You are on page 1of 4

GEOL. CROAT.

49/2

243 - 246

4 Figs.

ZAGREB 1996
Scientific note

Dry Gas Injection for Miscible Displacement on Zutica Oil Field


Tvanka JUTTNER
PROCEEDINGS

Key words: Gas injection, Mi scibility condition, Enhanced recovery, Di sp lacement, Vaporizing gas drive, Multiple conlacL

Kljucne nJeCl: utiskivanje pUna, uvjeti mtJcSanJa, povecanje iscrpka, istiskivanj e, otparavanje u plinsku fazu, visekontaktni proces. Sazetak
Pri proccsima uti skivanja plina ukupni iscrpak nafte ukljllcllje osim !laftc proizvedene izravnim istiskivanjem i ugljikovodikc otparene iz zaostale, nepokrelnc nafte. Mehanizam procesa je slo~.cn i obuhvaea cfckte interakcijc olparcnih ugljikovodika i nafte na frontll ist iskivanja. Zato je konacni iscrpak nane LIZ proccs mijcsanja veei od "konvcncionalno" isti sllulc i olparene naftc. Metodc racunanja visekontaktllog olparavanja s nckom od jed lIadzbi stanja odrcduju uvjcte mijdanja simulacijom proccsa; mehanizmom olparavanja iIi mchanizmom kondenzllcijc. Cilj si mulacijc procesa proizvodnje nanc polja Zutica rcZimom podrzavanja slojnog tlaka bio jc odrcdivanje karaktcra proccsa, Ij. stupnja priblil,avanja uvjctima mijcsanja izral.enog velicinom iscrpka naftc.

Abstract
By the process of gas injec tion under mi scible conditions, th e (alai oil recovery also includes vaporized hydrocarbons from the
residual immob ile oil, in addition (0 (he oil produced by direct dis placement. The process is complex and involves Ihe innucnce of the

interaction of extracted hydrocarbons and in-situ oil at the displacement fronl. Therefore, the final oil recovery under miscible cond it ions is higher than th e "conventionally" displaced oil. Methods of calculating multiple contacts miscibility with an Equation of State (EOS) determine the miscibility condit ion s by simula tion processes as a vaporizing gas drivc or cond ensi ng gas drive. The aim of this study was 10 dctcmlinc a degree of miscibility.

I. INTRODUCTION

When a fluid is injected into a reservoir to displace oil towards the production well, oil recovery is not completc. One method to improve recovery is to reduce or suppress the interfacial tension between the oil and injeetcd nuid. This happens when injected fluid, hydrocarbon gases for example (dry natural gas, mainly methanc, carbon -dioxide) are miscible with oil (BLACKWELL cl al.. 1959; BENHAM cl al.. 1960; STALKUP. 1984).

(the criterion for iluid mobility calculated by mUltiple contact vaporization), and does not consider either the influcnce of petrophysical heterogeneities of the reservoir rock, or the viscous fingering of Iluid. In fact, only the thermodynamic aspect of the process is investigated. The sequence of calculations is correlated with the practical procedure of oil production which consists of:
I. Gas injeclion (SLOBOD & KOCH. 1963; CAUDLE & DYES, [958) into a reservoir until a certain pressure is attained, and

2. METHODS AND RESULTS


The aim of this research was to simulate the process or oil production in the Zutica field by maintaining reservoir pressure, and to define process characteristics (miscibility or immiscibility condit ions). To simulate the process, a unidimcntional rcservoir sim ulator COMP3 was uscd (Scien ti fic Software Intercomp). A 9-component system was required in the formulation of fluid composition (adjusted to PR OS). It was also assumed that th e pore space contains only sat urated oil

2. Maintenance of co nstant reservoir pressure with a give n valuc of oil production. Part of the injected dry gas is dissolved in the reservoir oil and the cons(> q uenccs are: increasing oil volume (oil-swell); changes in phase composition, density and viscosity of oil; changes in composition and density of equi librium gas phase. Changes of these properties of Zutica oil calculated for various prcssures ranging from the initial satura tion pressure P bi :::: 128 .5 bar up to 200 bars are shown in Fi g. L In this particular case, injected dry gas is poorly dissolved in already saturated oil and swelling of oil is 6%, while oil density decreases by 3% from 0.687 10 0.665 g/cm 3. Simulation of the dynamics of displacement pro-

Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering , Un iversity of Zagrcb, Picroltijeva 6, HR- IOOOO Zagreb, Croatia.

244
1.08 0.70

Geologia Croatica 49/2

1.06

"E

~
'0 '0 >
~

,I v-----Y _________

density r swem,g facW

0.69

"
0

1.04

15

."
0

?:
1.02 -

1.00

125

/
150

. ~r
175

0.68

~v

0.67

0.66

0.65

200

Fig. 1 Changes in properties of reservoir oi l during gas inj ection (after JUlTN ER, 1995) .

