Drilling in Natural Gas Hydrate Reservoir

Subscriber access provided by Karolinska Institutet, University Library
Review
A Comprehensive Review on Exploration and Drilling
Techniques for Natural Gas Hydrate Reservoirs
Chandan Sahu, Rajnish Kumar, and Jitendra S. Sangwai
Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c02202 • Publication Date (Web): 31 Aug 2020
Downloaded from pubs.acs.org on September 6, 2020
Just Accepted
“Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted
online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical
Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination
of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in
full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully
peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the
Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore,
the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After
a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web
site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes
to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and
ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or
consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W.,

Washington, DC 20036
Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society.
However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works
produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the
course of their duties.
Page 1 of 87 Energy & Fuels
1
2
3 Research Article
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 A Comprehensive Review on Exploration and Drilling Techniques for Natural
15
16
17 Gas Hydrate Reservoirs
18
19
20
21
22 Chandan Sahu,a,b,c Rajnish Kumar,b,*Jitendra S. Sangwai,a,*
23
24 a
Gas Hydrate and Flow Assurance Laboratory, Petroleum Engineering Program,
25
26
27 Department of Ocean Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
28
29 Chennai 600 036, India
30
31 b
32
Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600
33 036, India
34
35 c
36 School of Petroleum Technology, Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, Raisan,
37 Gandhinagar, Gujarat, 382007, India
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 Corresponding Author:
48
49 Rajnish Kumar: rajnish@iitm.ac.in
50
51 Jitendra Sangwai: jitendrasangwai@iitm.ac.in
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels Page 2 of 87
1
2
3 ABSTRACT
4
5 With the depletion of conventional oil reservoirs and concerns about increasing carbon
6
7
8
footprint of coal, natural gas is poised to play a much bigger role in sustainable economic
9
10 growth. Gas hydrates being an abundant source of clean methane have created great interest
11
12 among academia and industry. Its demographic occurrence in shallow depths has motivated
13
14
industry and academia to explore its abundance and exploitation potential. Despite being
15
16
17 shallow, offshore gas hydrate exploration and drilling is a deep-water endeavour which was
18
19 considered expensive and risky due to its narrow thermodynamic stability and lack of
20
21 exploitation experience. However, with recent advancement in technology and long-term field
22
23
24 trials, it has been universally accepted that methane production from marine hydrate reservoirs
25
26 is achievable with innovative drilling techniques and proper well design pertaining to
27
28 appropriate location and layout of wells, efficient well orientation, competent casing and tubing
29
30
31
design and completion design requirements for long operating life and reliability of the well.
32
33 Much has been discussed about exploration and production but very little has been addressed
34
35 about the drilling technologies that have the potential for safe and effective exploitation of this
36
37
resource in commercial quantities. The objective of this review article is to enlighten the
38
39
40 readers with exploration techniques used to locate gas hydrate reservoirs and discuss drilling
41
42 tools and techniques that have the potential to avoid premature hydrate dissociation around the
43
44 wellbore and enhance production life of the well with minimum interventions. The techniques
45
46
47 discussed are mostly the learning’s from the international drilling projects on different types of
48
49 gas hydrate reservoirs. The review article also focuses upon different drilling fluids,
50
51 pressurized coring systems and well logs suitable for hydrate reservoirs. We believe this article
52
53
54
will provide a scientific reference material to engineers for safe exploration and drilling and
55
56 stimulate upcoming exploration and drilling activities in the field of gas hydrates.
57
58
59 Keywords: Gas hydrates, Exploration, Drilling, Drilling fluid, Coring, Well logging
60

1
2
3 CONTENTS
4
5 1. Introduction
6
7 2. Hydrate distribution and reservoir classification
8
9 3. Exploration techniques for gas hydrate reservoir
10
3.1 Seismic techniques
11
12 3.1.1 Attributes of bottom simulating reflector (BSR)
13
14 3.1.2 Other seismic attributes to locate gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ)
15
16 3.2 Coring techniques
17 3.3 Well logging
18
19 3.3.1 Attributes of well logging in gas hydrate reservoir
20
21 3.3.2 Response of different well logs to gas hydrate reservoir
22
23
3.3.3 Reserve calculation for gas hydrate reservoir
24 3.4 Proxy indicators
25
26 4. Drilling techniques for gas hydrate reservoir
27
28 4.1 Conventional reservoir vs. Gas hydrate reservoir
29
30 4.2 Gas hydrate drilling technologies
31
32 4.2.1 Managed pressure drilling (MPD)
33
34 4.2.2 Casing while drilling (CWD)
35
36 4.2.3 Managed pressure casing drilling (MPCD)
37
38 4.2.4 Dual gradient drilling (DGD)
39
40 4.2.5 Recommended operational modifications for drilling gas hydrate reservoir
41
42 4.3 Drilling profiles for enhanced production from gas hydrate reservoir
43
44 4.4 Common field problems encountered during drilling a gas hydrate reservoir
45
46 4.5 Riserless drilling vs. Riser drilling for gas hydrate reservoir
47
48 4.6 Summary of international drilling expeditions
49
50 5. Drilling fluids for gas hydrate wells
51
52 5.1 Fundamental characteristics of drilling fluids for gas hydrate reservoir
53
54 5.2 Interaction of drilling fluids with gas hydrate bearing formation
55
56 5.3 Drilling fluids used in major production test wells worldwide
57
58 6. Conclusion and future perspectives
59
60

1
2
3 1. INTRODUCTION
4
5 Energy being a multidimensional commodity plays a vital role in the economic
6
7
8
development of the nation. Owing to the depletion of conventional energy resources and
9
10 increasing energy demand, it is important to explore alternative energy resources for energy
11
12 security and affordable clean energy requirements. Natural gas, being the fastest growing fossil
13
14
fuel in the 21st century, will not only help us to achieve a low-carbon future but will also act as
15
16
17 a bridging fuel between the dominant fossil fuels of today and the renewable energy of
18
19 tomorrow. Unconventional energy resources like gas hydrates, shale gas, coal bed methane,
20
21 tight gas, etc., are alternative and abundant source of natural gas.1,2 Natural gas hydrate
22
23
24 reservoirs, which are one of the huge resources of natural gas, can be a game changer in this
25
26 field and will play a profound role for energy sustainability. Natural gas hydrates (also known
27
28 as methane clathrate, hydromethane, or methane ice) are nonstoichiometric compounds
29
30
31
composed of ice like three-dimensional hydrogen-bonded network of water cages that can trap
32
33 gas molecules under low temperature and high-pressure conditions. Gas and other
34
35 hydrocarbons that can fill the hydrate cages are of diameter from 2.7Å to 9.5Å.3-5 Water
36
37
38 molecules in the hydrate are held together by polar hydrogen bonds and gas molecules are
39
40 encaged with non-polar van der Waals forces.4-6 Gas hydrates, once exploited sustainably,
41
42 could be a source of pure methane gas from vast swathes of marine and permafrost regions.7,8
43
44
45 It has been anticipated that natural gas hydrates could contain twice the amount of carbon than
46
47
all the other fossil fuels combined.9 Successive pilot scale trials from gas hydrate reservoirs by
48
49
50 multiple countries (Japan, China and United States) has brought this unconventional resource
51
52 in the limelight; next step is to explore this resource at a commercial scale which could be a
53
54 promising resource in near future. Though gas hydrate resource estimations of 20,000 TCM
55
56
57 was made in 1990s based on favourable conditions of hydrates existence but with improved
58
59 understanding of uncertainties associated with economically feasible recoverable reserves, the
60

1
2
3 reserve estimations have now been significantly revised to around 3000 TCM.9,10 However,
4
5
6 these reserves are huge in comparison to the worldwide conventional gas
7
8 resources(404TCM)and shale gas reserves(204-456TCM).9 Limiting factors responsible for
9
10 the revised estimation could be porosity constraints, organic matter availability, type and
11
12
13
saturation of hydrate reservoir. According to BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy-2019,
14
15 the natural gas consumption worldwide is 3.85 BCM.11 Therefore, commercial production of
16
17 atleast 15% of the available hydrate resources can fulfil the energy requirement of the entire
18
19
world for more than 100 years. It could be safely argued that gas hydrate has travelled a long
20
21
22 distance in last 3-4 decades; from being a nuisance12 in conventional oil and gas well drilling
23
24 in 60s and 70s, to being identified as one of the largest deposits of methane gas. Today, after
25
26 multiple pilot scale trials and the valuable understanding of gas hydrate reservoirs, this
27
28
29 unconventional resource provides an ample opportunity for novel exploration and drilling
30
31 activities for clean and affordable methane gas supply.
32
33
34 Exploration and geophysical drilling activities are currently being carried out in Alaska,
35
36 Canada, Siberia, Gulf of Mexico, India, Japan, China, Korea, New Zealand and some other
37
38
deep oceans to evaluate its production potential.13 Far and wide hydrate reservoir exploration
39
40
41 depends mainly on seismic and cold seep system techniques.14 Geophysical seismic surveys
42
43 like conventional 2D/3D surveys, vertical seismic profiling or ocean bottom seismic techniques
44
45 along with well logging and control source electromagnetic surveys forms the backbone for
46
47
48 identification of gas hydrate reservoirs and assessment of gas hydrate volume in place.15
49
50 Bottom seismic reflection (BSR) techniques combined with enhanced reflections below BSR,
51
52 mounds, reflection strength and seismic banking are the decisive seismic indicators for gas
53
54
55 hydrate reservoirs.16 The results from these geological and geophysical exploration activities
56
57 need to be verified through drilling for further field appraisal and development activities.
58
59
60

1
2
3 Drilling is not only inevitable for production but also helps to reduce uncertainties related to
4
5
6 gas hydrate reservoirs through well logging and pressurized coring. Unlike conventional oil
7
8 and gas well drilling, gas hydrate reservoirs pose risk of rapid hydrate dissociation in the
9
10 reservoir upon decrease of pressure or increase in temperature within the wellbore. Drilling
11
12
13
becomes challenging due to change in host sediment properties, narrow margin between pore
14
15 pressure and fracture gradient, wellbore instability and hydrate dissociation.17’18 Therefore, it
16
17 is necessary to develop sound understanding of drilling tools and techniques to safely exploit
18
19
these reservoirs. Though there are few review articles discussing different geophysical and
20
21
22 geochemical techniques for identification of hydrate reservoirs, there are not many reviews
23
24 which have focused on the drilling tools and techniques to be used for hydrate reservoirs in
25
26 detail. The sole review article by Sukru Merey from Middle East Technical University,
27
28
29 Turkey19 merely gives a general idea on drilling, coring and cementing aspects related to gas
30
31 hydrate drilling but lacks in depth discussion on potential drilling tools and techniques available
32
33 for hydrate reservoirs. Moreover, the manuscript lacks in-depth discussion on available
34
35
36
pressurized coring systems and their comparison, methods other than coring for hydrate
37
38 detection and summary of global hydrate drilling expeditions.
39
40
41 Therefore, this paper aims to provide a holistic review on the following thematic areas:
42
43
44 a) Conventional hydrocarbon exploration tools and techniques that are being applied for
45
46 exploration of gas hydrate reservoirs and the specialized drilling techniques that exist
47
48 and have unique potential enabling safe exploitation of gas hydrates in commercial
49
50
51 quantities.
52
53 b) Comprehensive discussion and comparison of different pressurized coring systems
54
55 available for gas hydrate reservoirs and response of available well logs to gas hydrate
56
57
58
reservoir system.
59
60

1
2
3 c) Summary of global drilling expeditions and drilling fluids being used in drilling those
4
5
6 hydrate bearing sediments.
7
8
9 These areas are of paramount interest for any petroleum engineer or geoscientist working on
10
11 natural gas hydrate reservoir to develop new technologies and methodologies for cost-effective
12
13 extraction of this important energy resource of the world.
14
15
16 2. HYDRATE DISTRIBUTION AND RESERVOIR CLASSIFICATION
17
18
19 Though gas hydrates was discovered in 1810 by Sir Humphrey Davy,20 it remained a
20
21
scientific curiosity for long time. Soviet scientists in 1969 for the first time identified naturally
22
23
24 occurring gas hydrate deposits and studied them as a source of natural gas.21,22 Geographically
25
26 gas hydrates are more diversely distributed compared to conventional and other unconventional
27
28 resources.9 Gas hydrate deposits exists where water and hydrocarbon gases are available and
29
30
31 temperature and pressure conditions lies within a narrow thermodynamic limit (three-phase
32
33 hydrate equilibria) which is conducive for nucleation and growth of stable solid hydrates.4
34
35 Almost 99% hydrates are widely spread in deep ocean crusts at outer continental margin
36
37
38
whereas 1% in some portions of permafrost regions.23 Since hydrates are formed at elevated
39
40 pressure, they have been also found under oceanic sediments around equator where one might
41
42 not expect ice-like compounds.24 Till date, gas hydrates have been identified through seismic
43
44
reflection mapping in more than 90 offshore locations,25 presence of hydrates in many of these
45
46
47 sites, in Gulf of Mexico, United States, Japan, India, Norway, Peru, Canada, Korea, New
48
49 Zealand, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Oregon have been verified through drilling and coring of
50
51 samples from deep oceans,23 as shown in Figure 1.
52
53
54 Table 1 summarizes general distribution of gas hydrates from United States Atlantic
55
56
57 continental margin to northern sector of the South China Sea. To describe the relative size and
58
59
60

1
2
3 producibility of these hydrate occurrences, Boswell and Collett presented the concept of gas
4
5
6 hydrate pyramid35 as shown in Figure 2.
7
8
9 The tip of the pyramid represents the most promising resources that are at high saturations
10
11 within good quality reservoir rocks in Arctic environment. The next class of hydrates trapped
12
13 in sandstone reservoirs in marine environment are challenged by high cost of extraction
14
15
16
followed by those in fractured muds and shales with thick sections exhibiting vein fills, hydrate
17
18 nodules and massive layers parallel to bedding planes. The next group of resource are massive
19
20 gas hydrate mounds that remain exposed on the seafloor or underneath a thin layer of sediment
21
22 and extend downwards, to deeper depths. At the base of the pyramid are the most technically
23
24
25 challenging finely disseminated accumulations in marine reservoirs with limited permeability.
26
27 As we move down from the peak to the base of the pyramid the prospects for economic
28
29 recovery decreases due to decreasing reservoir quality and the likelihood for significant
30
31
32 disturbance to seafloor ecosystems.35,36 It should also be noted that the hydrate distribution in
33
34 nature exists in different classes, however, in reality hydrates of different nature co-exist
35
36 together, which makes it more challenging to exploit it sustainably. Natural hydrates have
37
38
probably nucleated from the water and dissolved methane gas which were present within the
39
40
41 pores. Nucleation and growth of such hydrates were very gradual and depending on the
42
43 availability of water and gas along with right thermodynamic conditions.
44
45
46 However hydrate distribution in the rock exist in four different forms37,38 as discussed below:
47
48 a) Disseminated: Hydrate size is less than the pore size. A typical scenario when both methane
49
50
51 and water was present in limited quantity within the pores, leading to exhaustion of raw
52
53 materials upon hydrate nucleation and growth. b) Nodular: Hydrate size exceeds pore size but
54
55 do not destroy pores. In this case, perhaps gas supply was continuous, however, water was
56
57
58
limiting, thus leading to complete conversion of all the pore water to hydrates, resulting in
59
60 swelling of pores. c) Layered: Size of hydrate reserves varies from a few millimeters to several

1
2
3 centimeters. Pore structure is also destroyed and hydrates begin to act as concrete/cement. This
4
5
6 scenario points to the fact that the sediment has seen significant water and gas flow during
7
8 hydrate growth, perhaps over a large geological timescale. d) Massive: Massive hydrate
9
10 reserves, which sometime extends many kilometres laterally with several meters of seam
11
12
13
thickness. In this case perhaps, a column of sea water within the thermodynamic boundary of
14
15 hydrate growth has come in contact with plume of methane gas from underneath, resulting in
16
17 vigorous mixing, nucleation and efficient hydrate growth due. Either in the geological
18
19
timescale these hydrates have never dissociated and/or continuous supply of gas from
20
21
22 underneath is feeding to this hydrate chunk and is growing with time.
23
24
25 Based on the above four category, the gas hydrate deposits confirmed till date has been
26
27 categorised into three categories39-41 which includes a) Pore filling type b) Naturally fractured
28
29 type and c) Massive or Nodule type as illustrated in Figure 3.Hydrate reservoirs represents
30
31
32 hydrates of natural gases either in pores of rocks or as a mass block. Pore filling type reservoirs
33
34 are further classified as Class 1, Class 2, Class3 and Class 4 reservoirs39,42,43 as shown in Figure
35
36 4.
37
38
39 Class 1 reservoirs comprise of three phases (hydrate, water and free gas) and have the most
40
41
suitable system for methane exploitation because the hydrate thermodynamics is close to
42
43
44 hydrate equilibrium. Reservoirs of this class pose low effective permeability of the hydrate
45
46 zone such as Messoyakha field in Russia and Sagavanirktok formation in Alaska. Class 2
47
48 reservoirs comprises of a hydrate bearing stratum and a zone of mobile water with no free gas.
49
50
51 Eastern Nankai Trough and the Mallik site are examples of Class 2 reservoirs. Class 3
52
53 reservoirs comprises of a single zone of hydrate stratum with no underlying mobile fluid. Most
54
55 of the gas hydrate deposits in Eastern Nankai Trough, Mallik site and Mt. Elbert are Class 3
56
57
58
reservoirs. On the contrary Class 4 reservoirs are widespread and not bound by confining strata.
59
60 They are not generally targeted for exploration as they appear as nodules with low saturation

1
2
3 over large areas.47-50 However, some of these sites could be a very good candidate for hydrate
4
5
6 mining and should be explored further at large scale.
7
8
9 3. EXPLORATION TECHNIQUES FOR GAS HYDRATE RESERVOIR
10
11
12
Gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ) refers to a zone and depth of the marine or
13
14 permafrost region at which methane hydrates naturally exist in our mother earth.51 This zone
15
16 is characterized by sufficient supply of gas and water at relatively low temperature and high
17
18
pressure.4 Techniques used to detect hydrates in sediments include: a) Seismic techniques b)
19
20
21 Coring techniques c) Formation evaluation or logging d) Proxy indicators.
22
23
24 3.1. Seismic techniques
25
26 The bottom simulating reflector (BSR) is the most common diagnostic tool used to
27
28 detect GHSZ in marine environment.52,53 BSR is a seismic reflection that indicates the lower
29
30
31 boundary of GHSZ due to density difference of hydrate saturated sediments, normal sediments
32
33 and free gas.54,55 A strong BSR reflection in Vancouver Island with its synthetic seismogram
34
35 is shown in Figure 5. Figure 5 clearly demonstrates the sharp negative reflection waveform
36
37
38
recorded opposite to that of the seafloor due to density contrast and the BSR reflection in the
39
40 seismogram due to velocity contrast.
41
42
43 3.1.1. Attributes of bottom simulating reflector (BSR)
44
45
Some of the fundamental characteristics of BSR includes: a) BSR gets recorded because of
46
47
48 negative impedance contrast between high velocity sediments containing hydrate and low
49
50 velocity sediments containing free gas (since sound waves travel the slowest through gases,
51
52 faster through liquids, and fastest through solids).54,57 b) BSR requires an abrupt impedance
53
54
55 contrast.58 c) BSR will have a polarity opposite to that of the seabed reflector, and a firm
56
57 reflection is expected to exist due to stinging change in acoustic impedance.59 d) The stinging
58
59 change in the acoustic impedance is from a dense concentration of hydrates at the base (with
60

