Or Spring 2010

Oilfield Review
Spring 2010
Revitalizing a Mature Field

Permanent Downhole Monitoring
Pipe Corrosion Detection
10-OR-0002
Reporting on Technology in a Cyclic Industry

In an industry whose primary commodity rose in price to
more than US$ 140/bbl and then dropped rapidly to less
than US$ 40/bbl, operating company attitudes regarding
application of new technology can change rapidly. How
then does a journal devoted to discussing technology establish and maintain a schedule of articles that will engage its
readers? The staff of Oilfield Review face this question four
times a year.
Our charter is to communicate technical advances in
the oil field to interested professionals, both within
Schlumberger and in its client organizations. I want to
discuss the philosophy that drives our editorial choices
within the context of industry volatility.
The journal has been published for more than 20 years
and has had more than 380 articles. In addition to our
approximately 30,000 subscribers, others who are interested in learning about new technology can read archived
articles on our Web site. Not surprisingly, the most recent
articles are the most-often viewed online. In general, the
monthly viewing rate declines from several hundred initially to fewer than five after two or three years.
Recently, a 1994 article stood out from this trend by having an extraordinary number of downloads. That article,
Corrosion in the Oil Industry, presents a succinct description of the basics of corrosion. The article was accessed
from countries all over the world. After a few years, it
declined back toward average. It is such a timeless overview
that we chose to reference it rather than repeat the basics
in this issues article describing a new corrosion-monitoring
tool (see Scanning for Downhole Corrosion, page 42).
Two archived articles on heavy oil and one focusing on
coalbed methane are also perennial favorites. Like most
Oilfield Review articles, these include an overview of an
industry issue, a basic description of technologies and
applications in the field.
Industry concern and solution: These are the essence of
the formula that guides our editorial planning through the
booms, the busts and the volatile times. Making discoveries
and producing in difficult and remote locations and from
resources of unconventional hydrocarbons require new

technological solutions. If not applied during a time of low
hydrocarbon prices, they certainly will need to be applied
in the near future. So our articles chronicle the innovative
technologies that companies apply, such as permanent
gauges in complex wells (see Permanent Monitoring: Taking It to the Reservoir, page 34). We occasionally look far
into the future; an example is the current status on field
demonstrations of gas hydrate production, in Developments in Gas Hydrates (page 18).
At the same time, companies will always focus on effective and efficient technologies to extract additional
reserves from producing fields. Thus, we also contribute
observations about techniques for developing mature fields,
such as the article describing the variety of technologies
currently applied in the Casabe field: Casabe: New Tricks
for an Old Field (page 4).
Many years are required to develop a new technology and
take it to market. If it is successful in filling an industry
need, the tool or service will be around for many more
years. We adopt this years-long view to bring descriptions of
technology to our readers. We present the basics of a new
technology at what we believe is an opportune time in its
development: shortly after its introduction, but long enough
that we can describe case studies. Many will read the article only when the issue is first published, but our feedback
tells us that many others will keep the journals on their
bookshelves and peruse them later, perhaps many times
over the years, or make a targeted search of our archive to
find an item of interest. Most older articles are viewed only
a few times a month, but given the ever-increasing size of
our online archive, that is still hundreds if not thousands of
interested readers a month who access explanations of
technology whenever they want them.
Visit the Oilfield Review archive online at www.slb.com/oilfieldreview. It includes

articles from previous issues, many in multiple languages. Citations for those
mentioned here follow:
Alboudwarej H, Felix J, Taylor S, Badry R, Bremner C, Brough B, Skeates C, Baker A,
Palmer D, Pattison K, Beshry M, Krawchuk P, Brown G, Calvo R, Caas Triana JA,
Hathcock R, Koerner K, Hughes T, Kundu D, Lpez de Crdenas J and West C:
Highlighting Heavy Oil, Oilfield Review 18, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 3453.
Anderson J, Simpson M, Basinski P, Beaton A, Boyer C, Bulat D, Ray S,
Reinheimer D, Schlachter G, Colson L, Olsen T, John Z, Khan R, Low N, Ryan B
and Schoderbek D: Producing Natural Gas from Coal, Oilfield Review 15, no. 3
(Autumn 2003): 831.
Brondel D, Edwards R, Hayman A, Hill D, Mehta S and Semerad T: Corrosion in
the Oil Industry, Oilfield Review 6, no. 2 (April 1994): 418.
Curtis C, Kopper R, Decoster E, Guzmn-Garcia A, Huggins C, Knauer L, Minner M,
Kupsch N, Linares LM, Rough H and Waite M: Heavy-Oil Reservoirs,
Oilfield Review 14, no. 3 (Autumn 2002): 3051.
Mark A. Andersen
Executive Editor, Oilfield Review
Mark A. Andersen, Executive Editor of Oilfield Review and Manager of
Oilfield Executive Communications, joined Schlumberger and the Oilfield
Review staff in 2000. He began his career in 1981 as a researcher in production rock properties at Amoco Research Center in Tulsa. He subsequently
spent several years in Stavanger, where he managed Amoco Norways external research program and wrote Petroleum Research in North Sea Chalk.
Mark is the author of many technical papers describing his own and other
scientists work, including 23 articles for Oilfield Review. He earned a BS
degree in engineering physics from the University of Oklahoma at Norman,
USA, and MS and PhD degrees in physics from The Johns Hopkins University
in Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Schlumberger
Oilfield Review
www.slb.com/oilfieldreview
Executive Editor
Mark A. Andersen
Advisory Editor
Lisa Stewart
Reporting on Technology in a Cyclic Industry
Editorial contributed by Mark Andersen, Executive Editor, Oilfield Review
Senior Editors
Matt Varhaug
Rick von Flatern
Editors
Vladislav Glyanchenko
Tony Smithson
Michael James Moody
Contributing Editors
Rana Rottenberg
Glenda de Luna
Design/Production
Herring Design
Steve Freeman
Illustration
Chris Lockwood
Mike Messinger
George Stewart
Printing
Wetmore Printing Company
Curtis Weeks
On the cover:
On site at a gas well, experts ready an
electromagnetic corrosion-monitoring
tool for a logging trip to assess pipe
integrity. Transmitters and receivers on
the tool mandrel determine geometric
and electromagnetic pipe parameters.
Sensors on the 18 arms provide an
azimuthal map of damage2D image
logs (inset ) that indicate local thickness
and damage to the inside of the pipe.
Casabe: New Tricks for an Old Field
Water
Oil
After twenty years of waterflooding, oil production in the

Casabe field had declined significantly, and a new operator
service company alliance took up the challenge of revitalization.
The resulting multidisciplinary field-redevelopment plan
helped reverse a steady production-rate decline of nearly
8% per year and more than doubled the daily oil production.
18 Developments in Gas Hydrates

Gas hydrates are ice-like substances that form when water
and natural gas combine at high pressures and low temperatures. Resource estimates vary widely, but the worlds
hydrate accumulations are thought to contain vast amounts
of natural gas. This article reviews techniques for evaluating
gas hydrate deposits and recent successes in exploration and
production of natural gas from gas hydrate accumulations.
About Oilfield Review

Oilfield Review, a Schlumberger journal,
communicates technical advances in
finding and producing hydrocarbons
to employees, clients and other oilfield
professionals. Contributors to articles
include industry professionals and experts
from around the world; those listed with
only geographic location are employees
of Schlumberger or its affiliates.
Oilfield Review is published quarterly and

printed in the USA.
Visit www.slb.com/oilfieldreview for
electronic copies of articles in multiple
languages, for subscription information
and to update a subscription address.
2010 Schlumberger. All rights reserved.

Reproductions without permission are
strictly prohibited.
For a comprehensive dictionary of oilfield
terms, see the Schlumberger Oilfield
Glossary at www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com.
Spring 2010
Volume 22
Number 1
ISSN 0923-1730
Advisory Panel
Abdulla I. Al-Kubaisy
Saudi Aramco
Ras Tanura, Saudi Arabia
34 Permanent Monitoring: Taking It to the Reservoir

Innovation and a growing reputation for reliability are leading
to increased operator interest in the use of permanent downhole sensors for even the most complex wells. To maximize the
value of data supplied by these systems, operators analyze and
use the information in a timely fashion.
Dilip M. Kale
ONGC Energy Centre
Delhi, India
Roland Hamp
Woodside Energy Ltd.
Perth, Australia
George King
Apache Corporation
Houston, Texas, USA
Eteng A. Salam
PERTAMINA
Jakarta, Indonesia
42 Scanning for Downhole Corrosion
Jacques Braile Salis

Petrobras
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Downhole corrosion can be detected and monitored using

electromagnetic induction tools. This article describes the
physics of pipe thickness measurement using a new electromagnetic tool with several sets of coil sensors. One set of
coils determines the characteristics of the pipe metal; others
measure average thickness of the pipe wall. A set of 18 sensors
on arms pressed against the inside wall maps pipe damage
with two-dimensional images.
Richard Woodhouse
Independent consultant
Surrey, England
51 Contributors
54 Coming in Oilfield Review
55 New Books
Editorial correspondence
Oilfield Review
5599 San Felipe
Houston, Texas 77056 USA
(1) 713-513-1194
Fax: (1) 713-513-2057
E-mail: editorOilfieldReview@slb.com
Distribution inquiries
Tony Smithson
Oilfield Review
12149 Lakeview Manor Dr.
Northport, Alabama 35475 USA
(1) 832-886-5217
Fax: (1) 281-285-0065
E-mail: DistributionOR@slb.com
Subscriptions
Client subscriptions can be obtained
through any Schlumberger sales office.
Paid subscriptions are available from
Oilfield Review Services
Barbour Square, High Street
Tattenhall, Chester CH3 9RF UK
(44) 1829-770569
Fax: (44) 1829-771354
E-mail: orservices@t-e-s.co.uk
Current subscription rates are available
at www.oilfieldreview.com.
Casabe: New Tricks for an Old Field
Mauro Amaya
Ral Amaya
Hctor Castao
Eduardo Lozano
Carlos Fernando Rueda
Ecopetrol SA
Bogot, Colombia
At some point in the operational life of an oil field, natural drive dwindles and
Jon Elphick
Cambridge, England
analysis, waterflooding, drilling and production optimization are restoring this
additional energy is needed to sustain production rates. In the Casabe field waterflooding has been used to enhance oil recovery. However, a combination of sensitive
lithology, structural complexity and water channeling caused hardware to fail and
wells to collapse, disrupting the waterflood efficiency. New techniques in geologic
once-prolific field to its former glory.
125
Water
Oil
10
Casabe alliance formed
15
75
50
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
25
1978
Water injection rate, 1,000 bbl/d
100
Waterflood pilot projects
20
1976
1. Peralta-Vargas J, Cortes G, Gambaretto W, Martinez

Uribe L, Escobar F, Markley M, Mesa Cardenas A,
Suter A, Marquez L, Dederle M and Lozano E: Finding
Bypassed Oil in a Mature FieldCasabe Field, Middle
Magdalena Valley Basin, Colombia, presented at the
ACGGP (Asociacin Colombiana de Gelogos y
Geofisicos del Petrleo) X Symposio Bolivariano,
Cartagena, Colombia, July 2629, 2009.
Marquez L, Elphick J, Peralta J, Amaya M, Lozano E:
Casabe Mature Field Revitalization Through an Alliance:
A Case Study of Multicompany and Multidiscipline
Integration, paper SPE 122874, presented at the SPE
Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
Conference, Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, May 31
June 3, 2009.
2. Cordillera is Spanish for range. Colombia has three
ranges: Oriental (eastern), Central, and Occidental
(western). These are branches of the Andes Mountains
that extend along the western half of the country. The
MMVB runs WSW-NNE, and the Magdalena River runs
northward through it, eventually flowing into the
Caribbean Sea.
3. Barrero D, Pardo A, Vargas CA and Martnez JF:
Colombian Sedimentary Basins: Nomenclature,
Boundaries and Petroleum Geology, a New Proposal.
Bogot, Colombia: Agencia Nacional de Hidrocarburos
(2007): 7881, http://www.anh.gov.co/paraweb/pdf/
publicaciones.pdf (accessed February 5, 2010).
of the natural drive period, the operator had

obtained a primary recovery factor of 13%. By this
time, however, production had declined significantly to nearly 5,000 bbl/d [800 m3/d]. Seeking
to reverse this trend, Ecopetrol SA (Empresa
Colombiana de Petrleos SA) conducted waterflood tests for several years before establishing
two major secondary-recovery programs in the
mid to late 1980s.
25
1974
Oilfield Review Spring 2010: 22, no. 1.

Copyright 2010 Schlumberger.
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Jos Isabel
Herberth Ahumada, Marvin Markley, Jos A. Salas, Hector
Roberto Saldao, Sebastian Sierra Martinez and Andreas
Suter, Bogot; and Giovanni Landinez, Mexico City.
AIT, CMR-Plus, Petrel, PowerPak XP, PressureXpress,
TDAS and USI are marks of Schlumberger.
Crystal Ball is a mark of Oracle Corp.
IDCAP, KLA-GARD and KLA-STOP are marks of M-I SWACO.
Old fields have stories to tell. The story of the

Casabe field, 350 km [220 mi] north of Bogot
and situated in the middle Magdalena River
Valley basin (MMVB) of Colombias Antioquia
Department, began with its discovery in 1941.
The field was undersaturated when production
began in 1945, and during primary recovery the
production mechanisms were natural depletion
and a weak aquifer. In the late 1970s, at the end
Oil production rate, 1,000 bbl/d
Walter Gambaretto
Leonardo Mrquez
Diana Paola Olarte Caro
Juan Peralta-Vargas
Arvalo Jos Velsquez Marn
Bogot
Operational year
> Casabe oil production and water injection. Waterflood pilot projects took place in the late 1970s, but it
was not until 1985 that the first of two major waterflood programs began. During the first three years of
each program, high injection rates were possible; however, water soon found ways through the most
permeable sands. Early breakthrough and well collapse forced the operator to choke back injection.
The steady decline in injection was accompanied by a decline in production, and attempts to reverse
this trend were unsuccessful. In 2004, when the Casabe alliance was formed, production rates were
5,200 bbl/d. By early February 2010, these rates had increased to more than 16,000 bbl/d.
Oilfield Review
During the secondary-recovery period, structural complexities, sensitive shales, heterogeneous sands and viscous oils all conspired to
undermine the effectiveness of the waterflood.
And although initially successful at increasing
production, injected water broke through prematurely at the production wells, an indicator of
bypassed oil (previous page). Sand production
occurred in a high percentage of wells, contributing to borehole collapse and causing failure of
downhole equipment. Water-injection rates were
gradually decreased in an attempt to overcome
these issues, and waterflooding became less
effective at enhancing oil recovery; from 1996
onward the production rates declined between
7% and 8% per year.
Spring 2010
In 2004 Ecopetrol SA and Schlumberger

forged an alliance to revitalize the Casabe field.
Using updated methods for managing highly
complex reservoirs, the alliance reversed the
decline in production: From March 2004 to
February 2010, oil production increased from
5,200 to more than 16,000 bbl/d [820 to
2,500m3/d].1 Also, the estimated ultimate recovery
factor increased from 16% to 22% of the original oil
in place (OOIP).
This article describes the complexities of the
reservoirs within the Casabe concession and the
oil recovery methods employed over the last
70 years, concentrating primarily on the major
reengineering work using updated methods that
began in 2004.
A Prolific Yet Complex Region

The middle Magdalena River Valley basin is an
elongated depression between the Colombian
Central and Oriental cordilleras and represents
an area of 34,000km2 [13,000mi2].2 Oil seeps are
common features within the basin; their presence was documented by the first western explorers in the 16th century. These reservoir indicators
motivated some of the earliest oil exploration and
led to the discovery in 1918 of the giant field
called La CiraInfantas, the first field discovered
in Colombia. Since that time, the MMVB has
been heavily explored. Its current oil and gas
reserves include more than 1,900 million bbl
[302million m3] of oil and 2.5Tcf [71billion m3]
of gas.3
Barrancabermeja
Central
Cordillera
Rio Suarez
anticline
A
m
0
5,000
20 km
10,000
10 mi
15,000
150 m
500 ft
La Cira shale
Miocene
50
25
100 km
50 mi
5,000 ft
Cretaceous
Oligocene
Lower sands
B0, B1, B2 and B3
NE
ain
M
0
0
Eocene
str
i
-S
W
C
al
nt
ie
Or
C sands
ra
Upper sands
A1 and A2
fau
lt z
le
ke
-sl
ip
il
on
e
Ce
Peroles
field
Real
Formation
Nuevo Mu
ndo sy
nclin
e
Rio Sua
rez an
ticlin
e
fault
illera
Palestine
Peroles
ntr
al C
ord
Casabe
Peas La Cira
Blancas Infantas
10
Nuevo Mundo syncline
La CiraInfantas
field
lt
Galn
u
eja fa
caberm
B a rran
Barrancabermeja
Casabe
field
> Casabe structural setting. The Casabe field lies to the west of La CiraInfantas field in the middle Magdalena River Valley basin (left). The principal
MMVB structures and producing fields are shown in the generalized structural cross section A to A (top right). The basin is limited on the east by a thrust
belt, uplifting the oldest rocks. Cretaceous and Paleocene (green), Oligocene (orange) and Miocene (yellow) rocks are shown in the central part of the basin
cross section. The preMiddle Eocene uplift and erosion have exposed the Central Cordillera on the west (gray). The Casabe field is highly layered, as shown in
the detailed structural cross section (bottom right). (Figure adapted from Barrero et al, reference 3, and Morales et al, reference 6.)
The abundance of hydrocarbon resources in

the basin attests to the prolific petroleum system
active in this region. A thick, organic-rich limestone and shale succession was deposited in an
extensive pericratonic trough along the northwest margin of the Guyana shield during the
Cretaceous Period.4 These underlying source
rocks are separated from the primary reservoirs
by an Eocene unconformity. Major fluid-migration mechanisms to fields within the MMVB consist of direct vertical migration where La Luna
Formation subcrops the Eocene unconformity,
lateral migration along the Eocene sandstone
carrier and vertical migration through faults.
The Colorado, Mugrosa and La Paz formations that make up the Casabe field were deposited during the Paleogene Period. These are
found at depths of 670 to 1,700 m [2,200 to
5,600 ft]. The reservoir sands in the field are
classified in three main groups: A, B and C,
which are subdivided into operational units
(above). Sands are typically isolated by impermeable claystone seals and have grain sizes that
vary from silty to sandy to pebbly.
Structurally the Casabe field is an 8-km
[5-mi] long anticline with a three-way closure,
well-defined eastern flank and a southern plunge.
The northern plunge is found outside the area of
ORSPR10Michael MoodyFigure 02
the Casabe field in the Galn field. A high-angle

NE-SW strike-slip fault closes the western side of
the trap. Associated faults perpendicular to the
main fault compartmentalize the field into eight
blocks. Drilling is typically restricted to vertical
or deviated wells within each block because of
heavy faulting and compartmentalization.
Throughout the history of the field, development planners have avoided placing wells in the
area close to the western fault. This is because
reservoir models generated from sparse 2D seismic data, acquired first around 1940 and later in
the 1970s and 1980s, failed to adequately identify
the exact location of major faults including the
4. Pericratonic is a term used to describe the area around a

stable plate of the Earths crust (craton).
5. Although the exact fault locations were not well-defined,
by conservatively locating the wells away from the
fault zones the waterflood planners ensured wells
remained within the correct block and inside the
western fault closure.
6. For more on historical structural maps from the Casabe
field: Morales LG, Podesta DJ, Hatfield WC, Tanner H,
Jones SH, Barker MHS, ODonoghue J, Mohler CE,

Dubois EP, Jacobs C and Goss CR: General Geology and
Oil Occurrences of Middle Magdalena Valley, Colombia,
in Weeks LG (ed): Habitat of Oil. Tulsa: The American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, AAPG Special
Publication 18 (1958): 641695.
7. For more on undeveloped areas in the Casabe field:
Gambaretto W, Peralta J, Cortes G, Suter A, Dederle M
and Lozano Guarnizo E: A 3D Seismic Cube: What For?,
paper SPE 122868, presented at the SPE Latin American

and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference,
Cartagena, Colombia, May 31June 3, 2009.
8. Peas Blancas field, discovered in 1957, is located 7 km
[4 mi] to the southwest of the Casabe field. Both fields
have the same operator. The area between the fields was
surveyed because oil indicators were found.
Oilfield Review
main strike-slip fault. The lack of a more accurate structural model caused two main problems:
Reservoir engineers underestimated OOIP and
waterflood planners found it difficult to locate
injector-producer pairs within the same reservoir
and, to a lesser extent, within the same fault
block.5 These uncertainties led the managers and
experts of the 2004 Casaba alliance to build a
multicomponent redevelopment plan.
Ecopetrol SA has long-standing experience in
and knowledge of the field and the measures
undertaken to keep it producing decade after
decade. Schlumberger provides new oilfield technologies to the operator, including seismic surveying, downhole measurements, data analysis
and specialized drilling, as well as domain expertise to decipher the challenges faced. With these
capabilities the alliance was confident it could
obtain results within a year.
The key goals of the redevelopment plan were
to increase reserves, manage the waterflood programs more efficiently and address drillingrelated problems such as reactive lithology,
tripping problems, low ROP, borehole collapse
and washouts, and completion challenges such as

poor cementing and casing collapse. Tackling
each of these elements involved close collaboration between the operators professionals and
technical experts from the service company. The
first stage of the project involved a thorough fieldwide analysis based on existing data and the gathering of new data using the latest technologies,
such as 3D seismic surveys and 3D inversion.
Undeveloped Areas and Attic Oil
Forty years ago it was common to create structural maps by identifying formation tops from
well data. With hundreds of evenly distributed
wells this task was quite straightforward over
most of the Casabe concession.6 However, a large
undeveloped area near the main NE-SW strikeslip fault encompassed over 20 km2 [7.7 mi2].
Smaller undeveloped locations also existed.7
A lack of well log data in these undeveloped
areas meant that formation tops were not available to create structural maps for several key
areas of operator interest. As a result, significant
potential oil reserves were possibly being over-
Formation Tops
Seismic Data
Depth, ft
3,300
Structural Sketch
with Well Locations
0
1,000
3,000
Depth, ft
3,300
2,000 m
looked. To improve structural understanding and

help increase reserves, Ecopetrol SA commissioned a high-resolution 3D seismic survey.
Geophysicists designed the survey to encompass both the Casabe and Peas Blancas fields
and also the area in between.8 WesternGeco performed the survey during the first half of 2007,
acquiring more than 100 km2 [38 mi2] of highresolution 3D seismic data; data interpretation
followed later that year. The new data enabled
creation of a more precise and reliable structural
model than one obtained from formation tops,
with the added advantage of covering almost the
entire Casabe concession (below).
In addition to accurately defining the structure of the subsurface, seismic data can also give
reservoir engineers early indications of oilbearing zones. In some cases oil-rich formations
appear as seismic amplitude anomalies, called
bright spots. However, these bright spots do not
guarantee the presence of oil, and many operators have hit dry holes when drilling on the basis
of amplitude data alone.
4,050
4,900
4,800
6,500
6,000 ft
N
Area not
drained
or drilled
Well location
0
0
1,000
2,000 m
6,000 ft
> Casabe structural maps and model. Structural maps of the field were
generated using formation tops from well logs (Formation Tops). But
operators avoided drilling along the main strike-slip fault for fear of exiting
the trap; hence, tops were unavailable (Structural Sketch, red-shaded area).
This poorly defined and undeveloped area represented significant potential
reserves. High-resolution 3D seismic data were used to create a refined set
Spring 2010
0
0
1,000
2,000 m
6,000 ft
of structural maps (Seismic Data). These maps indicate additional faults in

the field and adjusted positions of existing faults compared to the formation
top maps. Calibration of the new maps from existing well logs further
improved their accuracy. Geophysicists input the maps into Petrel software
to form a 3D structural model of the subsurface (inset, right). (Figure
adapted from Peralta-Vargas et al, reference 1.)
Typical amplitude signature
Bright spots
Offset
AVO anomaly
Offset
Uncorrected common
midpoint gather
AVO-corrected
amplitude map
Amplitude anomaly
Offset
Undeveloped area
Hydrocarbons
> Minimizing uncertainty of amplitude anomalies. Bright spots (top left) are high-amplitude features on
seismic data. These features can indicate oil accumulations, although they are no guarantee. One
technique for understanding bright spots begins with modeling the amplitudes of reflections from
reservoirs containing various fluids (top right). The amplitude at the top of a sand reservoir filled with
water decreases with offset. The amplitude at the top of a similar reservoir containing gas can
increase with offset. The results are compared with actual seismic traces containing reflections from a
sand reservoir (bottom left) to more accurately characterize reservoir fluid. Combined with other
information such as seismic inversion data, AVO-corrected amplitude maps (bottom right) can be a
useful tool to confirm the presence of oil (light-blue areas). (Figure adapted from Gambaretto et al,
reference 7.)
Several conditions can create misleading faults is uncertain. Interpretation of the Casabe
amplitude anomalies, but careful processing and 3D seismic data clarified field corridors where
interpretation can distinguish them. Analysis of wells had not been planned because of the unceramplitude variation with offset (AVO) corrects tainty surrounding the main fault position. Wells
data during the common midpoint gathering have since been drilled along these corridors
process (above).9 Using AVO-corrected amplitude with successful results (next page, top).
ORSPR10Michael
04
A detailed geologic
model provided a better
maps as an additional verification
tool, interpret- MoodyFigure
ers were able to confirm both undeveloped and understanding of the subsurface conditions,
which helped during the waterflood planning and
attic oil accumulations.
Attic oil is an old concept. Operators know drilling processes. Prestack inversion of the 3D
there can be oil in these higher zones, but identi- survey data yielded fieldwide estimates of rock
fying them is difficult if the exact location of
properties.10 Geophysicists calibrated these estimates using data acquired by a suite of newgeneration logging tools (see New Wells and
Results, page 15) in approximately 150 wells.
Using these calibrated rock types, geologists
created a facies distribution map, which they
combined with the structural model to create a
model of reservoir architecture.
The architectural model highlighted more
than 15 reservoirs with an average thickness of
3 m [10 ft] each. Reservoir engineers analyzed
10 of these reservoirs and discovered an additional 5 million bbl [800,000 m3] of estimated
reserves.11 The geologic model was then used during the waterflood redevelopment process to help
improve both areal and vertical sweep efficiency.
Effective Waterflooding
When the Casabe field was switched from natural
drive to waterflood in the late 1970s, the operator
chose to use a typical five-spot pattern with
approximately 500 injector and producer pairs.
To sweep the upper and lower sections of Sands A
and B, up to four wells were drilled per injection
location (next page, bottom). During the initial
waterflood period, injection rates peaked in 1986
and 1991. These dates correspond to the first and
second year after the beginning of the two waterflood programs for the northern and southern
areas of the Casabe field.
Two to three years after each peak there was
a noticeable drop in the water-injection rates.
This was due mainly to the restrictions imposed
on the rates to avoid casing collapse. However,
the reduction in water-injection rates was also
influenced by several other factors. These issues
were identified in the alliances redevelopment
plan and became a large part of the requirements
for reworking the Casabe waterflood programs.
9. For more on AVO analysis: Chiburis E, Franck C,
Leaney S, McHugo S and Skidmore C: Hydrocarbon
Detection with AVO, Oilfield Review 5, no. 1
(January 1993): 4250.
10. For more on inversion: Barclay F, Bruun A,
Rasmussen KB, Camara Alfaro J, Cooke A,
Cooke D, Salter D, Godfrey R, Lowden D, McHugo S,
zdemir H, Pickering S, Gonzalez Pineda F, Herwanger J,
Volterrani S, Murineddu A, Rasmussen A and Roberts R:
Seismic Inversion: Reading Between the Lines,
Oilfield Review 20, no. 1 (Spring 2008): 4263.
11. Amaya R, Nunez G, Hernandez J, Gambaretto W and
Rubiano R: 3D Seismic Application in Remodeling
Brownfield Waterflooding Pattern, paper SPE 122932,
presented at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering Conference, Cartagena de
Indias, Colombia, May 31June 3, 2009.
12. For more on understanding high-mobility ratios:
Elphick JJ, Marquez LJ and Amaya M: IPI Method:
A Subsurface Approach to Understand and Manage
Unfavorable Mobility Waterfloods, paper SPE 123087,
presented at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering Conference, Cartagena,
Colombia, May 31June 3, 2009.
Oilfield Review
1,000
Block VIII
2,000 m
6,000 ft
400
Block VII
N
New well
600
Block VI
Depth, m
800
Undeveloped
1,000
Block V
N
Block IV
Block III
Blocks I and II
Attic oil
B sands
1,200
Attic oil
C sands
Drilled wells
Approved locations
Proposed locations
Undeveloped areas
1,400
1,600
> Attic well. Experts had long predicted a field corridor along the main
strike-slip fault, but the lack of accurate seismic data made the risk of
drilling these zones too high. Interpretation of the 2007 3D seismic survey
enabled geophysicists to identify undeveloped drilling locations (red
ellipses, left) close to the major fault. A new offset well, approved for Block
VIII, was very close to the main strike-slip fault (dashed-green box, left). 3D
seismic data and structural maps (middle) visualized using Petrel software
helped well planners position the well. The trajectory avoided major faults
and targeted a large undeveloped zone and two attic oil zones in the B and
C sands (right). The wells constructed during the first and second drilling
campaigns were vertical; in the third campaign, especially from late 2008
onward, most of the wells drilled were offset wells in target pay zones close
to faults. (Figure adapted from Amaya et al, reference 11.)
Spontaneous
Potential
Formation
80
mV
A1
Injection
A2
B1
B2
Production
B
CBA
20 Sand 0 ohm.m 20
La Cira
Shale
Upper sands
Colorado
2,500
3,000
A1
3,500
A2
Oligocene
The operator had recorded early water breakthrough in the fields producers during both
waterflood programs. This was a result of injection water channeling inside high-permeability
layers. Also, a poor mobility ratio was present
throughout the field: Viscous oils (14.8 to 23.3API
gravity in the upper sands and 15.4 to 24.8 API
gravity in the lower sands) were pushed aside by
the more freely flowing water, and once breakthrough occurred the water influx increased.12
These conditions caused a poor vertical sweep
efficiency average of only 20%.
Depth,
ft
Resistivity
A3
4,000
ORSPR10Michael MoodyFigure
05
B1 SUP
Spring 2010
B2 SUP
Lower sands
Mugrosa
B1 INF
4,500
5,000
B2 INF
B3
5,500
La Paz
. Casabe field injection and production scheme.

