PRODUCTION OPERATIONS

Integrated Approach to Formation-Water Management:

From Reservoir Management to Protection of the Environment

Most fields in the Oriente basin of

GAS EXPORT OIL
Ecuador and neighboring Marañón
PRODUCTION
and Putumayo basins in Peru and FACILITIES
OIL TREATMENT WATER
Colombia, respectively, produce large WATER PWRI
INJECTION
SYSTEM
volumes of water. In most cases, as GAS EXPORT OIL
3. Facilities
the water cut increases, oil PRODUCTION TREATMENT
Separation,
OIL treatment
FACILITIES WATER
production is restricted, which Facilities upgrading
PWRI INJECTION
WATER SYSTEM
creates production problems Environment
3. Facilities
including scale deposition, Additional effect—
•Separation, unwanted fluid
treatment
corrosion, and sand production. An •Facilities upgrading
2. Producers Additional expense
integrated approach to formation- Scale, corrosion, sa Environment
water manage- ment begins with an nd production •Additional impact - Aquifer
Artificial lift tm e
understanding of the water-flow Water-shutoff trea ents chanisms unwanted fluid
Produced-water m •Additional expense 4. Injectors/Disposal
mechanisms in the res- ervoir and 2. Producers Injectivity mechanisms
•Scale, corrosion, sand production Aquifer
identifying the water-break- through •Artificial lift Water quality
•Water shut-off treatments Disposal wells
mechanism at the producer well, 4.Energy
Injectors/Disposal
•Produced water mechanisms
followed by the detection of pro- 1. Reservoir
duction bottlenecks in the wellbore Reservoir displacement energy
•Water quality
•Disposal wells
and surface facilities, and then Effect on production and recovery •Energy
finishing with analysis of water
1. Reservoir
disposal or reinjection. Fig. 1—Water system: reservoir, PRODUCERS
•Reservoir displacement , facilities, and injectors. PWRI=PROD
energy
WATER reinjection. •Impact on production and recovery
Introduction
Villano is a heavy-oil field in a tropi-
cal rainforest area in the Province of
Pastaza in the Oriente basin of
Ecuador.
Discovered in 1950, it began produc- warehouses, well pads, living quarters, At the time, Well V-11 was
ing in 1999. Because of concern for production facilities to dehydrate the temporarily shut in because of high
the environment and native oil, and transfer pumps to transport the water cut while WDW V-9 was being
communities in the area, development oil through a 12-in.-diameter 44-km- worked over. Water production is
was performed in an offshore-type long pipeline to the central processing expected to increase by three-fold
fashion. With no road access, all facility (CPF). Formation water is within the next 10 years.
transport was provided by helicopter. disposed of at Pad V-A into two Average rock and fluid properties of
The drilling and production facilities water-disposal wells (WDWs). Pad V- the Hollín reservoir in Villano are as
are limited to two well pads, V-A and B is a remote wellsite with limited follows.
V-B of approximately 4 and 2 facilities. Particularly rel- evant in the • Porosity: 17.0%
hectares, respectively. Pad V-A hosts a effort was construction of the aerial 12- • Permeability: 600 to 800 md
drilling and a workover rig, drilling in. pipeline, built without road support • Initial water saturation: 15.0%
and with a minimum effect to the rain
This article, written by Senior Technology forest environment. • Initial reservoir pressure: 5,070
Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of The Villano structure was developed psi
paper SPE 116218, “The Integrated primarily with horizontal wells. Sixteen • Current reservoir pressure: 4,950
wells have been drilled in Villano—13 psi The problem of excessive water
Approach to Formation-Water Manage- ment: pro- duction in Villano is critical
From Reservoir Management to Protection
producers, all fitted with electrical sub-
mersible pumps (ESPs); two WDWs; because the surface
of the Environment,” by Jose and one discovery well (V-1), which production facilities have
G. Flores, SPE, and Jon Elphick, SPE, has been abandoned. There are two exceeded their design capacity.
Schlumberger, and Francisco Lopez and additional WDWs at the CPF. All the Electrical generation and transmission
Pablo Espinel, Agip Oil Ecuador, prepared production is from and water disposal from CPF to the Pad V-A is sufficient
for the 2008 SPE Annual Technical is into the Hollín formation, of to cover the current needs; however,
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 21–24 Cretaceous age. it will not meet future needs as larger
Water production in July 2007 ESPs, with higher power
September. The paper has not been peer requirements, are installed to lift
reviewed. averaged 107,300 B/D, from 11 wells.
increasingly larger
volumes of fluid.
For a limited time, the full-length paper is available free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.
JPT • MARCH 2009
System assessment properly diagnosed and bad water is
confirmed, there may be opportuni-
ties for water-shutoff treatments.
Economic bottleneckProper
opportunities
diagnostics enable effective
Reservoir/facilities diagnosis control treatments. Superficial
diagnostics or no diagnostics at all will
result in treat- ments with poor or
Flow mechanismsnegative
target wells
results.
This paper presents a classification
Well diagnosis
of water problem types (PTs), as
shown in Fig. 3, ordered by the ease
with which they can be solved.