1
2
3 velocities of about 2.0 to 2.2 km/s) and from gas zone underneath the BSR producing slow
4
5
6 velocities.60 e) This firm reflection can also cause a polarity reversal(reflection coefficient helps
7
8 to know the magnitude of the polarity reversal).61 f) Though BSR proves to be an important
9
10 benchmark but is not always reliable. Hydrate can be present where there is no BSR and vice
11
12
13
versa. Hence BSR should be accompanied by other seismic techniques too for drilling site
14
15 selection.62,63 g) BSR is hardly generated for arctic permafrost areas. The impedance contrasts
16
17 from hydrate and underlying gas either are not adequately large or are not sufficiently
18
19
abrupt.56 h) Double BSR may also be encountered in certain locations both on convergent and
20
21
22 passive margins.54 i) Localized high amplitude reflections or bright spots above the BSR may
23
24 also be interpreted as direct indications of hydrates.54
25
26
27 Figure 6 shows different components involved in generating a seismic trace for detection of
28
29 gas hydrate stability zone in marine environment. The velocity component is constant for water
30
31
column and increases beneath the sea bed. Since hydrates increases the propagation velocity of
32
33
34 seismic waves through it, therefore, we can see a significant increase in the velocity profile in
35
36 the area of highly concentrated gas hydrates. The sharp decrease of velocity at the base of gas
37
38 hydrate stability zone is because of existence of gas in the sediments. Finally, velocity again
39
40
41 increases in sediments beneath the free gas and water zone. Impedance too is constant
42
43 throughout the water column and increases significantly at the sea bed where density and
44
45 velocity increases. There is another positive increase at the top of the highly concentrated gas
46
47
48
hydrate zone. Impedance again decreases at the bottom of gas hydrate stability zone due to
49
50 reduction of velocity in the presence of free gas. Finally, we can observe a strong reflection at
51
52 the seabed and bottom of the gas hydrate stability zone and a weaker reflection at the top of the
53
54
highly concentrated gas hydrate zone. The strong reflection at the base of gas hydrate stability
55
56
57 zone is of opposite polarity to the reflection at the seafloor whereas the reflection at the top of
58
59
60

1
2
3 the highly concentrated gas hydrate zone is weaker than the seabed reflection because the
4
5
6 change in impedance is smaller.58,64,65
7
8
9 3.1.2 Other seismic attributes to locate gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ)
10
11 a) Reflection strength
12
13
14 Sediments below GHSZ ordinarily contain free gas. The free gas brings down the
15
16 seismic velocities and has high reflection strength due to variation in gas saturation. Only a
17
18 minor amount of free gas can cause high changes in impedance.59
19
20
21 b) Seismic blanking
22
23
24 Gas hydrates cement the layers within the hydrate stability zone and decrease the
25
26 seismic amplitudes. Seismic amplitudes are reduced because the layers are homogenized to
27
28
29 reduce the acoustic impedance contrast between layers. It can be observed through
30
31 the reflectance attribute. Low reflectance resembles 'blanking'. The reflectance attribute helps
32
33 in analysing and quantifying the thickness of hydrate stability zone.66
34
35
36 3.2. Coring techniques
37
38
39 Coring is the only direct method to determine the presence of hydrates in sediments and
40
41 also to determine the in-situ concentration of the natural gas present in subsurface sediment.67,68
42
43
44
Coring services include acquisition and recovery of a continuous, undisturbed column of
45
46 reservoir rock to the surface. The main laboratory analysis conducted with the recovered cores
47
48 is sediment analysis, geochemical analysis, saturation determination and rock analysis.69,70
49
50
Hydrate bearing cores have been recovered by researchers across the globe during various
51
52
53 scientific expeditions. The challenge here is a slight change in pressure and temperature
54
55 condition can lead to gas hydrate dissociation which might completely destroy the integrity of
56
57 the core sample.71 Normally hydrates are recovered using pressure coring (typically N2 gas is
58
59
60 used to maintain pressure) under in-situ conditions carried out by vessels using conventional

1
2
3 drilling methods for complete qualitative and quantitative analysis. Figure 7 illustrates the
4
5
6 working principle of a pressure accumulator, the heart of any pressure coring system. The steps
7
8 involved in the process include:67 a) Initially accumulator is charged with 70–80% of
9
10 anticipated hydrostatic pressure that will be encountered at the coring depth. Chamber pressure
11
12
13
increases during deployment and the piston will start to push upward in the nitrogen chamber.
14
15 b) When the pressure of 34.4MPa is reached, the nitrogen bleeds off, resulting in an increase
16
17 in the volume of the pressure chamber and thus the pressure of 34.4MPa is maintained. c)
18
19
Pressure of the chamber is maintained at 34.4MPa by releasing excess nitrogen; due to release
20
21
22 of nitrogen the accumulator piston moves upwards, resulting in an increase in volume of the
23
24 chamber and drop in pressure.
25
26
27 The pressure accumulator works on the principle of Boyle’s Law. Coring action is generally
28
29 rotary, piston or punch type. Finally, a retrieving tool is lowered down through the drill pipe
30
31
32 by wireline that latches to the inner barrel. Subsequently the core is pulled inside the inner
33
34 barrel by applying external force from surface, ball valve closes and finally releases the tool
35
36 opening the exhaust vent.67 Figure 8 shows the in-situ core preservation technique with the ball
37
38
valve isolation chamber that can collect and transfer core samples at in situ pressures. The
39
40
41 upper section of the assembly comprises of running and retrieving tool followed by the middle
42
43 assembly for pressure control using the pressurized nitrogen chamber. The lower assembly is
44
45 responsible for the sample autoclave with extending rotating and non-rotating cutting shoes
46
47
48 along with the doughnut bit.73 Prior to transferring the core sample to onshore facility, most of
49
50 the pressure preserved cores are stored in liquid nitrogen to maintain their thermodynamic
51
52 stability. Many core samples are also sent for geochemical and microbial investigation.73 The
53
54
55 on-board core processing flow process is described in Figure S1 (supplementary information).
56
57 Figure 9 and Table 2 summarizes the available pressure coring systems with the industry and
58
59 their characteristics respectively. Though MeBo-Druckkern-Probennehmer (MDP) was
60

1
2
3 developed to work with an underwater vessel but Fugro Pressure Corer (FPC) and Fugro
4
5
6 Pressure and Rotary Pressure Corers (FRPC) are also equally efficient coring systems. With
7
8 JAMSTEC (Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology) holding the latest design
9
10 of pressurized coring system (Hybrid PCS) the reliability of recovering cores have significantly
11
12
13
improved.74,75
14
15
16
The other important parameter that can be inferred from hydrate cores is the morphology of
17
18 hydrate in sediments. Morphology is a strong benchmark that describes the physical properties
19
20 of gas hydrate and surrounding matrix.20,76-78 Hydrate morphology is mainly governed by
21
22 nature of sediment host and equally by essential chemical and environmental requirements
23
24
25 which include gas, water, pressure, temperature and site for nucleation.79-81 Broadly from
26
27 seismic velocities to wellbore electrical resistivity hydrate morphology has a vital role to play.20
28
29 Gas hydrate morphology also influences amount of gas saturation evaluated from geophysical
30
31
32 data.82 Modern pressurized coring methods have enabled recovery of intact gas hydrate
33
34 sediment morphologies, to study and simulate hydrate reservoir deposition, formation and
35
36 dissociation.82 Due to good resolution and focal depth Cryo-SEM is commonly used to study
37
38
morphology of pressurized hydrate cores.83
39
40
41
3.3. Well logging
42
43
44 Well logging also plays a vital role in characterizing gas hydrate deposits in the
45
46 sediments.53 It records subsurface formations and events encountered while drilling a gas
47
48
hydrate reservoir. Tools deployed in the well measures the electrical, acoustic, radioactive, and
49
50
51 electromagnetic properties of the formation. The physical properties of sediments containing
52
53 hydrates and underlying free gas help in the detection of hydrates.96 Since seismic velocity and
54
55 electrical resistivity are the two influencing properties in well logging tool, therefore high
56
57
58 velocity by sonic log and high resistivity by electrical logs are two important attributes for gas
59
60 hydrate detection.97,98 High resistivity value of gas hydrates is due to its excellent insulating

1
2
3 property, which is because of the cage like structure of hydrates, having a gaseous guest
4
5
6 molecule inside these cages.63 Well logging in hydrate reservoir not only gives information of
7
8 the formation encountered but also helps to determine bed boundaries, formation thickness,
9
10 porosity, permeability, water saturation, reservoir pressure, formation dip, etc.99 Density
11
12
13
porosity logs, neutron porosity logs, resistivity logs, gamma ray logs and borehole sonic logs
14
15 has been extensively used by the scientific community for the detection of hydrates.
16
17
18 Well logs and surface seismic data are also the key tools to characterize hydrate reservoir
19
20 heterogeneity with certain limitations. Fluid flow in hydrate reservoirs is highly influenced by
21
22 reservoir heterogeneity at a range of scales.100 Hydrate reservoir heterogeneity occurs due to
23
24
25 lithologic variation during sedimentary deposition and further complicated by mechanical
26
27 processes and is an important factor governing reservoir performance.100 Heterogeneity in
28
29 hydrate reservoir plays a significant role over time to determine whether a deposit is technically
30
31
32 and economically feasible to develop as a production target.101 Depending on the temporal and
33
34 spatial measures of the hydrate bearing petroleum system either fluid flow, heat transfer, phase
35
36 change, formation and dissociation kinetics or their combination control hydrate dissociation
37
38
during production.102 For example, just a minor heterogeneity in initial hydrate saturation can
39
40
41 be a big hindrance during production through depressurization via a horizontal well.101 Unlike
42
43 conventional oil & gas which uses saturation height data derived from coring and well log
44
45 analysis based on capillary and density difference, reservoir spatial heterogeneity is difficult to
46
47
48 generate for hydrate reservoirs. However, geostatistical approach using interpolating well data
49
50 can help us to understand and reduce uncertainties associated with lateral heterogeneity.101
51
52
53 3.3.1. Attributes of well logging in gas hydrate reservoir
54
55 Following are the attributes during well logging in gas hydrate reservoirs: a) The change in
56
57
58 sediment physical properties due to the presence of hydrate and of underlying free gas allows
59
60 detection.96 b) Logging measurements gives localised information but provides no information

1
2
3 into the lateral distribution of hydrates.57 c) The two primary properties are seismic velocity
4
5
6 and electrical resistivity. Both properties can be measured in field surveys and in downhole
7
8 logs.63 d) Sediments with hydrates shows increased velocity due to presence of high-velocity
9
10 hydrates. Even a very small concentration of gas can decrease velocity substantially.103 Thus
11
12
13
the velocity profile measured from sediment, containing both gas hydrates and free gas may
14
15 not be sufficient to predict presence of hydrates. e) Partial replacement of pore fluid by hydrate
16
17 does not change the density much, so the impedance contrasts that produce hydrate-related
18
19
reflections are primarily due to velocity.103 f) Because the formation of hydrate excludes
20
21
22 salinity, increasing salt ion concentration will increase the conductivity of the pore fluid but
23
24 with lower brine saturation the conducting paths become tortuous and conductivity decreases,
25
26 leading to higher resistivity. Small amounts of gas have only a small effect on resistivity.104,105
27
28
29 g) Both resistivity and porosity logs are not very helpful in distinguishing gas hydrates from
30
31 water ice. Gas mud log is a good indicator since large quantities of gas are released as the
32
33 hydrate is dissociated.106
34
35
36 In general for arctic permafrost areas, gas hydrates has been inferred mainly in conventional
37
38
exploration well data, broadly by high velocities in wellbore sonic logs, high resistivity in
39
40
41 electrical logs, and elevated mud gas.56,107
42
43
44 3.3.2. Response of different well logs to gas hydrate reservoir
45
46
47 Logging tools helps to determine the hydrate depth, extent, concentration, phase
48
49 boundary and reservoir saturation within complex reservoir systems. Resistivity and acoustic
50
51 logging tools are widely used in the industry to locate gas hydrate in sediments. Advancements
52
53
54 in nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and wireline formation testing (WFT) have helped the
55
56 industry to characterize gas hydrates in pore scale.108 Therefore, the response of gas hydrate
57
58 reservoir to different types of well logs are:37’109 a) Mud log: The dissociation of hydrates
59
60

1
2
3 causes a significant increase of gas in the drilling mud, which is encountered at the top of the
4
5
6 well. Cold or dense drilling fluids may suppress dissociation resulting in lower gas. b) Dual
7
8 induction log: In the shallow penetration log, a higher resistivity is obtained relative to a free
9
10 gas zone due to hydrate dissociation. This is a very tricky interpretation mainly due to changing
11
12
13
resistivity of water while gas and hydrate both are insulators. The deep induction log shows
14
15 high resistivity and mimics an ice-bearing reservoir. c) Spontaneous potential (SP) log:
16
17 Spontaneous potential log is less negative compared to free gas bearing zone, but similar to
18
19
that of ice. Freezing of water/hydrate causes salt rejection, leaving excess unfrozen water with
20
21
22 moderately high salinity. Higher salinity water tends to increase the SP deflection but the higher
23
24 resistivity of the ice/hydrate tends to reduce SP deflection. The net result is low SP deflection
25
26 in frozen intervals. SP in the unfrozen intervals behaves normally. d) Calliper log: An oversized
27
28
29 drill hole is indicated by hydrate dissociation. This may also occur with ice in the permafrost.
30
31 Many hydrate zones are poorly consolidated, so calliper logs may show large washouts as the
32
33 rock thaws. e) Acoustic transit time log: The acoustic wave time decreases relative to either
34
35
36
water or free gas; however, the acoustic transit time for hydrates is like ice-bearing sediments.
37
38 In large or rough boreholes, both density and sonic logs may show large spikes or noise. Gas
39
40 hydrate saturation data can be obtained from this log. f) Density log: Reservoir porosity can be
41
42
inferred from this log. The density decrease in hydrates is very small, still sufficient to be
43
44
45 distinguished from the density of water but not from ice density. However, this is a fine
46
47 difference, and it should be used with the suite of other logs. The lower density of ice and
48
49 hydrate, compared to water, makes the density porosity read too high also. In large or rough
50
51
52 boreholes, both density and sonic logs may show large spikes or noise. g) Nuclear magnetic
53
54 resonance (NMR) log: The NMR tool measures the induced magnetic moment of hydrogen
55
56 nuclei in water, present in pores; the porosity without water is determined by another tool (e.g.,
57
58
59
density), so the amount of hydrates is obtained by difference. NMR porosity decreases in gas
60

1
2
3 hydrate zone as water mobility in hydrogen bonded cages are lower compared to free water. h)
4
5
6 Neutron porosity log: These are used to obtain reservoir porosity data. The neutron log targets
7
8 the average hydrogen density of the volume under investigation. The excess hydrogen in gas
9
10 hydrates (due to the presence of methane in cages) compared to ice makes neutron porosity
11
12
13
logs read high in gas hydrates. i) Short spaced sonic log: These are used to calculate porosity
14
15 but compaction and gas corrections will be required. j) Resistivity log: Resistivity will read
16
17 high values in both water ice and gas hydrate in sand sequences; shales will show typically low
18
19
resistivity with moderate gamma ray values. Clay bound water does not freeze, so shale
20
21
22 resistivity does not increase much when frozen. Gas hydrate saturation and reservoir porosity
23
24 data can be inferred from resistivity logs.
25
26 3.3.3. Reserve calculation for gas hydrate reservoir
27
28
29 Resource and reserve estimates not only play a significant role as an input for
30
31
32 production design of the well but are also equally important for capital expenditure calculations
33
34 and cash-flow models validation.73 Figure S2 (supplementary information) illustrates the
35
36 fundamental steps involved in reserve calculation for a gas hydrate reservoir.
37
38
Mathematically:110
39
40
41 43560 × (1- water saturation) × Porosity (%) × Area(acres) ×Net pay thickness(ft)
42 Gas in place as hydrates(scf)=
Gas formation volume factor(cf/scf)
43
44
45 (1)
46
47
48
49 Recoverable gas in place = Gas in place as hydrates(scf) × Recovery factor
50
51 (2)
52
53 Equation 1 signifies the volumetric estimation of total gas in the reservoir based on geological
54
55 models.111 Since gas expands and occupies more space at the surface, gas formation volume
56
57
58
factor takes care of correcting subsurface volumes to standard volumes at surface. Equation 2
59
60 illustrates that recoverable reserves are a fraction of the original gas initially in place and is

1
2
3 totally dependent on the drive mechanism of the reservoir and thus we multiply this with the
4
5
6 recovery factor to determine the actually recoverable potential of the reservoir. The recovery
7
8 factor refers to the recoverable amount of gas initially in place, normally expressed in
9
10 percentage. The recovery factor is a function of the displacement mechanism in the reservoir.112
11
12
13 3.4. Proxy indicators
14
15
16 In-situ existence of natural gas hydrates is often inferred by geochemical anomalies like
17
18
freshening of pore water chlorinity/salinity or sulphate anomaly.113-117 During gas hydrate
19
20
21 crystallization in the pore space of hydrate bearing sediments, dissolved ions are removed from
22
23 the cage like structure increasing the chlorinity/salinity of the pore water. Concurrently solid-
24
25 fluid isotope fractionation triggers preferential intake of the heavy isotope (18O) in hydrates
26
27
28 and reduction in the fluid.118 In contrast when hydrates dissociate, fresh water and the heavy
29
30 isotope (18O) enriched fluid is unleashed and blends with enveloping pore water.119,120 Because
31
32 of that, excursions to low chlorinity in pore water accompanied by positive anomalies in
33
34
35
oxygen isotopic composition of the water not only delivers convincing evidence for gas hydrate
36
37 dissociation but also confers trustworthy information of gas hydrate existence in the
38
39 rocks.121,122 Moreover, dissimilatory bacterial sulphate reduction is due to elevated
40
41
concentration of sulphate in the ocean.123,124 The result is enrichment of 34
S and 18
O in the
42
43
44 leftover sulphate.125 Therefore, knowledge of sulphur and oxygen isotopes of sulphate could
45
46 provide indirect indication of possible gas hydrate occurrence. Clay dehydration reactions can
47
48 also be wrongly interpreted for the presence of gas hydrates.119 Measurement of temperature
49
50
51 anomaly in combination with the chlorinity anomaly also has been effective in estimating the
52
53 distribution of hydrates in sediments.126 In a nutshell geophysical proxy indicators can be
54
55 pockmarks, vents, gas upthrusts, gas saturated sediments, mud volcanoes, etc., whereas
56
57
58
geochemical proxy indicators can be sulphate reduction, methane enrichment, chloride
59
60 depletion and elevated barium concentration. On the other hand, sulphate and nitrate reducing

1
2
3 bacteria and fermenters can act as a potential microbiological proxy indicator for detection of
4
5
6 hydrate in sediments. Conclusively, the fundamental events involved in prospect finding for
7
8 hydrates in sediments are summarized in Table 3.
9
10
11 Apart from the techniques discussed above in onshore core processing unit or hydrate research
12
13 laboratories indirect analytical methods are commonly used to observe hydrate formation,
14
15
16
dissociation and subsequent changes in porous media. The available methods are X-ray
17
18 computed tomography (CT scanning), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), time domain
19
20 reflectometry (TDR), ultrasound, and resistance. Other modern analytical instruments used in
21
22 hydrate research are Laser Raman spectroscopy (Raman), X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning
23
24
25 electron microscope (SEM), and high-pressure differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). They
26
27 provide useful information related to structure, formation mechanisms, phase equilibrium,
28
29 thermal physical properties and so forth of gas hydrates.127 For example, for gas hydrate
30
31
32 research X -ray CT scanning can be used to get a clear picture of the internal structure of
33
34 hydrate sediment, determine occurrence mode of hydrate in sediments and also simulate
35
36 hydrate formation and decomposition process.4 Elemental physical properties of the sediments
37
38
like porosity, permeability and hydrate saturation can be studied in detail with CT scanning
39
40
41 without damaging the hydrate sediments.128 Similarly, NMR is used to understand the
42
43 molecular structures and physical properties of substances. The technique generates an NMR
44
45 spectrum, and irradiating them with electromagnetic waves at an appropriate frequency,
46
47
48 absorbs energy, transits nucleus energy level and produce NMR signals.96 Likewise, time-
49
50 domain reflectometry (TDR) is a real time technique used to study the physical parameters of
51
52 gas hydrates, such as the acoustics, resistivity, thermal and mechanical properties.127 Moreover,
53
54
55 resistance detection is based on the fact that different substances have different range of
56
57 electricity conduction. Resistance method can be used to inspect hydrate synthesis and
58
59 dissociation and the resistivity measured can help us to investigate hydrate stabilization
60

