SS i'5-0!

PETROLEUM SOCIETY OF CIM PAPER NO.4

'.'..
":'"
, .
THIS IS A PREPRINT- SUBJECT TO CORRECTION

A LABORATORY STUDY OF HEAVY OIL

RECOVERY WITH CARBON DIOXIDE

by
Kamal N. Jha
Petroleum Division
Saskatchewan Research Council

PUBLICATION RIGHTS RESERVED

THIS PAPER IS TO BE PRESENTEO ATTHE FIRST ANNUAL TECHNICAL MEETING OF THE SOUTH SASKAT-
CHEWAN SECTION, THE PETROLEUM SOCIETY OF CIM, HELD IN REGINA, SEPTEMBER 15 - 17, 1985. DISCUS-
SION OF THIS PAPER IS INVITED. SUCH DISCUSSION MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE TECHNICAL MEETING
AND WILL BE CONSIDERED FOR PUBLICATION IN CIM JOURNALS IF FILED IN WRITING WITH THE
: .-" TECHNICAL PROGRAM CHAIRMAN PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING.
\

i, ABSTRACT res~dual
ing gas
o~l-in-place
(WAG) mod~ and
(ROIP) in
between
the water-alternat-
23.1 and 33.2% ROIP

~ Heavy o~l reservoirs of Saskatchewan are char- for the slug process. The total recovery appeared
J acterized by thin pay, shaley sand, heterogene1ty, to level ofF at 60% 10IP. The CO2 injection 1nto
! low productiv1ty and bottom water. Thermal recovery the core at the initlal 011 saturatlon recovered
1 processes are not expected to be econom1cally feas- 29.9% lOIP 1n the WAGmode end 41.6% IOIP for a 61ug

ible for reservoirs containing approx~mately e~ghty process where CO2 was allowed to soak For 69 h.
percent of the heavy 011 in the provInce. The car- There appears to be considerable merIt in soakIng
\ bon dioxide immiscible flooding process ~s consider- with CO2 prIor to water injection.
- ed to be the most promising among the non-thermal
~ recove~ y method6 for these reservoirs. INTRODUCTION
~
a ThIS paper presents a survey of the recent Saskatchewan has an extensive ges~urce of heavy
" laboratory and F1eld studJ.es of the heavy oil-ca~bon 011. The p:oven resource J.~ 1.p~1 0 m and the pr\?-
dloxide 1mm1scible proce~s and the ~esult~ obta1ned bable 011-1n-place 3.4x10 m. The heavy oJ.l
. from phase behavior and co~e dlsplacement expe~J.- rese~VOIrs of Saskatchawan ate characterized by th1n
ments. VIscosity, dens~ty, bubble p01nt prassu~e, pay, shaley sand, heterogeneity, low productivity
gas-all ratio (GOR) and swel11ng factor For the and bottom wate~. Flfty-Five percent of the J.nitial
reconstituted reserVOlr fluids and CO2-saturated heevy oil-in-place 1S contained in reservoirs less
wellhead oil and reservoir fluid were measured at then 3 m thick and ninety-f1ve percent in less than
2S"C and pressu~es up to B.27 MPa. A forty-fivefold 7 m thick.2
reduction in ViSC08lty and a 16% ~ncrease ln the
swelling factor were observed in the heavy oil-CO2 Primary and secondary methods together recove~
system. Carbon dioxide once dlssolved In the heavy less than ten percent of the initial oil-J.n-place.
oil at a high pressure ~ema1nsin solution even when The development of appropriate recovery technIques
the pressure is reduced. spec~Flc to Saskatchewan reservoirs is necessary 1f
the full potential of this resource ~s to be real-
Waterflooding of the oil-sBtu~ated core pro- ized. Saskatchewan's heavy oil enhanced recove~y
duced 31.5 to 46.2% initlal oil-ln-place (IOIP). projects have centered around steam injection and
.1 The ~nc("emental recovery From the CO2 lnject10n J.nto in-sltu combustlon. While steam lnjection has been
--',

the water flooded core was between 12_7 and 3B-6~ very successful, it 1S not expected to be economi-

1--
call~' feasLble for those reserVOlrs WhlCh COl1ti1';: t1ve ln controlling th10hlgh moblilty or water and

appt'ox1lnately elght) percent. of the heavy 011.' enhanc1ng I"he recover).

In-Situ combust Lon, although applLcable to thIn

reservoirs, has been onl) marginally successFul thus Several researchers have reported thBt the

far. blowdown recovery folloWlng an llrlmlSCibLe CO2 Flood

1S "er)' effecl"lve 1n recoverlng addltlonal olli UI)

Reco\'er~' of heavy all uslng carbon dlo~lde to 30% of the lnttlal oll-ln-pla~~ ~~ be recovered

Llnmlsclble rloodlng 1S consldered to be the most VIa Solutlon gas dr1ve mechan1sm. ,

promisLng among the non-therm&l EOR processes, par-

t Lcularl) for those reserVO1rs havLng su7.h 6undeslr- The core d1splacement sludles conducted Ln var-
able geology as found ln Saskatchewan. - Slnce 10US laboratorles have employed one or roore of the

1982 the number of carbon dLD'Clde ImmtSCLble pro- follow1ng processes: CO2 huFF-n-puFr, continuous

Jecls In 3the United States has grown From zero to CO2 injection, CO2 slug followed by waterrloodlng

~lgI1tl!en. and alternate slU~S of CO2 and water (WAG) followed

b> waterFloodlng. 5,20,21

In order to develop a vLable imm1sc1ble carbon

dlo'(ide rel:o,,~r, process, a knowledge of the phYSI- The recover~ or lloydmlnster and CallforniB
cal. I:hemll:al and flow characterlstlcs of the heavy heavy oIls was investlgated1~n201aboratorles by lhc
()ll arId carbon dlo~lde system 13 essential. A sur- CO2 hufF-n-puFF technlque.' In spIte or a
vey of the recent laboratory and Fleld stUdl:S 1S large V1SCOSIty reduct10n and some swell\ng, poor

fJre:iented below. dlsplacement efficIency and hIgh consumption of CO2

per CUblC metr~ or Oil were observed. From a com-

Recovery Mechan!:sm parat1,,'e study it was concluded that the CO2 drIve

process IS more eff1clent ln rec£overtng heavy olls

The prlncipal mechanIsms belleved to contrIbute than the CO2 huFf-n-puFf process.

to improved recovery ln the CO2 dlsplacement process

are: E~perlmental studIes conducted In several

l) oll Vlscoslty reductlon laboratorles employIng a sllm tube, core dlsplace-

lL) ollswelllng ment apparatus and physlcal models have demonstrBted

lll) lnterfaclal tension reduction that Immiscible carbon dioxlde/waterrloodlng lS a

lV) emulslflcatlon vlable process f~r ~he recovery of moderately ViS-

v) blowdown, and COU3 olls.G, 10,2 _2 The 1nject1on of CO2 slugs

Vl) well stimulatIon effects. alternatlng wlth water is more eFFectLve then con-

tlnuous 1nject1on. The re5ults of these tests also

DlssolutLon of CO2 ln the 011 causes a reduc:tJon In show that. there 1S an optImum slug Slre of CO2 Fol-
vlscoSlt> and a swelllng of the 011 Wh1Ch contribljte lowed by water.

to lmproved flow propertIes and enhanced re[:overy

and product10n. These propert~es for a Lloydmln- NumerIcal slmulat1on studies of ImmlsClble CO2

ster-type heallY 011 and CO2 Solutlons halle beE:n de- dlsplacement ln heavy 011 reservolrsshfye2£eXr per-

termlned In thls study. Formed by several investigators., " The

results obta1ned by KIlns and Farouq All uslng R
literature Sur~ey modlFled black 011 slmulator lndi~ated that carbon

dlox1de flooding was superlor to natural depletIon,

Although mlsclble CO2 floodlng of lIght 011 nltrogen floodlng or waterFlood~ng for 011 vlSCOS1-

reserVOIrs has been extensively tested ~n laborator- tIes between 70 and 1000 mfa.s ln the pressure range

les and lr1 the rleld, stm?lar stud1es for hea',y oil of 7.0-7.5 MPa.5 011 recover~' was Found to lncreaso
reserVOlrs are llmlt.ed. - Because of thelr shallow rapldly wIth Increaslng lnltlal aLl saturatlon.

