A Case Study on Simulation of In-Situ CO2 Huff-‘n’-Puff Process
- Yong Wang (China University of Petroleum-Beijing) | Jirui Hou (China University of Petroleum-Beijing) | Zhaojie Song (China University of Petroleum-Beijing) | Dengyu Yuan (PetroChina Daqing Oilfield Limited Company) | Jingwei Zhang (China University of Petroleum-Beijing) | Teng Zhao (China University of Petroleum-Beijing)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- February 2018
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 109 - 121
- 2018.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Numerical simulation, In-situ CO2 huff ‘n’ puff, Enhanced oil recovery, Gas-forming reaction, Single fluid method
- 3 in the last 30 days
- 467 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
In-situ carbon dioxide (CO2) huff-‘n’-puff (ISCHP) is a promising enhanced-oil-recovery (EOR) technique that could overcome some major drawbacks associated with continuous CO2 flooding such as early CO2 breakthrough, high operation costs, and demand for CO2 source. The application in Jiangsu Oil Field triggered the augmentation of well productivity and indicated the preliminary potential of this technique.
Our work is to establish a prediction model for gas generation and to examine the mechanisms of ISCHP/EOR through sandpack tests and reservoir simulation. A salt solution with surfactant additives was selected to be the gas-forming agent, the gas-generating performance was tested in a high-temperature/high-pressure reactor first, and a kinetics-derived equation for gas-volume prediction was then verified by use of the experimental results. The displacement performance and efficiency were determined with sandpack testswith three different concentrations of a gas-forming agent. A reservoir model of ISCHP was established and calibrated on the basis of the sandpack-test results and past-production observations of the candidate well. The sensitivity analysis on the main-operation parameters was conducted to determine the optimal scheme, including injected volume, concentration, and soaking time.
The results indicate that gas volume predicted by the theoretical model is well-matched to experimental data of the gas-forming reaction, the sandpack test makes clear the synergy of CO2 and chemical flooding in ISCHP, and a higher concentration of reagent tends to produce more oil than a lower one. Reservoir simulation shows a large amount of CO2 generated near the wellbore, an average growth of 61% in oil production, an regent usage of 0.91 ton/ton of oil, and a temperature decline of 2.5°C in the region of 20m from the wellbore as a result of the endothermic reaction of reagent. On the basis of the reservoir model, the optimal scheme is achieved with a reagent concentration 16.4 wt%, an injected volume of 250 tons, and a soaking time of 7 days. This study can provide an improved understanding of ISCHP for EOR in Jiangsu Oil Field, including the gas-volume prediction, EOR potential in laboratory, and main operating parameters of ISCHP.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||13|
Altunina, L. K. and Kuvshinov, V. A. 2007. Physicochemical Methods for Enhancing Oil Recovery From Oil Fields. Russian Chem. Rev. 76 (10): 971–987.
Altunina, L. K. and Kuvshinov, V. A. 2008. Improved Oil Recovery of High-Viscosity Oil Pools Wth Physicochemical Methods and Thermal-Steam Treatment. Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 63 (1): 37–48. https://doi.org/10.2516/ogst:2007075.
Alvarez, J. M., Rivas, H. J., and Rossen, W. R. 2001. Unified Model for Steady-State Foam Behavior at High and Low Foam Qualities. SPE J. 6 (3): 325–333. SPE-74141-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/74141-PA.
Anada, H. R. 1980. State-of-the-Art Review of Nitrogen and Flue Gas Flooding in Enhanced Oil Recovery. Technical Report of US Department of Energy (No. DOE/MC/08333-2). Science Applications, Inc., Morgantown, West Virginia.
Apaydin, O. G. and Kovscek, A. R. 2001. Surfactant concentration and end effects on foam flow in porous media. Transport Porous Med 43 (3): 511–536.
Ashoori, E., van der Heijden, T. L. M., and Rossen, W. R. 2010. Fractional Flow Theory of Foam Displacements With Oil. SPE J. 15 (2): 260–273. SPE-121579-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/121579-PA.