1
2
3 conditions, nucleation dynamics and saturation estimation.96 Among the analytical instruments
4
5
6 Laser Raman spectroscopy (Raman) is an excellent technique to understand hydrate structure,
7
8 hydration number and cage occupancy. Moreover, it can also map in-situ hydrate structure shift
9
10 from sI to sII with gas composition change in the gas phase.129-132 Similarly, the X-ray
11
12
13
diffraction (XRD) technique is used for qualitative and quantitative analysis on different phases
14
15 of substances, hydrate structure types (structure I, structure II or structure H) and
16
17 incompleteness analysis. XRD also provides good understanding on hydrate formation
18
19
mechanisms and thermodynamics.96 Besides, SEM also proves to be an important
20
21
22 spectroscopic method used for structural studies in gas hydrate research. High potential
23
24 resolution, large focal depth and versality in detection capacity gives an edge to SEM for
25
26 producing accurate information related to hydrate growth studies.133 Differential scanning
27
28
29 calorimetry (DSC) is also a thermoanalytic technique used to assess the heat flow differences
30
31 between a sample and a reference with temperature or time, under program-controlled
32
33 temperature conditions. Research on gas hydrates using DSC mainly focus on hydrate stability,
34
35
36
hydrate dissociation enthalpy and hydrate dynamics.96,134
37
38
39
4. DRILLING TECHNIQUES FOR GAS HYDRATE RESERVOIR
40
41
42
Drilling in gas hydrate reservoirs is a complex process of creating a continuous conduit
43
44 from surface to subsurface reservoir for natural gas production, injection of complex fluids or
45
46 for reservoir monitoring and formation evaluation purposes. Though gas hydrates are a
47
48
stumbling block in deep water expeditions which increase the risk and cost associated with the
49
50
51 operation but can be safely handled without any loss to human life and equipment’s. Planning
52
53 of deep-water wells should incorporate awareness and acceptance that gas hydrates can be
54
55 encountered during drilling. Drilling is the only practical process to verify presence of hydrates
56
57
58 and prepare the well for production. If the location of the well is prone for hydrate formation
59
60

1
2
3 three vital necessary steps136 for combating its formation are: a) Prewell analysis. b) Planning.
4
5
6 c) Contingency plan.
7
8
9 4.1. Conventional reservoir vs. Gas hydrate reservoir
10
11 Conventional oil and gas reservoirs formed from organic matter from dead plants and
12
13 animals are deeper in comparison to gas hydrate reservoirs which are found at a much shallower
14
15
16 depth from the seabed as demonstrated in Figure 10. Though gas hydrate reservoirs are
17
18 different from conventional gas reservoirs, drilling of gas hydrate reservoir is very much
19
20 possible with engineered drilling fluids, cement slurry and trained manpower. Possible drilling
21
22
locations are identified based on exploratory studies which includes seismic surveys, gas
23
24
25 seepages, near-by aquifers, gas plumes, gas hydrate mounds in marine environment, and
26
27 pressure and temperature profiles19,63,137. Table 4 categorizes the fundamental differences
28
29 between a conventional oil and gas reservoir and a gas hydrate reservoir.
30
31
32 The important parameters governing selection of locations for drilling of exploration and
33
34
35 production wells are:19,145,146 a) Gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ). b) Organic rich sediments
36
37 in marine environment. c) Seismic survey. d) Gas seepages, plumes, mud volcanoes,
38
39 pockmarks, and hydrate mounds.
40
41
42 Decrease in ROP during drilling is an early indication of encountering a gas hydrate zone due
43
44
45
to the solid nature of gas hydrates. However, the challenges related to drilling a gas hydrate
46
47 reservoir are:147,148 a) Presence of a narrow margin between pore pressure and fracture gradient
48
49 in ocean sediments. b) Surface hole instability. c) Subsidence caused by hydrate dissociation
50
51
(methane production). d) Hydrate dissociation in wellbore due to change in pressure and
52
53
54 temperatures. e) Avoid pressure fluctuations due to swabbing, surging and ballooning.
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 4.2. Gas hydrate drilling technologies
4
5
6 Though natural gas hydrates contain enormous volumes of natural gas in marine and
7
8 permafrost regions worldwide but very little has been discussed about the technologies that
9
10 exist in the oil and gas industry that can help in safe and effective drilling and production.
11
12
13 Therefore, this section discusses about technologies that exists and can be uniquely applied to
14
15 hydrate drilling and reservoir evaluation.
16
17
18 4.2.1 Managed pressure drilling (MPD)
19
20 IADC defines MPD as “Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) is an adaptive drilling
21
22
process used to precisely control the annular pressure profile throughout the wellbore. The
23
24
25 objectives are to ascertain the downhole pressure environment limits and to manage the annular
26
27 hydraulic pressure profile accordingly”.
28
29 Mathematically:
30
31
32 Normal drilling variables149
33
34 Bottom hole pressure (BHP) = Mud Weight + Annular Friction Pressure
35
36 Managed pressure drilling variables149’150
37
38
39 BHPMPD = Hydrostatic Pressure + Annular Friction Pressure + Back Pressure
40
41 Variables Mud Weight Pump Rate, Rheological Surface Back
42
43 Properties, Temperature, Pressure and Surface
44
45
Well Geometry Pressure Losses
46
47
48
49 Back Pressure is applied through: a) Rotating Control Device (RCD) and an MPD choke
50
51 manifold (additional NRV-float valve is preferred during gas hydrate drilling to keep the
52
53 wellbore pressurized during connections). b) MPD choke manifold consist of back pressure
54
55
56
pump, rig pump diverter, and auto-choke for precise maintenance of bottom hole pressure.
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 Methane hydrate drilling related challenges require technologies that provide precise
4
5
6 management of wellbore pressure, temperature, well construction, and fluid programs that can
7
8 reduce stress on the fragile hydrate reservoir. The classification of MPD include:151’152 a)
9
10 Pressurized mud cap drilling: This MPD method is used when normal techniques fail to
11
12
13
maintain circulation. It avoids extreme losses and reduces associate non-productive time (NPT)
14
15 when drilling highly depleted zones and fractured formations. b) Constant BHP drilling: This
16
17 is an MPD method where the annular pressure is maintained close to a constant value to avoid
18
19
kicks and losses. It helps in reducing NPT and enables fewer and deeper casing strings when
20
21
22 pore- to fracture-pressure gradient windows are narrow. c) Dual gradient drilling: This MPD
23
24 method employs two different annular fluid gradients above and below the seabed to match the
25
26 natural pressure regime. d) Returns flow control drilling: This MPD method reduces risk to
27
28
29 personnel and the environment from drilling fluids, hazardous gases and well control incidents.
30
31 This method enables drilling complex reservoirs at reduced cost and enhanced safety.
32
33 Moreover the fundamental attributes of MPD include:153’154 a) MPD dynamically manages the
34
35
36
annular hydraulic pressure profile to mitigate the risks associated with narrow margin between
37
38 pore pressure and fracture gradient in oceanic sediments. b) MPD dynamically controls either
39
40 individually or in combination of backpressure, fluid density, fluid rheology, annular fluid
41
42
level, circulating friction, and hole geometry. c) MPD allows the driller to correct pressure
43
44
45 variations in a minimum time to avoid further risk associated. d) MPD techniques are designed
46
47 to avoid formation influx to a great extent.
48
49
50 Thus, MPD can avoid premature increase in temperature within the annulus and prevents
51
52 hydrate dissociation. Also, well control issues can be controlled to a greater extent due to
53
54
55 maintenance of constant bottom hole pressure. Figure 11 illustrates a schematic on-site layout
56
57 of an MPD operation and Table S1 (supplementary information) describes in detail the tools
58
59 used in MPD with their functions. Summarizing the advantages of managed pressure drilling
60

1
2
3 includes:147,153 a) Maintains wellbore pressure. b) Avoids well control issues. c) Reduces
4
5
6 formation damage compared to overbalanced drilling. d) Reduces wellbore instability. e)
7
8 Reduces costs associated with drilling hydrate wells.
9
10 4.2.2 Casing while drilling (CWD)
11
12
13 Casing while drilling ensures drilling and casing a well simultaneously section by
14
15 section which avoids pulsating the fragile and frozen hydrate wellbore unnecessarily. It
16
17 enhances the integrity of the borehole, improves drilling performance, and makes the operation
18
19
20
safer. Owing to the fragile nature of hydrate reservoirs they need to be cased and cemented as
21
22 soon as possible and CWD provides the ideal solution.147 Because of reduced weight of casing,
23
24 a less expensive floating rig would serve the purpose, resulting in additional savings.156
25
26
Classification of CWD is according to types of bottom hole assembly (BHA)157 used for the
27
28
29 operation and is illustrated in Figure 12.
30
31
32 The variants of casing while drilling include: a) Non-retrievable BHA: The non-retrievable
33
34 system is the simplest and most commonly used where rotation of the string is required but
35
36 does not poses directional trajectory change capability.158 b) Retrievable BHA: The retrievable
37
38
39 system can be steered and used with both conventional measurement while drilling (MWD)
40
41 and logging while drilling (LWD) tools. It can also drill both straight and directional holes
42
43 effectively.157 c) Retrievable liner BHA: The retrievable liner system does not involve the use
44
45
of a casing drive system and is capable for all deep-water applications.157
46
47
48
Advantages of casing while drilling includes:158,159 a) Reduces well instability and hole
49
50
51 problems (lost circulation, differential stuck up, wellbore collapse) due to “plastering effect”.
52
53 b) Reduces associated non-productive time (NPT)and enhances safety. c) Skin damage
54
55 significantly gets reduced. d) Reduces cementing cost due to more perfect gauged hole. e)
56
57
58 Cuttings reach surface more quickly due to increased annular velocity. f) Reduces manpower
59
60 requirement. g) Avoids need of extra casing strings.

1
2
3 4.2.3 Managed pressure casing drilling (MPCD)
4
5
6 Managed pressure drilling combined with casing while drilling can be an excellent
7
8 option while drilling for gas hydratereservoirs.160 MPCD will help in maintaining high and
9
10 constant BHP while drilling.161 Annular friction losses are high due to use of large diameter
11
12
13 casing as compared to conventional drilling with drill pipe. As in like MPD, well geometry,
14
15 mud rheological properties, and pump rates are also selected in MPCD to achieve and maintain
16
17 required constant BHP. Higher annular frictional pressure losses allow drilling with relatively
18
19
20
low mud densities, reduced injection rates to avoid losses as compared to conventional drilling.
21
22 It has an added benefit of improving drilling performance by avoiding tripping operations and
23
24 facilitating dynamic well control in high pore pressure zones.150
25
26
27 Key advantages of MPCD includes:150,162 a) It is capable of maintaining high and constant BHP
28
29 with lower mud density. b) It minimizes tripping operations and optimizes well control. c)
30
31
32 MPCD reduces hole problems (pipe stuck-up) and extends life of bits (PDC).
33
34
35 4.2.4. Dual gradient drilling (DGD)
36
37 Two gradients are involved in dual gradient drilling to better manage the narrow margin
38
39 between pore pressure and fracture pressure: the seawater gradient from sea surface to seabed
40
41
42 and mud gradient from the seabed. Apparently, the drilling rig is on the seabed as the water
43
44 depth overburden is balanced by the seawater line gradient. The seawater manages the borehole
45
46 and the later prevents the borehole from collapsing and removing cuttings from the borehole.
47
48
49
Mud return does not reach the surface through conventional large diameter riser instead a
50
51 separate mud lift system uses a return line powered by subsea pumps.163’164 Figure 13 shows
52
53 different pressure profiles of a dual gradient drilling system.
54
55
56 Riserless dual gradient drilling system provides a cost-effective way to exploit commercial
57
58
quantities of gas hydrates. Dual gradient drilling can reduce the pressure exerted on the shallow
59
60

1
2
3 weak hydrate formations and still maintain the required BHP. Figure 14 shows the drilling
4
5
6 process using dual gradient system with subsea mud lift system arrangement.
7
8
9 As dissociating hydrates poses a serious well control problem dual gradient drilling has the
10
11 advantage of fast kick detection.168 Series of events when hydrates dissociates into the wellbore
12
13 during dual gradient drilling are:169,170 a) System sense hydrates dissociation as if gas influx
14
15
16
has entered the wellbore. b) Subsea pump inlet pressure will increase and the subsea pump rate
17
18 will automatically increase to compensate. c) Subsequently pit gain warning and increased
19
20 subsea pump outlet and decreased surface pump outlet pressures will alert the driller to employ
21
22 well control methods. d) The subsea mud return system supplies the driller with back pressure
23
24
25 control over the formation that prevents the dissociating methane hydrates from causing other
26
27 influxes. e) Finally dissociating methane hydrates can be proactively and safely circulated from
28
29 the wellbore and drilling can resume quickly.
30
31
32 Key advantages offered by DGD includes: a) Enhances safety and reduces risk: DGD offers a
33
34
35
closed system which improves drilling through recycling of mud within. The closed system
36
37 also has the potential to prevent the formation of hydrates by adding inhibitors to the drilling
38
39 mud. DGD successfully controls gas hydrate dissociation, over pressured shallow gas zones
40
41
and shallow water flows.171 b) Improved exploration performance and drilling cost reduction:
42
43
44 DGD makes geological side tracks easier and few strings of casings are required to reach target
45
46 depth with reduced risk of lost circulation and thus reduction in hidden downtime.172,173 c)
47
48 Improved well integrity and productivity: Reduced casing loads improve integrity of the
49
50
51 borehole and customized completions are possible due to larger wellbore resulting in higher
52
53 well productivity.172
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 4.2.5. Recommended operational modifications for drilling gas hydrate reservoir
4
5
6 In addition to the drilling techniques discussed above for gas hydrate reservoirs there
7
8 are some operational modification procedures that helps in designing and optimizing the whole
9
10 process to get a winning combination together. The recommended adaptations are: a) Marine
11
12
13 Riser Insulation: Heat transfer from the seawater to the mud will enhance hydrate dissociation.
14
15 Thus, insulating the marine riser will help prevent hydrate dissociation.174 b) Use of slim riser:
16
17 Velocity of the returns to the rig will increase preventing hydrate dissociation by minimizing
18
19
20
the time for heat transfer from seawater to mud in the annulus.156 c) Insulated casings can also
21
22 help minimize heat transfer and prevent hydrate dissociation.174 d) Smart drill pipe or wired
23
24 drill pipe technology can help in mitigating drilling dysfunctions and help in optimal well
25
26
placement.175 e) Surface mud chilling unit for continuous circulation of chilled mud to avoid
27
28
29 hydrate dissociation. Chilled mud should maintain the bottom-hole temperature below 11ᵒC to
30
31 avoid any dissociation of hydrate in the return riser.71,156 f) Additives can be added through
32
33 concentric casing or parasite string to lower the freezing point of the returns in the annulus.174
34
35
36 g) Downhole deployment valve, wireline retrievable drill string check valve, Nitrogen
37
38 production unit are also some tools that can mitigate problems during methane hydrate
39
40 drilling.156
41
42
43 4.3 Drilling profiles for enhanced production from gas hydrate reservoir
44
45
46 Methane hydrates deposits, other than subsea, may be in very narrow deposits, or vanes.
47
48
Thus, for enhanced commercial production design, placement and configuration of well plays
49
50
51 a crucial role in gas production from a hydrate reservoir. Therefore, the most efficient approach
52
53 to a thin, but large deposit could be hydraulically fractured horizontal wells.160,176 Horizontal
54
55 wells are directional wells (with an inclination exceeding about 80 degrees from vertical)
56
57
58 drilled to boost reservoir performance177 by placing a long lateral wellbore section within the
59
60 gas hydrate bearing sediments. The major advantages of horizontal wells for gas hydrate

1
2
3 reservoir include increased gas production at low differential pressure, reduction in sand
4
5
6 production due to reduced pressure drop and lower fluid velocities around the wellbore and
7
8 reduced risks of generating secondary hydrates and freezing.177,178 Several researchers have
9
10 used horizontal well technique to simulate production from gas hydrate reservoirs and
11
12
13
understand the challenges associated.179-183 Experimentally it was investigated in laboratory
14
15 that a horizontal well enhances gas production through depressurization from hydrate
16
17 reservoirs with reduced water production.184 Moreover, it was also observed that for
18
19
depressurization and thermal stimulation techniques with horizontal wellbore configuration,
20
21
22 the heat transfer rate and the accumulative dissociation ratio are higher than that with vertical
23
24 well configuration.185 Recently from October 2019 to April 2020, China conducted its second
25
26 NGH production test in 1225 m deep Shenhu Area, South China Sea with horizontal well.
27
28
29 Cumulative gas production of 86.14 × 104 m3 was produced in duration of 30 days through
30
31 depressurization.178 Thus, China became the first country to apply horizontal well technology
32
33 for offshore NGH production test. Also, when the vane of methane hydrates is large and
34
35
36
expansive, multilateral drilling technology can be used to reach into different depths and
37
38 multiple reservoirs. Multilateral fishbone style can also be a practical method for reaching
39
40 through the varying vanes of a methane hydrates reservoir particularly in an offshore
41
42
environment. It is also worth mentioning that along with the well configuration, shape and
43
44
45 placement of perforations also plays an important role in governing production behaviour from
46
47 hydrate reservoirs. Perforation at the centre of the wellbore helps in avoiding excess water
48
49 production.186 Pictorial view of the different drilling profiles discussed above is shown in
50
51
52 Figure 15.
53
54
55 4.4. Common field problems encountered during drilling a gas hydrate reservoir
56
57
58
Deepwater drilling expeditions have encountered problems while drilling through gas
59
60 hydrate formations. A major problem is the phase transition from solid to dissociated water and

1
2
3 gas owing to rapid changes in fluid volumes and pressures.187 Some of the problems
4
5
6 encountered during drilling and their effects in the well drilling program are listed below.188-
7
190
8 a) Choke and Kill-line plugging: This causes difficulty in the use of the lines during well
9
10 circulation. b) Plug formation at or below the blow out preventers (BOP): Well-pressure
11
12
13
monitoring below the BOPs becomes impossible or difficult. c) Plug formation around the
14
15 drillstring in the riser, BOPs or casing: Makes drillstring movement problematic d) Plug
16
17 formation between the drillstring and BOPs: Creates problems in full closure of the BOP. e)
18
19
Plug formation in the ram cavity of the closed BOPs: Causes difficulty in opening the BOPs
20
21
22 fully. f) Gas hydrate dissociation: Wellbore instability, hole enlargement and even hole
23
24 collapse (since gasification of wellbore mud will reduce the mud density significantly). Owing
25
26 to gas hydrate dissociation, mechanical and physical properties also changes like increase in
27
28
29 permeability, reduction in modulus and weakening of the cementation provided by the
30
31 hydrates. This strength reduction in formation will also lead to wellbore instability. Moreover,
32
33 rheological properties of drilling mud also change, reducing the cleaning property of mud and
34
35
36
leading to serious complications like tight hole, packing off and stuck pipe.
37
38
Since dissociation of gas hydrates during drilling is undesired hence rate of penetration(ROP),
39
40
41 weight on bit (WOB)and circulation rate of mud needs to be carefully optimized.189 Besides
42
43 low circulation rate will also help to avoid erosion of formation wall and will reduce mud
44
45 temperature. Moreover MPCD should be preferred over normal overbalanced drilling162 with
46
47
48 a chilling unit for continuous circulation of chilled mud to prevent dissociation of hydrates.147
49
50
51 4.5 Riserless drilling vs. Riser drilling for gas hydrate reservoir
52
53
54 Currently the offshore wells drilled for exploratory and scientific purpose in shallow
55
56 environment are drilled without riser and those drilled for production, injection and observation
57
58 are drilled with riser to investigate the feasibility of gas hydrate production methods. The
59
60

