Amphoteric Polymer Improves
Hydrocarbon/Water Ratios in Producing
WellsĊAn Indonesian Case Study
F.O. Stanley, SPE, BJ Services; P.S. Tanggu, California Energy; and Hardianto
and Ewen Marnoch, SPE, BJ Services
Summary
Exorbitant water production is constantly burdening the oil indus-
try, especially as lifting and facility costs rise and disposal of pro-
duced water becomes increasingly expensive and environmentally
sensitive. An amphoteric polymer material (APM), previously de-
scribed in Ref. 2, has been successfully applied in Indonesia. This
product reduces water cut and very often increases hydrocarbon
production by effectively reducing the permeability to water with-
out significantly changing the formation permeability to hydrocar-
bons. This paper reviews the mechanism, application, and
associated laboratory results by which the APM polymer reduces
water cut, with a primary emphasis on Indonesian case histories.
The product can successfully and economically reduce water pro-
duction, often with the added benefit of increased hydrocarbon pro-
duction. Results also indicate that high-permeability sandstone res-
ervoirs with water-production problems can benefit from APM
treatments. Laboratory and field results show good product applica-
tion under high-shear situations and at temperatures up to
275°F.1,2,4 Careful candidate selection and good placement tech-
niques, in conjunction with production logging to determine water
location, are important to the success of APM jobs.
Introduction
The profitability of oil companies is suffering in high water-cut
areas and a focus on methods for water control is paramount in the
engineers’ plans to increase profits. Wells treated during a late 1995
and early 1996 Indonesian study showed a water-cut reduction, an
increased oil cut, and a reduced total volume of produced fluid in the
field, enabling more wells to be placed on-line and not exceed wa-
ter-management capabilities of the production facilities.
High water cuts are often caused by common oilfield phenomena
such as water fingering, coning, or early breakthrough during flood-
ing projects. Water production occurs in many oil and gas wells pri-
marily because of the higher mobility of water relative to hydrocar-
bons. This water production can take place on the initial completion
or later in the life of the well. Small amounts of water may not create
problems; however, when the production of water becomes exces-
sive, it is often necessary to consider water reduction. Operators are
often required to shut in high-water-cut, low-oil-producing wells so
that they can meet facility capabilities even though the reservoir is
known to contain economic quantities of hydrocarbons. Large
quantities of water add to the overall dollar-per-barrel costs of pro-
ducing a well. More water can mean additional lifting, separating,
and treatment costs as well as the environmental concerns that are
associated with water disposal.
Hydrocarbon production can also be reduced by high water pro-
duction. The increased wellbore hydrostatic head often reduces the
available energy to drawdown the reservoir. Higher-density water
in the tubing string can lead to early shut-in or the installation of un-
planned artificial-lift equipment.
The relative amounts of gas, oil, and water present at any particu-
lar level in the reservoir determine the most likely fluid(s) that will
*Formerly with PT Caltex Pacific Indonesia.
Copyright 1997 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 16 September 1996. Paper peer approved 22
May 1997. Paper (SPE 37016) first presented at the 1996 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Con-
ference held in Adelaide, Australia, 28–31 October.
SPE Production & Facilities, August 1997
be produced by a well completed at that level, and also influence the
relative rates of production. In most water-wet-sandstone forma-
tions, the water saturation varies from 100% below the oil zone to
progressively lower percentages at points higher in the oil zone. The
zone from a point of 100% water saturation to some point above
which water saturation is fairly constant is called the transition inter-
val. Relative permeability relations permit both water and oil to be
produced from this transition zone.
Water Production Overview
Extreme water production problems can come from many sources.
These include, but are not limited to, channels behind casing, casing
leaks, coning, encroachment, water breakthrough, and natural and
induced fractures. An important step in solving excessive water pro-
duction is to determine the source. A water-control method can then
be designed to control the unwanted water.
Cement squeezing for control of water production, because of
channels and casing leaks, can be very effective. However, if the wa-
ter is being produced from a formation close to the perforated inter-
val, the cement will have limited success because poor penetration
into the pore openings provides only a thin barrier to water produc-
tion. Other systems available are low or solids-free grouts including
plastics, sodium silicates, and polymer solutions.
Low-viscosity treatments often penetrate into the reservoir. If
placed effectively, they can provide some control of water production
by blocking pore throats and flow channels through which water nat-
urally produces. Application of these treatments can be difficult, es-
pecially in zones where the offending water production cannot be iso-
lated or identified. The treatments often follow the path of least
resistance and may not effectively seal off the water production. In-
correct placement could cause damage to the oil section of the zone,
resulting in serious and often permanent production losses. If the flow
of water is from a large channel or fracture, then these systems may
not have sufficient strength or viscosity to stay in place and are either
bypassed or produced out in a short period of time.
An APM was developed to selectively combat the problem of ex-
