Enhanced Oil Recovery in a Multilayer Complex Reservoir

Casabe Project Case Study

Authors: Adriano Lobo (ECP), Carlos Chaparro (ECP), Jose Francisco Zapata (ECP),
Ana Maria Jimenez (ECP), Thaer Gheneim (SLB), Annalyn Azancot (SLB)
Project Background
Discovered in 1941
~1,450 wells drilled by 2015
Active waterflooding
Five Spot patterns
~15 acre spacing
Producing formations: Colorado, Mugrosa, La
Paz
Fluvial environment
Layered sand/shale sequence
~ as many as 25 zones/producers
18-25 API oil with ~ 30-80 cp viscosity
Original pressure ~ 1,500 psia,
Current range from 400-1,200 psia
• k = 50-300 mD
• RF ~ 20% pattern WF
Vertical and Horizontal Heterogeneity tope_COLORADO
F607
tA1d
tA1b
BS
A0 tA1d
tA1b
bA3
BS
A1
A0 tope_COLORADO
tA1b
tA1d
bA3
BS
A0
A1

CSBE0033 [MD] CSBE0097 [MD] CSBE1068 [MD]

-93.56 SPC 36.29 MD 0.00 NORMAL 30.00 -100.73 SPC 14.21 MD 0.00 N38 30.00 16.53 SPC -17.11 MD 0.46 AHT60 72.49
3045 2989 3073

3100

3100
3050
3150

3150
3100
3200

3200
3150
3250

3250 A2 A2 A2
3200
3300

CREVASSE 3300
3250

CHANNEL BARS 3350

3350
3300

A2i
OVERBANK A2i
3400
A2i

3400
3350
3450

3450
3400
3500

3500
3450
A3 A3
3550
A3

3550
3500
3600

3600
3550
3650

(3650)
3600
VERTICAL HETEROGENEITY DUE TO CHANNEL STACKING 3700
(3692) 3636 3720
MODIFIED FROM RAMON Y CROSS, 1997

Relative Preservation Of The Channels

Sandstones Under Low And High A/S
Conditions
Project Background
– Large difference in mobility between oil and water in Casabe (Mw,o ~ 25)
– Maturity of secondary recovery create several operational problems in the field
• Increase of the water cut
• water influxes
• Increased volume of produced sand, etc.
– Heterogeneities create irregular water fronts, causing early water breakthrough
IMPROVE SWEPT EFFICIENCY

Ev = EA x E I

Where:
EV = Volumetric Efficiency
EA = Areal Efficiency
EI = Vertical Efficiency Mobility Ratio Modification

Source: Integrated Waterflood Asset k  ↑

Increase Water
Management. THAKUR Ganesh y SATTER ↓ M  rD D Viscosity
Abdus. 1998. k rd  d
5 Year EOR Cycle Time
No Economic
Technique

Screening Final Costs Go-No Go Decisions

Uneconomic
Pilot Design

Pilot Drilling Incremental not

Lab/Tracer Studies Delivered or Proven
& Installation

Follow-up
Pilot Operation & Doesn’t Deliver
Surveillance

Full Field
Technique Predictions Uneconomic
Pilot Expansion
Pilot Areas Pilot Plan
Budget AFEs

Full Field Devt Plan

Deliverables Proof of Concept
Early Cash
Reserves & FID

0 6 12 18 36 -42 54-60
EOR Project Implementation Process + Focus Team
Conceptual Pilot Well Pilot
Screening Pilot Design
 Project Manager Design Construction Operation

 Reservoir Engineer
 G&G Lab Studies
EOR Prefer
Vendor
EOR
Product &
Facilities
Contract
 Production Technologist Selection Delivery

 Well Construction Engineer Tech. Baseline

 Facilities Engineer Monitoring
Installation Construction

 Production Optimization InterWell

Well InterWell Tracer
 Economic Analyst Tracers
Contract
Intervention Tracers Analysis
 Supply Chain Support
Facilities Facilities Facilities
Design Contract Construction