Original field-development plans included as
many as four wells per injection location to flood
the multilayered sands (blue wells). Up to two
wells were used to extract oil, but in some
locations a single production well commingled
fluids from Sands A and B, B and C, or A, B and C
(green wells). The current string design for new
injector-producer pairs, shown in a later figure,
limits drilling to only one well per location. This
change has reduced cost and also the incidence
of proximity-induced well collapse. (Figure
adapted from Peralta-Vargas et al, reference 1.)
Waterflood Patterns in Block VI
1986
3,000
2,400
North, ft
1,800
1,200
600
0
0
750
1,500
2,250
3,000
3,750
East, ft
Fault traces
Top of A sands
Producers
Top of B sands
Injectors
Top of C sands
2003
3,000
2,400
North, ft
1,800
1,200
600
0
0
750
2,250
1,500
3,000
3,750
East, ft
> Comparison of 1986 and 2003 waterflood patterns. By 1986 the operator had
established an evenly distributed network of five-spot injection patterns throughout
the Casabe field (top). Well collapses had occurred in nearly 70% of the wells in
Block VI, and a significant number of collapses had been recorded in all other
blocks in the field. In 2003 (bottom) many of the collapsed wells remained abandoned
or inactive and numerous injectors had been converted to producers. Experts
suggested a new drilling campaign to reestablish fieldwide five-spot patterns.
ORSPR10Michael
MoodyFigure
07
(Figure adapted from
Elphick et al, reference
12.)
10
Sand production and high-velocity jetting of

sandy water through perforations significantly
eroded casing walls and completion hardware in
the producers. During a critical period of the
waterflood, numerous wells collapsed and were
abandoned or taken off line. To sustain production
levels the operator chose to convert many injection wells to producers, but this drastically
affected the waterflood patterns (left).
Choking back injection rates to mitigate
well collapses was another factor that caused an
uneven water-flow pattern. Areal sweep was poor,
resulting in many areas of bypassed oil. The
fields redevelopment team wanted to reestablish
patterns to improve areal sweep efficiency.
Therefore, a large part of the third drilling campaign involved planning and placement of new
injectors and producers. These were located to
recreate an evenly spread network of wells
throughout the field. However, areal sweep is
largely dependent on obtaining good vertical
sweep efficiency. Waterflood specialists first
needed to design better injection control systems
that would improve vertical sweep and also provide a mechanism to reduce the damaging effects
of water channeling on the production strings.
Vertical sweep efficiency is determined by the
effectiveness of water, flowing from injector
wells, at pushing oil through permeable layers to
formation-connected oil producers. The original
multiwell injector design had no injection profile
control, so water flowed preferentially through
the most permeable formations. This waterchanneling effect is aggravated by several mechanisms: Shallower sands can be unintentionally
fractured during waterflooding, significantly
increasing permeability. The injectivity index of
deeper layers may suffer if low-quality injected
water causes plugging of perforations or deposits
of scale in the production casing. Also, injected
water bypasses viscous oil, present in large
amounts in the Casabe field, and breakthrough
takes place in producers. As a consequence,
water flows through the layer of highest permeability and may not be injected at all in others,
especially in the deeper sands with skin damage.
This has been a distinctive feature during Casabe
production operations.
To optimize flooding, water management specialists recommended selective injection strings
using waterflood-flow regulators (next page).
These designs would enable the operator to choke
back injection rates in specific layers irrespective
of the reservoir pressure, permeability, skin damage or any other factors that would normally
affect flow. Each layer is packed off to prevent any
Oilfield Review
fluids within that zone of the wellbore from invading another zone. An injection nozzle is located
within this section and is controlled from the surface. The new selective-string designs have
improved the vertical sweep efficiency by enabling
the operator to maintain higher injection rates
into layers less affected by waterflood-induced
problems. Conversely, the new designs have mitigated issues related to channeling by allowing a
reduction of rates in problematic layers.
Use of a single well designed with packed-off
flow control was also much more cost-effective
than the previous design of up to four wells per
injection location. Up to 16 water-flow regulators
have now been installed in injectors in the
Casabe field. This solution also addressed the
possibility that drilling several injectors in close
proximity to one another was one of the likely
causes of casing collapse.
Four-zone injector schematic
Gamma Ray
0
gAPI
150
Spontaneous
Potential
Sand
80
mV
20
Resistivity
ohm.m
15
A1H
Packer
A2
WFR
A21
Overcoming Drilling Difficulties

From first production in 1945 to the end of 2006,
approximately 45% of the production wells in the
Casabe field had at some point collapsed, with
different levels of severity. As a result, wells were
abandoned, left inactive or reactivated only after
costly workovers. The abandoned and inactive
wells represented millions of dollars in capital
investment in the field and in lost revenue due to
lower production rates. The majority of casing
collapses had occurred in Block VI, which also
has the largest proven reserves. It was therefore
the focus of a casing-collapse study.13
In the first stage of the Block VI study,
production engineers gathered casing-collapse
statistics. In 2006 this block contained 310 wells.
A total of 214 showed some degree of collapse.
Slightly more producers than injectors collapsed,
but the difference was minor and indicated no
trend. Of the total number of wells with recorded
collapse events, 67 were abandoned and 80 were
inactive, a factor that the operator knew would
severely impact injection and production rates.
The remaining wells had been reactivated after
costly workovers. The engineers then looked for
a correlation between the 214 collapses and
when these wells were drilled to identify any
drilling practices that were incompatible with
the Casabe field.
Three main drilling campaigns coincided with
the primary-recovery, or natural-drive, period
(1941 to 1975); the secondary-recovery, or waterflood, period (1975 to 2003); and finally the
waterflood period of the Casabe alliance (2004 to
present). Of the wells drilled during the first
campaign, 78% had casing-collapse events during
Spring 2010
Perforations
A3
> Selective injection design. New injection strings in the Casabe field have up
to 16 waterflood-flow regulators (WFRs). WFRs and check valves prevent
backflow and sand production in case of well shutdown. The zone-isolated
injection devices are placed in the highly layered stratigraphic profiles of the
most-prolific producers that commingle fluids from A, B and C sands.
Production logs are unavailable because of rod pumps, but injection logs are
available: Track 1 describes a typical lithology of A sands (yellow shaded
areas); spontaneous potential logs (blue curves) are more accurate than
gamma ray logs (red curve) in the presence of radiation from feldspar, which
occurs naturally in the field. Track 2 shows resistivity response of the formation
at two measurement depths (red and blue curves) and water-injection zones
(green shaded area). (Figure adapted from Elphick et al, reference 12.)
operation. In the second campaign this figure the production engineers to display both models
was slightly less, at 68%. This period, however, in the same 3D window. Using modeling tools,
corresponded to the waterflood programs; hence they could then tag and clearly see the wellbore
many more wells had been drilled. During the depths and the locations along the Casabe strucstudy period there were no recorded collapse ture where collapses had been recorded.
The engineers discovered that casing collapse
events in Block VI for wells constructed in the
third drilling campaign. This change was consid- had occurred in all stratigraphic levels. However,
ered to be a result of improved drilling practices, collapse distribution did highlight a strong correlation
to the overburden
and to the waterwhich are discussed later in this
section.
ORSPR10Michael
MoodyFigure
08
To determine a link between casing collapse flooded formations. The analysis of well location
and subsurface conditions, the investigators con- 13. Olarte P, Marquez L, Landinez G and Amaya R: Casing
sidered the updated stratigraphic and structural
Collapse Study on Block VI Wells: Casabe Field, paper
SPE 122956, presented at the SPE Latin American
models built from the new 3D seismic data.
and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference,
Petrel seismic-to-simulation software enabled
Cartagena, Colombia, May 31June 3, 2009.
11
80
70
Number of collapse events
Production wells
Injection wells
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
A1
Overburden
A2
Colorado
A3
B1
B2
Mugrosa
B3
C
La Paz
Faults
Stratigraphic formation
> Areal and stratigraphic localization of casing collapse in Block VI. Statistical analysis of casing-collapse events within each stratigraphic section (left)
showed collapses in every formation. However, event frequency in the overburden and in the waterflooded zones (mainly Sands A1, A2, B1 and B2) was
several times higher than in other zones, indicating these intervals are more likely to cause collapse. Using Petrel modeling tools, engineers included Block
VI casing collapses in the structural model. A structural map of one reservoir (right) indicates collapses occurred throughout the block and not in any
specific area. (Figure adapted from Olarte et al, reference 13.)
Casing
7-in. H40
20 lbm/ft
7-in. J55
20 lbm/ft
Liners
7-in. K55
23 lbm/ft
7-in. N80
23 lbm/ft
65/8-in. H40
20 lbm/ft
65/8-in. J55
20 lbm/ft
500
1,000
Fluid level, ft
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
0% wall loss
20% wall loss
10% wall loss
30% wall loss
5,000
> Critical fluid levels for production casing and liners of the first drilling campaign. Testing using
TDAS software determined the critical load condition for fluid evacuation in Block VI wells from the first
drilling campaign. Casing (green box, left) and liners (red box, right) were tested first to obtain critical
fluid-evacuation levels based on original design specifications and again after calculations of 10%, 20%
and 30% wall loss. All wells for the simulation were at depths of 5,000 ft; depending on the amount of wall
loss, a collapse was probable as borehole fluid levels fell. For example, 7-in., 20-lbm/ft API Grade H40
casing strings could collapse even at their installed condition when the fluid was evacuated past 3,200 ft.
Wells that passed the first simulated test failed when wall loss was increased. This result indicated
that corrosion or general wear-and-tear (causing wall loss) would have weakened casing or liners
to the limit of collapse when the fluid level dropped to values that had been recorded in the field.
(Figure adapted from Olarte et al, reference 13.)
12
within the field and well-collapse distribution

revealed an evenly spread number of events,
which indicated no areal localization (above).
The next stage of the study was a probabilistic
analysis to evaluate the frequency of events
based on two variables: number of casingcollapse events and operational year. Production
engineers created probabilistic distributions by
plotting both variables for each drilling campaign
using the Monte Carlo simulation component of
the Crystal Ball software. The results showed the
highest number of events (about 30) for the wells
drilled during the first drilling campaign occurred
in 1985, coinciding with the beginning of the first
major waterflood program.
Interventions were more frequently performed on wells drilled during the second drilling
campaign, which meant that the timing of each
collapse event was recorded with greater certainty than for wells drilled during the first drilling period. Therefore, the probabilistic analysis
was even more reliable. It revealed that casing
collapse occurred primarily during the first few
years of the waterflood project and peaked during
1988. Investigators identified a critical period of
Oilfield Review
Spring 2010
30
Critical collapse period
Second drilling
campaign
Number of wells collapsed
25
20
15
First drilling campaign

10
1947
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
Operational year
105
Critical collapse period
Water injected
104
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
103
1986
Oil produced
1985
Injection and production rate, bbl/d
time during which collapse frequency was high.

This period coincided with the most intense rates
of water injection (right).
The next stage of the study evaluated the
mechanical integrity of the wells in the Casabe
field. This evaluation found that for the producers
in Block VI collapses occurred only in the production liners and casing. To uncover the root causes
for all these collapses, every event was evaluated
using TDAS tubular design and analysis software.
The application enables analysis of the mechanical performance of a casing in two scenarios.
First, an initial installed state considers the original casing-design specification and downhole conditions such as temperature and pressure. The
next scenario includes subsequent operationally
induced events such as injection and production
that are interpreted as forces on the casing, called
case loads. Engineers analyzed case loads for
compressional, tensional and triaxial stresses.
To begin, engineers needed to define the
installed condition, characterized by temperature, pressure and casing strength, for casing
designs in Block VI. Then they could apply case
loads to determine when a casing would fail.
Pressure and temperature profiles for each well
were calculated using logs from the Casabe field.
Because corrosion also significantly reduces casing strength, the USI tool, which measures ultrasonic acoustic impedance, was used to determine
the loss of wall thickness attributed to corrosion
(see Scanning for Downhole Corrosion, page 42).
According to the USI data, wells exhibited wall
losses between 10% and 35%. Engineers defined
four corrosion profiles at 0%, 10%, 20% and 30%
wall loss. These four profiles were combined with
pressure and temperature data to generate the
installed conditions that engineers needed to
begin simulation of operational loads.
Engineers performed hundreds of simulations
using the TDAS software. The first analysis considered fluid evacuation, a decrease of fluid level
in the borehole, which can be a critical load condition for casing collapse. Fluid levels in the wellbore may become low during the productive life
of a field for several reasons. These include low
productivity, increased extraction during production, sand fill, decreased water injection, and
swabbing and stimulation operations, all of which
had taken place in the Casabe field. When fluid
level drops, the internal pressure no longer balances the external pressure and the casing must
sustain this force. The critical load condition for
casing collapse occurs when the differential pressure is higher than the casing can withstand.
Operational year
> History of casing-collapse frequency. The frequency of collapse events by

year was plotted for the first and second drilling campaigns (top). In 1985 the
highest frequency (28) of reported events was recorded for wells from the first
drilling campaign. For wells from the second drilling campaign, which occurred
during the waterflood period, the peak frequency (20) of reported collapses
occurred in 1988. Both values correspond to the beginning of the waterflood
programs in the northern and southern areas of the Casabe field. A critical
10-year period from 1985 to 1995 was identified as coinciding with the highest
rates of production and water injection (bottom). (Figure adapted from Olarte
et al, reference 13.)
Once all critical limits and conditions for

After analysis of the casing design chosen
for wells during the first drilling campaign, the Casabe field had been obtained, production
engineers discovered that the specifications engineers ran simulations for several casing
had resulted in casing strings that were not strings with different specifications to find an
robust enough to withstand fluid evacuation optimal design for future wells. The TDAS simulacombined with the wall losses observed in tions enabled them to specify an ideal model that
would give an estimated service life of 20 years.
Block VI (previous page, bottom).
The final mechanical analysis was related to This model has been applied to all new wells
the main operational events leading to casing col- drilled throughout the field, with a successful
lapse. The reservoir pressure profile within the reduction in the frequency of recorded casing colORSPR10Michael
MoodyFigure
to less than102% of wells from 2006 to 2009.
formation during water injection
could impact lapse
the casing in both producers and injectors. The This is a dramatic improvement compared with
calculated increase in load from waterflooding events during the previous 60 years, in which 69%
was applied to casing that had passed critical of wells in Block VI experienced collapses.
load conditions in the earlier simulations; the
new test would determine if the additional pressure could cause them to collapse. This analysis
indicated that waterflooding increased the like
lihood of casing collapse.
13
Schematic of First Four Sections of the Original BHA with a Concentric Bit
81/2-in. bit
61/4-in. miscellaneous sub
61/2-in. collar
81/2-in. OD stabilizer
Design Improvements of Bicentric Bits and RWD
Pilot bit
Reamer
Pilot bit
Reamer
28 cutters
5 nozzles
5 blades
13.4-mm cutter
33 cutters
2 nozzles
4 blades
13.4-mm cutter
26 cutters
6 nozzles
4 blades
19-mm cutter
27 cutters
2 nozzles
4 blades
19-mm cutter
Modification: Stabilization
pad and guardian bearing
to drill out
Washout log
Before
After
> New versus old drilling design. Original drilling designs included a traditional polycrystalline diamond
compact bit (top), but swelling clays caused problems during tripping. Engineers designed a reamingwhile-drilling (RWD) BHA that incorporated a smaller pilot bit and a reamer (tan box). RWD enabled
oversized boreholes, which helped compensate for swelling and achieve target diameters for casing.
Further optimizations included larger cutters and a backup set of cutters to improve ROP (blue box). A
change in the number of nozzles and in the nozzle diameter dramatically reduced the washouts that
were causing cementing problems (bottom). The decision to redesign the bit was made partly to cope
with clay reactions. A new mud system has successfully inhibited the clay, and engineers are now
reconsidering a concentric bit to improve drilling efficiency.
Together with the results from the other

major milestones of the field-redevelopment
plan, the new casing designs enabled the alliance
to begin a new drilling campaign. The third
campaign began in 2004, and by 2007 a total of
37wells had been drilled. The alliance wanted to
drill as efficiently as possible to improve production, but problems were encountered during
drilling. These included stuck pipe caused by differential sticking in depleted reservoirs, problematic wiper trips resulting from highly reactive
shales and well control issues introduced by
water influx from the waterflooding.
To address the hole-stability and stuck-pipe
problems, the redevelopment team began by
improving the drilling fluid design. Drillers had
been using the KLA-GARD mud additive to prevent clay hydration, but it had little to no
success at inhibiting reaction in the troublesome
Casabe shales. Consequently, Schlumberger and
M-I SWACO initiated an investigation to find a
more effective shale inhibitor.
Laboratory analysis of 13 different fluid additives was conducted to compare their reactioninhibiting capabilities on Casabe lithology.
Experts deduced, from core and cuttings samples, that the clays and shales were highly reactive to water; therefore, the optimal drilling fluid
must prevent water from contaminating them.
The KLA-STOP mud system was compatible with
the Casabe shales and had the best properties for
inhibiting these reactions: Its fluid composition
includes a quaternary amine that prevents water
from penetrating target formations by depositing
a synthetic coating along the borehole wall.
When the new system was put to use, however,
it did not meet expectations, and the reactive
lithology continued to affect drilling time. Design
iterations continued until 2008; at this point
experts had increased KLA-STOP concentration
to 2% and added 3% to 4% potassium chloride
[KCl]. However, hole problems persisted and
experts concluded that another contaminant
could be affecting the mud system. Using core
samples from a wide range of wells, analysts measured pore throat sizes and laboratory specialists
performed mineralogical analysis to determine
the causes.
14. For more on bicenter bits and reaming-while-drilling
technologies: Rasheed W, Trujillo J, van Oel R,
Anderson M, McDonald S and Shale L:
Reducing Risk and Cost in Diverse Well Construction
Applications: Eccentric Device Drills Concentric Hole
and Offers a Viable Alternative to Underreamers,
paper SPE 92623, presented at the SPE/IADC
Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, February 2325, 2005.
14
Oilfield Review
CB-1054, was drilled with the new hardware, and

tripping times were notably reduced. Engineers
used the results from the pilot well to optimize the
bit and BHA designs. Experts ran unconfined compressive-strength tests on core samples taken at
numerous depths from several wells in the Casabe
field, which returned values from 585 to 845 psi
[4.0 to 5.8 MPa]. The results from this analysis
allowed the engineers to optimize the number of
primary cutters and to introduce backup cutters
on the drill bit (previous page).
Since the introduction of new technologies
and updated practices, the drilling problems
faced in the Casabe field have been resolved.
Better quality holes have increased the effectiveness of cementing jobs. Tripping times have been
reduced by more than 22%. Higher ROPs have
been achieved with updated cutter configurations and a PowerPak XP extended power steerable hydraulic motor (below). The majority of
new wells in the Casabe field have directional
S-type boreholes deeper than 5,200 ft [1.6 km] to
avoid collisions with existing and new wells or to
reach reserves in fault zones.
18
Spring 2010
New Wells and Results

The sands in the Casabe field have been extensively developed, but it is common in mature
fields to find oil in unexpected places. For example, some zones in the Casabe field were overlooked because the presence of low-resistivity
pay is difficult to detect using traditional resis
tivity tools; alternative tools are discussed later
in this section. Other zones in the field were inaccessible because a lack of structural data made
the drilling risk too high. Using structural information acquired by the alliance, the operator is
now developing the highest section of the Casabe
fields anticline structure in the B sands within
Block V.
Only one well in this block, the wildcat
Casabe-01 located downdip in the flank of the
anticline, exhibited oil shows in the thin sands
within the attic zones, but these zones had never
been tested. A new well, located updip of the
wildcat well, was proposed to develop the A
sands. After reviewing the new 3D seismic data
and the projected length of the oil leg, geoscientists revised the total depth for this newly proposed well and suggested deepening it to reach
the B sands.
Average drilling time

for year
Number of days
15
12
Optimized wells in 2009, average depth 5,400 ft
2010
CB 1137D
CB 1184D
CB 1147D
CB 1110D
CB 1251
CB 1129D
CB 1140D
CB 1271D
CB 1126D
CB 1127D
CB 1125D
2009
2008
2007
2004 to 2006
Well
> Drilling results. The new RWD and bicenter bit drilling technologies have
had18
a considerable impact, improving hole quality, reducing total trip times,
increasing ROP, minimizing stuck-pipe risk, reducing backreaming operations,
and improving the quality of primary cementing jobs. Average drilling-job times
have15been cut15.3
from 15.3 days to 6.8 days.
Average drilling time, days
The tests indicated that concentrations of

smectite, previously identified as the swelling
clay, decreased with depth. But the mineralogical
analysis also revealed the presence of illite and
kaolinite, which were not included as part of the
original mud system investigation. These dispersive clays break off into the mud upon contact
with water, causing drilling problems such as bit
balling, and also increase the viscosity of the
mud, making mud-weight curves less accurate. A
more complete understanding of downhole conditions enabled engineers to design a new mud
system with improved KLA-GARD B and IDCAP D
clay inhibitors. KCl was completely removed from
the fluid, helping to reduce environmental
impact and cleanup.
The mineralogy study showed why drilling in
the waterflooded zones was obviously problematic. Existing methods to avoid water influx
involved shutting in several injection wells up to
several weeks before drilling to reduce pressure.
In one extreme case 40 injectors were taken off
line to drill just 2 wells, which ultimately reduced
production rates.
Experts looked into the different ways they
could reduce water influx while also limiting any
effect on the waterflood programs. Instead of
shutting in injectors they could increase production in layers that were drilling targets, even if
this meant producing large volumes of water. In
addition, connected producers that were currently shut in could be reactivated, and if they
had no pump, there was a possibility that enough
pressure had built up for them to flow naturally.
Only after these steps were taken and deemed
insufficient would the alliance consider shutting
in injectors.
Another part of the investigation involved
reducing injector shut-in time. To avoid water
inflow, injectors were taken off line 15 days
before drilling commenced. However, it was
found that to avoid water delivery from the injector to the drilling location, injectors could be
shut in just before the drill bit penetrated the
connected zone. Also, with the production-based
pressure-reducing measures, injector shut-in
time was reduced from seven days to just two,
depending on the level of production.
The continuing difficulties with stuck pipe and
tripping problems led the alliance to seek other
options. After initial analysis of the drilling-related
issues, engineers selected a bicenter bit and reaming-while-drilling technologies.14 A pilot well,
12
13.5
11.4
9
6
3
0
10.5
6.8
15
Data from this new well included chromatography performed on mud from the B sands,
which revealed well-defined oil shows, and log
interpretation confirmed the oil presence. This
oil is due to a lack of drainage from the updip
wells. New data acquired with the PressureXpress
Resistivity
Invaded Zone
0.1
ohm.m
1,000
AIT 90-in. Array

0.1
ohm.m
1,000
AIT 60-in. Array

0.1
0.1
ohm.m
1,000
AIT 30-in. Array
ohm.m
LWD tool indicated the compartment was at

original pressure. Interpretation of data from
the CMR-Plus combinable magnetic resonance
logs confirmed movable oil (below). The interval
was completed and the well produced 211 bbl/d
[34 m3/d] of oil with no water cut. Historically,
1,000
AIT 20-in. Array

0.1
ohm.m
New well
1,000
AIT 10-in. Array

0.1
ohm.m
1.65
Permeability
0.1
mD
1,000
Schlumberger-Doll Research
0.1
mD
2.65 0
g/cm
Neutron Porosity
Timur-Coates
Depth,
ft
Lithology
Bulk Density
1,000
1,000
60
T2 Distribution
0 0.3
Small-Pore Porosity
Capillary-Bound Fluid
29
T2 Log Mean
ms
3,000
ms
Oil
Sandstone
Bound Water
T2 Cutoff
0.3
Water
3,000
Clay 1
4,850
4,883 to 4,892 ft
MD
A sands
B sands
4,904 to 4,922 ft
MD
4,900
4,950
2,000
PressureXpress data
Hydrostatic
Normal gradient
2,500
5,000
Depth, ft
3,000
Fault 120
Hydrostatic
3,500
Depleted
sands
4,000
Fault 130
4,500
5,000
Original pressure
5,500
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
Pressure, psi
2,500
3,000
3,500
> Discovering the unexpected in Well CSBE 1069. A new well drilled to reach Sand B in Block V (right) reflected a change in previous practices; in this area
the B sands were considered depleted and invaded by water. After interpretation of mud logs indicated oil shows in two locations, Schlumberger acquired
pressure and nuclear magnetic resonance logs in the low-resistivity intervals. Interpretation of the CMR-Plus log (left) confirmed the presence of oil
(green-shaded areas Track 4). Pressure data (inset middle) indicated the bypassed oil zones were at original reservoir pressure (blue box) along the
normal gradient.
16
Oilfield Review
Density Porosity
40
Resistivity
Invaded Zone
0.1
ohm.m 1,000
40
%
0
Free-Fluid Taper
%
Free Fluid
Density Porosity
30
CMR-Plus Bulk Water
40
%
0
30
%
0
Resistivity
T2 Distribution
CMR-Plus Bulk Fluid
Spontaneous Potential
Invaded Zone
ohm.m 1,000 CMR-Plus 3-ms Porosity
40
%
0 0
29 30
AIT 30-in. Array
%
0 60
mV
40 0.2
ohm.m
T2 Log Mean
Computed Gamma Ray
AIT 60-in. Array
0.1 ohm.m 1,000 Total CMR-Plus Porosity
Bound Water
40
%
0 0.3
ms 3,000
0
gAPI
140 0.2
ohm.m
Permeability
Moved Water
Small-Pore Porosity
Timur-Coates
T2 Cutoff
AIT 30-in. Array
Caliper
Oil
0.1
mD 1,000 Capillary-Bound Fluid 0.3
ms 3,000
ohm.m
6
in.
16 0.2
AIT 60-in. Array
0.1
Depth,
ft
20
Bulk Density
20 1.65
g/cm3
2.65
Neutron Porosity
20 60
5,200
Free water
5,250
5,300
Free oil
5,350
> Log confirmation of low-resistivity pay. Well CSBE 1060 log interpretation indicated shaly sand zones with
salinities exceeding 50,000 ppm NaCl. Identifying oil in the presence of high-salinity formation water may be difficult
because resistivity measurements cannot be used to distinguish the two (red-shaded area in Resistivity track).
Shaly sands have higher water content than sand alone, and an alternative to resistivity measurements is needed.
The CMR-Plus tool, which measures relaxation time of hydrogen molecules to identify oil and water, uncovered the
presence of oil (Free oil, red-shaded area). Based on these results the interval was tested and returned clean oil,
confirming low-resistivity pay in the Casabe field.
experts did not look for oil downdip in the

Casabe field because the deeper formation had
been flagged as a water zone.
The field provided another surprise during a
routine replacement of a retired well. A producing well had been mechanically damaged as a
result of sand production induced by the waterflood. A replacement was planned using improved
design factors garnered from the casing-collapse
investigation. The operator drilled the well into
the C sands for coring purposes. Before drilling,
this zone was considered to be water prone, but
during drilling, mud log interpretation suggested
there might be oil in these deeper sands. Log
interpretation was inconclusive because of the
low resistivity; a new approach was required to
identify movable oil (above).
Spring 2010
Interpretation of CMR-Plus data suggested

movable oil corresponding to the oil shows in the
mud logs. Based on these results, the operator
decided to test the well, which produced
130bbl/d [21 m3/d] of oil with no water cut. After
six months, cumulative production reached
11,000 bbl [1,750 m3] with no water cut. These
values represent additional reserves where none
were expected.
The Casabe field redevelopment project is
now in its sixth year, revitalizing the mature oil
field. Figures gathered at the beginning of 2010
show the Casabe alliance has increased overall
ORSPR10Michael
13
production
rates by nearlyMoodyFigure
250% since 2004. This
improvement is due in part to a fast-track study
that quickly identified the root causes impacting
the efficiency of the waterflood programs in the

field and discovered additional oil reserves using
newly acquired data.
The collaboration between Ecopetrol SA and
Schlumberger has been notably successful and
the partnership is currently scheduled to continue the Casabe story until 2014. Production
wells are being added in the newly defined southern Casabe field, enabled by the 2007 3D seismic
survey and improved logging methods. The new
drilling practices and waterflood technologies are
expected to achieve commercial production rates
for many years to come.
MJM
17
Developments in Gas Hydrates
Richard Birchwood
Jianchun Dai
Dianna Shelander
Houston, Texas, USA
Gas hydratesice-like compounds containing methanemay become a significant
Ray Boswell
US Department of Energy
National Energy Technology Laboratory
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
hydrate deposits and to map their distribution.
Scott Dallimore
Geological Survey of Canada
Sidney, British Columbia, Canada
Kasumi Fujii
Yutaka Imasato
Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan
Tatsuo Saeki
Japan Oil, Gas and Metals
National Corporation
Chiba City, Chiba, Japan
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Barbara
Anderson, Brookfield, Connecticut, USA; George Bunge,
Houston; Emrys Jones, Chevron, Houston; Tebis Llobet,
Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Sakhalin, Russia; Yuri Makogon, Texas
A&M University, College Station, Texas; and Osamu Osawa,
Sagamihara, Japan.
CHFR, DMR, EcoScope, geoVISION, MDT, PeriScope, RAB,
sonicVISION and TeleScope are marks of Schlumberger.
18
Methane
gas + ice
10
Methane
gas + water
50
Methane
hydrate
+ gas + ice
100
Methane hydrate
+ water + gas
ry
nda
bou
ase
Doug Murray
Beijing, China
s ph
Koji Kusaka
Tokyo, Japan
-ga
rate
Hyd
Masafumi Fukuhara
Moscow, Russia
Gas hydrate deposits hold copious amounts of

hydrocarbon. Estimates range over several orders
of magnitude, but the volume of gas contained in
gas hydrate accumulations is thought to be more
than that in all the worlds known gas reserves.
These accumulations often occur in parts of
the world that lack conventional reserves, potentially bringing a new level of self-sufficiency to
countries that rely on imported oil and gas. The
promise of this untapped energy source is prompting several government and industry groups to
initiate detailed investigations into developing
gas hydrates.
In addition to their potential role as an energy
source, gas hydrates can present drilling hazards,
threaten flow assurance, affect seafloor stability
and store or release greenhouse gases. Although
these are all important issues, this discussion
focuses on the benefits of gas hydrates as a supply
of natural gas for future energy needs.
This article reviews results of some early
hydrate studies and presents the findings of new
international efforts that are using advanced
technologies to characterize properties and distributions of gas hydrates. Case studies from the
Gulf of Mexico, Japan and India demonstrate how
oilfield technologies are helping to identify and
evaluate gas hydrate accumulations. Examples
from Canada and the USA show how natural gas
can be produced from these reservoirs.
Ice-water phase boundary
Ann Cook
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
Earth Institute of Columbia University
Palisades, New York, USA
and evaluate conventional oil and gas reserves are being used to characterize gas
Pressure, atm
Timothy Collett
US Geological Survey
Denver, Colorado, USA
energy resource if ways can be found to exploit them. Techniques designed to find
500
1,000
10
10
20
30
40
Temperature, C
> Phase diagram of methane hydrate stability.

