View
7
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Jaime Almeida
Practical Applicationsand Novel EOR Methods
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 2
Typical IOR/EOR Project Workflow
Project ManagementScreening for EOR methods.
Screening based in reservoir propertiesPredictive models Dynamic simulation
Laboratory investigationWettability, Relative permeabilitySwelling test, MMP, MECSWTT (Single Well Tracer Test) SorRock-Fluid compatibility test
Pilot testPilot design Pilot implementationPilot MonitoringReservoir and EOR parameter calibration.
Field Plan implementationFull field simulation after model calibration with pilot test.Economic analysis
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 3
Project Life Cycle (Front-End Loading)
Initialization (Pre-FEL)
Visualization
Conceptualization
Definition
Execution
Operation
FrontFront--End Loading (FEL)End Loading (FEL)
Value Identification Value Realization
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 4
FEL applied to an EOR projectScenario analysis and Design Optimization, South America (National Oil Company) using DMS
1800 MMSTB oilfield under decline, Evaluate 4 potential scenarios for enhanced recovery and compare with base case. Optimize design parameters for water alternating gas scenario.
SITUATION
CHALLENGE
TOOLS
VALUE ADDED BY DMS
Identify an optimal recovery scenario based on an economic objective function (NPV). Rapidly optimize the design parameters for the WAG scenario using distributed computation (for DMS) with a combined spreadsheet model.
• Fast determination optimal recovery scenario based on NPV using distributed computation.
• Optimized WAG ratio, cycle length, injection rate, number of cycles.
• DMS ( with distributed computing)
• VIP
• EXCEL (proprietary economics)
• SPOTFIRE ( Data visualization package)
WAG OptimizationScenario Analysis
Optimum design
Best scenario
NPV Vs. RF
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 5
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 6
Screening criteria for EOR Methods
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 7
Steam/Polymer/Surfactant
Surfactant/Polymer/CO2
CO2/Polymer/Hydrocarbon/Surf. CO2/Hydrocarbon
Nitrogen/Hydrocarbon
Polymer degradation limit
Thermal limit
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
ºAPID
epth
(m)
Steam
Polymer
CO2
HydrocarbonN2
Combustion
Hot Water
Miscellar/PolymerSurfactant
Waterflooding
Screening for IOR/EOR methods
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 8
Steam/Polymer/Surfactant
Surfactant/Polymer/CO2
CO2/Polymer/Hydrocarbon/Surf. CO2/Hydrocarbon
Nitrogen/Hydrocarbon
Polymer degradation limit
Thermal limit
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
ºAPI
Dep
th (m
)
Steam
Polymer
CO2
HydrocarbonN2
Combustion
Hot WaterMiscellar/Polymer
Surfactant
Waterflooding
What is missing?•Reservoir heterogeneity
•Relative permeability/rock wettability
•Reservoir geometry
•Minimum Miscible Pressure (MMP)
•Minimum Miscible Enrichment (MME)
Screening for IOR/EOR methods
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 9
Screening for IOR/EOR methods
Predictive modelsDOE Predictive models
Steamflood, In-situ Combustion, Polymer, Chemical Flood, CO2 Miscible Flood, Infill, Single-Well Chemical TracerCO2 Prophet and other commercial software
SINTEF Petroleum Research CO2 predictive model (2007).EOR RATE MODEL (2008) (*)
CorrelationsComputer methods of Screening
MAESTRO™SelectEOR™ (ALBERTA RESEARCH COUNCIL) (2009)
(*) Source: Danish Energy Agency
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 10
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.0
SW
KR
W /
KR
OW
Wettability effect in Sor
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.0
SW
KR
W /
KR
OW
Residual Oil Saturation
Sorw=100-90=10%
Target for EOR after Waterflooding
Strong water wet system
Residual Oil Saturation
Sorw=100-70=30%
Target for EOR after Waterflooding
What is the target oil for EOR?
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 11
Conformance Control Solutions DUAL FLOW HORIZONTAL WELL DESIGN
Well Oil (QL= 1,000 bbl/day)
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
Apr/2004
May/2005Jul/2
006Aug
/2007Sep/
2008Nov/2
009Dec/2
010Feb/
2012Mar/20
13Apr/2
014
Time (m/y)
Wel
l Oil
Pro
duct
ion
Tota
l (bb
l)
Qw = 0 bbl/dQw = 500 bbl/dQw = 1000 bbl/dQw = 1500 bbl/dQw = 2000 bbl/dQw = 2500 bbl/dQw = 3000 bbl/d
Temperature 65 to 160 oC
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 12
σLpk
Nc ΔΔ
=
Importance of capillary number in defining EOR
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.00E-08 1.00E-07 1.00E-06 1.00E-05 1.00E-04 1.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.00E-01 1.00E+00
Nc
Sor(
EOR
)/Sor
w
Dombroski & BrownellFosterTaberDu PreyGupta
Wetting
Nonwetting
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 13
Effect on reducing interfacial tension
Source: Bardon & Longeron SPE 7609
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 14
wro
orw
kk
owM
μμ
λλ
==
Effect of mobility ratio in Sweep efficiency
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 15
Laboratory investigationWettability, Relative permeabilitySwelling test, MMP, MMESWTT (Single Well Tracer Test) for Sor estimationRock-Fluid compatibility test
•Slim tube test
•Rising Bubble method
•Vanishing interfacial tension
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 16
MMP CorrelationsPure CO2
YearHolm and Josendal 1974 T MWC5+Cronquist 1977 T MWC5+ C1Yellin and Metcalfe 1980 TJohnson and Pollin 1981 T MWC7+Glaso 1985 T MWC7+ C2-C6Alston 1985 T C1N2 C2-C4,CO2Yuan et al. 2004 T MWC7+ C2-C6Shokir 2007 T MWC5+ C1N2 C2-C4,H2S,CO2
CO2 with ImpuritiesYear
Johnson and Pollin 1981 Gas compositionSebastian et al 1985 Gas compositionYuan et al. 2004 T MWC7+ C2-C6 Gas compositionShokir 2007 T MWC7+ C2-C6 Gas composition
N2 and lean gas YearFiroozabadi and Aziz 1986 T MWC7+ C2-C5
Hydrocarbon gas YearKuo 1985 T MWC5+
Parameters
Parameters
Gas composition
Parameters
Parameters
Estimation based on EOS calculations (T, compositions oil and gas).
