A Case Study On Miscible and Immiscible Gas-Injection Pilots in A Middle East Carbonate Reservoir in An Offshore Environment
A Case Study On Miscible and Immiscible Gas-Injection Pilots in A Middle East Carbonate Reservoir in An Offshore Environment
A Case Study On Miscible and Immiscible Gas-Injection Pilots in A Middle East Carbonate Reservoir in An Offshore Environment
net/publication/304369272
CITATIONS READS
6 554
3 authors, including:
All content following this page was uploaded by Jitendra Kumar on 16 December 2018.
Peripheral-water injection
PA-4 PA-5
Fig. 1—Schematic of location and well orientation of Pilot A and Pilot B (left: areal; right: vertical). Hor. Inj 5 horizontal injector,
Obs 5 observer, and OWC 5 oil/water contact.
reduce uncertainties and risks associated with gas injection. Two Reservoir A. The producer is 3,280 ft away from the midpoint of
unconfined pilots with an observer well and one confined produc- the horizontal section of the injector, as shown in Fig. 1. The ob-
ing pilot with an observer well were selected for execution to server well was 1,380 ft away from the injector and was also com-
assess injectivity, productivity, and displacement efficiency, as pleted with dual strings, similar to P-1. The nearby oil producers
well as vertical- and areal-sweep efficiency. The design and moni- (Wells PA-1, PA-2, and PA-3) were shut-in during the pilot pe-
toring program of the planned pilots are described in detail by Al- riod to avoid interference, which could have jeopardized pilot
Hendi et al. (1998). This paper describes only the two unconfined- interpretation. The other producers (Wells PA-4 and PA-5),
gas-injection pilots. located away from the pilot area, were on production to assess the
areal-sweep efficiency and can be used as a control point during
Pilot Description the history-match exercise. Well PA-4 was completed as a single
string in Reservoir A only, whereas Well PA-5 was completed
Pilot-A and Pilot-B. Two gas-injection pilots were performed in with dual strings, perforated in both the reservoirs, with the long
the two reservoirs of the field. In the overlying Reservoir A, injec- string in Reservoir B and the short string in Reservoir A.
tion occurred in secondary mode into the oil pool, whereas in the Openhole logs showed that the pilot area is vertically homoge-
underlying Reservoir B, tertiary injection was performed in the neous and uniform in porosity and permeability, with no evidence
transition zone, close to the oil/water contact in an area that had of baffles or barriers, as shown in Fig. 2. The average oil satura-
already experienced peripheral-water injection, as shown in Fig. tion along the zone is estimated to be 75% by use of a different
1. The injected gas was from the first-stage separator, with major set of logs.
components consisting of methane (76 mol%), ethane (14 mol%), Injection/Production Performance. Fig. 3 shows the injec-
propane (5 mol%), and CO2 (2 mol%), and minor constituents tion and production performance of the pilot. The gas injection
including butane, pentane, and nitrogen. started in March 2002 with an average monthly injection rate of
10 MMscf/D over the first 3 months, followed by 25-MMscf/D
Pilot A: Description and Performance. Pilot A was a secondary injections until it was further reduced back to 10 MMscf/D after
gas injection in the oil-pool area, where the average pressure in gas breakthrough in the producer well. In total, the pilot injected
the pilot area is lower than the MMP value by 600 psi (Fig. 2). 23 Bscf of gas, which corresponds to 1.18 pore volumes (PVs) in
Well configuration was line-drive, consisting of a horizontal in- 8 years.
jector (I-1), a vertical producer (P-1), and an observer (Obs-1), as Production started as dry oil for 3 years, with rate variations
shown in Fig. 1. The injector was perforated at the lower part of between 2500 and 3500 STB/D until gas breakthrough occurred
the reservoir and was approximately 2,500 ft long. The producer in 2004 (Fig. 3). After breakthrough, gas/oil ratio (GOR)
well was completed with dual strings, perforated across all the increased steeply from 750 to 5,000 scf/STB, and after 2005 the
layers, with the long string in Reservoir B and the short string in producing well was shut-in because of surface-facility constraints.
