Contents Author Index

Overview of engineering and operations

activities conducted as part of the JOGMEC/
NRCan/Aurora Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate
Production Research Well Program, Part B:
2008 field program
D.I. Ashford1, M. Numasawa2, C.K. Martin3, K. Yamamoto4,
S.R. Dallimore5, J.F. Wright5, F.M. Nixon6, A. Applejohn7, and A.E. Taylor8

Ashford, D.I., Numasawa, M., Martin, C.K., Yamamoto, K., Dallimore, S.R., Wright, J.F., Nixon, F.M.,
Applejohn, A., and Taylor, A.E., 2012. Overview of engineering and operational activities conducted as
part of the JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program,
Part B: 2008 field program; in Scientific results from the JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora Mallik 2007–2008
Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program, Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories, Canada, (ed.)
S.R. Dallimore, K. Yamamoto, J.F. Wright, and G. Bellefleur; Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 601,
p. 53–65.

Abstract: The Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program was conducted at
the Mallik site in Canada’s Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories over two successive winters. Year 1
(winter 2007) operations are described in another paper in this volume. In year 2 (winter 2008), the
Mallik 2L-38 and Mallik 3L-38 wells were reopened following their suspension at the end of the previ-
ous year’s field campaign. Mallik 2L-38 was subsequently recompleted for extended production testing,
while Mallik 3L-38 was equipped as a produced-water disposal well. Operational activities during the
winter 2008 campaign were conducted during a 77-day period from January 16 through April 3, 2008, and
included ice-road and site construction, mobilization of camp facilities and service rig, well re-entry, well
testing, well abandonment, and demobilization.
The Mallik 2L-38 well was perforated (in 2007) over a 12 m interval from 1093 to 1105 m, just above
the estimated base of gas hydrate stability at the Mallik site. Production testing was conducted in three
stages, under three different bottom-hole pressure (BHP) targets. Continuous gas production from the
Mallik gas hydrate reservoir was achieved during a 6-day period from March 10 to 16, 2008. At the con-
clusion of the campaign, all of the Mallik wells that had been drilled during the course of four gas hydrate
research programs (in 1998, 2002, 2007, and 2008) were legally abandoned.

1
62 Sandstone Ridge Crescent, Okotoks, Alberta T1S 1P9, Canada (formerly Inuvialuit Oilfield Services Ltd.),
doug.ashford@shaw.ca
2
Japan Petroleum Exploration Co. Ltd, 1-2-1 Hamada, Mihama-ku, Chiba 261-0025, Japan
3
Schlumberger Canada Limited, 525–3rd Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta T2W 0G4, Canada
4
Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation, 1-2-2 Hamada, Mihama-ku, Chiba 261-0025, Japan
5
Natural Resources Canada, Geological Survey of Canada–Pacific, 9860 West Saanich Road, Sidney, British Columbia
V8L 4B2, Canada
6
141 Clarendon Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 0R4 (formerly Geological Survey of Canada)
7
Senior Science Advisor, Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife,
Northwest Territories, Canada
8
10227 West Saanich Road, Sidney, British Columbia, Canada

53
 Contents Author Index

Résumé : Le Programme de puits de recherche sur la production d’hydrates de gaz Mallik 2007-2008
s’est déroulé au site Mallik au cours de deux saisons hivernales successives au Canada, dans le delta du
Mackenzie, aux Territoires du Nord-Ouest. Les activités entreprises au cours de la première année (hiver
2007) sont décrits dans une communication qui paraît ailleurs dans le présent volume. Au cours de la
deuxième année (hiver 2008), on a procédé à la réouverture des puits Mallik 2L-38 et Mallik 3L-38, dont
l’exploitation avait été suspendue à la clôture de la saison de terrain de l’année précédente. De nouveaux
travaux de complétion ont été entrepris dans le puits Mallik 2L-38, afin de le rendre apte à servir à des
fins d’essais de production prolongée, tandis que le puits Mallik 3L-38 était équipé de façon à ce qu’il
puisse servir de puits de refoulement d’eau produite. Les activités opérationnelles exécutées au cours de
la saison de terrain de l’hiver 2008 se sont déroulées au cours d’une période de 77-jours, s’étendant du
16 janvier au 3 avril 2008. Elles ont exigé, notamment, la construction du site à l’emplacement du puits et
du chemin de glace pour s’y rendre; la mise en chantier des installations; l’installation de la plate-forme
de maintenance; ainsi que les travaux liés à la réintroduction, aux essais et à l’abandon du puits, et à la
fermeture de chantier.
On a pratiqué des perforations dans le tubage du puits Mallik 2L-38 (en 2007) le long d’une section
de plus de 12 m située entre 1093 et 1105 m de profondeur, soit juste au-dessus de la base présumée
de la zone de stabilité des hydrates de gaz au site Mallik. L’essai de production s’est déroulé en trois
étapes, et en fonction de trois cibles de pression de fond différentes . On a réussi à produire du gaz à
partir du réservoir d’hydrates de gaz Mallik de façon continue sur une période de 6-jours, entre le 10 et le
16 mars 2008. À la fin de la saison de terrain, tous les puits du site Mallik qui avaient fait l’objet de forages
au cours des quatre programmes de recherche sur la production d’hydrates de gaz (en 1998, 2002, 2007 et
2008) ont été abandonnés légalement.

