1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. IOR 2019 – 20th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Summary

During the past decade, enhanced oil recovery (EOR) by CO2 in shale oils has received substantial attention. In shale oil reservoirs, CO2 diffusion into the resident oil has been considered to be the dominant interaction between the CO2 in fractures and the oil in the matrices. CO2 diffusion will lead to oil swelling and improvement in oil viscosity. However, despite two-way mass transfer during CO2 EOR in conventional oil reservoirs, one-way mass transfer into shale oils saturated with live oils is controlled by an additional transport mechanism, which is the liberation of light oil components in the form of a gaseous new-phase. This in-situ gas formation could generate considerable swelling, which could improve the oil recovery significantly. This mechanism has been largely overlooked in the past. This study is aimed to better understand the role of this evolving gas phase in improving hydrocarbon recovery.

Taking account of Bakken shale oil reservoir data, numerical simulations were performed to identify efficiencies of EOR by CO2 at the laboratory and field scales. Equation-of-state parameters between CO2 and oil components were adjusted to optimize the calculations and a sensitivity analysis was performed to identify the role of the parameters on gas formation and consequent EOR efficiencies. At the laboratory scale, in-situ gas formation can increase oil recovery by 20% depending on the amount of gas saturation. Also, the CO2 storage capacity of the shale matrix can be enhanced by 25%, due to CO2 trapping in the gas phase. At the field scale, an additional oil recovery of 9.3% could be attained, which is notably higher than previous studies where this gas evolution mechanism was ignored. The results suggest that a 6 weeks huff period would be sufficient to achieve substantial EOR if this new mechanism is incorporated. Furthermore, the produced fluid in the early period was primarily composed of CO2, which would make it available for subsequent cycles. The produced gas of the well under CO2 EOR was used in an adjacent well, which resulted in similar additional oil recovery and hence, 10% impurities in CO2 injection stream would not undermine efficiency of this EOR method. The results of this study, therefore, could potentially be used to substantially improve the evaluations of CO2 EOR in shale oil reservoirs.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900100
2019-04-08
2024-04-18

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900100
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. J.Sheng
    , “Critical review of field EOR projects in shale and tight reservoirs”, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 159, 654–665, 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. B.Jia, J.Tsau and R.Barati
    , “A review of the current progress of CO2 injection EOR and carbon storage in shale oil reservoirs”, Fuel, 236, 404–427, 2019.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. P.Zuloaga-Molero, W.Yu, Y.Xu, K.Sepehrnoori and B.Li
    , “Simulation Study of CO2-EOR in Tight Oil Reservoirs with Complex Fracture Geometries,”Nature Scientific Report, vol. 6, p. 33445, 2016.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. R. B.Jackson, A.Vengosh, J. W.Carey, R. J.Davies, T. H.Darrah, F.O'sullivan and G.Petron
    , “The Environmental Costs and Benefits of Fracking”, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, vol. 39, pp. 327–362, 2014.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. C.W.Hickok and H.J.Ramsay
    , “Case histories of carbonated waterfloods in Dewey-Bartlesville field”, in SPE Secondary Recovery Symposium, Texas USA, 1962.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. P.Mahzari, P.Tsolis, Farzaneh, A., M.Sohrabi, S.Enezi, A.Yousef and A.Eiden
    , “A Comprehensive Experimental Study of Pore-Scale and Core-Scale Processes During Carbonated Water Injection Under Reservoir Conditions,” in SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition, Dammam, Saudi Arabia, 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. P.Mahzari, P.Tsolis, M.Sohrabi, S.Enezi, A.Yousef and A.Eiden
    , “Carbonated water injection under reservoir conditions; in-situ WAG-type EOR”, Fuel, vol. 217, pp. 285–296, 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. M.Seyyedi, P.Mahzari and M.Sohrabi
    , “An integrated study of the dominant mechanism leading to improved oil recovery by carbonated water injection,”Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, vol. 45, pp. 22–32, 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. A.AlMesmari, P.Mahzari and M.Sohrabi
    , “An Improved Methodology for Simulating Oil Recovery by Carbonated Water Injection: Impact of Compositional Changes,” in SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dubai, UAE, 2016.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. M.Seyyedi, P.Mahzari and M.Sohrabi
    , “A comparative study of oil compositional variations during CO2 and carbonated water injection scenarios for EOR”, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 164, 685–695, 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. D.Alfarge, M.Wei and B.Bai
    , “Factors affecting CO2-EOR in shale oil reservoirs: numerical simulation study and pilot tests”, Energy and Fuels, 31, 8462–8480, 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. C.Chen, M.Balhoff and K. K.Mohanty
    , “Effect of Reservoir Heterogeneity on Primary Recovery and CO2 Huff ‘n’ Puff Recovery in Shale-Oil Reservoirs,”SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, vol. 17, no. 03, pp. 404–413, 2014.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. W.Yu, H.Lashgari and K.Sepehrnoori
    , “Simulation Study of CO2 Huff-n-Puff Process in Bakken Tight Oil Reservoir,” in SPE Western North American and Rocky Mountains Joint Regional Meeting, Denver, USA, 2014.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. A.AlMesmari, P.Mahzari and M.Sohrabi
    , “Modelling formation of a new fluid phase during carbonated water injection” in International Petroleum Technology Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, 2016.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. L.Lei, J.Sheng and J.Xu
    , “Gas selection for huff-n-puff EOR in shale oil reservoirs based upon experimental and numerical study”, in SPE Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, Canada, 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. P.Pankaj, H.Mukisa, I.Solovyeva and H.Xue
    , “Boosting oil recovery in naturally fractured shale using CO2 huff-n-puff”, in SPE Argentina Exploration and Production of Unconventional Resources Symposium, Neuquen, Argentina, 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. L.Lei, J.Sheng, Y.Su and S.Zhan
    , “Further investigation of effect of injection pressure and imbibition water on CO2 huff-n-puff performance in liquid-rich shale reservoirs”, Energy Fuels, 32, 5789–57982018.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. C.M.Oldenburg, D.Law, Y.Gallo and S.White
    , “Mixing of CO2 and CH4 in gas reservoirs: code comparison studies”, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Volume I, Pages 443–448, 2003.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900100
Loading
A New Mechanism for Enhanced Oil Recovery by CO2 in Shale Oil Reservoirs
Conference Proceedings 2019, 1 (2019); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201900100
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900100
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900100
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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