CANADIAN HEAVY
OIL ASSOCIATION
SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97370
PS2005-306
Application of Gas Lift to Heavy-Oil Reservoir in Intercampo Oilfield, Venezuela
D. Hong'en, C. Yuwen, and H. Dandan, RIPED, PetroChina Co. Ltd., and C. Wenxin and Z. Guozhen, CNPC America Ltd.
Copyright 2005, SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE International Thermal Operations
and Heavy Oil Symposium held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1–3 November 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA Program Committee
following review of information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of
the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Petroleum Society–Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy & Petroleum, or the Canadian
Heavy Oil Association and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as
presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA, its officers, or
members. Papers presented at SPE and PS-CIM/CHOA meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the SPE and PS-CIM/CHOA. Electronic reproduction,
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of the SPE or PS-CIM/CHOA is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is
restricted to a proposal of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
proposal must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was
presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax
01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
This paper presents successful applications of the gas lift to
heavy oil reservoirs in Intercampo oilfield, Lake Maracaibo.
Liquid production rate ranges from 50 to 2000 bbl per day per
well, gas lift was selected as the first artificial lift method in
the oilfield. The paper expresses the gas lift mechanisms in
high water cut with lower API degree in heavy oil reservoirs.
The theory analysis showed that injection gas rate of gas lift
and GOR of oil well have direct effects on fluid flow state in
wellbore.
Scenarios of theory design and actual production of gas lift
were described in the paper. For artificial lift design, the paper
points out the correlation equations of gas lift for heavy crude
reservoirs that their flow behavior of actual situation should
not characterized by present equations, therefore, there are big
error value between theory design and actual production when
producer is high water cut with lower API degree. In addition,
the error created reason was analyzed and oil well normal
production in high water cut stages with lower API degree was
emphasized, in the case, emulsion of water and oil should not
happen.
A corrected coefficient of gas lift design was provided under
the high water cut with lower API degree. Nowadays, for the
new correlations are very preliminary that will need to be
developed by means of production engineers and researchers
further. It is particularly important to production engineers in
optimization and design of gas lifting equipments.
Introduction
Continuous gas lift has been employed in lifting heavy crude
many yeas ago. The gas lift method was applied in former
Soviet Union and Venezuela widely. In fact, heavy oil has at
large introduced to continuous gas lift in Venezuela, of which
density is between 0.934 ~0.9659g/cm3 and viscosity is lower
than 50cp.
Experimental study shows that when 3% hydrocarbon solvent
is injected, daily oil production will increase. Actual data
from oilfield show that if water cut were lower than 40%, the
result is true; while water cut was higher than 50%, the
hydrocarbon solvent effect will be worse, or even no effect
will turn up when water cut was higher than 70%.
In traditional opinions, rod pumps were the best artificial lift
method in heavy oil reservoirs, especially for heavy crude oil
density between 0.96 1.0g/cm3.
Some scholars previously thought that gas lift would not be
suitable for lifting in heavy oil well of lower GOR. Perhaps
the conclusion can be explained as that the heavy oil well
might not supply sufficient gas for gas lift, but it cannot prove
that gas lift is no good for heavy oil well. In allusion to this
point, this paper discusses gas lift is achievable for lifting low
API heavy oil and taking as the first artificial lift method from
theory analysis and production practice in oilfields.
Generally, many literatures reported the flow behaviors of gas
lift same as natural flowing in vertical or near-vertical wells.
In fact, change of phase regimes brought about by gas lift is
much more complex than that of natural flowing, because high
velocity gas enters into tubing through gas lift valve to mix
with oil-gas-water of reservoir fluid, bringing not only
external gas mass but also external energy supplement. The
high velocity flow forms new multiphase fluid regime, which
is transitional flow, change from liquid phase to a continuous
gas phase occurs. Gas bubbles join together, and the liquid
may be entrained in the bubbles. Although the liquid phase
effects are significant, the gas phase effects are dominant.
Then annular flow /mist flow occurs, the gas phase is
continuous, and the liquid is entrained as droplets in the gas
phase. Gas phase controls the pressure gradient. and it does
not follow the three types of flow regimes in vertical tubing
gas/liquid flow, consisting of bubble, slug and plug and mist
flow from the bottomhole to wellhead. Factors influencing the
flow regimes include borehole deviation, proportion of each
phase; relative differences in phase densities, surface tension,
and viscosity of each phase, average velocity, tubing
roughness and chock size. However, kickoff pressure / casing
head pressure is a function of above named factors.
2 SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97370
When gas lift was used to produce low API heavy oil with
high water cut, many correlations published for predicting
flow parameters are not suitable, which only suit black oil
