— HAP TER OQ Gas Lift 19-1 INTRODUCTION In Chapter 8 the relationship between tubing and inflow performance led to the well deliverability. If the bottomhole flowing pressure is smaller than the tubing pressure differ- cence caused by a fluid with a given flowing gradient, then gas lift may be employed, Gas lift is one method of artificial lift. The other is mechanical lift, and it will be discussed in Chapter20. For gas lift, gasis injected continuously or intermittently at selected location(s), resulting in a reduction in the natural fowing gradient of the reservoir fluid, and thus reducing the hydrostatic component of the pressure difference from the bottom to the top of the well. ‘The purpose is to bring the fluids to the top at a desirable wellhead pressure while keeping the bottomhole pressure at a value that is small enough to provide good driving force in the reservoir, This pressure drawdown must not violate restrictions for sand control and water or gas coning. ‘Two other considerations must enter the design. First, large amounts of gas injected {nto the well will affect the separation facilities at the top. Second, there exists a limit gas— Tiquid ratio GLR) above which the pressure difference in the well will begin to increase ‘because the reduction in the hydrostatic pressure will be offset by the increase in the friction pressure, Figure 19-1 is a schematic of a typical gas-lft system showing the well, a blowup of a gas-lift valve, and the associated surface process equipment, The positioning of the gas-lift valves and their number is a matter of wellbore hy- 1500) of GLR, the gradient can usually be considered as largely constant for common well depths (~ 10,000 ft). For intermediate values, dp/dz is not constant but, instead, is a function of depth. ‘Suppose that the natural GLR (subscripted 1) would result in a pressure traverse requiring an unacceptably large py. Then, for a more desirable pus, gas at arate q, would lead to a higher GLR (subscripted 2). If the rate is qr, then q(GLRz — GLRi) = gy (9-3) EXAMPLE 19-1 Calculation of required GLR and gas-lift rate Suppose the weil descritied in Example 7-10 (with qo=400 STB/d and q.=400 STB/d) is in a reservoir where H=8000 ft and GLR=300 SCF/STB. If the indicated bottomhole pressure is 1500 psi, what should be the working GLR, and how much gas should be injected atthe bottom ‘of the well? Would it be possible to inject (instead) at 4000 ft and still produce the same liquid rates? What would be the GLR above this alternative injection point? Solution At8000 tand GLR=300SCF/STB (see Fig. 7-16), the required flowing bottomhole pressure would be 1900 psi. Since the indicated pressure is 1500 psi, then (again from Fig. 7-16) the required GLR would be 450 SCF/STB. Therefore, from Eq, (19-3), gg = 800(450 ~ 300) = 1.2 x 10° SCF/d (19-4) Now for the alternative option. From Eq. (19-2) it can be written that 100 + (2) 44000 + 4000(0.3) = 1500 9-5) where 0.3 is the pressure gradient for the GLR=300 SCF/STB curve (from Fig. 7-16) between depths of 4000 and 8000 fi. (dp/dz). should be the pressure gradient above the injection point. Solution of Eq. (19-5) results in (dp/dz),=0.05 psifft, which is not possible as shown in Fig. 7-16. No fluid in this well can provide such a low flowing gradient. In addition to the526 Gas Lift Chap. 19 antficial GLR, two other variables must be reconciled—the possible gas injection pressure and the required compressor power demand, which is a function of both the gas injection rate and. pressure. These will be outlined below. ° 19-3 PRESSURE OF INJECTED GAS From the mechanical energy balance [Eq, (7-15)], ignoring changes in kinetic energy and the friction pressure drop in the casing (i.e, relatively small gas flow rates) and changing into oilfield units, a dp 1 f[ —+ dH=0 19-6) Leal we From the real-gas law, 28.97yp = DRT (19-7) where y is the gas gravity to air and 28.97 is the molecular weight of air. The gas constant Ris equal to 10.73 psi ft*/b-mole-°R. The temperature is in °R. Substitution of Eq. (19-7) into Eq. (19-6) and integration (using average values of Z and 7) results in Pry = Pant e075 HF (19-8) EXAMPLE 19-2 Injection-point pressure If gas of y=0.7 (10 ait) is injected at 8000 ft and if pyye=900 psi, T= 80°F and Tay=160°R, calculate the pressure at the injection point, pj. Solution Tuial and error is requited for this calculation. Assume that piy=1100 psi. From ‘Chapter 4 Fig. 42), pp.