SPE/IADC 119267

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

Improving Wellbore Seal Integrity in CO2 Injection Wells
Glen Benge, SPE, ExxonMobil

Copyright 2009, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 17–19 March 2009.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have
not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not
necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or
storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract

The challenges associated with the construction of an injection well for carbon sequestration are cross disciplinary, but highly
manageable. Site selection, reservoir identification and formation evaluation involve geological and reservoir specialists that
perform detailed evaluations of the subterranean environment.[1-4]

Materials selection identifies components that are designed to withstand the unique chemical and physical environments of
these wells. Sealant selection is key to providing long term integrity of any well, with Portland cement being the material of
choice for most oil field applications.

Work on Carbon Sequestration in subterranean formations has renewed interest in investigating the long term effects of CO2
on Portland cements. Portland cement will react with the injected CO2, and while recent research indicates these
conventional cements are not a concern, additional work is ongoing to improve the long term effectiveness of the wellbore
sealant.

Efforts have focused on enhancing the properties of Portland cement by reducing the permeability of the set cement, lowering
the concentration of materials in the cement that react with CO2, or replacing the conventional Portland with specialty
cements. Complementing technologies that have been used to further promote long term seals include the use of in-situ swell
packers, and self healing cements.

Additional work has been done in evaluation of the long term stress environment of the well. This work goes beyond the
simple drilling and completion of the well to include input from long range reservoir and wellbore stress modeling through
the full life cycle of the well. These stresses are evaluated to confirm the selected sealants can withstand the changing stress
environment.

This paper discusses various identified solutions to the challenges of selecting a proper wellbore sealant for a CO2 injection
well. Additionally, the paper reviews the available sealant technologies, their application, and includes a discussion of stress
modeling for these wells.

Background

Successful carbon capture and sequestration (CSS) depends on a identifying a place to permanently store the captured CO2.
Geological formations are currently considered the most promising sequestration sites, with three types being considered the
most promising: depleted oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable coal seams and deep saline formations. To sequester CO2 into
any of these formations requires careful site selection and the proper installation of injection wells. Many of the depleted oil
and gas reservoir sites have existing wells, which creates an additional challenge of properly sealing those potential leak
paths.

There are a number of challenges with the installation of an injection well, with the selection of the wellbore sealant being
key to the long term sequestration of the CO2. Without a stable, permanent seal, leakage could defeat the purpose of the
2 SPE/IADC 119267

sequestration. This paper discusses current sealant selections, identified industry methods to enhance the seal, and reviews
material seleciton methods that include stress modeling of the wellbore environment. It is noted this paper assumes
successful placement of the sealant in the well as no material, however well designed, can function as designed if not
properly placed in the wellbore.

Portland Cement as the Primary Seal

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

Portland cement has been used as the primary sealant in oil, gas and water wells, and has been shown to provide effective
annular seals in these wells throughout the world. Of specific concern in CO2 injection wells are the carbonation reactions
that come from the reaction of CO2 in the form of carbonic acid with the Portland cement.[5,6] The reactions of interest are:

CO2 + H2O → H2CO3

H2CO3 + Ca(OH)2 → CaCO3
C-S-H + H2CO3 → CaCO3 + amorphous silica

In the initial reaction, carbon dioxide dissolves in the water, forming carbonic acid. The acid reacts with calcium hydroxide
and calcium silicate hydrate gels in the cement to form calcium carbonate. Stopping at that point, these reactions would
actually increase the strength of the cement and lower the permeability of the matrix. However, the calcium carbonate can
continue to react with fresh carbonic acid.

CaCO3 + H2CO3 → Ca(HCO3)2

Ca(HCO3)2 + Ca(OH)2 → 2CaCO3 + H2O

In these reactions, calcium carbonate is converted to calcium bicarbonate coupled with the formation of water, allowing
dissolution of additional CO2, the continued formation of carbonic acid and a continuation of the reaction process.