Bardon, C., Corlay, P., Longeron, D. et al. 1994. Miller B. CO2 Huff “n” Puff Revives Shallow Light Oil-Depleted Reservoirs. SPE Res Eng 9 (2): 92–100. SPE-22650-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/22650-PA.
Ben Shiau, B. J., Hsu, T. P., Roberts, B. L. et al. 2000. Improved Chemical Flood Efficiency by In Situ CO2 Generation. Presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 24–28 April. SPE-129893-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/129893-MS.
Blaker, T., Aarra, M. G., Skauge, A. et al. 2002. Foam for Gas Mobility Control in the Snorre Field: The FAWAG Project. SPE Res Eval & Eng 5 (4): 317–323. SPE-78824-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/78824-PA.
Bonenfant, D., Mimeault, M., and Hausler, R. 2003. Determination of the Structural Features of Distinct Amines Important for the Absorption of CO2 and Regeneration in Aqueous Solution. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42 (14): 3179–3184. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie020738k.
Chen, H., Dou, B., Song, Y. et al. 2012. Studies on Absorption and Regeneration for CO2 Capture by Aqueous Ammonia. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Con. 6: 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.11.017.
Cheng, L., Reme, A. B., Shan, D. et al. 2000. Simulating Foam Processes at High and Low Foam Qualities. Presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 3–5 April. SPE-59287-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/59287-MS.
Computer Modelling Group Ltd. 2012. STARS User’s Guide. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Computer Modeling Group Ltd.
Cui, Y., Yang, F., Lv, H. et al. 2014. Application of In-Situ Gas Generation Huff-n-Puff Technology in Libao Oilfield. Complex Hydrocarb. Reserv. 7 (3): 68–71.
Farajzadeh, R., Andrianov, A., Krastev, R. et al. 2012. Foam–Oil Interaction In Porous Media: Implications for Foam Assisted Enhanced Oil Recovery. Adv. Colloid Interfac. 183–184: 1–13. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2012.07.002.
Johnson, H. R., Schmidt, L. D., and Thrash, L. D. 1990. A Flue Gas Huff “n” Puff Process for Oil Recovery From Shallow Formations. Presented at the SPE/DOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 22–25 April. SPE-20269-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/20269-MS.
Khatri, R. A., Chuang, S. S. C., Soong, Y. et al. 2006. Thermal and Chemical Stability of Regenerable Solid Amine Sorbent for CO2 Capture. Energy Fuels 20 (4): 1514–1520. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef050402y.
Lawson, J. B. and Reisberg, J. 1980. Alternate Slugs of Gas and Dilute Surfactant for Mobility Control During Chemical Flooding. Presented at the SPE/DOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 20–23 April. SPE-8839-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/8839-MS.
Liu, F. 2009. Experimental Study on CO2 Capture From Flue Gas of Coal-Fired Power Plant by Regenerated Aqua Ammonia. PhD thesis, Tsinghua University.
Llama, O. G. 2011. Mobility Control of Chemical EOR Fluids Using Foam in Highly Fractured Reservoirs. MS thesis, University of Texas at Austin (May 2011).
Luo, P., Er, V., Freitag, N. et al. 2013. Recharacterizing Evolving Fluid and PVT Properties of Weyburn Oil-CO2 System. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Con. 16: S226–S235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.03.001.
Lv, M. and Wang, S. 2015. Studies on CO2 Foam Stability and the Influence of Polymer on CO2 Foam Properties. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal Tech. 10 (4): 343–358. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJOGCT.2015.072077.
Ma, K., Lopez-Salinas, J. L., Puerto, M. C. et al. 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.
Ma, J., Wang, X., Gao, R. et al. 2015. Enhanced Light Oil Recovery From Tight Formations Through CO2 Huff “n” Puff Process. Fuel 154: 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.03.029.
McCann, N., Macder, M., and Attalla, M. 2008. Simulation of Enthalpy and Capacity of CO2 Absorption by Aqueous Amine System. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47 (6): 2002–2009. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie070619a.