formatIon depths, Saskatchewan heavy 011 reservoirs Reld and Robinson's work on the l~ck Creek Meakln

exhlblt rracture pressures WhlCh are lower than the UnIt immlsC1ble COz/H20 flood project lndlcated that

min1mum mlsclbll1ty pressure of heavy 011 an(1 CO2, alternate C02/H20 1nject1on wlth cyclIc CO2 stlmula-

prectudLng any posslbllity of achlevlng mlsl:iblllty tlon of the produc:~ng wells would be the ~reFerred
In the re~ervOlr. [t has been reported that the CO2 operatlng procedure for fIeld appl1catlon.1 Spivak

requtrement for the lmmlsclble flood1ng procl~ss 15 and ChIma used an equat10n-oF-state composltlonal

20 to 500"; of that needed For mlsfirfe Floodlng fot' slmulator for the Wilmlngton field ln Callfornla and
the same volume of oil recovered. - concluded that the 1mmlsclble CO2 drille can be

looked upon as a process or VlscoSlty reductIon Ao~~

[t has been concluded from laboratory studies 10\'/ed by waterFloodlng of the less ViSCOUS 011.1.

that when CO2 was Injected as a gas rather than as a They also concluded that the WAG process as opposed

llquld, the lncremental reco\'ery of hea~y oll per to a slug Injection resulted In lmproved 011 recov-

unit mass of CO2 Injected ~'as hlgher.1 Several ery. It wa5 concluded from several numerLcal Slmu-

lnvestlqatlons have demonstrated that the dlssolu- latlon studles that lnjection of CO2 to a heav~ all
tlon of CO2 1n heavy oil causes ~ r~~uctlon In VIS- reSerVOlr could be successFul far a spec1f1c reser-
coSlty and an lncrease 1n volume. 3- The solubll- VOlr 1f properly des1gned and executed.

lty of CO2 gas ln heavy 011 (14-17GAPI) at moderate

pressures (4-6 MPa) and temperatures (20-25"C) lS A summary of several Fteld tests for heavy 011
Bppro~lmately 50-100 m3!m3 at SIP WhlCh reslilts 1n a CO2 lmmlsclble recovery projects Indicates that thiS

10-20% lr,crease 1n the 011 volume, more then a 90~ proces~ IS appllcable to thln and shallow reser-
reduct10n In VlSCOSltx and about 30% lowerlng of ~01rs. 0 The reserVOir characterlst1l:s and results
10 13 17 18
Inte~Faclal tensIon. , " I n-sltu forma- obtaIned are presented 1n Table 1 WhICh has been re-
tlon of aCidlc emulsLons has been found to be effec- produced from reFerence 10. Water-alternatIng gas

\"'
 .
..
~ Flood1ng schemes show more 1ncrease in production chosen to prov1de sufFlc1ent pressure drop to mea-
': rate and better ~conom~cs. sure the VlScoslty. The PVT ~ell and vlscometers
, .~.~; are pla~ed In e thermosteted air bath. The pressure
! \,~.; ThlS paper presents the results obtslned Frolll and temperature rstlnegs of th~a apparatus are 13.8
~ phase behavIour and core d16placement studies on a HPs (2000 pSI) and 40 C.
Lloydminster hesvy 011 and CO2 system at the reser-
vo~r temperatur~. The effects of CO2 ~oncentrations (ii) Visual Cell PVT Appara~s
on saturatIon pressure, v~scos~tYI denslty snd swel-
lIng Factor are descrIbed. Data generated from d15- Flgure 2 dlSplBYS the PVT Bpparatus wh~ch con-
pla~ement studies usIng a synthetIc core saturated SlStS of a sIght ~ell, a piston cell equipped wIth a
: with ~leaned ~Iellh~ad 011 under water flood, CO2 slug potentIometer to m~asure pi5ton displscement, a cell
dr1ven by water, end water-alternat1ng-C02 flood are to 5tore reserVOIr oil, and a viscometer made up of
. reported. staInless steel tublng. The system is equipped with
: sampling ports For introdu~ing oil and gas For re-
EXPERIME~TAL constltut1ng the reserVOlr Fluid, For mea5ur1ng gas-
oil rat.lO and vlscosities, end analyzing the evolved
ChBracter~zation of Stock Tank 011 gases. The slght cell permits the visual observa-
tIon of the gas and 011 phases dur~ng difFerentIal
A wellhead heavy 011 sample from a Lloydm1nster liberatIon experlments. These components ere en-
reservoir was supplIed by the Saskatche'~an 011 and closed In B thermostated air oven which is equ~pped
Ges CorporatIon. Suspended SOlids and \~ater were wIth a motor to rotate the cell by 180. FacIlItatIng
removed From ~he wellhead 011 by hIgh speed centr~- the m1~lng of oil and gas samples. This system 1S
fugat~on. The cleaned 011 was used for experiments. designed to wlthstand 69.0 MPa (10000 pSl) and
The dens1ty of the 011 was measured between ZO. and 150eC.
BOeC using a Paar DenS1ty f~eter, DMA 45 and D~~A

- 512.
HBTDCP,
The VISCOSIty
1.56," cone and
wasplate
determIned
model
by a Brookf1eld
CP-4Z V1scometer
Sall1'le Preparation

at ZO', 30e and 40eC and by a Ruska roll~ng ball The apparatus WBS evacuated and cleaned oil ~n-
vIscometer et 40°, 80e, 110. end 140.C. The p~es- troduced lntO the cell either through the sample
. su~e dependence of the denslty and the . VlSCOSlty of port or the lId opening. AFter evacuatlng the sy-
. the cleaned 011 were determ1ned at Z8 C ln the h~gh stem again, methane was ~ntroduced Into the cell at

:. pressure Paar dens~meter end In the on-llne PVT vis- the des~gnated saturetion pressure and the appropr1-
r cometer, respectlvely. These data along w~th the ate m1Xlng devl~e started. Period1c gas addItIons
.. .~. composLt10n of the oil are presented in Table 2. were made to ma1ntain the pressure. In the case of
:
~'
~.:,~
'-, PVT Apparatus and Procedures
heavy oil,
equilibratlon,
pressure
the free
was stabilized
gBS at the
in n h. AFter
top of the cell
, was removed while the system pressure was maintained
~; Two PVT apparatus were used to study the FluId constant by ra1sing the p~ston. The pressure in the
.' properties of the oil recombined with ~thane at the cell was then 1ncreased and the sample mixed for
~ reserVO1r pressure and temperature. The PVT proper- about 6 h to obtain a homogenIzed single phase
t1es of this reconstituted 011 end the cleaned oil sample throughout the system.
were determlned 1n the presence of several concen-
trat~ons of carbon dioxide. S~milarly, mixtures of reservoir Flu1d and car-
bon d10Xlde at deSlred concentrations or pressures
(i) Blind Cell PVT Apparatus were prepared.

