WATER AND GAS INJECTION

F. Verga

Politecnico di Torino
OIL RECOVERY
 OIL RECOVERY

Traditionally, oil recovery was subdivided into three stages which

described the production from a reservoir in a chronological
sense:
 Primary recovery – production due to energy naturally
existing in a reservoir

 Secondary recovery – water flooding (and gas injection) for

pressure maintenance

 Tertiary recovery – processes that use miscible gas,

chemicals, and/or thermal energy to displace additional oil
after secondary recovery processes become uneconomical

However, many reservoir production operations are not

conducted in the specified order. Thus, the designation of
Enhanced Oil Recovery became more accepted instead of the term
“tertiary recovery” in the petroleum engineering literature.
 RECOVERY FACTOR h
Percentage of displaced oil by the applied process with
respect to the oil in place at the start of the process:

h  hMDEhSEhCF

hMDE: Microscopic Displacement Efficiency

hSE hCF: Macroscopic Displacement Efficiency

hSE: Sweep Efficiency

hCF: Conformance Factor

 MACROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT

OIL OIL
(+ WATER) WATER
(+ WATER)
 RECOVERY FACTOR MAGNITUDE

Strictly influenced by technical, economical, regulation issues,

such as:

• Reservoir nature (rock, fluids,…)

• Production technologies already available and tested at
industrial scale
• Oil price
• Investment strategy, extraction costs,…
• taxation, contract terms and conditions, …
 GAS INJECTION

Immiscible gas injection can be applied for pressure

maintenance so as:

 To avoid, or to reduce, gas liberation in the reservoir

 To avoid, or to reduce, gas flaring

 To avoid, or to reduce, artificial lifting to produce oil at the

wells
 SOLUBILITY AND MISCIBILITY
SOLUBILITY: the gaseous phase can be dissolved in the liquid
phase
The two phases are separated at the interface. If the two phases are
similar, then a transition zone will be present.
The amount of gas that can be dissolved in the liquid depends on fluid
properties, temperature, and pressure (higher pressure, larger amount of
dissolved gas).

Separation Transition zone

MISCIBILITY: there is no interfacial tension, thus capillary forces

are also zero.
Capillary forces are responsible for oil entrapment in the rock pores.
When capillary forces are not present, Sor reduces to zero.
 INJECTION RATE

Immiscible gas injection should maintain the reservoir

pressure slightly above the saturation pressure:

Water injection rate: Qw,iBw,i = QoBo + Qw,pBw,p + Qg,fBg,f

Gas injection rate: Qg,iBg,i = QoBo + Qw,pBw,p + Qg,fBg,f
Productivity Index

Pressure (MPa)
 PRESSURE MAINTENANCE

Problems connected to gas injection:

 Maintenance of the average reservoir pressure slightly above

bubble point; if pressure falls below bubble point, injection
can be continued to restore higher values

 Position of the injection wells

 Gravitational segregation
 MICROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

Fraction of the oil initially in place that is recovered from the

reservoir volume due to displacement by an immiscible fluid in
those places in the rock where the displacing fluid contacts the oil

PORE SCALE
The microscopic displacement
efficiency is reflected in the
magnitude of the residual oil
saturation
 MACROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

Pore volume contacted by the displacing fluid divided by

the total pore volume of a portion of the reservoir of
interest.

hSE : Areal Sweep Efficiency

Portion of reservoir area contacted by the displacing fluid

hCF : Invasion Efficiency or Conformance Factor

Cross-sectional area contacted by the displacing fluid divided

by the cross-sectional area enclosed in all layers behind the
injected fluid front
 DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

The oil recovery for gas injection exploitation strategy

mainly depends on the displacement (sweep) efficiency

The oil displacement mechanism depends on the

heterogeneity of the porous media both at the:

 Pore scale

 Reservoir scale
MICROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT
EFFICIENCY
 DISPLACEMENT EQUATION
Buckley - Leverett

 mono-dimensional system

 bi-phasic and concurrent flux

 incompressible fluids

 homogeneous, isotropic, and incompressible porous

medium

 steady state conditions

Furthermore, it is assumed that the connate water is

unmovable.
 MONODIMENSIONAL FLOW

x
y a
3
z
p+dp L
dL
water
p
1
2
oil

qO 1  qw 3  qtot 2

dz  dL sin a
 GENERALIZED DARCY’S LAW

qtot  qo  qw
k dp dz
q=

A ( dL
- g
dL )
k o  po 
qo   A  go sina 
o  L 
k w  p w 
qw   A  g w sin a 
 w  L 