=668 psi and 7>-=390°R and therefore _ (900+ 1100/2 7 Por = SE 5 (19-9) and (80+ 160)/2 +460 = EO aL 7 Te = 49 (19-10) From Fig. 4-1, 2=0.86 and therefore Pj = 9006 90S RODO8ONSE — 1119 ogi (19-11 which agrees well with the assumed value. ° 19-3.1. Point of Gas Injection If Eq, (19-8) is expanded as a Taylor series and if common fluid properties for a natural gas and reservoir are considered such as y=0.7, Fini Pini % Putt ( + ai) (19-12)Soc. 19-3 Pressure of Injected Gas 527 where the pressures are in psi and Hiq is in feet. This relationship was offered first by Gilbert (1954). In current practice this type of approximation is usually not necessary, since the actual downhole injection pressure can be calculated readily with a simple computer program that considers the actual annulus geometry and accounts for both friction and hydrostatic pressure components. Equation (19-12), though, can be useful for first design approximations. The pi in the production tubing must be reduced by an additional 100 to 150 psi for the pressure drop across the gas-lift valve. The value of this pressure drop will be supplied by the manufacturer, The point of gas injection, Hiyj, would create two zones in the well: one below, with a flowing pressure gradient (dp/dz),, and one above, with a flowing pressure gradient (dp{dz)q. Thus, ‘dy ‘dj Pos = pap + Hj (), +(H = Hj) (2), (19.13) It should be obvious that the downhole gas injection pressure, pig, and the pressure within the tubing must be balanced for gas to enter the tubing at the injection point, Figure 19-2 shows the concept of continuous gas lift in terms of the pressure values, pressure gradients, well depth, and depth of injection. With the available flowing bottomhole Pressure and the natural flowing gradient (dp/dz),, the reservoir fluids would ascend only to the point indicated by the projection of the pressure profile in the well. This would leave partially filled wellbore. Addition of gas at the injection point would lead to a marked alteration of the pressure gradient (dp/dz),, which would lift the fluids to the surface. The higher the required wellhead pressure, the lower the flowing gradient should be. Also marked on Fig. 19-2 is the balance point, that is, the position in the tubing where the downhole pressure of the injected gas is equal tothe pressure in the tubing. This pressure is related to the surface pressure as shown by Eq, (19-8) of its approximation, Eq, (19-12). The actual point of injection is placed a few hundred feet higher to account for the pressure drop across the gas lift value, Apyaive. EXAMPLE 19-3 Relating gas injection pressure, point of injection, and well flow rate ‘Suppose that the well at a depth of 8000 ft and a GLR=300 SCF/STB (as in Example 19-1) drains a reservoir with an IPR given by 1 = 0399 ~ poy) (19-14) ‘What should be the surface gas injection pressure if the gas-lift valve is at the bottom of the Well and Pi — APrave = Pur=1000 psi? [The average reservoir pressure, pi, is 3050 psi for 4:=800 STB/A, as can be calculated readily from Eq. (19-14,)] ‘What shouid be the point of gas injection for a production rate of 500 STB/d? Figure 19-3 is the tubing performance curve for q)=500 STB/d with 50% water and 50% oil. Note from Fig. 19-3 that (dp/d2)4=0.33 psift for GLR=300 SCF/STB between 4 =5000 and 8000 ft. Use ADaie™=100 psi.AN Balance Point Pinj Pressure —> Poe Figure 19-2 ‘Continuous gas it with pressures and pressure gradients versus depth, 8000 40,000, c= 10 (1+ ) = 915 psi (19-15) For qi=500 STB/d, then from the IPR relationship (Eq. (19-14)], 500 Po = 3050 = 1770 psi (19-16) ‘The injection point must be where the pressure between the injected gas and the pressure in the production string must be balanced, Thus, Ha _ . 7 sis (: + abs) 100 = 1770 — 0.33(8000 ~ Ha) (19-17) and therefore Hiq=5490 f Finally, the pig at Hig is 5490 Pj = 915 (++ dia) * 00 (19-18) Inside the tubing the pressure is 940 psi, since AP, ‘The intersect between p=940 psi and Haj=5490 is at GLR=340 SCFISTB (see Fig. 19-4), Therefore the gas injection from Eq. (19-3) would be gy = 2.x 10* SCF. °Sec. 19-4 Power Requirements for Gas Compressors Pressure [psi © 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 {50 % Oil - 50 % Water) Tubing size : 2.5 in, LD. Producion rote : 500 bbl/doy Average Flowing Temp, : 40°F GIR : 0 -1000 fin steps of 100} Depth [ft] Figure 19-3 Gradient curves For 42500 STB/d (Example 19-3). 