Waterflooding Optimization Using Biotechnology

SPE 69652
Waterflooding Optimization Using Biotechnology: 2-Year Field Test, La Ventana Field,

Argentina
Alejandro Maure, Forrest Dietrich (Microbes Inc.), Ulises Gómez, Javier Vallesi, Marcelo Irusta (REPSOL-YPF).
Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

understanding MEOR mechanisms and to better designs for
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum bio-treatments.
Engineering Conference held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–28 March 2001.
Original oil production decline rates improved. Increments in
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
oil cut were measured using conventional methods for 24
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to months after MEOR program started (Figure 19). Two
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at combined mechanisms help explain the change:
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
1. Further depletion of residual oil saturation by in-situ
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is production of metabolites with low interfacial tension
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous and
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. 2. Improved oil mobility from short-chain solvents
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
originated by microbial alteration of heavy paraffinic
Abstract ends.
Biotechnology improved water flood performance during a Further evaluations will cover extension of pilot period and
two-year test in Victor Claro reservoir layers C2-D2, La economic feasibility analysis for large-scale MEOR
Ventana field, northern Cuyo Basin, Mendoza Province, implementation in other zones under conventional flooding.
Argentina (Figure 1, 2 and 3). Paraffinic oil has been produced
by water flooding since 1989. The objective of this project Introduction
was to determine the technical and economical feasibility of Today, there are numerous worldwide experiences describing
Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) methods for field- MEOR methods and field applications as technical, cost
wide application in mature water floods. This paper explains effective and competitive with conventional EOR methods
the continuation of a pilot study of controlled microbial (Ref.: 1 to 6).
colonization in producer wells begun in La Ventana field in The objective of the La Ventana project is to determine the
1995. technical and economical feasibility of Microbial Enhanced
Fluid property alterations were evaluated using a complete set Oil Recovery (MEOR) methods for field-wide application in
of rheology parameters, specific geochemical fingerprints and mature waterflood applications.
bioassays on more than 82 samples from La Ventana and The objective of this evaluation program is not only to
neighboring fields. The oil proved to be highly bio-treatable develop VC incremental reserves, but also to expand to Punta
and formation water to be compatible with MEOR de las Bardas South, Punta de las Bardas/Vacas Muertas Lobe
requirements. Reservoir conditions, including rock properties, South and Vacas Muertas North areas which are producing
pressure and temperature were also favorable. from the rest of active reservoirs (Figure 3).
Microbial Inoculation Program started December 1998 and
was implemented by systematic treatment of injected water MEOR references in northern Cuyo Basin
using hydrocarbon degrading anaerobic-facultative Tupungato-Refugio MEOR Project
microorganisms on a non-regular injection pattern having This project started in June 1994 in three wells producing from
direct influence on four neighboring producers (Figure 4). A Conglomerado Rojo Inferior (C.R.I) (BRC, in La Ventana
complementary tracer field test using Tritium permitted Field, Barrancas Fm.) and Victor Oscuro Member (Rio Blanco
validation of inter-well connectivity and allocation factors Fm.) formations. Average production per well was 90 BOPD
initially inferred by the use of streamline simulation. Pre- at 63% water cut. As a result of 14 months of combined
MEOR and Post-MEOR fractional flow field performance in monthly and bi-weekly microbial treatments, oil increment
producers was also correlated with theoretical predictions
using a proprietary 2D, vertically integrated streamline
simulator. The tracer and simulations contributed to better
2 A. MAURE SPE 69652
due to MEOR was 19,000 barrels (19% increase over baseline) from the reservoir. Water injection in the TRC started in 1968.
[Ref. 1]. Cumulative production through October 2000 is 230.2 million
Piedras Coloradas MEOR Project BO (36x106 M3) and the cumulative water injected is 729
The program started March 1997 and continued during twelve million BW (116x106 M3). The current average production
non-consecutive months. Six producer wells, two of them rates of the TRC are 4,474 BOPD (711 M3/D), 116,211 BFPD
horizontals, were systematically inoculated using (18,477 M3/D), 96% WC, through 126 active producers. The
hydrocarbon-degrading anaerobic-facultative microorganisms. injection rate is 86,800 BWPD (13,801 M3/D), through 29
The field produces from two separate reservoirs: active injectors.
Conglomerado Rojo Inferior (C.R.I.) (BRC, in La Ventana
Field, Barrancas Fm.) and Victor Oscuro Member (Rio Blanco BRC Reservoir
Fm.). Incremental oil averaged 66% over baseline, ranging Geology: BRC is the lower member of the Barrancas
from 28.5% to 110%. [Ref. 4]. formation. It consists of conglomerates grain and matrix-
supported sandstones and siltstones, interpreted as fluvial and
La Ventana Field debris flow deposits. The basal zone of the BRC is more
continuous, with fair to good permeability. The upper part has
General Description and MEOR Background poor continuity and poorer reservoir characteristics.
La Ventana, discovered in 1957, is located in Argentina 70 km History: The BRC reservoir started production in January
southwest of the city of Mendoza (Figure 1). It is the most 1959. A total of 290 wells have reported production from the
prolific field of the Cuyo Basin. Cumulative oil production as reservoir. Water injection in the BRC started in 1977.
of October 2000 is 429 MMBO (68.2x106 M3). It is located in Cumulative production through October 2000 is 84.4 million
the central trend of productive fields of the basin, between Rio BO (13.4x106 M3) and the cumulative water injected is 523
Tunuyan and Vizcacheras fields. La Ventana block is million BW (83.1x106 M3). The current average production
comprised of two separate fields (Figure 3): rates of the BRC are 3,808 BOPD (605.4 M3/D), 61,290 BFPD
1. La Ventana in the lower structural position of the (9745 M3/D), 94% WC, though 142 active producers. The
block and injection rate is 93,100 BWPD (14,802 M3/D), through 53
2. The main field consists of two subparallel noses active injectors.
which pinch out at the structure top, and is designated
the Vacas Muertas/Punta de las Bardas Area. LRB Reservoir
These fields produce from the Barrancas and Rio Blanco Geology: LRB, the lower member of the Rio Blanco
formations, which can be subdivided into four main reservoirs, formation, is the smallest reservoir of the field. It consists of
as follows: the TRC (Top Red Conglomerate) and BRC sandstones and tuffs interspersed with shales. The southern
(Bottom Red Conglomerate) in the Barrancas formation and part of Punta de las Bardas area has been subdivided in four
the VC (Victor Claro) and LRB (Lower Rio Blanco) in the Rio parasequences, which show a high vertical heterogeneity and
Blanco formation (Figure 2). fair to poor lateral continuity, due to faults or permeability
Structurally, the Cuyo basin is an extensive NW-trending barriers.
depocenter that is limited by extension faults, which were History: The LRB reservoir started producing in 1966,
subjected to several tectonics movements. though Punta de la Bardas main development happened in
La Ventana block has a total of 230 producers. Current oil 1992. A total of 19 wells have reported production from the
production is 11,950 BOPD (1,900 M3/D) and 214 MBWPD reservoir. A pilot waterflood project was implemented in the
(34,000 M3/D) of co-produced water. Waterflooding projects LRB in 1999. Cumulative production through October 2000 is
are mature, beginning in 1969 with currently more than 80 2.2 million BO (3.4x105 M3), and the cumulative water
injector wells injecting 226 MBWPD (36,000 M3/D) in the injected is 293 thousand BW (46.5x103 M3). Current average
three reservoirs. The difference between produced and injected production rates of the LRB are 313 BOPD (49.7 M3/D),
water (12,600 BWPD, 2,000 M3/D) is captured by a neighbor 2,733 BFPD (434.5 M3/D), 89% WC, through 13 active
field (Rio Tunuyán). producers. The injection rate is 960 (152.6 M3/D) BWPD,
through 1 active injector.
TRC Reservoir
Geology: TRC, the upper member of the Barrancas VC Reservoir
formation, is the most extensive reservoir of La Ventana Field. Geology: VC, the upper member of the Rio Blanco
It consists of grain-supported and matrix-supported sandstones formation, is a complex multichannel reservoir. It consists of
and siltstones, deposited by braided streams in proximal rivers gravels and sandstones interspersed with shales, which
subject to flood stages. This environment is characterized by a represent a fluvial-flood plain assemblage of facies. The VC
widespread distribution of its conglomerate bodies frequently sands have an irregular geometry with a variable range of
in contact due to “cut and fill” phenomenon. continuity and petrophysical properties in the different areas of
History: The TRC reservoir started production in the field.
December 1958. A total of 405 wells have reported production
SPE 69652 WATERFLOODING OPTIMIZATION USING BIOTECHNOLOGY: 2-YEAR FIELD TEST, LA VENTANA FIELD, ARGENTINA 3
History: The VC reservoir started producing in January primary goal of this method is to extensively colonize the
1962. A total of 223 wells have reported production from the poral medium of the oil-bearing formation. [Ref.: 1 to 6]
reservoir. The water injection in the VC sands started in 1969. Two main procedures are used to colonize a target
Cumulative production through October 2000 is 89.9 million reservoir (Figure 14):
BO, (14.3 x106 M3) and the cumulative water injected amounts 1) Treating producer wells by pumping downhole periodic
201.4 million BW (32.0 x106 M3). microbial batches in order to reach the near wellbore poral
The current average production rates of the VC are 2,591 space via tubing or annulus. This methodology is usually
BOPD (411 M3/D), 40,981 BWPD (6515 M3/D), 94% WC, referred to as simply MEOR. The microbial effect in treated
through 103 active producers. The injection rate is 31,370 wells could be detected in two consecutive stages: A) Clean up
BWPD (4,987 M3/D), through 26 active injectors. effects by the removal of organic damage occurring in the near
VC accounts for 22% of the La Ventana block production wellbore of the perforated interval, opening non-productive
and receive 13% of total injected water. Positive oil bio- zones bearing oils with a more segregated, heavy and
treatability indexes and favorable petrophysic parameters were pseudoplastic behavior. This effect produces a high peak in oil
primary factors in the selection of two sands from the VC rate but usually only for a limited time. B) Permanent
reservoir (D2-C2) as target for a systematic Microbial rheological effects by the compositional alteration occurring at
Inoculation Program (Figure 3 and 4). The pattern is part of deeper colonization radius in drainage zones with extremely
the Punta de las Bardas field. low shear rate values (low fluid velocity). This effect is the
All the four reservoirs produce by gas expansion and small most important MEOR objective to pursue in treating
natural water drive as primary mechanism of drainage and are producers, as this improvement is sustainable for a long time if
strongly assisted by artificial water flooding. Water injection appropriate microbial inoculation schedule is continued.
projects involve all reservoirs in Barrancas and Rio Blanco 2) Treating injector wells, by introducing the microbial
formations. treatment using the injected water as carrier to introduce
La Ventana MEOR Project in producer wells colonizing microorganisms into active streamtubes of flooded
The first evaluation, started in 1995, covered microbial space of the target layers. This is frequently termed as
inoculations and lab screenings in 8 wells producing from MEOR2, because it is usually used in combination with the
three reservoirs as follows: simultaneous treatments in injectors and producers described
• BRC above. The advantages of treating injectors are potentially
PB-67 (*), PB-172(*), PB-194, LV-21(*), PB-82 larger size of colonized zones, longer residence time of
• TRC microorganisms in target layers and the role of multiple
PB-204, PB-177, PB-194, LV-21, PB-82 enhanced recovery mechanisms: 1) Rheology alteration of
• VC moveable oil in active streamtubes and its direct impact on
PB-33 fractional flow and oil/water mobility ratio, 2) Depletion in
(*) Field inoculated residual oil saturation (Sor) by in-situ production of
It was extended with minor modifications from July 1996 biosurfactant, and 3) Conformance efficiency improvements
on a final cluster of five wells from BRC, TRC and VC created by the colonizing biomass in active streamtubes that
reservoirs: diverts fluids to unflooded zones.
PB-172 (BRC, Hydraulic) Microbial System used in MEOR
VM-95 (LBRC, Hydraulic) Seven different microbial sub-communities (grouped by
PB-136 (TRC, SRP) functionality into microbial products) of highly motile,
PB-33 (VC, Hydraulic) synergetic, symbiotic microorganism consortia were initially
PB-109 (VC, D2-C2, Hydraulic) used to test La Ventana oil biotreatability. The 17 strains used
The result was deemed technically positive (especially in to formulate the symbiotic blend are naturally occurring
PB-109). La Ventana producers are for the most part operated anaerobic-faculative bacteria capable of deriving nourishment
using an oil-powered hydraulic artificial lift system, which is from linear hydrocarbons.
cost and labor intensive. The costly operation method A combination of microorganisms is necessary to achieve
encouraged further analysis of MEOR feasibility with regard a successful adjustment of the bacterial community to specific
to waterflooding. Begginning October 2000, the operator substrates (oils), enhancement mechanisms and reservoir
began implementing a program to convert hydraulic systems conditions. Microbial products are also conditioned to have an
to PCP, SRP and ESP. adequate balance in C/N and C/P ratios and type of
complementary nutrients, buffers, trace elements (K+, Na+,
MEOR in Waterflooding Schemes: Conceptual frame Mg++, Ca++, Fe++/+++, Zn ++, Co++) and bio-catalyzers, since
formation water usually lacks sufficient nitrogen and
Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) technology is phosphorous.
based on the systematic inoculation of producing and/or Primary objectives of this stage are to stabilize enzymatic
injecting wells with hydrocarbon-degrading anaerobic- reactions at water/oil interfaces in productive formation, in
facultative microorganisms and complementary nutrients. The order that such biochemical action can modify oil mobility by
generating solvents and bio-surfactants. These alterations and