Kutchko et al.[7,8] evaluated the reaction of Portland cement with CO2, and from their laboratory testing determined the
reaction rates are sufficiently slow as to not be a concern over the timeframe of decades. These results mirror field results
reported by Carey et al.[9] on SACROC cores that had been exposed to a CO2 flood for over 30 years. The results are similar
to work by Barlet-Gouedard et al.[10,11] where the authors noted the diffusion (d) degradation rate of the cement exposed over
time (t) to wet supercritical CO2 could be expressed by:

d = 0.26 * t

Assuming a typical cement sheath thickness of 2 to 2.5 cm, the degradation across the annulus could potentially occur within
several years. However, this would only put the degradation front to the casing wall, not up the wellbore to shallower
formations. Taking the reaction along the length of the wellbore, to degrade as little as 6 m of cement would take several
hundred centuries. (It is noted this calculation assumes a continuous, renewable supply of fresh CO2, with no other inhibiting
reactions are occurring.) It is apparent from these works and the field results, the use of standard Portland cement in these
wells would most likely not cause a long term seal integrity concern.

The lifetime storage of CO2 will require permanent seal integrity, and making modifications to the standard Portland systems
may further improve the reliability of the long term seal.

Modifying Portland Based Cement Systems

A Portland cement system can be readily modified in a number of ways to slow or prevent the reaction with CO2. Methods
of system modification include reducing the permeability of the cement matrix, reducing the concentration of the reactive
species by dilution with carefully chosen non-reactive materials, or chemically protecting the species through some sort of
coating. Each of these methods has been used with considerable success in a number of applications.

Reducing the permeability of the cement matrix is one of the most effective means of reducing the reactivity of the cement
with CO2, and is one of the easiest to obtain. While there are several methods known to reduce the permeability of set
cement, the most common is to simply change the cement to water ratio, increasing the proportion of cement. While the
inevidable increase in slurry viscosity can be countered by the use of dispersants, simply changing the water to cement ratio
will increase the slurry density. This can be a key disadvantage of this approach in that not all wellbores can withstand the
higher hydrostatic pressures brought on by the increased cement slurry density.
SPE/IADC 119267 3

Adding specialty materials to the slurry to fill the pore spaces in the cement will act to reduce permeability. A considerable
body of work outlines the use of specific particle sized materials added to cement. The "tri modal" or three particle approach
has led to the development of a number of high performance cement systems. These systems can cover an entire range of
slurry densities, making them applicable to a wide range of wellbore conditions.[12-16]

The addition of the specifically sized particles will not only reduce the permeability of the set cement, but also dilute the
concentration of reactive species. This technique thus offers benefits beyond simple permeability reduction.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

An additional method for modifying Portland cement base systems is to protect the reactive species through addition of other
additives. Important advances have been reported by Barlet-Gouedard et al. in their development of a Portland based system
that appears to be completely resistant to CO2 attack.[10,11,17]

These developments are significant in they utilize standard Portland cement. These cements are readily available and have a
long history of providing an effective seal in a variety of environments. Their effectiveness has been demonstrated in field
work, specifically the SACROC studies previously noted. Laboratory testing of Portland based systems, however, has not
consistently shown Portland to be acceptable in these environments. It is not clear if this is due to an artefact in the
laboratory testing as many of the testing apparatuses use similar exposure techniques.[18-19]

Non Portland Cements

Another approach to addressing long term seal quality in CO2 injection wells is to replace the Portland cement with a non-
Portland system.[20] Limestone, the principal material in Portland cement clinker is readily available and forms the basis for
binder in Portland cement. The raw materials used to make non-Portland cements are less abundant and less widely
dispersed making them more difficult to obtain. Examples of non-Portland cements include calcium sulfoaluminate-based
cements, geopolymeric cements (alkali aluminosilicates), magnesium oxide cements, and hydrocarbon-based cements.

While less abundant, these systems are commercially available, and selected systems have been applied in injection wells for
decades. One of the most resistant systems is a calcium aluminate cement that does not react at all with CO2. This specialty
cement has been used in many applications in oil and gas wells, and specifically in one of the highest-rate acid gas injection
wells in the US.[21,22]

Use of specialty cements does require additional steps in the planning and execution phases. These materials are generally
not compatible with Portland cement, and operations must be planned to eliminate the potential for any cross contamination.
Conventional cementing additives do not react the same way with these cements, thus requiring additional testing prior to
their use, and the effective density range for these slurries is narrower than with Portland cement blends, potentially limiting
their application in some fields. Finally, these cements have limited availability and will not be available in many areas.