The methane-water combination is a solid at low
temperatures and high pressures (hatched
shading). At higher temperatures and lower
pressures, solid hydrate dissociates into its gas
and water components.
Oilfield Review
> Gas hydrate crystal structure. Methane [CH4] (green and white)
is the guest molecule in a cage formed by water [H2O] molecules
(red and white). This structure is one of five types of water cages
that contain guest gas molecules. Gas hydrates have been
produced from some sites in the Arctic, such as this one in
Alaska, USA. (Photograph courtesy of the Mount Elbert gas
hydrate stratigraphic test well project.)
Basics of Gas Hydrates

Gas hydrates are crystalline solids that resemble ice. Structurally they are clathrates, or compounds in which the basic structure consists of
a cage-like crystal of water molecules containing a gas molecule, called a guest (above). Of
greatest interest to the energy industry are
methane hydrates, which are also the most
abundant in nature.
Gas hydrates form when sufficient amounts of
water and gas are present at the right combination of temperature and pressure (previous
page). Outside this stability zone hydrates dissociate into their water and gas components. The
Spring 2010
compact nature of the hydrate structure results

in highly efficient packing of methane. A volume
of hydrate contains gas that will expand to somewhere between 150 and 180 volumes at standard
pressure and
temperature.
Oilfield
Review
Spring
Chemists
have10
known about gas hydrates for
Opener
more than Hydrates
200 years.Fig.
As with
many aspects of sciORSPRG10-Hydrate
Opener
entific discovery,
the history of Fig.
hydrates
is open
to debate. However, the earliest formation of
hydrate in the laboratory seems to be in 1778 by
Joseph Priestley, who inadvertently obtained a
hydrate of sulfur dioxide.1 The first documented
identification of hydrocarbon hydrates was in
1888 by Paul Villard, who synthesized hydrates of
methane and other gaseous hydrocarbons.
Throughout the 19th century hydrates were

concocted in laboratories and remained mere
experimental curiosities without practical applications. It was only after the 1920swhen pipelines began to transport methane from gas
fieldsthat a better understanding of hydrates
was required for practical applications. In cold
weather, solid plugs would sometimes disrupt gas
flow through pipelines. These blockages were at
first interpreted to be frozen water. However, in
the 1930s the cause of the problems was correctly
1. Makogon YF: Hydrates of Hydrocarbons. Tulsa: PennWell
Publishing Co., 1997.
19
Recovered gas hydrates

Inferred gas hydrates
> Marine and onshore hydrate locations. About 98% of the gas hydrate resources are concentrated in
marine sediments, with the other 2% beneath permafrost. Most of the mapped occurrences of
recovered gas hydrates (blue) have been discovered by scientific drilling programs, and the inferred
gas hydrate accumulations (orange) have been identified by seismic imaging. [Data from Lorenson TD
and Kvenvolden KA: A Global Inventory of Natural Gas Hydrate Occurrence, USGS, http://walrus.wr.
usgs.gov/globalhydrate/index.html (accessed March 24, 2010).]
identified as methane hydrates.2 This revelation

ushered in a new era of hydrate studies, and
investigators developed principles for predicting
the formation of hydrates and methods for inhibiting and controlling them.3
In 1946 Russian scientists proposed that the

conditions and resources for hydrate generation
and stability exist in nature, in areas covered
by permafrost.4 This prediction was followed by
the discovery of naturally occurring hydrates. In
2. Ziegenhain WT: Every Precaution Taken to Eliminate

9. Frye M: Preliminary Evaluation of In-Place Gas Hydrate
Clogging of New Chicago Gas Line, Oil & Gas Journal 30,
Resources: Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf,
no. 19 (1931): 34.
OCS Report MMS 2008004: US Department of the Interior,
Minerals Management Service, February 1, 2008.
Hammerschmidt EG: Formation of Gas Hydrates
in Natural Gas Transmission Lines, Industrial &
10. Gulf of Mexico Gas Hydrates Joint Industry Project
Engineering Chemistry 26, no. 8 (1934): 851855.
(JIP) Characterizing Natural Gas Hydrates in the
Deep Water Gulf of MexicoApplications for Safe
3. Carroll J: Natural Gas Hydrates: A Guide for Engineers.
Exploration, National Methane Hydrates R&D Program,
Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Elsevier, 2003, http://www.
US Department of Energy, http://www.netl.doe.gov/
knovel.com/web/portal/browse/display?_EXT_KNOVEL_
technologies/oil-gas/futuresupply/methanehydrates/
DISPLAY_bookid=1275 (accessed February 27, 2010).
projects/DOEProjects/CharHydGOM-41330.html
4. Makogon, reference 1.
(accessed February 17, 2010).
5. Miller SL: Clathrate Hydrates of Air in Antarctic Ice,
11. The results of the 2005 expedition, for which
Science 165, no. 3892 (August 1969): 489490.
donated the seismic data and acquisition,
Oilfield
Review WesternGeco
6. Riedel M, Hyndman RD, Spence GD, Chapman
NR,
were published as a thematic set: Ruppel C, Boswell R
Novosel I and Edwards N: Hydrate on the Cascadia
Spring 10
and Jones E (eds): Marine and Petroleum Geology 25,
Accretionary Margin of North America, presented
Hydrates Fig. 2 no. 9 (November 2008): 819988.
at the AAPG Hedberg Research Conference,
12. DOE-Sponsored
Expedition Confirms Resource-Quality
ORSPRG10-Hydrate
Fig. 2
September 1216, 2004, Vancouver, British Columbia,
Gas Hydrates in the Gulf of Mexico, National Methane
Canada, http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/documents/
Hydrates R&D Program, US Department of Energy, http://
abstracts/2004hedberg_vancouver/extended/reidel/
www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/FutureSupply/
reidel.htm (accessed February 17, 2010).
MethaneHydrates/2009GOMJIP/index.html (accessed
7. Brooks JM, Cox HB, Bryant WR, Kennicutt MC II,
February 10, 2010).
Mann RG and McDonald TJ: Association of Gas
Shedd B, Godfriaux P, Frye M, Boswell R and
Hydrates and Oil Seepage in the Gulf of Mexico,
Hutchinson D: Occurrence and Variety in Seismic
Organic Geochemistry 10, no. 13 (1986): 221234.
Expression of the Base of Gas Hydrate Stability in the
Reidel M, Collett TS, Malone MJ and Expedition 311
Gulf of Mexico, USA, Fire in the Ice (Winter 2009):
Scientists: Cascadia Margin Gas Hydrates: Expedition
1114, http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/
311 of the Riserless Drilling Platform: Balboa, Panama,
publications/Hydrates/Newsletter/MHNewswinter09.
to Victoria, British Columbia (Canada), Proceedings of
pdf#page=11 (accessed March 23, 2010).
the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program, vol 311, http://
13. Boswell R, Collett T, Frye M, McConnell D, Shedd W,
publications.iodp.org/proceedings/311/311title.htm
Dufrene R, Godfriaux P, Mrozewski S, Guerin G and Cook A:
(accessed March 24, 2010).
Gulf of Mexico Gas Hydrate Joint Industry Project
8. Collett TS, Johnson AH, Knapp CC and Boswell R:
Leg II: Technical Summary, http://www.netl.doe.gov/
Natural Gas Hydrates: A Review, in Collett TS,
technologies/oil-gas/publications/Hydrates/2009Reports/
Johnson AH, Knapp CC and Boswell R (eds): Natural Gas
TechSum.pdf (accessed March 9, 2010).
HydratesEnergy Resource Potential and Associated
Geologic Hazards. Tulsa: The American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, AAPG Memoir 89 (2010): 146219.
20
1968 ice cores containing air hydrates were

extracted during scientific drilling at Byrd Station
in western Antarctica.5
In the 1970s scientists on deepsea drilling
expeditions discovered that gas hydrates occur
naturally and abundantly in deepwater sediments
on outer continental margins. Recently, hydrate
masses have been observed on the ocean floor
and, in one case, were brought to the surface by
fishing net.6 These near-surface concentrations of
hydrates in sediments are often associated with
gas seeps, also called cold vents, such as those in
the Gulf of Mexico and off the Pacific coast of
Canada and the USA.7
Scientists now know gas hydrates occur naturally in many parts of the world (left). The typical
depth range for hydrate stability lies 100 to 500 m
[330 to 1,600 ft] beneath the seafloor. About 98%
of these resources are believed to be concentrated in marine sediments, with the other 2% in
polar landmasses. Significant accumulations
have been identified on the North Slope of Alaska,
USA; in the Northwest Territories of Canada; in
the Gulf of Mexico; and offshore Japan, India,
South Korea and China.
Only a small proportion of the evidence for
hydrate accumulations comes from direct sampling; most is inferred from other sources, such
as seismic reflections, well logs, drilling data and
pore-water salinity measurements from cores.
Borehole and core data indicate the distribution
of hydrates in sediments varies according to the
conditions under which they form. Some cores
exhibit sparse amounts of hydrates distributed in
clay-rich sediments, while others contain intervals of highly concentrated gas hydrate in sandy
sediments, and nearly pure, solid gas hydrate has
been found as fracture-filling material in clayrich zones.
Extrapolating these different scenarios of
distribution to all areas where gas hydrates are
presumed to occur has led to a tremendous range
of potential resource estimatesanywhere from
2.8 1015 to 8 1018 m3 [9.9 1016 to 2.8 1020 ft3]
of methane globally.8 Narrowing this spread
requires advances in several areas: clearer insight
into how hydrates are generated and deposited,
better understanding of the effects of hydrates on
borehole and geophysical measurements, and
fuller exploration of areas where conditions for gas
hydrate stability exist.
The most widespread evidence for accumulations of hydrates offshore comes from seismic
data. The potentially strong acoustic impedance
contrast between gas hydratebearing sediments
and adjacent sediments that contain free gas or
Oilfield Review
Alaminos Canyon
3,300
Seafloor
3,400
3,500
Gas hydrate
stability zone
3,600
Two-way time, ms
3,700
BSR
3,800
3,900
JIP Leg I drillsite (2005)

JIP Leg II drillsite (2009)
Hydrate indicator
4,000
4,100
Amplitude
4,200
4,300
Spring 2010
km
150
mi
4,400
Green Canyon
150
AT-14
2010 WesternGeco Used by Permission
Atwater Valley
4,500
AC-21
Alaminos Canyon
KC-195
Keathley Canyon
GC-955
WR-313
Walker Ridge
fM
o
ulf
exi
co
> Seismic section with a bottom-simulating reflector (BSR) from the Gulf of Mexico. A BSR is caused
by the acoustic impedance contrast between hydrate-bearing and non-hydrate-bearing sediments.
This BSR cuts across layering and a fault and represents the base of the hydrate-stability zone. The
reflecting interface separates stiffer material above from less stiff material below, giving rise to a
seismic reflection with polarity opposite to that at the seafloor. The high-amplitude signals on the right
side of the section probably indicate free gas trapped below the hydrate. The 2005 Gulf of Mexico JIP
expedition investigated sites in the Atwater Valley and Keathley Canyon areas. In 2009 JIP scientists
drilled and logged boreholes in Alaminos Canyon, Walker Ridge and Green Canyon. Geophysical
indicators of the base of the hydrate-stability zone are shown in red on the inset map. (Map adapted
from Shedd et al, reference 12; seismic section courtesy of WesternGeco.)
Walker Ridge Block 313

3,350
SE
nB
on
NW
3,400
rizo
Ho
Ho
3,450
3,500
Two-way time, ms
Gulf of Mexico Hydrate Assessment

The Minerals Management Service (MMS) of the
US Department of the Interior has used seismic
data, along with wellbore, geologic, geochemical
and paleontological information, to assess large
areas of the Gulf of Mexicoabout 174,000 mi2
[450,000 km2]where pressure and temperature conditions are suitable for hydrate-stability
conditions.9 The MMS study estimates the total
in-place volume of biogenically generated gas
hydrates ranges from 11,112 to 34,423 Tcf [315 to
975 trillion m3].
In 2000 Chevron and the US Department of
Energy initiated a JIP to develop technology and
acquire data to help characterize naturally
occurring gas hydrates in the deepwater Gulf of
Mexico.10 In addition to assessing the impact of
hydrates on drilling safety and seafloor stability,
the project strives to understand the long-term
potential of hydrates as a supply of natural gas.
In the early phases of the project, JIP team
members acquired and analyzed seismic data,
selected drilling locations and conducted a
35-day drilling, coring and logging expedition
covering several sites.11 In 2009 the JIP conducted a second expedition, which included sites
in the Walker Ridge and Green Canyon areas.12
Borehole locations were selected based on an
integrated geologic and geophysical analysis of
indicators for the presence of gas hydrates at
high saturations within sand reservoirs (above
right). The JIP program in the Gulf of Mexico has
provided substantial information on gas hydrate
exploration and drilling hazard assessment.
Gas hydrate explorationAn example of a
hydrate indicator in the Walker Ridge area is the
discontinuous high-amplitude reflection that corresponds to the updip terminations of free gas in
sandstones (right). The high amplitudes track
the base of the hydrate-stability zone.13
New Orleans
riz
water can cause a high-amplitude reflection. The

reflection depth depends on the temperature and
pressure conditions conducive to hydrate stability; typically, it parallels the seafloor. Such interfaces are known as bottom-simulating reflectors
(BSRs), and the seismic reflections they cause
often cut across structural and stratigraphic
reflections. However, lack of a BSR does not preclude the presence of hydrates.
The discovery of BSRs in many parts of the
world has led government agencies, energy companies and other institutions to form collaborative
ventures to assess particular hydrate accumulations. One such joint industry project (JIP) is
investigating hydrates in the Gulf of Mexico.
3,550
3,600
3,650
Base of gas
hydrate stability
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
Hydrates Fig. 3/4
ORSPRG10-Hydrate Fig. 3/4
3,700
3,750
3,800
3,850
Amplitude
2010 WesternGeco Used by Permission
3,900
> Seismic data from Walker Ridge Block 313, Gulf of Mexico. The seismic section shows a series of
isolated high-amplitude spots (blue and red) that delineate the base of the hydrate-stability zone. The
high-amplitude reflections are discontinuous in this view because the layers have varying lithology
and are steeply dipping. Free gas and gas hydrates are concentrated in the sand-rich layers. Because
shale-rich layers contain little or no hydrate, they do not exhibit significant amplitudes. Horizons A and
B are discussed in a later figure. (Courtesy of WesternGeco.)
21
Cement at Contacts
M1
Grain Coating
5.5
M2
5.0
Supporting Matrix or Grains

M3
P-wave velocity, km/s
4.5
Pore-Fill
M4
4.0
M1
M3
3.5
M2
3.0
M4
2.5
2.0
Matrix and Inclusions

M5
Fracture-Fill
1.5
M6
M5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Gas hydrate saturation, %
70
80
90
100
3.0
M1
2.5
S-wave velocity, km/s
M3
> Microstructural models of hydrate-bearing sediments. In the first five

of the six models, gas hydrates (blue) are evenly distributed throughout
the sedimentary grains (tan) to a first approximation. Hydrate may occur
as cement at grain contacts (top left), as coating on grains (top right), as
a component of the grain matrix (middle left) or as pore-filling material
(middle right). The fifth model considers sedimentary grains as inclusions
in a hydrate matrix (bottom left). The sixth model (bottom right) depicts
hydrates as nodules or fracture-fill in fine-grained, low-permeability
sediments. These models are used to simulate the response of hydratebearing sediments to logging and seismic measurements. (Adapted from
Dai et al, reference 14.)
2.0
M2
1.5
M4
1.0
M5
0.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Gas hydrate saturation, %
Predicting gas hydrate saturation from seismic data in the Walker Ridge and Green Canyon
areas requires a rock physics model that establishes the relationship between those elastic
properties that control the speed of acoustic
energy through sediments and gas hydrate saturations; in other settings around the world high
hydrate concentrations have been associated
with increases in acoustic velocities.14 Several
models have been proposed to explain this effect,
and all of them indicate that these properties are
Oilfield
Review
highly dependent on the
location
of hydrate in
Spring
10
the sediment (above left).
Theoretically,
hydrate
Hydrates Fig. 6
may occur in sedimentary rocks as cement at
ORSPRG10-Hydrate Fig. 6
grain contacts or as coating on grains. It may also
act as a component of the grain matrix or may fill
pores. These microstructural models all consider
the hydrate to be evenly distributed in sediments,
and equations have been derived to link gas
hydrate concentration to elastic properties.
Because gas hydrates have also been encountered in cores as nodules and fracture-fill, these
less homogeneous forms of distribution must also
be considered, although no quantitative treatment of such distributions has been developed.
22
> Comparison of measured and modeled seismic velocities in hydratebearing sediments. Compressional-wave (P-wave) velocities (top)
measured in hydrate-rich layers in a Canadian well (blue triangles) are
plotted with velocities calculated using the models described in the
previous figure. The measured velocities best fit the velocities from the
model treating hydrate as a component of the grain matrix (M3).
Shear-wave (S-wave) velocities (bottom) show a similar match.
(Adapted from Dai et al, reference 14.)
A comparison of seismic velocities computed

from these models with those measured in
hydrate-bearing rocks indicates that the model in
which hydrate acts as a component of the grain
matrix fits the data best (above right). In this
model hydrate neither coats nor cements sediment grains. Inputs include rock porosity and
hydrate saturation, enabling estimates of hydrate
saturation if porosity and seismic velocity are
known. Furthermore, porosity can be related to
seismic velocity, so hydrate saturation can be calculated from velocity alone.
Velocities are usually obtained by inversion of
seismic data for acoustic impedance, which is the
product of density and velocity. However, in gas
hydrates density does not vary much with saturation and therefore can be neglected for a first
approximation. This makes it possible to estimate saturation solely from acoustic impedance.
14. Shelander D, Dai J and Bunge G: Predicting Saturation

of Gas Hydrates Using Pre-Stack Seismic Data, Gulf
of Mexico, Marine Geophysical Researches, 2010
(in press).
Dai J, Xu H, Snyder F and Dutta N: Detection and
Estimation of Gas Hydrates Using Rock Physics
and Seismic Inversion: Examples from the Northern
Deepwater Gulf of Mexico, The Leading Edge 23, no. 1
(January 2004): 6066.
Kleinberg RL, Flaum C, Griffin DD, Brewer PG, Malby GE,
Peltzer ET and Yesinowski JP: Deep Sea NMR:
Methane Hydrate Growth Habit in Porous Media and
Its Relationship to Hydraulic Permeability, Deposit
Accumulation, and Submarine Slope Stability, Journal
of Geophysical Research 108, no. B10 (2003): 25082525.
15. For a description of the type of inversion used: Mallick S,
Oilfield
HuangReview
X, Lauve J and Ahmad R: Hybrid Seismic
Spring
10 A Reconnaissance Tool for Deepwater
Inversion:
Exploration,
Hydrates
Fig. The
7 Leading Edge 19, no. 11 (November
2000): 12301237.
ORSPRG10-Hydrate
Fig. 7
For more on seismic inversion in general: Barclay F,
Bruun A, Rasmussen KB, Camara Alfaro J, Cooke A,
Cooke D, Salter D, Godfrey R, Lowden D, McHugo S,
Ozdemir H, Pickering S, Gonzalez Pineda F, Herwanger J,
Volterrani S, Murineddu A, Rasmussen A and Roberts R:
Seismic Inversion: Reading Between the Lines,
Oilfield Review 20, no. 1 (Spring 2008): 4263.
16. Boswell et al, reference 13.
Oilfield Review
In support of the JIP effort, geophysicists at

WesternGeco performed high-resolution, fullwaveform prestack inversion and combined the
results with conventional linear prestack inversion to produce estimates of P-wave and S-wave
impedances in the 3D volumes created by the
seismic surveys.15 These impedances, in turn,
were converted into saturation cubes (right).
Predrill gas hydrate saturation estimates in
Walker Ridge and Green Canyon clearly highlighted those areas expected to hold the thickest
and most highly saturated reservoirs.
In April 2009 the JIP drilled and logged five
wells at the Walker Ridge and Green Canyon
sites. Four of the wells encountered sand reservoirs with gas hydrate at saturations exceeding
50% and potentially as high as 85%.16 At the Green
Canyon site one well penetrated nearly 100 ft
[30 m] of gas hydratebearing sand (below).
8
Depth,
ft below
rig floor
Horizon B
Well H
BGHS
Density
Ultrasonic Caliper
Gamma Ray
in.
gAPI
12 0
1.4
ohm.m
40
g/cm3
Hydrate Saturation
n = 1.5
2.2
Density Used
Ring
100 1
Hydrate saturation, %
> Gas hydrate saturations in Walker Ridge estimated from seismic inversion. Saturations range from
0% to 40% (green to red). Horizon A (left) lies stratigraphically above Horizon B (right). Well H penetrates
both horizons within the gas hydratestability zone, but Well G penetrates only Horizon A in the gas
hydratestability zone, intersecting Horizon B at a deeper point. The white dot is an oil and gas industry
well not related to the gas hydrate study. The base of the gas hydratestability zone is marked by BGHS.
(Adapted from Shelander et al, reference 14.)
Poor Density
Resistivity
Well H
BGHS
Caliper
12
Well G
Well G
Best Caliper
in.
Horizon A
100 1.4
g/cm
100
n = 2.5
2.2
100
1,340
1,360
1,380
1,400
1,420
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
Hydrates Fig. 9
1,440
1,460
1,480
> Well logs (left) from a Green Canyon gas hydrate well. High resistivities (Track 3) are the clearest indications of gas hydrates (pink shading) in this 100-ft
sand. Deeper, thinner sands also contain hydrates. The caliper log (Track 1) shows washouts in the hydrate-free zones (blue shading). Washouts can lead to
poor density results (Track 4). Estimated gas hydrate saturations (Track 5) range from 50% to more than 85% and depend on the saturation exponent, n, used
in Archies law, which relates resistivity to porosity and saturation. Personnel prepare LWD tools on the Q4000 floating drilling unit (right). (Photograph
courtesy of the JIP Leg II Science Team.)
Spring 2010
23
Well H
3,360
Hor
NE
izo
nA
SW
8,600
3,380
3,400
Two-way time, ms
3,440
Ho
rizo
3,460
nB
9,000
3,480
Depth, ft
8,800
3,420
Gamma ray
Resistivity
Sonic slowness
3,500
3,520
Base
3,540
hydr
ate-s
3,560
9,200
tabil
Hydrate saturation, % 40
ity zo
ne
3,580
3,600
9,400
9,380
9,370
9,360
9,350
9,340
9,330
9,320
9,310
9,300
Inline number
> Estimated saturations and acquired well logs through a gas hydrate zone. Seismic inversion
predicted high saturations of gas hydrate (reds) in Horizon B at the location of Well H. High
concentrations of gas hydrate can be inferred from the high resistivity values (yellow log) and sonic
slownesses (green log). The decrease in gamma ray readings (blue log) indicates the layer is a sand.
(Adapted from Shelander et al, reference 14.)
Pump Rate, galUS/min
Bit Total Flow Area, in.2

0.52
3.65
0.56
3.13
0.60
2.72
0.65
2.36
0.69
2.06
0.74
1.80
0.79
420
410
3.40
2.92
2.53
2.19
1.92
1.68
1.48
400
3.16
2.71
2.35
2.04
1.78
1.56
1.38
390
2.93
2.51
2.18
1.89
1.65
1.44
1.28
380
2.71
2.32
2.01
1.74
1.53
1.34
1.18
370
2.50
2.14
1.86
1.61
1.41
1.23
1.09
360
2.30
1.97
1.71
1.48
1.30
1.14
1.00
350
2.12
1.81
1.57
1.36
1.19
1.04
0.92
340
1.94
1.66
1.44
1.25
1.09
0.96
0.84
330
1.77
1.52
1.32
1.14
1.00
0.88
0.77
320
1.62
0.80
0.70
310
1.47
0.73
0.64
300
1.33
0.66
0.58
290
1.20
0.91
1.04
1.20
1.39
Oilfield
Review
Spring
0.83
0.95
1.26 101.09
Hydrates
Fig. 11 0.86
0.75
0.99
1.14
ORSPRG10-Hydrate
Fig. 110.68
0.78
0.89
1.03
0.59
0.52
280
1.08
0.93
0.81
0.70
0.61
0.53
0.47
270
0.97
0.83
0.72
0.63
0.55
0.48
0.42
1.59
> Optimizing circulation rates and bit design for the Green Canyon area.
This table shows bit hydraulic horsepower per square inch (HSI) as a
function of the bit total flow area and the circulation, or pump, rate. The
light-yellow shading denotes the range of circulation rates and bit sizes that
maintains the bit HSI between 1 and 1.5 to minimize hole erosion and
optimize the mechanical action of the bit. An additional design criterion
governing the circulation rate was to ensure that gas hydrate did not
dissociate during drilling.
24
Scientists confirmed that at the Walker Ridge

site, gas hydrate occurred in multiple reservoir
sands and fully saturated them over their geologic extent.
The Gulf of Mexico JIP Legs I and II are the
first drilling projects to have prepared predrill
estimates of gas hydrate saturation and then
tested them by subsequent drilling. The excellent
results provide increased confidence in the geologic and geophysical concepts and technologies
applied by the JIP team (left).17
Assessing gas hydrate drilling hazards
Drilling wells into gas hydrate accumulations
requires consideration of several wellborestability issues. The drilling process must avoid
stress-induced mechanical failure, washouts and
fluid influx resulting from hydrate dissociation
and shallow-water or free-gas flows.
In support of the JIP 2009 expedition,
Schlumberger geomechanics experts evaluated
the proposed drilling locations and flagged sites
where excess pore pressure presented potential
drilling hazards. They also developed methods to
predict the mechanical and phase stability of
boreholes drilled in sediments containing gas
hydrates. These methods involved calibration
correlations relating the mechanical properties
of hydrate-bearing sediments to log- and seismicderived data.18 Using numerical simulators, the
JIP team modeled the while-drilling borehole
temperatures and estimated the energy of impact
of drilling fluid streams impinging on the formation from bit nozzles.
These analyses enabled the JIP team to evaluate the potential for mechanical failure of the
borehole, gas hydrate dissociation and hydraulic
erosion of the sediment. Design criteria were
developed to optimize bit selection and circulation practice (left).
17. Jones E: Characterizing Natural Gas Hydrates in
the Deep Water Gulf of Mexico: Applications for
Safe Exploration and Production Activities, SemiAnnual Progress Report #41330417, prepared for
the US Department of Energy, October 2009, http://
www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/publications/
Hydrates/2009Reports/NT41330_SemiAnnSep2009.PDF
18. Birchwood R, Singh R and Mese A: Estimating the In
Situ Mechanical Properties of Sediments Containing
Gas Hydrates, Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on Gas Hydrates, Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada, July 610, 2008.
19. Schlumberger provided several LWD services, including
sonicVISION sonic logging, EcoScope multifunction
logging, TeleScope high-speed telemetry, geoVISION
imaging and PeriScope bed boundary mapping.
Oilfield Review
During the 2009 campaign, several LWD tools

were run in the JIP boreholes, including an experimental multipole sonic tool to evaluate shear
velocities in the unconsolidated hydrate-rich sediments.19 Transmission of LWD data in real time
enabled shipboard and onshore specialists to
modeling and correlation methods (below). The

success of the drilling campaign confirmed that
with proper planning and careful engineering
design, gas hydrate formations can be drilled safely.
update predrill models and to diagnose drilling

situations. This made it possible to optimize drilling practices over the course of the expedition.
The predictions made by wellbore-stability
and downhole temperature models were consistent with observed data, raising confidence in the
Shear Failure
Mud Weight
8
lbm/galUS
18
Modeled Pore Pressure

