Technical and economic feasibility study of flue gas injection in an Iranian oil field

Ahmadi, Mehdi; Hasanvand, Mahdi Zeinali; Shokrolahzadeh, Sara

doi:10.1016/j.petlm.2015.07.010

Cited by 18 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The flue gas can accumulate at the top of the reservoir where it provides an insulation effect and forces the steam chamber to spread laterally (Canbolat et al, 2004). Ahmadi (2015) utilized numerical simulation method to compare with effect for EOR different gas injection methods (N 2 , CO 2 , produced reservoir gas, and flue gas), and found that the ultimate oil recovery was greatest for flue gas injection. Bender and Akin (2017) used reservoir simulations to investigated the difference between CO 2 and flue gas injection for EOR, the results displayed that pure CO 2 injection achieved higher oil recovery and greater CO 2 sequestration than flue gas injection for injection periods up to 25 years but beyond this time oil recovery was similar for CO 2 and flue gas injection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In conclusion, even though recently studies of the flue gas assisted SAGD have made considerable progress, most of studies merely focused on numerical simulation (Ahmadi, 2015;Bender and Akin, 2017;Chang, 2020) and small physical simulation experiments Li, 2019;Li et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2019b), three-dimensional physical simulation experiments on flue gas assisted SAGD, large physical model especially, were barely carried out. The effect of flue gas on SAGD and the role flue gas plays in EOR mechanism are still not fully verified by performing large-scale 3D physical simulation experiments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

3D experimental investigation on enhanced oil recovery by flue gas assisted steam assisted gravity drainage

Tao

Yuan

Huang

et al. 2021

Energy Exploration & Exploitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flue gas assisted steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) is a frontier technology to enhance oil recovery for heavy oil reservoirs. The carbon dioxide generated from the thermal recovery of heavy oil can be utilized and consumed to mitigate climate warming for the world. However, most studies are limited to merely use numerical simulation or small physical simulation device and hardly focus on large scale three-dimensions experiment, which cannot fully investigate the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) mechanism of flue gas assisted SAGD, thus the effect of flue gas on SAGD production performance is still not very clear. In this paper, large-scaled and high temperature and pressure resistant 3D physical simulation experiment was conducted, where simulated the real reservoir to a maximum extent, and systematically explored the EOR mechanisms of the flue gas assisted SAGD. Furthermore, the differences between the steam huff and puff, SAGD and flue gas assisted SAGD are discussed. The experimental result showed that the production effect of SAGD was improved by injecting flue gas, with the oil recovery was increased by 5.7%. With the help of thermocouple temperature measuring sensors, changes of temperature field display that flue gas can promote lateral re-development of the steam chamber, and the degree of reservoir exploitation around the horizontal wells has been increased particularly. What’s more, the addition of flue gas further increased the content of light components and decreased the content of heavy by comparing the content of heavy oil components produced in different production times.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D experimental investigation on enhanced oil recovery by flue gas assisted steam assisted gravity drainage

Tao

Yuan

Huang

et al. 2021

Energy Exploration & Exploitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These mechanisms depend on the operational conditions and oil composition. The most common oil production mechanisms in CO 2 -based EOR methods are oil viscosity reduction, oil swelling, condensation, vaporization, and interfacial tension (IFT) reduction (Abedini and Torabi 2014 ; Ahmadi et al 2015 ; Bachu 2016 ; Czarnota et al 2017 ; Farajzadeh et al 2009 ; Li et al 2013b , 2015 ; Shelton et al 2016 ; Yang et al 2012 ). Reducing the level of CO 2 emissions in the atmosphere by the use of geological CO 2 storage in depleted oil reservoirs as well as its role in the oil recovery processes highlights the importance of further studies of CO 2 injection operations and the corresponding PVT behavior (Ahmadi et al 2016a , b ; Bachu 2016 ; Davis et al 2010 ; Jamali and Ettehadtavakkol 2017 ; Kim and Santamarina 2014 ; Li et al 2015 ; Li and Fan 2015 ; Liu and Wilcox 2012 ; Luo et al 2013 ; Orr et al 1982 ; Sell et al 2012 ; Shelton et al 2016 ; Yang et al 2012 ; Yu et al 2015 ; zeinali Hasanvand et al 2013 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid connectionist model determines CO2–oil swelling factor

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In-depth understanding of interactions between crude oil and CO2 provides insight into the CO2-based enhanced oil recovery (EOR) process design and simulation. When CO2 contacts crude oil, the dissolution process takes place. This phenomenon results in the oil swelling, which depends on the temperature, pressure, and composition of the oil. The residual oil saturation in a CO2-based EOR process is inversely proportional to the oil swelling factor. Hence, it is important to estimate this influential parameter with high precision. The current study suggests the predictive model based on the least-squares support vector machine (LS-SVM) to calculate the CO2–oil swelling factor. A genetic algorithm is used to optimize hyperparameters (γ and σ2) of the LS-SVM model. This model showed a high coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.9953) and a low value for the mean-squared error (MSE = 0.0003) based on the available experimental data while estimating the CO2–oil swelling factor. It was found that LS-SVM is a straightforward and accurate method to determine the CO2–oil swelling factor with negligible uncertainty. This method can be incorporated in commercial reservoir simulators to include the effect of the CO2–oil swelling factor when adequate experimental data are not available.

show abstract

“…The cost of the flue gas (0.1 US$ per 1000 cubic feet (MCF)) was based on the literature [31]. The results of the B/C ratios calculated for the hybrid CSS methods evaluated during the sixth cycle clearly show the inefficiency of CSS with solvents (Table 5).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both hybrid methods show promising B/C ratios and EE indices (Tables 5 and 6, respectively). However, the higher B/C ratio estimated for CSS with flue gases could be influenced by the optimistic costs of the flue gas (0.1 US$/MCF) [31]. The quality and cost of flue gas depends on the fuel used for steam or power generation (i.e., natural gas, fuel oil, etc.).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefit–Cost and Energy Efficiency Index to Support the Screening of Hybrid Cyclic Steam Stimulation Methods

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the evaluations of thermal enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods in numerical simulations mainly focus on the identification of recovery processes with the greatest potential to increase oil recovery. In some cases, the economic aspects of the EOR methods evaluated are also considered. However, these studies often lack the evaluation of the energy efficiency of the proposed methods as a strategy to support the selection of profitable recovery processes. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the potential of different hybrid cyclic steam stimulation (CSS, with flue gas, foam, nanoparticles, or solvents) methods based on a numerical simulation study using a radial model representative of a large heavy oil reservoir in the Middle Magdalena Basin, Colombia. The simulation results were used to estimate the benefit–cost (B/C) ratios and energy efficiency (EE) indices that can be used to screen and rank the hybrid CSS methods studied. When comparing different hybrid methods, it was found that CSS with nanoparticles or solvents performed better during the first two steam cycles (higher oil saturations). However, CSS with foam and flue gases showed higher incremental oil production (≥3564 bbls or 567 m3) during the sixth steam cycle. Based on an energy cost index (ECI = [(B/C) / EE]), CSS with foam outperformed (ECI ≈ 453) cyclic steam injection with flue gases (ECI ≈ 21) and solvents (ECI ≈ 0.1) evaluated during the sixth steam cycle. The results show that this methodology can be used to guide decision-making to identify hybrid CSS methods that can increase oil recovery in a cost-effective manner and provide an efficient energy balance.

show abstract

Technical and economic feasibility study of flue gas injection in an Iranian oil field

Cited by 18 publications

References 8 publications

3D experimental investigation on enhanced oil recovery by flue gas assisted steam assisted gravity drainage

3D experimental investigation on enhanced oil recovery by flue gas assisted steam assisted gravity drainage

Hybrid connectionist model determines CO2–oil swelling factor

Benefit–Cost and Energy Efficiency Index to Support the Screening of Hybrid Cyclic Steam Stimulation Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About