0 6 12 18 24
Months
Screening
Screening criteria for EOR processes
• Formation type/lithology
• Reservoir geology
• Oil Composition and Oil Viscosity
• Formation Water Salinity and Divalents
• Reservoir Temperature
• Formation Permeability
EORt Workflow
Operational issues to consider
• Availability of injecting agents (Water, Gas,
CO2, N2)
• Pattern configuration and well spacing
• Well Completion
• Facilities configuration and constrains
• Energy
• Environmental and Legal Regulations
Conceptual Design EOR Pilot Areas
Two Polymer Flooding Pilots for mobility control and Sor
Reduction EOR; variation in chemical make up for different
K/V shale
– One in Average Rock Quality, swept.
B6
– One in Best Rock Quality, swept
Two layers comprising >30% of OOIP
((4 arrangements*3 streamlines)/4)+(1 arrangement*4 streamlines) = 4 Wells B3

Injector

Producer

Observation
EOR Experimental Tests Digital Rock
Viscosity modification with
HMPA Polymer Surfactant Phase Behavior

Oil and water saturations

Viscosity modification with

Core Flooding
Associative Polymer

Low Polymer concentration High

9
Tracer Technology
Tracer injection
Zone
Producer
Injector
Sampling Valve
InterWell Tracer Irruptions Map A2i Sand Example

• InterWell Tracer Irruption observed on both sands A2

(Upper) and A2i (Lower)
Black 2 FBA CSBE-1292 A2i
Red 4 FBA CSBE-1292 A2
• InterWell Tracers confirm Sand deposition direction.
Green 2,3,4,5 FBA CSBE-1313 A2i • Irruption on 2nd line production wells confirm complex
Blue 3,5 FBA CSBE-1313 A2 channeling system.
Pink 2,6 FBA CSBE-1222 A2i
Grey 2,3,4 FBA CSBE-1222 A2 • Base on irruption times severe channeling is observed
Oranje 3,5 DFBA CSBE-1304 A2 between CSBE 1222 (INY) and CSBE-1159 (Central Well)
Yellow 3,4 FBA CSBE-1304 A2i
Viscosity reduction test on injection valves

Circulation Valves
No reduction effect on 9 mm circulation valves. Dramatic viscosity reduction on flow
regulation valves
 -3150

-3325

-3175

1018000 -3350
1018250 1018500 1018750 1019000 1019250
-3200

1272500 1272500
-3225
-3250
-3275

-3275

Pattern Distribution
-2700

cEOR Project Design

-3250

-3225
-2700 CB-1209
1272250
-3200
1272250

-2775
-2750
-2725 Producer
CB-1349
-2825
-2800
CB-0554
CB-0551
CB-0553

CB-0387R Polymer/Tracer Inj.

CB-0544
CB-0543 CB-1202
CB-1285
1272000 1272000
CB-1289
CB-0443 Observation
CB-1292
CB-1313 CB-0058R CB-1296
CB-1520

-2850
CB-0367 CB-0526
-2875
CB-1159
1271750 CB-0536
CB-0537 CB-1164 1271750
CB-0417 CB-1304
-2850

-2875
CB-0520
CB-1222
CB-1308
CB-0718R
CB-0534
CB-0535 CB-1301
CB-0468
CB-1162
CB-0164R
1271500 1271500
CB-1200

CB-0515

1271250 -2900
1271250
1018000 1018250 Completion Scheme
1018500 1018750 1019000 1019250
Porous Media
-2925
-2900

-2875

• Block 6.
 4 Polymer Injector Wells
 9 Oil Producer Wells
 1 Observation Well
 Comingle Production
 Selective Polymer Injection
Simulation Cases

• Four (1/4) Injectors • Four injectors • Sixteen Injectors

Five Spot Pattern Four Inverted Five Spot Patterns Four Inverted Five Spot Pattern
Implementation of the surveillance plan
Preparation Monitoring
& Baseline During Pilot Pilot
No Go
Evaluation
• Understand actual well • Monitoring key variables to
behavior. make decisions related to
• Know actual well mechanical changes in injection
conditions parameters.
• Identify prod/inj. • Ensure wells are operating
enhancement opportunities at optimum conditions
before the pilot
Pilot
• Baseline preparation Expansion

 Selective injection  No real time data for production/injection optimization

 Water flow regulator valves  Sand production
 Commingled production  Different type of ALS with rods
 Low Production Rates  High water cut
 Poor production monitoring  Casing/tubing damage
Surveillance plan

What are we injecting?

