Decarbonise case study Total Flow

Diagnostics identifies water source,

enabling effective remediation to
reduce water-cut and carbon emissions
Location: Middle East
Well type: Oil producer
Reference: SPE-203307-MS
Customer: Abu Dhabi Oil Company
(ADOC)
Case benefits
— Located and quantified behind-casing
crossflow.
— Enabled targeted remediation to
restore well to safe and productive
operation.
— Lowered energy requirement for
handling produced water.
— Reduced emissions and carbon-per-
barrel over the life of the field.
Challenge
High water cut in producing wells leads The total liquid rate was more than twice the
to unnecessarily high carbon dioxide projected level and the water cut was about
emissions and increased carbon-per-barrel 80%. The production gas–oil ratio at the
rates. Managing, treating, and reinjecting separator was lower than expected when
or disposing of excess water requires compared with a PVT analysis of the B2 zone
large amounts of energy, making water in a nearby well. Furthermore, water analysis
cut reduction a key area for performance results for well OP-1 were close to the
improvement. Well OP-1 was completed in existing results from other completion zones,
1971 as a vertical oil producer and it features which indicated substantial water entry from
a large number of perforated zones from an unknown source.
numerous campaigns over the course of
its operational history. The oil production Solution
rate was approximately 100 bpd, which was Conventional production logging tools
considered uneconomic, and the operators such as spinner and multiphase sensors
decided to switch the completion zone to can provide a production profile inside
boost production and enhance recovery the wellbore, but cannot identify behind-
from the field. casing communication with water-bearing
formations or crossflow.
Following a workover in December 2018, the
well was put back on production from the The field operator selected TGT’s Total Flow
new completion zone (B2), but unexpected diagnostics to determine whether behind-
water production was observed. casing crossflow was the cause of high

Figure 1 DEPTH WELL SKETCH

LITHOLOGY
PHIE_NEW
PERM
PERM
USI TEMP
TEMP_F1D1
QZ
QZ
QZ
QZ
LFD FLOWING SND FLOWING
100 110 dB SPL 79 120 dB SPL
Pre-workover diagnostics survey reveals ft 1 frac 0 0.1 mD 700 275 °F 278 0 % 100 0 % 80 0.01 kHz 4.9 0.1 kHz 58.6

that the main source of water is non- 275

TEMP_S1D1
°F 278

perforated water-bearing Zone B1.

Poor cement

X025

X050 Noise typical for

channeling flow

X075

Transient and shut-in

temperatures
suggest active
Channeling

X100
crossflow between Noise typical for
zones B1 and B2 reservoir flow

X125 Zone B1 69%

Zone B2 30%
X150

Flowing temperature cooled

down because of crossflow
behind casing from above

T1D1 T1D2 T1D3 TF_SIMULATION TG

tgtdiagnostics.com/decarbonise Decarbonise case study Total Flow CS033

 water cut in well OP-1 and to locate the water
source. The combination of TGT’s Chorus
spectral acoustic survey with standard
production logging tools enabled the survey
team to identify behind-casing flow. TGT’s
Indigo and Cascade technology was also
used to quantify the low flow rates.
Result
Analysis of the survey results indicated that
the crossflow from the previously isolated
perforated zones was less than 1% of the
total. About 30% of the liquid inflow was
coming from the targeted perforated interval
(Zone B2). The main unwanted production
(approximately 69%) was coming from the
non-perforated water-bearing Zone B1 and
was the result of behind-casing crossflow
(Figure 2). A remedial workover was
conducted in September 2019 to address
the crossflow issue. A cement evaluation log
showed that the cement condition above the
Zone B2 perforation interval was improved
and a successful pressure test (3,000
psig) against Zone B2 was performed. The
productive Zone B2 was stimulated once
more using a revised procedure.
A flowback test conducted before the
second survey showed that there had been
a significant decrease in water production
with time, and water cut was 0% in the post-
workover survey. Both Chorus and Indigo
data analysis confirmed that inflow was from
only the targeted interval with no evidence
of behind-casing communication with Zone
B1 (Figure 2).

Figure 2
Post-workover survey confirms the
effectiveness of the remedial work and
the elimination of water entry from
Zone B1.

LITHOLOGY PERM ILS TEMP LFD FLOWING SND FLOWING

DEPTH WELL SKETCH TPHI_(2019 RST) PERM ILS_F1D1 TEMP_F1D1 68 100 dB SPL 68 100 dB SPL
ft 1 frac 0 0.1 mD 700 -200 rpm 3600 272.4 °F 275.8 0.1 kHz 58.6 0.1 kHz 58.6
TEMP_S1D1
272.4 °F 275.8

X025

Spinner readings change

X050
due to change in TBG ID

X075

Spinner readings change due Acoustic signal due to fluid

X100
to fluid entry into tubing entry into tubing through
throught pre-perforated joint pre-perforated joint

X125

Zone B1
X150
Positive temperature anomaly across Acoustic signal typical
targeted formation due to oil inflow for reservoir flow
TEMP_T1D1 TEMP_T1D2 TEMP_T1D3

tgtdiagnostics.com/decarbonise Decarbonise case study Total Flow CS033