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
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

Recovery
y Mechanisms...
Primary
ay
Recovery
Artificial Lift

Natural Flow

Pump
p - Gas Lift - Etc.

Secondary
Recovery
y

Conventional
Recovery

Pressure
Maintenance

Waterflood

Water - Gas Reinjection

Tertiary
Recovery
Thermal

Enhanced
Recovery

Chemical
Solvent

Other

Source: Adapted from the Oil & Gas Journal, Apr. 23, 1990

Producing Phases
Primary
0.10

Oil Rate

Secondary
0.25

0.10

EL
_
P

Tertiary

Inj.

Prod.
Li
Lim

Ave. So

Time

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.
Meteoric
M t
i rise
i and
d fall
f ll in
i the
th 1980s
1980
Least popular EOR today (exc. of FSU, China)
Mostly
Mostly polymer because of tax treatment
Fewer than 10 projects
Thermal projects
Accounts for 50% of EOR oil
Around 60 projects, but declining
Solvent
Solvent projects.
projects
Substantial grow in last 10 years to 130 projects
About 50% are CO2 projects
About
Storage opportunities

EOR In the US

From Thomas, 2007

EOR Worldwide (2006)

Total EOR=2.5 MMBPD

From Thomas, 2007

Major EOR Projects (2006)

From Thomas, 2007

Chapter
p
1- Defining
g EOR
Overview
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
off new fields
fi ld
Discovery
Discovery of new reservoirs in
known fields
Extensions
E t
i
off 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
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

Growing Energy Demand

Oil Consumption and Industrialization
Oil Consumption Increases Fastest During Early Industrialization
Per C
Capita (Barrrels per Yea
ar)

35
30
25

US

20
15

Japan

South
Korea

10
5

India
20
000

19
995

19
990

19
985

19
980

19
975

19
970

19
965

19
960

19
955

19
950

19
945

19
940

19
935

19
930

19
925

19
920

19
915

19
910

19
905

19
900

China

Source: BP Statistical Review, Respective Census Bureaus, Marc Faber Limited, RJ&A

The Argument
g
for EOR (cont.)
(
)
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

Distribution of Ultimate Recovery

Substantial quantities of oil left behind.
1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
Europe*

Former
USSR*

Middle
East*

Africa*
Region

Far East*

Latin
America*

US

From Laherrere, 2002

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

Definition of Incremental Oil...

Oil
EOR Operation

Oil P
Production Rate

Incremental EOR

B
C

Ti
Time

Incremental Oil Recovery

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

Schematic of Solvent Flood

Fig. 7-1

Drawing by Joe Lindley, U.S. Department of Energy, Bartlesville, OK

Other CO2 Floods...

Sundown Slaughter

Means San Andres Unit

18000

(From Folger and Guillot, 1996)

14000

1,000

BOPD

B
Barrels/Day

16000

Actual Oil

18% HCPV
CO Injection
2

Began (Nov
v. '83)
CO2 Injecttion

10,000

12000
10000

Recovery, % OOIP
P+S
To Date 37.2

8000

Continued
Waterflood

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

6000

Continued Waterflood

2000
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992

1994

Year

Year

6.7

Ultimate 47.2 17 (17)*

*Original EOR Estimate

40000

1500

1000

P+S

EOR

To Date 21.8

Ultimate 21.8 15 (8)*

20000

20 MCF/D CO2
Source Secured

500

Continued Waterflood

0
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992

Year

46% HCPV
CO2 Injection
I j ti

*Original EOR Estimate

25% HCPV
CO Injection
2

30000

10000

R
Recovery,
% OOIP

Beg
gan (Feb. '81)
CO2 Injection

BOP
PD

50000

To Date 45.2

EOR

BOP
PD

60000

P+S

Ford Geraldine Unit

2000

Recovery, % OOIP

CO2 Injection
n

70000

Seminole San Andres Unit

Began (Mar. '83)

80000

3.2

Ultimate 38.7 11 (7)*

*Original EOR Estimate

4000
100
1987

EOR

End of
Water Injection
0
1978

1980

1982

Continued Waterflood
1984

1986

Year

1988

1990

1992

Chemical
C
e ca Flooding
ood g

Gradual
change
to water

Polymer
Additives

See below

Surfactant,
Polymer,
Micellar-polymer Mobility control
Surfactant
Co-surfactant
Co-solvent
Polymer
Usually 0.1-0.3 PV

No slug

Low salinity
Low calcium
Usually 0.5 PV

Alkaline
Surfactant, ASP
Surfactant
Polymer
Alkaline agent
g
Usually 0.1-0.3 PV

Chemical Flood Results.

North Burbank Unit

Daqing
ASP

Daqing Polymer

Process Variations

Steam soak
Steam

Cold
Oil

Steam

Shut in

Cold
Oil

Cold
oil

Inject
(2-30 days)
Steam

Steam

Hot
Water

Oil + Water

Cold
Oil

Cold
oil

Soak
(5-30 days)

Cold
Oil

Produce
(1-6 months)

Steam Drive

Water

Hot
Water

Cold Oil

Oil + Water

Example...
Steam Soak - Paris Valley Field

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

B rning the Oil...

Burning
Oil

West Buffalo Red River Unit

Primaryy Recovery:
y
6.5 % STOOIP

More Variations
Using
g
horizontal
wells
(SAGD)

Burning
tthe
eO
Oil

Foster Creek (EnCana)

Current production ~ 40000 bbl/d (Q1 2006)

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
- Optimizing SAGD
- Alternative heating technologies
High Value Products
- In situ upgrading
Naphtha
Light Processing

Producer
Heater

Heater
Overburden

High Temperature Causes Long, Horizontal Fractures

Jet
Diesel
Nat.
Nat Gas
Hydrogen
Chem. Feed
Heat

Next Research Phase

2 Step Process (at least) to Commercial

Freezewall Technology For Groundwater Isolation

Heater &
Producer
Wells

Freezewall Test
Football field sized test on 10 acres near

existing research
Test robustness of freezewall barrier
Active construction/production
p
from late
05 early 07
Reclamation 2010

Water &
Temperature
Monitor Wells

Solid
Shale

SURE

Shell Unconventional Resource Energy - White House Briefing April 11th, 2005

Freeze
Wells

Natural
Fractured
Shale
Aquifers

filename.ppt

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)

ExxonMobil
(S li zone))
(Saline

Mahogany zone

2000
0 ft

Heat
injection
well

Dissolution surface
Production
well

Saline water

Nahcolitic oil shale cap rock

Illitic oil shale
2000 ft

37

aquife
er system

1000 ft

Better water quality

Chemical EOR Processes

Processes...
Process

Ult.
Recovery (%)

Typical Agent
Utilization

P l
Polymer

1 lb polymer/
l
/
inc. bbl

Micellar/
polymer (SP)

15

15-25 lb surfactant/
inc. bbl

Alkaline/
polymer
p
y

35-45 lb chemical/
inc. bbl

ASP

20

Sum of SP/AP

Adj. Sal

10

---

Solvent EOR Processes...

Process

Typical Ult.
Ult
Agent
Recovery % OOIP Utilization

Miscible

10-15

10 MCF/inc. bbl

I
Immiscible
i ibl

5 10
5-10

10 MCF/i
MCF/inc. bbl

Thermal Reco
Recovery
er Processes
Processes...
P
Process

Typical
T
i l Ult.
Ult
Recovery % OOIP

Agentt
A
Utilization

Steam (drive
and soak))

50-65

0.5 bbl / net inc. bbl

Combustion

10-15

10 MCF air/inc. bbl

??

??

Like steam

Like steam

SAGD
Various EM