1887

Abstract

Summary

Carbon dioxide has been successfully used in fields as EOR agent; and because of technical, commercial and environmental reasons, it has received considerable attention in recent years over other solvents. Based on experience with CO2 flooding worldwide, it is well understood that despite its high local displacement efficiency, the process suffers from poor sweep efficiency due to reservoir heterogeneity, viscous instability and gravity override. Application of foam has been found to mitigate these limitations at laboratory scale, however understanding of CO2-Foam flow behaviour at a larger scale is limited industrywide. Some of the previous pilots have shown technical success especially near wellbore, but there exist a need to establish an integrated methodology to scale-up the CO2-Foam technology efficiently and effectively.

As part of an ongoing research program, we have identified a field with heterogeneous carbonate reservoir onshore in west Texas, USA to run CO2-Foam field trial. The research emphasizes on implementing a modelling, monitoring and verification approach as part of the roadmap. Static model created by integrating petrophysical logs and core data in-line with geologic framework, and dynamic model created based on analysis of reservoir engineering data including RCA, SCAL, PVT, pressure data and coreflood experiments forms the basis for reservoir simulation study for the pilot area. In this paper, we provide an overview of different elements of numerical model and demonstrate application of a probabilistic framework to incorporate the uncertainties associated with model inputs. The success will be validated via appropriate monitoring plan in the ongoing pilot research program.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700339
2017-04-24
2020-09-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcorn, Z.P., Fernø, M. and Graue, A.
    [2016] Workflow for Optimal Injection of CO2 to Enhance Oil Recovery in Mature Oil Fields: A Preliminary Study for a Field Pilot Program. SPE Bergen One-Day Seminar, Bergen, Norway, 20 April.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alvarez, J.M., Rivas, H., and Rossen, W.R.
    [2001] A Unified Model for Steady-State Foam Behavior at High and Low Foam Qualities. SPE Journal, 6, 325–333.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cheng, L., Reme, A.B., Shan, D., Coombe, D.A. and Rossen, W.R.
    [2000] Simulating Foam Processes at High and Low Foam Qualities. SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, OK, 3–5 April.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chou, S.I., Vasicek, S.L., Pisio, D.L., Jasek, D.E. and Goodgame, J.A.
    [1992] CO2 Foam Field Trial at North Ward-Estes. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington, D.C, 4–7 October.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Falls, A.H., Hirasaki, G.J., Patzek, T.W., Gauglitz, D.A., Miller, D.D. and Ratulowski, J
    [1988] Development of a Mechanistic Foam Simulator: The Population Balance and Generation by Snap-Off. SPE Reser. Eng., 3, 884–892.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Farajzadeh, R., Andrianov, A., Krastev, R., Hirasaki, G.J. and Rossen, W.R.
    [2012] Foam-Oil Interaction in Porous Media: Implications for Foam Assisted Enhanced Oil Recovery. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., 183–184, 1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Fernø, M.A., Eide, Ø., Steinsbø, M., Langlo, S.A.W., Christophersen, A., Skibenes, A., Ydstebø, T. and Graue, A.
    [2015] Mobility control during CO2 EOR in fractured carbonates using foam: Laboratory evaluation and numerical simulations. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 135, Pages 442–451.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Fernø, M.A., Steinsbø, M., Eide, Ø., Ahmed, A., Ahmed, K., Graue, A.
    [2015] Parametric study of oil recovery during CO2 injections in fractured chalk: Influence of fracture permeability, diffusion length and water saturation. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 27 (2), 1063–1073.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ferno, M.A., Gauteplass, J., Pancharoen, M., Haugen, Å., Graue, A., Kovscek, A.R. and Hirasaki, G.
    [2016] Experimental Study of Foam Generation, Sweep Efficiency, and Flow in a Fracture Network. SPE Journal, 21 (04).
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Harpole, K.J. and Hallenbeck, L.D.
    [1996] East Vacuum Grayburg San Andres Unit CO2 Flood Ten Year Performance Review: Evolution of a Reservoir Management Strategy and Results of WAG Optimization. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 6–9 October.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Haugen, A., Mani, N., Svenningsen, S., Brattekås, B., Graue, A., Ersland, G. and Fernø, M.A.