8
lbm/galUS
18
Modeled
Horizontal Stress
8
. Elastoplastic wellbore-stability model in Green

Canyon Block 955, Well H. High resistivities
(Track 1, orange) indicate the presence of gas
hydrates. Track 2 shows the friction (green) and
dilation (purple) angles. A binary lithology model
predicts much higher friction angles in sands
than in clays, particularly in shallower sections
where the confining stress at the borehole wall is
low. The dilation angle is estimated in sands
using a correlation; it is assumed to be zero in
clays. Track 3 displays the static Youngs modulus
(red) and the unconfined compressive strength
(blue). Both show a tendency to increase
whenever gas hydrate is present in the main
target sands, between 8,077 and 8,186 ft, but are
relatively unaffected by the presence of gas
hydrates in clays. Track 4 contains the output of
the wellbore-stability model: pore pressure
(blue), shear failure envelope (green), horizontal
stress (magenta) and overburden stress (red).
The mud weight used to drill the well is shown in
brown. The model predicts a stable borehole
everywhere except in the olive-shaded intervals,
where the shear failure envelope exceeds the
mud weight. Such intervals are prone to hole
enlargement due to shear failure. Track 5 shows
the difference (blue shading) between the bit size
(black) and the density caliper (purple). The
borehole is generally close to gauge; however,
some hole enlargement can be seen in sandy
zones between 8,000 and 8,328 ft, where there is
little or no gas hydrate. The wellbore-stability
model predicts that such zones are too weak to
support a borehole. The model also correctly
accounts for the strengthening effect of gas
hydrates in sand intervals where the borehole is
in gauge.
Gamma Ray
Depth,
ft
Dilation Angle
150 10
gAPI
ohm.m
deg
50 0
Friction Angle
Resistivity
20 10
deg
Unconfined Compressive
Strength
MPa
10 8
Static Youngs Modulus

50 0
MPa
500 8
lbm/galUS
18
Out of Gauge
Modeled
Shear Failure Envelope
lbm/galUS
Bit Size
18 8
in.
12
Modeled Overburden
Density Caliper
lbm/galUS
in.
18 8
12
7,000
7,500
Gas
hydrates
in clayrich
layers
Predicted
hole
enlargement
8,000
Target
gas
hydrate
bearing
sands
Observed
hole
enlargement
8,500
Spring 2010
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
Hydrates Fig. 13
25
Gamagori
km
a
S e
50
mi
50
n
pa
J a
o f
Na
FI
gh
CI
ou
PA
Tr
ai
nk
East
China
Sea
OC
EA
J A P A N
0
0
km
200
mi
200
> The region of the Nankai Trough, offshore Japan. Drilling locations in the
eastern Nankai Trough area are shown as red dots (inset). Seismic BSRs
(purple) indicate the presence of hydrates over vast areas.
Hydrates in the Eastern Nankai Trough

Another area of gas hydrate exploration is offshore Japan, in the region of the eastern Nankai
Trough. Seismic data indicate widespread existence of BSRs (left). In 1999 a Japanese governmentfunded project drilling in the eastern
Nankai Trough successfully penetrated a BSR
and recovered a number of gas hydrate samples.20 A few years later, in 2001, the Japanese
government initiated an 18-year exploration
project to evaluate the distribution of gas
hydrates, estimate reserves and develop a methane hydrate field.21
As part of this program, 2D and 3D seismic
surveys were acquired and 32 wells were drilled
through the BSR in water depths of 722 to 2,033m
[2,370 to 6,670 ft]. The base of the hydratestability zone ranges from 177 to 345 m [581 to
1,132 ft] below the seafloor. Of the wells drilled,
16 were logged with LWD tools, 12 were cored, 2
were logged with wireline tools, and 1 was
equipped with long-term temperature sensors.22
Cores were retrieved from a variety of hydraterich sediments (below).
One of the many studies focused on analysis
of well logs for determination of gas hydrate saturation.23 As solids in the pore space, gas hydrates
are invisible to NMR tools. Although there are
hydrogen atoms in both the water and the methane, they are locked in the hydrate lattice structure and their spins cannot be manipulated by
the NMR tool. Their absence from the NMR measurement results in a porosity value that is typically lower than that measured by other tools.
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
Hydrates Fig. 14
> Gas hydrates from the eastern Nankai Trough. At one site the gas hydrate (white) occupies a layer within a mud-silt zone (left). At a different site, the gas
hydrate is disseminated in the pore space of a sand layer (right). The scale is in centimeters.
26
Oilfield Review
Hunting Hydrates in India

Gas hydrate is also a potential source of energy
for India, which currently does not produce
enough oil and gas to fuel its growing economy.
The presence of gas hydrates on Indias continental margins has been inferred from BSRs seen in
seismic data. The total estimated resource from
natural gas hydrates in the country is placed at
1,894 trillion m3 [66,880 Tcf].28
In 1997 the government of India formed the
National Gas Hydrates Program (NGHP) to explore
and develop the countrys gas hydrate resources.
20. Matsumoto R, Takedomi Y and Wasada H: Exploration

of Marine Gas Hydrates in Nankai Trough, Offshore
Central Japan, presented at the AAPG Annual
Convention, Denver, June 36, 2001.
21. Fukuhara M, Sugiyama H, Igarashi J, Fujii K, Shunetsu O,
Tertychnyi V, Shandrygin A, Pimenov V, Shako V,
Matsubayashi O and Ochiai K: Model-Based
Temperature Measurement System Development
for Marine Methane Hydrate-Bearing Sediments,
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Gas
Hydrates, Trondheim, Norway, June 1316, 2005.
22. Takahashi H and Tsuji Y: Multi-Well Exploration
Program in 2004 for Natural Hydrate in the NankaiTrough Offshore Japan, paper OTC 17162, presented
at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
May 25, 2005.
Spring 2010
Porosity Difference
Density Porosity
Washout
80
10
in.
Caliper
10
in.
Gamma Ray
0
gAPI
NMR Porosity
Bit Size
Depth, m
This difference can be used to estimate hydrate

volume. The method is analogous to the DMR
densitymagnetic resonance technique developed
to determine gas saturation in gas reservoirs.24
Such a technique helped log analysts estimate saturation from wireline logs in an eastern
Nankai Trough well.25 Gamma ray, caliper,
resistivity, neutron, density, magnetic resonance
and sonic measurements showed alternation
of hydrate- and non-hydrate-bearing layers
(right). The difference between porosities seen
by the magnetic resonance tool and those computed from the density tool data corresponds to
the approximate volume of hydrate contained in
the sediments. Saturations calculated from the
resistivity and magnetic resonance responses are
comparable except where washouts have affected
the density and magnetic resonance readings.
Washouts occur mainly in the non-hydratebearing layers.
Using all available core, log and seismic data,
experts estimate the total amount of methane gas
in the surveyed area of the eastern Nankai Trough
to be 40 Tcf [1.1 trillion m3].26
The Japanese program has recently announced
that it will proceed with preparations to conduct
field tests of gas hydrate productivity at sites
within the Nankai Trough.27
20
80
Deep Resistivity
20 0.2
ohm.m
ohm.m
200 80
DMR Porosity
%
DMR Water
Saturation
Neutron Porosity
200 80
Shallow Resistivity
100 0.2
100
0
Resistivity Water
Saturation
0 100
X10
X20
X30
X40
> Formation evaluation in a hydrate zone. Track 1 plots gamma ray (green)
and caliper (solid black). Blue fill indicates washed-out intervals. Track 2
contains shallow and deep resistivity data. High resistivities correspond to
hydrate-rich zones. Low resistivities signify laminations without hydrate
layers that tend to wash out during drilling. Track 3 contains neutron
porosity (dotted blue), density porosity (red), NMR porosity (black) and the
DMR porosity obtained by combining density and NMR measurements
(green). Gold shading represents the volume of gas hydrate. Track 4 shows
the water saturations calculated using the resistivity (red) and densityNMR-difference technique (blue). Several spikes in Tracks 3 and 4 correlate
with borehole washouts.
23. Murray D, Kleinberg R, Sinha B, Fukuhara M, Osawa O,

26. Fujii T, Saeki T, Kobayashi T, Inamori T, Hayashi M,
Oilfield
Endo T and Namikawa T: Formation Evaluation
of GasReview Takano O, Takayama T, Kawasaki T, Nagakubo S,
Spring
Hydrate Reservoirs, Transactions of the SPWLA
46th10
Nakamizu M and Yokoi K: Resource Assessment of
Annual Logging Symposium, New Orleans, June
2629, Fig. 16 Methane Hydrate in the Eastern Nankai Trough, Japan,
Hydrates
2005, paper SSS.
paperFig.
OTC16
19310, presented at the Offshore Technology
ORSPRG10-Hydrate
Conference, Houston, May 58, 2008.
24. Freedman R, Cao Minh C, Gubelin G, Freeman JJ,
McGinness T, Terry B and Rawlence D: Combining NMR
27. Masuda Y, Yamamoto K, Tadaaki S, Ebinuma T and
and Density Logs for Petrophysical Analysis in GasNagakubo S: Japans Methane Hydrate R&D Program
Bearing Formations, Transactions of the SPWLA 39th
Progresses to Phase 2, Fire in the Ice (Fall 2009): 16,
Annual Logging Symposium, Keystone, Colorado, USA,
http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/
May 2629, 1998, paper II.
publications/Hydrates/Newsletter/MHNewsFall09.
pdf#Page=1 (accessed March 9, 2010).
25. Murray DR, Kleinberg RL, Sinha BK, Fukuhara M,
Osawa O, Endo T and Namikawa T: Saturation, Acoustic
28. Government of India, Directorate General of
Properties, Growth Habit, and State of Stress of a Gas
Hydrocarbons: Gas Hydrate: R&D Advances in India,
Hydrate Reservoir from Well Logs, Petrophysics 47,
http://www.dghindia.org/NonConventionalEnergy.
no. 2 (April 2006): 129137.
aspx?tab=2#3 (accessed February 17, 2010).
27
BANGLADESH
BURMA
Mahanadi
Mumbai
Krishna-Godavari
Kerala
Konkan
Chennai
Andaman
Islands
0
0
500
km
mi
16A
500
7A-D
15A
5A-E14A
11A
6A
4A
2A-B
3A-C
10A-D 12A
13A
20A
KrishnaGodavari
> Exploration sites (red circles) of the 2006 expedition of the Indian National
Gas Hydrates Program (NGHP). A scientific team aboard the JOIDES
Resolution drilling vessel assessed data from 39 boreholes in four different
regions. Samples from the Krishna-Godavari region (inset) contained
significant hydrate accumulations. (Adapted from Collett et al, reference 29.)
The first NGHP expedition, in 2006, explored four lenses and wispy subvertical veins oriented in
areas of the Indian Ocean (above). The primary a primary direction, with some crossing in a
goal of NGHP Expedition 01 was to conduct scien- secondary direction.
In the intervals where hydrates reside in pore
tific ocean drilling, coring, logging and analytical
space,
the Archie relationship can be used to
activities to assess the geologic Oilfield
occurrence,
Review
determine
saturation. However, in other zones,
regional context and characteristics ofSpring
gas hydrate
10
for example, where hydrate occupies fractures in
deposits along the continental marginsHydrates
of India.29Fig. 17
Fig. 17
sediments, the method is not
The expedition team consisted ofORSPRG10-Hydrate
more than low-permeability
100 scientists and professionals representing more applicable, but resistivity logs and images can
than 30 universities, national institutes and com- still be used to identify hydrate-filled fractures.
Images from an RAB resistivity-at-the-bit LWD
panies. During the 113-day operation, the scientific ocean drilling vessel JOIDES Resolution tool clearly show resistive hydrate-filled fractures
drilled 39 boreholes in water depths ranging as well as conductive fractures in several holes in
from 907 to 2,674 m [2,975 to 8,774 ft]. Scientists the Krishna-Godavari region.30 Fractures in most of
recovered 2,850 m [9,350 ft] of core, logged the holes analyzed have steep dips70 to 80
12holes with LWD tools and an additional 13holes (next page). Stress orientations calculated from
with wireline tools, and performed six borehole dip data indicate a maximum horizontal stress
seismic surveys.
direction perpendicular to the edge of Indias
The cores indicate that hydrates occur in a Continental Slopea finding that is inconsistent
variety of settings. In the Indian Ocean, as in with those from other passive continental margins
other parts of the world, hydrates are present documented for boreholes deeper than the holes
in coarse-grained sediments. More surprising in the NGHP study. This contradiction suggests
was the amount of hydrates discovered in fine- that the fractures may be related to local slumps
grained sediments, where they occur as layers, and slides, signifying shallow stresses at work
rather than deep tectonic stresses.31
28
The shale-dominated interval of hydratefilled fractures encountered at Site NGHP-01-10

is one of the richest marine gas hydrate accumulations ever discovered.32 Among the highlights of
the expedition was the discovery of one of the
deepest gas hydrate accumulations known: At
Site NGHP-01-17, offshore the Andaman Islands,
gas hydratebearing volcanic ash layers were
encountered as far as 600 m [1,970 ft] below the
seafloor. Future plans call for a pilot project to
produce methane from some of these locations.
Other Exploration Efforts
The successes of marine hydrate exploration campaigns in Japan and India have encouraged groups
in other countries to pursue similar programs. For
example, investigative projects in China have
begun in areas conducive to hydrate stability.
Chinas first gas hydrate drilling expedition,
GMGS-1, was conducted in 2007 by the Guangzhou
Marine Geological Survey (GMGS), China
Geological Survey (CGS) and the Ministry of
Land and Resources of the Peoples Republic of
China. The Bavenit geotechnical and scientific
drilling vessel visited eight sites in the Shenhu
area of the South China Sea. On this expedition,
the project team described both a new gas
hydrate province and a potentially new mode of
hydrate distribution within sediments.33
At each site a pilot hole was drilled and then
logged with a suite of high-resolution slimhole
wireline tools. From these logs decisions were
made either to immediately drill an adjacent
coring hole or to move on to another site.
At three of the five sites cored, gas hydrates
were detected in clay- and silt-rich sediments
directly above the base of the hydrate-stability
zone. Thickness of the hydrate-rich layers ranged
from 10 to 25 m [33 to 82 ft]. Hydrate was distributed evenly in 20% to 40% of the pore volume
throughout these fine-grained sediments. While
it is common to find hydrate dispersed in coarsegrained sediment and hydrate-filled fractures in
clay-dominated sediments, seldom have hydrates
been seen disseminated in extremely finegrained layers at such elevated saturations.
Further analysis of samples and data collected during the expedition will continue at the
GMGS and at laboratories throughout China.
Potential future expeditions to the Shenhu area
and other regions of the South China Sea margin
are under discussion.
Oilfield Review
Deep Resistivity
Caliper
Medium Resistivity
8 in. 20
Depth, m
Producing Methane from Hydrates

Although many countries and organizations are
finding gas hydrates plentiful and widespread,
the problem remains as to how to produce methane from them safely, efficiently and economically. In addressing this problem, a top priority is
to understand the dissociation mechanisms of
hydrates in different habitats.
Safety is also an important issue. Hydrates in
pore space strengthen the grain matrix, but when
the solid hydrate turns into gas and water, the
volume of the pore-filling material can increase
significantly; the sediment becomes fluidized,
compromising the strength and stiffness of the
sediment column. This can lead to compaction of
the sediment in the producing zone and over
burden, destabilization of faults, sand production
and other processes that may potentially damage
infrastructure. Techniques for hydrate exploitation will have to succeed without causing sediment instability.
To recover methane from hydrates, experts
concur that exploiting hydrates in sandy sediments has the highest probability of success and
requires the lowest investment in new technology.
Two principal techniques have been field tested
for recovering methane from hydrates: heating and
depressurization. For ease of access, tests have
been conducted on hydrate accumulations on land,
in permafrost regions. Comprehensive tests have
taken place at the Mallik gas hydrate field in the
Canadian Northwest Territories and at the Mount
Elbert prospect in Alaska.
Gamma
Ray
Density
Deep Resistivity Image

Statically Enhanced
Shallow Resistivity Resistive
gAPI
g/cm3
60
120 1.3
2.0 0.2
ohm.m
200
Deep Resistivity Image

Dynamically Enhanced
Conductive Resistive
S
Conductive
S
Dip and
Dip Direction
Gas Hydrate
Filled Fracture
Dip, deg
50 60 70 80
65
70
75
> Borehole image and core from the Krishna-Godavari region. Among the logs acquired in Well
NGHP-01-10A, a borehole image log (Tracks 4 and 5) exhibits high-resistivity gas hydrate (light colors) in
steeply dipping fractures (Track 6). Dips are consistently 70 to 80. (Log courtesy of Ann Cook,
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.) The core (inset) shows gas hydrate (white) filling a fracture in
black fine-grained sediments. (Photograph courtesy of the NGHP Expedition 01.)
29. US Geological Survey, Results of the Indian National

Gas Hydrate Program (NGHP) Expedition 01,
http://energy.usgs.gov/other/gashydrates/india.html
Collett TS, Riedel M, Cochran J, Boswell R, Kumar P,
Sathe A and NGHP Expedition 01 Scientific Party:
Geologic Controls on the Occurrence of Gas
Hydrates in the Indian Continental Margin: Results
of the Indian National Gas Hydrate Program (NGHP)
Spring 2010
Expedition 01, adapted from an oral presentation at

31. Cook and Goldberg, reference 30.
the AAPG Annual Convention, San Antonio, Texas,
32. Collett
et al, reference 29.
Oilfield Review
April 2023, 2008, http://www.searchanddiscovery.
33. Zhang H, Yang S, Wu N, Su X, Holland M, Schultheiss P,
Spring 10
net/documents/2008/08135collett/ndx_collett01.pdf
K, Butler H, Humphrey G and GMGS-1 Science
Hydrates Fig. 18 Rose
Team: Successful and Surprising Results for Chinas
30. Cook A and Goldberg D: Stress and Gas Hydrate-Filled
ORSPRG10-Hydrate
18 Drilling Expedition, Fire in the Ice
First Fig.
Gas Hydrate
Fracture Distribution, Krishna-Godavari Basin, India,
(Fall 2007): 69, http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Gas
oil-gas/publications/Hydrates/Newsletter/
Hydrates, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July
HMNewsFall07.pdf (accessed February 17, 2010).
610, 2008.
29
o r t
B e a u f
a
S e
Mallik
e
zi
n
ke
ac Bay
M
Ice
Yukon Territory
Northwest Territories
d
roa
Inuvik
0
0
km 50
mi
50
> The Mallik field, Northwest Territories, Canada. The Mallik field has been the site of hydrate
discoveries and research since 1972. The site is accessible only in winter by way of an ice road.
(Photograph courtesy of Scott Dallimore, Geological Survey of Canada.)
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
Hydrates Fig. 19
> A Mallik gas hydrate core sample collected in 2002. Gas hydrate (white)
resides within the pore space of a pebbly conglomerate. (Photograph
courtesy of Scott Dallimore, Geological Survey of Canada.)
30
Mallik Gas Hydrate Production

The Mallik field, located on the Mackenzie Delta
in the Beaufort Sea, has a long history of gas
hydrate investigation (left).34 Hydrates were discovered in 1972 during exploration drilling by
Imperial Oil Ltd. In the early 1990s the Geological
Survey of Canada (GSC) undertook a regional
appraisal of gas hydrates in the Mackenzie Delta
area. Later, in 1998, the Japan National Oil
Corporation (JNOC) and the GSC, working with
several other institutions, completed the Mallik
2L-38 Gas Hydrate Research Well Program.
Results from these studies establish the
Mallik field as one of the most concentrated gas
hydrate accumulations in the world.35 Interbedded
sequences of hydrate-rich sands occur at depths
from 890 to 1,106 m [2,920 to 3,629 ft], with some
layers surpassing 30 m [100 ft] in thickness.36 In
certain zones hydrate saturations exceed 80%
(below left). The abundance of subsurface data
available, the advantage of access by land and the
similarities with many offshore hydrate deposits
make the Mallik site attractive for research.
In 2002 a new program was initiated to conduct
production testing of hydrates from the Mallik
field.37 The production research program included
the GSC and JNOC, as well as formal collaboration
with the International Continental Scientific
Drilling Program and institutions from the USA,
Germany and India. A 1,166-m [3,825-ft] production
well was drilled, cored, logged and cased, and two
1,188-m [3,898-ft] observation wells were drilled
and cased. The response of the formation to thermal
stimulation and depressurization was monitored
using fiber-optic distributed temperature sensors
(DTS) installed in each well, repeat cased hole logging in the production well and cross-well seismic
surveys conducted in the monitoring wells.
The 13-m [43-ft] interval selected for the thermal test was a relatively clean sandstone bounded
by shales and located below the permafrost, with
hydrate saturation ranging from 70% to 85%.38
Heated brine was circulated past open perforations. The fluid and produced gas returned to surface in the annulus between the circulation string
and the casing. During the 5-day test cumulative
gas production was 516 m3 [18.2 Mcf].39
The differences noted in pretest openhole
resistivity logs and post-test cased hole resistivity
logs were used to determine the radius of hydrate
dissociation over the test interval (next page).40
The analysis indicated that the dissociation radius
was not uniform and was greatest near the outlet
of the circulation string, where fiber-optic DTS
sensors had recorded the highest temperatures.
In addition to variations in temperature across
Oilfield Review
34. Dallimore SR, Collett TS, Uchida T, Weber M, Chandra A,

Mroz TH, Caddel EM, Inoue T, Takahashi H, Taylor AE
and Mallik Gas Hydrate Research Team: The Mallik
Gas Hydrate Field: Lessons Learned from 30 Years of
Gas Hydrate Investigation, AAPG Bulletin 88, no. 13
(supplement), 2004.
35. Dallimore et al, reference 34.
36. Dallimore SR, Uchida T and Collett TS (eds): Scientific
Results from JAPEX/JNOC/GSC Mallik 2L-38 Gas
Hydrate Research Well, Mackenzie Delta, Northwest
Territories, Canada: Geological Survey of Canada
Bulletin 544, 1999.
37. Dallimore SR and Collett TS (eds): Scientific Results
from the Mallik 2002 Gas Hydrate Production Research
Well Program, Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories,
Canada: Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin 585, 2005,
available at http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi-bin/
starfinder/0?path=geoscan.fl&id=fastlink&pass=
&search=R%3D220702&format=FLFULL (accessed
April 1, 2010).
Spring 2010
Resistivity, ohm.m
900
10
100
Radius, m
1,000
910
Collar
Depth, m
the zone, variations in porosity and permeability

and in water invasion may have affected heat
exchange with the formation.
Deeper in the test well, small-scale pressuredrawdown tests were also carried out over six
hydrate-rich zones using a modified MDT modular formation dynamics tester.41 The tool collected samples of gas and water and measured
changes in pressure and flow rates. After analysis
of these and other data, along with intensive
numerical modeling efforts, the research team
concluded that depressurization would be a more
effective method than thermal stimulation for
inducing hydrate dissociation.
The next phase of production testing research
at Mallik was undertaken in the winters of 2007
and 2008. For this project Japan was represented
by the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National
Corporation (JOGMEC), and Canada was represented by Natural Resources Canada. Aurora
Research Institute in Inuvik, Northwest
Territories, acted as the operator. This program
was designed to advance long-term production
testing using a depressurization technique.
Considerable emphasis was also placed on design
and testing of various geophysical monitoring
techniques and evaluation of downhole completion technologies for gas hydrate production.
Operations during the first winterthe site
is accessible only when the 200-km [124-mi] ice
road from Inuvik is frozeninvolved installing
well infrastructure and conducting a short production test in the Mallik 2L-38 well drilled as
part of the 1998 research program. The test zone
was a 12-m [39-ft] interval near the bottom of a
hydrate-rich zone. An ESP was set below the perforations to depressurize the formation by lowering the water level in the well. Because of permit
restrictions during the first year, the operation
plans called for disposal of produced water in the
same wellbore. To accomplish this, gas-water
920
Collar
930
CHFR log
CHFR model
Openhole resistivity log

Resistivity model
Hole radius
Dissociation radius
> Determining hydrate dissociation volume. Logs were acquired before and
after a 2002 thermal stimulation production test in the Mallik field (left).
Openhole resistivity logs acquired before the test (orange) were compared
with CHFR cased hole formation resistivity logs run afterward (purple) to
determine the radius of hydrate dissociation over the test interval. The
differences correspond to a modeled radius of dissociation (right) that
varies with depth. (Adapted from Anderson et al, reference 38.)
separation was performed in the wellbore; the in the 5 days of thermal stimulation in the 2002
gas was produced to surface and the produced test.44 Sand production was much greater than
water was reinjected into water zones below the anticipated, a problem that would have to be
gas hydrate test interval.42
overcome in future operations. The team planned
The April 2007 production test was performed to return the next year, when freezing conditions
without sand control measures to monitor and would allow operations to continue.
After reviewing the experience from the first
measure the direct formation response to pressure drawdown.43 As expected, a significant winters operation, the team returned to Mallik in
amount of sand was producedso much that the the winter of 2008 with a simplified research proOilfield Review
gram. This time produced water was flowed to
test was curtailed after 60 hours. However,
Springduring
10
the surface and reinjected into a water-disposal
the most successful 12.5 hours ofHydrates
pumping,
Fig. 21
a custom-designed sand screen
830m3 [29.3 Mcf] of gas was produced,
more than well. In
ORSPRG10-Hydrate
Fig.addition,
21

The Mallik 2002 Consortium: Drilling and Testing

a Gas Hydrate Well, National Methane Hydrates
R&D Program, US Department of Energy, http://www.
netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/FutureSupply/
MethaneHydrates/projects/DOEProjects/Mallik-41007.
html (accessed February 11, 2010).
38. Anderson BI, Collett TS, Lewis RE and Dubourg I: Using
Open Hole and Cased-Hole Resistivity Logs to Monitor
Gas Hydrate Dissociation During a Thermal Test in the
Mallik 5L-38 Research Well, Mackenzie Delta, Canada,
Petrophysics 49, no. 3 (June 2008): 285294.
39. Dallimore and Collett, reference 37.
40. Anderson et al, reference 38.
41. Hancock SH, Dallimore SR, Collett TS, Carle D,
Weatherill B, Satoh T and Inoue T: Overview of
Pressure-Drawdown Production-Test Results for the
JAPEX/JNOC/GSC et al. Mallik 5L-38 Gas Hydrate
Production Research Well, in Dallimore SR and
Collett TS (eds): Scientific Results from the Mallik
2002 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program,

Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories, Canada:
Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin 585, 2005,
available at http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi-bin/
starfinder/0?path=geoscan.fl&id=fastlink&pass=
&search=R%3D220702&format=FLFULL (accessed
April 1, 2010).
42. Yamamoto K and Dallimore S: Aurora-JOGMECNRCan Mallik 2006-2008 Gas Hydrate Research Project
Progress, Fire in the Ice (Summer 2008): 15, http://
www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/publications/
Hydrates/Newsletter/HMNewsSummer08.pdf#Page=1
43. Energy from Gas Hydrates: Assessing the Opportunities
& Challenges for Canada, Report in Focus (July 2008),
http://www.scienceadvice.ca/documents/(2008_07_07)_
GH_Report_in_Focus.pdf (accessed January 27, 2010).
44. Hancock et al, reference 41.
31
assembly was installed before testing to limit

sand influx into the wellbore (left). The 6-day
test was highly successful, with sustained gas
flows ranging from 2,000 to 4,000 m3/d [70 to
140 Mcf/d].45 Operations continued smoothly at
three target drawdown pressures. The Mallik
tests successfully demonstrated a field-scale
proof-of-concept for gas production from hydrates
by depressurization using conventional oilfield
technologies adapted for arctic conditions.
Water
Gas
Permafrost zone
650
Depth, m
ESP
Gas separator
Heater
890
Pressure and
temperature sensors
1,070
Sand screen
1,100
Bridge plug
Aquifers
> Well completion for the Mallik 2008 depressurization production test. An
electric submersible pump (ESP) installed above the perforations
depressurized the formation by lowering the water level in the well. Sand
screens prevented sand influx from the unconsolidated formation into the
borehole. Hydrate dissociation produced gas and water. After gas-water
separation, gas flowed to the surface, and produced water was sampled
then reinjected in a separate water-disposal well. (Adapted from Yamamoto
and Dallimore, reference 42.)
Flowing bottomhole pressure

Flowing bottomhole temperature (FBHT)
Hydrate-stability pressure at initial FBHT
4
3
10
End flow
period 2
End flow
period 3
4
2
0
End flow
period 1
0
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
Hydrates Fig. 22
10
11
Flowing bottomhole temperature, C
Flowing bottomhole pressure, MPa
12
Test time, h
> Gas hydrate production test. An MDT tool was used to reduce well pressure
by drawing water from a layer containing high saturations of gas hydrate.
Between fluid-withdrawal, or flow, periods, the pump was shut off, pressure
build-up was monitored and gas and water samples were collected. During
the first flow period the bottomhole pressure (blue) was kept above the
hydrate-stability pressure (green), so no methane was produced. During the
second and third flow periods the bottomhole pressure was decreased to
below the stability pressure, allowing the gas hydrate to dissociate and gas to
be produced. (Adapted from Anderson et al, reference 51.)
32
Gas Hydrate Production in Alaska