The bllnd cell PVT apparatus ~s shown ln F1gure Measurements

1. The sta~nless steel PVT cell 1S cyllndr1cal 1n
~ shape with an Internal diameter of 6.)5 cm and a Tha bubble poInt pressure of the recombIned
, length of 17.7S cm. The 1nternal surface of the fluId was determined by measuring pressure-volume
- cell is honed to a ml~ror flnlsh and equipped wlth a relations on either of the equ1pment described
: piston wh~ch is dr~ven V1a a 2.5 cm dlameter thread- above. Determlnetlon of the bubble point of a mlx-
ed shaft by a handwheel. The d~splacement of the ture commenced at a pressure h1gher: than the estl-
p1ston ~s indicated by a vernier cal1per Wh1Ch can mated bubble point. This procedure ensures that a
be read to 0.05 mm. A sample port and an entry port s~ngle phase exIsts ln the cell. The volume of the
for the clrculBting flulds are connected to the l1d cell was then Increased and the change in pressure
of the cell. A pressure gauge ~s connected to the recorded aFter It reached B constant value. For
bottom of the cell. The dIstrIbutor plate attached heavy 011, the stabIl1zation of pressure above the
to the Ild facll1tates the homogenization of the bubble po~nt took sbout 4 h end below the bubble
circulating flulds insIde the cell. point about Z4 h- The process of the change ln vol-
ume and pressure was continued to atmospher1c pres-
A Mllton Roy variable stroke c~rculating pump sure.
1S connected to the cell. Flu1ds are drawn From the
bottom of the cell through a colI tube lnto the pump In order to measure the viscosity, the gas and
and inJected into the top of the cell via one of the liquid samples in the PVT cell were repressur~zed
. '-',. two v~scometer loops. The viscometers, made of above the bubble po~nt and m1Ked for about 6 h unt~l
'. ,: stainless steel tubing of dIfferent diameters and the system stabll1~ed. The viscosity of the single

lengths, are eQu~pped wIth d~Fferentlal pressure phase fluId was determined by circulating it through
transducers. The dimensions of the vlscometers were an approprIate viscometer at a constBnt flow rate

(
and measurlng the pressure drop across the V1SCO- The CO2 lnjection ctJmmenced on the oll-satur-
metl~r tube. ated or waterFlooded core. The WAG lnject ion was
conducted In Four CO2-H2O cycles. AFter these C}-
For density determlnatlons as a Functl(~ of cles water injectlon commenced for another 2.30 PV.

pre~;sure above the bubble pOlrt, the recombined At lhis pOint the system was blown down to atmos-
fluld was transferred b) a 10 cm mlcrometering pump pherlc pressure. The 011 and water produced were
equipped wlth a pressure transrlucer. The high pres- recovered In sample vials of knowrl welght and the
surl~ Paar Denslt} Meter, Dt.~ 512 cell, was charged gas was measured In a wet test meter and analyzed in
With the single phas~ fluld and density measured at a gas chromatograph. The sample vials were ~'eighed
the reserVOir temperature (20"C). and stored to allow the \~ater to settle at the bot-
tom. Water was extracted by a S}rlnge and welghedi
G3(3-0il ratio, Formation volume and swelll.ng the mass of the oll was determIned by the diFrerence
f.actor:;, al1d the compoSition of the oll arld gas sam- In the weights. The pressure data were recorded
ple!; were determined by wlthdrawing a known volume wlth a strlp chart recorder. At the end of the ex-
of the ,single phase fluId In a sampllng bottle. The perlment the core ~Ias removed, Frozen and its blilk
Oll accumulatelj In the bottle and the g~s was col- dlmensJ.ons determJ.ned. The core was then dlVlded
lected in a gasometer. The gas volume was recorded lnto two sect1ons; the water was evaporated ut 70"C
and its composlt1on analjzed by a gas chromatograph. from one and the oll burned oFF in a muFfle furnace
The all collected wa~ weighed. From the known vol- at. 420.C from the other. The decrease 1n mass at
ume of the sample collected at. cell conditl0nS and each step was used to calculate the residual water
the weight of the 011 and gas Fract.lons collected, and oll saturatLons. The lnjectlon rates For water
the GOR, the Formatlcwl and t.he swell1ng factors \~ere and CO2 are listed In Table 5.

caLI:;ulated.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Core D1splacement Apparatus and Procedures
The temperature and pressure dependence of the
The core dIsplacement apparatus, shown ln Fl.g- VlSCOSLtj and the denslty of the cleaned wellhead
ure 3, conslsts of a core holder, an lnject1on sys- oll are listed In Table 2 and depIcted 1n flgures 4
tern, a product1on s>'stem and support unlts. The and 5, respectively. All e~perlments were carrled
separator vessel and connectIng llnes in the produc- out at the reserVOl.r temperature or 2B"C except For
~.lon system were wrapped wLth heat tape to keep the the temperature dependence studles.
temperature between 50 and 60GC to allow the smooth
flow or the all. The 011 was collected at the bot- PVT Stud1es
~om of the vessel and periodIcally sampled. The gas
was passed through a wet test meter where the pro- Recombined Reservoir Fluid and Carbon DioxLde
duced volume was contlnuously recorded.
The reserVOir FlUId was sJ.mulated bj recombIn-
A 30.5 cm long trlaxlal stress core holder was Lng the centrlFuged wellhead 011 and methane to ;J
prepared For packl.ng \fIlth core mater tal. Ap~lroxl- bubble polnt pressure of 4.48 MPa at 28 DC. The data
mately 1300 g of 80-100 U.S. mesh Selkirk sand was generated For vlscosity, denslty, Formatlon volume
sieved twlce and wet packed 1nto the core holder factor, swelilng, GOR and Fluid cOmrJOsltlon are
uslng a vlbrator to asslst ln obtalning a tight listed in Table J. The VIscosity was reduc@d from
pack. The core materJ.al once conflned under 20.7 1430 mPa's for the centrlFuged oll to 512 mPa's For
t-lPa (3000 pSlg) overburden pressure was flushed wlth the methane-sat~rated oil at ~.48 MPa, and densit.y
acetone and alr. The core was then evacuated and from 960.9 kg/m to 954.0 kg/m under the same con-
1mbibed with dlstliled water at a net overtlurden dltlon. The Formation volume factor, swe~ll1g Fac-
pressure of 13.0 MPa (18B6 psi) to determIne the tor and GOR were 1.0268, 1.0185 and 13.8 m 1m I res-
pore ~.olume and poroslty. pectlvely. The recombined fluld contalned 20.42
mol% CH~ and 79.58 mol~ C2+.
The back pressure regulat,or was set at 5.0 t-lPa
l725 pSlg) and the system then pressurIzed to thls The reconstltuted reservoIr Fluld was Illixed
level. The overburden pressure was set at 1B.0 t-lPa separately with three concentratlons of
CO2 In the
(2611 pSl.g). The core and lnjectlon fluIds were PVT cell. The PVT data generated for these recom-
heated to 28°C to measure the absolute permeablllty blned flu1ds are presented In Table 3 and FIgures 'i

uslng water as the Fluld. All subsequent l.njel:tlons to B. The amount of CO2 dlssolved In the reserVOlr
were performed at these pressures and I;emper;lture. Fluid was 34.8, 5S.3 and 59.6 mol percent (Figure
The cLeaned 011 was lnjected J.nto the core to pro- 6). The denslty, bubble poJ.nt
pressure, COR and
vlde an oJ.l-saturated porous medlum. AFter 011 swelllng factor lncreased with lncreaslng dlssolu-
breakthrough the core dIFferentIal pressure levelled tlon of CO2 in the pressure range stud led ([able :5

oFf and the core was assumed to be at the lrreduc- and Flgure~ 5 to 7). The density lncreased fro~
lble water saturatlon. The dIsplacement of the 011 954.0 kg/m For the reserVO1r Fluid to 965.:5 kg/m
w1th water commenced at th1S saturatlon. for CO2-saturated reservoIr Fluld at 8.27 ~1Pa (Fig-
ure 5); under simllar condltions, the concentrat Lon
Water was lnjected into the core untll thl~ pro- of dlssolved gas In the reserVOIr Fllild lncreased
duced Fluld water-oll ratIo was greater than 50 at From 20.4 mol~ CHI, to 59.6 mol% CO2 ,nd3J.J mol~
Wh1Ch tlme the core was assumed to be rlear the re- C~~ (F1gure 6); GOR rose from 13.8 m 1m to 91.4
slclual all saturation. The oil recovery and core m 1m3 and the swelling factor From 1.0185 to 1.1664
diFFerentlal pressure data were recorded and used to (Flgure 7). Flgure B deplcts the steelJ decrease in
determIne end point saturatl.ons and fluId relatlve V1SCOSlty 1nItlall)-, followed by a shallow slope a~
permeabliltles. hIgher concentratlons of CO2. The Vlscos1ty IS re-
.
duced fr:om 512 mPa.s For: the r:eservoJ.r fluld at 4.48 sphel'ic pl'essure and 6 t"Pa and then leveling off at
.. MPa to 35 mPa.s for the CO2 saturation of 59.6 mol~ hlghel' pressul'es. The viscosity values al'e 1430
;:,:':;r.:., at 8.27 MPa, a FiFteenfold reduction. mPa's at atmospherJ.c pressure and 32 mPa's at 7.58

