1887

Abstract

Summary

CO2 injection in subterranean reservoirs for storage, for oil recovery, or for both, is challenging because of its very high mobility. CO2 foam or emulsion is a way to remedy this problem by increasing CO2 apparent viscosity. However, the generation of foam and its propagation in porous media present several issues which have to be overcome for this process to be economically realistic in practice. For example, it may take time, i.e., a number of pore volumes to be injected, before foam is created.

It is the objective of this study to investigate these issues thoroughly, and to identify the mechanisms underlying them by looking at the effect of various parameters.

It is found that surfactant adsorption on the surface of the rock is an important factor intervening in the delay of foam formation, but it may not explain all the results [ ]. Surfactant adsorption and nature of porous media have been studied on two limestone materials coming from different sources. Despite same type of mineralogy, they yield very different behaviors: in one case, the foam is formed at the inlet of the core with a delay due to surfactant adsorption, while in the other case it is generated at the outlet of the core by end-effect probably due to elevated Minimum Pressure Gradient (MPG). Thus, the nature and morphology of the porous medium may be in some cases the dominant factor for foam generation and propagation.

On the other hand, the effect of various parameters (CO2 volume fraction, temperature, presence of oil) on transient and steady-state characteristics of foam/emulsion transport has been investigated on quartz sandpack of high permeability, in conditions such that the pressure gradient is above the MPG. Steady state emulsion strength increases with CO2 fraction but is accompanied by a delay in foam generation and propagation, which is a drawback to overcome. From the understanding of the origin of the encountered problem, relevant mitigation strategies are envisioned and evaluated. The mitigation strategy will vary according to which factor is most relevant to the desired objective.

This study highlights also the importance of porous media not only for steady-state conditions but also for transition behavior of foam as well.

[1] Klimenko, A., Cui, L., Ding, L., & Bourrel, M. (2024). CO2 Geostorage and Enhanced Oil Recovery: Challenges in Controlling Foam/Emulsion Generation and Propagation. ACS omega.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531010
2025-04-02
2026-02-15