cessive water production.1,2,4 APM is a terpolymer characterized by
the presence of both positively and negatively charged components
along the polymer chain. The nature of this polymeric material is to
provide a strong bond to the formation. The hydrophilic character
of one branch of the polymer forms a hydrogen bond to water. The
net effect is a drag or high friction pressure on water flowing through
the formation pore spaces. Laboratory tests with APM on lower-
permeability (50 to 250 md) Berea sandstone (Figs. 1 through 4)
and on the higher permeability (7.7 d) Gretta formation (Fig. 5)
show that significant reduction in permeability to water is accom-
plished with little effect on the permeability to oil. Water production
is reduced by lowering the mobility of water without restricting pro-
duction of oil or gas to any appreciable extent.
General Formation Discussion
Permeability is a measure of the ease with which fluid or gas can
move through the interconnected pore spaces of the formation.
When the pore spaces contain only one fluid, the permeability of
that rock to that fluid is described as the absolute permeability. Be-
cause two, and often three, fluids (gas, oil, and water) can exist in
the same pore spaces in a petroleum reservoir, relative permeability
relationships must be considered. Relative permeability represents
the ease with which one fluid flows through connecting pore spaces
181
Fig. 1—The effect of APM on the absolute water permeability af-
ter treatment. The permeability of the core to water is reduced
approximately 90%.
Fig. 3—The performance of APM is not sensitive to shearing ac-
tion that may result from mixing and pumping.
in the presence of other fluids, compared to the ease which one fluid
flows when it is alone.
Most reservoir rocks were formed or laid down in water with hy-
drocarbons replacing a portion of the water at a later date. For this rea-
son, most reservoir rocks are considered to be water wet. The grains
of the rock matrix are coated with a film of water permitting hydrocar-
bons to fill the center of the pore spaces. Productivity of hydrocarbons
is maximized in sandstone formations that are water wet.3
Water saturation in a reservoir can vary from 100% (when pores are
completely filled with water), to connate water saturation where only
a thin film of water coats the actual formation rock. Connate water is
also called irreducible water. This water is not mobile and will not be
produced from the pore spaces. Between these two extremes is the
transition zone of a formation. Here, relative permeability relations
permit and influence the production of both water and oil.
Water coning, encroachment, and breakthrough are all factors
that can affect the near-wellbore water saturation and can play a
large part in influencing the ratio of water to hydrocarbon produc-
tion. Production of hydrocarbons and water from a formation is de-
termined by the effective permeability of the formation to that fluid,
and the effective permeability is a function of water saturation.1,2,4
During the production life of a well, relative permeabilities in the
near-wellbore area can be changed by many factors; however, the
overall absolute permeability of the formation should remain stable.
Refs. 2 and 4 review the unique ratio of effective permeability to
oil vs. effective permeability to water that exists for each water satu-
ration. These papers go into great detail on the calculations in-
volved, using this and other formation information to give an indica-
tion of whether a zone is damaged, producing naturally, or if fluids
are entering from another source.
Relative permeability and associated calculations can be hard to
perform because the required reservoir and well data are often hard
to obtain. In those situations, a determination on the use of APM is
often made using knowledge of area water-production characteris-
tics. Production logging can also be useful in determining the source
of water and helping to selectively treat just the water-producing
portion of the zone.
182
Fig. 2—The strong bonding and long-lasting properties of APM
for water control are illustrated. The APM was still effective after
5,000 pore volumes of a high-salinity brine had been flowed
through the core.
Fig. 4—Relative oil and water permeability determinations made
at irreducible fluid saturations. The data show that oil permeabil-
ity was relatively unchanged, but a significant decrease in rela-
tive permeability to water does occur.
Fig. 5—Relative oil and water permeability determinations made
at irreducible fluid saturations on a highly permeable sand pack.
The data show that oil permeability is relatively unchanged, but
a significant decrease in relative permeability to water does occur.
If a large change in absolute permeability is observed, then an ex-
amination of well information may provide some clues as to the
cause. A reduction in permeability may reflect fines migration, scale
build-up, organic deposition, wettability changes, or a variety of
other formation-damage mechanisms. Suitable damage-removal
systems (acids, solvents, etc.) may be sufficient to restore natural
permeability and improve hydrocarbon production. A significant
increase in absolute permeability, especially in wells that have not
been fracture stimulated, often indicates an external source of water
production from a channel behind pipe, a casing leak, or an induced
fracture. If it is determined that the production of water is through
the formation matrix, APM can be recommended to reduce the rela-
tive permeability of the formation to water and subsequently reduce
water production.
Treatment Overview
The APM treatment is carried in a brine solution (2% KCl or NH4Cl)
containing mutual solvent and a surface active agent. The mutual
solvent is required to provide strong water-wetting properties to the
treating fluid. This allows the APM to strongly absorb to the rock.
The surface active agent aids in the penetration of APM (2 cp viscos-
SPE Production & Facilities, August 1997

