You are on page 1of 13

SPE-187858-MS

EOR Miscible Gas Project in Oil-Gas Condensate Field

Nikolay Glavnov, Vitaly Kuntsevich, Maiia Vershinina, Artem Penigin, Ruslan Badgutdinov, and Igor Perevozkin,
LLC Gazpromneft Science and Technological Center; Dmitrii Bazhenov, Aleksey Shorokhov, and Ilnar Garipov, LLC
Gazpromneft-Yamal; Oleg Ushmaev, LLC Gazpromneft-Development

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference held in Moscow, Russia, 16-18 October 2017.

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 development of oil rims is usually accompanied by the production of a significant amount of associated
gas. It is often a positive monetization through sale or generation of electricity, due to the remoteness of
oil fields and/or consumers.
This work provides experience in carrying out a technological assessment of the implementation of the
miscible displacement in the oil rims by rich gas, with the simultaneous injection of dry gas in the gas cap
for one multizone oil field of Western Siberia.
The oil rims in the field are presented by the rims of the edge and the underlying type. The producing gas
in the field is reasonably dry, with about 10% of the molar C2-C4 concentration, which prevents miscibility of
gas and oil in the reservoir. In the comprehensive preparation of gas, there is a technology for the allocation
of the intermediate group of C2-C4 and C1 methane, which allows the further gas to be obtained by another
gas composition that satisfies the pressures and temperatures conditions of the reservoir.
The base field development plan of oil rims includes the gas return to the gas cap of the reservoir of the
total amount of gas produced. This development strategy to increase the level of oil production is achieved
only at the expense of maintaining the reservoir pressure. More oil can be obtained through the organization
of miscible displacement by rims, by increasing the proportion of mobile oil in the reservoir (reduction of
residual oil saturation) and reduce oil viscosity.
Increased detail calculations of phase and component behavior in the reservoir when changing pressure
and component concentration fields was achieved by performing compositional simulation, the major task
of which is to correct the forecast performance for oil and gas with optimization and selection of an effective
strategy for gas cycling-process in the field.
The article describes the basic steps to build and configure compositional model, assess the effectiveness
of implementation miscible displacement and its infrastructure constraints based optimization, as well as the
results of the comparison of accounts with similar projects worldwide. Based on the performed calculations
identified potential to increase oil recovery and improve the effectiveness of field development.
2 SPE-187858-MS

Introduction
Increased efficiency in the use of associated produced gas (APG) with total deposits can be achieved in
different ways: monetization, generation of electricity, organization of gas lift mode of production, chemical
transformation and gas re-injection. Only the latter method gives you the ability to enhance the production of
liquid hydrocarbons. Gas cap injection provides this increase only due to changes in the reservoir pressure,
gas injection with the miscible displacement in the oil rims region allows further increase oil recovery.
The positive efficiency technology (hydrocarbon gas injection in miscible displacement mode) proved
as laboratory investigation (Petrakov, 2013), and full-scale technology implementations in the fields (Lief
Hinderaker, 2010; Bharat Jhaveri, 2014).
Actually made an additional increase of oil recovery factor (RF) by miscible displacement varies from
a few points to 20-30%. To achieve high performance indicators in addition to favourable geologic and
physical reservoir properties and optimal strategies need large amounts of injection of hydrocarbon gas at
reservoir conditions.
Often the composition of produced gas with total field not allows to organize miscible displacement at
any of the reservoir without additional enrichment of its parts C2-C4, which in turn reduces the potential
volume of gas injection.
With the limited resources of the rich gas, the project team has arrival questions about the choice of the
injection facility, the optimization of the composition of the injected gas in terms of increasing the cost-
effectiveness of the technology.

Problem statement
The field is located in the north of the Yamal Peninsula, a region with a poor infrastructure. The industrial
development of the field has been under way since 2016.
In the geological cross section, there are 20 development zones, 5 of which are in the main, containing
90 per cent of the initial recoverable oil reserves. Oil deposits are represented by the rims of the edge and
the underlying type with the massive gas caps.
The total volume extracted APG consists of dissolved and breakthrough cap gas. Composition of the
gas was studied in 9 samples, according to the results of quantitative chemical analysis the content of C2-
C4 component depending on reservoir pressure changes and the development object, are as follows: in
breakthrough cap gas 5-7%; dissolved gas 8-21%.
Within the framework of the project decision on the efficient use of APG strategy is planned to be
injected in the gas caps of the reservoirs, which is used to maintain the reservoir pressure and increase the
oil production level of the wells in the oil rims (Figure 1).
SPE-187858-MS 3