54
 Contents
INTRODUCTION
During the winter of 2007, the Aurora/JOGMEC/NRCan
Mallik 2L-38 and 3L-38 wells (drilled in 1998 and 2002,
respectively) were reaccessed for the purpose of conducting
gas hydrate production testing of the Mallik reservoir. Mallik
2L-38 was re-entered, drilled, cased, and used for a short-
duration production pre-test during the winter 2007 operating
season. Mallik 3L-38 was re-entered, deepened, and com-
pleted as a produced-water disposal well, to be utilized for
an extended-duration production test scheduled for winter
2008. Both wells were suspended at the conclusion of the
winter 2007 season, pending resumption of field activities the
following year.
The Aurora Research Institute was the legal operator
for the project, with Inuvialuit Oilfield Services Ltd. acting
as their project management consultant (Inuvialuit Oilfield
Services Ltd. is a joint venture between the Inuvialuit
Development Corporation and Schlumberger Canada Ltd.).
As the major funding partners of the project, the Japan
Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC) and
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), through the Earth
Science Sector (ESS) and the Energy Sector (ES), jointly
managed the research and provided operational oversight for
the project.
This paper describes field activities undertaken in the
winter of 2008, which was the second year of the JOGMEC/
NRCan/Aurora Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production
Research Well Program carried out at the Mallik site in the
Mackenzie Delta. For general background on this program,
readers should refer to the companion paper by Ashford
et al. (2012), which describes winter 2007 activities as
well as the general goals and objectives of the overall pro-
gram. The original intent of the research program was to
establish appropriate site facilities and undertake a short
production test during the first winter field season (2007),
and then return to the site during the second winter field
season (2008) to conduct a longer term production test.
Unfortunately, as described by Ashford et al. (2012), there
were a number of problems encountered during the first
field season, related to the short lead time for program
planning, unexpected wellbore conditions, and insufficient
allowance for the harsh arctic working environment and its
impact on equipment. As a consequence of these problems
and associated cost overruns during the first year, the Mallik
Steering Committee agreed to a ‘scaled back program’ for
winter 2008 operations, with a substantial reduction in the
time available for production testing. A single test inter-
val was selected in the same zone that had already been
perforated and tested during the previous winter, with the
goal of achieving a 5- to 10-day depressurization test.
Field activities, from start of ice road construction to com-
pleted demobilization, were carried out over 77 days, from
January 18 to April 3, 2008.
Author Index
D.I. Ashford et al.
Key changes to the 2008 program relative to the original
proposal included 1) a single test in the same horizon as
year 1, rather than testing of multiple zones; 2) no geophysical
logging; 3) implementation of sand-control measures; 4) injec-
tion of produced water into a separate disposal well, enabling
reconfiguration of the completion and multiphase test streams;
5) incorporation of a down-hole heater to prevent gas hydrate
re-formation in the test string; 6) a shorter duration produc-
tion test; and 7) restructuring of project management based on
lessons learned in 2007.
MANAGEMENT OF 2008
FIELD ACTIVITIES
Management structure
The Steering Committee, Technical Committee, tech-
nical teams, role of the operator, and prime consultants
selected to co-ordinate field operations for the 2007 season
continued with their roles for the 2008 field season (Ashford
et al., 2012). However, new decision-making protocols
were implemented to improve field oversight. A project
operations centre was established at the Aurora Research
Institute facility in Inuvik prior to the start of field operations
in 2008. The purpose of the centre was to provide a strong
focus on cost management and operations control, with rep-
resentation from the primary funding partners, operator, and
project manager, close to the field operations and available
for round-the-clock decision-making. Figure 1 depicts the
organization chart for the project and the reporting structures
established prior to field operations.
Permitting and approval process
As described in Ashford et al. (2012), a number of permits
and authorizations are required to conduct field operations
in the Mackenzie Delta. For 2008 activities, the National
Energy Board (NEB) renewed the Operator Licence for
Aurora College to assume responsibility for field oper-
ations. In early February 2008, the NEB issued program
approvals to carry out the field program. These included
permits to Alter the Condition of a Well (ACW) for Aurora/
JOGMEC/NRCan Mallik 2L-38 and 3L-38, and changes
to well names from JAPEX/JNOC/GSC Mallik 4L-38 and
5L-38 to Aurora/NRCan Mallik 4L-38 and 5L-38 (note that
the well names for Aurora/JOGMEC/NRCan mallik 2L-38
and 3L-38 had already been changed from JAPEX/JNOC/
GSC Mallik 2L-38 and 3L-38 as part of the previous 2007
program). The Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (now
Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada)
Land Use Permit and the Northwest Territories Water
Board (NWTWB) Water Licence approved for the win-
ter 2007 season carried over for the 2008 field activities;
however, the 2007 NWTWB Type B Water Licence did not
permit use of an injection well for disposal of produced
55
 Contents Author Index

GSC Bulletin 601

water during 2007 operations. As a result, the 2007 produc- and 35 cm thick beneath the rig. The area of the 2008 pad
tion testing program required a complex well completion was approximately 2.5 ha, which was somewhat smaller
with reinjection of produced water at greater depths within than that of the previous year given that only a service rig
the producing well. Fortunately for 2008 operations, the was used for re-entry, testing, and abandonment operations
NWTWB allowed pumping of produced water to the sur- (Fig. 2).
face and its subsequent reinjection in Mallik 3L-38, which
Mobilization of field equipment from staging areas in
had been prepared as a water injection well during the pre-
Inuvik to the Mallik site began on February 11, enabling
vious field season (see Ashford et al., 2012 for details on
start-up of the main camp on February 16. Transport and
the completion configuration of this well).
set-up of the service rig was completed on February 24, with
rig-less operations to re-enter the Mallik 3L-38 well being
conducted concurrently during the rig-up period.
LOGISTICS
The 2008 Mallik ice road followed a very similar route
to that of 2007 (Ashford et al., 2012), and a comprehensive MALLIK 3L-38 OPERATIONS
road-sharing agreement was implemented with MGM Energy
The preparation of Mallik 3L-38 as a produced-water
Corp., who were drilling elsewhere on the Mackenzie Delta.
disposal well was undertaken using a slick-line service unit
Ice-road construction activities commenced on January 25,
positioned over the well to retrieve the down-hole suspension
2008. A mobile construction ‘sleigh’ camp was towed from
plug from the wellbore. An injectivity test was conducted in
Tuktoyaktuk to the Mallik site on January 27 behind road-
advance of 2008 production operations, with a 5% potassium
and site-construction equipment. An ice-road profile was
chloride (KCl) brine employed in the final stage of the test,
conducted on February 7, which indicated sufficient thick-
yielding a sustainable injection rate of 250 L/min. at a surface
ness to support heavy loads from Inuvik. Preparation of the
pumping pressure of 4300 kPa. By comparison, the injectiv-
Mallik site commenced on February 1 using a fresh-water
ity test conducted during the 2007 field season recorded a
source located 2 km to the southeast. Construction of the ice
surface pumping pressure of 6800 kPa at the same injection
pad, completed by February 13, required 5.3 million L of
rate and brine formulation. A pressurized circulation loop,
water to create a pad 20 cm thick beneath the camp facilities
installed between 3L-38 and the service rig pump, allowed

