PETE 323

Reservoir Models:
EOR Notes

Spring, 2003
 Learning Objectives for
EOR

Describe screening criteria for enhanced

oil recovery methods.
Use a systematic decision analysis
approach for selecting an alternative to
improve reservoir recovery efficiency.
 Learning Objectives for
EOR
Describe EOR methods used to improve
reservoir recovery efficiency, and
explain their differences.
For each method, state whether it can
improve displacement, vertical or areal
sweep efficiency and explain how it
works.
 Methods to Improve
Recovery Efficiency

we focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery Methods.

 Enhanced Oil Recovery
(EOR) Processes
Enhanced oil recovery (EOR)
processes include all methods that
use external sources of energy
and/or materials to recover oil that
cannot be produced, economically
by conventional means.
 Currently Used EOR
Processes

Waterflooding
Thermal methods: steam
stimulation, steamflooding, hot
water drive, and in-situ combustion
 Currently Used EOR
Processes

Chemical methods: polymer,

surfactant, caustic, and
micellar/polymer flooding.
Miscible methods including:
hydrocarbon gas, CO2, nitrogen,
flue gas
Waterflooding
 Waterflooding Highlights
Description
 Waterflooding consists of injecting water into
the reservoir. Most widely used post-primary
recovery method. Water is injected in patterns
or along the periphery of the reservoir.
Mechanisms That Improve Recovery Efficiency
 Water drive
Increased pressure
 Waterflooding Highlights
Limitations
 High oil viscosities result in higher mobility ratios.
 Some heterogeneity is acceptable, but avoid extensive
fractures.
Challenges
 Poor compatibility between the injected water and the
reservoir may cause formation damage.
 Subsurface fluid control to divert injected water and
to shut off undesirable produced fluids.
Surfactant/Polymer Flooding
 Surfactant/Polymer
Flooding Highlights
Description
 Surfactant/polymer flooding consists of injecting a
slug that contains water, surfactant, electrolyte
(salt), usually a co-solvent (alcohol), followed by
polymer-thickened water.
Mechanisms That Improve Recovery Efficiency
 Interfacial tension reduction (improves displacement
sweep efficiency).
 Mobility control (improves volumetric sweep
efficiency).
 Surfactant/Polymer
Flooding Highlights
Limitations
 An areal sweep of more than 50% for waterflood is
desired.
 Relatively homogeneous formation.
 High amounts of anhydrite, gypsum, or clays are
undesirable.
 Available systems provide optimum behavior within a
narrow set of conditions.
 With commercially available surfactants, formation
water chlorides should be <20,000 ppm and divalent
ions (Ca++ and Mg++) <500 ppm.
 Surfactant/Polymer
Flooding Highlights
Challenges
Complex and expensive system.
Possibility of chromatographic separation of
chemicals.
High adsorption of surfactant.
Interactions between surfactant and
polymer.
Degradation of chemicals at high
temperature.
Polymer Flooding
Polymer Flooding Highlights

Description
 Polymer augmented waterflooding consists of
adding water soluble polymers to the water
before it is injected into the reservoir.
Mechanisms That Improve Recovery Efficiency
 Mobility control (improves volumetric sweep
efficiency).
Polymer Flooding Highlights
Limitations
 High oil viscosities require a higher polymer
concentration.
 Results are normally better if the polymer
flood is started before the water-oil ratio
becomes excessively high.
 Clays increase polymer adsorption.
 Some heterogeneity is acceptable, but avoid
extensive fractures. If fractures are present,
the crosslinked or gelled polymer techniques
may be applicable.
Polymer Flooding Highlights

