The Giant Karachaganak Field,

Unlocking Its Potential

Karachaganak, one of the worlds largest gas condensate reservoirs,
requires an innovative team approach to maximize field potential. Its
remoteness, complex carbonate structure and perplexing fluid behavior
present both obstacles and opportunities for production optimization.

Steve Elliott
H.H. Hsu
Terry OHearn
Ian F. Sylvester
Ricardo Vercesi
Karachaganak Integrated Organization
London, England, UK
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Tom
Olsen, Dowell, Aberdeen, Scotland; Keith Rappold,
Schlumberger Oilfield Services, Sugar Land, Texas, USA;
and Daniel Ugwuzor, Schlumberger Oilfield Services,
Luanda, Republic of Angola.
StimCADE is a mark of Schlumberger.

16

The Karachaganak field of northern

Kazakhstan, under production for the last fifteen years, imposes major challenges in
reservoir characterization and production
optimization on the international team
charged with developing the giant condensate accumulation. The Karachaganak
Integrated Organization (KIO) Development
Team, comprising technical experts from
Agip, BG, Texaco and Lukoil, is responsible
for devising a field production strategy that
will make the most of the complex carbonate structure. Constructing structural and
stratigraphic models and understanding the
behavior of the reservoir fluids are keys to
this problem. This article describes the information available to the team and discusses
the approaches being taken to maximize
recovery of Karachaganak reserves.

Land of the Giants

The Karachaganak field lies on the northern

margin of the Pre-Caspian basin, the predecessor of the Caspian Sea, 150 km [93 miles]
east of Uralsk, Kazakhstan (next page). The
sediments in the 500,000-km2 [193,000 sqmile] basin are up to 22 km [14 miles] thick,
with a salt layer dividing the volume into
subsalt and suprasalt sections.
Hydrocarbon exploration has been active
in the suprasalt section of the Pre-Caspian
basin since the early 1900s: about 80 small,
mainly oil fields were discovered, but are
now almost depleted. Subsalt exploration
began only in the 1970s. Since then, discovery of the giant fields such as Karachaganak,
Tengiz and Astrakhan has placed the PreCaspian among the richest oil and gas basins
in the world.

Oilfield Review

Moscow

Quantifying reserves and optimizing

recovery from these fields require an overall
understanding of the basin and its architecture. Drilling into the subsalt has been
confined mainly to the margins of the basin,
and in some parts there exist seismic surveys. These and a knowledge of the regional
geology have helped to construct a vision of
the basin that is guiding exploration and
production efforts.

Kazakhstan

To Samara

Field History

Autumn 1998

A
UR

R
LP

OV

IN C

To Orenburg

Uralsk
Carbonate platform

Karachaganak

ate
pla
t f or

mm
arg
i

A
LG
VO

Ca
rbo
n

Karachaganak itself was discovered in 1979

and began production in 1984 under the
operatorship of Karachaganakgazprom, a
subsidiary of Russias GazProm. Kazakhgas,
the Kazakhstan state gas company, took over
operatorship when Kazakhstan became a
sovereign state in 1992. Agip and British Gas
formed a contractor group after being
awarded sole negotiating rights to the field in
1992. Texaco and Lukoil joined this group in
March 1995 and signed a Production
Sharing Agreement (PSA) with the Republic
of Kazakhstan in November 1997. The PSA
became effective in January 1998.
The field is located near the border
between Kazakhstan and Russia in a lowlying, almost flat area noted for its arable
farming but traditionally considered part of
the steppes. The region is characterized by
hot summers, cold winters and short springs

Bolshoi mountains

Iran

CENTRAL

DEPRESSION

Astrakhan

Tengiz

Basin
margin suture

Caspian Sea

To Black Sea

Zhanazhol

0
0

km
miles

250
400

Karachaganak field,
now being developed
by BG, Agip, Texaco
and Lukoil. Currently,
produced fluids are
piped 130 km for processing and distribution
to Orenburg, Russia.
In the future, separated
and stabilized oil will
be sent, via a connector,
to the Caspian Pipeline
Consortium pipeline.
[Map adapted from
Cook HE, Zhemchuzinikov VG,
Buvtyshkin VM, Golub
LY, Gatovsky YA and
Zorin AY: Devonian
and Carboniferous Passive-Margin Carbonate
Platforms of Southern
Kazakhstan: Summary
of Depositional and
Stratigraphic Models to
Assist in the Exploration
and Production of
Coeval Giant Carbonate
Platform Oil and Gas
Fields in the North
Caspian Basin, Western
Kazakhstan, in Pangea:
Global Environments
and Resources, Canadian
Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 17.
Calgary, Alberta,
Canada: Canadian
Society of Petroleum
Geologists (1994):
363381.]

17

ties associated with drilling to depths of 6500

m [21,330 ft], very few of these wells penetrated as far as the Middle Devonian.
However, hydrocarbons from the Middle
Devonian have flowed to surface on test, so it
is an important appraisal target for the KIO
Reservoir Team.

