Insights on Injection Practices and Injector

Performance in High Temperature Reservoirs

By
Ahmed Abou-Sayed
Advantek International

A SedHeat Workshop

Unlocking the Energy Elephant

Salt Lake City, Utah
March 1-4, 2017
Geothermal Injector/Producer Wells
Water Injector Wells:
• Will discuss here heat extraction from
permeable reservoirs and brown fields
• Typically inject water directly into the
Geothermal zone’s rock matrix
• Water injection cost is 7-10 c/bbl in
existing fields
• Total capacity is determined by the
volume of the hot rock reservoir
• Geothermal zones are selected based
on isolation from freshwater sources
• Inject colder water into naturally
occurring hydraulic fractures or those
created during the injection process
• Thermal heat extraction capacity
determined by the volume of the
fractures accessed during injection during Injection
• Thermal heat recovery zones are
selected based on isolation from
freshwater sources and stress barriers
which prevent fracture propagation Geothermal Hot Layer
beyond the heat extraction zone
Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Temperature Effects on Injection Performance
Wellhead 9000 120

Rate /bpd, BHP /psi

Pressure
8000 115
7000
(psi) 110

BHT /F
6000
105
2500
5000
4000
100 Produced Water
3000 95
2000 90
0 20 40 60

2000 Tim e /days

Rate BHP BHT

Seawater
1500
50
45
40
35

Inject iv ity (bbls/day/psi)

Se a Wat e r

1000
30
25
20 Produce d Wa te r
15
10
5
0
500
1-Jul-92

27-Jan-93
29-Sep-92

28-Dec -92
31-Jul-92

29-Oct-92
30-Aug-92

28-Nov -92
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
North Sea Forties
Alaska Prudhoe Bay Flow Rate (bbl/day)

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Injector Number Rate Wellhead
Pressure
Injector Scenarios for Needed
Of wells (m3/day) (kPa)
Pressure
Various Well Scenarios Needed Per well (kPa)

Matrix 4 3595
7200 6895

Fractured 2 9241
18500 6895
(180m)
Horizontal 1 12600
25200 6827
(1200m No fracture)

Horizontal 1 12600
25200 2177
(1200m 4fracture
fractures)
4)

Horizontal 2 10456
20900 6895
(600m No fracture)

Horizontal 1 12600
25200 2315
(600m 4 fractures)

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Multiple Batch Injection

Flow Partitioning
due to stress profile

Horizontal Well Fracture

Loss of containment
Vertical Well Fracture due to stress Build Up
Loss of containment
due to stress Build Up

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
RII vs. Cumulative Injection

1.000
Increasing
Fracture
0.800

Pressure
0.600
RII
0.400
0.200
0.000

0 5000000 10000000 15000000 20000000 25000000

Cumulative Injection

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Effect water Quality on Injection Behavior (Best Case)

Differential Pressure (psi), SW 100% PW 0% Differential Pressure (psi), SW 75% PW 25%

No Temperature Effect PW @ 110 F SWPW @ 100 F

9700 Differential Pressure (psi), SW 50% PW 50% Fractured Injection

Differential Pressure (psi), SW 25% PW 75%
Differential Pressure (psi), SW 0% PW 100%
9600

9500
Regime
1800
Lowering Water
Bottom Hole Injection Pressure (psi)

9400

9300
Quality
1600 9200

9100

9000

1400 8900

8800
Differential Pressure (psi)

8700
1200 8600
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Time (days)

1000
Decreasing Water quality indicates
increasing proportions of Produced Water
800
and contaminants in the injection water

600

400
Matrix Injection This case considers the fracture to
have height of 22 feet.
200
Regime

0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000
Injection Rate (bpd)
Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Fracture Damage/Propagation

Fracture
Increasing Plugging
Fracture &
Pressure Swelling

RII Fracture
RII
Plugged
Gained
Fracture
Injection
Growth
Area

Date Date

F(Fracture F(Water Quality)

Pressure)

RII RII

F(Temperature, Damage, F(Fracture Propagation)

Pore Pressure)

Date
Date
Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Water Quality Sensitivity (TSS)

SWPW_TSS=0.5 SWPW_TSS=5 SWPW_TSS=10 SWPW_TSS=25 SWPW_TSS=50 SWPW_TSS=0.5 SWPW_TSS=5 SWPW_TSS=10 SWPW_TSS=25 SWPW_TSS=50

450 200

400 180

160
350

140
300
Fracture Length (ft)

Net Pressure (psi)

