The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 storage and EOR ... Kickoff...

The effect of pore compressibility on The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 t d EOR i C tiCO2 t d EOR i C tiCO2 storage and EOR in CroatiaCO2 storage and EOR in Croatia

Domagoj Vulin

Faculty of Minig, Geology and Petroleum Engineering,y g gy g g

University of Zagreb

[email protected]

Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering, University of Zagreb

1

do agoj u @ g

The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 storage and EOR in Croatiastorage and EOR in Croatiastorage and EOR in Croatiastorage and EOR in Croatia

This presentation is based on three previously published/presented works:

1) Goričnik, B. (INA-Naftaplin, University of Zagreb), 2000.:EOREOR byby CO2 ICO2 Injectionnjection PPotentialotential inin CCroatianroatian OOilfieldsilfieldsEOR EOR byby CO2 ICO2 Injectionnjection -- PPotentialotential inin CCroatianroatian OOilfieldsilfields

2) Domitrović, D., Šunjerga, S. (INA-Naftaplin) & Goričnik D., Vulin, D.(University of Zagreb) 2005 :(University of Zagreb), 2005.:Simulation Study of CO2 Retention During Tertiary EOR Flood in Ivanić Oil FieldSimulation Study of CO2 Retention During Tertiary EOR Flood in Ivanić Oil Field

3) Vulin, D., Kolenković, I., Kurevija, T., (University of Zagreb), 2011.:) , , , , j , , ( y g ),The Effect of Mechanical Rock Properties on CO2 Storage CapacityThe Effect of Mechanical Rock Properties on CO2 Storage Capacity


2

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain Croatia

Goricnik B Domitrovic D Sarapa M (1999 ): “Possible improvements of CO2-

• Laboratory tests since late 1977

Goricnik B., Domitrovic D., Sarapa M. (1999.): Possible improvements of CO2flood performance in Ivanić oilfield, R. Croatia”,

• Laboratory tests - since late 1977• Pilot CO2 injection project at Ivanić field (from1993 to 1995, and from 2005-), )• CO2 injection study - Ivanić and Žutica in 1997• Simulation studies from 2000


3

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain Croatia• Laboratory tests - since late 1977

Phase 1 - Field Screening

(General criteria, supported by related basic lab testing)related basic lab testing)

Phase 2 - Detailed Lab Studies

(Potential of CO2 processin selected fields)


4

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaPhase 1 - Field Screening

• Using published criteria* on reservoir and fluidproperty requirements for CO2 implementation as wellas location considerations, 1414 fields were singled out;

• Fluid samples from these reservoirs were tested toFluid samples from these reservoirs were tested todetermine physical and PVT properties of current reservoir fluid in each case, i.e.:

- Effect of CO2 in terms of CO2 solubility, oil swelling and oil viscosity reduction,

- Oil displacement efficiency of CO2 as obtained bythe basic slim tube test


5

*(e.g. Geffen,1973; Lewin&Ass.,1976; NPC,1976; Klins,1980; Taber&Martin. 1983 )

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaPhase 2 - Detailed Lab Studies

• Additional PVT on CO2 : oil mixtures, 2 ,related to current depletion status.EOS modeling of phase behavior.

• Related more detailed slim-tube oil displacement tests. Simulation of the displacement testsof the displacement tests.

• Core flood tests at reservoir conditions d diff t CO i l t ti and different CO2 process implementation

scenarios.


6

*(e.g. Geffen,1973; Lewin&Ass.,1976; NPC,1976; Klins,1980; Taber&Martin. 1983 )

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaLocations of oilfields ( ), selected by preliminary screening for subsequent laboratory testing:screening for subsequent laboratory testing:

VAR AŽDIN

Mura depres sion

KRA PINA

KOPRI VNICA

Hrvats ko za gorje Jagnjedova cL epavina

ZAGR EB BJELOVAR

VIRO VITIC A Šandrov ac

Drava depressio n

Žutica

IvanićBeni čanci

Šte vkovic a

Bunjani

SI SAK

Sav a depr ession

Požega bas inSlavonsko - srijemska depression

Str užec

ObodMramorBrdo


7

POŽE GA

0 50 kmKozarica

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaResults of laboratory testing . . .

