Canadian Bakken IOR/CO 2 Pilot Projects Richard Baker, Leon De Villiers, Crystal Lok, Tim Stephenson Baker Hughes Presented at the 20 th Annual CO 2 Flooding Conference December 11-12, 2014 Midland, Texas
Executive Summary 1) Waterflooding has had a lot of success very low permeability situations with multifrac horizontal injectors 2) A Gas (CO 2 ) flooding pilot was successful in very low permeability reservoir (k air ~0.1md) 3) Both waterflooding and CO 2 flooding is influenced by flooding induced fractures
Executive Summary 4) Injectivity behavior indicates waterflood induced fractures and natural fractures 5) Flooding success depends upon Matrix permeability Dispersion of water or CO 2 injection Imbibition Induced fracture length Level of pressure depletion
outline Executive Summary Objective Field Cases (public data only) CO 2 flooding in low permeability rock ~ 0.13mD with horizontal wells Waterfloods in low permeability rock K a max <0.06 md with hz multifract wells (Viewfield Bakken) Why are the waterflood and CO 2 floods successful? Conclusions
Sinclair/Viewfield waterfloods +CO 2 Classification of reservoir type by absolute permeability. From Golan (1991). Arrow drawn by RB Permeability Classification Permeability (md) Very low < 0.01 Low 0.01 1 Average 1 100 High 100 10000 Very high > 10000
Mobility, a Critical Driving Parameter 10000 Range of most miscible Floods assuming 0.3-10cp 1000 100 2013 Baker Hughes Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. Mobility Mobility (md/cp) Permeability/ Viscosity of oil 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 Is it possible to gas flood this area? μ oil ~ 0.3cp 0.00001 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 Permeability (md) permeability Gas Shale McClure Shale Bakken Ti ght Oil Conventional Gas Tight Gas Tight Oil Antelope Shale Conventional Oil McDonald Shale CO2 (0.3 cp) CO2 (10 cp) 6
Resource Pyramid
Viewfield (Bakken) Daly Sinclair field (Three forks) Canada USA From; http://www.crude.com/investor-center/invest-in-the-bakken-shale/?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=ce:%20 BAKKEN%20SHALE%20Search&utm_term=+bakken%20+oil%20field%20map
Bakken Formation 9,723 Wells in the Bakken Formation 320 new injectors since January 2011 148 of the new injectors are in the tight 148 of the Bakken new water area injectors highlighted are in the tight Bakken area highlighted started injection since 2011
New Horizontal Mulitfractured Wells; Red Highlighted Wells are Injectors Weyburn/Estevan: Viewfield Bakken Pool Daly Sinclair: Bakken-Torquay B Pool 148 new water injectors are in the tight Bakken area highlighted started injection since 2011 9,723 Wells in the Bakken Formation
Waterfloods in low permeability rock with hz multifract wells CO 2 flood with Horizontal CO 2 injector DALY SINCLAIR FIELD
>200 hz multifrac wells 6 miles ~400 m or yards between wells North
Core description Interbedded siltstone and shale, massive shale and occasionally Brecciated; most rock permeability K ave ~0.1 md, Kmax~30md in streaks oil-water capillary transition zone which results in a mobile water saturation and free water production
16 Reservoir Parameters Daly Field (Sinclair) reference source Manitoba Govt Reservoir Properties (Three-Forks-Formation) Pb (kpa) 1920 GOR (sm3/sm3) 6.4 Permeability (md) Upper Three Forks Lower Three Forks Porosity (fraction) Upper Three Forks Lower Three Forks 0.13 0.002 0.061 0.037 Density (API) 42.6 Bo (sm3/sm3) 1.026 Viso (cp) 1.597 Gas gravity 0.88 Swi (%) 29 Sor (%) 31 Air permeability K air ave =0.13 K max ~ 30 md streaks Ultimate primary recovery~13% from
Map of CO 2 pilot area 3 miles ~300 M spacing 4 miles Core hole
Waterflood Response Unit 1 minus CO 2 pilot area Waterflood injectors are hz hydraulically fractured ~300 M spacing Great waterflood response in low permeability rock Low produced Water volumes
World Stress Map Stress trend
Orientation of Induced Hydraulitc Fractures and Stress field
Schematic Picture of Horizontal muli-frac well in East West orientation with stress field in NE+SW trend ` East West hz well Intersecting Fractures In NE-SW orientation
Waterflood Response Unit 1 minus CO 2 pilot area Waterflood injectors are hz hydraulically fractured Great waterflood response in low permeability rock Low produced Water volumes
Vertical Injector vs. Horizontal Injector
Field Development 06/2007 09/2008 06/2010 02/2011 08/2013 08/2014 CO2 production or injection Oil producing well Water injection well
Horizontal Injector Both CO2 and Water Horizontal CO 2 injector starts
CO 2 Project areas Nominal Pilot Area Project Area
Highlighted Area Production (CO2 injection and surrounding production) Horizontal water injector starts Horizontal CO 2 injector starts
Highlighted Area Production (CO2 injection and surrounding production)
CO 2 Produced and Retention CO2 INJECTION AND % PRODUCTION VS TIME CO2 INJECTED CO2 PRODUCED CUMULATIVE CO2 PRODUCED 1500 100 CO 2 (MCF/DAY) 1350 1200 1050 900 750 600 450 300 150 0 2007 2009 2010 2011 2013 2014 TIME 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 CUM CO 2 PRODUCED (%)
Vertical Injector vs. Horizontal Injector
Vertical Well Vertical Well Horizontal Well Simple planar fracture system Very high permeability fracture Complex fracture system Substantial pressure drop within fracture system Cross fractures Pressure/rate dependent
Conclusions 1.Low permeability waterfloods with injectors with hydraulic fractures are increasing reserves 2.Low permeability CO 2 floods have had some success increasing reserves 3.Managing the fracture system and the matrix flow is key