120
250
100

200
80

150
60

100 40

50 20

0
0
0.00E+00 2.00E+07 4.00E+07 6.00E+07 8.00E+07 1.00E+08 1.20E+08 1.40E+08 1.60E+08
0.00E+00 2.00E+07 4.00E+07 6.00E+07 8.00E+07 1.00E+08 1.20E+08 1.40E+08 1.60E+08
Injected Volume (bbls)
Injected Volume (bbls)

Increase TSS increased fracture Length

Increase TSS increased net pressure
Increase TSS decreased well life

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Data Mining and Prediction

Mining existing field data

Extract patterns/correlations
Predict future behavior
Measure and rank effects of varibles

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Fault Stability and Activation

The stability of nearby faults is

important
Impacts maximum pressure &
capacity
Current engineering analysis is
adequate
Uncertainty in dynamic faults
properties 30000000

29998000
Tau difference (psi)
537.4
498.6
459.9
421.1
29996000 382.4
343.7
304.9
29994000
266.2
227.4
29992000 188.7
150.0
111.2
Y

29990000 72.5
33.7
-5.0
29988000

29986000

29984000

29982000

535000 540000 545000 550000 555000

X

1.2
30000000
Normal stress (psi)
2006.1
Modified Snow Data - Exponent = 3 29998000
1 1933.9
Modified Snow Data - Exponent = 1 1861.7
Curves 3 and 4 from Voegele et al.
Normalized by Ambient Permeability

29996000 1789.5
1717.3
1645.1
0.8
29994000 1572.8
1500.6
Permeability

1428.4
29992000 1356.2
0.6 1284.0
Y

1211.8
29990000
1139.6
1067.4
0.4 29988000 995.2

29986000
0.2
29984000

0 29982000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000
Effective Normal Stress (psi) X

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Monitoring and Assurance : Daily Monitoring and Reporting
Pressure 'psi' Rate 'bpm'

Daily monitoring of the following 1400

1300 Maximum
11
10 Wellhead Pressure
1200
parameters: 1100
1000
1200
9
8

• Injection Rate

Wellhead Pressure (psi)

7

Injection Rate (bpm)

900
1100
800 6

Wellhead Pressure (psi)

• Well head pressure 700
600
1000 5
4
900
• Fluid density, viscosity
500
3
400
300 800 2

• Fluid volume 200

100
700
1
0

• Annulus pressure 0
600 -1

500
Closure Pressure (psi)
3050
Date 400
Injector pressure transient 2950

analysis using proprietary tools to 2850

Fracture Length (ft), PKN Fracture Length (ft), KGD Fracture Length (ft), Radial

Closure Pressure (psi)

400
2750 Date
obtain fracture geometry, closure 2650
350

300
pressure, and injectate frontier 2550
250

Length (ft)
2450
200

2350 150

2250 100

50
Date 0

10/28/2010
11/27/2010
12/27/2010

10/23/2011
11/22/2011
12/22/2011
5/31/2010
6/30/2010
7/30/2010
8/29/2010
9/28/2010

1/26/2011
2/25/2011
3/27/2011
4/26/2011
5/26/2011
6/25/2011
7/25/2011
8/24/2011
9/23/2011

1/21/2012
2/20/2012
3/21/2012
4/20/2012
5/20/2012
4/1/2010
5/1/2010
Date

Monitoring is a critical component for the long term assurance of fracture

containment and well integrity.

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Real-time Operational Monitoring

Field operators and subsurface engineers must work together to

monitor and control the well
• Well performance
• Well-head pressure
• Injection rate
• Operational procedures
• Correct injection times and rates
• Correct injected volume
• Slurry rheology
• fluid viscosity & density
• Correct water quality

Safe operations are the highest priority

• Surface and subsurface risks must be constantly evaluated using real-time
surveillance to ensure that surface pressures and subsurface behaviors are
within bounds

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Well Testing

Fall-Off Test Step Rate Test

Injection fall off data can be analyzed for Fracture closure and propagation pressures
information on fracture containment, near- are interpreted through the step rate test
well damage, fracture and reservoir to confirm fracture geometry and injection
properties zone

2012/10/09-0213 : OIL
100
DP & DERIVATIVE (PSI/STB/D)

10-1
10-2
10-3
10-4

10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 102

Delta-T (hr)

Alaska GNI-2A PFO

Radial Composite Double-Porosity Reservoir(P.S.S.)
** Simulation Data ** Static-Data and Constants

