Evaluation of the efficiency of oil displacement by gas using complex filtration studies on a slim tube model with different injection gases for the Achimov deposits of Western Siberia

   Objective. Determination of the minimum miscibility pressure, based on the results of physical modeling on a slim tube model, during oil displacement by gas for the conditions of Achimov deposits. Comparison of the efficiency of methane and associated petroleum gas as a displacement agent.

   Materials and methods. Recombination of reservoir oil was performed in two ways — combining all separator oil samples and further recombination, as well as combining reservoir oil samples (partially degassed) and further recombination. Preliminary estimation of the minimum miscibility pressure was performed based on analytical correlation and compositional (PVT — Pressure-Volume-Temperature) modeling. A set of physical modeling studies was performed using a slim tube model to determine the dynamics of displacement changes and chromatographs for further analysis of the released oil and gas. Filtration experiments were performed in accordance with the conditions of the Achimov deposits.

   Conclusion. By means of physical modeling on a slim tube model, the displacement coeffi cients for methane and associated petroleum gas (APG) injection have been determined. During analysis of the obtained results the dynamics of gas/oil ratio, pressure drop, component compositions of gas and oil during fi ltration experiments was evaluated. On the basis of the obtained data the displacement modes were determined, and the intervals of the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) were calculated: 45.03 MPa — for APG; 45.89 MPa — for methane.

1. Zhao-xia Liu, Yan Liang, Qiang Wang, Yong-jun Guo, Ming Gao, Zheng-bo Wang, Wan-lu Liu. Status and progress of world-wide EOR field applications. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2020, vol. 193, pp. 107449.

2. Burrows L.C., Haeri F., Cvetic P., Sanguinito S., Shi F., Tapriyal D., Goodman A., Enick R.M. A Literature Review of CO₂, Natural Gas, and Water-Based Fluids for Enhanced Oil Recovery in Unconventional Reservoirs. Energy & Fuels. 2020, no. 34(5), pp. 5331–5538.

3. Sorokin A.S., Bolotov A.V., Nuriev D.R., Derevyanko V.K., Minkhanov I.F., Varfolomeev M.A. Dynamic Criteria for Physical Modeling of Oil Displacement by Gas Injection. Processes. 2022, no. 10(12), pp. 2620.

4. Derevyanko V.K., Bolotov A.V., Minkhanov I.F., Varfolomeev M.A., Usmanov S.A., Saifullin E.R., Sagirov R.N. (2023, November). Feasibility of Foam-Enhanced Water-Gas Flooding for a Low-Permeability High-Fractured Carbonate Reservoir. Screening of Foaming Agent and Flooding Simulation / In SPE Annual Caspian Technical Conference (p. D031S015R008). SPE.

5. Luiz Felipe Niedermaier Custodio, Cleyton de Carvalho Carneiro. Global enhanced oil recovery assessment: A comprehensive data-driven analysis asing self-organizing maps. Geoenergy Science and Engineering. 2024, pp. 212771.

6. Dorcas S. Eyinla, Smith Leggett, Foued Badrouchi, Hossein Emadi, Olajide J. Adamolekun, Olumuyiwa T. Akinsanpe. A comprehensive review of the potential of rock properties alteration during CO₂ injection for EOR and storage. Fuel. 2023, vol. 353.

7. Ning Yanrui, Kazemi Hossein. Ethane-Enriched Gas Injection EOR in Niobrara and Codell: A Dual-Porosity Compositional Model. 2018

8. Steven B. Hawthorne, David J. Miller, Carol B. Grabanski, and Lu Jin. Experimental Determinations of Minimum Miscibility Pressures Using Hydrocarbon Gases and CO₂ for Crude Oils from the Bakken and Cut Bank Oil Reservoirs. Energy & Fuels. 2020, vol. 34(5), pp. 6148–6157.

9. Salari Sardari F., Khorsand Movaghar M.R. A simulation approach to achieve the best miscible enrichment in gas flooding and chemical injection process for enhanced oil recovery. Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2017, no. 12, pp. 230–246.

10. Dindoruk B., Johns R., and Franklin M. Orr. Measurement and Modeling of Minimum Miscibility Pressure: A State-ovfthe-Art Review. SPE Res Eval & Eng 24. 2021, pp. 367–389.

11. Firoozabadi A., Aziz K. Analysis and correlation of nitrogen and lean-gas miscibility pressure. SPE Reservoir Engineering. 1986, vol. 1, issue 06. Available at: doi: 10.2118/13669-PA.

12. Maklavani A.M. [et al.] New minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) correlation for hydrocarbon miscible injections. Brazilian journal of petroleum and gas. 2010, vol. 4, issue 1, pp. 11–18. Available at: http://www.portalabpg.org.br/bjpg/index.php/bjpg/article/view/83/116

13. Derevyanko V.K. et al. Comparison of oil displacement efficiency during associated petroleum gas and carbon dioxide injection at Tsarichanskoye + Filatovskoye field (Russian). Oil Industry Journal. 2023, vol. 2023, no. 01, pp. 34-39. (In Russ.)

14. Zhang K., Gu Y. Two different technical criteria for determining the minimum miscibility pressures (MMPs) from the slim-tube and corefood tests. Fuel. 015, no. 161, pp. 146–156.