Fraction of water in the flowing stream in any point of the flooded rock

qw
Fractional flow fw  0  fw  1
qtot
SOME MATHEMATICAL DEVELOPMENT…..

q o o p o
  go sina
koA L

q ww p w
  g w sina
kwA L

1 w  o  p c
qw  qo   g( w  o )sina

A kw 
k o  L

w o p c
qw  qo  g( w   o )sina
 L
1 kw ko
A o o
q tot q tot
ko ko
 …..SOME MORE…..
w o
qw  qo
kw ko k A  p 
 o  c  g( w   o )sina 
o q tot o  L 
q tot
ko

w
qw
qw kw w ko
fw   fw
q tot o k w o
q tot
ko

qo q tot  q w
  1 fw
q tot q tot
 FRACTIONAL FLOW FORMULA
w 
qw  qo o
kw ko w ko
 fw  (1  f w )
 k w o
q tot o
ko

w 
qw  qo o
kw ko  kro w 
 f w 1   1
o  k  o 
q tot  r w
ko

ko A  p c 
1  L  g(   ) sin a 
qtot o
w o
fw 
kr o  w
1
 o kr w
 FRACTIONAL FLOW CURVE
fw is a function of water saturation as relative permeabilities
are a function of water saturation only.

For an oil of medium viscosity and density, the fractional flow

curve qualitatively is:

0
0 1
 oil displacement by water injection should occur up-dip
to obtain a lower value of fw

( w  o )  0

sina  0 if 180  a  360

 oil displacement by gas injection should occur down-
dip to obtain a lower value of fw

(g  o )  0

sina  0 if 0  a  180

 hence, the effect of capillary pressure is:

pc pc pc S w pc S w

0  0 0
L L S w L S w L
 FRACTIONAL FLOW

ko A  p c 
1  L  g(   ) sin a 
qtot o
w o
fw 
kr o  w
1
 o kr w

 a higher oil viscosity results in a less efficient displacement

 a higher apparent velocity of the displacing front results in a

less efficient displacement

qtot
apparent velocity of the displacing front =
A
as the total flow rate is reduced, the apparent velocity of
the displacing front is correspondingly reduced
 FORCES ACTING ON FRACTIONAL FLOW

w w o  g sen w o dpc
fw (Sw) = + +
w + o (w + o) v (w + o) v dx

Viscous term Gravitational term Capillary term

w = water mobility
o = oil mobility
k = absolute permeability
 = density difference
v = apparent front velocity
 SIMPLIFIED FRACTIONAL FLOW FORMULA

w w o  g sen w o dpc
fw (Sw) = + +
w + o (w + o) v (w + o) v dx

viscous term

1
fw 
kro w
1
o krw
 OIL PRODUCTIVITY

The viscous term controlling fw(Sw) should be minimized to

increase oil productivity by:

o
either decreasing
w o = oil viscosity
w = water viscosity
kro = oil relative permeability
kro krw = water relative permeability
or increasing
krw

When an immiscible displacement process takes place, in the reservoir

rock contacted by the displacing fluid:
 fluid viscosity should be modified to accelerate oil recovery
 interfacial tension should be modified to increase final oil recovery
 OIL PRODUCTIVITY INCREASE

