bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Technology Focus: Overview: Artificial Lift (July 2011)
Authors: Noonan Shauna 
Published: February 2015

Technology Focus
The electrical-submersible-pump (ESP) industry has achieved many milestones this year, with a new publication, record-setting workshop, and an international standard in development.
Recently, SPE published its first reprint on ESP technology. This volume contains key papers that give a “state of the industry” perspective on the extent to which ESP technology has evolved and which areas have been most pre-dominant. Topics include subsea and deepwater applications, extreme environments, alternative deployment, reliability information, and failure tracking. It is available online as a digital edition from the SPE Bookstore. (Lesson learned—First, check with your information-technology department to ensure that your company supports use of the digital-editions software.)
In April 2011, the SPE ESP Workshop (sponsored by the Gulf Coast Section) had a record attendance of 560 people from 24 countries. This 5-day event included continuing-education classes, a technical session with 31 papers, and a sold-out exhibition area. To learn more about this event, go to www.espworkshop.com.
It was at the SPE ESP Workshop that the industry caught its first glimpse of what is being covered in the new international standard for ESPs (ISO 15551-1). The ISO ESP committee has been working hard over the past 11/2 years to draft a standard that contains requirements for pumps, gas handlers, intakes, mechanical gas separators, cables and motor-lead extensions, seal-chamber sections, and induction motors. The expected date for publishing ISO 15551-1 is 2013, the same year as the next SPE ESP Workshop.
Papers selected for this feature cover three areas of ESP research and advancement: understanding how liquid viscosity under two-phase-flow conditions affects centrifugal-pump performance, pushing ESP technology for deepwater developments, and a case study on reliability improvements through data col-lection, interpretation, and benchmarking.
Artificial Lift additional reading available at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org
SPE 134068 - “Application of Composite Jet-Rod Pumping System in a Deep Heavy-Oil Field in Tarim, China” by Jianxin Shen, China University of Petroleum, Beijing, et al.
SPE 142764 - “Assessing Gas Lift Capability To Support Asset Design” by James W. Hall, SPE, Qatar Petroleum, et al.
SPE 137264 - “Inherent Dangers in PCP Run-Life Field-Data Analysis” by John Sheldon, SPE, C-FER Technologies, et al.
Technology Focus: Unconventional Resources (July 2011)
Authors: Polikar Marcel 
Published: February 2015

Technology Focus
The future of “unconventionals” is upon us! The 21st century will see the growth of clean renewable-energy sources. Natural gas will play a prominent role. Currently, a large portion of the natural gas comes from unconventional sources (e.g., shale gas, tight gas, coalbed methane, and, soon, gas hydrates). Shale and tight gas exploitation are widely commercialized, with constant improvement of fracturing techniques to increase yield and decrease costs. North America is leading the way in unconventional-resources recovery and technology development. Transfer of these technologies to up-and-coming players has become essential. This has to be managed carefully to minimize environmental, societal, and political effects.
Nations that are deficient in natural resources are turning to importing necessary fuels or wisely gathering renewable resources. For example: What will Japan do after the accident at the Fukushima nuclear plant? Will it still invest as much as it used to in nuclear power to supply its energy needs? Will Japan increase its imports of nonrenewable energies, such as liquefied natural gas, or rely on renewable energies such as wind power? What will be the nature of its main demand for energy in the near future and in the long term, and how will it strike a delicate balance between these options?
China has emerged as the second world power behind the USA. It also has immense nonrenewable resources that are being exploited. East/West relationships are changing with regard to energy resources. Other players besides China (i.e., India, Australia, and Europe) are starting to exploit their unconventional resources by taking advantage of the dissemination of new technologies. Inevitably, cards must be redealt in light of this new reality.
What are the new challenges of this century? Who will be the new energy partners of the western world, and what kind of relationships will be built? How will this new reality influence the choices of economic and resource development? Future opportunities are great, and unconventional resources clearly will play a key role in our future energy landscape.
Unconventional Resources additional reading available at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org
SPE 137667 • “Natural-Gas Hydrates: Development and Test of Innovative Methods for Gas Production From Hydrate-Bearing Sediments” by J.M. Schicks, Helmholtz Centre, Potsdam German Research Centre for Geosciences, et al.
SPE 140864 • “Managing Environmental Risks From Shale-Gas Exploration—Applying Lessons Learned in the US to New Ventures in Poland” by F.V. Jones, SPE, ERM Southwest, et al.
SPE 139723 • “Enhanced Gas Recovery and CO2 Storage in Coalbed-Methane Reservoirs: Optimized Injected-Gas Composition for Mature Basins of Various Coal Rank” by Karine Schepers, SPE, Advanced Resources International, et al.
SPE 144093 • “Application of Propane (LPG)-Based Hydraulic Fracturing in the McCully Gas Field, New Brunswick, Canada” by Don LeBlanc, SPE, Eastex Petroleum Consultants, et al.
CO2 Storage Capacity - Combining Geology, Engineering, and Economics
Authors: Denney Dennis 
Published: February 2015