Work by Argonne National Labs has also identified ceramic based cements that show promise in wellbore applications.
Originally part of an effort to identify materials to safely bind and encapsulate nuclear waste, the resulting systems may find
application in lower temperature wells. The system is difficult to place at higher temperatures, but considering most CO2
injection wells are planned for shallow, low pressure oil reservoirs, its potential use shows promise on many projects.[23]

Swelling Technologies

An advancing area over the past few years has focused on swelling technologies. These technologies identify materials that,
when placed in the well, have the ability to react to changing wellbore environment, and most importantly the intrusion of
wellbore fluids or gasses. Interactions with the wellbore fluids cause an expansion of the swelling materials resulting in a
tighter annular seal.

Unlike approaches that seek to modify the cement in the annulus against attack by CO2, these materials do not change the
cement itself, but enhance the seal in the wellbore if there is an intrusion of particular fluids or gasses. A number of papers
on both innovative "self healing cements", and swelling packers have been written in the recent past.

Self Healing and Specialty Cements

Failure of a cement sheath can occur for a number of reasons. Stress modeling and field experience indicates common
reasons for sheath failure related to cracking of the cement from some stress change in the wellbore, followed closely by de-
bonding of the cement sheath either from the formation or the casing.[24,25] These changes can be brought on by rapid
temperature increases or more commonly pressure events, either due to completion or stimulation operations, or simply long
term production of the well.
4 SPE/IADC 119267

The cracks, or de-bonded areas of the cement sheath can open up paths for gas or fluid flow in the annulus. Self healing
cements incorporate specific additives that are designed to interact with this gas or fluid to eliminate the flow. The technique
is similar to that found in the swelling packers, though specifically adapted to work within a cement system.

Self healing cements react to a failure of the sheath through their interaction with the flowing material in the well. To date,
work on these cement systems has focused on hydrocarbon swellable materials. No work has been specifically reported on
the interaction of these additives with CO2, though testing is currently underway to identify the efficacy of these materials in

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

a CO2 environment.

Other specialty cement systems are designed to prevent stress failure from the initial placement of the cement. One technique
incorporates flexible materials in the cement to enhance the ability to withstand changes in the pressure environment, while
other techniques key on reducing the Young's Modulus of the set cement. The materials used in these applications can be
either solid, flexible additives, or foamed cement technologies. Additionally, use of expanding agents either alone or in
conjunction with flexible materials has been used to eliminate de-bonding issues at the formation or casing interfaces.[26]

Many recommendations are now being made that include self healing cements containing both flexible and expanding agents.
Further investigation of the long term mechanical properties of these various systems, and their effectiveness in changing
stress environments will be required, though early modeling work indicates these system to be very effective in preventing
stress failure.

Swellable Packers

Another emerging technology has been a swellable packer element that is placed on the outside of the casing and acts as a
passive seal element. The element is designed to swell in the presence of hydrocarbon, water or both. As with the self
healing cements, to date no specific work has been reported on the effectiveness of these elements when exposed to CO2.
These elements do not act as the initial seal in the wellbore, but in the event of any failure of the cement sheath, or movement
of fluids or gasses, respond by swelling and isolating the flow, thus preventing migration along the wellbore.[27-32]

Some applications of swellable packer technologies have completely eliminated the cement as the sealing element in the well.
In these applications, the well has been drilled with a hydrocarbon based fluid, and the packer element has been designed to
swell in hydrocarbon. After running the casing to total depth (TD), the well is left idle for a period of time, typically less
than two days, to allow the element to swell and effect an annular seal. The elements are designed to withstand up to 5,000
psi differential across the element and have been shown to be very effective in providing a seal.

Completely eliminating the cement from the annulus would not be recommended in CO2 injection wells. Through
incorporating swellable packers in conjunction with proper cementing could provide additional security for long term seal
integrity.

Stress Modeling

Historically, the main goal for designers of cement systems was to assure the cement system had sufficient thickening time to
allow for placement, followed by rapid and high strength development. Modeling work has made it clear compressive
strength is not sufficient to maintain a seal for the life of the well. Simulations of the stress environment throughout the life
of the well indicate other cement properties are much more important than strength alone.

