The Phase Behaviour of Acid Disposal Gases and the Potential Adverse Impact on Injection or Disposal Operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As increased volumes of acid gases (containing carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide) are processed, the technique of downhole re-injection of the concentrated acid gas for disposal of these unwanted fluids continues to become more popular. In many cases, bottomhole injection temperature and pressure conditions are such that the injected acid gas phase is a supercritical fluid that is miscible with the existing reservoir fluids and, thus, the potential for adverse relative permeability effects (due to thecreation of in situ immiscible liquid and vapour phases) is avoided. In other cases, however, combinations of lower reservoir temperatures and/or initially depleted disposal zone pressures, or blending of the acid gas with the in situ lean gas, can result in the formation of both liquid and vapour acid gas phases in the formation in the near-wellbore region. This can often cause very significant relative permeability effects, which may result in large reductions in injectivity of the acid gas on either a permanent or transient basis. This paper provides actual examples of such systems, as well as reviewing the design protocol that must be used to evaluate if potential phase behaviour problems can occur downhole during an acid gas disposal operation. This hasproven to be a key parameter in the successful evaluation of anacid gas disposal operation. Introduction In many acid gas injection operations, the bottomhole pressure condition is high enough that, over the entire life of the injection operation and at all possible blended compositions between the acid injection gas and the reservoir fluids, a monophasic condition is present. In some cases, when the initial reservoir pressure is low, initial injection commences in the "gas" phase region, and as pressure gradually increases, the phase condition of the fluids around the injection wells enters the two-phase region where a "liquid" acid gas phase is in thermodynamic equilibrium with an acid gas "vapour" phase. This may also occur when the acid gas blends with reservoir gas which may elevate the dew point pressure line upwards above the current injection pressure level, once again resulting in a condition of two-phase flow. The creation of these two immiscible phases (which have an interface and measurable interfacial tension between them) can, particularly in lower permeability formations, create significant adverse relative permeability effects which may result in large transient or permanent reductions in injectivity, possibly compromising the economics of the acid gas injection operation. Understanding the phase behaviour in such situations and how it interacts with the capillary pressure and relative permeability phenomena present within the matrix of the proposed injection zone is essential. Limited data is available in the literature on the properties of high temperature and pressure acid gas mixtures and their specific phase behaviour(1–8). This is also the case with data regarding the specific interaction of single and multiphase acid gas interactions with reservoir rock(9–11) and the effects of multiphase acid gas induced relative permeability effects(12). The motivation of this work was to obtain a dataset to expand the knowledge base in this area.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".