Fig. 6—Pore volume required to fill radially around a 7-in. well-
bore.
ity with surface tension of 18 to 20 dyne/cm) into the small forma-
tion capillaries and improves fluid cleanup after the treatment. Dis-
placement is usually with a KCl or produced-water fluid.
Wettability problems encountered in oil or gas wells may also con-
tribute to high water production. In sandstone reservoirs, before pro-
duction, the water preferentially adheres to the rock. In this situation,
oil will be the most likely fluid to flow. However, in many oil wells
heavy-ended organics such as paraffin and asphaltenes may deposit
on the formation surface and create an oil-wet situation. This condi-
tion will allow water to be the preferred fluid for flow. In many oilwell
cases, a solvent treatment combined with a water-wetting chemi-
cal(s), designed to help with the organic-deposition removal, can less-
en this problem and is often used in front of the APM treatment.3 For
gas wells, 2% KCl plus a water-wetting surfactant (surface active
agent) is recommended as a preflush before an APM treatment.
The actual volume of APM needed to reduce relative permeabil-
ity to water in a particular formation is largely a function of the
formation’s ion-exchange capacity. For practical design purposes,
the normal treatments are designed for radial penetration of 5 to 8
ft, which covers an average range of 60 to 400 gal/ft of section
treated. Fig. 6 (or similar industry-published graphs) can be used to
calculate treatment volumes on the basis of wellbore size and forma-
tion porosity. APM concentrations generally range from 1 to 10%
ally, as the permeability increases, the available surface area for
treatment decreases and the APM concentration (and volume)
should be increased.
Conventional pumping and mechanical equipment are used for
mixing, pumping, and placement. Pump rates are generally below
2 bbl/min and should always remain below the fracture gradient. A
shut-in period of 2 to 4 hours is required to allow the polymer time
to give the optimum relative permeability changes. See the simpli-
fied procedure below.
1. Perform production logging, reservoir modeling, and/or detailed
production plotting to determine the location of the unwanted water
and whether the well is a good candidate for water-control treatments.
2. If possible, attempt to isolate the zone of interest to be treated
by using a packer(s) or other method. This is especially important
on long intervals.
3. Hold safety meeting, rig up pump truck, and test lines. Pickle
pipe if necessary.
4. Perform injectivity test with filtered KCl and record pressures.
Do not exceed formation fracture pressure.
5. Mix preflush and APM product in clean tanks.
6. Pump the following treatment below fracture pressure:
SXylene, toluene, or diesel at +/- 25 to 50 gal/ft plus water wetting
surfactant/nonemulsifier.
SAPM product to give 5 to 8 ft of radial penetration.
SFiltered KCl displacement fluid.
7. Displace to within 1 bbl of perforations.
8. Shut well in for at least 2 to 4 hours (longer is O.K.).
9. Slowly bring well on production.
Indonesian Case Histories
High water cuts are a major problem for many wells in the Riau area
of central Sumatra, Indonesia. The majority of the area is a large an-
ticline with a natural (strong) water drive. Coning and fingering
(channeling) of water from high-permeability streaks are thought to
be the primary contributors to water-production problems. This is
confirmed from various sources—production logging, detailed res-
ervoir modeling, and water/oil ratio (WOR) and WOR-derivative
plot-performance curves. WOR plots are described further in vari-

