Page 128 - Hybrid Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Smart Waterflooding

120 Hybrid Enhanced Oil Recovery using Smart Waterflooding

(A)
Oil Recovery Pressure Drop
80 500
75
450
70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
65 400
Cumulative Oil Recovery (%OOIP) 50 300 Pressure Drop across core (psi)
60
350
55
45
250
40
35
200
30
25
20
100
15 150
10
50
5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
Cumulative Volume Injected (PV)
(B)
Oil Recovery Pressure Drop
70 250
65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
60 200
Cumulative Oil Recovery (%OOIP) 45 150 Pressure Drop across core (psi)
55
50

40
35
30
100
25
20
15
10 50
5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Cumulative Volume Injected (PV)
FIG. 5.4 The oil recovery and pressure drop across the unaged core for the experiments of CO 2 WAG
process using (A) seawater and (B) low-salinity water. (Credit: From Ramanathan, R., Shehata, A. M., &
Nasr-El-Din, H. A. (2015). Water alternating CO 2 injection process e does modifying the salinity of injected
brine improve oil recovery? Paper presented at the OTC Brasil, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 27e29 October. https://
doi.org/10.4043/26253-MS.)

system of the brine/oil/CO 2 by changing the brine type. of IFT depending on the salinity are obtained. The addi-
Because of the interaction of CO 2 in both brine and oil, tional dynamic contact angle measurement of CO 2
a slight increase in IFT is observed at initial period. WAG using aged Berea sandstone rock is supplemented.
When there is no effective mass transfer across the In the system using aged rock, the low-salinity water
phases, the stabilized IFT and the consistent tendency shows the lowest contact angle compared with the