JOGMEC AURORA RESEARCH INSTITUTE NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA (NRCan)

PLANNING
(Calgary and client/operator head offices)
Contract
Project
Manager
(Inuvialuit
Oilfield
JOGMEC Services Ltd./ OPERATION MANAGEMENT
Inuvik Schlumberger) NRCan
& COST CONTROL

INUVIK Project Operations Centre

JOGMEC NRCan SITE OPERATIONS

site

QHSE Well-Site Supervisor Logistics

Medic Testing Rig Completion/ Construction Camp Storeman

sand control maintenance & support
Monitors
Artificial
SKK Well services Other non-rig related services
lift

Wireline Other operational services

Figure 1. Organization chart for project management during the winter 2008 season of the
Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program (prepared by C.K. Martin,
Inuvialuit Oilfield Services Ltd.). Abbreviations: QHSE, quality, health, safety and environmental
management; SKK, Schlumberger K.K. (Japan).

56
 Contents Author Index

D.I. Ashford et al.

for continuous circulation of fluids during operations, thus
preventing freezing of the exposed surface lines. Actual
fluid injection was undertaken in discrete batches once an
adequate volume of produced fluid had accumulated in an
isolated 20 m3 rig tank.
MALLIK 2L-38 OPERATIONS
The Mallik site is located within 200 m of the Beaufort
Sea shoreline, at an elevation of approximately 1 m above sea
level. Storm surges can cause flooding, so precautions were
taken to prevent the well cellars from filling with water and
subsequently freezing. During August 2007, relatively large
diameter inner tubes from truck tires were installed around
the wellheads (Fig. 3) to minimize the amount of water/ice
that could accumulate in the cellars. The well heads were also
wrapped with steam hoses to afford an efficient mechanism for
thawing the wellhead and cellar excavation, as required. Prior
to erecting the service rig, the distributed temperature sens-
ing (DTS) and light electric resistance array (L-ERA) cables
were spliced and connected to surface monitoring equip-
ment to enable recording of baseline temperature profiles
and resistivity data (see Fujii et al., 2008).
Shehtah Nabors LP service rig 203, a free-standing,
mechanical double service rig rated to 3500 m with 73 mm
tubing (Fig. 4), was used for Mallik 2L-38 operations. The
free-standing capability is accomplished by a load beam and
outriggers, thus eliminating the requirement to set rig anchors
to secure the derrick. Service rig operations commenced on
February 24, with the first operation being the removal of
the 2L-38 wellhead and installation of the blowout preventer
(BOP). Prior to beginning completion operations, it was neces-
sary to retrieve the tubing-retrievable suspension bridge plug
installed the previous year (set at 1072 m). The well began
to flow gas immediately upon release of the bridge plug. A
total of 2.0 m3 of fluid and entrained gas flowed up the tubing
before the well was shut in. A subsequent build up of tubing
pressure to 3500 kPa was recorded. The well was circulated
for an extended period, during which time approximately 5 m3
of 5% KCl brine was bull-headed into the well. By this means,
the trapped gas was effectively circulated out of the wellbore
and the well subsequently stabilized with no additional flow
observed.
During bridge-plug retrieval, a BOP test was run for
crew-training purposes and to confirm the function of the
pipe rams. Unfortunately, the test was not successful, as
the pipe rams did not close properly. Upon disassembly of
the BOP, the failure was attributed to a defective ram shaft
(Fig. 5). The ram shaft had been inspected and tested by a
third-party specialist in December 2007, and this was the
first deployment following its certification. Subsequent
metallurgical analysis indicated that the failure was caused
by torsion overloading in combination with pre-existing
cracks in the shaft. Following replacement of the ram shaft,
the bridge plug was successfully retrieved and scheduled
operations could proceed.

Fd.l. 400.35 m

Thaw
ponds
MALLIK 6L-38 MALLIK 2L-38 drill sump
MALLIK 5L-38

Lease boundary
MALLIK 3L-38 MALLIK 4L-38

Flare pad

MALLIK 2L-38

MALLIK L-38

1.0 m
245.70 m

MALLIK L-38
drill sump LEGEND:
Wellhead Ice pad

Contours (m)
N
1.0 m
GPS Co-ordinates
Description Northing Easting
Fd.I. (east) 7705676.96 513629.42
0 Fd .I. (south) 7705388.09 513352.88
50 50 meters
Fd.I. (west) 7705557.63 513175.22

Fd.l. Lease boundary Fd.l.

m
Access road 20

Figure 2. Plan of the Mallik drill site, showing locations of research wells and ice pad, 2008.