Miller, B. J. 1990. Design and Results of a Shallow, Light Oilfield-Wide Application of CO2 Huff “n” Puff Process. Presented at the SPE/DOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 22–25 April. SPE-20268-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/20268-MS.
Mohammadi, S. S., Coombe, D. A., and Stevenson, V. M. 1993. Test of Steam-Foam Process for Mobility Control in South-Casper Creek Reservoir. J Can Pet Technol 32 (10): 49–54. PETSOC-93-10-06. https://doi.org/10.2118/93-10-06.
Monger, T. G. and Coma, J. M. 1988. A Laboratory and Field Evaluation of the CO2 Huff “n” Puff Process for Light-Oil Recovery. SPE Res Eng 3 (4): 1168–1176. SPE-15501-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/15501-PA.
Moradi-Araghi, A., Johnston, E. L., Zornes, D. R. et al. 1997. Laboratory Evaluation of Surfactants for CO2-Foam Applications at the South Cowden Unit. Presented at the SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, 18–21 February. SPE-37218-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/37218-MS.
Nowak, P. and Skrzypek, J. 1989. The Kinetics of Chemical Decomposition of Ammonium Bicarbonate and Carbonate in Aqueous Solutions. Chem. Eng. Sci. 44 (10): 2375. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(89)85170-X.
Patton, J. T., Coats, K. H., and Spence, K. 1982. Carbon Dioxide Well Stimulation: Part 1—A Parametric Study. J Pet Technol 34 (8): 1798–1804. SPE-9228-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/9228-PA.
Peng, D. Y. and Robinson, D. B. 1976. A New Two-Constant Equation of State. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 15 (1): 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1021/i160057a011.
Radke, C. J. and Gillis, J. V. 1990. A Dual Gas Tracer Technique for Determining Trapped Gas Saturation During Steady Foam Flow in Porous Media. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 23–26 September. SPE-20519-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/20519-MS.
Shayegi, S., Schenewerk, P. A., and Wolcott, J. M. 1998. Enhancement of Residual Oil Recovery Using a Mixture of Nitrogen or Methane Diluted With Carbon Dioxide in a Single-Well Injection Process. US Patent No. 5725054.
Sayegh, S. G. and Maini, B. B. 1984. Laboratory Evaluation of the CO2 Huff-n-Puff Process for Heavy Oil Reservoirs. J Can Pet Technol 23 (3): 29–36. PETSOC-84-03-02. https://doi.org/10.2118/84-03-02.
Schramm, L. L. 1994. Foam Sensitivity to Crude Oil in Porous Media. ACS Advances in Chemistry Series 242: 165–197. https://doi.org/10.1021/ba-1994-0242-ch004.
Srivastava, M. 2010. Foam Assisted Low Interfacial Tension Enhanced Oil Recovery. PhD thesis, University of Texas Austin (May 2010).
Talebian, S. H., Masoudi, R., Tan, I. M. et al. 2014. Foam Assisted CO2-EOR: A Review of Concept, Challenges, and Future Prospects. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 120: 202–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2014.05.013.
Yang, F., Zhu, W., Yu, X. et al. 2013. Application of In-situ Generation Gas Huff-n-Puff Process in W5 Heavy Oil Reservoir of Jiangsu Oilfield. Complex Hydrocarb. Reserv. 6 (3): 71–75.
Zanganeh, M. N. 2011. Simulations and Optimization of Foam EOR Processes. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands (July 2011).
Zhang, F., Fan, X., and Ding, J. 2000. Field Experiment of Enhancing Heavy Oil Recovery by Cyclic Fuel Gas Injection. Presented at the International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in China, Beijing, 7–10 November. SPE-64724-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/64724-MS.
Zhou, B., Qin, G., Fu, S. et al. 2011. Study and Application of Heat Self-Generating CO2 Flooding for EHOR. Presented at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference and Exhibition, Kuwait, 12–14 December. SPE-150086-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/150086-MS.