Doe/netl-2012/1540 Mobility And Conformance Control For Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery (Co2-Eor) Via Thickeners, Foams, And Gels - U.s. Department Of Energy Page 13

ADVERTISEMENT

difficulty associated with forming weak foams of specified mobility in low perm, oil-bearing
zones compared to generating strong foams in high perm, water-out zones; and demanding
logistics of SAG mobility control treatments, especially for cycles of very short duration.
Given the multitude of lab-scale efforts conducted to understand and design CO
mobility
2
control foams and the very small number of mobility control pilot-tests, CO
mobility control
2
foams may remain a promising area for future field testing. Gels are designed for dramatic
increases in viscosity, and are therefore incapable of being used for mobility control purposes,
leaving SAG CO
mobility foams as a viable alternative to WAG. These mobility control foams
2
could even be used in conjunction with gel-based conformance control techniques.
The
performance of such processes could be contrasted with the current state-of-the-art of or gel-
based and mechanical techniques for conformance control combined with WAG for mobility
control.
There has been a limited and very recent rekindling of interest in CO
foams associated with an
2
old idea: CO
-soluble surfactants. The objective is to dissolve the surfactant in the injected CO
2
2
rather than in alternating slugs of brine. Given the large amounts of brine in the pore space, the
foams could still be generated in situ; thus it should be possible to reduce or possibly eliminate
the need for alternating injections of brine. Further, unlike SAG, this process would ensure that
the surfactant would be present where the CO
flows in the formation. Finally, this technique
2
could also be employed by companies that only conduct continuous CO
injections rather than
2
WAG.
Extensive surfactant studies conducted at the University of Texas at Austin have resulted in
promising single-well injectivity pilot test results using a Dow Oil & Gas surfactant at SACROC
in 2010, and have led to the expansion to a four-well oil recovery pilot at the same field. Results
from the first phase showed a consistent increase in the cumulative CO
volume injected versus
2
time at constant injection pressure indicating that (for the duration of this test) the foam
propagated through the matrix for 500 hours following the introduction of surfactant. Further,
injection profiles indicated that about 30% of the injected CO
was diverted to a lower portion of
2
the formation while only 1% of the CO
flowed into the lower zone prior to the addition of the
2
surfactant. Favorable lab-scale results from an Office of Fossil Energy– University of Pittsburgh
project are leading to the identification of inexpensive, CO
-soluble, nonionic surfactants from
2
other chemical suppliers.
New nano-science technologies may also provide an alternative for the generation of stable CO
2
foam. Studies show that small solid particles such as fumed silica can adsorb at fluid/fluid
interfaces to stabilize drops in emulsions and bubbles in foams. The nanoparticles readily
disperse in water and this dispersion is capable of flowing through unconsolidated porous media.
Using nanoparticles instead of surfactant to stabilize CO
foam may overcome the long-term
2
instability and surfactant adsorption loss issues that affect surfactant-based CO
foams. Recent
2
laboratory-scale tests show promise, but no nanoparticle-stabilized core, lab-scale oil recovery,
pilot, or field tests have yet been reported because this technology is still in its infancy.
ix

ADVERTISEMENT

00 votes

Related Articles

Related forms

Related Categories

Parent category: Legal
Go
Page of 267