1. CHEMICAL EOR FIELD EXPERIENCE Oil Chem Technologies, Inc
CHEMICAL EOR FIELD EXPERIENCE Oil Chem Technologies, Inc. Sugar Land, TX USA

2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE Introduction to Oil Chem EOR – past
EOR - Oil Chem Technologies field experience to share
EOR - future

3. PRESENTATION OUTLINE Introduction EOR – past
EOR - Oil Chem Technologies field experience to share
EOR - future

4. WHY EOR?

5. BAVIER; BASIC CONCEPTS OF EOR PROCESSES(1991)
Oil Recovery Overview
DESCRIBE CHART FULLY. REFER TO REFERENCE
HOW MANY IN THE AUDIENCE ARE INVOLVED OR CONSIDERING SOME TYPE OF EOR PROJECT.
HOW MANY ARE CONSIDERING CHEMICAL EOR?
LET’S LOOK AT THE TYPES OF TERTIARY RECOVERY METHODS
BAVIER; BASIC CONCEPTS OF EOR PROCESSES(1991)

6. WHY CHEMICAL EOR?

7. ECONOMICS FOR FIELD ASP PROJECTS
W. Kiehl
Cambridge
Daqing
Surfactant
0.10%
0.30%
Alkali
0.80%
1.25%
1.00%
Polymer
1050 ppm
1425 ppm
1200 ppm
Tot. Cost
$375,000
$2,518,000
$1,009,000
Inc. ASP Oil
275,000
1,143,000
270,000
Cost/bbl
$1.46
$2.20
$3.79

8. ROLE OF SURFACTANTS Reduce interfacial tension Wettability alteration
Polymer, CDG, BW, etc. can be used along with surfactants when mobility control is necessary

9. SURFACE OR INTERFACIAL TENSIONS
SYSTEM
mN/m
Water 72
Pure Hydrocarbons
~ 40
Crude Oil ~
Crude Oil/Water ~
Crude Oil/Water/Surfactant
< 0.01

10. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CAPILLARY NUMBER AND OIL RECOVERY
Nc =  µ / cosθ
Nc = Capillary Number
 = Darcy Velocity
µ = Viscosity
= Interfacial Tension
Θ=wetting angle

11. PRESENTATION OUTLINE Introduction EOR – past
EOR - Oil Chem Technologies field experience to share
EOR - future

12. LOUDON FLOOD - EXXON 1983 2.3% surfactant 96% of the connate salinity
0.3% pore volume
0.1% Xanthan gum
56 million pounds surfactant was injected in 9 months
68% ROIP

13. ROBINSON – MARATHON 1983 10% surfactant – petroleum sulfonate
0.8% hexanol as co-surfactant
2.5% salt
No polymer
0.1 pore volume
19 –21% ROIP

14. CHEMICAL EOR -PAST PROBLEMS
Technical success but limited “commercial” success Reasons?

15. EOR BY CHEMICAL FLOOD
Limited commercial success for the past two decades - Reasons?
Sensitivity to oil price
Limitations of chemicals
High surfactant concentration
Salinity optimization required
Potential emulsion block

16. However,
Extensive lab evaluations and field pilot tests support the feasibility of chemical flooding
New chemicals and processes open the door for new opportunities
Recent field data using these new chemical and processes proves chemical flooding is an effective way to recover residual oil

17. PRESENTATION OUTLINE Introduction EOR – past
EOR - Oil Chem Technologies field experience to share
EOR - future

18. CURRENT PROJECTS 21 Current projects 20MT to 400 MT Surfactant/mo
% = 28,000,000 bbl/mo injection
California 50,000 MT 0.2% =155,000,000 bbl/yr
Build plant onsite

19. CHINA EOR PROJECTS Low perm formation oil recovery
Heavy crude recovery
Low perm formation oil recovery
High temp. / high salinities
Effective, economical offshore EOR

20. INJECTED, ON-GOING & APPROVED PROJECTS
CHINA EOR PROJECTS
INJECTED, ON-GOING & APPROVED PROJECTS
SS B2080, SS B5050, SS B1688,
ORS-46L, ORS-97HF, ORS-41HF

