Downhole Scale Management in Gorm, Dan, and Halfdan, and Implications to
Industry Trends

Jones, Trevor; Kogsboll, Hans Henrik; Koldig, Jesper

doi:10.2523/100508-ms

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this method requires that the horizontal section of the liner is sufficiently cemented to achieve zonal isolation, that the packers are not leaking, that the SSDs can be effectively closed as well as tubing integrity of each zone in the horizontal part. As the field becomes mature, especially the latter becomes a problem, due to development of scale (Jones, 2006) and Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC) (Skovhus, 2007), as well as erosion of tubing due to injection water and or back produced fracture sand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving a Water Shortcut Between Old Wells with Multiple Completion Zones: Example in the Dan Field

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In mature fields an important challenge is shutting off injection water breakthroughs. In the Dan field offshore Denmark developed with multi-zone completed long horizontal wells, the primary method now is closing Sliding Side Doors (SSDs) in the horizontal completions. A shortcoming of this method is that it does not work if there is communication between individual zones or holes in the tubing. This is the case in many of the up to 20-year-old wells.The primary goal of a recent coil tubing conveyed well intervention was to remove a shortcut between two horizontal wells: a producer with 16 sand fracced zones and an injector with 5 water fracced zones. This was planned to be done by closing one or two PSI zones in the injector. The connection could not be removed by shifting zones in the producer due to a restriction in the vertical section, making the horizontal completion of the well inaccessible.Production logging results of the shut in injector showed a substantial cross-flow from zones 1 and 4 into zone 3 via both the sliding side door and a hole in the zone. Due to the presence of cross-flow, the injection well was effectively injecting an estimated 4,000 bbl/d into the culprit zone, when closed in at surface. Due to the tubing leak in zone 3 it was not possible to stop the flow out of the zone by shutting the door, so all zones (1-5) in the well were closed, and injection was stopped. The closure of all zones in the injection well resulted in an immediate response in the production well, reducing water production with 6,000 stb/d while increasing the oil production with 1,200 stb/d.The intervention and responses in nearby wells indicated that the injection well was connected to up to three other water injection wells and up to two other production wells. In this paper the reasons for these short cuts and the impact it has on water flooding are analysed.The lack of water injection in the area has resulted in declined production in other wells, hence the future challenge for the area is finding a new way of shutting the connections either by means of chemical conformance treatment in cases of connected zones or straddles in wells with tubing holes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%