Nanopore Compositional Modeling in Unconventional Shale Reservoirs
- Najeeb S Alharthy (Colorado School of Mines) | Tadesse Weldu Weldu Teklu (Colorado School of Mines) | Thanh N Nguyen (Computer Modelling Group) | Hossein Kazemi (Colorado School of Mines) | Ramona M Graves (Colorado School of Mines)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- July 2016
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 415 - 428
- 2016.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- compositional modeling of liquid rich shale reservoirs, liquid-rich shales
- 7 in the last 30 days
- 1,028 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Understanding the mechanism of multicomponent mass transport in the nanopores of unconventional reservoirs, such as Eagle Ford, Niobrara, Woodford, and Bakken, is of great interest because it influences long-term economic development of such reservoirs. Thus, we began to examine the phase behavior and flow characteristics of multicomponent flow in primary production in nanoporous reservoirs. Besides primary recovery, our long-term objectives included enhanced oil production from such reservoirs. The first step was to evaluate the phase behavior in nanopores on the basis of pore-size distribution. This was motivated because the physical properties of hydrocarbon components are affected by wall proximity in nanopores as a result of van der Waals molecular interactions with the pore walls. For instance, critical pressure and temperature of hydrocarbon components shift to lower values as the nanopore walls become closer. In our research, we applied this kind of critical property shift to the hydrocarbon components of two Eagle Ford fluid samples. Then, we used the shifted phase characteristics in dual-porosity compositional modeling to determine the pore-to-pore flow characteristics, and, eventually, the flow behavior of hydrocarbons to the wells. In the simulation, we assigned three levels of phase behavior in the matrix and fracture pore spaces. In addition, the flow hierarchy included flow from matrix (nano-, meso-, and macropores) to macrofractures, from macrofractures to a hydraulic fracture (HF), and through the HF to the production well. From the simulation study, we determined why hydrocarbon fluids flow so effectively in ultralow-permeability shale reservoirs. The simulation also gave credence to the intuitive notion that favorable phase behavior (phase split) in the nanopores is one of the major reasons for production of commercial quantities of light oil and gas from shale reservoirs. It was determined that the implementation of confined-pore and midconfined-pore phase behavior lowers the bubblepoint pressure, and this, in turn, leads to a slightly higher oil recovery and lesser gas recovery. Also it was determined that the implementation of midconfined-pore and confined-pore phase-behavior shift reduces the retrograde liquid condensation region, which in turn, leads to lower liquid yield while maintaining the same gas-production quantity. Finally, the important reason that we are able to produce shale reservoirs economically is “rubblizing” the reservoir matrix near HFs, which creates favorable permeability pathways to improve reservoir drainage. This is why multistage hydraulic fracturing is so critical for successful development of shale reservoirs.
|File Size||2 MB||Number of Pages||14|
Alharthy, N., Al Kobaisi, M., Torcuk, M. A. et al. 2012. Physics and Modeling of Gas Flow in Shale Reservoirs. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 11–14 November. SPE-161893-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/161893-MS.
Bird, R. B., Stewart, W. E., and Lightfoot, E. N. 2007. Transport Phenomena, second edition (revised). John Wiley & Sons.
Chen, X., Cao, G., Han, A. et al. 2008. Nanoscale Fluid Transport: Size and Rate Effects. Nano Letter 8 (9): 2988–2992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/nl802046b.
Devegowda, D., Sapmanee, K., Civan, F. et al. 2012. Phase Behavior of Gas Condensates in Shales Due to Pore Proximity Effects: Implications for Transport, Reserves and Well Productivity. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–10 October. SPE-160099-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/160099-MS.
Du, L. and Chu, L. 2012. Understanding Anomalous Phase Behavior in Unconventional Oil Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, 30 October–1 November. SPE-161830-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/161830-MS.
Eker, I., Kurtoglu, B., and Kazemi, H. 2014. Multiphase Rate Transient Analysis in Unconventional Reservoirs: Theory and Applications. Presented at the SPE/CSUR Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, 30 September–2 October. SPE-171657-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/171657-MS.
Firincioglu, T., Ozkan, E., and Ozgen, C. 2012. Thermodynamics of Multiphase Flow in Unconventional Liquid-Rich Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–10 October. SPE-159869-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/159869-MS.
Hamada, Y., Koga, K., and Tanaka, H. 2007. Phase Equilibria and Interfacial Tension of Fluids Confined in Narrow Pores. J. Chemical Physics 127: 084908. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2759926.
Kanda, H., Miyahara, M., and Higashitani, K. 2004. Triple Point of Lennard-Jones Fluid in Split Nanopore: Solidification of Critical Condensate. J. Chem. Phys. 120 (13): 6173–6179. Http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1652431.