57
 Contents Author Index

GSC Bulletin 601

In an effort to avoid the problems encountered during this screen size was to avoid reduced permeability in the near–
winter 2007 operations (see Ashford et al., 2012), one of the well-bore area by allowing passage of fine material into the
first activities undertaken upon re-entry of the 2L-38 well was well bore, while retaining the bulk of formation sand behind
the installation of a mesh screen at the perforations that was the screen.
designed to limit sand infiltration into the production tubing.
After installation of the sand screen, the production test-
Grain-size analysis of Mallik 5L-38 cores and sand recovered
ing string was run into the well. This assembly consisted of
from the 2007 test suggested that the main sediment type in the
a down-hole electric heater, an electric submersible pump
production interval is fine- to medium-grained sand containing
(ESP), and pressure-temperature (P-T) gauges, all on 73 mm
some silt. Although a number of countermeasures were con-
tubing. The ESP and down-hole heater featured combined
sidered to limit sand infiltration, a composite mesh–type sand
power and capillary-tube umbilical lines strapped to the out-
screen was selected due to the short duration of the test. The
side of the tubing and extending from the surface to their
composite screen was 177.8 mm in diameter with a 200 µm
respective down-hole locations. Technical specifications for
mesh, and was installed across the existing perforations from
the ESP and an overview of the placement and strategic util-
1093 to 1105 m (Fig. 6). Packers were set above and below
ization of the down-hole heater are presented in Rojas et al.
the sand screen to anchor it in place. The rationale in selecting
(2012).

Figure 5. Failed pipe ram shaft from the blowout preventer on

Figure 3. Summer site visit in preparation for Mallik 2L-38 well-head Mallik 2L-38 during re-entry of the well in 2008. Photograph by
access during the winter 2008 season of the Mallik 2007–2008 S. Wan, C & M Engineering Ltd. 2012-067.
Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program. Photograph by
C.K. Martin, Inuvialuit Oilfield Services Ltd. 2012-071.

Figure 6. Stand-alone sand screen of composite mesh type

Figure 4. Shehtah Nabors LP service rig 203, Aurora/JOGMEC/ (177.8 mm diameter, 200 µm mesh size) installed across the
NRCan Mallik 2L-38 gas hydrate production research well, 2008. production-test interval in the Mallik 2L-38 well for the 2008 gas
Photograph by S.R. Dallimore. 2012-068. hydrate production test. Photograph by C.K. Martin, Inuvialuit
Oilfield Services Ltd. 2012-072.

58
 Contents
While the completion string was being run in, the well
again began to flow when the bottom of the completion string
reached a depth of about 800 m. At this point, the annular
BOP was closed around the tubing and the two umbilical
lines. However, the annular BOP failed to effectively seal
within operating-pressure range and it was therefore decided
to cut the umbilical lines to secure the well. Once the well was
secured, a stabilized shut-in tubing pressure of 1350 kPa and
shut-in casing pressure of 1700 kPa were observed, with the
gas kick assessed to be approximately 4 m3 in volume (at stan-
dard temperature and pressure). The well was successfully
killed by the volumetric well-control procedure (Grace et al.,
1994), through bull-heading a total of 6.5 m3 of 12% sodium
chloride (NaCl) brine into the well in two separate operations.
Following this, the umbilical power lines were successfully
spliced and the completion string was rerun and landed at the
planned target depth. The general configuration of the com-
pletion string and the location of specific components of the
assembly are presented in Figure 7.
PRODUCTION-TESTING OPERATIONS
Two completely separate trains (or systems) of surface
production-testing equipment were connected at the Mallik
2L-38 wellhead (Fig. 8). Train A, connected to the tubing
outlet at the wellhead, was designed to process the water-
dominated flow stream produced through the down-hole ESP
and tubing to the surface. It included an array of sand filters
located upstream of a gas/water separator, with the capability
to capture sand down to 50 µm in size. Periodic inspection
of the sand accumulated in these filters provided an indirect
indication of the efficiency of the down-hole sand screens in
preventing the migration of larger sand particles from the res-
ervoir into the well-bore and production stream. Indeed, only
small amounts of fine-grained residue (very fine sand and
minor silt) were observed on these filters, suggesting that the
down-hole sand screens were performing according to design
specifications. Train A also included a rotary-vane–type water
meter, designed to directly measure the water-flow rate during
production. However, the actual water-production rate real-
ized was often below the minimal operational threshold of
this meter, so water flow measured directly by this meter was
considered to be unreliable. Ultimately, produced water was
allowed to flow from the Train A separator into an external
rig tank, and changes in water level over time were recorded
and subsequently converted to reasonable estimates of the
water-production rate.
Train B was connected to the annular space between the
tubing and the well casing, and was designed to handle a
fluid stream dominated by free gas. It incorporated three sep-
arate gas measuring devices: 1) a Schlumberger multiphase
meter (located upstream of the Train B separator), which
measures gas, condensate, and water concurrently, based on
flow velocity and a nuclear densitometer; 2) a conventional
Author Index
D.I. Ashford et al.
differential-pressure orifice meter; and 3) a positive-displace-
ment meter for accurately measuring gas volumes below the
minimum operating threshold of the orifice meter.
A program was implemented to periodically sample pro-
duced gas, water, and sediment during the test. Water-sample
characteristics were measured at the site and subsamples
retained for further testing in Inuvik and at southern labora-
tories. Gas and sediment samples were retained for post-field
analysis. All samples were inventoried, stored, and transported
with appropriate temperature control and monitoring.
The production test began at 06:00 GMT on March 10,
2008. The down-hole heater was powered up first to pre-heat
the wellbore fluid before it entered the ESP, in order to pre-
vent gas hydrate re-formation within the pump and/or tubing
during the production stage. Figure 9 depicts the down-hole
pressure regime (at the perforations), as well as the instan-
taneous and cumulative gas flows for the three distinct
operating phases during the production test of the perforated
interval (1093–1105 m) in the Mallik 2L-38 well. In phase 1,
the bottom-hole pressure (BHP) was reduced to 7.5 MPa by
using the ESP to lower the fluid level in the casing annu-
lus down to approximately 330 m below surface. Phase 2
lowered the annular fluid level to 580 m below surface, thus
reducing the BHP to 5 MPa. Finally, in phase 3, the annular
fluid level was drawn down to about 700 m below surface,
yielding a BHP close to 4 MPa.
Production-test operations continued until 12:00 GMT
on March 16. During the 6 days of testing, a cumulative
total of 12 300 m3 of gas was produced, with the flow rate
at the end of phase 3 approaching 2 500 m3/d. The total
water produced was approximately 70 m3 (Fig. 10); this was
pumped to the surface and subsequently reinjected into the
Mallik 3L-38 disposal well. During the test, two separate ice-
plugging events required the gas-water separators to be shut
in; however, the ESP continued to operate (and the well to
produce) during these two events, which totalled just over
5 hours of interruption in the collection of surface data. The
gas- and water-production data were continuously recorded
and archived for subsequent post-field analysis by numerical
reservoir simulation, including history matching (Kurihara et
al., 2012; Uddin et al., 2012), prediction of long-term produc-
tion trends (Uddin et al., 2012), and short-term geomechanical
responses of the reservoir to production (Uchida et al., 2012).
WELL ABANDONMENT
AND DEMOBILZATION
Following the production test, the Mallik 2L-38 well
was killed by pumping 35 m3 of 12% NaCl brine down the
tubing. The remaining fluid occupying the tubing-casing
annulus was recovered to the surface using the Train B test
equipment and subsequently injected into the Mallik 3L-38
disposal well. The ESP, down-hole heater, gauges, and
59
 Contents Author Index