Skin(mech.) =
Copyright 2016 Advantek Waste
well. storage = 0.89893 BBLS/PSI
5.8014
Management
Volume-Factor
Thickness
Services LLC. This material is private and confidential
= 0.9950 vol/vol
= 100.0 FEET
permeability = 254.42 MD Viscosity = 1.000 CP
Perm.(inner) = 1563.8 MD Total Compress = .9640E-05 1/PSI
Stor.rto+x o/i = 0.013579 Rate = -394.1 STB/D
Field Data Falloff Experience in Fractured Injectors

• Field data does not match conventional fall-off analysis, the solution requires:
o The models with “closing fractures” and the consideration of “fracture-
closure-induced” flow rate.
o Consideration of change of fracture dimensions during falloff. The closing
fracture is not stationary but its dimensions will reduce (shrink) gradually.
This requires further geomechanical consideration in the formulation.
o Composite systems (multiple mobility zones).

• Case studies: North Sea water injector, solid waste/produced water injection operation in
an Alaska North Slope field.
2014/07/26-0350 : OIL
DP & DERIVATIVE (PSI/STB/D)

10-2
10-3
10-4

10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 102

Delta-T (hr)

Alaska GNI-02A PFO

Infinite Conductivity Vertical Fracture
** Simulation Data ** Static-Data and Constants
well. storage = 0.020000 BBLS/PSI Volume-Factor = 0.9950 vol/vol
permeability = 150.00 MD Thickness = 100.0 FEET
Half.Length = 145.00 FEET Viscosity = 1.000 CP
fracture-skin = 0. Total Compress = .9640E-05 1/PSI
Perm-Thickness = 15000. MD-FEET Rate = -28210. STB/D
Initial Press. = 3030.00 PSI Storivity = 0.0003085 FEET/PSI
Smoothing Coef = 0.,0. Diffusivity = 12820. FEET^2/HR
Gauge Depth = N/A FEET
Perf. Depth = N/A FEET
Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Datum Depth = N/A FEET
Analysis-Data ID: GAU001
Based on Gauge ID: GAU001
PFA Starts: 2014-07-12 00:00:00
Well Testing Reminder

2014/07/26-0350 : OIL

DP & DERIVATIVE (PSI/STB/D)

10-2
10-3
• Diagnostic Plots

10-4
10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Delta-T (hr)

•
Alaska GNI-02A PFO
Conventional Type Infinite Conductivity Vertical Fracture
** Simulation Data **
well. storage = 0.020000 BBLS/PSI
Static-Data and Constants
Volume-Factor = 0.9950 vol/vol

Curve Analysis permeability

Half.Length
fracture-skin =
=
=

Perm-Thickness =
150.00 MD
145.00 FEET
0.
15000. MD-FEET
Thickness
Viscosity
= 100.0 FEET
= 1.000 CP
Total Compress = .9640E-05 1/PSI
Rate = -28210. STB/D
Initial Press. = 3030.00 PSI Storivity = 0.0003085 FEET/PSI

• Fracture Pressure Smoothing Coef = 0.,0. Diffusivity

Gauge Depth
Perf. Depth
Datum Depth
= 12820. FEET^2/HR
= N/A FEET
= N/A FEET
= N/A FEET

Analysis (FPA) and DFIT Analysis-Data ID: GAU001

Based on Gauge ID: GAU001
PFA Starts: 2014-07-12 00:00:00
PFA Ends : 2014-08-01 10:28:52

(MFO)
Curtesy:
http://www.fekete.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/Posters/Fekete_WellTest_Fu
ndamentals_5731_0614AA_LOW.png

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Pressure Transient Response for a Closing Fracture

• Fracture closure is characterized by a

sudden rapid change in pressure
(determines the fracture closure
pressure).
• Mixture of fracture storage flow and
linear formation flow before closure.
• After closure, flow from the fracture
into the formation will show a
transition from linear formation flow
to pseudo-radial flow.
• Fracture closure is characterized by a
sharp peak

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
@IPT Analyses Options

Any combination of the following options is available in @IPT:

• Fluid Mobility:
o Single Mobility (One Region)
o Dual Mobility (Inner and Outer zones with different mobility)
• Fracture Conductivity:
o Infinite Conductivity
o Finite Conductivity
• Fracture Types:
o KGD
o PKN
o Ellipsoidal
• Fracture Shrinkage Types:
o No Shrinkage
o Height Shrinkage Only
o Length Shrinkage Only
o Combined Height and Length Shrinkage

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
@IPT Composite Reservoir Configuration (Two-zone System)


VI  . x 2f . sinh( 20 ) . h f .  . (1  S wi  Sro )
2

Elliptical coordinate of the

water front ξ0 = 0.5

X0

Y0 Xf fracture half-length

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Shrinking Closing Fracture Type Curves

• Fractures do not close abruptly but

tend to shrink before closure.
• Pressure and derivative curves
show a smooth transition from
before to after closure conditions.
• Fracture closure is observed to be
associated with:
• Height Shrinkage
• Length Shrinkage
• Both
• Pressure transient analyses of
actual field data in injectors will
yield more realistic reservoir
characteristics as well as the
degree of confinement.

