SPE-194652-MS

Maximizing a Mature Field Value by Combining Polymer Flooding,

Well Interventions, and Infill Drilling
J. L. Mogollón, Halliburton; S. Yomdo, OIL India Limited; A. Salazar, Halliburton; R. Dutta, OIL India Limited; D.
Bobula, Halliburton; P. K. Dhodapkar, OIL India Limited; T. Lokandwala, Halliburton; V. Chandrasekar, CMG

Copyright 2019, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Oil and Gas India Conference and Exhibition held in Mumbai, India, 9-11 April 2019.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not
necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this
paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
The perception of better economics and less risk from infill drilling and recompletions are reasons well-
focused remedies are preferred compared to reservoir-focused solutions, such as enhanced oil recovery
(EOR). However, most literature does not discuss the economic and risk indicators driving this.
Using a real example, this work demonstrates that combining polymer flooding with infill drilling and
recompletion substantially increases economic benefits with reasonable risk.
The reservoir considered is an Oligocene sandstone at a depth of 2700 m. The °API is 29.5 and
permeability ranges from 50 to 500 mD. Current reservoir pressure is 43% of the original and it is below
bubble point. A black oil model with a 133 × 56 × 128 grid was used. The model incorporated more than
50 years of matched primary and waterflooding production history and experimental polymer physico-
chemical parameters. For the stochastic economic risks estimation, 1,000 iterations were run for each
scenario considering uncertainties in injection-production, capital expenditures (CAPEX), operational
expenditures (OPEX), and oil prices.
For a 20-year horizon, the injection-production-pressure profiles were numerically forecasted;
economic results were calculated using a classic model and inputs from the forecast. The economic risk
was determined stochastically. The redevelopment scenarios considered were as follows:

• Base: current waterflooding

• Existing wells interventions: workover, opening shut-in wells, and new perforations
• Infill drilling: vertical/horizontal infill drilling wells + existing wells operations
• Polymer flooding: using existing wells
• Combined Infill and polymer: vertical infill drilling wells and polymer flooding

P50 forecasts showed that interventions in existing wells in the base scenario increased oil production
by 11% and net present value (NPV) by 71% with a risk index of 0.38.
2 SPE-194652-MS

A numerical optimizer was used to account for possible combinations of 14 potential drilling locations
and vertical to horizontal well ratios. A scenario with three vertical wells was selected. Compared to the
base case, this scenario showed an oil production increase of 23%, NPV increase of 178%, and a risk
index of 0.41.
The injection rate of the polymer flood was optimized, resulting in a 17% increase in oil production
and 95% increase in the NPV, with a risk index of 0.40. This justifies performing a polymer flood.
The most promising scenario is the combined infill drilling and polymer injection, which significantly
improved the economic indicators—30% increase in oil production, 230% improvement of the NPV over
the base scenario, with a risk index of only 0.41.
The results of this study demonstrate that the combination of EOR with different operational strategies
results in significant benefits compared to the individual scenarios. Analysis of just oil production independent
of economics and risk can be misleading. Infill drilling or flooding should no longer be the question. Instead,
the question should be how they can be properly combined at various stages of asset life.

Introduction
It is common that operators choose to perform infill drilling and recompletion rather than EOR to
revitalize mature waterflooded fields. This is despite it being inevitable that the asset will require sweep
efficiency improvement to increase the oil recovery factor (RF). The perception of improved economics
and less risk from drilling and recompletions are reasons for a preference of well-focused remedies
compared to reservoir-focused solutions. However, most literature does not show the economic and risk
indicators driving this decision and rather focuses mostly on production gains.
To infill or to flood is a question commonly asked by operators and causes intense debate when redesigning
exploitation schemes. This papers demonstrates that, instead, chemical EOR is complementary to infill drilling
and other well-centric operations. Therefore, the combination of technologies creates greater benefits and the
real question should be how they can be properly combined at various stages of asset life.
The fundamental mechanisms of oil displacement by viscous aqueous polymer solutions have been
well studied. Multiple papers address numerical simulation, pilot testing, and full field deployment.
Works such as Lake et al. (2014), Alvarado and Manrique (2010), and Sheng (2013) are good
compilations of such information.
The economics of polymer flooding and other chemical EOR processes has been previously addressed
(Wyatt et al. 2008; Mogollón et al. 2016). However, the literature is not extensive on this topic. There is
enough evidence indicating the method to be profitable. Less information is available related to the
economic risks of implementing chemical EOR projects. In projects with the dimensions and complexity
of flooding a reservoir, there can be multiple uncertainties. Therefore, analysis of the associated
economics risks is of paramount importance.
In previous studies, Mogollón and Lokhandwala (2013) demonstrate for a specific polymer flood
project a 90% probability of positive NPV under broad ranges of uncertainty for oil price, RF, CAPEX,
and OPEX. Certainly, oil price has a strong influence on the outcome. However, so does the RF and the
original oil in place (OOIP). The very few negative NPV values were most likely a result of lower values
on the benefit side (oil price, RF) rather than of higher values on the cost side (CAPEX, OPEX).
An optimization of a polymer flood value was conducted by Mogollón et al. (2016). Initially, seven full
field deterministic numerical simulations suggested a low feasibility of a profitable project. Regardless of
initial results, it was decided to ascertain the best combination for the following four decision variables: two
polymer concentrations, two polymer injection times, the number of new injector wells from 0 to 33, and the
number of new producer wells from 0 to 18. The combination of these variables results in 28,000 possible
scenarios; the use of smart algorithms for identifying the best proved it as a powerful tool. This resulted in a
30% improvement in the NPV and 25% increase in cumulative oil recovery compared to waterflooding.
SPE-194652-MS 3

