the mining- induced disturbances has been estimated from mechanical modeling of the overlying rock mass. Model calibration was performed through history matching the gas production &om gob gas ventholes in the study area. Results presented in this paper include a simulation of gas flow patterns from the gas-bearing zones in the overlying strata to the mine environment, as well as the influence of completion practices on optimizing gas production from gob gas ventholes.
  • Glossary of Oilfield Production Terminology (GOT) (DEFINITIONS and ABBREVIATIONS)

    Glossary of Oilfield Production Terminology (GOT) (DEFINITIONS and ABBREVIATIONS)

    Glossary of Oilfield Production Terminology (GOT) (DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS) FIRST EDITION, JANUARY 1, 1988 American Petroleum Institute 1220 L Street, Northwest Washington, DC 20005 Issued by AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE Production Department FOR INFORMATION CONCERNING TECHNICAL CONTENTS OF THIS PUBLICATION CONTACT THE API PRODUCTION DEPARTMENT, 2535 ONE MAIN PLACE, DALLAS, TX 75202-3904 – (214) 748-3841. SEE BACK SIDE FOR INFORMATION CONCERNING HOW TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION. Users of this publication should become familiar with its scope and content. This publication is intended to supplement rather than replace individual engineering judgment. OFFICIAL PUBLICATION REG U.S. PATENT OFFICE Copyright 1988 American Petroleum Institute TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD 2 SECTION 1: LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 3 SECTION 2: ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS 5 FOREWORD A. This publication is under the jurisdiction of the API Executive Committee on Standardization of Oilfield Equipment and Materials. B. The purpose of this publication is to provide standards writing groups access to previously used abbreviations and definitions. Standards writing groups are encouraged to adopt, when possible, the definitions found herein. Attention Users of this Publication: Portions of this publication have been changed from the previous edition. The location of changes has been marked with a bar in the margin. In some cases the changes are significant, while in other cases the changes reflect minor editorial adjustments. The bar notations in the margins are provided as an aid to users to identify those parts of this publication that have been changed from the previous edition, but API makes no warranty as to the accuracy of such bar notations.
  • Hydrocarbon Reservoir Modeling: Comparison Between Theoretical and Real Petrophysical Properties from the Namorado Field (Brazil) Case Study

    Hydrocarbon Reservoir Modeling: Comparison Between Theoretical and Real Petrophysical Properties from the Namorado Field (Brazil) Case Study

    Hydrocarbon reservoir modeling: comparison between theoretical and real petrophysical properties from the Namorado Field (Brazil) case study. Hashimoto, Marcos Deguti, Student from the Master in Oil Engineering E-mail: [email protected] 1. Abstract In reservoir characterization and modeling, due to information-acquisition’s high costs, frequently only indirect measurements of the subsurface properties such as seismic reflection data is available. In the worst-case scenario, only regional geological information is at disposal. In an attempt to provide deeper insights over the study area, with low costs, modeling synthetic reservoirs has been a reliable tool to better characterize reservoir/prospects. In this work two synthetic hydrocarbons reservoirs were modelled recurring to two different approaches to characterize Earth’s subsurface petrophysical (facies, porosity and permeability) and elastic (P-wave, S-wave and density) properties. In the second half of 2013, during the IST (Instituto Superior Técnico) Internship, a synthetic reservoir was conceived and modeled using Namorado Field’s (Campos Basin, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) as reference. During this intern public data, knowledge, papers, books and dissertations were gathered. In order to validate and certify this outcome, a new synthetic reservoir was proposed, but this time using real data for this field provided by the Brazilian Oil & Gas Agency (ANP). This dissertation addresses the comparison between the theoretical and real synthetic reservoir results, validating the first reservoir step-by-step. The major conclusion reached confirms that the theoretical synthetic reservoir outputs reliable results, however with caution in some of the modelled properties. Keywords: Hydrocarbon synthetic reservoir, Reservoir Modeling, Rock Physics Model, Petrophysical properties, Namorado Field, Campos Basin (Brazil).
  • Confirmation of Data-Driven Reservoir Modeling Using Numerical Reservoir Simulation

    Confirmation of Data-Driven Reservoir Modeling Using Numerical Reservoir Simulation

    Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports 2019 CONFIRMATION OF DATA-DRIVEN RESERVOIR MODELING USING NUMERICAL RESERVOIR SIMULATION Al Hasan Mohamed Al Haifi [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd Part of the Petroleum Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Al Haifi, Al Hasan Mohamed, "CONFIRMATION OF DATA-DRIVEN RESERVOIR MODELING USING NUMERICAL RESERVOIR SIMULATION" (2019). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 3835. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/3835 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONFIRMATION OF DATA-DRIVEN RESERVOIR MODELING USING NUMERICAL RESERVOIR SIMULATION Al Hasan Mohamed Mohamed Al Haifi Thesis submitted to the Benjamin M. Statler College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements
  • Techniques for Modeling Complex Reservoirs and Advanced Wells

    Techniques for Modeling Complex Reservoirs and Advanced Wells

    TECHNIQUES FOR MODELING COMPLEX RESERVOIRS AND ADVANCED WELLS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RESOURCES ENGINEERING AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Yuanlin Jiang December 2007 °c Copyright by Yuanlin Jiang 2008 All Rights Reserved ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dr. Hamdi Tchelepi Principal Advisor I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dr. Khalid Aziz Advisor I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dr. Roland Horne Approved for the University Committee on Graduate Studies. iii Abstract The development of a general-purpose reservoir simulation framework for coupled systems of unstructured reservoir models and advanced wells is the subject of this dissertation. Stanford's General Purpose Research Simulator (GPRS) serves as the base for the new framework. In this work, we made signi¯cant contributions to GPRS, in terms of architectural design, extensibility, computational e±ciency, and new advanced well modeling capabilities. We designed and implemented a new architectural framework, in which the fa- cilities (man-made) model is treated as a separate component and promoted to the same level as the reservoir (natural) component.
  • Annual Information Form Year Ended December 31, 2017 March 23, 2018

