Naturally Fractured Gas Sandstone Reservoir Behavior: Lessons Learned

Author(s):  
Y. Dyah
2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.A. Nasr-El-Din ◽  
J.D. Lynn ◽  
M.K. Hashem ◽  
G.E. Bitar ◽  
A.A. Al-Ali

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence A.P. Camilleri ◽  
Leila Hamza ◽  
Ozhan Ahmet Yucel ◽  
Vincent Fabien Rodet ◽  
Baptiste Breton

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xueqing Tang ◽  
Lirong Dou ◽  
Ruifeng Wang

ABSTRACT Deep formation damage caused by killing fluid frequently occurs in blowout wells and clean-up operations may result in early water breakthrough and less hydrocarbon recovery. This paper presents three innovative practices applied in oil and gas wells that suffered blowout accidents for more hydrocarbon recovery. i.e.: For a blowout oil well, N2 huff and puff process can be applied for clean-up around the wellbore. During the first several cycles, the well got clean-up and output and wellhead pressure increased.For a blowout gas well in a massive gas pool, controllable drawdown pressure is recommended due to its updip location. The drawdown pressure should be met for both clean-up and minimum water coning. When water breakthrough appears, then neighboring wells at lower locations produce at larger drawdown pressure than that of blown-out well to minimize the impact of water influx on production of blowout well.For a blowout gas well in a faulted, naturally fractured reservoir, drawdown pressure should be maintained at the level of no liquid-loading in the wellbore. Gas and water co-production should be kept stable. Any shut-in of the well must be avoided. These methods have been successfully utilized in more than 40 wells for over 50 years. The three typical field examples are illustrated. One of them is an oil well in sandstone reservoir, with double oil rate as the nearby wells. The rest are a gas well in massive carbonate pool with bottom water, with the most prolific gas production in the field, and a gas well in a naturally fractured reservoir, with Gp of over 180 BCF.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-96
Author(s):  
Mary R. T. Kennedy

Purpose The purpose of this clinical focus article is to provide speech-language pathologists with a brief update of the evidence that provides possible explanations for our experiences while coaching college students with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Method The narrative text provides readers with lessons we learned as speech-language pathologists functioning as cognitive coaches to college students with TBI. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather to consider the recent scientific evidence that will help our understanding of how best to coach these college students. Conclusion Four lessons are described. Lesson 1 focuses on the value of self-reported responses to surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. Lesson 2 addresses the use of immediate/proximal goals as leverage for students to update their sense of self and how their abilities and disabilities may alter their more distal goals. Lesson 3 reminds us that teamwork is necessary to address the complex issues facing these students, which include their developmental stage, the sudden onset of trauma to the brain, and having to navigate going to college with a TBI. Lesson 4 focuses on the need for college students with TBI to learn how to self-advocate with instructors, family, and peers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document