期刊文献+

An experimental and numerical study of chemically enhanced water alternating gas injection 被引量:2

An experimental and numerical study of chemically enhanced water alternating gas injection
下载PDF
导出
摘要 In this work, an experimental study combined with numerical simulation was conducted to investigate the potential of chemically enhanced water alternating gas (CWAG) injection as a new enhanced oil recovery method. The unique feature of this new method is that it uses alkaline, surfactant, and polymer additives as a chemical slug which is injected during the water alternating gas (WAG) process to reduce the interfacial tension (IFT) and simultaneously improve the mobility ratio. In essence, the proposed CWAG process involves a combination of chemical flooding and immiscible carbon dioxide (CO2) injection and helps in IFT reduction, water blocking reduction, mobility control, oil swelling, and oil viscosity reduction due to CO2 dissolution. Its performance was compared with the conventional immiscible water alter- nating gas (I-WAG) flooding. Oil recovery utilizing CWAG was better by 26 % of the remaining oil in place after waterflooding compared to the recovery using WAG conducted under similar conditions. The coreflood data (cumulative oil and water production) were history mat- ched via a commercial simulator by adjusting the relative permeability curves and assigning the values of the rock and fluid properties such as porosity, permeability, and the experimentally determined IFT data. History matching ofthe coreflood model helped us optimize the experiments and was useful in determining the importance of the parameters influencing sweep efficiency in the CWAG process. The effectiveness of the CWAG process in pro- viding enhancement of displacement efficiency is evident in the oil recovery and pressure response observed in the coreflood. The results of sensitivity analysis on CWAG slug patterns show that the alkaline-surfactant-polymer injection is more beneficial after CO2 slug injection due to oil swelling and viscosity reduction. The CO2 slug size analysis shows that there is an optimum CO2 slug size, around 25 % pore volume which leads to a maximum oil recovery in the CWAG process. This study shows that the ultralow IFT system, i.e., IFT equaling 10 2 or 10 3 mN/ m, is a very important parameter in CWAG process since the water blocking effect can be minimized. In this work, an experimental study combined with numerical simulation was conducted to investigate the potential of chemically enhanced water alternating gas (CWAG) injection as a new enhanced oil recovery method. The unique feature of this new method is that it uses alkaline, surfactant, and polymer additives as a chemical slug which is injected during the water alternating gas (WAG) process to reduce the interfacial tension (IFT) and simultaneously improve the mobility ratio. In essence, the proposed CWAG process involves a combination of chemical flooding and immiscible carbon dioxide (CO2) injection and helps in IFT reduction, water blocking reduction, mobility control, oil swelling, and oil viscosity reduction due to CO2 dissolution. Its performance was compared with the conventional immiscible water alter- nating gas (I-WAG) flooding. Oil recovery utilizing CWAG was better by 26 % of the remaining oil in place after waterflooding compared to the recovery using WAG conducted under similar conditions. The coreflood data (cumulative oil and water production) were history mat- ched via a commercial simulator by adjusting the relative permeability curves and assigning the values of the rock and fluid properties such as porosity, permeability, and the experimentally determined IFT data. History matching ofthe coreflood model helped us optimize the experiments and was useful in determining the importance of the parameters influencing sweep efficiency in the CWAG process. The effectiveness of the CWAG process in pro- viding enhancement of displacement efficiency is evident in the oil recovery and pressure response observed in the coreflood. The results of sensitivity analysis on CWAG slug patterns show that the alkaline-surfactant-polymer injection is more beneficial after CO2 slug injection due to oil swelling and viscosity reduction. The CO2 slug size analysis shows that there is an optimum CO2 slug size, around 25 % pore volume which leads to a maximum oil recovery in the CWAG process. This study shows that the ultralow IFT system, i.e., IFT equaling 10 2 or 10 3 mN/ m, is a very important parameter in CWAG process since the water blocking effect can be minimized.
出处 《Petroleum Science》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2015年第3期470-482,共13页 石油科学(英文版)
基金 the EOR Center at University Technology Petronas for providing financial support
关键词 Enhanced water alternating gas (CWAG) Enhanced oil recovery Interfacial tension Mobilitycontrol ~ Water blocking Keywords Enhanced water alternating gas (CWAG) Enhanced oil recovery Interfacial tension Mobilitycontrol ~ Water blocking
  • 相关文献

参考文献25

  • 1Al-Abri A, Amin R. Phase behaviour, fluid properties and recovery efficiency of immiscible and miscible condensate displacements by SCC02 injection: experimental investigation. Transp Porous Med. 2010;85(3):743-56. doi: 10. 1007/s1 1242-010-9589-5.
  • 2Aziz K, Settari A. Petroleum reservoir simulation. London: Applied Science Publishers Ltd; 1979.
  • 3Caudle BH, Dyes AB. Improving miscible displacement by gas-water injection. In: The 32nd annual fall meeting of Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dallas, Texas; 1958. doi:IO.2118/911-G.
  • 4Christensen JR, Stenby EH, Skauge A. Review of WAG field experience. SPE Reserv Eva1 Eng. 2001;4(2):97-106. doi:lO. 211817l203-PA.
  • 5CMG: STARS user's guide. Version 2011. 10, Calgary, Canada; 2011.
  • 6Corey AT. The interrelation between gas and oil relative permeabi1- ities. In: The 18th technical conference on petroleum production, Pennsylvania; 1954.
  • 7Dehghan AA, Farzaneh SA, Kharrat R, et al. Pore-level investigation of heavy oil recovery during water alternating solvent injection process. Transp Porous Med. 2010;83(3):653-66. doi:IO.1007/ s11242-009-9463-5.
  • 8Dong M, Foraie J, Huang S, Chatzis I. Analysis of immiscible wateralternating-gas (WAG) injection using micromodel tests. J Can Pet Technol. 2005;44(2):17-25. doi:IO.2118/05-02-01.
  • 9Faisa1 A, Bisdom K, Zhumabek B, et al. Injectivity and gravity segregation in WAG and SWAG enhanced oil recovery. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana; 2009. doi:IO.2118/124197-MS.
  • 10Flaaten A, Nguyen QP, Pope GA, Zhang J. A systematic laboratory approach to low-cost, high-performance chemical flooding. SPE Reserv Eval Eng. 2009;5:713-23. doi:10.21 1811 13469-PA.

同被引文献15

引证文献2

二级引证文献6

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部