Effect of Oil and Flue-Gas Compositions on Oil Recovery in the Flue-Gas/Light-Oil Injection Process

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
O.S. Shokoya ◽  
S.A. Mehta ◽  
R.G. Moore ◽  
B. Maini
Keyword(s):  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Flue Gas ◽  
Injection Process ◽  
Light Oil ◽  
Oil Injection

The Mechanism of Flue Gas Injection for Enhanced Light Oil Recovery

2004 ◽  
Vol 126 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. S. Shokoya ◽  
S. A. (Raj) Mehta ◽  
R. G. Moore ◽  
B. B. Maini ◽  
M. Pooladi-Darvish ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Flue Gas ◽  
Gas Injection ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Air Injection ◽  
Oil Reservoirs ◽  
Flue Gases ◽  
Low Permeability ◽  
Light Oil ◽  
Light Oil Reservoirs

Flue gas injection into light oil reservoirs could be a cost-effective gas displacement method for enhanced oil recovery, especially in low porosity and low permeability reservoirs. The flue gas could be generated in situ as obtained from the spontaneous ignition of oil when air is injected into a high temperature reservoir, or injected directly into the reservoir from some surface source. When operating at high pressures commonly found in deep light oil reservoirs, the flue gas may become miscible or near–miscible with the reservoir oil, thereby displacing it more efficiently than an immiscible gas flood. Some successful high pressure air injection (HPAI) projects have been reported in low permeability and low porosity light oil reservoirs. Spontaneous oil ignition was reported in some of these projects, at least from laboratory experiments; however, the mechanism by which the generated flue gas displaces the oil has not been discussed in clear terms in the literature. An experimental investigation was carried out to study the mechanism by which flue gases displace light oil at a reservoir temperature of 116°C and typical reservoir pressures ranging from 27.63 MPa to 46.06 MPa. The results showed that the flue gases displaced the oil in a forward contacting process resembling a combined vaporizing and condensing multi-contact gas drive mechanism. The flue gases also became near-miscible with the oil at elevated pressures, an indication that high pressure flue gas (or air) injection is a cost-effective process for enhanced recovery of light oils, compared to rich gas or water injection, with the potential of sequestering carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas.

A Methodology for Screening and Ranking of Reservoirs for Light Oil Air Injection Implementation

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.. Niz-Velasquez ◽  
M. L. Trujillo ◽  
C.. Delgadillo ◽  
J.. Padilla
Keyword(s):  
Numerical Simulation ◽  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Feasibility Studies ◽  
Air Injection ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Screening Criteria ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Injection Process ◽  
Light Oil

Abstract A great portion of the produced oil currently comes from mature fields, reason why the increase in oil production of current reservoirs is the main objective of oil companies. Thermal enhanced oil recovery processes have been studied, implemented and improved over the years. In the last decade there has been significant interest in the light oil air injection (LOAI) process since the successful implementation of the process known as High Pressure Air Injection in the Buffalo Field (USA), which is a variation from the air injection process in light oil, applicable to deep reservoirs with low permeability and porosity. Proof of this are the West Hackberry Field (USA), more than five commercial projects along the Willinston Basin (USA) and recently a pilot in the Zhong Yuan Field (China). Additionally, feasibility studies have also been initiated and performed in Mexico, Argentina and Colombia. This article proposes screening criteria for the selection of potential light oil reservoirs to be candidates for air injection, as well as a general methodology for the prioritization of the reservoirs with the highest LOAI implementation potential. Said methodology employs screening criteria, analogies and numerical simulation. The first part goes beyond the binary screening by assigning a weight to each one of the criteria, therefore resulting in a numerical ranking. For the analogies the reservoirs in which the technology has already been applied are grouped in four group types, against which the field on evaluation is compared. There is also a numerical simulation in 1D – 2D, where the injectivity with or without pressurization is evaluated, as well as the displacement stability. Additionally a multi-criteria evaluation method is used to select the best candidate.

A Comprehensive Project of Thermal, Gas and Chemical EOR Method Application for Bazhenov Shale Formation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Ushakova ◽  
Elena Mukhina ◽  
Alexandra Scerbacova ◽  
Aman Turakhanov ◽  
Denis Bakulin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Water Injection ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Thermal Exposure ◽  
Chemical Eor ◽  
Light Oil ◽  
Shale Formation ◽  
Oil Injection ◽  
Oil Formation ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract The article describes the development aimed at a comprehensive study for enhanced oil recovery methods (EOR) of the Bazhenov shale oil formation. Potentially effective technologies for low-permeable reservoirs are under consideration: injection of associated petroleum gas in the mode of miscible displacement to recover light oil; injection of the surfactants water solutions, to separate sorbed hydrocarbons from the rock and change core wettability; and heating technologies to convert solid hydrocarbons into liquid and gaseous, and recover. The project explore potentially effective EOR technologies and their influence on the various types of hydrocarbons of the shale Bazhenov formation: mobile oil in closed pores, sorbed and solid (kerogen) hydrocarbons. Experimental studies were carried out: the selection of the gases composition, the selection of surfactant compositions, the study of the possibility of thermal exposure by over-heated water injection. The project is currently at the stage of determining the effectiveness of each method, selecting a technology for specific field conditions and identifying which hydrocarbon resources each method is aimed at extracting.