:"~:i"
. A dlfferential llberation experlment was per-
MPa for:
fJ.vefold
the
reductLon.
CO2 8atuJ:ated
Slmllar
centri effecte
fuged of oil,pressurea forty-on

formed on the reserVOir flu1d saturated with CO2 at the VJ.SCOSlty of the reserVOlr fluid saturated with

8.27 ~1Pa. The solubilitles of CO2 and CH.. durlng CO2 are shown 1n f1gure 8.

the liberation cycles at 6.21 MPa, 3.45 MPa, O.BJ

MPa and atmospherlc pressure are demonstrated in The tempel'ature depen~ence of v~scos~ty for the

Flgure 6. The samples were mixed and allowed to centr1fuged 011 between 28 C and 140 C at atmospher-

equllibrate for: 24 h at each pressure. iC pl'essure and the pl'essure dependence of the ce~-

tr~fuged oil saturated w1th CO2 from atmospheric

I It i5 evldent from the plots that more CO2 was pressure to 7.58 MPa at 28"C are depicted ln f1gUl'e

: r:etalned in solut1on dur1ng Ilberatlon than was dlS- 4. The plots demonstrate that the eFfects of tem-
. solved during pressur1zation at any glven pressure. perature between 2BQC and 96"C, and CO2 saturation

Similarly, the solutlon GOR values plotted in Flgure pressure between 0 and 6.5 ~1Pa on the V1SCOSity are

7 are higher and V1Scoslties lower (Flgure 8) for very slmllar.

liberatIon experiments than For the pressurlzatlon

at the same pressure. The retentIon of more CO2 A large reductlon in the ViSCOSlty (92-98%) and

durJ.ng the lLberatlon cycle and the lower Vlscoslty a 16~ increase ln the swelling Factor of the CO2

values suggest that the mobility and production rate saturated centr1fuged heavy 011 and resel'voJ.r Fluld

of the reserVO1r fluld will be mainta1ned at hlgher at moderate pressures and 28"C suggest that enhanced

values for a longer perIod. It IS lmportant that recovery of lloydminster-type heavy oil is viable by

the hysteresIs effect observed In the solublilty and CO2 Injectlon at the reservoir temperature and pres-

V1SCOSlty values of CO2 ln the oil be taken lnto sures below the reservoir Fracture pressures.

conslderation during the numerical slmulatlon

studles. Core Displaccment Studies

CentrifuQed Wellhead Oil and Carbon Dioxide The core displacement tests were des1gned to

determlne the amount of 011 recovered and the l'ela-

CentrIfuged wellhead oil was saturated with CO2 tive importance of the various modes and sequence of

at 3.28, 5.52 and 7.58 MPa at 2B"C 1n the PVT cell. CO2 and water J.njection on the oil recovery under

The data generated fr:om the PVT maasur:ements are the immisclble CO2 flood. Table 4 lists the predis-

.,;c.., displayed ln Table 3 and Figures 5 to 8. The amount placement properties of the cores used ln eight

f.':'~) of CO2 dissolved ln the 011 was 36.1, 56.7 and 60.9 experlments. Table 5 and Figures 9 to 11 pre-?ent
, mol% at 3.28, 5.52 and 7.58 MPa, respectlvely (FJ.g- the exparlmental parameters and the results obtalned

ure 6). It is evident from FJ.gure 6 that the solu- From displacement tests conducted under various con-

bllity of CO2 alone ln centrifuged 011 is greater ditions. A brIef summary of each test is given be-

than the combined solubility of methane and CO2 ln low.

the methane-saturated reservoIr fluld. The plots

also lndlcate that the solubILIty of CO2 tends to Displacement No.1 - CO2 WAG Drive

level off at pressures higher than 6-7 MPa at 28"C.

The inJ.tial 011 saturation at irreducJ.ble water

The denslty incr:eased from 960.9 kg/m3 for the was 95.8% PV and the resJ.dual oJ.l saturatJ.on 55.8%

centriFuge~ oil at atmospher~c pressure and 2B"C to PV after J.njecting 11.3 PV water. The average WOR
966.7 kg/m for CO2 saturated 011 at 7.58 MPa (Flg- for the last three readings was 142. During a CO2

ure 5). It is noteworthy that the pl'essure depan- WAG drive 0.15 PV of CO2 was injected J.n Four slugs

dence of the densJ.ty at 28"C lS approximately the separated by 0.10 PV of water. The oil recovered

same for the cleaned 011 sample and the clean oil- during WAG floodlng was 1.7% ROIP. The WAG process
CO2 saturated samples (Figure 5). ThlS lS striking- was followed by 2.30 PV of water injection wIth an
ly different from the correspondIngly large effect additJ.onal oil recovery of 5.2% ROIP. The blowdown
of pressure between the density of the reservoJ.r recovery was 5.B% ROIP. The total oil recovered
: fluId and the reservoJ.r fluid saturated w1th CO2 during inItial waterflooding (41.8% IOIP), CO2 WAG
(Flgure 5). This behaviour suggests that the addJ.- flooding followed by waterflooding and blowdown was
. t1on of methane molecule3 loosens the oJ.l structul'e 49.2% IOIP. The oil recovery versus injection curve
r end Increases the overall volume whereas the intro- is dep1ct~d fn F~gure 9. The CO2 utilization ratio
duction of carbon dioxide molecules ln the pl'esence was 192 m 1m oil at STP.

of methane provides attractive intermolecular: Forces

resulting in the shr:inkage of the overall volume. DiBplacement No.2 - CO2 SluQ

The gas-oil rat1o and swelling factor at 7.58 MP~ J.~

the centrlfuged oil saturated wJ.th CO2 IS 84.4 m 1m The predisplacement and recovery parameters for

) and 1.1564, respectively (Figure 7). Flgure 7 dem- this test are listed in Tables 4 and 5. The initial

: onstrates that at lower CO2 saturation pressures, 011 saturation at irreducible water was 94.4~ PV and

~ both the GOR and the swelling factor are higher for the residual oil saturation 50.8% after injectLng

the centrlfuged oil than for the reservoir fluid. 13.9 PV water. The average WaR for the last three

: , measurements was J08. A 0.24 PV slug of CO2 was

:'.:".: The effect of pressure on Viscos1ty J.S pre- Followed by 2.JO PV of water injection. The 011
, " sented 1n FIgure 8 for the cantr1fuged 011 and cen- recover:J.es durlng CO2 1njectJ.on, subsequent water-

tl'ifuged 011 saturated with CO2. For the latter, FloodJ.ng and blowdown were 0.3%, 19.3% and J.5~

: there 15 a rapId decrease in V1SCOSlty between atmo- ROIP, respectively, or a total of 12.4~ IOIP. The