consequent modifications are tested by serial Rheological Lab General Screening Criteria
Procedures (Appendix A) in combination with Organic Primary requirements to check are:
Geochemistry Methods (Biomarkers and GC-MS 1. Crude oil composition must contain n-alkanes in
Chromatography (Appendix C). sufficient amount and show little or no evidence of
The change in amount and compositional characteristic of previous levels of biodegradation by indigenous micro
produced fluids results from microbial action on saturated biota.
portion of hydrocarbon substrates under anaerobic conditions 2. Bottom hole temperature below 250° F.
(Table 1). It is accompanied by a strong modification on N/P Pressure is not a limiting factor.
ratio in the colonized poral volume. Changes in micro- 3. Chloride levels less than 100,000 ppm in the formation
environmental parameters existing in poral space promote water.
specific metabolic paths that ultimately produce the 4. pH is best near neutral.
biocracking on linear and branched paraffin compounds, 5. Pore throat distribution in objective reservoirs needs to
which are present in abundance in La Ventana oil (Figures 5, have a minimal portion above the range of microbial
6). The expected result is the shifting in molecular weight and community size (2 to 4 µm) to allow microorganism
chain length toward a lower range and greater compositional migration. This "available window" in poral geometry
homogeneity. The most significant evidence is the viscosity permits profound microbial incursion.
reduction at low shear rates and the shift in pour and cloud
temperature points (Figures 12 and 13, Appendix A). Fluid Evaluation, Oils
Candidate injection patterns were selected having A complete set of rheology parameters, specific geochemical
producers from only the target reservoir (VC, Rio Blanco fm.), data, ionic patterns, fingerprints and biomarkers were used to
avoiding treatment of multilayer systems, with different evaluate pre- and post-trial compositional alterations in La
petrophysical parameters. Ventana reservoir fluids.
Geochemical background
Water Flooding Optimization approach in La Ventana In October 1996, the first geochemical analyses were
Field performed on three oils from La Ventana field (PB-109 (VC),
PB-172 (BRC) and VM-136 (TRC)). These analyses showed
Motivation oils not biodegraded and provided clear evidence that these
The optimization of waterflooding schemes is typically oils were good targets for an MEOR program. The Tupungato
accomplished by adding chemically active substances to the and Piedras Coloradas pilot projects corroborated these
injection water. Though this method is highly effective in lab findings.
conditions, it is difficult to reach sustainable levels of Main conclusions were [Ref.: 2]:
functional entities (mainly due to dillutive effects and 1. All three La Ventana oils belonged to one oil family.
degradation) at extreme conditions (temperature, salinity, 2. All were very paraffinic, undegraded oils that were
indigenous biota, etc.). sourced from a single source facies.
The motivation to explore the use of biotechnology in 3. All geochemical parameters indicated a single oil
waterflooding schemes is based on the evidence that active type, with normal alkane distributions.
bio-compounds (surfactants, polymers, solvents, etc.) with 4. Pristane/Phytane ratios and their relationship to
impact on EOR mechanisms could be derived by direct normal homologous paraffins were particularly
metabolization of existing hydrocarbons by the colonizing diagnostic for oil-oil correlation parameters and
biomass. The biomass thriving at the water/oil interface in the biodegradation
poral space needs to be supplemented with an appropriate N/P
(Nitrogen to Phosphorous) ratio for optimal growth. When Oil sample Prystane/nC17 Phytane/nC18
levels of N and P are below one or two orders of magnitude of Id. Ratio Ratio
C requirements, it is possible to assist pattern-size bioreaction PB-109 (VC) 0.28 0.14
volumes (essentially the water phase in the poral volume PB-172 (BRC) 0.27 0.14
associated with the floodable portion of the pattern) by PB-136 (TRC) 0.27 0.13
introducing the proper microbial system (inoculum) and
reasonable amounts of N, P salts periodically with every 5. The oils showed signs of water washing (especially
treatment (Figure 14, 33). The metabolites (surfactants, PB-109 (VC) and VM-136 (TRC).
polymers, solvents, etc.) are in direct relationship to the
concentration of living (sessile and planktonic) biota capable Oil sample Toluene/nHeptane nHeptane/MCH
of being assisted by the treament program. The concurrent Id. Ratio Ratio
flow helps transport the nutrients a considerable distance from PB-109 (VC) 0.10 1.05
the injection point. N/P is a controllable parameter for biota PB-172 (BRC) 0.45 1.16
concentration along the colonized streamtubes (Figure 34, 35). PB-136 (TRC) 0.09 1.12
between isomers could change after an MEOR process (Figure

6. An odd-carbon preference was discernable in the oils, 7, 8).
in the medium range (C17, C19) n-alkanes, CPI Detailed C6-C7 Gas Chromatography. Twenty-five
averages 1.10 for the three oils. These preferences, compounds are identified and quantified in the C6-C7 range
together with the presence of C27 and C29 steranes through gas chromatography. The range is very sensitive to
suggested the oils were derived from both algal and microbial attack and should experience changes after an
terrestrial precursors. MEOR process.
MEOR-oriented geochemical studies Stable Carbon Isotopes of Whole Oil, Saturates
An additional independent geochemical laboratory was Hydrocarbon Fraction And Aromatic Hydrocarbon
selected to confirm previous studies and to evaluate Fraction. The δ 13C values are bulk characteristics of oils.
compositional alterations and their correlation to rheology After an MEOR process, the values could hypothetically show
parameter evolution. minor to significant modifications.
Conceptual basis and methodology Gas Chromatography – Mass Spectrometry of
Changes in the composition of petroleum during the MEOR Saturates Hydrocarbons. The terpane and sterane biomarker
process can be tracked through analyses that are typically fingerprints represent extraordinary valuable information in
applied in the geochemical characterization of rock bitumens the characterization of an oil (source, thermal maturity,
and oils. These changes could occur at a bulk or molecular biodegradation). An MEOR process could very possibly
level, most likely both, and are difficult to anticipate: each oil modify molecular ratios and parameters of these fingerprints.
type subjected to a specific microbial batch treatment reacts in Gas Chromatography – Mass Spectrometry Of
a different manner under particular subsurface conditions. Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Similar to saturate biomarkers, the
Moreover, these changes are time-dependant and several of fingerprints of aromatic steranes are a supplement to the
them are sequential, and could show up at very different times molecular characterization of oil. In addition, the method
in non-related oils. A summary list of the analytical techniques allows quantification of 2- & 3-ring aromatic hydrocarbons
applied to the geochemical characterization of oils can be (naphthalene, phenanthrene and dibenzothiophenes
found in Appendix B. Short comments of the changes that compounds).
could be expected on specific oil after an MEOR process are: Rheological studies
Liquid Column Chromatography is applied after Conceptual basis. Oil is very complex substance that exhibits
precipitation of asphaltenes to determine the proportions of typical non-Newtonian behavior (Figure 10). Viscosity is
saturated hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons and resins + shear rate sensitive (pseudoplastic model) and its apparent
NSO (nitrogen, sulfur, oxygen) compounds. The naphthenes value correlates with the fluid velocity field and capilar throat
can be later estimated as a part of saturates from the whole oil distribution and coordination geometry of poral chambers. The
gas chromatography. These five fractions are expected to concept of constant viscosity in the area under drainage or
change after an MEOR process. Modification of API gravity under flooding is no longer valid, rather "apparent" values are
should be related to the changes in the oil’s bulk composition. pertinent. Specific quantitative lab procedures were conducted
Sulfur Percentage is a typical bulk parameter of oil, which to measure the shift in rheological properties in treated
will likely be modified after an MEOR process. (inoculated) and untreated (control) samples obtained from
High Resolution Whole Oil Gas Chromatography wellhead manifold for each well that was a candiate for
typically allows determination of normal- and iso-paraffins microbial treatment.
(quantitatively, in ppm) and defines the “envelope” of an oil. Lab indexes and methodology. Serial assays were
Ratios between compounds and relationships between ranges conducted to determine the alterability of Barrancas and Rio
of compounds (light, medium, heavy) as well as the Blanco oils under systematic microbial influence (enzymatic
chromatogram baseline should change after an MEOR process cracking). Basically, lab procedures consisted of serial
(Figure 5, 6). inoculations of oil with seven different microbial products,
Gas Chromatography of the Saturated Hydrocarbon followed by a program of incubation at specific temperatures
Fraction basically provides the same information as whole oil and ambient pressure. Further examination of inoculated and
gas chromatography but is more precise in resolving peak co- control oils (original) using full computational rotational
elution and allows better ratio calculations. However, a big viscometers, produced the necessary data to generate
disadvantage is that during isolation of the fraction, the light quantitative indicies. Deviations in µapp.[mpa.s] vs.
compounds <C15 are partially or totally lost. Temperature [°F] and µapp.[mpa.s] vs. Shear Rate [1/s] curves
Gas Chromatography of the Aromatic Hydrocarbon were the basis for calculating quantitative numbers describing
Fraction allows identification and quantification of the typical the degree of compositional alteration. Mathematical
aromatic compounds present in oils: methyl-naphthalenes, expressions for these dimensionless indexes are described in
dimethyl-naphthalenes, trimethyl-naphthalenes, phenanthrene, Appendix A. These numbers translate the graphical
methyl-phenanthrenes and dimethyl-phenanthrenes. information into lab performance indicators. Furthermore, they
Relationships between these groups of compounds and are used during pilot monitoring to contrast and compare lab
and field figures.
So, the Newtonian Index (NI) is used to evaluate the shifting

from shear rate sensitive (pseudoplastic) behavior toward a Reservoir Selection oriented to microbial waterflooding
more Newtonian fluid. The comparison between control and optimization
inoculated oil samples is evidence of microbial cracking by To correlate MEOR performance with homogeneous
each different microbial culture. A positive NI should exceed fluid/rock systems, it is advisable to select reservoirs being
1.10. (Eq.1) flooded separately from the rest and having homogeneous
The Delta Viscosity (DV) Index measures the global oil/rock parameters. In the screening process, six patterns
change in apparent viscosity in the explored range of shear meeting this requirement were scrutinized:
rates (minSR, maxSR). This index should exceed 0.10, to test
Pattern Reservoir Active Layers Producers
positive. (Eq.2)
VM-75 BRC B1, 2, 3 6
By direct mathematical manipulation of DV index, a
GBB-7 TRC N/D 3
simple version of Enhanced Oil Recovery factor (EOR Index)
B-182 TRC N/D 3
is obtained, as related only to viscosity contribution. An EOR
PB-115 VC-LRB C2, B3, 1 4
value greater than 1.15 is considered positive. (Eq. 3)
PB-191 VC D2, C2 4
A data base of 82 oil samples from La Ventana and
VM-80 BRC LBRC1, 2 5
neighboring fields producing from Barrancas and Rio Blanco
formations, pertaining to both structural axes of Cuyo For operating considerations, only PB-191 was considered
sedimentary basin were tested to define general rheological acceptable for a sustainable MEOR program. As a result of the
properties of Mendoza North oils. First evaluations started in rest of screening figures, the PB-191 pattern, which injects
1994. In general, all these crude oils tested far above cut-off recycled formation water in two sands (D2 and C2) of VC
values, evidencing very good microbial treatability. Reference reservoir, was pre-selected as the candidate for microbial
values in pre-selected oils were: flooding during a two-year program. PB-191 started water
injection in August 1989. Figures 15 to 18 illustrate fluid
Sample NI DV EOR production and injection histories.
LV-21 (B.R.C), La Ventana 1.94 0.22 1.22
PB-161 (T.R.C.), P. de las Bardas 2.90 0.21 1.27
MEOR target: VC Reservoirs, characteristics
A-22 (V.C.) – Atamisqui 1.11 0.50 2.00
Oils from Victor Claro reservoirs, PVT data (PB-53).
Limit for positive testing >1.10 >0.10 >1.15 Bubble pressure (psi): 574
Gas Oil Ratio (M3/M3): 84
PB-220: Rheological Analysis for main productive Boi factor (M3/M3 ): 1.110 @ 2600 psi
formations Viscosity (cp, SR>20 s-1, 180°F): 10 (Roll Ball viscometer)
PB-220 producer (Punta de las Bardas field) was
API°: 29.0 (Reservoir condition)
programmed for rig work during the screening period of
reservoir candidates to obtain oil samples from every
VC reservoirs: Pattern Selection
producing interval in order to evaluate rheological parameters PB-191 non-regular injection pattern was the final selection
vs. depth. PB-220 has six different producing zones pertaining from several injector candidates. This well had a selective
to LBRC, VC and LRB reservoirs with MEOR potential. The installation (Figure 42) and was injecting into only two layers
samples were collected and tested by comparative rheology for (D2-C2) of VC. There was no evidence of crossflow between
biotreatability. sands. The PB-191 Injector had direct influence on four
The results were used to crosscheck vertical with areal neighboring producers: PB-83, PB-111, PB-212, and PB-220
biotreatability indexes, permitting individual selection of the with good treatability parameters:
best candidate sands for MEOR application.
Sample NI DV EOR
Reservoir Sand NI DV EOR
PB-116 (V.C.) as control 3.57 0.14 1.16
LBRC 1,2,3 2.30 0.39 1.64
PB-109 (V.C.) as control 14.9 0.58 2.39
VC D2 0.50 0.36 1.56
PB-83 (V.C.) 2.03 0.37 1.58
VC C2 2.83 0.16 1.19
PB-212 (V.C.) 0.50 0.62 2.66
VC (LRB) B3 1.31 0.14 1.16 PB-220 (V.C.) 3.90 0.42 1.72
VC (LRB) B1 1.42 0.25 1.33 PB-111 (V.C.) 1.68 0.34 1.52
Limit for positive testing >1.10 >0.10 >1.15 Limit for positive testing >1.10 >0.10 >1.15
Fluid Evaluation, Water The main criteria used for this selection were:
Ionic pattern and salinity of formation water need to meet
1. Adequate number of producers to have sufficient
certain requirements to avoid side effects during the MEOR
statistical significance and good discrimination in well-
pilot test. Chloride cotent is considered safe when less than by-well and global performance evaluation.
100,000 p.p.m. pH is best near neutral. Blending water is also
conditioned and monitored for total solid content and
particulate size distribution (Figure 41).
2. Non-marginal wells having consistent, understandable