gas injection pressure (bar)

cess at set constant pressure o r gas injectio n has already been performed unde r var ious pressure va lues. Typical curves of oil recovery versus volume of injected gas are shown in Fig. 2. Oil recovery is not a distinct function of inj ectio n press ure , therefo re the oil recovery at a press ure or 135 ba rs (press ure close to actual reservoir condi ti ons) is a little lower than oil recovery at 180 bars pressure. Gas injection of one pore volume (P.Y.) at a pressure of 135 bar gave a recovery of 5 1%, wh ile at a press ure of 180 bar the recovery is 55% of th e orig inal oil in place. A practical method of defi nin g a characteristic mu ltiple contact miscibility between injected fluid and oil is the "sli m-tube" test from which the minimum misci bi lit y press ure (MMP) was de termin ed . Accord in g to

the c riterion ( YELLING & METCALFE, 1980) the minimum miscibility press ure (MMP) is that particular gas injection press ure when 1.2 P.V. of injected gas disp laced ovcr 90 % of present oil. Re sult s of the "slimtub e" tes t are shown in Fi g. 3 w hi ch showcs that th e miscibl e conditions in the sys tern (s aturated oil Zutica methane, respec ti vely dry natural gas), can be achieved only after applicatio n of very hi gh press ure (MMP of a sys tem is 500 bar). In other words, in oil product io n from th e Zutica fi e ld, th e reg ime of press ure maintenance should make modest con tri butions by th e mechanism of multiple contact vaporization to oil displacemen t, since in the interval of rea l applicable press ures of gas injection the process will proceed undcr immi scibl e conditions.

100

80

................. , ................. I I 0------0 I


0----0

injection pressure", 135 bar injection pressure", 180 bar

I
I
I

,:
;J!
0

"E

60

.........................

g
0 u ~

"
>

40

f-- ....

'0

20 C-.. ..

0.5

1.0
amount of gas injection (P.V.)

1. 5

2.0

Fig. 2 Oil r ecovery by multiple conlac\ process Caner JUTTNER, 1995).

J u1tner: Dry Gas Injection for Miscible Displacement on Zut ica Oil Field

245
I

100
~

80

:>
0:
;f.

60

:....----

..------- ~

-----

>
~

'"
u
0

'0

40

/ /'

/
I
il recovery at '. at injected gas

20

100

200

300
gas injection pressure (bar)

4DC

500

Fig. 3 Determination of minimum m iscibili ty pressure ( MMP) ("s li me-tube" test) (afte r JOTTNER, 1995).

Quantitative dynamic changes of composition with dependence on quantity of injected gas is shown in Fig. 4. The enrichment of dry gas with for example ethane is about 80% at the first contact and aboltt50% at the 16th contact (which equals the total injected volume from 0.8 P.V.). It must be noted that these data relate to processes of gas injection into saturated oil. The gas cap in the reservoir has not been considered. In this particular process, composition of lhe existing gas cap affects the phase equilibria and final composition of the produced gas phase.

3, CONCLUSION
By processes of gas injeclio n into a reservoir, th e composition of fluids in the area near the critical point
100

distinctly diffe r from the composition of the original reservoir fluid. Therefore it is necessary to create a good model of a fluid from 9 to 15 components adjusted with one Equations of State (EOS). To produce more oil, the pressure in the reservoir must be maintained by injecting another fluid. Oil displacement in the Zutica oil field by maintaning reservoir pressure by gas injection at an actual pressure of 130 bar occurs under immisci ble conditions in accordance with the expected phase behaviour of a methaneoil system, because th e minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) of injected gas in reservoir oil, dete rmined by the "slim-tube" test, is about 500 bar. If the process should be performed at higher pressure (up to maximum possible reservoir pressure of 200 bar), it cannot be expected to produce a greater contribution to misci10

80 ;f.

Ia D

injected gas

after 1st contact afte r 15th contact

r-......

8
;f.

15
6
. . . .. .

15

o
15
c

E 60 -

.2 1i

" "

E 40
u

u c

r-r-I

15
c
~

E
20

r--

u c
u
0

c,

III

11I

11

III

co,
components

.o
Fig. 4 Composition of equilibrium gas (after JOlTNER, 1995).

246

Gt:ologia CrOiltiCii 49/2

bility displacement in th e LOtal production. At the present production regime, injection of the dry gas leads to enrichmen t of gas phase by multiple contact vaporization of liglll hydrocarbons. Low volumes of methane dis solve in the oil in place, so changes in the propcI1ics of th e sa turated oil arc indistinct. The co ntribution of multiple contact mechanism of hydrocarbon vaporizing in \olal oil displacement is negligible.

4. REFERENCES BENHAM, A.L., DOWDEN, W.E. & KUNZMAN , W.J. (1960): Miscible fluid displacement prediction of m iseibility. - Trans. AIME, 219, 219-237. BLACKWELL, R.l., RAYNE , 1.R. & TERRY, W.M . (1959): Factors influencing the e fficiency of miscible displacement.- Trans. AIME, 216, 1-8. CAUDLE, B.H. & DYES, A.B . (1958): Improving miscible displacement by gas-wate r injection.- Trans. AIME, 213, 281 -284. lUTTNER, l. (1995): Proces optimalization for recov ery improvement by gas recycl ing in oil reservoir with gas-cap .- Unpublished PhD Thesis, [-'acuity of Mining, Geo logy and Petroleum Engineering, Uni versity of Zagreb, 122p. SLOBOD, R.L. & KOCH , H.A. l r. (1963): High pressure gas injection-mehanism of recovery increase.Drill. and Prod. Prac., 20, 82-96. STALKUP, F.l. lr. (1984): Miscible dispiacement.Monograph Series, L. H. Doherty Memorial Funf. of AiME SPE, Dallas, 8, 2-135. YELLING, W.F. & METCALFE, R.S. (1980): Determination an d prediction of CO 2 MMP. - 1. Petr. Techn., 32/1,160-168.

Acknowledgment
Thi s work was supported in part by Ministry of Science and Technology of the Repub lic of Croatia (Projec t 2-16-230: " Improvement of Hydrocarbon Recovery by Gas Injection Processes"),