Figure 1—The concept of APG treatment and injection

The heavy components of C2-C4 (rich) are also present in the prepared gas, this presence has beneficial
influences on the dissolving of gas in the oil under the reservoir conditions and with little modification of
the integrated gas production system (dashed line, Figure 1) can be allocated to a separate stream.
In the process of field development there are changing as the actual gas factor from 300 to 3 000 m3/t
(the average is 1 200 m3 to 1 ton of produced oil), and the composition of the produced gas, namely change
the C2-C4 volume content (predicted from 5.5% to 6.2%). Taking into account the ongoing assessment of
gas production profile at peak 8.3 billion m3/year and accumulated over 10 years of production – 62 billion
m3 can conclude that the C2-C4 volumes will not be enough to upload organization in all objects, or even
to cover a single object as a whole.
Another important point is the technological capabilities of gas treatment unit (GTU), which allows for
16-24 per cent of the total volume of C2-C4 to be extracted, which is relatively small for the realization of
miscible injection pure C2-C4.
To overcome this restriction, there are two ways: the first is the increase in upload agent by combining
flows of C2-C4 with a certain amount of methane in the proportions that allows not to lose condition
miscibility, and the second is the optimal zone in the context the lowest specific consumption of gas per unit
of additional oil production (ratio of total gas injection volume and total volume of enhanced oil production).
When selecting potential reservoirs for gas injection, all five major development objects were considered
for several criterias: (1) potential geological volumes for impact, (2) Displacement efficiency, and (3) a
project strategy for the impact on the reservoir (gas and water injection).
The first criterion is determined by the net thickness of the oil rim, the permeability, the residual oil
saturation (by water/gas) and the well spacing of the real or project scheme. All these parameters determine
the hydrocarbon pore volume used after the stage of depletion or flooding.
The second criterion relates to the heterogeneity of the threshold space and the extent of the reservoir
in the section. The high homogeneity of the reservoir makes it possible to achieve a uniform front of
4 SPE-187858-MS

displacement profile, thereby increasing the sweep efficiency and RF. The Dykstra-Parsons and average
number of permeable intervals were used to describe and digitize heterogeneity parameters.
The project Impact strategy (as third criteria) determines whether can be organized to implement a water
impact, thus increasing the impact of technology on fixed gas resources and potentially increasing the
efficiency of the technology.
The parameters reviewed were collected in table 1. As a result of the analysis of all parameters in the
aggregate, Reservoirs II, IV, which are characterized by the maximum homogeneity of the permeability
among the objects, have been identified as the best candidates for gas injection. Reservoir V has also been
identified for further detailed development because of the possibility of implementing a water-alternating-
gas injection as result higher displacement efficiency.

Table 1—Design parameters of objects

Task Solution
Depending on the type of hydrocarbon (HC) system in the reservoir, as well as the modelled methods for
increasing the recovery, use either compositional modelling for systems and processes with the expressed
flow of phase transitions, or a model of "black oil", with predominantly two-phase filtration. In our case,
this is a process of miscible displacement, accompanied by the active redistribution of components between
the filtration agents and the fluid saturating pore, so the simulation was performed in a composite simulator.
Important factor in carrying out numerical calculations is their speed, depending on the amount of HC
component, for each of which there is a solution to Equations of State and mass transfer.
In order to optimize the time spent for reservoir systems II, IV and V was grouped in 5, 4, and 5, of
the component respectively. The groupings took into account the properties of the gas component with oil.
Gas component for oils IV and V has two components: the first C1+ includes CH4 and N2, poorly soluble in
oil, the second C2+ (C2H6-C4H10) and CO2, increase of injection agent which reduces the minimum miscible
pressure (MMP). For oil II in a separate component is selected CO2. The composition of the reservoir oil
is shown in table 2.
SPE-187858-MS 5

Table 2—The Oil compositions

It is known that the accuracy of the modeling of physical processes that occur when fluid filtration in
porous rock, is primarily dependent on the correctness of set properties of hydrocarbon system. Therefore,
it is necessary to match HC model system for laboratory studies. The basis for the adaptation of the phase
behavior of model systems were laid out the results of the experiments of saturation pressure, oil properties in
reservoir conditions, data differential vaporization and constant composition expansion test. Configuration
results are shown in table 3.

