Feasibility Study of Hot Fluid Injection: An Athabasca Oil Sands Reservoir Case

Jian Li, Moslem Hosseininejad Mohebat, Zhangxing (John) Chen, and Brij Maini,
University of Calgary

Abstract. The objective of this work is to investigate feasibility of injecting a hot

reservoir fluid into a reservoir with the same well configuration as SAGD to increase and
sustain the reservoir temperature. CMG’s STARS and Schlumberger’s Eclipse Thermal
are used to perform a preliminary feasibility, and reservoir temperature distribution
profiles are calculated and compared. An Athabasca oil sands reservoir is studied as a
case, and simulation results show that hot fluid injection can be an effective start-up
process to heat the zone between the two horizontal wells to the upgrading temperature.

1. Introduction
As the conventional crude resources continue to decline, further development and
production of heavy oil and oil sands is critical to meet the present and future energy
requirement. A vast amount of oil sands has accumulated in Alberta, Canada. Three
major deposits are located in the Athabasca, Cold Lake, and Peace River areas. This
report will only concentrate on an Athabasca oil sands reservoir.
Unlike conventional oil, oil sands contain a mixture of bitumen, sand, clay, and water.
The Athabasca oil sands are composed of approximately 70% sand and clay, 10% water,
and anywhere from 0 to 18% (weight) heavy oil or bitumen (Deutsch and McLennan,
2005). A thin film of water, which contains trace amounts of clay, iron, vanadium and
titanium, surrounds each sand particle. The viscous oil or bitumen surrounds the water
skin and sand particles. The oil sands must specifically be treated in order to remove the
bitumen from the sand. Syncrude, for example, first removes the majority of the sand and
clay via a hot water washing process, and then the resulting froth is diluted with a
hydrocarbon mixture that promotes settling of water and solids and suspends the viscous
bitumen (Deutsch and McLennan, 2005). Fig. 1 shows a typical viscosity versus
temperature curve for the Athabasca oil sands (Mehrotra and Svrcek, 1986).

Figure 1: Viscosity versus temperature curve for Athabasca oil sands

Nowadays, there are many thermal recovery methods available for heavy oil and bitumen
production. The Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD, Butler, 1997) process has
shown to have the most promise in recovering the heavy oil and bitumen. Its most
common implementation consists of two parallel horizontal wells, the first drilled near
the bottom of a reservoir and the other located above it. The upper well provides
continuous steam supply into the reservoir and the lower one allows for continuous
production of oil, gas, and condensed water.
In general, oil sands are immobile. It is necessary to preheat a reservoir and create an
effective thermo-hydraulic communication between the two parallel wells before the
SAGD process is implemented. A start-up stage consists of three steps (Vincent,
MacKinnon, and Palmgren, 2004). First, steam is circulated in both wells, and the heat
transfer within the reservoir occurs mainly by conduction. In the second step, a pressure
differential is imposed between these wells, adding a convection component to the heat
transfer process in the reservoir. In the third step, the well pair is converted to a full
SAGD operation.
Pilots and commercial operations have shown that SAGD is a technically effective
method but still needs more research. Although there have been successful production
projects by using the SAGD process with high recovery efficiency in Alberta, high steam
production costs and substantial volumes of water used require more economical and
effective upgrading and recovery methods. There exist some variations of SAGD, such as
fast-SAGD, single well SAGD, and ES-SAGD (expanding solvent-SAGD). These
recovery variations can provide some incremental improvements over the standard
SAGD but still are not effective in terms of the use of steam and water. The operating
pressure is a very important parameter during the SAGD process because a higher
operating pressure can lead to a higher steam temperature. Hence much energy is
required to increase the steam temperature and decrease the oil viscosity. However, it is
known that the fracture pressure is about 3,400 kPa in the Athabasca oil sands reservoir.
Therefore, there exists a temperature limitation for steam injection in Athabasca. In situ
upgrading of bitumen requires temperatures higher than the maximum feasible steam
temperature. One possible method for generating such high temperatures is by injecting
heated bitumen into the reservoir.
This report focuses on a feasibility study of the start-up stage of hot fluid injection. For
this a low viscosity oil is injected and circulated at certain temperature using the upper
well, and oil, gas, and any mobilized water are produced from the lower well. When the
temperature of the inter-well region reaches 250°C, it is possible to switch from low
viscosity oil to bitumen or vacuum residue. The purpose is to heat the zone between the
two horizontal wells to the upgrading temperature of 350°C.
We investigate the efficiency of this hot fluid injection process for an Athabasca oil sands
reservoir by examining such important parameters as temperature distribution, water, gas,
and oil saturations, and injection and production rates. Preliminary simulation results
carried out via both CMG’s STARS and Schlumberger’s Eclipse Thermal show that it
can be an effective start-up process to heat the zone between the two horizontal wells to
the upgrading temperature.
2. An Athabasca Oil Sands Reservoir Case
2.1. Model Specification
A three-dimensional block-centered grid model is constructed using the Athabasca
reservoir properties and dead oil bitumen. Table 1 lists the dimensions of this reservoir
model, the grid block information, and the reservoir properties, and Fig. 2 displays a
cross section along the well direction (the j-direction). The reservoir is assumed to be
homogenous with a 5,000 md horizontal permeability, a ratio 0.2 of the vertical to
horizontal permeabilities, and 34% porosity. Half of this reservoir is simulated where the
well index, fluid transmissibilities, and grid volumes are all adjusted in order to properly
simulate the symmetry. The well length is 200 m and the reservoir net pay thickness is 22
m. The initial dead oil and water saturations are 0.82 and 0.18, respectively. The
production well is drilled at the bottom of the reservoir and the injection well is placed
4.5 m above the producer. The heat loss to overburden and underburden is computed by
using both analytical and numerical approaches, which does not show much difference in
the reservoir temperature profiles.

