Laboratory Study of Ultrasonic Velocity Variations During CO2 Flooding in Tuscaloosa Sandstone
- Avinash Mohapatra (Glendale Energy Capital) | Chandra Rai (University of Oklahoma) | Carl H. Sondergeld (University of Oklahoma) | Trevor Richards (Chesapeake Energy)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- May 2019
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 520 - 530
- 2019.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- EOR, Fluid detection and monitoring, Reservoir Management, Acoustic, Impedence
- 5 in the last 30 days
- 75 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Surface seismic technology offers a promising technique for monitoring carbon dioxide (CO2) flood fronts during the enhanced-oil-recovery (EOR) process. Changes in the seismic signature have been observed with CO2 flooding, but its quantification with respect to subsurface saturation is still in its infancy. This study is focused on quantifying variation in the seismic parameters (velocity and impedance) as a function of subsurface fluid type and saturation.
We present results of a laboratory study in which velocity and density were monitored as the pore fluids (formation brine and oil, and CO2) were replaced sequentially. All the experiments were performed at in-situ pressure conditions on core plugs (Tuscaloosa Sandstone) recovered from a well in a field currently undergoing CO2 flooding. These plugs are characterized as fluvial (quartz ˜87%, clay ˜10%) and distributary channels (quartz ≈75%, clay ≈17%).
When dry samples were flooded with brine, a decrease in compressional-wave (P-wave) velocity (≈2%) was observed until 95% saturation of brine was achieved. For the remaining 5% of saturation, the velocity increased by 7 to 12.5%. After attaining 100% brine saturation, oil was pumped to displace the brine until irreducible water saturation was achieved. A linear drop of 3 to 4% in velocity to oil saturation was observed during this step. Thereafter, liquid CO2 was injected to displace the oil/brine system and a drop of 5 to 10% in P-wave velocity was observed. Biot-Gassmann modeling shows good agreement with experimental results for the gas/brine and oil/brine systems, but not for liquid-CO2 flooding.
An empirical relationship was derived from the experimental results, and was applied to sonic logs and used for sensitivity analysis of 4D-seismic data. Post-flooded sonic data were compared to a theoretical sonic curve estimated from an empirical and ‘patchy’ model. Also, a significant increase in seismic amplitude difference was observed when CO2 saturation was greater than 50%.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||11|
API RP-40, Recommended Practices for Core Analysis Procedures. 1998. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
Archie, G. E. 1942. The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristic. In Transactions of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Vol. 146, Issue 1, 54–62, SPE-942054-G. Richardson, Texas: SPE. https://doi.org/10.2118/942054-G.
Arts, R., Eiken, O., Chadwick, A. et al. 2004. Monitoring of CO2 Injected at Sleipner Using Time-Lapse Seismic Data. Energy 29 (9–10): 1383–1392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2004.03.072.
Ballard, B. D. 2007. Quantitative Mineralogy of Reservoir Rocks Using Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy. Presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, 11–14 November. SPE 113023-STU. https://doi.org/10.2118/113023-STU.
Batzle, M. and Wang, Z. 1992. Seismic Properties of Pore Fluids. Geophysics 57 (11): 1396–1408. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443207.
Berryman, J. G. and Milton, G. W. 1991. Exact Results for Generalized Gassmann’s Equations in Composite Porous Media With Two Constituents. Geophysics 56 (12): 1950–1960. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443006.
Biot, M. A. 1956a. Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in a Fluid-Saturated Porous Solid. I. Low Frequency Range. J Acoust Soc Am 28 (2): 168–191. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1908239.
Biot, M. A. 1956b. Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in a Fluid-Saturated Porous Solid. II. Higher Frequency Range. J Acoust Soc Am 28 (2): 179–191. https://doi.org/10.101121/1.1908241.
Brie, A., Pampuri, F., Marsala, A. F. et al. 1995. Shear Sonic Interpretation in Gas-Bearing Sands. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 22–25 October. SPE-30595-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/30595-MS.
