Numerical Investigation of Potential Injection Strategies To Reduce Shale Barrier Impacts on SAGD Process
- Weiqiang Li (Texas A&M University) | Daulat Mamora (Texas A&M University) | Yamin Li (Occidental Petroleum Corporation) | Fangda Qiu (Schlumberger)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
- Publication Date
- March 2011
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 57 - 64
- 2011. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.3.9 Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage, 5.3.4 Reduction of Residual Oil Saturation, 5.2.1 Phase Behavior and PVT Measurements
- Athabasca, solvent coinjection, SAGD, shale barrier, top injector application
- 2 in the last 30 days
- 684 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 5.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
It is well known that shale barriers significantly reduce steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) performance in Athabasca fields. An extensive 2D simulation study shows that the flow resistance at the end of shale barriers and the extra heat absorbed by the residual water inside the unproductive shale barrier are the main reasons for the shale barrier effects. Long continuous shale barriers located vertically above or near the wellbore delay production performance significantly.
We investigated potential strategies, including solvent coinjection, top injector application, or a combination of both, to reduce the shale barrier impacts. Solvent in the vapour phase can pass through the narrow flow path at the end of a shale barrier. Meanwhile, because the phase condenses from vapour to liquid, solvent efficiently reduces the flow resistance of the shale barrier. Liquid solvent coinjection can accelerate the near-wellbore flow and reduce the residual oil saturation at the wellbore vicinity. Coinjecting a multicomponent solvent can flush out the oil at different areas with different drainage mechanisms from vaporized and liquid components. Additional injector application at the top of the reservoir results in only marginal improvement.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||8|
Butler, R.M. and Mokrys, I.J. 1991. A New Process (VAPEX) for RecoveringHeavy Oils Using Hot Water and Hydrocarbon Vapour. J Can Pet Technol 30 (1): 97-106. JCPT Paper No. 91-01-09. doi:10.2118/91-01-09.
Butler, R.M. and Mokrys, I.J. 1993. Recovery of Heavy Oils Using VaporizedHydrocarbon Solvents: Further Development of the VAPEX Process. J Can PetTechnol 32 (6): 38-55.
Butler, R.M. and Mokrys, I.J. 1998. Closed Loop Extraction Method for theRecovery of Heavy Oils and Bitumens Underlain by Aquifers: The VAPEX Process.J Can Pet Technol 37 (4): 41-50.
Chen, Q., Gerritsen, M.G., and Kovscek, A.R. 2007. Effects of Reservoir Heterogeneitieson the Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage Process. Paper SPE 109873 presentedat the SPE Annual Technology Conference and Exhibition, Anaheim, California,USA, 11-14 November. doi: 10.2118/109873-MS.
ConocoPhillips. 2009. Challenged Resources, http://www.conocophillips.com/EN/tech/upstream/challenged/Pages/index.aspx.
Farouq-Ali, S.M. 1997. Is there life after SAGD? J Can Pet Technol 36 (6): 20-23.
Kisman, K.E. and Yeung, K.C. 1995. Numerical Study of the SAGD Processin the Burnt Lake Oil Sands Lease. Paper SPE 30276 presented at the SPEInternational Heavy Oil Symposium, Calgary, 19-21 June. doi:10.2118/30276-MS.
Law, D.H.-S. and Nasr, T.N. 2000. Field-Scale Numerical Simulation ofSAGD Process with Top-Water Zone. Paper SPE 65522 presented at the DPR/CIMInternational Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, Calgary, 6-8 November.doi: 10.2118/65522-MS.
Li, W. and Mamora, D.D. 2010. Drainage Mechanism of Steam withSolvent Coinjection under Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) Process.Paper SPE 130802 presented at the International Oil and Gas Conference andExhibition in China, Beijing, 8-10 June. doi: 10.2118/130802-MS.
Mokrys, I.J. and Butler, K.M. 1993. In-Situ Upgrading of Heavy Oils andBitumen by Propane De-Asphalting: The VAPEX Process. Paper SPE 25452presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,USA, 21-23 March. doi: 10.2118/25452-MS.
Nasr, T.N., and Ayodele O.R. 2006. New Hybrid Steam-Solvent Processesfor the Recovery of Heavy Oil and Bitumen. Paper SPE 101717 presented atthe Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi,UAE, 5-8 November. doi: 10.2118/101717-MS.
Nasr, T.N., and Ayodele, O.R. 2005. Thermal Techniques for the Recoveryof Heavy Oil and Bitumen. Paper SPE 97488 presented at SPE InternationalImproved Oil recovery Conference in Asia Pacific, Kuala Lumpur, 5-6 December.doi: 10.2118/97488-MS.
Nasr, T.N., Beaulieu, G., Golbeck, H., and Heck, G. 2003. Novel Expanding Solvent-SAGD Process"ES-SAGD." J Can Pet Technol 42 (1):13-16. JCPT PaperNo. 03-01-TN. doi: 10.2118/03-01-TN.
Pooladi-Darvish, M. and Mattar, L. 2002. SAGD Operations in the Presence OfOverlying Gas Cap and Water Layer-Effect Of Shale Layers. J Can PetTechnol 41 (6): 40-51. JCPT Paper No. 02-06-04. doi:10.2118/02-06-04.
Richardson, J.G., Harris, D.G., Rossen, R.H., and VanHee, G. 1978. The Effect of Small, DiscontinuousShales on Oil Recovery. J Pet Technol 30 (11):1531-1537. SPE-6700-PA. doi: 10.2118/6700-PA.
Thomas, S. 2008. EnhancedOil Recovery--An Overview. Oil & Gas Science and Technology 63 (1): 9-19. doi: 10.2516/ogst: 2007060.
Yang, G. and Butler, R.M. 1992. Effects of Reservoir Heterogeneitieson Heavy Oil Recovery by Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage. J Can PetTechnol 31 (8): 37-43. JCPT Paper No. 92-08-03. doi:10.2118/92-08-03.