Table 1: Data for an Athabasca oil sands reservoir.

Parameter value
Reservoir pressure (kPa) 1,500
Reservoir thickness (m) 22.5
Depth to top of reservoir (m) 200
Vertical permeability (D) 1
Horizontal permeability (D) 5
Porosity (%) 0.34
Oil saturation (%) 0.82
Methane gas mole fraction 0
Porosity reference pressure (kPa) 1,000
Formation compressibility (1/kPa) 1.8 × 10
−5

3 2,350
Formation heat capacity (kJ/m -K)
3 6
Rock volumetric heat capacity (J/m -K) 1.5 × 10
3 6
Under- and overburden volumetric heat capacity (J/m -K) 1.5 × 10
Under- and overburden thermal conductivity (J/(m-d-°C) 1.5 × 10
5

Rock thermal conductivity (J/(m-d-°C) 1.5 × 10

5

Oil thermal conductivity (J/(m-d-°C) 2 × 10

4

Water thermal conductivity (J/(m-d-°C) 5 × 10

4

Gas thermal conductivity (J/(m-d-°C) 1.4 × 10

2
 Figure 2: Reservoir cross-sectional grids.

2.2. Fluid Model

The Athabasca dead-oil bitumen is modeled as one pseudo-heavy component with no
ability to vaporize. All the K-values are taken to be zero at all conditions. The molecular
weight of this heavy component is 570 kg/kg-mole, with a density of 1,000 kg/m3. Its
bitumen viscosity and its change with respect to temperature are predicted by the
Mehrotra and Svrcek correlation (1986, cf. Fig. 1):
ln ln µ (cp ) = A + B ln T (K )
A = 22.8515 (1)
B = −3.5784
For example, the viscosity at 5°C is 3,453,000 cp, and an increase of the oil temperature
to 360°C reduces it to 2.210 cp. The water-oil relative and gas-oil relative permeability
functions are displayed in Figs. 3a and 3b, respectively.
 Figure 3a: Water-oil relative permeability.

Figure 3b: Gas-oil relative permeability.

2.3. Initial Conditions
The initial condition for the start of hot oil injection is very important. The idea is to have
an initial temperature distribution inside the reservoir similar to the temperature profile
after the circulation period in SAGD. An example is that a one-dimensional temperature
profile at the end of the steam circulation period can be estimated by equation (2):
Ts = steam temperature

x Ti = initial temperature
T = (Ts − Ti )erfc( ) + Ti where :  (2)
2 αt t = circulation time
 x = dis tan ce from well