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
by volume and are surface-area and permeability dependent. Gener- ous SPE papers. For this project, the WOR plots indicated that there

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
TABLE 1—CASE HISTORY INFORMATION—RIAU PROVINCE, INDONESIA
Stimulation Job Description and Well Information

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Well Well Well Well Well All

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ 1 2 3 4 5 Wells

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Treatment Fluid Treatment Fluids of Perforations, gal/ft

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Diesel 25 25 25 71 50

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
APM (% APM concentration) 195 135 163 571 375
(8%) (8%) (8%) (8%) (10%)

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Well Data

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Bottomhole static temperature, °F 136 136 225 122 240

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Bottomhole pressure, psi 620 615 1,500 650 470
Depth, ft 1,318 1,311 3,940 980 2,294

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Gross perforations, ft 24 28 20 17 10

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Treated perforations, ft 18 28 20 7 10

ÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Permeability, md 478 421 998 681 3,487
Porosity, % 33 23 25 25 22

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Gravity of oil, °API 22.1 23.8 35 23.8 36

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Casing diameter, in. 7 7 9.625 7 7
Tubing diameter, in. 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ Production Information

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Initial bbl/D of fluid, pretreatment 3,216 1,192 1,464 615 12,593 19,080

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Current bbl/D of fluid, posttreatment 1,136 654 792 996 7,266 10,844

ÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Initial BOPD, pretreatment 64 83 73 74 342 636
Current BOPD, posttreatment 182 111 277 50 385 1,005

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Initial % water cut, pretreatment 98 93 95 88 97.4 96.7
Current % water cut, posttreatment 84 83 65 95 94.7 90.1