(Sensitivity of oils examined to CO2 injection)(Sensitivity of oils examined to CO2 injection)

COCO22 solubility in oilsolubility in oil200

160

180

200

BunjaniJagnjedovacKozaricaLepavinaIvanicŽuticaat

Pb a

nd T

R

100

120

140ŽuticaŠandrovacStružecŠtevkovicaObodBenicanci

rese

rvoi

r oil

a

60

80

bilit

y, m

3 / m

3

0

20

40

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

CO

2 sol

ub


8

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

pressure, bar


Oil lli1.5

ŠtevkovicaObod

Oil swelling

1.4

ObodStružecŠandrovacŽuticaIvaniæKozaricaLepavinaoi

l at

TR

1.3

LepavinaJagnjedovacBunjani

of r

eser

voir

o

1 1

1.2

wel

ling

fact

or

1.0

1.1

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Sw


9

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

pressure, bar


Oil i it20

KozaricaPas

Oil viscosity

10

KozaricaJagnjedovacLepavinaBunjaniBenièanciŠtevkovicaObodil

at

T R ,

mP

5ObodIvaniæŽuticaStružecŠandrovac

of r

eser

voir

oi

1

2

ty re

duct

ion

o

0.5

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Visc

osit


10

CO2 injection pressure, bar

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaSummary of the lab screening datay g

CO2 process type assignmentsfor the selected oilfields:Mura depression

miscible near-miscible immiscible

KRAPI NA KOPR IVNI CA

tsko za gorje Jagnjed ovac

Lep avina

ZA GREB

B JELOVAR

VIRO VITIC A Šandrovac

Drava depressio n

Z utica

Ivanic

Kloštar

Beni canci

Š tevkovic a

Bunjani

SISAK

S ava depression

Pož ega ba sinSlavon sko - srijemska depression

0 50 km

utica

Struzec

Obod

MramorBrd o


11

POŽEGA

S ava depression 0 50 km

Kozar ica

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaEOS Modeling of Phase Behavior

• Peng-Robinson EOS

• EOS was tuned to experimental oil PVT (CCE, DLE, Sep.Test) and oil swelling data

• Several compositional formulations i.e. oil+CO2 mixtures were examined

• Proper EOS description of a mixture phasebehavior validated (through multiple-contactbehavior validated (through multiple contactvaporization calculations and slim-tube displacement simulations).


12

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaExample validation of regression tuned PR EOS

(Ivanić oil + CO ; 5-component model)

Slim-tube oil recovery 100100

Minimum miscibility pressure

(Ivanić oil + CO2; 5-component model)

90

100

80

100

experimental

calculated

80

over

y, %

P.V

.

60

over

y, %

P.V

.

60

70

ExperimentalCalculated

Oil

reco

20

40

Oil

reco

50120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

CO2 injection pressure, bar

00 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Pore volumes of CO2 injected


13

2 j p2 j

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaCoreflood Scenarios Initial conditions: Core saturated with live oil

at Swiwiand “aged” for 48 hr at TR

1. Secondary CO2 - oil displacement testsCO continuously injected at a constant •CO2 continuously injected at a constant

pressure•Incremental fluid recovery measured and final saturations determined

2. Tertiary CO2 - oil displacement tests

a) Core waterflooded to Sorb) CO2 injected

•continuously•continuously•alternatively with water (WAG)

Incremental fluid recovery measured and final saturations determined


14

saturations determined

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaCORE DATA:

D = 9 8 cm k = 73 3 mD S = 31 % PV

TEST SEQUENCE1 Waterflood at 150 bar to Sor1 R i t 200 b ith tD = 9.8 cm k = 73.3 mD Swi = 31 % PV

L = 17.8 cm = 20.2 % Sor (WF) = 38 % OOIP1 Repressuring to 200 bar with water1 Continuous injection of CO2

Continuous CO2 Injection Coreflood Test (Ivanic)

80

90

100

80

90

100

60

70

60

70

% O

OIP

r c

ut,

%

30

40

50

30

40

50

of

CO

inje

ctio

n2

il r

ecov

ery,

Wat

e

Waterc ut

Oil recovery

10

20

10

20Sta

rt

H O2 CO2

O


15

00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0

0

Pore volumes of fluids (water, CO ) injected2

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaCORE DATA:

D = 9 8 cm k = 36 7 mD S i = 34 % PV

TEST SEQUENCE:1) Waterflood at 150 bar to SorD = 9.8 cm k = 36.7 mD Swi = 34 % PV

