MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2018808295 · doi:10.2118/04-12-04

Alkaline/Surfactant/Polymer (ASP) Flood Potential in Southwest Saskatchewan Oil Reservoirs

2004· article· en· W2018808295 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Mingzhe Dong

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Établissements canadiensSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesPetroleum Technology Research Centre
Mots-clésPulmonary surfactantPetroleum engineeringPilot testOil in placeEnhanced oil recoveryFlooding (psychology)Flood mythSurface tensionEnvironmental scienceGeologyChemistryPetroleumGeographyArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Most of the medium oil reservoirs in southwest Saskatchewan are in thin pay zones of less than 8 m. Primary and waterflood methods have reached more than 80% of their estimated oil recovery potential. These medium oil reservoirs are basically untouched by enhanced oil recovery techniques. An initial study was conducted to assess the suitability of Alkaline/Surfactant/Polymer (ASP) flooding for southwest Saskatchewan reservoirs. On the basis of screening criteria in the literature, the region's reservoir conditions, except for some of the formation types, are favourable for ASP flooding. If only sandstone formations are considered for this process, about 49% of the pools in the region are good candidates for ASP flooding. Extensive oil/water interfacial tension and viscosity measurements were taken using screening criteria for surfactant, alkaline, and polymers. A series of sandpack flood tests were conducted in sandpacks to evaluate ASP flooding for the oil. A tertiary oil recovery of 39% IOIP (72% ROIP) was obtained for the test using all three chemicals. These sandpack flood test results showed that a synergistic enhancement among the chemicals did occur in the ASP system for the medium oil with a very low acid number. The results also indicated that, for a medium oil, mobility control was essential and selection of the right surfactant was important. Introduction Oil reservoirs located in southwest Saskatchewan, with 3.1 billion barrels of proven oil, are characterized by thin pay (2 to 8 m in thickness) and shaley sand. The estimated oil recovery by primary and secondary methods from these reservoirs is about 25% initial oil in place (IOIP)(1). Waterfloods in most of these reservoirs have experienced early water breakthrough and high water cut due to the high oil-to-water viscosity ratio. For some of these reservoirs, waterfloods have nearly reached their economic limit. For achieving additional oil recovery and subsequent financial benefits, the development of an enhanced oil recovery technique is essential. Chemical-enhanced oil recovery methods mainly include micellar/polymer flooding, alkaline flooding, polymer flooding, and combinations of two or all of the three methods. Extensive studies of these processes have found that successful chemical flooding needs to be able to efficiently lower the oil/water interfacial tension and to have very good mobility control. The displacement mechanism of an ASP flood is similar to that of micellar/polymer flooding except that much of the surfactant is replaced by low-cost alkali. Therefore, the overall cost is lower even though the chemical slugs can be larger. Polymer is usually incorporated in the larger, dilute slug. It has been recognized that oil recovery can be greatly improved by the synergism of chemicals used in the ASP formulations. ASP processes are also being tested in the field. A field-wide project in Wyoming reports costs of US$10 to $22/tonne (US$1.6 – 3.5/bbl) of incremental oil produced(2). The economic analysis of two ASP pilot tests in the Daqing oil field, China, showed that the chemical cost was US$21 to $28/tonne (US$3 – 4/bbl) of incremental oil produced(3).

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,627
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0050,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,004
Tête enseignante GPT0,188
Écart entre enseignants0,183 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations31
Publié2004
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologyMême sujetEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesTravaux en français237 207