See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254533958

Laboratory Tests with CO2, N2 and Lean

Natural Gas in a Naturally Fractured GasCondensate Reservoir under HP/HT Conditions
Article January 2011
DOI: 10.2118/142855-MS

CITATIONS

READS

44

4 authors, including:
Heron Gachuz-Muro
Heriot-Watt University
16 PUBLICATIONS 16 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

smart water for water-invaded zones with high salinity water in NFR at high pressure and
high temperature, carbonate formations View project

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

Available from: Heron Gachuz-Muro

Retrieved on: 04 November 2016

SPE 142855-PP
Laboratory Tests with CO2, N2 and Lean Natural Gas in a Naturally
Fractured Gas-Condesate Reservoir under HP/HT Conditions
Heron Gachuz-Muro, SPE, Pemex-Heriot Watt University; Blanca Gonzalez-Valtierra, SPE, Pemex; Erick LunaRojero, SPE, IMP; Berenice Aguilar-Lopez, SPE, IMP; Armando Pineda-Muoz, SPE, IMP

Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1921 July 2011.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
The study of gas-condensate reservoirs has been a fruitful field of research in the last years because of their peculiar
behaviour. Gas cycling is the recovery process of choice for gas-condensate reservoirs but this process can often not be
implemented because of economic reasons. Nitrogen is a potential alternative injection gas. Nevertheless, this has also
disadvantages. The application of these processes is more complex in the offshore sites.
This paper describes laboratory studies performed to evaluate the effectiveness of some gases (CO2, N2, lean natural gas) in
displacing condensate from naturally fractured gas-condensate reservoirs (offshore field). Numerous hurdles had to be
overcome. The experiments represented the behavior of a reservoir under HP/HT conditions, 334 oF and 8455 psia. The
results of CO2 and natural depletion showed little difference in their ability to recover condensate. The natural gas raised the
recovery of the light fraction, but, by contrary, the addition of N2 made evident to be less effective than the rest.
The residual saturations and condensate recovery were measured and the results are presented. The detailed analyses revealed
that natural gas seems to have been more effective in recovering condensate. Under these conditions, condensate recovery
will significantly increase if the lean natural gas is injected. The answers are in agreement with the simulation model.
The conclusions are relevant to the overall management of gas-condensate reservoir. These experiments will serve as a
guideline to develop the long term corporate strategy to improve additional recoveries in Mexico.

Introduction
A significant percentage of oil and gas reserves are trapped in naturally fractured reservoirs (NFR). NFR are considered to be
extremely challenging in terms of correct recovery prediction because of their complexity and heterogeneity. The fractures
create complex paths for fluids movement which impact reservoir characterization, and ultimately, production performance
and total recovery.
A major portion of the oil remains in the low permeability matrix blocks after depletion. Generally, the matrix blocks remain
essentially unaffected. Primary production is derived mainly from the higher permeability fracture systems. There are no
economically realistic secondary or enhanced recovery methods currently available to mobilize a significant fraction of this
bypassed oil. Usually, oil is readily produced from the fracture portion of the system, however, the oil located in the matrix
blocks is not easily displaced because of the relative case of the fluids to channel through the fractures and bypass the matrix
pore system. Matrix recovery in NFR is achieved by an interaction between fluid in fracture and matrix oil. The oil recovery
by natural depletion is usually low in NFR. Maximizing economic recovery from NFR requires a thorough understanding.

SPE 142855-PP

The declining oil production from mature oil fields after some decades of exploitation and the significant amount of oil still
remaining in place, are of great concern to the oil companies.
Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) could increase technically and/or economically recoverable oil. In current reservoir
management practice, various EOR are considered much earlier in the productive life of a field. All EOR processes are
normally applied in many oil reservoirs throughout the world but few processes are used for NFR. Gas injection has been
extensively applied in EOR processes, including NFR and offshore enviroments. Recent studies and limited number of field
applications have shown that gas injection might result in substantial amount of additional oil recovery.
Injecting lean gas into condensate reservoir is a practice currently used to increase recovery but it could be unattractive for
long periods of time especially in offshore fields. As a result, the use of nonhydrocarbons gases as injection fluids has been
successfully applied. A possible alternative for gas cycling is the injection of N2 or CO2. They are being widely practiced in a
quite of few recovery projects. The application of these processes is more complex in the offshore sites. Supply problems
may limit the use of these gases for the injection. For instance, carbon dioxide flooding has been widely put into operation
but has had limited use off the coast. Hence, the feasibility of using a gas as an alternative for oil recovery is mainly an
economic problem.
This paper describes laboratory studies performed to evaluate the effectiveness of some gases such as CO2, N2 and Lean
Natural Gas in displacing condensate from a Gas-Condensate Reservoir.