Obs-1 P-1
00
05
TVDSS (ft) (showing last two digits)
10
1,900
15 ft
TVDSS
TVDSS
TVDSS
TVDSS
TVDSS
TVDSS
TVDSS
20
25
30
35
40
0 10 20 30 40 0.1 10 1000 0 25 50 75 100 3,800 3,900 4,000 0 10 20 30 40 0.1 10 1,000 0 25 50 75 100 3,800 3,900 4,000
Porosity (%) Permeability (md) So (%) Pressure (psig) Porosity (%) Permeability (md) So (%) Pressure (psig)
Fig. 2—Porosity, permeability, saturation, and pressure (before pilot began) in Wells Obs-1 and P-1. TVDSS 5 true vertical depth subsea.
40 6,000 4,000 10
GOR (Mscf/STB)
4,000
25 6
20 3,000 2,000
15 4
2,000
10 1,000
2
1,000
5
0 0 0 0
02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 02 03 04 05 06 07
Years Years
05
TVDSS (ft) (showing
15
last two digits)
25
35
February June August July July December September April October June November
2003 2003 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008
Nevertheless, the well was tested biannually to monitor the gas by gas presence throughout the reservoir column in the CNL runs
movement. Injected gas has also been observed at the distant Well from 2008.
PA-4, which is outside the pilot area because its GOR started Producer Well P-1 was sidetracked for coring and openhole
increasing in 2006, and is shown later in the areal and vertical logs in 2010 to evaluate gas-injection performance. Dean-Stark
sweep discussion of the history match. analysis performed on plugs showed a residual fluid saturation in
Monitoring Performance. Before gas injection started, open- the range of 10–30% with an average of 22%. Openhole logs per-
hole-formation-pressure-testing surveys at the producer and formed on the sidetrack well showed that only the top part of the
observer confirmed a reservoir pressure of approximately 3,900 reservoir was swept by gas, with a remaining oil saturation of
psia, which is much lower than the MMP of injected gas (Fig. 2). 20%, whereas the rest of the column has remaining saturation
The permanent-downhole-gauge recording shows that pressure close to the initial oil saturation. This was also confirmed with a
near the producer started increasing with gas injection and formation-pressure-testing tool by collecting bottomhole samples
remained close to MMP during the pilot duration, and is shown from the top and bottom of Reservoir A. The top sample indicated
later in the pressure discussion of the history match. presence of 100% gas, whereas the bottom sample contained a
Vertical sweep was evaluated through cased-hole logs composition similar to that of the original oil.
performed biannually, and results are presented in Fig. 4 for The crude oil has low asphaltene content (0.1 wt%), but as-
the observer well. The compensated-neutron-porosity log (CNL) phaltene deposition was observed in all wells experiencing gas
showed gas presence at the top of the observer well in 2003. The breakthrough. The left side of Fig. 5 shows the asphaltene deposi-
CNL tool calculates porosity and identifies lithology and the pres- tion on the spinner of the production-logging tool when pulled up
ence of gas by making thermal- and epithermal-neutron measure- at the surface, whereas the right side shows the same asphaltene
ments. Subsequent CNL runs indicated that gas was mainly after cooling. Asphaltene deposition was also observed in a previ-
sweeping the top of the reservoir, indicating strong gravity segre- ous near-miscible gas-injection pilot of onshore Abu Dhabi with
gation. CNL results were validated by reservoir-saturation logging an oil of similar composition to the field under consideration
(RST), which also indicated the presence of gas only at the top. (Negahban et al. 2003). The cause of this deposition is the incom-
RST computes the saturation either from carbon/oxygen-ratio patibility between reservoir oil and the accumulation of enriched
measurement or from r measurement. Vertical sweep began gas near the wellbore (Yonebayashi et al. 2009).
increasing after approximately 1 PV injected (PVI), as indicated
History Match of Pilot A. Model Description. The 3D grid
model used for the history-match exercise is derived from the ge-
ological model that was built in Roxar (2012) RMS software,
with a spacing of 250 250 m2 and average layer thickness of 3
ft. The model properties was geostatistically populated by use of
reservoir-rock types. The reservoir-rock types were generated by
considering the petrophysical groups on the basis of the mercury-
injection capillary pressure, lithofacies data, and geology. Upscal-
ing of the geological model was not performed for the construc-
tion of the dynamic model.