Problem types
Solution identification
Mainly, it addresses vertical oil wells,
but a similar categori- zation can be
used for horizontal wells, gas wells
All feasible solutions expected
with water resultsproduction or even oil
Solution-selection risked economics
wells with gas problems.
PTs are defined according to the water-
flow path. PTs can be divided into three
flow categories: open-flow path (PT 1, 2,
Optimum solution
Detailed design, execution & evaluation
5, and 6), edgewater from waterflood or
natural aquifer (PT 4, 8, 9, and 10), and
bottom water (PT 3 and 7). Each cat-
egory has a “typical” water-production
Results
history, which may help the diagno-
sis. Other, complex problems are not
Fig. 2—Water-management process. included here, and a well may have more
than one problem. However, this clas-
Water Management sification provides a useful framework to
Fig. 1 shows an integrated engineering guide engineers in diagnosis and finding
approach to formation-water manage- solutions even in these complex cases.
ment that accounts for the entire water PT1: TUBING/CASING/PACKER LEAK.
system, following the process shown in This PT is represented schematically
Fig. 2. The aim is to gain an in Fig. 3a. Solutions typically include
understand- ing of the water-flow squeezing shutoff fluids or mechanical
mechanisms in the reservoir, identify shutoff. PT1 is a prime candidate for
the water-break- through mechanism water shutoff.
and production constraints in the PT2: Flow Behind CASING. Fig.
producer wells, detect production 3b shows that it is generally caused
bottlenecks in the surface facilities, and by failed primary cementing
analyze water disposal or reinjection. allowing water to flow behind
Then, constraint analysis should be casing in the annulus. A secondary
used to integrate the entire system to cause is the cre- ation of a “cave”
determine the overall eco- nomic behind casing. PT2 is a prime
remediation. In the proposed method, candidate for water shutoff.
assessment of the entire water system PT3: OIL/WATER CONTACT (OWC)
and identification of the problem types Moving up. Fig. 3c is representative
and bottlenecks enable selection of of the OWC moving up uniformly.
effective water-management solutions. This situation usually has a large flow
area; low velocity; and low vertical
Reservoir. In fields with an active permeabili- ties, typically less than 1
aqui- fer or under waterflooding, water md. In a vertical well, this problem can
can help displace oil toward the be solved by aban- doning the well
producers, or the water can limit from the bottom by use of a
production of hydrocarbons. It is mechanical system, such as a bridge
useful to use the concept of “good” plug or a cement plug. In
water and “bad” water. Good water horizontal wells, there is no near-
is any water with which enough oil is wellbore solution, and a sidetrack must
produced to pay for the cost of be considered once the water/oil ratio
handling the water. Produced water becomes intolerable.
that negates profit should be PT4: HIGH-PERMEABILITY LAYER
considered bad water. Without Crossflow. Fig. 3d shows
a high-permeability zone with a shale
Producers. The producer-well mod- (or other) continuous barrier above
ule of an integrated-water-management and below. In this case, the water
study investigates the mechanisms source may be from an active aquifer
caus- ing the breakthrough of or waterflood injection. With no
formation water in producer wells. reservoir crossflow,
When the problem is
74
73
this problem is solved by applying
rigid shutoff fluids or by mechanical
shutoff in either the injector or
producer. The high permeability may
be from microf- ractures contained in
the layer. PT4 is a prime candidate for
water shutoff.
PT5: Fissures Between Injector
AND Producer. In naturally fissured or
fault- ed formations under
waterflood, the situation shown in
Fig. 3e occurs in which water can
break through to the producer(s)
rapidly. Injecting a flowing gel at the
injector is effective in shutting off the
water without adversely affect- ing
the fissures that contribute to oil
production. PT5 is a prime
candidate for water shutoff.
PT6: FISSURES/FRACTURES From A
WATER LAYER. Fig. 3f shows water
production from an underlying water
zone through natural fissures or
conduit faults. A simi- lar problem is
caused when hydraulic fractures
penetrate down (or up) into a
water layer. For hydraulic fractures,
the problem is well characterized
and solutions are easier to apply. The
appli- cation of flowing gels can be
effective. However, the design
engineer is faced with three
difficulties. First, the treat- ment
volume is difficult to determine
because of the unknown volume of
the fissure system. Second, the
treatment may shut off the oil-
producing fissures, so selective
placement or an overflush is required
to maintain productivity near the
wellbore. Third, if a flowing gel is
used, it must be tailored carefully
to resist flowback after the treatment.
PT7: Coning or Cusping. Fig. 3g
shows the coning problem in a vertical
well. In a horizontal well, this may be
referred to as duning or cusping. One
solution is to place a layer of gel.
However, to be effective, a radius of at
least 50 ft is required (even then, the
water rate will be reduced rather than
shut off), and economically placing gel
to this penetra- tion is difficult. An
alternative to fluid placement is to place
a lateral drainhole near the top of the
formation to take advantage of greater
distance from the OWC and decreased
drawdown, both of which reduce the
coning effect.
