Field-Scale Modeling of Hybrid Steam and In-Situ-Combustion Recovery Process in Oil-Sands Reservoirs Using Dynamic Gridding
- Min Yang (University of Calgary) | Thomas G. Harding (Nexen Energy ULC) | Zhangxing Chen (University of Calgary)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- August 2019
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 2019.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SAGD, thermal recovery, in-situ combustion, numerical simulation
- 6 in the last 30 days
- 39 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Hybrid steam and in-situ-combustion (ISC) recovery processes have shown advantages over pure steam injection for recovery of oil-sands resources, particularly with respect to reducing costs and lowering requirements for water and natural-gas use. However, it has been very challenging to predict the field performance of hybrid steam-and-combustion processes with a reasonable degree of confidence. Usually, a combustion front has a thickness of only a few inches and high-resolution grids are required to capture steep temperature, saturation, and fluid-composition gradients in the vicinity of the combustion front. Using high-resolution, fine grids (FGs) in an entire reservoir to improve the accuracy of simulation can involve excessive computation time and, therefore, might be impractical for field-scale modeling. It is important to have a robust simulation tool to accurately predict reservoir performance without compromising the computational efficiency.
In this work, numerical modeling of a hybrid steam-and-combustion recovery process was performed in a typical Athabasca Oil Sands reservoir. A comprehensive reaction-kinetics model derived from laboratory results was incorporated to represent the complex chemical reactions in the combustion process. This hybrid recovery process used oxygen-enriched air coinjection after several years of a steam-assisted-gravity-drainage (SAGD) operation. In the numerical model, safe limits were set on producing well temperature and oxygen content of the produced fluids. The initial grid size in the numerical model was at the centimeter scale, resulting in long run time, so to improve the computational efficiency a dynamic-gridding (DG) feature was applied. Parameters for controlling the creation of a dynamic grid and subsequently reverting back to a coarse grid have been examined to properly trigger the DG feature in the model. Once the optimized DG parameters were determined, operating parameters were investigated, including well configuration, oxygen (O2) concentration, and steam concentration. Comparisons were made between SAGD and hybrid steam/combustion processes in terms of cumulative water (steam) injection, cumulative oil production, and a cumulative steam/oil ratio (cSOR).
By comparing the simulation results from an FG model and a DG model, we found that a temperature gradient is the best criterion to use for controlling DG compared to fluid-saturation and/or composition criteria. The threshold value for the temperature criterion was determined to be 35°C. The model locates the FGs in close proximity to the combustion front where the temperature and fluid-saturation gradients are the steepest and it places the coarse gridblocks elsewhere in the model. Comparisons are made between the computation time and the accuracy of simulation, and they demonstrate that dynamic grid amalgamation reduces the computation time significantly while maintaining reasonable computation accuracy of the simulation. Different well configurations affect O2-injection timing, combustion-front sweep efficiency and, therefore, the overall performance. The suggested O2 concentration in the hybrid process is between 10 and 20%. Steam can also be replaced with nitrogen (N2) to further improve the performance. For all simulation scenarios considered in this work, the cSOR in the hybrid process was improved, illustrating the main advantage of the hybrid approach over steam-only injection as in SAGD.
|File Size||2 MB||Number of Pages||15|
Ado, M. R., Greaves, M., and Rigby, S. P. 2017. Dynamic Simulation of the Toe-to-Heel Air Injection Heavy Oil Recovery Process. Energy Fuels 31 (2): 1276–1284. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b02559.
Belgrave, J. D. M., Nzekwu, B. I., and Chhina, H. S. 2007. SAGD Optimization With Air Injection. Presented at the Latin American & Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 15–18 April. SPE-106901-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/106901-MS.
Card, C. C. H., Kumar, A., Close, J. C. et al. 2014. A New and Practical Workflow for Large Multipad SAGD Simulation—An Oil-Sands Case Study. J Can Pet Technol 53 (1): 14–31. SPE-165511-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/165511-PA.
Chen, Z. and Ewing, R. E. 2003. Degenerate Two-Phase Incompressible Flow IV: Local Refinement and Domain Decomposition. J Sci Comput 18 (3): 329–360. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022673427893.
Chen, Z., Ewing, R. E., Lazarov, R. D. et al. 1996. Multilevel Preconditioners for Mixed Methods for Second Order Elliptic Problems. Numer Linear Algebra 3 (5): 427–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1506(199609/10)3:5<427::AID-NLA92>3.0.CO;2-I.
Christensen, J. R., Darche, G., Dechelette, B. et al. 2004. Applications of Dynamic Gridding to Thermal Simulations. Presented at the SPE International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium and Western Regional Meeting, Bakersfield, California, 16–18 March. SPE-86969-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/86969-MS.
Faradonbeh, M. R., Hassanzadeh, H., and Harding, T. G. 2016. Numerical Simulations of Bitumen Recovery Using Solvent and Water Assisted Electrical Heating. Fuel 186: 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.08.077.
Freitag, N. P. and Exelby, D. R. 1998. Heavy Oil Production by In Situ Combustion—Distinguishing the Effects of the Steam and Fire Fronts. J Can Pet Technol 37 (4): 25–32. PETSOC-98-04-02. https://doi.org/10.2118/98-04-02.
Hogue, B., Gutie´rrez, D., Hong, C. et al. 2015. Oil Recovery From Gas-Over Bitumen Reservoirs: Results From the AIDROH Pilot Project in Alberta. J Can Pet Technol 54 (6): 351–360. SPE-174455-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/174455-PA.