Both of these studies showed that methodologies to analyze the economics and risks of polymer flooding
and the results are encouraging. However, none of them separated the contribution of the polymer flood from
the perforation of new wells and rather used as reference the waterflood with the same number of wells.
With the objective of finding the best technology to be used revitalizing a very mature field, this paper
analyzes the individual and combined contributions to the cumulative oil (Np), economics (NPV), and
risks index of:

• New perforations and shut-in well reactivation

• Vertical and horizontal infill drilling

• Polymer flooding

They are all compared to the existing waterflood scheme. The forecasts were accomplished using a
latest-generation black oil model. A smart algorithm optimizer software was used to select the proper
number and location of infill wells; a stochastic technique was used to quantify the economic risks.

Field Description
Fig. 1 displays the location of study area.

Figure 1—Map of the area.

The target Barail sandstone reservoirs are Oligocene age. Some wells have penetrated the entire
Tertiary sequence and other wells have been drilled down to upper and/or middle parts of the Barail
formation. Information obtained from these wells shows that, except for a few thin Paleocene/Eocene
Limestone beds, the sediments are primary clastic of the Paleocene/Eocene times; rocks were deposited in
marine environments, which gradually graded into deltaic/fluvial environments through Oligocene
onward. Fig. 2 presents the generalized stratigraphic succession of the Upper Assam basin.
4 SPE-194652-MS

Figure 2—Stratigraphy.

Oil production in Zaloni Barail 4th Sand, Well 41+54 Block began in 1960 and peaked in 1962 for a
short period of time when the new wells came online. Oil production significantly declined between 1969
and 1970 as the number of producing wells decreased. The commencement of water injection in Barail
4th Sand in 1969, continuation of gas injection, and new well drilling contributed to a period of high
production between 1970 and 1976. From 1978 to 1995, there was a relatively steady decline in oil
production, which stabilized post-1995 and drastically decreased in 2005.
Table 1 presents the key reservoir properties. The petrophysical properties are good, with low clay
content. The crude oil also has good properties: sweet (low sulphur) with API gravity of 22 to 36°. But,
typical wax content is 10 to 16% by wt., which causes flow assurance issues.
A tank model analysis indicated a varied degree of recovery mechanisms, such as water influx, fluid
expansion, and gas injection are in play. However, as the field matures, water injection plays a major role
in recovery.
SPE-194652-MS 5

Table 1—Key reservoir properties.

Cumulative production, MMbbl 48.5

No. of wells 22
Wells on production 3
Water injector wells 4
Oil production, B/D 638
Reservoir datum depth, mbd 2713
Initial reservoir pressure, kg/cm2 275
Current reservoir pressure, kg/cm2 119
Bubble point pressure, kg/cm2 269
Oil viscosity at initial reservoir condition, cP 0.5 to 0.7
Crude, °API 29.5
Pour point, °C 29.7
Average porosity, % 24
*Average permeability, mD 50 to 500

*Pressure transient analysis (PTA) in some wells

The current production from this reservoir is low (i.e., less than 10% of the plateau production). This is
attributed to the high degree of depletion. Moreover, the reservoir pressure being well below the bubble
point (i.e., 0.22 and 0.44 ratio) increased the oil viscosity to 1 to 2.5 cP, which impaired the water-oil
mobility ratio and, hence, oil production.
Clear oil water contact between 2,713 and 2,750 m in various regions has been observed in the block.
Furthermore, material balance indicates a high degree of water influx within this block.
High water cut has been observed and some wells are shut in because of this. Chan plot analysis showed
channeling in the upper zones wells. The encroachment of bottom water in several wells along the periphery
shows that the water/oil contact (WOC) has moved up during the course of the field's history.
With respect to implementing a polymer project, some possible challenges were identified: relatively
low permeability in some areas and a relatively low number of active injection and drainage points (i.e.,
only four producer and five injector wells active of 22).
To extend reservoir life and increase accumulated economic benefits, incrementing the already
relatively high oil recovery factor was a primary goal.

