CO2 Foam EOR Field Pilots for Efficient and More Sustainable Petroleum Production

Prof. Arne Graue Dept. of Physics and Technology University of Bergen, NORWAY

IOR NORWAY 2016: University of Stavanger, April 26-27th, 2016

Energy Poverty is Widespread

31  

8  

85  

653  

836  

423  

661  

La+n  America  

Sub-­‐Saharan  Africa   China  

India  

Rest  of    developing    

Asia  

289   379  

585  

1.3 billion people in the world live without electricity & 2.7 billion live without clean cooking facilities

Million  people  without  electricity  

Million  people  without  clean  cooking  facili4es  

The Global Need for Energy Continues to Rise Growth in primary energy demand in the IEA’s New Policies Scenario

Source: International Energy Agency

0  500  

1  000  1  500  2  000  

2  500  3  000  3  500  4  000  4  500  

2010   2015   2020   2025   2030   2035  

Mtoe  

China  India  Other  developing  Asia  Russia  Middle  East  Rest  of  world  OECD  

Research for More Sustainable Oil and Gas Production

Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage

(CCUS) Utilization of CO2:

-  Business Case for CO2 Sequestration - CO2 EOR - Integrated EOR (IEOR) with foam as mobility control - Exploitation of Hydrate Energy -  Technology implementations require field tests

uib.no

Advantages with CO2 for EOR

Low MMP

Oil viscocity

Swelling CO2 storage

Department of Physics and Technology

uib.no

Challenges with CO2 for EOR

Corrosion Availability

Low viscosity Recycling

Department of Physics and Technology

uib.no

Department of Physics and Technology CO2-foam •  Mitigates gravity override

•  Improves sweep efficiency

CO2   CO2-­‐Foam  

Next Generation CO2 Flooding -  Main challenges in CO2 EOR:

-  Early CO2 breakthrough and poor sweep efficiency -  Up-scaling laboratory EOR to field performance

-  US White Paper: -  Mobility control in CO2 EOR, USDOE/Advanced Resource International Inc. -  Target: 137 Billion bbl

-  US import of foreign oil may be reduced by 30%

-  “Next generation CO2 EOR technology" based on mobility control

-  68 billion barrels of oil: 1,35 billion bbl of oil every year for 50 years - Similar results in the North Sea; pilot in the Snorre Field -  Economic at oil price of US$ 85 and CO2 price of US$ 40/ton

-  Need more CO2

- Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage (CCUS) a win-win situation

uib.no

Agenda and Research Approach Department of Physics and Technology

Present study part of an ongoing multi-scale approach for mobility control in heterogeneous and fractured reservoirs during CO2 EOR

uib.no

PET/CT @ Haukeland University Hospital Dept. of Physics and Technology

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

Temp.: 400C

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41 SCA2008-41

EOR Enables CCUS: Integrated EOR (IEOR) for CO2 Sequestration

Collaboration: 11 Universities in France, The Netherlands, UK, USA and Norway

Coordinator: Arne Graue, Dept. of Physics, University of Bergen, NORWAY

Funding: The Research Council of Norway (NRC/CLIMIT) and oil companies; US$ 1,7mill

MRI of CO2 injection

Complementary NTI & MRI facilities

Lab to pilot field test

CO2 Foam for Mobility Control for EOR in Fractured Reservoirs in Texas

Project advantages:

- CO2 is commercially available - Foam as mobility control - Researchers from 11 reputational universities - Up-scaling; major challenge in oil recovery - Fraction of costs of off-shore field tests - Fast results: short inter-well distances - 30 years experience in Texas on CO2 EOR - 4D seismic establishes a field laboratory

CO2 Foam for Mobility Control for EOR in Fractured Reservoirs in Texas

Normal text - click to edit

CO2 Storage in Hydrate Reservoirs with Associated Spontaneous Natural Gas Production

In-Situ imaging (MRI) of hydrate formation

Methane production by CO2 injection in field test

in Alaska 2012

Objectives: Experimentally and theorethically determine spontaneous methane production when hydrate is exposed to CO2; with the purpose of CO2 sequestration.

Methane hydrate reservoirs

Arne Graue and Bjørn Kvamme, Dept. of Physics, University of Bergen, NORWAY Funding: ConocoPhillips, Statoil and The Research Council of Norway

Normal text - click to edit

•  The amount of energy bound in hydrates may be more than twice the world’s total energy resources in conventional hydrocarbon reservoirs; i.e. oil-, gas- and coal reserves

•  Simultaneous CO2 Sequestration

•  Win-win situation for gas production

•  Need no hydrate melting or heat stimulation

•  No associated water production

•  Formation integrity

CO2 Exchange: Project Motivation

Iġnik Sikumi #1 Flowback/Drawdown: Gas composition

Gas Production from the Field Test

CCUS:

Huge Opportunity for the Petroleum Industry

- Financially

- Social license to operate - Improves environmental footprint

- Mitigates global warming - Releases vast additional energy resources - Attracts new generation energy engineers

Thank you!

Acknowledgement We are indebted to the NRC/CLIMIT program for funding.

We appreciate collaboration with the following university partners: -  Stanford U. -  Rice University - University of Texas at Austin - Texas A&M U. - MSU - Imperial College, London - TREFLE, Bordeaux, France - TU Delft, The Netherlands - NTNU , Trondheim, Norway -  Natonal IOR Center of Norway - University of Bergen, Norway

Why  CO2  for  EOR?  Advantages   Challenges  �  Is  soluble  in  oil,  causing  the  oil  to  swell  and  reduces  its  viscosity  

�  Develops  miscibility  at  pressures  lower  than  hydrocarbon  gasses  �  Can  extract  components  up  to  C30  from  the  reservoir  oil  

�  Poten4al  for  CO2  storage  

�  Low  macroscopic  displacement  efficiency  �  Mobility  ra4o  �  CO2  traveling  through  high  permeable  zones  

�  Opera4onal  costs  �  Supplying  enough  CO2  to  the  fields  at  an  acceptable  cost  

�  CO2  and  brine  might  cause  weakening  of  the  chalk  and  corrosion  of  wells  and  equipment  

CO2  in  fractured  reservoirs  � Matrix/fracture  neSwork   � Molecular  diffusion  

� Mass  transfer  and  mixing  due  to  random  mo4on  

�  Driving  force:  �  Concentra4on  gradient  �  Diffusivity  of  each  component  

�  Concentra4on  is  a  func4on  of    �  Time    �  Distance  

�  Goal  to  achieve  equilibrium  between  the  injected  CO2  and  the  reservoir  oil  

High  permeability    

Low  permeability