('
total oil recovered lncludlng lnltlal waterFloodlng Z1.2% IOIP. The average WOR for the last threc
was 58.6~ !OIP (Flgure 91. The CO2 utlllzat.lon readlngs of t.he flnal wasterfloodlng was 44. Total
3 3
ratiO was 178 m 1m 011 at SfP. reco~.ery For thlS test includlng the Inltlal water-
rloodlng wa5 57.2% IOIP (Table 5 and Flgure 1°)~
Dlsplacement No. J - CO2 ~IAG Drive The CO2 utlllzat.lon ratlo was estlmated at. 16) m 1m
011 at. SfP.
Tables 4 and 5 provlde the predlsplacement pro-
perlles of the core and t.he 011 reco~ery results ob- Displacement No.7 - CO2WAGDrive
talned froln thlS experlment. The lnltlal oll satur-
atlon at lrreduclble water was 96.0~ PV and the The core had an lnltlal 011 saturatl~1 or 96.1%
resldual oll saturatlon 54.5% PV after lnject.lng PV. No lnltlal wat~rFloodlng was perFormed on thl.~
6.73 PV water. Thl~ average WOR For the last three core In order to del.ermlne the eFrect of CO2 Flood-
reaoLngs was 99. DurIng CO2 WAG drive 0.Z2 I)V of ing at a hlgh 011 saturatlon. A 0.27 PV of CO2 wa~
CO2 was lnjected In rOlJr slugs separated b~ 0.10 PV Injected ln Four slugs separated by 0.10 PV or wa~er
of water. Thls was Followed by 2.,0 PV water injec- and followed b) 2.30 PV of water injectlon. The oll
tlQl). The oll recoverles durIng the CO2 WAG pro- recovered durIng the CO2 WAG process, waterFloodlng
ces:" subsequent waterFloodlng and blowdown were and blowdown was 16.B~, B.2% and 4.9~ or 101P, re-
1-1°~, 12.8~ and 11.9% I!OIP, respectlvel~, WhlC~1 are spectlvely, For a total recovery of 29.9~~ 10lP (Flg-
cqULvalent to a total of 14.9~ IOIP. ThIS resulted ure 11). The average \~OR For the last three read-
ln a total recovery of 57.9% rolp lncludlng Inltial ings durIng waterFl~odtng was 33. The CO2 utll12a-
wat~rFloodlllCJ ~Fl~Ur~ 10). The CO2 ut1llzatlon tion ratio was 63 m 1m 011 at STP.
ratlo was 117 m 1m oll at STP.
The total 011 recovery of 29.9~ IOIP was the
Displacement No.4 - C021~AG Drive lowest obtaIned for any test In thlS study.

Tht~ lnit1al all saturation at lrreduclble water Displacement No.8 - CO2. Sluq and Soak
was 96.1% PV and the reSidual oLl saturation aFter
Inj~ctir)g 6.73 PV of water 65.9% PV. The a\erage No initial waterFlooding \'Ias conducted on thIS
I-IOR For the last ti"lree readings was Found to b~ 54. core WhICh had an inltlal oil saturatlon or 911.B~~
A 0.19 PV of CO, was injected lntO the waterFlooded PV. The eFFect of CO2 soaklng on the all recover)
core In Four slugs separated by 0.10 PV of wat~r and was determlned in this test. A 0.23 PV or CO2 slug
Followed b~' 2.30 P\I water lnjectlon. The all recov- was lnjected lnto the core and allowed to soak for
er-ed during the I'IAG process, subsequent waterrlood- 69 h. The core was then flooded wlth 2.30 PV
ing and blowdown was 2.Z%, 6.7% and 29.7% ROIP, \-Iater. The 011 recovered during the CO, injection
respectlvely, or a total of 26.S~~ 101P. Thus the and soaklng period, subsequent waterFloodlng and
total 011 recovered lncluding Initlal waterFloodIng blowdown was 4.5%, 25.6% and 11.5~ 10IP,
was 5B.0% 10lP (Table S and Figure 10). The CO2 respect1vely, For a total recovery of 41.6~ 10lP
J 3
Ul.1lizatlon ratlO was Found to be 55 m 1m 011 at ( Flgure 11). The average WOR for the last three
STP. readIngs durlng waterFloofl~ was 8.B. The CO2
utlllzation ratIo was 45 m 1m 011 at STP.
Dl.5placement No.5 - CO2 WAG DrJ.ve

CorI¥Jarison of Results
The 011 saturatlon
inltial at lrreduclble water
was 9}.B~ PV and the resldual 011 saturatl.on aFter The all recovered during the inltial waterrlood
uljectlng 6.73 PV water 60.0% PV. The average WOR varies between 31.5and 46.Z~ IOIP and the average
For the last three determlnatlons was 77. A CO2 WAG WO~ ~'alues for the last three measurements range
drive was conducted by injecting 0.25 PY of CO2 In From 54 to 30B (Table 5, rigures 9 and 10). As ex-
four slugs separated b~' 0.10 Pv water. ThlS process pected, the hIgher the WOR the greater the oil rc-
\'/as Followed b) 2.30 PV water injectlon. 011 recov- covery. However, lt 15 evident From Table 5 end
ered during the CO2 WAG drlve, subsequent 'I/ater- FIgure 10 that the 011 recovery From the same PY of
floodLng and blowdown was 3.3~"16.5~ and 3.0~~ ROIP, water injected (6.73 PV) at the same superrlclsl
respectlvely, or a total of 14.6% IOIP. The average velOCity (2.14z0.01 mid) varIes between 31.5 ann
WDR For the last three measljrements 0 F the final 43.2% IOIP.
wal.er rloodlng was 32. This test recovered 50.6%
[DIP lncludlng the inltial ~/aterFloodlnq (Table 5 The CO2 WAG process applied to the wa~erFlooded
and rigur1 19). The measured CO2 utlllzatlon ratlo cores recovered 12.7 to 38.6~ ROIP or 7.4 ~o 26.5~~
wa5 168 m 1m oil at STP. rOIP. rhe 011 recovered wlth this process seems to
depend more upon the oIl saturatIon after the inlti-
DIsplacement No.6 - CO2 SluQ al waterFlood than on the PV of the CO, lnjec~ed
whJ.ch ranged from 0.15 to 0.25. CI)reS Wi th hlgher
For thIS run the core
had an lnitial 011 satur- 011 saturatlon produced more 011 under the CO2 WAG
a~lon of 96.5~ PV and the resldual oil saturation of process. The 011 recovered rrom each run durlng CO2
61.7% PV aFter the initIal waterflooding to 6.73 PV. injectIon, subsequent waterFlooding and blowdown is
The average \iOR For the last three measurements was shown in Figure 12.
70. The 011 recovery during inltlal waterrloodl.ng
was 36.0~ IDIP. A 0.J9 PY slug of CO2 was lnjected Recoveries From the CO2 slug lnjection lnto the
into the waterflooded core followed by 2.30 PV of waterFlooded core were 23.1 and 3J.2% ROIP or 12.4
water lnjection. The CO2 slug. subsequent water- and 21.2% 10IP For 0.24 and 0.39 PV of CO2. glvlng B
Flooding and blo~ldown produced an addltlonal 1.3%, total oil recovery of 58.6 and 57.2% 10IP. respec-
30.2% and 1.7% RDIP, resper:tlvely or a tol.al of tlvel)'. The WOR of 30B and 70 For the lnltlal
 water flood suggests that the uppe~ Ilmlt of recovery 6- The CO2~jAG p~ocess, followed by waterfloodlng,
--, under these condltlons is app~oxlmately 6~ IOIP. applled to the wate~flooded cores recovered 12.7
'~ ThlS lS also supportlOd ¥lJ.th the total oll recovery to 3B.6~~ ROTP or 7.4 to 26.5~ IOIP with 0.15 to
of 58~ IOIP from Run No.3 and 4 under the CO2 WAG 0.25 PV CO2 lnjection. The CO2 slug injection,
process. From these results the CO2 WAG end slug followed by waterflooding, in the water flooded
processes appear to be equally efflcient, at least cores produced 23.1 and 33.2% ROIP or 12.4 and
for a llnear Flow system. 21.2% IOIP For CO2 slug sizes of 0.24 and 0.39
PV, respectlvely. The larger CO2 slug recovered
The results obtalned from the CO2 W~G test on more 011.
the cores whJ.ch were at the J.nltlal 011 saturatlons
. show that the total 011 recovery of 29.9~~ IOIP after These results suggest that the upper lJ.mlt of
: the Flnal waterflood to ~ WaRof 33 and blowdown w~s recovery unde~ waterfloodlng and CO2 J.njectlon
lhe lowest among the tests conducted. ThiS seems to lS approxJ.mately 60~ IOIP whJ.ch demonstrate that
suggest that CO2 floodlng after an lnltlal water- lmmlscible CO2fwaterfloodlng does recover addl-
flood lS more efflclent. However, a CO2 slug exper- tlonal 011 over a waterflood.
; lment conducted on slmllar core but Followed by a
: soak perlod of 69 h beFore the Flnal waterfloodlng 7. The COZlnjectJ.on and subsequent waterfloodlng
J to ~ \,jOR of B.B, produced 41.6% 10IP whlCI-l lS much of the cores at the lnltlal 011 saturatlons re-
~ higher than the precedlng test where the COzwas not covered 29.9~ IOIP under the WAGmode and 41.6%
j allowed to soak. The soakJ.ng perlod helps recover 10IP under a slug process followed by a COzsoak
" an addltlonal 11.7% IOIP Whlch is most probably perlod of 69 h. An addltlonal recovery of 11.7%
1 caused by the dlffuslon of COz lnto the 011. These IOIP following a CO2 soak period results from
" results
Into the seem
011 to suggest
occurs at athatrather
the dlFfuS101"I
slow rate. of CO2
The the dlffu610n
that of CO2
thlS process lnto the
occurs at a 011 which suggests
relatlvely slow
i additlonal recovery would have been much higher lF rate.
~ Ylaterfloodlng had bee:n contlnued to an average WOR
. of 3D or higher for Test No. B. The total recovery 8. It IS suggested that CO2lnjection followed by a
I would probably have reached h~gher than 5~ IOIP, soak pe~iod before the commencementof water-
~ Slmllar to Runs 1 to 6 where CO2 lnjection was pre- flooding may be a preferable CO2 recovery pro-
I ceded by waterflooding. ThlS suggests that the J.n- cess.
, jection of CO2 followed by a soak perlod before the
. commencement of waterfloodlng may produce oil at a 9. Immlscible CO2 flooding appears to be a vlable
.- faster rate than CO2 lnjectlon without soBkJ.ng and process for the recovery of heavy oil From Sask-
,~ use a slgnlfJ.cantly lower amount of water. atchewBn reservoirs.
-
l::-~'i}
SUMlolARYAND CONCLUSIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1- The ViSCOSlty and densJ.ty of the wellhead all The author wishes to express his appreciation
and the reconstltuted reservoir fluid lncreased to Saskatchewan Energy and r-lines and Energy, Mlnes
': wJ.th rJ.sJ.ng pressure. The rate of Increase ln and Resources Canada for their flnancial support and
the V1SCOSlty was 50 and 18 mPa.s/r"Pa For the permission to publish th~s study. Thanks are also
wellhead all and the reservoJ.r Fluld, respec- due to K. Kovacs, K. Knorr and T. Costain for thelr
I
tlvely. contributlons
and O. SlnclBlrto for
the thelr
experlmental work,ln totheD- prepar-
aSSlstance Hymers