with high API gravity over 17 degree, and cutoff value of
water cut of 60%. According to literatures report, emulsion
should be formed at water cut of 50% severely. Black oil
correlation of Woelflin is used at water cut less than or equal
to the cutoff value. Therefore, the correlations could be
applied neither for higher water cut nor for a new flow that is
large numbers of gas being injected into tubing through gas lift
valve. A new correlation needs to be established by
researchers in order to calculate pressure drop in this case and
the design power of surface facilities.
A new theory for lifting low API heavy oil with high water cut
by gas lift was present. In addition, the study gained a
correction factor to kickoff pressure/casing head pressure
(CHP) predicted by use of some prevailing business software,
also worked out a regression correlation in low API heavy oil
with high water cut for predicting kickoff pressure with
oilfield data.
Reservoir Description
BASUP-53 reservoir is located in the northeast on the Lake
Maracaibo, which belongs to Intercampo contract area and has
been taken over by CNPC America Ltd., Venezuela. The lake
depth is about 7 to 26 meters and the whole area is 39.56
square kilometers. At present, the reservoirs in the contract
area can be classified to three types, heavy oil reservoirs of
mid-high permeability in upper formation of Miocene, middle-
heavy oil reservoirs of high permeability in middle formation
of Miocene, and low permeability middle-heavy oil reservoirs
in lower formation of Eocene. The main BASUP-53 reservoir
in district structure is located in the downthrown of PUEBLO
VIEJO Fault, In regional structure, the main part of BASUP-
53 reservoir is a dipping to south monocline located on the
down faulted block. In the north of the reservoir, there
developed a north-south strike reverse fault dipping to east
whose fault throw is about 100-500ft, and this fault dissected
the BASUP-53 reservoir into two parts—the upper and
downthrown fault blocks. The average API gravity is 14.3
degree and viscosity is about 40~763cp under the heavy oil
reservoir condition (see in Fig.1). The API gravity usually
ranges from 11 to 17, with the lowest API to 10 and the
highest API up to 23. Therefore, the well liquid property is
not good and the reservoir belongs to difficultly produce heavy
oil reservoir. Presently, pilot test is going on. The BASUP-53
reservoir data is shown in Tab.1
New Theory for Lifting Low API Heavy Oil
Usually, fluid configuration and flow regime of heavy oil
keeps unchanged along wellbore when heavy oil is produced
with artificial lift equipment except gas lift. Generally, bubble
and liquid fluid appears in the bottom of tubing. When gas
volume is about 3 to 4 times as liquid volume, the fluid regime
shall turns into slug flow. For the low GOR of heavy oil, the
whole lifting process keeps mixture fluid of bubble and liquid.
However, for gas lift, the single fluid regime does not exist.
Some scholars considered flow regimes of gas lift same as
nature flowing. However, this opinion could not accord with
the actual field production. Actually, the flow regime is
different from that of nature flowing and other artificial lift
methods.
For gas lift, gas enters into tubing through gas valve port and
mixes with reservoir fluid. When gas rate is high, gas will
break the primary continuous fluid into small oil drip or foamy
fluid to form annular fluid regime. In addition, if the gas flow
velocity is high enough, shear stress between bubbles and fluid
film will increase to make both bubbles and fluid film into oil
mist. In other words, it is entirely possible to form foamy-oil
flow in gas-lift. This fluid regime can greatly reduce the
density of mixed fluid. Thus, the mixture viscosity is
obviously reduced and flow condition in wellbore is greatly
improved. Actually, flow regime presents a transition state of
foamy flow during the gas-lift process. With increase of lift
height, the pressure will fall gradually; more gas will be
released again; flow velocity will gradually increase once
more, and mist flow will be formed the second time, fluid
regimes were showed in Fig.2 for gas lift.
According to the general theory, in lifting heavy oil with low
API, heavy oil and water is emulsified severely when water
cut ranges from 60% to 85%. It is assumed that emulsification
appears in wellbore during gas lift, so more power is needed to
lift well fluid to the wellhead, gas lift kick off increases
undoubtedly. Nevertheless, it has been proved by production
practice in the oilfield there is no emulsification phenomenon
occurred under the water cut. Why the phenomenon
commonly encountered in other lift method does not happen in
gas-lift? Even though oil and water had slight emulsified in
wells, under the scouring of high-speed flow of massive lift
gas, the primary phase was broken and the new phase was set
up. It can be said that both flow in the wellbore and the fluid
flow through multi porous media are transition. Moreover,
flow regime of each point along the wellbore is thus
independent or different. The explanation and calculation of
pressure drop gradient and friction of multi-phase flow in
wellbore based on general emulsification curve, in particular
for gas-lift, are all with relatively big errors.
Lifting crude oil with high water cut, emulsification would be
worse between crude oil and water for the artificial lift
methods except gas lift, no matter rod pumps (sucker rod
pump, progressive cavity pump) or rodless pumps (electric
submersible pump, hydraulic pump). The traditional
viewpoint is that gas lift could not meet to heavy or extra-
heavy oil lifting, in fact, sharp changing of flow regime forms
no more steady emulsification for gas lift.
Due to continuous gas injection, pressure increases in tubing
and amount of natural gas resolves into crude oil. Then a part
of crude oil turns up to foamy oil after resolving gas, the
mixture density goes down, and the discharging pressure