The USGS has studied gas hydrate accumulations
in the Alaska North Slope and currently estimates
they contain between 25.2 and 157.8 Tcf [714 and
4,468 billion m3] of undiscovered technically
recoverable natural gas.46 Much of this resource
occurs within gas hydrate deposits near existing
oil and gas production facilities (next page).47
Early work on hydrates in this area dates to
1972, when ARCO and Exxon drilled, cored and
tested methane hydrates in the Northwest Eileen
State-2 well.48 However, that testing indicated
subcommercial production rates; as a result,
Alaskas gas hydrate zones were not considered
45. Report in Focus, reference 43.
46. Assessment of Gas Hydrate Resources on the North
Slope, Alaska, 2008, U.S. Geological Survey, Fact
Sheet 2008-3073 (October 2008), http://pubs.usgs.
gov/fs/2008/3073/pdf/FS08-3073_508.pdf (accessed
January 18, 2010).
47. Alaska North Slope Gas Hydrate Reservoir
Characterization, National Methane Hydrates R&D
Program, US Department of Energy, http://www.
netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/futuresupply/
methanehydrates/projects/DOEProjects/Alaska-41332.
html (accessed January 18, 2010).
48. Collett TS: Natural Gas Hydrates of the Prudhoe Bay
and Kuparuk River Area, North Slope, Alaska, AAPG
Bulletin 77, no. 5 (May 1993): 793812.
49. BP Drills Alaska North Slope Gas Hydrate Test Well to
Assess Potential Energy Resource, BP press release
(February 2007), http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.
do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7028944 (accessed
January 18, 2010).
50. Boswell R, Hunter R, Collett T, Digert S, Hancock S,
Weeks M and Mount Elbert Science Team:
Investigation of Gas Hydrate-Bearing Sandstone
Reservoirs at the Mount Elbert Stratigraphic Test
Well, Milne Point, Alaska, Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference on Gas Hydrates, Vancouver,
British Columbia, Canada, July 610, 2008.
51. Anderson BJ, Wilder JW, Kurihara M, White MD,
Moridis GJ, Wilson SJ, Pooladi-Darvish M, Masuda Y,
Collett TS, Hunter RB, Narita H, Rose K and Boswell R:
Analysis of Modular Dynamic Formation Test Results
from the Mount Elbert-01 Stratigraphic Test Well,
Milne Point Unit, North Slope of Alaska, Proceedings
of the 6th International Conference on Gas Hydrates,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July 610, 2008.
52. Collett T and Boswell R: The Identification of Sites for
Extended-Term Gas Hydrate Reservoir Testing on the
Alaska North Slope, Fire in the Ice (Summer 2009):
1216, http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/
publications/Hydrates/Newsletter/MHNewsSummer09.
pdf (accessed January 27, 2010).
53. US DOE, reference 47.
54. Report in Focus, reference 43.
Oilfield Review
as potential gas reservoirs but were treated as

drilling hazards to be dealt with as deeper targets
were developed.
The recent assessment of Alaska gas hydrates
as a resource began in 2001 with a cooperative
research program between BP Exploration
Alaska Inc., the US Department of Energy and
the USGS. BP provided a 3D seismic survey over
its Milne Point production unit. Through analysis
of the 3D seismic data, public well logs and reservoir modeling studies, USGS scientists identified
several potential accumulations. The highest
ranked prospect was selected for acquisition of
well log and core data.
In 2007 the project team drilled and collected
data from the Mount Elbert gas hydrate research
well.49 Hydrate-bearing formations were encountered 1,800 to 2,500 ft [550 to 760 m] below the
surface. As a precaution against hydrate dissociation and hole destabilization, oil-base drilling
fluid was chilled to below 32F [0C]. The resulting borehole remained in gauge, enabling highquality data collection.
Data include LWD and extensive wireline
openhole logs, more than 500 ft [152 m] of continuous core, and MDT pressure tests. Log analysis
confirmed the presence of 100 ft of hydratesaturated sand in which porosities reach 40%,
intrinsic permeabilities are in the multiple-Darcy
range and hydrate saturations vary between 45%
and 75%.50
Nuclear magnetic resonance logs indicate
the presence of mobile water even in the most
hydrate-saturated intervals. Mobile water, which
is removed from the formation to initiate depressurization, appears to be a prerequisite for
producing methane from gas hydrate reservoirs
that are not otherwise in contact with free gas
or water.
The MDT tests exhibited a variety of results
depending on drawdown pressures.51 During the
first flow period the test interval was intentionally held at pressures above the hydrate equilibrium pressure; hydrate dissociation did not occur
and no gas was produced (previous page, bottom). In the second and third flow periods the
well pressures were below the gas hydratestability pressure and gas was produced. The pressure responses were successfully modeled using
reservoir simulators.
A key observation of the simulation studies is
that short-term tests do not necessarily indicate
the fully developed flow behavior of a gas hydrate
reservoir. The pore space available for fluid flow
changes as hydrate dissociates. For example, in
Spring 2010
Alaska USA CANADA
Point Barrow
Prudhoe Bay
ARCTIC
OC E AN
Northern Alaska gas hydrate

total petroleum system
National Petroleum
ReserveAlaska
Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge
0
0
km
100
mi
Mount Elbert well

100
Kuparuk
River
oil field
Milne Point 3D
seismic survey
Prudhoe Bay
oil field
> Gas hydrates in Alaska. The northern Alaska gas hydrate total petroleum system is shaded in
blue-gray. The limit of the gas hydratestability zone is outlined in red. The area covered by the 3D
seismic survey is shown as a red-dashed rectangle. (Modified from USGS Fact Sheet 2008-3073,
reference 46).
the Mount Elbert case, when the well pressure Early Days for Hydrates
was greater than the hydrate-stability pressure, The current state of understanding of the producin situ effective permeability was 0.12 to 0.17 mD. ibility of gas from hydrates is analogous to that of
Decreasing the wellbore pressure to below the coalbed methane and heavy-oil sands about
level required for hydrate stability caused disso- 30years ago.54 Although recovery from both coalciation of hydrate within the pore space, and the bed methane formations and oil sands took seveffective permeability increased.
eral decades to become commercially viable, it is
To conduct extended production tests in the too early to determine the development horizon
Alaska North Slope, scientists will need year- of gas hydrate resources.
round access to a wellsite with existing
infraOilfield
Review As far as resource supply and access are con10 cerned, several countries are optimistic about the
structure. Seven potential surface Spring
locations
23
within the Prudhoe Bay, Kuparuk RiverHydrates
and MilneFig. potential
of gas hydrates to meet future energy
Point fields have been evaluated.52 A site in the needs. Japan, India, China and South Korea, all
Prudhoe Bay field has been identified as optimal countries that import oil and gas, have launched
because of its combination of low geologic risk, programs to explore the possibilities of unlocking
low operational risk, maximal operational flexi- methane from the hydrate cage. As with other
bility and promise of meaningful reservoir unconventional resources, development of hydrate
response. BP and the other companies with work- reserves will undoubtedly benefit from technoloing interest in the site are discussing plans for gies originally designed for conventional oil and
gas exploration and production.
LS
long-term production testing there.53
33
Permanent Monitoring:
Taking It to the Reservoir
John Algeroy
John Lovell
Gabriel Tirado
Ramaswamy Meyyappan
Rosharon, Texas, USA
Instruments able to continuously report current downhole conditions in producing

wells have become powerful tools for managing oil and gas reservoirs. Recent
refinements in deployment, fiber optics and interpretation methods have combined to
greatly expand the role of permanent monitoring sensors and the types of wells and
George Brown
Robert Greenaway
Southampton, England
fields in which they may be applied.
Michael Carney
Joerg H. Meyer
Houston, Texas
John E. Davies
BP Exploration
Sunbury on Thames, England
Ivan D. Pinzon
BP America
Houston, Texas
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Christian
Chouzenoux, Clamart, France; David Morrissey, Sugar
Land, Texas; and Eghosa Oriaikhi, Emmanuel Rioufol, Scott
Rubinstein and Garrett Skaggs, Rosharon.
Intellitite, Neon, Petrel, RTAC, THERMA, WellNet and
WellWatcher Flux are marks of Schlumberger.
1. For more on reliability testing: Al-Asimi M, Butler G,
Brown G, Hartog A, Clancy T, Cosad C, Fitzgerald J,
Navarro J, Gabb A, Ingham J, Kimminau S, Smith J and
Stephenson K: Advances in Well and Reservoir
Surveillance, Oilfield Review 14, no. 4 (Winter
2002/2003): 1435.
2. Survival analysis is a branch of statistics dealing with
failure in mechanical systems (or death in biological
organisms). In the field of engineering, it is often called
reliability theory; it involves time-to-event modeling to
determine the fraction of a population that will survive
past a certain time, the rate at which survivors
will fail, ways to account for multiple causes of failure
and special circumstances that may increase or
decrease the odds of survival.
3. Veneruso AF, Kohli H and Webster MJ: Towards
Truly Permanent Intelligent Completions: Lifelong System
Survivability Through a Structured Reliability Assurance
Process, paper SPE 84326, presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver,
October 58, 2003.
4. Konopczynski M: Intelligent Wells: Whos Calling the
Shots? E & P (September 1, 2008), http://www.epmag.
com/Magazine/2008/9/item8226.php (accessed
February 9, 2010).
34
Oilfield Review
1972: First Schlumberger

gauge installation
1970
1978: First subsea

wet-mate conector
1992: First remote

data communication
1980
1993: First digital

gauge installation
permanent quartz gauge
2003: Development of
Intellitite connector
1990
2004: Newgeneration gauges
2008: Distributed
sandface measurements
2000
1995: Fiber-optic DTS
2010
2006: WellWatcher
and Neon hybrid cable
2010: Fiber-optic
pressure gauge
> Evolution of permanent monitoring. This time line illustrates the evolution of permanent gauges since Schlumberger installed the first permanent downhole
analog pressure gauge in 1972, offshore Congo. Industry acceptance of fiber optics in downhole environments, breakthroughs in electrical connectors, improved
gauge reliability and a hybrid fiber-optic cable have moved permanent monitoring to the sandfaceincluding to lower sections of two-stage completions.
In the 1990s many engineers in the oil and gas

industry resisted the use of downhole sensors and
controls. Their reliability had not yet been proved
over the 20-year or more life span typical of many
producing wells. This insistence on long time
periods between failures is reasonable: The typical well targeted by operators for permanent
monitoring systems tends to be complex or in
remote areas, such as deep water. Both these factors greatly increase the cost to retrieve, repair
and reinstall failed parts.
In response to industry concerns, sensor suppliers leveraged techniques from other industries
to qualify product reliability and to forecast
sensor life expectancy.1 Studies used survival
analysis techniques that look back using case
histories to measure equipment reliability and
that look forward using reliability modeling.2
They also analyzed in detail the failure modes for
each systems key components and deployment.3
Applications of lessons learned from these
and other studies have led to improvements in
long-term reliability of intelligent completions
a primary application for permanent monitoring
systems.4 As a consequence, reliability is rarely
questioned today during discussions about permanent downhole sensors.
Traditionally, these sensors have been used to
gather data at single points along the wellbore
usually above the packer. A sudden change in
downhole temperature or pressure, for example,
might indicate water or gas breakthrough or a
breach of zonal isolation. While this approach
often is sufficient for operator needs, recent
innovations in permanent sensors, particularly
digital sensors and fiber-optic distributed temperature sensors (DTS), allow engineers to take
many more temperature and pressure measurements along the length of the wellbore.
Hardware solutions aside, the value realized
from monitoring systems is very much a function
Spring 2010
of how data are analyzed. Some operators who

today routinely include permanent pressure and
temperature sensors in all completions of a certain type may fail to fully assess the data delivered by their sensors and do not realize the full
benefit of the information gathered. They may
not analyze it at all and only store it, as they
might offset-well data, to be referenced only
when planning future drilling programs or when
attempting to understand the cause of sudden
production problems.
A more proactive approach integrates production data from various sourcesincluding
permanent downhole sensorsusing software
programs to manage the continuous data stream
in real time. Schlumberger has developed
THERMA thermal modeling and analysis software for wells with distributed temperature sensors. The software uses a steady-state pressure
model combined with a thermal solution to model
most black-oil and composite-fluid scenarios and
thereby facilitate analysis of DTS data.
Used this way, continuous real-time pressure
ORSPR10RVFFigure 02
and temperature readings can have an impact
akin to that of obtaining production logs while
the well is producing. This is particularly attractive in wells where traditional interventions are
problematic or the cost of deferred production is
unacceptably high.
This article discusses ongoing efforts to bring
permanent downhole sensor measurements to
the reservoir. It also describes the application of
software as well as the expert interpretation that
clarifies the data to maximize value.
A case history from Azerbaijan illustrates the
value of using fiber-optic technology to track
downhole production changes. Another from offshore India demonstrates the effectiveness of a
new technology aimed at overcoming the problem of establishing communication and control
between upper and lower completions. The same
study examines how information garnered while

monitoring the sandface allows operators to better understand subtle but crucial reservoir characteristics. And a redevelopment effort offshore
Malaysia showcases how a hybrid opto-electric
system, when combined with other standard oilfield tools, may be used to optimize development
of unexploited reservoirs.
Measuring Top to Bottom
Particularly when reservoir layers are few or welldefined, pressure and temperature point sampling
is a powerful reservoir analysis tool and accounts
for a majority of permanent sensor applications.
However, pressure and temperature measurements taken at discrete points are cumulative in
nature. That is because the characteristics of the
fluids at the sensor locations are the result of the
varied environments through which they have
passed. As a consequence, a significant change at
some location along the wellbore between sensors may be masked, distorted or missed entirely
at the sample point.
Recent developments within the oil and gas
industry have done much to address the shortcomings of point sampling. Key to this effort has
been industry acceptance of fiber optics. Suitably
robust to withstand the rigors of installation and
to survive for extended periods in rugged downhole environments, fibers installed in cables or
inside control lines allow temperature measurements to be taken along the entire length of the
wellbore. During the past decade, numerous
innovations in fiber-optic sensor technology have
added to the industrys ability to communicate
between the surface and the sandface. As a
consequence, over time the focus of permanent
sensors has been changed from monitoring the
well to characterizing the reservoir (above).
35
This is an important distinction. By using a

fiber-optic distributed temperature system that
takes measurements at the point of fluid inflow
rather than at some distance away, it is possible
to interpret temperature to provide a depth- and
time-based profile. This interpretation can then
be analyzed and the wells flow profile obtained.5
Until recently it has not always been possible
to install the sensors at the sandface. For example, many offshore wells are complex completions
that include gravel packs and must be installed in
two stages. The lower stage containing the gravelpack assembly is placed across the production
zone, followed by the upper stage containing the
packer and production tubing (below).
Connecting cables and hydraulic lines
between the upper and lower completions as part
of the second step in the procedure is extremely
problematic. As a consequence, operators have
traditionally opted not to deploy gauges over the
reservoir interval of the lower completion.
Two key innovations have helped address this

basic connectivity issue. The first is a DTS system
in the form of a fiber-optic dual-stage mateable
system. It may be installed in either a cable or a
control line pumped into wells through the tree
once both upper and lower completions are in
place. DTS systems are able to take a temperature measurement every meter along the well
from surface to total depth. The second innovation is a wireless communication system that
transfers power and data using an inductive coupler at the interface between the upper and
lower completions. By so doing, it makes possible
the deployment of digital temperature and pressure sensors along the lower completions.
Tubing hanger assembly
Surface-controlled
subsurface safety valve
Pressure and temperature gauges
Packer
PBR inner mandrel

PBR
Packer
Gravel pack
> Two-stage completion. A two-stage completion involves placing the lower

section of the completion across the zone of interest. The lower section is
isolated from the upper portion of the well by a packer with a polished bore
receptacle (PBR) facing upward. If sand control is required, a workstring with
a polished bore stings into the packer and circulates the sand into place at
the screen. The workstring is removed before the second stage of the
completion to install the upper section of the well. This second-stage
operation includes installation of production tubing whose lowest joint is a
polished bore. This is stung into the polished bore receptacle of the packer to
tie the well back to the surface.
36
Right Tool, Right Job, Right Way

It is now possible to install an optical DTS system
in a two-stage completion. First, a hydraulic conduit is strapped to the lower production string. A
similar conduit attached to the upper completion
is then connected to the lower section by means
of a special control-line wet-mate system able to
orient and align the two lines. Once the completion is installed, an optical fiber is carried by fluid
circulated through the conduit and placed along
the entire length of the completion.6
DTS systems can also be embedded in the
gravel-pack shrouds on the outside of the gravelpack screens (next page, top right). This configuration is important because the wellbore outside
the basepipe behaves like the reservoir rock.
Therefore, the temperature measured by the DTS
at the producing interval is the inflow JouleThomson temperature and is not influenced by
the temperature of the fluid mixture flowing up
the wellborethe axial fluid flow. This means
that the flow from an individual reservoir layer
can be readily distinguished from the axial fluid.
Additionally, owing to the DTS positioning, the
inflow temperature is a direct function of the
drawdown pressure and the Joule-Thomson coefficient, which is dependent on fluid properties.
The resulting temperature profiles can be converted into flow profiles using a thermal model of
the well and the near-wellbore region built specifically for use with DTS systems (next page, bottom
right). Near-wellbore flow is a function of the reservoir and flowing wellbore pressures, zone permeability, reservoir size and fluid properties. Flow
to the surface is a function of the completion, inlet
and outlet pressures, gravity effects and fluid properties. Therefore, pressures can be solved throughout the system for flow rate, reservoir pressure or
surface flowing pressure through a nodal finiteelement pressure analysis.7
Oilfield Review
ORSPR10RVFFigure 03
Once pressures throughout the system have

been determined, a radial near-wellbore thermal
model is used to calculate the temperatures from
the far geothermal temperature in each reservoir
zone as a function of the fluid, formation and
completion thermal properties. This must include
the temperature change due to the near-wellbore
pressure drop, which is a function of permeability
and skin, that results in oil warming and gas or
gassy oil cooling as a consequence of the JouleThomson effect.8
The Joule-Thomson coefficient for the fluid in
a particular reservoir layer is determined by
employing a multiple flash calculation using the
black-oil PVT properties of the fluid at the reservoir pressure and temperature. This calculation
also determines the thermal properties of the
fluid. An axisymmetric 2D radial model is then
used to account for heat transfer through conduction and convection between the wellbore and
casings, cement, and formation and annular well
fluids; between reservoir layers and the surrounding rock; and as a function of depth. Temperature
change resulting from the near-wellbore pressure
drop is a function of permeability and skin. The
Joule-Thomson effect accounts for this pressure
drop that warms oil and cools gas and is included
in the thermal model.9
A direct measure of reservoir drawdown is
thus possible using the difference between the
DTS-measured temperature and the geothermal
temperature in the flowing reservoir intervals.
Knowing the drawdown pressure enables engineers to calculate and to monitor the effects of
depletion for each reservoir layer.
Such critical information has traditionally
been captured through production logs. But
because acquisition of conventional logs was
limited by difficult wellhead access, high flow
rates and differential depletion of individual
reservoirs, BP turned to a DTS system to monitor
the reservoirs of the Azeri field in the Caspian
Sea, offshore Azerbaijan.10
BP engineers were particularly interested in
creating efficient voidage replacement through
water and gas injection, which was considered
2010: Fiber-optic
critical to reservoir drainage. The successful
pressure gauge
implementation of this strategy depended upon a
5. Brown G, Carvalho V, Wray A, Sanchez A and Gutierrez G:
Slickline with Fiber-Optic Distributed Temperature
Monitoring for Water-Injection and Gas Lift Systems
Optimization in Mexico, paper SPE 94989, presented at
the SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference, Rio de Janeiro, June 2023, 2005.
6. Pinzon ID, Davies JE, Mammadkhan F and Brown GA:
Monitoring Production from Gravel-Packed Sand
Screen Completions on BPs Azeri Field Wells Using
Permanently Installed Distributed Temperature Sensors,
paper SPE 110064, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Spring 2010
DTS cable
Joule-Thomson
inflow temperature
Shunt tube
Wellbore wall
Screen
Basepipe
Axial-flow
temperature
Gravel pack
Screen shroud
> DTS cable placement. By strapping the DTS cable to the outside of the
gravel-pack screen shroud, the resulting measurement is of the JouleThomson inflow temperature, unaffected by the temperature or fluid
properties of the axial flow.
Temperature
Borehole
Shroud
Basepipe
Gravel pack
Shale
Reservoir
Geothermal
temperature
Shale
Reservoir
Axial-flow
temperature
(center of pipe)
Shale
> DTS data. When a well is shut in, the temperature reading from a fiber-optic
ORSPR10RVFFigure
cable strapped to the external
wall of a gravel-pack05
shroud (right) is a
function of the geothermal gradient (green). As the well is produced, the cable
reads the temperature of the upwardly flowing mixture (right), or the axial flow
(red). The gradient of the mixture remains essentially constant during flow
through shales. Discrete changes in the axial-flow temperature are caused by
drawdown due to inflow from the reservoir as a consequence of the
Joule-Thomson effect.
Conference and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, USA,
November 1114, 2007.
Al-Asimi et al, reference 1.
For more on fiber optics and DTS: Brown G: Downhole
Temperatures from Optical Fiber, Oilfield Review 20,
no. 4 (Winter 2008/2009), 3439.
7. Fryer V, Shuxing D, Otsubo Y, Brown G and Guilfoyle P:
Monitoring of Real-Time Temperature Profiles Across
Multizone Reservoirs During Production and Shut-In
Periods Using Permanent Fiber-Optic Distributed
Temperature Systems, paper SPE 92962, presented at
the SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Jakarta, April 57, 2005.
8. Flow from a reservoir to the wellbore is the result of

pressure drop, or drawdown. This change in pressure
also causes a temperature change in the flowing
fluids. The change in temperature as a function of the
drawdown is due to the Joule-Thomson effect. The
magnitude of the change of temperature with pressure
depends on the Joule-Thomson coefficient for a
particular gas.
9. Fryer et al, reference 7.
10. Pinzon et al, reference 6.
37
Temperature, C
72.4
Reservoir layers
08/10/200607:30
08/07/200621:08
72.0
08/05/200603:15
08/02/200609:22
71.5
07/30/200615:29
07/27/200621:36
71.0
71.0
Tempera
71.5
ture, C
72.0
70.5
70.5
3,800
4,200
4,000
Depth, m
Joule-Thomson inflow temperatures
> Early-time DTS data. In this plot of the DTS data, temperature decreases correspond to the reservoir
layering as the fiber-optic DTS responds to the inflow of gas cooled by the Joule-Thomson effect.
Temperature decreases in the Pereriv B layers (pink) are greater than those in the Pereriv D (green),
indicating the drawdown in the Pereriv B is less than in Pereriv D. This difference is explained by the
pressure in Pereriv B being 200 psi [1.4 MPa] lower than that in Pereriv D. A short shut-in period
around 08/05/2006 is reflected in higher temperatures. (Adapted from Pinzon et al, reference 6.)
3,700
3,800
Depth, m
3,900
4,000
ORSPR10RVFFigure 05A
4,100
4,200
4,300
65
70
Temperature, C
75
thorough understanding of production and injection conformance, both geographically and by formation. Also, because gas breakthrough was a
concern, it was important to monitor the gas/oil
ratio (GOR) in the producers. This is possible
using DTS because an increase in GOR causes
reservoir-layer fluid viscosity to decrease and the
flow rate to change. These events produce a
decrease in temperature that is clearly detectable
through DTS.
These principles were clearly demonstrated
by results from one new well in the Azeri field
that flowed at 35,000 bbl/d [5,565 m3/d] with a
constant GOR of 880 ft3/bbl [156.6 m3/m3].
DTS data acquired over the first four months of
production clearly show temperature decreases
correspond with three reservoir layers within
the Pereriv reservoir into which the well was
drilled (left).
Engineers built a thermal model using a coreto-log permeability correlation, reservoir intervals as defined by gamma ray log, and a skin of 4
as determined by well testing. The model was
calibrated to the measured flowing well pressure
by defining the reservoir layers based on the DTS
measurements. Options to calibrate the model to
the bottomhole pressure (BHP) measurements
included significantly increasing skin to 10 or
decreasing permeability by 25%. Reservoir engineers, however, decided to adjust the net to gross
pay of the model reservoir layers based on the
Joule-Thomson inflow intervals on the temperature profile. This created sufficient drawdown to
match reservoir pressures to the BHP gauge.
The calculated Joule-Thomson temperature
decrease, which resulted from the drawdown in
those redefined inflowing layers, matched the
DTS data. The modeled and DTS axial-flow temperatures also agreed, as did the flow distribution
resulting from individual layer drawdown, permeability and skin.
After two months of production, sensors in
the Pereriv B reservoir layers and in the top layers of the Pereriv D reservoir indicated increased
cooling. Knowing the fluid propertiesand
therefore the Joule-Thomson coefficienthad
not changed, the operator concluded that the
only explanation for the temperature changes
was a lower drawdown caused by increased
depletion (left).
> Time dimension. Differences in DTS readings between August (blue) and October (red) indicate inflow
temperature decreases in several layers of the Pereriv B (pink stripe), C (blue stripe) and D (green
stripe) reservoirs. All other parameters were unchanged, so the only explanation for the temperature
shifts is depletion. The gamma ray log (black curve) was used to define intervals. (Adapted from Pinzon
et al, reference 6.)
38
Oilfield Review
Wireless Connection
Operators have placed numerous permanent temperature and pressure gauges on an electrical
line along the length of traditional completions
for many years. However, because of complexities
already mentioned in subsea wells, permanent
sensors have not been been placed in the lower
Spring 2010
AC power
Inductive
coupler
Bidirectional
communication
Electronic control
module
DC power
section of two-stage completions. Instead, operators have typically chosen to restrict the location
of electric or hydraulic instrumentation to above
the packer. This has meant that the temperature
of fluids from the entire lower production intervaloften hundreds of meters long and comprising multiple primary production targetsis a
single measurement. With so little input, determining such important factors as reservoir connectivity and compartmentalization, or how much
of the perforated interval is actually contributing
to production in the lower completion, may be difficult or impossible.
While Schlumberger engineers have recently
deployed an opto-electric cable that incorporates
an optical wet-mate connector into a North Sea
subsea well, they have also developed an alternative method that is particularly suited to twostage completions. The WellWatcher Flux system
replaces hard-wire connections with a large-bore
inductive coupler that provides wireless power
and data communication across the upper and
lower connections, allowing sensors to be placed
at the reservoir section of the completion (right).11
To eliminate the time-consuming need to weld
splices at each sensor, engineers also designed
digital temperature sensors short enough that they
can be welded along a single spooled cable, or bridle. The welds are performed in a clean-room and
undergo full helium-leak testing to further ensure
against failure in the field. Also as a result of the
spoolable system design, sensors can be tested
again before installation to avoid problems arising
on site. The spacing of the sensors is arbitrary but
constrained by the limit of fewer than 48 sensors
per 1 km [0.6mi] of bridle.
Additionally, the sensors are miniaturized to fit
on the spool. WellWatcher Flux temperature sensors have ODs of 3/4 in. [19 mm] and are less than
1 ft long. This means they can be placed along
sections too small to accommodate a traditional
permanent sensor and its typically large-gauge
mandrel. This sensor array is strapped to the production string of the lower completion, obviating
the need for making connections as the upper
completion is run.12
WellWatcher Flux sensors use high-resolution
platinum resistance thermometry to provide
high-precision, low-drift measurements. The sensors uncalibrated accuracy is better than 0.3C
[0.5F] at 100C [212F]. This accuracy was
further improved during manufacturing by calibrating them to 0.1C [0.18F] over the range of
typical reservoir temperatures.13
Block data
In a second new well within the field BP engineers observed a GOR increase from 1,000 to
2,500 ft3/bbl [178 to 445 m3/m3] during the first
three months of production. DTS data indicated
the temperature in some layers was decreasing
rapidly while that in others remained unchanged.
The temperature profile also clearly showed gas
breakthrough in much thinner layers than would
be expected from the gamma ray shale indicator.
BP used the DTS-defined layering to analyze the
well. To match the DTS data after gas breakthrough with the thermal model, both reservoirlayer pressure and GOR had to be changed. To
achieve a unique solution, it was essential that
modeled-layer GORs and flow match surfacemeasured GORs and flow
chosen reservoir pressures result in a flowing well
pressure that matches the pressure-gauge value
within reservoir layers, calculated Joule-Thomson
inflow temperature match the DTS curve
the axial-flow temperature between reservoir
layers match measured DTS data.
Engineers calculated the Joule-Thomson
inflow and axial-flow temperatures and used
them to compute the oil and gas flow rates of the
Pereriv B and D reservoir layers. A third formation,
the Pereriv C, was ignored because pressure data
indicated it was impermeable. Pereriv B showed
significant depletion over the three-month period
while the Pereriv D showed less depletion. When
the well was shut in, DTS data indicated crossflow
from D into B, which was consistent with observed
reservoir-layer pressure differences.
These results confirmed that gas had broken
through at the top and middle of the Pereriv B
and in one reservoir layer of the Pereriv D. The
flow contibution after three months had also
gone from 50% each from Pereriv B and D to 25%
and 75%, respectively. Analysis confirmed that
gas was not breaking through in a flat flood front.
Based on these results, BP gained a better
understanding of layering in the Pereriv reservoir
and has used this approach to review its reservoir
pressure support strategy. Consequently, the
company was able to reduce gas breakthrough in
another well in the field using a water-injection
well to locally raise reservoir pressures.
Sensor
> Inductive coupling. A downhole electronic

control module beneath the inductive coupler
governs the DC power to each sensor of the
lower completion (shown). The sensors transmit
temperature and diagnostic information to the
control module. This array is arranged in parallel
so that the failure of a single sensor does not
cause the failure of the entire array. The sensors
are interlaced between DC power lines to provide
redundancy. (Adapted from Gambhir et al,
reference 14.)
11. Two conductors are referred to as inductively coupled

or magnetically coupled when they are configured such
that change in current flow through one wire induces a
voltage across the ends of the other.
12. Somaschini G, Lovell J, Abdullah H, Chariyev B,
Singh P and Arachman F: Subsea Deployment of
Instrumented Sand Screens in High-Rate Gas Wells,
paper SPE 125047, presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
October 47, 2009.
13. The uncalibrated accuracy of the sensors is better than
1/3 (0.3 + 0.005 |T|)C where |T| is the absolute value
ORSPR10RVFFigure 07
of the temperature in C. For example, at a reservoir
temperature of 100C, their uncalibrated accuracy is
0.8/3, or 0.27C.
39
124.89
Temperature, C
124.88
124.87
124.86
124.85
7
8
Time, days
10
11
12
13
14
> High-resolution sensors. Sensors tested in a laboratory oven detected minute changes in
temperature. The module test oven was set to 125C, but because of variations in the air conditioning
within the building, records show the oven attained 124.87C [256.77F] during the day and 124.86C
[256.75F] at night. Because of its high resolution, the sensor detected these small variationsin effect
detecting when the engineers were present. Plotted here are measurements taken taken every minute
and averaged over an hour. (Adapted from Gambhir et al, reference 14.)
In an effort to quantify zonal contribution,

track depletion and identify water breakthrough,
Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) installed six
WellWatcher Flux permanent sandface measurement systems in its deepwater subsea development in the D1-D3 gas field in the KG-D6 block,
offshore India.14 The company deployed temperature sensors on the exterior of openhole gravelpack screens in high-rate gas wells.15
In the worlds first such installations, RIL
placed 18 to 25 sensors along the lower comple-
Laboratory and in-well testing has shown

minimal differences from one sensor to the next,
and a standard deviation of drift of less than
0.04C/yr [0.07F/yr] at 125C [257F] (above).
Field data have demonstrated 0.002C [0.0036F]
resolution when temperature is sampled every
minute. This capability to measure tiny temperature differences may make these sensors good
candidates for use in interpreting thermal
responses in high-angle wells where temperature
change with depth is typically quite small.
10
20
4,200
30
40
Gas rate, MMcf/d