GSC Bulletin 601

8 MPa at ~283 m
6 MPa at ~485 m 20", 94 lbs./ft., J55 (103 m)
5 MPa at ~581 m
4 MPa at ~688 m
3 MPa at ~789 m 2.875" EUE, L80 Tbg
Base of Permafrost
at 640 m 13.375", 61 lbs./ft., J55 (677 m)

ESP cable with chemical injection #4

Downhole heater #4 cable
(no chemical injection)
CTS cable (back-up ESP sensor)
Downhole heater #4 cable (NO CHEMICAL INJECTION)
Bleeder valve (683 m)
Bleeder valve (739 m)

Bleeder valve with STOP (795 m)

CTS gauge carrier (~798 m)

Chemical injection splice (injection point at 811 m)

EUE: external upset ends

Pump intake (811 m)
Tbg: tubing
Phoenix gauge (~822 m)
ESP: electric submersible pump

CTS: custody transfer system Downhole heater (825–837 m)

FC: float collar

Anular gauge carrier bottom (1083 m)

LB permanent packer (top at 1083 m)

Mesh-Rite sand control screens

Gas hydrate zone (1093–1105 m)

LB permanent packer (top at 1110 m)

Cement plug (1194 m)

Bridge plug (1202 m)

Model S packer (1211 m)

Model S packer (1218 m)

Injection zone (1224–1230, 2.313" landing SXN nipple (1240 m)

1238–1256, 1270–1274 m) Model B shear plug (1238 m) (sheared)

FC (1275 m)

Shoe 9.625", 40 lbs./ft., J55 (1288 m)

Figure 7. Schematic diagram of completion string for the Aurora/JOGMEC/NRCan

Mallik 2L-38 gas hydrate production research well during the winter 2008 production
test (prepared by L. Hernandez-Johnson, Schlumberger Ltd.).

60
 Contents Author Index

D.I. Ashford et al.

tubing were all recovered in good condition. Mallik 2L-38 Mallik site had been completed. A site inspection by Indian
was abandoned by setting permanent tubing-set bridge plugs and Northern Affairs Canada (now Aboriginal Affairs and
at 1050 and 103 m. The 244 mm casing was filled with Northern Development Canada) on August 28, 2008 indicated
cement from the bridge plug at 103 m to the surface. that all aspects of the site and access were acceptable.
The service rig was then moved to Mallik 3L-38 disposal
well to pull the 73 mm tubing, after which the well was
abandoned by setting permanent tubing-set bridge plugs at DISCUSSION
1049 and 103 m. The 140 mm casing was filled with cement
from the bridge plug at 103 m to the surface. Planning
The final surface abandonment of Mallik 2L-38, 3L-38, Much of the knowledge and experience gained during
4L-38, 5L-38, and 6L-38 was accomplished by excavating the winter 2007 field program was successfully applied
around the wells to between 1.0 and 1.5 m below ground to the winter 2008 operations. During the planning stage
level, cutting all monitoring lines, welding casing plates over for the second year, more emphasis was given to detailed
all casings where cover plates were not already in place, time and cost estimates for individual program compon-
welding monument poles onto all wellbores, backfilling the ents, in order to better control schedules and budgets. A
excavations, and fastening well identification plates to the lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities within and
monument poles. between program management, operations, contractors, and
clients in the winter 2007 program led to problems in mak-
All equipment was trucked from the Mallik site to Inuvik.
ing critical decisions in a timely fashion. This shortcoming
With the exception of construction equipment, all equipment
was addressed by devising a comprehensive communica-
was off the site by March 26. Final cleaning of the ice pad
tions plan that clearly defined the roles and responsibilities
continued until April 3, at which time all activities at the
of the various participants. It also clarified the process of

Well testing unit (A) Relief line to

CINJP WHUPA WHDPA Flare stack N1
WHUTA WHDTA
B
TRAIN A DPU
CR
NRV
Surface Dual-pot 1
X-mas tree Safety valve Choke
manifold
sand trap C Relief line to
PCV
Flare stack N1
P-TANK