SPE Production & Facilities, August 1997 183

 Fig. 7—Production performance on Well 1—Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia.
was a deviation in what was previously a normal water cut. This, in
combination with reservoir and logging info, helped to determine
that fingering or channeling was the most likely water source.
Facilities and pipelines that handle and transport total fluid
throughout the area are currently being used to their maximum capa-
cities. Selective well “shut ins” have had to be performed because
of the limitations of handling large quantities of water. These cur-
tailments have resulted in loss of oil production.
The primary objective of this APM pilot project was to reduce to-
tal water production from high-water-cut wells while still maintain-
ing the current oil production in those wells. Any increase in oil pro-
duction would also be welcome but was not essential. Reduced fluid
volumes would in turn save water-treating, facility, and field-main-
tenance costs. Various intervals in this area have been previously
left unproduced because of excessive water production. If the pilot
project was deemed successful, then numerous zones could be
opened and/or reopened and APM jobs performed.
Seven APM jobs have been performed to date. Five wells are
presented in this paper (the data is summarized in Table 1). The oth-
er jobs were recently pumped and are cleaning up; early indications
are favorable.
Well 1. Excess water production was a problem on this well and esti-
mated remaining reserves were calculated at 350,000 bbl. A com-
prehensive analysis program (production logging, reservoir model-
ing, and WOR plots) was performed to identify the water-producing
layer and its mechanism. Data indicated that the lower portion of the
zone was contributing the majority of the water production for the
interval. The most likely path was through high-permeability
channels (fingering). A low-risk APM water treatment was rec-
ommended.
Fig. 8—Production performance on Well 2—Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia.
184
In October 1995, the lower 18 ft of perforations were treated (at
0.5 to 0.75 bbl/min) with 450 gal (25 gal/ft) of diesel (plus additives)
followed by 3,500 gal (195 gal/ft) 2% KCl with 8% APM concentra-
tion (plus additives). Surface pressures during the job were less than
5 psi. Estimated radial penetration of the APM was 5 ft.
The production (Fig. 7) showed an initial dramatic improvement
in oil production from 64 to 346 BOPD (a 441% increase) and a
drastic decrease in fluid production from 3,216 to 1,236 B/D of fluid
(a 62% decrease). Water cut was reduced from 98 to 84%. Produc-
tion has stabilized at 182 BOPD and 1,136 B/D of fluid (84% water
cut). Water reduction and subsequent oil increase was immediate on
this well. This is most likely caused by the selective treatment of
only the water section of the zone with the APM. The payout of the
entire project was less than 10 days.
Well 2. Well 2 experienced oil-production declines from 300 BOPD
to 83 BOPD while total fluid was maintained at 1,200 B/D of fluid.
Water cut had increased to 93%; however, additional remaining re-
serves were calculated. The most likely path of water production was
high-permeability channels (fingering), which was also noted on the
No. 1 offset well. An APM treatment was recommended to help re-
duce the relative permeability to water and reduce water volumes. A
slight oil gain was also anticipated. The suspected water interval was
thought to be in the lower portion of the zone; however, it was planned
to treat the entire interval with the APM. By treating both the oil and
water sections, the intention was to confirm lab tests that showed little
reduction in permeability to oil with the use of APM.
In November 1995, the entire 28-ft interval was treated (at 0.75
bbl/min) with 700 gal (25 gal/ft) of diesel (plus additives) followed
by 3,750 gal (135 gal/ft) 2% KCl with 8% APM concentration (plus
additives). Pump pressures increased from 10 to 35 psi when the
SPE Production & Facilities, August 1997
 Fig. 9—Production performance on Well 3—Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia.
APM system was at the perforations. Estimated radial penetration
of the APM was 5 ft.
After treatment, the oil increase (Fig. 8) was slow but showed
continuous improvement with time. Current improvement in oil
production is from 83 to 111 BOPD (a 34% increase) and a decrease
in fluid production from 1,192 to 654 B/D of fluid (a 45% decrease).
Water cut was reduced from 93% to 83%. The slow cleanup of this
well (compared to the No. 1 offset described above) is believed to
be caused by the entire interval being treated with APM. The oil was
pushed away from the wellbore during the treatment and took time
to re-establish its production path to the wellbore. Extensive logging
was not performed to identify the water-producing interval, result-
ing in cost savings and faster payout.
Well 3. This well was identified as having a water-channeling prob-
lem from evaluation of WOR and WOR-derivative plots. In Febru-
ary 1996, the entire 20-ft interval was treated (at 0.50 bbl/min) with
500 gal (25 gal/ft) of diesel (plus additives), followed by 3,250 gal
(163 gal/ft) 2% KCl with 8% APM concentration (plus additives).
Pump pressures remained flat at 0 to 5 psi throughout the job. Esti-
mated radial penetration of the APM was 5 ft.
Oil-production increase (Fig. 9) was slow but gradually increased
to 419 BOPD (from a pretreatment rate of 73 BOPD) within 2 weeks
of the APM job. Current oil production is 277 BOPD (a 279% in-
crease) with a decrease in total fluid production from 1,464 to 792
bbl/D of fluid (a 46% decrease). Water cut was reduced from 95 to
65%. Production logging was not performed to identify the water-
producing interval, resulting in cost savings and a rapid payout of
less than 2 weeks. Of special note is that the bottomhole temperature
on this well is 225°F, confirming previous laboratory tests showing
high-temperature stability of the APM product.
Well 4. Diagnostic plots on this well identified water channeling as
the most probable cause of the high water cuts. Although the zone
does not have a strong water drive, has limited interval (7 ft), and has
relatively low water cut (relative to other “problem” wells), an APM
Fig. 10—Production performance on Well 4—Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia.
SPE Production & Facilities, August 1997
job was still planned in an attempt to decrease water and increase oil
production. In December 1995, the 7-ft interval was treated (at 1.0
bbl/min) with 500 gal (71 gal/ft) of diesel (plus additives), followed
by 4,000 gal (571 gal/ft) 2% KCl with 8% APM concentration (plus
additives). Pump pressures increased slightly during the job from 0
to 11 psi. Estimated radial penetration of the APM was 9 ft.
A successful total fluid production decrease was noted (Fig. 10).
The total fluid was reduced from 615 to 480 B/D of fluid (a 22% de-
crease); however, the oil production also dropped. A steady, slow in-
crease in oil was closely monitored and in March 1996 a workover
to clean out sand fill was performed in the hope of increasing the oil
production. The oil increased; however, the total fluid also jumped
drastically. This well, as stated above, was not the best candidate for
a water-control treatment, and the response from the APM treatment
has confirmed this observation.
Well 5. This well was identified as having a water-channeling prob-
lem from evaluation of WOR and WOR-derivative plots. In March
1996, the 10-ft interval was treated (at 0.50 bbl/min) with 500 gal
(50 gal/ft) of diesel (plus additives), followed by 3,750 gal (375 gal/
ft) 2% KCl with 10% APM concentration (plus additives). Pump
pressures increased slightly from 0 to 20 psi when the APM polymer
reached the perforations. Estimated radial penetration of the APM
was 8 ft.
Oil-production increase (Fig. 11) was slow but gradually increased
to 385 BOPD (from a pretreatment rate of 342 BOPD) within 2
months of the APM job. A decrease in total fluid production from
12,593 to 7,266 B/D of fluid (a 42% decrease) was noted; however,
a portion of this was possibly caused by the smaller-sized pump that
was run after the APM treatment. What is more notable is the water-
cut reduction from 97.4 to 94.7%. Production logging to identify the
water-producing interval was not performed. The current trend on this
well is a continued increase in oil production with a stable water cut.
Bottomhole temperature is 240°F and the permeability is estimated
at 3,800 md, illustrating that high-permeability and high-temperature
wells can benefit from the APM product.
185
 Fig. 11—Production performance on Well 5—Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia.