1
2
3 operational characteristic differences between both are:191,192 a) Riserless drilling for gas
4
5
6 hydrate reservoirs: In this type of drilling only drillpipe is attached with the drill bit and cuttings
7
8 are dispersed in the seafloor. Seawater is used as the drilling fluid and no casing is set into the
9
10 well. This drilling system offers many advantages like use of less expensive flexible mooring
11
12
13
system, reduction in weight and space and hence reduces the cost of the drilling rig, elimination
14
15 of casing points saves time and money, and fast LWD and pressure coring operations. Later
16
17 the well can be abandoned with seawater after LWD operations. b) Riser drilling for gas hydrate
18
19
reservoirs: In this type of drilling drill pipe runs through the riser and riser extends back from
20
21
22 seafloor to platform. Wellhead is installed at the seabed and the well is well cased and
23
24 cemented. This drilling system too offers many advantages like it allows drilling fluid
25
26 conditioning to avoid hydrate dissociation, better hole cleaning, better control of downhole
27
28
29 pressures and allows re-entry to the well. Riser drilling also allows deep drilling for hydrates
30
31 with enhanced safety and efficiency.
32
33
34 4.6 Summary of international drilling expeditions
35
36
37 Recent drilling expeditions in marine and permafrost environment aim to understand
38
39 many unknown parameters to reduce the cost and risk associated with drilling gas hydrate
40
41
reservoir. Table 5 summarizes the hydrate related drilling expeditions undertaken worldwide
42
43
44 whereas Table S2 (supplementary information) summarizes the important characteristics of
45
46 hydrate saturated Indian offshore basins. Scientific community across the globe are
47
48 continuously focussing on how to understand different aspects of this resource right from its
49
50
51 formation and petrophysical properties to drilling, coring, logging and production technologies.
52
53 Gas hydrate wells can be drilled safely and effectively with proper well design and experienced
54
55 manpower.
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 5. DRILLING FLUIDS FOR GAS HYDRATE WELLS
4
5
6 Generally drilling fluids comprises of different types of fluids used in the process of
7
8 drilling to maintain the structural integrity of the borehole, transport cuttings from bit to
9
10 surface, control the formation pressure and cool and lubricate the bit.194 Unlike conventional
11
12
13 oil and gas wells there is a risk of hydrate dissociation in gas hydrate wells which might cause
14
15 slope failure, wellbore collapse, kick, and other health and safety problems.19 The dissociation
16
17 of gas hydrates during drilling is attributed to either change in temperature or pressure prior to
18
19
20
hydrate bearing formation or during its penetration.195 a) Prior to hydrate bearing formation:
21
22 borehole environment should make hydrate less stable: inhibitors added with the drilling fluid
23
24 can help to achieve it. b) During hydrate bearing formation penetration: hole stability should
25
26
be maintained by keeping hydrate stable: mud coolers help to keep the circulating mud chilled
27
28
29 to prevent hydrate dissociation.
30
31
32 5.1 Fundamental characteristics of drilling fluids for gas hydrate reservoir
33
34 Drilling fluid design and optimization for low temperature gas hydrate reservoirs is the
35
36 need of the hour for commercial exploitation of gas hydrates. The parameters that needs to be
37
38 considered while selecting a drilling fluid formulation for gas hydrate reservoirs are wellbore
39
40
stability, gas hydrate suppression, formation damage, stuck pipe prevention, lost circulation
41
42
43 prevention, fluid and solids control management, logging objectives, cost containment and
44
45 environmental compliances.196’197 The main criteria in selecting a drilling fluid for a gas
46
47 hydrate well are to inhibit the decomposition of gas hydrate in GHSZ and also inhibit the
48
49
50 formation of gas hydrate in drilling fluid. This can be achieved by adding engineered drilling
51
52 fluid additives with known characteristics to provide thermodynamic inhibition. Currently salts
53
54 are used to suppress hydrate formation temperature but at extreme low mudline temperatures.
55
56
57 Addition of both kinetic and thermodynamic inhibitors in drilling fluid might help us to achieve
58
59 our goal.198 However, selection of a drilling fluid is also influenced by the depth of the well. A
60

1
2
3 drilling fluid system used to drill hydrate bearing marine sediments should have the following
4
5
6 fundamental characteristics: 196,199 a) Relative density should be appropriate to prevent hydrate
7
8 formation around the wellbore and provide adequate hydrostatic pressure to drill the well
9
10 safely. b) It should inhibit shale hydration and hydrate agglomeration in drillpipe and BOP. c)
11
12
13
Appropriate lubrication and filtration properties. d) It should have better rheological properties
14
15 and stability. e) Calcium and magnesium ions in the ocean affect rheological properties of the
16
17 drilling fluid. Therefore, it should prevent these ions to pollute the drilling fluid.
18
19
20 5.2 Interaction of drilling fluids with gas hydrate bearing formation
21
22 With the progress of drilling through a gas hydrate bearing formation, the drilling bit
23
24 breaks the hydrate which then gets carried away by the drilling fluid. In the wellbore hydrates
25
26
27 dissociate into gas and water due to change in temperature and pressure and alter the
28
29 rheological properties of the drilling fluid.189 The dissociated gas also travels to surface as gas
30
31 pockets when water-based drilling fluids are used. In either of the cases gas will reduce the
32
33
34
effective weight of the mud and well will be prone to kicks. The gas produced will also have a
35
36 huge impact on the well control equipment’s installed at the mudline.200
37
38
39 There is always a continuous mass exchange phenomenon going on between the wellbore and
40
41 the formation. During overbalanced drilling (BHP > formation pore pressure) drilling fluid
42
43 permeates through the semi-permeable filter cake into the formation and displace the original
44
45
46 pore fluids around the wellbore and affects the pore pressure and permeability of the formation.
47
48 This also accounts for formation damage and affects production from the well. Conversely
49
50 when the well is underbalanced (formation pore pressure > BHP) fluids from the formation
51
52
53
will flow into the wellbore. This situation is very risky as it can invite kick into the wellbore
54
55 which may lead to a blowout. Moreover, influx of formation fluids into the wellbore will not
56
57 only affect the rheological properties of mud but will also worsen wellbore stability and
58
59
integrity. Likewise, there is also a continuous heat exchange phenomenon taking place between
60

1
2
3 the wellbore and the formation. Variation in wellbore temperature induces heat stress which
4
5
6 directly affects mechanical stability of the wellbore. Though due to location and depth of GHSZ
7
8 there is not much difference between formation and drilling fluid system used but this can
9
10 affect the effective stress distribution of rock surrounding borehole.201
11
12
13 5.3 Drilling fluids used in major production test wells worldwide
14
15
16 Good hydrate inhibition and excellent rheological property is must for a drilling fluid
17
18
design for hydrate drilling. Considering environment and the associated cost, the most common
19
20
21 drilling fluid system preferred is the water-based mud (WBM).201 Bentonite is a common gas
22
23 hydrate drilling fluid additive used for viscosity and filtration control but increase of bentonite
24
25 in mud can enhance risk of hydrate formation due to higher nucleation sites owing to its
26
27
28 increased surface area.202,18 Modified starch (MS), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) and
29
30 xanthan gum (XG) are the common biodegradable polymer thickeners used with bentonite for
31
32 drilling fluid formulation for hydrate drilling and works similar to KHI.203 CMC is more
33
34
35
applicable to a system that does not requires cooling. XG is more suitable when a chilled mud
36
37 is used for hydrate drilling.203 However, XG requires a defoaming agent to be used with the
38
39 drilling fluid because its enhanced foaming characteristics can weaken the hydrate inhibition
40
41
properties of the drilling fluid.203 Likewise, molecular weight of these polymers also plays a
42
43
44 vital role in hydrate inhibition. Hydrate inhibition performance of low molecular weight XG,
45
46 guar gum (GG) and polyacrylamide (PAM) containing drilling fluids is lower compared to
47
48 relatively high molecular weight polymers.204 Researchers are also working on nanoparticles
49
50
51 as a viable alternative that when used with polymers like XG can prevent its thermal
52
53 degradation and subsequently enhance viscosifying capacity, solid suspension and filtration
54
55 control of the drilling fluid. Nanoparticles are known to strengthen the hydrogen bonds with
56
57
58
polymer preventing its hydrolysis.205 Therefore, the choice of mud engineer for marine hydrate
59
60 drilling is a polymer-based drilling fluid with 20-25% NaCl and higher concentration of

1
2
3 thermodynamic inhibitors (THI).206 Having said that THI are expensive and requires higher
4
5
6 amount to exhibit hydrate suppression. Therefore, researchers are interested to use kinetic
7
8 hydrate inhibitors (KHI) which are water soluble polymers and requires significant less
9
10 concentration than THI to show hydrate suppression.207 Moreover, they also do not shift the
11
12
13
hydrate-liquid-vapor equilibrium (HLVE) curve.208
14
15
16
In major drilling expeditions water-based drilling fluid (WBM), generally sea water was
17
18 preferred due to its economic feasibility at shallower depth.209 The induction time for hydrate
19
20 formation in OBM is lower than WBM as gas readily gets dissolved in oil than water.18
21
22 However, under extreme cold environmental conditions OBM can fracture the formation due
23
24
25 to increased viscosity and equivalent circulating density (ECD).210 Therefore it is not advisable
26
27 to use oil based mud (OBM) in offshore due to environmental safety reasons. Researchers
28
29 propose use of synthetic based drilling fluid which combines the technical advantage of OBM
30
31
32 and WBM effectively.211 Synthetic based drilling fluid is synthesized by dispersing salt brine
33
34 in a synthetic phase to form an emulsion along with other additives which includes emulsifiers,
35
36 barite, clay, lignite and lime.212 The most commonly used mud formulations in Gulf of Mexico,
37
38
North Sea and Offshore Brazil are salt/polymer mud systems.213 The knowledge gained by
39
40
41 testing different drilling fluids and inhibitors in hydrate sediments are: a) The commonly used
42
43 drilling fluids in offshore deep-water drilling are NaCl/polymer formulations, KCL polymer
44
45 solutions, sepiolite drilling fluid and lecithin based water-based drilling fluids.213,214 b) Widely
46
47
48 used effective hydrate inhibitors are NaCl, KCL, CaCl2.215,216 c) Ethylene glycol works best
49
50 due to the fact that higher number of hydroxyl groups are available to make hydrogen bonds
51
52 with water making it difficult for water to participate in the hydrate structure.213,217 d) Organic
53
54
55 phase of the synthetic drilling fluid slightly suppresses hydrate equilibrium temperature but
56
57 increases the rate and amount of hydrate formation. This is due to the higher gas solubility.213
58
59 e) Drilling fluid temperature should be kept near the temperature of the sediments.132 f) Oil
60

1
2
3 based mud not only prevents hydrate dissociation but also do not freeze in cold
4
5
6 environments.218 Table 6 comprises of the list of drilling fluids used in drilling different hydrate
7
8 reservoirs in Canada, Japan, India and USA.
9
10
11 The gas hydrate business is currently an endeavour and all the major industry players are
12
13 making every effort to explore and drill, in relatively unexplored areas. Though the probability
14
15
16
of finding large reservoirs in quite high now, gradually there will be a competitive industry
17
18 when new fields will be harder to discover and there will be a little room for error. With the
19
20 ambition and intention to discuss the complete life cycle of a gas hydrate well right from
21
22 exploration to well decommissioning this review article shed light upon exploration and
23
24
25 drilling activities in gas hydrate reservoirs. In our forthcoming review article, we will discuss
26
27 well completion and artificial lift operations in gas hydrate reservoirs. After successful drilling,
28
29 the well needs to be made ready for production. Successful production and depletion are
30
31
32 directly proportional to well completion. In this process the completion engineer decides the
33
34 type of completion and artificial lift to be installed for long operating life and reliability. Both
35
36 open hole and cased hole completion has been employed in production testing wells worldwide.
37
38
Owing to the fragile nature of unconsolidated gas hydrate reservoirs sand production is
39
40
41 unavoidable owing to reduction of strength of the formation. Sand control media employed in
42
43 the field till date includes gravel packing, standalone screens, pre-swelled geoform screen with
44
45 shape memory polymers and modified pre-packed screen with gravel packing. Among the
46
47
48 artificial lifts used electrical submersible pump (ESP) has been the most popular and efficient
49
50 for hydrate reservoirs.220 Similarly, in our concluding review article we will review production
51
52 techniques and abandonment procedure for gas hydrate wells. Owing to the clean burning
53
54
55 properties of natural gas it offers tremendous energy value and have contributed to its
56
57 increasing use in electricity generation and as a transportation fuel. To conventionally produce
58
59 gas from a gas hydrate reservoir which is in solid state they need to be dissociated into gas and
60

1
2
3 water.221 To dissociate hydrate into gas and water the stability condition needs to be altered by
4
5
6 shifting the phase equilibrium towards the unstable region.222 The phase change can be
7
8 achieved either by reducing the pressure or by increasing the temperature or combination of
9
10 both. The main production technologies for hydrate reservoirs are thermal stimulation,
11
12
13
depressurization, inhibitor injection and CO2 swapping.223,224,225 Among them the
14
15 depressurization technique provides a cost-effective solution to produce methane from hydrate
16
17 bearing sediments.226,227 Likewise, the review article will also discuss about the last stage in
18
19
the life cycle of a hydrate well i.e. well decommissioning or well abandonment. Well
20
21
22 abandonment is done when the well is no longer economical i.e. operating expenses are higher
23
24 than the operating income. It is when use of artificial lift, well workovers, well stimulation or
25
26 infill drilling cannot be justified to enhance, improve or prolong the life of the hydrate reservoir.
27
28
29 Whether it is in permafrost areas or in marine environment, wells need to be temporarily or
30
31 permanently plugged to avoid future migration of reservoir fluids to surface. To acknowledge
32
33 the same Figure 16 demonstrates the topics discussed and the subject matter that our research
34
35
36
group is planning to talk about in our subsequent review articles.
37
38
39
6. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PRESPECTIVES
40 Gas hydrate inevitably will be a valuable paradigm in the area of alternative clean source
41
42
43 of energy for the generations to come. Industry and academia are continuously trying to
44
45 develop new technology and methodology for exploration and drilling to efficiently find,
46
47 characterize and recover methane from hydrates. International research collaboration continues
48
49
50 to be an imperative part of this mission to establish the sustainability of this resource on a
51
52 global scale. Though each technique discussed has its own applications, advantages and
53
54 limitations, the fundamental conclusions that can be drawn includes:
55
56
57 a) The most commonly used marker to determine existence and depth of marine gas
58
59
hydrate deposits is bottom simulating reflector (BSR). However, it is not always
60

1
2
3 reliable and should be accompanied by other seismic techniques for drill site location
4
5
6 assortment.
7
8 b) Occurrence of gas hydrates can also be documented by direct visual observation of
9
10 cores. Comparision of the available pressurized coring systems available gives us a
11
12
13
fundamental idea that FPC and FRPC has been successfully used in many hydrate
14
15 reservoirs and have gained wide popularity in gas hydrate coring. However, Hybrid
16
17 PCS by JAMSTEC is also a reliable tool with good recovery rates.
18
19
c) Gas hydrates are characterized by distinctive chemical compositions and marked
20
21
22 electrical resistivity and acoustic physical properties which allows us to identify and
23
24 characterize hydrate bearing sediments with downhole logging. High sonic velocity and
25
26 high resistivity are two influencing parameters for gas hydrate detection.
27
28
29 d) Despite the complications caused by hydrates during deep-water drilling, gas hydrates
30
31 can be handled safely through proper well planning and contingency procedures.
32
33 Drilling induced problems caused by hydrate dissociation could be greatly reduced by
34
35
36
perfect blend of innovative techniques like managed pressure drilling, casing while
37
38 drilling and managed pressure casing drilling which has the ability to precisely control
39
40 the pressure in the wellbore and react quickly to pressure variations by applying
41
42
backpressure from surface.
43
44
45 e) Well-engineered chilled drilling fluid, use of low exothermic cement, insulation
46
47 methods and optimization of circulation rate can help us to control wellbore
48
49 temperature and avoid wellbore stability problems.
50
51
52 f) During riserless drilling seawater as a drilling fluid might cause wellbore stability issues
53
54 such as washouts. Therefore, a low cost, light, environmentally benign drilling fluid
55
56 can help us to resolve these issues.
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 g) So far hydrate production techniques aim to change the stability conditions. However,
4
5
6 these techniques should be accompanied by horizontal and multilateral wells for
7
8 commercialization and high rate of return.
9
10 h) Stability of water-based drilling fluids such as KCL polymer mud, sepiolite and lecithin
11
12
13
have been successfully tested in different global drilling expeditions.
14
15
16 Though researchers around the world have deepened our knowledge on gas hydrate exploration
17
18 and drilling but still efforts are necessary to develop feasible, cost-effective and sustainable
19
20 techniques to explore and exploit this resource which could act as a catalyst for the future
21
22
23
energy basket. At the very least this review would facilitate a precise and rigorous engineering
24
25 gap survey in the field of hydrate technologies, proposed to drill natural gas hydrates. Above
26
27 all the authors also believe that future studies should focus on the following aspects:
28
29
30 a) Development of production technologies needs to be addressed to develop Class 4
31
32
hydrate reservoirs and deposits other than pore filling type.
33
34
35 b) Detailed research is needed to understand the gas and fluid migration pathways which
36
37 controls the temporal and spatial variation of methane seeps and distribution of high
38
39 saturation gas hydrates. Moreover, development of an integrated
40
41
42 geological/geophysical technique should be prioritized to enable absolute assessment
43
44 of the hydrate reservoir prior drilling.
45
46 c) A robust coring system needs to be developed that can effectively collect and analyse
47
48
49
physical and chemical properties of hydrate core samples with flexibility across range
50
51 of sediments.
52
53 d) Innovative drilling techniques discussed needs to be validated with rigorous field
54
55
implementation. Also hydrate bearing rock and drilling bit interactions needs to be
56
57
58 addressed emphasizing techniques for preventing hydrate reformation in the wellbore.
59
60

1
2
3 e) Promising laboratory production techniques should be applied in field for long term to
4
5
6 understand its dynamic effect on the marine environment and carbon cycling.
7
8
9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
10
11
12 CS acknowledges the financial support towards his PhD scholarship from Pandit Deendayal
13
14 Petroleum University, Gujarat. RK & JS, acknowledge the financial support received from the
15
16 Science and Engineering Research Board (EMR/2017/000810), Gas Authority of India Limited
17
18
19 (GAlL/NOlD/17146/5900000195) and Scheme for Promotion of Academic and Research
20
21 Collaboration (SPARC/2018-2019/P666/SL). This review article has benefited immensely
22
23 from the suggestions and queries of anonymous reviewers. We acknowledge their contribution
24
25
26
in improving the manuscript.
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 REFERENCES
4
5
6 (1) Nair, V. C.; Gupta, P.; Sangwai, J. S. Gas Hydrates as a Potential Energy Resource for
7
Energy Sustainability. In Green Energy and Technology; Springer, Singapore, 2018; pp
8
9 265–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7188-1_12.
10
11
12
(2) Yang, M.; Sun, H.; Chen, B.; Song, Y. Effects of Water-Gas Two-Phase Flow on
13 Methane Hydrate Dissociation in Porous Media. Fuel 2019, 255 (May), 115637.
14
15 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115637.
16
17
(3) Yin, Z.; Khurana, M.; Tan, H. K.; Linga, P. A Review of Gas Hydrate Growth Kinetic
18
19 Models. Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 342 (January), 9–29.
20
21 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.01.120.
22
23 (4) Englezos, P. Clathrate Hydrates. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1993, 32 (7), 1251–1274.
24
25 https://doi.org/10.1021/ie00019a001.
26
27 (5) Davidson, D. W. Clathrate Hydrates. In Water, a Comprehensive Treatise: Volume 2-
28
29 Water in crystalline hydrates; aqueous solutions of simple nonelectrolytes; Franks, F.,
30
31 Ed.; Springe, Boston, MA, 1972; Vol. 2, p 684.
32
33 (6) Englezos, P.; Kalogerakis, N.; Bishnoi, P. R. Formation and Decomposition of Gas
34
35 Hydrates of Natural Gas Components. J. Incl. Phenom. Mol. Recognit. Chem. 1990, 8
36
37 (1–2), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01131290.
38
39 (7) Anderson, R. Methane hydrate: Dirty fuel or energy saviour?
40
41 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-27021610 (accessed Apr 5, 2020).
42
43 (8) Chen, B.; Yang, M.; Sun, H.; Wang, P.; Wang, D. Visualization Study on the Promotion
44
45 of Natural Gas Hydrate Production by Water Flow Erosion. Fuel 2019, 235 (April 2018),
46
47 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.07.072.
48
49 (9) Chong, Z. R.; Yang, S. H. B.; Babu, P.; Linga, P.; Li, X.-S. Review of Natural Gas
50
51 Hydrates as an Energy Resource: Prospects and Challenges. Appl. Energy 2016, 162,
52
1633–1652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.12.061.
53
54
55 (10) Milkov, A. V. Global Estimates of Hydrate-Bound Gas in Marine Sediments: How
56
57 Much Is Really out There? Earth-Science Rev. 2004, 66 (3–4), 183–197.
58 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2003.11.002.
59
60

