Department of Chemical & Petroleum Engineering

PEEG 794: Chemical Flooding CEOR Field

Project

CO2-Foam Injection for Conformance Enhancement in the

EVGSANU

Paper Review Summary

Fall 2023
22nd November 2023

Assigned by: Dr Emad W. Alshalabi

Student Name: Hala K. Alshadafan

Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

List of Figures
Figure 1: Issues faced during gas injection in porous media that reduce oil recovery efficiency. a. CO 2
override due to gravity; b. CO2 channeling due to permeability heterogeneity (Dow, 2023).................5
Figure 2: EVGSANU historical oil production rate (Moffitt et al., 2015)..............................................5
Figure 3: Location and layout of the pattern selected for the foam injection pilot (Katiyar et al., 2020).
.................................................................................................................................................................6
Figure 4: EVGSANU large variance in water and CO 2 injection during baseline period (2014-2017)
(Katiyar et al., 2020)................................................................................................................................6
Figure 5: Gas injectivity for the baseline and each of the pilot cycles. Injection of surfactant and
generation of foam resulted in an immediate drop in injectivity compared to the baseline (Katiyar et
al., 2020)..................................................................................................................................................7
Figure 6: Application of foam mitigated direct gas breakthrough and increased average well runtime
(Katiyar et al., 2020)................................................................................................................................8
Figure 7: Individual well oil production response (Katiyar et al., 2020).................................................8

2
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

List of Tables
Table 1: IPL results verifying the more uniform injection distribution between U-SA and L-SA post
foam (Katiyar et al., 2020).......................................................................................................................7

3
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

Table of Contents
List of Figures..........................................................................................................................................2
List of Tables...........................................................................................................................................3
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................5
Field History............................................................................................................................................5
Pilot Description......................................................................................................................................5
New Surfactant Chemistry...................................................................................................................6
Pilot Pattern..........................................................................................................................................6
Vertical Conformance:.....................................................................................................................7
Areal Conformance:.........................................................................................................................7
Injection Strategy.................................................................................................................................7
Results......................................................................................................................................................7
Gas Injectivity......................................................................................................................................7
Conformance Improvement.................................................................................................................7
Well Runtime.......................................................................................................................................7
Individual Well Oil Production Response...........................................................................................8
Conclusions..............................................................................................................................................8
Expansion Phase......................................................................................................................................8
References................................................................................................................................................9

4
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

Introduction
Foam is a gas liquid mixture in which liquid phase forms a continuum wetting the rock,
whereas gas is made discontinuous by thin liquid films called lamellae. Co-injection or alternate
injection of surfactant solution and gas generates foam in subsurface porous media (Talebian et al.,
2014). Bond and Holbrook (1958) were the first to show that foam generated in oil reservoir could
increase sweep efficiency by addressing issues including gas override and channeling (Figure 1).

a b
Figure 1: Issues faced during gas injection in porous media that reduce oil recovery efficiency. a. CO2 override due to
gravity; b. CO2 channeling due to permeability heterogeneity (Dow, 2023).

Field History
Selected pilot is a CO2-Foam injection endeavour by ConocoPhillips and The Dow Chemical
Company for conformance enhancement in the East Vacuum Grayburg San Andres Unit
(EVGSANU). East Vacuum formation is located in southeast New Mexico; Primary production was
initiated in the 1940s, followed by Waterflooding in the 1980s to prepare the subsurface for Miscible
CO2 application five years later (Katiyar et al., 2020). Figure 2 depicts oil production rate from the
start of waterflood till the year 2015. Prior to water injection, EVGSANU was producing 4,000
BOPD. After water injection, oil production rate increased to 15,000 BOPD. Implementation of CO 2
injection started in 1985; initial increase in oil rate was followed by a steep decline. Mitigation

Figure 2: EVGSANU historical oil production rate (Moffitt et al., 2015).

5
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

included installation of an NGL recovery plant to recover liquids from the produced gas stream; the
capacity of which was reached in 1998 (Moffitt et al., 2015).

Pilot Description
San Andres (SA), the main zone of interest, is divided into the upper (U-SA) and lower (L-
SA) intervals by the Lovington Sandstone. Injectivity in the L-SA has historically been higher than
that in the U-SA. The objective of the pilot is to improve overall sweep efficiency across the U-SA
and L-SA formations by correcting vertical and areal conformance. Pilot would only be deemed
successful if surfactant injection achieved sufficient incremental oil production to make the operation
economically feasible (Katiyar et al., 2020).

New Surfactant Chemistry

Dow Chemical designed a new surfactant that is highly stable at formation salinity and
temperature, has a higher partition coefficient in CO 2, suffers lower adsorption to reservoir rock when
compared to previous foam pilots in EVGSANU, and generates stronger foam at lower surfactant
concentration.
The new surfactant chemistry displayed the following characteristics (Katiyar et al., 2020):
Surfactant remained stable under real reservoir conditions.
Mass fraction of surfactant in the CO2 is 22 times greater than the mass fraction in the brine.
Higher volume of surfactant is consumed generating foam rather than adhering to the rock
surface.
As surfactant concentration increased, apparent foam viscosity measured 2-3 orders of magnitude
greater than the viscosity of brine or CO2.
As total injection rate increased, shear thickening rheology was observed up to an optimal
injection rate.
There is an optimal injection gas fraction that achieved the highest quality foam.
Foam destabilized when it encountered a sufficient volume of mobile oil (~10-15%mobile oil
fraction).

