1887

Abstract

Summary

Surfactant-alternating-gas (SAG) is often the injection method for foam enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in order to improve injectivity. However, liquid injectivity can be very poor once foam is created in the near-wellbore region. In a previous study, we reported core-flood experiments on liquid injectivity after foam flooding and liquid injectivity after a period of gas injection following foam. Results showed the importance of the gas slug to subsequent liquid injectivity. However, the effects of multiple gas and liquid slugs were not explored.

In this paper, we present a coreflood study of injectivities of multiple gas and liquid slugs in a SAG process. We inject nitrogen foam, gas and surfactant solution into a sandstone core sample. The experiments are conducted at a temperature of 90°C with 40-bar back pressure. Pressure differences are measured to quantify the injectivity and supplemented with CT scans to relate water saturation to mobility.

We find that during prolonged gas injection in the first gas slug following foam, a collapsed-foam region forms near the inlet due to the interplay of evaporation, capillary pressure and pressure-driven flow. This region slowly propagates downstream. During subsequent liquid injection, liquid mobility is much greater in the collapsed-foam region than downstream, and liquid sweeps the entire core cross section there rather than a single finger. In the region beyond the collapsed-foam region, liquid fingers through foam. Liquid flow converges from the entire cross section to the finger through the region of trapped gas.

During injection of the second gas slug, the liquid finger disappears quickly as gas flows in, and strong foam forms from the very beginning. A collapsed-foam region then forms near the inlet and slowly propagates downstream with a propagation velocity and mobility similar to that in the first gas slug. Behavior of the second liquid slug is likewise similar to that of the first liquid slug.

Our results suggest that, in radial flow, the small region of foam collapse very near the well is crucial to injectivity because of its high mobility. The subsequent gas and liquid slugs behave like the first slugs. The behavior of the first gas slug and subsequent liquid slug is thus representative of near-well behavior in a SAG process.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900107
2019-04-08
2020-04-09
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atteia, O., Estrada, E. D. C., Bertin, H.
    [2013] Soil Flushing: A Review of the Origin of Efficiency Variability. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 12(4), 379–389.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Farajzadeh, R., Andrianov, A, Zitha, P. L. J.
    [2009] Investigation of Immiscible and Miscible Foam for Enhancing Oil Recovery. Industrial & Engineering chemistry research49 (4), 1910–1919
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Gong, J., Vincent Bonnieu, S., Kamarul Bahrim, R. Z., Che Mamat, C. A. N. B., Tewari, R.D., Groenenboom, J., Farajzadeh, R., Rossen, W.R.
    [2018] Modelling of Liquid Injectivity in Surfactant-Alternating-Gas Foam Enhanced Oil Recovery. Accepted for publication by SPE Journal. SPE-190435-PA.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gong, J., Vincent Bonnieu, S., Kamarul Bahrim, R. Z., Che Mamat, C. A. N. B., Groenenboom, J., Farajzadeh, R., Rossen, W.R.
    [2018] Laboratory Investigation of Liquid Injectivity in Surfactant-Alternating-Gas Foam Enhanced Oil Recovery. Accepted for publication by Transport in Porous Media.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Heller, J. P.
    [1994] CO2 Foams in Enhanced Oil Recovery. In: Schramm, L. L. Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry, pp. 201-234. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hirasaki, G., Miller, C. A., Szafranski, R., Tanzil, D., Lawson, J. B., Meinardus, H., Jin, M., Londergan, J. T., Pope, G. A.
    [1997] Field Demonstration of the Surfactant/Foam Process for Aquifer Remediation. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hoefner, M. L., Fogler, H S., Stenius, P., and Sjoblom, J.
    [1987] Role of Acid Diffusion in Matrix Acidizing of Carbonates. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 39(02), 203–208.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Kamarul Bahrim, R. Z., Zeng, Y., Vincen Bonnieu, S., Groenenboom, J., Tewari, R. D., and Biswal, S. L.
    [2017] A Study of Methane Foam in Reservoir Rocks for Mobility Control at High Temperature with Varied Permeabilities: Experiment and Simulation. SPE/IATMI Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Kuehne, D. L., Ehman, D. I., Emanuel, A. S., Magnani, C. F.
    [1990] Design and Evaluation of a Nitrogen-Foam Field Trial. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 42(02), 504–512.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Kibodeaux, K. R., Zeilinger, S. C., Rossen, W. R.
    [1994] Sensitivity Study of Foam Diversion Processes for Matrix Acidization. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Kibodeaux, K. R., Rossen, W. R.
    [1997] Coreflood Study of Surfactant-Alternating-Gas Foam Processes: Implications for Field Design. SPE Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, California, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lake, L. W., Johns, R. T., Rossen, W. R., Pope, G. A.
    [2014] Fundamentals of Enhanced Oil Recovery. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, TX.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Matthews, C. S.
    [1989] Carbon Dioxide Flooding. In: Donaldson, E. C., Chilingarian, G. V., Yen, T. F. (eds.) Developments in Petroleum Science, pp. 129-156. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Martinsen, H. A. and Vassenden, F.
    [1999] Foam-Assisted Water Alternating Gas (FAWAG) Process on Snorre. European IOR Symposium, Brighton, UK.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Nguyen, Q. P., Zitha, P. L. J., Currie, P. K., Rossen, W. R.
    [2009] CT Study of Liquid Diversion with Foam. SPE Production & Operations, 24(01), 12–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Rossen, W. R.
    [1996] Foams in Enhanced Oil Recovery. In: Prud'homme, R.K., Khan, S.A. (eds.) Foams: Theory, Measurements and Applications, pp. 413–464. Marcel Dekker, New York City.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Rossen, W. R., van Duijn, C. J., Nguyen, Q. P., Shen, C., Vikingstad, A. K.
    [2010] Injection Strategies to Overcome Gravity Segregation in Simultaneous Gas and Water Injection into Homogeneous Reservoirs. SPE Journal, 15(01), 76–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Schramm, L. L.
    [1994] Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Shan, D., Rossen, W. R.
    [2004] Optimal Injection Strategies for Foam IOR. SPE Journal, 9(02), 132–150.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Schindelin, J., Arganda-Carreras, I., Frise, E., Kaynig, V., Longair, M., Pietzsch, T., Preibisch, S., Rueden, C., Saalfeld, S., Schmid, B., Tinevez, J. Y., White, D. J, Hartenstein, V., Eliceiri, K., Tomancak, P., Cardona, A.
    [2012] Fiji: An Open-Source Platform for Biological-Image Analysis. Nature methods, 9(7): 676–682.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Wang, S., Mulligan, C. N.
    [2004] An Evaluation of Surfactant Foam Technology in Remediation of Contaminated Soil. Chemosphere, 57(9), 1079–1089.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900107
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900107
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