drops. Therefore, the flowability of mixture and lift condition
is improved, and extra-heavy oil is produced with gas lift
successfully.
Production Examples
There were 110 wells produced by continuous gas lift except
eight ESP wells in the oilfield; average daily liquid production
of these wells is about 4760.8m3/d; average daily oil
SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97370
production is 2456.35m3/d; water cut is 48.2%. Liquid
production rate ranges from 50 to 2000 barrels per day per
well. At present, the actual consumption was 104.7×104m3
per day. The gas consumption was about 0.952×104m3 per well
and GOR was 219m3/m3. The data of heavy oil/extra-heavy oil
well with low API and high water cut wells was shown in
Tab.2. The change of CHP with water cut was analyzed by
design software, and results were shown in Fig.3. The
calculated CHP value reached up to 11.3MPa and 12.1 MPa in
well BA2387and BA2321 respectively, whose water cuts are
approximately 80% to 90%. However, the field data indicated
that BA2387 produced 156m3/d liquid with water cut of 79%,
lift gas rate of 147.84m3/d and CHP of 6.8MPa. Well BA2321
production liquid reached 133m3/d with water cut of 89.5%,
lift gas injection rate of 227.72m3/d and CHP of 6.5MPa.
Comparing the two results between the calculation of software
and the actual wellhead lift pressure, the gap is between 5 to 6
MPa. Therefore, it can be concluded primarily that the
correlations of present business software were not good for
field production by gas lift in high water cut with low API.
Correlation
Many correlations are used to suit black oil with API gravity
more than 17 degree and cut off of water cut of 60%. The
correlations are not applicable for high water cut from 50% to
95% with low API from 11 to 16 degree in heavy crude oil.
Even viscosity correction is performed; the correlations could
not express the actual oil well condition. In fact, the actual
pressure loss calculation in wellbore does not have the
corresponding correlations after emulsification. Usually,
Orkiszewski method was adapted to make sure flow regime
prediction and pressure gradient calculation for gas lift.
However, this method could merely consider flow mass
change without gas injection and power supplement. New
energy balance equation will need to be present when the
multiphase flow regime of oil-gas-water is set up through
valve port under the external gas injection. New correlation of
prediction multiphase flow regime will be established.
Consequently, it is a new research task in multiphase area.
According to statistic results from some wells in high water
cut with low API degree, the paper points out that the design
CHP needs to multiply with a corrected coefficient at water cut
of 70% to 80%. Then it is validated that this corrected
coefficient value is from 0.5 to 0.6. After correction, CHP of
well BA2387 was assured from 5.65 to 6.78 MPa and well
BA2321 was between 6.05 to 7.26 MPa, which presents a low
error with the actual value.
To regress by oilwells data, the following regression
correlation is proved to approach the actual value, the applying
condition is adapted to oilwell CHP calculation with
approximately 11 API, and water cut from 50% to 95%.
P = 0.0018fw - 0.54215fw3 + 59.585fw2 - 2828.95fw + 49547
4
The above examples have proved that heavy oil with high
water cut and low API does not emulsify to lead CHP increase.
Even if emulsification occurs, the relatively high gas injection
amount would break the emulsion condition. In addition, with
3
water cut increasing, lift gas amount and CHP change slightly,
because density of mixture fluid goes up with water cut.
According to these, no emulsion breaker is required anymore
when gas lift is employed in high water cut with low API in
heavy oil reservoir. Gas lift method brings relative easiness to
deal with heavy oil and extra-heavy oil. So it is the best
choice to such oilfield.
Conclusions
1. The flow regime of gas lift is different from nature
flowing and other artificial lift methods. In the process of
lifting heavy crude oil, it changes flow regime in wellbore
and makes foamy oil condition appearing mostly. Then
the mixture density goes down, and gas lift becomes
easily produced for heavy oil. Therefore, gas lift is the
first choice for producing heavy and extra-heavy oil.
2. It is proved in Intercampo oilfield that gas lift can produce
heavy oil successfully in high water cut with low API
degree and no emulsification exhibits, which is better than
the other artificial lift methods.
3. Multiphase fluid correlations do not meet with the actual
field production by using in the pressure gradient and
friction loss calculations for gas lift. The authors present
correction coefficient and regression correlation to
approach the actual value of field, but they are very
preliminary that will need to be developed by means of
production engineers and researchers further.
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank CNPC America Ltd., Venezuela for
granting permission to publish this paper. Also, thank RIPED,
Petrochina Company Ltd. for support.
References
1. Kermit E.Brown, The Technology of Artificial Lift
Methods, Vol.2a, Pennwell Publishing Company, Tulsa,
1980
2. Kermit E.Brown, The Technology of Artificial Lift
Methods, Vol.4, Pennwell Publishing Company, Tulsa,
1984
3. Abdel Wally et al, “Study Optimizes Gas Lift in Gulf of
Suez Field,” Oil & Gas J., June 24 1996, pp.38-44
4. Shahaboddin Ayatallahi et al, Method Optimizes Aghajari
Oil Field Gas Lift,” Oil & Gas J., May 21 2001, Vol.99,
No.21
5. Juan Carlos Mantecon et al. “Dynamic Simulation
Estabishes Water-Cut Limits for Well Kickoff”, JPT, May
2005, pp64~65
6. Edinburgh Petroleum Services Ltd. “FloSystem User
Documentation”, Version 3.6, Sept. 1999
7. Baker Jardine Petroleum Engineering and Software,
“Pipesim 2000 User Guide for Windows”, 2002
4 SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97370

