Study and Evaluation of WAG and Comparison with Water and Gas Injection in One of the Fractured Oil Reservoirs in the West of Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Abstract

By development and improvement of oil industry, the tendency to increase the production of oil fields has been paid more attention. The growing need to increase the output and ultimate recovery by enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods has received great significance as far as mature oil fields are concerned. Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection also is one of these methods. WAG is defined as the injection of both water and gas into the same reservoir. WAG injection is an oil recovery method initially aimed to improve sweep during gas injection mainly by using water to increase the contact surface of injected fluid with the reservoir; it is also to control the mobility of the displacement and create stable mobility front. This including definition covers MWAG (miscible), IWAG (immiscible), HWAG (hybrid), SWAG (simultaneous), SSWAG (selective simultaneous). In this study, the various scenarios of WAG injection have been simulated in one of the reservoirs of National Iranian Oil Company by the GeoQuest commercial software package and ECLIPSE100 module; the efficiency coefficient, total oil production in factors effective on injection such as injection cycle, injection type and injection method (IWAG, HWAG, SWAG and SSWAG) are studied and compared. Then, the scenarios of water, gas, and WAG injection are studied and compared to choose the appropriate method of injection in the interested field. At last, by designing various scenarios of water, gas, and WAG injection in four- and five-spot injection patterns, the efficiency, residual oil saturation, and total oil production are studied and compared in various methods in the above patterns in order to find the optimal and appropriate pattern of injection. The results show that by choosing suitable parameters, the efficiency and production of WAG method will be higher than water and gas injection.

Keywords

References

منابع
[1] Skauge A. & Dale E.I., “Progress in immiscible wAG modeling”, PP, SPE 111435, presentation at 2007 SPE/EAGE reservoir characterization and simulation Conference held in Abu Dhabi ,UAE, 28-31 Oct 2007.
[2] Berge L, Jange Stensen G, Crapez B & Quale E, “SWAG injectivity behavior based on siri field data”, PP, SPE 75126, presentation at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma USA., 13–17. Apr 2002.
[3] Christensen J.R., Stenby E.H. & Skauge A, “Review of WAG field experience”, PP, SPE 71203, Presented at the SPE European Petroleum Conference held in Milan, Italy, 22-24. Oct 2001.
[4] Sanchez L.N., “Management of water alternating gas (WAG) injection projects”, PP, SPE 53714, presentation at the 1999 SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference held in Caracas, Venezuela, 21–23. April 1999.
[5] Klov M. & Hustod N, “Experimental investigation of various methods of tertiary gas injection”, PP, SPE 80579, presented at the 2003 Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston USA., 13–17. Apr 2003.
[6] Quijada M.G., Optimization of a CO2 flood design wasson field - west texas, Master Of Science Thesis, Texas A&M University, Aug 2005.
[7] Cobanoglu M.,“ A Numerical study to evaluate the use of WAG as an EOR method for oil production improvement at B.Kozluca field”, Turkey, PP, SPE 72127, presentation at the SPE Asia Pacific Improved Oil Recovery Conference held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 8–9. Oct 2001.
[8] Instefjord R. & Todnem C.A., “10 Years of WAG injection in Lower Brent at the Gullfaks field”, PP, SPE 78344, presentation at the SPE 13th European Petroleum Conference held in Aberdeen, Scotland, U.K., 29–31. Oct 2002.
[9] Shi W. & Corwith J, “Kuparuk MWAG project after 20 years”, PP, SPE 113933, presentation at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma USA., 19–23. Apr 2008.
[10] Rogers J.D. & Grigg R.B., “A literature analysis of the WAG injectivity abnormalities in the CO2 process”, PP, SPE 59329, presented at the 2000 review SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery symposium on held in Tulsa, OK, 3-5. Apr 2000.
[11] Rehman T., A Techno economical evaluation of miscible flooding, Dalhousie university, June 2008.
[12] Barnawi M.T., A Simulation study to verify stone’s simultaneous water and gas injection performance in a 5-spot pattern, Master Of Science Thesis, Texas A&M University, May 2008.
[13] Bermude L. & Russell T.J., “Parametric investigation of WAG floods above the MME”, PP, SPE 84366, Presentation at Technical Conference Denver, 5–8. Oct 2007.
[14] Algharaib M., Gharbi R. & Malallah A., “Parametric investigation of a modified swag injection technique”, PP, SPE 105071, Presented at The 15th SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Conference Held in Bahrain, Kingdom of Bahrain, 11-14 Mar 2007.
[15] LaForce T. & Jessen K., “Analytical and numerical investigation of multicomponent multiphase WAG displacements”, PP, SPE 110264, presentation at the 2007 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Anaheim, California, U.S.A., 11–14 Nov 2007.
[16] Ghomin Y., Pope A.G. & Sepehrnoori K.,“ Hysteresis and field-scale optimization of WAG injection”, PP, SPE 110639, presentation at the 2008 SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma USA., 19–23. Apr 2008.
[17] Van Dijke M.I.J., Lorentzen M. & Sohrabi M., “Pore-Scale simulation of WAG floods in mixed-wet micromodels”, PP, SPE 113864, presentation at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma USA., 19–23. Apr 2008.
[18] Safdarian M., Parametric study of WAG process its performance over the synthetic fracture model , Master Of Science Thesis, Petroleum University of Technology at.
Journal of Petroleum Research
Volume 20, Issue 62 - Serial Number 62
July and August 2010
Pages 28-43

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics