SPE Production & Operations
Volume 22, Number 2, May 2007, pp. 260-264

SPE-99789-PA

Development of a Correlation Between Performance of CO2 Flooding and the Past Performance of Waterflooding in Weyburn Oil Field

View full textPDF ( 982 KB )

DOI  More information 10.2118/99789-PA http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/99789-PA

Citation

  • Asghari, K., Dong, M., Shire, J., Coleridge, T., Nagrampa, J. and Grassick, J.  2007. Development of a Correlation Between Performance of CO2 Flooding and the Past Performance of Waterflooding in Weyburn Oil Field. SPE Prod & Oper  22 (2): 260-264. SPE-99789-PA.

Discipline Categories

  • 5 Production and Operations

Summary

Weyburn oil field, located in southeast Saskatchewan, has been the site of one of the largest carbon dioxide (CO2) flooding projects in the world since September 2000.

In this paper, data of the past performance of waterflooding in the Weyburn field was used to develop empirical correlations to predict the performance of CO2 flooding. Two different correlations were developed based on CO2-injection schemes in Weyburn. The first correlation is based on a water-alternating-gas (WAG) process through vertical wells, and the second correlation is based on the cases in which CO2 is injected through horizontal wells and water is injected separately through vertical wells. The first step was to collect and analyze production data from 1958 to 2004. Oil-production rates for both waterflooding and CO2 flooding periods, water-injection rates, and CO2-injection rates were used in developing the correlations. The empirical model for injecting CO2 and water through vertical wells was verified using the Kinder Morgan CO2 flood-scoping model (this is not a trademark product) and actual field production data. The comparative analysis showed 12% error between our simple correlation and the Kinder Morgan model. For injecting CO2 in horizontal wells, the correlation could not be verified against the Kinder Morgan model, but the correlation followed the actual oil production in the field very closely.

This new model can be used effectively as a screening tool for predicting the performance of CO2 flooding in various locations in the Weyburn reservoir based on the data obtained from past waterflooding performance and the rate of CO2 injection. Therefore, it can contribute significant savings in time and expense to the operating oil company. Also, this approach can be used for other potential CO2-flooding processes in reservoirs with histories and properties similar to those of the Weyburn field.

Introduction

The Weyburn oil field was developed in 1954 while undergoing primary production of medium oil with a American Petroleum Institute (API) degree ranging from 25 to 34 (Fig. 1). Waterflooding started in 1964, and reached its peak production of 7 500 m3/d (47,175 STB/D) in 1966.  To maintain production, drilling of vertical infill wells followed by horizontal drilling began in 1986. Initial investigations indicated that CO2 flooding might be a viable option for enhancing oil recovery from this field. Therefore, CO2 flooding was commenced in the Weyburn field in September 2000. It is estimated that implementation of a CO2 flood would extend the economic life of this field more than 25 years, with an incremental recovery prediction of 13 to 19%.

The field has two carbonate layers that are CO2-flooded: the marly dolomite (upper) and the vuggy limestone (lower).  Relative to the vuggy zone, the marly zone has a tighter formation with an average porosity of 26% and an average permeability of 10 md.  The Marly zone has low flow capacity and sweep efficiency.  The vuggy zone has an average porosity of 15% and an average permeability of 30 md.

Natural vertical fractures are present in the Weyburn-Midale formations.  Three major fracture trends exist in the northeast.southwest, northwest/southeast, and north/south directions. Analysis of logs indicates that the dominant fracture orientation is parallel to the current southwest/northeaste orientation (Monea and Wilson 2004).

View full textPDF ( 982 KB )

History

  • Original manuscript received: 4 October 2005
  • Revised manuscript received: 21 June 2006
  • Manuscript approved: 26 June 2006
  • Version of record: 20 May 2007