Injection of Aquifer Water and GOSP Disposal Water into Tight Carbonate Reservoirs
- Krishnam U. Raju (Saudi Aramco) | Hisham A. Nasr-El-Din (Saudi Aramco) | V. Hilab (Saudi Aramco) | Shameem Siddiqui (Saudi Aramco) | Sudhir Mehta (Saudi Aramco)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Journal
- Publication Date
- December 2005
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 374 - 384
- 2005. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 4.1.2 Separation and Treating, 4.2 Pipelines, Flowlines and Risers, 1.8 Formation Damage, 5.2 Reservoir Fluid Dynamics, 4.6 Natural Gas, 4.1.5 Processing Equipment, 5.1 Reservoir Characterisation, 4.3.4 Scale, 5.8.7 Carbonate Reservoir, 1.2.3 Rock properties, 3.2.4 Acidising, 1.6.9 Coring, Fishing, 3.2.6 Produced Water Management, 4.2.3 Materials and Corrosion, 6.5.2 Water use, produced water discharge and disposal, 5.5.2 Core Analysis, 6.5.3 Waste Management
- 1 in the last 30 days
- 853 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Disposal of produced water from oil fields is a major concern forenvironmental and economic reasons.One way to dispose of this water is tomix it with aquifer water and inject it back into the formation.One ofthe carbonate reservoirs in Saudi Arabia produces wet oil where the totaldissolved solids (TDS) of the produced water is high (up to 238,000 mg/L). Theproduced water also contains dissolved gasses (H2S and CO2) and suspendedmaterial (oil and corrosion products). Thus, disposal water from a gas/oilseparation plant (GOSP) not only has CaCO3 scaling potential, but can alsoprecipitate sulfides because it contains nearly 750 mg/L of H2S. Incontrast, the aquifer waters from the area contain approximately 2 mg/L oftotal iron. Therefore, if these two waters were to be mixed, the possibility ofdamaging the formation from iron sulfide precipitation could be signficant. Theobjective of this study is to assess potential formation damage that can resultwhen the two waters are mixed and injected into the tight carbonatereservoir.
The current study included a detailed analysis of field waters,determination of scaling potential of various waters, and extensive corefloodtesting using reservoir cores. A unique feature of this study was that thecores were examined after the injection of the mixed waters by computerizedtomography (CT) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to determine both macroand pore-level effects on core properties.
The study revealed that the injection of mixed water into reservoir corescreated wormholes, which increased core permeability. This new findingindicates that disposal water is not always damaging. On the other hand, theprecipitated iron sulfide particles seem to damage the cores, but the damagewas constrained by the core initial permeability. For example, the iron sulfideparticles (0.25 GREEK mu m) caused damage to cores with permeability of lessthan 20 md after injecting 1,000 pore volumes (PV) of the mixed waters.However, no damage was observed in cores with permeability greater than 60 md,even after injecting 600 PV of the same mixed water.
The study identified various types of scale resulting from mixing producedand aquifer waters, and determined conditions under which these waters could beinjected. Also, the study highlights an unexpected benefit of injectingH2S-containing waters, which is to create wormholes and thus significantlyincrease permeability of tight carbonate reservoirs.
Introduction and Background
Produced water reinjection (PWRI) has been carried out throughout the worldto minimize environmental concerns. However, there are only a few studies onthe effects of commingled produced and injection water (sea or aquifer water),and still fewer numbers of actual field cases. Incompatibilities and otheroperational problems are the main concern, although economics favor themixed-water injection.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||11|
1. Paige, R.W. and Murray, L.R.: "Reinjection of Produced Water—FieldExperience and Current Understanding ," paper SPE 28121 presented at the1994 SPE Rock Mechanics in Petroleum Engineering Conference, Delft, TheNetherlands, 29-31 August.