Karachaganak field operating conditions.

A remote location and harsh conditions,
including extreme variations in seasonal
weather, make production operations
difficult and challenging.

The Development Plan

and autumns. The severe continental climate, with wind blowing constantly, makes
operating conditions very difficult (above).
From November to March, with temperatures regularly around 40C [40F], the
ground is frozen and travel is hazardous.
Crews have to fly to Uralsk using a charter
airline. During the spring thaw and after
occasional rain showers, the soil turns to
heavy, sticky mud and roads are regularly
washed out, so roads in the field have to be
built up onto banks several meters high. The
summer months, by contrast, are noted for
temperatures in excess of +40C [140F].
Currently, the operating team uses existing
buildings for both accommodation and
offices in the nearest support town, Aksai,
over 30 km [19 miles] away. Plans are afoot
to develop a new camp site to provide modern working and living facilities for a staff of
200 expatriates and 600 local residents.
The 1979 discovery of the field resulted
from drilling to confirm a structural high
detected during reinterpretation of 1970 to
1971 vintage 2D seismic data. Extensive
appraisal drilling resulted in the identification
of the huge Permian-Carboniferous reef complex measuring 30 by 15 km [19 by 9 miles]
(next page). The crest of the structure is recognized at 3500 meters subsea (mss), the gasoil contact at 4950 mss and the oil-water
contact at 5150 mss. This provides a gas column of over 1450 m [4757 ft] and an oil column of 200 m [656 ft], with hydrocarbon in
place of 1.2 Tcm [42.4 Tcf] gas and 1 billion
tonnes [0.1 billion tons] of liquids.
It is hardly surprising therefore that
Karachaganak is ranked as one of the largest
gas condensate fields in the world and is
expected to produce far into the next century. The field consists of a carbonate massif,
the structure and stratigraphy of which have
been documented in several publications.1

18

The formations are heterogeneous, especially the uppermost reservoir in the Permian.
The average reservoir permeability is 2 mD
with 9% porosity, 40% net/gross ratio and a
water saturation of only 10%. Initial reservoir
pressure was 52,000 to 59,500 kPa [7547 to
8630 psi] and the field temperature ranged
from 70 to 95C [158 to 203F].
Hydrocarbon production began in October
1984, initially from three wells penetrating
the Permian. An oil and gas separation plant
was installed to treat the oil and gas for transfer by pipeline to the Orenburg processing
plant located 130 km [80 miles] north in
Russia. In 1984 the pilot production plan
limited production operations to partial
separation and dewpoint control with all subsequent stages of processing at Orenburg.
The condensate delivered is approximately
47 degrees API and contains a high mercaptan content of 1700 ppm.2 Also, the gas is
difficult to handle as it is sour, averaging
3.5 to 5.0% hydrogen sulfide [H2S] and 5.5%
carbon dioxide [CO2]. The hydrocarbon
composition varies with depth.3
The previous development plan, created by
VNIIGaz, called for full voidage gas reinjection to maintain the reservoir pressure above
the dewpoint pressure. Since then, this dewpoint restriction policy on production wells
has been maintained by the Kazakhstan
Ministry of Geology and Protection of
Natural Resources.
During the pilot production phase, production rose steadily as more wells were brought
on-stream to reach a plateau rate of 155 Bcf/yr
of gas and 100,000 B/D of liquid in 1990. The
plateau lasted for two years until a gradual
decline began in mid-1992. The field is
expected to produce 2.0 Mt of liquids in
1998. There have been 252 vertical production wells drilled on the field, but the current
maximum number of active wells on production is only 36. Because of technical difficul-

Karachaganak has a large number of development options and challenges due to its
remoteness, size and fluid composition. The
distance of the field from western markets is
perhaps the greatest challenge for KIO. Since
Karachaganak is already partially developed,
the development plan calls for the completion, refurbishment and improvement of existing facilities as well as the construction of
new facilities. When completed, the field will
be equipped with wells, facilities and processing capabilities, which will increase production to maximum liquid and gas rates of
13,000 tons/yr and 883 Bcf/yr by 2005 and
2010, respectively.
While the previous development plan of
VNIIGas was based on full injection of gas
after the extraction of liquids, the current
development plan calls for injecting 10 Bcm/a
353 Bcf/yr] of sour separator gas by the year
2010, making the balance of the gas available
for export. Injection will initially take place in
a southeastern part of the Carboniferous reservoir. Current development plans envision that
40% of the total produced gas will be reinjected over the 40-year term of the PSA.
The KIO Reservoir Team is working with
NIPIMunaigas, a Kazakh technical institute,
to develop a new technological scheme for
the development of the Karachaganak field.
1. Bagrintseva KI and Shershukov IV: Models of
the Distribution of Different Types of Carbonate
Reservoirs in Oil and Gas Fields of the Pre-Caspian
Depression, Abstracts, American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention, vol. 6.
Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA: AAPG (1997): A6.
Bodden WR III, Sherman GX, Yugai TA, Savvin VA
and Votsalevsky ES: Karachaganak Field, Precaspian
Basin, Kazakhstan, Abstracts, American Association
of Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention, vol. 6.
Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA: AAPG (1997): A12.
Grigoryeva VA, Zulpukarova NT, Ivanova MM and
Kolesnikov AF: Geology of Karachaganak Field and
Tasks for Bringing it Onstream, Petroleum Geology
29, no. 1-2 (1995): 815.
Kononov YS: The Carbonate Massif of The
Karachaganak Field, Petroleum Geology 23,
no. 7-8 (1989): 287-291.
2. Mercaptans are pungent-smelling sulfur compounds
that occur in natural gas and are sometimes used to
add odor to refined gas.
3. Perepelichenko VF, Shilin AV and Rovenskaya AS:
Gigantic Hydrocarbon Fields of Pre-Caspian Basin
Aspects of their Distribution, Features of Exploration
and Development, Abstracts, 58th Conference and
Technical Exhibition of the European Association of
Geoscientists & Engineers, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, June 3-7, 1996, A042.