A full-field compositional model including a seven-component
EOS tuned with experimental data and 0.4 million grid cells was
used for gas-injection-pilot history match, by use of Schlumberger
(2012) Eclipse300 software, incorporating the pressure-gradient
Fig. 5—Asphaltene precipitation in the production-logging tool effect and peripheral-seawater-injection sweep efficiency. The
at Well P-1. full-field-model grid cells are very big (250 250 m2), and to
0
Obs-1 P-1 P-1
(before pilot starts) (before pilot starts) (after pilot ends)
5
15
TVDSS
TVDSS
20
25
30
35
Observed Observed Observed
Simulated Simulated Simulated
40
3,700 4,200 4,700 3,700 4,200 4,700 3,700 4,200 4,700
Pressure (psi) Pressure (psi) Pressure (psi)
*Observed data is obtained from (a) openhole-formation-pressure-testing surveys for before pilot starts case and
(b) permanent-downhole-gauge measurements for after pilot ends case
Fig. 6—Pressure match along the layers of the observer and producer well before/after starting the pilot.
accurately represent the saturation front, local grid refinement was Pressure Match. For the gas injection, agreement with pres-
performed vertically and horizontally in the pilot area to reduce sure data is highly important because it governs the microscopic
the numerical dispersion of composition and saturation front displacement through the miscibility behavior, and hence the ulti-
(Camy and Emanuel 1977; Jerauld 1998; Lawrence et al. 2003). mate recovery. Moreover, in this case, the existing pressure gra-
Moreover, local grid refinement allowed more-accurate represen- dients strongly influenced gas movement, and thus must be well-
tation of well trajectories, which was difficult in the larger grid represented in the pilot area to accurately evaluate gas movement
cells of the full-field model. A value of 5% residual oil to miscible and breakthrough timing. Fig. 6 shows the pressure match of dif-
flood (Sorm), obtained from coreflood experiments (Kumar et al. ferent layers of Wells Obs-1 and P-1 before starting the pilot,
2015), was used to restrict the vaporization of oil components into demonstrating that the model used for the history-match exercise
the gas phase below the user-defined residual oil saturation (ROS) has captured important features of the pressure gradient areally
in a gridblock (Hiraiwa and Suzuki 2007; Bourgeois et al. 2011; and vertically, and is thus a good base from which to start the his-
Patacchini et al. 2015). In the model, the injectors were controlled tory match.
by surface water/gas-injection rate, whereas the producers were A good history match is obtained for the pilot, as shown in
controlled by the surface liquid rate. Fig. 7. The model accurately captures the movement of mobile-
4,000 10
Oil-Production Rate (STB/D) GOR (Mscf/STB)
Observed Observed
Simulated 8 Simulated
3,000
6
2,000
4
1,000
2
0 0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Years Years
1 7,000
Water-Cut Average Reservoir Pressure (psia)
6,000
0.8
5,000
Observed
0.6 Simulated 4,000
0.4 3,000
Observed
2,000 Simulated
0.2
1,000
0 0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Years Years
Fig. 7—Comparison of oil rate, GOR, water cut, and bottomhole pressure of Well P-1 with observed data.
2.5 2.5
Well PA-4 Well PA-5
2 2
Observed Observed
GOR (Mscf/STB)
GOR (Mscf/STB)
Simulated Simulated
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Years Years
Fig. 8—GOR match of the nearby wells (Wells PA-4 and PA-5) with observed data.
Sg Sg Sg Sg Sg
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
10
12
14
TVDSS (ft) (showing last two digits)
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
July 2003 July 2005 December 2005 July 2007 November 2008
32
34
36
Fig. 10—Evolution of gas saturation at Well Obs-1 as obtained from the simulation model. Sg 5 gas saturation as percent of PV.
Delta Oil Saturation Pilot B: Description and Performance. Pilot B was also a line-
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 drive pilot, but was in the waterflooded transition area of Reser-
5
voir B. It was started at the same time as Pilot A and oil was pro-
duced by use of the long string of Well P-1. The long string of
Obs-1 was used to monitor the vertical gas efficiency and pres-
sure. Gas was injected from horizontal injector Well I-2, which is
perforated at the lower part of the reservoir and is approximately
10 2,300 ft long. The producer well is 2,360 ft away from the mid-
point of the horizontal section of the injector, whereas the ob-
server is 460 ft away from injector, as shown in Fig. 1.