1
2
3 (11) British Petroleum Statistical Review of World Energy; 2019; Vol. 68.
4
5
6 (12) Khurana, M.; Yin, Z.; Linga, P. A Review of Clathrate Hydrate Nucleation. ACS Sustain.
7
Chem. Eng. 2017, 5 (12), 11176–11203.
8
9 https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b03238.
10
11
12
(13) Jorge Gabitto; Maria Barrufet. Gas Hydrates Research Programs: An International
13 Review; Pittsburgh, PA, and Morgantown, WV (United States), 2009.
14
15 https://doi.org/10.2172/978338.
16
17
(14) Talukder, A. R. Review of Submarine Cold Seep Plumbing Systems: Leakage to
18
19 Seepage and Venting. Terra Nov. 2012, 24 (4), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
20
21 3121.2012.01066.x.
22
23 (15) Rajput, S.; Thakur, N. K. Exploration of Gas Hydrates; Intergovernmental Panel on
24
25 Climate Change, Ed.; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011; Vol. 58.
26
27 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14234-5.
28
29 (16) Rajput, S.; Sen, M. K.; Chopra, S. Seismic Indicators of Gas Hydrates and Associated
30
31 Free Gas. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2009; Society of Exploration
32
33
Geophysicists, 2009; pp 2622–2626. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3255391.
34
35 (17) Merey, Ş. Evaluation of Drilling Parameters in Gas Hydrate Exploration Wells. J. Pet.
36
37 Sci. Eng. 2019, 172 (July 2018), 855–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.08.079.
38
39 (18) Ning, F.; Wu, N.; Yu, Y.; Zhang, K.; Jiang, G.; Zhang, L.; Sun, J.; Zheng, M. Invasion
40
41 of Drilling Mud into Gas-Hydrate-Bearing Sediments. Part II: Effects of Geophysical
42
43
Properties of Sediments. Geophys. J. Int. 2013, 193 (3), 1385–1398.
44 https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt016.
45
46
47 (19) Merey, Ş. Drilling of Gas Hydrate Reservoirs. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2016, 35 (Part A),
48 1167–1179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.09.058.
49
50
51 (20) Gabitto, J. F.; Tsouris, C. Physical Properties of Gas Hydrates: A Review. J. Thermodyn.
52
2010, 2010, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/271291.
53
54
55 (21) Kuznetsov, F. A. Gas Hydrates of Siberia. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2006, 912 (1), 101–111.
56
57 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06763.x.
58
59 (22) Maria Barufet, J. G. Gas Hydrates Research Programs: An International Review; 2010.
60

1
2
3 (23) Max, M. D. Natural Gas Hydrate In Oceanic and Permafrost Environments; Max, M.
4
5 D., Ed.; Coastal Systems and Continental Margins; Springer Netherlands: Dordrecht,
6
7 2000; Vol. 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4387-5.
8
9 (24) Ramasamy, R.; Subramanian, S.; Sundaravadivelu, R. Formation of Gas Hydrates at
10
11 Deep Interior of the Earth and Their Dissipation to Near Surface Horizon. J. Geol. Res.
12
13 2013, 2013 (L), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/207031.
14
15 (25) Hester, K. C.; Brewer, P. G. Clathrate Hydrates in Nature. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2009, 1
16
17 (1), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.marine.010908.163824.
18
19 (26) Kumar, R.; Linga, P. Gas Hydrates. Encyclopedia of Geochemistry; 2018.
20
21 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39312-4_177.
22
23 (27) Collet, T. S.; Ladd, J. Detection of Gas Hydrate with Downhole Logs and Assessment
24
25 of Gas Hydrate Concentrations (Saturations) and Gas Volumes on the Blake Ridge with
26
27 Electrical Resistivity Log Data. In Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, 164
28
Scientific Results; Ocean Drilling Program, 2000.
29
30 https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.164.219.2000.
31
32
33
(28) Appendix to Methane Hydrates Advisory Committee (MHAC) Letter of May 21, 2014
34 https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/06/f22/MHAC_Appendix_to_Secretary_
35
36 5_21_2014.pdf (accessed Aug 6, 2020).
37
38 (29) J. A. Majorowicz, K. G. O. Gas Hydrate Distribution and Volume in Canada. Am. Assoc.
39
40 Pet. Geol. Bull. 2001, 85 (7), 1211–1230. https://doi.org/10.1306/8626CA9B-173B-
41
42 11D7-8645000102C1865D.
43
44 (30) Tinivella, U.; Accaino, F.; Camerlenghi, A. Gas Hydrate and Free Gas Distribution from
45
46 Inversion of Seismic Data on the South Shetland Margin (Antarctica). Mar. Geophys.
47
48 Res. 2002, 23 (2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022407914072.
49
50 (31) Oyama, A.; Masutani, S. M. A Review of the Methane Hydrate Program in Japan.
51
52 Energies 2017, 10 (10), 1447. https://doi.org/10.3390/en10101447.
53
54 (32) Song, Y.; Yang, L.; Zhao, J.; Liu, W.; Yang, M.; Li, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, Q. The Status of
55
56 Natural Gas Hydrate Research in China: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014,
57
58 31, 778–791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.025.
59
60 (33) Ryu, B.-J.; Riedel, M. Gas Hydrates in the Ulleung Basin, East Sea of Korea. Terr.

1
2
3 Atmos. Ocean. Sci. 2017, 28 (6), 943–963. https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2017.10.21.01.
4
5
6 (34) S.Korea may boost energy efforts in disputed area
7
https://www.reuters.com/article/korea-japan-islands/s-korea-may-boost-energy-efforts-
8
9 in-disputed-area-idUSSEO9213520080801 (accessed Aug 22, 2020).
10
11
12
(35) Boswell, R.; Collett, T. The Gas Hydrates Resource Pyramid. Fire in the ice. USA 2015.
13
14 (36) Marcelle-De Silva, J.; Dawe, R. Towards Commercial Gas Production from Hydrate
15
16 Deposits. Energies 2011, 4 (2), 215–238. https://doi.org/10.3390/en4020215.
17
18 (37) Sloan, E. D.; Koh, C. A. Clathrate Hydrates of Natural Gases, Third.; Taylor and
19
20 Francis group, 2007.
21
22 (38) Malone, R. D. Gas Hydrates Topical Report-DOE/METC/SP-218 (DE85001986); USA,
23
24 1985.
25
26 (39) Kurihara, M.; Narita, H. Gas Production from Methane Hydrate Reservoirs. In 7th
27
28 International Conference on gas Hydrates; United Kingdom, 2011.
29
30
(40) Schicks, J. M.; Spangenberg, E.; Giese, R.; Steinhauer, B.; Klump, J.; Luzi, M. New
31
32 Approaches for the Production of Hydrocarbons from Hydrate Bearing Sediments.
33
34 Energies 2011, 4 (1), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.3390/en4010151.
35
36 (41) Nair, V. C.; Prasad, S. K.; Kumar, R.; Sangwai, J. S. Energy Recovery from Simulated
37
38 Clayey Gas Hydrate Reservoir Using Depressurization by Constant Rate Gas Release,
39
40 Thermal Stimulation and Their Combinations. Appl. Energy 2018, 225 (December
41
2017), 755–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.05.028.
42
43
44 (42) Moridis, G.J., and Collett, T. S. Strategies for Gas Production from Hydrate
45
46
Accumulations under Various Geologic Conditions; 2003.
47
48 (43) Nair, V. C.; Ramesh, S.; Ramadass, G. A.; Sangwai, J. S. Influence of Thermal
49
50 Stimulation on the Methane Hydrate Dissociation in Porous Media under Confined
51 Reservoir. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2016, 147, 547–559.
52
53 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2016.09.017.
54
55
56
(44) Moridis, G. J.; Collett, T. S. Strategies for Gas Production from Hydrate Accumulations
57 Under Various Geological and Reservoir Conditions. In TOUGH Symposium;
58
59 California, 2003; Vol. 2.
60

1
2
3 (45) Moridis, G. J.; Collett, T. S. Gas Production from Class 1 Hydrate Accumulations.
4
5 Recent Adv. Study Gas Hydrates 2004, 83–97.
6
7
(46) Moridis, G. J.; Sloan, E. D. Gas Production Potential of Disperse Low-Saturation
8
9 Hydrate Accumulations in Oceanic Sediments. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007, 48 (6),
10
11 1834–1849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.01.023.
12
13 (47) Moridis, G. J.; Kowalsky, M. B. Gas Production From Class 2 Hydrate Accumulations
14
15 in the Permafrost. In Economic Geology of Natural Gas Hydrates; M. Max, A.H.
16
17 Johnson, W. P., Collett, D. and T., Eds.; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2006; Vol. 7,
18
pp 249–266. https://doi.org/10.2523/110858-MS.
19
20
21 (48) Lee, J. Y.; Ryu, B. J.; Yun, T. S.; Lee, J.; Cho, G.-C. Review on the Gas Hydrate
22
23 Development and Production as a New Energy Resource. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2011, 15
24 (4), 689–696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-011-0009-3.
25
26
27 (49) Yin, Z.; Chong, Z. R.; Tan, H. K.; Linga, P. Review of Gas Hydrate Dissociation Kinetic
28
Models for Energy Recovery. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2016, 35, 1362–1387.
29
30 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.04.050.
31
32
33
(50) Konno, Y.; Fujii, T.; Sato, A.; Akamine, K.; Naiki, M.; Masuda, Y.; Yamamoto, K.;
34 Nagao, J. Key Findings of the World’s First Offshore Methane Hydrate Production Test
35
36 off the Coast of Japan: Toward Future Commercial Production. Energy and Fuels 2017,
37
38 31 (3), 2607–2616. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b03143.
39
40 (51) Murshed, M. M.; Schmidt, B. C.; Kuhs, W. F. Kinetics of Methane-Ethane Gas
41
42 Replacement in Clathrate-Hydrates Studied by Time-Resolved Neutron Diffraction and
43
44
Raman Spectroscopy. J. Phys. Chem. A 2010, 114 (1), 247–255.
45 https://doi.org/10.1021/jp908016j.
46
47
48 (52) Plaza-Faverola, A.; Vadakkepuliyambatta, S.; Hong, W.-L.; Mienert, J.; Bünz, S.;
49 Chand, S.; Greinert, J. Bottom-Simulating Reflector Dynamics at Arctic Thermogenic
50
51 Gas Provinces: An Example from Vestnesa Ridge, Offshore West Svalbard. J. Geophys.
52
53 Res. Solid Earth 2017, 122 (6), 4089–4105. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JB013761.
54
55 (53) Riedel, M.; Willoughby, E. C.; Chopra, S. Gas Hydrates — Geophysical Exploration
56
57 Techniques and Methods. In Geophysical Characterization of Gas Hydrates; Society of
58
59 Exploration Geophysicists, 2010; pp 1–22.
60

1
2
3 https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802197.ch1.
4
5
6 (54) Spence, G. D.; Haacke, R. R.; Hyndman, R. D. Seismic Indicators of Natural Gas
7
Hydrate and Underlying Free Gas. In Geophysical Characterization of Gas Hydrates;
8
9 Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2010; pp 39–71.
10
11 https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802197.ch4.
12
13 (55) MacKay, M. E.; Jarrard, R. D.; Westbrook, G. K.; Hyndman, R. D. Origin of Bottom-
14
15 Simulating Reflectors: Geophysical Evidence from the Cascadia Accretionary Prism.
16
17 Geology 1994, 22 (5), 459. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-
18
7613(1994)022<0459:OOBSRG>2.3.CO;2.
19
20
21 (56) Hyndman, R. D.; Dallimore, S. R. Natural Gas Hydrate Studies in Canada. CSEG Rec.
22
23 2001, No. 2, 12–20.
24
25 (57) Rajput, S.; Thakur, N. K. Exploration of Gas Hydrates; Springer Berlin Heidelberg:
26
27 Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14234-5.
28
29 (58) Rogers, R. Deep Ocean Sediment–Hydrate Relationships. In Offshore Gas Hydrates;
30
31 Elsevier, 2015; pp 21–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802319-8.00002-4.
32
33 (59) Taylor, M. .; Dillon, W. .; Pecher, I. . Trapping and Migration of Methane Associated
34
35 with the Gas Hydrate Stability Zone at the Blake Ridge Diapir: New Insights from
36
37 Seismic Data. Mar. Geol. 2000, 164 (1–2), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-
38 3227(99)00128-0.
39
40
41 (60) Hydrates https://wiki.seg.org/wiki/Hydrates (accessed Jun 23, 2020).
42
43 (61) Lu, Y.; Luan, X.; Lyu, F.; Wang, B.; Yang, Z.; Yang, T.; Yao, G. Seismic Evidence and
44
45 Formation Mechanism of Gas Hydrates in the Zhongjiannan Basin, Western Margin of
46
47 the South China Sea. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2017, 84, 274–288.
48 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2017.04.005.
49
50
51 (62) Milkov, A. V.; Sassen, R. Economic Geology of Offshore Gas Hydrate Accumulations
52
and Provinces. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2002, 19 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-
53
54 8172(01)00047-2.
55
56
57 (63) Majumdar, U.; Cook, A. E.; Shedd, W.; Frye, M. The Connection between Natural Gas
58 Hydrate and Bottom-Simulating Reflectors. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2016, 43 (13), 7044–
59
60 7051. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL069443.

1
2
3 (64) Wang, H. Characterising Gas Hydrate Deposits on New Zealand’S Southern Hikurangi
4
5 Margin Using Seismic Reflection Data, 2016.
6
7
(65) Mienert, J.; Bunz, S. Encyclopedia of Marine Geosciences; Harff, J., Meschede, M.,
8
9 Petersen, S., Thiede, J., Eds.; Springer Netherlands: Dordrecht, 2014.
10
11 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6644-0.
12
13 (66) Ojha, M.; Sain, K. Seismic Attributes for Identifying Gas-Hydrates and Free-Gas Zones:
14
15 Application to the Makran Accretionary Prism. Episodes 2009, 32 (4), 264–270.
16
17 https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2009/v32i4/003.
18
19 (67) Abid, K.; Spagnoli, G.; Teodoriu, C.; Falcone, G. Review of Pressure Coring Systems
20
21 for Offshore Gas Hydrates Research. Underw. Technol. 2015, 33 (1), 19–30.
22
23 https://doi.org/10.3723/ut.33.019.
24
25 (68) Dai, S.; Santamarina, J. C. Borehole Tool for the Comprehensive Char- Acterization of
26
27 Hydrate-Bearing Sediments; 2018.
28
29 (69) Al-Saddique, M. A.; Hamada, G. M.; Al-Awad, M. N. J. State of the Art: Review of
30
31 Coring and Core Analysis Technology. J. King Saud Univ. - Eng. Sci. 2000, 12 (1), 117–
32
33
137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1018-3639(18)30709-8.
34
35 (70) Gaafar, G. R.; Tewari, R. D.; Zain, Z. M. Overview of Advancement in Core Analysis
36
37 and Its Importance in Reservoir Characterisation for Maximising Recovery. In SPE Asia
38 Pacific Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2015; pp
39
40 222–238. https://doi.org/10.2118/174583-MS.
41
42
43
(71) Burger, J.; Gupta, D.; Jacobs, P.; Shillinglaw, J. Overview on Hydrate Coring, Handling
44 and Analysis; 2006.
45
46
47 (72) Hybrid Pressure Core Sampler (Hybrid-PCS)
48 https://www.jamstec.go.jp/cdex/e/techdevelopment/coring/pressure-core.html
49
50 (accessed May 26, 2020).
51
52
(73) Kubo, Y.; Mizuguchi, Y.; Inagaki, F.; Yamamoto, K. A New Hybrid Pressure-Coring
53
54 System for the Drilling Vessel Chikyu. Sci. Drill. 2014, 17 (17), 37–43.
55
56 https://doi.org/10.5194/sd-17-37-2014.
57
58 (74) Yamamoto, K.; Inada, N.; Kubo, S.; Fujii, T.; Suzuki, K.; Nakatsuka, Y. A Pressure
59
60 Coring Operation and On-Board Analyses of Methane Hydrate- Bearing Samples. In

1
2
3 Offshore Technology Conference; Offshore Technology Conference: Texas,USA, 2014.
4
5
6 (75) Inada, N.; Yamamoto, K. Data Report : Hybrid Pressure Coring System Tool Review
7
and Summary of Recovery Result from Gas-Hydrate Related Coring in the Nankai
8
9 Project. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2015, 66, 323–345.
10
12
13 (76) Babu, P.; Yee, D.; Linga, P.; Palmer, A.; Khoo, B. C.; Tan, T. S.; Rangsunvigit, P.
14
15 Morphology of Methane Hydrate Formation in Porous Media. Energy & Fuels 2013, 27
16
17 (6), 3364–3372. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef4004818.
18
19 (77) Dai, S.; Santamarina, J. C. Hydrate-Bearing Clayey Sediments: Morphology, Physical
20
21 Properties, Production and Engineering/Geological Implications Principal
22
23 Investigators / Submitting Organization OIL & GAS Office of Fossil Energy; 2018.
24
25 (78) Terzariol, M.; Park, J.; Castro, G. M.; Santamarina, J. C. Methane Hydrate-Bearing
26
27 Sediments: Pore Habit and Implications. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2020, 116 (December 2019),
28
104302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104302.
29
30
31 (79) Kleinberg, R. L.; Flaum, C.; Griffin, D. D.; Brewer, P. G.; Malby, G. E.; Peltzer, E. T.;
32
33
Yesinowski, J. P. Deep Sea NMR: Methane Hydrate Growth Habit in Porous Media and
34 Its Relationship to Hydraulic Permeability, Deposit Accumulation, and Submarine
35
36 Slope Stability. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2003, 108 (B10).
37
38 https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JB002389.
39
40 (80) Camps, A. P. Hydrate Formation in near Surface Ocean Sediments, University of
41
42 Leicester, 2008.
43
44 (81) Servio, P.; Englezos, P. Morphology of Methane and Carbon Dioxide Hydrates Formed
45
46 from Water Droplets. AIChE J. 2003, 49 (1), 269–276.
47
48 https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690490125.
49
50 (82) Holland, M.; Schultheiss, P.; Roberts, J.; Druce, M. Observed Gas Hydrate
51
52 Morphologies in Marine Sediments. In Icgh2008; 2008.
53
54
https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0041062.
55
56 (83) Sun, J.; Li, C.; Hao, X.; Liu, C.; Chen, Q.; Wang, D. Study of the Surface Morphology
57
58 of Gas Hydrate. J. Ocean Univ. China 2020, 19 (2), 331–338.
59 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11802-020-4039-7.
60

1
2
3 (84) Jogmec; Aist; Enaa. Japan ’ s Methane Hydrate R & D Program Phase 1; 2008.
4
5
6 (85) Schultheiss, P.; Aumann, J.; Humphrey, G. Pressure Coring and Pressure Core Analysis
7
for the Upcoming Gulf of Mexico Joint Industry Project Coring Expedition. In
8
9 Proceedings of Offshore Technology Conference; Society of Petroleum Engineers,
10
11 2010; Vol. 3, pp 2306–2314. https://doi.org/10.2523/20827-MS.
12
13 (86) Collett, T.; Bahk, J.; Goldberg, D.; Husebo, J.; Koh, C.; Malone, M.; Shipp, C.; Torres,
14
15 M. Historical Methane Hydrates Project Review. Report Prepared for the U.S
16
17 Department of Energy – National Energy Technology Laboratory by the Consortium for
18
Ocean Leadership; Project Number: DE-FE0010195; 2013.
19
20
21 (87) Pape, T.; Hohnberg, H.-J.; Wunsch, D.; Anders, E.; Freudenthal, T.; Huhn, K.;
22
23 Bohrmann, G. Design and Deployment of Autoclave Pressure Vessels for the Portable
24 Deep-Sea Drill Rig MeBo. Sci. Drill. 2017, 23, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.5194/sd-23-
25
26 29-2017.
27
28
(88) Barnard, K. A. ’Donal. H. C. K. A. . Pressure Core Barrel: Application to the Study of
29
30 Gas Hydrates, Deep Sea Drilling Project Site 533, LEG 76; 1978; Vol. 2.
31
32
33
(89) Kvenvolden, K. A.; Barnard, L. A.; Cameron, D. H. Pressure Core Barrel: Application
34 to the Study of Gas Hydrates, Deep Sea Drilling Project Site 533, Leg 76; U.S.
35
36 Government Printing Office, 1983. https://doi.org/10.2973/dsdp.proc.76.107.1983.
37
38 (90) Pressure Core Sampler http://www-odp.tamu.edu/publications/tnotes/tn31/pdf/pcs.pdf
39
40 (accessed May 29, 2020).
41
42
43
(91) Yamamoto, K. Overview and Introduction : Pressure Core-Sampling and Analyses in
44 the 2012-2013 MH21 Offshore Test of Gas Production from Methane Hydrates in the
45
46 Eastern Nankai Trough. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2015.
47
49
50 (92) Humphrey, G. Planning and Execution of a Marine Methane Hydrate Pressure Coring
51
52 Program for the Walker Ridge and Green Canyon Areas of the Gulf of Mexico; Houston,
53
54
2016.
55
56 (93) Downhole tools and pressure coring http://www-
57
58 odp.tamu.edu/publications/204_IR/chap_08/c8_9.htm (accessed Jun 29, 2020).
59
60 (94) Abegg, F.; Hohnberg, H.; Pape, T.; Bohrmann, G.; Freitag, J. Development and