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 17
Shokir method
Linear regression MethodsAlternating Conditional Expectation (ACE) Algorithms
JPSE, 58 (2007) 173-185
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 18
0 2000 4000 6000X
-15100
-15000
-14900
-14800
-14700
-14600
-14500
-14400
-14300
-14200
-14100
ELE
V
AQS0.550.50.450.40.350.30.250.20.15
Run: wf-5sowsWaterflood (5-spot, original well spacing)Model 2 (24 Layer 3D)
WCE
WLWWater SaturationGrid Plane j=6
WRW
t = yr 2003.55 yrs Waterflooding
API = 16o
API = 8o
API = 4o
j=1
j=6
j=1k=12
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Y
AQS0.550.50.450.40.350.30.250.20.15
Run: wf-5sowsWaterflood (5-spot, original well spacing)Model 2 (24 Layer 3D)
WLW
Water Saturation
WRW
t = yr 2003.55 yrs Waterflooding
WCEGrid Plane K=12
J=1
Pilot project design
Reservoir parametersDepth 4421 mThickness 213 mPorosity 8 - 12 %Permeability 10-150 mDOil Gravity 26 APITemperature 146 CInitial pressure 791 BARBubble point pressure 267 BARMMP 499 BARRes. Pressure 506 BAR
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 19
Cross section study results
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030YEAR
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
Oil
Rec
over
y(f
ract
ion
OO
IPw
ithA
PI>
8o)
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
5-spot-owsoriginal well spacing 5spt with infill 9-spot with infill
gas inj5-spt if9-spt if
5-spt ows wf
9-spt if wf
9-spt if wag
5-spt if wf
5-spt if wag
gas inj5-spt ows
5-spt ows wag
WaterfloodGas Injection1:1 WAG
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 20
r, ft
elev
atio
n
0 100 200 300 400 500
-14800
-14700
-14600
-14500
-14400
InjectWaterat10,400psi Initial60dayswaterinjection GasSaturation
31m 50m 75m 150mRUNwbprf360halfcycle
r, ft
elev
atio
n
0 100 200 300 400 500
-14800
-14700
-14600
-14500
-14400 AQSAT0.60.550.50.450.40.350.30.25
InjectWaterat10,400psi
Sw=Swi=.14
WaterSaturation31m 50m 75m 150m
.2cut-off
r,ft
elev
atio
n
0 100 200 300 400 500
-14800
-14700
-14600
-14500
-14400
PRESSURE900089008800870086008500840083008200810080007900780077007600750074007300720071007000
InjectWaterat10,400psi
Pressure(psi)31m 50m 75m 150m
presentation/wbprf3-xs.lay
r,ft
elev
atio
n
0 100 200 300 400 500
-14800
-14700
-14600
-14500
-14400 HCSAT0.80.750.70.650.60.550.50.450.40.350.30.250.20.15
InjectWaterat10,400psi
So=Sorw=.34 So=Soi=.86
OilSaturation31m 50m 75m 150m
Pilot test monitoring
Injector•Production Profile Log (PLT)
•Down Hole P and T measurements
•Water chemical tracer
•Gas Chemical tracer
Observation well•Production Profile Log (PLT)
•Down Hole P and T measurements
•Saturation logs
Tracers
Fluorbenzoic acid (Water)
Perfluorcarbon Hydrocarbon (Gas)
WAG Pilot Project Design
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 21
Monitoring
The Weyburn Monitoring Project
3D- 3component and 3D-9 component geophysical survey
•Vertical Seismic Profiling (VSP) from surface to horizontal well
•Cross-well seismic between parallel
•Horizontal wells
•Single horizontal well seismic
Source: K. Brown et al, Role of Enhanced Oil Recovery in carbon Dioxide Sequestration the Weyburn Monitoring Project, a case Study
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 22
Novel EOR Technology
Integration of CO2 storage and EOR
Toe to heel air injection THAI™ (CAPRI)
Solvent Vapour Extraction (SVX)
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 23
Source: Gulraiz Khan, M.Sc. Dissertation 2009.
Integration of CO2 storage and EOR
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 24
Integration of CO2 storage and EOR
Source: DOE/NETL Feb 2008
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 25
THAI™ is a new combustion process
Toe to heel air injection (THAI) is a new method of extracting oil from heavy oil deposits which may have significant advantages over existing methods. The method was developed by Malcolm Greaves of the University of Bath and has been patented by Petrobank.
© 2009 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved. 26
Solvent Vapour Extraction (SVX)
Source: Petroleum Technology Research Centre (PTRC) JIVE Program
JIVE said: For every billion barrels of oil produced by SVX instead of SAGD:
•85 millions tones of CO2 prevented form entering the atmosfere
•400 millions barrels of fresh water saved
•1.65 trillion cubit feet of natural gas not burned
Recommended