1887

Abstract

Summary

CO2 enhanced oil recovery (CO2 EOR) development in China and America was briefly compared to show the potential and challenges of CO2 flooding in oilfields where affordable CO2 was not available. Overview of field tests in China and were presented to show the complexity of CO2 flooding when the CO2 was not affordable for oilfields. The oil production of CO2 EOR in USA and China was compared. Typical 4 CO2 EOR field tests in America and China were analyzed. Use of CO2 as EOR agent was first proposed in 1920s. One of the first CO2 EOR laboratory tests in America was conducted in 1948, 13 years earlier than that in China. The first CO2 EOR patent and the first commercial CO2 EOR field test was in 1952 and 1972 respectively in America. The commercial test was a great success. Various tests were conducted later in the USA. By contrast, the first CO2 EOR pilot in China was conducted in 1987 by Sinopec by huff and puff. The CO2 EOR in Jilin Oilfield was notable for high concentration CO2 was contained in natural gas produced. One field in China showed that an incremental oil recovery of 25% may be obtained by injecting a large CO2 slug (0.9 HCPV) within around ten years, while another big CO2 EOR test in the USA reported a very good incremental oil recovery performance after CO2 was injected in more than 20 years. Although CO2 flooding was generally adopted in low permeability reservoirs in the USA, it was tested in both low and medium permeability reservoirs in China. The average IORF in America and China was 17% and 7% OOIP respectively. most CO2 EOR in the USA were miscible while most CO2 EOR in China were immiscible. Insufficient CO2 injection and higher MMP partly accounted for the immiscibility of CO2 EOR projects in China. CO2 EOR was still not commercially used in China because of CO2 source and high cost while the prospects of CO2 EOR in China was very good.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202331023
2023-10-02
2025-11-08

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202331023
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcorn, Z.P., T.Føyen, B.Sintef, et al.2020. CO2 Foam Field Pilot Design and Initial Results.SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference. pp. 1–19. Paper presented at, 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bruce, H. & W.Ning.2020. CO2 EOR in China:An Armchair Tour.26th Annual CO2 Conference. Paper presented at, 2020. Midland, Texas.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Chao, X.2023. Storage CO2 to Dispalce Out More Oil.Science and Technology Daily, 22 August 2023
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Chen, Z., G.Wu, W.Qian, et al.2020. EOR technology and application of CO2 injection for smallcomplex fault block reservoirs in Subei Basin.Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 27(1): 152–162.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Gang, T., A.Jones, K.Painter, et al.2022. Optimizing Wasson ROZ CO2 Flood Pattern Configuration for Capital Efficiency: Case Study of 40-Year Field History.Proceedings - SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Paper presented at, 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Ghahfarokhi, R.B., S.Pennell, M.Matson, et al.2016. Overview of CO2 injection and WAG sensitivity in SACROC.SPE-179569-MS.SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 11–13 April 2016. This. Paper presented at, 2016.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Guo, H., X.Lyu, E.Meng, et al.2022. CCUS in China: Challenges and Opportunities.SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference held virtually on 25–29 April. pp. 1–22. Paper presented at, 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Guo, H., K.Song, S.Liu, et al.2021. Recent advances in polymer flooding in China: Lessons learned and continuing development.SPE Journal, 26(4): 2038–2052. https://doi.org/10.2118/204455-PA
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gupta, N., S.Parakh, T.Gang, et al.2022. Residual Oil Zone Recovery Evaluation and Forecast Methodology: A Wasson Field Case Study. Paper presented at, 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Hill, L.B., X.C.Li & N.Wei.2020. CO2-EOR in China: A comparative review.International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 103(February): 103173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103173
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Hu, Y. & M.Hao.2020. Development characteristics and cost analysis of CCUS in China.Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 10(3): 15–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Institute, G.C.2020. Global Status of CCS 2020.Global CCS Institute, p.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Ji, B. & Y.He.2021. Practice and understanding about CO2 flooding in low permeability oil reservoir by Sinopec.Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 11(6): 805–844.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Kalteyer, J.2020. SPE-200460-MS.A case study of SACROC CO2 flooding in marginal pay regions: Improving asset performance.SPE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery. Paper presented at, 2020. Koperna, G., S.Melzer, K.R.Denbury, et al., 2021. A Survey of U.S. CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects. In: Advanced Resources Intl (ARI) [online]. [Cited 21 July 2021].
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Mirzaei, M., D.Kumar, D.Turner, et al.2020. SPE-200371-MS CO2 Foam Pilot in a West Texas Field : Design, Operation and Results Laboratory Work
     [Google Scholar]
  16. NTEL.2010. Untapped Domestic Energy Supply and Long Term Carbon Storage Solution.1–32 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Qin, J., Y.Li, D.Wu, et al.2020. CCUS global progress and China’s policy suggestions.Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 27(1): 20–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Sanders, A.W., R.M.Jones, M.Linroth, et al.2012. Implementation of a CO2 foam pilot study in the SACROC field: Performance evaluation.Proceedings - SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 5: 4021–4033. https://doi.org/10.2118/160016-ms
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Sheikha, H., S.M.Blackmer & E.Sharaf.2020. SPE-200398-MS Improving CO2 Vertical Sweep Efficiency in Tinsley Field with Dedicated Injectors
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Song, K., J.Tao, X.Lyu, et al.2022. Recent Advances in Polymer Flooding in China.Molecules, 27(20): 1–35. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27206978
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Verma, M.K.2015. Fundamentals of Carbon Dioxide-Enhanced Oil Recovery (CO2-EOR)—A Supporting Document of the Assessment Methodology for Hydrocarbon Recovery Using CO2-EOR Associated with Carbon Sequestration.19 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Wang, S.2023. Jilin Oilfield Advocate A “Carbon” Way for Future.China Petroleum Daily, 5 September 2023
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Wang, Z. & Y.Kong.2023. A comprehensive review of the supply and demand structure of China’s oil and gas.Petroleum Science Bulletin, 8(4): 502–511. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2096-1693.2023.04.038
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Wei, N., X.Li, R.T.Dahowski, et al.2015. Economic evaluation on CO2-EOR of onshore oil fields in China.International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 37: 170–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.01.014
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Zhang, X., X.Lu & X.Lu.2023. China CCUS Annual Report(2023). Beijing88–100 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. YuanS., WangQ., LiJ., et al.2020. Technology progress and prospects of enhanced oil recovery by gas injection. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 41(12): 1623–1632.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. YuanS., HanH., WangQ., et al.2021. EOR Technological Innovation Keeps China’s Crude Oil Production Stable on Long-term Basis, 40(3): 24–32.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202331023
Loading
A Brief Comparison of CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery in China and America
Conference Proceedings 2023, 1 (2023); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202331023
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202331023
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202331023
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