PT8: Poor AREAL Sweep. Edgewater
from an aquifer or waterflood flowing
through a layer with poor areal sweep
is shown in Fig. 3h. This situation can
be caused by areal-permeability hetero-
geneity or anisotropy, or by an adverse
mobility ratio. This problem is severe
in sand channels. Diverting injected
water away from the swept pore space
JPT • MARCH 2009
 Simple
ab c d e f
Fig. 3—Representations of the 10 main water PTs in PRODUCING wells.
is required. A very large treatment vol-
ume or continuous viscous flood is
required, both of which generally are
uneconomic, except at high oil prices.
Infill drilling can improve recovery in
this situation. Lateral drainholes can
be used to access unswept oil more
economically than infill drilling from
the surface. Streamline simulation can
be very useful to optimize the rates of
existing wells to improve areal sweep.
PT9: GRAVITY-SEGREGATED LAYER. Fig.
3i shows a thick layer with good verti-
cal permeability. Water, either from
the aquifer or a waterflood, is
segregated by gravity and sweeps only
the lower part of the formation. Any
treatment in the injector aimed at
shutting off the lower perforations has
only a marginal effect in sweeping
more oil before gravity seg- regation
dominates. At the producer, there is
local coning and, just as for the
coning case, gel treatments are
unlikely to provide lasting results.
Lateral drain- holes may be effective
in accessing the unswept oil. Foamed
viscous flood fluids also may
improve the vertical sweep. Water-
alternating-gas technolo- gies should
be considered.
PT10: HIGH-PERMEABILITY LAYER With
Crossflow. Fig. 3j shows a high-
permea- bility layer similar to Fig. 3d,
except that there is no barrier to
reservoir crossflow. In this case, any
near-wellbore attempts to modify the
production profile or the injection
profile will be short-lived because of
crossflow away from the wellbore. It
may be possible to place deep-
penetrating gel in the thief layer
economically if it has a very small
height compared with the oil zone, and
a very high permeability compared
with the oil zone. Even under these
conditions, care-
JPT • MARCH 2009
Complex
g h ij
ful engineering is required before com-
mitting to a treatment. Tighter spacing
or the use of laterals may be required.
Facilities. The facilities portion of
inte- grated water management
identifies bottlenecks in the flow-
handling setup, typically focusing on
the water-han- dling vessels, pumps,
and equipment. A major facilities
upgrade for Villano was required in
2003 to accommodate the expected
production profile at that time. A new
process upgrade will be required to
meet future production needs. Two
structured solutions were developed
for the short and medium term and for
the long term, accord- ing to defined
production targets and in such a way
that all upgrades fit smoothly and
become part of the long- term
solution.
WATER Injection. The connection
between injectors and the reservoir
can be classified in a manner similar
to that of the 10 PTs shown for
produc- ers. Only PT3 (OWC moving
up) and PT7 (coning) do not have
equivalents for injector wells. Injectors
also exhibit several other problems.
Loss of Injectivity. Damage buildup
in injectors is more severe than in pro-
ducers, depending on the quality of the
injected water. The water may contain
plugging materials such as oil, solids,
and/ or bacteria, but also may be
incompatible with the formation,
causing clay swelling or migration of
clays, or may be incom- patible with
formation water of different
compositions, resulting in scale deposi-
tion. The three major alternatives to loss
of injectivity include the following.
• Treat water at the surface to
mini- mize damage.
• Accept damage and stimulate
or reperforate injectors regularly.
• Inject at pressures above the
frac- turing pressure.
FORMATION Souring. The introduc-
tion of sulfate-reducing bacteria
into the formation by water
injection can generate H2S. This
situation can be avoided with
intermittent injection of bactericide.
Injection FRACTURING. Injection some-
times takes place above the
fracturing pressure. Even when this is
not the case, injectors often are
fractured because the fracture pressure
is lower than expected, lack of
control of injection pressures
(particularly as damage builds up),
and reduction of the fracturing
pressure with cooldown of the
formation by the injec-
tion of cool surface waters.
In Villano WDWs, there are two
main injection modes with significantly
differ- ent injectivity: matrix-flow
injection and open-fracture injection.
Wells can switch between the two
modes. However, switching between
these modes is a complex phenomenon
because a well that has recently
operated in open-frac- ture mode can
easily plug, even at high injection rates,
until a high threshold rate is achieved.
This phenomenon has been observed in
the field.
Maximum injectivity in Villano can
be achieved by ensuring that wells
operate in open-fracture mode. This
mode may require occasional high-
rate/-pressure injection, particularly
after shut-in or low-rate injection.
Open-fracture injec- tion generally can
be initiated within the normal pressure
limits with the water-injection pumps.
If necessary, this mode could be
accomplished by temporarily injecting
at a higher pres- sure with a skid-
mounted pump con- nected to the
wellhead. It is good practice to
provide the well-capacity graphs to
field personnel, asking them to
compare the well performance to the
curve regularly. Any well operating at
a point above the baseline curve
should be considered for action,
including, ini- tially, a short period of
higher-rate and
-pressure injection.
Villano-System Assessment. An assess-
ment of the reservoir, producers, sur-
face facilities, and injectors in Villano
revealed that production is limited pri-
marily by the current surface handling
capacity and by water-disposal capacity.
However, it may be possible to reduce
the water cut of producer wells. JPT
75