Reservoir Management

Under Water Injection

A Worldwide Perspective
Dr. William M. Cobb
Dallas, Texas
2nd National Meeting on Secondary and
Assisted Oil Recovery
September 89, 2005
Malargue, Argentina

Current Oil Production in

South America (1000 B/D)

Argentina 718
Brazil 1538
Colombia 514
Ecuador
533
Mexico
3252
Venezuela2640
Total 9150

Argentina
Monthly Oil Rate vs Time
1,000 BO

Argentina
Year 2004 Production
BOPD

% of Total

Primary
Production

442,000

63.2

Secondary
Production

257,000

36.8

Total

699,000

100.0

Argentina
Monthly Oil Rate vs Time
1,000 BO
Secondary Production

Primary Production

Argentina
Percent Primary & Secondary Production
Primary

Secondary

Argentina
Principle Productive Areas
Noroeste
Cuyana
.

Neuquina
Gulfo San Jorge
Austral

Argentina
Principle Production Areas
% of
Total BOPD Country Total
Austral

47,000

6.7

Cuyana

41,000

5.9

Gulfo San Jorge

284,000

40.6

Neuquina

310,000

44.4

Noroeste

17,000

2.4

699,000

100.0

Argentina
Year 2004 Production
BOPD Primary, % Secondary, %
Austral

47,000

86.6

13.4

Cuyana

41,000

61.7

38.3

Gulfo San Jorge

284,000

60.6

39.4

Neuquina

310,000

60.5

39.5

Noroeste

17,000

100.0

0.0

Total

699,000

Argentina
% of Total Secondary
Nequina

Gulfo San Jorge

Cuyana
Austral

Argentina Oil and Injection Well

Count vs Time

Argentina Injection Well Count and

Average Daily Injection per Well

Argentina
Well Distribution on 1/1/05
Producing

% of
Total

Injectors

Austral

289

1.7

40

0.8

7.2

Cuyana

938

5.5

246

4.8

3.8

11,005

64.2

2,740

53.6

4.0

Neuquina

4,852

28.3

2,086

40.8

2.3

Noroeste

57

0.3

0.0

17,141

100.0

5,112 100.0

3.4

Gulfo San Jorge

Total

% of
P/I
Total Ratio

Daily NYMEX Oil Price

Oil Price

Gas Price

Common Denominators for

Management of Waterfloods on
a Worldwide Basis

Why Inject Water?

A. Maintain Reservoir Pressure
Pressure Maintenance
B. Increase Reservoir Pressure
Waterflooding
C. Supplement Natural Water Influx

But . . .
A, B & C are Displacement Processes and the
Goal is to Displace Oil to a Production Well

Worldwide Reminders When Managing

Waterflood Activities
Pressure Depletion Stops
Volumetric Sweep
Net Pay Cutoffs
Decline Curve Analysis
WOR Analysis
Waterflood Quarterback
Keep the Ax Sharp

What are the Key Factors that Drive the

Outcome of a Water Injection Project?

Np N*EA*EV*ED
Np = Cumulative Waterflood Recovery, BBL.
N = Oil in Place at Start of Injection, BBL.
EA = Areal Sweep Efficiency, Fraction
EV = Vertical Sweep Efficiency, Fraction
ED = Displacement Efficiency, Fraction

Waterflood Recovery Factor

Np
N

RF

RF E A * EV * E D

EVOL

EA

= f (Mobility Ratio, Pattern, Directional

Permeability, Pressure Distribution,
Cumulative Injection & Operations)

EV

= f (Rock Property variation between

different flow units)

EVOL = Volumetric Sweep of the Reservoir by

Injected Water
ED = f (Primary Depletion, Krw & Kro, o & w)

Traditional Waterflood Volumetric

Sweep Efficiency Calculation

Uses Net Cumulative Water Injected (Wi-Wp)

Does not Account for Injection losses out of
zone
Does not Account for Natural Water Influx

Compute Volumetric Sweep Based

on Oil Production Data
Oil in place at start of waterflooding = Produced oil since the start of injection
+ Oil currently in reservoir
Where:
V p So
, STBO
Oil in place at start of waterflood =
Bo
Produced oil since the start of injection =