2. Hjelmas, T.A. et al.: "Produced Water Reinjection:Experience From Performance Measurements on Ula in the North Sea," paperSPE 35874 presented at the 1996 SPE Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil andGas Exploration and Production Conference, New Orleans, 9-12 June.
3. Andersen, K.I. et al.: "Water Management in a ClosedLoop—Problems and Solutions at Brage Field ," paper SPE 65162 presented atthe 2000 SPE European Petroleum Conference, Paris, 24-25 October.
4. MacKay, E.J. et al.: "PWRI:Scale Formation Risk Assessment and Management," paper SPE 80385 presentedat the 2003 SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Scale, Aberdeen, 29-30January.
5. Palsson, B. et al.: "AHolistic Review of the Water Injection Process," paper SPE 82224 presentedat the 2003 SPE European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, TheNetherlands, 13-14 May.
6. Stalker, R., Collins, I.R., and Graham, G.M.: "The Impact of ChemicalIncompatibilities in Commingled Fluids on the Efficiency of a Produced WaterReinjection System: A North Sea Example," paper SPE 80257 presented at the2003 SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, 5-7February.
7. Raju, K.U., Nasr-El-Din, H.A., and Al-Shafai, T.A.: "A Feasibility Study of MixingDisposal Water With Aquifer Water for Downhole Injection," paper SPE 81449presented at the 2003 SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, 9-12 June.
8. Nasr-El-Din, H.A. and Al-Taq, A.A.: "Water Quality Requirements andRestoring the Injectivity of Waste Water Disposal Wells," paper SPE 39487presented at the 1998 SPE Formation Damage Control Conference, Lafayette,Louisiana, 18-19 February.
9. Atkinson, G., Raju, K., and Howell, R.D.: "The Thermodynamics of ScalePrediction," paper SPE 21021 presented at the 1991 SPE InternationalSymposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Anaheim, California, 20-22 February.
10. Atkinson, G. et al.: "A Comprehensive Scale Prediction Program for Oiland Gas Production," paper No. 276 presented at the 1993 NACE Annual CorrosionConference, New Orleans, 8-11 March.
11. Nasr-El-Din, H.A. et al.: "Investigation of Sulfide Scavengersin Well-Acidizing Fluids," SPEPF (November 2002) 229.
12. Hall, B.E. and Dill, W.R.: "Iron Control Additives for Limestoneand Sandstone Acidizing of Sweet and Sour Wells," paper SPE 17157 presentedat the 1988 SPE Formation Damage Control Symposium, Bakersfield,California,8-9 February.
13. Taylor, K.C., Nasr-El-Din, H.A., and Al-Alawi, M.J.: "Systematic Study of Iron ControlChemicals Used During Well Stimulation," SPEJ (1999) 19.
14. Brezinski, M.M.: "ChelatingAgents in Sour Well Acidizing:Methodology or Mythology," paper SPE54721 presented at the 1999 SPE European Formation Damage Conference, TheHague, The Netherlands, 31 May-1 June.
15. Siddiqui, S. and Khamees, A.: "Dual-Energy CT-Scanning Applicationsin Rock Characterization," paper SPE 90520 presented at the 2004 SPE AnnualTechnical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 26-29 September.
16. Siddiqui, S., Grader, A.S., Touati, M., Loermans, A.M., and Funk, J.J.:"Techniques for ExtractingReliable Density and Porosity Data From Cuttings ," paper SPE 96918prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference andExhibition, Dallas, 9-12 October.
17. Mehta, S.: "Imaging of WetSpecimens in Their Natural State Using Environmental Scanning ElectronMicroscope (ESEM):Some Examples of Importance to Petroleum Technology,"paper SPE 22864 presented at the 1991 SPE Annual Technical Conferenceand Exhibition, Dallas, 6-9 October.
18. Przybylinski, J.L.: "IronSulfide Scale Deposit Formation and Prevention Under Anaerobic ConditionsTypically Found in the Oil Field," paper SPE 65030 presented at the 2001SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, 13-16 February.