Ministry of Higher Education and

Scientific Research
University of Technology
Petroleum Technology Department
Scientific
Report

Condensate Reservoirs Benefits and Risks

Homam Mohammad Radhy

Alwan
3rd Stage (2019/2020) Morning
Gas Reservoirs
 1

Condensate Reservoirs Benefits and Risks

Prepared by

Homam Mohammad Radhy Alwan

28/August/2020
 2

Abstract:
The depletion of gas condensate reservoirs to pressures below the dew point has been
studied by reservoir engineers for many years. Pressure decline below the dew point
pressure causes condensation to occur which creates a hydrocarbon liquid saturation
in the reservoir. This process reduces liquid
recovery and may reduce gas productivity and gas recovery. Exxon experience,
particularly in low productivity, high-yield gas condensate fields, suggests that liquid
condensate formation can result in severe loss of well deliverability and therefore of
gas recovery. This study was undertaken to evaluate the historical frequency and
severity of productivity impairment due to near-wellbore condensate buildup and to
identify reservoir parameters associated with severe productivity and recovery
reduction.
This study of gas condensate reservoirs included a survey of Exxon and published
industry experience, a review of published laboratory data, and simulations with
single well flow models. Data from 17 fields are included in this paper to demonstrate
that severe loss of gas recovery occurs primarily in low productivity ‘reservoirs.
Production data from two wells were history matched with simple radial models to
evaluate the potential range of the critical condensate saturation (the minimum mobile
condensate saturation) and its impact on gas recovery. Published laboratory data for
gas-condensate relative permeability were used as a starting point for these
simulations.
The primary conclusion from this study is that productivity impairment results in
reductions in gas recovery for wells with a permeability-thickness below 1000 md-fl.
The history matched simulations support a range of critical condensate saturations
from 10% to 30%, in good agreement with published laboratory values.

Introduction:
Natural-gas condensate, also called natural gas liquids, is a low-density mixture
of hydrocarbon liquids that are present as gaseous components in the raw natural
gas produced from many natural gas fields. Some gas species within the raw natural
gas will condense to a liquid state if the temperature is reduced to below
the hydrocarbon dew point temperature at a set pressure.
The natural gas condensate is also called condensate, or gas condensate, or
sometimes natural gasoline because it contains hydrocarbons within the gasoline
boiling range, and is also referred to by the shortened name condy by many workers
on gas installations. Raw natural gas may come from any one of three types of gas
wells.

• Crude oil wells: Raw natural gas that comes from crude oil wells is
called associated gas. This gas can exist separate from the crude oil in the
underground formation, or be dissolved in the crude oil. Condensate produced
from oil wells is often referred to as lease condensate.
• Dry gas wells: These wells typically produce only raw natural gas that contains no
hydrocarbon liquids. Such gas is called non-associated gas. Condensate from dry
gas is extracted at gas processing plants and is often called plant condensate.[3]
 3

• Condensate wells: These wells produce raw natural gas along with natural gas
liquid. Such gas is also called associated gas and often referred to as wet gas.

The Impact of Gas-Condensate Type (Lean - Rich)

The condensate blockage was dominated by fluids flow around the wellbore that is
represented by the relative permeability curves irrelevant of the gas-condensate type
(i.e. condensate richness). Based on the amount of condensation, rich gas-condensate
was expected to have larger blockage effect due to higher liquid dropout than lean
gas-condensate. However, lean gas-condensate blockage was more severe than rich
gas-condensate because of the imposed relative permeability curves. Based on
laboratory measurement, lean gas-condensate used in this study has lower condensate
fractional flow compared to those applied for rich gas-condensate.

Composition:
There are many condensate sources, and each has its own unique gas condensate
composition. In general, gas condensate has a specific gravity ranging from 0.5 to 0.8,
and is composed of hydrocarbons such as propane, butane, pentane, and hexane.
Natural gas compounds with more than two carbon atoms exist as liquids at ambient
temperatures. Additionally, condensate may contain:

• Heavier straight-chain alkanes having from 7 to 12 carbon atoms (denoted

as C7 to C12)
• Hydrogen sulfide (H2S)
• Thiols traditionally also called mercaptans (denoted as RSH, where R is an
organic group such as methyl, ethyl, etc.)
• Carbon dioxide (CO2)
• Cyclohexane and perhaps other naphthene’s
• BTX (chemistry) (Aromatics such as benzene, toluene, xylenes,
and ethylbenzene)