Oilfield Review

South
3400

33

15

P - Permian

23

C - Carboniferous

P1ar

D - Devonian

3600

P1s

s - Serpukhovian
v - Visean
t - Tourmaisian

3800

North

13

3400

kg - Kungurian
ar - Artinskian
s - Sakmarian
a - Asselian

3600

Depth subsea, m

3800
P1a

fm - Famennian

4000

4000
P1kg

4200
P1s

4200

P1ar
P1a

4400

4400

4600

4600

C1s

C1b

4800

4800
P1a+ar
C1v

5000

C2b

D3fm

D3fm

5000

5115
D3fm
5200

West

5277

Limestone

Talus

Normal marine

Shallow marine

Inner reef lagoon

Reef core

Relatively deep water

Slope

Anhydrite

19

11

110

103

3300
P1kg
P1ar

3700
P1ar

3900

28

21

East

3500
3700
3900

P1s

4100
Depth subsea, m

17

3300

3500

4100
P1a

4300

P1a

4300

4500

4500
C1s

4700

4700
C1v

4900
5100

5200

5279

D3fm

C1t

4900
5100

3300

3300

4300

4300

5300

5300

Structural cross sections through the Karachaganak field showing the buildup associated with the PermoCarboniferous reef complex.
The flanks of the structure are overlain by salt so imaging them seismically is difficult. Consequently, the new 3D seismic acquisition
program being planned for 1999 may lead to a different interpretation of the flanks.

Autumn 1998

19

History-Matched Delta Skins from Well 621 Total Skin Before = 75, Post-Acid Skin = 18
70,000

IPR
Absolute pressure, kPa

60,000

Zero skin production

600 m3/d

50,000
40,000

Post-acid
production

30,000

Initial
production

20,000
10,000
0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Oil rate, m3/d

Increase in production after stimulation. Production rate before stimulation is plotted at

the intersection of the two pink curves. The rate after stimulation appears at the intersection of the pink and purple curves.

Optimizing Karachaganak Operations

The team is actively evaluating suitable

methods for stimulating production from
Karachaganak and in 1997 collaborated
with Schlumberger on a pilot stimulation
program whose aim was to increase field
productivity from 50,000 to 70,000 B/D
[7945 to 11,125 m3/d]. Initially, 10 wells
were chosen and a program consisting
primarily of matrix acidizing to reduce the
high skin was carried out in the summer
and fall of 1997.
The first part of the pilot stimulation program involved using coiled tubing to clean
out the wells and spot hydrochloric acid at a
low rate (0.6 bbl/min) across the long pay
interval. The matrix acid was then bullheaded into the formation at a rate of 5
bbl/min, and the first wells saw a substantial
400% increase in productivity index,
although much of the surface production
increase was tempered by current tubing
restrictions (above). This success was very
encouraging. However, the extremely large
zones did cause a problem for conventional
bull-headed acid jobs. As soon as the acid
opened up a section of the damaged zone,
that zone absorbed all the remaining acid.
Also, high-permeability streaks within the
pay zone inhibited total interval stimulation;
the acid flowed preferentially into certain
zones and did not open the entire interval.
Next the team focused on diversion techniques to achieve more effective acidization.
In many of the Karachaganak wells, the quality of the cement bond behind the casing is
unknown. Thus, diversion techniques would
have to take into account the possibility of
acid channeling behind the casing through
the cement and not into the formation. The