Methodology
Numerical Simulation Model Description
The Zaloni Barail 4th Sand consists of two segments. The light-yellow area corresponds to Segment 4a
and the dark yellow is the Segment 4b, Block 41 + 54, which corresponds to the area of study (Fig. 3).
A black-oil numerical reservoir simulation model was used in this study. The numerical model was run
using CMG-IMEX (version 2016.10) black-oil numerical simulator software.
A quality assurance (QA)/quality control (QC) of the 3D geomodel of the dynamic model confirmed it
honors the input data from geological, petrophysical, and geophysical analysis with the assumption that
all the input data are correct. The model included all necessary input data—most property data taken from
the static model, while no modification of the input data was observed in the model data file. The field
production data was evaluated and the numerical model was updated and history matched, following the
initial assessment, up to August 2016.
6 SPE-194652-MS

The Zaloni model has five relative permeability regions—with three relative permeability sets for each
region. This accurately captures the reservoir behavior included in the pressure/volume/temperature
(PVT) matching using equation of state (EOS) modeling of this black oil fluid.
Table 2 presents a summary of the dynamic numerical reservoir simulation model used in this study.

Figure 3—Zaloni Barail 4th Sand (41 + 54 Block).

Table 2—Properties of current dynamic model including 4A + 4B.

Reservoir Parameters Current Dynamic Model

Grid Dimensions 133 × 56 × 128

Grid Size DX × DY About 100 m × 100 m
Sands Included 41 + 54 Block of Barail 4th Sand
Pressure/Volume/Temperature Regions 2
Saturation Function Numbers 5
Equilibrium Regions 4
Analytical Aquifer Number 1
Analytical Aquifer Location Northeast
Stock Tank Oil Originally In Place 283 MMBbl
Stock Tank Oil Originally In Place in 4B 196 MMBbl

A partially hydrolyzed polyacrylamide (HPAM) was previously selected among copolymers and
terpolymers of acrylamide. The selection was based on rock permeability analysis and fluid properties
(i.e., long-term stability, rheological behavior, which provide good mobility control and exhibit good
stability for the actual water and crude oil compositions of the reservoir).
The polymer's (polyacrylamide) properties were matched in the model to be consistent with laboratory data.
Mathematical functions of polyacrylamide viscosity vs. concentration and vs. shear rates were used. The
experimentally determined polymer adsorption was matched by a Langmuir isotherm. Also, the relative
permeability determined in the laboratory were incorporated in the model. The physico-chemical values were
upscaled to the field scale. The scaling up was achieved by using the ratio method that preserves the quotient
between the relative permeability and residual oil saturations between successive interpolation sets.
The polymer slug size and concentration were previously ascertained by numerical simulation of 5-
spot inverted pilot pattern. The variables were: 0.5 PV, 0.67 PV and infinite PV; 0 g/l, 0.5 g/l and 0.75 g/l
SPE-194652-MS 7

respectively. The 0.5 PV injection of a 0.5 g/l solution was found to have the best incremental oil barrels
to polymer mass ratio.
Cases Evaluated by Numerical Simulation
This section presents the numerical simulation conducted to evaluate four development cases and the base
case reference. For the selection of the most suitable case, multiple scenarios were run allowing the
identification of the best operational parameters. That work included for example the determination of the
optimum number and location of infill wells, water and polymer injection rates, and polymer injection time.
The following activities were conducted to accomplish these objectives:

• Numerical simulation of the base case

• Definition and numerical simulation of waterflooding-based case, including new perforations, reactivation, and
vertical and horizontal infill drilling

• Optimization of the polymer flood injection parameters, such as slug volumes and concentration, net pay, and
injection rate
• Visualization of polymer flood full-field extension

In addition to the base case, two types of cases were analyzed. The objective of cases 1 and 2 is to
improve the current water injection scheme to produce oil that is left behind. Cases 3 and 4 changed the
injection scheme and tested polymer flooding. The production was forecasted for 20 years, until August
2036 for all the cases.
The cases evaluated are:

• Base: current waterflooding

• Case 1: Existing wells interventions: workover, opening shut-in wells, and new perforations
• Case 2: infill drilling: vertical/horizontal infill drilling wells + existing wells interventions of Case 1
• Case 3: polymer flooding using existing wells
• Case 4: combined infill and polymer: vertical infill drilling wells and polymer flooding

Cases 2 through 4 include the operating conditions proposed in Case 1, the proposed workovers,
opening shut-in wells, and new perforations. To obtain realistic forecasts, the activities were scheduled
according to specific capabilities and constraints in the studied field, such as rig availability and drilling
time. Therefore, reactivation and/or workover were considered every four and eight months.
For the base case, the producer wells were constrained on total produced liquids and the injector wells
on total injected water. This enabled better representation of the latest production data from the field with
the numerical model.
For Cases 1 and 2, targeting waterflood improvement, production was constrained in the numerical model
by bottomhole pressure (BHP) and total liquid rate to obtain more realistic fluid production forecasts.
For Case 3, polymer flooding: using existing wells, 1,258 and 1,887 B/D/well (200 and 300 m 3/D/well)
injection rates were evaluated given the field-observed injectivity. Injection rate of 1,887 bbl/D/well and
20-ft open interval in the injector well were selected as explained below.
Economic Analysis Methodology
The optimal field development plan is determined by analyzing the economic performance of each of the
previous cases. Although production rates and total production of a potential development plan can provide a
good indication of its success, the investment necessary to achieve production might be prohibitively high.
The revenue resulting from production must be compared to all costs associated with the given production
8 SPE-194652-MS