L = 18.3 cm = 21.6 % Sor (WF) = 42 % OOIP 2) Repressuring to 200 bar with water3) WAG injection of water and CO2

Results of a WAG CO2 Injection Coreflood Test (Ivanic)j

80

90

100

80

90

100

60

70

80

60

70

80

% O

OIP

t, %

30

40

50

30

40

50water cutoil recovery

Oil r

ecov

ery,

%

Wat

er c

ut

CO

in

jec

tio

n2

C O210

20

30

10

20

30O

H O2 H O2H O2H O2HO2H O2CO2CO2CO2

Star

t of


16

00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0

0

Pore volumes of fluids (water, CO2 ) injected

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaThe outcome of the laboratory study for Sava depression oilfields

KRAPI NA KOPR IVNI CA

Mura depression

Lep avina

B JELOVAR

tsko za gorje Jagnjed ovac

Lep avina

miscible near-miscible

ZA GREB

B JELOVAR

VIRO VITIC A

Drava depressio nKloštar

Šandrovac immiscible

Z utica

Ivanic

Struzec

Beni canci

Obod

Š tevkovic a

Bunjani

MramorBrd oSISAK

POŽEGA

S ava depression

Pož ega ba sinSlavon sko - srijemska depression

0 50 km

Struzec

Kozar ica

MramorBrd o


17

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaIvanić Ivanić –– New Geological model (part of simulation studies started in 2000)New Geological model (part of simulation studies started in 2000)


18

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain CroatiaIvanić Ivanić –– geological settinggeological settingg g gg g g

OldOldNewNew


19

OverviewOverview ofof EOREOR EffortsEfforts in Croatiain CroatiaOverviewOverview of of EOR EOR Efforts Efforts in Croatiain Croatia6 prediction scenarios6 prediction scenarios


20



21



22

The effect of pore compressibility on The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 tCO2 tCO2 storageCO2 storage


23

Volumetric approachVolumetric approach

USDOEUSDOE (U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy) Carbon

m A h E

USDOEUSDOE (U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy) Carbon Sequestration Atlas of United States and Canada, 2006, 86 p.

2 2 ,CO CO p Tm A h E

CSLFCSLF

(1 ) (1 )V V S A h S

CSLFCSLF (Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum) Estimation of CO2 storage capacity in geological media, June 2007, 43 p.

2 (1 – ) (1 – )CO t trap wirr wirrV V S A h S

The effective storage volumeThe effective storage volume

2 2 CO e c CO tV C V Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering, University of Zagreb

24

2 2CO e c CO t

Poroelastic definition of rockPoroelastic definition of rock

Van der Meer, LGH, Yavuz, HVan der Meer, LGH, Yavuz, H. CO2 storage capacity calculations , , ,, , , g p yfor the Dutch subsurface. Energy Procedia 1 2009, pp. 2615-2622.

There areThere are three kinds of compressibilitythree kinds of compressibility::There are There are three kinds of compressibilitythree kinds of compressibility::

•rock matrix compressibility

rrr

VVp

VV

c

11

•bulk compressibility

prpr VpV

bVc

1•bulk compressibility

pbb V

c

V •pore compressibility p

p

pp

VV

c

1


25

Poroelastic definition of rockPoroelastic definition of rock

By applying instantaneous pore compressibilityBy applying instantaneous pore compressibilityBy applying instantaneous pore compressibility By applying instantaneous pore compressibility for changed for changed (effective) (effective) pressurepressure::

0 1p p p eV V c p p p p

0 1 p ec p 0 p ep


26

Laboratory pore compressibility Laboratory pore compressibility measurementmeasurementmeasurementmeasurement

2

p

1 2

4

2

3obp

2

5

6


27

Typical (theoretical) pTypical (theoretical) pee--VVpp curvecurveFormation compressibility type curves for a three different degrees of consolidation (Yale et al 1993 )consolidation (Yale et. al.,1993.)

1 dV 1

ob

pp

p e p

dVc

V dp

ob


28

Typical (theoretical) pTypical (theoretical) pee--VVpp curvecurveppee--VVpp plot for one sample (from Lipovljani oil field) plot for one sample (from Lipovljani oil field)

5 3

5.4

5.5

1 pdVc

5 1

5.2

5.3

m3

ob

pp e p

cV dp

4.9

5.0

5.1

Vp,

cm

4.7

4.8

4.60 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

pe, bar


29

pe, bar

Extrapolation of measured data to Extrapolation of measured data to regional aquiferregional aquiferregional aquiferregional aquifer

Lipovljani oil field

EU GeoCapacity, 2007,EU GeoCapacity, 2007, Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide,


30

p y, ,p y, , g p p y g g ,Technical reports, FP-518318.: Storage Capacities. WP2.3 D12, 2009.


