Page 53 - Hybrid Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Smart Waterflooding
P. 53

CHAPTER 3 Modeling of Low-Salinity and Smart Waterflood  45

          modeling of aqueous solubility of CO 2 . The solubility
                                                                   	              1
          of CO 2 in water is not calculated by thermodynamic  F IF ¼ F IF b Ca ; b Mg ¼  	     (3.46)
          modeling, and some CO 2 is assumed to be dissolved                1 þ am b Ca ; b Mg

          in water. With this assumption, the dissolved CO 2 in  m b Ca ; b Mg ¼ max½b Ca ðt ¼ 0Þ  b Ca ðt > 0Þ; 0Š

          water participates in the aqueous and mineral reactions.  þ max b Mg ðt ¼ 0Þ  b Mg ðt > 0Þ; 0    (3.47)

          In terms of wettability modification modeling, the
          study adopted an approach following the MIE mecha-  where b Ca and b Mg indicate the desorbed Ca 2þ  and
                                                          2þ
          nism, which is assumed to modify relative permeability  Mg , a is the constant, t is the time, and m(b Ca , b Mg )
                                                                                          2þ
          through the ion-exchange reaction. The injection of  is the amount of the desorbed Ca 2þ  and Mg .
          low-salinity water results in the detachment of the  For validating the LSWF model, the study numeri-
          divalent cations (Ca 2þ  and Mg ) because of the ion  cally simulated the experimental coreflooding of LSWF
                                  2þ
          exchange. The amount of the detachment linearly inter-  by Fjelde, Asen, and Omekeh (2012). Both experiment
          polates the relative permeability between threshold  and numerical simulation successively injected forma-
          high and low salinity conditions as shown in  tion water, seawater, and low-salinity water. They
          Eqs. (3.41) and (3.42). The interpolation factor is given  compared the effluent concentrations of the divalent
                                                                         2þ
          by Eq. (3.46) and a function of concentration of the  cations (Ca 2þ  and Mg )(Fig. 3.2). In the experiment,
          adhered divalent cation as shown in Eq. (3.47).  the retention in the effluent concentration of Ca 2þ  is
                          (A)       0.20
                                    0.18
                                    0.16
                                    0.14                          Ca_Exp
                                   Ca [moles/l]  0.12             Ca_Injected
                                    0.10
                                    0.08
                                    0.06                          Ca_dissolution +
                                                                  IE_sim
                                    0.04
                                                                  Ca_IE_sim
                                    0.02
                                                                  Ca_tracer_sim
                                    0.00
                                       0      10    20     30
                                              PV injected
                           (B)
                             0.06
                             0.05

                             0.04                                     Mg_Exp
                            Mg[moles/l]  0.03                         Mg_Injected


                                                                      Mg_dissolution +
                             0.02
                                                                      IE_sim
                             0.01
                                                                      Mg_IE_sim
                             0.00                                     Mg_tracer_sim
                                 0         10        20        30
                                            PV injected
                FIG. 3.2 The comparison of the effluent concentrations of (A) Ca 2þ  and (B) Mg 2þ  between simulations and
                experiments. (From Fjelde, I., Asen, S. M., & Omekeh, A. V. (2012). Low salinity water flooding experiments and
                interpretation by simulations. In: Paper presented at the SPE improved oil recovery symposium, Tulsa,
                Oklahoma, USA, 14e18 April. https://doi.org/10.2118/154142-MS.)
   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58