D
LCV

DPU
SP

CR
Surface
Safety valve
(B)
WTA GASPA
GASTA GASPC
WQA GASTC
GASDPA
GASQA GASDPC
GASQC
Well testing unit (B)
Low gas
measurement skid
TRAIN B DPU DPU Relief line to
CR CR
Chemical
A Phase tester
NRV
1
Flare stack N2

pump C
Choke Tester
PCV PCV
SP
Relief line to
Flare stack N2
P-TANK B

D
LCV

DPU
To 400bbl tank
SP

CR
Emergency
down stations
PIN GASPB
POUT CSGUP CSGDP WTB GASTB
DPV CSGUT CSGDT WQB GASDPB
TL QASQB
LEGEND PIN: Phase tester pressure in WHUP:Well-head upstream pressure on train A/B
POUT: Phase tester pressure out WHUT: Well-head upstream temperature on train A/B
D Liquid line DVP: Venturi differential pressure WHDP: Well-head downstream pressure on train A/B
C Gas line TL: Line temperature WHDT: Well-head downstream temperature on train A/B
CSGUP: Casing upstream pressure CINJP: Chemical-injection-pump pressure
B Pressure relief line CSGUT: Casing gas differential pressure
PCV: Pilot circuit valve
A Well effluents GASP: Separator pressure on train A/B/C
LCV: Liquid control valve
GAST: Separator temperature on train A/B/C
Fluid Water GASDP:Separation gas differential pressure NRV: Non-return (check) valve
Gas Relief line on train A/B/C SP: Sampling point
QASQ: Gas flow rate on train A/B/C DPU-CR: Differential pressure unit
Hydraulic signal
pressure signal WT: Seperator water temperature on train A/B
WQ: Water rate on train A/B th
Updated 10 January 2008

Figure 8. Schematic diagram of test equipment configuration for the winter 2008 production test of the Aurora/
JOGMEC/NRCan Mallik 2L-38 gas hydrate production research well (prepared by L. Hernandez-Johnson,
Schlumberger Ltd.).

61
 Contents Author Index

GSC Bulletin 601

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

13 000 13 000

12 000 12 000
Initial gas flow to surface
11 000 11 000

10 000 10 000
Commence gas metering CUMULATIVE GAS
9 000 9 000

Gas produced (m )
Pressure (kPa)

3
8 000 8 000
7 000 7 000

6 000 6 000
BOTTOM-HOLE PRESSURE
5 000 5 000
4 000 4 000

3 000 3 000
INSTANTANEOUS GAS RATE
2 000 2 000

1 000 1 000
0 0

12:00 12:00 12:00 12:00 12:00 12:00 12:00

March 10 March 11 March 12 March 13 March 14 March 15 March 16
Date and time (GMT)

Figure 9. Down-hole pressure and gas production during the three phases of depressurization
of the Aurora/JOGMEC/NRCan Mallik 2L-38 well, winter 2008 production test.

120 100
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
110 90
100
Train B metering 80
period begins
90
70
80

Water produced (m )
3
Bottom-hole pressure
70 60
Pressure (kPa)

60 50

50 40
40
30
30
'Zeroed' to start of Train A
data-collection period 20
20
10
10 Ice plug at surface
0 0
16:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 16:00
March 10 March 11 March 12 March 13 March 14 March 15 March 16
Date and time (GMT)

Bottom-hole flowing pressure (memory gauge)

Cumulative water production (flow meter)
Cumulative water production (P-tank level)

Figure 10. Water production during the three phases of depressurization of the Aurora/
JOGMEC/NRCan Mallik 2L-38 well, winter 2008 production test.