19-4 Power REQUIREMENTS FOR GAS COMPRESSORS ‘The horsepower requirements can be estimated from the following equation: 02 HHP = 2.23 x 10g, [(@) | (19-19)530 Gas Lift Chap. 19 Pressure [psi] (50 % Oil - 50 % Wotes Tubing size : 2.5 i, 1. Production rote: 500 bbI/day ‘Average Flowing Temp. : 140*F GAR : 0 -1000 {in siops of 100} Depth [f] 8000 9000 10000 t Figure 19-4 Point of ges injection. nersection of gas injection pressure with gradient curves (Ex- ample 19-3). ‘where pig is the intet compressor pressure, Thus fora given gas injection rate in a well and the surface pressure, the calculated horsepower would be an important variable in gas-lift optimization design. ”Sec. 19-5 Increase of Gas Injection Rate; Sustaining of Oll Rate 531 EXAMPLE 19-4 Caleulation of gas-lift compressor horsepower ee ‘Suppose that the gas injection rate is 1.2 x 10° SCF/d, prut is 1330 psi, and the compressor inlet pressure, pie, is 100 psi, Calculate the horsepower requirements. , Solution From Eq. (19-19), a 1330\"7 HHP = 2.23 x 10-4(1.2 x 10°) 700 — 1) = 18.4hhp (19-20) ° 1965 IMPACT OF INCREASE OF GAS INJECTION RATE; SUSTAINING OF OIL RATE WITH RESERVOIR PRESSURE DECLINE Figure 19-4 can be used to investigate the effect of increasing the gas injection rate, and therefore increasing the GLR in the wellbore. First, increasing the gas injection rate allows the injection at a lower point in the tubing without increasing the injection pressure. From Eq. (19-13), as Hiqj increases {with the associated smaller (dp/dz)q] and since (dp/dz)y remains constant within a smaller interval H — Hix, then pus Will necessarily decrease. Therefore larger oil production rates are likely to be achieved with higher GLR and a lower injection point. Similarly, to sustaina production rate while the reservoir pressure depletes, the flowing bottomhole pressure must be lowered. This can be accomplished by lowering the injection point and by increasing the gas injection rate. This has a limit, and it will be addressed in the next section, EXAMPLE 19-5 Effect of injection rate and injection point on the flowing bottomhole pressure Assuming that Fig. 19-4 represents a gas-lift graph, calculate the flowing bottomhole pressure at 8000 ft for the injection points described by the intersection of the gas injection curve and the pressure traverse curves for GLR values equal 10 500, 600, and 700 SCF/STB, respectively. ‘The flowing gradient below the injection point is 0.33 psifft (GLR=300 SCF/STB), Solution From Fig. 19-4, the wellhead pressure is 100 psi. Also, the following table can be constructed from the intersection ofthe gas and pressure traverse curves: GLA Injection Point Pressure at Injection Point 500 250 960 psi 600 6800 970 psi 700 7050 975 psi532 Gas Litt Chap. 19 ‘The pressures atthe injection points shown above are obtained from Eq. (19-12) using Poet=915 psi and subtracting 100 psi across the gas-lift valve, Therefore the bottomhole pressure can be calculated readily by rar = pa t= th (2) asa ey where pi is the pressure at the injection point. Substituting the values for pj and the corresponding Hig results in pay equal to 1538, 1366, and 1288 psi, for GLRs equal to $00, 600, and 700 SCF/STB, respectively. Assuming thar Fig. 19-4 cesetes approximately the pressre traverse of fw rates lager than 500 ‘STB/4, these lower bottomhole pressures would lead to larger oil production rates. If Eq, (19-14) in Example 19-3 describes the IPR for this well, then the lower bottomhole pressures (using p=3050 psi as in Example 19-3) would result in g, equal to 590, 657, and 687 STB/d, respectively, ° EXAMPLE 19-6 Sustaining « produc Repeat Example 19-3 withthe IPR described by Eq, (19-14). Where should the injection point be after the reservoir pressure drops by 500 psi? What should be the gas injection rate to sustain «liquid production rate equal to 500 STB/d? Use Fig. 19-4 and the data of Example 19-5 for the analysis rate whi the reservoir pressure depletes Solution From Eq, (19-14) and rearrangement if =2550 psi (500 psi less than the original 3050 psi) 500 Poy = 2550 ~ 7 = 1268 psi (19-22) ‘The injection point must then be obtained from the solution of o( leading to Hig#7120 ft From Fig, 19-4 at Hiy=7120 ft and (calculated) piq=980 psi, the GLR must be equal to 750 SCF/STB. Finally, the gas injection rate is 4% = (750 ~ 300)500 = 2.25 x 10° SCRA 19-24) ‘This injection rate is more than 10 times the gas injection rate calculated in Example 19-3, which would be tequired at the reservoir pressure of 3050 psi. The injection point is a0 deeper: from 5490 to 7120 ft. s) ~ 100 = 1268 - 0.33(8000 — Hig) (19-23) 19-6 MAaxiMUM PRODUCTION RATE WITH Gas LIFT As stated in the introduction to this chapter, there exists a limit value of GLR re- ferred to here as “limit” (Golan and Whitson, 1991, have referred to it as “favorable”) GLR, where the flowing pressure gradient is minimum, For GLR values that are larger than theSec. 