Impact of CO2 Impurity on MMP and Oil Recovery Performance of the Bell Creek Oil Field

Jin, Lu; Pekot, Lawrence J.; Hawthorne, Steven B.; Gobran, B.D.; Greeves, Allan; Bosshart, Nicholas W.; Jiang, Tao; Hamling, John A.; Gorecki, Charles D.

doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1841

Cited by 25 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, the recoveries of flooded crude oil with CO 2 and CO 2 /C1/C3 were about 65% and 76%, respectively, where the ultimate recovery was reached after about 7 and 19 injected PVs of CO 2 and CO 2 /C1/C3, respectively. Jin L, 2016 [8] investigated the impact of CO 2 impurity (C1) on MMP and stated that the purest CO 2 does not lead to the best oil recovery at the same period. The paper suggested that the reason for the difference is due to compressibility of the light hydrocarbon, where practically methane usually has the largest content.…”

Section: Effect Of Added Light Components To Co 2 As a Displacing Flumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fai-Yengo et al [7] performed various experiments using different compositions of methane (C1) and ethane (C2) in the injected CO 2 gas (displacing fluid) and concluded that an acceleration of the incremental oil recovery was observed in the case of the richer gas. Jin [8] studied the impact of CO 2 impurity on minimum miscible pressure (MMP). Hamouda and Tabrizy [9] investigated the effect of recombined light components with CO 2 as a displacing fluid for asphaltenic oil and concluded that the presence of light components reduces oil recovery in the presence of asphaltene.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This work addresses oil recovery from both stabilized and live oils from sandstone reservoirs and the dynamic changes in their composition following flooding with CO 2 alone and CO 2 with light hydrocarbon. It is stated in the literature, (Jin. L, 2016), [8] that injection of pure CO 2 does not necessarily lead to the best recovery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is stated in the literature, (Jin. L, 2016), [8] that injection of pure CO 2 does not necessarily lead to the best recovery. It was, therefore, decided to address the effect of light components in the model oil n-C10 compared to crude oil (from the North Sea) at 200 bars by flooding with CO 2 and CO 2 /C1/C3 at different temperatures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Miscible CO2 Flooding for EOR in the Presence of Natural Gas Components in Displacing and Displaced Fluids

Hamouda

Chughtai

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon dioxide (CO 2) flooding is a complicated process as it involves phase behavior. The objective of this work was to understand the mass transfer mechanisms during flooding with CO 2 and CO 2 /C1/C3 (CO 2 /HC) based on experimental and simulated composition changes. Three model oil compositions were used (n-C10, n-C10/C1, and n-C10/C1/C3). For a comparison, crude oil from a North Sea field was included. The second part of the investigation was to compare the effect of the combined light components (C1/C3) with CO 2 as a displacing fluid on enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Equation of State EOS SRK-Peneloux was used for the simulations to predict composition changes. The highest recovery was obtained from model oil (n-C10) displaced with CO 2 compared to model oil containing light components with the highest recovery recorded from model oil/C1 (live oil A) compared to model oil/C1/C3 at all of the tested temperatures. The presence of light components (C1/C3) in the injected CO 2 at miscible conditions increased the oil recovery for crude oil compared to flooding only with CO 2. Transverse dispersion of CO 2 helps in eliminating/reducing the effect of viscous instabilities by shortening fingering travel/widening the fingers. The collected samples contained water, although the flooding was done on dry sandstone cores. Possible mechanisms are discussed in a later section.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Added Light Components To Co 2 As a Displacing Flumentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Miscible CO2 Flooding for EOR in the Presence of Natural Gas Components in Displacing and Displaced Fluids

Hamouda

Chughtai

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effect of methane, changing from 1 to 4 mol% of the gas volume, as an impurity on CO 2 injection in the Bell Creek oil field (USA), was studied by Jin et al (2017) using the vanishing interfacial method. Due to the restricted amount of gas impurities permitted in operational conditions, they determined an optimal composition range of the gas in order to obtain desired gas injection performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impacts of gas impurities on the minimum miscibility pressure of injected CO2-rich gas–crude oil systems and enhanced oil recovery potential

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An effective parameter in the miscible-CO 2 enhanced oil recovery procedure is the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) defined as the lowest pressure that the oil in place and the injected gas into reservoir achieve miscibility at a given temperature. Flue gases released from power plants can provide an available source of CO 2, which would otherwise be emitted to the atmosphere, for injection into a reservoir. However, the costs related to gas extraction from flue gases is potentially high. Hence, greater understanding the role of impurities in miscibility characteristics between CO 2 and reservoir fluids helps to establish which impurities are tolerable and which are not. In this study, we simulate the effects of the impurities nitrogen (N 2), methane (C 1), ethane (C 2) and propane (C 3) on CO 2 MMP. The simulation results reveal that, as an impurity, nitrogen increases CO 2-oil MMP more so than methane. On the other hand, increasing the propane (C 3) content can lead to a significant decrease in CO 2 MMP, whereas varying the concentrations of ethane (C 2) does not have a significant effect on the minimum miscibility pressure of reservoir crude oil and CO 2 gas. The novel relationships established are particularly valuable in circumstances where MMP experimental data are not available. Keywords EOR exploiting impure flue gases Á CO 2-crude oil minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) Á Impact of gas impurities on MMP

show abstract

Assessing the effects of CO2/methane mixtures on gas−oil interfacial tension and fluid flow using compositional simulation

Dantas

Santos

Lins

et al. 2023

Braz. J. Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact of CO2 Impurity on MMP and Oil Recovery Performance of the Bell Creek Oil Field

Cited by 25 publications

References 26 publications

Miscible CO2 Flooding for EOR in the Presence of Natural Gas Components in Displacing and Displaced Fluids

Miscible CO2 Flooding for EOR in the Presence of Natural Gas Components in Displacing and Displaced Fluids

The impacts of gas impurities on the minimum miscibility pressure of injected CO2-rich gas–crude oil systems and enhanced oil recovery potential

Assessing the effects of CO2/methane mixtures on gas−oil interfacial tension and fluid flow using compositional simulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About