1
2
3 Application of Pressure-Core-Sampling Systems for the Investigation of Gas- and Gas-
4
5 Hydrate-Bearing Sediments. Deep Sea Res. I 2008, 55, 1590–1599.
6
7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2008.06.006.
8
9 (95) Freudenthal, T.; Wafer, G. Scientific Drilling with the Sea Floor Drill Rig MeBo. Sci.
10
11 Drill. 2007. https://doi.org/10.2204/iodp.sd.5.11.2007.
12
13 (96) Ye, Y.; Liu, C. Natural Gas Hydrates-Experimental Techniques and Their Applications;
14
15 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-64-31101-7.
16
17
(97) Pearson, C. F.; Halleck, P. M.; McGuire, P. L.; Hermes, R.; Mathews, M. Natural Gas
18
19 Hydrate Deposits: A Review of in Situ Properties. J. Phys. Chem. 1983, 87 (21), 4180–
20
21 4185. https://doi.org/10.1021/j100244a041.
22
23 (98) Waite, W. F.; Santamarina, J. C.; Cortes, D. D.; Dugan, B.; Espinoza, D. N.; Germaine,
24
25 J.; Jang, J.; Jung, J. W.; Kneafsey, T. J.; Shin, H.; Soga, K.; Winters, W. J.; Yun, T.-S.
26
27 Physical Properties of Hydrate-Bearing Sediments. Rev. Geophys. 2009, 47 (4),
28
RG4003. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008RG000279.
29
30
31 (99) Collett, T. S. Well Log Characterization of Sediment Porosities in Gas-Hydrate-Bearing
32
33
Reservoirs. In Proceedings of SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition;
34 Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1998; Vol. 1999-Septe, pp 765–776.
35
36 https://doi.org/10.2523/49298-MS.
37
38 (100) Bonnell, B.; Hurich, C. Characterization of Reservoir Heterogeneity: An Investigation
39
40 of the Role of Cross-Well Reflection Data. Can. Soc. Explor. Geophys. 2008, 33.
41
42
43
(101) Reagan, M. T.; Kowalsky, M. B.; Moridis, G. J.; Silpngarmlert, S. The Effect of
44 Reservoir Heterogeneity on Gas Production From Hydrate Accumulations in the
45
46 Permafrost. In SPE Western Regional Meeting; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2010;
47
48 Vol. 2, pp 585–609. https://doi.org/10.2118/132649-MS.
49
50 (102) Yin, Z.; Moridis, G.; Linga, P. On the Importance of Phase Saturation Heterogeneity in
51
52 the Analysis of Laboratory Studies of Hydrate Dissociation. Appl. Energy 2019, 255
53
54
(June), 113861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113861.
55
56 (103) Kumar, I. Gas Hydrate Detection Using VSP Data and Its Correlation with Well Log
57
58 Data. In South Asian Geoscience Conference and Exhibition,Geo India; 2011.
59
60 (104) Spangenberg, E.; Kulenkampff, J. Influence of Methane Hydrate Content on Electrical

1
2
3 Sediment Properties. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2006, 33 (24), L24315.
4
5 https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL028188.
6
7
(105) Birkedal, K. A.; Ersland, G.; Petter, L.; Hauge, Ø.; Graue, A.; Hester, K.; Stevens, J.;
8
9 Howard, J. Electrical Resistivity Measurments of Ch4 Hydrate- Bearing Sandstone
10
11 During Formation; 2011.
12
13 (106) Crain, E. R. (Ross). Permafrost and Gas hydrates https://www.spec2000.net/17-
14
15 gashydrate.htm (accessed May 20, 2020).
16
17
(107) Lin, Z.; Pan, H.; Fang, H.; Gao, W.; Liu, D. High-Altitude Well Log Evaluation of a
18
19 Permafrost Gas Hydrate Reservoir in the Muli Area of Qinghai, China. Sci. Rep. 2018,
20
21 8 (1), 12596. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30795-x.
22
23 (108) Collett, Timothy & Lee, Myung. (2012). Well Log Characterization of Natural Gas-
24
25 Hydrates. Petrophysics. 53. 348-367.
26
27 (109) Crain, E. R. R. Unicorns in the Garden of Good and Evil. Crain’s Petrophysical
28
29 Handbook. 2011.
30
31
(110) Ahmed, T. Reservoir Engineering, Third.; Gulf Professional Publishing: USA, 2006.
32
33
34 (111) Boswell, R.; Collett, T. S. Current Perspectives on Gas Hydrate Resources. Energy
35
36 Environ. Sci. 2011, 4 (4), 1206–1215. https://doi.org/10.1039/C0EE00203H.
37
38 (112) Schlumberger. Recovery Factor
39
40 https://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/en/Terms/r/recovery_factor.aspx (accessed Aug
41
20, 2020).
42
43
44 (113) Kastner, M.; Claypool, G.; Robertson, G. Geochemical Constraints on the Origin of the
45
46
Pore Fluids and Gas Hydrate Distribution at Atwater Valley and Keathley Canyon,
47 Northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2008, 25 (9), 860–872.
48
50
51 (114) Borowski, W. S.; Paull, C. K.; Ussler, W. Carbon Cycling within the Upper
52
53 Methanogenic Zone of Continental Rise Sediments; An Example from the Methane-
54
55 Rich Sediments Overlying the Blake Ridge Gas Hydrate Deposits. Mar. Chem. 1997,
56
57 57 (3–4), 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4203(97)00019-4.
58
59 (115) Buffett, B. A. Clathrate Hydrates. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2000, 28 (1), 477–507.
60

1
2
3 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.earth.28.1.477.
4
5
6 (116) Ramana, M. V.; Ramprasad, T.; Desa, M.; Sathe, A. V.; Sethi, A. K. Gas Hydrate-
7
Related Proxies Inferred from Multidisciplinary Investigations in the Indian Offshore
8
9 Areas. Curr. Sci. 2006, 91 (2), 183–189.
10
11
12
(117) Seol, J.; Lee, H. Natural Gas Hydrate as a Potential Energy Resource: From Occurrence
13 to Production. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2013, 30 (4), 771–786.
14
15 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-013-0033-8.
16
17
(118) Hesse, R.; Harrison, W. E. Gas Hydrates (Clathrates) Causing Pore-Water Freshening
18
19 and Oxygen Isotope Fractionation in Deep-Water Sedimentary Sections of Terrigenous
20
21 Continental Margins. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1981, 55 (3), 453–462.
22
23 https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821X(81)90172-2.
24
25 (119) Hesse, R. Pore Water Anomalies of Submarine Gas-Hydrate Zones as Tool to Assess
26
27 Hydrate Abundance and Distribution in the Subsurface What Have We Learned in the
28
Past Decade? Earth-Science Rev. 2003, 61 (1–2), 149–179.
29
30 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-8252(02)00117-4.
31
32
33
(120) Ussler, W.; Paull, C. K. Effects of Ion Exclusion and Isotopic Fractionation on Pore
34 Water Geochemistry during Gas Hydrate Formation and Decomposition. Geo-Marine
35
36 Lett. 1995, 15 (1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01204496.
37
38 (121) Matsumoto, R.; Borowski, W. S. Gas Hydrate Estimates from Newly Determined
39
40 Oxygen Isotopic Fractionation (AGH-IW) and D18O Anomalies of the Interstitial
41
42 Waters: Leg 164, Blake Ridge. In Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, 164
43
44
Scientific Results; Ocean Drilling Program, 2000; Vol. 164, pp 59–66.
45 https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.164.206.2000.
46
47
48 (122) Luo, M.; Chen, L.; Tong, H.; Yan, W.; Chen, D. Gas Hydrate Occurrence Inferred from
49 Dissolved Cl− Concentrations and Δ18O Values of Pore Water and Dissolved Sulfate
50
51 in the Shallow Sediments of the Pockmark Field in Southwestern Xisha Uplift, Northern
52
53 South China Sea. Energies 2014, 7 (6), 3886–3899. https://doi.org/10.3390/en7063886.
54
55 (123) Froelich, P. N.; Klinkhammer, G. P.; Bender, M. L.; Luedtke, N. A.; Heath, G. R.;
56
57 Cullen, D.; Dauphin, P.; Hammond, D.; Hartman, B.; Maynard, V. Early Oxidation of
58
59 Organic Matter in Pelagic Sediments of the Eastern Equatorial Atlantic: Suboxic
60

1
2
3 Diagenesis. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1979, 43 (7), 1075–1090.
4
5 https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7037(79)90095-4.
6
7
(124) Berner, R. A. Early Diagenesis: A Theoretical Approach. In Earth Surface Processes
8
9 and Landforms; Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1982; Vol. 7, pp 197–198.
10
11 https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848182032002006.
12
13 (125) Kemp, A. L. W.; Thode, M. G. The Mechanism of the Baoterial Reduction of Sulphate
14
15 and Studi. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1968, 32, 71–91.
16
17
(126) Tréhu, A. M.; Long, P. E.; Torres, M. E.; Bohrmann, G.; Rack, F. R.; Collett, T. S.;
18
19 Goldberg, D. S.; Milkov, A. V.; Riedel, M.; Schultheiss, P.; Bangs, N. L.; Barr, S. R.;
20
21 Borowski, W. S.; Claypool, G. E.; Delwiche, M. E.; Dickens, G. R.; Gracia, E.; Guerin,
22
23 G.; Holland, M.; Johnson, J. E.; Lee, Y. J.; Liu, C. S.; Su, X.; Teichert, B.; Tomaru, H.;
24 Vanneste, M.; Watanabe, M.; Weinberger, J. L. Three-Dimensional Distribution of Gas
25
26 Hydrate beneath Southern Hydrate Ridge: Constraints from ODP Leg 204. Earth Planet.
27
28 Sci. Lett. 2004, 222 (3–4), 845–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2004.03.035.
29
30 (127) Wu, N.; Liu, C.; Hao, X. Experimental Simulations and Methods for Natural Gas
31
32 Hydrate Analysis in China. China Geol. 2018, 1 (1), 61–71.
33
34 https://doi.org/10.31035/cg2018008.
35
36 (128) Ma, S.; Zheng, J.; Tang, D.; Li, Y.; Li, Q.; Lv, X. Application of X‐Ray Computed
37
38 Tomography Technology in Gas Hydrate. Energy Technol. 2019, 7 (6), 1800699.
39
https://doi.org/10.1002/ente.201800699.
40
41
42 (129) Chazallon, B.; Focsa, C.; Charlou, J.-L.; Bourry, C.; Donval, J.-P. A Comparative
43
44
Raman Spectroscopic Study of Natural Gas Hydrates Collected at Different Geological
45 Sites. Chem. Geol. 2007, 244 (1–2), 175–185.
46
47 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2007.06.012.
48
49 (130) Ballard, A. L.; Sloan, E. D. Optimizing Thermodynamic Parameters to Match Methane
50
51 and Ethane Structural Transition in Natural Gas Hydrate Equilibria. Ann. N. Y. Acad.
52
53 Sci. 2006, 912 (1), 702–712. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06826.x.
54
55 (131) Uchida, T.; Hirano, T.; Ebinuma, T.; Narita, H.; Gohara, K.; Mae, S.; Matsumoto, R.
56
57 Raman Spectroscopic Determination of Hydration Number of Methane Hydrates.
58
59 AIChE J. 1999, 45 (12), 2641–2645. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690451220.
60

1
2
3 (132) Subramanian, S.; Sloan, E. . Molecular Measurements of Methane Hydrate Formation.
4
5 Fluid Phase Equilib. 1999, 158–160, 813–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-
6
7 3812(99)00134-X.
8
9 (133) Stern, L. A.; Kirby, S. H.; Circone, S.; Durham, W. B. Scanning Electron Microscopy
10
11 Investigations of Laboratory-Grown Gas Clathrate Hydrates Formed from Melting Ice,
12
13 and Comparison to Natural Hydrates. Am. Mineral. 2004, 89 (8–9), 1162–1175.
14 https://doi.org/10.2138/am-2004-8-902.
15
16
17 (134) Ma, S.; Zheng, J.; Lv, X.; Li, Q.; Yang, M.; Song, Y. DSC Measurement on Formation
18
and Dissociation Process of Methane Hydrate in Shallow Sediments from South China
19
20 Sea. Energy Procedia 2019, 158, 5421–5426.
21
22 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2019.01.607.
23
24 (135) Liu, L.; Sun, Z.; Zhang, L.; Wu, N.; Yichao, Q.; Jiang, Z.; Geng, W.; Cao, H.; Zhang,
25
26 X.; Zhai, B.; Xu, C.; Shen, Z.; Jia, Y. Progress in Global Gas Hydrate Development and
27
28 Production as a New Energy Resource. Acta Geol. Sin. - English Ed. 2019, 93 (3), 731–
29
755. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.13876.
30
31
32 (136) Aird, P. Deepwater Drilling; Elsevier, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-00499-0.
33
34 (137) Barnard, A.; Sager, W. W.; Snow, J. E.; Max, M. D. A New Look at Seafloor Venting:
35
36 Natural Gas Hydrate Derivatives. In Offshore Technology Conference; Offshore
37
38 Technology Conference, 2016; Vol. 5, pp 4500–4513. https://doi.org/10.4043/27283-
39
MS.
40
41
42 (138) Yin, Z.; Linga, P. Methane Hydrates: A Future Clean Energy Resource. Chinese J.
43
44
Chem. Eng. 2019, 27 (9), 2026–2036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2019.01.005.
45
46 (139) Cunningham; Saigo. Oil and Gas Basics
47
48 https://personal.utdallas.edu/~pujana/latin/PDFS/Lecture 11- Oilbasics.pdf (accessed
49 May 25, 2020).
50
51
52 (140) Kumar, R.; Linga, P. Gas Hydrates. Encycl. Earth Sci. Ser. 2018, No. Bp 2013, 535–
53
54
541.
55
56 (141) Li, J.; Zhen, M.; Chen, X.; Li, D.; Wang, S.; Song, T. Connotation Analysis, Source-
57
58 Reservoir Assemblage Types and Development Potential of Unconventional
59 Hydrocarbons in China. Pet. Res. 2016, 1 (2), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2096-
60

1
2
3 2495(17)30038-8.
4
5
6 (142) Sun, Z.; Wang, H.; Yao, J.; Yang, C.; Kou, J.; Bongole, K.; Xin, Y.; Li, W.; Zhu, X.
7
Different Mechanism Effect between Gas-Solid and Liquid-Solid Interface on the
8
9 Three-Phase Coexistence Hydrate System Dissociation in Seawater: A Molecular
10
11 Dynamics Simulation Study. Energies 2017, 11 (1), 6.
12
13 https://doi.org/10.3390/en11010006.
14
15 (143) Engineering, A. P. Consideration of Gas Hydrate Production Well Technology.
16
17 Production 2005.
18
19 (144) Jung, J. W.; Jang, J.; Santamarina, J. C.; Tsouris, C.; Phelps, T. J.; Rawn, C. J. Gas
20
21 Production from Hydrate-Bearing Sediments : The Role of Fine Particles. 2012, 480–
22
23 487.
24
25 (145) Pohlman, J. W.; Kaneko, M.; Heuer, V. B.; Coffin, R. B.; Whiticar, M. Methane Sources
26
27 and Production in the Northern Cascadia Margin Gas Hydrate System. Earth Planet.
28
Sci. Lett. 2009, 287 (3–4), 504–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2009.08.037.
29
30
31 (146) Max, M. D.; Johnson, A. H.; Dillon, W. P. Natural Gas Hydrate - Arctic Ocean
32
33
Deepwater Resource Potential; SpringerBriefs in Energy; Springer International
34 Publishing: Cham, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02508-7.
35
36
37 (147) Motghare, P. D.; Musale, A. Unconventional Hydrocarbons: Gas Hydrates - Drilling
38 Challenges and Suitable Technology. In SPE Oil and Gas India Conference and
39
40 Exhibition; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2017; pp 455–468.
41
42 https://doi.org/10.2118/185424-MS.
43
44 (148) Muhammad, M. A. Managed Pressure Drilling – Experiences and Way Forward
45
46 https://connect.spe.org/events/eventdescription?CalendarEventKey=4da6cf80-afdc-
47
48 4229-aac9-6719c21e6b28 (accessed Mar 3, 2020).
49
50 (149) Malloy, K. P.; McDonald, P. A Probabilistic Approach to Risk Assessment of Managed
51
52 Pressure Drilling in Offshore Applications; 2008.
53
54 (150) Balanza, J. A.; Justiniano, L. C.; Poletzky, I. Implementation of Managed Pressure
55
56 Casing Drilling and Managed Pressure Cementing Techniques in Unconventional
57
58 Reservoirs. In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition; Society of Petroleum
59 Engineers, 2015; Vol. 2015-Janua, pp 1075–1090. https://doi.org/10.2118/173080-MS.
60

1
2
3 (151) Nas, S. W.; Toralde, J. S.; Wuest, C. Offshore Managed Pressure Drilling Experiences
4
5 in Asia Pacific. In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition; Society of Petroleum
6
7 Engineers, 2009; Vol. 2, pp 1099–1111. https://doi.org/10.2118/119875-MS.
8
9 (152) Kok, M. V.; Tercan, E. Managed Pressure Drilling Techniques, Equipments, and
10
11 Applications. Energy Sources, Part A Recover. Util. Environ. Eff. 2012, 34 (7), 591–
12
13 601. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2010.516319.
14
15 (153) Malloy, K. P.; Stone, R.; Medley, G. H.; Hannegan, D. M.; Coker, O. D.; Reitsma, D.;
16
17 Santos, H. M.; Kinder, J. I.; Eck-Olsen, J.; McCaskill, J. W.; May, J. R.; Smith, K. L.;
18
Sonnemann, P. Managed-Pressure Drilling: What It Is and What It Is Not. In IADC/SPE
19
20 Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference & Exhibition;
21
22 Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2009; pp 178–183. https://doi.org/10.2118/122281-
23
24 MS.
25
26 (154) Todd, R. J.; Hannegan, D. M.; Harrall, S. New Technology Needs for Methane Hydrates
27
28 Production; Offshore Technology Conference, 2006.
29
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4043/18247-MS.
30
31
32 (155) Driedger, D. J.; Kelly, S. P.; Leggett, C.; Thain, J.; Silva, M. Managed Pressure Drilling
33
34 Technique Applied in a Kurdistan Exploration Well. In SPE Middle East Oil and Gas
35 Show and Conference; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2013; Vol. 3, pp 1869–1876.
36
37 https://doi.org/10.2118/164403-MS.
38
39
(156) Hannegan, D.; Richard, J.; Pritchard, D.; Jonasson, B. MPD - Uniquely Applicable to
40
41 Methane Hydrate Drilling. In Proceedings of SPE/IADC Underbalanced Technology
42
43 Conference and Exhibition; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2004; pp 159–162.
44
45 https://doi.org/10.2523/91560-MS.
46
47 (157) Fontenot, K. R.; Strickler, R. D. B.; Warren, T. M. Using Casing to Drill Directional
48
49 Wells Drilling with Large-Diameter Tubulars Eliminates the Need to Run Conventional.
50
Schlumberger. 2005, pp 44–61.
51
52
53 (158) Pavkovic, B.; Bizjak, R.; Petrovic, B. Review of Casing While Drilling Technology.
54
55 Podzemn. Rad. 2016, 29 (29), 11–32. https://doi.org/10.5937/podrad1629011P.
56
57 (159) Tessari, R. M.; Garret, M. Casing Drilling - A Revolutionary Approach to Reducing
58
59 Well Costs. In Proceedings of SPE/IADC Drilling Conference; Society of Petroleum
60

1
2
3 Engineers, 1999; Vol. 1, pp 221–229. https://doi.org/10.2523/52789-MS.
4
5
6 (160) Hannegan, D. M. Methane Hydrate Drilling Technology. In Offshore Technology
7
Conference; Offshore Technology Conference: Texas,USA, 2005; pp 1304–1306.
8
9 https://doi.org/10.4043/17448-MS.
10
11
12
(161) Naterstad, T. L. Utilizing Managed Pressure Casing Drilling in Depleted Reservoir
13 Zones, 2014.
14
15
16 (162) Stone, C.; Medley, G.; Reynolds, P. Blending Technologies : MPD, Casing Drilling Can
17
Eliminate Intermediate Casing String. Drilling contractor. 2006, pp 55–57.
18
19
20 (163) Cohen, J.; Stave, R.; Schubert, J.; Elieff, B. Dual-Gradient Drilling. In Managed
21
22
Pressure Drilling; Elsevier, 2008; pp 181–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-933762-
23 24-1.50014-0.
24
25
26 (164) Kenneth L. Smith1, A. D. Gault1, D. ABSTRACT: SubSea MudLift Drilling Joint
27 Industry Project: Delivering Dual Gradient Drilling Technology to Industry. Am. Assoc.
28
29 Pet. Geol. Bull. 2002, 86, 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1306/3FEF4C7B-1741-11D7-
30
31 8645000102C1865D.
32
33 (165) Smith, K. DGD brings operations in tune with nature
34
35 https://www.drillingcontractor.org/dgd-brings-operations-in-tune-with-nature-20347
36
37 (accessed Apr 3, 2020).
38
39 (166) Cohen, J.; Smith, K. Dual Gradient Drilling Methods : Their Layouts and Pressure
40
41 Profiles https://www.scribd.com/document/331325574/K-Smith-IADC-DGD-
42
43
Workshop-Different-Types-of-DGD-Systems (accessed Jun 24, 2020).
44
45 (167) Dowell, D. The Dual Gradient Drilling System Production Company Riser at Seawater
46
47 Gives Full DGD Effect Seafloor
48 https://www.scribd.com/document/162614608/DDowellPump-Based-DGD-IADC-
49
50 Final (accessed Apr 4, 2020).
51
52
(168) Elieff, B. A.; Schubert, J. J. Dual Gradient Drilling Will Control Shallow Hazards in
53
54 Deepwater Environments. In Volume 7: Offshore Geotechnics; Petroleum Technology;
55
56 ASMEDC, 2009; Vol. 7, pp 509–539. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2009-79790.
57
58 (169) Malloy, K. P.; Garrett, D. L. Risk Profile of Dual Gradient Drilling Risk Profile of Dual
59
60 Gradient Drilling; USA, 2011.