Challenges
 Lower injectivity than with water can adversely
affect oil production rates in the early stages
of the polymer flood.
 Acrylamide-type polymers loose viscosity due to
shear degradation, salinity and divalent ions.
 Xanthan gum polymers cost more, are subject
to microbial degradation, and have a greater
potential for wellbore plugging.
Miscible Gas Flooding
(CO2 Injection)
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(CO2 Injection) Highlights
Description
 CO2 flooding consists of injecting large quantities of
CO2 (15% or more hydrocarbon pore volumes) in the
reservoir to form a miscible flood.
Mechanisms That Improve Recovery Efficiency
 CO2 extracts the light-to-intermediate components
from the oil, and, if the pressure is high enough,
develops miscibility to displace oil from the
reservoir.
 Viscosity reduction / oil swelling.
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(CO2 Injection) Highlights
Limitations
Very low Viscosity of CO2 results in poor
mobility control.
Availability of CO2
Surface Facilities
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(CO2 Injection) Highlights
Challenges
Early breakthrough of CO2 causes problems.
Corrosion in producing wells.
The necessity of separating CO2 from
saleable hydrocarbons. Repressuring of CO2
for recycling.
A large requirement of CO2 per incremental
barrel produced.
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(Hydrocarbon Injection)
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(Hydrocarbon Injection)
Highlights
Description
 Hydrocarbon gas flooding consists of injecting
light hydrocarbons through the reservoir to
form a miscible flood.
Mechanisms that Improve Recovery Efficiency
 Viscosity reduction / oil swelling / condensing or
vaporizing gas drive.
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(Hydrocarbon Injection)
Limitations
Highlights
 Minimum depth is set by the pressure needed
to maintain the generated miscibility. The
required pressure ranges from about 1,200 psi
for the LPG process to 3,000-5,000 psi for
the High Pressure Gas Drive, depending on the
oil.
 A steeply dipping formation is very desirable -
permits gravity stabilization of the
displacement that normally has an unfavorable
mobility ratio.
 Miscible Gas Flooding
(Hydrocarbon Injection)
Highlights
Challenges
Viscous fingering results in poor vertical
and horizontal sweep efficiency.
Large quantities of expensive products
are required.
Solvent may be trapped and not
recovered.
Nitrogen / Flue Gas
Flooding
 Nitrogen / Flue Gas
Flooding Highlights
Description
Nitrogen or flue gas injection consists of
injecting large quantities of gas that
may be miscible or immiscible depending
on the pressure and oil composition.
Large volumes may be injected, because
of the low cost.
Nitrogen or flue gas are also considered
for use as chase gases in hydrocarbon-
miscible and CO2 floods.
 Nitrogen / Flue Gas
Flooding Highlights
Mechanisms that Improve
Recovery Efficiency
Vaporizes the lighter components of the
crude oil and generates miscibility if the
pressure is high enough.
Provides a gas drive where a significant
portion of the reservoir volume is filled
with low-cost gases.
 Nitrogen / Flue Gas
Flooding Highlights
Limitations
Miscibility can only be achieved with
light oils at high pressures; therefore,
deep reservoirs are needed.
A steeply dipping reservoir is desired to
permit gravity stabilization of the
displacement, which has a very
unfavorable mobility ratio.
 Nitrogen / Flue Gas
Flooding Highlights
Challenges
Viscous fingering results in poor vertical
and horizontal sweep efficiency.
Flue gas injection can cause corrosion.
Non hydrocarbon gases must be
separated from saleable gas.
Thermal (Steamflooding)
 Thermal (Steamflooding)
Highlights
Description
Steamflooding consists of injecting
about 80% quality steam to displace oil.
Normal practice is to precede and
accompany the steam drive by a cyclic
steam stimulation of the producing wells
(called huff and puff).
 Thermal (Steamflooding)
Highlights
Mechanisms That Improve
Recovery Efficiency
Viscosity reduction / steam distillation.
Thermal expansion.
Supplies pressure to drive oil to the
producing well.
 Thermal (Steamflooding)
Highlights
Limitations
 Applicable to viscous oils in massive, high
permeability sandstones or unconsolidated sands.
 Oil saturations must be high, and pay zones
should be > 20 feet thick to minimize heat losses
to adjacent formations.
 Steamflooded reservoirs should be as shallow as
possible, because of excessive wellbore heat
losses.
 Thermal (Steamflooding)
Highlights
More Limitations
 Steamflooding is not normally done in carbonate
reservoirs.
 Since about 1/3 of the additional oil recovered
is consumed to generate the required steam,
the cost per incremental barrel of oil is high.
 A low percentage of water-sensitive clays is
desired for good injectivity.
Challenges
 Adverse mobility ratio and channeling of steam.
 Screening Criteria
Depth Limitations for Enhanced Oil
Recovery Methods Depth [ft]

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

EOR Method

Hydrocarbon-Miscible Very good Deep enough for required pressure

Nitrogen and Flue Gas Very good Deep enough for required pressure

CO Flooding Deep enough for required pressure

2

Surfactant/Polymer Limited by temperature

Polymer Limited by temperature

Alkaline Preferred zone High

cost

Fire Flood Deep enough for required pressure

SteamDrive Normal range (possible)

