Selecting Injected Viscosity in Polymer Flood Projects: A Controversial and Critical Question
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Polymer injection is now a mature EOR process, and numerous large-scale expansions are currently underway while new projects are being designed all over the world. Curiously, one of the basic design questions still remains highly controversial: what is the optimum viscosity that should be injected? Some practitioners advocate injecting very high viscosities while others advocate just the opposite. The selection of the viscosity to inject has obvious economic implications as it is directly linked to the polymer concentration and thus to the cost of the polymer which can reach tens or hundreds of millions of dollars for large expansions. This paper will explain why the question still remains without a clear answer and will describe the arguments of both camps while outlining the pros and cons of each approach using case studies. The paper reviews the theoretical and practical arguments based on real field experience to help future project designers select the right viscosity for their polymer project. This is a critical issue as this can have an impact on injectivity and economics. The Gogarty method is a theoretical tool to select polymer viscosity, but it is extremely conservative and may lead to over-design. Reservoir simulations have also been used in several cases to justify extremely high polymer viscosities but in some cases field results do not bear out these expectations. The conclusions of this work show that several factors need to be considered when selecting polymer viscosity; beyond injectivity and mobility control which are obvious ones, another important factor is the reservoir layering. Field experience shows that in single layer reservoirs such as those in Canada, lower viscosities can be used but that in cases of heterogeneous, multi-layer reservoirs, higher viscosities are required. However, theory demonstrates that even when injecting infinite polymer viscosity, vertical sweep will remain controlled by the permeability contrasts. Finally practical concerns for expansions should not be forgotten: practical experience in Daqing for instance shows that injecting at high viscosity can cause severe casing and vibration issues, while theory and practical experience in other fields both confirm that produced polymer concentration could cause severe issues in the surface facilities. Reservoir and surface aspects need to be considered with the view that even when designing a pilot, large-scale expansion is the ultimate goal that needs to be kept in sight. Expansions require not only successful pilots but also attractive economics and will present challenges beyond those experienced in a pilot such as separation issues in the surface facilities. The paper will provide some guidance for the design of their future projects and provide the context for making such decisions in the framework of large-scale field projects.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,036 | 0,071 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».