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Shrinking Type Curves Compared with Actual Field Falloffs

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
@IPT Input-Output
Fracture Fracture
Height Height
Required Input Year (Measured) (Simulation)
(Fixed) (ft) (ft)
Formation Height (Thickness)
Formation Volume Factor 2010 100 109
Injected Fluid Initial Saturation 2011 107 101
Injection Fluid Compressibility 2012 133 130
Injection Fluid Viscosity
Reservoir Fluid Viscosity 2013 150 143
Injection Rate
Pore Fluid Residual Saturation Output by Type Curve Matching:
Pressure vs. time data Containment Layer Stress
Reservoir Poisson's Ratio Fracture Conductivity
Reservoir Porosity Fracture Half Length
Reservoir Young's Modulus Fracture Penetration into Containment Layer
Total Compressibility Fracture Skin
Volume Injected Fracture Storage Constant
Wellbore Volume Injection Layer Stress
Mobility Front, Elliptical
(Fixed or Estimated from Field Data) Permeability of the Inner zone
Containment Layer Stress Mobility Ratio
Fracture Half Length (Permeability of the Outer zone)
Fracture Storage Constant Rate of Fracture Length Shrinkage
Injection Layer Stress Wellbore Storage Constant
Mobility Front, Elliptical
Mobility Ratio 
Permeability of the Inner zone VI  . x 2f . sinh( 20 ) . h f .  . (1  S wi  Sro )
2
Wellbore Storage Constant
In Water Injection and Water Flooding, the
Mobility Front can be estimated

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Results

• As expected, the model for a shrinking Parameters 2010 2011 2012 2013
fracture with finite conductivity in a dual-
Pi (psi) 4121 4017 4237 4279
mobility zone provided the best match in
xf (ft) 60 70 80 100
all tests.
• Evidence for distinct inner and outer Hi (ft) 109.2 101.3 130.0 142.9
zones ΔH (ft) 4.6 0.65 15.0 21.5
• Stress contrast ≈ 650 psi (0.1 psi/ft)
CfV 0.15 0.7 0.7 0.05
• Higher mobility (R > 1) and higher (bbls/psi)
permeability in the inner zone ki (mD) 200 200 225 100
• Effects of accumulated damage: R 4 4 4.5 2
• Decrease in the inner zone permeability
• Decrease in FCD ko (mD) 50 50 50 50
• Effects of injected volumes: Increase in FCD 2.5 0.7 1.0 0.75
inner zone area:
Skin 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.0
• Increasing trend in fracture length
• Increasing trend in the inner-outer ξ0 0.5 1.25 1.5 1.5
boundary location
a (ft) 67.7 132 188 235
• Fracture Containment:
• Increase in fracture penetration b (ft) 31.3 112 170 213
• In all years, the fracture height is within
Area 6645 46570 100710 157360
the containment layer intervals, sufficient (ft2)
degree of hydraulic fracture containment

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
Conclusions

• Injector Performance is important in Geothermal heat extraction in

Sedimentary Rock
• Well monitoring helps in improving efficiency and mitigate loss of well
performance
• All injectors are likely to be fratcured during heat extraction
• The novel method formulated for closing and shrinking fractures after
shut-in in falloff analyses of fractured injectors (IFOT) can be used for
the assessment of fracture and injection domain characteristics from
falloff tests in both water and solid slurry waste operations.
• Using type curve analysis techniques, important reservoir and fracture
properties of injectors can be assessed by IFOT:
o Fracture geometry
o Fracture storage coefficient
o Fracture conductivity
o Extent of the inner zone
o Permeability in the inner and outer domains
o The stress contrast between the injection and containment layers
o The rate of fracture shrinkage (height and or length)

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
@SSURE Surveillance Architecture

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
@SSURE User Interface

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential
 Thank You
Any Questions?

Copyright 2012 Advantek International Corporation. This material is private and confidential