Is the polymer is under
Qinj
specifications?
Pinj

Effect on the producer.

Increase of oil production?

Where we are
injecting?
All layers are
taking polymer?
 Preparation & Baseline Monitoring During Pilot

Initial Evaluation:

Producers:
Corrosion and MultiFinger logs
• Casing integrity evaluation
PLT at different flow rates (SIP analysis)
• Initial production distribution
Multiphase flow meters
• Production baseline
Injectors:
• Initial injection profile DSL
• Injectivity tests WS surface pumps
• Sand in annular RST silicon activation log
Observation well:
RST-C/O
• Initial oil saturation
XPT
• Initial formation pressure
Well connectivity
Reservoir:
Channel size
• InterWell tracers
Breakthrough times NT in Casabe
 Preparation & Baseline Monitoring During Pilot

Polymer specifications
Data Acquisition
program:

Frecuency 31-Jan-15 28-Feb-15 31-Mar-15 30-Apr-15 31-May-15 30-Jun-15 31-Jul-15 30-Aug-15 30-Sep-15 30-Oct-15 30
Prodution monitoring with multiphase flow meters Prod/Inj Analysis
2 well test daily 60 56 60 Polymer
60 injection60
process
60 60 60 60 60
(# of well tests monthly)
Wellhead preassure Real time 30 28 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
ALS parameters Real time 30 28 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
PLT with wireline Each 6 months 1 1
Downhole pressue gauges # gauges installed 4 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
Polymer injection presure and rate Daily 30 28 30 30 30 movement
Fluids 30 in reservoir
30 30 30 30
Viscosity, concentration, filter ratio Daily 30 28 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Polymer stock Weekly 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Injection profiles Each 2 weeks 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Oil saturation Each 6 months 1
Formation pressure Flowing and Formation
As requiered 1 1 pressures 1 1
(PLT and downhole pressure gauges)
QA/QC (days per month)
QC polymer, polymer breaktrough in producers , Monthly 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
water quality, viscosity, filter ratio, concentration

NT in Casabe
EOR Pilot Performance Evaluation
Observation Well Well Location

Original Oil Saturation

• Shows good Original Oil Saturation OBSERVATION WELL OBJECTIVES
• Not sweep oil

• Observation well to evaluate

increase in sweep efficiency of
polymer injection in A2/A2i
sands.
• Infill drilling well to evaluate the
efficiency of reduction in the
injection – production pattern
spacing.
RST Time Lapse. A2 Sand
RST Base RST TL1 RST TL2
RST TL1 RST TL2 RST Base

A B C D E F

B: Oil saturation increase between October 2014 and April 2015

D: Oil saturation decrease between Abril 2015 y October 2015
F: Total Oil Saturation Change entre October 2014 y October 2015

Average So
RST Time Lapse. A2i Sand
RST Base RST TL1 RST TL2
RST TL1 RST TL2 RST Base

A B C D E F

So Promedio

B: Oil saturation change between October 2014 and April 2015

D: Oil saturation change between Abril 2015 y October 2015
F: Total Oil Saturation Change entre October 2014 y October 2015
Flow Behavior
1. Initial Saturation Condition :
Original So
2. RST @ 6 months: So increase, oil
front reached observation well.
3. RST @ 1 year:
• Preferential drainage.
• Channels with So reduction
due polymer flood effect, oil
CSBE-01PO
is pushed to neighbor wells.
• Channels with So increase
due polymer flood effect,
entrapment due to lack of
drainage points.
4. Proof of concept of areal sweep
increase.
Injector Well CSBE-1222