    [2014] Miscible and Immiscible Foam Injection for Mobility Control and EOR in Fractured Oil-Wet Carbonate Rocks. Transport in Porous Media, 104 (109–131).
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Heller, J.P., Boone, D.A. and Watts, R.J.
    [1985] Field Test of CO2 Mobility Control at Rock Creek. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, 22–26 September.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Holm, L.W. and Garrison, W.H.
    [1988] CO2 Diversion With Foam in an Immiscible CO2 Field Project. SPE Reservoir Eng., 3 (01).
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Honarpour, M.M., Nagarajan, N.R., Grijalba Cuenca, A., Valle, M. and Adesoye, K.
    [2010] Rock-Fluid Characterization for Miscible CO2 Injection: Residual Oil Zone, Seminole Field, Permian Basin. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, 19–22 September.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Islam, M.R. and Farouq-Ali, S.M.
    [1990] Numerical Simulation of Foam Flow in Porous Media. J. Canadian. Pet. Tech., 47–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jarrell, P.M., Fox, C.E., Stein, M.H. and Webb, S.L
    [1990] Practical Aspects of CO2 Flooding. SPE Monograph Series, 22.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Jian, G., Puerto, M.C., Wehowsky, A., Dong, P., Johnston, K.P. and Hirasaki, G.J.
    [2016] Static Adsorption of an Ethoxylated Nonionic Surfactant on Carbonate Minerals. Langmuir, 10244–10252.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Jonas, T.M., Chou, S.I. and Vasicek, S.L.
    [1990] Evaluation of a CO2 Foam Field Trial: Rangely Weber Sand Unit. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 23–26 September.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kibodeaux, K.R. and Rossen, W.R.
    [1997] Coreflood Study of Surfactant-Alternating-Gas Foam Processes: Implications for Field Design. SPE Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, CA, June 25–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kim, J.S., Dong, Y. and Rossen, W.R.
    [2005] Steady-State Flow Behavior of CO2 Foam. SPE Journal, 10 (405–415).
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Law, D.H., Yang, Z.M. and Stone, T.
    [1992] Effect of Presence of Oil on Foam Performance: A Field Simulation Study. SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, Houston, TX, Feb. 6–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Leeftink, T.N., Latooij, C.A. and Rossen, W.R.
    [2015] Injectivity errors in simulation of foam EORJournal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 126, Pages 26–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ma, K., Biswal. S.L. and Hirasaki, G.J.
    [2012] Experimental and Simulation Studies of Foam in Porous Media at Steady State. AIChE Spring Meeting, Houston, TX, 1–5 April.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Nguyen, Q.P., Hirasaki, G.J. and Johnston, K. P.
    [2015] Novel CO2 Foam Concepts and Injection Schemes for Improving CO2 Sweep Efficiency in Sandstone and Carbonate Hydrocarbon Formations. Technical Report, U.S. Department of Energy / National Energy Technology Laboratory.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Osterloh, W.T. and Jante, M.J.
    [1992] Effects of Gas and Liquid Velocity on Steady-State Foam Flow at High Temperature. SPE/DOE EOR symposium, Tulsa, OK, April 22–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Rossen, W.R., Zeilinger, S.C., Shi, J.X. and Lim, M.T.
    [1999] Simplified Mechanistic Simulation of Foam Processes in Porous Media. SPE Journal, 4 (279–287).
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rossen, W.R.
    [2013] Numerical Challenges in Foam Simulation: A Review. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 30 September–2 October.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schlumberger
    [2015] Technical Description. ECLIPSE Reservoir Simulation Software.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Wang, F.P., Lucia, J.F. and Kerans, C.
    [1998] Integrated Reservoir Characterization Study of a Carbonate Ramp Reservoir: Seminole San Andres Unit, Gaines County, Texas. SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering, 1(2).
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Xu, Q. and Rossen, W.R.
    [2004] Experimental Study of Gas Injection in Surfactant-Alternating-Gas Foam Process. SPE Reservoir Eval Eng., 7 (438–448).
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700339
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700339
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error