21. 1992-94: LAB EVALUATION Including: ORS-41 Petroleum Sulfonates
Over 100 Surfactants Were Tested
Including:
ORS-41
Petroleum Sulfonates
Carboxylates
Lignin Sulfonate/Petroleum Sulfonates
Microbiological

22. 1995 - INITIAL FIELD EVALUATION Daqing No.4 Field - Oil Chem
Technologies’ ORS-41
Daqing No.1 Field – another US company’s Petroleum Sulfonate

23. 1996-1998: ENLARGED FIELD EVALUATION
ORS-41 was the ONLY surfactant chosen for enlarged field evaluation. More than 7000 MT of the ORS-41 was injected in several field blocks and this confirmed the viability of the ASP process
SPE , 57288, 71061, 71491, 71492

25. DAQING CENTRAL WELL
SPE 57288

26. DAQING CENTRAL FIELD
SPE 84896

27. HEAVY OIL RECOVERY BY CREATING WATER EXTERNAL PSEUDO-EMULSION

28. HEAVY OIL PSEUDO-EMULSION
Control
0.1% SF-100
Surfactant

29. HEAVY OIL PSEUDO-EMULSION
0.1% SF-100
Surfactant
Control

30. HEAVY OIL PSEUDO-EMULSION
0.1% SF-100
Surfactant
Control
Oil Viscosity < 200 cps
Oil Viscosity = 6,700 cps

31. LAB CORE FLOOD DATA
Oil Recovery, %
Water flood
Injection Volume, PV

32. LOW PERM INJECTIVITY ENHANCER
Permeability: 0.1 – 10 md
High water injection pressure makes water flood unfeasible
FI series surfactants reduced injection pressure, increased injectivity
Effectively increased the injectivity in several fields in China and USA

33. CANADA EOR PROJECTS HEAVY CRUDE TAR SAND LOWER RESERVOIR TEMPERATURES
FRESH WATER SOURCES
HIGH SALINITY RESERVOIRS
FRACTURED CARBONATE FORMATIONS

34. CANADA EOR PROJECTS SS B2080, SS B5050, SS B1688,
INJECTED, ON-GOING & APPROVED PROJECTS
SS B2080, SS B5050, SS B1688,
ORS-46L, ORS-97HF, ORS-41HF
Some field results will be published
upon completion of projects

35. NORTHERN CANADA SP PROJECT
Heavy oil field, API =
Under polymer flood
Added 0.1% surfactant with polymer in November, 2006
~ 3 months later, the water cut reduced from 97% to 58%

36. UNITED STATES EOR PROJECTS
FRESH WATER SOURCES
HIGH SALINITY RESERVOIRS
FRACTURED CARBONATE FORMATIONS
LOW PERMEABILITY

37. UNITED STATES EOR PROJECTS
INJECTED, ON-GOING & APPROVED PROJECTS
ORS-41HF (2), ORS-62, ORS-97, ORS-46HF,
ORS-162, SS-7593, SS B1688(2)

38. SHO-VEL-TUM FIELD
On production > 40 yrs, extensive water flood, produced 4 bbl/day
ASP started on 2/98, using Na2CO3 and ORS-62
Total incremental oil > 10,444 bbl (22 bbls/day) in 1.3 years
SPE 84904

39. OIL SATURATION AFTER ASP INJECTION
SPE 84904

40. MELLOTT RANCH WYOMING ASP PROJECT
0.1% ORS-46HF, 1% NaOH, 1300 PPM polymer
Recovered 989,000 bbl or 16.4 % OOIP between 2003 and 2005
Injection volume decreased 2,800,000 bbl due decreased water cut

41. MELLOTT RANCH ASP PROJECT - ORS-46HF
WATER FLOOD SINCE 1966

42. BIG SINKING, KENTUCKY Project Information Crude oil : 100 Million bbl
Bottom Hole Temperature: 30oC
Depth: ft
Thickness: 25 feet (7.32 meter)
Permeability: 45 mD
SPE

43. BIG SINKING, KENTUCKY Chemical injected: Problems overcome:
0.8% NaOH + 0.1% ORS-162HF
Problems overcome:
IFT lowered from 23.6 to mN/m
Poor water injectivity
High water cuts
220% increase in injectivity
Large field trial scheduled to begin in 12/2007
SPE 89384