fluid production histories. Production values (M3/day) at Victor Claro Fm., C2 Reservoir
MEOR start were: Effective interval (pattern average): 3.6 m
Effective interval (at PB-191): 1 m
Well Qo Qw Perforated on
Allocation Factor for Injection Rate: 34%
PB-83 (V.C.) 5 108 Feb. 1983
Depth (m.b.s.): 2262.5
PB-212 (V.C.) 7 18 July 1995
Victor Claro Fm., D2 reservoir
PB-220 (V.C.) 16 133 May. 1997
Effective interval (Pattern average): 4 m
PB-111 (V.C.) 15 145 Apr. 1970
Effective interval (at PB-191): 3.5 m
PB-109 (V.C.) 6 19 Feb. 1974
Allocation Factor for Injection Rate: 66%
3. Capable of discriminating microbial stimulation and EOR Depth (m.b.s.): 2249.2
improvements in relation to control variables for targeted
reservoir (Rio Blanco Fm). Pilot Design
4. Wells producing oils with positive bio-treatability tests. Design of a pilot test is a complex process. To produce the
5. Adequate completion and extraction configuration. best results in terms of degree of significance and
6. Relevance for determining design considerations for discrimination, it is necessary to integrate a multidisciplinary
future expansions. team, knowledgeable in biotechnology, reservoir, production
7. Good petrophysical parameters: in general, the poral and complementary areas (rheology and geochemical). The
system in VC formation was favorable to microbial main objective is to achieve technical closure and good levels
migration. Poral throat distribution was controlled by the of correlation between controllable and uncontrollable groups
quantity and type of cement, which was related to the of variables. The controllable variables are mainly MEOR
amount of tuff ashes between the grains. Pore geometry treatment parameters. The uncontrollable variables are related
characteristics had distinctive matrix monomodal to fluid and rock characteristics, which exert significant
distribution with poral throat mean values centered at 10 influence on MEOR response. Additional objectives are to
µm. Further evaluation detected the presence of confirm feasibility indexes exhibited during laboratory testing.
microscopic fractures. These small fractures, which are The pilot was designed to measure microbial impact on
common in this tectonic framework contribute to the Recovery Factor for the treated pattern of the reservoir in
movement of fluids and permit migration of microrganis production.
transversally and longitudinally to the flow paths direction A reasonable prediction capability between previous
in the reservoir. screening and post-MEOR results is another important
objective. Discrimination in pre- and post-pilot data
VC petrophysical characteristics at PB-191 pattern information and good “signal to noise ratio” is essential for a
successful pilot. The trial needs to be programmed so that it is
Figures 25, 26, 42 are for reference of vertical distribution and possible to see all relevant processes within temporal (the time
areal continuity. Tables 3, 4, 5 serve as a basis for comparison of the pilot) and spatial dependence (number of wells, depth
with general parameters of active reservoirs and structural position). Minimum time needs to be a two-year
D2-C2 sands: Common petrophysical parameters period or the equivalent of at least 2 pore volumes of
Kro (Swirr): 0.468 acumulated injected water. Another important consideration
Krw (Sor): 0.203 during pilot implementation is to reduce the uncertainty of all
Swirr (%): 41 relevant measurement occurring during the pre- and post-
Sor (%): 28 MEOR stages. Finally, cost of pilot evaluation needs to be
Porosity (%): 18.5 consistent with expected benefits under different scenarios,
Absolute Permeability (md): 200 risk and expansion strategies.
Depth (m.b.s.): 2249.2
Reservoir Temperature (°F) 230 Pattern Selection
Original Reservoir Pressure (psi): 2600 PB-191 non-regular injection pattern was selected from
Present Reservoir Pressure (psi): 800 several candidates from different productive areas in La
Bubble Pressure (psi): 574 Ventana Block, exploiting different reservoirs, as mentioned
GOR (M3/M3): <30 above. The PB-191 Injector has direct influence on four
Bo factor (M3/M3): 1.125 neighboring producers: PB-83, PB-111, PB-212, and PB-220.
Viscosity (cp, SR>20 s-1, 170°F): 10 (Roll Ball viscometer) The selection was based on:
API° (Bottom Hole Conditions): 29.0 1. Good connectivity between the injector and
producers without excessive interwell distances.
2. Regular pattern geometry such as inverted five or
seven spot.
3. At least four first line producers per treated injector
4. Consistent production and injection data during diluting water). Blending water was the injection water taken
conventional waterflooding. from wellhead and checked for neutral pH, ionic profile and
5. Wells producing oil with proven positive bio- solid particulate content).
treatability tests and average petrophysical The specific blend of product concentrates was determined
parameters for the target layers in selected reservoir. according to oil and rock characteristics of VC reservoir. The
6. Pattern located in zones with a simple structural following combination was used in PB-191: EOR-BAC 1
description, avoiding macro-heterogeneities like (30%), EOR-BAC 4 (10%), EOR-BAC 5 (10%) and EOR-
faults or permeability barriers. BAC 6 (50%).
7. Adequate completion configuration for both Treatment batch size for each week was adjusted in
producers and injector. accordance with the previous week’s cumulative injection.
8. Relevance to design consideration for future The treatment was displaced down hole using the injector
expansions. tubing string at very low rate (1 to 2 BPM). A low rate (10
gpm) duplex positive displacement pump with a maximum
Operative aspects pressure rating of 400 psi was sufficient.
The inoculation program started December 1998 and A total of 96 weekly treatments were performed from
continued for 24 consecutive months. VC reservoir under PB- December 1998 to December 2000. The total amount of
191 waterflooding (four first-line active producer wells), were Microbial Products (concentrates) used in this period was
under a systematic program of inoculations using hydrocarbon 3892 gallons.
degrading anaerobic-facultative microorganisms. 189,000 M3 of water were injected. (1.65 times the Moveable
Treatments Oil In Place existing in the pattern at MEOR start). The
PB-191 injector was equipped with selective injection in D2- average rate of water injected was 256.4 M3/D in the same
C2 sands (Figure 42) period (Figure 40).
Treatment design focused on following items: Monitoring
1. Method of inoculation based on injector completion and Fluid production was monitored by running a weekly
pressure conditions at wellhead. Rapid pressure fall-off conventional battery test for every producer participating in
when the injection ceases is a good indicator. the pilot. Serial oil samples were taken every month to check
2. Good storage facilities to maintan the products safe from changes in rheology and hydrocarbon compositional profiles.
extreme weather conditions (freezing temperatures, direct Ionic profile was monitored every week.
sunlight, etc). Instantaneous injection rate and cumulative water were
3. Microbial community structure. continuously monitored by a turbine flow meter in the
4. Concentration of complementary nutrients, salts, and injection line.
biocatalyzers in order to assist the colonization. A Quality control of microbial products was based on CFU
variable amount of supplements and formulations was counts/ml and by tracking biochemical profiles for every
used in this case. MEOR typology. Miniaturized matrix identification assays
5. The global biotic concentration to use during periodic having more than 30 different dehydrated substrates producing
treatments (varying from 50 to 100 p.p.m.) cromogenic indication were used to avoid any alteration or
6. Quality control of microbial products based on CFU contamination in the microbial products. Serial samples for
counts/ml. and biochemical profile matrix assays help to every concentrate were taken periodically and prior to
maintain optimum viability and avoid contamination in formulating the blend at well location. The results ensured the
storage drums. Serial samples for every concentrate were maintenance of stable quality parameters during the microbial
taken prior to formulating the blend at well location. The inoculation program.
results ensure optimum quality in microbial products.
7. Blending water availability and stable ionic pattern of Project evaluation
injected water. The evaluation covered technical and economical aspects.
8. Presence of competitive indigenous biota and chemical Multidisciplinary sessions were conducted every two months
interference (SRB colonies and chemical biocides on the average. The evaluation program began six months
programs to mitigate them). before the pilot start date and continued for 24 consecutive
9. Microbial typologies according with EOR objectives months. VC reservoir under PB-191 waterflooding and four
(factory cultured). active producer wells were under weekly fluid monitoring and
10. Frequency of periodic inoculations. close production surveillance. A complete set of rheology
parameters, specific geochemical fingerprints and biomarker
Microbial inoculations in the injector were scheduled every 7 comparisons were used to evaluate pre- and post-trial
days. The batch was formulated at well location with fixed compositional alterations in produced fluids. To analyze
amount (65 +/- 15 p.p.m.) of four basic microbial concentrates MEOR performance, Mann-Whitney (non parametric test, also
having a minimal activity of 106 Coloning Forming Units per called U proof) procedure was used to verify degree of
ml) but variable in terms of blending water (400 liters of statistical significance between conventional waterflooding
history (pre-MEOR) and post-MEOR evolutive data series. • Second, Incremental Oil Rates (IOR) and Water Cut vs.
(Figures 19 to 20). time figures, are forecast using streamline simulators
according to treatment design, produced and injected
Technical aspects rates, reservoir description, pattern geometry and well
Methodology to evaluate MEOR performance in connectivity information;
waterflooding Schemes • Third, predicted curves are correlated with field
MEOR’s long-term distinctive response is to increase oil performance data during pilot implementation, thus
recovery and simultaneously reduce water cut (Figures 19, providing insights and guidelines for process optimization
20). This typical duality in MEOR response is explained by and treatment design changes, allowing assessment of
two mechanisms working in combination and occurring in the MEOR prospects and offering practical guidelines during
colonized portion of the reservoir, the bioreactor: 1) Improved field implementation and pilot project follow-up
oil mobility from short-chain solvents created by microbial monitoring; and
alteration of heavy paraffinic ends. Rheology alteration of • Fourth, economic models using field validated
moveable oil in active streamtubes has a direct dependence on performance and alternative baseline forecasts are run to
fractional flow and oil/water mobility ratio and 2) Further calculate a complete set of updated profitability indexes.
depletion of residual oil saturation by in-situ production of
metabolites which lower interfacial tension [Ref. 16, 17, 18 to Tracers field test and Streamlines Simulations
27]. Inter-well connectivity and allocation factors
A collateral mechanism is micro scale conformance Streamlines concepts are also useful to delimitate the poral
efficiency improvements created by the colonizing biomass space under flooding and to measure the amount of injected
affecting the poral geometry in active streamtubes is to divert water reaching specific producers. A complementary tracer
fluids to unflooded zones. field test using Tritium was used to validate inter-well
Project Performance is evaluated well by well using connectivity and allocation factors initially inferred and then
Productivity Index (P.I.) evolution in relationship to matched by streamline simulation runs.
cumulative water injected. Individual well testing into The tracer test in PB-191 pattern was initiated December
common battery was used to ensure good data for calculating 15, 1999 using Tritium radiotracer. The injected activity was
and updating P.I. Four production tests per well per month, 15 Ci (Curie), 555 GBq. PB-191 injection was 256.4 m3/day.
with confirming duplicate tests, was the usual monitoring The ealiest and peak Time Of Flights for tracer (TOF, in
practice. Special care was taken to verify consistency in days from tracer pulse) to producers is summarized below:
producing conditions pre- and post-MEOR.
Pre-MEOR baselines for every producer well and the Producer Earlier TOF TOF at peak response
pattern as a whole (Figure 19, 20) were calculated before PB-83 72 153
starting the inoculation program. Low noise (data scatter) that PB-212 104 118 (first), 230 (second)
ensures consistent decline curve determination is of utmost PB-220 90 230
importance for appropriate discrimination of microbial effects PB-111 141 141 (first), 230 (second)
on well and reservoir productivity. Project predictive figures Figures 27 to 32 depic tracer behavior. The match shown in
are obtained by using a proprietary 2D-vertically integrated Figure 30 used a composite of 19 streamlines near the
multiphase reservoir simulator based on streamtube concepts. interwell line. The low values of tracer activity recovered are
The simulator is coupled with fluid models that consider the remarkable. The peak split in well PB-212 and PB-111 is
oil as non-Newtonian, shear-rate-dependent fluid (Appendix explained by the segregation of petrophysics parameters in
A) and geostatistic routines that could be easily adjusted to layers D2/C2 (without crossflow). The null response in PB-
take into consideration both small and large scale 212 inferred by homogeneous case of streamlines pattern is
heterogeneities with minimal uncertainty. explained by the “shielding effect” created by PB-83 and PB-
Each individual streamline under analysis produces a set of 220 drainage cones. The fact that some tracer reached PB-212,
MEOR Performance Curves (MPC). The streamline approach macro heterogeneities (15 degree north-east high permeability
makes it possible to convert 2D transport cases of multiple channel) in combination with the above-mentioned case, helps
species into one-dimension problems along the streamline to explain this particular tracer response. Several runs with
axial coordinate. It incorporates the convective-diffusive 3D-seismic detected faults validate this assumption.
equations and microbial kinetics to allow an easy input of The streamline based simulator makes it possible for MEOR
rock, fluid and micro biota parameters, which are validated simulations and tracer analysis on typical waterflooding
using field and lab data. (Ref. 28, 29, 30) schemes to be done using laptop computers (256 MB RAM,
The use of MPC methodology is accomplished in four 700 MHZ clock frequency), taking 42 CPU hours to run
basic steps: 128x128x1 (16,384) grid cells for two layers having 100
• First, lab screening procedures are conducted to test streamlines per layer and partitioning every streamline in 60
rheology behavior and alteration in produced oils using timesteps (Ref. 33, 34, 35, 36).
control and inoculated samples for every well;
Pre- and Post- MEOR Fluid Production Series the sake of brevity, composite performance graphs were used
The inflection point in the decline tendency is a distinctive for this paper. The change in oil decline tendency before and
response between the pre- and post-MEOR oil production after MEOR is well defined. At the end of the evaluation
series. MEOR improved the oil decline rate to practically 0 period, MEOR Incremental Oil averaged 14.3% and 33.9%
(horizontal line in Figures 36, 37). over case 1 and case 2 baseline alternatives respectively
Cases 1 through 4 summarize the extrapolated pattern of (Table 9).
MEOR performance (DMEOR: 0 [1/day]) and MEOR decline
tendency inflection, as compared to two decline hypotheses:
Pattern PB-191 Oil Cut vs. Cum Oil
Case 1: DMEOR: Dconv: 0.000375 [1/day] 20
MEOR improved decline from pilot start,
jlim: 2 [years] where jlim is the length of 18 MEOR_Start MEOR_End
time that MEOR maitaines a zero decline
rate, Figure 36. 16
Case 2: DMEOR: Dconv: 0.000375 [1/day]
MEOR improved decline from pilot start, 14
jlim: 4 [years], Figure 37.
12
Case 3: DMEOR: Dconv: 0.000590 [1/day]
Oil Cut [%]