19-6 Maximum Production Rate With Gas Lift 533 minimum, the flowing gradient begins to increase. As discussed already, the well flowing pressure gradient is a combination of the hydrostatic pressure head and the friction pressure drop. While increase of the GLR from small values would result in fluid density reduction with modest friction pressures, continued GLR increase would lead to a disproportionate increase in the friction pressure. Thus the limit GLR is that value at which the increase in friction pressure will offset the decrease in the hydrostatic pressure. Figure 19-5 represents pressure traverse calculations for a specific liquid production rate (q;=800 STB/d) in a given tubing size, The values of the GLR have been selected to be large enough to observe the behavior reversal at the limit GLR value. For this example, the limit GLR is approximately equal to 4000 SCF/STB. Pressure [psi] 0 20 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Beenie Tubing size : 2.5 in, 1D, Prodveson vale = 800 bbI/day ‘Average Flowing Temp, : 10°F [| [150% 08-509 wou | T Depth [fh] Figure 19-5 Large GLR values and limit GLR for g=800 STB/A.534 Gag Lift) Chap. 19 ‘The limit GLR increases as the production rate decreases, Figure 19-6is for a smaller liquid production rate (g)=500 STB/d) in the same size well, In this example the limit GLR is approximately 7000 SCF/STB. This limit GLR for which the minimum puy will be obtained is rarely the natural GLR of the reservoir fluids, ‘Thus it can be reached only through artificial gas lift. While the above apply to an already completed well, appropriate production engineering must take into account these concepts before the well is completed, A larger well size would lead to a Targer limit GLR, with, of course, a larger ges injection rate, These design issues, balancing benefits and costs, will be dealt Section 19-8. Pressure [psi] oO 200 400 6 800 «1000 1200-1400 (50 % Oi- 50 % Woe Tubing size: 2.5 in, 1D, Production ‘oto = $00 bbI/day ‘Average Flowing Temp. | 140% Depth [ft] Figure 19-6 Large GLR values and limit GLR for 1 = 500 STB/A,Sec. 17 Gas-Lift Performance Curve 535 19-7 GAS-LIFT PERFORMANCE CURVE Poettmann and Carpenter (1952) and Bertuzzi et al. (1953), in developing design procedures for gas-lift systems, introduced the “gas-lift performance curve,” which has been used extensively in the petroleum industry ever since. Optimized gas-lift performance would have an important difference from natural well Performance. Based on the information presented in the previous section, for each liquid production rate there exists a limit GLR where the minimum py; will be observed. Thus, 4 plot similar to the one shown in Fig. 19-7 can be drawn. ‘The IPR curve, as always, characterizes the ability of the reservoir to deliver certain combinations of production rates and flowing bottombole pressures. Intersecting this IPR curve is the optimum gas-lift performance curve of minimum flowing bottomhole pressures (minimum pressure intake curve), and for each production rate they correspond to the limit GLR, Other values of GLR above or below the limit GLR will result in smaller production rates. This is shown conceptually in Fig, 19-8, Each gas-lift performance curve in the vicinity of the maximum production rate will result in a larger pressure intake and therefore lower production. In summary, the intersection of the IPR curve with the intake curves from various GLR values in a given tubing can be depicted as shown in Fig. 19-9. The gas-lift GLR minus the natural GLR times the liquid production rate is the required gas injection rate as shown by Eq, (19-3). A plot of the gas injection rate versus the production rate is the gas-lift performance curve, This is shown in Fig. 19-10, where the maximum production rate corresponds to the gas injection rate for the limit GLR. This ‘graph corresponds to an instant in time in the life of the reservoir. For later times a new 2s-lift performance curve will be in effect. EXAMPLE 19-7 Development of gas-lift performance curve ‘With the IPR curve described