Layer | Fill | Outline |
---|
Map layers
Theme | Visible | Selectable | Appearance | Zoom Range (now: 0) |
---|
Fill | Stroke |
---|---|
Collaborating Authors
Results
Abstract Chemical Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) methods have been implemented in a West Texas fractured carbonate. Due to the partially oil-wet nature of Yates field and slightly viscous oil (5-7 cP), surfactant injection was implemented to alter wettability and polymer was injected in the waterflood area to improve displacement efficiency, respectively. Single well huff-n-puff (HnP) surfactant treatments (late 1980's-today) and well-to-well pilots (1990's-2000's) have increased incremental oil production relative to base decline. Optimum surfactant chemicals were chosen based on laboratory results, reservoir performance, and economic viability. Polymer injection was carried out over a 6 year span (1983-1989) in which 55+ million pounds of polymer was injected; however the interpretation and analysis was complicated due to concurrent drilling, workover activities, and no prior waterflood development. Design parameters key to the surfactant implementation included: surfactant type and concentration, Critical Micelle Concentration (CMC), fluid saturations, oil composition, formation water salinity, fracture intensity, and treatment soak timing. Laboratory experiments included interfacial tension, contact angle, adsorption, fluid phase stability, Amott tests, and coreflooding. Numerical models were developed to help understand the sensitivity of each parameter on EOR performance and guide the design of treatments. Field implementation of surfactant included different surfactant types: anionic, non-ionic, and cationic. HnP treatments were followed by a soak period before returning the well to production and conducting flow back water analysis. Overall, HnP treatments using cationic surfactant resulted in the highest efficiency in terms of barrels of oil per kilogram of surfactant. Well-to-well tests were only conducted with non-ionic surfactants and showed mixed results. Design parameters for polymer injection such as fluid viscosity, concentration, adsorption and molecular weight were determined through coreflooding and fluid viscosity experiments. Two polymer types, high and low molecular weight, were studied and manufactured in-field and used in 200 or more injectors either continuously or alternating with produced water. Polymer injection was not effective in improving displacement efficiency in the water flood area of Yates reservoir and was suspended in 1989. The scale of field implementation and analysis of the impact of chemical injection on oil production in a massive, densely fractured carbonate field has provided valuable insight and learnings for future development and will be discussed. Other chemical EOR methods currently under investigation such as foam and other wettability altering technologies will also be discussed.
- Geology > Geological Subdiscipline (1.00)
- Geology > Rock Type > Sedimentary Rock > Carbonate Rock (0.46)
- North America > United States > Texas > Permian Basin > Yeso Formation (0.99)
- North America > United States > Texas > Permian Basin > Yates Formation (0.99)
- North America > United States > Texas > Permian Basin > Wolfcamp Formation (0.99)
- (31 more...)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Unconventional and Complex Reservoirs > Naturally-fractured reservoirs (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Unconventional and Complex Reservoirs > Carbonate reservoirs (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Improved and Enhanced Recovery > Waterflooding (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Improved and Enhanced Recovery > Chemical flooding methods (1.00)
EOR Screening Including Technical, Operational, Environmental and Economic Factors Reveals Practical EOR Potential Offshore on the Norwegian Continental Shelf
Smalley, P. Craig (Imperial College London) | Muggeridge, Ann H. (Imperial College London) | Amundrud, Sølvi S. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Dalland, Mariann (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Helvig, Ole S. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Høgnesen, Eli J. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Valvatne, Per (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Østhus, Arvid (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate)
Abstract We present a novel advanced EOR screening approach, adding to an existing technical screening toolkit powerful new practical discriminators based on: (1) Operational complexity of converting existing offshore fields to new EOR processes; (2) Environmental acceptability of each EOR process, given current field configuration; (3) Commercial attractiveness and competitiveness. We apply the new approach to 14 EOR processes across 85 reservoirs from 46 oilfields and discoveries on the offshore Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). When the operational, environmental and economic thresholds were included, 45% of the technical opportunities were screened out, and the overall potential recovery increment was ~280 MSm (million standard cubic metres), the top processes being HC miscible, low salinity/polymer, low salinity, CO2 miscible, gels. Excluding environmental factors (i.e., assuming environmental issues could be solved by new technologies), the increment is ~340 MSm, indicating a ~60 MSm prize for research into environmentally benign EOR methods. The economic thresholds used here were intentionally set low enough to eliminate only severely commercially challenged opportunities; using higher commercially competitive thresholds would reduce the overall volumes by a further ~40 MSm. The extension of EOR screening to include operational, environmental and economic criteria is not intended as a substitute for in-depth studies of these factors, but it should help stakeholders make earlier and better-informed decisions about selection of individual EOR opportunities for deeper study, leading to piloting and eventual field-scale deployment. Revealing the sensitivity of each EOR process to operational, environmental and economic factors will also help focus R&D onto the practical, as well as technical, barriers to EOR implementation.
