Technologies for Safe Handling of Drilling Waste during Well Construction in the Ob Bay

2021 ◽  
pp. 52-60
Author(s):  
A.D. Dzyublo ◽  
◽  
S.О. Borozdin ◽  
E.E. Altukhov ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Waste Disposal ◽  
Industrial Waste ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Environmental Safety ◽  
Kara Sea ◽  
Oil Field ◽  
Gas Condensate ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Field Calculation ◽  
Drilling Waste

Development of the Russian oil and gas fields in the Arctic requires ensuring industrial and environmental safety of conduct of the operations. Large and unique oil and gas condensate fields are discovered in the southern part of the Kara Sea. The Kamennomysskoye-Sea, Severo-Kamennomysskoye, Semakovskoye, Parusovoye, etc. gas condensate fields are located in the Ob Bay of the Kara Sea. The raw material base of the Severo-Obskoye gas condensate field, unique in terms of the reserves, will become the basis for future Arctic LNG projects. Based on the published data, the initial recoverable total hydrocarbon resources in the Ob and Taz bays are about seven billion tons. Active exploration and commissioning of the already discovered fields require the large volumes of well drilling in a freezing sea, the presence of permafrost, and gas hydrates. During construction of the wells and operation of the offshore ice-resistant oil and gas production platforms, it is required to ensure the disposal of drilling waste (cuttings) and domestic water. There are two technologies for waste disposal — injection into the reservoir or into the clay formations. The first one is used in onshore fields, the second one — on the shelf. Injection into a clay reservoir is successfully used in the Lunskoye gas field on the shelf of the Sakhalin island, and on the Prirazlomnoye oil field in the Pechora Sea. The possibility of using the method and the selection of a reservoir for injecting waste into it requires a geological justification, and the reservoir should ensure a stable injectivity of the required volume. The article presents the results of modeling the injection into the formation of drilling waste, and the waste of the household activities for the Kamennomysskoe-Sea gas condensate field. Calculation was made concerning the zone of absorption of the technological waste into the designed well of the offshore ice-resistant stationary platform. Formation allocation for waste injection was made according to the data of a complex of offshore wells geophysical studies. Three packs of sandy-argillaceous rocks with high reservoir properties were selected as the object of industrial waste disposal. Сalculation was carried out related to the radius of the spread of waste (effluent) in the target reservoir considering drilling and operation of twenty five wells, the construction of which is planned for five years. The results of modeling the process of pumping industrial waste of various types into an absorption well showed that the planned volumes can be successfully disposed of in the selected objects. This will allow to ensure functioning of the marine industry and its environmental safety.

scholarly journals Geoenvirоnmental risks on the background geopolitical challenges for the oil and gas industry in the Arctic

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 12-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. P. Trubitsina ◽  
V. N. Bashkin
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
Environmental Safety ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
Expert Assessment ◽  
Arctic Ecosystems ◽  
Oil And Gas Development ◽  
Projected Changes

The article is devoted to the issues of geoecology and geopolitics in the Arctic. The authors reveal the need to consider geopolitical challenges in the analysis of geoecological risks (GER) of oil and gas development of the Arctic region. This is due to the intersection here of the strategic interests of several States and their focus to prove the inability of Russia to ensure environmental safety in the development of Arctic fi elds. Th e subject of GER is used as a geopolitical tool against Russia due to the probability of it becoming a key player in the region. The authors propose a model for the analysis of GER, which is based on critical loads (CL) of acidity of pollutants and includes 2 stages: 1) the stage of quantitative assessment of GER, which allows to calculate not only the magnitude of the projected changes in the state of the Arctic ecosystems, but also the probability of their occurrence; 2) the stage of management of GER taking into account geopolitical factors, assuming a qualitative expert assessment, which is a procedure for making a management decision to achieve acceptable levels of the total GER.

Alaska’s North Slope May Yet See Its Renaissance in Arctic Exploration

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (10) ◽  
pp. 17-22
Author(s):  
Pat Davis Szymczak
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Oil Field ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Energy Information Administration ◽  
Gas Field ◽  
The Us ◽  
Arctic Exploration

It wasn’t too long ago that Arctic oil and gas exploration enjoyed celebrity status as the industry’s last frontier, chock full of gigantic unexplored hydrocarbon deposits just waiting to be developed. Fast forward and less than a decade later, the same climate change that made Arctic oil and gas more accessible has caused an about-face as governments and the world’s supranational energy companies rebrand and target control of greenhouse gases (GHG) to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. Among countries with Arctic coastlines, Canada has focused its hydrocarbon production on its oil sands which sit well below the Arctic Circle; Greenland has decided to not issue any new offshore exploration licenses (https://jpt.spe.org/greenland-says-no-to-oil-but-yes-to-mining-metals-for-evs), and while Norway is offering licenses in its “High North,” the country can’t find many takers. The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD) reported that while 26 companies applied for licenses in 2013, this year’s bid round attracted only seven participants. Norway is Europe’s largest oil producer after Russia with half of its recoverable resources still undeveloped and most of that found in the Barents Sea where the NPD says only one oil field and one gas field are producing. That leaves Russia and the US—geopolitical rivals which are each blessed with large Arctic reserves and the infrastructure to develop those riches—but whose oil and gas industries play different roles in each nation’s economy and domestic political intrigues. Russia sees its Arctic reserves, particularly gas reserves, as vital to its national security, considering that oil and gas accounts for 60% of Russian exports and from 15 to 20% of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP), according to Russia’s Skolkovo Energy Centre. With navigation now possible year­round along the Northern Sea Route, Russia’s LNG champion and its largest independent gas producer, Novatek, is moving forward with exploration to expand its resource base and build infrastructure to ship product east to Asia and west to Europe. https://jpt.spe.org/russian­lng­aims­high­leveraging­big­reserves­and­logistical­advantages As a result, Russia’s state­owned majors—Rosneft, Gazprom, and Gazprom Neft—are lining up behind their IOC colleague as new investment in Arctic exploration and development is encouraged and rewarded by the Kremlin. In contrast, the American Petroleum Institute reports that the US oil and gas industry contributes 8% to US GDP, a statistic that enables the US to have a more diverse discussion than Russia about the role that oil and gas may play in any future energy mix. That is unless you happen to be from the state of Alaska where US Arctic oil and gas is synonymous with Alaskan oil and gas, and where the US Geological Survey estimates 27% of global unex­plored oil reserves may lie. Though Alaska is responsible for only 4% of US oil and gas production, those revenues covered two-thirds of Alaska’s state budget in 2020 despite the state’s decline in crude production in 28 of the past 32 years since it peaked at 2 million B/D in 1988, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA).