by Eq. (19-14) (Example 19-3) and a well at 8000 ft depth whose ‘gradient curves for 800 and 500 STB/d were given in Figs. 19-5 and 19-6, develop a gas-lift performance curve assuming that the ges injection valves are at the bottom of the well, The Average reservoir pressure, f, is 3050 psi, and the natural GLR is 300 SCF/STB. Solution Figure 19-11 is a graph of the intersection of the IPR and the optimum gas-lift Performance curve, that is, the locus of the points comesponding to the limit GLR for each production rate, Maximum production rate is 825 STB/4, which corresponds to a limit GLR of 3800 SCF/STB (gradient curves are not shown for this rate). From Eq, (19-3), the gas injection rate for the maximum production rate of 825 STB/d ‘and limit GLR=3800 SCF/STB is Gy = 825(3800 — 300) = 2.89 x 10° SCF/d (19-25) Figure 19-12 is the gas-lift performance curve for this well. For production rates other than the maximum, the gas injection rate could be larger or smaller. This performance curve will change with time, as will be shown in Example 19-12. °Flowing Bottomhole Pressure, Pye ‘Liquid Rate, a, Figure 19-7 JPR and optimum gaslift performance (at iit OLR), GLR, Limit GL Limit GER. Flowing Bottomhole Pressure, Pig, Liquid Rate, 4, I Figure 19-8 ‘Maximum production rate i atthe limit GLR. Larger or smaller values of GLR will result in smaller production rates. 536j | oN Giz, UimitGLk GLa GLR Figure 19-9 Liquid production rate versus GLR. Limit GLR corresponds to maximum qi Maximum , 4 4g (Limit GLR) Liquid Production Rate, q, Gas Injection Rate, a, Figure 19-10 Gassift performance curve, Time dependency. 5378 Flowing Bottomhole Pressure, Py (si) 1000 lumi GLA Umi GLA "70004000 SOFISTS SOFSTB + { 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Liquid Production Rate, q, (STB/A) Figure 19-11 TPR and optimum gas lift Example 19-7), q+ a & % 500 3 s ° 25 3 38 Gas Injection Rate, q, (MMSCF/a) Figure 19-12 GGas-lit performance curve (Example 19-7). 538Sec. 19-7 Gas-Litt Performance Curve 539 EXAMPLE 19-8 Near-wellbore damage and gas lift ‘Suppose that wellbore damage (s ~ +9) would reduce the IPR curve used in Examples 19-3 and 19-7 to 1 = 0.226 ~ Pep) (19-26) what would be the maximum production zate and the associated gas-lift requirements? Solution Figure 19-13 shows the new IPR curve and its intersection with the optimum gas- lift curve. The point of intersection is at q)=500 STB/d. From Fig. 19-12 (done for Example. 19-7) at 500 STB/4, the gas injection rate, qy, is 3.35 x 10° SCF/d. If q.=500 STBM, then, from Eq. (19-26), 500 Pug = 3050 780 psi (19-27) JE, though, the gas injection rate for the undamaged well were maintained (q, = 2.89 x 10° ‘SCF/d for q = 825 STB/d—see Example 19-7), then the GLR would be GLR = : + GLB) raat (19-28) 1 and therefore 0° GLR = 2ST 5309 = 6100 SCHIST (19-29) 000 & ¢ i 2000 | @ 1000 2 5 e ° © 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Liquid Production Rate, q,(STBVd) Figure 19-13 Wellbore damage and its effect on gasclft performance (Example 19-8).540 Gas Lift Chap. 19 It can be calculated readily that at GLR=6100 SCF/STB and 1=8000 ft the flowing. bottomhole pressure would be $10 psi rather than 780 psi. This would tend to reduce the production rate further. It should be remembered always that for a given production rate there is always one specific limit GLR. This example also shows that optimized gas lift not only cannot offset wellbore damage but will require a larger gas injection rate (larger GLR) to lift the maximum possible liquid production rate. Itis then evident that matrix stimulation must be ‘a continuous concer of the production engineer, and any production-induced damage should be removed periodically o allow optimum well performance, ° EXAMPLE 19-9 Limited gas supply; economics of gas lift ‘In Example 19-8 the required gas injection rate for maximum production was the one corre- sponding to the limit GLR. This would assume unlimited gas supply. Since this is frequently not the case, repeat the well deliverability calculation for 0.5, 1, and 5 x 10* SCF gas injec- tion rates, respectively. If the cost of gas injection is $0.5/HHP-hr, the cost of separation is SIAMSCFId), and the price of ol is $30/STB, develop a simple economic analysis (benefits ‘minus costs) versus available gas rate. Use the IPR curve for Example 19-3, 6=3050 psi, and. natural GLR=300 SCF/STB. Solution If only a gas injection rate of 5 x 10* SCF/d is available, then if, for