2017•SPE Reservoir Evaluation & EngineeringRequires access

Enhanced Oil Recovery in Liquid–Rich Shale Reservoirs: Laboratory to Field

Najeeb S. Alharthy, Tadesse Weldu Teklu, Hossein Kazemi, Ramona Graves, Steven B. Hawthorne, Jason R. Braunberger, Basak Kurtoglu

Open publisher page 229 citations

Abstract

Summary Production of tight oil from shale reservoirs in North America reduces oil imports and has better economics than natural gas. Currently, there is a strong interest in oil production from Bakken, Eagle Ford, Niobrara, and other tight formations. However, oil-recovery fraction for Bakken remains low, which is approximately 4–6% of the oil in place. Even with this low oil-recovery fraction, a recent United States Geological Survey study stated that the Bakken and Three Forks recoverable reserves are estimated to be 7.4 billion bbl; thus, a large volume of oil will remain unrecovered, which was the motivation to investigate the feasibility of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in liquid-rich shale reservoirs such as Bakken. In this paper, we will present both laboratory and numerical modeling of EOR in Bakken cores by use of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane/ethane-solvent mixture (C1/C2), and nitrogen (N2). The laboratory experiments were conducted at the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC). The experiments recovered 90+% oil from several Middle Bakken cores and nearly 40% from Lower Bakken cores. To decipher the oil-recovery mechanisms in the experiments, a numerical compositional model was constructed to match laboratory-oil-recovery results. We concluded that solvent injection mobilizes matrix oil by miscible mixing and solvent extraction in a narrow region near the fracture/matrix interface, thus promoting countercurrent flow of oil from the matrix instead of oil displacement through the matrix. Specifically, compositional-modeling results indicate that the main oil-recovery mechanism is miscible oil extraction at the matrix/fracture interface region. However, the controlling factors include repressurization, oil swelling, viscosity and interfacial-tension (IFT) reduction, diffusion/advection mass transfer, and wettability alteration. We scaled up laboratory results to field applications by means of a compositional numerical model. For field applications, we resorted to the huff ’n’ puff protocol to assess the EOR potential for a North Dakota Middle Bakken well. We concluded that long soak times yield only a small amount of additional oil compared with short soak times, and reinjecting wet gas, composed of C1, C2, C3, and C4+, produces nearly as much oil as CO2 injection.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Summary Production of tight oil from shale reservoirs in North America reduces oil imports and has better economics than natural gas. Currently, there is a strong interest in oil production from Bakken, Eagle Ford, Niobrara, and other tight formations. However, oil-recovery fraction for Bakken remains low, which is approximately 4–6% of the oil in place. Even with this low oil-recovery fraction, a recent United States Geological Survey study stated that the Bakken and Three Forks recoverable reserves are estimated to be 7.4 billion bbl; thus, a large volume of oil will remain unrecovered, which was the motivation to investigate the feasibility of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in liquid-rich shale reservoirs such as Bakken. In this paper, we will present both laboratory and numerical modeling of EOR in Bakken cores by use of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane/ethane-solvent mixture (C1/C2), and nitrogen (N2). The laboratory experiments were conducted at the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC). The experiments recovered 90+% oil from several Middle Bakken cores and nearly 40% from Lower Bakken cores. To decipher the oil-recovery mechanisms in the experiments, a numerical compositional model was constructed to match laboratory-oil-recovery results. We concluded that solvent injection mobilizes matrix oil by miscible mixing and solvent extraction in a narrow region near the fracture/matrix interface, thus promoting countercurrent flow of oil from the matrix instead of oil displacement through the matrix. Specifically, compositional-modeling results indicate that the main oil-recovery mechanism is miscible oil extraction at the matrix/fracture interface region. However, the controlling factors include repressurization, oil swelling, viscosity and interfacial-tension (IFT) reduction, diffusion/advection mass transfer, and wettability alteration. We scaled up laboratory results to field applications by means of a compositional numerical model. For field applications, we resorted to the huff ’n’ puff protocol to assess the EOR potential for a North Dakota Middle Bakken well. We concluded that long soak times yield only a small amount of additional oil compared with short soak times, and reinjecting wet gas, composed of C1, C2, C3, and C4+, produces nearly as much oil as CO2 injection.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 229 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Summary Production of tight oil from shale reservoirs in North America reduces oil imports and has better economics than natural gas. Currently, there is a strong interest in oil production from Bakken, Eagle Ford, Niobrara, and other tight formations. However, oil-recovery fraction for Bakken remains low, which is approximately 4–6% of the oil in place. Even with this low oil-recovery fraction, a recent United States Geological Survey study stated that the Bakken and Three Forks recoverable reserves are estimated to be 7.4 billion bbl; thus, a large volume of oil will remain unrecovered, which was the motivation to investigate the feasibility of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in liquid-rich shale reservoirs such as Bakken. In this paper, we will present both laboratory and numerical modeling of EOR in Bakken cores by use of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane/ethane-solvent mixture (C1/C2), and nitrogen (N2). The laboratory experiments were conducted at the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC). The experiments recovered 90+% oil from several Middle Bakken cores and nearly 40% from Lower Bakken cores. To decipher the oil-recovery mechanisms in the experiments, a numerical compositional model was constructed to match laboratory-oil-recovery results. We concluded that solvent injection mobilizes matrix oil by miscible mixing and solvent extraction in a narrow region near the fracture/matrix interface, thus promoting countercurrent flow of oil from the matrix instead of oil displacement through the matrix. Specifically, compositional-modeling results indicate that the main oil-recovery mechanism is miscible oil extraction at the matrix/fracture interface region. However, the controlling factors include repressurization, oil swelling, viscosity and interfacial-tension (IFT) reduction, diffusion/advection mass transfer, and wettability alteration. We scaled up laboratory results to field applications by means of a compositional numerical model. For field applications, we resorted to the huff ’n’ puff protocol to assess the EOR potential for a North Dakota Middle Bakken well. We concluded that long soak times yield only a small amount of additional oil compared with short soak times, and reinjecting wet gas, composed of C1, C2, C3, and C4+, produces nearly as much oil as CO2 injection.

Key concepts: Oil shale, Petroleum engineering, Tight oil, Shale oil, Enhanced oil recovery, Oil in place, Unconventional oil, Geology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Enhanced Oil Recovery in Liquid–Rich Shale Reservoirs: Laboratory to Field — Research Paper | ScholarLens