Faculty of Geology and Petroleum Engineering

Department of Petroleum Engineering

Discipline: Exploration of oil and gas field

CASE STUDY
Reservoir #4

Made by: Абжапбаров Темирлан

Балтабеков Бекзат

Абдураимов Али

Almaty 2021
Content
Introduction.............................................................................................................................................3
Main body...............................................................................................................................................4
Conclusion...........................................................................................................................................8
Introduction
Enhanced oil recovery (EOR), also known as “tertiary recovery,” is a
process for extracting oil that has not already been retrieved through
the primary or secondary oil recovery techniques.

Although the primary and secondary recovery techniques rely on the

pressure differential between the surface and the underground well, enhanced oil
recovery functions by altering the chemical composition of the oil itself in order to
make it easier to extract.

Enhanced oil recovery techniques are complex and expensive and therefore
are employed only when the primary and secondary recovery techniques have
exhausted their usefulness. Indeed, depending on factors such as the cost of oil, it
may not be economical to employ EOR at all. In those cases, oil and gas might be
left in the reservoir because it is simply not profitable to extract the remaining
amounts.

There are three primary techniques of EOR: gas injection, thermal injection,
and chemical injection. Gas injection, which uses gases such as natural
gas, nitrogen, or carbon dioxide (CO2).  Thermal injection, which involves the
introduction of heat. Chemical injection, which can involve the use of long-chained
molecules called polymers to increase the effectiveness of waterfloods.
 Main body

1) Selection of EOR methods （application criteria） by exclusion method （it is

necessary to justify the reason why you exclude one or another EOR method)
 Our research has shown that the best method that fits the parameters of our
reservoir is Thermal method: Combustion.

Miscible gas injection CO2 is not suitable, because the range of depth for
that method is 1500-13365ft. Depth one of the important parameter and a
minimum average reservoir depth must be 3,000 feet or more, as the temperature
and pressure at this depth promotes the miscibility of CO2 with the formation oil
and also helps to accommodate high pressure CO2 injection.

Injection of hydrocarbon is not fit with our reservoir because of net

thickness, WAG because of formation type. For WAG must be sandstone, in our
reservoir formation type dolomite. Nitrogen’s method has higher reservoir
temperature. Immiscible gas injection method also does not appropriate, because
Nitrogen and hydrocarbon method’s formation type sandstone and CO2 methods
average porosity and depth much higher than in our case.

Chemical methods also don not suitable because of sandstone. There are can
be used only for sandstone. Last method is microbial also can not be used because
of temperature.

In-situ combustion (ISC) is an enhanced oil recovery method in which the

air is injected into the reservoir burning the heaviest crude oil components
generating heat and combustion gases that enhance recovery by reducing oil
viscosity and pressurizing the system, respectively. In this process, highly
exothermic reactions occur in the porous medium resulting in significant increases
in the temperature. For heavy oils, a 300-400 °C increase in temperature is not
uncommon. [1] Large temperature differences signify heat transfer and also will
result in the phase change. ISC involves many phenomena, making modeling
complex. So the engineering of the process is more difficult than any other method
of crude oil recovery, but the advantages of in-situ combustion motivate
researchers to investigate on it.
 2) Mechanism of action

In-situ combustion (ISC) is a displacement process in which an oxygen-containing

gas is injected into a reservoir where it reacts with crude oil to create a high-
temperature combustion zone that generates combustion gases and creates a heated
front that propagates through the reservoir. In-situ combustion (ISC) is an
Enhanced oil recovery process for heavy oil in which an oxygen-containing gas is
injected into a reservoir where it reacts with crude oil to create a high-temperature
combustion zone that generates combustion gases and creates a heated front that
propagates through the reservoir. The most common fluid injected is air but there
are some cases in which oxygen enriched gas or air is injected.

ISC can be forward or reverse, which is mainly dependent on the combustion front.
In forward ISC, ignition occurs near an injection well and the combustion front
moves in the direction of the air flow. In reverse ISC, ignition occurs near a
production well and the combustion front moves in the opposite direction to the air
flow.
In practice, forward ISC is usually adopted. The combustion reactions between the
injected air and the crude oil produce a lot of heat to decrease the oil viscosity and
achieve oil recovery. As air is constantly injected, the combustion front will
propagate toward production wells. Reservoir fluids can be displaced in the
condition of high temperature (600°C–700°C) toward production wells. The heavy
components are burned to produce large amounts of flue gas and the lighter
component will move downstream and mix with the crude oil as mobile oil
ISC can effectively displace the oil in contact with the hot fluids within
the combustion zone. The ISC can achieve as high as 95% oil displacement, with
negligible control by reservoir permeability. In addition, by using air for ignition,
ISC is usually much more economical than SF.
In situ combustion affect sweep efficiency and it is significantly reduced by
this process. It means overall macroscopic efficiency also reduces
 3) Analysis of pros and cons of the proposed method

The process has some advantages over steam injection including higher
thermal efficiency, relatively small heat loss to the overburden, no heat losses in
the wellbore, and it can be applied in deeper and high-pressure reservoirs.

There are several disadvantages with the in situ combustion process

including:
 formation of oil-water emulsions which cause pumping problems and reduce well
productivity;
 production of low-pH (acidic) hot water rich in sulfate and iron that
causes corrosion problems;
 increased sand production and cavings;
 formation of wax and asphaltene as a result of thermal cracking of the oil;
 liner and tubing failure due to excessive temperatures at the production wells.

Limitations of conventional in-situ combustion, such as low sweep

efficiency, low mobility and low injectivity

4) Justification of the prospects of the proposed method EOR

In-situ combustion is applicable to a wide array of reservoirs. In fact, it is the

only thermal method that can presently be applied to deep reservoirs, though deep
downhole steam generation is being tested. It can be used at any stage of reservoir
depletion; it can be used in special situations such as offshore or in Arctic regions.
Because of the lack of heat losses at the surface and in the injection wells, it is the
most thermally efficient thermal recovery method. The injectant (air) is readily
available. Combustion allows wider well spacing than steam; economic results are
comparable to those of steam injection

Considerable improvements in the application of in-situ combustion have

been made since the early projects. New developments, such as application to light
oil reservoirs, and the use of horizontal wells are reviving interest in in-situ
combustion. This process deserves consideration for many reservoirs, including
those in hostile environments or those not amenable to other recovery methods

Even though in-situ combustion has obvious advantages and wide

adaptability, it still has some limitations. Due to gravity override of the injected
gases, the combustion front may not advance uniformly in the vertical direction.
Hence, the sweep efficiency may be reduced f by the preferential flow of the gases
to one or more wells of the pattern. 'Since in-situ combustion process requires the
mobilized oil flows ahead of combustion front into the colder immobile oil, this
can cause mobility reduction and lower injectivity. Therefore, more attention has
been paid to improve in-situ combustion technology.

Conclusion