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531010
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Holm, L. W.CarbonDioxide Solvent Flooding for Increased Oil Recovery. Trans. AIME1959, 216 (01), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.2118/1250-G.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Godec, M. L.; Kuuskraa, V. A.; Dipietro, P.Opportunities for Using Anthropogenic CO2 for Enhanced Oil Recovery and CO2 Storage. Energy Fuels2013, 27 (8), 4183–4189. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef302040u.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Ampomah, W.; Balch, R.; Cather, M.; Rose-Coss, D.; Dai, Z.; Heath, J.; Dewers, T.; Mozley, P.Evaluation of CO2 Storage Mechanisms in CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery Sites: Application to Morrow Sandstone Reservoir. Energy Fuels2016, 30 (10), 8545–8555. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b01888.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Kolster, C.; Masnadi, M. S.; Krevor, S.; Mac Dowell, N.; Brandt, A. R.CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery: A Catalyst for Gigatonne-Scale Carbon Capture and Storage Deployment?Energy Environ. Sci. 2017, 10 (12), 2594–2608. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7EE02102J.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Iglauer, S.; Paluszny, A.; Rahman, T.; Zhang, Y.; Wülling, W.; Lebedev, M.Residual Trapping of CO2 in an Oil-Filled, Oil-Wet Sandstone Core: Results of Three-Phase Pore-Scale Imaging. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2019, 46 (20), 11146–11154. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083401.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Sun, Q.; Ampomah, W.; Kutsienyo, E. J.; Appold, M.; Adu-Gyamfi, B.; Dai, Z.; Soltanian, M. R.Assessment of CO2 Trapping Mechanisms in Partially Depleted Oil-Bearing Sands. Fuel2020, 278, 118356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118356.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Garcia, S.; Kaminska, S.; Mercedes Maroto-Valer, M.Underground Carbon Dioxide Storage in Saline Formations. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. - Waste Resour. Manag. 2010, 163 (2), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1680/warm.2010.163.2.77.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Krevor, S. C. M.; Pini, R.; Zuo, L.; Benson, S. M.Relative Permeability and Trapping of CO2 and Water in Sandstone Rocks at Reservoir Conditions. Water Resour. Res. 2012, 48 (2). https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010859.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Iglauer, S.CO2–Water–Rock Wettability: Variability, Influencing Factors, and Implications for CO2 Geostorage. Acc. Chem. Res. 2017, 50 (5), 1134–1142. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00602.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Ringrose, P. S.; Furre, A.-K.; Gilfillan, S. M. V.; Krevor, S.; Landrø, M.; Leslie, R.; Meckel, T.; Nazarian, B.; Zahid, A.Storage of Carbon Dioxide in Saline Aquifers: Physicochemical Processes, Key Constraints, and Scale-Up Potential. Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, 2021, 12, 471–494. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-093020-091447.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. CO2-Dissolved: successfully combining CO2 storage and geothermal heat extraction | BRGM. https://www.brgm.fr/en/reference-completed-project/co2-dissolved-successfully-combining-co2-storage-geothermal-heat (accessed 2024–11-25).
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Massarweh, O.; Abushaikha, A. S.A Review of Recent Developments in CO2 Mobility Control in Enhanced Oil Recovery. Petroleum2022, 8 (3), 291–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2021.05.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Rossen, W. R.; Farajzadeh, R.; Hirasaki, G. J.; Amirmoshiri, M.Potential and Challenges of Foam-Assisted CO2 Sequestration. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 2024, 239, 212929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoen.2024.212929.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Cui, L.; Bourrel, M.; Dubos, F.; Klimenko, A.Surfactant for Enhanced Oil Recovery. US11254854B2.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Cui, L.; Dubos, F.; Bourrel, M.Novel Alkyl-Amine Surfactants for CO2 Emulsion Assisted Enhanced Oil Recovery. Energy Fuels2018, 32 (8), 8220–8229. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b01555.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Jian, G.; Alcorn, Z.; Zhang, L.; Puerto, M. C.; Soroush, S.; Graue, A.; Biswal, S. L.; Hirasaki, G. J.Evaluation of a Nonionic Surfactant Foam for CO2 Mobility Control in a Heterogeneous Carbonate Reservoir. SPE J. 2020, 25 (06), 3481–3493. https://doi.org/10.2118/203822-PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Propriétés thermophysiques des systèmes fluides. https://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/fluid/(accessed 2024-11-25).
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Yan, W.; Huang, S.; Stenby, E. H.Measurement and Modeling of CO2 Solubility in NaCl Brine and CO2–Saturated NaCl Brine Density. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control2011, 5 (6), 1460–1477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.08.004.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gauglitz, P. A.; Friedmann, F.; Kam, S. I.; Rossen, W. R.Foam Generation in Porous Media. In All Days; SPE: Tulsa, Oklahoma, 2002; p SPE-75177-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/75177-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Rossen, W. R.; Gauglitz, P. A.Percolation Theory of Creation and Mobilization of Foams in Porous Media. AIChE J. 1990, 36 (8), 1176–1188. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690360807.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Yu, G.; Vincent-Bonnieu, S.; Rossen, W. R.Foam Propagation at Low Superficial Velocity: Implications for Long-Distance Foam Propagation. SPE J. 2020, 25 (06), 3457–3471. https://doi.org/10.2118/201251-PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Yu, G.; Rossen, W. R.; Vincent-Bonnieu, S.Coreflood Study of Effect of Surfactant Concentration on Foam Generation in Porous Media. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2019, 58 (1), 420–427. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.8b03141.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Rossen, W. R.Theory of Mobilization Pressure Gradient of Flowing Foams in Porous Media: I. Incompressible Foam. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1990, 136 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(90)90074-X.