Table 3—The result of matching PVT models to experiment data

The success of miscible displacement is determined by the MMP which depending depending on oil and
injection gas composition. A necessary condition of mixing is exceeding the current reservoir pressure over
MMP. The most common and accurate method for its determination is a laboratory test on the model in
stainless steel tubing of small diameter 8-10 mm and considerable length 10-15 m in 4-5 different values
of pressure (A. Polishchuk, 2014). During the experiment dependence of oil recovery factor of pressure
is measured when injected 1.2 pore volume of the tube. The minimum miscible pressure is defined at the
inflection point of the graph and the outlet to the flange. By conducting this experiment, the laboratory
means the optimum composition of injection gas and the conditions for the implementation of the injection
process.
The laboratory studies on the definition of MMP for the reservoir oils II, IV and V with gas of various
trains were not carried out at the time of writing. In order to determine the optimum composition of
injected gas, providing miscibility in the reservoir conditions of the objects in question, a one-dimensional
compositional simulation model was used, as detailed in the article (Mogbo O., 2011). The method consists
of a numerical replay of the laboratory study. The model is a grid of 200 cells of size 0.05m of high
6 SPE-187858-MS

permeability 100md sufficient to ensure continuity and minimize the loss of pressure in the cell when gas
is being injected.
The associated petroleum gas composition was used as base point which is obtained according to the
results of the experiment, with the terms of the relevant field. Variation of composition of produced gas a
towards the enrichment of its intermediate HC components group of C2H6 is C4H10 + CO2 were estimated.
Determined by the results of modeling the dependence of oil recovery factor from the component
concentration C1+ in injection gas when 1.2 pore volume is pumped at a pressure equal to the reservoir one.
Figure 2 shows the obtained dependences RF and MMP by C1+ concentration in gas for oils reservoir
II, IV and V.

Figure 2—Dependence of RF (at initial reservoir pressure) and MMP from the composition of the injected gas.

Based on the results of the analysis of the obtained relationships optimal content of methane in the agent
is in the range of 50-60%, considering that the implementation of the gas injection is planned after operation
on the mode of depletion, for further calculations, the composition was adopted with a concentration equal
to C1+ 50%.

Sector compositional simulation model calculations


Following principles were used to select sectors of reservoirs for calculations:

• shortest distance from the gas processing unit to a well cluster,

• highest thickness and width of oil rim.


SPE-187858-MS 7

Figure 3 shows the boundaries of sectors of II, IV and V reservoirs, location of producing horizontal
wells and oil and gas boundary contours.

Figure 3—Structural map of sectors of II, IV and V reservoirs with well locations: a) II reservoir b) IV reservoir c) V reservoir

Sector simulation models were created from last current full-scale model by substitution of black oil PVT
properties by compositional ones and cutting off outside required boundary. Number of blocks varies from
100 to 800 thousand. Preliminary computations of all sectors have shown good convergence with black oil
and composite PVT and average computation time for 10 years period is 30 minutes.
Given that horizontal wells are drilled along the edge of rim, firstly it was necessary to determine the
well with which to begin the injection of gas in a miscible regime into the reservoir:
1. into a well nearest to GOC (Well_4 of reservoir II) in order to make it a gas injector after significant
increase in gas production and related infrastructure overloading;
2. into a well nearest to OWC (Well_1 of reservoir II) in order to increase sweep efficiency injecting
gas into deeper part of a reservoir and to reduce residual oil saturation in the area of water-oil contact
uplifting.
To find required solution, calculations of two options considered and of base depletion case were
performed on the sector compositional model of reservoir II (all produced gas is pumped into the gas cap,
therefore impact on the sector is minimal). The injectivity of the well was determined to be 1.0 million m3 /
day, gas composition was set as 50% C1 + and 50% C2 +.
For the sake of verification of miscible displacement process, the change in block oil saturation was
monitored. Figure 5 shows cross-sections of the oil saturation grid for two moments with 2 years difference.
Well1 is an injector and oil saturation around it falls to 0, that proves complete miscibility of oil and gas
(the model has not limits on minimum oil saturation in miscible gas displacement process).
8 SPE-187858-MS

Figure 4—Cross-section grid of oil saturation: a) gas injection start b) 2 years after start