20

aggressiveness of the diversion program

would then be a function of the connectivity
of the reservoir. If the reservoir intervals are
separate, then each interval would need to
be stimulated individually to tap the oil.
Ideally, the wells would be worked over and
vertical conformance testing performed with
packers to determine vertical permeability.
Such tests would help determine reservoir
connectivity. However, as workovers are
expensive, the stimulation program was performed through tubing.
The first trial step in the diversion program
involved the use of self-diverting acid pumped
at a high rateexceeding 30 bbl/min.
This type of gelled acid etches wormholes into
the carbonate formation, but as the acid is
spent, pH increases, causing the fluids to
crosslink and thicken. The acids viscosity
increases, thereby temporarily shutting off the
wormhole and diverting the fresh acid to
other damaged areas in the formation.
Finally, the diversion program evaluated
mechanical diverters, such as ball sealers or
coiled tubing injection with through-tubing
inflatable packers. Alternatively, a full
workover may be necessary to run straddle
packers or fullbore packers and bridge plugs
to isolate zones.
The combination of mechanical and chemical diversion techniques has helped to
improve the production stimulation program
and achieve the desired production targets.
Simulations using StimCADE well stimulation software are now being run to match the
results of the damage removal from the pilot
acidizing program with the modeled job
designs. Mechanical and particulate diversion techniques are also being modeled to
determine additional means of removing the
skin from the wells.

Another option under consideration for the

future is acid-etched fracturing. The acid
fracs would bypass the deep-penetrating formation damage, which is difficult to remove
by the radial flow of matrix acidizing. Acid
fracs also allow stimulation of lower permeability intervals and can attain significant
negative skins to improve production. These
jobs are not perfect, however, and without
mechanical diversion, the fractures tend to
initiate in the high-permeability streaks,
leading to suboptimal conformance.
Another potential problem is control of
fracture height and placement. In order to
prevent gas cuspinganalogous to water
coninginto the oil zone, the team will
need to ensure that the fractures do not
extend beyond 200 m [656 ft]. In fact, it may
be technically less risky to drill horizontal
drainholes because the risk of gas cusping is
reduced as gas is injected or liquid is produced. Cusping may become an even
greater problem as gas is reinjected.
Similarly, modern horizontal well technology could be used to optimize production
from the 200-m thick Carboniferous oil rim.
One approach would be to use existing vertical wells as starting points for horizontal
drainholes. For this purpose it is important to
know the condition of the wells, so another
part of the Karachaganak project involves a
study of the mechanical state of the wells.
Initially, all well log data such as cement bond
logs are being analyzed for rock mechanics
information to characterize the rock properties. Also, all datum depths are being verified,
because it is crucial to know the precise spatial extent of one well if another horizontal
well is being drilled nearby.
Reservoir Characterization Challenges

Previous 2D mapping and detailed lithostratigraphic and chronostratigraphic studies

of the Karachaganak field by Agip and British
Gas geologists in 1992 produced a layer-cake
model. This was done by correlating porosity packets interpreted from wireline log
data and using the original reservoir rocktype classification scheme based on five rock
types. Since 1992, advances in sequence
stratigraphy and 3D reservoir modeling techniques now enable a more realistic reservoir
description incorporating all the available
core, log, seismic and performance data.
Cores promise to reveal a great deal about
reservoir quality and facies distribution.
Much of the original sedimentary fabric is
reported to have been preserved, despite
locally extensive dolomitization of the
carbonate reservoir. One of the keys to reservoir model development will be locating
original core from the field. At least 52 wells

Oilfield Review

Autumn 1998

Southwest

915

452
20 905

27

Northeast

4000

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

4500

Depth subsea, m

10
11
12

4950 GOC

13
14
15
16
17

5000

Porosity, %
>12
8 to 10

5150 OWC

6 to 8
4 to 6
0 to 4

5500

6000

Early Permian (Layers 1 to 5)

Carboniferous (Layers 6 to 16)
Late Devonian (Layer 17)

6500

Southeast 713 43

446

452
437 913 425

Northwest

1
2

4500

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Depth subsea, m

were cored early in the life of the field

and approximately 1800 to 2500 m [5900
to 8200 ft] of core were collected.
Unfortunately, the cores were not continuous, and core recovery was not consistent.
Additionally, through the years, the cores
have been divided and distributed to a number of institutions in Russia and Kazakhstan.
The KIO reservoir team plans to recover the
core to enable detailed interpretation of
whole well cores. The team understands that
much work has been completed in the past
and plans to ensure that past studies are
incorporated into the present work and that
local experts in Kazakh institutes are closely
involved in the field development.
The cores may also be useful for answering
an important question about the role played
by fractures and faulting in the production of
hydrocarbons from Karachaganak. In the
existing 2D seismic datasets, significant
faults have not been identified in the
Permian-Carboniferous reservoir, yet they
are recognized in the Middle Devonian. The
reservoir team has not seen compelling arguments for fracture support in the past production history of the field and can account
for existing production rates through matrix
support from the low-permeability, 1650-m
[5414-ft] thick reservoir. However, until the
cores have been studied in detail, the team is
keeping an open mind on the issue. Local
experts have indicated the possibility of fractures in their interpretations of well logs, but
there are only limited borehole images available that could cast some light on the issue.
Currently, the largest contribution to the
geological database for modeling the field
comes from electric logs taken in 173 wells.
In only one well, K818, have both westernstyle and Russian-style logs been run.
Even so, this single occurrence of dual logging has enabled an algorithm to be created
that relates western rock property measurements to Russian log values and ratios
(see Comparing Schlumberger and Russian
Well Logs, page 22). Consequently, the
large quantity of older Russian log data was
usable in producing rock property distributions and the present reservoir model for
Karachaganak. In the well deepening that
will occur with further development of the
field, there will be a number of opportunities
to run new sets of both Russian and westernstyle logs including borehole imaging tools.
Construction of a detailed digital 3D reservoir and visualization model will therefore
consist of a number of stages:
Collection, repatriation, description and
interpretation of the cores