50
60
Interpreted flow
70
80
90
100
Calculated temperature profile
4,300
4,400
ORSPR10RVFFigure 08
Depth, ft
4,500
Sensor data
4,600
4,700
4,800
4,900
5,000
160
162
164
166
168
170
172
174
176
178
180
182
184
Temperature, F
> Determining flow profile from temperature. In this prejob simulation, synthesized sensor data (blue
dots) are input into THERMA reservoir modeling software, which uses an iterative process to solve for
composite gas or black-oil drainage and perform a nodal pressure analysis along the length of the
wellbore. Iterations are performed to calculate a temperature profile (red) that best fits the measured
data. The software program then creates an interpreted flow profile (black). Reservoir layers are
depicted in pink and orange. (Adapted from Gambhir et al, reference 14.)
40
tion, plus two quartz gauges to update temperature and pressure measurements every second.
Array temperature data were transmitted every
minute and upper completion temperature and
pressure data every second. The data from the
dual-stage subsea wells were transmitted to
shore in real time during well cleanup and the
system continuously monitored the reservoir
once production began.
The data combined diagnostic information
with raw temperature values in packed blocks. A
downhole communication hub, the WellNet multisensor station, merged those blocks with temperature and pressure data acquired above the
production packer. These stations may be deployed
in each production zone on gauge mandrels with
power and telemetry provided by a single cable.
This configuration minimizes wellhead and packer
penetrations and simplifies installation.
Data transmitted from the lower to upper
completion through the WellWatcher Flux inductive coupler were then transferred to a subsea
interface card in the tree. The information went
to an RTAC real-time acquisition and control system on the production platform, which provided
real-time communication to the RIL offices in
Mumbai. Engineers there were then able to use
THERMA software to derive gas flow profiles from
the sensor arrays.
Using the same strategy as for wells with DTS
systems, analysts input the profiles into THERMA
modeling and analysis software. This software
performs an iterative inversion to vary reservoir
properties until simulated temperature data
match measured data. Standard fluid modeling
programs then deliver a flow profile using those
interpreted reservoir properties (left).
As the wells were cleaning up, data from the
sensors were used to confirm brine displacement
followed by gas flow from each of the major sand
bodies. As individual wells were brought on line,
Reliance engineers identified crossflow in some
wellsupward flow in some wells and downward
flow in others. Comparisons of when individual
wells had been brought on line clearly established that the data were not just indicating
crossflow between compartments within individual wells but also from one well to another.
Prompted by this evidence of connectivity,
engineers added traditional interference testing
14. Gambhir HS, Shrivastav A, Lovell J, Mackay S,
Chouzenoux C, Juchereau B, Arachman F and
Chaudhary A: Sensor Architecture for Open Hole
Gravel Pack Completions, paper SPE 116476, presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver, September 2124, 2008.
15. Integrated Project Teams Achieve Fast-Track
Conclusion at KG-D6, in RILs KGD6 Fields
Transforming Indias Energy Landscape, Oil & Gas
Journal (Supplement, 2010), 3438.
Oilfield Review
to the mix and used the results to update

their seismic models with Petrel seismic-tosimulation software. The revised models will be
used in planning future drilling operations.
Polymeric encapsulation
Cable armor
Polymeric jacket
Flexibility
Multiple permanent pressure gauges and DTS
systems make powerful reservoir management
tools, especially when deployed together. However,
operators typically have been reluctant to use
them together because to do so requires an extra
penetration through packers and wellheads to
accommodate both a fiber-optic cable and an
electrical line. In response, Schlumberger has
developed the Neon hybrid opto-electric permanent monitoring cable that allows deployment of
quartz pressure gauges along with DTS in a single
cable. Versions of the Neon cable have been
developed to meet fluid characteristics of various
downhole pressure and temperature environments. The hybrid opto-electric connectors have
been qualified for continuous operations at conditions up to 103 MPa [15,000 psi] and 175C
[350F] (right).
The ability to measure pressure and distributed temperature simultaneously is especially
useful when operators are forced to drill into
reservoir layers with unknown pressures, flow
dynamics or permeabilities. Such was the case
for one operator whose redevelopment program
of a field offshore east Malaysia included completing dual-string multizone wells in deep layers. The operator had little information with
which to calculate zonal allocation and depletion
and wanted the ability to monitor pressure and
temperature from individual zones.
Because operator engineers were also anxious to monitor gas lift performance and to identify potential leak points, sensors were installed
across each reservoir perforation interval.
Experts used THERMA modeling software to analyze the DTS data and then adjusted variables
until measured and calculated data agreed.
The permanent system allowed uninterrupted
reservoir surveillance without costly interventions and deferred production. Downhole gauge
data, in conjunction with other techniques,
helped determine flow from individual zones.
Information about layer pressure communication
was captured by wireline formation testers, well
tests and pressure-transient analyses.
DTS data and analysis of zonal production in
the stacked reservoir enabled early detection of
internal crossflow zones during well cleanup.
Zonal pressure and rate profiling helped optimize
application of an inflow control valve. Further,
the installation eliminated the time-consuming
and often risky intervention required for cased
Spring 2010
Polytetrafluoroethylene tape
Filler rod
Fiber metal tube
Conductor insulation
Optical fiber
Stranded conductor
Filler rod
> Hybrid cable. The Neon cable contains an electrical line for the pressure gauge stranded to a fiber
metal tube capable of supporting up to three optical fibers. The optical fibers and electrical line are
surrounded by a polymeric jacket to keep the core in place. This is then housed inside a 6.35-mm
[0.25-in.] cable armor and surrounded by an 11-mm by 11-mm [0.43-in. by 0.43-in.] polymeric
encapsulation to protect the cable as it is run in the well.
using cyclic steam injection, the continuous measurements from permanent temperature sensors
could prove critical in determining the sweep
efficiency and for optimizing the timing of injecExtracting Value
Permanently installed pressure gauges have long tion and production. The same sensor may probeen used to monitor oil and gas production. vide valuable subsurface information about a CO2
Downhole temperature sensors also have a long flood program, but if the operators overarching
history, but traditionally they have been used to concern is pressure maintenance, a temperature
correct for temperature effects on measurements gauge is not the optimal sensor.
of pressure gauges and logging tools. However,
The proliferation of permanent downhole
industry acceptance of fiber-optic measure- monitoring systems has been driven in large meaments, along with improvements in sensor reli- sure by operator need to manage production from
ability and interpretation capabilities, has begun complex and remote wells. DTS and sandface
to create demand for permanent temperature pressure data allow operators to visualize what is
sensors for continuous monitoring and control of happening in their wells and to judge the effiproduction and injection operations.
ciency of such production strategies as artificial
Operators are also turning to permanent DTS lift, injection and secondary-recovery programs.
systems to acquire information that was previBut maximum value from permanent sensors
ously obtainable only through production logs: is realized only when the raw data are properly
detecting or monitoring fluid flow behind pipe interpreted. This realization plus a trend toward
and identifying flow from or into individual zones. more multichannel systems and higher sampling
Permanent DTS systems are also used with rates will likely drive development of automated
increasing frequency to identify tubing leaks as systems that can identify and respond to producthey occur and to monitor gas lift performance in tion problems with minimal human intervention.
artificial lift wells.
Until that
ORSPR10RVFFigure
10 time, however, the task of interMaximizing the value of permanent downhole pretation and response to permanent sensor
sensors requires operators to take a considered data must be the purview of experienced, knowlapproach to their use. In many instances simple edgeable engineers armed with appropriate
databases of temperature and pressure are pow- software. Their interpretations, combined with
erful decision-making tools, useful throughout other subsurface information and reservoir simthe life of a well or field. In others, realizing the ulations, allow operators to take a broad, fieldfull value of a sensor is contingent on its being wide view of assets. Properly applied, the results
the right tool for the circumstances, expected are fewer wells drilled, more accurate well
production problems or well architecture. For placement, fewer days spent on drilling and
instance, in an enhanced oil recovery campaign completion operations and, ultimately, optimal
hydrocarbon recovery.
RvF
hole logging while offering continuous wellbore
data over the life of the well.
41
Irlec Alexandra Acua

Alan Monsegue
The Hague, The Netherlands
Scanning for Downhole Corrosion
Thilo M. Brill
Princeton, New Jersey, USA
Hilbrand Graven
Frans Mulders
GDF SUEZ E&P Nederland B.V.
Zoetermeer, The Netherlands
Jean-Luc Le Calvez
Edward A. Nichols
Fernando Zapata Bermudez
Clamart, France
Dian M. Notoadinegoro
Balikpapan, Indonesia
Ivan Sofronov
Moscow, Russia
Electromagnetic induction tools can be used to investigate corrosion and pitting in

downhole pipe. Using a combination of sensors, a new corrosion-monitoring tool
provides measurements of average pipe thickness and two-dimensional imaging of
the pipe wall to distinguish between internal and external damage. The tool also
delivers a qualitative measurement of metal loss in outer casing strings.
Corrosion is one of the many ways that nature

humbles human activity. It is a relentless process
that, unchecked, renders our most marvelous
constructions into little more than junk. However, for our global economic well-being we rely
on an infrastructure of metal in buildings,
bridges, factories, vehicles and pipelines. The
network of pipes leading from hydrocarbon-bearing strata deep underground to refinerieseven
to the burner tips in our homesis critical for
supplying the energy to fuel our economy. And so
the battle against corrosion continues.
It is an expensive battle. In a massive study
published in 2001, the direct total cost of corrosion in the USA was calculated to be US $276 billion per year, about 3.1% of the US gross domestic
product (GDP).1 Costs worldwide are estimated
to be a similar fraction of the global GDP, resulting in a worldwide cost of about US $1.8 trillion.2
Within the USA corrosion costs in the E&P industry were estimated to be almost US $1.4 billion
annually, comprising US $589 million for surface
piping and facilities, US $463 million in downhole
tubing expenses and US $320 million in capital

expenditures.3 Expenses and lost revenue resulting from lost production and leakage were not
included in these figures.
Corrosion is caused by several mechanisms,
including electrochemical, chemical and mechanical effects.4 One way of mitigating this action is to
substitute corrosion-resistant alloys, such as chromium steel instead of carbon steel. Another is to
use a coating, the simplest of which is paint. A
design may call for cathodic protection, which
transfers the corrosive effect from essential structural components to a nonessential, sacrificial
piece of metal. This approach can also be achieved
for large structures by supplying a DC current.
A primary element in the battle against corrosion is monitoring. In addition to mitigating
direct costs, corrosion monitoring also reduces
risks to safety and the environment by detecting
weak spots before they fail or leak. At the surface,
monitoring can sometimes be done visually, but
there are also tools designed to detect hidden
metal loss due to corrosion. For downhole casing

For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Nash Asrar,
Richard Byrd and Martin Isaacs, Sugar Land, Texas, USA.
EM Pipe Scanner and PS Platform are marks of
Schlumberger.
2. Hays GF: Now Is the Time, Advanced Materials

Research 95 (2010), http://www.scientific.net/AMR.95.-2.
pdf (accessed February 3, 2010).
3. Koch et al, reference 1.
4. For more on the basics of corrosion: Brondel D,
Edwards R, Hayman A, Hill D, Mehta S and Semerad T:
Corrosion in the Oil Industry, Oilfield Review 6, no. 2
(April 1994): 418.
5. For more on corrosion measurement: Cased Hole Log
Interpretation Principles/Applications. Houston:
Schlumberger Educational Services, 1989.
1. Koch GH, Brongers MPH, Thompson NG, Virmani YP

and Payer JH: Corrosion Cost and Preventive Strategies
in the United States, Report FHWA-RD-01-156 prepared
by CC Technologies Laboratories, Inc., for the US Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), Office of Infrastructure
Research and Development (September 2001), http://
www.corrosioncost.com/home.html (accessed
February 3, 2010).
42
Oilfield Review
Tool Physics
The EM Pipe Scanner tool provides nondestructive casing inspection using electromagnetic
induction. Its principle of operation is similar to
that of a transformer with losses. A transformers
Spring 2010
Pipe wall
Distance in multiples of skin depth,
Distance in multiples of skin depth,
and tubing strings, logging tools are the only

means of monitoring.
The four main types of corrosion-monitoring
logging tools today are mechanical calipers,
ultrasonic acoustic tools, cameras and electromagnetic (EM) tools.5 Multifingered calipers are
well-established tools for evaluating internal
problems, but they provide no data about external corrosion and are affected by scale buildup
on the inner wall. Ultrasonic measurements
yield excellent pipe thickness information in a
single casing string and have superior azimuthal
resolution. However, ultrasonic tools are unable
to operate in gas wells, through tight restrictions
or on monocables, and their measurements can
be disrupted by pipe roughness and excessive
corrosion. Downhole cameras can also be used
for corrosion detection, if the wellbore is filled
with gas or another clear fluid.
EM corrosion-monitoring tools in use today
rely on one of two physical principles: flux leakage and electromagnetic induction. A flux leakage tool uses a permanent or electromagnet to
magnetize the pipe to near saturation. Near a pit,
hole or corrosion patch, some of the magnetic
flux leaks out of the metal; this flux leakage is
detected by coils on the tools pad-mounted sensors. A flux leakage tool can sense defects on the
inside or outside of the casing, but since the magnet must be as close as possible to the pipe, a casing examination requires operators to pull the
tubing out of the hole. In addition, flux leakage
tools are good at measuring sudden thickness
changes, but they are not effective if the corrosion is constant or varies slowly over a whole section of pipe.
The most recent Schlumberger EM induction
sonde for corrosion monitoring is the EM Pipe
Scanner tool. It has excellent vertical resolution
and good thickness resolution, although the
azimuthal resolution is not as high as that of
ultrasonic measurements. The tool detects metal
loss both inside and outside of casing as well as
loss from an outer casing string when multiple
strings are present. It can operate in any fluid,
can be run on monocables and can pass through
small restrictions.
This article describes the physics of EM
induction as applied to this tool. Case studies
from Indonesia and the Netherlands illustrate
tool use in the field.
2
100
100
Electric field amplitude, relative
90
180
270
360
Electric field phase shift, deg
Medium
Relative Magnetic
Permeability, r
Conductivity,
, S/m
Frequency,
f, Hz
Skin Depth,
, mm
Vacuum
Arbitrary
Infinite
10
22,500
1,000
2,250
10
21
Brine
50
Copper
60 x 10 6
Casing
100
5 x 10 6
1,000
10
1,000
0.7
> Skin depth. When an EM field impinging from below encounters a

conducting material such as the metal of a pipe (blue), the amplitude (red,
top left) decreases exponentially with a characteristic rate given by the skin
depth . An unattenuated signal (dashed gray) is shown for comparison. At
the same time, the phase shifts almost linearly with distance of travel
through the metal (top right). The phase can change more than 360, as it
does here. Skin depth varies greatly, depending on the medium (table, bottom).
Air has properties close to those of a vacuum, which has an infinite skin
depth at all frequencies. A conductive and ferromagnetic material, such as
casing, has a short skin depth. All media other than a vacuum have shorter
skin depths at higher frequencies. Resistivity is the inverse of conductivity ().
Angular frequency is 2f. The values used for r and are typical for the
various media.
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
basic
primary coil generates a time-varyingPipeScanner
magnetic Fig.
1 EM physics is the same for all transmitterORSPRG10-PPSCN
Fig.pairs,
1
but the responses differ because
field that flows through a magnetic core
to induce receiver
a voltage in its secondary coil. In comparison, the of the frequency of the signal and the transmittools transmitter coilacting as a primary coil ter-receiver spacing. The general aspects of the
generates a magnetic field whose flux is guided physics of EM induction are described next,
by the casing; this magnetic flux induces a volt- followed by specific tool applications.
When a time-varying EM wave penetrates a
age in a secondary or receiver coil.
The flux guide provided by the casing is conductive body, such as the steel pipe of tubing
lossyenergy is lost or dissipated in the or casing, its magnitude decays exponentially. The
mediumbecause of the currents induced in the rate of decay depends on the bodys conductivity
casing metal. The tool measures these losses to and magnetic permeability and the frequency of
determine geometrical, electrical and magnetic the wave; the decay rate is characterized by a
properties of the casing, including the presence length called the skin depth, (above). The phase
of corrosion or pitting in the pipe.
of the wave also changes as it passes through the
Oilfield
Reviewconductor, a property that is useful in measuring
The EM Pipe Scanner tool contains
several
Spring 10
EM transmitters and associated receivers.
The Fig.
the1Athickness of the material.
PipeScanner
ORSPRG10-PPSCN Fig. 1A
43
The EM signal decay results from response

currentscalled eddy currentscreated in the
conductor. In the geometry of a circular pipe with
a transmitter at its axis, the eddy current forms a
closed current sheet flowing azimuthally within
the pipe wall. The eddy current sets up a response
EM field that acts to oppose the primary field from
the transmitter. This attenuates the field much
more rapidly than when no casing is present.
If the pipe has a defect, such as one caused by
corrosion or pitting, the eddy current can no
longer form a closed sheet since it is forced to
bypass the defect. This behavior is like that of
water in a stream flowing around a rock in its path.
The response EM field is altered by this anomalous
flow path. Receivers located in multiple pads
pressed against the inside of the casing respond to
these perturbations in the current flow path. The
output of the sensor pads supplies a 2D image from
which engineers can assess the altered EM field
that provides evidence of the damage.
The EM field generated by a transmitter coil
extends throughout space to infinity. At physical
boundaries within that space, such as the inner
and outer walls of the pipe, the field from both
sides must match. Because of this required
match of the boundary conditions, the behavior
of the field in each region influences its behavior

in all the others (below). The total EM field can
be represented as a superposition of three constituent fields.
The first field is that of a transmitter in
free space, that is, in the absence of any pipe.
At a distance sufficiently far from the coil, this
is the weakly attenuated field of a simple magnetic dipole.
The second field is added by the presence of a
pipe that is thick enough that any EM field penetrating it is completely absorbed. This introduces
the influence of the boundary condition at the
inner surface of the pipe; the outer boundary plays
no role in this field. The eddy currents induced
inside the conductive pipe give rise to a secondary
response field. It is opposed to the source field
out of phase by 180and has similar amplitude.
As a result, the sum of the first and second fields
termed the direct field within the pipeis weak
and decays exponentially. This situation is similar
to the case of propagating microwaves in a waveguide: The frequencies used by the tool are beyond
the cutoff frequency, so the signal attenuates rapidly within the pipe.6 Axial attenuation is faster
than radial attenuation.
Remote-Field Eddy Current (RFEC)
The thick-pipe approximation is appropriate

for high-frequency signals because the field
decays rapidly within the metal and eddy currents are localized near the inner surface of the
pipe. The response field from such a signal, which
is affected by the conductivity and permeability
of the steel, can be detected by a receiver coil
that is close to the transmitter.
Since the direct field is the sum of the
free-space field and the induced secondary field
of a thick pipe, it does not contain any information on the thickness of the pipe. It is the contribution of a third fieldthe indirect fieldthat
provides this.
The indirect field is caused by the boundary
condition at the outer pipe surface, which was
neglected for the case of a thick pipe. At great
distance this field also must satisfy the free-space
boundary condition of a simple magnetic dipole.
This third field can be seen, somewhat simplistically, as relating to the reflection of the penetrating EM field at the outer pipe surface. The
indirect field is strongly attenuated by passage of
the signal through the pipe metal, but it contains
the sought-after information about the pipe
thickness. This information comes from the
phase change that is approximately linear with
distance of travel within the pipe, as discussed
previously in the description of skin depth.
Near-Field Eddy Current (NFEC)
Transmitter
coil
Transmitter
coil
25
50
Distance along pipe, in.
75
100
25
Radius, in.
Radius, in.
Pipe wall
3
50
75
100
> Lines of potential for transmitter coils inside a pipe from finite-difference models. Each color contour represents a one-decibel decrease in the potential
voltage of the electric field created by a transmitter coil. A low-frequency signal (left) penetrates the pipe wall and decays slowly outside the pipe. Because
of this, in the RFEC region at large offset from the transmitter, the main flow of energy (yellow arrows) goes through the pipe wall, along the outside of the
pipe, then back through the wall to the inside of the pipe. In contrast, the direct signal within the pipe (black arrow) decays rapidly. A high-frequency signal
(right) reaches the pipe wall but decays rapidly within the pipe. The signal and response in this NFEC region (black arrows) provide information about the
properties of the metal on the inner surface of the pipe wall. The radial scale is greatly expanded in comparison to the axial scale, and the low- and
high-frequency transmitter coils are of typical sizes for an EM corrosion-monitoring tool.
44
Oilfield Review
Potential
Phase
Transmitter
coil
Transmitter
coil
25
50
75
100
25
Radius, in.
Radius, in.
Pipe wall
3
50
75
100
> Response to a low-frequency source in a grooved pipe. Lines of electric potential (left) and phase (right) are perturbed by grooves on the inner (white box
at 10 in.) and outer (white box at 90 in.) surfaces of the pipe wall. Both the potential and phase perturbations within the pipe where measurements are made
are identical for the inside and the outside grooves.
The skin depth is frequency dependent, so only

low-frequency signals contribute to this indirect
field. The low-frequency signal propagates beyond
the outer wall of the pipe into material of lower
conductivity, such as cement, rock, oil, brine or, in
the case of coaxial pipes, a gas such as air. If there
are multiple strings and the signal is strong
enough, the signal will continue propagating
through the other pipes. It will decay in the same
manner as for the innermost string, acquiring a
similar thickness-dependent phase shift.
The signal outside the pipe (or pipes) is dominated by the field set up by the eddy currents in
the pipe metal. Because of the approximate
dipole behavior of the field, the signal decays as
the inverse cube of the distance traveled. This is
a significantly smaller decay than that experienced by the direct signal inside the pipe. Thus,
with use of a low-frequency signal and long transmitter-receiver spacing, the direct field may be
much smaller than the indirect field at the
receiver position. For the geometry of the tool
and the low-frequency signals used, that spacing
is about twice the diameter of the pipe.
Since the direct field is so small at this distance from the transmitter, the path of energy
flow follows the indirect field. The field decayed
while traveling from the coil to the inner pipe
Spring 2010
wall. It then decayed exponentially passing

through the metal (and had its phase shifted in
that traversal). In the medium outside the pipe it
decayed by the inverse cube of the distance travelled. The field experienced a second attenuation
and phase shift as it passed through the pipe
metal to the receiver coil, which measures an
induced voltage.7
In practice, the tool signal is normalized by a
measurement in air to cancel out geometry and
tool effects. This leaves a normalized signal that
has been attenuated by the product of the expoOilfield
nential decay
in theReview
metal (including the phase
Spring 10
shift) and constant geometrical factors. Metal
PipeScanner Fig.2A
loss from pitting
or corrosion Fig.
affects
ORSPRG10-PPSCN
2A both the
phase shift and the attenuation detected at the
receiver coil (above).
The physical behavior of the field, given the
geometry of coils inside a conducting pipe, provides a neat division into two regions and two
frequency ranges, each of which has a relatively
easy-to-interpret measurement. With a short
transmitter-receiver offset a high-frequency signal
can be used to investigate the properties of
the inner wall of the pipe. This configuration
measures the direct field from the eddy currents in
the pipe near the receiver coil. This is termed the
near-field eddy current (NFEC) region.
A long transmitter-receiver offset with a lowfrequency signal investigates what is called the
remote-field eddy current (RFEC) region. This
region is dominated by the indirect field, which
involves the signal path described previously: The
path goes through the pipe metal twice in its
traversal from transmitter to receiver. That passage through the metal generates both signal
attenuation and a phase shift.
Between the RFEC and the NFEC lies the
transition region. Both the direct and indirect
signals influence the field here, and the interpretation may be quite complex. For that reason,
commercial induction-tool designs for corrosion
detection avoid placing receivers in this region.
6. At certain frequencies a waveguide such as a metal
pipe transmits EM signals with little loss. This range
is bounded by the upper and lower cutoff frequencies;
signals beyond those cutoffs decay exponentially
with distance.
7. Although it seems counterintuitive to be able to
measure pipe thickness using a source and receiver
that are both inside the pipe, the physics is well-defined.
The energy flux, as indicated by the Poynting vector,
flows approximately radially outward through the pipe
wall at the transmitter, along the outside wall of the pipe,
then approximately radially inward again, providing the
receiver is more than about two pipe diameters from
the transmitter. For an example of a finite-element
analysis: Lord W, Sun YS, Udpa SS and Nath S: A
Finite Element Study of the Remote Field Eddy Current
Phenomenon, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 24, no. 1
(January 1988): 435438.
45
Tool outer
diameter
2D discrimination
Sensitive
region
TH
RP
Discriminator
transmitter, TH
Pipe
Pad
receiver, RP
RP
RLL
RP
TH
Average thickness
RP
RLS R
LL
RLS
TL
TL
2D thickness
Applying Principles to Measurement

The EM Pipe Scanner tool takes advantage of
both the skin-depth effect and the difference in
signal between the near and remote regions to
make four distinct measurements (left). The first
determines the casing electrical and magnetic
properties, referred to as impedance or Z properties. The transmitter sends high-frequency signals to the pipe and back to receivers mounted on
the tool mandrel at a short offset, making this an
NFEC measurement. The second measures the
average thickness of the metal normalized by the
skin depth; it uses a low-frequency signal in the
RFEC region. The final two measurements are 2D
images of the pipe using 18 pad sensors pressed
against the inner wall of the pipe. One image uses
low-frequency signals in the RFEC region to
obtain 2D thickness information. The other uses
high-frequency, NFEC signals to discriminate
inner-wall features from those elsewhere.
Z-properties measurementThe electromagnetic properties of the pipe must be known to
interpret other tool measurements. Two transmitter-receiver offsets of 1.5 and 2.5 in. [3.81 and
6.35 cm] are available; the operator selects
which to use based on the pipe diameter. The
Z-properties system transmits three signals ranging from medium to high frequency, each having
a skin depth small enough that the signal does
not penetrate far into the pipe wall. The resulting
measurement is a function of two quantities: the
RLS
RLL
TL
Skin-depth decay
RLS
Z properties
RLL
RZ
RZ
RZ
RZ
TZ
TZ
1 1
0 ID
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
PipeScanner Fig. 3
ORSPRG10-PPSCN Fig. 3
46
, Coil configurations for the EM Pipe Scanner tool. The tool makes four
measurements. The Z-properties measurement (bottom) uses a transmitter
(TZ) operating at three frequencies and one of two nearby receivers (RZ).
The response signal can be used to determine a quantity, , that is a function
of the pipe ID, the angular frequency , and the EM properties of the pipe
metal: the permeability and the conductivity . The term 0 is the constant
permeability of free space. The average thickness d is determined from the
low-frequency transmitter (TL) in the middle of the tool, along with two
receivers above and two below the transmitter (lower middle). Two lowfrequency receivers (RLL) are termed long-spacing receivers and two are
termed short-spacing receivers (RLS), but all are in the RFEC region. The
phase shift of the signalwhich is a function of skin depth as it goes
through the pipe at the transmitter and again at each receiver is used to
determine the EM thickness of the pipe d/. Near the top of the tool 18 caliper
arms press pad receivers (RP) against the inside of the pipe. Combining these
sensors with the low-frequency signal from the transmitter (TL) at the middle
of the tool provides a 2D thickness measurement (upper middle). The 18
sensors are also used with a high-frequency discriminator transmitter (TH)
located on the tool mandrel in line with the sensor pads (top). The highfrequency signal does not penetrate the pipe wall, so this part of the tool
provides a 2D map that discriminates damage on the inside wall from
other signals.
Oilfield Review
> Configuration of 18 arms with sensors. Wellsite sensor experts examine and service the sensor pads after a logging run.
inside pipe diameter and the square root of the

ratio of the magnetic permeability and conductivity of the metal. A physical model helps define
the geometry and EM properties as a solution of
an inverse problem.
Average EM thicknessIn the RFEC region
the phase change of a low-frequency signal is
almost a linear function of the thickness of the
pipe wall, expressed as a ratio of the actual thickness d to the skin depth, or d/. As the signal
passes through the pipe at the transmitter, the
phase change is proportional to d/, then as it
passes back through the pipe at the receiver, the
phase changes again proportionally to d/.
Because of the cylindrical symmetry with transmitter and receiver at the center of the pipe, the
thickness measurement is an average over the circumference at the two locations. For multiple casing strings the result is qualitative, but the
thickness measurement can be compared with
those of past and future runs to indicate changes.
Spring 2010
With inclusion of the Z-properties measurement the thickness of a single string can be calculated from either the conductivity of the pipe
or its magnetic permeability. The conductivity
depends on the pipe chemistry and is typically
constant for a given pipe joint and even for a
majority of joints in a well, since they often come
from one manufacturing run. A computation
based on conductivity provides the basic measurement of thickness. In contrast, the magnetic
permeability is highly variable, so derivation of
the thickness based on permeability is used as a
quality-control measure.
Thickness is measured at a user-selected frequency. The operator typically chooses a signal at
8.75 Hz for multiple strings, at 17.5 or 35 Hz for
single strings, and at 70 Hz for chromium-steel
strings. Processing combines data from multiple
Review
receivers,Oilfield
all at offsets
sufficient to be in the
Spring
RFEC region,
to 10
remove ghosts.8 Although the
Fig.
4 of the phase
thicknessPipeScanner
is almost a linear
function
ORSPRG10-PPSCN
Fig. 4 by invershift, more-accurate
values are obtained
sion modeling to account for nonlinearity.
2D thickness imagingA high-resolution

thickness image is obtained by 18 sensor pads
pressed against the inner pipe surface, incorporating the same low-frequency transmitter as
that used for the average EM thickness measurement (above). Each pad is sensitive to the nearby
pipe thickness, sampling an azimuthal area
extending about 0.5 in. [1.27 cm] on either side of
the pad. Coverage of the inner pipe surface by the
tool depends on the pipe diameter and weight.
The minimum pipe size that can be accessed is
27/8-in. OD, and 100% coverage of a single string is
possible for up to 7-in. OD for heavyweight pipe.
The tool can make accurate measurements in a
maximum pipe ID of 95/8 in.
8. A ghost is a duplicate of the signal generated by a defect.
It results from the traversal of the signal through the pipe
at both the transmitter and receiver locations. Thus, a
defect is indicated once when the transmitter passes it
and again when the receiver passes it. Use of several
offset receivers allows addition and subtraction of logs
to remove the ghost.
47
EM Thickness
0
in.
1.5
Depth,
m
Casing Inner Diameter (EM)