If Ts is not high enough, the heat injected into the reservoir by hot liquid bitumen will not
suffice to increase the reservoir temperature; a low initial temperature profile does not
give hot bitumen enough time and injectivity to heat the reservoir. If the heating rate of
the reservoir is less than the rate of temperature decrease, the reservoir temperature will
decline until the oil viscosity is high enough that the injector cannot continue its
injection. The initial reservoir temperature before circulation is 10°C, and the initial
pressure of the reservoir is 1,500 kPa for all grid blocks. Table 1 also shows the initial
fluid saturations of the reservoir.
3. Simulation Study
The purpose of this simulation study is to investigate the feasibility and performance of
hot fluid injection with the same well configuration as SAGD. Understanding operating
conditions to improve the initial performance of SAGD requires an understanding of the
methodology of preheating the near-wellbore area in the start-up stage of this recovery
process.
Three-dimensional numerical simulations are performed using Schlumberger’s Eclipse
with the data given in Table 1 for a major Athabasca oil sands reservoir. The reservoir
has dimensions 30 × 500 × 22.5 m 3 . The numerical grid sizes are 1.5 m, 100 m, and 1.5 m
in the i-, j-, and k-directions, respectively, and the horizontal wells are in the j-direction,
with a length of 200 m. The grid blocks of the well perforation are (1, 2:4, 11) and (1,
2:4, 14) for the injection and production wells, respectively. The total grid number of the
base case are 20 × 5 × 15. The injection well is 4.5 m above the production well, as noted.
The original Athabasca reservoir bitumen, with a temperature of 360°C, is injected into
the reservoir in all the simulations. A number of different simulations are conducted with
different injection and production pressure constraints and different initial temperature
profiles in the reservoir. First, Ts is taken to be 120°C, which means that a temperature
profile having the general form of equation (2) is distributed inside the reservoir with the
highest temperature of 120°C in the well grid blocks and the lowest temperature of 10°C
at the distance far enough from the wells. Regardless of the pressure and rate constraints,
this temperature distribution does not allow continuous oil injection and reservoir
heating. Oil injection starts with a low injection rate, the reservoir cools down faster than
the supply rate of the heat to it, and thus the injection rate gradually decreases to zero.
Fig. 4 shows the molar oil injection and production rates for the cases of the injection and
production pressures of 17 and 5 bar, respectively. There is no rate constraint applied in
this simulation. Fig. 5 depicts the temperature of different segments of the injection well
where segment 1 is the inlet of this well and segment 5 is its toe. It can be seen that the
injection well temperature rapidly decreases with time. Moreover, Fig. 6 indicates the
production well segment’s temperature, again segment 1 being its heel and segment 5 its
toe.
Figure 4: Molar oil injection and production rates, Pinj= 17 bar, Pprod=5 bar

Figure 5: Injection well temperature, Pinj= 17 bar, Pprod=5 bar

 Figure 6: Production well temperature, Pinj= 17 bar, Pprod=5 bar

Attempting to have a continuous hot oil injection and reservoir heating, Ts is now raised
to 200°C instead of 120°C; a higher temperature profile helps to start the oil injection
with a higher rate and allows continuous injection of the hot fluid without over-
pressurization of the injector. In fact, higher energy input can be supplied to the reservoir
before the reservoir temperature drops and the oil viscosity increases. Fig. 7 shows the
molar oil injection and production rates for this case when oil is injected with a pressure
of not greater than 17 bar and the production well pressure is kept higher than 13 bar. It is
observed that once the reservoir temperature starts to rise, the injection of more fluid is
possible and the reservoir can be heated consequently. The injection of hot bitumen can
be continued as shown in Fig. 7. The rates of injection and production stay almost the
same during the entire period of the process. Figs. 8 and 9 show the temperature of
different segments of injection and production wells for this case. Segment 5 in both
wells is located at the toe where no injection or production occurs through this segment.
Since the injection of hot fluid is continued, the injection well temperature does not
decrease and the production well temperature increases with time.
Figure 7: Molar oil injection and production rate, Pinj= 17 bar, Pprod=13 bar

Figure 8: Injection well temperature, Pinj= 17 bar, Pprod=13 bar

 Figure 9: Production well temperature, Pinj= 17 bar, Pprod=13 bar

For comparison, CMG’s STARS was also used to simulate the hot fluid injection when Ts
is 200°C. The injection rates and temperature distribution profiles obtained by using both
STARS and Eclipse are given in Figs. 10 and 11 and Tables 2 and 3. It is interesting to
note that almost the same results for these quantities are obtained by using two different
thermal simulators. Three chambers form around the grid blocks (j=2, 3, and 4) of the
injection well while the hot fluid is injected. The temperature in the interwell region
around these chambers reaches around 350 o C after one month (cf. Figs. 11 and 12 and
Table 2 at j=2).

