First Autonomous Inflow Control Valve AICV Well Completion Deployed in a Field Under an EOR Water & CO2 Injection Scheme

Abstract

Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) schemes utilizing CO2 and water injection often experience significant problems and challenges with short circuiting of CO2 gas and water between injectors and producers, thereby leaving significant oil behind. Presented herein is the description and results of a field trial of new downhole flow control technology designed to provide autonomous inflow control of produced fluids from each zone in multi-zone wells. The new technology deployed involves integrating an autonomous inflow control valve (AICV) and a conventional (passive, non-autonomous) inflow control device (ICD) into a unique 3-position "sliding sleeve", shifted by coil tubing, to allow performance comparison between the two different inflow control devices as well as multiple flow control settings of each type. The AICV was designed (and lab tested) to selectively choke back or shut off flow of free CO2 gas and also high watercut (>99%), thereby significantly improving reservoir sweep and yielding higher oil production. The AICV opens or closes autonomously depending on sensed properties of wellbore fluids. Prior to installing the advanced completion, the multi-zone (vertical) trial well was extensively characterized using PLT and other log data, which was then inputted into a commercially available computer model to help design the AICV and ICD settings. The field trial was designed to evaluate the use of flow control in the EOR scheme over a wide range of flow rates and also to compare the two different flow control technologies at different settings within the same wellbore and reservoir condititions. This paper presents the results of the world's first field trial of the AICV in a Water and CO2 injection scheme, and the world's first comparison with conventional ICD technology in the same well. In addition to lab tests, the early field trial results of the advanced flow control completion are compared with historical production and PLT data where the zones were comingled (without any downhole flow control). A performance comparison of AICV versus conventional ICD, along with conclusions, implications for other wells in the same field and other fields, and lessons learned, are all presented herein.

Computational study of CO2 injection at Johan Sverdrup for enhanced oil recovery and storage

“…This mechanism is controlled by a minor pilot flow that flows parallel to the main flow, and this is shown in Figure 4. The mechanism is described in detail in (Aakre, 2017;Aakre et al, 2013;Kais et al, 2016;Aakre et al, 2018). When the difference in pressure (P1-P2) is high, as in the case of oil, the valve stays in the open position.…”

Simulation of enhanced oil recovery with CO2 injection

“…At the same time, the production will continue without any restrictions from the other zones. The principle of the AICVs is based on the difference in viscosity and density for different fluids (InflowControl, 2019;Aakre, 2017;Kais et al, 2016). Figure 3…”

“…AICVs were tested for CO2-EOR in a vertical pilot well in Canada in 2015. This was the first EOR installation that used autonomous inflow control in combination with CO2 injection (Kais et al, 2016;Aakre et al, 2018). CO2 injection has become more and more common in enhanced oil recovery, especially in North America where natural sources of CO2 exist.…”

Simulation of Oil Production from Homogenous North Sea Reservoirs with Inflow Control using OLGA/Rocx

“…The yellow area is a piston, and this piston is moving from open to closed position depending on the viscosity of the fluid surrounding the AICV. The principle of the AICV technology is described in detail by Mathiesen et al, Aakre et al and Ransis et al (Mathiesen et al, 2014;Aakre et al;2013;Ransis et al, 2016) 2 Simulation set-up Simulations of oil production are carried out by using the near well simulation tool Rocx in combination with OLGA.…”