MEOR improved decline from pilot start, 10
jlim: 2 [years].
Case 4: DMEOR: Dconv: 0.000590 [1/day] 8
6.8
MEOR improved decline from pilot start,
jlim: 4 [years]. 6
The production decline tendency under MEOR as
compared to Conventional improved oil production 14.3% and 4
33.9% depending upon the baseline hypothesis. ( Case 1 and 3
“O.K” in Table 09.Table 09). 2
0
Oil cut increment 600 612 624 636 648 660
An evaluation of incremental oil cut was performed using a Cum Oil [MM3]
total of 16 four-point post-MEOR production data averages.
This was compared with pre-MEOR series and a forecasted Pre- and Post-MEOR oil cut evolution: At the end of the pilot
evaluation period, the gain in oil cut is 2.2%.
baseline. The result was a gain of 2.2% shown in the next
figure. This baseline was based on the composite response of a
selected group of streamlines done on a well-by-well basis. Recovery Factors
The predictions were crosschecked by parametric models At the end of the two-year MEOR program, Incremental
under the phase-segregated hypothesis (Dake model) and by Recovery is inferred to range from 3.3% to 9.2% based on
the use of 1-D, two-layer, integrated streamline simulations. Moveable Oil In Place (MOIP) at MEOR start date. The
In both methods the oil was considered non-Newtonian (two- calculation of MOIP value is critical in comparing
parameter Ostwald de Waele Nutting scheme). improvements with different Enhanced Oil Recovery
The effect of petrophysics parameters on MEOR response processes in comparison with previous stages of conventional
is twofold: water flooding (Appendix D; Tables 6, 7, 8 and 9; Figures 23,
1) Microbial Migration Rates (MMR) related to reservoir 24, 25 and 26).
poral geometry (pore throats distributions), concurrent The method to estimate the floodable poral volume is
velocity field and microbial motility; and determined by a combination of both static (geostatistic) and
2) Shear Rate Field (SRF) based on the colonized dynamic (potential flow) models.
reservoir and its fluid flow dynamics and their MEOR results need to be correlated with the appropriate
connection with apparent viscosity. measure of the moveable fluids content in the poral space
MMR correlates well to how quickly the maximum MEOR under water flooding influence. The value is calculated at the
response is obtained. This response depends on the transverse begining of MEOR for further reference.
distances (perpendicular to streamline axial coordinate) of RF measures the change of oil saturations in a given poral
bacteria penetration and the density of colonies in the volume and during a specific time interval.
corresponding reservoir poral spectra. SRF has a particular The following considerations are important in calculating
importance with the shear rate of sensitive oils (pseudoplastic RF during MEOR programs:
behavior) and the degree of compositional alteration to free The number of volumetric cells (N cells) involved in the
unmoveable oil. The next set of figures summarizes the pre- summation needs to be stable during the period of analysis.
and post-MEOR oil and water cut comparative history. For This pertains only to the Active Pore Volume (APV) affected
by the water flooding process in the selected pattern. To
calculate the APV, it is necessary to define the area affected Water Cut Reduction
by water using streamline envelopes (Figures 23, 24) and then The next Figures summarize pre- and post-MEOR water cut
to produce the cell-by-cell vertical integration. During this and gross rate evolution vs. cumulative values. Water cut
process, net interval values (layer thickness) and petrophysics tendencies for the four-well composite is shown below. The
parameters are interpolated using geostatistical methods over water influx is decreasing in relation with oil. Change in water
every active layer. It is also necessary to validate all cut tendency is evident and shows a clear indication of
assumptions with the subjacent geology model and tracer mobility alteration at reservoir conditions. The result is a 2%
response (Figure 23, 24). reduction at MEOR end. The gross rate remains stable.
MEOR performance is measured in conjunction with
maturity measures of the conventional water flood at the Pattern PB-191 Water Cut vs. Cum Water
100
moment MEOR starts. To evaluate maturity it is necessary to
rebuild the fractional flow vs. the water saturation history of 98 MEOR_Start MEOR_End
the injection pattern. This was accomplished by using an
adaptation of the Dake method (Figure 19, 20, 21, 22; Ref. 39, 96
44). Then a reasonable inference of the status of moveable 94
fluid saturations at the start of the project was derived and
Water Cut [%]

used as input for simulations (Table 7). 92
The present global efficiency in terms of water injected per
90
oil produced for active water flooding projects in La Ventana
block is included as an additional maturity reference. This 88 "
efficiency figure is a dimensionless index expressed in terms
of water injected per volume of oil produced (M3 /M3) for 86
every reservoir, compared with similar calculations for PB-
84
191 pattern is as follow:
M3 of water injected per M3 of oil produced (present time) 82
Reservoir:
TRC: 19.4 80
54 58 62 66 70 74
BRC: 24.4 Cum Water [MM3]
LRB: 3.0
VC: 12.1 Pre- and Post-MEOR water cut evolution
The calculation of this efficiency parameter in PB-191 pattern

is 5.6M3/M3. This calculation does not agree with the VC
global value of 12.1. The difference could be from the Pattern PB-191 Gross Rate vs. Cum Oil
influence of the primary production coming from PB-212 and 200
PB-220 (perforated at 1995 and 1997 respectively) MEOR_Start MEOR_End
180
Different evaluation scenarios were considered in terms of
size of flowable area; petrophysic models for layers D2, C2; 160
and fluid saturations at MEOR commencement date. Table 9
summarizes the results for cases 1 and 2. 140
Gross Rate [M3/D]
The Incremental Oil produced during the two year MEOR

120
program (Tables 10 to 14), varies from 4.81 to 9.75 M3 (30.2
to 61.3 barrels). These values are compared to the Total 100
Volume of Microbial product used (3,892 gallons) during the
same period, giving a global parameter of Microbial Product 80
Efficiency (MPE). In La Ventana Project, MPE ranges from
7.8 to 15.7 barrels per gallon of Microbial product used. 60
During the two year program, the injected water amounts 40
were 189,000 M3, or 1.65 times the Moveable Oil in Place
existing in the pattern at the start of MEOR (using the same 20 6.8
reference, this number is 8.13 times for the conventional water
flooding history from 1989 through1998. The average rate of 0
600 612 624 636 648 660
water injected was 256.4 M3/D during this period. Cum Oil [MM3]
MEOR show production improvements of 14.3% to 33.9%
over the Conventional Decline indicated in the baseline Pre- and Post-MEOR gross rate stability.
hypothesis (Table 09).
Rheological comparison enzymatic cracking on heavy ends of n-alkanes (A, coincident

A clear improvement in oil rheology was detected at the end in both controls) and to a lesser degree by the alteration of
of the MEOR program. The treated oils were compared with zone C (microbial alteration of saturate hydrocarbon is
control oil from PB-109. The shift in Viscosity vs. selective with carbon chain length). The shift of line B to the
Temperature curves was remarkable (Figures 12 and 13). left is a result of a lower molecular composition than in A
Geochemical comparison (compare with Figure 12 and 13 and Table 2). This behavior is
Generally the oils appear to have experienced very slight coherent with 9% (residence time: 336 hs.) of microbial
compositional and molecular changes compared with the generated solvents (equivalent to mixing C12-C14 segment of
untreated counterparts. In addition, the four MEOR treated external solvents in the oil) during lab testing of microbial
samples look very similar to each other. Many of the inoculated oils (Figure 11).
variations detected are about the same range assessed between
Control and Post-MEOR samples
the reference PB-109 and PB-116 oils. Slight variations that 1
could potentially have come from the treatment were: Light End Heavy End
0.9
Zone 18 Zone 34
Composition, the treated samples were slightly poorer in 0.8
saturated hydrocarbons.
0.7
Whole oil gas chromatography, PB-83 oil developed an n- C
0.6 A
alkane distribution significantly different from the three other PB-116 (pre-MEOR)
treated samples and from control sample PB-109, augmenting 0.5
the proportion of light and mid molecular weight compounds 0.4

compared to heavy ones (next column figure). 0.3 0.2
PB-109 (pre-MEOR)
C7 GC, no major or systematic change is observed, with 0.2
Peak area [%]