- South America (1.00)
- North America > United States (1.00)
- Asia > Middle East (0.94)
- (3 more...)
- South America > Colombia > Huila Department > Magdalena Basin > Tello Field (0.99)
- South America > Brazil > Rio de Janeiro > South Atlantic Ocean > Campos Basin > Salema Field (0.99)
- North America > Mexico > Veracruz > Tampico-Misantla Basin > Chicontepec Basin > Panuco Block > Ebano Field (0.99)
- (23 more...)
Polymer Chemical Structure and its Impact on EOR Performance
Beteta, Alan (Heriot-Watt University) | Nurmi, Leena (Kemira Oyj) | Rosati, Louis (Kemira Chemicals Inc.) | Hanski, Sirkku (Kemira Oyj) | McIver, Katherine (Heriot-Watt University) | Sorbie, Kenneth (Heriot-Watt University) | Toivonen, Susanna (Kemira Oyj)
Abstract Polymer flooding is a mature EOR technology that has seen an increasing interest over the past decade. Co-polymers of Acrylamide (AMD) and Acrylic Acid (AA) have been the most prominent chemicals to be applied, whereas sulfonated polymers containing 2-Acrylamido-tertiary-butyl sulfonic acid (ATBS) have been used for higher temperature and/or salinity conditions. The objective of this study was to generate guidelines to aid in the selection of appropriate polyacrylamide chemistry for each field case. Our main focus was in sandstone fields operating at the upper end of AMD-AA temperature tolerance, where it needs to be decided whether sulfonation is required. The performance of the polymer throughout the whole residence time in the reservoir was considered since the macromolecule can undergo some changes over this period. Several key properties of nine distinct polymer species were investigated. The polymers consisted of AMD-AA co-polymers, AMD-ATBS co-polymers and AMD-AA-ATBS ter-polymers. The polymers were studied both in their original state as they would be during the injection (initial viscosity, initial adsorption and in-situ rheology) as well as in the state which they are expected to be in after the polymer has aged in the reservoir (i.e. in a different state of hydrolysis and corresponding viscosity retention and adsorption after ageing for various time periods). We note that the combination of viscosity retention and adsorption during the in-situ ageing process has not been typically investigated in previous literature, and this is a key novel feature of this work. Each of the above parameters has an impact on the effectiveness and the economic efficiency of a polymer flooding project. The content of ATBS was limited to 15 mol%. Buff Berea sandstone was applied in the static and dynamic adsorption experiments. The majority of the work was carried out in seawater at temperature, T = 58°C. Under these conditions AMD-AA samples showed maximum viscosity and lowest adsorption when the content of AA was moderate (20 mol%). When the AMD-AA polymers were aged at elevated temperature, the AA content steadily increased due to hydrolysis reactions. When the AA content was 30 mol% or higher, the viscosity started to decrease, and adsorption started to increase as the polymer was aged further. Thermal stability improved when ATBS was included in the polymer structure. In addition, sulfonated polyacrylamide samples showed increasing initial viscosity yields and decreasing initial adsorption with increasing ATBS content. For most of the samples, the maximum observed apparent in-situ viscosity increased when the bulk viscosity and relaxation time of the sample solution increased. The information generated in this study can be used to aid in the selection of the most optimal polyacrylamide chemistry for sandstone fields operating with moderate/high salinity brines at the upper end of AMD-AA temperature tolerance.