Figure 5—Reservoir II simulation results: a) additional oil production, thousand


tons.; b) additional gas production, millions.m3; c) specific gas rate, m3/ton

Results of calculations such as additional (relative to the base case) oil production, gas and specific gas
flow rates are shown in Figure 5. The maximum additional oil production with minimum gas injection is
provided by injecting gas into the well located closer to GOC, which is explained by changing mode of well
with minimal oil production to injection, as evidenced by oil production growth straight from the first year
after start, as opposite to option with Well_1, leading to decrease in oil production by 180 thousand tons.
On the one hand, the curves for additional oil and gas production for both options are parallel (at
least during first 4-5 years, Figure 5a), which proves equality of displacement efficiency. On the other
hand, dynamics of specific gas consumption (cumulative gas injection divided by cumulative additional oil
production) has a significant discrepancy: growing when well Well4 is injector and falling when Well_1
is injector (Figure 5c).
The break of additional gas production curve while injecting in Well_4 (Figure 5b) is explained by shut-
off of producing Well_3 by 5 000 m3/ton GOR limit.
Obviously, part of the positive effect on oil production is achieved by maintaining reservoir pressure in
production wells zone, so another option was also calculated with injection of pure methane into Well4.
Methane is not miscible under current thermobaric conditions with oil (Figure 2) and will be distributed in
the formation as free gas phase, only maintaining reservoir pressure.
SPE-187858-MS 9

Additional oil production for this injection strategy was 268 thousand tons. Low additional gas production
values are explained by shut-off of two production wells Well_3, Well_2 by GOR limit of 5,000 m3/ton.
Specific gas consumption increased 5 to 6 times on the average.
Thus, for reservoir II, the best option (strategy) for gas injection in oil rim is preliminarily obtained
- injection in a well nearest to GOC. That provides a total increase in oil production by +698 thousand
tons (+0.071 RF), 430 thousand of which (+0,043 RF) are accounted for miscible displacement. Another
important factor that strengthens the correctness of the option is flexibility in redistribution of excess gas
production inside infrastructure.
Development strategy of IV and V reservoirs assumes waterflooding with injection into wells Well_12
and Well_22, respectively. Hence, design options for gas injection have been modified to combine gas and
water injection:
1. into a well nearest to GOC (Well_13 and Well_24);
2. in water injection wells (Well_12 and Well_12), using water-alternating gas (WAG) method, with 1:1
gas-water ratio and increment reservoir volume injection of 5% of pore volume.
The use of WAG is justified by efforts to increase vertical sweep efficiency deteriorated by high
heterogeneity of reservoirs (Table 1, reservoir V - Dykstra-Parsons coefficient is 0.82).
Due to the limited available volume of C2 + and the poor filtration properties of IV and V reservoirs
(relatively to reservoir II), the injectivity in considered options was taken equal to 500 thousand m3/day. The
results are shown in Figures 6 and 7. As expected, miscibility displacement efficiency in reservoir V object
was the lowest. That is explained by significant lithological heterogeneity and variation of flow capacity
coupled with high reservoir thickness (low permeable interlayers remain upswept during displacement
process).

Figure 6—Reservoir IV simulation results: a) additional oil production, thousand


tons.; b) additional gas production, millions.m3; c) specific gas rate, m3/ton
10 SPE-187858-MS

Figure 7—Reservoir V simulation results: a) additional oil production, thousand


tons.; b) additional gas production, millions.m3; c) specific gas rate, m3/ton

Use of WAG allows to reduce specific gas consumption by 2-2.5 times, which makes possible to
proportionally increase the area of technology application and, therefore, increase total oil production of
the whole field.
Another important feature that can increase potential production and should be taken into account in
full-scale modeling is accounting of additional gas produced in gas injection volume i.e. modeling a full
recycling process.

Full composition simulation object for gas injection


To make a proper compositional simulation model which will be consistent with historical data the most
probable geological realization, including structure geometry and faults, net-to-gross ratio and porosity,
were taken. Subsequently, reservoir properties, such as critical and minimum water, oil and gas saturations
and others were calculated inside the model through relationships with porosity and permeability obtained
from core samples analysis.
Oil-water and gas-oil relative permeabilities (figure 8) were incorporated in the model along with
previously described compositional PVT model matched with subsurface samples of oil and free gas.