This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper SPE 133804, ’CO2 Storage Capacity - Combining Geology, En gineering, and Economics,’ by W.G. Allinson, SPE, Y. Cinar, SPE, P.R. Neal, SPE, J. Kaldi, SPE, and L. Paterson, SPE, Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies, prepared for the 2010 SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, 18-20 October. The paper has not been peer reviewed.
The authors contend that any capacity-estimation method requires a combination of geological, engineering, and economic analysis to provide rigorous capacity estimates. Also, the classification of capacity estimates should follow concepts in the existing SPE Petroleum Resources Management System (PRMS) as closely as possible. Definitions of petroleum resources can be applied to storage capacity, and a storage-capacity classification system is recommended.
Introduction
As technology for carbon capture and storage (CCS) moves from research to deployment, there is a need to estimate the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) that can be stored safely and securely in the subsurface. Much of the literature on estimating the capacity of geological sites for storing CO2 focuses on determining the total pore volume of a formation and then applying a “storage-efficiency factor” to quantify the portion of this resource that could be accessed for storage. Theoretical and practical pitfalls of such storage-capacity-estimation methods are identified. A more-appropriate means of estimating CO2-storage capacity uses a combination of geological, reservoir-engineering, and economic analyses. Such an approach leads directly to definitions of capacity that have direct correlation with SPE definitions of reserves and resources. Unless otherwise stated, the term “storage capacity” is used loosely here to mean that part of the Earth’s crust in which CO2 can be stored either practically or economically.
Estimating Storage Capacity
A difficulty in determining storage capacity by traditional methods and by use of reservoir simulation and economics is defining the area and thickness of the potential storage formation. Possibly straightforward for a structural trap having a single high-permeability sandstone layer bounded by sealing shale layers, these definitions become more difficult for interbedded sands and shales of varying quality, which leads to definitions that involve permeability- or porosity-cutoff values (usually defined without reference to commercial factors). In some cases, the thickness can be determined from techniques such as reflection seismology and geophysical well logging with some satisfactory accuracy. However, estimating the area can be particularly challenging.
On the Precipice of a New Energy Source?
Authors: Jacobs Steve , Leach Patrick , Nagel David J. 
Published: February 2015

Guest editorial
In the late 1850s, the whaling industry was in a veritable boom in the town of Lahaina on the Hawaiian island of Maui. Business was great, and many in the whaling industry believed that increased demand would continue for decades to come. But in 1859, oil was discovered in Titusville, Pennsylvania with a well drilled by Edwin Drake. The rest is history.
That was 150 years ago. A small but increasing number of people around the world believe we are on a similar course, except this time it is the petroleum industry that might be threatened. As with any emerging technology, critical challenges must be overcome and a significant effort lies ahead to convince a world of skeptics that a new source of energy has been discovered and will be important.
The potential new source of energy is low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR). With any discussion of a new technology, caution is advised. The world of LENR is filled with mystery, contradiction, gross speculation, misinformation, slippery timelines, and skepticism that sometimes spill over into outright denial. Healthy skepticism on LENR (or any new technology) is a good thing, but so is an open mind. If LENR is for real—and many well-qualified physicists believe it is—it will not only change the petroleum industry, but also significantly affect almost every aspect of our world. Some call it “the new fire.”
In 1989 at the University of Utah, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann announced they had discovered a cold fusion process that would ultimately result in cheap, limitless energy. The outcome from these cold fusion efforts became widely known and well documented, primarily because other researchers were unable to replicate the results from the initial experiments. Cold fusion was (and is) viewed as impossible by many in the scientific community. Although the research did not cease, it was largely ignored. For the past 20-plus years, a small number of scientists have been diligently working on what could eventually become a hugely disruptive technology.
According to New Energy Times, “LENRs are weak interactions and neutron-capture processes that occur in nanometer-to-micron-scale regions on surfaces in condensed matter at room temperature. Although nuclear, LENRs are not based on fission or any kind of fusion, both of which primarily involve the strong interaction. LENRs produce energetic nuclear reactions and elemental transmutations, but do so without strong prompt radiation or long-lived radioactive waste.” (“Strong interaction” and “weak interaction” refer to the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force, which—along with electromagnetic force and gravity—make up the four basic forces in nature.)
Pilot Test Shows Promising Technology for Gas Drilling
Authors: Li Jun , Liu Gonghui , Guo Boyun 
Published: February 2015