scholarly journals EXPLORATION WELLS COMPLETION IN ICE CONDITIONS OF THE ARCTIC

2016 ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
D. A. Kustyshev ◽  
A. V. Kustyshev ◽  
A. A. Barkov ◽  
M. D. Antonov ◽  
V. A. Dolgushin
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Gas Condensate ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
History Of Development ◽  
Oil And Gas Resources ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ice Conditions

The article considers the history of development of oil and gas resources of seas and oceans, and prospects of the Arctic off-shore fields development. The analysis of the project solutions on development of the off-shore gas and gas-condensate fields in the Tyumen region north has been carried out. The technology solutions are proposed aimed on completion of prospecting wells from the ice islands at time deficit using drill rigs, as well as on completion of wells with using the preventing units.

An Improved Methodology for Gas-Condensate Cluster Evaluations under Uncertainty

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergei Igorevich Melnikov ◽  
Nikita Vladimirovich Vershigora ◽  
Alexander Alexandrovich Groo ◽  
Denis Sergeevich Grigorev ◽  
Pavel Yurievich Kiselev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Development Strategy ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Business Case ◽  
Oil Field ◽  
Gas Condensate ◽  
Gas Field ◽  
Field Development ◽  
Asset Development ◽  
Additional Value ◽  
Probabilistic Nature

Abstract A decision to buy oil and gas assets requires a project evaluation (PE) aimed at integrated calculation of numerous possible scenarios of asset development, based on the uncertain resource values, variety of geological exploration program events, the most preferable decisions about the oil field development in the current economic conditions. The vast amount of calculations determined by the probabilistic nature of the PE and specific timeframes require optimization of the current approaches based on the balance between accuracy and time. This issue is particularly relevant for the evaluation and analysis of gas or gas-condensate field cluster as the profitability of the project can be concentrated in the asset integration into one production cluster. Such option as well as proposal to gather separate fields to the common infrastructure, sequence of fields development with different geological and physical characteristics, calculations of a large number of synergy options, etc. require the multi-disciplinary team to think outside the box while searching for a business case. Thus, this paper is aimed to improve current approaches and the current tools adaptation which will be used to drastically automate cross-functional probability estimate of gas field cluster with technical and economic justification of sustainable integrated solutions. The results were successfully validated within PE of several perspective gas condensate projects focused on the possibility of integration of the fields into a single cluster that creates additional value from the optimization of the project solutions (exploration, development strategy, gathering and transportation of hydrocarbons, monetization of the products) equal to tens of billions of rubles in a limited period of time.

scholarly journals Dynamics of hydrocarbon production in long-developed fields of the South Caspian basin with emphasis on reserves renewability

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 1081-1091
Author(s):  
A. A. Feyzullayev ◽  
I. Lerche ◽  
I. M. Mamedova ◽  
A. G. Gojayev
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Oil Field ◽  
Gas Condensate ◽  
Caspian Basin ◽  
The South ◽  
South Caspian Basin ◽  
Hydrocarbon Production ◽  
Field Development

AbstractThe scientific basis of the paper is the concept of renewability of oil and gas resources. In accordance with this concept, the purpose of this paper is to estimate the volumetric rate of natural replenishment of the reservoir with oil and gas using the example of long-developed Bibieybat oil and Garadag gas condensate fields in the South Caspian Basin (SCB). The methodological approach of this assessment is based on the authors' assumption that at the late stage of field development, the recoverable amount of hydrocarbon fluids is compensated by the amount of their natural inflow, as a result of which oil or gas production stabilizes. The analysis of the dynamics of hydrocarbon production for the Bibieybat oil field covered the period from 1935 to 2018, and for the Garadag gas condensate field from 1955 to 1979. The rate of natural oil replenishment calculated for 29 operating facilities of the Bibieybat field varies per well within 0.32–1.4 ton/day (averaging 0.76 ton/day) or about 277 ton/year. The rate of natural gas inflow at the Garadag gas condensate field is about 5.2 thousand m3/day per well.

Integrated substantiation of the Erema–Chona giant gas–condensate–oil field (Lena–Tunguska petroleum province)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgy G. Shemin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Oil Field ◽  
Gas Condensate ◽  
Structural Elements ◽  
Compelling Evidence ◽  
Oil And Gas Fields ◽  
Gas Fields ◽  
Favorable Conditions

This paper provides compelling evidence for the previously discovered oil and gas fields in the central, most uplifted part of the Nepa–Botuoba anteclise, to be the constituent structural elements of the Erema–Chona giant gas–condensate–oil field. The revealed tectonic, lithological–facies, and geochemical affinities within its limits attest to equally favorable conditions for the formation of oil and gas accumulations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document