Tables
Tab.1 Basic data of BASUP-53 reservoir
Sedimentary Lake-river delta Original pressure (MPa) 13.3
2
Oil-bearing area (km ) 9.243 Saturation pressure (MPa) 12.16
Valid thickness (m) 32.92 Geothermal ( ) 76
4 3
OOIP (10 m ) 5829.25 Coefficient of pressure 0.95
Geothermal gradient
Porosity ( ) 30 3.42
( /100m)
Oil saturation ( ) 72 Datum depth (m) 1402
API 14.3 Put into production (year) 1955
3
Oil density (g/cm ) 0.971 Well spacing 300
Oil-viscosity @ underground(cp) 40~700 Well pattern Three-spot
Natural water drive and solution
Reservoir depth (ft) 4330 5103 Drive type
gas drive
2
Permeability (µm ) 783 Recovery percent (%) 2.99
Shale content (%) 2.38 Water cut (%) 48

Tab. 2 Production parameters of several typical well for lifting low API heavy oil

Daily Daily oil Middle depth of Reservoir Saturation Reservoir Gas

liquid rate rate Water-cut GOR reservoir pressure pressure temperature density
Well No. Reservoir API m3/d m3/d % m3/m3 m MPa MPa g/cm3

1420-
BA2421 BS53ZT 11.7 100 82 18 16.8 1429 12 12.1 76 0.7

1448-
BA2387 BS53ZT 11.8 156 33 78.6 133 1468 12 12.1 76 0.7

1426-
BA2359 BS53ZT 15.7 111 110 0.9 7.7 1478 12 12.1 76 0.7

1491-
BA2321 IS09ZT 16.6 133 14 89.5 181.5 1768 13 12.1 76 0.7
SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97370 5

Figures