1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. IOR 2019 – 20th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Summary

Foam processes aim to improve the efficiency of gas-based injection methods through gases mobility control. They have been successfully applied in various EOR contexts: CCUS through CO2-EOR, steam injection for heavy oil reservoirs, and also in fractured reservoirs. The success of such processes depends on multiple factors, among which the interactions between the surfactants, the oil and the rock, play a key role. The purpose of this study is to provide initial answers by focusing on the influence of wettability and oil saturation on the behavior of CO2-foam flows.

A new coreflooding set-up is designed for ‘mesoscopic’ cores (2cm diameter) in order to conduct foam formulation screening and perform faster foam injection tests at reservoir conditions. This set-up was first validated by repeating experiments performed previously on classical corefloods with 4cm diameter cores. Similar results in terms of mobility reduction were obtained for the same operating conditions with a considerable reduction of test duration.

All experiments were performed with Clashach sandstones cores having approximatively 16% porosity and 600mD permeability. Two gas compositions have been studied: (1) a dense supercritical CO2 (density of 638kg/m3 at P=160bar, T=60°C) and (2) a non-dense gas mixture of CO2 and CH4. For each gas composition, four foam injection tests were carried out: two on water-wet rock samples, two others on crude-aged core samples, and for both in the absence and in presence of oil. Anionic surfactant formulations and gas were co-injected with a gas fraction of 0.7. Foam rheology was assessed by measuring foam apparent viscosity through a scan of interstitial velocities.

All the tests performed in dense conditions have highlighted the generation of strong foams, which present shear-thinning rheological behavior; the apparent viscosity decreases as a power law of the interstitial velocity. An influence of the wettability is observed on the foam apparent viscosity, which drops off by 30% in altered wettability rock samples. When samples were originally saturated with oil at Swi, the level of apparent viscosity remains globally unchanged but the kinetics of the initial formation of the foam is slower with oil than without. Foam flooding experiments are sometimes carried out simply in the presence of oil without taking into account the influence of wettability, which appears to be as important, if not more, than the oil saturation itself. These results will hopefully provide some guidance for future foam studies and raise awareness on the importance of these parameters.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900151
2019-04-08
2024-04-24

