Open Access
Samih Mohieldin Hassan,
- Simulation Engineer Development and Production Department, Petro Energy E&P Khartoum Sudan
Abstract
Chemical injection stimulation is one of worldwide proven technologies for viscosity reduction and mobility enhancement. The principle mechanism is to reduce heavy oil viscosity by injecting of active chemical agent solution into reservoir as huff and buff practice, the agent solution is act at near wellbore area by remove plugging of heavy organic material, Energy support due to large quantity of stimulation liquid being injected into the formation, viscosity reduction by emulsification and micro- emulsion which will greatly enhance oil mobility; therefore, accelerate oil recovery and reduce interfacial tension (IFT); therefore, increase oil recovery. as global oil industry many technologies introduced to Sudanese oil fields such as chemical which had been implemented in 2018 to increase oil production by developing high viscous oil reservoirs. The pilot was done in two wells in Moga and Fula fields; they are located at southern part of western escarpment trend of Fula sub-basin, Main oil-bearing distributes in Aradeiba, Bentiu and Abu Gabra formations. Bentiu formation was selected for pilot, it is consolidated medium productive sand stone reservoir as per well test interpretation productivity index is 0.05 to 0.2 bbl/day/psia, PVT features: low bubble point pressure, low gas oil ratio (GOR), viscosity at initial pressure between 396–5902 mPa.s and 8986–13880 mPa.s at surface pressure and 29°C, permeability lab test results show strong heterogeneity formation. This paper discusses the chemical injection as enhanced oil recovery (EOR) application in block-6, investigate and evaluate pilot results, then discuss lesson learned from this pilot. Basic reservoir engineering principles and lab test result had been used to calculate production and reservoir parameters before and after implementation. The results of first well shows instantaneous downhole fluid level (DFL) raising about 129 m and remain stable while same pump speed was maintained after the chemical injection, the water cut dropped from 64% to 42% and Oil rate jumped from 95 BOPD to 204 BOPD. second well shows bad performance post the chemical injection and the oil rate decreased from 60 to 40 BOPD and WC increased from 70% to 93% due to well located in the down dip close to OWC and strong reservoir pressure support.
Keywords: Downhole fluid level, enhanced oil, recovery, chemical flooding, sustainable energy, production, mobility enhancement
References
1. Lu, Nu, Hou, Jian, Liu, Yongge, et al. Optimization chemical flooding methods to enhance oil recovery of strong heterogeneity, high temperature and high salinity reservoirs-case study of Shengli oil field. Paper presented at the SPE/IATMI Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition. Jakarta, Indonesia: SPE; 2017 October 17–19. p. 2017. doi: 10.2118/186435-MS.
2. Mohsenatabar Firozjaii AM, Saghafi HR. Review on chemical enhanced oil recovery using polymer flooding: fundamentals, experimental and numerical simulation. Petroleum. 2020;6(2):115–22. doi: 10.1016/j.petlm.2019.09.003.
3. Elhag, Hani Hago A, Hashim A, et al. Evaluation of continuous surfactant flooding in North East Africa: case study of Bentiu reservoir. SPE. Paper presented at the SPE Niger Annual International Conference and Exhibition, Virtual. Vol. 2020; 2020 August 11–13. doi:
10.2118/203702-MS.
4. Farog A, Mustafa A, Haytham, Mukhtar E, et al. Implementation of chemical EOR as huff and puff to improve oil recovery for heavy oil field by chemical treatment SEMAR cast study bamboo oil field. Paper presented at the SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Tech Symposium and Exhibition. Dammam, Saudi Arabia: SPE; 2016 April 25–28. p. 2016. doi: 10.2118/182792-MS.
5. Pal S, Mushtaq M, Banat F, Al Sumaiti AM. Review of surfactant-assisted chemical enhanced oil recovery for carbonate reservoirs: challenges and future perspectives. Petrol Sci. 2018;15(1):77– 102. doi: 10.1007/s12182–017–0198–6.
6. Lefebvre Ch, Lemouzy P, Sorin D, et al. Building a road map for enhanced oil recovery Prefeasibility study. Paper presented at the SPE Russian Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Technical Conference and Exhibition. Moscow, Russia: SPE; 2012, October 16–18. p. 2012. doi:10.2118/159264-MS.
7. Ali HA, Ahmed MT, Doroudi A. Chemical enhanced oil recovery pilot design for Heglig main Field-Sudan. Al-Khobar. Paper presented at the SPE Saudi Arabia Section Annual Tech Symposium and Exhibition. Saudi Arabia: SPE; 2015, April 21–23. p. 2015. doi:
10.2118/177984-MS.
8. Foo YY, Tewari RD, Kok KC, et al. Laboratory evaluation of chemical EOR process for viscous and high EACN oil in East African Oilfields. Paper presented at the International Petrol Technol Conference. Bangkok, Thailand: SPE; 2016 November 14–16. p. 2016. doi: 10.2523/IPTC18601-MS.
9. Thomas S, Ali SMF. Micellar Flooding and ASP-Chemical Methods for Enhanced Oil Recovery. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology. 2001;40(2). doi: 10.2118/01–02–04.
10. Gbadamosi AO, Junin R, Manan MA, Agi A, Yusuff AS. An overview of chemical enhanced oil recovery: recent advances and prospects. Int Nano Lett. 2019;9(3):171–202. doi:10.1007/s40089–019–0272–8.
Journal of Petroleum Engineering & Technology
| Volume | |
| Received | March 1, 2022 |
| Accepted | April 3, 2022 |
| Published | January 7, 2023 |