Air-Foam-Injection Process: An Improved-Oil-Recovery Technique for Waterflooded Light-Oil Reservoirs

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (04) ◽  
pp. 436-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaohu Dong ◽  
Huiqing Liu ◽  
Peng Sun ◽  
Jiapeng Zheng ◽  
Rong Sun
Keyword(s):  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Oil Reservoirs ◽  
Improved Oil Recovery ◽  
Injection Process ◽  
Light Oil ◽  
Recovery Technique ◽  
Light Oil Reservoirs

The Mechanism of Flue Gas Injection for Enhanced Light Oil Recovery

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. S. Shokoya ◽  
S. A. Mehta ◽  
R. G. Moore ◽  
B. B. Maini ◽  
M. Pooladi-Darvish ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Flue Gas ◽  
Gas Injection ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Air Injection ◽  
Oil Reservoirs ◽  
Flue Gases ◽  
Low Permeability ◽  
Light Oil ◽  
Light Oil Reservoirs

Flue gas injection into light oil reservoirs could be a cost-effective gas displacement method for enhanced oil recovery, especially in low porosity and low permeability reservoirs. The flue gas could be generated in situ as obtained from the spontaneous ignition of oil when air is injected into a high temp erature reservoir, or injected directly into the reservoir from some surface source. When operating at high pressures commonly found in deep light oil reservoirs, the flue gas may become miscible or near miscible with the reservoir oil, thereby displacing it more efficiently than an immiscible gas flood. Some successful high pressure air injection (HPAI) projects have been reported in low permeability and low porosity light oil reservoirs. Spontaneous oil ignition was reported in these projects, at least from laboratory experiments; however, the mechanism by which the generated flue gas displaces the oil has not been discussed in clear terms in the literature. An experimental investigation was carried out to study the mechanism by which flue gases displace light oil at a reservoir temperature of 116 °C and typical reservoir pressures ranging from 4,028 psi (27.77 MPa) to 6,680 psi (46.06 MPa). The results showed that the flue gases displaced the oil in a forward contacting process resembling a combined vaporizing and condensing multi-contact gas drive mechanism. The flue gases also became near-miscible with the oil at elevated pressures, an indication that high pressure flue gas (or air) injection is a cost-effective process for enhanced recovery of light oils, compared to rich gas or water injection, with the potential of sequestering greenhouse gases.

Thermodynamic Analysis of Alternating Steam and Flue Gas Injection Process in Application to Heavy Oil Fields in Colombia

2021 ◽  
Vol 628 (6) ◽  
pp. 51-56
Author(s):  
V. A. Naletov ◽  
◽  
M. B. Glebov ◽  
A. Yu. Naletov ◽  
S. F. Muñoz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Thermodynamic Analysis ◽  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Heavy Oil ◽  
Flue Gas ◽  
Gas Injection ◽  
Working Fluid ◽  
Steam Generation ◽  
Compression Process ◽  
Injection Process ◽  
Exergy Losses

This paper presents the thermodynamic analysis of the cyclic steam and flue gas injection process in application to heavy oil production for Colombian oilfields in order to improve oil recovery as well as reduce the environmental impact. The process comprises two subsystems: the steam generation subsystem and flue gas compression process. Working fluid parameters were selected based on the depth of the producing wells and the experimental data provided for Colombian oilfields. As part of the thermodynamic analysis, exergy losses were calculated for the subsystems operating separately as well as together in the cyclic flue gas-steam alternating injection process. The analysis was conducted for varying ratio between the duration and steam and flue gas injection over a five-day cycle. Is was determined that the efficiency of the subsystems operating together in the process (which is achieved by minimizing the total exergy losses) is drastically different depending on whether centralized power or local power generation is used for energy supply. It was concluded that an economic analysis is required in addition to the thermodynamic analysis. The varying part of the relative costs for the cyclic steam-flue gas injection process was assessed and it was shown that the optimal solution would be steam-flue gas injection with an injection ratio of 4.5:0.5 (for a five-day cycle) that uses a centralized power source.

Numerical Optimization of WAG Injection in a Sandstone Field using a Coupled Surface and Subsurface Model

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thaer I. Ismail ◽  
Emad W. Al-Shalabi ◽  
Mahmoud Bedewi ◽  
Waleed AlAmeri
Keyword(s):  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Gas Injection ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Sensitivity Study ◽  
Mobility Control ◽  
Base Case ◽  
The North ◽  
Injection Process ◽  
Interaction Terms ◽  
Wag Injection

Abstract Gas injection is one of the most commonly used enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods. However, there are multiple problems associated with gas injection including gravity override, viscous fingering, and channeling. These problems are due to an adverse mobility ratio and cause early breakthrough of the gas resulting, in poor recovery efficiency. A Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection process is recommended to resolve these problems through better mobility control of gas, leading to better project economics. However, poor WAG design and lack of understanding of the different factors that control its performance might result in unfavorable oil recovery. Therefore, this study provides more insight into improving WAG oil recovery by optimizing different surface and subsurface WAG parameters using a coupled surface and subsurface simulator. Moreover, the work investigates the effects of hysteresis on WAG performance. This case study investigates a field named Volve, which is a decommissioned sandstone field in the North Sea. Experimental design of factors influencing WAG performance on this base case was studied. Sensitivity analysis was performed on different surface and subsurface WAG parameters including WAG ratio, time to start WAG, total gas slug size, cycle slug size, and tubing diameter. A full two-level factorial design was used for the sensitivity study. The significant parameters of interest were further optimized numerically to maximize oil recovery. The results showed that the total slug size is the most important parameter, followed by time to start WAG, and then cycle slug size. WAG ratio appeared in some of the interaction terms while tubing diameter effect was found to be negligible. The study also showed that phase hysteresis has little to no effect on oil recovery. Based on the optimization, it is recommended to perform waterflooding followed by tertiary WAG injection for maximizing oil recovery from the Volve field. Furthermore, miscible WAG injection resulted in an incremental oil recovery between 5 to 11% OOIP compared to conventional waterflooding. WAG optimization is case-dependent and hence, the findings of this study hold only for the studied case, but the workflow should be applicable to any reservoir. Unlike most previous work, this study investigates WAG optimization considering both surface and subsurface parameters using a coupled model.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document