Co-production of Tight Gas and Coalbed Methane from Single Wellbore: a Simulation Study from Northeastern Ordos Basin, China

Zhao, Shihu; Wang, Yanbin; Li, Yong; Wu, Xiang; Hu, Yinjie; Ni, Xiaoming; Liu, Du

doi:10.1007/s11053-021-09814-8

Cited by 20 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a pioneer work, Meng et al 20 proposed a mathematical model of gas and water two-phase flow for the co-production process with a vertical well-penetrated sandstone−coal overlap gas reservoir. A similar model was employed by Zhao et al 71 to focus on the co-production of tight gas and coalbed methane. Chai et al 7 used a commercial software, Eclipse, to simulate the multilayer co-production of a tight gas reservoir.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Well Types on Optimizing the Co-production of Gas from Coal and Tight Formations

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-production of gas from both coalbeds and tight formations is considered a viable means to improve well productivity. Most previous studies focused on the geology and resource estimates for gas production viability with little attention to the effectiveness of gas co-production with regard to well types. To make up for this weakness, a two-phase flow and reservoir deformation coupled model is proposed together with an anisotropic permeability model. The coupled model is first verified using gas and water production data from a vertical well from the Linxing block in the Ordos Basin, China. Then a reservoir model is built, including one coal seam and one tight gas formation separated by a low-permeability stratum with four simulation scenarios designed. Based on the results, the impacts of the crossflow between different reservoirs are addressed and the mechanisms of the gas co-production rate profile types observed in the Linxing block are analyzed. It is also found that high water-saturated adjacent reservoirs would keep the water relative permeability of the gas-rich reservoir at a high level, impeding the gas flow. The use of a horizontal well is strongly recommended when most gases are stored in a specific thin reservoir and the life of the well is short; however, a vertical well is favored when two or more gas-rich and high permeability reservoirs co-exist and the well life is relatively long. For the application of vertical wells, the hydraulic fractures should extend in the horizontal planes and interact with the pre-existing natural fracture. For horizontal wells, the hydraulic fracture should extend in the host reservoir and penetrate into the adjacent strata. This work can shed new light on the co-exploitation of coal measure methane.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Well Types on Optimizing the Co-production of Gas from Coal and Tight Formations

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We can conclude that perforation thickness has an important effect on the production ratio and it must be taken into account in the production splitting. 8 Geofluids…”

Section: Porositymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The tight gas reservoirs, which are characterized by vertical multilayer superimposition, are often developed by the multilayer coproduction technology [6,7]. However, multilayer coproduction will lead to difficulty of reservoir dynamic analysis and detailed descriptions and will affect the formulation of production measures [8][9][10]. Thus, an accurate production splitting method is needed for the commingled production well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Dynamic Splitting Method for Production Based on Material Balance Theory and Catastrophe Theory in Tight Gas Reservoirs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Splitting methods play a significant role in the coproduction of tight reservoirs which are characterized by vertical multilayer superimposition. It directly affects the accuracy of reservoir performance analysis and detailed descriptions. However, conventional splitting methods are limited to a few factors and static factors without considering the effect of layer parameter change. In this study, sensitivity analysis was carried out on five factors that affect the production splitting in coproduction wells. The research shows that in the production process, multiple parameters have a direct impact on the production of layers. Different parameters, which have to be included to split production, have different scale effects on layer production. Comparing the results of the KH method with the numerical simulation results, the limitation of the KH method for yield splitting is illustrated. A novel dynamic splitting method for production (DPSM) was proposed. This method is based on two primary methods, which are the multifactor static method for production splitting of gas (GPSM) and water (WPSM) and use the catastrophe theory and material balance equation (MBE) and obtain the final results by iterative method. The advantage of this method is that more accurate results in the production process are obtained by selecting eight factors, which contain 6 static factors and 2 dynamic factors, for research. It is more in line with the production practice that the ultimate results of production splitting vary with the production process. The accuracy and practicality of the results had been verified by numerical simulation. This method has practical significance for production splitting in tight gas reservoirs.

show abstract

“…Global recoverable CBM reserves are estimated at 49 × 10 12 m 3 , which accounts for 21.7% of the world's unconventional methane resources. [1][2][3] Moreover, to prevent and control coal mine methane disasters, many technologies have been developed to enhance methane extraction, including large-diameter intensive drilling, hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic slotting, and hydraulic punching. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Although some progress has been made in this area, these methods are still facing low methane extraction efficiency or methane production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coalbed methane (CBM) is an unconventional methane resource with plentiful reserves and is considered a source of clean energy. Global recoverable CBM reserves are estimated at 49 × 10 12 m 3 , which accounts for 21.7% of the world's unconventional methane resources 1–3 . Moreover, to prevent and control coal mine methane disasters, many technologies have been developed to enhance methane extraction, including large‐diameter intensive drilling, hydraulic fracturing, hydraulic slotting, and hydraulic punching 4–11 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental study on improving coalbed methane extraction by chemical treatment using acetic acid or ammonium persulfate

Wang

Chen

2022

Energy Science & Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ad‐/desorption and diffusion processes are the key factors controlling methane production from coal. The experiments used samples from methane‐producing coal seams with different contents of carbonate mineral and different ranks. Acid treatment using 1.0 mol/L acetic acid (CH3COOH) and oxidant treatment using 1.0 mol/L ammonium persulfate ((NH4)2S2O8) were conducted on these coal samples to observe the changes in surface functional groups that act as primary sorption sites and pore structure that determines diffusivity by Fourier transform infrared spectrometer, in situ scanning electron microscopy (SEM) imaging and energy dispersive spectroscopy. The results showed that the acidizing‐related mass loss of coal samples is in the range of 3.78%–7.57% due to the complete dissolution of pore‐ and fracture‐filling carbonate minerals. For the coal samples after oxidizing treatment, dissolution evidence can be observed in both carbonate minerals and organic matter, with a mass loss ranging from 2.01% to 3.0%. Acidizing or oxidizing induced dissolution can destroy aliphatic functional groups and the cross‐linked structure of coal, resulting in a decrease in methane adsorption capacity that is beneficial to methane desorption. More opened pores and interconnected fractures can be observed in SEM images due to the dissolution of carbonate minerals, suggesting an alteration of methane diffusion pathways in the coal matrix. Although only some of the carbonate minerals were dissolved following oxidant treatment, coal organic matter is partially oxidized and generates some dissolution pores, which provides more methane diffusion pathways in the coal matrix. Therefore, all the treated coal samples showed a reduction in methane adsorption capacity and an enhancement of desorption capacity and diffusivity. This result suggests that chemical treatment in coal seams using acetic acid or oxidant has the potential to improve coalbed methane extraction.

show abstract

Co-production of Tight Gas and Coalbed Methane from Single Wellbore: a Simulation Study from Northeastern Ordos Basin, China

Cited by 20 publications

References 37 publications

Influence of Well Types on Optimizing the Co-production of Gas from Coal and Tight Formations

Influence of Well Types on Optimizing the Co-production of Gas from Coal and Tight Formations

A Novel Dynamic Splitting Method for Production Based on Material Balance Theory and Catastrophe Theory in Tight Gas Reservoirs

Experimental study on improving coalbed methane extraction by chemical treatment using acetic acid or ammonium persulfate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About