the exception of the somewhat richer proportion of C6 and C7 0.1
compounds measured for PB-83 oil compared with the other 0
three treated samples. However, the data maintains about the 0.1 − 0.2
same or slightly lower ratio than that measured for PB-109 and 0.2
PB-116 oils. PB-83 (post-MEOR)
0.3
Aromatics GC-MS analysis, treated samples had
0.4
phenanthrene/dibenzothiophene ratios in the range of 4.8-5.7;
those of untreated samples had 9.8-11.9. These variations 0.5 B
could apparently derive from the MEOR process. 0.6 A
Additionally, C28 TA sterane (20R) in the m/z 231 mass 0.7
fragmentogram is slightly augmented with respect to the other 0.8 PB-116 envelope
components. This could be due to compositional variations of 0.9 (pre-MEOR)
the oils in the area (differential charge, facies, etc.) D
1
0 10 20 30 40
Saturate GC-MS, the overall absolute concentration of
Retention time [min]
biomarkers (ppm) in treated samples is slightly to moderately
augmented compared to untreated samples. However, it seems
Comparative Compositional Changes Between Microbial-altered
difficult to explain this only through the MEOR process. and Control Oils
Consistent with the C28 TAS increase, saturate steranes have
the C29 component slightly increased compared to C27 and °API variation (at lab normalized conditions)
C28 in the treated samples. Again the effect could be
attributed to variability of the oil in itself. Pre-MEOR (Control based on PB-109/PB-116): 29.1/25.9
Aromatic hydrocarbons have general and non-systematic Post-MEOR °API value Variation with Controls
variations with respect to the untreated samples. The trend PB-83 30.3 +1.2/+4.4
showing changes in the proportions of naphthalenes and PB-212 19.4 -9.7/-6.5
phenanthrenes detected in other study (Piedras Coloradas, Ref. PB-220 21.4 -7.7/-4.5
4) is not evident in this set (Figure 7, 8). PB-111 30.8 +1.7/+4.9
High temperature gas chromatography kept the same
envelope obtained for the treated samples. No significant Economical aspects
changes were observed. Short-term and five-year forecasts using net present value
The figure in the next column illustrates and summarizes curves based on pattern performance curves were calculated at
the changes in the La Ventana MEOR application. It shows the end of the project. Then, an integral set of NPV (net
control compositional envelopes (upper sector, traces A and Present Value) and CIB (Cost per Incremental Barrel) figures
C) for control oils (PB-109 and PB-116 respectively) and for four different cases of MEOR and conventional decline
similar profile for oil sampled from PB-83 wellhead (lower extrapolation were calculated over a similar period with
part, trace B). Light ends (D) are mainly originated by sensitivity and risk analysis. Different economic indexes such
as Payout (break-even point analysis), Exposure, and Internal

Rates of Return (I.R.R.) were derived. Further analysis with Conclusions
several scenarios of oil prices (from location-adjusted WTI of 1- Biotechnological methods of injection schemes are an
20 to 15 $/barrel), taxes and treatment alternatives (50 to 100 important prospect for these fields if appropriate
p.p.m.) provided a detailed profitability evaluation (Tables 10, screening is conducted for candidate patterns.
11, 12 and 13). 2- During the pilot, MEOR Incremental Reserves (IR)
Payouts (PO) totaled a range of 1,255 (7893 bbls.) to 3,339 (21,000
Based on a well-by-well analysis, a range of PO values from bbls.) M3 of oil during the first year and 3,555 (22,358
159 to 545 days from the start of pilot was obtained. (Table bbls.) to 6,419 (40,371 bbls.) M3 during the second year.
14) Values ranging from 22,002 (138 Mbbls.) to 40,800 (256
Cost per Incremental Barrel (CIB) Mbbls.) M3 of oil for the next five years of MEOR was
CIB was varying from 1.92 to 3.23 $/barrel during the two- assumed as a conservative projection.
year pilot stage. On MEOR Expanded scales, CIB is forecast 3- At current oil price scenario and treatment costs today,
to decrease to between 1.39 to 2.35 $/barrel. The difference is MEOR is profitable at pilot and scaled stages. On an
explained by the small scale of the pilot trials and because of expanded scale, Cost per Incremental Barrel (CIB) is
the ntensive nature of research, operative support and projected to decrease to below 1.39 to 2.35 $/barrel.
engineering throughout this stage. Also, the two-year period 4- Multidisciplinary team integration and appropriate
delay is equivalent to least 0.8 PVI necessary to begin to monitoring techniques are key factors to optimize
develop an MEOR response. fractional flow and incremental recovery in microbially
Incremental Reserves (IR) stimulated reservoirs.
According to the minimum and maximum decline hypothesis, 5- Streamline simulators are useful to evaluate Recovery
IR totals a range in values of 1,255 to 3,339 M3 of oil during Factors during MEOR evaluation and they are important
the first year and 3,555 to 6,419 M3 of oil during the second tools in project design.
year. The economic limits (<2 M3/D per well) are not
presumed to reach for 8 years. A range of IR values from Future course of actions
22,002 to 40,800 M3 for the next five years of MEOR 1- To conclude in-course optimization stage in PB-191
application was assumed as conservative. Values were injection pattern.
considered on a well-by-well analysis and the further 2- To evaluate best expansion strategies for C2-D2
integration of individual calculations for the composite for the reservoirs to maximize economic return.
four different decline cases. 3- To evaluate MEOR prospects in other reservoirs of La
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) Ventana Block under waterflooding influence.
Actual IRR value was far above original inferences (54% and
159%) had improved value for the average optimized SI metric Conversion Factors
prospect. acre-foot x 1.233 489 E+03 = m3
barrel x 1.589 873 E-01 = m3
Biosafety issues foot x 3.048* E-01 = m
MEOR bacteria used in La Ventana project are non- md x 9.869 233 E-04 = µm2
pathogenic. During the pilot, special care was taken to meet ml x 1.0 E-06 = m3
local and foreign regulations related to environmental and psi x 6.894 757 E+00 = kPa
health topics. Bq x 3,7 E+10 = curie
Toxicity tests on animals and plants were done by the Bq x 1 E+00 = d/sec
Institute of Microbiology (Academia Sinica) and by the (d/sec: 1 disintegration per second)
Institute of Atom Energy Utilization, Chinese Academy of U.S.Gal x 3.785 412 E+00 = L
Agriculture Science, both in the Peoples Republic of China. °F (°F -32)*5/9 E-01 = °C
Selected animals and plants were Kunming mice (200 mice, * Conversion factor is exact
half-male, half-female, weighting 18-20 grams.,) and
Cucumber (Jinyan #5 strain) and rice (Yuefu strain) seeds Acknowledgements
respectively. Special essay protocols and method of exposure We want to thank ASTRA-REPSOL Company and Microbes
using microbial products number #1, #4, #5 and #6 were Inc. for their permission to publish this paper. Special thanks
applied to germinated plants, seeds and animals. to La Ventana executives and operations staff for their
Results showed no adverse affects on plants or animals. valuable contributions in discussions held to interpret MEOR
The microbial products caused no abnormalities in plants (rice field data.
and cucumber) or on mice. No abnormality or disease
occurred on crops treated differently. No abnormality occurred
in hearts, livers, spleens, lungs, kidneys or intestines of test
mice.
References E.P. Robertson, SPE, K.B. Barrett and G.A. Bala, SPE,
EG&G Idaho Inc.. SPE 22844.
1. Microbial EOR Technology Advancement: Case Studies of 16. Adsorption of Carboxylic Acids on Reservoir Minerals
Successful Projects. F.L. Dietrich, SPE, F.G. Brown, SPE, From Organic and Aqueous Phase. Lene Madsen, SPE, and
Z.H.Zhou, SPE, Microbes, Inc.; and M.A.Maure, SPE, IDA Lind, SPE, Technical U of Denmark.
Green Consultores. SPE 36746. 17. Chemistry of the Crude Oil/Brine Interface. Hill S.
2. Systematic Extensive Laboratory Studies of Microbial EOR Buckley, New Mexico Petroleum Recovery Research
Mechanisms and Microbial EOR Application Results in Center, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.
Changqing Oilfield. Dejun Deng, Chenglong Li, Quanyi Ju, Proceeding of the 3rd International Symposium on
Pingcang Wu, Changqing Petroleum Administration Bureu Evaluation of Reservoir Wettability and its Effect on Oil
and F.L. Dietrich. Microbes Inc. SPE 54380. Recovery. Laramie, WY, 21-23 September 1994.
3. Microbial EOR Laboratory Studies and Application Results 18. Dependence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa continuous culture
in Daqing Oilfield. Yijiang Zhang, Zhengshun Xu, Ping Ji, biosurfactant production on nutritional and environmental
and Weihong Hou, Daqing Petroleum Administration factors. Luis H. Guerra-Santos, Othmar Käppeli, and Armin
Bureau and Forrest Dietrich, Microbes Inc.. SPE 54332. Fietcher. Departament of Biotechnology, Swiss Federal
4. Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery Pilot Test in Piedras Institute of Technology, Hönggerberg, 8093 Zürich,
Coloradas Field, Argentina. M.A. Maure, SPE, and F.L. Switzerland.
Dietrich, SPE, Microbes Inc. and V.A. Diaz and H. 19. Production of Biosurfactants by a Mixed Bacteria
Argañaraz, Perez Companc S.A. SPE 53715. Population Grown in Continuous Culture on Crude Oil.
5. MEOR – Altamont/Bluebell Field Project. L.P. Streed, Georges Mattei and Jean-Claude Bertrand. Centre
Coastal Oil & Gas Corp., and F.G. Brown, National d’Océanologie de Marseille (URA 41), Faculté des
Parakleen Co. SPE 24334. Sciences de Luminy, 13288 Marseille Cedex 9.
6. Microbes: The practical and Environmental Safe Solution 20. Effect of addition of Pseudomonas aeruginosa UG2 inocula
to Production Problems, Enhanced Production, and or biosurfactants on biodegradation of selected
Enhanced Oil Recovery. F.G. Brown, National Parakleen hydrocarbons in soil. Devender J. Jain, Hung Lee and Jack
Co. Inc. SPE 23955. T. Trevors. Journal of Industrial Microbiology, 10 (1992)
7. Microbial-Enhanced Waterflooding : Mink United Project. 87-93, Published by Elsevier.
Rebecca S. Bryant, SPE, and Thomas E. Burchfield, SPE, 21. Effect of the Carbon Source on Biosurfactant Production by
Natl. Inst. for Petroleum & Energy Research ; DM. Dennis, Pseudomonas Aeruginosa 44T1. M. Robert, M. E.
Microbial System Corp. ; and D.O. Hitzman, Injectech Inc. Mercadé. M. P. Bosch, J. L. Parra, M. J. Espuny, M. A.
SPE 17341. Manresa, J. Guinea. Biotechnology Letters Vol 11 No 12.
8. Geochemical Report, Source Rock Evaluation of the PCXP 871-874 (1989).
1002 Well and Characterization of Five Oils, Piedras 22. Pseudomona Aeruginosa Biosurfactant Production in
Coloradas Field, Cuyo Basin, Argentina, October 1988, Continuous Culture with Glucose as Carbon Source. Luis
Exlog Consulting Services. H. Guerra-Santos, Othmar Käppeli, and Armin Fietcher.
9. Laboratory Testing of a Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery Department of Biotechnology, Swiss Federal Institute of
Process Under Anaerobic Conditions. Bruce Rouse, Franz Technology, Hönggerberg, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland.
Hiebert, and L.W. Lake, U. of Texas. SPE 24819. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Aug 1984.
10. New Tools Target Oil-Quality Sweet Spots in Viscous-Oil 23. Enhanced Production on Surfactin from Bacillus subtilis by
Accumulations. P.C. Smalley, SPE, and N.S Goodwin, BP Continuous Product Removal and Metal Cation Additions.
Exploration ; J.F. Dillon and C.R. Bidinger, BP Exploration D. G. Cooper, C. R. Macdonald, S. J. B. Duff, and N.
(Alaska) Inc. ; and R.J. Drozd, IITRI. SPE 36652. Kosarig. Biochemical Engineering Faculty of Engineering
11. Crude Oils in Reservoirs : The Factors Influencing their Science. The University of Western Ontario. Applied and
Composition. Chapter I. 6. Ph. Blanc and Connan. (Elf Environmental Microbiology, Sept 1981.
Aquitaine, Centre Scientifique et Technique Jean Feger 24. Production of extra cellular emulsifying agent by
64018 Pau Cedex, France.) Pseudomona aeruginosa UG1. Cynthia G. MacElwee, Hung
12. Pieter Shenck Award acceptance speech Geochemical Ledd, and Jack T. Trevors. Department of Environmental
indicators of biodegradation : tools for developing and Biology, University on Guelph. Journal of Industrial
managing heavy oil assets (17th. International Meeting on Microbiology. 5 (1990) 25-32.
Organic Geochemistry, Donostia- San Sebastian, 25. Biosurfactant production by two isolates Pseudomonas
September 6, 1995). Mark A. McCaffrey. Aeruginosa. C. Rocha, F. San-Blas, G. San-Blas and L.
13. Calculating Viscosities of Reservoir Fluids From Their Vierma. World Journal of Microbiology and
Compositions. John Lohrenz, Bruce G. Bray, Members Biotechnology, 8 , 125-128.
AIME, Charles R. Clark. Continental Oil Co, Ponca City , 26. The production of Biopolymers for Enhanced Oil Recovery
Okla. U. of Kansas. Lawrence , Kans. Paper presented at Use. Ian W. Sutherland. Pages 200-204 Microbes and Oil
SPE Annual Fall Meeting, held in Houston, Tex., Oct. 11- Recovery. Volume I, International Bioresources Journal
14-1964. J.E. Zajic. E.C. Donaldson.
14. Wettability Literature Survey - Part 2 :Wettability 27. Isolation an Characterization of Halotolerant,
Measurement. William G. Anderson, SPE, Conoco Inc. Thermophilic, Anaerobic, Biopolymer-Producing and
Journal of Petroleum Technology, November 1986. Biosurfactant-Producing Bacteria. S.M. Pfiffner, G.E.
15. Surfactant - Base EOR Mediated by Naturally Occurring Jenneman, G.B. Walker Jr. M. Javaheri, M.J. McInerney,
Microorganisms. CP. Thomas, SPE, M.L. Duvall, SPE, and R.M. Knapp. Pages 285-294. Microbes and Oil
Recovery. Volume I, International Bioresources Journal 37. Effect of Wettability Alteration on Water/Oil Relative
J.E. Zajic. E.C. Donaldson. Permeability, Dispersion, and Flowable Saturation in
28. A Mathematical Model for Microbially Enhanced Oil Porous Media. F.H.L. Wang, SPE, Exxon Production
Recovery Process. Xu Zhan, R.M. Knapp, and M.J. Research Co. SPE Reservoir Engineering, May 1988.
Mclnerney, U. of Oklahoma. SPE/DOE 24202. 38. A Genome Probe Survey of the Microbial community in
29. Mathematical Modeling of Microbial Enhanced Oil Oil Fields. Voordouw. G. ; Telan , A. J. Department of
Recovery. M. R. Islam, U. of Alaska-Fairbanks. SPE Biological Sciences, The University of Calgary, Alberta,
20480. T2N 1N4, Canada.
30. The Transport of Bacteria in Porous Media and its 39. A Prediction Technique for Immiscible Processes Using
Significance in Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery. Long Field Performance Data. Iraj Ershaghi, SPE, U. of
Kuan Jang, M.M. Sharma, and T.F. Yen, U of Southern Southern California. Doddy Abdassah, SPE, U. of Southern
California. SPE 12770. California. SPE 6977.
31. A Streamline-Based 3D Field-Scale Compositional 40. A Study of Formation Plugging with Bacteria. J.T. Raleigh.
Reservoir Simulator. Marco R. Thiele, SPE, Rod P. D.L. Flock. Members AIME . The U. of Alberta.
Batycky, SPE, and Martin J. Blunt, SPE Stanford Edmonton, Alta. Journal of Petroleum Technology, July
University. SPE 38889. 14, 1964.
32. Mathematical Modeling of Microbial Enhanced Oil 41. Microbes Deep inside the Earth. James K. Fredrickson and
Recovery. M.R. Islam, U. Of Alaska-Fairbanks. SPE Tullis C. Onstott. Scientific American, October 1996.
20480. 42. Advances in the characterization of microbial populations
33. Simulating Flow in Heterogeneous Systems Using in the subsurface. Ian Head. NRC News, May 1996,
Streamtubes and Streamlines. M.R. Thiele, SPE, R.P. Subsurface Microbial Populations.
Batycky, SPE, and M.J. Blunt, SPE, and F.M. Orr Jr, SPE, 43. Modeling and Laboratory Investigation of Microbial
Stanford U.. SPE Reservoir Engineering, February 1996. Transport Phenomena in Porous Media. M-M. Chang, F.T-
34. Semi analytical Computation of Path Lines for Finite- H. Chung, R.S. Bryant, H.W. Gao, and T.E. Burchfield.
Difference Models. David W. Pollock. Ground Water, Vol. IITRI/NIPER. SPE 22845.
26 Nº 6 44. The Practice of Reservoir Engineering. Laurie P. Dake.
35. Experimental Study of Waterflood Tracers. Robert A. Development in Petroleum Science, 36. Pages 441 to 445
Greenkorn, Jersey Production research co. Tulsa, Okla. 1994 Edition, Elsevier Science B. V.
January 1962. SPE 169.
36. Aqueous Tracers for Oilfield Applications. R.D. Hutchins
and H.T. Dovan, Unocal Science & Technology, and B. B.
Sandiford, Polymer Applications. SPE 21049.
Figures Formation Name
Marino
Divisadero Largo
1900 m.b.s
Punta de las Bardas
TRC (Top Red Conglomerate)
Barrancas (Triasic) BRC (Bottom Red Conglomerate)

