Summary Coalbed-methane (CBM) reservoirs are naturally fractured formations, comprising both permeable fractures and matrix blocks. The interaction between fractures and matrix presents a great challenge for the forecast of CBM reservoir performance. In this work, a dual-permeability model was applied to study the parameter sensitivity on the CBM production, because the dual-permeability model incorporates not only the influence from matrix and fractures but also that between adjacent matrix blocks. The mass exchange between two systems is defined as a function of desorption time constant at the standard condition, coal matrix porosity, and the difference of gas pressure between two systems. Correspondingly, gas diffusivity in matrix is considered as a variable and represented by a function of shape factor, gas desorption time, and reservoir pressure. These relations are integrated into a fully coupled numerical model of coal geomechanical deformation and gas desorption/gas flow in both systems. This numerical approach demonstrates the important nonlinear effects of the complex interaction between matrix and fractures on CBM production behaviors that cannot be recovered without rigorously incorporating geomechanical influences. This model was then used to investigate the sensitivity of CBM extraction behavior to different controlling factors, including gas desorption time constant, initial fracture permeability, fracture spacing, swelling capacity, desorption capacity, production pressure, and fracture and matrix porosities. Modeling results show that the peak magnitudes of gas-production rate increase with initial fracture permeability, sorption and swelling capacities, and matrix porosity, and decrease with gas desorption time constant and production pressure. These results also show dramatic increase in gas-production efficiency with decreasing magnitudes of fracture spacing. The comparison of the transient contributions of the desorbed gas and the free phase gas from the matrix system to gas production shows that the free phase gas plays the dominant role at the early stage, but diminishes when the adsorption phase gas takes over the dominant role, indicating the necessity of incorporating free phase gas impact in simulation models. The numerical model was also applied to match the history data from a gas-production well. A better matching result than that for the single-permeability model demonstrates the potential capability of the dual-permeability model for the forecast of CBM production.
The North Pacific Subtropical Countercurrent area (STCC) is high in mesoscale eddy activities. According to the rotation direction of the eddy flow field and the sign of temperature anomaly within the eddy, they can be divided into four categories: cyclonic cold-core eddy (CCE), anticyclonic warm-core eddy (AWE), cyclonic warm-core eddy (CWE) and anticyclonic cold-core eddy (ACE). CCE and AWE are called normal eddies, and CWE and ACE are named abnormal eddies. Based on the OFES data and vector geometry automatic detection method, we find that at the sea surface, the maximum monthly number of the CCE, AWE, CWE, and ACE occurs in December (765.70 ± 52.05), January (688.20 ± 82.53), August (373.40 ± 43.09) and August (533.00 ± 56.92), respectively. The number of normal eddies is more in winter and spring, and less in summer and autumn, while abnormal eddies have the opposite distribution. The maximum rotation velocity of the four types of eddies appears in June (11.71 ± 0.75 cm/s), June (12.24 ± 0.86 cm/s), May (10.63 ± 0.99 cm/s) and June (9.97 ± 0.91 cm/s), which is fast in winter and spring. The moving speed of the four types of eddies is almost similar (about 10 ~ 11 cm/s). The amplitude of normal and abnormal eddies is both high in summer and autumn, and low in winter and spring, with larger amplitudes in normal than abnormal eddies. The eccentricity (defined as the eccentricity of the ellipse obtained by fitting the eddy boundary) of the four types of eddies is also close to each other, and their variation ranges from 0.7 to 0.8, with no apparent seasonal variation. The vertical penetration depth, which has no significant seasonal difference, is 675.13 ± 67.50 m in cyclonic eddies (CCE and CWE), which is deeper than that 622.32 ± 81.85 m in anticyclonic eddies (ACE and AWE). In addition, increasing the defined temperature threshold for abnormal eddies can significantly reduce their numbers but does not change their seasonal variation trend.