P. 1
J_EOR_ppt

J_EOR_ppt

|Views: 0|Likes:
Published by Dung Tien Hua

More info:

Published by: Dung Tien Hua on Mar 26, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/26/2014

pdf

text

original

Fundamentals of Enhanced Oil Recovery

Larry W. Lake The University of Texas at Austin (512) 471-8233 Larry_Lake@mail.utexas.edu k @ il d

Chapter p 1- Defining g EOR
•Overview •Current status •Why EOR •Incremental oil recovery •Comparative performances

Enhanced Oil Recovery Reco er (EOR) is is…
• • • • •
Oil recovery by injection of fluids not normally present in reservoir Excludes pressure maintenance or waterflooding Not necessarily tertiary recovery

Improved Oil Recovery (IOR) is…
EOR plus l additional dditi l technologies t h l i dealing d li with ith drilling, d illi production, operations, and reservoir characterization An attempt to avoid negative connotation of EOR

Enhanced Oil Recovery Reco er (EOR) is is…
• •
End of the Road "If you intend to select reservoir engineering as a career , then you should steer clear of the more 'career' esoteric subjects such as EOR flooding or the recovery y of highly g y viscous crude oils." • "While EOR may present the more satisfying intellectual challenge, there is also the risk that it may lead prematurely to the dole queue." L. P. Dake, 1994

Apr.Gas Lift ..Etc.Gas Reinjection Artificial Lift Pump p .Recovery y Mechanisms. 1990 . 23.. Primary ay Recovery Natural Flow Secondary Recovery y Waterflood Pressure Maintenance Water . Conventional Recovery Tertiary Recovery Thermal Solvent Chemical Other Enhanced Recovery Source: Adapted from the Oil & Gas Journal.

10 Secondary 0. So Time .25 Tertiary 0.Producing Phases Primary Oil Rate EL _ P Inj. 0. Ave.10 P Li Lim Prod.

of FSU. projects •Substantial grow in last 10 years to 130 projects •About 50% are CO2 projects •Storage opportunities . •Meteoric M t i rise i and d fall f ll in i the th 1980s 1980 •Least popular EOR today (exc. China) •Mostly polymer because of tax treatment •Fewer than 10 projects •Thermal projects… •Accounts for 50% of EOR oil •Around 60 projects. but declining •Solvent projects….EOR Application Summary •First deliberate application in the 1950s •Approximately 10% of US production from EOR •US accounts for 1/4 of worldwide production •Chemical projects….

2007 .EOR In the US From Thomas.

EOR Worldwide (2006) Total EOR=2. 2007 .5 MMBPD From Thomas.

2007 .Major EOR Projects (2006) From Thomas.

Chapter p 1.Defining g EOR •Overview •Current status •Why EOR .

Reserves: What are They? Petroleum (crude. (crude condensate. condensate gas) recoverable From known reservoirs Under p prevailing g economics With existing technology Three categories P Proved d (90% certain) t i ) Probable (50%) Possible (10%) Present reserves = Previous reserves-Production+Additions .

Reserves Additions •Discovery Di of f new fields fi ld •Discovery of new reservoirs in known fields •Extensions E t i of f known k fi fields ld •Redefinition of reserves because of Economics Extraction technology .

The Argument g for EOR • Worldwide consumption increase at a boring rate (2%/yr) •Reserves not generally replaced •Requires discovery of “giant” fi ld (100 MM bbl fields bbls in i place) l ) •Drilling g alone •Requires large capital investment •Drilling rate inversely correlated with finding rate .

Marc Faber Limited.Growing Energy Demand Oil Consumption and Industrialization Oil Consumption Increases Fastest During Early Industrialization 35 Per C Capita (Barr rels per Yea ar) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 19 900 19 910 19 920 19 930 19 935 19 940 19 945 19 960 19 965 19 970 19 975 19 985 19 905 19 915 19 925 19 950 19 955 19 980 19 990 US Japan South Korea China India 19 995 20 000 Source: BP Statistical Review. Respective Census Bureaus. RJ&A .

) ( ) • EOR applies pp to known reservoirs •No need to find them •Some infrastructure in place •Markets available •Technology is mature and cost effective •65% of oil remains after secondary recovery .The Argument g for EOR (cont.

6 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.4 0. 1. 2002 .0 Europe* Former USSR* Middle East* Africa* Region Far East* Latin America* US From Laherrere.Distribution of Ultimate Recovery • Substantial quantities of oil left behind.

Defining g EOR •Overview •Current status •Why EOR •Incremental oil recovery .Chapter p 1.

. Oil A Oil P Production Rate EOR Operation Incremental EOR B D C Ti Time ..Definition of Incremental Oil.

Comingled production Oil from outside project Inaccurate decline estimates IOR IOR recovery efficiency = 100 OOIP .Incremental Oil Recovery y( (IOR) ) Oil ( (HC) )p produced in excess of existing (conventional) operations Difficulties….