Reduction Reduction
Actions Effect on
factor factor for fw(Sw)

o
Temperature
0.1 0.5
50  150 °C
w

Water viscosity o
1  10 cp

Oil viscosity 0.1 0.5

w
(1 order of magnitude)

krw
Wettability
0.5 0.6
oil wet  water wet kro
 WELDGE’S METHOD

 f w 
f w q totdt   f w  dL q totdt 
 L 
 S w 
 AS w dL  A S w  dt dL
 t 

f w Sw
dLq totdt  A dtdL
L t

Sw q tot f w

t A L

Sw Sw
Sw  Sw (L, t ) dSw  dL  dt
L t
  dL 
  Velocity of a constant saturation
 dt Sw cos t section, for which dSw=0

 dL  Sw S w
dSw  0   
 dt Sw cos t t L

 dL  q tot f w Sw
  
 dt Sw cos t A L L

 dL  q tot f w
  
 dt Sw cos t A Sw
 FRONTAL ADVANCE EQUATION

q tot  df w 
L   t
A  dS 
 w  Sw

df w
dS w

L*

0 1
 WATER FRONT

1. Discontinuity of saturation values at the advancing water front

Sw ADVANCING WATER FRONT

Swc

2. The saturation variation behind the advancing water front

depends on the volume of injected water

1Sor
q tot t  A  LdSw
Swc

thus the area under the curve dfw/dSw is proportional to the

volume of the displacing fluid
 DISPLACING WATER FRONT

Lf

0 Swc Swf 1-Sor 1

Sw
1

1-Sor

displacing water front

Sw

Swc
0 distance (L)
  Swf
q tot t  A  L f dSw  
1Sor
LdSw 
 Swc Swf 

q tot t 1Sor
 (Swf  Swc )L f   LdSw
A S wf

q tot  df w 
L   t
A  dS 
 w  Sw

q tot t q tot t  df w  q tot t 1Sor df w

 (Swf  Swc )     dSw
A A  dSw 
f A wf dSw
S

 df w  1
1  (Swf  Swc )    df w
 f wf
 dSw f
 WATER SATURATION AT THE WATER FRONT

 df w 
1  (Swf  Swc )   1  f wf
 dSw  f

 df w  fwf
  
 dS w  f S wf  S wc

this indicates that the water

saturation at the water front is
given by the tangent to the
curve fw(Sw) throught the point
(Swc;0)
 DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

BREAKTHROUGH TIME: time required for the displacing fluid front to

flow a distance L in the porous medium

Volume of water which has cumulatively invaded the porous medium at

breakthrough time:


q tot t BT  AL SBT  Swc 
SBT average water saturation in the porous medium

Frontal advance equation at breakthrough time:

q tot  df w 
L   t BT
A  dS w 
 Sw
 AVERAGE WATER SATURATION @ tBT

 df w  1
  
 dS 
 w Sw SBT  S wc

The tangent to the fw(Sw) curve

from (Swc,0) extrapolated to fw=1
yields the value of the average
water saturation SBT
EFFECT OF OIL VISCOSITY ON fw
EFFECT OF FLOW VELOCITY ON fw
EFFECT OF WATER FLOW DIRECTION ON fw
 WATER FRONTAL ADVANCE

Water injection Production well

 AVERAGE WATER SATURATION FOR t > tBT

For t>tbt the average water saturation can be calculated based on the
water saturation at the producer well and is given by:

 dfw  1  f w ,e
  
 dS w  S w ,e S w , e  S w , e
The tangent to the fw(Sw) curve from Sw,e extrapolated to fw=1 yields
the value of the average water saturation Sw,e
 MICROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

Because constant fluid density has been assumed, the volume of the
displaced fluid is equal to the volume of the displacing fluid

Voil produced
h MDE 
Voil init ial

@ t = tBT h M DE 

 AL S BT  S w c 
 AL (1  S w c )

S BT  S w c
h M DE 
1 Sw c

1  S or  S w c
@t= h M DE 
1 Sw c
 MICROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

(1-Swi – Sor )
hMDE =
(1-Swi )

In an oil displacement process by water, Sorw is closely related to:

 Pore geometry
 Porous media heterogeneity
 Wettability and interfacial tension
 Capillary pressure and gravity
 CAPILLARY FORCES

At the reservoir scale the capillarity term is negligible

when:

1/2

L Nc > 10
k

106 103 10-6

 = porosity
k = absolute permeability
L = displacement length
Nc = capillary number
 CAPILLARY NUMBER

NC represents the ratio between the viscous forces and the

capillary forces evaluated at the pore scale

v w
Nc =
swo coswo

If the capillary forces clearly prevail over the viscous forces (Nc
lower than a critical value Nco) Sor is independent from the flow
velocity of the displacing fluid