Reservoir Characteristics
The relavant reservoir characteristics are as follows: average depth, 16732 ft (5100 m) subsea; initial pressure, 11916 psi (838
Kg/cm2); thickness, 459 ft (140 m); average porosity and permeability, 2.4 % and 18 mD, respectively.
Materials
The fluids and core used during all coreflood experiments and some their properties are mentioned above.
Laboratory Conditions: Temperature: 334 oF (168 oC), Sw: 24 %, Initial Pressure: 8445 psi (594 Kg/cm2).
Oil: A gas-condensate fluid was employed (offshore reservoir). Dewpoint pressure: 5692 psi (400 Kg/cm2), density
and viscosity at 20 oC were 43 oAPI and 0.04 cp (average stabilized oil), respectively. The original fluid was made
by combination of stock tank oil with gas mixture from a well. 1.3 liters of fluid were prepared for a given
composition.
Brine: Synthectic formation water was used during the experiments (salinitiy: 28, 230 ppm, electroneutrality: -1.1).
The synthetic brine used in the laboratory was reformulated from the reservoir birne composition provided by the
field operators.
Cores: A core from a naturally fractured reservoir were dried, weighed and vacuumed. The whole segment of the
core was revised. CT-Scan analysis was performed to evaluate the heterogeneity at the core scale. Examination of
the core revealed a composition of CaCO3 and CaMg (CO3)2 (fluorescence and diffraction analysis). The core did
not show a great variability in the poro structure, figure 1. Relevant data is presented in table 1.
Table 1.-Core data for experiments.
Core

Diameter (pg)

Height (pg)

12.16

Average
Permeability (mD)
0.0126

Average Porosity
(%)
6.0032

SPE 142855-PP

gr/cm 3

Figure 1.- X-ray density tomography.

Gases: Three gas injection experiments were performed by Nitrogen, CO2 and Natural Gas. No precipitation of
asphaltenes was observed in the rock sample by gas injection.
High Pressure Core Facility: A high pressure core facility was developed to allow tests to be conducted as follows,
figure 2. For convenience, the core holder were designed to accept that the long core is surrounded by a space
simulating a fracture, figure 3. The core assembly was mounted vertically.

Figure 2.- Schematic of high pressure apparatus.

SPE 142855-PP

Space within the core

holder (simulated fracture)

Gas
Injection

Core

Core
Holder

Production
Figure 3.- Gravity Drainage scheme, simulated fracture.

Experimental Tests

A set of experiments were designed to illustrate the program under certain conditions of exploitation, figure 4. The test
sequence can be seen in figure 4 as well. Additional experiments were performed using CO2 and Natural Gas as the injection
gases. The composition of the lean gas is shown in table 2.
In the first experiment (nitrogen injection), the clean core was saturated with synthetic brine. Swi was achieved by flooding
with gas-condensate fluid to 6,500 psi. After finishing this injection (Swi= 24 % approximately) the system temperature was
raised to 334 oF and the sample was aged some days. Finally, the experiment was stabilized to 8445 psi (safety regulations).
The general program of injection was supported by the simulation predictions, pressure and time. It is important to mention
that the temperature stay contant during all the experiments, 334 oF.
Table 2.-Gas Natural Injection Properties (composition in mol porcent).
CO2

H2S

O2

N2

C1

C2

C3

i-C4

n-C4

i-C5

n-C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

C10+

2.680

2.011

0.004

0.300

78.462

10.021

3.72

0.558

1.094

0.250

0.318

0.23

0.143

0.127

0.054

0.00734

The core was producing initially by natural depletion until a pressure close to the dewpoint pressure of 5632 psi. Any
production from this part was identified. Special attention was given to the gas production. Later, the sample was subjected to
gas injection by gravity drainage, see figure 3 above. The gas was injected at the top of the system with fluids produced at the
bottom. The produced gas composition is shown in figure 5. This graph indicates that initially the produced gas was not
enriched with Nitrogen at the early stages and at the late stages the methane went down slightly.
The next two experiments were prepared in a similay way. This sequence then was repeated with CO2 and Natural Gas.