Gas Condensate Relative Permeability

Testing

Is retrograde condensation going to severely impact gas production? To answer this

question, experimental testing was done using two separate core stacks, each
comprised of four core plugs of 3.81 cm in diameter. The properties of the stacks are
shown in Table 3. The stacks were prepared with the relevant water saturations and
then a baseline permeability to humidified methane was measured. The methane
permeabilities for the two stacks at Swi were 122.1 and 28.4 mD, respectively, at a
pore pressure of 62,053 kPag at 119°C (9,000 psi at 246°F). Compared to the single
phase gas permeabilities of 136.1 and 36.0 mD, this decrease in gas permeability in
the presence of water would be expected since it is thought that most of the water
would be associated with the smaller pores which contribute little to the overall
permeability of the samples. The core stack was then mounted in an oven at
reservoirtemperature with two pressure control valves (PCV): one on the injection
end and one on the production end. With the PCV in place, the pressure of the
injection fluid could be maintained above dew point pressure and the pore pressure of
 4

the core could be maintained at specific pressures in the two-phase region. Thus,
single phase fluid would enter the first valve, flash into two phases and then liquid
and gas flow into the stack. The liquid drop-out characteristics were previously
measured, and a pore pressure corresponding to 5.9% liquid drop-out of 20,684 kPag
(3,000 psi) was chosen; condensate saturation is dictated by the volume of dew point
fluid

injected into the core. The pressure of 20,684 kPag (3,000 psi) was thought to be
conservative from a bottom hole flowing pressure over the first years of the field
project. It was also thought that phase interference effects would not be expected to
be this serious for many years [reservoir pressure of 82,909 kPag (12,025 psi)].
Although there would be an initial distribution of condensate along the stack,
eventually the condensate would reach a critical saturation above which it would start
to flow. It was considered that, due to the relatively homogeneous stack, the average
critical condensate saturation (CCS) measured would be representative of the overall
stack. Once the specific volume of dew point fluid was injected, with its
corresponding volume of condensate, equilibrium gas was injected and the end-point
permeability to equilibrium gas was measured. Figure 5 shows the relative
permeability relationship for the second stack. It shows a critical condensate
saturation of about 19% at which point the gas permeability had decreased to 17% of
its original value. This Scc was considered high, but some porous media has been
reported with Scc values well in excess of this(1). Once the Scc had been attained, the
stack was then flooded with equilibrium condensate at 3,000 psi and the displacement
history-matched with a two-phase compressible relative permeability model. The
trapped gas saturation was 12.6% of the pore volume or 16.6% of the initial
hydrocarbon in place. Following the condensate saturation the equilibrium gas was
then injected at increasing rates up to a rate corresponding to field rates of 1274
E3M3 STP [45 MMscfD; wellbore of 21.6 cm (8.5 inches) and a completion interval
of 61 m (200 feet) – 309 m3/ m2-day (1,013 scf/ft2-day)]. The residual condensate
saturation to this high rate was 43.3% of the trapped gas end-point condensate
saturation. The high-rate gas permeability was Forchheimer corrected to provide a
value of 24.8 mD or a regain permeability of 87.5% of the initial Kg value. Figure 6
shows the same relationship, but at 62,053
 5

kPag (9,000 psi). Very little change was observed from the perspective of gas
permeability reduction. For the higher pressure regime, however, with only 2.2%
liquid drop out, insufficient separator liquid was available and so a synthetic liquid
was prepared. It had properties that were not representative (GOR too high, IFT too
low). This synthetic liquid resulted, when flooded into the core stack, in a high mass
transfer displacement and was not deemed as representative of hydrocarbon liquid
imbibition. Similar testing was done for the higher permeability stack. The results
from this testing are summarized as follows:

1. The high and low permeability stacks exhibited Scc values of 14 and 19%
respectively. Critical condensate saturation changed very little as a function of IFT
change from 3.4 to 0.25 mN/m (20,684 and 62,053 kPag – 3,000 and 9,000 psi). This
is not unexpected since the larger porous features are thought to govern the first
condensate mobilized and is not expected to be a strong function of IFT. Residual
condensate saturation is considered to be a strong function of IFT, although the data
measured herein were insufficient to judge conclusively (lack of available low IFT
condensate phase).