3.7
in.
4.7
Maximum Internal Radius (Caliper)

1.85
in.
Minimum Internal Radius (Caliper)

1.85
in.
2.35
Average Internal Radius (Caliper)

1.85
Relative
Bearing
2.35
in.
2.35
0 deg 360
Tension
10,000 lbf 0
Casing Properties (EM)
Cable
Speed
Gamma Ray
0
200 0 m/h 1,200 9
20
Outer
casing
collar
gAPI
150
Discriminated CCL
V
2D Thickness
Minus
Average (EM)
Radii Minus
Average (Caliper)
2D Discriminator
Minus
Average (EM)
X,580
, Uncorroded pipe in a double string. This log

illustrates the response of an uncorroded interval
of pipe, measured using both the EM Pipe
Scanner tool and the PS Platform multifingercaliper imaging tool (PMIT). The 2D thickness
display (Track 4) has been normalized by
subtracting the average measurement of all 18
sensors from each sensor measurement. Other
than background noise, only the casing collars
are present as horizontal bands of darker colors.
The 2D discriminator image (Track 5) is relatively
featureless, as is the PMIT radii image (Track 3),
except for some indications of casing collars.
Track 1 contains the ID measurements from both
tools, which agreewithin 5%with the
nominal value. The casing properties
measurement (Track 1, gold) is almost constant
through this section. The average EM thickness
measurement (Track 1, green) and the 2D
thickness image (Track 4) detected a collar on
the outer casing string at X,583 m, which was not
detected by the other measurements, including
the casing collar locator (CCL, Track 2).
X,590
X,600
Casing Inner
Diameter
Depth,
ft
4
in.
EM
Thickness
6 0
in.
Casing
Properties
0.4 0
Double-Coil
Amplitude
10 30
dB
Double-Coil
Phase
2D Thickness
Minus Average
deg
in.
0 0
X,X40
X,X60
270 0.2
2D Discriminator
Minus Average
0.2 0.15 in.
0.15
, Corrosion at perforations in Kampung Baru field

in a well producing natural gas with H2S. The 2D
thickness image (Track 6) clearly shows metal loss
(reds) below X,Y15 ft, while the 2D discriminator
log (Track 7) shows only the perforations (browns).
This observation indicates that the loss is on the
outside wall of the casing. Higher in the interval
shown, the log responses are evidence of casing
collars and pipe manufacturing patterns: Pipe is
manufactured from flat steel and then rolled and
welded, creating seams that are seen by
pipe-analysis tools.
X,X80
X,Y00
X,Y20
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
PipeScanner Fig. 5
X,Y40
X,Y60
48
Oilfield Review
In multiple-string casing designs the tool

measurement includes all strings (out to its
signal-to-noise limit) but is most influenced by
the innermost string. Like the average thickness
measurement, the 2D thickness image is based
on the phase shift of the signal as it passes
through the metal of the pipe wall or walls. It can
be normalized by subtracting the average of all 18
measurements at that location. This removes
thickness variation that is uniform around the
pipe, such as that caused by a casing collar (previous page, top).
2D discrimination imagingThe 2D thickness image does not distinguish between defects
on the inside or the outside of the inner tubing.
To obtain that measurement, the tool has a highfrequency (8-kHz) transmitter mounted on the
tool mandrel at the center of the ring of 18 sensor
pads. The high-frequency signal barely penetrates the metal of the pipe, so the response
detected by this NFEC signal is strictly from the
inner surface of the pipe, immediately adjacent
to the pads. Thus, if an anomaly appears on the
2D thickness image but not on the 2D discriminator image, it cannot be on the inner wall of the
pipe. The 2D discriminator image can also be normalized by subtracting the azimuthal average.
Finding Corroded Pipe
Energy Equity Epic operates the onshore Kampung Baru gas field in Sulawesi, Indonesia. The
produced gas contains both carbon dioxide
[CO2] and hydrogen sulfide [H2S]; the stream is
treated to remove water and these corrosive
gases at a central processing facility before
transport to a power plant.9 The field has three
producing wells that have been operating for 12
years. Because of the potential for pipe corrosion caused by H2S in the gas stream, the wells
in the field were logged using the EM Pipe Scanner
tool and PS Platform multifinger imaging tool
(PMIT) to assess corrosion.
In one interval the logs indicated substantial
corrosion in a perforated zone (previous page,
bottom). The 2D thickness image from the EM
Pipe Scanner tool clearly showed metal loss,
while the 2D discriminator log showed only the
perforations and no metal loss. This combination indicates that corrosive fluids are removing
metal from the outside.
In another interval in the same well the EM
Pipe Scanner average-thickness measurement
revealed metal loss from the outer string of 95/8-in.
casing (right). Neither the high-frequency 2D
13 /8 in.
72 lbm/ft
12.347-in. ID
0.514-in. thickness
Depth,
m
Double-Coil Double-Coil
Short-Spacing Short-Spacing
Amplitude
Phase
CCL
3
V 1
Tension
1,000 lbf 0
Gamma
Ray
dB
0 0
deg 360
Double-Coil Double-Coil
Long-Spacing Long-Spacing
Phase
EM Computed Thickness Amplitude
0 gAPI 150 0
in.
1 5
dB
0 0
deg 360
2D
Thickness
55
0
deg
2D
Discriminator
55 0.943
1.069
X00
95/8 in.
53.5 lbm/ft
8.535-in. ID
0.545-in. thickness
X50
Y00
41/2 in.
12.75 lbm/ft
3.958-in. ID
0.271-in. thickness
Y50
> Evidence of metal loss in outer casing. The logged section has 41/2-in. tubing and 95/8-in. casing (well
diagram, left). The EM computed thickness of the double string of pipe is significantly less than nominal
above X40 m (Track 1), but there is no evidence of loss on the 2D discriminator log (Track 5), indicating
the loss is not on the inside wall of the tubing. The EM computed thickness curve also shows metal loss
from X83 to Y50 m, which also is not evident on the 2D discriminator log. In addition, the PMIT caliper
log (not shown) indicated no metal loss from the inner surface of the 41/2-in. tubing. The log response is
Oilfield
Review
interpreted as loss of thickness in the outer
wall
of the 9 5/8-in. casing in these sections. In Track 4 the
10 phase-angle change.
thickness change is represented as theSpring
proportional
PipeScanner Fig. 7
9. HALFYR: EWC: Energy World Corporation Half Year

Ended 31 DecemberDirectors Report, March 2, 2009,
http://www.findata.co.nz/Markets/NZX/14125/HALFYR_
EWC_Energy_World_Corporation_Half_Year_Ended_31_
December.htm (accessed February 22, 2010).
Spring 2010
49
Casing Nominal
Inner Radius
1.75
in.
2.25
Casing Inner
Diameter (EM)
Depth,
m
3.5
Gamma Ray
0
gAPI
in.
4.5
Average Internal
Radius (Caliper)
3,000 1.75
in.
2.25
1,625
1,750
1,875
2,000
2,125
2,250
2,375
2,500
> Indication of scale in 41/2-in. pipe. Below about

2,033 m, the measurement of inner radius from the
PMIT caliper tool (Track 2, black) agrees with the
EM Pipe Scanner ID measurement (blue). Above
that point the EM measurement continues to
indicate the same ID, but the caliper tool
indicates a smaller radius. The large increase in
gamma ray response (Track 1) is interpreted as
resulting from a buildup of scale containing
naturally occurring radioactive material.
Oilfield Review
Spring 10
10. Vandeweijer VP, Van der Meer LGH, Hofstee C,

PipeScanner
Fig.
9
DHoore D and
Mulders F: CO
2 Storage and Enhanced
Gas Recovery
at K12-B, paper R041,Fig.
presented
ORSPRG10-PPSCN
9 at the
71st EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam,
June 811, 2009.
11. van der Meer LGH, Kreft E, Geel CR, DHoore D and
Hartman J: CO2 Storage and Testing Enhanced Gas
Recovery in the K12-B Reservoir, presented at the 23rd
World Gas Conference, Amsterdam, June 59, 2006.
Vandeweijer et al, reference 10.
12. Vandeweijer et al, reference 10.
13. For more on scale problems: Crabtree M, Eslinger D,
Fletcher P, Miller M, Johnson A and King G: Fighting
ScaleRemoval and Prevention, Oilfield Review 11,
no. 3 (Autumn 1999): 3045.
50
discriminator log nor the caliper log indicated

metal loss in this interval.
Results from this tool run clearly demonstrated that the tubing in one well was too thin to
pull it safely, so the company is drilling a replacement well nearby.
Scale in Pipes
GDF SUEZ E&P Nederland B.V. operates the K12-B
gas field located about 150 km [93 mi] northwest
of Amsterdam in the Dutch sector of the North
Sea. The field was discovered in 1982.10 About 13%
of the produced gas is CO2. The separated CO2
from the K12-B platform is currently being reinjected into the K12-B6 well, the first site in the
world to return CO2 to the same reservoir from
which it originated.11 The injection project is being
studied by the Nederlandse Organisatie voor
Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek
(TNO, the Netherlands Organization for Applied
Scientific Research) as part of several Dutch and
European Union projects on CO2 injection.
The subject well was used for gas production
from 1991 to 1999 and then was shut in for several years. The operator began CO2 injection in
January 2005. Since the injection is a pilot for
larger-scale CO2 injection, the important issue of
well integrity may extend beyond the life of the
nearly depleted field.
When in contact with water, CO2 can be corrosive to the 13% chromium steel used in this
wells tubing. Although the CO2 now being
injected is dry, Well K12-B6 occasionally produced water while it was a production well. GDF
SUEZ performs annual pipe-integrity studies to
monitor for potential problems. Multifinger
caliper surveys by a third party began showing
anomalous results, with the measured pipe ID
increasing and then decreasing with repeat surveys.12 Coverage by the caliper fingers was only
25% to 30% of the 41/2-in. OD tubing. The operator
opted to switch to the PMIT in combination with
the EM Pipe Scanner service to obtain increased
coverage of the inner surface.
The resulting survey indicated the tubing was
still in good condition in terms of corrosion, but
the log showed the presence of scale. Buildup of
scale inside pipe affects corrosion-monitoring
tools differently. Calipers will ride along scale,
indicating an ID that is too small. The effect on
an EM-based measurement depends on the composition of the scale itself. In the case of nonconducting, nonmagnetic scale such as calcium
carbonate, there is no effect unless the buildup is
thick enough that the distance from the sensors

to the pipe wall affects the 2D resolution.13
In this case the PMIT and EM Pipe Scanner
measurements diverged (left). Along this interval
there was also a strong increase in the gamma ray
signal, indicative of a buildup of scale that
includes naturally occurring radioactive material. The operator plans to obtain scrapings from
this interval to verify the indication of scale, and
to rerun the combination of monitoring tools.
Engineers want to ascertain the type of scale and
determine if it developed in the past, when the
well was on production, or if it is occurring during
injection of the dry CO2, and if so, how. The result
from the upcoming monitoring run will also
determine whether the company should continue
monitoring annually or switch to every other year.
Scanning for Problems
Corrosion doesnt stop eating away at metals until
there is nothing left for it to consume. Regardless
of how hard engineers attempt to hold it at bay, it
is relentless and will exploit any opportunity.
Corrosion monitoring provides assurance that
mitigation efforts are succeeding or tracks the
progress of corrosion when they are not.
The EM Pipe Scanner tool is the newest
Schlumberger induction tool for monitoring casing conditions. Its combination of measurements
allows quantitative evaluation of pipe thickness
in single strings of casing. The 2D imaging capabilities indicate the spread of corrosion or pitting, and whether this is occurring on the inside
or the outside of the casing. In multiple strings
the tool is qualitative, since the EM characteristics of the outer pipe cannot be evaluated in situ.
Adding the dimension of time through repeat
surveys allows determination of the progression
of corrosion. This gives an operator the information needed to decide between replacing or
repairing tubulars, or continuing to operate a
well when it is safe to do so.
Although advances in metallurgy, coatings
and equipment designs are being made, the
basic methods to control corrosion have not
changed in many years. The battle to defeat
corrosion continues to challenge engineers to
their utmost, and monitoring using equipment
such as the EM Pipe Scanner service is an important tool in their arsenal for assessing the integrity of infrastructure.
MAA
Oilfield Review
Contributors
Irlec Alexandra Acua has been a Schlumberger
Wireline Account Manager since 2008. Based in The
Hague, she manages all international and emerging
accounts in the Netherlands, oversees the growth of the
wireline and slickline business and leads key account
activities in marketing, business development, relationships and technology engagement. She began her
career in 1997 and worked as a mechanical engineer for
SuperOctanos, Den Spie and PDVSA in Caracas and
Puerto La Cruz, Venezuela. In 2000 she joined
Schlumberger as a Wireline field engineer with offshore
and onshore assignments in various countries such as
Venezuela, the UAE, Kazakhstan, Italy, France, Romania
and Norway. Six years later she moved to Assen, the
Netherlands, as technical support sales engineer,
responsible for Schlumberger Wireline business development for the Shell account there. Irlec earned a masters degree in mechanical engineering from Instituto
Universitario Politcnico de la Fuerzas Armadas
Nacionales (IUPFAN), now Universidad Nacional
Experimental Politcnica de la Fuerza Armada
Bolivariana (UNEFA), in Venezuela.
John Algeroy is Schlumberger Systems Manager at the
Schlumberger Reservoir Completions Center (SRC) in
Rosharon, Texas, USA. There he is responsible for the
development of a new completion system for Saudi
Aramco. In 1986 he joined Camco and held various
management positions in Norway and the UK before
the Schlumberger acquisition of Camco in 1998. He was
the global intelligent completion business development
manager from 1999 to 2001, based at SRC, and transferred to Dubai in 2001. Prior to his current assignment, he spent six years in the Middle East, including
time as completions operations manager for the East
Africa and East Mediterranean GeoMarket* region, in
Cairo. John has a BS degree in petroleum engineering
from Rogaland Regional College in Stavanger.
Mauro Amaya, who is an Ecopetrol SA Senior
Engineer, has experience in Colombias Casabe field.
Ral Amaya is a Senior Petroleum Engineer with
Ecopetrol SA. He has worked on the Casabe field project in Colombia.
Mark A. Andersen, Executive Editor of Oilfield Review
and Manager of Oilfield Executive Communications,
joined Schlumberger and the Oilfield Review staff in
2000. He began his career in 1981 as a researcher in
production rock properties at Amoco Research Center
in Tulsa. He subsequently spent several years in
Stavanger, where he managed Amoco Norways external research program and wrote Petroleum Research
in North Sea Chalk. Mark is the author of many technical papers describing his own and other scientists
work, including 23 articles for Oilfield Review. He
holds a BS degree in engineering physics from the
University of Oklahoma at Norman, USA, and MS and
PhD degrees in physics from The Johns Hopkins
University in Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Richard Birchwood is a Geomechanics Specialist with
Schlumberger in Houston, where he has developed
methods for predicting the mechanical and thermal
stability of formations containing gas hydrates. He has
also conducted research on sand production and inversion of sonic logging data for the attributes of rocks
and fractures. Prior to his Houston assignment, he was
Spring 2010
based in Caracas for two years, where he was the

Schlumberger geomechanics specialist for Venezuela,
Trinidad and Tobago. Before joining Schlumberger,
Richard held faculty appointments in the Mechanical
and Civil Engineering Departments at Binghamton
University and The City University of New York, USA,
respectively. He received MS and PhD degrees in
mechanical engineering from Cornell University in
New York and a BSc degree in engineering mathematics from Queen Mary College, University of London.
Ray Boswell is Technology Manager for Methane
Hydrates at the US Department of Energys National
Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in Morgantown,
West Virginia, USA. There he manages the US
Department of Energys R&D portfolio in gas hydrates.
Since he joined NETL in 1991, he has been involved in
unconventional gas resource appraisals and has participated in gas hydrate field programs in India, Alaska and
the Gulf of Mexico. Before joining NETL, he worked for
Chevron in New Orleans from 1988 to 1990. Ray holds a
BS degree from the College of William and Mary,
Williamsburg, Virginia, USA, and MS and PhD degrees
in geology from West Virginia University in Morgantown.
Thilo M. Brill is Project Leader of Detector
Development at the Schlumberger Princeton Technology
Center in New Jersey, USA. There he manages the development of nuclear detectors for Schlumberger Wireline
and Drilling and Measurements applications. He also
interacts with tool researchers and developers at
Schlumberger technology and product centers and with
suppliers of scintillator materials. After three years as a
postdoctoral research fellow at Harvard University in
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, he joined the company
in 1998 as a senior research scientist in the Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance group at Schlumberger-Doll
Research, in Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA. Five years
later he became an engineering physicist at the
Schlumberger Riboud Product Center in Clamart,
France, where he helped design, develop and field test
the EM Pipe Scanner* electromagnetic casing inspection tool. Thilo received an MSc degree in physics from
Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universitt, Frankfurt am Main
in Germany, and a PhD degree, also in physics, from
Universitt Konstanz in Germany.
George Brown joined Sensa in Southampton, England,
as manager of interpretation development in 1999.
(Sensa was later acquired by Schlumberger.) In his
current post as Temperature Interpretation Advisor, he
is responsible for developing interpretation methodology and software for fiber-optic distributed temperature sensors (DTS), such as Schlumberger THERMA*
software; interpreting DTS data; and training
Schlumberger staff and clients to interpret the data.
He began his career with Schlumberger Wireline in
1973, working 12 years in the North Sea and Middle
East in operational, management and sales positions.
During the next 15 years he was with BP Exploration
in several posts, including head of petrophysics at the
Sunbury Research Centre in England and senior formation evaluation consultant with the Intelligent
Wells team charged with developing new permanent
monitoring systems for horizontal and subsea wells.
George earned a First Class degree (Hons) in mechanical engineering from Lanchester Polytechnic in
Coventry, England.
Michael Carney, a Production Consultant with the

Schlumberger Permanent Monitoring and
Interpretation group in Houston, is a member of a
small team looking at new uses of technology for permanent downhole monitoring. He joined Schlumberger
in 1991 as the district geologist in Port Gentil, Gabon,
and subsequently managed the data center in Luanda,
Angola. In 1995 Michael moved to the USA, where he
was involved in the early integration of software into
the GeoFrame* system. Next, he managed technical
applications support for Conoco in the USA. He then
moved into special production projects focusing on
production data management. After leading the
Production Data Management group within GeoQuest,
he joined the Advanced Well Evaluation group that was
part of a joint technology development project with
Chevron. Before joining Schlumberger, he spent nearly
15 years as a development geologist for Gulf Oil and
Chevron in West Texas, West Africa and the North Sea,
specializing in well remediation, field development
planning and equity redetermination. Michael holds a
BSc degree in geological engineering from the
Colorado School of Mines in Golden, USA.
Hctor Castao is Regional Manager for Ecopetrol in
Colombias Middle Magdalena River Valley basin.
Timothy Collett is a Research Geologist with the US
Geological Survey (USGS). Recently, he was a co-chief
scientist and operational manager for the India NGHP
Expedition-01 gas hydrate research project. He was
also a co-chief scientist of the international cooperative gas hydrate research project that was responsible
for drilling dedicated gas hydrate production research
wells in the Mackenzie Delta of Canada under the
Mallik 1998 and 2002 efforts. Tim sailed as the logging
scientist on the Ocean Drilling Program Legs 164 and
204 gas hydrate research cruises. He also sailed as the
co-chief scientist on the Integrated Ocean Drilling
Program Expedition 311 gas hydrate research cruise.
As the principal investigator, he was responsible for
organizing and conducting the 1995 USGS National Oil
and Gas Assessment of natural gas hydrates. Tim has a
PhD degree from the Colorado School of Mines.
Ann Cook is a postdoctoral research fellow at the
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia
University in Palisades, New York. Her primary interest
is marine natural gas hydrates; other interests include
the petroleum industry, geothermal energy and CO2
sequestration. Ann earned a PhD degree from
Columbia University in New York City and a BS degree
in geology and geophysics from the University of Tulsa
in Oklahoma.
Jianchun Dai, who is a Senior Geoscientist for
Schlumberger in Houston, works on problems related
to seismic and rock physics inversion for lithology,
porosity and reservoir fluid properties. He joined the
company in 2002 as a geophysicist, developing seismic
methods for natural gas hydrate quantification, multicomponent event registration and joint inversion. He
also works on pore pressure and shallow-hazard prediction and tar estimation. Before that, he worked as a
senior geophysicist for Global Synergy Corporation and
Paradigm Geophysical Corp., both in Houston.
51
Jianchun received his PhD degree in geoscience from

The University of Texas at Austin. He also has an MS
degree in geoscience from the University of Petroleum
in Beijing and a BS degree in petroleum geology from
the University of Petroleum in Dongyeng, China.
Scott Dallimore is a Geotechnical Engineer, specializing
in gas hydrate and permafrost investigations in the
Mackenzie Delta and Beaufort Sea areas of northern
Canada, as well as in the circumpolar Arctic. He has
worked as a research scientist with the Geological
Survey of Canada for the past 25 years. During this time
he has led a number of large multidisciplinary, multipartnered field projects at the Mallik site, where many
milestones have been reached in the areas of gas
hydrate science, geophysics and production engineering.
John E. Davies is Resource Opportunity Progression
Team Leader for the Azerbaijan Strategic Performance
Unit at BP Exploration at Sunbury on Thames,
England. There he is responsible for establishing and
leading a new team to identify, develop and drive the
delivery of resource-adding projects across BPs operating fields in Azerbaijan. During his 30 years with BP
Exploration, he has held various technical, operational
and research positions in the Middle East, the North
Sea, China and the UK. Prior to joining BP, he worked
for BP Chemicals and the National Coal Board. John
earned a BSc degree (Hons) in mechanical engineering and energy studies at University College in Cardiff
and studied engineering at Pontypridd Technical
College, both in Wales.
Jon Elphick is based in Cambridge, England, and has
worked for Schlumberger since 1974, specializing in
water management for the last 15 years. He provides
field technical support for water management projects
worldwide. His work involves the whole water cycle
from subsurface to facilities in order to improve the
asset value through water management. He has published various water management papers on problem
types, diagnostic methods and case histories. Jon has a
degree in mathematics as well as postgraduate diplomas in reservoir management and education.
Schlumberger-Doll Research Center in Connecticut, as

an experimental physicist working on nuclear magnetic resonance. He joined Schlumberger in 1984 at
Schlumberger Kabushiki Kaisha (SKK) in Japan to
work on a fabrication process for pressure sensors.
Masafumi has an MS degree in physics from Tokyo
Metropolitan University and a postgraduate diploma in
physics from Tokyo University.
Walter Gambaretto, who is based in Bogot, Colombia,
is a Schlumberger Field Development Geophysicist for
the Casabe project. His main responsibilities are defining well locations, supporting drilling and completion
operations, building structural and stratigraphic models
and planning field development. He began his career in
1983 as a geophysicist with Yacimientos Petrolferos
Fiscales in Argentina. He subsequently worked on seismic acquisition, processing and interpretation for
Compagnie Gnrale de Gophysique, Bridas SAPIC
and Quintana Minerals Corporation, all in Argentina. In
2002 he joined Schlumberger Data & Consulting
Services in Mexico, where he participated in bids and
block assessments for the Sureste, Burgos, Misantla and
Sabinas basins. The author of many technical papers,
Walter received a degree in geology from Universidad
Nacional de Crdoba and earned masters degrees from
Universidad Nacional de Cuyo (Mendoza) and Instituto
Tecnolgico de Buenos Aires, all in Argentina.
Hilbrand Graven is Manager of Reservoir Engineering
and Well Operations for GDF SUEZ E&P Nederland
B.V. in Zoetermeer, the Netherlands. His main responsibilities are reservoir engineering work in the Dutch
assets, reserve reporting and coordination of well
interventions with the companys drilling and production departments. He has been with the company since
1981. Hilbrand obtained a masters degree in geology
at the University of Amsterdam.
Kasumi Fujii is a Schlumberger Senior Engineer who

was seconded to the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals
National Corporation (JOGMEC) methane hydrate
R&D project during the second Mallik production test
program. She joined Schlumberger in 1996 as a physics
engineer in Japan, working on developing acoustic
measurements. In 2003 she began work on thermal
modeling of methane hydrates and a temperaturemeasurement system installed in the Nankai Trough.
More recently she has been in charge of the modeling
and measurement physics group for the methane
hydrates production test carried out by JOGMEC and
other organizations in Canadas Mackenzie Delta.
Kasumi obtained an MS degree in physics from
Ochanomizu University in Tokyo.
Robert Greenaway has been Product Champion for

Schlumberger Fiber Optics and Surface Acquisition
Systems since July 2008. He works in the Southampton
Product Centre in England, as part of the Completions
Reservoir Monitoring and Control (RMC) organization.
Prior to his current responsibilities, he was a product
and operations support engineer for fiber optics in the
Southampton Product Centre. He joined Schlumberger
in 2000 at Aberdeen. As a field engineer for Coiled
Tubing Services from 2000 to 2005, he was also UK
product champion for the DepthLOG* CT depth correlation tool in 2003. In this role, Rob combined three
new technologies, DepthLOG service, eFire* firing
head and OrientXact* guns, to implement and perform
the first successful oriented perforating on coiled tubing in the North Sea using wireless pulse telemetry. He
was a CoilTOOLS* technical support engineer at the
Sugar Land Product Center from 2005 to 2006. He
holds a BEng degree in mechanical engineering from
the University of Southampton.
Masafumi Fukuhara, Program Manager for Borehole

Seismics and Acoustics at the Schlumberger Moscow
Research Center, manages a group working on modeling of new acoustic measurements. Before transferring
to Moscow, he was the methane hydrate R&D program
manager in Fuchinobe, Japan. He also managed development of sonic imaging technologies and supervised
the development of an acoustic-emission monitoring
tool. Starting in 1985, he spent three years at the
Yutaka Imasato, Schlumberger Fluid Analysis