2. The VlscoSlty of the COz-saturated wellhead oJ.l atlon of thlS manuscript and to Sa5katchewan011 and
and reservoir fluld decreased with lncreasJ.ng Gas Corporation for making the oil samples avail-
pressure ln the pressure range studled. ~t B able.
"'Pa, the respectlve reductJ.ons were forty-flve-
fold and flfteenfold. At the same CO2satura- REFERENCES
, tl0n pressure the vlscosity of the wellhead 011
was slgnlficantly lower than that of the reser- 1. Jha, K.N. and Verma, A. "Heavy Oil Development
voir Fluid. ln Saskatchewan," II International Conference
on Heav Crude and Tar Sands, R.t. Meyer, J.C.
3. The solubillty of CO2was high in both the well- Wynn and J.C. Olson eds. , McGrawHJ.ll, Inc.,
head oil and reserVOlr fluid at about B r~Pa(60 Caracas (1982) 205-211.
mol%). During the differential liberation cycle
more CO2 was retained ln solutlon than wag dlS- 2. FairFJ.eld, W.H. and Wh1te, P.o. "LloydmJ.nster
I solved during pressurlzation at any given pres- fireflood Performance, Modification6 Promise
: sure. This observation has important implica- Good Recoverles," Oil and Gas J., (Feb. B,
! tJ.ons for numeri~al simulatlon studJ.es. 1982) 101-112.
1
; 4. There was 16%swellJ.ng of the Fluld ln the pre- 3. Leonard, J. "EOR Set to r-lake Slgnlficant Con-
I sence of CO2at 8 MPa. tributlon," Oil and Gas J. (Aprll 2, 1984).

. ~ 5. Waterflooding of the core to 6.73 PV at lnltlal 4. Alikhan, A.A. and Farouq Ali, S.M. "Current:
'~1~,1~} oil ..saturetion5 of 95% PV recovered 31.5 to Status of Nonthermal Hea\'y OJ.l Recovery," paper
,~ 43.2.. IOIP. The lower recovery was obtained SPE 11B46 presented at the 19B3 Rocky r"ounta.ln
where the WOR at the end of waterflooding was RegJ.onal Meeting, Salt Lake City, May 2J-25,
smaller. 1983.
 5. KIlns, M.A. and Farouq All, S.M. "Heav'( 011 20. Sankur, V. and Emanuel, A.S. "A Laboralory
Productlon by Carbon DIoxide Injectlon," J. Can. 5tudy of Heavy 011 Recovery wIth CO2 Injec-
Pet- Tprh. (Sept.-Oct. 1982) 64-72. tlon," paper SPE 11692 presented at the 1903
Call fornla Regional t.leetlng, Ventura, March 23-
6- Rojas G. and FarolJq All, 5.tol. "D)'namICs of Sub- 25, 1983.
crltlcal C02/Brlne Floods for Heavy 011 Recov-
er)'," paper SPE 13598 presented at the 1905 Cal- 21. Bardon, C.H., Behar, E. and Topkaya, I. "Lab-
lfornla RegIonal t"eetlng, IJakersfleld, March 27- oratory Studles For CO2 InjectIon as en lmlnls-
29, 1965. clble Application In a Heav)' 011 Reservoir In
Turke)'," II InternatIonal Conference on Heav~'
7. StalklJp, F.I. Jr., t-iiscible DIsplacement, t"0110- Crude and Tar Sands, R.F. Meyer, J.C. Wynn and
graph SerlBs, SPE, Dallas (198}) B. J.C. Olson (eds~), McGraw Hill, Inc., Cara~asJ
(1962) 853-B68.
8. Holm, L-W. "CO2 ~-loodlng, Its Tlme Has [orne,"
J- Pet. Tech. (December 1982) 27J9-2745. 22. Sigmund, P.M., Kerr, W. and MacPherson, R.E.
"A Laboratory and Computer Iolodel Evaluation of
9. Drr, F-M. Jr. and Taber, J.J. "Use of ('~rbon ImmisCIble CO2 Flooding ln a Low-Temperature
Dloxlde In Enhanced OIl Recover)," ScIence, 224, Reservoir," paper SPE/DDE 1270J presented at
No- 4649, (1964) 563-569. the 1984 Fourth Jolnt SPE/DOESympOSIumon En-
hanced 011 Recovery, Tulsa, AprIl 15-18, 1994.
10. Roj~s, G. and Farouq All, S.M. "Current T~chno-
log) of liea\!} Oil Reco\!ery by ImmISCIble ('arbon 23. Patlon, J.T., Coats, K.H. and Spence, K. "Car-
Dio~lde and Waterrloodlng," Proc. III Interna- bon Dlo~lde Well Slimulatlon: Part I--A Para-
tlonal Conference on Heavy Cr~nd Tar ~;ands, metrIC Study," J. Pet. Tech. (August 1982) 1798
Long Reach (1965) Vol. II, 6~2-661. -1804.

11. Reld, T.B. and Robinson, H.J. "Lick Creek Mea- 24. Spivak, A. and ChIma, C.M. "Mechanismsof Im-
kin Sand UnIt Immlsclble C02/Waterflood Pro- mlsclble CO2 InjectIon In Heavy Oil Reservolrs,
ject," J. Pt"t. Tech. (September 1981) 1723-1729. WIlrnlngton FIeld, CA.," paper SPE 12667 pre-
sented at the 1984 Callfornla Regional t1eetlnq,
12. Beeson, D.M. and Ortlofr, G.D. "Laboratory In- Long Beach, April 11-13, 1964.
..estlgatlon of the Water-Driven Carbon DJO-.lde
Process For 011 Recovery," Trans. AIt.,E 11959)
216, 338-391.