Pilot Pattern
EVGSANU is divided into injector-centered WAG patterns in the center of the field, and
water-only injectors around the periphery that act as a "water barrier" to maintain CO 2 injection within

Figure 3: Location and layout of the pattern selected for the foam injection pilot (Katiyar et
al., 2020).
6
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

the lease boundary. Figure 3 shows a single WAG injector surrounded by six vertical wells and two
horizontal wells.

Vertical Conformance:
Figure 4 illustrates the field’s poor vertical conformance, for U-SA has had less than 0.3PV of CO 2
injected while L-SA has received most of the historical injection with approximately 0.6PV of CO 2
injected.

Areal Conformance:
Characterization of areal conformance was achieved by comparing the gas-oil-ratios (GOR) and oil
cuts (OC) during the baseline period (2014-2017) for all of the producing wells in the pattern. It was
found that wells that are East or West (E-W) relative to the injector suffered higher than normal GOR
and lower than normal OC compared to the rest of the pattern (Katiyar et al., 2020).

Injection Strategy
Designed strategy to optimize foam flood was as follows: injection of fixed volume slug of
water followed by surfactant injected with CO 2 to generate foam for conformance control followed by
pure CO2.

Results
Gas Injectivity

a b

Figure 5: Gas injectivity for the baseline and each of the pilot cycles. Injection of surfactant and generation of foam resulted in an
immediate drop in injectivity compared to the baseline (Katiyar et al., 2020).

Conformance Improvement
Vertical conformance improvement was evaluated by collecting four Injection profile logs
(IPL) (Table 1); first two were recorded immediately after shutting off surfactant injection and
transitioning into CO2, third IPL was collected at the end of the CO 2 only portion, and final reading
was taken more than 1.5 years after the previous IPL.
Table 1: IPL results verifying the more uniform injection distribution between U-SA and L-SA post foam (Katiyar et al.,
2020).

% Gas Distribution
After surfactant injection After CO2 only injection
Baseli 3rd 5th 11th
ne cycle cycle cycle 5th cycle
U-SA Pay Zone 33 38 40 47 46
Pay Zone 56 62 60 53 54
L-SA Out of Zone
(OOZ) 21 0 0 0 0

7
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

Well Runtime
All producers within the pattern use artificial lift. Excess gas in the pump from CO 2
breakthrough results in a decrease in pump efficiency and runtime, which leads to higher bottom hole
pressures and lower production rates. Application of foam mitigated direct gas breakthrough and
increased average well runtime from 15% to 60% within the first six months of surfactant injection
(Katiyar et al., 2020).

Figure 6: Application of foam mitigated direct gas breakthrough and increased average well runtime (Katiyar et al., 2020).

Individual Well Oil Production Response

Foam pilot did not influence all the producers in the same way. Wells offset to the injector in
an E-W direction (identified as the dominant permeability direction) were the first to witness uplift.
Wells that lie N-S relative to the injector (perpendicular to the dominant permeability direction)
recorded production uplift after several months from start of foam injection. On the other hand,
horizontal wells did not exhibit any change in production (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Individual well oil production response (Katiyar et al., 2020).

Conclusions
Complete elimination of OOZ injection redirected gas flow to upswept regions improving vertical
conformance.
Reduction in gas injectivity, due to strong foam generation and propagation, blocked gas
breakthrough between the injector and highly connected producers located along the E-W
direction improving areal conformance and increased well runtime.

8
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

CO2 sequestration while extending the EVGSAU lifetime is another benefit of the foam
technology.

Expansion Phase
Due to the outstanding performance of the pilot described by Katiyar et al. (2020), the same
surfactant with high foaming tendencies, high gas solubility, and low adsorption characteristics was
utilized to expand the pilot size by three times to verify robustness and reproducibility of the
technology (Hassanzadeh et al., 2022).

References
Dow. (2023, June 6). ELEVATE™ CO2 Foam Additives [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6-tdJTx_8U&ab_channel=Dow
Hassanzadeh, A., Katiyar, A., Kalaei, H., Pecore, D., Schofield, E., Nguyen, Q., and Corey G.
"Successful CO2-Foam Field Implementation for Improving Oil Sweep Efficiency in EVGSAU
Field at Permian Basin: Expansion Phase." Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA, October 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.2118/210182-MS
Katiyar, A., Hassanzadeh, A., Patil, P., Hand, M., Perozo, A., Pecore, D., Kalaei, H., & Quoc N.
"Successful Field Implementation of CO2-Foam Injection for Conformance Enhancement in the
EVGSAU Field in the Permian Basin." Paper presented at the SPE Improved Oil Recovery
Conference, Virtual, August 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/200327-MS
Moffitt, P., Pecore, D., Trees, M., & Greg S. "East Vacuum Grayburg San Andres Unit, 30 Years
of CO2 Flooding: Accomplishments, Challenges and Opportunities." Paper presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA, September 2015.
doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/175000-MS
Talebian, S. H., Masoudi, R., Tan, I. M., & Zitha, P. L. J. (2014). Foam assisted CO2-EOR: A
review of concept, challenges, and future prospects. Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering, 120, 202-215.

9
Hala K. Alshadafan 22nd Nov
2023

10