44. BIG SINKING, KENTUCKY
SPE 89384

45. TANNER FIELD, WYOMING Project Information Crude oil : 21o API
Bottom Hole Temperature: 175oF
Depth: ft
Thickness: 25 ft
Porosity: 20%
Permeability: 200 mD
SPE

46. TANNER, WYOMING
SPE

47. SOUTHEAST ASIA PROJECTS
HEAVY CRUDE
HIGH TEMPERATURES
ENVIRONMENT CONCERNS
FRESH WATER SOURCE

48. SOUTHEAST ASIA PROJECTS
INJECTED, ON-GOING & APPROVED PROJECTS
SS 6-72LV, SS 8020

49. OFFSHORE ALKALINE SURFACTANT (AS) PROJECT
SEA WATER IS SOFTENED ON THE PLATFORM
SINGLE WELL TEST SUCCESSFULLY PERFORMED
USING SS 6-72LV INJECTED WITH NAOH
PILOT PROJECT WILL PROCEED

50. SOUTH AMERICA PROJECTS
VARIOUS RESERVOIR CONDITIONS
MANY EOR CANDIDATE FIELDS –
OFFSHORE & INLAND
ASPHALTENE REMOVAL / WELLBORE
DAMAGE REMOVAL
IMPROVED GAS RECOVERY/REDUCED
WATER CUT

51. SOUTH AMERICA PROJECTS
INJECTED, ON-GOING & APPROVED PROJECTS
ORS-57HF, ORS-41HF (2), SS-6046,
SS GI-1416, SS B1688

52. as

53. PRESENTATION OUTLINE Introduction EOR – past
EOR - Oil Chem Technologies field experience to share
EOR - future

54. EOR BY CHEMICAL FLOOD High oil prices Energy demand
The future is bright – Reasons?
High oil prices
Energy demand
Diminishing reserves
Past experience
New technologies

55. CHEMICAL EOR - THE FUTURE
New processes use less surfactant (up to
10 times less)
Extensive lab evaluations support the feasibility of chemical flooding
Field data proves chemical flooding is an effective way to recover residual oil
Cost of chemicals have not increased in proportion to price of crude oil

56. COST OF CHEMICALS 1980 2006 Polymer1 $3-4/lb $1/lb Surfactant2
Alkali3
$0.12/lb
$ /lb
Crude Oil
$12/bbl
$50-70/bbl
Incr. Cost/bbl
$8-15
$0.50-$5
1 Some processes eliminate need for polymer
2 Surfactant concentration has been reduced by 10
3 Alkali has been reduced by 50% or in some cases is
not needed at all

57. PROCESS CHOICES Surfactant Surfactant Polymer Alkaline Surfactant
Alkaline Surfactant Polymer
Smart Surfactant
Pseudo-emulsion
Chemical/Mechanical

58. SCALING UP

59. ENLARGED FIELD CHEMICAL FLOOD
Raw Material Supply
Source (local or import)
Availability (quantity, quality)
Alternative suppliers
Storage
Manufacturing Location
Foreign, domestic, on-site
Shipping, tax, etc.
Storage and distribution
Flexibility

60. ENLARGED FIELD CHEMICAL FLOOD
Capital Investment
Up-front investment
Operational cost
By-products

61. CHEMICAL EOR OPPORTUNITIES
Conventional Oil Recover Factor <33%
Oil reserves & reservoir characteristics have already been confirmed
Improved processes and chemicals are available
Better scaling and modeling has been developed

62. CHEMICAL EOR OPPORTUNITIES
Two trillion bbl of oil remain in depleted or abandoned wells
Chemical floods offer the only chance in many depleted & water flooded reservoirs
Chemical EOR must be re-evaluated based on current technical & economic conditions
Minimal or no remediation is necessary, minimizing environmental constraints
Trained personnel are available locally

63. SURFACTANT EVALUATION
COMPLIMENTARY
SURFACTANT EVALUATION
SS-7593
Total Bill
= $ 0.00
To: Oil Chem
Technologies

64. TEAM WORK - KEY TO SUCCESS
SHARE OUR TECHNOLOGY
& EXPERENCES
TEAM WORK - KEY TO SUCCESS

65. Oil Chem Technologies, Inc.
THANK YOU !
Oil Chem Technologies, Inc.
12822 Park One Drive
Sugar Land, TX 77478