Hoteit, H. and Chawathe´, A. 2016. Making Field-Scale Chemical Enhanced-Oil-Recovery Simulations a Practical Reality With Dynamic Gridding. SPE J. 21 (6): 2220–2237. SPE-169688-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/169688-PA.
Husky Oil Operations Limited. 2016. McMullen Thermal Conduction Process Experimental Pilot Project. Alberta Energy Regulator Annual Performance Presentation. Calgary, Canada: Husky Oil Operations Ltd.
Kerr, R. K. and Jonasson, H. P. 2013. SAGDOX—Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage With the Addition of Oxygen Injection. Presented at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 11–13 June. SPE-165509-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/165509-MS.
Ma, M., Faradonbeh, M. R., Hassanzadeh, H. et al. 2017. Comparative Study of SAGD and Solvent and Water Assisted Electrical Heating: Effect of Shale Layers. Presented at the SPE Canada Heavy Oil Technical Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 15–16 February. SPE-184997-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/184997-MS.
Marjerrison, D. M. and Fassihi, M. R. 1994. Performance of Morgan Pressure Cycling In-Situ Combustion. Presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 17–20 April. SPE-27793-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/27793-MS.
Mehra, R. K. 1991. Performance Analysis of In-Situ Combustion Pilot Project. Presented at the SPE International Thermal Operations Symposium, Bakersfield, California, 7–8 February. SPE-21537-MS https://doi.org/10/2118/21537-MS.
Mercado, D. and Trevisan, O. V. 2017. Pseudokinetic Model for Field-Scale Simulation of In-Situ Combustion. SPE Res Eval & Eng 20 (1): 161–167. SPE-181760-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/181760-PA.
Moore, R. G., Belgrave, J. D. M., Ursenbach, M. G. et al. 1999. In Situ Combustion Performance in Steam Flooded Heavy Oil Cores. J Can Pet Technol 38 (13): 1–9. PETSOC-99-13-34. https://doi.org/10.2118/99-13-34.
Oskouei, S. J. P., Maini, B. B., Moore, R. G. et al. 2013. Experimental Evaluation of SAGD/ISC Hybrid Recovery Method. J Can Pet Technol 52 (3): 204–218. SPE-137836-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/137836-PA.
Oskouei, S. J. P., Moore, R. G., Maini, B. B. et al. 2011. Feasibility of In-Situ Combustion in the SAGD Chamber. J Can Pet Technol 50 (4): 31–44. SPE-137832-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/137832-PA.
Perez-Perez, A., Mujica, M., Bogdanov, I. et al. 2016. A Methodological Analysis of the Mechanisms Associated With Steam/Solvent Coinjection Processes Using Dynamic Gridding. SPE J. 21 (6): 2238–2249. SPE-169075-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/169075-PA.
Rahnema, H., Barrufet, M., and Mamora, D. 2011. Experimental Study of Air Injection in SAGD Chamber. Presented at the Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 15–17 November. SPE-149195-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/149195-MS.
Rahnema, H., Barrufet, M., and Mamora, D. D. 2017. Combustion Assisted Gravity Drainage—Experimental and Simulation Results of a Promising In-Situ Combustion Technology To Recover Extra-Heavy Oil. J Petrol Sci Eng 154: 513–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2017.01.044.
Ren, S. R., Greaves, M., and Rathbone, R. R. 2002. Air Injection LTO Process: An IOR Technique for Light-Oil Reservoirs. SPE J. 7 (1): 90–99. SPE-57005-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/57005-PA.
Rios, E., Harding, T. G., Moore, R. G. et al. 2018. 3-D Physical Modeling of Hybrid Steam and Oxygen Injection for In-Situ Recovery of Oil Sands. Presented at the SPE Canada Heavy Oil Technical Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 13–14 March. SPE-189757-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/189757-MS.
Sammon, P. H. 2003. Dynamic Grid Refinement and Amalgamation for Compositional Simulation. Presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Houston, Texas, 3–5 February. SPE-79683-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/79683-MS.
STARS is a trademark of Computer Modelling Group Ltd., 3710 33 Street NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2L 2M1 Canada. https://www.cmgl.ca/stars.
Thornton, B. and Hassan, D. 1996. Horizontal Well Cyclic Combustion, Wabasca Air Injection Pilot. J Can Pet Technol 35 (9): 40–44. PETSOC-96-09-01. https://doi.org/10.2118/96-09-01.
van Batenburg, D. W., Bosch, M., Boerrigter, P. M. et al. 2011. Application of Dynamic Gridding Techniques to IOR/EOR-Processes. Presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, The Woodlands, Texas, 21–23 February. SPE-141711-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/141711-MS.
WinProp is a trademark of Computer Modelling Group Ltd., 3710 33 Street NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2L 2M1 Canada. https://www.cmgl.ca/stars.
Yang, M., Harding, T. G., and Chen, Z. 2017a. An Improved Kinetics Model for In Situ Combustion of Pre-Steamed Oil Sands. Energy Fuels 31 (4): 3546–3556. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b02582.
Yang, M., Harding, T. G., Chen, Z. et al. 2017b. Numerical Modelling of Hybrid Steam and In-Situ Combustion Performance for Oil Sands. Presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Conference, Montgomery, Texas, 20–22 February. SPE-182708-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/182708-MS.
Yang, M., Harding, T. G., and Chen, Z. 2019. Numerical Investigation of the Mechanisms in Co-Injection of Steam and Enriched Air Process Using Combustion Tube Tests. Fuel 242, 638–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.01.041.