 Screening Criteria
Preferred Oil Viscosity Ranges for
Enhanced Oil Recovery Methods
Oil Viscosity - Centipoise at Reservoir Conditions
0.1 1.0 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
EOR Method

Hydrocarbon-Misc Very good Good More Difficult

Nitrogen, Flue Gas Good More Difficult

CO2 Flooding Very good Good More Difficult

Surfactant/Polymer Good Fair Very

Difficult Not Feasible

Polymer Good Fair Difficult Not Feasible

Alkaline Good Fair Very Difficult Not Feasible

Fire Flood May not be possible Good Not Feasible

SteamDrive Not economically feasible Good

Special Thermal Various Techniques Possible

Mining / ExtractionNot Feasible Not Established Limits

 Screening Criteria
Permeability Guides for Enhanced Oil
Recovery Methods
0.1 1.0
Permeability (millidarcy)
10 100 1,000 10,000
EOR Method

Hydrocarbon-Miscible Not Critical If Uniform

Nitrogen and Flue Gas Not Critical If Uniform

CO2 Flooding High Enough for Good Injection Rates

Surfactant/Polymer Preferred zone

Polymer Possible Preferred zone

Alkaline Preferred zone

Fire Flood Preferred zone

SteamDrive Preferred zone

Higher permeabilities are usually better.

 Summary of Screening
Criteria for EOR Methods
 Summary of Screening
Criteria for EOR Methods
Summary of Screening Criteria
for EOR Methods (cont.)
Summary of Screening Criteria
for EOR Methods (cont.)
 Effect on Efficiencies of
Various EOR Methods
Displacement Vertical Sweep Areal Sweep
Method
Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency

Affected by
Maintains reservoir
barriers, baffles,
pressure Decreases with
and boundaries
Waterflooding Enhanced water drive increased
Poor sweep if
displacing oil to heterogeneity
adverse mobility
producers
ratio

Affected by zonal
Dry HC Gas Maintains reservoir
pressure
Injection pressure
distribution

Limited to near-
Limited to near-
Oil viscosity wellbore
wellbore
Cyclic Steam reduction Provides for higher
Dissolves plugging
Injection Reduces pressure injection rates with
deposits around
around the wellbore subsequent
wellbore
steamflood
 Effect on Efficiencies of
Various EOR Methods
Displacement Vertical Sweep Areal Sweep
Method
Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency

Oil viscosity
Steam injection
reduction
can override Adverse mobility
Steamflooding Steam distillation
because of gravity ratio
Pressure drives oil
segregation
to producers

Water injected after

Water
steam causes the Reduces gravity Improves areal
Alternating
steam zone to override conformance
Steam Process
collapse while Reduces vertical Reduces
(WASP)
tending to underrun channeling channeling
Injection
the reservoir

Oil viscosity
Gravity Controlling flame
reduction
In-situ segregation front is difficult
Pressure gradient
Combustion Adverse mobility Adverse mobility
drives oil
ratio ratio
Upgrades crude
 Effect on Efficiencies of
Various EOR Methods (cont.)
Displacement Vertical Sweep Areal Sweep
Method
Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency

Reduces interfacial
tension Improves mobility
Increases water ratio
Surfactant Flooding
wettability Improves areal
Solubilizes oil conformance
Enhances mobility

Augments waterflood
Provides mobility
Increases viscosity of Provides mobility
control
Polymer Flooding injected water control
Viscosity loss from
Decreases mobility of Formation plugging
shear degradation
injected water

Adverse mobility Adverse mobility ratio

Viscosity reduction
ratio. Gravity Early breakthrough
Oil swelling
Miscible Gas segregation. Asphal- and fingering
Vaporizing gas
Flooding – CO2 tene deposition near Increases native
Reduces interfacial
injectors permeability in a
tension
Corrosion and scaling carbonate reservoir
 Effect on Efficiencies of
Various EOR Methods (cont.)
Displacement Vertical Sweep Areal Sweep
Method
Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency

Viscosity reduction
Oil swelling Adverse mobility
Miscible Gas Adverse mobility
Condensing/ ratio. Early
Flooding – HC ratio
vaporizing gas breakthrough and
gas Gravity segregation
Reduces interfacial fingering
tension

Vaporizes light oil

Adverse mobility
components Adverse mobility
Nitrogen/Flue Gas ratio. Early
May be miscible but ratio
Injection breakthrough and
mostly used for Gravity segregation
fingering
pressure maintenance
 Technical Constraints
CLASSIFICATION OF EOR CONSTRAINTS (I - DOE NIPER - 527)
CLASSIFICATION EXPLANATION

Mobility Control Gas channeling related to mobilitv rather than

heterogeneity; breakdown of polymer bank
due to bacterial degradation.