1}. I-liller, ,J.S. and Jones, R.A. "A Laboratory

Stud~ to Determlne PhysIcal CharacterIstIcs of
Heavy 011 after CO2 SaturatIon," paper SF'E/DOE
9769 presented at the 19B1 Second Joint Sympos-
ium on Enhanced 011 Recovery, Tulsa, Aprll 5-8,
1981.

14. Kantar, K., Karaoguz, D., Issever, K. and Vrana,

L - "Heavy 011 Recovery by CO2 Application from
Bati Raman Fleld, Turkey," paper SPE 1147~i pre-
sented at the 1983 t~lddle East 011 TechnIcal
Conference, Bahraln I-larch 14-17, 1983.

15. Sa)egh, S.G. and Malnl, B.8. "Laboratory Eval-

uatlon of the COz Huff-n-Puff Process for Heavy
011
1984)Reservoirs,"
19-36. J. Can. Pet. Tech. (tola'i-June
.

16. Jha, K.N. and Costaln, T. "Enhanced Heavy 011

Recovery by Carbon DIoxIde Injecllon," R&D,/B4-6,
Saskoll, RegIna (t~arch 1984).

17. Welker, J.R. and Dunlop, D.D. "Physical Prop-

ertles of Carbonated Oils," J. Pet. Tech. (Aug-
ust 1963) 873-876.

18- Saner, W.B. and Patton, J.T. "COz Recover)' of

Heav)' 011: The WIlmington Field Tesl," paper
SPE 12082 presented at the 19B3 Annual TechnI-
cal Conference and Exhlbltlon, San Francisco,
Oct. 5-8, 19B3.

19. Holm, L.W. and Josendal. V.A. "MechanJsmof'

011 Displacement by Carbon DIoxIde," J. Pet.
~ (December 1984) 1427-1436.

"'-~"""~""
 ~-.':: ~ - ~rvoir Clar..:ter:i.ticB In! Results of Field Teata of CO, Injectiona

.. ;
- ~ ~ Uo:k Creek Wilm~ton ~yl~~l Kit.m:ot.y t~taI Bes:fI

St.te Arkansas Arkansas Callfornl& Hungrla Albort& CallrOrnla

~orslor U.S. Oiland Ref. Co. PhillipS Ch...plln !JKGT Hu9ky AminOll

.. Proces9
Year
Tapon de CO2
196~
1:1 WAG
1~76
0-22:1
1~81
WAG -
I~BO
lny. Cl~lt~a
19B1
Iny. Cicll~.
1991

Depth/Thicknes9 (m/m) 7~2/2.lI 777/2.6 762/12.8 2256/- 549/6.5 762/~1.lI

~ Poro.ity/Permeabillty (~/md) 31/2750 33/120!J 24/46~ -/1000 '1/2000 2~/250
S Pressure/Temp (MPag/'C) B.6/52.2 7.2/~7.B 7.~/~!J.6 -/120 '.5/21-1 ~.6/54.4
! Gra\ltly ("API) 16 17 14 16 13 1~
.., VIscosity al Re9. Concl. (mP.,s) 195 16!J 2BJ 92 7000 175
~ Otl/Water S.tur.tian (~) 8!J/20 68/}2 51/4~ Hlgh/lo" High/LoN 67/)J
. Type of Project Sec. Se~. Terc. Seo:. Sec. Ter:c.
~ InJ.,/Prod. Ifells 3/1' 16/39 4/3 1/5 2 2
. Area of Proje~t (ha) !9 .6Q 1. 81 '2 13
~ Recovery Increase (~ O[P) 12(10A)' 3.2(5A) 5.S(2A) - - -
: Prod. Rale Increase (..3/d) 10 lo 64 )7 to 9S 4.5 to 27 '5 to 27 6 to B 17 lo 24
.
:;
3 3
CO2Requirement (5m 111) 1!J69 26~4 1069 - - -
~ Econanic7 Yes reG Yas Yea No No

-:. . Reprodu~.cI rrOlll Ref. 10, Rogas, G. and Farouq All, S.M. (19B5).
.: -Oller 10 Years. '.Re: AnnualProduclion Reporl. Oil end GasJ. (April 2, 1~94).

t. -
1
Table 2 - Properties of Centrifuged Wellhead Oil

. Temperature, o[
095 kPa (g)
De~sity
kq/m~ (OAPI)
Viscosity
lIl'a,s or cp

20 965.3 (15.3) 2600

28 960.9 (15,8) 1430
30 959.0 (16.0) 1070
40 952.0 (17.1) 483
80 9Z6.S (21.2) 57.4
110 22.0
i 140 16.1
, PresBure kPa (g)
I 0200[
.
( 0 960.9 (15.8) 1430
I. 2070
3450 962.4
963.2 (15.5)
(15.4) 1530
1590
4820 964.2 (15.) 1650
f 6880 965.6 (15.0) 1760
10880 2000
j
: Molecular Weight 423 g/mol
£o!!JJonents ~ei~t Percent

Saturates 26.3
.~ Aromatics 32.9
-4 Resins 26.3
Asphaltenes 10.5
Sulfur 2.99
 Table 3 - PVT Properties of the Reconst.ltuted 011 and CO2 Mixtures at 20D[a

Prope~ties Oil + CH~ Oil + CH~ + COl 011 + 002

Bubble POint 4.48 5.17 6.89 B.27 3.28 5.52 7.58

P~essure (650) (750) (1000) (1200) (47S) (800) (1100)
HPa (psig)

Viscosity ~12 115 43 35 154 45 32

mPa's

Density 954.0 959.1 961.6 965.3 963.4 964.5 966.7

3
kg/m

Formatlon 1.0268 1.0789 1.1518 1.1758 1.0666 1.1428 1.165B

Volumc Factor

Swf:lling 1.0185 1.0702 1.1425 1.1664 1.0580 1.1335 1.1564

Factor

Gas-Oil Ratio 13.8 39.4 76.3 91.4 30.5 70.9 84.4

3/ 3
m m

CH~, mDl~ 20.42 7.61 3.43 3.30 0 0 0

CO2., mol~ 0 :54.78 55. 30 59.6"2 36. 13 56.74 60. 90

C2.+, IIXIl~ 79.58 ';7.61 41.27 37.08 63.B7 43.26 39.10

aThe ViS~oslty and denslty for cleaned 011 at Z8"C and atmospherlc pressure
3
were 1430 mPa.s and 960.9 kg/m , respectIvely.

~~ - Care PropertJ.esa

D1splacement Pore Po£osity Pe£meabil~ty Initial Oil Relative Oil

Number Volume, cm3 ~ PV Kabs,~m Saturation, ~V Pe~m, ~ Kabs

1 255.6 32.7 9.3 95.8 65.0

2 258.9 33.8 9.5 94.4 69.5

3 255.0 33.6 9.5 96.0 60.7

4 253.0 32.9 10.0 96.1 56.0

5 25J.J 33.0 9.5 9J.8 64.2

6 252.5 33.1 9.8 96.5 63.1

7 249.1 32.5 9.8 96.1 71.7

8 251.3 33.0 9.4 94.8 64.,

aA 30.S cm trlaXlal stress core holder was packed wlth 80-100 mesh SelkJ.rk sand.
 ..-
, "

T~le 5 - Sl.8Dary of DisplacfSMt Tests

Displaceaent Nu.ber 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8

CO2WAG CO2 CO2 WAG CO2WAG CO2WAG CO2 CO2WAG CO2a

Type of Process 4 cycles Slug 4 Cycles 4 Cycles 4 Cyclea Slug 4 Cycles Slug

, Initial Oil Saturation :PV 95.8 94.4 96.0 96.1 9).8 96.5 96.1 94.8
.. Residual Oil Saturation 55.8 50.8 54.5 65.9 60.0 61.7 N/Ab N/A.

