Howdy, readers! Welcome to the 2nd quarter edition, and please welcome SPE Production & Operations' two newest Associate Editors, Shaya Movafaghian and Javier Sanchez Reyes. Volunteer Technical Editors and Associate Editors are the heart and soul of SPE's Editorial Committee, without which our peer-reviewed technical literature would not be possible. If you want to learn how to get involved with the Editorial Committee or to serve your profession in some other way, please seehttp://www.spe.org/volunteer/.
The SPE Technical Director for Production & Operations, Shauna Noonan, provided us the following information about SPE's P&O online community:
The Production and Operations online community was recently launched through SPE Connect. This online community replaces the recently disbanded P&O Technical Section. This community is a virtual place where SPE members can network, share their experiences, and transfer and gain knowledge among their peers. Response and participation have been outstanding. It is hoped that this will be the primary location for members to get the latest information on events, announcements, training, and hot discussion topics. For more information, please visit SPE Connect and get connected! In addition to connecting with other P&O personnel, you can also find more information about P&O topics at theP&O discipline web page.
SPE has a standard describing the characteristics of a paper that is a good candidate for peer review, and that standard includes several aspects of professionalism. In our last issue, Associate Editor Madelyn Holtzclaw wrote about one aspect of professionalism: avoiding commerciality. This time I have some remarks about avoiding plagiarism. Wilson Mizner once said that "copying from one person is plagiarism, but copying from more than one person is research." SPE says that both are plagiarism, unless you properly cite and reference all your sources. You can view SPE's plagiarism policy athttp://www.spe.org/authors/plagiarism.php. Just as the rise of steroid usage in sports led to an increased level of testing and an increased number of people being caught using performance-enhancing drugs, access to online libraries has led to an increase in plagiarism, antiplagiarism tools, and more plagiarists being caught. Although SPE changed their preferred style for citations and references in 2007, we are still receiving many papers that are using the old format. Because using the new SPE Style Guide citation and reference style is more compatible with the reports generated by the antiplagiarism software used by SPE, I recently began sending papers back to authors and asking them to revise their citations and references to conform with the Style Guide before the papers are sent through for full peer review.
Copying the work of others is an obvious form of plagiarism. A more subtle form of plagiarism is copying your own work and failing to reference it. There are several reasons this is a problem. Contrary to popular opinion, if you transferred your copyright to someone else when a paper was published, you no longer own it, and therefore you don’t have the right to copy it without referencing your prior work. Another reason is that there may be different co-authors involved, so one or more co-authors of the prior work are not receiving proper credit for their ideas that are being re-used. According to SPE's guidance, copying a few sentences or a paragraph of your own prior work may not be a problem, but consider the case if you are claiming the new submission is original, and also the impact of having different co-authors. If your own integrity is not a sufficient deterrent to stop you from plagiarizing, consider the impact on your reputation and your career if colleagues learn that you have had a paper withdrawn from a meeting or from the online paper library because of plagiarism. For students, also consider the potential actions that may be taken by your university. SPE Technical Editors and Associate Editors are expected to communicate with their Associate Editors and Executive Editors, respectively, if they suspect that plagiarism has occurred. Authors who feel their work may have been plagiarized and SPE members who believe they have observed a case of plagiarism are encouraged to send an email to email@example.com.
And now, on to the introduction of the peer-approved papers. This issue features two flow-assurance papers, two formation damage control papers, and five well-stimulation papers.
In the first flow-assurance paper, Geology and Geohistory Contribute to Flow Assurance, the authors report finding a correlation between asphaltene onset pressure and geologically-controlled bitumen distribution. The authors of A New Approach for Predicting Inhibited Erosion-Corrosion in CO2-Saturated Oil/Brine Flow Condition provide improved methods to predict inhibitor performance for controlling erosion-corrosion, particularly when sand is present in the flow stream.
Both formation damage control papers should be of great interest to readers. Tests reported in A New Environmentally Friendly Clay Stabilizer demonstrated clay stabilizer effectiveness up to 300°F in Berea sandstone cores, and the effectiveness was maintained after up to 4 HCl treatment stages. An interesting case study, Inhibited Gas Stimulation To Mitigate Condensate Banking and Maximize Recovery in Cupiagua Field, reports some success using inhibited diesel and alcohol to remove condensate blocks, mitigating the productivity damage from retrograde condensation near the wellbore.
In the first well-stimulation paper, the authors of Theoretical Basis for Interpretation of Temperature Data During Acidizing Treatment of Horizontal Wells have developed an inversion model that is suitable for monitoring the distribution of a matrix treatment in a horizontal well in real time using distributed temperature sensing. In Microseismic Clouds: Modeling and Implications, the authors use a geomechanical model to match the observed microseismic response during a fracture stage and discuss how using their approach may lead to improved proppant placement within a fracture network. A more practical approach to acquiring DFIT data when long shut-in times are required is reported in A Method To Perform Multiple Diagnostic Fracture Injection Tests Simultaneously in a Single Wellbore. For the wells studied in Comparison of Fracture Valves vs. Plug-n-Perforation Completion in the Oil Segment of the Eagle Ford Shale: A Case Study, the authors did not find much difference in production response for the two different diversion systems. The authors of A Superior, High-Performance Enzyme for Breaking Borate Crosslinked Fracturing Fluids Under Extreme Well Conditions report a new, bond-specific mannanase enzyme that is active to at least 225°F and results in significantly reduced insoluble polymer residue.
In case you missed them, you may benefit from the following recent peer-reviewed papers:
February 2013 SPE Journal:
February 2013 Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering:
January 2013 Economics & Management:
January 2013 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology:
March 2013 Drilling & Completion:
February 2013 Oil and Gas Facilities:
Until next time, stay safe, and remember to visit the P&O online community!