5000

13

4950 GOC

14
15
16

5150 OWC

17

Porosity, %
>12
8 to 10
6 to 8
4 to 6

5500

0 to 4

6000
Early Permian (Layers 1 to 5)
Carboniferous (Layers 6 to 16)
Late Devonian (Layer 17)

Examples of two vertical cross sections through the Karachaganak field showing the
distribution of porosity according to a multilayered model. Note the heterogeneous nature
of the units.

Development of modern genetic sedimentary units within a sequence stratigraphic

approach
Integration of petrophysical, geological
and seismic data

Creation of a 3D stochastic geological

model (above)
Upscaling for reservoir simulation and
development planning.

21

Comparing Schlumberger and Russian Well Logs

In order to make independent estimates of

GR

reserves, and to determine or predict how the

Karachaganak reservoir might perform, Russian

APISchlumberger

Russian

ohm-mSchlumberger

ohm-mRussian

GK

and Schlumberger logs were run in the same well,

K818 (right). This operation allowed Russian logs

LLD

Depth,
200

DTM
20,000

300

s/m
Schlumberger

20,000

300

s/mRussian

LL
10

NPHL
100

0.4

100

0.4

DTM

PHIE

LSSchlumberger 0.1

0.4

NPHL
LSRussian

Schlumberger

0.1

PHIE
0.1

0.4

Russian

0.1

to be calibrated against Schlumberger logs, which

are in turn calibrated against known standards for

5100

rock and fluid properties.

In general, there is good agreement between
the Russian and Schlumberger log curves. The
exception is the neutron curve: in most intervals,
the Russian logs read 2 to 5 porosity units higher
than the Schlumberger curve, reflecting the algorithm used to convert Russian curve counts to

5150

porosity. Hole conditions are reported to be good,

as revealed by an excellent caliper response.
Effective porosity curves from the neutron/sonic
crossplots are presented in the far right-hand
track. Despite the different ways in which Russian
and western experts interpret the meaning of effective porosity, neutron/sonic crossplot porosities

5200

compare much more closely than do the raw neutron curves.1 Porosities from the Russian logs were
then calibrated, using an algorithm developed
from K818 relationships, against western logs.
As a result of this comparative study, and other
back-to-back well log evaluations,2 considerable
confidence was gained in the Russian logs and

5250

logging contractors, to the extent that calibrated

Russian logs from the remaining 170 wells in
Karachaganak could be used to obtain valuable
reservoir parameters for mapping, modeling and
reserve estimation. In addition, these results
showed that a substantial new log acquisition program was not required, and that operational costsavings could be made by using local contractors.

Russian and Schlumberger log responses for Karachaganak Well K818. Schlumberger curves and headers
are in blue; Russian curves and headers in red. Reading from left to right, the curves are as follows.
Track 1: gamma ray. Track 2: laterolog resistivity (LL) and deep laterolog resistivity (LLD). Track 3: sonic logs.
Track 4: neutron porosity (limestone matrix). Track 5: neutron/sonic crossplot porosity.

1. Moss B and Stocks A: "Log Interpretation Methods in the

Former Soviet Union," in Harrison R (ed): Russian-Style
Formation Evaluation: London, England: London
Petrophysical Society (1995): 175182.
2. Kennedy M: "A Direct Comparison of Western and Russian
Porosity Logs," in Harrison R (ed): Russian-Style
Formation Evaluation: London, England: London
Petrophysical Society (1995): 187191.

22

Oilfield Review

The Fluid Model

Gas

Depth subsea, m

4000
4200
4400
4600
4800
5000

Oil

5200
200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

Gas/liquid ratio, sm3/sm3

Variation of gas/liquid ratio with depth. Practically speaking, the boundary between
the oil and gas condensate zones is a continuum and is marked as a transition zone.
3600
3800
4000
Depth subsea, m

Gas
4200
4400
4600
4800
5000

Oil

5200
24

26

28

30

32

34

36
38
API

40

42

44

46

48

50

Variation of API with depth. API decreases gradually from 48 in the gas condensate
leg to 26 at the base of the oil column, but there is no obvious boundary between the
two layers, reflecting a continuum as the gas/liquid ratio varies with depth.
3600
3800
4000

Gas

4200

s
res
np

atio

4400

ure

Depth subsea, m

orm

Autumn 1998

3800

ial f

4. Wheaton R: Characterisation and Development

Planning for a Giant Gas Condensate Field, presented at the Optimisation of Gas Condensate Fields
Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland, June 2627, 1997.

