A Laboratory Study on Near-Miscible CO2 Injection in Steelman Reservoir
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Miscible flooding is considered unsuitable for some reservoirs in southeast Saskatchewan because of high C)2 minimum miscibility pressure or operating pressure constraints. Therefore, the effectiveness of near-miscible C)2 injection was assessed for the Steelman reservoir in a laboratory study. The minimum miscibility pressures (MMP) were estimated for Steelman reservoir fluids with pure C)2 and C)2-hydrocarbon gas mixtures, the partially flashed reservoir fluids and the dead oils with pure C)2. The results of MMP studies demonstrated (1) addition of ethane or propane can reduce C)2 MMP greatly; and (2) achieving a miscible C)2 flood in the Steelman reservoir could be possible at a lower operating pressure than the measured C)2 MMP, by partially depleting the reservoir. Asphaltene flocculation tests showed that, after the onset point, flocculation increased linearly with gas concentration, but that the presence of brine had a negligible effect. Three tertiary C)2 coreflood tests were conducted with Steelman reservoir fluids at the reservoir temperature. These results showed that the microscopic displacement efficiency during the C)2 injection stage improved with the operating pressure in the near-miscible region, but no dramatic change in oil recovery was observed with a change in operating pressure. Introduction The Steelman pool, located about 200 km southeast of Regina, Saskatchewan, was discovered in 1954. Covering approximately 370 km2, the field was estimated to contain over 134 million m3 of light oil in the Frobisher and Midale beds located at a depth of about 1,400 m. Most of the reservoirs in the Midale beds, which contain about 83﹪ of the reserves of the pool, have been under waterflood for over 20 years and have nearly reached the estimated production limit by primary and waterflood(1). For achieving additional oil recovery and consequent financial benefits, the development of tertiary enhanced oil recovery (EOR) techniques, such as C)2 flooding, is essential. Miscible C)2 flooding is a proven enhanced oil recovery technique(2). Over the last decade, C)2 injection has become the leading EOR process for light oil(3). In Canada, the industry interest in C)2 flooding is evidenced by Shell Canada's C)2 pilot tests(4, 5), a miscible C)2 flood at Joffre field in Alberta(6), and the implementation of PanCanadian's Weyburn C)2 injection project(7). Additional field applications are expected to be initiated in southeast Saskatchewan and other regions when C)2 sources are available. Miscible C)2 displacement offers the greatest oil recovery potential, but it can only be achieved at a pressure greater than a certain minimum referred to as the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP). The effect of solution gas on the development of miscibility is not well understood, as is reflected by the lack of a consensus in the literature. Rathmell et al.(8) found that C)2 MMP is related to the volatile and intermediate fractions of the oil. Yelling and Metcalfe(9) found from their experimental study that, for a saturated reservoir oil, areal variation in gas-oil ratio (GOR) will result in an areal variation in the C)2 MMP. They pointed out that the C)2 MMP determined for a pilot area may not apply to the rest of the field.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».