to determine its economic attractiveness. Furthermore, the economic performance of different development
plans must be compared to determine the relative attractiveness of each potential development plan.
The economic analysis used for this project relies on a custom economic model built using the country's
fiscal regime and operating cost structure. The model uses the production and injection output of the reservoir
model as the main input. The modeled oil and gas production rates are used to determine revenues. The water
production rate, water injection rate, and chemical injection rates from the model are variable and used to
determine costs along with operating and production costs, which are a function of production and injection.
The country's fiscal regime is modeled to subtract tax and royalty obligations from revenue. Also,
amortization of CAPEX is accounted for. All of the revenue, costs, tax obligations, and amortization are used
to determine net cash flow to the operator. All financial metrics calculated are based on the net cash flow.
The main financial metric used to determine the economic performance of each development plan is
the NPV. NPV is the time value of future cash flows discounted back to the first time period assumed in
the model.
Revenue
The output of production from the reservoir model for oil, gas, and water is the average daily production
in each month. These values are used as input to the economic model. The daily rates are then converted
to total production for each month based on the number of days in the month. The reservoir model
outputs production, starting from the first day of production in 1956. However, the economic analysis is
performed on production beginning in August 2016. This same date is used as the start date for all
development plans (cases shown in the numerical simulation section) to objectively compare all
development plans based on all options available in August 2016.
The total production in each month is then used to calculate revenue from oil and gas production. This
model assumes a constant price throughout the entire 20-year analysis period for oil and gas. The market
prices used are as shown below.

• Oil: USD 50.14 per barrel net price

• Gas: USD 2.50 per 1,000 standard cubic meters net price (inclusive of marketing margin)

The monthly oil production is multiplied by the oil market price to determine oil revenues. The monthly gas
production is multiplied by the gas market price, then divided by 1,000 to determine gas revenues.

Capital and Operating Expenditures

The forecast production from the reservoir model for all cases except for the base case results from well
drilling or well workovers. For this model, both workovers and drilling are treated as capital expenditures
that can be amortized over time. The reason for this is that the impact and benefit of a workover and
drilling a new well is realized over time, not only in the period that the workover or drilling takes place.
This means that while the cost of the workover or drilling takes place in a given month that cost can be
amortized over a period of eight years from the date of the event. Amortization of these costs reduces the
tax obligation based on gross income.
Well-drilling capital expenditures are calculated based on the depth of the bottom perforation, plus 10 m for
vertical wells, and the total well depth for horizontal wells. The cost of drilling the wells is as follows:

• Vertical wells: USD 1,354 per m

• Horizontal wells: USD 2,325 per m

SPE-194652-MS 9

Well workover capital expenditures are calculated based on a rig day rate, downhole equipment, and
perforating service. Well reactivation is also categorized as a workover, but with a cost of USD 232,522.
Reperforation and other workovers are calculated as follows:

• Rig day-rate: USD 7,366 per day for one day each workover

• 2 7/8-in. tubing: USD 8.67 per m multiplied by the depth of the perforations
• One gas lift valve mandrel for each workover: USD 183
• Perforations: USD 2,325 per meter of perforations

Taxes and Royalties

Royalties are paid to the government before any other fiscal obligations are met. Royalties are paid based on
the total volume of oil and gas produced in a month. Royalties are typically paid, regardless of the total
operating costs or other taxes. In the model used in the project, royalties for oil and gas are as follows:

• Oil: USD 8.04 per barrel of oil produced

• Gas: USD 8.57 per 1,000 standard cubic meters of gas produced

Royalties are calculated each month based on the total production in that month multiplied by the
royalty rate. In the case of gas, the product is then divided by 1,000.
Once royalties are paid, cess is paid. Cess is a special tax in the country that is earmarked for a
particular purpose, opposed to normal taxes, which are used for general government financing. Cess is
paid on oil only at a rate of USD 8.50 per bbl produced. Cess is calculated each month based on the total
production of oil in that month multiplied by the cess rate.
After royalties and cess, taxes must be paid on income. The taxable income is all revenue minus
CAPEX, operating expenditures, royalties, cess, and depreciation. If this sum is negative, then there is no
taxable income for that month. CAPEX can be depreciated (or amortized) over a period of time after the
expense is first incurred. For purposes of this project, well drilling and well workovers are depreciated
over eight years using a "written-down value" method. Surface facilities are depreciated over the life of
the field, which is assumed to be 20 years in this analysis.

Cash Flow and NPV

The net cash flow to the operator is the revenue minus CAPEX, OPEX, royalties, Cess, and taxes. Net
cash flow represents the total and actual proceeds received by the operator. The financial performance of
a development plan (simulation case) is determined using this net cash flow.
For the base case, the NPV is determined using the net cash flow of the base-case. However, the NPV
for each of the other cases is determined using the incremental cash flow compared to the base case. For
each month, the net cash flow of the case is determined exactly as in the base case. The base-case net cash
flow for that month is subtracted from the net cash flow of the scenario to determine the incremental cash
flow, as shown in Table 3.
10 SPE-194652-MS

Table 3—Calculation of incremental cash flow above base case.