3600

Init

The Karachaganak field is considered to

have a range of fluids and fluid behavior that
is uniquely complex, so a thorough understanding of these properties is essential to
modeling the behavior of the field and planning its development in the future.4
The reservoir hosts a gas condensate fluid
system grading from rich at the structural
top of the reservoir to extremely rich and
black oil at the bottom. The initial pressure
and temperature of the system place it in the
category of retrograde gas condensate
behavior: when production causes the pressure to drop below the saturation pressurea
condition called the dewpointcondensate
liquid will condense from the gas phase. The
properties of such a fluid, especially its mobility, and the effects on well productivity during
production below the dewpoint, are under
debate within the technical community. This
will be discussed in more detail in the next
section (see Production Below the
Dewpoint, page 24).
The ratio of gas to liquid varies with depth
throughout the reservoir. At the top of the
Permian, for example, the gas/liquid ratio
(GLR) is about 2000 scm/scm, at the gas-oil
contact (GOC) it is 800 scm/scm and at the
base of the oil leg in the Carboniferous the
ratio has dropped to 200 scm/scm. There is a
continuous and steady compositional gradation between these points, as can be seen in
the decreasing GLR (above right), the
decreasing API of the product liquids (right)
and by the variation in dew- and bubblepoint
with depth (below right). In fact, there is no
distinct boundary between the gas condensate and oil legs of Karachaganak, and at the
gas-oil contact zone the reservoir fluid is
close to the critical point. This means that the
gas and oil have very similar compositions
and there are no sudden changes in fluid
properties as gas condensate becomes oil. In
fact, the formation pressure would have to
drop by 20% for a heterogeneous fluid system to appear.
A large amount of data on reservoir and
surface liquids was available from earlier
Soviet sources, which allowed Agip and BG
to develop a robust fluid model for the reservoir. Field data available to the companies
included: historical produced gas/liquid
ratios; drillstem test (DST) data for exploration and production wells plus associated
laboratory studies; and well test data on production wells. Karachaganakgazprom generated these data and the Agip-BG group was
able, in addition, to conduct several western

4600
4800
5000
Oil
5200

360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620
Pressure, bar

A steady variation in dewpoint and bubblepoint with depth. At the boundary

between the gas and oil legs, the reservoir pressure is close to the critical point,
resulting in a very smooth transition between fluid compositions of the different legs.

23

standard DSTs and pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) experiments at the Agip and

BG laboratories.
Integrating the field-observed GLR variation
with depth and the experimental PVT results
allowed development of the equation of state
(EOS) for the fluid model. GLR changes with
depth were considered to be primary data
sources, while the laboratory-derived reservoir fluid data such as saturation pressures,
liquid drop-out and compositions were considered to be a secondary data source since
they depend on the accuracy of recombination of surface fluids.
However, there are a number of difficulties
in measuring GLRs for a gas condensatevolatile oil system when the reservoir exhibits
a high degree of heterogeneity. In these circumstances, pressures around the wellbore
may drop below the saturation pressure when
the well is flowed and therefore change the
GLRs. This sensitivity to changes in tubinghead pressure and thus to flow rate produces
GLRs that can be substantially above or
below the true initial GLR. This is particularly true in the Permian because of the limited drainage volumes and connectivity
between wells. Inaccuracies in GLRs can also
result from practical difficulties such as poor
temperature control or exceeding the capacity of the separator. However, the effects of
these potential problems were all carefully
considered and accounted for when analyzing the available GLR data.
The GLR data were used in conjunction
with the PVT experimental data to develop a
12-component EOS fluid model that
matched saturation pressures, liquid dropout and surface densities at all depths from
which samples were collected. To increase
confidence in the compositional trends with
depth, the validity of the fluid model was
checked in a series of field tests in 1996. In
all cases the fluid property model was determined to be reliable.
Production Below the Dewpoint

When a retrograde condensate fluid is

produced below the dewpoint, a liquidcondensate phase forms. It was commonly
believed that allowing reservoir pressure to
fall below the dewpoint could significantly
limit reservoir performance and ultimate
recoveries of liquids and gas. However, there
are now strong technical arguments and field
analogies that can support a production
strategy which yields efficient recoveries at
pressures below the dewpoint. The low interfacial tension and the offsetting effects of
high flowing velocities near the wellbore
and improving fluid properties at lower pressures may negate the reduction of effective
gas permeability.

