Reliance Industries Limited

Chemical EOR
 Chemical EOR

1980 2008

Function of Chemicals
 Chemical EOR
ADVANTAGES

LIMITATIONS
 Chemical EOR
Reasons for Chemical EOR not taking off Changes since 1980’s

Current Research
 Polymer Flooding

Optimizing polymer molecular weight not maximizing it, to

achieve the Highest Efficiency in EOR Polymer Flooding
Favorable Characteristics for Polymer Flooding
 Degradation of Polymers
CHEMICAL DEGRADATION MECHANICAL DEGRADATION
„ The mechanism of chemical degradation is the „ High shear will cut the polymer chains in
formation of free radicals that cut the chain pieces
„ Th
These free
f radicals
di l are formed
f d by
b redox
d reaction
ti „ High
Hi h MW giving
i i a certain
t i viscosity
i it with
ith few
f
chains will be more sensitive to shear than a
low MW providing the same viscosity with
more chains
„ This shear degradation is amplified by the
formation of free radicals as a mechanism of
degradation

„ The high MW (>15 MM) chains are more sensitive to

chemical degradation

THERMAL DEGRADATION
 Polymer Development

‰ Thermostable polymers which increase the stability of the HAPM from 75°C to 90°C with new
monomers
¾ FLOPAAM AN 125 125-132
132

‰ Associative polymers with a main HAPM chain and statistical repartition of hydrophobic groups.
There is an association of these hydrophobic groups in a specific brine to give a high viscosity
¾ SUPERPUSHER

‰ Star polymers with 3 or more branches on a central polymer group. These polymers are normally
associative to have a high viscosity
¾ ST5030

‰ Comb and T shape polymers with a main hydrophobic chain and end hydrophilic chain

‰ Block associative polymers with multiple hydrophobic groups inside an hydrophylic chain

‰ Structured polymers with hydrophilic branches in a main hydrophilic chain

‰ Soft or Movable gels are totally insoluble yet injectable gels mainly used in profile modification but
with high potential in EOR

¾ FLOPERM 2000
 Polymer Development

The new polymers bring as many questions as they solve problems

– Size of associative polymers compared with the permeability of the reservoir
– Association with oil
– Absorption on the oil wetted parts
– Very high variation viscosity against the salinity of the reservoir with possibility of plugging with
salinity increase
– Very quick loss of viscosity by dilution
– Sensitivity to Calcium, Magnesium and precipitation
– Thermal stability
– Mechanical stability
– Dissolution problems
– Very high viscosities before dilution
Case Study – Sanand Polymer Flood

Source: SPE Paper 114878 & 113552, Oct., 2008

Use of Surfactants in EOR

100

% Oil Recoverred
80
60
40
20
0
1 E 06
1.E-06 1 E 05
1.E-05 1 E 04
1.E-04 1 E 03
1.E-03 1 E 02
1.E-02
Capillary Number
Surfactant –Oil Phase Behavior
 Micellar Polymer Flooding

Favourable Characteristics Historical Perspective

Surfactant
Sales
 ASP & LASP Flooding
Advantages of adding Alkali to Surfactant Common ASP: 0.1% surf. / 1.0% NaOH
Common LASP: 0.1% surf. / 0.2% NaOH
‰ Improves wetting characteristics of the rock ASP LASP
‰ Reduces the adsorption of surfactants thus reduces
surfactant retention „ Combines the advantages of ASP and SP
‰ Produces natural surfactant if crude is acidic „ Use 0.1 – 0.6% alkali
„ Reduces surfactant adsorption
„ Reduces polymer degradation
S l ti off Alk
Selection Alkali
li „ Reduce the maintenance cost
„ Reduce the scale formation
‰ Depends upon the type of formation, clay type and
„ Reduces the total cost of the treatment
bivalent cations.
‰ In carbonate reservoirs
reservoirs, NA-
NA metaborate is used.
used
‰ If reservoir contains clays NAHCO3 is preferred.
‰ Na2CO3 is the most commonly used alkali (cheap
&good mobility)

Problems with ASP

0.1
„ Alkali causes corrosion of the equipment
„ Scale forms in the formation
IFT, mN/m

„ Produced wells plugged and require fracturing 0.01

t t
treatment t to
t produce
d oilil again
i
„ Alkali is detrimental to polymer viscosity 0.001
„ Extra polymer, alkali and maintenance costs 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
% NaOH
SP / ASP Projects

Source: Oilchem Technologies 2009

 Case Study – Daqing, China

ASP PILOT TESTS

Oil Vis. = 9 cp; RF = 15-25% OOIP

TR = 113 0C;
0C Salinity
S li i = 5-7000
000 ppm

Source: JPT • FEBRUARY 2006

Case Study – Daqing, China

35
30
25

So, %PV
V
20
15
10
5
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
(SURFACTANT CONC, %)(ASP SLUG SIZE)

Source: JPT • FEBRUARY 2006

 Case Study – Viraj, India
Based on the low primary recovery
and mobility contrast and high acid
number of the crude,, ASP p
pilot was
decided in the Field
Other Projects
Successful Chemical EOR Projects
Thank You