Month 1 2 3 4

Cash Flow

Earnings before tax, USD 0 1,745,618 1,744,028 1,887,435

Total cash flow, USD 0 185,035 244,164 150,995
Base case cash flow, USD 232,473 223,269 230,808
Case incremental cash flow, USD –47,437 20,895 –79,813

The NPV of each case is then calculated based on the incremental cash flow. For this project, a
spreadsheet software was used to determine the NPV of the monthly cash flows over a 20-year period.
The operator's cost of capital is 15%, and this value was used as the discount rate for the NPV calculation.
This value translates to a 1.17149% discount rate on a monthly basis. The NPV is calculated using Eq. 1.
NPV calculation

(1)

Where:
 n = Number of periods to analyze
 r = Discount rate
Cn = Net cash flow in period n

Stochastic Analysis
All exploration and production projects are executed under uncertainties of reservoir parameters and
performance, cost of operations, and future oil prices. The effect of uncertainties on the forecasted
injection and production fluids and the economics of the project can be large; therefore, it has been the
subject of numerous studies (Vincent et al. 2018). Stochastic analyses are able to quantify the effect of
uncertainties, providing a range of possible outcomes and the estimation of economic risks. Both are of
great importance for managing hydrocarbon assets. Therefore, stochastic calculations were performed for
all the scenarios evaluated.
The steps of the stochastic analysis are:

• Identify key variables

• Assign a probabilistic type distribution and variation coefficients

• Calculate the probabilistic distribution of the forecasted injection-production fluids
• Calculate the economic probabilistic distribution

For calculating the probabilistic distribution, the values of all variables are input into a spreadsheet
using the Monte Carlo technique, which randomly selects the input of each iteration (calculation)
combining the values of all variables constrained by the type and variation coefficient assigned.
Typically, 5,000 to 10,000 iterations are accomplished for each case analyzed.
In a recently published review of waterflooding related projects, Mogollon et al. (2017) proposed the
probabilistic distribution type and coefficient type, shown in Table 4. Except for production related
parameters, all other values on price and cost are applicable to the assets of interest in this work.
Therefore, those values were used for the stochastic analysis.
SPE-194652-MS 11

Table 4—Multipliers used for uncertainty-risk analysis, after Mogollón et al. (2017).

Description Distribution Type Variation Coefficient Maximum

Crude oil price Normal 15 —

Recompletion costs Log-normal 15 —
Water production Normal 10 —
Crude oil production unit cost Log-normal 15 —
Water injection unit cost Log-normal 15 —
Gas production Normal 30 1.2
Water injection rate Normal 30 1.6
Injection well investment Log-normal 15 —
Production well investment Log-normal 15 —

To avoid overly optimistic production forecasts and to be on the conservative side, a triangular distribution
was used for oil production, wherein the mode in the triangular distribution is to be the maximum value times
0.49. On the low side, a conservative 80% of the mode value can be used as the minimum. All of the above
give the three points that define the triangular probability for oil production, shown in Fig. 4.

Figure 4—Probabilistic distribution for the reservoir.

Results
Numerical Simulation
This section shows the results of multiple simulations conducted to optimize each redevelopment case and a
comparison of the base case and four redevelopment cases previously described in the methodology section.
Base Case: Current Waterflooding. The black-oil numerical reservoir simulation model was used for the
base case waterflooding analysis and forecast production for 20 years from August 2016 to August 2036
under the current waterflooding operation conditions. The simulation was run until 2036 to compare
faithfully with the operating schedule timing included in the cases evaluated for the well workover,
drilling, improved waterflooding, and polymer flood forecast evaluation.
Wells in the Zaloni Barail 4th Sand segment 4B are currently shut in, with the exception of four
injector and three producer wells. The simulation constraints used for the base case forecast are the total
liquid constraint for the producer wells and total water constraint for the injector wells to better represent
the latest production data from the field with the numerical model.
The results obtained for the base case by numerical simulation showed a very flat oil production rate
with 5.7294E+7 bbl (9.109E+6 m3) oil cumulative production (Fig. 5).
12 SPE-194652-MS

Figure 5—Cumulative oil production and oil rate production forecast to August 2036.

Case 1: Existing Wells Interventions: Workover, Opening Shut-In Wells and New Perforations. The
effect of performing workover operations, such as perforation of attic/bypassed pay and reactivation of
wells to stimulate oil recovery. Upon evaluation of the field production data for the wells, it was observed
that, currently, the majority of the wells are shut in primarily because of high water cut and have been
closed for a long period.
Intervals with more than 50% remaining oil saturation and permeability approximately and greater than 100
mD values were observed in the numerical model. Therefore, reactivation of the original perforations and
additional well perforations were open. Such areas are located mainly in the upper layers of the reservoir.
For the intervention case, four producer wells were opened/reactivated, thereby increasing the number of
active producer wells to seven. Potential new perforations and/or workover in the four existing wells just
opened were identified in layers, which fulfilled the discussed criteria. The reactivation and/or workover
operations were scheduled every four months; then, the production was forecasted until August 2036.
The constraints used in the numerical simulation to more realistically forecast the oil production are a
BHP of 21,000 to 24,000 kPa to honor BHP and achieve pressure closer to the reservoir pressure of the
latest field data update and a total liquid production rate constraint of 629 bbl/d/well (100 m 3/D/well)
based on field experience and to control the total surface liquid rate (oil and water).
The numerical simulation results from the waterflooding forecast with the reactivation of the existing
wells and the addition of new perforations showed 11% cumulative oil production increase compared to
the base case (Fig. 6).
SPE-194652-MS 13

Figure 6—Cumulative oil and oil rate for the waterflooding forecast production Case 1: existing well interventions:
workover, opening shut-in wells, and new perforations; base case is green line, and Case 1 is red line.