Vp = -5E-09pe3 + 7E-06pe

2 - 0.0036pe + 5.43475.4

5.5

0.00065

0.00070

5.2

5.3

3 0.00050

0.00055

0.00060

1

Vpcp

4 9

5.0

5.1

Vp,

cm

0.00040

0.00045

c p, b

ar-1

p

cp - fitted

Vp - fitted

3 24.7

4.8

4.9

0.00025

0.00030

0.00035

cp = -8E-13pe3 + 1E-10pe

2 + 9E-07pe - 0.00074.6

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700pe, bar

0.00020


31


0 030

0.025

0.030

0 015

0.020

erro

r

0.010

0.015

rel.

e

0 000

0.005

0.0000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

pe, bar


32


Depth (h) vs. cp (bar-1) and porosity (fi,%).

90

100

0.0014 pe=0 barpe=50 barpe=100 barpe=150 bar

60

70

80

0.0010

0.0012ppe=200 barh-Ф(%)Linear (h-Ф(%))

40

50

60

0.0006

0.0008

c p, b

ar-1

20

300.0004

0

10

0.0000

0.0002

1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800


33

h, m


Aquifer Sava – centralNet area, km2 517

Average depth - H m 1700Average depth H, m 1700Net to gross thickness - Hef, m 550

i 0 18porosity. 0.18Storage capacity coefficient, E 0.03

average pressure, bar 198Average temperature °C 87Average temperature, C 87

Density of CO2, kg/m3 545.5


34

Storage capacity, Mt CO2 837.6


p bar

00 100 200 300 400 500 600

p, bar

hydrostatic pressure

500

1000

petrostatic presure,ro=2900kg/m3oil f ields

gas f ields

1500

2000

h, m

g

petrostatic pressure,ro=2200kg/m3

2500

3000

3500

4000


35


Storage capacities Storage capacities withoutwithout pore compressibility andpore compressibility and

When cWhen cpp includedincluded

withwith pore compressibilitypore compressibility

p pe cp Vp CO2 mCO2 mCO2 increasebar bar bar-1 % 106m3 kg/m3 Mt %bar bar bar % 10 m kg/m Mt %

198 286 0.000316 18.00 51183 548.07 837.55 0.0199 285 0.000317 18.02 51252 560.70 842.70 0.6204 280 0.000319 18.04 51297 572.68 862.87 3.0214 270 0.000325 18.07 51388 594.80 900.37 7.5224 260 0.000330 18.10 51481 614.76 934.44 11.6


36

ConclusionsConclusions

• Pore compressibility increases with increased amount of injected fluid,i.e. with aquifer pressure: for first 10 bars increase in table 2, the porevolume will increase by 0 175% for next 10 bars pore volume willvolume will increase by 0.175%, for next 10 bars, pore volume willincrease by 0.179%.

• The changes in percents do not seem so dramatic however results can• The changes in percents do not seem so dramatic, however results canbe compared as capacity with pore compressibility vs. capacity withoutpore compressibility included:

The analysis is conducted as pessimistic – petrostatic pressure isprobably lower (which would result in higher pore compressibility),the chosen pore compressibility curve is the one with the lowestthe chosen pore compressibility curve is the one with the lowestaverage compressibility of 6 available curves


37

ConclusionsConclusions the brine compressibility can be taken into account (also by usingpessimistic approach to obtain minimum brine compressibility) bypessimistic approach to obtain minimum brine compressibility) byusing one of the many published correlations (also adjusted for theactual brine), for example:

•Meehan, DN. A Correlation for Water Compressibility, Pet. Eng., 1980, pp. 125-126.

C S f O O &•Kutasov, IM. Correlation Simplifies Obtaining Downhole Brine Density, Oil & Gas J., 1991, pp. 48-49.•Numbere, D, Brigham, WE, and Standing, MB. Correlation of Physical Properties of Petroleum Reservoir Brines. Stanford University Petroleum Research Institute, 1977.


38

The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 storage and EOR ... Kickoff...

Documents

Transcript of The effect of pore compressibility on CO2 storage and EOR ... Kickoff...