2000 m.b.s
2100 m.b.s
D2 sand
VC
Rio Blanco (Triasic) (Victor Claro) C2 Sand
2200 m.b.s
2450 m.b.s
LRB (Lower Rio Blanco)

2600 m.b.s
Cacheuta
La Ventana Field
Figure 2: Target Reservoirs and Objective Sands
(Cuyo Basin, Argentine)
Figure 1: Field Location
PB-212
PB-083
LA VENTANA
LA VENTANA (LV)
BLOCK
PB-220
PB-191
RIO VIEJAS (RV)
GRAN BAJADA BLANCA (GBB) PB-109
PUNTA
DE LAS VACAS
BARDAS (PB) MUERTAS (VM)
PB-111
PB-191 Pattern
Figure 4: Streamlines and Well Locations in PB-191 Pattern
GUANACO BLANCO (GB)
Figure 3: Pattern of PB-191 injector, Relative Situation Of Active

Wells Reaching D2 Sand
40 100
15 PB-109 PB-116
10 15 20
20 [Pre-MEOR] [Pre-MEOR]
25
10
25
Response X10000
Response X10000
Pr
30
Ph
Pr 30
Ph 35
35
2
2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Retention Time, [Minutes]
Retention Time, [Minutes]
Figure 5: Chromatographic Profile in Control Oil Figure 6: Chromatographic Profile in Control Oil
8 50 PB-116
PB-109
[Pre-MEOR] [Pre-MEOR]
DMN
DMN MP
TMN
Response X10000
Response X10000
MP MN
DMP TMN
P P DMP
MN
2 2
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Retention Time, [Minutes] Retention Time, [Minutes]
Figure 7: Aromatic Hydrocarbons Distributions in Control Oil Figure 8: Aromatic Hydrocarbons Distributions in Control Oil
PRISTANE/n-C , PHY T A N E / n- C
Pr/n-C17 1 7 1 8
R A T IOS
1 0 .0
OXIDIZING
A B C D
M A T U R A T I O N
B I O D E G R A D A T I O N
1 .0
R E D U C I N G
PB-109
A - Terrg
i enous Organc
i M atter
B - P a a t - C o a lE n v ri o n m e n t
C - Mx
i ed Organ ic Sources
D - Ag
l al / B a c t e r a
i lM atter
PB-116
0 .1
0 .1 1 .0 1 0 .0
Ph/n-C18
Figure 9: Pre-MEOR Biodegradation Status in Control Oils
Liquid Chromatography
Status
Saturates Aromatics NSO Asphaltenes
(%) (%) (%) (%)
PB-109 Pre-MEOR 64.3 11.7 4.8 19.1
PB-116 Pre-MEOR 60.6 20.3 15.0 4.1
Table 1: Main Component Participation in Control Oils
THOMPSON Compositional Ratios

Well Heptane Paraffinicity Aromaticity Isoheptane Aromaticity Paraffin
Samples Value (1) Value (2) Branching
(H) (F) (B) (I) (A) (R)

PRE-MEOR samples
PB-109 31.15 1.19 0.14 0.56 0.04 7.39
PB-116 29.41 1.25 0.14 0.48 0.05 7.13
POST-MEOR samples
PB-111 27.65 1.15 0.16 0.51 0.05 7.69
PB-220 27.74 1.13 0.17 0.53 0.04 7.82
PB-212 28.52 1.12 0.17 0.52 0.04 7.84
PB-83 28.30 1.12 0.17 0.52 0.05 7.88
Table 2: Status of Alteration Parameters in Control Oils and post-MEOR samples

Oil: PB-109 MEOR, Internal Solvent Generation

500 420 µcontrol_LSR
450 0.3 3 378

µcontrol_LSR 0 Ψt
T
400 336
Apparent viscosity of blend, [MPa.s]

350 294
Apparent Viscosity [mPa.s]
300 252
µcontrol_HSR
250 210
200 168
µMEOR
150 126
100 84
50 42
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Shear Rate, SR [1/s] % of solvents [v/v]
Control Internal Solvents [Matching]

Residence Time: 48 hs. Extrapolation
144 hs. Internal Solvents [MEOR, 0-336 hs]
336 hs. External Solvents [C12-C14]
Figure 10: Rheological Profile for Control and Lab Inoculated Oils Figure 11: Internal (Microbial Induced) and External Solvent
Comparison
Viscosity vs Temperature Viscosity vs Temperature [Zoom]

2500 250
240
2250 Teval
230 Teval
220
210
2000 200
190
1750 180
170
160
Viscosity (mPa.s)
Viscosity (mPa.s)
1500 150
140
130 µMEOR
1250 120
110
1000 100
90
750 80
70
60
500 µcontrol_HSR 50
40
µMEOR 30
250 20
10
0 0
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90
Temperature(C. deg.) Temperature(C. deg.)
Control (Pre-MEOR) Control (Pre-MEOR)
PB-083 (Post-MEOR) PB-083 (Post-MEOR)
Figures 12: Post-MEOR Comparison with Control Oil Figures 13: Zoom of High Temperature Zone
Oil to Downstream Processing
Injection Production Gross

Microbial
Water Water Production
Inoculation
Program
Batch Size Qiny
Qoil
Water Conditioning Battery Qwater
Plant Qgas
Time
Injector Producer
Layer " ï "

Under Flooding
A Cross Section A-A
Producer
Producer
Injector
Streamtube " k " X

under
Colonization
A
Producer
Plant View
Figure 14: Streamtube Colonization in Target Sand by Inoculating Injection Water, Conceptual Frame
Pattern PB-191 - Oil Rate History

150
140
130 MEOR_Start
120
110
Oil Rate [M3/Day]

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Years
Figures 15: Oil Rate History
100
Pattern PB-191 - Water Rate History
100
90 MEOR_Start
80
Water Rate [M3/Day]
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Years
Figure 16: Water Rate History
Pattern PB-191 - Gross Rate History

200
175 MEOR_Start
150
Gross Rate [M3/Day]
125
100
75
50
25
0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Years
Figure 17: Gross Rate History
Pattern PB-191 - Injection Rate History

1000
900
800 Injection_Start MEOR_Start
Injection Rate [M3/Day]
700
600
500
400 mean ( Q )
300
200
100
0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Years
Figure 18: Injection Rate History (PB-191 Operates as Injector of VC (D2-C2) Since August 1989)
Pattern PB-191 Oil Cut vs. Cum Oil Pattern PB-191 Water Cut vs. Cum Water
20 100
18 MEOR_Start MEOR_End MEOR_Start MEOR_End

98
16 96
14 94
12
Water Cut [%]

92
Oil Cut [%]
10 90
6.8
8 88 "
6 86
4 84
2 82
80
0 54 58 62 66 70 74
600 612 624 636 648 660
Cum Water [MM3]
Cum Oil [MM3]
Figure 19: MEOR, Oil Cut Improvements (Two-Year Program) Figure 20: MEOR, Water Cut Improvements (Two-Year Program)
Fractional flow curve Fractional flow curve [Zoom]

1 1
fwe411
TMEOR_Start TMEOR_Start
0.9 0.97
0.8 0.94
0.7 0.91 fwe411

Fractional Flow, [M3/M3]
Fractional Flow, [M3/M3]
0.6 0.88
0.5 0.85
0.4 0.82
0.3 0.79
0.2 0.76
0.1 0.73
0 0.7
0.4 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.5 0.52 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.6 0.5 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.6
Water Saturation Water Saturation
Figure 21: Pattern PB-191, Fractional Flow History and Water Figure 22: Zooming of Interest Region
Saturation at MEOR Start Time
5
1.2 .10
A191-83 max = 247739 sq. m

PB-212
5
1 .10 PB-083
L191-212 = 764 m
AF1: 23%
A191-83 min = 140299 sq. m
ST 191-83 (2)
L191-83 = 412 m PB-220
4
8 .10 AF2: 7%
L191-220 = 496 m
A191-220 = 62900 sq. m
PB-191
4
6 .10
L191-109 = 482 m
PB-109
A191-109 = 80299 sq.AF3:
m 16%
4
4 .10
L191-111 = 789 m
4
2 .10 A191-111 = 187718 sq. m
PB-111
AF4: 5%
0
4 4 4 4 5 5
0 2 .10 4 .10 6 .10 8 .10 1 .10 1.2 .10
Figure 23: Flooded Areas and Water Injected Allocation Factors with PB-109 producer (active)
A191-83 max = 195897 sq. m