Young Technology Showcase
Gas drilling has been widely promoted and applied in China in recent years. The cuttings-carrying media usually consist of air, nitrogen, and natural gas. Air is commonly used because of its free availability. However, the mixture of air and natural gas in a borehole can cause fire and explosion. Although the downhole fire problem is prevented with nitrogen or natural gas, other issues arise, such as costly nitrogen generation, restrictions to the use of natural gas, resource waste, and environmental concerns.
The current gas drilling practice of handling gas returned from the borehole is to discharge it to the atmosphere directly. If the gas can be recycled in the same way as drilling mud, the energy consumption and drilling cost can be greatly reduced. The recycling system can also allow the produced gas from the reservoir to be compressed and transported to the gas gathering system in the field. The overall efficiency of gas drilling will be improved significantly.
The gas recycling system (GRS) has been investigated at the China University of Petroleum, Beijing (CUPB), for several years. A systematic research and development group at the CUPB carried out a comprehensive study including an integration design, technological process investigation, cuttings transport analysis, separation and filter equipment selection, and control system design. To verify the feasibility of the new system and technology, CUPB recently conducted an open-loop field test at Sinopec Group’s Dayi 101 well in the Sichuan province in western China. The result of the test is very promising. It proved the feasibility of the innovative technology.
System Description
The general idea of the GRS is to separate gas effectively from the gas-liquid-solid mixtures returned from the well and reinject the gas back into the well. At the same time, cuttings and fluids are discharged after the separation. During the natural gas drilling process, the separated gas can be released to the gas gathering system in the field. The integrated design of the process is illustrated in Fig. 1.
Pressure Distribution in Progressing-Cavity Pumps: Performance and Run Life
Authors: Denney Dennis 
Published: February 2015

This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper SPE 153944, ’Pressure Distribution in Progressing-Cavity Pumps: Test Results and Implications for Performance and Run Life,’ by Evan Noble, SPE and Lonnie Dunn, SPE, Weatherford, prepared for SPE's Progressing Cavity Pumps 2011 Digital Edition. The full manuscript is available as a supplement to this article.
Conventional thought has assumed that pressure builds linearly along the length of progressing-cavity pumps (PCPs). Rotor sizing and pump-lift selection have been based on this assumption. A series of laboratory tests investigated the buildup of pressure and temperature along the length of a PCP. The test results help explain common field-failure modes and can be used as a basis for selecting pump assemblies for challenging applications.
Introduction
Since being introduced to the oil field several decades ago, PCPs have been assigned a pump-pressure rating. This rating is the theoretical pressure difference at which a given PCP model can operate while maintaining acceptable performance and life. The pump-pressure rating, also called lift, generally is listed in terms of differential pressure across the entire pump and in terms of meters or feet of fluid head, psi, or kPa. Generally, a pump is selected with a higher pump-pressure rating than is required for the application, to provide a safety factor. The pump-pressure rating is based on the number of pitches in the pump and the cavity-pressure rating. The cavity-pressure rating is the theoretical pressure difference at which a sealed cavity is recommended to operate to ensure acceptable performance and life. The cavity-pressure rating is the difference between the pressure in a sealed upstream cavity and the pressure in the sealed cavity immediately downstream in the pump. The cavity-pressure rating is a manufacturer-established value and can range from 50 psi/pitch to more than 140 psi/pitch. Cavity-pressure ratings can vary with pump geometry, elastomer strength and design, and manufacturer preference. Cavity-pressure ratings assume that pressure builds inside the pump in a linear fashion, and the cavity-pressure rating is the rate of constant pressure buildup. To determine the pump-pressure rating, the cavity-pressure rating is multiplied by the number of pitches. To create a pump with a higher pump-pressure rating (also called increasing the lift), more pitches are added to the pump. All ratings and specifications that relate to pressure in a PCP are based on the cavity-pressure rating, which is an assigned value. The cavity-pressure rating is not modified or adjusted for rotor sizing, operating speed, or fluid viscosity. The cavity-pressure rating dictates the pump model rating, but it does not indicate the capability of the pump model.
Reciprocating Submersible Pump Improves Oil Production
Authors: Denney Dennis 
Published: February 2015