Researchers have been working to define the necessary cement parameters required to maintain a seal throughout the full
stress environment in a well.[33-39] The simulations begin with the initial placement of the cement, and rely on the initial state
of stress in the well. When placed, cement slurries stress the wellbore with hydrostatic pressure from the fluid column, and
as the column of cement sets, the hydrostatic pressure is converted to a mechanical stress. Changes in wellbore temperature
and pressure in the initial phases of the cement setting are key to determining the initial stress state in the well.

After the cement has set, the well can undergo a number of pressure and temperature changes. Continued drilling, production
or injection of fluids or gasses will change the wellbore pressure and temperature environment. Changing injection or
production rates may create a cyclic stress environment. Much like bending a piece of wire multiple times, cyclic stresses
can lead to early failure of the cement if not properly designed.

Much of the stress modeling work evaluates three areas of potential seal failure. Failure at the cement and formation
interface is often controlled by the character of the formation, the pressure changes in the formation, and the bonding
characteristics of the cement to the formation. The cement to casing interface can fail most often through changes in the
internal pressure of the casing, and again rapid temperature changes. Finally, tensile failure of the cement sheath can be
SPE/IADC 119267 5

initiated by internal pressure and temperature changes within the casing. All of these pressure and temperature changes are
incorporated into sophisticated stress models to better understand and design the cement slurries for the well conditions.

One limitation to current stress modeling of the wellbore environment is the need for good data on cement mechanical
properties. There are no industry standard test methods for determining parameters such as Young's Modulus which can lead
to differences in the predictions from various models. Additionally, most models use only one value for Young's Modulus
and do not account for the changes in this value as the boundary conditions in the well change. This tends to result in the

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

simulations being made on a worst case basis.

Case History Review:

Benge and Dew (September 2006 SPE Drilling & Completion) describe the challenges in design and completion of two high
rate acid gas injection wells in the Western US.[22] Two wells were designed for injection of up to 100 million SCF/day each
of H2S and CO2 gas. The authors discuss formation considerations, casing selection, cement job and slurry designs. Two
specific cement systems are noted in the paper, one of which incorporated select particle size technologies to reduce the
permeability and relative concentration of reactive species in the cement, with the other being a high alumina based, non-
Portland system. The risks associated with selection of each of the cement systems is presented in the paper and includes the
understanding the Portland based system had a potential for eventual attack by CO2, while the non-Portland based system,
being immune to CO2 attack, required considerable work to develop specific additives to allow its use in the specific well
conditions.

Updating the progress of these wells, in the three years since the wells were brought on line, uninterrupted injection has
continued into each well at approximately 50 million SCF/day with no indication of wellbore problems.

Conclusions:

While field results indicate the use of standard Portland cement in CO2 injection wells would most likely not cause a long
term seal integrity concern, laboratory results are not consistent with the results from field observations.

Currently available technologies have been shown to be very effective in providing long term seal integrity in wells. Used in
concert, and supplemented with advanced simulation work, these technologies can assure long term seal integrity for the full
life cycle of the wellbore.

Seal integrity for CO2 injection wells cannot depend solely on placing the cement in the well and allowing it to set. Proper
design of the cement system for the current and future wellbore conditions is critical to maintaining long term well integrity.

Developing technologies in the area of CO2 resistant cements will allow the continued use of Portland based cement systems
that do not react with CO2. Combining these technologies with flexible and expansive materials can further reduce the risk of
cement failure.

Incorporating swelling technologies, either through the use of swelling packers or self healing cement systems, can add an
additional layer of assurance of long term seal integrity. These technologies are not necessarily intended to act as the initial
seal in the wellbore, but function later in the life of the well.
6 SPE/IADC 119267

References:

1. Hofstee, C., Seeberger, F., Orlic, B, Mulders, F., van Bergen, F, and Bisschip, R. 2008. The feasibility of effective
and safe carbon dioxide storage in the De Lier gas field, First Break, Vol. 26, January.
2. Loizzo, M. 2007. Drilling and deep sampling in CO2 storage sites, International School of Geophysics, CO2 Capture
& Storage, Erice, Italy, Nov 3.
3. Holm, L. W. and O'Brien, L. J., 1986. Factors to Consider When Designing a CO2 Flood, paper SPE 14105,