PB-212
PB-083 L191-212 = 764 m

AF1: 21%
A191-83 min = 66697 sq. m
L191-83 = 412 m PB-220

AF2: 20%
L191-220 = 496 m
PB-191 A191-220 = 137370 sq. m
L191-111 = 789 m
A191-111 = 189896 sq. m
PB-111
AF4: 12%
Figure 24: Flooded Areas and Water Injected Allocation Factors without PB-109 producer (inactive)
PB-191
PB-212
PB-212
PB-83 PB-83
PB-111
PB-109
PB-220
PB-220
PB-191 PB-109
PB-111
Figure 25: C2 Layer, VC Reservoir (PB-191 Pattern)
PB-191
PB-212
PB-212
PB-83
PB-83 PB-111
PB-109
PB-220
PB-220
PB-191 PB-109
PB-111
Figure 26: D2 Layer, VC Reservoir (PB-191 Pattern)

Well PB-220: Tritium Response Well PB-83: Tritium Response

2500 10 5000 6.0
4000 4.8
Concentration
2000 8
Concentration
Recovery (%)
Recovery (%)
Activity
Activity
(Bq/L)
(Bq/L)
1500 6 3000 3.6
1000 4 2000 2.4
500 2 1000 1.2
0 0 0 0.0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
Days from Tracer Injection Days from Tracer Injection
Tracer Concentration Recovered Water Tracer Concentration Recovered Water
Figure 27: Tracer Analysis Figure 28: Tracer Analysis
Tracer Analysis: PB-191, PB-083

1.5
1.4 70 365
PB-212
1.3
PB-083
1.2
Tracer Concentration [Bequerel/liter]

1.1 1
PB-220
1
0.9
PB-191
0.8
PB-109
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
PB-111 0.2
0.1 0
Figure 29: Streamlines and Tracer Analysis 0
0 200 400 600 800
Days from Tracer Injection
Figure 30: Matching Analysis for PB-83 Well
Well PB-111: Tritium Response Well PB-212: Tritium Response

400 0.8 300 1.2
350 0.7 250 1.0
Concentration
Recovery (%)
Recovery (%)
Concentratio
300 0.6
200 0.8
n (Bq/L)
Activity
Activity
250 0.5
(Bq/L)
200 0.4 150 0.6

150 0.3 100 0.4
100 0.2
50 0.1 50 0.2
0 0.0 0 0.0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
Days from Tracer Injection Days from Tracer Injection
Tracer Concentration Recovered Water Tracer Concentration Recovered Water
Figure 31: Tracer Analysis Figure 32: Tracer Analysis

Streamline PB-191 - PB-83 (2) CoN_P

110
100
90 Injector Producer
80
Relative concentrations
70
60
Biomass (Sessile+Planktonic)
50
N/P Ratio
40
30
20 Initial_Inoculum
10
0
10
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Relative distance along streamline
Picture 33: Nutrient Attenuation Profile and Biomass Growing Inference by Simulation
Producer
PB-83
(Producer)
Stream_line PB-191 PB-83 (2)
PB-191
(Injector)
Injector
Figure 35: Streamline Under Analysis (ST_PB-191 PB-83 (2))

Figure 34: Biomass Growing Factors Mapped on Selected
Streamline
MEOR and untreated net oil curves MEOR and untreated net oil curves
100 100
jlim Telc jlim Telc
80 80
Oil Rate [m3/day]
Oil Rate [m3/day]

60 60
40 40
20 20
Econlimit Econlimit
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
[Days] [Days]
Incremental Oil Incremental Oil
Conventional Decline Conventional Decline
MEOR Performance MEOR Performance
Pre, and Post-MEOR Data set Pre, and Post-MEOR Data set
t := 0 .. Ny⋅ 365 i := 0 , 200.. Ny⋅ 365

Figure 36: Economic Analysis (Case 1, Minimal) Figure 37: Economic Analysis (Case 2)
MEOR: Incremental reserves MEOR: Incremental reserves

2 .10 2 .10
5 5
730 Telc 730 Telc
1.5 .10 1.5 .10

5 5
RescTelc RescTelc
[m3]
[m3]
1 .10 1 .10
5 5
Resm Telm
Resm Telm
5 .10 5 .10
4 4
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
[Days] [Days]
Incremental Reserves [m3] Incremental Reserves [m3]
Conventional Reserves [m3] Conventional Reserves [m3]
Total Reserves [m3] Total Reserves [m3]
Figure 38: Reserves Analysis (Case 1, Minimal)) Figure 39: Reserves Analysis (Case 2)
PB-191
PB-191: Cum. Injected Water Ionic Profile
2 .10
5
VC (D2-C2) reservoirs
1.9 .10
5
TMEOR_start TMEOR_end
.
1.8 10
5
Calcium
1.7 .10
5
1000.0
1.6 .10
5
.
1.5 10
5
100.0
1.4 .10
5 Sulphates Magnesium
1.3 .10
5
.
1.2 10
5 10.0
100000
1.1 .10
5
[M3/day]
1 .10
5
1.0
9 .10
4
8 .10
4 Chlorides Sodium
7 .10
4
50000
6 .10
4
5 .10
4
4 .10
4
3 .10
4 Bi-Carbonates Potasium
2 .10
4
1 .10
4 PB-191, D2-C2, VC (01/99)
PB-109, D2-C2, (01/99)
0 PB-109, D2-C2, (09/96)
0 80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720 800 PB-133, VC, (09/96)
Time from MEOR2 start [days]
Figure 41: Formation Waters Chemical Characteristic

Figure 40: Two-Year MEOR program, Cumulative Water Injected
Tubing 2 7/8"
2261.86
Packer FH N3
2212
Casing 7"
BRC
(Bottom Red Tubing 2 3/8"
Conglomerate)
Isolated
2243
2261.86
Packer FH N2
2246
2248.5
2273.16
D2 sand Mandrel FH N2 (130 m3/day)
2251
VC 2252.5
(Victor Claro) 2261.86
Packer FH N1
2262 2273.16
C2 Sand Mandrel FH N1 (150 m3/day)
2263
2282.95
No Go Niple
Figure 42: PB-191 (Injector), Selective Instalation in D2, C2 Sands

NPV analysis NPV analysis

2 .10 2 .10
6 6
Tbreak1 T1 Tbreak1 T1
1.5 .10 1.5 .10

6 6
1 .10 1 .10
6 6
[$]
[$]
5 .10 5 .10
5 5
− Inv1 − Inv1
0 0
5 .10 5 .10
5 5
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Time [Days from pilot start] Time [Days from pilot start]
Net Present Value alt. 1 Net Present Value alt. 1
Net Present Value alt. 2 Net Present Value alt. 2
NPV max alt. 1 NPV max alt. 1
NPV max alt. 2 NPV max alt. 2
Zero Zero
Figure 43: MEOR, NPV Evolution (Case 1, Minimal) Figure 44: MEOR, NPV Evolution (Case 2)
Cost per incremental oil [$/barrel] Cost per incremental oil [$/barrel]
30 30
27.5 27.5
25 25
22.5 Price 22.5 Price
20 20
17.5 17.5
[$/barrel]
[$/barrel]
15 15
12.5 12.5
10 10
7.5 7.5
5 5
2.5 2.5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time from MEOR start [years] Time from MEOR start [years]
Treatment design 1 Treatment design 1
Treatment design 2 Treatment design 2
Oil Price Oil Price
Figure 45: Cost per Incremental Barrel Evolution (Case 1, Minimal) Figure 46: Cost per Incremental Barrel Evolution (Case 2)
TRC Reservoir
General Information Top Depth [m] 2190
Average Pay Thickness [m] 7
2
Productive Area [km ] 32.2
3
OOIP (MMm std) 76.1
o
Reservoir Temperature [ F] 226
Initial Pressure [Psia] 2600
Saturation Pressure [Psi] 650
Petrophysical Properties Average Porosity [%] 18
Average Permeability [mdarcys] 370
Initial Water Saturation [%] 34
Residual Oil Saturation [%] 27
o
Fluid Properties Specific Gravity [ API] 30.2
Oil Viscosity [cp] 4.5
Oil Volume Factor [@ Pinitial] 1.123
3 3
Gas - Oil Ratio [m /m ] 20
Formation Water Salinity [ppm] 28100
Table 3: TRC Reservoir Characteristic
BRC Reservoir
2
3
OOIP (MMm std) 64.9
o
Reservoir Temperature [ F] 230
o
Fluid Properties Specific Gravity [ API] 29.2
Oil Volume Factor [@ Pinitial] 1154
3 3
Gas - Oil Ratio [m /m ] 25
Table 4: BRC Reservoir Characteristic
VC Reservoir
2
3
OOIP (MMm std) 59.3
Reservoir Temperature [ oF] 230
Fluid Properties Specific Gravity [oAPI] 29.0
Oil Volume Factor [@ P initial] 1.110
Gas - Oil Ratio [m 3/m 3] 15
Table 5: VC Reservoir Characteristic (LRB is having similar parameters)

Geometry Case A Case B Pethophysic

Well Category Formation Sand Interval I-P Distance Thickness Flooded Area Flooded Area Porosity
[m.b.s] [m] [m] [m2] [m2] [%]
PB-191 Injector VC D2-C2 2246-2252.5/2262-2263 0 4 0 0 20
PB-83 First line - Producer VC D2-C2 2220-2224/2230-2233 412 9 195897 247739 21.2
PB-109 Non Active - Producer VC D2-C2 2227.5-2231.5/2240-2242 482 7.5 0 82299 15
PB-111 First line - Producer VC D2-C2 2226.5-2231.5/2237.5-2241 789 6 169896 187718 14.5
PB-212 Second line - Producer VC D2-C2 2207.5-2211/2216-2218 764 4.4 0 0 20.9
PB-220 First line - Producer VC D2-C2 2219-2222/2224.5-2235 496 11 137370 62900 14.5
Table 6: PB-191 Pattern Characteristics and Geometry
Fluid Saturations PVT data

Well Category Formation Sand Sor Soi Swi Swmst Boi @ 800 psi
[%] [%] [%] [%] [rb/stb]
PB-191 Injector VC D2-C2 28 59 41 56.3 1.125
PB-83 First line - Producer VC D2-C2 28 59 41 56.3 1.125
PB-109 Non Active - Producer VC D2-C2 28 59 41 56.3 1.125
PB-212 Second line - Producer VC D2-C2 28 59 41 56.3 1.125
Table 7: PB-191 Pattern Saturations and Fluid Parameters Assumed at MEOR start
Oil in Place at MEOR start

Case A Case B
[stm3] [stm3]
0.0 0.0
52161.9 65966.0
0.0 12920.9
20627.6 22791.5
0.0 0.0
30577.3 14001.0
Total A Total B
103367 115679
Table 8: PB-191 Pattern Moveable Oil In Place
Fluid
MEOR/Conventional Decline MEOR Fractional
Cum. Oil Cum. Oil Allocation
Improvement Recovery
Well Factors
At MEORpilot start At MEORpilot end Difference From Case 1 From Case 3 Case B Case 1 Case 3
[stm3] [stm3] [stm3] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%]
PB-83 77 79.8 2.8 14.3 33.9 21 3.9 9.2
PB-109 99.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0
PB-111 211.1 221.1 10 14.3 33.9 12 3.3 7.8
PB-212 12 16.7 4.7 0 0 0 0.0 0.0
PB-220 13.1 22.1 9 14.3 33.9 20 3.8 9.1
Table 9: Two-Year MEOR Program, Fractional Recovery Inference

Pattern PB-191
Case: Baseline Hyphotesis and MEOR Performance Extrapolation [1]
MEOR Cost per NPV: Net Present Value
Incremental Reserves Incremental Barrel at selected Price [WTI adjusted]
Year from MEOR start MIR CIB 15 [$/b] 20 [$/b]
[m3] [$/Barrel] [M$] [M$]
1 1255 6.05 -43.7 -21.8
2 3555 3.23 66.4 142.5
3 5178 2.63 227.1 372.2
4 5944 2.41 394.6 608.3
5 6270 2.35 549.4 826.2
Table 10: MEOR, Economic Analysis (Case 1)
Pattern PB-191
[m3] [$/Barrel] [M$] [M$]
1 1255 6.05 -43.5 -22.0
2 3555 3.23 66.4 142.5
3 5561 2.29 242.2 392.0
4 7310 1.83 456.5 691.7
5 8244 1.79 670.8 989.4
Pattern PB-191
[m3] [$/Barrel] [M$] [M$]
1 3339 2.98 65.8 124.6
2 6419 1.92 308.1 464.9
3 7975 1.85 581.2 844.4
4 7888 1.94 817.0 1171.0
5 7308 2.15 1004.0 1432.0
Pattern PB-191
[m3] [$/Barrel] [M$] [M$]
1 3339 2.98 65.8 124.6
2 6419 1.92 308.1 464.9
3 8902 1.49 617.4 892.7
4 10900 1.26 957.9 1359.0
5 11240 1.39 1264.0 1778.0
Pattern PB-191
Short Term Analysis
Case Investment Pay Out Annual Cost
15 [$/b] 20 [$/b] [Average]
[M$] [Days from MEOR start] [Days from MEOR start] [M$]
1 26.1 545 434 52.8
2 26.1 545 434 52.8
3 26.1 159 217 52.8
4 26.1 159 217 52.8
Table 14: MEOR Cases Summary, Short Term Indexes
Appendix A Viscosity [mpa.s] vs. shear rate [1/s]