Case 2: Infill Drilling: Vertical/Horizontal Infill Drilling Wells + Existing Well Interventions of Case 1. For
planning further development for Zaloni Barail 4th Sand (41 + 54 Block), the potential of new infill wells to
increase oil production and improve and optimize the reservoir performance was evaluated. All the potential
scenarios analyzed for this case included the perforation/workovers, and/or interventions in
existing wells, and open shut in wells proposed in Case 1.
For simplicity, four potential zones were identified in the field where either no well has been drilled
yet or areas where a twin well can be drilled within the zone. The potential new infill wells (i.e., 11
verticals and three horizontals) were located within these four zones identified in the field that also meet
the same selection criteria as those used for identifying perforations layers in Case 1: good permeability
values higher than 100 mD and oil saturation greater than 50%.
More than 60 numerical simulations (scenarios) were run to ascertain the best type and number of new
wells (vertical or horizontal), the infill well locations, and injection-production conditions using an
optimization software using a smart algorithm. The objective function was to maximize cumulative oil
production.
To obtain realistic outputs, the model was constrained by BHP and liquid production rate as it was for
Case 1, BHP values (minimum BHP 19,000 kPa) were closer to the reservoir pressure (∼23,000 kPa)
upon the latest field data update, and liquid production rate constraints to control the total surface liquid
rate (oil and water) by 629 B/D/well (100 m3/D/well).
For these scenarios, the operational activities were scheduled considering the rig availability and
drilling time to better represent the drilling plan in the field and forecasted up to August 2036 to be
compared to the base case and other cases.
The optimum cases identified from the numerical simulation output were (a) drilling three vertical
infill wells and (b) drilling three vertical wells and one horizontal infill well. However, no horizontal well
has been previously drilled; the operational risk of drilling just one horizontal well was considered too
high to justify a slight production increase. Therefore, the three vertical well scenario selected and being
added to the previous already open/intervention wells increases the number of producer wells to 10 for
Zaloni segment 4B.
It was observed that there was no need for additional injector wells, as the current four injector wells
exhibited sufficient pressure support to the reservoir at rates between 944 and 2,465 B/D/well (150 and
392 m3/dD/well) currently used in the model, which correspond to the last injection rates from the field
production data.
14 SPE-194652-MS

The forecast showed that the addition of three new vertical infill drilling wells could increase the oil
production by 23% over the base case (Fig. 7).

Figure 7—Oil production rate for base case (green curve), Case 1-
perforation and reactivation (red curve), Case 2-infill drilling (blue curve).

Case 3: Polymer Flooding: Using Existing Wells. Polymer injection was tested on the full field scale. To
have all the drainage points from Segment 4B open, three more existing wells from that segment were
reactivated, bringing the total number of producer wells for Case 3 to 10. It was necessary to shut in two
injector wells from the four original wells because two were located in the flank of the pattern where the
polymer is injected. However, four new injector wells were added to the model, either because they were
converted to injector or drilled, for a total of six injectors for this case.
Numerical simulation runs were conducted at 1260 bbl/d/well (200 m3/d/well) and 1887 bbl/d/well
(300 m3/D/well) injection rates, according to injectivity observed in the field runs were constrained to
BHP and liquid production rate constraints to control the total surface liquid rate (oil and water).
The results show that at 1,887 bbl/d/well the polymer is able to recover more incremental oil over the
oil production rate for the 1,260 bbl/d/well injection case (Table 5).
Table 5—Results for polymer flooding scenarios: Case 3.

Cumulative
Injection Rate (bbl/D/well) Polymer Concentration (g/l) Injected Polymer (kg)
Produced Oil (bbl)

1887 0.5 1,259,250 6.714E+7

1260 0.5 2,918,700 6.748E+7

A significant improvement is obtained through polymer injection at 1887 bbl/d/well (300 m3/d/well),
which may increase oil recovery by 17% over the base case (Table 6). However, this is not so over the
other drilling and perforation opportunities from Case 2, and still a large amount of unrecovered oil can
potentially be found. A combination of infill drilling in conjunction with polymer flooding to have more
options for pattern injection is indicated.
SPE-194652-MS 15

Table 6—Comparison of polymer flooding Case 3 with the base case.

Polymer Injected Polymer Cumulative Incremental Oil

Injected Polymer (kg)
Concentration (g/l) Cost (USD) Produced Oil (bbl) (bbl) Over Base Case

Base case 0 5.729E+7

Case 3 0.5 1,259,250 3,399,975 6.714E+07 9,850,000 (17%)

Figure 8—Oil production rate for base case, case 1: perforation and re-activation,
case 2 - infill drilling, Case 3-waterflooding and polymer flooding in increasing order.