Openhole logs performed in the pilot area indicate that the res-
ervoir surrounding Pilot B is not as homogeneous as that sur-
TVDSS (ft) (showing last two digits)
P-1
0
10
TVDSS (ft) (showing last two digits)
15
20
TVDSS
TVDSS
TVDSS
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 0.1 10 1,000 0 25 50 4,850 4,900 4,950
Porosity (%) Permeability (md) So (%) Pressure (psig)
Fig. 12—Porosity, permeability, oil saturation, and pressure profile of Well P-1 before pilot began.
40 6,000 2,500 18
GOR (Mscf/STB)
4,000 12
25
1,500
10
20 3,000
8
15 1,000
2,000 6
10
4
1,000 500
5
2
0 0 0 0
02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years Years
15
20 1,900 ft
25
TVDSS
TVDSS
30
35
40
45
50 Observed
Simulated
55
4,500 5,000 5,500 4,500 5,000 5,500 4,500 5,000 5,500
Pressure (psi) Pressure (psi) Pressure (psi)
Fig. 14—Pressure match along the layers of the observer and producer wells before/after beginning the pilot.
Monitoring Performance. The pressure survey of the pro- Production-logging tools were used to evaluate vertical-sweep
ducer and observer confirmed that during the whole period of efficiency. The CNL showed the presence of gas in the middle of
injection there was good pressure support in the pilot area and the formation at Well Obs-1, which is in line with the presence of
the pressure always remained higher than the MMP, as shown high-permeability streak. Early breakthrough occurred through
in Fig. 14. this high-permeability streak, as shown in Fig. 15, and afterward
Three perfluorocarbons—perfluorodimethylcyclobutane, per- vertical sweep started improving, as seen by the presence of gas at
fluromethylcyclo-hexane, and 1,2-perfluorodimethylcyclohex- the top of the formation.
ane—were used as gas tracers and were injected in Well I-2 in In 2010, the producer well was side-tracked for coring and
July 2002 to compare their travel time with the producer and openhole logs to evaluate gas-injection performance. Dean-Stark
assess areal sweep. The differing extents of alkylation and per- analysis performed on plugs showed the ROS in the range of
fluoronation of these three tracers results in different partitioning 1–16% with an average of 5%. The low values of saturation were
coefficients and arrival times. The first tracer, perfluorodimethyl- observed in the highly permeable zone, whereas the high values
cyclobutane, was observed 114 days after injection, reflecting the were found in the dense zone, which was swept by much-less gas.
existence of high-permeability streaks. The second tracer was The sampling performed at the top and bottom of the formation
observed after 272 days, which is very close to the gas-break- observed 100% gas, which may indicate the presence of ROS to
through timing. The third tracer was received after 423 days. miscible flood in the vicinity.
10
TVDSS (ft) (showing
20
last two digits)
30
40
50
OH August November August July July December
2002 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005
1,500 30
Oil-Production Rate (STB/D) GOR (Mscf/STB)
1,200 25
Observed Observed
Simulated 20
900 Simulated
15
600
10
300 5
0 0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years Years
1 7,000
Water-Cut Average Reservoir Pressure (psia)
Observed 6,000
0.8 Simulated
5,000
0.6 4,000
0.4 3,000
Observed
2,000 Simulated
0.2
1,000
0 0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years Years
Fig. 16—Comparison of oil rate, GOR, water cut, and bottomhole pressure of Well P-1 with observed data.