60
Treatability Indexes 57 1 5
54
control
µapp
( µappcontrol )min SR − (µapp control )max SR TMD i
NI = (
51
)
(µappinoculated )min SR − (µappinoculated )max SR
Viscosity [mpa.s]
48
.................................................................................. (Eq. 1) 45
42
max SR max SR
∑ (µappi )control − ∑ (µappi )inoculated
39
36
DV = ( i = min SR max SR
i = min SR )TMD 33
µ app
inoculated
∑ (µappi )control
i
30
0 5 10 15
minSR Shear rate [1/s] maxSR
i = min SR 1+
SRi
................................................................................... (Eq.2) 2+
3
4
5
1
EOR = ..................................................... (Eq. 3) 6
1 − DV BB
Control
Figure 47: Methodology to Analyze Microbial Sub-communities

Influence in Oils
Appendix B
Geochemical Methods and instrumentation

Fractionation by Liquid Chromatography: Asphaltenes are precipitated with hexane and soluble fraction is separated into saturate
hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons and resins/NSO compounds on a silica column by successive elution with hexane, benzene, and
benzene-methanol. The solvents are evaporated and weight percent of each fraction is determined.
Gas Chromatography (GC): The whole oil is analyzed with a Varian model 3300 gas chromatograph fitted with a 50 m fused silica
capillary column. Analytical data are processed with a Nelson Analytical Model 3000 chromatography data system.
Very High Resolution C7 Gas Chromatography: A sample of oil is injected directly into a Varian model 3400 gas chromatograph
fitted with a split injector and a Quadrex 100 meter fused silica capillary column. The GC run is isothermal at 35°C while collecting
the data from C2 – C8, then heated to purge the remaining sample from the column. Analytical data are processed with a Nelson
Analytical model 3000 chromatographic data system and IBM computer hardware.
Biomarker Analysis (GC-MS): The saturate or aromatic fractions separated by liquid chromatography from whole oils or source
rocks extracts are injected into a HP5890 gas chromatograph coupled to the HP5971A MSD. The Selected Ion Monitoring (SIM)
capabilities of the computer data acquisition system allow specific ions to be monitored. Ion m/z = 191 allows characterization of
specific saturate triterpenoid compounds and m/z = 217 certain saturate steranes. The ions m/z = 253 and 231 are respectively specific
for mono and triaromatic steroids; m/z = 156 and 170, for C2–naphthalenes; m/z = 178 and 192, for phenanthrene and
methylphenanthrenes, respectively; m/z = 184 and 198, for dibenzothiophene and methyldibenzothiophene, respectively.
Rheological Methods and instrumentation
Basically, lab procedures consisted of serial inoculations of oil with different microbial sub communities, followed with 48 to 96 hours
of controlled atmosphere incubation program at specific temperatures. Fluid samples and their replicates were taken at wellhead
conditions for every producer well pertaining to the pattern under screening following a specific timetable during pre- and post-MEOR
stages. The oil and formation water is separated from the original sample and divided in a set of small portions to be inoculated and
coded with different combination of anaerobic-facultative microorganisms. The serial rheology (using Brookfield DVIII viscometer
with ULA adapters) analysis produced control and inoculated sets of apparent viscosity vs. shear rate and apparent viscosity vs.
temperature curves used to derive MEOR treatability indexes (NI, DV and EOR). These indeces are helpful in deciding the best
combination of microbial products to use with the target oil/formation water combination under testing. In waterflooding applications,
the control (non inoculated samples) and inoculated bottles are incubated at specific temperatures for at least 400 hourr. A serial
rheology procedure runs every 24 to 48 hours on the control and inoculated sub-samples taken from the oil and water phases from the
corresponding serial bottles. To track compositional changes and correlate them with viscosity alterations, small portions of oil (1 ml)
are sampled to run High Resolution Whole Oil Chromatography. Microbial activity in the water phase is checked periodically. The
study of external solvents (nC12-nC14 alkane range) matched with the biogenerated internal solvents is also a common practice during
pre-MEOR evaluation. Serial bottles of inoculated oils are incubated and tested to be able to reach 400 hours of residence time.
Appendix C
Thompson Compositional Values With:
a = n - HEXANE
  b = BENCENE
  c = CYCLOHEXANE
 k 
H =  × 100 ........................... (Eq. 4) d = 2 – METHYLPENTANE
i =l
  e = 2,3 – DIMETHYLHEXANE
 ∑ Compound i  f = 1,1 – DMCP
 i = c  g = 3 – METHYLHEXANE
h = 1 – cis, 3 – DMCP
k i = 1 – trans, 3 – DMCP + 3 – EP
F= ................................................................ (Eq. 5) j = 1 – trans, 2 – DMCP
l
k = n – HEPTANE
l = METHYLCYCLOHEXANE
m
B= ............................................................... (Eq. 6) m = TOLUENE
k
H : Heptane Value
d + g F : Paraffinity
I =  ..................................................... (Eq. 7) B : Aromacity (1)
 h+i  I : Isoheptane Value
A : Aromacity (2)
b R : Paraffin Branching value
A= ................................................................ (Eq. 8)
a
k 2.5
R= ................................................................ (Eq. 9)
d
2.0
All values are normalized areas [%] from GC Evaporative Fractionation
chromatography.
1.5
m
B=
k
1.0
Maturation
Original
0.5
Oils Water Washing
0.0 Biodegradation
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
k
F=
l
Figure 48: Interpretation Guide (Table 2)
Appendix D
Calculation of Recovery Factor (RF) using reservoir discretization schemes based on streamlines patterns:
producer = M t 
∑  ∫ qo(t ) ⋅ dt 
t producer = 1  to 
RF to =
injector = L producer = M streamtube = N  ξf  (1 − Sor − Swirr − Swmov)ξ , to  
∑ ∑ ∑  ∑ A ⋅ h ⋅φ ⋅  
 ξ , to ξ , to ξ , to  Bo 

injector = 1 producer = 1 streamtube = 1 ξo  ξ , to  Streamline (k )
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...(Eq. 10)
 ξf  (1 − Sor − Swirr − Swmov)ξ , to  

Streamtube( k ) = ∑ Aξ , to ⋅ hξ , to ⋅φξ , to ⋅
MOIPto 
 ξo  Bo 
  ξ , to  Streamline(k )
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...(Eq. 11)
With:
t = recovery factor considering ( t-to) time interval, stock tank condition
RF to
MOIP to
3
Streamline ( k )
= moveable oil in place at time to and for streamline k, stock tank conditions, [std m ]
A = cell area at position ξ, along streamline, time to, [m2]

ξ , to
hξ , to = net interval at position ξ along streamline, time to, [m]
φ = porosity at position ξ along streamline, time to

ξ , to
Bξ , to = volume factor at position ξ,, along streamline, time to, [std m3/reservoir m3]
Swmovξ , to = moveable watersaturation at position ξ along streamline, time to
Bo = volume factor, [std m3/reservoir m3]
N = number of active streamlines connecting an especific pair of producer-injector wells
M = number of active producers in the pattern under evaluation
L = number of active injectors in the pattern under evaluation
Swmov = moveable water saturation at MEOR start
Swirr = irreducible water saturation
Sor = residual oil saturation
qo(t ) = oil rate at time t, [m3/day]
t =final time [days]
to =initial time[days] produc er
Assumptions:
ξ streamline coordinate
1) Monolayer reservoir A
ξ , to
2) Moveable oil as reference
3) No inter-layer cross flow
4) Convective-diffusive flow φ
ξ , to
5) Active streamlines pattern remain stable during (t-to) h ξ , to
6) Streamline pattern validated by tracers and subjacent

geology (micro and macro heterogeneities)
inj ec tor
ξo
Figure 49: Reservoir Discretization, Streamline (k) and Boundaries

Nomenclature Subscripts
µapp = apparent viscosity, [cp] control = original sample condition (pre MEOR)
Boi = volume factor, [std m3/reservoir m3] inoculated = Inoculated sample condition
DV = Delta Viscosity index e = natural logarithms base, 2.7172...
EOR = EOR index i = data point, spatial reference
GOR = gas oil relationship, [m3/ m3] j = producer reference
SR = shear rate, [1/s] ξ = streamline axial coordinate
maxSR =maximum explored Shear Rate, [1/s] m = microbial enhanced
minSR =minimum explored Shear Rate, [1/s] max = maximum
min = minimum
MEOR(ti ) = productivity index ratio, MEOR performance
o = origina, initial
index, dimensionless t = time
NI = Newtonian index
Qmeor( ti ) = oil rate after MEOR, [m3/day]
Qo( ti ) = oil rate before MEOR, [m3/day]
qo(t ) = oil rate at time t, [m3/day]
So = oil saturation
Sw = water saturation
Swmst = water saturation at MEOR start
Swirr = irreducible water saturation
Swc = connate water saturation
Sor = residual oil saturation
Kro(Swirr) = oil relative permeability at Swirr
Krw(Sor) = water relative permeability at Sor
TMD = Temperature of Maximum Discrimination of
rheological properties, [° F]
Jlim = post MEOR decline commencement year
Telc = time to economic limit
N/P = nitrogen to phosphorus ratio
Co N-P = Initial concentration of nitrogen and
phosphorous [ppm]
I-P Distance= injector to producer distance [m]
DMEOR = effective MEOR decline [1/day]
Dconv = effective conventional decline [1/day]

Waterflooding Optimization Using Biotechnology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Waterflooding Optimization Using Biotechnology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Waterflooding Optimization Using Biotechnology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SPE 69652

Waterflooding Optimization Using Biotechnology: 2-Year Field Test, La Ventana Field,

Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

generating solvents and bio-surfactants. These alterations and

between isomers could change after an MEOR process (Figure

So, the Newtonian Index (NI) is used to evaluate the shifting

2. Non-marginal wells having consistent, understandable

Oil Cut [%]

Water Cut [%]

The calculation of this efficiency parameter in PB-191 pattern

The Incremental Oil produced during the two year MEOR

Rheological comparison enzymatic cracking on heavy ends of n-alkanes (A, coincident

the proportion of light and mid molecular weight compounds 0.4

Peak area [%]

as Payout (break-even point analysis), Exposure, and Internal

Figures Formation Name

Barrancas (Triasic) BRC (Bottom Red Conglomerate)

LRB (Lower Rio Blanco)

Figure 1: Field Location

Figure 4: Streamlines and Well Locations in PB-191 Pattern

GUANACO BLANCO (GB)

Figure 3: Pattern of PB-191 injector, Relative Situation Of Active

Retention Time, [Minutes] Retention Time, [Minutes]

Figure 9: Pre-MEOR Biodegradation Status in Control Oils

THOMPSON Compositional Ratios

(H) (F) (B) (I) (A) (R)

Table 2: Status of Alteration Parameters in Control Oils and post-MEOR samples

Oil: PB-109 MEOR, Internal Solvent Generation

450 0.3 3 378

Apparent viscosity of blend, [MPa.s]

Control Internal Solvents [Matching]

Viscosity vs Temperature Viscosity vs Temperature [Zoom]

Oil to Downstream Processing

Injection Production Gross

Layer " ï "

A Cross Section A-A

Streamtube " k " X

Pattern PB-191 - Oil Rate History

Oil Rate [M3/Day]

Figures 15: Oil Rate History

Figure 16: Water Rate History

Pattern PB-191 - Gross Rate History

Figure 17: Gross Rate History

Pattern PB-191 - Injection Rate History

18 MEOR_Start MEOR_End MEOR_Start MEOR_End

Water Cut [%]

Fractional flow curve Fractional flow curve [Zoom]

0.7 0.91 fwe411

Fractional Flow, [M3/M3]

A191-83 max = 247739 sq. m

A191-83 max = 195897 sq. m

PB-083 L191-212 = 764 m

L191-83 = 412 m PB-220

PB-191 A191-220 = 137370 sq. m

A191-111 = 189896 sq. m

Figure 25: C2 Layer, VC Reservoir (PB-191 Pattern)

Figure 26: D2 Layer, VC Reservoir (PB-191 Pattern)

Well PB-220: Tritium Response Well PB-83: Tritium Response

1000 4 2000 2.4