This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper IPTC 14966, ’Novel Reciprocating-Submersible-Pumping Technology for Performance Improvements in Oil Production,’ by Zhigang Wang, PetroChina, prepared for the 2011 International Petroleum Technology Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, rescheduled to 7-9 February 2012. The paper has not been peer reviewed.
Submersible pumping by use of a linear motor is crucial for oil production in a low-permeability reservoir, especially in China. However, improving the life, reliability, and performance of the submersible linear motor and reducing energy consumption are challenging. Several novel designs for lubrication, hydraulic buffer, floating suction device, automatic motor drive, and control methods were proposed. The technology is simple to implement and can be adapted to low-production wells, directional wells, and horizontal wells.
Introduction
Rod pumping is a conventional oil-lift method in China, with more than 80% of oil wells across the country using this technique. However, conventional systems are more suited to high-production wells (e.g., in the range of 5–100 m3/d) than to low-fluid-yield wells. Conventional systems have high energy consumption and low efficiency when applied to low-fluid-yield wells such as directional, deviated, or sidetracked wells. Therefore, a rodless pumping technique was developed. In China, approximately 20% of the oil wells use rodless pumping with a nonlinear (rotary) motor, representing 30% of the country’s oil production and accounting for approximately one-third of total energy consumption in oil production. Compared with rod pumping, the rodless technique has lower associated materials costs, less risk, and no issues caused by the accidental dropping of rods and the eccentric wear associated with the conventional rod-pumping method.
Either rotary or linear motors can be used in rodless pumping. The linear motor is a relatively new type of electric motor. The linear motor has its stator and rotor in linear motion to produce a linear force along its length. It is designed to convert electrical energy directly into linear mechanical energy. Although linear motors have been traced back to the 19th century, they are not widely used. Linear motors have been advanced and have proved to be economically viable for industrial application. In 2001, North China Oilfield Company experimented with the linear-motor-pumping technique. The linear-motor-pumping device used a downhole linear motor to lift the oil by reciprocating movement.
New Estimation Technique Shifts Assessment of Global Unconventional Gas Resources
Authors: Wilson Adam 
Published: February 2015

This article, written by Editorial Manager Adam Wilson, contains highlights of paper SPE 148365, ’Global Unconventional Gas Resource Assessment,’ by Z. Dong, S.A. Holditch, SPE, D.A. McVay, SPE, and W.B. Ayers, SPE, Texas A&M University, prepared for the 2011 SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, 15-17 November. The paper has not been peer reviewed.
As the world reserves of liquid hydrocarbons from conventional reservoirs peak and begin to decline, natural gas will play an increasingly important energy supply role. Most estimates of the original gas in place (OGIP) reported for world unconventional gas start with Hans-Holger Rogner’s 1997 top-down study. That global estimate is most likely quite conservative because the oil and gas industry has discovered enormous volumes of shale gas around the world since the 1990s. The objective of this project was to estimate the probabilistic distributions of original volumes of gas trapped in coalbed, tight sand, and shale reservoirs worldwide.
Introduction
To accomplish this objective, the authors reviewed published assessments of coal and conventional and unconventional resources and established the quantitative relationship between unconventional gas [coalbed methane (CBM), tight sands gas, and shale gas] and the conventional hydro-carbon (coal, conventional gas, and oil) resource endowments for North America. Then, they used this relationship to extrapolate original unconventional gas in place worldwide. For the assessments, P10, P50, and P90 are the values for which the probability is 10, 50, and 90%, respectively, that the value will be exceeded. This work established an unconventional OGIP of 83,400 Tcf (P90)–184,200 Tcf (P10), which is 2.6–5.7 times greater than Rogner’s estimate of approximately 32,600 Tcf.
Global Unconventional Gas Base. According to Rogner’s estimates, world-wide original in-place resources were approximately 9,000 Tcf of CBM, 16,000 Tcf of shale gas, and 7,400 Tcf of tight sands gas. Rogner’s 1997 global estimate is most likely quite conservative, given the recent discovery of significant shale gas around the world.
Resource Triangle. J.A. Masters suggested in a 1979 paper that hydrocarbon resource types can be assigned to various resource classes in a triangular distribution and that their positions in the triangle reflect their abundance, their reservoir quality, and the technology required for recovery (Fig. 1). As one goes lower on the gas resource triangle, the reservoirs are lower grade, which usually means the reservoir permeability is decreasing. These low- permeability reservoirs are much larger than the higher-quality reservoirs.