Engineering Manager and Optics and Sensors
Engineering Manager at SKK in Japan, oversees development of in situ fluid analysis products and sensors
for downhole application. After earning a bachelors
degree in applied and environmental geology from
Kyushu University in Fukuoka, Japan, he joined Japan
Drilling Company (JDC) in 1985 and spent two years
with JDC as a drilling engineer. He next moved to
52
Fujitsu Limited in Tokyo as a system engineer and

worked on scientific applications in collaborative
research with Japans National Chemical Laboratory
for Industry. He joined Schlumberger as an engineer in
1991. In subsequent positions as software engineer,
staff engineer, project engineer, senior engineer and
project manager, he worked on software development
for various wireline tools, on intelligent completions
and on real-time acquisition and control systems for
permanent reservoir monitoring. He was seconded to
JOGMEC to work on the methane hydrate production
research program in the Mallik test wells in Canadas
Mackenzie Delta. Before taking his current post in
2008, he managed the hydrate and monitoring program at SKK. Yutaka is coauthor of many technical
papers and patents.
Koji Kusaka is Schlumberger Oilfield Services
Manager for the Japan, Korea and Taiwan area, based in
Tokyo. After joining Schlumberger in 1983, he worked as
a wireline logging engineer for seven years in Libya,
Italy, Taiwan and Malaysia. He has also held marketing
and management positions in France and Japan. From
2002 to 2005 he was seconded as a project consultant to
the JOGMEC methane hydrate research project. Koji
has a BS degree in geology from Hiroshima University in
Japan, and a diploma in reservoir management jointly
awarded by Institut Franais du Ptrole, RueilMalmaison, France; Delft Technical University, the
Netherlands; and Imperial College, London.
Jean-Luc Le Calvez, who is Senior Engineer at the
France, develops answer products for the EM Pipe
Scanner electromagnetic casing inspection tool. He
joined Schlumberger in 2001 as a signal processing
engineer to work on gas analysis by infrared spectroscopy. From 2002 to 2007 he was in charge of
answer products for the Isolation Scanner* cement
evaluation service. Jean-Luc earned a PhD degree in
signal processing and telecommunications, and a masters degree in mathematics, both at the University of
Rennes 1, in France.
John Lovell is the Schlumberger Systems Manager for
Distributed Measurements in the Reservoir Monitoring
group based in Rosharon, Texas. There he leads the
development of the WellWatcher Flux* system. In previous positions he has created technology and developed markets for resistivity logging tools, imagingwhile-drilling tools, electromagnetic MWD telemetry
and real-time measurements during stimulation. John
holds masters degrees in mathematics from Oxford
University in England and Cornell University in Ithaca,
New York, as well as a PhD degree in electrical engineering from Delft University of Technology in the
Netherlands. Outside of Schlumberger, he has held
positions as lecturer at Cornell University and at Wells
College in New York, and at Federal University of Par
in Belm, Brazil. John was SPWLA Distinguished
Lecturer in 1998. He has coauthored six Oilfield Review
articles, holds approximately 20 patents and has written many conference proceedings and publications.
Eduardo Lozano is Ecopetrol Regional Manager for
the companys Southern District in Colombia.
Oilfield Review
Leonardo Mrquez joined Schlumberger in 2003. He

is a Senior Reservoir Engineer and Project Manager
who worked as the subsurface manager of the Casabe
alliance from 2004 to 2007. In this role he led the field
development plan (FDP), 3D seismic acquisition and
the first phase of the FDP implementation for the
Casabe field. As a reservoir engineer, he has worked in
integrated reservoir studies and field development
planning and has been involved in several waterflood
projects. He also worked in Integrated Project
Management (IPM) business development at the Latin
America Field Development and Execution Center
(FDEC) and was one of the main contributors in consolidating the collaborative Center to Increase
Recovery and Optimize Production (CIROP) with
Ecopetrol SA, the Colombian national oil company.
Previously, he worked for PDVSA and Eni S.p.A. in various reservoir and production engineering positions.
Leonardos degrees are in petroleum engineering: a BS
degree from the Universidad Central de Venezuela in
Caracas and an MSc degree from Universidad del Zulia
in Maracaibo, Venezuela.
Joerg H. Meyer, who is based in Houston, is Manager
of the Schlumberger Permanent Measurements &
Interpretation (PM&I) Program, a cross-segment
product development initiative with the Reservoir
Production group. He joined the company in 1989 as a
software development engineer at Schlumberger
Riboud Product Center, working on seismic crosswell
and borehole seismic software. In 1996 he became district geophysicist in Dallas and moved to Houston two
years later to become geophysicist for Wireline and
Data & Consulting Services (DCS) headquarters. In
2002 he became DCS operations manager in Norway.
He relocated to Moscow in 2004 as DCS strategy implementation manager at the Moscow Technology Center.
Before assuming his current position in 2007, he was
manager of permanent monitoring projects, developing a strategy for microseismic reservoir monitoring.
Joerg holds MSc and PhD degrees in geophysics.
Ramaswamy Meyyappan is Schlumberger Sustaining
Manager, Reservoir Monitoring and Control (RMC), at
the Schlumberger Reservoir Completions Center (SRC)
in Rosharon, Texas. There he oversees the RMC product
development team for sustaining and RapidResponse*
projects. He joined the company in 1998 as a sustaining
engineer for well logging heads and other conveyance
equipment in Sugar Land, Texas. He spent the next five
years as a design and project engineer working on subsea monitoring and control systems for deepwater wells
in the Gulf of Mexico. From 2003 to 2007 he was based
at Schlumberger in Rosharon as project manager working on connectivity for WellWatcher* monitoring systems and Neon* cables and on development of
downhole, subsea and surface optical connectors for
subsea distributed temperature sensors. Before taking
his current assignment in 2009, he was product line
manager for connectivity, managing new product development for the SRC Connectivity group. Ramaswamy
received a bachelors degree from Birla Institute of
Technology and Science, in Pilani, Rajasthan, India, and
a masters degree from The University of Texas at
Austin, both in mechanical engineering.
Spring 2010
Alan Monsegue, who is based in The Hague, is

Schlumberger Production, Perforating and Well
Integrity Domain Champion. He joined the company in
1980 and had field engineering assignments in Brazil,
Argentina and Venezuela. He subsequently served as
district technical engineer, service quality coach and
field service manager in Trinidad and Tobago. In 2000
he became a Wireline sales engineer in Venezuela, providing technical support for MaxPro* services. He was
also a sales engineer for openhole and cased hole services for the Trinidad market. Before assuming his current position in 2008, he was production domain
champion for the US northern Gulf Coast. Alan has a
BS degree in electrical engineering from the
University of the West Indies at St. Augustine, Trinidad
and Tobago.
Frans Mulders is a Reservoir Engineer for GDF SUEZ
E&P Nederland B.V. in Zoetermeer, the Netherlands.
He is involved in gas well deliquification, CO2 storage,
analysis of production test data, monitoring and optimization of gas production, preparation of gas reserves
reports, history matching, and maintenance of the
teams reservoir engineering database. Before joining
the company in 2007, he spent four years as a geomechanics researcher at Nederlandse Organisatie voor
Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek, or TNO
(Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific
Research), in Utrecht, the Netherlands. His work there
included research on coupled modeling of multiphase
fluid flow, dynamic fault-seal behavior, well and seal
integrity for CO2 storage, subsidence and induced seismicity related to gas production. Frans holds an MSc
degree in engineering geology from RheinischWestfaelische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen
University in Germany, and a PhD degree from Delft
University of Technology in the Netherlands.
Doug Murray is a Schlumberger Formation Evaluation
Principal based in Beijing. Prior to his current position, he was manager of hydrate evaluation in
Fuchinobe, Japan. He also served as DCS operations
manager in Argentina, Trinidad and Saudi Arabia. He
began his career in 1982 as a Wireline field engineer in
Canada and held other field positions in Algeria and
Nigeria. Doug has a BS degree in electrical engineering from Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario,
Canada, and an MS degree in management systems
from University of Hull, England.
Edward A. Nichols is an EM Specialist at
France. Previously, he was EM discipline manager,
EMI Technology Center, in Richmond, California, USA,
where he was responsible for land and marine geophysical instrumentation products. He began his
career in 1977 as a geologist-geophysicist in eastern
Canada with Amax Minerals Exploration. From 1985 to
2004 he worked for Electromagnetic Instruments Inc.
as vice president for R&D, president, operations manager and consulting geophysicist. The author of numerous publications and holder of several patents, Edward
has a BS degree (Hons) in mathematics from Mount
Allison University, in Sackville, New Brunswick,
Canada, and an MS degree in geophysics from McGill
University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. He was also
in the PhD program at University of California at
Berkeley from 1982 to 2001.
Dian M. Notoadinegoro, Schlumberger Senior

Wireline Field Engineer in Balikpapan, East
Kalimantan, Indonesia, provides reservoir evaluation
services to oil companies. He joined Schlumberger in
2006 as a junior Wireline field engineer. Dian received
a bachelors degree in mechanical engineering from
Bandung Institute of Technology, West Java, Indonesia.
Diana Paola Olarte Caro is a Schlumberger
Production Technologist working on the Casabe field
project in Colombia. Her responsibilities for Casabe
casing collapse studies included calculation of
dynamic and static geomechanics moduli, stratigraphic correlation and casing mechanical analysis
simulations. Currently, she monitors waterflooding and
oversees fracture stimulations through selective
strings in injection wells. She joined Schlumberger in
2006 as a production and reservoir engineer trainee,
working on IPM assignments in fields in Peru, Ecuador
and Colombia. Diana earned a bachelors degree in
petroleum engineering from the Universidad de merica in Bogot.
Juan Peralta-Vargas, who is based in Bogot, is a
Schlumberger Senior Reservoir Geologist responsible
for reservoir model characterization and production
geology in the Casabe field. After earning a degree in
geological engineering from Universidad Central de
Venezuela, in Caracas, he began his career in 1991 as a
junior geologist and micropaleontologist with PDVSA
affiliate Maraven. In 1993 he worked as a consulting
geologist with Geoexploracin SA in Caracas. From
1994 to 1999 he was a junior geologist and then staff
geologist with Occidental Petroleum and ARCO in
Venezuela, Texas and California. He became a senior
geologist for Lasmo PLC and coordinated several projects in Venezuela including the Dacin alliance.
Before taking his current position with Schlumberger
in 2007, Juan was a senior production geologist and
sedimentologist for the Total-Statoil-PDVSA
Consortium, Sincor SA, based in Caracas.
Ivan D. Pinzon, who is based in Houston, is a BP
America Senior Petrophysicist in the Gulf of Mexico
Subsurface Team. Prior to this he was a BP senior
petrophysicist and petroleum engineer working as lead
petrophysicist for the Azeri asset in Azerbaijan. He has
also been lead petrophysicist on the team in charge of
appraisal and exploration of the Piedemonte license,
senior petrophysicist for the Cupiagua field and lead
petrophysicist on the Niscota subsurface team, all in
Colombia. He has also had extensive experience in
coordinating production field operations. Ivan earned
a bachelors degree in geosciences from the
Universidad Nacional de Colombia in Bogot; a
diploma in geological surveying from The International
Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth
Observation (ITC) in Enschede, the Netherlands; and
a masters degree in geosciences from Texas Tech
University in Lubbock.
Carlos Fernando Rueda is Ecopetrol Superintendent
of the SOR region of the Middle Magdalena River
Valley basin of Colombia.
53
Tatsuo Saeki is a Research Geophysicist for Japan

Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC).
He received his BS and MS degrees in science and his
PhD degree in engineering from Kyoto University in
1986, 1988 and 2007, respectively. He joined Japan
National Corporation (now JOGMEC) in 1988. His
main interests include wave processing and analysis,
3D seismic interpretation and methane hydrate exploration. He is a member of SEG, EAGE and SEGJ.
Dianna Shelander is a Principal Geophysicist for
Schlumberger in Houston. She has 30 years of petroleum exploration and exploitation experience covering a variety of geologic regimes, such as passive
margins, rift basins, strike-slip tectonics and salt
diapirism. Recently, she has worked on interpretation
of seismic data for the Joint Industry Project to investigate gas hydrates in the Gulf of Mexico. She began
her career with Schlumberger as a field engineer in
Midland, Texas, then worked for Amoco Production
Company in Denver and Unocal Corporation in Sugar
Land, Texas, before returning to Schlumberger at
WesternGeco in 1999. Dianna has a BS degree in
physics from Georgia Institute of Technology in
Atlanta, USA, and an MS degree in geophysics from
Stanford University in California.
Ivan Sofronov, Borehole Seismic and Acoustics
Discipline Expert at the Schlumberger Moscow
Research Center, focuses on development of reliable
high-performance technologies for modeling seismic
wave propagation in anisotropic heterogeneous
media, including applications for reverse time migration and full-waveform inversion. He also serves as a
Schlumberger liaison with the Moscow Institute of
Physics and Technology and with the Russian
Academy of Sciences, supporting university recruiting. His main areas of expertise are numerical analy-
sis and partial differential equations; and the construction and mathematical analysis of numerical
methods for hyperbolic, parabolic and elliptic problems with applications in computational elastodynamics, computational fluid dynamics and computational
electromagnetics. He joined Schlumberger after 27
years of research at the Keldysh Institute of Applied
Mathematics, Russian Academy of Sciences in
Moscow. Ivan earned MS and PhD degrees in computational mathematics at the Moscow Institute of
Physics and Technology and a Doctor of Science
degree, also in computational mathematics, at the
Institute of Mathematical Modeling, Russian Academy
of Sciences in Moscow.
Gabriel Tirado is Global Business Development
Manager for Schlumberger Completions headquarters
in Rosharon, Texas. There he oversees worldwide new
technology introduction and growth of the companys
reservoir monitoring product line. He joined
Schlumberger in 1994 as a Testing field engineer. In
1997 he became a field supervisor for Testing operations
and quality assurance officer for Schlumberger Nigeria.
Two years later he was named field service manager for
Testing operations in eastern Venezuela. He became an
account and support manager in 2000, overseeing Well
Completions & Productivity (WCP) operations in Brazil.
Before assuming his current post in 2007, he was reservoir monitoring and upper completions manager for
operations in the US Gulf of Mexico and also WCP district manager in Louisiana, USA. Gabriel has a degree in
chemical engineering from the Universidad
Metropolitana (UNIMET) in Caracas.
Arvalo Jose Velsquez Marn, who is based in

Bogot, has been Schlumberger Drilling Team Leader
of the Alianza Casabe Project since 2006. He began
his career in 1980, drilling exploratory wells for
Maraven in Venezuela. In 1985 he became a directional drilling and drilling instructor for the company.
He gained further drilling experience with PDVSA in
Venezuela as drilling and workover superintendent;
engineering and technology superintendent; multilateral, directional and geomechanics team leader; and
drilling manager for underbalanced wells. In 2002 he
moved to Drillmar Energy in Houston as technical
limit instructor. One year later he joined
Schlumberger as senior drilling engineer on the
Veracruz project with PEMEX in Mexico. Arvalo
earned a bachelors degree in petroleum engineering
from Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge.
Fernando Zapata Bermudez has been Schlumberger
Product Champion for Well Integrity in Paris since
2009. His main responsibility is to coordinate the
efforts of headquarters, research, engineering, operations and the industry to ensure introduction of reliable products with complete client and field
acceptance. He joined Schlumberger in 2000 as a field
engineer in Colombia. The following year he became a
field engineer, working on openhole and cased hole
operations in remote locations in the Amazon jungle.
In 2004 he became a senior field engineer in Peru.
Later that year he moved to the Netherlands as general field engineer, becoming engineer in charge in
2005. He subsequently became field services manager
for Schlumberger UK, responsible for all openhole,
cased hole, memory and multiline operations in the
North Sea. Fernando holds a bachelors degree in civil
engineering from Pontificia Universidad Javeriana,
Bogot, Colombia.
An asterisk (*) is used to denote a mark of Schlumberger.
Coming in Oilfield Review
Diagenesis. Immediately following deposition,

sediments are acted upon by a variety of physical,
biological and chemical forces, which collectively
cause diagenesis. The resulting subtle, yet important,
alterations will ultimately determine whether a reservoir is productive. This article focuses on diagenesis
and its effects on two key parameters for oil and gas
companies, namely the loss or gain of reservoir
porosity and permeability.
54
Enhanced Land Seismic Techniques. Advances in

land seismic acquisition and processing are improving
characterization of both shallow anomalies and deep
geologic targets. Improved evaluation of signals
particularly those previously considered near-surface
noiseis enhancing subsurface imaging in areas that
have typically yielded poor results. Powerful sources
and better processing algorithms are producing seismic data rich in low-frequency content; the results are
superior structural imaging and successful inversion
for reservoir properties with no compromise in
acquisition efficiency.
Integrating Exploration Technologies. Geoscientists

have carried out an integrated study of prospects in
the Potiguar and Cear basins, offshore Brazil, through
prestack depth migration of a legacy 2D seismic
dataset and subsequent construction of a 3D static
geologic model and 4D dynamic petroleum systems
models. The team evaluated the exploration potential
of both basins by integrating all available data into
these models, including satellite remote-sensing
analysis to identify natural oil seeps and customized
controlled-source electromagnetic surveys. The result
is an integrated evaluation of the prospectivity of
these basins.
Oilfield Review
NEW BOOKS
strength and failure angles, and

composing useful engineering reports.
. . . Highly recommended.
This outstanding, unparalleled volume will contribute to the educational

needs of the tsunami science and engineering student as well as the advanced
researcher and veteran oceanographer.
Dimmick CW: Choice 46, no. 9 (May 2009): 1734.
Grose LTL: Choice 46, no. 11 (July 2009): 2148.
Engineering Geology:
Principles and Practice
The Sea: Tsunamis

Eddie N. Bernard and
Allan R. Robinson (eds)
Harvard University Press
79 Garden Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 USA
2009. 450 pages. US $125.00
David George Price (edited and

compiled by M.H. de Freitas)
Springer-Verlag
175 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10010 USA
2009. 450 pages. US $109.00
ISBN 0-674-03173-3
ISBN 978-3-540-29249-4
This book, volume 15 in a series surveying the frontiers of ocean science and
research, examines the current science
of tsunamis. Written by the worlds
foremost experts on the subject, the 13
chapters provide up-to-date knowledge
on the recorded and geologic history of
tsunamis and information on the probability of tsunami occurrence, the generation of tsunamis, the measurement
and modeling of tsunami propagation
and inundation, the impacts of
tsunamis on coastlines, and tsunami
forecasting and warning systems.
Contents:
Introduction: Emergent Findings and
New Directions in Tsunami Science
Tsunami History: Recorded
Geologic Effects and Records
of Tsunamis
Tsunami Probability
Excitation of Tsunamis
by Earthquakes
Tsunami Generation: Other Sources
Tsunami Measurements
Tsunami Modeling: Development of
Benchmarked Models
Tsunami Modeling: Propagation
Tsunami Modeling: Inundation
Tsunami Impacts on Coastlines
Tsunami Forecasting
Tsunami Warning Systems
Index
This rare book eminently provides
an excellent basis of scientific and
technical information in this
neglected field.
Exploration Geophysics:
An Introduction
Mamdouh R. Gadallah and Ray Fisher
Springer-Verlag
175 Fifth Avenue
2009. 262 pages. US $139.00
ISBN 978-3-540-85159-2
The authors focus primarily on seismic

reflection techniques as applied to
petroleum exploration. The book
describes how seismic data are
acquired in 2D and 3D, how they are
processed to convert the raw data to
vertical and horizontal seismic cross
sections that are geologically meaningful, and how these and other data are
interpreted to delineate an oil and gas
prospect. Included are problem exercises related to actual situations.
Contents:
Overview of Geophysical Techniques
Seismic Fundamentals
Data Acquisition
Seismic Data Processing
Seismic Interpretation
4-D (Time Lapse 3-D)
Seismic Surveys
Future Trends
Appendixes, Glossary, Index
Gadallah and Fisher have
extensive experience in petroleum
exploration, and this book reflects
the type of work they regularly perform.
. . . Recommended.
Field MS: Choice 46, no. 9 (May 2009): 1731.
Written for students and practitioners

of geology, engineering geology and civil
engineering, the text illustrates how
geology is related to calculations of
stability, deformation and groundwater
flow. It discusses geologic materials and
masses, maps, sampling techniques,
field tests, site investigations and
ground behavior under natural and
artificially created conditions.
Contents:
The Basis of Engineering Geology
Geological Materials
Geological Masses
Maps
Recovery of Samples
Field Tests and Measurements
Organisation, Design and Reporting
of Site Investigations
Ground Response to Engineering and
Natural Processes
Withdrawal of Support by Surface
Excavations
Withdrawal of Support by Underground Excavations
Static Loading of the Ground
Dynamic Loading of the Ground
Ground Reaction to Changes of Fluid
and Gas Pressures
Epilogue, References, Index
This is one of the best course
resources and reference works
published on engineering geology in a
long time. The book is weighted very
strongly toward the practical
application of engineering geology
principles and the methods generally
used in gathering essential data,
calculating or estimating critical
values for such things as rock or soil
Sandstone Landforms
Robert W. Young, Robert A.L. Wray
and Ann R.M. Young
Cambridge University Press
32 Avenue of the Americas
2009. 314 pages. US $140.00
ISBN 978-0-521-877336-6
With examples drawn from around the

world, this book describes the wide
variety of landforms that are found in
sandstone and discusses the role of
lithological variation, chemical weathering and erosional processes in creating these features. Also included are
climatic and tectonic constraints on the
development of sandstone landscapes.
Contents:
Introduction
Variations Within Sandstones
Cliffs
Curved Slopes
Chemical Weathering
Solutional Landforms
Erosional Forms
Climatic Zonation of
Sandstone Terrain
Tectonic Constraints on Landforms
Conclusions, References, Index
[The book] is also revolutionary in
that it shows by numerous worldwide
examples that the most important
controls on sandstone landforms are
lithological and structural, and that
climatic variations play a much smaller
role than was formerly believed.
This reviewer knows of no other
book which brings together in one
place the wide range of variations in,
and the factors which control, sandstone landforms. The volume includes
an extensive bibliography and an adequate index. . . . Highly recommended.
Dimmick CW: Choice 47, no. 3
(November 2009): 533.
Spring 2010
55
mental impacts of hydrogen via review

of existing and developing codes of
standards complements this books rich
content. As carbonaceous compounds
will be important feedstock for hydrogen production, the thorough discussion of CO2 sequestration technologies
presented at the end of the book is
excellent for conclusion. In short, a
comprehensive work on hydrogen fuel.
Tavakoli J: Choice 47, no. 3 (November 2009): 534.
Hydrogen Fuel: Production,

Transport, and Storage
Petroski reminds us, quite rightly,

that while scientists may ring the warning when it comes to potential disasters
. . . it will be the optimistic engineers
who hear the warnings not as doomsday scenarios but as calls to tackle
significant problems. The warning bells
are ringing clear and loud. One hopes
that Petroskis own alarm, calling
engineers to creative arms, is heard
as clearly as a klaxon.
Ram B. Gupta (ed)

CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW
Suite 300
Boca Raton, Florida 33487 USA
2009. 624 pages. US $129.95
ISBN 978-1-4200-4575-8
This book presents a comprehensive

review of the latest information on
hydrogen fuel and deals with various
production methods, including natural
gas, coal, nuclear energy, wind energy,
biomass, photobiological processes,
solar energy and electrolysis. Discussion
includes storage in tanks, in metal
hydrides and in carbon materials; and
the safety of carbon sequestration.
Contents:
Fundamentals and Use of Hydrogen
as a Fuel
Production of Hydrogen from
Hydrocarbons
Hydrogen Production from Coal
Hydrogen Production from Nuclear
Energy
Hydrogen Production from Wind
Energy
Sustainable Hydrogen Production
by Thermochemical Biomass
Processing
Use of Solar Energy to Produce
Hydrogen
Targets for Onboard Hydrogen
Storage Systems: An Aid for the
Development of Viable Onboard
Hydrogen Storage Technologies
Hydrogen Transmission in Pipelines
and Storage in Pressurized
Cryogenic Tanks
Hydrogen Storage in Metal Hydrides
Hydrogen Storage in Carbon
Materials
Hydrogen Storage in Organic
Chemical Hydrides on the Basis of
Superheated Liquid-Film Concept
Hydrogen Codes and Standards
Hydrogen Sensing and Detection
Hydrogen Safety
Carbon Sequestration
Index
Addressing the safety and environ-
56
But his point here is not so much to

celebrate the past accomplishments
and general worthiness of engineering
and design: Thats a task hes handled
definitively in more than a dozen previous books. Instead, Petroski presents a
book-length argument for the place
of engineering in humanitys future,
especially when it comes to ensuring
that future in the face of climate
change, natural disasters, dwindling oil
supplies and other global problems.
The Essential Engineer:

Why Science Alone Will Not
Solve Our Global Problems
Hayden T: The Washington Post (February 28,

2010), http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
content/article/2010/02/26/AR2010022602789.html
(accessed March 2, 2010).
Henry Petroski
Alfred A. Knopf, a division
of Random House
1745 Broadway
2010. 288 pages. US $26.95
ISBN 978-0-307-27245-4
The aim of the book is to clarify the differences between the roles of science
and engineering in defining and solving
some of the most urgent problems in
the world today. Analyzing both historical and contemporary examples, from
climate change to public health, the
author shows how science often fails
to take into account the structural,
economic, environmental and aesthetic
dimensions that routinely challenge
engineers. He argues that only by
working together can scientists and
engineers find solutions to crucial
global problems.
Contents:
Ubiquitous Risk
Engineering Is Rocket Science
Doctors and Dilberts
Which Comes First?
Einstein the Inventor
Speed Bumps
Research and Development
Development and Research
Alternative Energies
Complex Systems
Two Cultures
Uncertain Science and Engineering
Great Achievements and
Grand Challenges
Prizing Engineering
Notes, Illustration Credits, Index
No Small Matter:
Science on the Nanoscale
George Whitesides and Felice Frankel
Harvard University Press
79 Garden Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 USA
2009. 192 pages. US $35.00
ISBN 978-0-674-03566-9
An introduction to the science and technology of small things, the book explains
science on the nanoscale. Using traditional photography, computer-generated
imaging and various high-powered
microscopic techniques, biochemist and
essayist Whitesides and photographer
Frankel describe seemingly invisible
objects. Also included are discussions of
new methods used to study nanostructures and suggestions for understanding
their often bizarre behavior.
Contents:
Small: Santa Maria; Feeling Is
Seeing; Quantum Cascades;
Water; Single Molecules; Cracks;
Nanotubes
Alice in Wonderland: Vibrating Viola

String; Prism and Diffraction;
Duality; Interference; Quantum
Apple; Molecular Dominoes; The
Cell in the Silhouette; Laminar
Flow; The Wet Fantastic; Fingers
Life: Soap Bubbles; The Cell as
Circus; Ribosome: Bacterial
Flagella; Life as a Jigsaw Puzzle;
As the Wheel Turns; Quantum Dots
and the Cell; Sequencing DNA;
Molecular Recognition; Harvesting
Light; The Elegance of Simple
Animals; Antibodies; Virus
Why Care?: Writing with Light;
Eleanor Rigby; Abacus; Counting on
Two Fingers; Babbages Computing
Engine; Computers as Waterworks;
Microreactor; Templating; Catalyst
Particles; Christmas-Tree Mixer;
Self-Assembly; Synthetic Nose;
Millipede; E-Paper and the Book;
Lateral Flow Assay as Crystal Ball;
Cooling the Fevered Brain
Cheetah in the Underbrush?:
Phantoms; Privacy and the Nest;
Soot and Health; Robots; Fog; In
Sickness and in Health
Whale or Herring?: The Internet;
Reverse Osmosis Membrane;
Nuclear Reactions; Flame;
Fuel Cell; Solar Cell; Plants
and Photosynthesis
Coda
Five Not-So-Easy Pieces: Notes from
the Photographer
Further Reading, Visual Index
. . . the book combines colorful
imagery from multiple disciplines with
thoughtful essays to capture the bizarre
world below the level of the visible and
to introduce readers to the strange
principles driving science on the
nanoscale.
Greenwood V: A Miniature Miscellany,
(November 5, 2009), http://seedmagazine.com/
slideshow/no_small_matter/ (accessed
April 6, 2010).
This is a brilliant book that will

help a wide readership to appreciate
the wonders of the very small. It
should adorn the coffee table of every
nanoscience laboratory, and no doubt
will find its way into the Christmas
stockings of friends of many scientists.
Briggs A: A Closer Look at the Hidden World,
(December 10, 2009),
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.
asp?storyCode=409462&sectioncode=26
(accessed April 6, 2010).
Frankel and Whitesides book adds

gravitas and nuance to the popularization of nanotechnology, articulating its
interest and vast opportunities.
Baumberg J: A Vision of the Nanoscale,
Nature 462, no. 850 (December 17, 2009),
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7275/
full/462850a.html (accessed April 6, 2010).
Oilfield Review

Or Spring 2010

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Or Spring 2010

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Oilfield Review

Revitalizing a Mature Field

Reporting on Technology in a Cyclic Industry

resources of unconventional hydrocarbons require new

Visit the Oilfield Review archive online at www.slb.com/oilfieldreview. It includes

Reporting on Technology in a Cyclic Industry

Editorial contributed by Mark Andersen, Executive Editor, Oilfield Review

Casabe: New Tricks for an Old Field

After twenty years of waterflooding, oil production in the

18 Developments in Gas Hydrates

About Oilfield Review

Oilfield Review is published quarterly and

2010 Schlumberger. All rights reserved.

34 Permanent Monitoring: Taking It to the Reservoir

42 Scanning for Downhole Corrosion

Jacques Braile Salis

Downhole corrosion can be detected and monitored using

Casabe: New Tricks for an Old Field

analysis, waterflooding, drilling and production optimization are restoring this

once-prolific field to its former glory.

Casabe alliance formed

Water injection rate, 1,000 bbl/d

Waterflood pilot projects

1. Peralta-Vargas J, Cortes G, Gambaretto W, Martinez

of the natural drive period, the operator had

Oilfield Review Spring 2010: 22, no. 1.

Old fields have stories to tell. The story of the

Oil production rate, 1,000 bbl/d

In 2004 Ecopetrol SA and Schlumberger

A Prolific Yet Complex Region

Nuevo Mundo syncline

The abundance of hydrocarbon resources in

the Casabe field in the Galn field. A high-angle

4. Pericratonic is a term used to describe the area around a

Jones SH, Barker MHS, ODonoghue J, Mohler CE,

paper SPE 122868, presented at the SPE Latin American

and washouts, and completion challenges such as

looked. To improve structural understanding and

of structural maps (Seismic Data). These maps indicate additional faults in

Typical amplitude signature

. Casabe field injection and production scheme.

Waterflood Patterns in Block VI

Sand production and high-velocity jetting of

Four-zone injector schematic

Overcoming Drilling Difficulties

Number of collapse events

20% wall loss

10% wall loss

30% wall loss

within the field and well-collapse distribution

Critical collapse period

Number of wells collapsed

First drilling campaign

Critical collapse period

Injection and production rate, bbl/d

time during which collapse frequency was high.

> History of casing-collapse frequency. The frequency of collapse events by

Once all critical limits and conditions for

61/4-in. miscellaneous sub

Design Improvements of Bicentric Bits and RWD

Together with the results from the other

CB-1054, was drilled with the new hardware, and

New Wells and Results

Average drilling time