A Field Test of Micellar Solution Flooding
- W.B. Gogarty (Marathon Oil Co.) | H. Surkalo (Marathon Oil Co.)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Journal of Petroleum Technology
- Publication Date
- September 1972
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 1,161 - 1,169
- 1972. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 2.5.2 Fracturing Materials (Fluids, Proppant), 5.6.5 Tracers, 5.5.2 Core Analysis, 5.4.7 Chemical Flooding Methods (e.g., Polymer, Solvent, Nitrogen, Immiscible CO2, Surfactant, Vapex), 5.6.2 Core Analysis, 1.6.9 Coring, Fishing, 5.2.1 Phase Behavior and PVT Measurements, 1.6 Drilling Operations, 4.3.4 Scale, 5.3.2 Multiphase Flow, 5.4.1 Waterflooding, 5.3.4 Reduction of Residual Oil Saturation, 3 Production and Well Operations, 6.5.2 Water use, produced water discharge and disposal, 2.4.3 Sand/Solids Control
- 2 in the last 30 days
- 177 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
The test described here indicated that it is technically feasible to use micellar solutions and recover oil from a previously waterflooded reservoir. For the particular reservoir and conditions tested, tertiary recovery in a full-scale flood should be in the neighborhood of 60 percent.
Laboratory results have been reported on an oil recovery process using micellar solutions. These solutions also are being used for injection well stimulation. Field testing with micellar solutions started in 1962 in the Eastern Illinois oilfield area. The first test was conducted in a reservoir that had not previously been waterflooded; the next was in a reservoir that had been waterflooded. The latter represented an initial attempt to obtain tertiary oil by using micellar solutions. (Results of the first two tests are summarized in Ref. 8.)
The test described here was carried out in the same general area as the first two and was of a tertiary nature. Results from the first tertiary test indicated that although oil had been displaced, little was produced; therefore the objective of this test was to determine if oil could be displaced and recovered by using micellar solutions in a previously waterflooded reservoir.
In conducting the test, two patterns in close proximity were run simultaneously. One pattern area proximity were run simultaneously. One pattern area remained fixed, and the other was enlarged in two steps. Because difficulties were encountered in evaluating the pattern that was repeatedly expanded, we shall deal here with the operation and evaluation of only the pattern with the fixed area.
The micellar solution test was conducted in a Robinson sandstone that had previously been waterflooded on 10-acre spacing. Geological studies of the Robinson sandstone indicate that its origin is nonmarine fluvial and that the individual sand bodies are lenticular. The test was located in one of these sand bodies known as the Henry reservoir, which is in southeastern Illinois, near the town of Robinson.
Fig. 1 is a net sand isopachous map of the Henry reservoir showing the location of the test site within the reservoir. Fig. 2 it a detailed isopachous map of the test area. With the exception of Water Injection Well M-18 and Oil Wells 26 and 27, all wells in the immediate test area are new and were drilled specifically for the test.
Wells 34, 36, 37, and 38 outline the test area considered in this paper. The area encompasses 0.75 acres. Well WI-2 served as the injection well for this inverted five-spot pattern. Wells to the east of the pattern are those used in the expanded portion of the pattern are those used in the expanded portion of the test mentioned above.
Detailed geological and reservoir studies were performed on core and logging data obtained from the performed on core and logging data obtained from the new wells. In Fig. 10, the porosity, permeability, and lithology are typical of data that came from this study. These data also are representative of the wells within the test area. As indicated in the figure, the test portion of the reservoir was at a depth of about 1,000 ft portion of the reservoir was at a depth of about 1,000 ft and has an average porosity of approximately 20 percent. The average air permeability of the test area was percent. The average air permeability of the test area was approximately 200 md.
All wells were drilled with rotary tools. The entire reservoir section was exposed below 5 1/2-in. casing.
|File Size||918 KB||Number of Pages||9|