62
 Contents
consultation and authorization for critical decision-making,
including the timely management of activities and schedules
in response to unforeseen conditions and events. An import-
ant part of the communication strategy was the establishment
of a Project Management office in Inuvik (which was staffed
throughout the field-operations phase) to facilitate effective
liaison between the operator, field supervisors, contractors,
and clients. Perhaps just as important was the involvement of
all participants in each planning stage to ensure that all ser-
vice providers were clear on the goals and objectives of the
client (e.g. the need to measure all gas from the beginning of
a production test, sampling requirements, and model predic-
tions to inform the establishment of operational parameters).
Detailed decision trees were constructed for critical activities
to capture a wide range of possible operational scenarios and
to provide guidance for dealing with each, thereby ensuring
appropriate contingencies for situations where the risks were
deemed significant.
As a result of the previous year’s field operational experi-
ence and the implementation of a more rigorous management
approach, considerably more realistic time and budget contin-
gencies were built into the winter 2008 program. In the 2007
program, the drill rig was oversized and had been in storage
for some time. This, together with inefficiencies inherent in
the use of a drill rig instead of a service rig for production
testing, resulting in excessively long rig-up time and a com-
paratively awkward deployment of equipment in the 2007
program. Furthermore, a number of mechanical issues were
encountered with the Shehtah Nabors rig 414 used in 2007
(Ashford et al., 2012), some of which were related to insuffi-
cient lead time for procurement. In order to minimize rig
deficiencies in the 2008 program, a number of meetings of
the Project Operations Team and Nabors Production Services
took place before the Shehtah Nabors rig 203 was selected.
This service rig and the accessory buildings and connection
piping for the Mallik 3L-38 produced-water disposal well
were assembled at the Nabors facility in Leduc, Alberta prior
to transport of the equipment to the Mackenzie Delta.
Road and site construction
activities and logistics
Effective construction and maintenance operations for
roads and facilities was achieved for the winter 2008 pro-
gram by using experienced northern contractors that had
performed well during the 2007 field program. This led to
negotiation of more beneficial contracts and improved atten-
tion to details (e.g. well-site topography), which in return
resulted in more efficient road and facilities construction.
Materiel management was also improved in the 2008 pro-
gram, as dedicated stores staff were employed to implement
a comprehensive shipping, receiving, and inventory system.
An efficient, experienced expeditor was retained from the
2007 program, as was the camp sewage and waste-water
system that had performed well in the first year. Remote
Author Index
D.I. Ashford et al.
communications were problematic in 2007, partly because
of misunderstandings by the contractor and its field oper-
ators regarding the requirements of the various program
participants. Although still not perfect, changes to the sys-
tem implemented for the 2008 program resulted in better
capacity and reliability than had been achieved the previ-
ous year. In addition, the operator provided an independent
satellite phone system for its representatives in 2008, con-
siderably relieving the strain on the core communications
systems.
Well operations
Two well-control events (mentioned in the ‘Mallik 2L-38
operations’ section) were encountered, emphasizing the need
to re-evaluate standard well-control procedures as applied to
completion and production operations in gas hydrate reser-
voirs. The first event occurred during retrieval of the bridge
plug used to suspend the well at the end of the 2007 field pro-
gram. Given that the natural in situ reservoir salinity in the
targeted production zone (around 1100 m depth) was in the
range of 45 ppt (Wright et al. 2005), the gas hydrate within
the production-test interval was very close to its instabil-
ity threshold. It is thought that the relatively warm 5% KCl
fluid (about 50 ppt KCl) used to kill the well following the
2007 production test increased local salinity and temper-
ature enough to promote gradual dissociation of residual gas
hydrate in the vicinity of the perforated interval. This likely
continued for some time after the bridge plug was set and
the well suspended, with free gas accumulating below the
bridge plug until local pressure increases, combined with
stabilization of local reservoir temperatures, stopped the dis-
sociation reaction. Upon removal of the bridge plug at the
start of 2008 operations, the residual free gas thus accumu-
lated would have flowed up the well to the surface, causing
an observable gas kick. The solution applied was to force
more 5% KCl into the formation, which may once again
have shifted near-wellbore reservoir conditions outside the
gas hydrate stability field; this manifested as a second gas-
kick event when the completion string was run into the well
several days later. Again the response was to force brine into
the formation, this time 12% NaCl.
In hindsight, this conventional well-control strategy may
have led to recurrent dissociation of gas hydrate in the near-
wellbore area, and to difficulty in managing the well under
reservoir conditions that were close to the boundaries of
gas hydrate stability. Therefore, a thorough understanding
of stability conditions in a particular setting, together with
careful monitoring of pressure and temperature conditions
in the well, is critical to successful management of produc-
tion operations in gas hydrate reservoirs. In addition, the use
of nonsaline, freezing-depressed suspension and completion
fluids should be considered as an alternative to conventional
bull-heading of saline fluids for well-control operations.
63
 Contents
GSC Bulletin 601
Production test
Perhaps the most critical operational knowledge gained
during the winter 2007 operation was from the planned
short-duration production test, the purpose of which was
to evaluate equipment and production strategies in prepara-
tion for an extended-duration production test the following
year. In practice, this test was intermittent and ultimately
abbreviated as a result of pump-performance problems and
eventual pump failure due to excessive sand entering the
casing (see Ashford et al., 2012). Post-production analysis
of the pump and related equipment, in conjunction with
recorded pump-performance data, indicated that, although
pump capacity was appropriate for the expected volumes
of produced gas and water, the implementation of effective
sand-control measures would be crucial to the successful
realization of sustained, long-term production. Modelling
and laboratory tests, using archived sediment samples col-
lected during the Mallik 2002 Gas Hydrate Production
Research Well Program (Dallimore and Collett, 2005),
provided a basis for the evaluation of various sand-control
options (e.g. gravel-pack versus sand screens). In the end, a
composite mesh–type, stand-alone sand screen was selected
and successfully employed in the 2008 extended-production
test. This selection was validated by good overall pump per-
formance during the test, the lack of pump wear observed in
the post-test inspection, and the very low volumes of sand
produced (supported by grain-size analysis of produced sol-
ids), all of which confirmed that effective sand control was
achieved.
The 2008 testing program utilized a more conventional
pump configuration (compared to 2007), with the ESP intake
positioned well above the production perforations and sand
screen (Fig. 7). In addition, a down-hole electric-induction
heater was positioned between the perforations and the pump
(see Rojas et al., 2012). The heater was designed to pre-heat
produced fluid prior to it entering the pump intake, so as to
minimize the risk of gas hydrate re-formation (and possible
blockage of flow pathways) within the pump assembly and tub-
ing. This requirement was based on the analysis of the 2007
test results and subsequent modelling, which suggested that
re-formation of gas hydrate could not be ruled out, given the
down-hole pressure and temperature conditions anticipated
during the production test.
