No abstract

TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractMitigating drilling hazards-balancing drilling risks against the optimum well design while preparing for unplanned drilling events-has been a challenge to cost-effective well construction for decades. The pore pressure/formation fracture gradient balancing challenges mixed with the unexpected encounters with shallow flows, unstable formations, overpressure formations and depleted formations makes AFE (authorization for expenditures) goals dim.Excessive use of loss circulation pills and traditional contingency liners drive well costs up and jeopardize reaching total depth (TD) with an effective completion. A drilling hazard remediation solution could be as simple as using that planned contingency liner or using drill-in casing to fight sloughing formations. However, the use of conventional solid expandable drilling liners can drive excessive risks into the well and even cause a costly sidetracking of the well.Operators in the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea and in Asia Pacific have been successfully using a set of proven well construction tools with a more "Fit for Purpose" application to mitigate drilling problems that have resulted in excessive nonproductive time (NPT) during drilling operations. These systems are used only when necessary to mitigate the well challenge, allowing the well construction to continue while minimizing their NPT fighting these well problems.This paper describes some of these "fit for problem" well construction tools and their applications in recent case histories.

A Canadian project (the National Initiative for Telehealth Guidelines) was established to develop telehealth guidelines that would be used by health professionals, by telehealth providers as benchmarks for standards of service and by accrediting agencies for accreditation criteria. An environmental scan was conducted, which focused on organizational, human resource, clinical and technological issues. A literature review, a stakeholder survey (245 mail-outs, 84 complete responses) and 48 key informant interviews were conducted. A framework of guidelines was developed and published as a preliminary step towards pan-Canadian policies. Interim recommendations were that organizations and jurisdictions might consider formal agreements to specify: (1) organizational interoperability; (2) technical interoperability; (3) personnel requirements; (4) quality and continuity-of-care responsibilities; (5) telehealth services; (6) remuneration; and (7) quality assurance processes. An additional recommendation was that flexible mechanisms were needed to ensure that accreditation criteria will be realistic and achievable in the context of rapid changes in technology, service integration and delivery, as well as in the context of operating telehealth services in remote or underserved areas.

No abstract

No abstract