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900151
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcorn, Z. P., Fredriksen, S. B., Sharma, M. et al.
    2018. An Integrated CO2 Foam EOR Pilot Program with Combined CCUS in an Onshore Texas Heterogeneous Carbonate Field, 24. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/190204-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Almajid, M.M. and Kovscek, A. R.
    2016. Pore-level mechanics of foam generation and coalescence in the presence of oil. Adv Colloid Interface Sci233: 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2015.10.008.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Batôt, G., Fleury, M., and Nabzar, L.
    2017. Reducing CO2 Flow Using Foams. Energy Procedia114: 4129–4139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1553.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Batôt, G., Fleury, M., Rosenberg, E. et al.
    2016. Foam Propagation in Rock Samples: Impact of Oil and Flow Caracterization, 8. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/179855-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bergeron, V., Fagan, M. E., and Radke, C. J.
    1993. Generalized entering coefficients: A criterion for foam stability against oil in porous media. langmuir. https://doi.org/10.2172/10192744.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Chabert, M., D'Souza, D., Cochran, J. et al.
    2016. A CO2 Foam Conformance Pilot in US Gulf Coast Region, 15. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/183352-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chauveteau, G. and Zaitoun, A.
    1981. Basic rheological behavior of xanthan polysaccharide solutions in porous media: Effects of pore size and polymer concentration. Proceedings of the First European Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Bournemouth, England, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, TX: 197–212.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chou, S. I., Vasicek, S. L., Pisio, D. L. et al.
    (eds.). 1992. CO2 foam field trial at north ward-estes. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Denkov, N. D.
    2004. Mechanisms of foam destruction by oil-based antifoams. Langmuir20 (22): 9463–9505. https://doi.org/10.1021/la049676o.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Farajzadeh, R., Andrianov, A., Krastev, R. et al.
    2012. Foam-oil interaction in porous media: implications for foam assisted enhanced oil recovery. Adv Colloid Interface Sci183–184: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2012.07.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gao, F., Yan, H., Wang, Q. et al.
    2014. Mechanism of foam destruction by antifoams: a molecular dynamics study. Phys Chem Chem Phys16 (32): 17231–17237. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4cp02038c.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Géraud, B., Jones, S. A., Cantat, I. et al.
    2016. The flow of a foam in a two-dimensional porous medium. Water Resour. Res.52 (2): 773–790. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017936.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Gland, N., Chevallier, E., Cuenca, A. et al.
    2018. New Developement of Cationic Surfactant Formulations for Foam Assisted CO2-EOR in Carbonates Formations, 22. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/193201-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hirasaki, G. J.
    1989. The Steam-Foam Process. SPE-19505-PA41 (05): 449–456. https://doi.org/10.2118/19505-PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hoefner, M. L., Evans, E. M., Buckles, J. J. et al.
    1995. CO2 foam: Results from four developmental field trials. SPE Reservoir Engineering10 (04): 273–281.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Huerre, A., Miralles, V., and Jullien, M.-C.
    2014. Bubbles and foams in microfluidics. Soft Matter10 (36): 6888–6902. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4sm00595c.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Iglauer, S.
    2017. CO2-Water-Rock Wettability: Variability, Influencing Factors, and Implications for CO2 Geostorage. Acc Chem Res50 (5): 1134–1142. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00602.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Jones, S. A., Dollet, B., Méheust, Y. et al.
    2013. Structure-dependent mobility of a dry aqueous foam flowing along two parallel channels. Physics of Fluids25 (6): 63101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4811178.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Kim, J., Dong, Y., and Rossen, W. R.
    2005. Steady-state flow behavior of CO2 foam. SPE Journal10 (04): 405–415.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kovscek, A. R. and Bertin, H. J.
    2003a. Foam mobility in heterogeneous porous media - (I: Scaling concepts). Transport in Porous Media52 (1): 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022312225868.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 2003b. Foam mobility in heterogeneous porous media - (II: Experimental observations). Transport in Porous Media52 (1): 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022368228594.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Lawson, J. B. and Reisberg, J.
    1980. Alternate Slugs Of Gas And Dilute Surfactant For Mobility Control During Chemical Flooding, 16. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/8839-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Lv, M. M., Wang, S. Z., Jing, Z. F. et al.
    2012. Studies on Foam Flow in the Porous Media in the Last Decade: A Review. AMR616–618: 257–262. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.616-618.257.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Mannhardt, K. and Svorstøl, I.
    1999. Effect of oil saturation on foam propagation in Snorre reservoir core. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering23 (3–4): 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-4105(99)00016-9.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Mauray, A.
    2017. PhD Thesis. Study of foam flow properties in model porous media, UNIVERSITE GRENOBLE ALPES (2017).
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Negin, C., Ali, S., and Xie, Q.
    2017. Most common surfactants employed in chemical enhanced oil recovery. Petroleum3 (2): 197–211.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Nikolov, A. D., Wasan, D. T., Huang, D. W. et al.
    1986. The Effect of Oil on Foam Stability: Mechanisms and Implications for Oil Displacement by Foam in Porous Media. SPE Journal. https://doi.org/10.2118/15443-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Pal, S., Mushtaq, M., Banat, F. et al.
    2018. Review of surfactant-assisted chemical enhanced oil recovery for carbonate reservoirs: Challenges and future perspectives. Petroleum Science:1–26.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Pedroni, L.
    2017. PhD Thesis. Experimental study of mobility control by foams: potential of a FAWAG process in pre-salt reservoir conditions, Université Pierre et Marie Curie - IFP Energies nouvelles (2017).
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Quennouz, N., Ryba, M., Argillier, J. F. et al.
    2014. Microfluidic Study of Foams Flow for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). Oil Gas Sci.Technol.Rev.IFP Energies nouvelles69 (3): 457–466.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Sanders, A., Jones, R. M., Rabie, A. et al.
    (eds.). 2012. Implementation of a CO2 foam pilot study in the SACROC field: Performance evaluation. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Schramm, L. L.
    (ed.). 1994. Foams: Fundamentals and applications in the petroleum industry - Foam sensitivity to crude oil in porous media. Washington: American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/advances.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Schramm, L. L. and Mannhardt, K.
    1996. The effect of wettability on foam sensitivity to crude oil in porous media. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering15 (1): 101–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Talebian, S. H., Masoudi, R., Tan, I. M. et al.
    2014. Foam assisted CO2-EOR: A review of concept, challenges, and future prospects. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering120: 202–215.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Veeningen, D., Zitha, P. L.J., and van Kruijsdijk, C. P.J.W.
    1997. Understanding Foam Flow Physics: The Role of Permeability, 11. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/38197-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900151
Loading
Influence of Wettability and Oil Saturation on the Rheological Behavior of CO2-Foams
Conference Proceedings 2019, 1 (2019); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201900151
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900151
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900151
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error