    Annual Information Form Year Ended December 31, 2017 March 23, 2018

    Annual Information Form Year Ended December 31, 2017 March 23, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL MATTERS ................................................................................................................................ 1 Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements ..................................................................... 1 Reserves and Resources Advisory ........................................................................................................... 3 Currency .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................... 5 CORPORATE STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................................... 5 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS ................................................................................... 6 Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Corporate History and License Areas ...................................................................................................... 7 Corporate Social Responsibility ............................................................................................................ 11 Environmental and Safety Matters .......................................................................................................
  • Subsea Sampling Systems MARS Multiple Application Reinjection System Configurations

    Subsea Sampling Systems MARS Multiple Application Reinjection System Configurations

    Subsea Sampling Systems MARS multiple application reinjection system configurations APPLICATIONS Almost all technical and economic studies in the oil industry require an understanding of the reservoir ■ Production monitoring fluids. MARS* multiple application reinjection system sampling technology enables the capture of ■ Reservoir modeling and management a representative, uncontaminated sample from multiphase flow, in which the sample has the same molecules in the same proportions as the flow at the sampling point where all three phases are ■ Flow assurance in equilibrium. ■ Well intervention ■ Each phase is enriched and captured individually to collect sufficient volume of sample from ■ Subsea processing strategically chosen phase-rich sampling points. ■ EOR ■ No pressure or temperature drop should occur during sampling to maintain equilibrium BENEFITS between phases. ■ Enables representative subsea sampling ■ Each phase is captured and physically or mathematically recombined for reservoir fluids properties. throughout life of field ■ Mitigates risk and enhances flow assurance management ■ Optimizes multiphase flowmeter calibration and performance ■ Increases production and recovery rates ■ Reduces capex FEATURES ■ Flexibility for integration into subsea hardware and for various sampling applications ■ Three-phase representative sampling from multiple wells in a single dive ■ Phase detection and enrichment ■ Complete chain of custody throughout sample journey ■ Proven technology ■ Ideal solution for greenfield architecture ■ Retrofit
  • Overpressure and Petroleum Generation and Accumulation in the Dongying Depression of the Bohaiwan Basin, China

    Overpressure and Petroleum Generation and Accumulation in the Dongying Depression of the Bohaiwan Basin, China

    Geofluids (2001) 1, 257–271 Overpressure and petroleum generation and accumulation in the Dongying Depression of the Bohaiwan Basin, China X. XIE1,2,C.M.BETHKE2 ,S.LI1 ,X.LIU1 AND H. ZHENG3 1Faculty of Earth Resources, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China; 2Department of Geology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA; 3Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Shenli Oil Corporation, Dongying, Shandong, China ABSTRACT The occurrence of abnormally high formation pressures in the Dongying Depression of the Bohaiwan Basin, a prolific oil-producing province in China, is controlled by rapid sedimentation and the distribution of centres of active petro- leum generation. Abnormally high pressures, demonstrated by drill stem test (DST) and well log data, occur in the third and fourth members (Es3 and Es4) of the Eocene Shahejie Formation. Pressure gradients in these members com- monly fall in the range 0.012–0.016 MPa mÀ1, although gradients as high as 0.018 MPa mÀ1 have been encountered. The zone of strongest overpressuring coincides with the areas in the central basin where the principal lacustrine source rocks, which comprise types I and II kerogen and have a high organic carbon content (>2%, ranging to 7.3%), are actively generating petroleum at the present day. The magnitude of overpressuring is related not only to the burial depth of the source rocks, but to the types of kerogen they contain. In the central basin, the pressure gradient within submember Es32, which contains predominantly type II kerogen, falls in the range 0.013–0.014 MPa mÀ1. Larger gra- dients of 0.014–0.016 MPa mÀ1 occur in submember Es33 and member Es4, which contain mixed type I and II kero- gen.
  • Chapter 6 Static Reservoir Model

    Chapter 6 Static Reservoir Model

    CHAPTER 6. STATIC RESERVOIR MODEL Martin K. Dubois, Geoffrey C. Bohling, and Alan P. Byrnes For detailed documentation on the construction of the static model see digital appendix: Geomod4_build INTRODUCTION Building an accurate static model for the entire Hugoton field (Hugoton and Panoma in Kansas and Guymon-Hugoton in Oklahoma) was the primary objective in the Hugoton Asset Management Project (HAMP). The goal was to develop a model with sufficient detail to represent vertical and lateral heterogeneity at the well, multi-well, and field scale, which could be used as a tool for reservoir management. This required that the model be finely layered (169 layers, 3-ft (1 m) average thickness), and have relatively small XY cell dimensions (660x660 ft, 200x200m; 64 cells per mi2). These criteria resulted in development of a 108-million cell model for the 10,000-mi2 (26,000-km2) area modeled. Although lithofacies geo-bodies tend to be laterally extensive, covering multi- section to township scales, small XY-cell dimensions were required to allow the extraction of portions of the model for local reservoir simulation. The Hugoton geomodel may be the largest model of its kind (lithofacies-controlled, property-based water saturations), and the workflow illustrates how very large models can be built. The simplified workflow presented in Figure 6.1 might be interpreted to indicate that the workflow process was linear; however, it is important to note there are multiple feedback loops at varying scales (with each step, between adjacent steps, and involving multiple steps). In addition, there were multiple iterations in the workflow at scales from individual steps to the model scale.