example, q)=500 STB/d, the GLR would be [from Eq. (19-8)] Sx 10 Gur =F +300 = 400 SCF/STB (19-30) From Fig. 19-3 at GLR=400 SCH/STB, the flowing bottomhole pressure (with p.y =100 psi) is 1500 psi. Similar calculations can be done with the gradient curves for other flow rates, The resulting gas-lift performance curve is shown in Fig, 19-14. In addition to 4 = 5 X 10° SCF/4, the two other curves, corresponding to 1 and $ x 10° SCF/4, are also drawn, Intersections with the IPR curve would lead to the expected production rates and flow- ing bottomhole pressures. With the help of Eq, (19-12), the surface pressure can be calculated {assuming 100 psi pressure drop across the valve). Finaly, from Eg, (19-19), the horsepower requirements are calculated (using pia=100 psi). The results are shown in Table 19-1 Table 19-1 Well Performance with Unlimited and Limited Gas Injection Rates Gy (SCF) a (STB) uy (PS!) Paw (PSI) HHP 5x 108 15, 1475 1310 15 1x 10° 660 1360 1220 143 5x 10° 750 1130 1025 66 289x108 825 935 865 348,‘Sec. 19-7 Gas-Litt Performance Curvo 5a IPR 9475x104 scrid st qetrtene § 3 i Flowing Bottomhole Pressure, Py, (psi) \ \ \ © 200 400 600800 1000 1200 1400 Liquid Production Rata, q, (STBV¢) Figure 19-14 Production with gas lift with unlimited and limited gas injection rate (Example 19-9), ‘An economic comparison between the various options is made below considering the ‘5.x 10* SCF/d injection rate as a base case. Incremental benefits between this and the 1 x 10° SCFid rate are Ag x (S/STB) = (660-615) x30 = $1350/d. Incremental costs are AHHP x 24x (SMP ~ hr)= (14.5 ~ 7.5)(24)(0.5) = $84/d and Agy x $1/MSCF = [(1 x 105) ~ (5 x 10*)](1/1000) = $50/d. Therefore the incremental benefits are 1350 — 134 = $1220/4. Similarly, for gy = 5 x 10° SCF/d, incremental benefits are $2900/d, Finally, for the limit GLR (g, = 2.89 x 106), the incremental benefits are ~$720/d; that is, the incremental production rate cannot compensate for the incremental compression and separation costs. This type of calculation, of course, is indicated always. It depends heavily on local costs and, especially, like everything else in production engineering, on the price of oil. ° EXAMPLE 19-10 ‘Tubing size versus gas-lift requirements ‘The IPR for a high-capacity reservoir with producing water-oil ratio equal to 1 is q = 1.03(9 = Puy) (19-31)Gas Lift Chap. 19 Ifthe average reservoir pressure, fis 3550 psi and the natural GLR is 300 SCF/STB, calculate the required rate of gas to be injected at the bottom of the well (H'=8000 ft) for three different tubing sizes (2.5 in.,3.5in., and 4.5 in, respectively) in order to produce 2000 STB/d of liquid, ‘The wellhead pressure is 100 psi Solution If q=2000 STB/4, then, from Eq, (19-31), Puy must be equal to 1610 psi. Figures 19-15, 19-16, and 19-17 are the gradient curves for qi=2000 STB/d (50% water, 50% oil) for the three tubing sizes From Fig. 19-15, at H/=8000 ft and ).j=1610 psi, the GLR must be 800 SCF/STB. Since the natural GLR is 300 SCF/STB, the required gas injection rate, g, , must be 2000(800—300) = 1x 10° SCF/d. Pressure [ps © 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 4+ (50 % Oi- 50 % Wore) Tubing size: 2.5 i. UD. Production rte : 2000 bbl/doy 7 ‘verge Howing Temp, : 140% GR =O 1000 ten steps of 100) r Figure 19-15 Gradient curves for q/=2000 STB/d and tubing LD.=B.5 in, (Example 19-10).Soc. 1-7 Gas-Lift Performance Curve 543 From Fig, 19-16 (forthe3.5-in. well), the required GLR forthe same H and pyy would be only 350 SCF/STB and therefore the gasinjection rate would be only 2000(350-300) = 110° SCF/d, an order of magnitude smaller, Finally, as can be seen readily from Fig. 19-17, the natural GLR would be sufficient to lift the liquid production rate if the mbing diameter is 45in, Pressure [psi} © — 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 150 % OW- 50 % Wied ‘Tubing ze | 3.5 in. 10, Prodieton rte : 2000 bbl/doy ‘Average Flowing Temp. » 140% ‘GR: 0- 1000 fin stops of 100) Depth [A] Figure 19-16 Gradient curves for 4122000 STB/d and tubing LD-=3.5 in, (Example 19-10). ‘This calculation shows the importance of the tubing size selection (and the associated economics of well completion) versus gas-lift requirements (ie., volume of gas, compression and separation costs). °54a) Gas Litt Chap. 19 Pressure [psi] © 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 9000 3500 4000 4500 (50% O1- $0 % Wom |] eg aan 45 18 J] Peston : 2060 boy || Average Flowing Temp. : 140°F |] Gat: 0- 1000 fn ss of 100) Depa f] Figure 19-17 Gradient curves for q1=2000 STB and ting LD.