1
2
3 (170) Hauge, E. Automatic Kick Detection and Handling in Managed Pressure Drilling
4
5 Systems, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2013.
6
7
(171) Schubert, J. J.; Texas, A.; Texas, A.; Choe, J. Well Control Procedures for Dual Gradient
8
9 Drilling as Compared to Conventional Riser Drilling. In SPE/IADC Drilling
10
11 Conference; Society of Petroleum Engineers: Netherlands, 2003.
12
13 (172) Smith, K. L.; Gault, A. D.; Witt, D. E.; Weddle, C. E. SubSea MudLift Drilling Joint
14
15 Industry Project : Delivering Dual Gradient Drilling Technology to Industry; Society of
16
17 Petroleum Engineers Inc, 2001; p 13. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/71357-
18
MS.
19
20
21 (173) Smith, K. Dual Gradient Drilling: Has Its Time Finally Come? http://www.cargos-
22
23 paquebots.net/Revue de presse/0000_IMAGES-05/524-Dual_Gradient_Drilling.pdf
24 (accessed Feb 2, 2020).
25
26
27 (174) Hannegan, D. M. Methane Hydrate Drilling Technology. In Offshore Technology
28
Conference; Offshore Technology Conference: Texas,USA, 2005; pp 4–6.
29
30 https://doi.org/10.4043/17448-MS.
31
32
33
(175) Pixton, D.; Craig, A.; Intelliserv, N. O. V; Shishavan, R. A.; Perez, H.; Hedengren, J.
34 Addressing UBO and MPD Challenges with Wired Drill Pipe Telemetry; 2014.
35
36 https://doi.org/10.2118/168953-MS.
37
38 (176) Chong, Z. R.; Yin, Z.; Zhao, J.; Linga, P. Recovering Natural Gas from Gas Hydrates
39
40 Using Horizontal Wellbore. Energy Procedia 2017, 143, 780–785.
41
42 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.12.762.
43
44 (177) Petrowiki. Horizontal Wells https://petrowiki.org/Horizontal_wells (accessed Aug 17,
45
46 2020).
47
48 (178) Ye, J.; Qin, X.; Xie, W.; Lu, H.; Ma, B.; Qiu, H. The Second Natural Gas Hydrate
49
50 Production Test in the South China Sea. China Geol. 2020, 2, 197–209.
51
52 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31035/cg2020043.
53
54 (179) Li, B.; Liang, Y.-P.; Li, X.-S.; Zhou, L. A Pilot-Scale Study of Gas Production from
55
56 Hydrate Deposits with Two-Spot Horizontal Well System. Appl. Energy 2016, 176, 12–
57
58 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.05.061.
59
60 (180) Feng, J.-C.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.-S.; Li, G.; Chen, Z.-Y. Production Behaviors and Heat

1
2
3 Transfer Characteristics of Methane Hydrate Dissociation by Depressurization in
4
5 Conjunction with Warm Water Stimulation with Dual Horizontal Wells. Energy 2015,
6
7 79 (C), 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.11.018.
8
9 (181) Li, X.-S.; Yang, B.; Duan, L.-P.; Li, G.; Huang, N.-S.; Zhang, Y. Experimental Study
10
11 on Gas Production from Methane Hydrate in Porous Media by SAGD Method. Appl.
12
13 Energy 2013, 112, 1233–1240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.02.007.
14
15 (182) Li, G.; Li, X. Sen; Yang, B.; Duan, L. P.; Huang, N. S.; Zhang, Y.; Tang, L. G. The Use
16
17 of Dual Horizontal Wells in Gas Production from Hydrate Accumulations. Appl. Energy
18
2013, 112, 1303–1310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.057.
19
20
21 (183) Feng, J.-C.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.-S. Entropy Generation Analysis of Hydrate Dissociation
22
23 by Depressurization with Horizontal Well in Different Scales of Hydrate Reservoirs.
24 Energy 2017, 125, 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.104.
25
26
27 (184) Chong, Z. R.; Zhao, J.; Chan, J. H. R.; Yin, Z.; Linga, P. Effect of Horizontal Wellbore
28
on the Production Behavior from Marine Hydrate Bearing Sediment. Appl. Energy 2018,
29
30 214 (January), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.01.072.
31
32
33
(185) Feng, J.-C.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.-S.; Li, G.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, Z.-Y. Effect of Horizontal
34 and Vertical Well Patterns on Methane Hydrate Dissociation Behaviors in Pilot-Scale
35
36 Hydrate Simulator. Appl. Energy 2015, 145, 69–79.
37
38 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.137.
39
40 (186) Yin, Z.; Huang, L.; Linga, P. Effect of Wellbore Design on the Production Behaviour of
41
42 Methane Hydrate-Bearing Sediments Induced by Depressurization. Appl. Energy 2019,
43
44
254 (May), 113635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113635.
45
46 (187) Teodoriu, C.; Falcone, G.; Afolabi, A. Investigation of Drilling Problems in Gas Hydrate
47
48 Formations. In Volume 1: Offshore Technology; ASMEDC, 2008; Vol. 1, pp 389–393.
49 https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2008-57438.
50
51
52 (188) Sedigh, M.; Vahedi, M.; Khodafarin, R.; Osouli, A. Gas Hydrate of Deep Water Regions
53
54
and Drilling Hazards; 7th International Conference on Gas Hydrates, 2011; Vol. 98, p
55 88724255.
56
57
58 (189) Amodu, A. A. Drilling Through Gas Hydrate Formations : Possible Problems and
59 Suggested Solutions, Texas A&M University, 2008.
60

1
2
3 (190) Lei, L.; Santamarina, J. C. Physical Properties of Fine-Grained Sediments with
4
5 Segregated Hydrate Lenses. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2019, 109 (August), 899–911.
6
8
9 (191) Moridis, G.; Collett, T. S.; Pooladi-Darvish, M.; Hancock, S. H.; Santamarina, C.;
10
11 Boswell, R.; Kneafsey, T. J.; Rutqvist, J.; Kowalsky, M. B.; Reagan, M. T.; Sloan, E.
12
13 D.; Sum, A.; Koh, C. Challenges, Uncertainties, and Issues Facing Gas Production From
14 Gas-Hydrate Deposits. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 2011, 14 (01), 76–112.
15
16 https://doi.org/10.2118/131792-PA.
17
18
(192) Drilling-JAMSTEC https://www.jamstec.go.jp/cdex/e/operations/drilling/ (accessed Jul
19
20 23, 2020).
21
22
23 (193) Yamamoto, K.; Wang, X.-X.; Tamaki, M.; Suzuki, K. The Second Offshore Production
24 of Methane Hydrate in the Nankai Trough and Gas Production Behavior from a
25
26 Heterogeneous Methane Hydrate Reservoir. RSC Adv. 2019, 9 (45), 25987–26013.
27
28 https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RA00755E.
29
30 (194) Petrowiki. Functions of drilling fluid https://petrowiki.org/Functions_of_drilling_fluid
31
32 (accessed Apr 4, 2020).
33
34 (195) Maslin, M.; Owen, M.; Betts, R.; Day, S.; Dunkley Jones, T.; Ridgwell, A. Gas
35
36 Hydrates: Past and Future Geohazard? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.
37
38 2010, 368 (1919), 2369–2393. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0065.
39
40 (196) Stephens, M. P.; Bruton, J. R. Fluid Selection and Planning for Drilling Unconsolidated
41
42 Formations. In Offshore Technology Conference; Offshore Technology Conference,
43
44
1992; Vol. 1992-May, pp 361–368. https://doi.org/10.4043/7021-MS.
45
46 (197) Burden, P.; Dimitriadis, K.; Clements, K.; Nguyen, C.; Staples, T.; Thomas, S. Drilling
47
48 Fluid Selection Methodology For Environmentally Sensitive Areas. In SPE/IADC
49 Drilling Conference; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2013; Vol. 2, pp 1138–1163.
50
51 https://doi.org/10.2118/163508-MS.
52
53
54
(198) Zhang, L.; Zhang, C.; Huang, H.; Qi, D.; Zhang, Y.; Ren, S.; Wu, Z.; Fang, M. Gas
55 Hydrate Risks and Prevention for Deep Water Drilling and Completion: A Case Study
56
57 of Well QDN-X in Qiongdongnan Basin, South China Sea. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2014, 41
58
59 (6), 824–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(14)60100-2.
60

1
2
3 (199) Jiang, G.; Liu, T.; Ning, F.; Tu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Yu, Y.; Kuang, L. Polyethylene Glycol
4
5 Drilling Fluid for Drilling in Marine Gas Hydrates-Bearing Sediments: An Experimental
6
7 Study. Energies 2011, 4 (1), 140–150. https://doi.org/10.3390/en4010140.
8
9 (200) Wang, Z.; Sun, B. Deepwater Gas Kick Simulation with Consideration of the Gas
10
11 Hydrate Phase Transition. J. Hydrodyn. 2014, 26 (1), 94–103.
12
13 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6058(14)60011-1.
14
15 (201) Ning, F.; Jiang, G.; Zhang, L.; Bin, D. Analysis on Characteristics of Drilling Fluids
16
17 Invading Into Gas Hydrates-Bearing Formation. Geophysics 2008, No. 50704028.
18
19 (202) Kelland, M. A.; Mønig, K.; Iversen, J. E.; Lekvam, K. Feasibility Study for the Use of
20
21 Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors in Deep-Water Drilling Fluids. Energy & Fuels 2008, 22 (4),
22
23 2405–2410. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800109e.
24
25 (203) Wang, R.; Sun, H.; Shi, X.; Xu, X.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, Z. Fundamental Investigation of
26
27 the Effects of Modified Starch, Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium, and Xanthan Gum on
28
Hydrate Formation under Different Driving Forces. Energies 2019, 12 (10), 2026.
29
30 https://doi.org/10.3390/en12102026.
31
32
33
(204) Gupta, P.; Sangwai, J. S. Formation and Dissociation Kinetics of Methane Hydrate in
34 Aqueous Oilfield Polymer Solutions (Polyacrylamide, Xanthan Gum, and Guar Gum)
35
36 and Their Performance Evaluation as Low-Dosage Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors (LDHI).
37
38 Energy & Fuels 2019, 33 (7), 6335–6349.
39
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.9b01204.
40
41
42 (205) Vargas, J.; Roldán, L. J.; Lopera, S. H.; Cardenas, J. C.; Zabala, R. D.; Franco, C. A.;
43
44
Cortés, F. B. Effect of Silica Nanoparticles on Thermal Stability in Bentonite Free
45 Water-Based Drilling Fluids to Improve Its Rheological and Filtration Properties after
46
47 Aging Process. Offshore Technol. Conf. Bras. 2019, OTCB 2019 2020.
48
49 https://doi.org/10.4043/29901-ms.
50
51 (206) Ebeltoft, H.; Yousif, M.; Soergaard, E. Hydrate Control during Deep Water Drilling:
52
53 Overview and New Drilling Fluids Formulations. In SPE Annual Technical Conference
54
55 and Exhibition; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1997. https://doi.org/10.2118/38567-
56 MS.
57
58
59 (207) Kelland, M. A. History of the Development of Low Dosage Hydrate Inhibitors. Energy
60

1
2
3 & Fuels 2006, 20 (3), 825–847. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef050427x.
4
5
6 (208) Rogers, R. Hydrate Inhibition During Drilling and Production. In Offshore Gas
7
Hydrates; Elsevier, 2015; pp 151–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802319-
8
9 8.00005-X.
10
11
12
(209) Alcázar-Vara, L. A.; Cortés-Monroy, I. R. Drilling Fluids for Deepwater Fields: An
13 Overview. In Recent Insights in Petroleum Science and Engineering; InTech, 2018.
14
15 https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70093.
16
17
(210) Sorgard, E.; Alterås, E.; Fimreite, G.; Dzialowski, A.; Svanes, G. S. Design Of Water
18
19 Based Drilling Fluid Systems For Deepwater Norway. In SPE/IADC Drilling
20
21 Conference; Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2001; Vol. 53, p 36.
22
23 https://doi.org/10.2118/67834-MS.
24
25 (211) Khodja, M.; Khodja-Saber, M.; Paul, J.; Cohaut, N.; Bergay, F. Drilling Fluid
26
27 Technology: Performances and Environmental Considerations. In Products and
28
Services; from R&D to Final Solutions; Sciyo, 2010. https://doi.org/10.5772/10393.
29
30
31 (212) Fink, J. K. Drilling Fluids. In Water-Based Chemicals and Technology for Drilling,
32
33
Completion, and Workover Fluids; Elsevier, 2015; pp 5–114.
34 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802505-5.00002-0.
35
36
37 (213) Ebeltoft, H.; Majeed, Y.; Sœrgärd, E. Hydrate Control During Deepwater Drilling:
38 Overview and New Drilling-Fluids Formulations. In SPE Drilling & Completion;
39
40 Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc., 2001; Vol. 16, pp 19–26.
41
42 https://doi.org/10.2118/68207-PA.
43
44 (214) Wang, L.; Jiang, G.; Zhang, X. Modeling and Molecular Simulation of Natural Gas
45
46 Hydrate Stabilizers. Eur. J. Remote Sens. 2020, 00 (00), 1–12.
47
48 https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2020.1738901.
49
50 (215) Lal, B.; Nashed, O. Chemical Additives for Gas Hydrates; Springer, Cham, 2020.
51
52 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30750-9.
53
54 (216) Chandrasekharan Nair, V.; Mech, D.; Gupta, P.; Sangwai, J. S. Polymer Flooding in
55
56 Artificial Hydrate Bearing Sediments for Methane Gas Recovery. Energy & Fuels 2018,
57
58 32 (6), 6657–6668. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b00874.
59
60 (217) Fan, S.; Zhang, Y.; Tian, G.; Liang, D.; Li, D. Natural Gas Hydrate Dissociation by

1
2
3 Presence of Ethylene Glycol. Energy & Fuels 2006, 20 (1), 324–326.
4
5 https://doi.org/10.1021/ef0502204.
6
7
(218) Schoderbek, D.; Farrell, H.; Howard, J.; Raterman, K.; Silpngarmlert, S.; Martin, K.;
8
9 Smith, B.; Klein, P. ConocoPhillips Gas Hydrate Production Test Final Technical
10
11 Report; Pittsburgh, PA, and Morgantown, WV (United States), 2013.
12
13 https://doi.org/10.2172/1123878.
14
15 (219) Echt, T.; Plank, J. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering An Improved Test
16
17 Protocol for High Temperature Carrying Capacity of Drilling Fl Uids Exempli Fi Ed on
18
a Sepiolite Mud. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2019, 70 (July), 102964.
19
20 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2019.102964.
21
22
23 (220) Li, X. Sen; Xu, C. G.; Zhang, Y.; Ruan, X. K.; Li, G.; Wang, Y. Investigation into Gas
24 Production from Natural Gas Hydrate: A Review. Appl. Energy 2016, 172, 286–322.
25
26 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.101.
27
28
(221) Yuan, Y.; Xu, T.; Xin, X.; Xia, Y. Multiphase Flow Behavior of Layered Methane
29
30 Hydrate Reservoir Induced by Gas Production. Geofluids 2017, 2017, 1–15.
31
32 https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7851031.
33
34 (222) Li, G.; Moridis, G. J.; Zhang, K.; Li, X.-S. Evaluation of Gas Production Potential from
35
36 Marine Gas Hydrate Deposits in Shenhu Area of South China Sea. Energy & Fuels 2010,
37
38 24 (11), 6018–6033. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef100930m.
39
40 (223) Tang, L.-G.; Li, X.-S.; Feng, Z.-P.; Li, G.; Fan, S.-S. Control Mechanisms for Gas
41
42 Hydrate Production by Depressurization in Different Scale Hydrate Reservoirs. Energy
43
44
& Fuels 2007, 21 (1), 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef0601869.
45
46 (224) Mekala, P.; Babu, P.; Sangwai, J. S.; Linga, P. Formation and Dissociation Kinetics of
47
48 Methane Hydrates in Seawater and Silica Sand. Energy & Fuels 2014, 28 (4), 2708–
49 2716. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef402445k.
50
51
52 (225) Zheng, J; Chong, Z. R; Qureshi, M. F.; Linga, P. Carbon Dioxide Sequestration via
53
54 Gas Hydrates: A Potential Pathway toward Decarbonization, Energy Fuels 2020, in-
55
56 press, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c02309
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 (226) Oyama, H.; Konno, Y.; Masuda, Y.; Narita, H. Dependence of Depressurization-
4
5 Induced Dissociation of Methane Hydrate Bearing Laboratory Cores on Heat Transfer.
6
7 Energy & Fuels 2009, 23 (10), 4995–5002. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef900179y.
8
9 (227) Walsh, M. R.; Hancock, S. H.; Wilson, S. J.; Patil, S. L.; Moridis, G. J.; Boswell, R.;
10
11 Collett, T. S.; Koh, C. A.; Sloan, E. D. Preliminary Report on the Commercial Viability
12
13 of Gas Production from Natural Gas Hydrates. Energy Econ. 2009, 31 (5), 815–823.
14 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.03.006.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60 TABLES