SPE 142855-PP

9000

NaturalDepletion

Pi=8459.7psia

8000

7000

BaseCase

GasInjection

CO2

Pressure[psia]

Nitrogen

GasInjection Program

6000

5,987.7psia
5,646.7 psia

DewPointPressure
Natural
Depletion

5000

4000

3000

LeanGas
2000
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Time[hrs]

Figure 4.- General program of injection.

Figure 5.- Produced gas composition during the experiment with nitrogen.

Results

Table 3 presents results of these tests. The first experiment with nitrogen indicated that natural depletion resulted in minimal
recovery, 4 % approximately. In general the rest of experiments had poor values under natural depletion. As expected, the
natural gas raised the recovery of the light fraction, but, by contrary, the addition of N2 made evident to be less effective than
the rest after about 170 hrs of injection, 18.7 % (total recovery factor). A significant amount of condensate was left behind
during the Nitrogen flooding. Chart 6 present the first 50 hrs during the CO2 experiment. It is possible to distinguish the fast
production achieved in this experiment. Finally, the detailed analyses revealed that natural gas seems to have been more
effective in recovering condensate. Remember that the Methane can evaporate more condensate than Nitrogen. Under these
conditions, condensate recovery will significantly increase if the lean natural gas is injected. The answers are in agreement
with the simulation model.

SPE 142855-PP

Table 2.- Test Results*

Gas
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
Natural Gas

Natural
Depletion (ml)
3.82
5.80
4.20

Final Volume
(ml)
13.82
25.60
38.05

Recovery Factor
% (Final)
18.70
34.78
51.70

*We assume 73.6 ml of condensate.

Figure 6.- Production after 50 hrs with the CO2 experiment.

To compare oil recovery by gas injection with that by Natural Depletion, a further experiment was planned considering
normal conditions of exploitation of this field (Base Case). Surprisingly, the results of CO2 and Natural Depletion showed
little difference in their ability to recover condensate, 34.78 and 35.4 % respectively. This unexpected result is higher
compared to N2. It seems to be that the different factors which are the cause of lower recovery, when nitrogen is injected into
the core as compared to the rest of the experiments, could attribute to: a) higher liquid drop-out and lower evaporating
capacity.
Figure 7 compares the findings using gases or base case. This chart clearly exhibits that recovey of trapped condensate
strongly depends on the nature of the gas used. The importance of selecting correctly a recovery process can induce good
recovery factors.

SPE 142855-PP

50

NaturalGas

ProducedVolume(ml)

40

NaturalDepletion

30

CO2

20

N2
10

0
0

100

200

300

400

500

Time(hrs)
Figure 7.- Recovery of condensate, effects of different gases and base case.

Conclusions
The findings of this study indicate that lean gas (gas cycling) is a realistic alternative for pressure depletion for this NFR
under extreme conditions.
More data and simulation are needed for whole verification of the magnitude of the different recovery mechanism involved in
these processes. Nevertheless, a group of further evaluations are under way.
These results require to be further evaluated for economic feasibility of each process for field scale operations.
The experiments demonstrate the need to test different alternatives of development under real conditions of exploitation.
The ultimate recovery will strongly depend on the phase behaviour of the mixture reservoir/injected fluid.
If we take the present results as they are, it is important to be aware of basic economic concepts and factors that may affect
the performance of this offshore reservoir.
These experiments go to serve as a guideline to develop the long term corporate strategy to improve additional recoveries in
Mexico.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Pemex E&P for permission to publish this article. The authors also acknowledge Pamela Maldonado
and Marisela Zapata for their contribution in the experimental work.