=4.5in. (Example 19-10) 19-8 GAS-LiFT REQUIREMENTS VERSUS TIME As the reservoir pressure declines, the driving force in the reservoir is reduced and therefore, in order to sustain a given production rate, the flowing bottomhole pressure must be reduced accordingly. This was discussed in Section 19-5 and was shown in Example 19-6, In that example it was concluded that sustaining a production rate would require an increase in the gas injection rate as the reservoir pressure declines. In the same example the production rate was not the maximum possible for the given reservoir pressure (500 STB/dSec. 19-8 Gas-Lift Requirements versus Time 845, versus 825 STB/d, as shown in Example 19-7, where maximized gas-lift performance was calculated), Maximizing the liquid production rate with gas lift requires an increase in the gas. injection rate, since the limit GLR is larger for smaller production rates in a given tubing size. Again, design of gas lift versus time must be the subject of economic evaluation, An appropriate method for forecasting gas-lift requirements versus time is as follows, 1. Establish an optimum gas-lift performance curve for the given tubing and reservoir fluid. 2. For each average reservoir pressure, develop a new IPR curve, 3. The intersection of the IPR curves with the optimum gas-lift performance curve is the maximum production rate, 4, This maximum production rate is at the li the minimum pyy. 5. Material balance calculations as shown in Chapter 9 can provide the reservoir ‘cumulative production within each reservoir pressure decline interval, A. 6, ‘The production rate within this interval and the calculated cumulative production easily allow the calculation of the time required for this pressure decline. 7, Well performance and gas injection rate requirements versus time can then be forecasted. GLR, which is also associated with EXAMPLE 19-11 ‘Maximized production rate with gas lift ina depleting reser ‘What would be the average reservoir pressure for a maximized production rate of $00 STB/A, Use the IPR curve described by Eq, (19-14) (the same as for Examples 19-3 and 19-7), Calculate the flowing bottomhole pressure. Solution The simplest solution to this problem can be obtained graphically from Fig. 19-11. ‘The maximum production rate must be at the intersection of the new IPR curve (slope 0.39) and the optimum gas-lift curve. Thus, a parallel IPR (Fig. 19-18) is drawn, which intersects the vertical axis at an average reservoir pressure, j, equal to 2050 psi. Prom the same figure or from the IPR equation, the corresponding flowing bottomhole pressure, pus, is 770 psi. 0 EXAMPLE 19-12 Onset of gas lift in the life of a well; need for gas lift Use the well described in Appendix B. Suppose that the depth is 8000 ft. If there is to be an attempt to sustain the production rate at 1000 STB/A, could gas lift play a role? If so, when should it begin, and what should be the location of the gas lift valves versus time? Assume that the well is completed with a 2 3/8-in. tubing (~ 2-in, LD.) and that the wellhead pressure requirement is 300 psi, Solt From the data in Appendix B, the IPR curve for this well, using Eq. (3-11) and allowing for different average reservoir pressures and formation volume factors By, is546 Gas Lift Chap. 19 3000 B= 30s0psi 8 B= 2050psi 8 Flowing Bottomhole Pressure, Py (pi) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Liquid Production Rata, (STBVd) Figure 19-18 JPR curves with declining resesvoir pressure for optimized gas lift Example 19-11), % (19-32) 0465 [p02 = -08( Figure 19-19 shows the series of IPR curves for this problem for average reservoir pressures ranging from the initial value (4350 psi) to 3350 psi in increments of 200 psi. The corresponding required flowing bottomhole pressures for q=1000 STB/d can be readily ex- tracted from this figure. Figure 19-20 is an expanded scale of the flowing gradients for this wel for different GL. values, The maximum GLR is 2000 SCF/STB. The curves for GLR > 1600 are practically indistinguishable, The natural GLR for tis well is 840 SCF/STB (= R,). Of course, as the well matures, the producing GLR will increase, reflecting the emergence of a gas cap (although the solution R, will decrease). To alow for decisions on gas lift, material balance calculation as suggested by Havlena and Odeh (1963) and a deliverability relationship