Pore-to-Core EOR Upscaling for CO2 Foam for CCUS
- Arthur Uno Rognmo (University of Bergen) | Sunniva Brudvik Fredriksen (University of Bergen) | Zachary Paul Alcorn (University of Bergen) | Mohan Sharma (University of Stavanger) | Tore Føyen (University of Bergen and SINTEF Industry) | Øyvind Eide (University of Bergen) | Arne Graue (University of Bergen) | Martin Fernø (University of Bergen)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Journal
- Publication Date
- December 2019
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 2,793 - 2,803
- 2019.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- micromodel, CCUS, foam flow, EOR, CO2-foam
- 42 in the last 30 days
- 122 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
This paper presents an ongoing CO2-foam upscaling research project that aims to advance CO2-foam technology for accelerating and increasing oil recovery, while reducing operational costs and lessening the carbon footprint left during CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Laboratory CO2-foam behavior was upscaled to pilot scale in an onshore carbonate reservoir in Texas, USA. Important CO2-foam properties, such as local foam generation, bubble texture, apparent viscosity, and shear-thinning behavior with a nonionic surfactant, were evaluated using pore-to-core upscaling to develop accurate numerical tools for a field-pilot prediction of increased sweep efficiency and CO2 utilization. At pore-scale, high-pressure silicon-wafer micromodels showed in-situ foam generation and stable liquid films over time during no-flow conditions. Intrapore foam bubbles corroborated high apparent foam viscosities measured at core scale. CO2-foam apparent viscosity was measured at different rates (foam-rate scans) and different gas fractions (foam-quality scans) at core scale. The highest mobility reduction (foam apparent viscosity) was observed between 0.60 and 0.70 gas fractions. The maximum foam apparent viscosity was 44.3 (+/–0.5) mPa·s, 600 times higher than that of pure CO2, compared with the baseline viscosity (reference case, without surfactant), which was 1.7 (+/–0.6) mPa·s, measured at identical conditions. The CO2-foam showed shear-thinning behavior with approximately 50% reduction in apparent viscosity when the superficial velocity was increased from 1 to 8 ft/D. Strong foam was generated in EOR corefloods at a gas fraction of 0.70, resulting in an apparent viscosity of 39.1 mPa·s. Foam parameters derived from core-scale foam floods were used for numerical upscaling and field-pilot performance assessment.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||11|
Alcorn, Z. P., Fernø, M., and Graue, A. 2016. Workflow for Optimal Injection of CO2 to Enhance Oil Recovery in Mature Oil Fields: A Preliminary Study for a Field Pilot Program. Presented at the SPE Bergen One-Day Seminar, Grieghallen, Bergen, Norway, 20 April. SPE-180029-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/180029-MS.
Alvarez, J. M., Rivas, H. J., and Rossen, W. R. 2001. Unified Model for Steady-State Foam Behavior at High and Low Foam Qualities. SPE J. 6 (3): 325–333. SPE-74141-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/74141-PA.
Bennion, B. and Bachu, S. 2005. Relative Permeability Characteristics for Supercritical CO2 Displacing Water in a Variety of Potential Sequestration Zones. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 9–12 October. SPE-95547-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/95547-MS.
Bennion, B. and Bachu, S. 2007. Permeability and Relative Permeability Measurements at Reservoir Conditions for CO2-Water Systems in Ultra Low Permeability Confining Caprocks. Presented at the EUROPEC/EAGE Conference and Exhibition, London, 11–14 June. SPE-106995-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/106995-MS.
Buchgraber, M., Al-Dossary, M., Ross, C. M. et al. 2012. Creation of a Dual-Porosity Micromodel for Pore-Level Visualization of Multiphase Flow. J Pet Sci Eng 86: 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2012.03.012.
Cheng, L., Reme, A. B., Shan, D. et al. 2000. Simulating Foam Processes at High and Low Foam Qualities. Presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 3–5 April. SPE-59287-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/59287-MS.
Chou, S. I., Vasicek, S. L., Pisio, D. L. et al. 1992. CO2 Foam Field Trial at North Ward-Estes. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington, DC, 4–7 October. SPE-24643-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/24643-MS.
Enick, R. M., Olsen, D. K., Ammer, J. R. et al. 2012. Mobility and Conformance Control for CO2 EOR via Thickeners, Foams, and Gels—A Literature Review of 40 Years of Research and Pilot Tests. Presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 14–18 April. SPE-154122-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/154122-MS.
Farajzadeh, R., Andrianov, A., Krastev, R. et al. 2012. Foam–Oil Interaction in Porous Media: Implications for Foam Assisted Enhanced Oil Recovery. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 183–184: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2012.07.002.
Fredriksen, S. B., Rognmo, A. U., and Fernø, M. A. 2016. Pore-Scale Mechanisms During Low Salinity Waterflooding: Water Diffusion and Osmosis for Oil Mobilization. Presented at the SPE Bergen One-Day Seminar, Grieghallen, Bergen, Norway, 20 April. SPE-180060-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/180060-MS.
Fredriksen, S. B., Alcorn, Z. P., Frøland, A. et al. 2018. Surfactant Pre-Floods During CO2 Foam for Integrated Enhanced Oil Recovery in Fractured Oil-Wet Carbonates. Presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Tulsa, 14–18 April. SPE-190168-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/190168-MS.
