1 / 38

Vacuum Fd.

New. Mexico. Vacuum Fd. Slaughter Fd. Texas. CO 2 HUFF-n-PUFF PROCESS IN A LIGHT OIL SHALLOW SHELF CARBONATE RESERVOIR (Contract No. DE-FC22-94BC14986). SSC DOE Class-II Project Review Univ. of TX - C.E.E.D. Odessa, TX 12.Dec.02 by Scott C. Wehner. NORTHERN SHELF. Midland - Odessa.

binh
Télécharger la présentation

Vacuum Fd.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. New Mexico Vacuum Fd. Slaughter Fd. Texas CO2 HUFF-n-PUFF PROCESSIN A LIGHT OILSHALLOW SHELF CARBONATE RESERVOIR(Contract No. DE-FC22-94BC14986) SSC DOE Class-II Project Review Univ. of TX - C.E.E.D. Odessa, TX 12.Dec.02 by Scott C. Wehner

  2. NORTHERN SHELF Midland - Odessa

  3. Pre-1997

  4. Generic Information Producing Horizon Grayburg & San Andres Fms Lithology Carbonate w/ few sands Heterogeneous Producing Interval 4,200 – 4,700 ft Avg. Net/Gross Pay Ratio 40/100 Reservoir Temperature 95o to 101o F Injection Pattern 40-A 5-Spot 20-A Line Drive Porosity Range (Avg.) 0 – 23.7 % (11.6%) Permeability Range (Avg.) 0 – 530 md (22.3 md) Reservoir Pressure Above Pb Oil Gravity 38o API Fractures Uncommon Production Drive Mature Waterflood

  5. H-n-P Project Objectives • Determine whether oil can be recovered economically in a cyclic CO2 Huff-n-Puff process in a reservoir undergoing a waterflood/drive • Provide guidelines and transfer findings to the industry

  6. Relation between Drive Index and Recovery Efficiency of the CO2 H-n-P Process Developed from Gulf-Coast sandstone reservoir field trials

  7. Benefits of Wide Application if a Successful Process • Mitigate early negative cashflows in a CO2 flood • Add reserves associated with H-n-P CO2 process • Reduce LOE • Accelerate miscible CO2 process • Maximize recoveries in smaller fields • Maximize recoveries of acreage not targeted for miscible CO2 flooding • Provide early injectivity measures

  8. Generalized CAPEX & Response Generalized CAPEX & Response Flood Starts 10 2 CO 8 Base WF MBOPD Miscible H-n-P 6 or 4 $MM 2 0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Year

  9. 12 - 40 Days RESIDUAL OIL ~100 ft RESIDUAL OIL ~300 ft

  10. 1 - 4 Weeks RESIDUAL OIL RESIDUAL OIL . . . ABSORBING CO2

  11. 2 - 6 Months . . . MOBILIZES ACTIVE LOWER VISCOSITY WATERFLOOD . . . SWELLED OIL

  12. Project Components • Reservoir Characterization and Geological Model • Parametric and Site-specific Simulation Study • Field Test • History-match of Field Test • Technology Transfer • Reservoir Characterization and Geological Model • Parametric and Site-specific Simulation Study • Field Test • History-match of Field Test • Technology Transfer

  13. Typical H-n-P Performance (parametric simulation) • Peak oil rate is 2 to 5 times the base rate • Incremental oil of 1.5 to 3 MSTB for 25 MMscfCO2 • Peak oil rate returns to the base rate after 40 to 80 days • Incremental oil increases with injected CO2 volume

  14. Typical H-n-P Performance (parametric simulation) • Incremental oil increases with watercut • WOR returns to the base level at the same time • Reservoir heterogeneity was not important. Results from 1, 2, 5, and 12 layer models were similar. • Trapped gas saturation was required for incremental oil

  15. Typical H-n-P Performance (parametric simulation) • Oil Swelling, viscosity reduction, and near well pressure increase cause initial rise in oil rate but not long term incremental oil • Trapped gas causes long term incremental oil production. Without trapped gas, the oil production rate falls below the base rate after the initial peak because the H-n-P zone is being resaturated with oil

  16. 186 187 244 194 193 Site Specific 196 197 Reservoir DOE H-n-P Model 199 200 201 203 204 1 4-D, 3-C Seismic Central Vacuum Unit (CVU) (Excerpt)

  17. INJECTION ! Injected ~50 MMscfCO2 ) Avg. 2.21 MMscfCO2/D ) Avg. 3.4o F ) Avg. 622 psig ! CO Containment 2 ! Bottomhole Pressure ! CO Breakthrough 2

  18. SOAK 20-Day Soak ! Offset Injectors Activated ! Pressure Increased to 889 psig ! Cross-flow ? !

  19. PRODUCTION ! Returned to Active Status ) Avg. 631 psig: 13-18/64" Chokes ) 400 - 900 Mscf/D ! Reduced H O Rate 2 ! 94% CO Gas Stream 2 ! Peak Oil impacted by Chockes/Artificial Lift ! Winter Weather Effects ! Wellbore Loading Gas Handling/Disposal

  20. Central Vacuum Unit No. 97

  21. Slaughter Sundown Unit (SSU) (Excerpt) DOE H-n-P

  22. Sundown Slaughter Unit No. 1341

  23. Results/Conclusions • Sg (trapped) Appeared Non-existent in Demo • All injected gas recovered? • Oil production results mixed but lower thansimulations • Economically Challenged • Cannot support trucked/pumped CO2 • Pipeline creates options for consideration • Produced CO2 Disposal Not Always Available

  24. Results/Conclusions • Economics burdened by costs to flow/pump wells • Restricting producing rate during flowback reduces recovery • H-n-P may provide indication of reduced H2O injectivity in miscible WAG operations • An estimate of CO2 injectivity can be found • H2O production can be reduced near-term

  25. Results/Conclusions • LOE are reduced near-term • Oil response relates to CO2 volume • Higher H2O-cut provides better H-n-P response • Reservoir characterization not so critical • Don’t try this at home boys & girls…… it’s still R&D in SSC Waterflooded Reservoirs

  26. One Lingering Question… Can the application of CO2 H-n-P cause an accelerated response from future CO2 miscible flooding?

More Related