- North America > United States > Oklahoma (0.29)
- North America > United States > West Virginia (0.24)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania (0.24)
- (2 more...)
- Geology > Rock Type > Sedimentary Rock > Clastic Rock > Sandstone (0.74)
- Geology > Mineral > Silicate (0.46)
- Energy > Oil & Gas > Upstream (1.00)
- Materials > Chemicals > Commodity Chemicals > Petrochemicals (0.35)
- South America > Suriname > North Atlantic Ocean > Guyana-Suriname Basin > Tambaredjo Field (0.99)
- South America > Guyana > North Atlantic Ocean > Guyana-Suriname Basin > Tambaredjo Field (0.99)
- Europe > United Kingdom > Atlantic Margin > West of Shetland > Faroe-Shetland Basin > Judd Basin > Block 204/25 > Greater Schiehallion Field > Schiehallion Field (0.99)
- Europe > United Kingdom > Atlantic Margin > West of Shetland > Faroe-Shetland Basin > Judd Basin > Block 204/20 > Greater Schiehallion Field > Schiehallion Field (0.99)
Abstract This paper summarizes BP's Alaskan viscous oil resource appraisal strategy to de-risk viscous oil resource progression with a goal to improve recovery factor by 10%. A key to recovery improvement is application of improved oil recovery/enhanced oil recovery (IOR/EOR) methods. However, even after detailed studies, moving to the next stage including field pilots is not always easy in the mature and remote Alaskan North Slope. The paper also covers BP's Alaskan viscous oil technology strategy, extraction technologies selection, simulation and analytical studies, laboratory studies, and field trials for various shortlisted methods. A comprehensive study strategy conducted for progressing chemical EOR processes is discussed. The paper also addresses the challenges of obtaining new core and fluid samples for laboratory studies and logistical and economic considerations for field trials due to location and weather conditions in this part of the world.
- North America > Canada (0.68)
- Europe > United Kingdom (0.66)
- North America > United States > Alaska > North Slope Borough > Prudhoe Bay (0.28)
- Geology > Mineral (0.93)
- Geology > Geological Subdiscipline > Geomechanics (0.68)
- North America > United States > Alaska > Schrader Bluff Formation (0.99)
- North America > United States > Alaska > North Slope Basin > Milne Point Field > Kuparuk Formation (0.99)
- North America > United States > Alaska > North Slope Basin > Duck Island Field > Endicott Field > Kekiktuk Formation (0.99)
- (8 more...)