The crude oil has same asphaltene content as Pilot A, but this phenomenon in the compositional simulation because interfa-
unlike Pilot A, asphaltene deposition was not observed in Pilot B cial tension, miscibility behavior, and relative permeability are all
producers. This may be attributed to low initial oil saturation dependent on pressure and compositions. Fig. 14 shows that the
because oil has already been swept by water in the zone around simulation model is able to accurately capture the pressure profile
gas-injection Pilot B. Another possible reason may be that in Pilot along Wells Obs-1 and P-1 before starting the pilot and can be
B, because both water and oil are flowing, asphaltene may act as used to represent the fluid behavior inside the pilot area. Fig. 14
an emulsion-forming agent and can lie at the interface of oil and (right) shows that the pressure evolution in the model is well-rep-
water, which prevents their deposition. This assumption needs to resented because it accurately matches the sidetracked-well-pres-
be validated through laboratory experiments, as well as perhaps sure measurement.
future pilots. Fig. 16 show that an acceptable history match was obtained
that captures the major features of three-phase-fluid movement,
History Match of Pilot B. Model Description. Similar to Pilot and it can be used to predict the areal and vertical efficiency of
A, a full-field compositional model was used to history match this miscible pilot.
Pilot B, incorporating the effect of existing pressure gradients and Areal and Vertical Sweep. Fig. 17 show the evolution of the
peripheral-seawater-injection sweep. Similar local grid refinement GOR in the nearby well (PA-5) and the match obtained, which
has been performed vertically and horizontally in the area sur- demonstrates good match of GOR. Another nearby well (PA-4)
rounding Pilot B to reduce the numerical dispersion of composi- was not perforated in Reservoir B and therefore cannot be used to
tion and saturation fronts. Other modifications were similar to assess areal-sweep efficiency. Moreover, the water cut obtained
those for the Pilot A model. from the simulation is in agreement with the observation for
Pressure Match. Pressure in the Pilot B area was greater than Well P-1, as shown in Fig. 16 (bottom left). All these results
the MMP during the production period. It is important to replicate show that the model is able to assess areal-sweep efficiency with
good accuracy.
Fig. 18 shows that the gas breakthrough in the simulation also
2 occurs from the high-permeability streaks that are in the middle
Well PA-5 of the formation, as described in Fig. 15. The evolution of gas
was also captured in the simulated model, which predicts the
1.6 improvement in vertical sweep, but these gas saturations cannot
Observed
be verified because of the qualitative nature of the time-lapse
GOR (Mscf/STB)
Simulated
1.2 CNL and RST logs.
As mentioned previously, the producer well was sidetracked in
2010 and fluid samples were collected in the top and bottom
0.8
zones, with both samples indicating the presence of almost 100%
gas. The simulation model predicts similar behavior, as shown in
0.4 Fig. 19 (left). Dean-Stark analysis that yields 10% ROS after
flooding is also in agreement with the simulated model.
0
The simulation predicts in a good range the areal and vertical
2002 2003 2004 2005 gas movement of the pilot. Because the pilot lies in transition
zone that has low initial oil saturation, most of the oil has already
Fig. 17—GOR match of the nearby well (Well PA-5) with been recovered by peripheral water injection, as seen in Fig. 19
observed data. (left). At this stage the water-cut at the pilot is 80% as shown in
Sg Sg Sg Sg Sg Sg
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
15
18
21
24
27
TVDSS (ft) (showing last two digits)
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
60 August 2002 November 2002 August 2003 June 2004 July 2005 December 2005
63
66
Fig. 16 (bottom left). The remaining oil, which is difficult to conditions. Results also indicate that gas injection can be conducted
recover by water injection, is recovered through miscible gas in tertiary mode to improve overall recovery in this field. However,
injection. Fig. 19 (right) shows the comparison of oil recovery by the major challenges that affect recovery, as highlighted by both
water injection, if water remained injected in the pilot area, and pilots, are gravity segregation and reservoir heterogeneity.
the gas injection. It shows that the miscible gas injection in terti- The current field-development scheme has relied on the pe-
ary zone can yield an additional recovery of 16%, as predicted ripheral-water injection and crestal-gas injection for pressure
from simulation after 1.49 PVI of gas. maintenance, as discussed by Pavangat et al. (2015). The future
development plan is to migrate gradually toward sweep-oriented
development, as described by Nakashima et al. (2015). For full-
Discussion field implementation of gas injection, WAG is considered to be a
Two gas-injection pilots with secondary- and tertiary-recovery promising option because it improves both macroscopic sweep as
methods have been successfully executed in an offshore environ- well as microscopic-displacement efficiency in water-swept
ment. Both pilots demonstrate that gas injection helps improve pres- zones. Implementation of a WAG scheme would result in the
sure support and production, whether in miscible or nearly miscible development of a three-phase zone in each injector/producer-
Oil Saturation
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60
10
15 100
Recovery Factor (%)
20
80
TVDSS (ft) (showing last two digits)
Water injection
25
Gas injection
30 60
35
40
40
50
Initial 0
After waterflood 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
55 Dean-Stark
Simulation
60
Fig. 19—Oil- and gas-saturation comparison of observed and simulated data of Well P-1 (left) and recovery comparison (right).