24

Historically, the industry has employed

pressure maintenance techniquescycling
produced gas through the reservoirto
maintain reservoir pressure above the dewpoint. This was due to mobility concerns and
other factors such as the lack of a gas market.
A review of literature shows that as early as
1947 Standing et al presented a different
view of the need to maintain pressure above
the dewpoint.5 They stated, The recovery of
the heavier components from a gas cap or
retrograde pool is shown to be the greatest
when the sand is cycled with a dry gas at a
low pressure. This conclusion is in direct
opposition to the belief that the most efficient production program is pressure maintenance and cycling at or near the dewpoint.
Weinaug and Cordell reported on revaporization studies in 1948.6 They stated, A study
of the behavior of retrograde condensation
from gas mixtures was made in the presence
and absence of sand in order to determine if
the condensed liquid would revaporize in the
presence of sand. The data obtained for this
system also show that equilibrium is maintained at all times during the pressure
decline. These results indicate that revaporization is aided rather than prevented by the
fact that the condensate wets the sand.
In 1967 Havlena et al reported on their
study of cycling at declining pressures in the
Windfall field.7 They addressed the issue of
revaporization and concluded, Cycling
condensate reservoirs under conditions of
declining pressure rather than constant pressure is advantageous both from a recovery
and an economic standpoint. By operating at
declining pressure, the wet gas displaced
from the swept areas is recovered concurrently with wet gas recovered by expansion
from the unswept portions of the reservoir.
Any liquid condensed in the swept areas is
revaporized by dry injection gas and recovered as an enriched gas.
In 1983 Aziz gave a critique of gas cycling
and in his discussion of factors affecting
recovery efficiency he noted, It is very
important to closely define reservoir heterogeneity in order to predict the performance
by cycling a gas-condensate reservoir.8
This applies especially to numerical modeling. Aziz discussed revaporization of condensate and reminded the reader of the
work of Standing et al. He stated, A popular concept prevailing until the sixties was
that any liquid condensed in the reservoir by
pressure reduction would be lost forever.
Standing et al had presented an opposite
concept in 1946. However, the possibility of
revaporization of condensate with dry gas
injection was ignored as a viable process.

The increasing price of gas forced operators to make a thorough study of the cycling
process. As a result of these findings and the
increased price of gas, the previous cycle of
gas production, condensate stripping, gas
reinjection with makeup gas followed by
blowdown and gas sales only has been
modified. Net present worth of a gascondensate reservoir can now be maximized
by an optimal amount of gas and condensate
sales right from the start. Essentially, Aziz
emphasized the economic aspects of gascondensate reservoir operations.
These quotations by leading reservoir engineers show that production below the dewpoint with gas injection does not cause the
large-scale loss of condensate that was previously anticipated. The volume of gas
injected will depend upon an optimization
of technical and economic conditions relevant for that field.
The development strategy for Karachaganak
is designed to efficiently recover hydrocarbons from each distinct producing horizon
using state-of-the-art technologies such as 3D
reservoir characterization and horizontal
drilling. The dewpoint is only an issue in the
Carboniferous, where gas reinjection is
planned. Heterogeneities in the Permian will
not support reinjection, while the volatile
oil rim will be developed using horizontal
wells. Staged reinjection is planned in the
Carboniferous with extensive monitoring to
detect mobility losses should they occur. This
targeted development planalong with technical arguments, field analogies and continual laboratory testingwill guide the
reservoir development.
To investigate the phenomena of condensation and condensate mobility below the
dewpoint, BG Technology performed several
experiments at their London Research
Station in England. Soon after, BG
Technology relocated in 1994 to the purpose-built Gas Research and Technology
Centre in Loughborough, England. BG
Technology completed additional experiments to measure the interfacial tension (IFT)
of the condensate at pressures below the
dewpoint and measured the relative permeability of gas and condensate at various pressures below the dewpoint.
An important benefit for the Karachaganak
development is that the fluid is near-critical
in the lower section of the gas leg. The fluid
EOS model predicted low IFT in the nearcritical fluid, which increases the pseudopressure, offsetting a reduction in relative
permeability caused by liquid drop-out. The
EOS model prediction of low IFT was confirmed by BG Technologys laser IFT rig that
measured IFT values at reservoir conditions
as low as 0.08m N/m at more than 6900 kPa

Oilfield Review

Gas production and marketing challenges.

A complex carbonate reservoir and complicated fluid behavior present obstacles and
opportunities for Karachaganak operations
that are addressed through an innovative
team approach.