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

Presented at the International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering, 17-20 March, Beijing, China.
4. Imbus, S. et al. 2006. Critical Issues in CO2 Capture and Storage: Findings of the SPE Advanced Technology
Workshop (ATW) on Carbon Sequestration, paper SPE 102968, presented at the Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, 24-27 September, San Antonio, Texas
5. Bruckdorfer, R.A. 1986. Carbon Dioxide Corrosion in Oil well Cements, paper SPE 15176 presented at the SPE
Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Billings, MT, 19-21 May.
6. Onan, D.D. 1984. Effects of Supercritical Carbon Dioxide on Well Cements, paper SPE 12593, presented at the
Permian Basin Oil & Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, TX, 8-9 March.
7. Kutchko, B., Strazisar, B., Dzombak, D. and Lowry, G., Thaulow, N. 2007. Degradation of Well Cements under
Geologic Sequestration Conditions, Environ. Sci. Technol, vol. 41, 4787-4792.
8. Strazisar, B. and Kutchko, B., 2006. Degradation of Wellbore Cement Due to CO2 Injection - Effects of Pressure
and Temperature, 2006 International Symposium on Site Characterization for CO2 Geological Storage, Berkeley,
CA, March 21.
9. Carey, J.W., Wigand, M., Chipera, S. et al. 2006. Analysis and performance of oil well cement with 30 years of CO2
exposure from the SACROC unit, West Texas, USA, 8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control
Technologies, Trondheim, Norway, 19-22 June.
10. Barlet-Gouédard, V., Rimmelé, G., Goffé, B. and Porcherie, O. 2006. Mitigation strategies for the risk of CO2
migration through wellbores, paper IADC/SPE 98924, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami,
Florida, 21-23 February.
11. Barlet-Gouedard, V., Rimmele, G., Goffe, B. And Porcherie, O. 2007. Well Technologies for CO2 Geological
Storage: CO2-Resistant Cement, Oil & Gas Science and Technology, Vol. 62, No. 3, pp. 325-334.
12. Baret, F., Garnier, A., and Rashad, B. 1996. High Performance Water Reduced Cement Slurries Prepared With Low
Cost Optimized Blend, paper SPE 35088 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, LA, 12-15
March.
13. Nagelhout, A.C.G., et al. 2005. Laboratory and Field Validation of a Sealant System for Critical Plug and Abandon
Situations, paper SPE/IADC 97347, presented at the SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and
Exhibition, Dubai, U.A.E., 12-14 September.
14. Le Roy-Delage, S., Baumgarte, C., Thicerlin, M., and Vidick, B. 2000. New Cement Systems for Durable Zonal
Isolation, paper SPE 59132, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, LA, 23-25 February.
15. Pokhriyal, J., Gaudlip, T., and Suter. W. 2001. Use of Concrete Technology for High-Density Cement Systems in
South Texas, paper SPE 67259, presented at the SPE Production and Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK,
24-27 March.
16. Thicerlin, M., Baumgarte, C. and Guillot, D. 1998. A Soil Mechanics Approach to Predict Cement Sheath Behavior,
paper SPE/ISRM 47375, presented at the SPE/ISRM Rock Mechanics in Petroleum Engineering, Trondheim,
Norway, 8-10 July.
17. Schlumberger, EverCRETE: CO2-resistant cement for long-term zonal isolation. (2008) www.slb.com/evercrete
18. Duguid, A., Radonjic, M. and Scherer, G. 2006. The effect of carbonated brine on the interface between well cement
and geologic formations under diffusion-controlled conditions, 8th International conference on Greenhouse Gas
Control Technologies, Trondheim, Norway, June 19-22.
19. Jacquemet, N., Pironon, J. and Caroli, E. 2005 A new experimental procedure for simulation of H2S + CO2
geological storage - Application to well cement aging. Oil Gas Sci. Technol., 60, 93-206.
20. Halliburton, Thermalock Cement for Corrosive CO2 Environments (1999) www.halliburton.com
21. Benge, G. 2005. Cement Designs for High-Rate Acid Gas Injection Wells, paper IPTC 10608, presented at the
International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 21-23 November.
22. Benge, G., and Dew, E., 2006. Cement Designs for High-Rate Acid Gas Injection Wells, SPE Drilling &
Completion, September 2006 (SPE 91867-PA)
23. Ross, E., Squeeze Play. Ceramic Cement Offers Cost Effective Solution for Zonal Isolation (2007) New Technology
Magazine, November 2007, pp. 27.
24. Goodwin, K.J. and Crook, R.J. 1992. Cement Sheath Stress Failure, SPE Drilling Engineering, Volume 7, No. 4, pp
291-296. (SPE 20453-PA)
25. Thicerelin, M.J., Dargaurd, B., Baret, J.F. and Rodriguez, W.J. 1997. Cement Design Based on Cement Mechanical
Response, paper SPE 38598, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,
Texas, 5-8 Oct.
SPE/IADC 119267 7