In order to accommodate the requirement to measure (and
sample) multiphase fluids under low flow volumes and rates,
the 2008 surface-testing facilities featured two independent
flow/test streams consisting of separate surface equipment
for flows dominated by gas (annulus) and water (tubing;
Fig. 8). Insulation and tracer heating of exposed surface flow
lines was also implemented to minimize the possibility of
ice plugging and flow interruption in this extreme environ-
ment, in which air temperatures commonly fall to -30 to
-40°C or lower for extended time periods. In spite of these
measures, a number of freezing events and pipe blockages
64
Author Index
did occur, although they were generally quickly addressed
and had only a minor impact on production operations and
related data acquisition.
Finally, the 2008 extended-production test was con-
figured to pump produced water to the surface (via the
production tubing) and through the surface-testing equip-
ment of Train A, with subsequent injection into a dedicated
produced-water disposal well (Mallik 3L-38). Indeed, the
cumulative rate of water production was sufficiently low that
continuous injection could not be undertaken, so the pro-
duced water was instead held in an external rig tank until
a sufficient volume had accumulated for periodic injection.
The experience and knowledge gained during the 2007
program were indeed valuable and undoubtedly contributed
greatly to the efficient, safe, and environmentally respon-
sible operations of the Mallik 2008 program, including
the completion of 6 days of continuous production testing.
This experience, however, was gained at considerable cost.
Due to the significant budget over-runs encountered in
2007, together with the failure of major components of the
externally mounted down-hole monitoring systems and end-
of-season difficulties in meeting environmental commitments,
the major funding partners of the program were motivated to
minimize perceived risks in the following year. Consequently,
the original 2008 program plan (20 days testing up to three
production zones, incorporating pre- and post-test cased-hole
logging) was scaled back to a nominal 5.5 day test (ultim-
ately a 6-day test was achieved) of the already-perforated
zone, without any well logging. As a result, a number of
the improvements proposed for the 2008 testing program
(e.g. oriented perforation with optimized sizing and pene-
tration, more robust logging operations, and enhanced data
communications) could not be implemented and evaluated.
SUMMARY
The Mallik Gas Hydrate Production Research Well
Program was conducted in a safe and environmentally
responsible manner from January through April of 2008.
Gas hydrate was continuously dissociated and produced
to the surface during a 6-day production test by reservoir
depressurization, and measurable gas and water were pro-
duced to surface. Production-flow data were captured under
three distinct bottom-hole flowing pressures. Produced
water was injected into a sand formation located well below
the gas-hydrate-bearing intervals at Mallik, using the recom-
pleted 3L-38 as an injector well (Fig. 2). Two well-control
events were successfully managed. The operations team and
the Technical Committee built adequate contingency into the
schedule to allow for weather delays and operational prob-
lems. The program was completed within the allotted time
frame and under budget. All gas hydrate wells drilled in the
course of the four Mallik research programs conducted over
the previous 11 years were abandoned according to relevant
federal and territorial regulations.
 Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the partnership that undertook
the 2007–2008 Mallik Gas Hydrate Production Research
Well Program: the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National
Corporation, Natural Resources Canada, and the operator
for the program, Aurora College.
REFERENCES
Ashford, D.I., Mizuta, T., Dallimore, S.R., Yamamoto, K.,
Nixon, F.M., Imasato, Y., Wright, J.F., Taylor, A.E., and
Applejohn, A., 2012. Overview of engineering and operations
activities conducted as part of the JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora
Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well
Program, Part A: 2007 field program; in Scientific results
from the JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora Mallik 2007–2008 Gas
Hydrate Production Research Well Program, Mackenzie Delta,
Northwest Territories, Canada, (ed.) S.R. Dallimore,
K. Yamamoto, J.F. Wright, and G. Bellefleur; Geological
Survey of Canada, Bulletin 601.
Dallimore, S.R. and Collett, T.S. (ed.), 2005. Scientific results from
the Mallik 2002 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program,
Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories, Canada; Geological
Survey of Canada, Bulletin 585, 140 p. and 2 DVD-ROMs,
<http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi-bin/starfinder/0?path=geoscan.
fl&id=fastlink&pass=&format=FLSHORTORG&searc
h=R=220702> [accessed October 10, 2012].
Fujii, K., Yasuda, M., Cho, B., Ikegami, T., Sugiyama, H.,
Imasato, Y., Dallimore, S.R, and Wright, J.F., 2008a.
Development of a monitoring system for the JOGMEC/
NRCan/Aurora gas hydrate production test program; in
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Gas
Hydrates (ICGH 2008), Vancouver, British Columbia, July
6–10, 2008, Paper 5830, 6 p.
Grace, R.D., Cudd, B., Carden, R.S., and Shursen, J.L., 1994.
Advanced blowout & well control; Gulf Publishing Company,
Houston, Texas, 397 p.
Kurihara, M., Sato, A., Funatsu, K., Ouchi, H., Yamamoto, K.,
Fujii, T., Numasawa, M., Masuda, Y., Narita, H.,
Dallimore, S.R., Wright, J.F., and Ashford, D., 2012. Analysis
of 2007 and 2008 gas hydrate production tests on the Aurora/
JOGMEC/NRCan Mallik 2L-38 well through numerical
simulation; in Scientific results from the JOGMEC/NRCan/
Aurora Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research
Well Program, Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories,
Canada, (ed.) S.R. Dallimore, K. Yamamoto, J.F. Wright, and
G. Bellefleur; Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 601.
Author Index
D.I. Ashford et al.
Rojas, M., Martin, C.K., Hernandez-Johnson, L., Ashford, D.,
Wright, J.F., Yamamoto, K., Numasawa, M., Dallimore, S.R.,
and Isted, R.E., 2012. Electric submersible pump as an effect-
ive artificial lift method to control bottom-hole pressure in a
producing gas hydrate well, JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora 2007–
2008 Mallik Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program;
in Scientific Results from the JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora Mallik
2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program,
Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories, Canada, (ed.)
S.R. Dallimore, K. Yamamoto, J.F. Wright, and G. Bellefleur;
Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 601.
Uchida, S., Soga, K., Klar, A., and Yamamoto, K., 2012:
Geomechanical study of the Mallik gas hydrate production
field trials; in Scientific results from the JOGMEC/NRCan/
Aurora Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research
Well Program, Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories,
Canada, (ed.) S.R. Dallimore, K. Yamamoto, J.F. Wright, and
G. Bellefleur; Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 601.
Uddin, M., Wright, J.F., Dallimore, S.R., and Coombe, D., 2012.
Gas hydrate production from the Mallik reservoir: numerical
history matching and long-term production forecasting;
in Scientific results from the JOGMEC/NRCan/Aurora
Mallik 2007–2008 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well
Program, Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories, Canada,
(ed.) S.R. Dallimore, K. Yamamoto, J.F. Wright, and
G. Bellefleur; Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 601.
Wright, J.F., Dallimore, S.R., Nixon, F.M., and Duchesne, C.,
2005. In situ stability of gas hydrate in reservoir sediments
of the JAPEX/JNOC/GSC et al. Mallik 5L-38 gas hydrate
production research well; in Scientific results from the Mallik
2002 Gas Hydrate Production Research Well Program,
Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories, Canada,
(ed.) S.R. Dallimore and T.S. Collett; Geological Survey of
Canada, Bulletin 585, 11 p., <http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/
cgi-bin/starfinder/0?path=geoscan.fl&id=fastlink&pass=&form
at=FLSHORTORG&search=R=220702>
[accessed October 10, 2012].
65