1.0 40
Cumulative Oil Production (million STB) Gas-Usage Factor (Mscf/STB)
35
0.8
Tertiary: Continuous gas injection 30 Tertiary: Continuous gas injection
20
0.4
15
10
0.2
5
0.0 0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Years Years
Fig. 20—Comparison of cumulative oil production and gas-usage factor for tertiary continuous and WAG injection.
drainage pattern, with potential effect on relative permeabilities, obtain necessary petrophysical parameters such as gas-trapping
trapped oil and gas saturation, and, consequently, injectivity. and hysteresis.
The Pilot B history-matched simulation model was used to eval-
uate the benefit of WAG implementation instead of tertiary gas Nomenclature
injection in the Pilot B area. A WAG ratio of 1:1 and a 6-month
cycle was used for the screening study. In this model, hysteresis CNL ¼ compensated neutron log tool to calculate porosity
and gas-trapping effects are not considered because laboratory and identify lithology and presence of gas by making
experiments have not yet been performed to evaluate these parame- thermal and epithermal neutron measurements
ters. The operational constraints of Pilot B are used in the model, k ¼ permeability
including a GOR limit of 15 Mscf/STB and a water cut of 95%. RST ¼ reservoir saturation tool to compute the saturation ei-
Fig. 20 shows the performance comparison of tertiary Pilot B ther from carbon/oxygen (C/O) ratio measurement or
and WAG. WAG recovers significant additional oil with the same from sigma measurement
operational constraints compared with tertiary gas injection. So ¼ oil saturation as percent of PV
WAG injection also extends the duration of the producing pilot by Sorm ¼ ROS to miscible flood as percent of PV
3 years compared with tertiary Pilot B, the production of which / ¼ porosity
was discontinued after only 1 year of production, with the same
operational constraints. WAG not only produces extra oil but also
reduces by half the amount of gas required. Compared with terti- Acknowledgments
ary injection, the WAG gas-usage factor, the amount of gas The authors are grateful to the management of the Abu Dhabi Ma-
required to produce 1 unit of oil, is reduced significantly, as rine Operating Company and the industrial shareholders (Abu
shown in Fig. 20 (right). Moreover, WAG injection can be further Dhabi National Oil Company, British Petroleum, Total, and
optimized by reducing gas volume in later cycles, or “tapering” the Japan Oil Development Company) for permission to present
the WAG. this paper.
Conclusions
1. Two gas-injection pilots were conducted in two different reser- References
voirs (Reservoirs A and B) in a Middle Eastern, Lower Creta- Al-Basry, A. H., Al-Hajeri, S. K., Saadawi, H. N. et al. 2011. Lessons
ceous carbonate formation. Improvement in pressure support Learned from the First Miscible CO2-EOR Pilot Project in Heteroge-
and production performance was observed in both the pilots. neous Carbonate Oil Reservoir in Abu Dhabi. Presented at the SPE
2. The vertical-sweep efficiency was affected by reservoir geol- Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference, Manama, Bahrain,
ogy, as shown by Pilot B observing early gas breakthrough 25–28 September. SPE-142665-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/
through high-permeability streaks. Significant gravity override 142665-MS.
of gas is also observed in Pilot A, which affected the pilot re- Al-Hendi, A., Boyd, D. and Al-Riyami, A. 1998. Design of Action Plan
covery. Therefore, continuous gas injection is not an effective and Monitoring Program; Secondary and Tertiary Gas Injection Pilots
scheme for large-scale application. in a Limestone Reservoir. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Pe-
3. Flow-assurance issues, including asphaltene deposition in pro- troleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 11–14 November.
ducer wells upon gas breakthrough, have been encountered in SPE-49538-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/49538-MS.
one of the pilots. This issue needs to be studied before full-field Al-Shamsi, H. A., Al-Katheeri, A. B., Al-Ameri, A. F. et al. 2012. Immis-
implementation. cible WAG Injection Pilots Performance and Lessons Learnt in Car-
4. Operational learnings include increased awareness of the com- bonate Reservoir Onshore Abu Dhabi Oil Field, United Arab
plexities involved with implementing pilots in an offshore Emirates. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibi-
environment and the necessity of proper planning, including tion and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 11–14 November. SPE-162165-MS.
preparation of a detailed risk-mitigation plan. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/162165-MS.