Kuila, U. and Prasad, M. 2011. Understanding Pore-Structure and Permeability in Shales. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, USA, 30 October–2 November. SPE-146869-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/146869-MS.
Kurtoglu, B., Ramirez, B., and Kazemi, H. 2013. Modeling Production Performance of an Abnormally High Pressure Unconventional Shale Reservoir. Presented at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, USA, 12–14 August. URTeC 1581994.
Moore, E. B., de La Llave, E., Welke, K. et al. 2010. Freezing, Melting and Structure of Ice in a Hydrophilic Nanopore. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 12 (16): 4124–4134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/B919724A.
Morishige, K., Fujii, H., Uga, M. et al. 1997. Capillary Critical Point of Argon, Nitrogen, Oxygen, Ethylene, and Carbon Dioxide in MCM-41. Langmuir 13 (13): 3494–3498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/la970079u.
Nagarajan, N. R., Honarpour, M. M., Sampath, K. et al. 2004. Comparison of Gas-Condensate Relative Permeability Using Live Fluid vs. Model Fluids. Presented at the International Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts, Abu Dhabi, 5–9 October. SCA-2004-09.
Nojabaei, B. and Johns, R. T. 2012. Effect of Capillary Pressure on Fluid Density and Phase Behavior in Tight Rocks and Shales. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–10 October. SPE-159258-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/159258-MS.
Orangi, A., Nagarajan, N., Honarpour, M. et al. 2011. Unconventional Shale Oil and Gas-Condensate Reservoir Production, Impact of Rock, Fluid, and Hydraulic Fractures. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, 24–26 January. SPE-140536-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/140536-MS.
Peng, D. and Robinson, D. B. 1976. A New Two-Constant Equation of State. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals 15 (1): 59–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/i160057a011.
Pommer, M. E. 2014. Quantitative Assessment of Pore Types and Pore Size Distribution Across Thermal Maturity, Eagle Ford Formation, South Texas. MS thesis, The University of Texas, Austin (August).
Qiao, Y., Punyamurtula, V. K., Han, A. et al. 2006. Temperature Dependence of Working Pressure of a Nanoporous Liquid Spring. Applied Physics Letters 89 (25): 251905-1–251905. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2408664.
Qiao, Y., Liu, L., and Chen, X. 2009. Pressurized Liquid in Nanopores: A Modified Laplace-Young Equation. Nano Letter 9 (3): 984–988. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/nl8030136.
Rine, J., Smart, E., Dorsey, W. et al. 2013. Comparison of Porosity Distribution Within Selected North American Shale Units by SEM Examination of Argon-Ion-Milled Samples. In Electron Microscopy of Shale Hydrocarbon Reservoirs: AAPG Memoir 102, ed. W. Camp, E. Diaz, and B. Wawak, 137–152.
Sapmanee, K. 2011. Effects of Pore Proximity on Behavior and Production Prediction of Gas/Condensate. MS thesis, Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological Engineering, University of Oklahoma (September).
Shultz, J. M. 2015. Pore Network Variation Identified Through NMR Analysis: Eagle Ford Group, South Texas, USA. MS thesis, The University of Texas at Austin (May).
Singh, S. K., Sinha, A., Deo, G. et al. 2009. Vapor-Liquid Phase Coexistence, Critical Properties, and Surface Tension of Confined Alkanes. J. Physical Chemistry 113 (17): 7170–7180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp8073915.
Sondergeld, C., Ambrose, R., Rai, C. et al. 2010. Micro-structural Studies of Gas Shales. Presented at the SPE Unconventional Gas Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 23–25 February. SPE-131771-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/131771-MS.
Teklu, T. W., Alharthy, N., Kazemi, H. et al. 2014. Phase Behavior and Minimum Miscibility Pressure in Nanopores. SPE Res Eval & Eng 17 (3): 396–403. SPE-168865-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/168865-MS.
Travalloni, L., Castier, M., Tavares, F. W. et al. 2010. Critical Behavior of Pure Confined Fluids From an Extension of the Van der Waals Equation of State. J. Supercritical Fluids 55: 455–461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.supflu.2010.09.008.
Wang, F. and Reed, R. 2009. Pore Networks and Fluid Flow in Gas Shales. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, USA, 4–7 October. SPE-124253-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/124253-MS.
Whitson, C. and Sunjerga, S. 2012. PVT in Liquid-Rich Shale Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–10 October. SPE-155499-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/155499-MS.
Zarragoicoechea, G. J. and Kuz, V. A. 2004. Critical Shift of Confined Fluid in a Nanopore. Fluid Phase Equilibria 220: 7–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fluid.2004.02.014.