Operations Problems with oil treating, corrosion, scale,

artificial lift, compression, formation plugging
unrelated to injectant quality.

Reservoir Conditions Refers to reservoir fluid conditions such as oil

saturation, thickness of oil column, reservoir
drive mechanism, etc. As defined, reservoir
conditions are a subset of reservoir
description.
 Technical Constraints
CLASSIFICATION OF EOR CONSTRAINTS (I - DOE NIPER - 527)
CLASSIFICATION EXPLANATION

Reservoir Description Refers to rock related description such as

depositional environment, rock composition,
faulting, heterogeneity, continuity, etc.

Reservoir Heterogeneity Areal or vertical permeability variations, faults,

directional flow trends, depositional
environments, etc.

Process Design Inadequate or incomplete investigation of

different areas known to be important in the
EOR processes.
 Effect on Efficiencies of
Various EOR Methods
Displacement Vertical Areal Sweep
Method
Efficiency Sweep Efficiency
Efficiency

Decreases mobility Reduced recovery Improves areal

Water
of injected gas can result from conformance
Alternating Gas
Maintains reservoir gravity Reduces
(WAG) Injection
pressure segregation channeling

Seals reservoir Seals reservoir

conduits between conduits between
injectors and injectors and
producers producers
Microbial EOR N/A
Seals watered-out Seals watered-out
and high and high
permeability permeability
zones zones
 Constraints for EOR
Technologies
Gas EOR
Reservoir heterogeneity
Mobility control and reservoir
conformance
Incomplete mixing
Lack of predictive capability
Poor injectivity
Corrosion problems with CO2
 Constraints for EOR
Technologies
Surfactant Flooding
 Reservoir heterogeneity
 Excessive chemical loss
 Coherence, stability and cost-effectiveness of
surfactant slugs
 Limited to reservoir salinity <20% NaCI
 Limited to reservoir temperature <200oF
 Limited to permeability> 100 md
 Polymer propagation
 Constraints for EOR
Technologies
Alkaline Flooding

Limited range of applicable salinity

High chemical consumption
Brine incompatibility - precipitation
 Constraints for EOR
Technologies
Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery
Nutrients for field application
Lack of well documented field tests
Limited to reservoir temperature <
170oF
Limited to reservoir salinity < 10% NaCl
Insufficient basic understanding of the
mechanisms of microbial technologies
 Constraints for EOR
Technologies
Reservoir Characterization
 The complexity of the rock and fluid
distributions even in the “simplest” reservoirs
 The inadequate amount of detailed information
from even the most ambitiously sampled
reservoir
 Scaling of properties from core or smaller scale
to interwell scale
 Difficulties in interpreting seismic data in terms
of rock and fluid properties
 Constraints for EOR
Technologies
Thermal EOR
 Lower crude oil prices due to gravity, sulfur and
heavy metal content
 Large front end investments and delayed responses
 Absence of cost-effective technology to upgrade
low-quality, low-gravity crude into saleable
products
 Absence of cost effective technology that permits
the use of low-grade fuel such as coal, petroleum
coke, high sulfur crude oil and brackish water to
generate steam without violating the environmental
regulations
 Technical Constraints
CLASSIFICATION OF EOR CONSTRAINTS (I - DOE NIPER - 527)
CLASSIFICATION EXPLANATION

Chemical Loss Loss of injected fluid due to chemical,

mechanical, or microbial degradation;
chemical loss due to adsorption, ion
exchange, or entrapment.
Downhole Completion Completion techniques; equipment;
Production problems unrelated to corrosion,
scale, or artificial lift.

Facility Design Surface injection or production facilities.

Gravity Segregation Gravity override in Steam; potential may

exist for override in Situ or gas injection
projects.
 Technical Constraints
CLASSIFICATION OF EOR CONSTRAINTS (I - DOE NIPER - 527)
CLASSIFICATION EXPLANATION

Injectivity Process specific to gas injection projects.

Low polymer injectivity in chemical projects
was considered inherent to the polymer
process..

Injection Control Formation pressure parting; injected fluid flow

out of intended zone; inadequate monitoring
of injection.

Injectant Quality Steam quality at sandface; injection well

plugging related to poor mixing (polymer)
or injection system contaminants
(rust, lubricants).
This is the end of the
course you have
survived !!!