Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
This paper reviews waterflood management practices,
highlighting key industry papers. It is intended to move
readers up the learning curve and provide a road map for
implementing and operating a successful waterflood project. It
will assist reservoir engineers, production-operations
engineers, and development geologists who are involved in or
are contemplating waterflood operations.
The paper addresses operating philosophy, well spacing
(density), pattern development (selection), completions,
injection water, and surveillance. Although these factors are
presented from a west Texas perspective, they are applicable
to reservoirs having a high degree of vertical and areal
heterogeneity.
In addition to a brief history of waterflooding, the paper
reflects lessons learned through years of experience in
waterflooding and CO2 flooding carbonate reservoirs,
principally in west Texas. This experience has been gained
through work in both a major and a large independent oil
company, through interfacing with outside operators of all
sizes, and through consulting for small, independent oil
companies.
Introduction
Many of the worlds oil reservoirs produce by a solution gas
drive mechanism. This drive mechanism has inherently low
reservoir energy, which usually leaves a large portion of the
original oil in place in the reservoir when the wells reach their
economic limit. In addition, many of these oil reservoirs are
heterogeneous. That is, these fields are not thick, clean, sand
sections with strong water drives.
One of the cheapest and most popular methods of restoring
and maintaining reservoir energy is to inject water into the
reservoir; i.e., waterflooding. Although this process has been
around for over 50 years, the fundamentals are buried in
numerous papers and books.
This paper presents the
essentials of waterflooding that the authors have discovered
throughout their careers, supported by excerpts from the
literature.
A Brief History of Waterflooding
Although the history of waterflooding dates back as early as
1865, the use of waterflooding as a recovery method did not
come into widespread acceptance and use until the early
1950s.1 In west Texas, there was a significant expansion of
the oil industry in the 1950s with the discovery of a number
of very large fields such as Wasson, Slaughter, Levelland,
North and South Cowden, Means, and Seminole. Statewide
rules forced most fields to be developed on a density of 40
acres per producing well. These solution gas drive reservoirs
were found in highly heterogeneous shallow shelf
carbonates.2-5 Consequently, reservoir energy depleted within
a few short years and producing rates dropped rapidly. To
compound matters, many of the wells were completed in only
the high permeability streaks and well above any possible
water production.
Water injection was implemented to restore oil production
rates. The typical waterflood development scenario went
something like this: First, some wells around the perimeter of
the property were converted to water injection, thus creating a
peripheral waterflood. An alternative scheme was a single
line of injectors through the center of the field.6,7 When this
had only minimal effect, largely due to low injectivity in the
relatively low permeability reservoirs (0.1 to 20 md.), some
interior wells were converted to water injection. Often the
wells converted were the poorer producing wells or were
selected so as to set up an inverted 9-spot pattern (3 producing
wells for every injection well). In the 1970s, it was realized
that the conversion of wells to water injection effectively
raised the density of producing wells to a value greater than 40
acres per producing well. Drilling additional producing wells
SPE 40044
SPE 40044
SPE 40044
it go out of the intended pay zone. The first part requires that
water be injected at the highest pressure possible. The second
part limits the injection pressure to just below formation
parting pressure. In practice, operators commonly use a
surface injection pressure of 50 psig below formation parting
pressure minus the static pressure of a column of injection
fluid.
Injection Water Quality
Injecting water that is laden with oil and/or suspended solids
equals one thing: a plugged up injection wellbore that is
incapable of taking the maximum amount of water. Therefore,
clean injection water is imperative.
There are four main problems with injection water: 1)
dissolved solids in the injection water that can precipitate and
form scale, 2) oil and suspended solids that can plug
wellbores, 3) oxygen in the water that can cause corrosion,
and 4) bacteria in the system that can cause corrosion and
suspended solids. Patton has written a book23 that is an
excellent treatise on all aspects of water associated with the
production of petroleum. He has summarized many of these
issues in his SPE Distinguished Author Series paper.24
Cleanup of injection water can be accomplished either by
filtration or by providing sufficient settling time for solids and
oil breakout. Research by Amoco Production Company25 that
shows that standard tanks, with or without internal baffles,
provide only a fraction of the theoretical retention time due to
the water channeling directly from the tank inlet to the tank
outlet. They have designed and patented a vortex settling tank
system that significantly improves this retention time
efficiency. Cleanup of injection water and remediation of the
clogged wellbores provided significant improvement in west
Texas and in Alaskan North Slope.26, 27
Many operators worry about the chemical compatibility of
injected water with formation water. They fear that the
formation will become plugged if scale precipitates in the
formation. Patton23 dispels this concern by pointing out that
there is very little contact between injection water and
formation water in the reservoir.
However, the problem of scale precipitation in the
producing wellbore persists. In carbonate systems, especially
where anhydrite or gypsum is present, the injected water will
dissolve minerals as it moves through the formation until it
reaches saturation, and then it will precipitate scale as pressure
drops in the wellbore. The only effective solution to this
problem is to squeeze scale inhibitor into the formation
periodically, but these treatments can be expensive.
To avoid both scale problems and the high cost of
inhibitors, many operators use fresh water for their make-up
water. But we have seen that there isnt a problem in the
formation, and fresh water doesnt necessarily solve the
problem in the wellbore. Brackish water used as make-up
water with a split injection system can be a better alternative
to the use of fresh water which is needed for human
consumption and irrigation.
SPE 40044
3.
4.
SPE 40044
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
SPE 40044