for solution gas drive as introduced by Tamer (1944) are indicated. This type of calculation was presented in detail in Chapter 9, Table 9-4 gives the physical properties (obtained from Fig. B-1 in Appendix B) and the calculated values of ©, and ©, for reservoir pressures from j=4350 to 3350 psi. ‘The incremental cumulative prertuctivun ant cusnulative productions for oll and gas and the producing GLR (listed as R,,) are shown in Table 9-5, The incremental time and total time ‘versus average reservoir pressure for this example ae listed in Table 19-2. ‘The way to interpret these results is as follows. From Fig. 19-19, inthe interval between, =4350 psi and j=4150 psi for q=1000 STB/d, the pay should be 2000 psi. From TableSec. 198 Gas-Lift Requirements versus Time. 547 2500 2000 1000 500. 400 600 800 = 1000 1200 1400 a (STB/d) Figure 19-19 TPR curves at different reservoir pressures for Example 19-12. 9-5, the producing natural GLR is 845 SCF/STB. From the gradient curves in Fig, 19-10 at ‘H=8000 ft and GLR=845 SCF/STB, the required p.y would be only 1710 psi. Therefore the well would naturally move the fluid to the top. At pos=1710 psi, the producing rate, q, (at average p=4250 psi) would be [from Eq. (19-32)] equal to 1090 STB/d. ‘Similar calculations can be done until the reservoir pressure is 3750 psi. The increasing producing natural GLR would shift the required bottomhole pressure to the left, allowing the ‘minimum production rate of 1000 STB/d without the need of artificial lift. Inthe interval between 3550 and 3750 psi for q=1000 STB/d, the required puy is 1400 psi [from Fig. 19-19 or Eq, (19-32)]. From Table 9-S, the producing GLR is 1280 SCF/STB, which ‘would require a bottomhole flowing pressure of 1600 psi (from Fig, 19-20). Gas lift could then be possible. However, as can be seen from Fig. 19-20, the maximum GLR curve at that depth ‘would require a pur equal to 1560 psi. Therefore, increasing the GLR would require an even larger pus. ‘The conclusion from this problem is that gas lift cannot be used as a means of antficial lift. Furthermore, the production rate cannot be sustained at 1000 STB/d after the reservoir pressure drops below 3750 psi. The example shown here is the type of calculation that is needed in every well in order to design an artificial lift system in anticipation of future production behavior. °Gas Litt Chap. 19 Pressure [psi] oa Tubing sxe: 2 in, LD. Production rt: 1000 bbl/doy ‘Avwroge Flowing Temp, : 140% GBR: 800 + 1600 fn ps of 100) Depth {ft 1600; 550 psi/3000 Figure 19-20 [Expanded-seale gradient curves for well in Example 19-12.References. 549 Table 19-2 Production Prediction versus Time for Well in Exampie 19-12 (Initlal Oil in Place 5.87 x 107 STB for A = 640 acres) Pips) AN, (STB) Ae (days) +t (days) 4350 L71 x 108 WW 4150 im 4.94 x 10° 494 3950 665 7.04 x 10° 704 3750 1370 74 x 10° 740 3550 2110 6.46 x 10° 646 3350 2756 REFERENCES 1. Bertuzzi, A. F, Welchon, J. K., end Poettmen, FH, “Description and Analyses of an Efficient Continuous Flow Gas-Lift installation,” JPT, pp. 271-278, November 1953. 2, Brown, K. B, Day, J.J, Byrd, J.P, and Mach,,J,, The Technology of Artificial Lift Meshods, Petroleum Publishing, Tulsa, OK, 1980. 3. Gilbert, W. E., “Flowing and Gas-Lift Well Performance,” Drill. and Prod. Prac., API, p. 143, 1954, 4. Golan, M,, and Whitson, C. H., Well Performance, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991. 5. Havlena, D., and Odeb, A. S., "The Material Balance as en Equation of a Straight Line,” JPT, pp. 896-900, Angst 1963, 66. Poettman, F.H., and Carpenter, P.G., “Multiphase Flow of Gas, Oi! and Water through Vertical Flow Strings with Application to the Design of Gas-Lift Installations,” Drill and Prod. Prac., API, pp. 257-317, 1952. 1, Tamer, 1, "How Different Size Gas Ceps and Pressure Maintenance Programs Affect Amount of Recoverable it” Oi! Weekly, pp. 32-34, June 12, 1944. PROBLEMS: 19-1. Use Fig. 19-3. Suppose that the natural GLR is 200 SCF/STB and the well depth is 10,000 ft. What would be the natural bottomhole pressure to lift this liquid rate? What should be the working GLR for the bottomhole pressure to be 1500 psi? If the average reservoir pressure is 3500 psi, what is the goveming IPR for this well? What would be the gas injection rate for this case? 19-2, What would be the production rate if and if the flowing gradient below the Problem 19-1 is =1000 psi were injected at 5000 ft were 0.37 psifft? The IPR from =0.25(8 = pus)