Indexing
All Issues
Submission
Author Guidelines
Reviewers
Editorial Members
Publication Fee
Vol.3 , No. 2, Publication Date: Apr. 26, 2016, Page: 47-52
 as a method to improve the WAG process. pH and slug size are significant parameters that determine the efficiency of ASP-Gas in oil recovery. An experiment was conducted to determine their effect on alternating ASP with Gas at room conditions. Sand pack models 100cm long and 2.5cm diameter were used with moderately heavy oil of density 0.85g/cc and viscosity 37cp. Immiscible flooding process was achieved by injecting carbon dioxide gas into the core. The resultsshowed that the pH had a significant effect on oil recovery up to a certain limit, however the pH effect depend on oil properties such as acidity. The optimum recovery (15.4%) eventually was found by injection ofthe slug which consisted of 0.1%wt polymer, 0.1% surfactant and alkaline with pH 11 and slug ratio of 1:1.&picture=http://www.aascit.org/aascit/decorators/img/journal/896.jpg)
| [1] | Sagala Farad, Department of Petroleum Engineering & Renewable Energy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Skudai, Malaysia. |
| [2] | Hussein Kisiki Nsamba, Section of Industrial Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, College of Natural Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala Uganda; Department of Chemical Engineering, Invention Plus Limited, Kampala, Uganda. |
| [3] | Al Hassan A. Ibrahim Makera, Department of Petroleum Engineering & Renewable Energy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Skudai, Malaysia. |
| [4] | Wasswa Joseph, College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. |
| [5] | Isa Kabenge, College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. |
Water alternating gas has been acommonplace method for enhancing oil recoverythat has been practiced in many parts of the world. Although this process is conceptually sound, its field incremental recovery is disappointing as it rarely exceeds 5 to 10% OOIP. This is due to challenges such as water blocking and high gas mobility. This study seeks to address the mentioned problems and propose ASP alternating gas (ASP-Gas) as a method to improve the WAG process. pH and slug size are significant parameters that determine the efficiency of ASP-Gas in oil recovery. An experiment was conducted to determine their effect on alternating ASP with Gas at room conditions. Sand pack models 100cm long and 2.5cm diameter were used with moderately heavy oil of density 0.85g/cc and viscosity 37cp. Immiscible flooding process was achieved by injecting carbon dioxide gas into the core. The resultsshowed that the pH had a significant effect on oil recovery up to a certain limit, however the pH effect depend on oil properties such as acidity. The optimum recovery (15.4%) eventually was found by injection ofthe slug which consisted of 0.1%wt polymer, 0.1% surfactant and alkaline with pH 11 and slug ratio of 1:1.
Keywords
Enhanced Oil Recovery, Immiscible Gas Flooding, Slug Ratio, WAG, Sweep Efficiency
Reference
| [01] | Aladasani, A. and B. Bai, Recent developments and updated screening criteria of enhanced oil recovery techniques. SPE, 2010. 130726: p. 1-24. |
| [02] | Zhang, P. and S. Huang, Coupling Gas and Polymer Injection to Improve Heavy Oil Recovery. PTRC Report, March, 2008. |
| [03] | Majidaei, S., et al., A simulation study of chemically enhanced water alternating gas (CWAG) injection. SPE Journal, 2012(154152). |
| [04] | Kulkarni, M. M. and D. N. Rao, Experimental investigation of miscible and immiscible Water-Alternating-Gas (WAG) process performance. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2005. 48(1): p. 1-20. |
| [05] | Christensen, J., M. Larsen, and H. Nicolaisen. Compositional simulation of water-alternating-gas processes. in SPE annual technical conference. 2000. |
| [06] | Farajzadeh, R., et al., Effect of continuous, trapped, and flowing gas on performance of Alkaline Surfactant Polymer (ASP) flooding. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2013. 52(38): p. 13839-13848. |
| [07] | Christensen, J. R., E. H. Stenby, and A. Skauge, Review of WAG field experience. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 2001. 4(02): p. 97-106. |
| [08] | Liu, Q., et al., Surfactant enhanced alkaline flooding for Western Canadian heavy oil recovery. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2007. 293(1): p. 63-71. |
| [09] | Jennings, R., J. Rogers, and T. West, Factors influencing mobility control by polymer solution, 1970, Dow Chemical Co. |
| [10] | Pei, H., et al., Comparative effectiveness of alkaline flooding and alkaline–surfactant flooding for improved heavy-oil recovery. Energy & Fuels, 2012. 26(5): p. 2911-2919. |
| [11] | Falls, A. H., et al., Field test of cosurfactant-enhanced alkaline flooding. SPE Reservoir Engineering, 1994. 9(03): p. 217-223. |
| [12] | Larsen, J. A. and A. Skauge. Comparing hysteresis models for relative permeability in WAG studies. in 1995 SCA Conference, Paper. 1995. |
| [13] | Rogers, J. D. and R. B. Grigg, A literature analysis of the WAG injectivity abnormalities in the CO2 process. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 2001. 4(05): p. 375-386. |
| [14] | Homsy, G. M., Viscous fingering in porous media. Annual review of fluid mechanics, 1987. 19(1): p. 271-311. |
| [15] | Mai, A. and A. Kantzas, Heavy oil waterflooding: effects of flow rate and oil viscosity. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 2009. 48(3): p. 42. |
| [16] | Pye, D. J., W. Gogarthy, and D. Pye, Improved secondary recovery by control of water mobility. J. Pet. Technol.; (United States), 1964. 16(8). |