1400
WFR No WFR 2500

1300 CAUDAL BLS

2250
1200
PRESION PSI 2000
1100 2-3
1000 1750
900
1500
1
Caudal [bbl/d]

800

Presion [psi]
700 1250

600
1000
500

400 750

300 500
200
250
100

0 0
2-Apr-14

1-Sep-14

1-Oct-14

2-Apr-15

1-Sep-15

1-Oct-15
1-Jan-14

2-Mar-14

31-Dec-14

2-Mar-15
2-Jun-14

1-Aug-14
2-Jul-14

1-Nov-14

1-Jun-15

1-Aug-15
2-Jul-15

31-Oct-15
31-Jan-14

31-Jan-15
2-May-14

2-May-15
1-Dec-14

1-Dec-15
Polymer
CSBE-1222 shows good injectivity both water and polymer.
1. Concentration reduction to 400 ppm
2. Conformance with mother solution at 3000 ppm - A2i
3. Hypochlorite Clean Up - A2
Injector Well CSBE-1304
WFR No WFR
1400 2500

1300 CAUDAL BLS

2250
1200
PRESION PSI
1100 2 2000

1000 1750
900
1500
1
Caudal [bbl/d]

800

Presion [psi]
700 1250

600
1000
500

400 750

300 500
200
250
100

0 0
2-Apr-14

1-Sep-14

1-Oct-14

2-Apr-15

1-Sep-15

1-Oct-15
1-Jan-14

2-Mar-14

2-Jun-14

1-Aug-14

31-Dec-14

2-Mar-15
2-Jul-14

1-Nov-14

1-Jun-15

1-Aug-15
2-Jul-15

31-Oct-15
31-Jan-14

31-Jan-15
2-May-14

2-May-15
1-Dec-14

1-Dec-15
Polymer
CSBE-1304 shows reduction of injectivity due lack of drainage points.
1. Concentration reduction to 400 ppm
2. Hypochlorite Clean Up - A2. Injection increased.
B6 Pilot Pattern Performance
Prior polymer injection, pattern
optimization shows a increase in
oil production.
Polymer Injection stabilization
occurred since January 2015.
Dramatic water production
decrease after polymer injection.
Oil Production Increase after 8-9
months of polymer injection.
B6 Pilot Pattern Performance

Oil production increased after pattern optimization. After

polymer injection oil production decrease slightly but
water production decrease drastically.
After 8-9 month oil increase.
B6 Pilot Pattern Performance
Sweep efficiency increase
observed after Water
Flooding optimization.
Polymer Flood show sweep
efficiency over Water
flooding. Decrease barrel of
water injected by barrel oil
produced.

4.8 BWI/BOP

3.7 BWI/BOP

2.5 BWI/BOP
Facilities Installation Polymer injection started in October 28 2014, in four
polymer injector wells.
Total injection capacity is 3.000 B/D of 500 ppm
polymer solution at 2,000 psi

Polymer Mixing and Injection Unit

Polymer Mixing and Injection Unit

Individual pump for each injector is used

to allow individual pressure control
Polymer Unit Control Panel
Conclusions
• Fast Track EOR is feasible and achievable
With the right integration of Operator and Service Provider(s):
18 months to pilot online
36 months to proof of concept
• One Stop Shop to minimized tender, decision and handovers delays
• Successful Implementation of Casabe Pilot Project
• A surveillance plan for any EOR pilot is key to ensure the collection of critical data that will
allow a proper evaluation of the pilot.
• The surveillance plan is determined by the characteristics and challenges of each field.
• The implemented plan is far more robust than conventional surveillance used at the field.
• Design, Operation & Surveillance must still be best in class and focus on earliest proof of
concept
• A structured Team dedicated to the project is fundamental for success
• Synergy between different players across the organization are crucial to implement a fast
track project