[1000 psi] below dewpoint pressure. This

result indicated that condensate that
dropped out of the gas phase would still be
mobile within the given pressure range.
Further laboratory experiments carried out
under reservoir conditions involved depositing condensate onto core samples by reducing pressure below the dewpoint. Flowing
equilibrium gas through the core and measuring gas and liquid flow rates demonstrated that liquid mobility continued well
below the dewpoint with residual condensate saturation still at only 5% at 6900 kPa
below the dewpoint. Agip also conducted
gas injection experiments on the oil leg to
determine the alteration of the bubblepoint
as lean gas is injected.
Based on the results of the experimental
program, Agip and BG proposed a field
experimental program to evaluate the laboratory phenomena under field conditions. In
August 1995 Agip and BG signed a protocol
with the Republic of Kazakhstan Ministry of
Oil and Gas and Ministry of Geology and
Protection of Natural Resources to allow six
wells to be produced below the dewpoint to
a pressure of 410 bar to test the laboratory
results. These wells have been on production
since, and no reduction in condensate/gas
ratio (CGR) has been observed. It has been
agreed with the Kazakh technical governing
bodies that condensate mobility in the producing wells of the field trial is not adversely
affected for drawdowns consistent with the
pressure drops applied during the laboratory
experimental program.
The KIO reservoir team has received
approval to add more wells to the dewpoint
trial well stock during 1998 to drawdown the
wells even further below the dewpoint to
observe the effect on the CGR. To assist in
the field experiment program, equipment
that will allow continuous monitoring of the
CGR ratio will be applied to the dewpoint
well stock.

Autumn 1998

Additional plans call for conducting further

reservoir-condition laboratory measurements
of IFT and gas-condensate relative permeabilities to support the field experiment program.
3D Seismic Survey

To further understand the reservoir and

petroleum system, the team is planning to
conduct a large 3D seismic survey over the
field in 1999. This survey will cover approximately 800 km2 [308 sq miles], and will
have three primary objectives. The first is to
image the detailed internal structure and heterogeneities within the Permian and
Carboniferous reservoirs to resolve the
effects of faulting and fracturing. The second
is to delineate the flanks of the Karachaganak
Permian and Carboniferous reservoirs, which
are overlain by thick salt. The third objective
is to image deep Devonian strata to 7000 m
[23,000 ft] to appraise its exploration and
production potential.
Planning, designing and executing the survey will be particularly challenging in view
of the multiple, and to a certain extent conflicting, objectives of the survey, the size of
the study and the environment of the region.9
To assist in the 3D interpretation, the team is
investigating the placement of geophones
suspended down wells during the 3D acquisition. The 3D survey will require careful
planning in order to obtain balanced results
and optimize the trade-offs between cost
and benefits.
Although imaging the Devonian may be
the most difficult of the objectives, it is
nevertheless vital for the team to obtain
some information on the potential of this
unit. The Production Sharing Agreement
between the KIO and the Government of
Kazakhstan was signed in November 1997;
the team has only five years from that date to
submit a development plan for the
Devonian. The appraisal program will
include workovers, DSTs and new wells
drilled into the Devonian.

Looking Ahead

Karachaganak is a giant field with large

commercial (gas marketing) and technical
challenges caused by reservoir heterogeneity
and the complex fluid system (left).
Describing, monitoring and predicting reservoir performance will require the use of
leading-edge technologies to optimize
recovery from the field. The reservoir and
operations teams of KIO will be closely
watching the development of technologies
and working with technology solution
providers such as Schlumberger to address
these challenges:
planning and completing a large 3D
seismic survey with both exploration and
production objectives
characterizing heterogeneity of the reservoir: can the heterogeneity be predicted?
understanding the role of fractures and
faults in field performance
predicting the performance of the oil leg
evaluating the potential of horizontal wells
resolving the dewpoint issue: how far
below the dewpoint can the field be produced? What is the best timing and quantity of gas reinjection?
The teamwork approach and application
of appropriate technology promise to go a
long way toward answering these questions,
thus unlocking the full potential of
Karachaganak.
LS
5. Standing MB, Lindblad EN and Parsons RL:
Calculated Recoveries by Cycling from a Retrograde
Reservoir of Variable Permeability, Transactions.
AIME 174 (1948): 165-190.
6. Weinaug CF and Cordell JC: Revaporization of
Butane and Pentane from Sand, Transactions, AIME
179 (1949): 303-312.
7. Havlena ZG, Griffith J D, Pot R and Kiel OG:
Condensate Recovery by Cycling at Declining
Pressures, paper SPE 1962, presented at the 42nd
SPE Annual Fall Meeting, Houston, Texas, USA,
October 1-4, 1967.
8. Aziz RM: A 1982 Critique on Gas Cycling Operations
on Gas-Condensate Reservoirs, paper SPE 11477,
presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Technical
Conference, Manama, Bahrain, March 14-17, 1983.
9. For more on survey design:
Ashton CP, Bacon B, Mann A, Moldoveanu N,
Deplante C, Ireson D, Sinclair T and Redekop G: 3D
Seismic Survey Design, Oilfield Review 6,
no. 2 (April 1994): 1932.
Multi-objective surveys:
Boardman M and Walker R: The Road to High-Density Seismic, Oilfield Review 7, no. 3 (Autumn 1995):
52-60.
Subsalt surveys:
Farmer P, Miller D, Pieprzak A, Rutledge J and Woods
R: Exploring the Subsalt, Oilfield Review 8, no.1
(Spring 1996): 5064.

25