Nco < 10-5 for water-wet systems

Nco < 10-7 for oil-wet systems
Nco < 10-8 for mixed-wet systems
 Sor vs CAPILLARY NUMBER

10-8 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1

Nc
 MICROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

For displacement of light/medium oils (>35° API)

by gas observed values of Sorg are lower that 10%

The main reasons for the reduction of the value of Sor

compared with water displaced oil:

Low gas/oil interfacial tension

Oil vaporization/stripping from the gas

Film-flow of oil
 SPREADING COEFFICIENT

s
s•go
go
sw,o = 0.30 – 0.35 N/m
gas
K<0 ss sg,o = 0.01 – 0.05 N/m
gw
•gw
sow oil
water
sg,w = 0.40 – 0.45 N/m
rock

Spreading Coefficient K = sg,w- (sg,o+so,w)

In gas-oil systems with connate water it may happen that K is greater

than zero (K= 010). Then an oil film forms and oil can flow. Sor can be
negligible even if the displacement occurs between two immiscible phases

gas

K>0 oil
water

rock
VOLUMETRIC DISPLACEMENT
EFFICIENCY
 MACROSCOPIC DISPLACEMENT

OIL OIL
(+ WATER) WATER
(+ WATER)
 AREAL SWEEP EFFICIENCY hSE

Function of:

 Injection and production wells location with respect to

the reservoir geometry

 Injection/production rates at the single wells

 Mobility ratio

 Injected volume of displacing fluid

 Reservoir heterogeneity
ADVANCING WATER FRONT
 AREAL DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

Assuming:

 homogeneous porous medium

 constant thickness layer connecting the oil producing

well to the water injection well

 monodimensional, steady-state flow

 irreducible water saturation only before water

injection
 AREAL DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

Considering one flow line: Lw Lo

L

@ t=0 the flowing fluid is oil only:

k o p L
q tot t 0
 qo  A
o L

@ a generic instant t the fluid flux is:

p L  p L w  p L o
with Lw position of the water front in the layer
 q tot  w q tot  o
p L  Lw  (L  L w )
A kw A ko

q tot  w o 
p L   Lw  (L  L w )
A  kk rw kk ro 

q tot p L

A w o
Lw  (L  L w )
kk rw kk ro

q tot p L kk rw

A w  kk
L w  o (L  L w ) rw
kk rw kk ro
APPARENT DISPLACEMENT VELOCITY
q tot p L kk rw

A k
 w L w  rw  o (L  L w )
k ro

q tot p L kk rw

A  L w k rw  o L  L w 
 w L  
 L k ro  w L 

Lw
assumin g R
L

q tot p L kk rw

A  w L[R  M(1  R )]
 EFFECT OF MOBILITY RATIO

The ratio between the apparent displacing fluid front at time t and the
apparent displacing fluid front at time t=0 is:

q tot x
A M R=
 L
q tot R  M(1  R )
A M = mobility ratio
t 0

M=1: steady state displacing conditions (constant velocity)

M>1: the front velocity increases as the front moves forward along the layer;
the advancing displacing fluid front is unstable

M<1: the front velocity decreases as the front moves forward along the layer;
the advancing displacing fluid front is stable
 CONSTANT FRONT VELOCITY

M=1
 INCREASING FRONT VELOCITY

M>1
 DECREASING FRONT VELOCITY

M<1
FRONT VELOCITY DURING DISPLACEMENT
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY hCF

Function of:

 Reservoir heterogeneity

 Mobility ratio
EFFECT OF MOBILITY RATIO
Homogeneous Rock
 TONGUING EFFECTS

For high mobility ratios the advancing front is unstable: the

phenomenon is also known as tonguing. It occurs when the
viscous forces are lower than the gravitational forces.
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT
Heterogeneous rock

OIL OIL
( +WATER )
WATER ( +WATER )
 CONSTANT FRONT VELOCITY

Sequence of layers with different petrophysical

characteristics

k1

M=1 k2

ki

kn
 INCREASING FRONT VELOCITY

Sequence of layers with different petrophysical

characteristics

M>1
 DECREASING FRONT VELOCITY

Sequence of layers with different petrophysical

characteristics

M<1
 MOBILITY RATIO

End point mobility ratio

 VERTICAL FRONT STABILITY

Vertical flow M >> 1 Always valid

∆ρ > 0 for gas
pc = 0

M>1  ug < ug,c steady

M>1  ug > ug,c non-steady

ug,c = k λg ∆ρ g /(M-1)
∆ρ = (ρo-ρg) > 0
 DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

The volumetric oil displacement efficiency is poor when injecting gas.