A robust economic analysis can enable one to assess the economic benefit of polymer injection in this
reservoir. Uncertainty ranges added to production and economic regimes could also assist decision
making. This is to confirm that chemical EOR is a suitable option to increase production, recovery factor,
and to extend the reservoir life. This is discussed in the section titled "Economic Analysis" following.
Case 4: Combined Infill and Polymer: Vertical Infill Drilling Wells and Polymer Flooding. The
optimization of the current water injection with polymer flooding and workover, opening shut-in wells and
new perforations (Case 3) showed good results. However, the oil recovery of the flooding cases was less than
that of the infill drilling case: Case 2. Therefore, the combination of three new vertical infill drilling wells in
conjunction with the full field polymer flooding with 10 producer wells, for a total of 13 producer wells was
analyzed. The number of injector wells was kept constants as well as the injection rate of 1,887 B/D/well.
As in Case 3, the simulation runs were constrained to BHP of and liquid production rate constraints to
control the total surface liquid rate (oil and water) and using the same number of injector wells as in Case 3.
The oil recovery obtained for Case 4 is shown in Table 7. Related to Case 3: the polymer flooding
process without the presence of drilling infill wells, the combined Case 4: polymer flooding in
conjunction with infill drilling, brings a significant incremental oil production of 7,170,000 bbl for the
same total polymer injected of 1,259,250 kg (Table 7).
Table 7—Polymer flooding cases comparison.

Injection Rate Polymer Injected Cumulative

Case Incremental Oil (bbl)
(B/D/well) Concentration (g/l) Polymer (Kg) Produced Oil (bbl)

Case 3 0.5 1,259,250 6.714E+07

1,887
Case 4 0.5 1,259,250 7.431E+07 7,170,000
16 SPE-194652-MS

The results for oil production rate and cumulative oil production compared to previous cases are shown
in Figs. 9 and 10.

Figure 9—Oil production rate at 1887 B/D/well comparison for

combination of infill drilling wells with full field application cases.

Figure 10—Cumulative oil production at 301,887 Bbl/d/well comparison

for combination of infill drilling wells with full field application cases.

Case 4 increased the cumulative oil up to 29.7% over the base case. Case 3 polymer flooding without
the infill drilling wells showed an increase of 17 % over the base case (Table 8).
SPE-194652-MS 17

Table 8—Comparison of the well intervention and polymer flooding (Case

3) with well intervention, polymer flooding, and infill drilling (Case 4).

Polymer Injected Cumulative Incremental Oil

Concentration (g/l) Polymer (Kg) Produced Oil (bbl) (bbl) Over Base Case

Base case 5.729E+7

Case 3 0.5 1,259,250 6.714E+07 9,850,000 (17%)
Case 4 0.5 1,259,250 7.431E+07 17,020,000 (29.7)

Table 9 summarizes the resulting number of wells for each case and the numerical simulation forecast
of incremental cumulative oil (Np). The benefit of the low-cost intervention of existing well, this is 11%
increment in the cumulative oil related to the base case can be appreciated. Higher cost solutions, such as
Cases 2 and 3, also showed incremental oil. The drainage of new areas with infill wells is of great benefit,
being the forecasted incremental oil 23%. Polymer flood increment cumulative oil by 17% related to the
base case.

Table 9—Numerical simulation forecast: summary.

Number of
Case Number of Injector Wells Injected Polymer (ton) % Incremental Np
Producer Wells

Base 4 3 –
1, Interventions 4 7 11
2, Interventions + infill drilling 4 10 23
3, Interventions + polymer 6 10 1259 17
4, Interventions + infill + polymer 6 13 1259 29.7

In terms of incremental oil production, Case 4 is the most attractive for revitalizing the Zaloni 4th sand
reservoir. Although these results are promising, the comparison of the economic benefits and the
economics risks of all the cases would be decisive for the case to be implemented in the field. This is
discussed in the following section.
Economics Analysis
Generation of Stochastic Production Forecast. Using the distributions described, random values within
each distribution are generated for all cost variables and production values. All cost variables for
operations and production as provided by the operator are assigned a random cost base, using the
provided values as the mean and the standard deviation, as specified in Table 4. Also, production values
are assigned a random value within the specified distribution as described. The parameters used to
determine the NPV in the deterministic case are replaced by the randomly generated values, and a Monte
Carlo simulation is run for each case to determine the NPV under uncertainty. Shown following are
examples of the distribution of oil production, operating cost, and daily oil production for the asset from a
Monte Carlo simulation with 5,000 iterations (Figs. 11 and 12).
18 SPE-194652-MS

Figure 11—Oil operating cost distribution.

Figure 12—Field daily oil production distribution.

Figs. 13 through 17 show the distribution of NPV results for each of the development plan scenarios.
The x-axis of each plot is the NPV USD millions, and the y-axis is the frequency in Monte Carlo
simulations of 5,000 iterations each.

