Find a credible shortfall.
Earlier baseline versus current output
AWT treatment programs address organic deposition and friction across the well and artificial-lift system. The aim is simple: test whether a credible part of the production gap can be recovered before committing to a heavier intervention.
Treatment design follows the fluid, completion and operating history of the candidate well.
Is productive capacity trapped behind removable organic damage?
Screen one well before proposing a wider treatment program.
Baseline the well, agree on success criteria, then measure the response.
Oil well production recovery
AWT Well Performance helps operators in the Middle East, Africa and Europe screen mature, shut-in and underperforming oil wells for potentially recoverable constraints associated with paraffin, wax, asphaltene, near-wellbore organic damage and artificial-lift friction.
The first decision is whether one well has a credible mechanism and baseline for a controlled field evaluation. Mechanical failure, integrity risk, dominant reservoir depletion and water-production problems are redirected rather than forced into a chemical program.
Review candidate-screening questionsA step-change after shut-in does not automatically mean the reservoir has lost the same amount of potential. Cooling and pressure movement can leave wax, paraffin or asphaltenic material in the production path and near-wellbore region.
The commercial case begins only when the operating history supports that mechanism. AWT then treats the well as one production system: restore flow paths, reduce lift drag and protect the response with a well-specific operating program.
The process is deliberately simple: find a credible shortfall, check whether the cause fits, treat the flow path, then measure the result before making a wider commitment.
Identify a well producing below a credible earlier baseline.
Check whether buildup and friction, rather than a mechanical failure, explain the loss.
Place the treatment, allow it to work, then restart the well under control.
Compare the response with the agreed baseline. Expand only if the evidence is clear.
The technical Q&A turns the supplied white paper into 31 direct answers on damage mechanisms, chemistry, candidate selection, execution, economics and limits.
Open the technical Q&ADesigned to mobilize established paraffin, wax and asphaltenic material in the production path and near-wellbore region.
A surface-active treatment intended to reduce mechanical friction and fluid drag while helping limit future deposition.
The supplied AWT product deck adds specific lubricant-film, torque and field-case context to the two-stage treatment logic.
The original product deck specifies: “Product targeted to an 8mm film” during continuous post-clean-out treatment.
The source deck states that the penetrating adhesive lubricant can reduce surface-drive torque by up to 40% in progressive-cavity-pump applications.
In the E&B Resources PCP case, surface-drive torque moved from 960 to 720 ft-lb—a 25% torque reduction. Production moved from 257 to 354 bbl/d, a 37.5% production increase, and motor load from 54 to 38 amps.
Source-deck specifications and analogue field evidence—not a forecast for a candidate well. Results depend on the well, completion, fluid system, operating condition and treatment design.
The program is configured from operating data and fluid conditions. There is no one-formula promise.
The strongest candidates combine a clear production gap with a technically plausible organic or friction-driven constraint.
A mature well returns below its pre-shut-in baseline after cooling and pressure equilibration.
Paraffin, wax or asphaltene is restricting flow through tubing, perforations or the near-wellbore region.
Rising load, torque, pressure or recurring failures point to friction and solids across the production system.
A useful first exchange does not require a full data room. It does require enough evidence to separate an organic or friction-driven constraint from a problem chemistry should not be asked to solve.
Review candidate criteriaProduction and pressure history
Pre-shut-in baseline and restart response
Crude, PVT, WAT, water cut and GOR data
Lift type and the operating signals that changed
Prior chemical or mechanical interventions
Known integrity, completion or water-production issues
Confirmed tubing, completion or lift-equipment failure
Integrity risk or material incompatibility
A dominant reservoir-depletion or water-production problem
No credible evidence of organic deposition or friction-driven loss
AWT’s treatment platform has been used in mature, paraffinic and heavy-oil environments in the United States and Venezuela, with documented case histories across multiple artificial-lift types.
For a new region, the commercial case should be established through disciplined candidate selection, baseline data and a controlled field evaluation under local operating standards.
Review the well history, restart response, crude profile, lift method and evidence of organic damage.
Match chemistry, placement, soak time and ongoing treatment to the well—not to a generic program.
Establish a baseline, define operating guardrails and evaluate the production and lift response.
Use the field response to decide where a broader, locally supported program can create value.
AWT Well Performance handles the first commercial exchange for the region. Start with the asset context, the production gap and the operating evidence. A direct company introduction follows when candidate fit and the next technical step are clear.