1887

Abstract

Summary

Large amounts of oil left in the petroleum reservoir after primary and secondary enhanced oil recovery methods have brought about the implementation of several tertiary means of oil recovery. Increment of oil recovery can support the world’s oil supply. Water alternating gas injection has been a very popular method of gas injection to improving volumetric sweep efficiency. Although water alternating as injection has been shown to improve oil recovery, this process suffers inherent challenges such as water blocking, mobility control in high viscosity oil and gravity segregation. To combat these problems associated with water alternating gas flooding, the use of surfactant has been employed in water alternating gas injection. Due to the high operational cost arising from chemical cost in surfactant alternating gas injection, a new technique which involves the injection of low concentration surfactant before water alternating as flooding has been proposed. This work investigates experimental and numerical oil recovery potential of surfactant enhanced water alternating gas flooding. The distinctive feature of this technique is that instead of injecting surfactant slugs alternatively with gas, which will result to using a greater amount of surfactant, a low concentration surfactant is injected into the reservoir before water alternating gas flooding. The aim is to evaluate the performance of this technique as a low cost and effective means of chemically enhanced oil recovery by combining both mechanisms of surfactant reduction of water-oil interfacial tension and creation of foam with gas. This study begins with surfactant evaluation to characterise surfactants compatibility with reservoir brine and oil. Then followed by series core flooding experiments which include waterflooding, gas flooding, water alternating gas flooding and surfactant-enhanced water alternating gas flooding. Core flood data was history matched for water alternating as flooding and surfactant-enhanced water alternating as flooding via commercial simulator by inputting relative permeability curves, rock, fluid properties and interfacial tension. The results showed that experimentally, surfactant enhanced water alternating as flooding had the highest oil recovery when compared to conventional enhanced oil recovery methods. History matching of core flood experiment predicted similar increment in oil recovery during surfactant enhanced WAG. The effectiveness of this technique is based on the injection pattern after the initial surfactant injection and oil recovery potential is similar to that of surfactant alternating gas flooding.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700343
2017-04-24
2020-07-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Muggeridge, A., Cockin, A., Webb, K., Frampton, H., Collins, I., Moulds, T., and Salino, P.
    , (2013) Recovery rates, enhanced oil recovery and technological limits, philosophical transactions of the royal society of mathematical, physical and engineering science publication.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Green, D. and Willhite, G.
    , (1998) Enhanced oil recovery, SPE text book, Vol. 6, ISBN 1-55563-077–4, pp15.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ahmadi, M.A., and Shadizadeh, A.R.
    (2013b) Implementation of a high-performance surfactant for enhanced oil recovery from carbonate reservoirs, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, pp66–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Hosseini-Nasaab, S., Zitha, P., Mirhaj, S., and Sahand, S.
    , (2015) A new chemical enhanced oil recovery method, Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 173732, pp 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Majidaie, S., Khanifar, A., Onur, M., and Tan, I.
    , (2012) a simulation study of chemically enhanced water alternating gas (CWAG) injection. Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Huh, C.
    , (1979) Interfacial tensions and solubilizing ability of a microemulsion phase that coexists with oil and brine, Journal of Colloid Interface Science.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Kulkarni, M., and Rao, D.
    , (2005) Experimental investigation of miscible and immiscible water-alternating-gas (WAG) process, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, pp1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lake, L.W.
    (1989) Enhanced Oil Recovery, New Jersey, prentice hall Publishing, ISBN 0132816016Renkema, W.J., and Rossen, W.R., (2007) Success of SAGA foam processes in heterogeneous reservoirs. Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp 1–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Caudle, B. H., and Dyes, A. B.
    , (1958) Improving Miscible Displacement by Gas-Water Injection. , Society of Petroleum Engineers. Christensen, J. R., Stenby, E. H. & Skauge, A. (1998) Review of WAG Field Experience. International Petroleum Conference.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Syahputra, A., Tsau, J., and Grigg, R.
    , (2000) Laboratory Evaluation of Using Lignosulfonate and Surfactant Mixture in CO2 Flooding, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, pp 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Christensen, J., StenbyE. and SkaugeA.
    (2001) Review of WAG field experiences, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, pp 97–107.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. SharmaA., RaoDN.
    (2008) Scaled physical model experiments to characterize the gas-assisted gravity drainage EOR Process. In: SPE/DOE symposium on improved oil recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Rao, D.N., Ayirala, S.C., Abe, A.A. and Xu, W.
    , (2006) Impact of low cost dilute surfactants on wettability and relative permeability, Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 99609, pp1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Salehi, M., Safarzadeh, M., Sahraei, E. and Alireza
    ., (2013) Experimental study of surfactant –alternating-gas injection versus water-alternating-gas and waterflooding enhanced oil recovery methods. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, pp1–13
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Majidaie, S., Onur, M., and Tan, I.
    , (2014) An experimental and simulation study of chemically enhanced water alternating gas injection. Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp 1–9
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Abdi, M., Moradi, S., Habibniya, B., and Kord, S.
    , (2014) Improving oil recovery during water injection and WAG processes in asphaltenic oil reservoir by using non-ionic surfactants, International Journal of Science and Emerging Technologies, pp302.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Memon, M.K., Elraies, K.A., and Al-Mossawy, M.
    , (2016) Impact of new foam surfactant blend with water alternating gas injection, Journal of Petroleum Exploration Production and Technology
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hanssen, E. J., Surguchev, L.M., Svorstol and Blaker, T.
    , (1995) SAGA injection: A new IOR process for stratified reservoir.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Walker, D., Britton, C., and Kim, D.H
    (2012) The impact of microemulsion viscosity on oil recovery. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Winsor, P.A.
    , (1985) Solvent properties of amphiphilic compound. London Buttersworth scientific publications
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sheng, J.
    (2011) Modern chemical enhanced oil recovery theory and practice, Gulf publishing, Elsevier, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Fuseni, A., Han, M. and Al-mobith, A.
    (2013) Phase behaviour and interfacial tension properties of an amphoteric surfactant for EOR application, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, pp1–14
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Levitt, D., Jackson, A; Heinson, C. and Britton, L.
    , (2006) Identification and evaluation of high-performance EOT surfactants, Society of Petroleum Engineers journal, pp1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700343
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700343
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