5. A good history match of both the pilots has been obtained, sug- Alsharhan, A. S. and Nairn, A. E. M. 1997. Sedimentary Basins and Petro-
gesting that near-miscible injection occurred in Pilot A and leum Geology of Middle East. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
miscible injection occurred in Pilot B. Tertiary miscible injec- Bonnin, E., Levallois, B. and Joffroy, G. 2002. Full Field Tertiary Gas
tion of Pilot B recovered an additional 16% stock-tank oil in Injection: A Case History Offshore Abu Dhabi. Presented at the Abu
place compared with waterflooding. Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi,
6. Gas injection in WAG mode is a possible solution to control 13–16 October. SPE-78362-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/78362-MS.
mobility and improve recovery. Simulations performed on the Bourgeois, M. J., Thibeau, S. and Guo, J. 2011. Modelling Residual Oil
history-matched model by use of a WAG strategy give higher Saturation in Miscible and Immiscible Gas Floods by Use of Alpha
oil recovery with lower GOR, and thus should be studied as a Factors. Presented at the SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual Conference
future development option. These findings should be confirmed and Exhibition, Vienna, Austria, 23–26 May. SPE-143379-MS. http://
and optimized through dedicated coreflood experiments to dx.doi.org/10.2118/143379-MS.
Camy, J. P. and Emanuel, A. S. 1977. Effect of Grid Size in the Composi- the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference,
tional Simulation of CO2 Injection. Presented at the SPE Annual Fall Abu Dhabi, 11–14 November. SPE-49516-MS. http://dx.doi.org/
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver. 9–12 October. SPE- 10.2118/49516-MS.
6894-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/6894-MS. Patacchini, L., Sebastien, D., Bourgeois, M. et al. 2015. Simulation of Re-
Dabbouk, C., Namba, T. and Mohammed, S. A. 1996. Pilot Gas Injection sidual Oil Saturation in Near-Miscible Gasflooding through Satura-
Design in Two Middle East Carbonate Reservoirs. Presented at the tion-Dependent Tuning of the Equilibrium Constants. SPE Res Eval &
Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Eng 18 (3): 288–302. SPE-171806-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/
Dhabi, 13–16 October. SPE-36248-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/ 171806-PA.
36248-MS. Pavangat, V., Patacchini, L., Goyal, P. et al. 2015. Development of a Giant
Figuera, L. A., Al-Hammadi, K. E., Bin Amro, A. A. et al. 2014. Perform- Carbonate Oil Field, Part 1: Fifty Years of Pressure Maintenance His-
ance Review and Field Measurements of an EOR-WAG Project in tory. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition
Tight Oil Carbonate Reservoir- Abu Dhabi Onshore Field Experience. and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 9–12 November. SPE-177768-MS. http://
Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and dx.doi.org/10.2118/177768-MS.
Conference, Abu Dhabi, 10–13 November. SPE-171871-MS. http:// Roxar. 2012. Reservoir Management Software (RMS) Suite, version 2012.
dx.doi.org/10.2118/171871-MS. Emerson Process Management Group.
Green, D. W. and Willhite, G. P. 1998. Enhanced Oil Recovery, Vol. 6. Schlumberger. 2012. Eclipse 300 software, version 2012. Schlumberger
Richardson, Texas: Textbook Series, Society of Petroleum Engineers. Limited.
Hiraiwa, T. and Suzuki, K. 2007. New Method of Incorporating Immobile Stofferis, M. and Boibien, C. 1995. Monitoring of Two Gas Injection
and Nonvaporizing Residual Oil Saturation into Compositional Reser- Pilots in an Offshore Abu Dhabi Field. Presented at the Middle East
voir Simulation of Gasflooding. SPE Res Eval & Eng 10 (1): 60–65. Oil Show, Bahrain, 11–14 March. SPE-29804-MS. http://dx.doi.org/
SPE-88719-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/88719-PA. 10.2118/29804-MS.