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Chang, S. H.; Owusu, L. A.; French, S. B.; Kovarik, F. S.The Effect of Microscopic Heterogeneity on CO2-Foam Mobility: Part 2-Mechanistic Foam Simulation. In All Days; SPE: Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1990; p SPE-20191-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/20191-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. M’barki, O.; Ma, K.; Mateen, K.; Ren, G.; Luo, H.; Neillo, V.; Bourdarot, G.; Morel, D.; Nguyen, Q.Experimental Investigation of Multiple Pore Volumes Needed to Reach Steady-State Foam Flow in a Porous Media. In IOR 2019 – 20th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery; European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers: Pau, France, 2019; pp 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Myers, T. J.; Radke, C. J.Transient Foam Displacement in the Presence of Residual Oil: Experiment and Simulation Using a Population-Balance Model. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2000, 39 (8), 2725–2741. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie990909u.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Apaydin, O. G.; Kovscek, A. R.Surfactant Concentration and End Effects on Foam Flow in Porous Media. Transp. Porous Media2001, 43 (3), 511–536. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010740811277.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Nguyen, Q. P.; Currie, P. K.; Zitha, P. L. J.Determination of Foam Induced Fluid Partitioning in Porous Media Using X-Ray Computed Tomography. In All Days; SPE: Houston, Texas, 2003; p SPE-80245-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/80245-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Almajid, M. M.; Nazari, N.; Kovscek, A. R.Modeling Steady-State Foam Flow: Hysteresis and Backward Front Movement. Energy Fuels2019, 33 (11), 11353–11363. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.9b01842.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Belhaj, A. F.; Elraies, K. A.; Mahmood, S. M.; Zulkifli, N. N.; Akbari, S.; Hussien, O. S.The Effect of Surfactant Concentration, Salinity, Temperature, and pH on Surfactant Adsorption for Chemical Enhanced Oil Recovery: A Review. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 2020, 10 (1), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-019-0685-y.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Amirmoshiri, M.; Zhang, L.; Puerto, M. C.; Tewari, R. D.; Bahrim, R. Z. B. K.; Farajzadeh, R.; Hirasaki, G. J.; Biswal, S. L.Role of Wettability on the Adsorption of an Anionic Surfactant on Sandstone Cores. Langmuir2020, 36 (36), 10725–10738. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.0c01521.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Heberling, F.; Trainor, T. P.; Lützenkirchen, J.; Eng, P.; Denecke, M. A.; Bosbach, D.Structure and Reactivity of the Calcite–Water Interface. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2011, 354 (2), 843–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2010.10.047.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Song, J.; Zeng, Y.; Wang, L.; Duan, X.; Puerto, M.; Chapman, W. G.; Biswal, S. L.; Hirasaki, G. J.Surface Complexation Modeling of Calcite Zeta Potential Measurements in Brines with Mixed Potential Determining Ions (Ca2+, CO32-, Mg2+, SO42-) for Characterizing Carbonate Wettability. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2017, 506, 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2017.06.096.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Klimenko, A.; Cui, L.; Ding, L.; Bourrel, M.CO2 Geostorage and Enhanced Oil Recovery: Challenges in Controlling Foam/Emulsion Generation and Propagation. ACS Omega2024, 9 (35), 37094–37104. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.4c04137.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Chen, X.; Da, C.; Hatchell, D. C.; Daigle, H.; Ordonez-Varela, J.-R.; Blondeau, C.; Johnston, K. P.Ultra-Stable CO2-in-Water Foam by Generating Switchable Janus Nanoparticles in-Situ. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2023, 630, 828–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2022.10.102.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Mannhardt, K.; Svorstøl, I.Surfactant Concentration for Foam Formation and Propagation in Snorre Reservoir Core. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2001, 30 (2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-4105(01)00107-3.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Lotfollahi, M.; Farajzadeh, R.; Delshad, M.; Varavei, A.; Rossen, W. R.Comparison of Implicit-Texture and Population-Balance Foam Models; 2016; p D021S009R003. https://doi.org/10.2118/179808-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Ma, K.; Ren, G.; Mateen, K.; Morel, D.; Cordelier, P.Modeling Techniques for Foam Flow in Porous Media. SPE J. 2015, 20 (03), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.2118/169104-PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Farajzadeh, R.; Lotfollahi, M.; Eftekhari, A. A.; Rossen, W. R.; Hirasaki, G. J. H.Effect of Permeability on Implicit-Texture Foam Model Parameters and the Limiting Capillary Pressure. Energy Fuels2015, 29 (5), 3011–3018. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b00248.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Vavra, E.; Bai, C.; Puerto, M.; Ma, K.; Mateen, K.; Hirasaki, G. J.; Biswal, S. L.Effects of Velocity on N2 and CO2 Foam Flow with In-Situ Capillary Pressure Measurements in a High-Permeability Homogeneous Sandpack. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13 (1), 10029. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36345-4.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Ding, L.; Jouenne, S.; Gharbi, O.; Pal, M.; Bertin, H.; Rahman, M. A.; Economou, I. G.; Romero, C.; Guérillot, D.An Experimental Investigation of the Foam Enhanced Oil Recovery Process for a Dual Porosity and Heterogeneous Carbonate Reservoir under Strongly Oil-Wet Condition. Fuel2022, 313, 122684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.122684.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Blunt, M. J.; Bijeljic, B.; Dong, H.; Gharbi, O.; Iglauer, S.; Mostaghimi, P.; Paluszny, A.; Pentland, C.Pore-Scale Imaging and Modelling. 35th Year Anniv. Issue2013, 51, 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.03.003.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Bijeljic, B.; Mostaghimi, P.; Blunt, M. J.Insights into Non-Fickian Solute Transport in Carbonates. Water Resour. Res. 2013, 49 (5), 2714–2728. https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20238.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531010
Loading
Challenges in Controlling CO2 Foam Generation and Propagation
Conference Proceedings 2025, 1 (2025); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202531010
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531010
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531010
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