S. OK .Schematic of Solvent Flood Fig. 7-1 Drawing by Joe Lindley. Department of Energy. U. Bartlesville.

1996) 18000 16000 Means San Andres Unit Began (Nov v.000 BOPD 12000 10000 8000 Recovery.2 EOR 3.2 17 (17)* *Original EOR Estimate Ultimate 21. '83) CO2 Injection n Recovery.2 Continued Waterflood 100 1987 6000 4000 Ultimate 38.7 11 (7)* *Original EOR Estimate Continued Waterflood 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 2000 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Year 80000 70000 60000 Year 2000 Seminole San Andres Unit Began (Mar.Other CO2 Floods. % OOIP P+S To Date 45.8 15 (8)* *Original EOR Estimate 1000 46% HCPV CO2 Injection I j ti 20 MCF/D CO2 Source Secured 25% HCPV CO Injection 2 500 Continued Waterflood Year 0 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 End of Water Injection 0 1978 1980 1982 1984 Continued Waterflood 1986 1988 1990 1992 Year . '81) CO2 Injection R Recovery.8 EOR 7 1500 BOP PD BOP PD 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 Ultimate 47..7 Ford Geraldine Unit Beg gan (Feb..2 EOR 6. % OOIP P+S To Date 37. % OOIP P+S To Date 21. 10.000 Sundown Slaughter (From Folger and Guillot. '83) CO2 Inject tion 18% HCPV CO Injection 2 B Barrels/Day 14000 Actual Oil 1.

1-0.3 PV No slug Alkaline Surfactant.1-0.5 PV Surfactant.3 PV . Micellar-polymer Mobility control Surfactant Co-surfactant Co-solvent Polymer Usually 0. Polymer. ASP Surfactant Polymer Alkaline agent g Usually 0.Chemical C e ca Flooding ood g Gradual change to water Polymer Additives See below Low salinity Low calcium Usually 0.

North Burbank Unit Daqing ASP Daqing Polymer .Chemical Flood Results….

Process Variations Steam soak Steam Shut in Oil + Water Cold Oil Steam Cold Oil Cold oil Hot Water Cold Oil Cold oil Hot Water Cold Oil Inject (2-30 days) Steam Soak (5-30 days) Produce (1-6 months) Oil + Water Steam Drive Steam Water Cold Oil .

. Steam Soak ..Example.Paris Valley Field .

.. .Cruse 'E' (IADB) Expanded Steamflood.

Burning Oil ..B rning the Oil..

West Buffalo Red River Unit Primary y Recovery: y 6.5 % STOOIP .

More Variations Using g horizontal wells (SAGD) Burning the t eO Oil .

Foster Creek (EnCana) Current production ~ 40000 bbl/d (Q1 2006) .

In situ upgrading • Naphtha Light Processing Producer Heater Heater Overburden ¢ • Jet • Diesel • Nat. Nat Gas • Hydrogen • Chem. Feed • Heat High Temperature Causes Long.Optimizing SAGD . Horizontal Fractures .Weaning from Light Oil The Problem: Reserves of ultraheavy (stranded) crude are enormous The Initiative: Make recovery y of this resource economical and environmentally benign .Alternative heating technologies High Value Products .

.

Next Research Phase 2 Step Process (at least) to Commercial Freezewall Technology For Groundwater Isolation Freezewall Test • Football field sized test on 10 acres near Heater & Producer Wells Water & Temperature Monitor Wells Freeze Wells • • • existing research Test robustness of freezewall barrier Active construction/production p from late ’05 – early ’07 Reclamation 2010 Solid Shale Natural Fractured Shale Aquifers SURE Shell Unconventional Resource Energy .ppt 4 .White House Briefing April 11th. 2005 filename.

Ice Wall on Surface .

Athabasca Oil Sands Mining .

True in-situ processing is being pursued in the Piceance Basin by y four companies p Shell (Leached zone) Chevron (Mahogany zone) AMSO (Illitic shale) Better water quality aquife er system ExxonMobil (S li zone) (Saline ) 1000 ft Mahogany zone Heat injection well Dissolution surface Production well Saline water 2000 0 ft Nahcolitic oil shale cap rock Illitic oil shale 2000 ft 37 .

bbl 35-45 lb chemical/ inc. Sal Ult. Recovery (%) 5 15 5 20 10 Typical Agent Utilization 1 lb polymer/ l / inc. bbl Sum of SP/AP --- .Chemical EOR Processes Processes.. bbl 15-25 lb surfactant/ inc. Process P l Polymer Micellar/ polymer (SP) Alkaline/ polymer p y ASP Adj..

Process Typical Ult.Solvent EOR Processes. bbl 10 MCF/i MCF/inc. bbl Miscible I Immiscible i ibl ... Ult Agent Recovery % OOIP Utilization 10-15 5 10 5-10 10 MCF/inc.

5 bbl / net inc. bbl ?? Like steam . bbl 10-15 ?? Like steam 10 MCF air/inc.. Ult Recovery % OOIP 50-65 Agent A t Utilization Steam (drive and soak) ) Combustion SAGD Various EM 0. P Process Typical T i l Ult..Thermal Reco Recovery er Processes Processes.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->