Jerauld, G. R. 1998. A Case Study in Scaleup for Multicontact Miscible Yonebayashi, H., Al-Mutairi, A. M., Al-Habshi, A. M. et al. 2009.
Hydrocarbon Gas Injection. SPE Res Eval & Eng 1 (6): 575–582. Dynamic Asphaltene Behavior for Gas Injection Risk Analysis. Pre-
SPE-53006-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/53006-PA. sented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha,
Konwar, L., Tariq, S., Khan, S. et al. 2011. Lessons Learnt from Nine 7–9 December. IPTC-13266-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-
Years of Immiscible Gas Injection Performance and Sector Modeling 13266-MS.
Study of Two Pilots in a Heterogeneous Carbonate Reservoir. Pre-
sented at the Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference
and Exhibition, Abu Dhabi, 9–11 October. SPE-147999-MS. http:// Jitendra Kumar is a reservoir engineer in the Field Develop-
dx.doi.org/10.2118/147999-MS. ment Studies Division, on secondment from Total, at the Abu
Kumar, J., Yammahi, F. S. and Nakashima, T. 2015. Gas Injection EOR Dhabi Marine Operating Company. Previously, he worked in
the Thermal EOR Department at Total’s technical center in
Screening by Laboratory Experiment and Sector Modeling in Carbon-
Pau, France, where he worked on thermal EOR reservoir simu-
ate Reservoir. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Ex- lation and performed associated coreflood experiments with
hibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 9–12 November. SPE-177505- hot water, steam, and electrical heating. Kumar holds a
MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/177505-MS. bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from the Indian Institute
Lawrence, J. J., Teletzke, G. F., Hutfilz, J. M. et al. 2003. Reservoir Simu- of Technology and a master’s degree in reservoir engineering
lation of Gas Injection Processes. Presented at the Middle East Oil from IFP School, France.
Show, Bahrain, 5–8 April. SPE-81459-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/ Pawan Agrawal is a reservoir engineer in the Technology
81459-MS. Deployment Division at the Abu Dhabi Marine Operating
Marzouk, I. 1999. Wettability and Saturation in Abu Dhabi Carbonate Company. He has more than 6 years of industrial experience
Reservoirs. Presented at the Middle East Oil Show and Conference, in different aspects of reservoir engineering, from exploration
Bahrain, 20–23 February. SPE-53379-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/ to development, and has worked on several fields in India,
53379-MS. Venezuela, Canada, and the Middle East. Agrawal holds a
Nakashima, T., Kumar, J. and Draoui, E. 2015. Development of a Giant Car- bachelor’s degree in petroleum engineering from the Indian
bonate Oil Field, Part 2: Migration from Pressure Maintenance Develop- School of Mines and a master’s degree in chemical engineer-
ing from the University of Calgary.
ment to Sweep Oriented IOR Development. Presented at the Abu Dhabi
International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, 9–12 Elyes Draoui is the vice president of the Technology Deploy-
November. SPE-177801-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/177801-MS. ment Division, on secondment from Total, at the Abu Dhabi
Negahban, S., Joshi, N., Jamaluddin, A. K. M. et al. 2003. A Systematic Marine Operating Company. During his 27 years of experience
Approach for Experimental Study of Asphaltene Deposition for an in the oil and gas business, he has held several managerial
and expertise positions in offshore and onshore environments,
Abu Dhabi Reservoir Under WAG Development Plan. Presented at the
focusing on the development of gas/oil, condensate, extra-
International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, 5–7 Febru- heavy-oil, high-pressure/high-temperature, and deepwater
ary. SPE-80261-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/80261-MS. fields in countries including Nigeria, Brunei, Malaysia, Republic
Nicolle, G., Cartier, G. and Jaber, O. 1998. Tertiary Gas Injection: From of the Congo, and Venezuela. Draoui holds a PhD degree
Pilot to Full Field – A Case History Offshore Abu Dhabi. Presented at from the Mining School of Paris.