Abstract
There are several maturing waterfloods in the Medicine River/Gilby region of
West-Central Alberta which are operating at high reservoir pressures, and are
suitable candidates for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) by CO2 flooding. Potential
CO2 supplies also exist in the region from various petrochemical, as well as
sour gas and solution gas processing plants. A prototype reservoir was selected
for a detailed “business case” study. CO2 flooding and geological storage were
seen to be feasible in the prototype reservoir based on geological/ reservoir
reviews, laboratory testing and reservoir simulation.
Economic parameters (payout periods for the investment, rates of return) on
risk-weighted basis were moderate in light of front-end capital requirements
for extraction, recycle and transportation facilities. The situation would
change for the better if regional infrastructure for CO2 capture, extraction
and transport is developed. This, in turn, is dependent upon adequate assured
demand. On the other hand, demand won’t develop unless there is appropriate
infrastructure in-place. Fragmented ownership of the resource and of CO2-rich
waste gas streams, as well as inertia favouring status quo, are some of the
other challenges.
We present here a generalized “business case” for illustrating some of the
issues of CO2-EOR implementation.
Introduction
CO2-EOR is receiving increasing attention mainly because of the following
emerging trends:
- Increasing awareness of potential reserves addition by CO2 flooding in
mature sedimentary basins such as the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin
(WCSB), based on performance of Weyburn and Joffre Viking CO2 flooding projects
in WCSB, and also in various oil fields of West Texas Permian Basin.
- Growing recognition of the importance of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
and anticipated incentives for CCS projects in value-added mode such as
EOR.
- Consensus that the main barrier to widespread implementation of CO2-EOR in
Alberta is lack of supply and transportation infrastructure for CO2.
© 2009. Society of Petroleum Engineers
View full textPDF
(
1,072 KB
)
History
- Original manuscript received:
29 April 2009
- Revised manuscript received:
4 June 2009
- Manuscript approved:
28 October 2009
View Cart