Thus, gas is preferably injected in the gas cap – provided there exists a
primary gas cap – or artificially creating a secondary gas cap. Vertical
flow is preferred also because horizontal flow may involve gravitational
segregation.

The microscopical displacement is more efficient when gas is injected

rather than water.
 WAG – Water Alternate Gas
EOR process consisting in injecting gas alternating water

 displacing gas
M= M is typically unfavorable because of the low viscosity
of the injected gas
 displaced oil bank
Since the presence of a water-phase reduces the effective permeability to the injected gas

WAG injection improves the mobility ratio of the displacement

WAG – Water Alternate Gas
 WAG – Water Alternate Gas
Main features:
 The displacing water has a relatively low mobility which improves
sweep-out efficiency over that obtained with the solvent.
 The gas and water injection cycle are alternated every 3 or 6 months

 In most common applications, the injection pattern is dispersed

 Gas can be enriched or mixed with CO2, N2 (gas can also be miscible
with oil)

Main effects:
 kr,g and kr,o reduction

 Sor reduction

 o and o reduction by light components stripping

 recovery of attic oil (oil which can not be displaced by water injection
only)
 RECOVERY FACTOR

WATER OIL GAS OIL

WATER + GAS OIL

Recovery factor increments:

 Immiscible WAG = 2 – 4 %

 Miscible WAG = 4 – 8 %
 WAG – Water Alternate Gas

Conventional WAG injection

Approach more effective in highly
stratified heterogeneous
reservoirs:
it minimizes gas cycling in
high-velocity layers

WATER + GAS OIL

Non-conventional WAG injection

Approach - characterized by ever-
increasing gas cycle lengths -
allowing periodical adjustment of
water-to-gas ratio and/or cycle slug
sizes in flood patterns.
MISCIBLE GAS
INJECTION
 MICROSCOPIC EFFICIENCY
In an immiscible displacement process:

hMDE << 1

• Part of the crude oil in place contacted by the displacing fluid is

trapped as isolated drops, stringers, and pendular rings
depending on the rock wettability and mostly on capillary
forces;

• Relative permeability to oil is reduced;

• Continued injection of fluid is ineffective because the fluid

simply flows around the trapped oil;

• The oil does not move in the flowing stream because of the
capillary forces.

Miscible displacement
 MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT FEATURES

Oil and
gas
gas
Oil
(Miscible
(slug)
zone)

The displacing fluid is miscible with the displaced fluid at the conditions
existing at the displacing-fluid/displaced-fluid interface.

The interfacial tension is eliminated, thus capillary forces are zero.

The mixing leads to the development of an oil bank, followed by a

solvent/oil mixture bank that is rich in oil at the front end and rich in
solvent at the back.

If the two fluids do not mix in all proportions to form one single phase,
the process is called immiscible.
 MISCIBILITY
Atmospheric 2000 PSIA
Mixture
conditions 150° F

Methane

Immiscible
Oil

Propane

Miscible
Oil

Methane

Miscible
Propane
 MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT FEATURES
The injected gas dissolves in the crude so
• it reduces oil viscosity

• it increases oil volume

• it increases oil-water relative permeability

For the miscibility to be developed, specific reservoir conditions are

required; however, since reservoir temperature is generally
considered constant, then the focus is on pressure:

• pressure > minimum miscibility pressure

The displacement processes can be conveniently classified in:

• first-contact miscible (FCM) process; and
• multiple-contact miscible (MCM) process

on the basis of the manner in which miscibility is developed.

 SOLVENTS

Various gases and liquids are suitable for use as miscible

displacement agents in either FCM or MCM processes.
These include:
• low-molecular-weight hydrocarbons
• mixtures of hydrocarbons (LPG’s)
• CO2
• N2
• mixtures of the above solvents

The application depends on:

• reservoir pressure and temperature
• compositions of the crude oil and the injected fluid
 FCM processes
A FCM process involves injection of a displacement fluid that forms only a
single phase upon first contact when mixed in all proportions with the oil
in place (i.e.: butane and crude oil).