Figure 8—Relative permeabilities: a) oil-water; b) oil-gas

In order to ensure meaningful calculation results it was necessary to perform history matching. Results
of the process is presented in figure 9.
SPE-187858-MS 11

Figure 9—History matching result

Model dimension is 238x458x133, 11% of them are active, average calculation time of a full model with
24 threads CPU is 10 hours.
Injection into the reservoir is performed by injecting methane into the gas cap and injecting an enriched
mixture of the formed fraction of 50% C1+ and 50% C2+ in oil rim. A schematic diagram of injected gas
generation is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10—Order of injection

According to net map of reserves, a part of the reservoir containing the largest oil reserves, developed
by two sets of horizontal wells, was selected. The wells that are closest to the gas cap will be shut by high
GOR by the time the project starts and obviously are candidates for gas injection. The injection into the
wells takes place in turn, the optimal order is shown in Figure 10.
Cumulative additional oil production for 10 years is 2.27 million tons and and its profile comparing with
base one are shown in figure 11. It is worth noting that the main effect of technology implementation is 2-5
years after the start of gas injection.
12 SPE-187858-MS

Figure 11—Additional oil production

The volume of gas production is also increasing, first, through increased oil production and, secondly,
by a breakthrough in gas after the oil shaft. Figure 12 shows the difference in capacity for injection gas with
and excluding the amount of gas production in the injection area (i.e. potential volumes of recycling). At
this site, the increase in the volume of injection gas (the required composition) was 2.0-2.5 times which
significantly increases the possible area for the implementation of technology.

Figure 12—depicts the difference between injection with recycling and without it.

The total specific gas rate at the end of the 10-year period was about 3,000 m3/ton, which is higher than
the average of the analogues.

Recommendations for further steps of the study


The full simulation is based on the amount of gas production from the entire field, and more specifically
on the potential amounts of C2+ fraction. Thus, in order to improve the accuracy of the prediction, it is
necessary to increase the number of gas samples in order to clarify its composition at different time intervals.
SPE-187858-MS 13

Additionally, time should be given to assess the risk of not achieving the project profile of the gas production
as a result of the redistribution of drilling volumes from one site to another.
Implementation of miscible injection for a specific gas composition based on correlation and numerical
simulation of oil displacement process by gas in thin tube, but only the holding of specialized laboratory
tests can confirm or deny the assumptions taken into account.
Major capital expenditures to implement technology in current field already included in expenses on other
ongoing projects in the field, but it was necessary to undertake a clarification of the cost of modernization
GTU and the high pressure lines to injection wells, which in the end will do a full assessment of the economic
viability of the technology.

Conclusions
On the basis of available PVT and geological information and developed criterias held primary ranking of
objects for use of technology in the areas of oil rims by miscible displacement. Of 20 reservoirs for modeling
three most potential were selected for further assessment
Based on numerical modelling of a laboratory study on the determination of minimum miscible pressure,
the optimum injection gas composition has been determined; the maximum concentration of C1+ should not
exceed 50%.
With the use of sector simulation models, a multivariant calculation has been made for choosing the
best injection strategy and then ranking the development objects for full-scale modelling. The injection of
gas into the nearest well to the GOC on the res-II indicates better efficiency in the implementation of the
technology.
The results of the full-scale simulation confirm the need for integrating recycling volumes of gas in total
deposits level injection to increase forecasting accuracy and underestimating the technology at an early
stage of its development. The proposed strategy for gas injection allows you to increase the accumulated
oil at 2.3MMtons. With an average flow rate is 3000 m3/ton slightly higher than the average for ongoing
projects in the world.

References
Bharat Jhaveri and James Brodle, Pinggang Zhang. 2014. Review of BP's Global Gas Injection Projects. Papers
SPE-171780 presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 10-13
November. SPE-171780-MS.
Lief Hinderaker and Sreinar Njaa. 2010. Utilization of associated Petroleum Gas (APG)-the Norwegian Experience.
Papers SPE-136316 presented at the Russian Oil & Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition, Moscow, 26-28 October.
SPE-136316.
Mogbo O. 2011. CO2 EOR sequestration in a depleted gas condensate reservoir: UKNS case study, Papers SPE-150752
presented at …, SPE-150752.
Petrakov A.M., Egorov Y.A., Nenartovich T.L. 2013. Eksperimentalnoe issledovanie protsessa vyitesneniya nefti pri
zakachke gaza v plast. Neftyanoe hozyaystvo 8: 24–26. (in Russian)
Polischuk A.M., Hlebnikov V.N., Gubanov V.B. 2014. Ispolzovanie slim-modeley plasta (slim-tube) dlya fizicheskogo
modelirovaniya protsessov vyitesneniya nefti smeshivayuschimisya agentami. Neftepromyislovoe delo 5: str. 19. (in
Russian)