Upscaling CO2 Foam for EOR as CCUS from On- To Offshore
- Zachary Paul Alcorn (University of Bergen) | Martin A. Fernø (University of Bergen) | Arne Graue (University of Bergen)
- Document ID
- Offshore Technology Conference
- Offshore Technology Conference, 4-7 May, Houston, Texas, USA
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2020. Offshore Technology Conference
- 2.5.2 Fracturing Materials (Fluids, Proppant), 2.4 Hydraulic Fracturing, 2 Well completion, 5.7 Reserves Evaluation, 5.4 Improved and Enhanced Recovery, 1.6.9 Coring, Fishing, 5.5 Reservoir Simulation, 5.5.3 Scaling Methods, 5.4 Improved and Enhanced Recovery, 1.6 Drilling Operations, 5 Reservoir Desciption & Dynamics, 5.7.2 Recovery Factors
- Foam, CO2 EOR, CCUS, Upscaling, Mobility Control
- 10 in the last 30 days
- 94 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
Two major challenges in CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) are the high mobility of CO2 and reservoir heterogeneity. High CO2 mobility, related to the low density and viscosity of CO2, compared to in-situ fluids can cause viscous fingering, gravity override, and flow in thief zones resulting in poor reservoir sweep efficiency and low oil recoveries. Mobility control foam can improve CO2 EOR and CO2 storage potential by mitigating unfavorable CO2 properties and reducing the impact of reservoir heterogeneity. CO2 foam injection involves injecting a foaming agent (surfactant) with CO2 to generate stable foams in porous media. This work presents an incremental physical upscaling approach that moves from the pore- to core- to field-scale for characterizing and optimizing foam systems for CO2 mobility control, EOR, and CO2 storage. An additional focus was to visualize and describe in-situ fluid saturation dynamics during CO2 storage processes. We address the challenges associated with transferring CO2 foam EOR technology offshore, using lessons learned from an ongoing onshore pilot in the Permian Basin of west Texas. The aim is to encourage co-optimized CO2 EOR and long-term CO2 storage foam technology as part of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) for offshore applications.
|File Size||1014 KB||Number of Pages||16|
Alcorn, Z.P., Sharma, M., Fredriksen, S. B., Fernø, M.A., and Graue, A. 2019. An Integrated CO2 Foam EOR Pilot Program with Combined CCUS in an Onshore Texas Heterogeneous Carbonate Field. SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering 22 (04): 1449-1466. https://doi.org/10.2118/190204-PA.
Buchgraber, M., Al-Dossary, M., Ross, C. M. 2012. Creation of a Dual-Porosity Micromodel for Pore-Level Visualization of Multiphase Flow. J Pet Sci Eng 86: 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2012.03.012.
Eide, L.I., Batum, M., Dixon, T., Elamin, Z., Graue, A., Hagen, S., Hovorka, S, Nazarian, B., Nøkleby, P.H., Olsen, G.I:, Ringrose, P., and Mello Vieira, R.A. 2019. Enabling Large-Scale Carbon Capture, Utilisation, and Storage (CCUS) Using Onshore Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Infrastructure Developments—A Review. Energies 2019, 12, 1945; doi:10.3390/en12101945
Fernø, M.A., Gauteplass, J., Hauge, L.P., Abell, G.E., Adamsen, G.E., and Graue, A. 2015. Combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography to visualize and quantify fluid flow in sedimentary rocks. Water Resour. Res., 51, doi:10.1002/2015WR017130.
Gauteplass, J., Chaudry K., Kovscek, A.R., and Fernø, M.A., 2014. Pore-level foam generation and flow for mobility control in fractured systems. 2014. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 468 (2015) 184-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2014.12.043
Hornbrook, J. W., Castanier, L. M., and Pettit, P. A. 1991. Observation of Foam/Oil Interactions in a New, High-Resolution Micromodel. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 6-9 October. SPE-22631-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/22631-MS.
Jones, S. A., Laskaris, G., Vincent-Bonnieu, S. 2016. Surfactant Effect on Foam: From Core Flood Experiments to Implicit-Texture Foam-Model Parameters. Presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Tulsa, 11-13 April. SPE-179637-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/179637-MS.
Ma, K., Lopez-Salinas, J.L., Puerto, M.C., 2013. Estimation of Parameters for the Simulation of Foam Flow through Porous Media. Part 1: The Dry-Out Effect. Energy & Fuels 27 (5): 2363-2375. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef302036s.
Rognmo A., Fredriksen, S.B., Alcorn, Z.P., Sharma, M., Føyen T., Eide, Ø., Fernø M.A., and Graue, A. 2019. Pore-to-Core EOR Upscaling for CO2 Foam for CCUS. SPE Journal Preprint July 2019. https://doi.org/10.2118/190869-PA.
Taber, J. J., Martin, F. D., and Seright, R. S. 1997. EOR Screening Criteria Revisited—Part 1: Introduction to Screening Criteria and Enhanced Recovery Field Projects. SPE Res. Eng. 12(3). SPE-35385-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/35385-PA.