N p ,STBO

Oil currently in reservoir = Oil in water bank + oil in oil bank

Oil in water bank =

Oil in oil bank =

V p Evw (1.0 S w )
Bo

,STBO

V p (1.0 Evw )(1.0 S wc )

Bo

,STBO

Volumetric Sweep Based on Oil

Production Data

N p Bo
Evw
SPE-38902

Vp

1.0 So S wc
S w S wc

Example
Waterflood Statistics
Conditions at Start of Waterflood
Connate Water Saturation

= 22 percent

Gas Saturation

= 8 percent

Oil Saturation

= 70 percent

Residual Oil Saturation

= 31 percent

Oil Viscosity

= 0.3
centipoise

Oil Formation Volume Factor

= 1.57
RB/STB

Example (cont.)
Total Unit
Pore Volume

= 350,000
MB

Cumulative Oil Production Since Start of

Injection

= 40,000
MSTB

Current Volumetric Sweep Efficiency

= 0.552

Remaining Oil Production under Current

Operations

= 5,000 MB

Estimated Waterflood Ultimate Recovery

= 45,000
MSTB

Ultimate Volumetric Sweep Efficiency

under Current Operations

= 0.600

Volumetric Sweep Efficiency for Waterflood Project

(Pore Volume Based on 6.0% Porosity Cutoff)

Evw 0.85

26.0 MMSTB

Evw
Cumulative Oil Production
Remaining Oil Production
Estimated Ultimate Recovery =

= 40.0 MMSTB
=
5.0 MMSTB
45.0 MMSTB

Volumetric Sweep Efficiency for Waterflood Project

(Pore Volume Based on 6.0% and 10.0% Porosity Cutoff)

26.0 MMSTB

Evw 0.85

Evw

8.4
MMSTB

10% Porosity Cutof

6% Porosity Cutof

Cumulative Oil Production

Remaining Oil Production
Estimated Ultimate Recovery =

= 40.0 MMSTB
=
5.0 MMSTB
45.0 MMSTB

Whats the Secret for

Maximizing EA and EV (and EVOL)?
ITS THE INJECTION WELL!

Properly Locate the Injection Well

Develop an Appropriate Pattern!
Inject Water where You Find the Oil!
Measure and Manage Injection Profiles
Keep Fluid Levels in a Pumped Off Condition
Balance Injection and Withdrawals
Remember the Quarterback!

SHIFTING
GEARS

Net Pay
Static OOIP
Dynamic OOIP
Drive Mechanism
Controlled by Cutoffs
Permeability Distribution between Flow Units
(Dykstra-Parson Coefficient)
Oil/Water Relative Permeability
Mobility Ratio (Oil and Water Viscosity)
Fluid Saturations at Start of Injection (So, Sg, Swc)
Water Cut Economic Limit

Permeability Cutoff Using the

Watercut Method at a 95 Percent
Watercut Economic Limit
80 Acre Pattern

k50 20md
Dykstra-Parsons, V

SPE-48952

Sg = 0%

Sg = 10%

0.6

0.24

1.10

0.7

0.71

3.30

0.8

1.20

5.60

CHANGING
HORSES

Decline Curve Analysis

Assume
Gas Fillup has been Achieved (Reservoir contains oil
and water
Reservoir Pressure is Approximately Constant (B o is
constant)
Steady State Flow Prevails (Approximately)

Conclusion
Water Injection = Liquid Production (at Reservoir
Conditions)

Decline Curve Analysis

Fact:

qo

qw

iw * Einj * f o
Bo

iw * Einj * (1 f w )
Bo

iw * Einj * f w
Bw

Conculsion:
Oil and Water Production Rates are directly related to
injection rates. Therefore, DCA of qo vs t or qo vs Np must
be evaluated only after giving consideration to
historical and projected water injection rates.