If the process is used after injection of water with the oil at waterflood
residual saturation, the injected solvent must first displace the water
phase to contact the residual oil and then the oil as a single-phase
mixture.

A FCM process consists in injecting a relatively small primary slug that is

miscible with the crude oil at first contact.

The primary slug is followed by the injection of a larger and less

expensive secondary slug. The sizes of the primary slug are determined
from economical considerations.

Ideally, the secondary slug should be miscible with the primary slug.
Otherwise, a residual saturation of the primary slug material will be
trapped in the displacement process.
 MCM processes

In a MCM process the condition of miscibility is generated

through in-situ composition alteration of both residual oil in
place and injected solvent, resulting from mass transfer between
the fluids to such a degree that they become miscible as the
solvent moves through the reservoir.

So in MCM processes, miscibility does not exist initially but is

dynamically developed as the process continues.

The multiple-contact processes are classified in:

• Vaporizing-gas displacements
• Condensing-gas displacements
• CO2 displacements
 MCM processes

• Vaporizing-gas process: the injected fluid is generally a relatively

lean gas: low-molecular weight hydrocarbons or inert gases (N2).
The composition of the injected gas is modified as it moves through
the reservoir so that it becomes miscible with the original reservoir
oil; the injected fluid is enriched in composition through multiple
contacts with the oil, during which oil intermediate components are
vaporized into the injected gas.

Under proper conditions, the injected fluid of modified composition

become miscible with the oil at some point in the reservoir and a
miscible displacement will start occurring.
 MCM processes

• Condensing-gas process: the injected fluid contains larger

amounts of intermediate-molecular-weight hydrocarbons and thus is
more expensive. Reservoir oil near the injection well is enriched in
composition: light hydrocarbon components are condensed from the
injected fluid into the oil.

Under proper conditions, the oil is sufficiently modified in composition

to become miscible with additional injected fluid, and a miscible
displacement will ensue.

Typically, this process can be operated at a lower pressure than the

vaporizing process
 MCM processes

• CO2 displacement process: miscibility between CO2 and oil

develop according to a sort of condensing/vaporizing mechanism.
CO2 condenses into the oil making it lighter and driving the lighter
components out of it.
These lighter components of the oil vaporize into the CO2 phase
making it denser and thus more easily soluble in the oil.

Mass transfer continues until the resulting two mixtures of CO2-

enriched-oil and oil-enriched-CO2 become indistinguishable and no
interface between the two fluids exists anymore.
 MME determination
For specified dynamic conditions, the primary slug fluid properties at
which miscibility will occur must be determined.

Miscibility can occur between the solvent gas and crude oil only if the gas
has been sufficiently enriched of hydrocarbon components.

The injected-fluid composition at which miscibility is achieved between

solvent gas and crude oil in a multiple contact process, is defined as the
Minimum Miscibility gas Enrichment (MME).

100%

T=Tr =constant
Oil recovery

p=pr =constant

MME C2+ Mole Fraction

 MMP determination
For specified fluid properties, the dynamic conditions at which miscibility
will occur must be determined.

Miscibility can occur between the displacing gas and oil only if pressure is
high enough to liquefy the primary slug.

The pressure at which miscibility between the solvent gas and crude oil is
verified, is defined as the thermodynamic Minimum Miscibility Pressure
(MMP).

100%

T=Tr =constant
Oil recovery

constant fluid composition

Pressure
MMP
 Rising bubble apparatus

Gas bubble dimension

(qualitative)
Pressure (psig)

Immiscibility is ensured at
the beginning of the test.
 SLIM-TUBE EXPERIMENT

Constant T Air Bath Vapor

x Cooler

Liquid
CO2

Back-pressure
Oil

regulator
SLIM TUBE:
• Stainless steel
Constant volume • ID 5/16 in
High pressure Pump • L 40 ft

The best source of thermodynamic MMP is the routine laboratory

slim-tube test.
MMP determination between reservoir oil and CO2 or lean gas