2. The gas phase permeability at critical condensate saturation (Scc) decreased by 60

and 84% for the high and low permeability stacks, respectively.

3. Trapped gas saturations were 13.5% PV for the high permeability stack at 20,684
kPag (3,000 psi) and 12.6% PV for the low permeability stack. This may appear to be
counterintuitive, but if the condensate phase is more wetting than the gas, then the
smaller porous features might exhibit a degree of spontaneous imbibition that could
reduce trapped gas more than a more permeable core. The higher pressure trapped gas
saturations were not measured since the synthetic liquid phase had excessive mass
transfer and trapped gas values were unrealistic (apparent value of 3% was
determined).
 6

4. The importance of using representative equilibrium fluids became paramount since

subtle changes in IFT could affect the displacement efficiency significantly; analogue
fluids that possess the viscosity, density and IFT characteristics of the true
equilibrium phases are very difficult to create.

Benefits:

Condensate is mostly used to make vehicle fuel, such as gasoline. It is therefore

sometimes called natural gasoline.

It can also be used to dilute heavier crude oils before they are used as a feedstock in
oil refineries.
 7

It is also used to make products like plastic in the petrochemical sector.

Before it can be used, condensate has to be stabilized by removing vapor pressure and
other elements.

Risks:
Like all fossil fuels, condensate contains toxicants which are harmful to the
environment, animals and humans.

It is generally more flammable and explosive than normal crude oil.

Operating in areas where condensate has escaped is dangerous for crew due to the
danger of explosions, oxygen displacement and the threat of asphyxiating and
anaesthetizing, which can occur within a few human breaths.

Whether escaped condensate causes an oil spill or not depends on whether it has
vaporized, burnt off, or escaped in liquid form.

When forming a spill, it is considered to be dangerous due to its toxicity and because
it is difficult to contain and manage. However, it dissipates and breaks down more
easily than heavier oils.

Discusssion:
1. What is a gas condensate reservoir?
Print. Gas condensate reservoirs are gas systems that reside in reservoirs with the
original temperatures lying between the critical temperature, TC, and the
cricondentherm.

2. Is condensate liquid or gas?

Condensate is a mixture of light liquid hydrocarbons, similar to a very light (high
API) crude oil. It is typically separated out of a natural gas stream at the point of
production (field separation) when the temperature and pressure of the gas is dropped
to atmospheric conditions.

3. How is condensate formed?

Condensate is mainly composed of propane, butane, pentane and heavier
hydrocarbon fractions. The condensate is not only generated into the reservoir, it is
also formed when liquid drops out, or condenses, from a gas stream in pipelines or
surface facilities.

4. What is condensate gas ratio?

A condensate to gas ratio (CGR) implies the ratio of gas to the condensate in
a condensate/ gas reservoir. It's measured in barrels per millions of standard cubic
feet (barrels/mmscf). CGR measures the liquid content of a
hydrocarbon mixture which at reservoir conditions is classified as gas condensate.
 8

References:

1. International Energy Glossary (a page from the website of the Energy

Information Administration)
2. ^ Natural gas processing Archived 2011-03-04 at the Wayback Machine (a
page from the website of the Energy Information Administration)
3. ^ Jump up to:a b U.S. Crude Oil Production Forecast- Analysis of Crude
Types (PDF), Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 29
May 2014, p. 7, A final point to consider involves the distinction between the
very light grades of lease condensate (which are included in EIA's oil
production data) and hydrocarbon gas liquids (HGL) that are produced from
the wellhead as gas but are converted to liquids when separated from
methane at a natural gas processing plant. These hydrocarbons include
ethane, propane, butanes, and hydrocarbons with five or more carbon atoms
– referred to as pentanes plus, naptha, or plant condensate. Plant condensate
can also be blended with crude oil, which would change both the distribution
and total volume of oil received by refineries.

4. Ahmed, T. (2006). Reservoir Engineering Handbook (Vol. Third Edition).

Elsevier.

5. CHEN, H.L., WILSON, S.D. and MONGER-MCCLURE, T.G.,

Determination of Relative Permeability and Recovery for North Sea
Gas-Condensate Reservoirs; SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, Vol.
2, No. 4, pp. 393-402, August 1999