An uprising Enhanced Oil Recovery Technique Enhanced Oil Recovery Technique Technical Seminar topic for Petroleum Engineering

1. under the guidance of
Mr. Farahan Ahmed
Assistant Professor
Department of Petroleum Engineering
Al Habeeb College of Engineering and Technology
August, 2018
Technical Seminar Presentation On
Plasma Pulse Technology: An uprising Enhanced Oil Recovery
Technique
by
Mr. Sarwar Alam Ansari H.T. No.: 15H11A2754
Submitted to JNTUH, Hyderabad in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of BACHELOR OF
TECHNOLOGY in PETROLEUM ENGINEERING
1

2. Content
1. Introduction
2. Problem Statement
3. Objectives
4. Methodology
6. Results & Discussions
7. Conclusions
8. References
2

3. Introduction
 Invented in Russia
 2013 U.S
 Hubbert’s theory
 Average recovery 20-40%
 An alternative technology
 Environmentally safe
 Doesn’t involve any chemical or water
 Economically feasible
 Without any Heavy mechanical accessories
3

4. Primary
Natural Flow
Secondary
Tertiary
Recovery
factor
Artificial Lift
Water Flooding Pressure Maintenance
Thermal Gasinjection Chemical Others
30-50%
Generally
<30%
50-80%
MobileFluidImmobileFluid
IOR
EOR
Alkali
Surfactant
Polymer
Steam
Hot water
combustion
Microbial
Acoustic
CO2
Nitrogen
Flue Gas
Fig.1. Defining improved oil recovery (IOR) and enhanced oil recovery (EOR) 4
Introduction

5. Enhanced Oil
Recovery
Methods
Thermal EOR Others EORGas EORChemical EOR
•In-Situ combustion
•Steam Drive
•Hot water drive
•Cyclic steam Injection
•Steam Assisted Gravity
Drainage(SAGD)
•Acid flooding and acid
treatment
•Alkaline solution
Flooding
•Polymer Solution
Flooding
•Surfactant Flooding
•Miceller Flooding
•CO2 drive
•Inert and Flue gas
drive
•High Pressure Gas
drive
•Vibrowave
Treatment
•Electro Hydraulic
treatment
•Ultrasonic
Treatment
•Acoustic
•Microbial
Fig.2. Conventional EOR classification and its type (modified after Abramova et al. 2014
5
Introduction

6.  Running out of oil
 Primary Challenges faced in EOR
 Economically not profitable
 Technologically not possible
 After abandon still there is a lot of oil which can be recovered
 Present oil after abandon of well
 EOR techniques are found immoderate
Problem Statement
Fig3. Illustrative diagram showing EOR treatment being applied to horizontal well and ineffectivness of EOR
method due small effective area of producing well being treated.
6

7. Increase in Oil recovery with cost effective and
Environment Friendly method.
Objectives
7

8. Methodology
8
High Voltage Step-Up
Transformer
Spark Gap
High Voltage
Capacitor
AC Mains
Fig.5. Simple electric circuit diagram showing formation of plasma arc across spark plug.
Technical specification of the PPT tools

9. 9
Methodology
Tool attributes Specifications
Tool diameter 3.5 inch
Length ~8 ft
Weight 155 pounds (~70kg)
Capacitor’s charging voltage 2.5-6 kV
Pulse power 1.5-2kJ
Number of pulses 2000 (Electrodes needs to be charged afterwards)
Table 1. Specification of plasma pulse tool

10. PPT on oil recovery enhancement
Fig.4. Effect of PPT on the cement integrity after and
before its application
Methodology
10

11. Effect of PPT on viscosity of oil
Effect of PPT on production well
Effect of PPT on injection well
Results & Discussions
11

12. 682
642
212
235
14550
1792
407
620
605
149
172
9877
1367
329
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
OilViscosity(mPa.s)
Samples
Effect of PPT on viscosity of oil
Before Treatment of PPT After Treatment of PPT
Fig.6. Reduction in effective viscosity observed after application of PPT 12
Results & Discussions

