Page 55 - Enhanced Oil Recovery in Shale and Tight Reservoirs
P. 55

Huff-n-puff gas injection in oil reservoirs                   43


              the Sigmund (1976) correlation. Fig. 2.35 shows that the oil recovery with
              diffusion is about 10% higher than that without diffusion in the first five
              cycles. The difference becomes lower with later cycles.
                 Li et al. (2018) used a simulation model which matched an experiment of
              huff-n-puff methane injection. The oil viscosity at different distances from
              the “fracture” are shown in Fig. 2.36A with diffusion and Fig. 2.36B
              without diffusion. The fracture was the open space between the core plug
              of 1.5 inches in diameter and the container wall in the experiment. The
              place with 0.75 inches to the fracture was at the edge of the core, 0.45 inches
              to the fracture was the middle of the core, and the 0.075 inches to the frac-
              ture was the center the core. In the figure, “H” represents the huff time (1 h)
              and soaking time (4 h), and “P” represents the puff time (4 h). The figure
              shows that with diffusion in (A), the oil viscosity in the center of the core
              increased during the huff and the soaking time, and the oil viscosity in the
              middle and the edge of the core decreased, as the methane diffused from
              the edge to the center. Without diffusion in (B), the oil viscosity did not
              change during the huff and the soaking time.


                   2.11 Effect of water saturation
                   In real reservoirs, some initial water and aqueous fracturing fluid exist.
              Li et al. (2018) studied the effect of this water on huff-n-puff CO 2 perfor-
              mance. Since the water and oil saturation in the core initially and at the end
              of a cycle were not known, oil recovery factor could not be calculated.
              Instead, a liquid recovery factor was calculated using the following equation:

                                                             W rþwþo   W i
                 Liquid recovery factor at the end of cycle i ¼
                                                            W rþwþo   W dry
                                                                         (2.21)
                 In the above equation, W rþwþo is the weight of the rock saturated with
              water and oil initially, W i is the weight of the rock with water and oil at the
              end of cycle i, and W dry is the weight of dry rock. Three tests were conduct-
              ed: one test with the core fully saturated with Wolfcamp dead oil, the other
              two tests with cores saturated with oil and water of 15% KCl for repeatability
              tests. During the tests, the soaking pressure of 2000 psi was released to the
              atmosphere. About 6 h of soaking time and 6 h of huff time were used.
              The experimental data are shown in Fig. 2.37. It showed that even the
              produced oil and water were added together, the liquid oil recovery is lower
              than the oil recovery, indicating the multiphase fluid system was not as
   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60