Screening Criteria for Carbon Dioxide Huff ‘n’ Puff Operations

Mohammed-Singh, Lorna J.; Singhal, A.K.; Sim, Steve

doi:10.2523/100044-ms

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is ascribed to more dissolution of CO 2 into the oleic phase, and the trend can be found in many previous experimental or numerical results. ,, Meanwhile, the exact value of soaking time is related to the dimensions of the reservoir, oil saturation, pressure, etc. A field application showed that a long-enough soaking interval of 4 weeks was favorable . Therefore, the soaking time should be optimized using the tool of numerical simulation at a reservoir scale for a specific tight oil reservoir.…”

Section: Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CO₂ Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

Wei

Zhou

et al. 2020

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The oil recovery factor in tight oil reservoirs is quite low when compared with conventional reservoirs. CO2 injection and addition of surfactants in fracturing fluids to assist imbibition have been shown to be two effective and practical methods to enhance oil recovery of tight/shale reservoirs, which, for the former, achieves carbon sequestration as well. In this study, a series of imbibition and huff-n-puff (HNF) laboratory experiments were performed on tight oil samples to explore the possible combination of the two enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods. After evaluation, a hybrid EOR strategy, CO2 HNF after surfactant-assisted imbibition, was proposed to enhance oil recovery in tight reservoirs. In the hybrid method, the imbibition process preferentially displaces the crude oil in relatively small pores, while the CO2 HNF process mostly produces the crude oil in relatively large pores. Imbibition and HNF compensate each other to recover the residual oil in the pore networks, which makes them a perfect combination to enhance oil recovery in tight reservoirs. In addition, the operation parameters including cycle number, injection volume, and soaking time of this hybrid EOR method were also examined, and the results showed that the optimization of these parameters is different from that in the conventional CO2 HNF operation. This work provides a promising hybrid EOR method and can be a good reference to evaluate operational parameters and improve the production performance for tight oil reservoirs.

show abstract

Section: Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CO₂ Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

Wei

Zhou

et al. 2020

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[10][11][12][13] More than 130 CO 2 injection projects are operational around the world, 8 and they have helped identify its key mechanisms, which are (a) oil viscosity reduction; (b) oil swelling due to CO 2 solution; (c) vaporization and extraction of lighter hydrocarbon component; (d) dissolved gas drive aided by gravity drainage; (e) reduction in two-phase interfacial tensions to achieve miscible; and (f) permeability improvement by acidification effect. 8,14 Therefore, CO 2 offers better injectivity to the rock matrix than the injected water, and it is more advantageous than other gases such as nitrogen gas. This makes CO 2 the best candidate for improving the tight oil recovery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of CO₂/N₂ injection in tight oil reservoirs with confinement effect

Wang

et al. 2019

Energy Science & Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the CO2/N2 injection process in tight oil reservoirs considering the confinement effect. To study the microscopic physical mechanisms, the confinement effect is characterized by properties shift and capillarity and introduced into the flash calculation to obtain the phase equilibrium of mixture fluids (tight oil/CO2/N2) in tight porous media. The results indicate that the injected nitrogen gas could effectively maintain the reservoir pressure, while it also weakens the effects of the CO2 injection recovery mechanisms, notably diffusivity and viscosity reduction. In addition, a dual‐pore tight oil reservoir model is set up to investigate the CO2/N2 injection with ultra‐low permeability and hydraulic fracturing. The basic CO2 injection parameters are optimized by the orthogonal method. Based on CO2 injection process, three injection schemes of CO2/N2 injection, which are mixed‐gas injection, CO2‐alternating‐N2 (CAN) injection, and N2‐alternating‐CO2 (NAC) injection, were investigated and a comparative analysis was made for the pressure distribution, CO2 mole fraction distribution, and cumulative oil production. Based on this analysis, the CAN injection process proved to be the best injection scheme. A parametric analysis further suggested that the nitrogen gas injection rate was the most important factor. Besides, the effect of gravity drainage, reservoir permeability, nature fractures, and permeability heterogeneity on the oil production of CAN injection process were also investigated in detail. The results show that tight oil reservoir with better vertical connectivity, poor fracture growth, and higher heterogeneity is more favorable for the CO2/N2 injection process.

show abstract

“…As a consequence, more oil can be produced and oil recovery can be enhanced by reducing oil viscosity, expanding oil volume, and extracting the light components of crude oil. [18][19][20][21][22][23] Mohammed-Singh et al 24 summarized the cases of CO 2 huff and puff in oil fields over the past two decades. Among above methods, CO 2 huff and puff has attracted more attention as an efficient and important technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[13][14][15][16][17] Both soaking time and CO 2 injection volume are important operation parameters to improve the performance of CO 2 huff and puff. [18][19][20][21][22][23] Mohammed-Singh et al 24 summarized the cases of CO 2 huff and puff in oil fields over the past two decades. They found that the best soaking time was 2-4 weeks and massive CO 2 injection enhanced the oil recovery of CO 2 huff and puff.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental investigation on influencing factors of CO₂huff and puff under fractured low‐permeability conditions

Bai

et al. 2019

Energy Science & Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fracture system is a vital component of fractured low‐permeability reservoirs. The presence of fractures can improve reservoir flow capacity and injected carbon dioxide (CO2) utilization, thus leading to higher oil recovery. In this study, the effects of the presence of fracture, fracture morphology, soaking time, and CO2 injection volume on CO2 huff and puff were investigated through 11 low‐permeability cores with different properties. The experimental results indicated that the presence of fractures enhanced cyclic oil recovery and increased the effective cycle numbers during CO2 huff and puff in low‐permeability cores. Moreover, compared with low‐permeability cores without fractures, ultimate oil recovery of CO2 huff and puff was risen up by ~11% in fractured cores. Longer soaking time was conducive to enhancing ultimate oil recovery of CO2 huff and puff in fractured low‐permeability cores, but the excessive soaking time had little effect on ultimate oil recovery. Meanwhile, excessive CO2 injection volume did not significantly improve the performance of CO2 huff and puff, but it did reduce the CO2 utilization. Moreover, gravity caused the produced oil to deposit on the bottom surface of the blowout end of the fracture, which made oil recovery of the core with a horizontal fracture slightly higher (~7%) than that of the core with a vertical fracture. In addition, variation in the intersection angle of fractures had little effect on ultimate oil recovery of CO2 huff and puff in fractured low‐permeability cores. It, however, did change the conductivity of the entire core, thus affecting oil recovery during the first two cycles remarkably.

show abstract

Screening Criteria for Carbon Dioxide Huff ‘n’ Puff Operations

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

CO₂ Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

CO₂ Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

Investigation of CO₂/N₂ injection in tight oil reservoirs with confinement effect

Experimental investigation on influencing factors of CO₂huff and puff under fractured low‐permeability conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Screening Criteria for Carbon Dioxide Huff ‘n’ Puff Operations

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

CO2 Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

CO2 Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

Investigation of CO2/N2 injection in tight oil reservoirs with confinement effect

Experimental investigation on influencing factors of CO2huff and puff under fractured low‐permeability conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

CO₂ Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

CO₂ Huff-n-Puff after Surfactant-Assisted Imbibition to Enhance Oil Recovery for Tight Oil Reservoirs

Investigation of CO₂/N₂ injection in tight oil reservoirs with confinement effect

Experimental investigation on influencing factors of CO₂huff and puff under fractured low‐permeability conditions