1
2
3 Table 1
4
5 Worldwide distribution of natural gas hydrate reservoirs
6
7 Location Mapped areas Mapping *Gas reserves References
8 techniques (m3)
9 U.S Atlantic • Blake Ridge* BSR and amplitude 57 × 1012 Ladd et
10 continental blanking al.,200027
• Hatteras Outer Ridge
11
margin • Carolina Trough Diapirs Max, 200023
12
13 • Hudson-Wilmington drape
14 area
15 Arctic and • North Slope of Alaska* BSR and gas and fluid 2.4 × 1012 Max, 200023
16 northern north • Gulf of Mexico, offshore* bursts 1.14 × 1014 MHAC
17 Atlantic • Eastern US offshore* 2.68 × 1014 Letter28
18 oceans • Wrangel Abyssal Plain
19
20 • Barents Sea
21 • Norwegian continental
22 margins
23 • Eastern Labrador Sea
24 Cascadia • Mackenzie delta-Beaufort BSR with Deep-Tow 0.24-8.7 × 1013 Max, 200023
25 margin, Acoustics/Geophysics 0.19-6.2 × 10 14 Majorowicz et
Sea, Canada*
26
northeast • Arctic Archipelago, Canada* System (DTAGS) 1.9-7.8 × 1013 al.,200129
27
Pacific Ocean • Atlantic margin, Canada* 0.32-2.4 × 1013
28
29 • Pacific margin, Canada*
30 • Cascadia accretionary margin
31 • Vancouver Island
32 • Hydrate Ridge (off Oregon)
33
Antarctic • South Shetland Margin* BSR 2.3 × 1012 Max, 200023
34
35 margin • Wilkes Land margin Lodolo et
36 • Pacific Margin of the al.,200230
37 Antarctic Peninsula
38 South Orkney continental
39 block
40 North east • Northern Arabian Sea and BSR along with 1894 × 1012 at Max, 200023
41
Arabian sea Bay of Bengal* amplitude blanking 95% (P) and
42
43 and northern • Krishna-Godavari offshore and velocity reversal 14572 × 1012 at
44 ocean - India • Andaman & Nicobar 5% (P)
45 convergent margin
46 Japan • Nankai Trough* BSR 1.1 × 1012 Oyama et
47 al.,201731
48 Northern Digital bathymetry 1.2 × 1011 - 2.4 Max, 200023
• Qinghai -Tibet plateau
49
sector-South (Qilian)* along with BSR × 1014 Song et
50
China sea • South china sea SCS (Shenhu 6.5 × 1013 al.,201432
51
52 area, pearl river mouth basin.
53 *
54 • Northern sector of south
55 China sea
56 South and west of Taiwan
57 Southwestern BSR 2.48 × 108 Ryu et
• Ulleung Basin
58
east sea-Korea al.,201733
59
60 Reuters34

1
2
3 Table 2
4
5 Characteristics of different pressure coring systems
6
7 Pressure core
Working Core length Compatibility/ Formation/ Depth Limitations References
Tool/ Type/ Drive/ Sealing pressure (m) and Active range
8 systems
(psi) diameter (mm)
9 Compatible with standard DSDP Sporadic premature tripping of Nierenberg et
10 Pressure core barrel Dropped down and wireline retrievable/
4989 5.8&58 No
wireline coring system/ Oceanic the ball closure, vent and al.,198489
11 (PCB) Rotary latch/ Rotary table/ Ball valve sediments/ 6100 m water depth release mechanism Abid et al.,201567
12 Compatible with the existing BHA Limited to formations Ocean Drilling
13 Free fall deployable and wireline used for the APC and XCB coring composed of soft sediments to Program90
Pressure core
14 sampler (PCS)
retrievable/ Rotary latch/ 10,000 1&43.2 No systems/ From mudline to indurated firm clay and core diameter is
Rotary table/ Ball valve formations /6500 m combined water limited by ball valve size
15 depth and formation penetration
16 Pressure Sandy sediments/ Approx. 1006 m Incompatible with PCATS and Yamamoto 201591
Wireline retrievable/ Rotary latch/ Rotary
17 temperature corer
table/ Ball valve
3480 3&66.7 No water depth other pressure core analysis Humphrey 201692
18 system (PTCS) tools
Compatible with PCATS and plastic Passive heave compensator Humphrey 201692
19 Fugro pressure
Wireline retrievable/ Precussion type-
(Cellulous Butyrate) liners/ system is required and reduced
powered by fluid circulation/ Downhole 3625 1&53.97 Yes
20 corer (FPC)
mechanism/ Flapper valve
Unlithified sediments/ 13.5 mbsf core quality with unclamped
21 tested string
Wireline retrievable/ Rotary latch/ Non- Compatible with plastic (Cellulous Lower autoclave valve IODP93
22 HYACE rotary
rotating drill string 3045 1&50.8 Yes Butyrate) liners/ Lithified sediments/ prevents the core from being Abid et al.,201567
23 corer (HRC)
Downhole mechanism/ Flapper valve 37.5 mbsf tested recovered at in situ pressures
24 High pressure
Wireline retrievable/ Rotary, punch latch/
Compatible with Fugro coring tools/ Incompatible with PTCS Schultheiss et
25 temperature corer 5076 3.5&54 Yes Sandy and clayey sediments al.,201085
Top drive/ Ball valve
(HPTC)
26 Hybrid pressure Compatible with PCATS/ Cannot retrieve oriented cores Kubo et al.,201473
27 Wireline retrievable/ Rotary latch/ Top
coring system 5076 3.5&51 Yes All pressure- and temperature-
drive/ Ball valve
28 (Hybrid PCS) sensitive formations
Modified version of HRC/FRPC. Bit restriction to cut deep Abid et al.,201567
29 Sugar corer Wireline retrievable/ Rotary latch/ Prototy Designed to obtain good quality cores
30 (SUCO) Downhole mechanism/ Flapper valve
3045 1.2&50
pe WOB and penetration rate will be
31 kept constant
32 Multiple autoclave Near surface sediments/5000 m water Requires horizontal surface Abegg et al.,200894
Cable/ Piston/ Gravity/ Flapper valve 2030 0.55&100 No
corer (MAC) depth
33 Dynamic autoclave Near surface oceanic sediments/2000 Penetration depth needs to be Abegg et al.,200894
34 piston corer Cable/ Piston/ Gravity/ Ball valve 2900 2.5&84 Yes m water depth restricted to the core-cutting
35 (DAPC) barrel for greater cores
MeBo Druckken Loose to hard sediments / 200mbsf No sensors to measure heat Freudenthal et
36 Wireline retrievable/ Rotary, push latch/ Prototy
Probennehmer 2900 1.3&45 flow in the sea floor al.,200795
37 (MDP)
Top drive/ Flapper valve pe
Baurer 201894
38
39
40
41
42
43 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
44
45
46
1
2
3 Table 3
4
5 Chronological events in prospect finding of hydrates in sediments (Modified from Liu et al.,2019135)
6
Steps Objective Information obtained
7
Step 1 • Search for peculiarities indicating the existence of large-scale hydrate mounds Seabed topography details, Gas plumes
8
Baseline survey • Monitor submarine cold-seep system related to hydrate dissolution
9
10 • Tools used: Vessel based geophysical tools (Swath bathymetry -single, multiple and split
11 beam system)
12 Step 2 • Detailed observations of geological structures of the hydrate mounds using acoustic Geological structures map, Seafloor samples
13 Geological survey profiles for physical and chemical analysis
14
• Tools used: Autonomous underwater vehicle (AUVs), Swath bathymetry, Side-scan sonar,
15
16 Sub-bottom profiler
17 Step 3 • Direct observations via camera mounted on the ROV Seafloor surface morphology of the hydrate
18 Submarine visual survey • Advanced positioning systems mounted on them are capable of performing accurate and mounds, Population structures of microbial
19 precise ground truth sampling communities, Dissolved methane sensing,
20 • Tools used: Remote operated vehicle (ROVs), Deep-tow digital camera system, Seafloor sediment sampling
21 Autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV), Deep-tow geo-acoustic systems, Human
22
occupied vehicle (HOV)
23
Step 4 • To determine the structures of the gas chimney systems Base of GHSZ, Location and characteristics
24
Seismic survey • Identify the BSR distribution of geological structures, Subsurface
25
26 • Identify possible migration conduits of hydrate-related gas and their relationship with the discontinuities, Layering, Probable
27 free-gas reservoir below the BSR rock/structures
28 • Tools used: 3D Seismic
29 Step 5 Hydrate saturation
• To image bulk resistivity and augment seismic data
30 Electromagnetic survey
31 • To determine sediments with high resistivity and calculate hydrate saturations
32
33 Step 6 • To determine the scale of hydrate-bearing sediments around the well via sensors Porosity, Saturation, Resistivity, Borehole
34 Well logging during drilling • They are usually applied during the middle period, between seismic and drilling for factors, Weight on bit, Lithology, Dip,
35 determining hydrate saturations, which could help achieve a stereoscopic exploration from Hydrocarbon presence
36 a point observation
37 • Tools used: Resistivity logs, Acoustic velocity, Neutron porosity logs, Density log and
38 Gamma ray log
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
1
2
3 Step 7 • To perform precise ground truth sampling and successfully recover hydrate deposit Porosity, Permeability, Fluid saturation,
4 Coring sediments at in situ pressure Grain density, Lithology, Texture, Capillary
5
• To determine gas hydrate saturation, pressure, Electrical-Acoustic-Compressive
6
Tools used: Pressure tight piston core barrel properties
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
1
2
3 Table 4
4
5 Differences between conventional oil & gas and unconventional gas hydrate reservoir
6
7 Parameter Conventional reservoir Gas hydrate reservoir References
8 Depth Found at deeper depth under Located at shallow depth Yin and Linga,
9 the seabed (3000 m to 5000 (≈500 m from the seabed for 2019138
10 m or deeper). marine deposits and ≈300- Cunningham/Sa
11
1000 m for permafrost igo,1999139
12
13 deposits).
14 Distribution Fairly distributed in both 99% gas hydrates exist in Ruppel,2015140
15 onshore and offshore areas. marine sediments while 1%
16 are found in permafrost
17
18 regions.
19 Reservoiring Found in interparticle, Natural gas is locked in ice Li et al.,2016141
20 space intraparticle, dissolution or like cages in interparticle
21 organic, pores and fractures pores or fractures.
22
of reservoir rock and coal
23
24 pore or cleat fractures in
25 case of CBM.
26 Phase transition No phase change of oil and Solid state hydrate changes to Sun et
27 during production gas. fluid phases (gas and water). al.,2017142
28
29 Migration mode Primary & secondary Secondary migration. Li et al.,2016141
30 migration.
31 Requirements for Trap and cap rock. Hydrate stability zone is Li et al.,2016141
32 retention equivalent to the trap and cap
33
rocks, with unsteady state
34
35 characteristics.
36 Initial reservoir Normal or higher initial Initially normally pressured APA Petroleum
37 pressure reservoir pressure. (water phase pore pressure). Engineering
38
2005143
39
40 Flowing BHP Controlled by: Controlled by: APA Petroleum
41 • Drawdown limitation • Dissociation. Engineering
42 (borehole stability, water • Production rate must equal 2005143
43 production etc.). dissociation rate.
44
45 • Surface pressure constraint. • Flowing well head pressure
46 • Rate constraint. is controlled by flowing
47 bottom hole pressure and
48 production rate (gas &
49
50
water).
51 Compression Typically staged later in life Required throughout the life APA Petroleum
52 requirement of the field. of project Engineering
53 2005143
54
Primary water • Condensation. • Dissociated water APA Petroleum
55
56 sources • Coning & cusping. (1 ft3of gas hydrate = (160- Engineering
57 • Active aquifer. 170) scf of gas & 0.8 ft3 of 2005143
58 water).
59
60

1
2
3 Hydrate Includes: Includes: APA Petroleum
4
prevention in • Flowing well head • Maintaining low flowing Engineering
5
6 wellbore temperature > 75 F bottom hole pressure. 2005143
7 depending upon gas • Heat and/or chemical
8 analyses & pressure. injection.
9 • Temporary heating or
10
11
chemical injection.
12 Liquid Liquid loading. Water production. APA Petroleum
13 production label Engineering
14 2005143
15
Associated • Corrosion problem by Though no significant APA Petroleum
16
17 problems CO2 and H2S. corrosion, condensate liquids Engineering
18 • Scaling from produced or significant scaling is 2005143
19 water. observed in gas hydrate wells Jung et
20 •Asphaltenes & paraffins but the major problems are: al.,2012144
21
22
deposition (gas condensate). • Sand production.
23 •Extreme high temperatures • Reformation of hydrate.
24 and pressures.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 Table 5
4
5 International hydrate related drilling projects (Liu et al.,2019135,Ye et al.,2020178,Yamamoto et al.,2019193)
6 Project Country & Area of Reservoir Hydrate type Drilling platform Water Drilling Buried
7 name/Year exploration lithology depth (m) depth depth (m)
8 (m)
9 ODP164/1995 United states & Blake Clay rich Pore filling hydrate/nodular JOIDES Resolution 945 278-678 180-268
10 ridge argillaceous rock particles, massive block
11
MET1/1999 Japan & Nankai trough Sandstone Pore-filling hydrate Rig M.G Hulme Jr 2770-2800 7-750 260
12
13 ODP204/2002 United states & Mud Thin beds, nodular, veins JOIDES Resolution 780-1200 9-470 68-200
14 Southern hydrate ridge
15 MET1/2004 Japan & Nankai trough Coarse Pore-filling and fracture-filling JOIDES Resolution 720-2033 250-400 95-332
16 sandstone/mud hydrate/nodular particles
17 IODP311/2005 United states & Coarse sandstone Thin beds, nodular particles, veins JOIDES Resolution 950-2200 1-350 130-220
18 Northern hydrate ridge
19 JIP-I/2005 United states, Mexico, Fine grain Fracture filling hydrate Semi-Submersible 1500-2030 340-1100 180-400
20
Cuba & Gulf of Mexico sandstone Vessel-Uncle John
21
22 NGHP-01/2006 India & KG basin, Mud/Sandstone Pore-filling and fracture-filling JOIDES Resolution 920-2660 30-700 120-620
23 Mahanadi basin, hydrate/massive block, veins, lens-
24 Andaman Islands shaped
25 UBGH1/2007 Korea & Ulleung basin Mud/Sandstone Pore-filling and fracture-filling Multipurpose 180-2100 150
26 hydrate/thin beds, disperse offshore vessel-Rem
27 particles, veins Etive
28 GMGS1/2007 China & Shenhu area Fine grained mud Disperse particles Bavenit >1500 250 90-240
29
JIP-II/2009 United states, Mexico, Clay/Sandstone Fracture-filling hydrate Semi-submersible 1100-2100 830-1100 402-446
30
Cuba & Gulf of Mexico drilling vessel -Helix 810-900
31
32 Q4000
33 UBGH2/2010 Korea & Ulleung basin Mud/Sandstone Pore-filling and fracture-filling Synergy 910-2160 230-260 140-153
34 hydrate/nodular
35 MH21/2012 Japan & Nankai trough Sandstone Pore-filling and fracture-filling Chikyu 1000 378 260-320
36 hydrate/thin beds, disperse
37 particles, veins
38
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
1
2
3 GMGS2/2013 China & Dongsha region Silty mud Fracture-filling hydrate/thin beds, Multipurpose 667-1747 160-310 80-280
4 massive block, nodular particles, offshore vessel-Rem
5
disperse particles, veins Etive
6
7 GMGS3/2015 China & Shenhu area Muddy silt/Silty Pore-filling hydrate/Structure II Voyager 885-1530 170-360 130-170
8 mud hydrate was discovered for the first
9 time
10 NGHP-02/2015 India & KG basin, Coarse sandstone Pore-filling and fracture-filling Chikyu 1519-2815 239-567 150-280
11 Mahanadi basin, hydrate/massive block, veins, lens-
12 Andaman Islands shaped
13 GMGS4/2016 China & Shenhu area Muddy silt/silty Pore filling hydrate Voyager 793- 178- 130-200
14 mud 1292/1700- 297/309-
15
1960 618
16
17 IODP372/2017 New Zealand & Muddy silt/silty Pore-filling hydrate JOIDES Resolution 700-3500 100-750 135-165
18 Hikurangi margin mud
19 GOM2-1/2017 United states, Mexico, Sandstone Fracture-filling hydrate Semi-submersible 2032 720 412-450
20 Cuba& Gulf of Mexico drilling vessel Helix
21 Q4000
22 MH21/2017 Japan & Nankai Trough Sandstone/Siltstone Channel filling hydrate Chikyu 1000 90 270
23 SHSC2-6/2020 Shenhu area, South Clayey silt Pore filling hydrate PRIDE engineering 1225.23 896.23 207.8-
24
China Sea ship 253.4
25
26 Abbreviations: ODP (Ocean drilling program), IODP (Integrated ocean drilling program), JIP (Joint industry project), GOM (Gulf of Mexico and
27 Environmental technology), UBGH (Ulleung basin gas hydrate), NGHP (National gas hydrate program), GMGS (Guangzhou marine geological
28 survey)
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
1
2
3 Table 6
4
5 Drilling fluids used in different gas hydrate drilling expeditions
6
7 Field Country Drilling fluid Well Remarks References
8 Mallik Field Canada 6 weight % lecithin- Production test Lecithin is a Burger et
9 water solution and a wells and phospholipid and was al., 200671
10 water-based drilling injection wells used to stabilize the
11
fluid (Telnite, hydrates during
12
KCL/polymer drilling
13
14 system)
15 Nankai Field Japan KCL polymer mud Observations Borehole MH21,
16 and sepiolite drilling and Production enlargements were 200884
17 fluid test wells observed in layers
18 other than hydrate
19 bearing zone.
20 NGHP India Sepiolite Drilling Scientific Better plastic Collett et
21
Expedition Fluid Expedition viscosity and yield al.,201284
22
wells point and stable at low Echt et
23
24 temperature al.,2019219
25 environment.
26 Ignik Sikumi USA Oil Based Drilling Production test OBM reduces the risk Schoderbek
27 Permafrost mud well of hydrate formation, et al.,2013218
28 Field has high temperature
29 resistance and
30 provides good
31 reservoir protection.
32
Shenhu area, China Low density, high Production test Strong inhibition Ye et
33
34 South China performance WBM well performance and good al.,2020178
35 Sea wellbore stability.
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 FIGURES
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 1.Worldwide natural gas hydrate distribution (Adapted from Kumar & Linga,201826)
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Figure 2.Resource pyramid of hydrate accumulations (Adapted from Boswell et al.,201535)
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 Figure 3. Schematic representation of the types of methane hydrate depositions (Reproduced
24
25
26 with sand and thermoplastic beads)
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48 Figure 4. Hydrate reservoir classification and its properties (Concept from Moridis and
49
50
Collett 200344, 200445; Moridis and Sloan 200746)
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31 Figure 5. A strong BSR of Vancouver Island (Modified from R.D. Hyndman and S.R.
32 Dallimore,200156)
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34 Figure 6. 1) Profile of gas hydrate stability zone with respect to temperature and pressure in the marine environment, 2) Representation of a
35
36 velocity model for gas hydrate deposits from the profile 1, 3) Schematic representation of impedance from profile 2, 4) Schematic representation
37
38 of a seismic trace with the impedance contrast shown in 3 (Modified from Hanyan Wang,201664)
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Figure 7.Working of the pressure accumulator of pressure coring system (Adapted from
24
25 Khizar Abid et al.,201567)
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57 Figure 8. Schematic of core sample preservation under in-situ condition and the ball valve
58
59
that maintains pressure (Modified from JAMSTEC72)
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 Figure 9.1: Pressure temperature coring system (PTCS) (Modified from Research Consortium
4
5 for Methane Hydrate Resources in Japan,200884) 2: High pressure temperature corer (HPTC)
6
7 (Modified from Schultheiss et al.,201085) 3: Fugro pressure corer (FPC) and HYACE rotary
8
9
corer (HRC) (Modified from Collett et al.,201386) 4: MeBo-Druckkem-Probennehmer (MDP)
10 (Modified from Pape et al.,201787) 5: Pressure core sampler (PCS) (Modified from Collett et
11
12 al.,201386) 6: Hybrid PCS (Modified from Kubo et al.,201473) 7: Pressure core barrel (PCB)
13
14 (Modified from Kvenvolden et al.,198288)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52 Figure 10. Stability depth of gas hydrate reservoir vs. conventional oil and gas reservoir
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35 Figure 11. Schematic layout of managed pressure drilling operation (Modified from Ling et al.,2015155)
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 Figure 12.Variants of casing while drilling (Modified from Fontenot et al., 2005157)
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
Figure 13. Pressure profiles for dual gradient drilling (Modified from Smith,2013165)
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51 Figure 14. Mud lift drilling arrangement for dual gradient drilling (Adapted from
52
53 Chevron,2011166,167)
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 Figure 15. Well profiles for enhanced gas recovery from gas hydrate reservoir
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Figure 16. Subject matter of our current and subsequent discussion
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59

Drilling in Natural Gas Hydrate Reservoir

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drilling in Natural Gas Hydrate Reservoir

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drilling in Natural Gas Hydrate Reservoir

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subscriber access provided by Karolinska Institutet, University Library

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W.,

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

ACS Paragon Plus Environment