26. Bouras, H., Doumaz, N., Bellabara, M., Caceres, E., Mananga, S. Le Roy-Delage, S, Gamal, M, Aziz, A. and
Rebbou Benberber, M. 2008. Responsive Cementing Material Prevents Annular Leaks in Gas Wells, paper SPE
116757, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, CO. 21-24 September.
27. Wood, E., Yakeley, S., Constantine, J. and Augustine, J. 2008. Advanced Noncement Options for Isolating
Wellbores, Journal of Petroleum Technology, September pp 36-39.
28. Antonio, L., Barrios, O. and Martinez, G. 2007. Swelling Packer Technology Eliminates Problems in Difficult Zonal
Isolation Tight-Gas Reservoir Completion, paper SPE 107578, presented at the Latin American & Caribbean

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEDC/proceedings-pdf/09DC/All-09DC/SPE-119267-MS/2702324/spe-119267-ms.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 22 August 2023

Petroleum Engineering Conference, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 15-18 April.
29. Rogers, H., Allison, D. and Webb, E. 2008. New Equipment Designs Enable Swellable Technology in Cementless
Completions, paper SPE 112302, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, 4-6 March.
30. Kennedy, G., Lawless, A., Shaikh, K. and Allbi, T. 2005. The use of Swell Packers as a Replacement and
Alternative to Cementing, paper SPE 95713, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Dallas, TX 9-12 October.
31. Freyer, R. 2005. Run-and-Forget Completions for Optimal Inflow in Heavy Oil, paper SPE 97336, presented at the
APE/PS-CIM/CHOA International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, 1-3
November.
32. Freyer, R., Fejerskov, M. and Huse, A. 2002. An Oil Selective Inflow Control System, paper SPE 78272, presented
at the European Petroleum Conference, Aberdeen, UK, 29-31 October.
33. Gepard, B., Frenette, R., Auge, L., Barlet-Gourdard, V., Desroches, J., Jammes, L. 2006. Well Integrity in CO2
Environments: Performance & Risk; Technologies, CO2SC Symposium, Berkley, CA, 20-22 March.
34. Pedersen, R.O., Scheie, A., Johnson, C., Hoyos, J.C., Therond, E., and Khatri, D.K. 2006. Cementing of an Offshore
Disposal Well Using a Novel Sealant That Withstands Pressure and Temperature Cycles, paper SPE 98891,
presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami, Florida, 21-23 February.
35. Ladva, H.K.J., Braster, B., Jones, T.G.J., Goldsmith, G. and Scott, D. 2005. The Cement-to Formation Interface in
Zonal Isolation, SPE Drilling & Completion, Vol. 20, No 3, September. (SPE 88016-PA)
36. Moroni, N., Repetto, C., Ravi, K. 2008. Zonal Isolation in Reservoir Containing CO2 and H2S, paper IADC/SPE
112703, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, 4-6 March.
37. Ravi, K., Bosma, M., and Gastebled, O. 1997. Safe and Economic Gas Wells through Cement Design For Life of the
Well, paper SPE 75700, presented at the Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, 30 April - 2 May.
38. Bosma, M., Ravi, K., van Driel, W. and Schreppers, G.J. 1999. Design Approach to Sealant Selection for the Life of
the Well, paper SPE 56536, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, 3-6
October.
39. di Lullo, G. and Rae, P. 2000. Cements for Long Term Isolation - Design Optimization by Computer Modelling and
Prediction, paper IADC/SPE 62745, presented at the IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 11-13 September.