Figure 13—Base case NPV.

SPE-194652-MS 19

Figure 14—Case 1, existing wells Intervention NPV.

Figure 15—Case 2, infill drilling + interventions NPV.

Figure 16—Case 3, polymer flooding + interventions NPV.

20 SPE-194652-MS

Figure 17—Case 4, infill drilling + polymer flooding + interventions NPV.

Table 10 summarizes the results of the stochastic analysis.

Table 10—Summary of economic results.

Scenario P50 NPV (USD) Risk Index (=Std. Dev./NPV)

Base case 16,879,564 0.31

Case 1: existing wells intervention 28,820,025 0.38
Case 2: infill drilling + interventions 46,969,075 0.41
Case 3: polymer flooding 32,955,318 0.40
Case 4: combined infill drilling +
interventions + polymer flooding 55,696,791 0.41

The risk index for each case is a defined as one standard deviation of the NPV distribution divided by
the mean NPV of that case. Table 10 shows that all of the cases produce a higher NPV than the base case.
However, there are large variations in NPV and risk between the cases. The lowest NPV above the bases
case is Case 1 with only slightly higher risk than the base case. Infill drilling combined with well
interventions adds greatly to the incremental NPV above the base case without increasing risk
substantially. Polymer flooding alone shows highly increased NPV above the base case, but the value is
not as high as Case 2. The highest NPV is observed in Case 4, where the incremental production above
the base case is much higher with all options combined and the increased revenue helps offset the risk
from higher variable costs over time.

Conclusions
The strategy of combining polymer flooding with existing well interventions and infill drilling maximizes
the incremental cumulative oil (by 30%), thereby resulting in the maximum added value (by 290% NPV)
to a mature waterflood. This is despite the fact that polymer flooding alone showed lower incremental
cumulative oil and NPV compared to the strategy of just increasing the injection-drainage points.
The increased injection-drainage point strategy by itself increased cumulative oil by up to +23% and
the NPV by up to +178%. This is likely because the reservoir is being kept energized by waterflooding.
Contrary to common belief, for both strategies and their combination, the incremental economic risks
are very low compared to the base case of continuing the current waterflooding scheme. It is worth
mentioning that the risk calculations considered the uncertainty in fluid production, capital-operational
costs (CAPEX-OPEX), and oil prices.
SPE-194652-MS 21

This study shows the convenience of combining the technologies of the two strategies to maximize the
benefits of revitalizing waterflooding projects. Therefore, the question of whether to intervene existing
wells, infill drill, or flood is no longer the question. Instead, the key is how these methods can be properly
combined at different stages of asset life.

Acknowledgements
The authors thank Halliburton and OIL India Limited for granting permission to publish this paper.
Comments made and support to the on-going numerical simulation work by H. Dixie, A. Das and V.
Sharma are greatly appreciated. Laboratory data provided by Solvay is acknowledged.

Nomenclature
bbl =barrels
BHP = bottom hole pressure
cP = centi-Poise
d = day
g =gram
l =liter
kPa = kilo Pascal
m3 = cubic meters
mD = mlli -Darcy
Np = cumulative oil in barrels, otherwise stated
PV =pore volume fraction
OOIP = original oil in place
CMG = Computer Modelling Group

References
Alvarado, V. and Manrique, E. 2010. Enhanced Oil Recovery: Field Planning and Development Strategies. Elsevier,
192 pp.
Lake, L., Johns R., Rossen, B. et al 2014. Fundamentals of Enhanced oil Recovery. SPE, 496 pp.
Marques J.B.D., Trevisan O.V., Marques L.M. et al 2014. Stochastic Processes and Copula Model Applied in the
Economic Evaluation for Brazilian Oil Fields Projects. Presented at the SPE Hydrocarbon Economics and
Evaluation Symposium, Houston, Texas, 19–20 May. SPE-169857-MS.
Mogollón J.L. and Lokhandwala T. 2013. Rejuvenating Viscous Oil Reservoirs by Polymer Injection: Lessons Learned
in the Field. Presented at Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2–4 July. SPE 165275-MS.
Mogollón J.L., Lokhandwala T., and Tillero E. 2017. New trends in Waterflooding Optimization. Presented at LAPEC,
Buenos Aires, Argentina. SPE-185472-MS.
Mogollón, J.L., Tillero, E., Gutiérrez, I. et al 2016. Numerical Maximization of the Secondary Polymer Flooding Value
in a Mature, Offshore, Heavy Oil Reservoir. Presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas,
USA, 2–5 May. OTC-27189-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.4043/27189-MS.
Sheng J.J. 2013. Enhance Oil Recovery Field Case Studies. Elsevier, pp 667.
Vincent, P and Schaaf, T. 2018. Reservoir and Economic Uncertainties Assessment for Recovery Strategy Selection:
Use of Stochastic Decision Trees. Presented at EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark, 11–14
June. SPE-190858-MS.
Wyatt, K., Pitts, M., and Surkalo, H. 2008. Economics of Field Proven Chemical Flooding Technologies. Presented at
the SPE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 20–23 April. SPE-113126-MS.