13. Pashninsk
oe
Shkapovs
ke
Sovetskoe
krapivinsk
oe
Djususjev
skoe
Tevlinsko
e
Severnoye
Tajlakovs
koe
Pervomajs
koe
Oil Prod. Before PPT 6.71 2.24 7.45 29.8 14.9 43.96 33.53 52.15 201.15
Oil Prod. After PPT 14.9 17.88 29.8 89.4 81.95 104.3 88.66 163.9 305.45
Water Cut before PPT 79 43 75 66 85 74 2 18 20
Water Cut after PPT 61 45 69 77 70 39 2 2 20
122% 700%
300%
200% 450%
137%
164%
214%
52%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
BOPD
%watercut
Fig.7. Oil production and % water cut before and after of PPT treatment on production Well of few oil fields of Russia (Novas Energy, 2015)
*Percentage on bar
shows percentage
increment in oil
production after
treatment
Effect of Treatment on Oil Production and Water Cut
13
Results & Discussions

14. Table 2
Before and after effect of PPT on injection well of few oil fields of Russia
(Novas Energy, 2015)
Oil fields Bbls/day(Before) Bbls/day(after) %increase
Lomovoe 119 728 511
Poludennoe 314 942 200
Sutorminskoe 157 1080 588
Tajlakovskoe 31 376 1100
Arlanskoe 31 138 340
Turchaninovskoe 125 546 335
Muravlenskovkoe 1727 4396 155
14
Results & Discussions

15. Arbuckle
formation
Red fork
sand
stone
Red fork
sand
stone
Red fork
sand
stone
Red fork
sand
stone
Mississip
pi Lime
stone
Mississip
pi Lime
stone
Frederick
sburg
Lime
stone
Frederick
sburg
Lime
stone
*Mississi
ppi Lime
stone
Oil Production before PPT 2 0 5 1.5 1.5 2.43 0.75 1 0.5 6
Oil Production after PPT 40 44 57 5.5 3.5 4.8 1.7 2 1 18
1900%
4400%
1040%
267%
134% 98%
127% 100% 100%
200%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60BOPD
Effect of PPT on few US wells
*Percentage on
bar shows
percentage
increment in oil
production after
treatment
Formation Arbuckle formation Red fork sand stone Mississippi Lime stone Fredericksburg Lime stone *Mississippi Lime stone
Region in USA US Stafford County Creek county, Oklahoma Haysville, Kansas Shreveport, LA Kay county, Oklahoma
Fig.8. Effect of PPT on oil production from sandstone and limestone formation of few US fields 15
Results & Discussions

16. Cost Effective
Technically more efficient
500% more improved production
Environment Friendly
Conclusions
16

17. I would like to thank Mr. Farahan Ahmed (Assistant Professor),
Mr. Vishnu P Raj (Assistant Professor and Head), Mr. Mohd
Amjad (Assistant Professor), Mr. Mohd Sameer khan (Assistant
Professor) and Mr. Mohd Zubair(Assistant Professor).
Acknwledgment
17

18. • Abramova, A.V., Abramov, V.O., Kuleshov, S.P., Timashev, E.O., 2014. Analysis of the
• modern methods for enhanced oil recovery. In: Umesh, C.S., Sivakumar, Sri,
• Ram, P. (Eds.), Energy Science and Technology, Oil and Natural Gas, vol. 3.
• Studium Press LLC, USA, pp. 118e148.
• Ageev, P.G., Molchanov, A.A., 2015. Plasma source for generating nonlinear, wideband,
• periodic, directed elastic oscillations and a system and method for
• stimulating wells, deposits and boreholes using the plasma source. US Patent
• No., US 9,181,788 B2, 10 Nov. 2015.
• Alagorni, A.H., Yaacob, Z.B., Nour, A.H., 2015. An overview of oil production stages:
• enhanced oil recovery techniques and nitrogen injection. Int. J. Env. Sci. Dev. 6
• (9), 693e701.
• Alvarez, J., Han, S., 2013. Current overview of cyclic steam injection process. J. Pet.
• Sci. Res. 2 (3), 116e127.
• Chellappan, S.K., Al Enezi, F., Marafie, H.A., Bibi, A.H., Eremenko, V.B., 2015. First
• Application of Plasma Technology in KOC to Improve Well's Productivity. Society
• Web References
• http://www.novasenergy.ca/technology/presentations.html, 2015, (8th May, 2018).
• http://www.jardineoil.com/case-studies (8th May, 2018)
References
18

19. 19