WOR is Independent of Injection Rate

qw
WOR
q0
WOR

iw * Einj * f w
iw * Einj * (1 f w )

fw
WOR
(1 f w )
(WOR ) STD .COND .

fw
Bo

*
(1 f w ) Bw

Conclusion:

WOR is independent of injection rate

WOR should be applied to individual wells and not
field
WOR should be applied using values greater than 2.0

Keep Life Simple

Production Centered 5-Spot Pattern

N-Well

80 Acres

W-Well

E-Well
C-Well

S-Well

North American Waterflood Pattern 35-10

North American Waterflood Pattern 35-10

S-i
E-i

N-i
W-i

MONUMENT
BUTTE
UNIT-MB
FED 10-35
- WOR vs
Cumulative Oil
North
American
Waterflood
Pattern
35-10

WOR

10.0

1.0

0.1

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

Cumulative Oil, MBO

350.0

400.0

450.0

500.0

A Friendly Reminder
Waterflood Operations
Cartesian Plots of Oil Rate versus Cumulative
Oil Production Should Be Prepared on A Well
Basis
Semi-log Plots of WOR versus Cumulative Oil
Production Should Be Prepared on A Well basis
Preparation of the Above Two Plots For The
Entire Field Gives an Average Result Which May
be Optimistic or Pessimistic

Have there been Recent Developments

in Waterflooding Technology??

NO !
& YES ! ? ? ? ?
BUT . . .

Improved application of old principles

leads to better recovery

What Are the Key Elements

of a Successful Waterflood?
High Moveable Oil Saturation
Moderate to Low Oil Viscosity
Favorable Relative Permeability
Low Permeability Variation
Symmetrical Patterns
Ability to Inject Large Volumes of Water
Ability to Lift Large Volumes of Produced Water
Pumped Off Producing Wells

What are the Pitfalls of

Waterflooding Practices?
Failure to keep producing wells in pumped off
condition

Failure to clearly distinguish between Static OOIP

and Dynamic OOIP (Primary vs Secondary)

Failure to collect sufficient quantity and quality of

reservoir data

Failure to timely convert oil wells to injection wells

Failure to monitor injection water quality
Failure to keep the Ax sharp

Summary of
New Waterflood Paradigms

Remember the Quarterback

(The Injector)

Keep the End in Mind

(Maximize Volumetric Sweep)

Keep the Ax Sharp

(SPE meetings, SPE-TIGS, and SPE.org

provide great opportunities to sharpen the mind!)

Pretty Please with Sugar!

Keep Life Simple

One Well Field - Latin America

Field Analysis Latin America

140

1.4

130
120

1.2

100

90
80

0.8

GOR

Oil (BOPD); Water (BWPD); Gas (MCFPD); WC%

110

70
60

0.6

50
40

0.4

30
20

0.2

10
0

BOPD

BWPD

MCFPD

WCUT

GOR

One Well Field - Latin America

Field Analysis Latin America

100

Oil Production, BOPD

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

BOPD

One
Well
Field - Latin
America
Field
Analysis
Latin
America
100

Water Production, BPD

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

BWPD

One
Well
Field - Latin
America
Field
Analysis
Latin
America
100

Water Production, BPD

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

BOPD

BWPD

BWPD

One
Field -Latin
FieldWell
Analysis
LatinAmerica
America
2

GOR, MSCF/BO

1.5

0.5

GOR

One
Well
Field - Latin
America
Field
Analysis
Latin
America
2

90

1.8

80

1.6

70

1.4

60

1.2

50

40

0.8

30

0.6

20

0.4

10

0.2

BOPD

GOR

GOR, MSCF/BO

Oil Production, BOPD

100

One
Well
Field - Latin
America
Field
Analysis
Latin
America

Oil Production, BOPD

100

10

BOPD

One
Well
Field - Latin
America
Field
Analysis
Latin
America
100

Oil Production, BOPD

90
80
70
60
50
40

EUR @ 10 BOPD = 625MBO

30
20
10
0

Cum Oil - MBO

Reservoir Management
Under Water Injection
A Worldwide Perspective
Dr. William M. Cobb
Dallas, Texas
2nd National Meeting on Secondary and
Assisted Oil Recovery
September 89, 2005
Malargue, Argentina