基于先发制人的风险评估发放经营许可

Alexandre Campos Manhaes, Aloysio Garcia Neto, A. A. Zanetti, Daniel Tiago Muller, E. Radespiel, Leonardo Marazzo Garcia
{"title":"基于先发制人的风险评估发放经营许可","authors":"Alexandre Campos Manhaes, Aloysio Garcia Neto, A. A. Zanetti, Daniel Tiago Muller, E. Radespiel, Leonardo Marazzo Garcia","doi":"10.4043/29703-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Dealing with well integrity non-compliances with respect to the principle of two well barrier envelopes is a problem of paramount importance in well integrity governance during the life cycle of wells. Besides, during production phase, operators might experience several difficulties related to the feasibility and conclusiveness of well integrity assessments, this is especially true for subsea wells. On the other hand, those assessments are quite conclusive and easy to perform by the rig when a workover is in progress. Namely, because there is usually only one fluid phase (brine) during pressure test and the feasibility of performing those tests in the actual flow direction, the well barrier elements evaluations performed by the workover rig are, in general, conclusive when compared to the verifications done by the production platform during production phase.\n Thus, it is common to find out some unforeseen well integrity non-compliances with respect to the principle of two well barrier envelopes during a workover. Therefore the operator must establish a process for making up a decision concerning whether the handover process after the intervention back to the production team or downhole plugging the well whenever it is necessary, depending upon the well integrity status. This decision is based upon a preemptive (preventive and anticipative) risk assessment.\n The use of a preemptive risk assessment leads to very interesting results, namely: a) standardization of decision making process avoiding subjectivities about well integrity statuses evaluation; b) savings on applying highly skilled technical human resources; c) mitigating environmental and compliance problems; and d) guidance on workover designers with better intervention planning practices concerning well integrity uncertainties.\n This paper describes how it can be done as well as the regulations aspects related to it. Furthermore, it is shown case studies to illustrate the whole process of making up the right decision of handing the well over or downhole plugging whenever it is needed.","PeriodicalId":415055,"journal":{"name":"Day 1 Tue, October 29, 2019","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Granting Operating Permit Based Upon a Preemptive Risk Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Alexandre Campos Manhaes, Aloysio Garcia Neto, A. A. Zanetti, Daniel Tiago Muller, E. Radespiel, Leonardo Marazzo Garcia\",\"doi\":\"10.4043/29703-ms\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Dealing with well integrity non-compliances with respect to the principle of two well barrier envelopes is a problem of paramount importance in well integrity governance during the life cycle of wells. Besides, during production phase, operators might experience several difficulties related to the feasibility and conclusiveness of well integrity assessments, this is especially true for subsea wells. On the other hand, those assessments are quite conclusive and easy to perform by the rig when a workover is in progress. Namely, because there is usually only one fluid phase (brine) during pressure test and the feasibility of performing those tests in the actual flow direction, the well barrier elements evaluations performed by the workover rig are, in general, conclusive when compared to the verifications done by the production platform during production phase.\\n Thus, it is common to find out some unforeseen well integrity non-compliances with respect to the principle of two well barrier envelopes during a workover. Therefore the operator must establish a process for making up a decision concerning whether the handover process after the intervention back to the production team or downhole plugging the well whenever it is necessary, depending upon the well integrity status. This decision is based upon a preemptive (preventive and anticipative) risk assessment.\\n The use of a preemptive risk assessment leads to very interesting results, namely: a) standardization of decision making process avoiding subjectivities about well integrity statuses evaluation; b) savings on applying highly skilled technical human resources; c) mitigating environmental and compliance problems; and d) guidance on workover designers with better intervention planning practices concerning well integrity uncertainties.\\n This paper describes how it can be done as well as the regulations aspects related to it. Furthermore, it is shown case studies to illustrate the whole process of making up the right decision of handing the well over or downhole plugging whenever it is needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":415055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 1 Tue, October 29, 2019\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 1 Tue, October 29, 2019\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4043/29703-ms\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 1 Tue, October 29, 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4043/29703-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在井的生命周期中,处理不符合两井隔离包封原则的井完整性问题是井完整性治理中最重要的问题。此外,在生产阶段,作业者可能会遇到与油井完整性评估的可行性和结论性相关的一些困难,特别是对于海底井。另一方面,当修井作业进行时,这些评估非常具有结论性,并且很容易由钻机执行。也就是说,由于在压力测试过程中通常只有一种流体相(盐水),并且在实际流动方向上进行这些测试的可行性,因此与生产平台在生产阶段进行的验证相比,修井机进行的井障元件评估通常是结论性的。因此,在修井过程中,经常会发现一些不可预见的井完整性不符合两个井隔离封包的原则。因此,作业者必须建立一套流程,根据井的完整性状况,在必要时决定是将修井作业移交给生产团队,还是进行井下封堵。这个决定是基于先发制人(预防性和预见性)的风险评估。先发制人风险评估的使用产生了非常有趣的结果,即:a)决策过程的标准化,避免了对井完整性状态评估的主观性;B)节省使用高技能的技术人力资源;C)减轻环境和合规问题;d)针对井完整性不确定性,为修井设计人员提供更好的修井计划指导。本文介绍了如何做到这一点,以及与之相关的法规方面。此外,还展示了案例研究,以说明在需要时做出正确决定的整个过程,即交井或井下封堵。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Granting Operating Permit Based Upon a Preemptive Risk Assessment
Dealing with well integrity non-compliances with respect to the principle of two well barrier envelopes is a problem of paramount importance in well integrity governance during the life cycle of wells. Besides, during production phase, operators might experience several difficulties related to the feasibility and conclusiveness of well integrity assessments, this is especially true for subsea wells. On the other hand, those assessments are quite conclusive and easy to perform by the rig when a workover is in progress. Namely, because there is usually only one fluid phase (brine) during pressure test and the feasibility of performing those tests in the actual flow direction, the well barrier elements evaluations performed by the workover rig are, in general, conclusive when compared to the verifications done by the production platform during production phase. Thus, it is common to find out some unforeseen well integrity non-compliances with respect to the principle of two well barrier envelopes during a workover. Therefore the operator must establish a process for making up a decision concerning whether the handover process after the intervention back to the production team or downhole plugging the well whenever it is necessary, depending upon the well integrity status. This decision is based upon a preemptive (preventive and anticipative) risk assessment. The use of a preemptive risk assessment leads to very interesting results, namely: a) standardization of decision making process avoiding subjectivities about well integrity statuses evaluation; b) savings on applying highly skilled technical human resources; c) mitigating environmental and compliance problems; and d) guidance on workover designers with better intervention planning practices concerning well integrity uncertainties. This paper describes how it can be done as well as the regulations aspects related to it. Furthermore, it is shown case studies to illustrate the whole process of making up the right decision of handing the well over or downhole plugging whenever it is needed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
P-67: Review of Dry Transportation of FLNG’s/FSRU’s/FPSO’s Compact Hydrate Dissociation Plant: Combined Direct and Indirect Heating for Increased Efficiency Research on Engineering Technologies to Develop China's Complex Reservoirs and their Feasibility in Development of Marginal Oilfields in South America Efficient Selection of Reservoir Model Outputs within an Emulation Based Iterative Uncertainty Analysis Decommissioning of Subsea Facilities in Brazil
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1