Figure 10: Comparison of molar oil injection rates.

 Figure 11a: Initial temperature profile by STARS.

Figure 11b: Initial temperature profile by STARS after one month.

Figure 11c: Initial temperature profile by STARS after one year.

 Table 2: Temperature at different blocks after one month
Block CMG Eclipse
(1,2,11) 358.00°C 356.82°C
(2,2, 11) 351.20°C 345.36°C
(3, 2, 11) 330.20°C 313.92°C
(4, 2, 11) 313.92°C 229.01°C
(1, 2, 15) 306.70°C 298.10°C
(2, 2, 11) 269.20°C 263.60°C
(3, 2, 11) 205.70°C 196.97°C

Table 3: Temperature at different blocks after one year

Block CMG Eclipse
(1, 2, 11) 360.00°C 359.76°C
(2, 2, 11) 360.00°C 359.63°C
(3, 2, 11) 359.90°C 359.22°C
(4, 2, 11) 359.20°C 357.34°C
(5, 2, 11) 356.20°C 352.23°C
(6, 2, 11) 348.90°C 340.94°C
(7, 2, 11) 332.70°C 319.37°C
(8, 2, 11) 300.80°C 284.23°C
(1, 2, 15) 342.80°C 335.46°C
(2, 2, 15) 334.90°C 325.87°C
(3,2, 15) 324.50°C 313.75°C
(4, 2, 15) 310.80°C 298.81°C
(5, 2, 15) 292.80°C 280.04°C

Water, oil, and gas saturations are also investigated in this work using STARS. In the
standard SAGD process, chambers involve complex steam condensation, and oil flows
from the chamber edges down to the producer. From Figs. 12 and 13 for the saturation
results at three different times, it can be seen that the oil saturation decreases and the
water saturation gradually increases along the perimeter of a chamber. Some of the
reservoir oil flows into the production well, and some of the injected oil is lost into the
reservoir. However, the rates of injection and production stay almost the same during the
entire period of the process (cf. Fig. 14a), as mentioned above. For the current study, no
steam and water is injected into the reservoir. But we still find water production (cf. Fig.
14b). It is the connate water in the reservoir that evaporates in the heated zone and
condenses near the perimeter of the heated chamber. Then it flows into the production
well under the gravity drive. Also, no gas phase is present from our results (cf. Fig. 15c)
because it is a two-phase flow reservoir without the gas phase for the Athabasca oil sands
reservoir under consideration.
 Figure 12a: Initial oil saturation.

Figure 12b: Oil saturation after six months.

Figure 12c: Oil saturation after one year.

 Figure 13a: Initial water saturation.

Figure 13b: Water saturation after six months.

Figure 13c: Water saturation after one year.

 Figure 14a: Oil injection and production rates.

Figure 14b: Water injection and production rates.

Figure 14c: Gas injection and production rates.

4. Conclusions
This report discusses the startup of the hot fluid injection process for in situ upgrading
and its application to an Athabasca oil sands case. Numerical results for the temperature
distribution, phase saturation, and oil injection and production rates are reported. Also, a
comparison of this case study between CMG’s STARS and Schlumberger’s Eclipse is
performed. While more investigations are needed, it is clear from the preliminary
numerical study in this report that the start-up stage of hot fluid injection appears feasible
and effective in heating the zone between the two horizontal wells to the upgrading
temperature for the Athabasca oil sands reservoir considered.

Reference

[1] C.V. Deutsch and J.A. McLennan, Guide to SAGD (Steam Assisted Gravity
Drainage) Reservoir Characterization Using Geostatistics, Guidebook Series Vol. 3,
Centre for Computational Geostatistics, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 2005.

[2] A. K. Mehrotra and W. Y. Svrcek, Viscosity for Compressed Athabasca Bitumen,

Can. J. Chem. Eng., 64 (1986), 844-847.

[3] R. Butler, Thermal Recovery of Oil and Bitumen, GravDrain Inc., Calgary, Alberta,
1997.

[4] K. D. Vincent, C. J. MacKinnon, and C.T.S. Palmgren, Developing SAGD Operating

Strategy Using a Coupled Wellbore Thermal Reservoir Simulator, SPE 86970, presented
at the 2004 SPE thermal operations and heavy oil symposium and western regional
meeting, Bakersfield, California, March 16-18, 2004.