Gauteplass, J., Chaudhary, K., Kovscek, A. R. et al. 2015. Pore-Level Foam Generation and Flow for Mobility Control in Fractured Systems. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 468: 184–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2014.12.043.
Henry, R. L., Fisher, D. R., Pennell, S. P. et al. 1996. Field Test of Foam to Reduce CO2 Cycling. Presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 21–24 April. SPE-35402-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/35402-MS.
Hoefner, M. L., Evans, E. M., Buckles, J. J. et al. 1995. CO2 Foam: Results From Four Developmental Field Trials. SPE Res Eval & Eng 10 (4): 273–281. SPE-27787-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/27787-PA.
Hornbrook, J. W., Castanier, L. M., and Pettit, P. A. 1991. Observation of Foam/Oil Interactions in a New, High-Resolution Micromodel. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 6–9 October. SPE-22631-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/22631-MS.
Jarrell, P. M. and Jones, R. T. 2002. Practical Aspects of CO2 Flooding, Vol. 22. Richardson, Texas: SPE Monograph Series, Society of Petroleum Engineer.
Jian, G., Puerto, M. C., Wehowsky, A. et al. 2016. Static Adsorption of an Ethoxylated Nonionic Surfactant on Carbonate Minerals. Langmuir 32 (40): 10244–10252. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.6b01975.
Jonas, T. M., Chou, S. I., and Vasicek, S. L. 1990. Evaluation of a CO2 Foam Field Trial: Rangely Weber Sand Unit. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 23–26 September. SPE-20468-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/20468-MS.
Jones, S. A., Laskaris, G., Vincent-Bonnieu, S. et al. 2016. Surfactant Effect on Foam: From Core Flood Experiments to Implicit-Texture Foam-Model Parameters. Presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Tulsa, 11–13 April. SPE-179637-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/179637-MS.
Law, D. H. S., Yang, Z. M., and Stone, T. W. 1992. Effect of the Presence of Oil on Foam Performance: A Field Simulation Study. SPE Res Eval & Eng 7 (2): 228–236. SPE-18421-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/18421-PA.
Lemmon, E.W., McLinden, M.O., and Friend, D.G. 2018. Thermophysical Properties of Fluid Systems. In NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69, ed. P. J. Linstrom and W. G. Mallard. Gaithersburg, Maryland: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.18434/T4D303.
Li, R. F., Yan, W., Liu, S. et al. 2010. Foam Mobility Control for Surfactant Enhanced Oil Recovery. SPE J. 15 (4): 928–942. SPE-113910-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/113910-PA.
Ma, K., Lopez-Salinas, J. L., Puerto, M. C. et al. 2013. Estimation of Parameters for the Simulation of Foam Flow Through Porous Media. Part 1: The Dry-Out Effect. Energy Fuels 27 (5): 2363–2375. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef302036s.
Merchant, D. H. 2010. Life Beyond 80: A Look at Conventional WAG Recovery Beyond 80% HCPV Injected in CO2 Tertiary Floods. Presented at the SPE International Conference on CO2 Capture, Storage, and Utilization, New Orleans, 10–12 November. SPE-139516-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/139516-MS.
Moffitt, P., Pecore, D., Trees, M. et al. 2015. East Vacuum Grayburg San Andres Unit, 30 Years of CO2 Flooding: Accomplishments, Challenges, and Opportunities. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 28–30 September. SPE-175000-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/175000-MS.
Nguyen, Q., Hirasaki, G., and Johnston, K. 2015. Novel CO2 Foam Concepts and Injection Schemes for Improving CO2 Sweep Efficiency in Sandstone and Carbonate Hydrocarbon Formations. US DOE/NETL Technical Report, DE-FE0005902, Department of Petroleum&Geosystems Engineering in association with Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA (5 February). https://doi.org/10.2172/1178538.
Rognmo, A. U., Horjen, H., and Fernø, M. A. 2017. Nanotechnology for Improved CO2 Utilization in CCS: Laboratory Study of CO2-Foam Flow and Silica Nanoparticle Retention in Porous Media. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 64: 113–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.07.010.
Rognmo, A. U., Heldal, S., and Fernø, M. A. 2018. Silica Nanoparticles to Stabilize CO2-Foam for Improved CO2 Utilization: Enhanced CO2 Storage and Oil Recovery From Mature Oil Reservoirs. Fuel 216: 621–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.11.144.
Sanders, A., Jones, R. M., Rabie, A. et al. 2012. Implementation of a CO2 Foam Pilot Study in the SACROC Field: Performance Evaluation. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–10 October. SPE-160016-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/160016-MS.
Schramm, L. L. 1994. Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry, Vol. 242. Washington, DC: Advances in Chemistry Series, American Chemical Society (Reprint).
Schramm, L. L. 2000. Surfactants: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Reprint).
Sharma, M., Alcorn, Z. P., Fredriksen, S. et al. 2017. Numerical Modeling Study for Designing CO2-Foam Field Pilot. Presented at the IOR 2017 – 19th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Stavanger, Norway, 24 April. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201700339.
Taber, J. J., Martin, F. D., and Seright, R. S. 1997. EOR Screening Criteria Revisited – Part 1: Introduction to Screening Criteria and Enhanced Recovery Field Projects. SPE Res Eval & Eng 12 (3): 189–198. SPE-35385-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/35385-PA.