Byrne, M. and Patey, I. 2004. Core Sample Preparation—An Insight Into New Procedures. Presented at the International Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 5–9 October. SCA2004-50.
Chadwick, A., Williams, G., Delepine, N. et al. 2010. Quantitative Analysis of Time-Lapse Seismic Monitoring Data at the Sleipner CO2 Storage Operation. The Leading Edge 29 (2): 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3304820.
Dobrin, M. B. and Savit, C. H. 1988. Introduction of Geophysical Prospecting, fourth edition, 357–358. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Domenico, S. N. 1976. Effect of Brine-Gas Mixture on Velocity in an Unconsolidated Sand Reservoir. Geophysics 41 (5): 882–894. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440670.
Gassmann, F. 1951. Uber die Elastizität Poröser Medien. Gesellschaft in Zürich: Vier Der Natur 96: 1–23.
Gutierrez, M., Katsuki D., and Almrabat A. 2012. Effects of CO2 Injection on the Seismic Velocity of Sandstone Saturated With Saline Water. Int J Geosciences 3 (5A): 908–917. https://doi.org/10.4236/ijg.2012.325093.
Han, D. H., Sun, M., and Batzle, M. 2010. CO2 Velocity Measurement and Models for Temperatures up to 200°C and Pressures up to 100 MPa. Geophysics 75 (3): E123–E129. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3383324.
Hill, R. 1963. Elastic Properties of Reinforced Solids: Some Theoretical Principles. J Mech Phys Solids 11 (5): 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(63)90036-X.
Kim, J., Matsuoka, T., and Xue, Z. 2011. Monitoring and Detecting CO2 Injected Into Water-Saturated Sandstone With Joint Seismic and Resistivity Measurements. Exploration Geophysics 42 (1): 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1071/EG11002.
Lumley, D. 2010. 4D Seismic Monitoring of CO2 Sequestration. The Leading Edge 29 (2): 150–155. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3304817.
Lumley, D., Adams, D., Wright, R. et al. 2008. Seismic Monitoring of CO2 Geo-Sequestration: Realistic Capabilities and Limitations. Presented at the 2008 SEG Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada, 9–14 November. SEG-2008-2841. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3063935.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). 2011. Thermophysical Properties of Fluid Systems. https://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/fluid/ (accessed February 2012).
Powell, J. B. 1972. Exploration History of Delhi Field, Northeastern Louisiana. In Stratigraphic Oil and Gas Fields—Classification, Exploration Methods, and Case Histories, ed. R. E. King, 548–559. Tulsa: American Association of Petroleum Geologists.
Richards, T. 2011. Lessons From 4D Seismic Monitoring of CO2 Injection at the Delhi Field. First Break 29 (1): 89–94. http://www.earthdoc.org/publication/publicationdetails/?publication=46401.
Shakhashiri, B. Z. 2008. Chemical of the Week, Carbon Dioxide, CO2. University of Wisconsin-Madison. http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/chemweek/pdf/CarbonDioxide.pdf (downloaded 7 September 2011).
Smith, T. M., Sondergeld, C. H., and Rai, C. S. 2003. Gassmann Fluid Substitutions: A Tutorial. Geophysics 68 (2): 430–440. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1567211.
Sondergeld, C. H., and Rai, C. S. 1993. New Exploration Tool: Quantitative Core Characterization. In Experimental Techniques in Mineral and Rock Physics, ed. R. C. Libermann and C. H. Sondergeld, 249–268. Basel, Birkhäuser Verlag.
Todd, T. and Simmons, G. 1972. Effect of Pore Pressure on the Velocity of Compressional Waves in Low Porosity Rocks. J Geophys Res 77 (20): 3731–3743. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB077i020p03731.
Wang, Z., and Nur, A. M. 1989. Effects of CO2 Flooding on Wave Velocities in Rocks With Hydrocarbons. SPE Res Eng 4 (4): 429–436. SPE-17345-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/17345-PA.
White, D. 2009. Monitoring CO2 Storage During EOR at the Weyburn-Midale Field. The Leading Edge 28 (7): 838–842. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3167786.