SPE 142855-PP

Conversion Factors
o
API
ft3
o
F
km2
kg/cm2
bbl
acre
in

x
x
x
x
x
x
x

141.5/(131.5+oAPI)
0.02831
(oF-32)/1.8
247.1
14.22
0.158 9873
0.00405
0.0254

= g/cm3
= m3
= oC
= acres
= lb/pg2
= m3
= km2
=m

References

1. Al-Anazi, H.; Sharma, M. M.; Pope, G. A. 2004. Revaporization of Condesate with Methane Flood. Paper SPE-90860,
presented at the 2004 SPE International Petroleum Conference in Mexico held in Puebla, November 8-9.
2. Boersma, D. M.; Hagoort, J. 1994. Displacement Characteristics of Nitrogen vs Methane Flooding in Volatile-Oil
Reservoirs. Paper SPE-20187, SPERE, 261-265, November.
3. Castelijns, J. H. P. 1980. Recovery of Retrograde Condensed Liquid by Gravity Drainage. Paper SPE-10535. November.
4. Castelijns, J. H. P.; Hagoort, J. 1984. Recovery of Retrograde Condensate from Naturally Fractured Gas-Condensate
Reservoirs. 1984. Paper SPE-11199, SPEJ, 707-717, February.
5. Darvish, G. R.; Lindeberg, E.; Holt, T. 2006. Laboratory Experiments of Tertiary CO2 Injection Into a Fractured Core.
Paper SPE 99649, presented at the 2006 SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery held in Tulsa, Oklahoma,
USA, April 22-26.
6. Donohoe, Ch.; Buchanan Jr., R. 1981. Economic Evaluation of Cycling Gas-Condensate Reservoirs with Nitrogen. Paper7494. JPT, 263-270. February.
7. Dykstra, Herman. Prediction of Oil Recovery by Gravity Drainage. Paper SPE 6548, JPT, 818-830.
8. Egermann, P.; Robin, M.; Lombard, J. M. 2003. Gas Process Displacement Efficiency Comparisons on a Carbonate
Reservoir. Paper SPE 81577, presented at the SPE 13th Middle East Oil Show & Conference held in Bahrain, April 5-8.
9. Hagoort, J. 1980. Oil Recovery by Gravity Drainage. Paper SPE 7424, June, 139-150.
10. Hagoort, J.; Brinkhorst, J. W.; Van der Kleyn, P. H. 1988. Development of an Offshore Gas-Condensate Reservoir by
Nitrogen Injection vs Pressure Depletion. Paper SPE-15873, JPT, 463-469, April.
11. Karimaie, H.; Darvish, G. R.; Lindeberg, E. 2007. Experimental Investigation of Secondary and Tertiary Gas Injection in
Fractured Carbonate Rock. Paper SPE 107187, presented at the SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition
held in London, United Kingdom, June 11-14.
12. Knut, U.; Lars, H. 2002. Miscible Gas Injection in Fracture Reservoirs. Paper SPE 75136, presented at the SPE/DOE
Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, April 13-17.
13. Li, H., Putra, E., Schechter, D. 2000. Experimental Investigations of CO2 Gravity Drainage in a Fracture System. SPE
64510, presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Brisbane, Australia, October 1618.

SPE 142855-PP

14. Li, S.; Zheng, X.; Dai, Z; Luo, K.; Chen, G.; Liu, N. 2001. Investigation of Revaporization of Retrograde Condesate.
Paper SPE-68170, presented at the 2001 Middle East Oil Show held in Behrain, March 17-20.
15. Miguel-Hernandez, N.; Miller, M.A.; Sepehrnoori, K. 2004. Scaling Parameters for Characterization Gravity Drainage in
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Paper SPE 89990, International Petroleum Conference, Mexico.
16. Mohammad, J. 2004. Vertical Miscible Displacement of Oil from Fractured Reservoir. Paper SPE 88791, presented at the
11th Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference held in Abu Dhabi, AUE, October 10-13.
17. Moses, P.; Wilson, K. 1981. Phase Equilibrium Considerations in Using Nitrogen for Improved Recovery from
Retrograde Condensate Reservoirs. Paper SPE-7493. JPT, 256-262. February.
18. Sanger, P; Hagoort, J. 1998. Recovery of Gas Condensate by Nitrogen Injection Compared with Methane Injection. Paper
SPE-30795, SPEJ, 26-33, March.