| Authors |
L. Song, SPE, A.Kantzas, SPE, University of Calgary; J.L. Bryan, SPE, TIPM
Laboratory
|
| Source |
SPE International Conference on CO2 Capture, Storage, and Utilization,
10-12 November 2010,
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
|
| Preview |
Abstract
Since the 1950’s, the use of carbon dioxide to increase heavy oil recovery
has attract more attention from industry and laboratory research. The injection
of carbon dixode has shown technical and economical advantages for enhancing
heavy oil and bitumen recovery, because it can effectively reduce viscosity
under the reservoir conditions. When carbon dioxide is injected into the
reservoir, it partially dissolves into the heavy oil and mass transfer is the
first mechanism to occur. Consequently, the accurate prediction and evaluation
of the diffusion coefficient of carbon dioxide in heavy oil is one of the key
parameters to develop technology for extraction of heavy oil in a feasible and
cost-effective way. However, few experimental data for diffusivity of carbon
dioxide in heavy oil are available in the literature. Therefore, this study
conducted in order to add to the existing the laboratory data for evaluation
and calculation of diffusion coefficient of carbon dioxide into heavy oil. In
the past, experimental methods used to determine the diffusion coefficient of a
gas in heavy oil were conducted under a constant gas pressure, which assumed
that oil phase can be contacted with infinite gas at a fixed pressure. In this
study, by employing X-ray Computed Assisted Tomography (CAT) and a
non-iterative finite volume method, the purpose is to evaluate and compare
experimental diffusion coefficients of carbon dioxide in heavy oil under the
constant pressure and decaying pressue at the same time. Moreover,
investigation of impacts of pressure on diffusion coefficients is
conducted.
It is found that the diffusvity of carbon dioxide in heavy oil is sensitive
to the system pressure. The comparison between carbon dioxide diffusion
coefficients under the constant pressure and those measured under the decaying
pressrue showed an obvious difference. The results of study are essential for
understanding oil recovery through carbon dioxide injection.
Introduction
As early as 1950’s, as conventional oil reserves became depleted, interest
began to grow in the improved recovery and utilization of heavy oil and
bitumen. Many reservoirs in Canada are lelatively small and thin, so techniques
need to be developed in order to reduce oil viscosity without application of
heat through steam. Compared to the other non-thermal techniques, injection of
gas has become as an attractive way to enhance heavy oil and bitumen production
since it is more cost-effective. Among a number of kinds of injection gas,
carbon dioxide has considerable potential as a solvent fro EOR applications. It
is well-known that, compared to methane, nitrogen, or flue gas, carbon dioxide
has a much stronger ability to vaporize and extract hydrocarbons. In addition,
the pressure required for miscibility with carbon dioxide is basically
considerably lower than that for miscible displacement with either methane,
nitrogen or flue gas.
When carbon dioxide is injected into the heavy oil reservoirs, the heavy oil
viscosity is significantly reduced under the reservoir conditions. In order for
mixing and viscosity reduction to occur, mass transfer is the first mechanism,
which is bacically controlled by the diffusion coefficient. Accordingly, the
measurement and evaluation of the diffusion coefficient is important to
understand the mechanism of carbon dioxide extracting heavy oil and develop
feasible technology for enhancement of heavy oil recovery. Currently,
experimental methods for measuring the diffusivity of a gas in heavy oil can be
generally classified into two categories: conventional and nonconventional
[1]. Several experiments have been published using conventional
composition analysis [2, 3], monitor pressure decay
[4-9], monitor gas-oil interface position [10], dynamic
pendant drop volume analysis [1, 11], and low field nuclear magnetic
resonance (NMR) spectra [12, 13].
|