|
Abstract
The primary purpose of surfactants used in stimulating sandstone reservoirs is
to reduce surface tension, contact angle and leakoff control. However, many
of these chemicals adsorb rapidly within the first few inches of the sandstone
formations, reducing their effectiveness in deeper penetration. This
phenomenon causes surfactants to adsorb or plate-out reducing their
effectiveness in post fracturing fluid recovery.
This study describes experimental and field case studies of various
surfactants used in the oilfield. Several different surfactants including a
nonionic ethoxylated linear alcohol, nonyl phenol ethoxylate, an amphoteric, a
cationic and a microemulsion system were investigated to determine their
adsorption properties when injected into a laboratory sand packed column. A
laboratory simulated comparison study of commonly used surfactants and
microemulsion was used to identify their leakoff and water recovery properties
from gas wells.
Field data collected from Bradford, Balltown and Speechley sandstone
formations confirmed experimental sand packed column and core flow
investigations. Reservoirs treated with microemulsion fluids demonstrate
exceptional water recoveries when compared with conventional surfactant
treatments. Wellhead pressures, flowing pressures and production data were
collected and evaluated using a production simulator to show effective
fracture lengths, damage surrounding the fractures and drainage areas with
various fluid systems. These investigations and presented case studies can be
used to minimize formation damage.
Introduction
Surfactants or surface active agents are predominately used in hydraulic
fracturing fluids to reduce emulsion tendencies between reservoir oil and
treatment fluids. This problem is normally addressed by incorporating a
non-emulsifier within fracturing fluids. However when gas wells are
stimulated with water based fracturing fluids, fluid retention and a reduction
in interfacial tension between the rock and the injected fluid are the key
driving forces worthy of consideration for well cleanup. One of the
continuing challenges in Appalachian Basin gas wells is post fracturing fluid
recovery due to low pressure reservoirs. This could be due to the water based
fluid creating fluid retention, or interfacial tension between the injected
fluid and the reservoir rock, or capillary end effect on and around the
vicinity of the face of the fractured rock1. To reduce these problems,
commonly available surfactants are incorporated within the fracturing fluid to
reduce surface tension. However, surfactants alone do not provide adequate
water recovery properties for the reservoirs in the Appalachian Basin. Low
temperature, pressure and permeability of these reservoirs may be some of the
major reasons that less than 50% of the treatment fluids can be recovered from
gas wells through conventional methods.[1] As illustrated in Figure 1, it is
possible that large quantities of injected fracturing fluids could be trapped
in the area near the fractured proppant pack.
When this condition occurs, higher water saturation adversely impacts the
relative permeability resulting in gas being trapped, thus significantly
impairing gas production into the fractured face and ultimately into the
wellbore. This condition along with capillary end effects eventually leads to
longer swabbing times, well cleanups, and poor well productivity.
|