Discussion SI Metric Conversion Factors

Results of the ongoing pilot study show that treated wells cumula-
tively dropped water cuts from 96.7 to 90.1%, increased oil by a to-
tal of 369 BOPD (a 58% increase) and decreased total produced
fluid by 8,236 B/D of fluid (a 43% decrease). The reduced water vol-
ume has allowed all wells in the field to be placed on line without
exceeding facility water-production capabilities. This in turn has in-
creased the average total barrels of oil per day and decreased the av-
erage water-handling costs for the area. Reducing the water cut has
allowed the operating company to extend the economic life of the
wells and increase the recoverable hydrocarbon reserves.
Conclusions
1. An amphoteric polymer material (APM) has been applied suc-
cessfully to an Indonesian oil field to reduce water production econom-
ically with the extra benefit of increased hydrocarbon production.
2. High-permeability sandstone reservoirs with water-produc-
tion problems can benefit from APM treatments.
3. Field results verify previous laboratory tests showing good
product application at temperatures above 200°F.
4. The candidate selection and implementation process, includ-
ing detailed water-production plots and proper placement tech-
niques, in conjunction with production logging to determine exact
water location, are important to the long-term success of APM jobs.
Acknowledgments
We extend our appreciation to PT Caltex Pacific Indonesia and BJ
Services for permission to publish this paper. Special thanks to all
those that supplied vital well information and treatment results. In
addition, we gratefully acknowledge the previous diligent work by
Joel Boles, Dave Dunlap, and Rudy Novotny on this subject.
References
1. Boles, J.L. and Mancillas, G.: “Water Control Well Treatment Solution
and Method,” U.S. Patent No. 4,476,931 (16 October 1984).
2. Dunlap, D.D., Boles, J.L., and Novotny, R.J.: “Method for Improving Hy-
drocarbon-Water Ratios in Producing Wells,” paper SPE 14822 presented
at the 1986 SPE Symposium on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette,
Louisiana, 26–27 February.
3. Gidley, J.L.: “Stimulation of Sandstone Formations with Acid-Mutual
Solvent Method,” JPT (May 1971) 551.
4. Novotny, R.J.: “Matrix Flow Evaluation Technique for Water Control Ap-
plications,” paper SPE 30094 presented at the 1995 SPE European Forma-
tion Damage Conference, The Hague, Netherlands.
°API 141.5/(131.5)°API)+g/cm3
bbl 1.589 873 E*01 +m3
cp 1.0* E*03 +Pa@s
ft 3.048* E*01 +m
dyne 1.0* E*02 +mN
°F (°F*32)/1.8 +°C
gal 3.785 412 E*03 +m3
in. 2.54* E)00 +cm
md 9.869 233 E*04 +mm2
psi 6.894 757 E)00 +kPa
*Conversion factor is exact. SPEPF
Rick Stanley is a country technical engineer for BJ Services workĆ
ing in Jakarta, Indonesia. His primary areas of responsibility are
fracturing, acidizing, remedial treatments, and sand control/
frac packing. Before his 9 years with BJ Services, spent mostly in
New Orleans, he held various production and drilling engineerĆ
ing positions with Callon Petroleum in Natchez, Mississippi, and
with Exxon Company U.S.A. in New Orleans. He holds a BS deĆ
gree in civil engineering from the U. of Alabama. Ewen Marnoch
is a station manager with BJ Services working in Duri, Indonesia.
His focus in recent years has been on operations, remedial waĆ
terĆcontrol treatments, sand control, and frac packing. Before
his Duri assignment he was involved in coiledĆtubing operations
in Jakarta, Indonesia, and the North Sea area. Hardianto is a
field technical engineer with BJ Services currently working in BalĆ
ikpapan, Indonesia. His current focus is on cementing; however,
previously he was stationed in Duri and involved in remedial waĆ
terĆcontrol treatments and sand control. He holds a BS degree
in petroleum engineering from UPN in Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Paternus Syukur Tanggu is now working with California Energy
Co. Previously he was in the production department in Duri for
PT Caltex Pacific Indonesia and was involved in remedial and
stimulation projects in the Duri field. He graduated from ITB in
Bandung, Indonesia, with a degree in petroleum engineering.
Photo is unavailable.
Stanley Marnoch Hardianto

186 SPE Production & Facilities, August 1997