Screening for EOR and Estimating Potential Incremental Oil Recovery on the Norwegian Continental Shelf
Smalley, P. C. (Imperial College London) | Muggeridge, A. H. (Imperial College London) | Dalland, M.. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Helvig, O. S. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Høgnesen, E. J. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Hetland, M.. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) | Østhus, A.. (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate)
Abstract This paper presents an improved approach for rapid screening of candidate fields for EOR and estimation of the associated incremental oil recovery, and the results of applying it systematically to oil fields on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS), an area that already has a high average recovery factor (47%). Identifying, piloting and implementing new improved recovery methods within a reasonable time is important if substantial remaining oil volumes on the NCS are not to be left behind. The approach uses up-to-date screening criteria, and has more sophisticated routines for calculating screening scores and incremental oil recovery compared to previous published methods. The EOR processes screened for are: hydrocarbon miscible and immiscible WAG, CO2 miscible and immiscible WAG, alkaline, polymer, surfactant, surfactant/polymer, low salinity, low salinity/polymer, thermally activated polymers and conventional near well gel treatments. Overall screening scores are derived from sliding-scale scores for individual screening criteria, weighted for importance, and with the ability to define non-zero scores when non-critical criteria are outside their desired range, so avoiding the problem of processes being ruled out completely even though rock or fluid properties are only marginally outside the threshold of applicability. Incremental recoveries are estimated taking into account the existing recovery processes in the field and are capped by theoretical maximum recovery factors derived from theoretical/laboratory values for displacement and sweep. The methodology calculates the expected increment (and uncertainty range) for each EOR process and the increments for the top three compatible process combinations. The methodology was implemented in a spreadsheet-based tool that allowed multiple fields to be screened and the results compared and evaluated. The new tool was used to estimate the potential EOR opportunity for 53 reservoirs from 27 oil fields on the NCS. The results indicate a mid case EOR technical potential of 592 million standard cubic metres (MSm) with a low- to high case range of 320-860 MSm. The most promising processes are low salinity with polymer, surfactant with polymer, and miscible hydrocarbon and CO2 gas injection. Some field clusters were identified that could provide economies of scale for such processes. The EOR screening study has enabled the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate to advocate EOR-technology studies, including pilots, in specific regions or fields. Such pilots will play an important role in verifying process feasibility and narrowing the uncertainty range for incremental recovery potential.
- Asia > Middle East (0.88)
- Europe > Norway (0.67)
- Europe > United Kingdom > North Sea (0.46)
- North America > United States > Alaska > North Slope Borough (0.46)
- North America > United States > Alaska > North Slope Basin > Duck Island Field > Endicott Field > Kekiktuk Formation (0.99)
- Europe > United Kingdom > North Sea > Northern North Sea > East Shetland Basin > Alwyn Area > Block 3/9b > Alwyn Area > Alwyn South Field > Dunbar Field (0.99)
- Europe > United Kingdom > North Sea > Northern North Sea > East Shetland Basin > Alwyn Area > Block 3/8a > Alwyn Area > Alwyn South Field > Dunbar Field (0.99)
- (13 more...)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Improved and Enhanced Recovery > Waterflooding (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Improved and Enhanced Recovery > Miscible methods (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Improved and Enhanced Recovery > Gas-injection methods (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Improved and Enhanced Recovery > Chemical flooding methods (1.00)
Abstract Polymer transport and preparation can present a key challenge in chemical EOR project implementation. Hydrolyzed polyacrylamide in emulsion form presents some advantages, including an easier transportation and a simplification of the injection process. The trade off is a lower active concentration (~30% - 50%), which increases the volumes to be transported, as well as the presence of oil and emulsifiers, which may have unintended effects in the reservoir. In this article, we compare two industrial and commercially-available polymers, one in powder form from the gel process, and the other in an inverse emulsion, with similar viscosifying power. Properties of both polymers are investigated through rheological and screen factor measurements, filterability tests on bulk solutions, shear thickening behavior and resistance to shear degradation in porous medium. The likely origin of the observed differences is discussed in light of the two polymerization methods (bulk vs. emulsion) that lead to differences in polydispersity. Mobility reduction and residual resistance factor measurements during propagation tests at low velocity give some insight on the propagation of the stabilized oil droplets coming from the injected emulsion. Finally, oil recovery efficiency is investigated through secondary polymer injections on sandpacks. No significant difference was observed between the polymers in term of oil recovery or pressure behavior. These results are relevant to oil companies planning polymer or surfactant-polymer pilots and considering the tradeoffs between emulsion and powder polymers.
- Europe (0.70)
- North America > United States > Texas (0.46)
- North America > United States > California > Dos Cuadras Field (0.99)
- Europe > United Kingdom > Atlantic Margin > West of Shetland > Faroe-Shetland Basin > Judd Basin > Block 204/25 > Greater Schiehallion Field > Schiehallion Field (0.99)
- Europe > United Kingdom > Atlantic Margin > West of Shetland > Faroe-Shetland Basin > Judd Basin > Block 204/20 > Greater Schiehallion Field > Schiehallion Field (0.99)