Initial Waterflood, :PV

J Water-Oil RatioC 142 30B 99. 54 77 70 N/A N/A

:
..
PV Water Injected 11.3 13.9 6.73 6.73 6.73 6.73 N/A N/A
Oil Recovered During 41.8 46.2 4J.2 31.5 36.0 36.0 N/A N/A
. Initial Naterrlood, :IOIP

: Water SuperFicial 1.05 2.09 2.13 2.15 2.15 2.14 N/A N/A
" Velocity, mId
. PV CO2 Injected D.15 0.24 0.22 0.19 0.25 0.39 0.27 0.23

CO2SuperFicial 0.15 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.25 0.40 0.29 0.24

velocity, m/d
--, Oil Recovered During CO2 1.7 0.3 1.1 2.2 3.3 1.3 16.8 ~.5
: ...j Injection, :ROIP
'~-
PV Water Injectedd 2.'0 2.30 Z.30 2.'0 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.'0
\

,:. Oil Recovered During

CO2Materflood. :RDIP
5.2 19.3 12.8 6.7 16.5 30.2 B.2 25.6

: Water-Oil RatioC 94 35 39 46 32 ~ 33 B.B

BlowdoMn Recovery, :RDIP 5.8 3.5 11.9 29.7 ).0 1.7 4.9 11.5
Tertiary Oil Recovery
~ ROIP 12.7 23.1 25.8 38.6 22.8 3J.2 29.9 41.6
I ~ IOIP 7.4 12.4 14.7 26.5 1'.6 21.2 29.~ 41.6
Total Oil Recovery. ~ IOIP 49.2 50.6 57.9 58.0 50.6 57.2 29.9 41.6

CO23Ut!lization Ratio 192 178 117 55 168 163 6) 45

m /m Oil at SIP

final GOR Be)or5 174 45 1B1 82 142 57 19 1.7

Blowdown, m /m

Relative Permeability
of Water, % Kabs
After Initial Waterflood 6.' 8.2 3.4 3.8 3.3 4.4 N/A N/A
AFter Final Wsterflood 7.7 15.1 3.7 3.2 5.1 3.B 4.6 -

sA soak period of 69 h was allowed For the CO2 slug. bNot applicable. CAverage of the last three
measurements. dThe superficial velocity For water injection was O.BO mid.
 ... ., .. ... .. . . . ." .-.'.. ~
;: D.P. Transducer ;

. .. ... . . - . . .. .,- - - .. -.., Sighl e

t Glas9 Pr~...r6 5 7

I
Sampling 9
Line
D.P.T, 6 7 ,
~ "3 B

Viscomeler
Tubas

PVT FrOfIl Rear

Cell Plslon Cell Pi. Ian Sa~le
.
Vernler- 16
Cell

II 13 -~ Air Bcth

Pump"
I'! Maximum Operating Condilian9,
IZ ~. 69 MPa (10,000 psll, ISO.C

Air Balh ~6 :

Polantiomeler 4

Ma~imumOperallng Candillons,I4MPa (ZOOOp9il,40.C

W IZ
14 13
II

Fig. 1- Blind Call PVT Apparalus Ta Ru~a Pump

BPR
W
Fig,Z- PVT Apparatus wilh Visual CGII

'"
z
TGmperalure .C
'2S '10 60 80 100 IZO I~O

l:. Wellhead 011 (T!

8 10 . Wellhead 011 a CO, (PI

g
a
at2BDC

\
J \
.i \
,
,J \
'I \
.. \
. "
,
~ In "
i
I ~ .

E
~102
0;
Q
~
] ~ :>

"
. &.
~ [
-~tJ° <t , 6,
~O i: ,
I:IC) ~ ...
oN E -- A
tJ,..:
0 -
..
u
-w

.-" 8. a
"5-
cO ..

i8
o~
c~ 100 12.0
E J!. 8 Saluralian Pressure MPo
E
.-
~ I
,')
j -
::;t t Fig.4 - Vi9cosily
and C~orpresslJrll
wellhead oil as a runcllon ar lempGralurli
 ,
96&
60.
X CO2In Wollhoad Oil
. CO2in Reservoir Fluid - Pre..urizGtian
/ /"""..:-;X ... '"

-:.
.:
55 0 t n_' R . FI ' d .b .
_.!,n eservolr UI -LI oral Ion
" - 96
'
50
. CH4in Resorvoir
Fluid.
Pressurization

I!I CH" in Reser.oir Fluid-

9 Lib.ralion
45

96
4
OJ
~ 960 I!I Reservoir Fluid 'E

.z
.?; . ReservalrFluida C°2. i
~
35

~ 958 e Wellhead Oil i

.WellheadOil&C°2. ~3
956 ~
;:?; 25

954
2

952
0 2,0 - . 8.0 I
Pressure, MPo

Fig,5 - Density of wellhead oil,reservoir fluid and their CO saturaled I

solul ion. as a function af pressuro at 28.C Z

- . ,

9 Pre..ure, MPG

Fig.6- Salubilily of C°2. in wellhead oil and reservair fluid as

; 0 functian of pressure GI 2.8"C
8 X R8sorvoir Fluid
. . Reservoir
FluidB COz
- Presiurizalion
7 I!I Reservoir
Fluide COz Liberalian -
. Wellhead
Oil£\ CO2
. 6
i
JI 5 10

.
I
$
I )(

: "'e 4 x--X--X-~
,J .,"-
.. rie X Raservoir
Fluid
\ 03 on
'" 20 ,; . R . FI - d ~
, . ~ eservOlr UI a C02-Pressurizolion
,
~ 20 e
.iff: EI R8sBrvoir Fluid 8 C°2. L iboralian -
j 8. Wellhead
Oil£\CO2
. D
1 10 :> 2 e Wellhead Oil
10

i
! .10

,""...
,", '
".
."

100 20
. - . 8.0' o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Saturation Prossurn, MPa Pressure,MPa

Flg.7-GORand 5welling
faclarof COz-5alurOled
wellhead
oil andreseryair Fig.8- Visca.ilyor wellheadoil, reservoirfluid and Iheir C°2.-salurGI8d
fluid as 0 funclion of pressure 01 28.C solulions as a function of pressure 01 28'C

).
 0

(!I
~
3-
c N 0
!AI .~ !AI
(!I ~ I-
u ~
a: I-
u QJ
~~ W (g !AI
~ cn.., .. ..,

N N
-
z:
"
c
[I:
-
:z

0 0 N
U U 0 ..- "Q '0
I I U § ~ .!
-, [I: U u
- ,~Oj oJ
to ~ '2" '0 .-
~ ~.- to .. .S
" " -
~~;o'" -'" u .-~d"
.. "C
,-
-c U
~ C ~ '0~
- C 0
CX) on ~ f; "-

E
..
-0 oJ "
-OJ
-:>" >
""6

:I 0
~ ~
- .,.
OJ
!;. -
.. 0 d:: 0
(D
a.
S >
a.
>
a.
"' on
" ~
U1 on
~ ~
.. ..
,. >

.,. >. >.

... '-
~ N OJ
,. >
0 a
" u U
I- ~ OJ
aJ" .:: ::..

0 -0 "6
N I I
/'"'\
:I:
m -
0

~, .~
U-
,~
U-
0
(D In ~ 0
I') 0
N - 0° 0
~ In 0:- 0
I') 0
N 0
- 00

dlOI % '~J~"OJ~~ 110 dlOI% '.(Ja"a~i~ I!O

45

Run +7 - CO2 WAG

4 Rur,*'8 - Caz SluQ

3
Q.
- Z
(5
~
~
~
0
'20
U

-
~
~
I
"6

0.0 0.4 0.8 I 2. 1,6 " " .6

Pare VolumesInjecled
FIQ.II - Oil recovery versus PVof CO2 ond walBr InJe~'ed
 ~
~-

~ Figure 12
;I
". .~..~;::~. OIL RECOVERED DURING CO2 FLOODING
-:
:I
\"'.-~"
-r-:-- 45
'/
; 41.6
40
.
'j
.

; 35
n.
0 30
~
~
. ~ 25 22.8

0 20
u
w
rr
..J 15
0'
10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

;. iJ~
" '
rlZ] CO2 INJ. [SSJ CO2-H2O FLOOD f1ZZJ 8LOWDOWN

.
.
.
.
;,
,: 0.5
I

W 0.4 0.39
~
:J
..J
0
>
,.. w
~ 0.3
, 0
. D-
r
c
~
u 0.2
. I£J
-,
~
N
. 0
U 0.1

,:' :
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

RUN NUMBER

,,'i . --