WATER INJECTION ENHANCED RECOVERY IN SHALE FORMATIONS!

PERAPON FAKCHAROENPHOL, HOSSEIN KAZEMI AND YU-SHU WU! COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES!

1. BACKGROUND !
Economic production from tight shale formations has been achieved because of the advance in horizontal well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. However, oil or liquid hydrocarbon recovery- efciency from ! tight shale formations is low, in the range of 5 - 15 %. As a result, large amount of oil is left in shale reservoirs.! Two enhanced recovery techniques, including water injection and CO2 injection have been put on pilot test. Positive results from water injection in Vieweld Bakken has been reported. The operator has indicated that the production decline rate has been reduced after about a year after water injection.! !

2. OBJECTIVES!
The goal of this research is to identify possible production enhanced mechanisms for water injection in shale formations. We have based our work on theoretical and numerical studies. ! This research has been divided into two parts. First, we studied the propensity of water injection induced micro-fractures. Second, we investigated water imbibition mechanisms, focusing on osmotic or electrical potential driven process. !
!

4. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS:! OSMOTIC DRIVEN WATER IMBIBITION!

Osmotic / electrical potential!
The salinity difference between injected water and formation water could generate electrical potential as high as 3,000 psi equivalent osmotic pressure (). !

Transfer function:!
w,m / f = 0.006328kmw,m / f ( pof pom ) ( pwf pwm ) +
+ 0.006328kmw,m / f (14.5) ( f m )
Fracture, Swf=100%, f=0.005 ! Matrix, !

z ( h hwm ) w wf

3. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS: INDUCED MICRO-FRACTURES!

A simulation numerical simulation study for a sector model was conducted, using a coupled ow-geomechanics model. ! Simulation results!
Macrofractures network
Matrix

Swm=Swrm, ! m=0.05!

Water flow through fractures

Single dual-porosity grid was simulated to investigate water imbibition process. The fracture was initialized as fully saturated with injected water (10,000 ppm) and the matrix was at the irreducible formation water saturation (250,000 ppm).!
0.5

Microfractures

(1)!

(2)!
1 0.5

0.45

Cooled formation

Temperature-induced microfractures

10

20 Time, (day)

30

40

0.4

10

20 Time, (day)

30

40

5000.01

5300

(3)!

(4)!

pgf, (psi)

5000 4999.99

5200 5100 5000

Two scenarios were simulated: (1) Non-water-wet matrix rock with zero capillary pressure and (2) water-wet matrix rock with 2,000 psi maximum capillary pressure.! The simulation results indicate that the water imbibition process is dominated by osmotic/ electrical potential. !

Cartoon showing the process during water injection in tight shale formations: The matrix surface is contracted due to the cooling effect. Micro-fractures are created from the surface into the matrix block.!
C , (ppm)
f

0 x 10
4

10

20 Time, (day)

30

40

pgm, (psi)

Swm, (fraction)

S , (fraction)

wf

0 x 10
5

10

20 Time, (day)

30

40

1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1

2.5

Cm, (ppm)

2.4 2.3 2.2

Non-water-wet Water-wet

10

20 Time, (day)

30

40

10

20 Time, (day)

30

40

The sector model included pre-existing fracturenetwork created during hydraulic fractures, hydraulic fractures. Rock properties were taken from literatures1,2,3.! The simulation results indicate that cooling effect, during cold water injection, could induce micro-fractures. These micro-fractures, which penetrates into matrix block, can increase interface area between fractures and matrix, and improve hydrocarbon production from tight Rock failure model was calibrated to literature shale formations.! data2 !
ACKNOWLEDGMENT:! Special thanks are due to Energy Modeling Group (EMG) and Marathon Center of Excellence for Reservoir Studies (MCERS) at Colorado School of Mines. ! ! Fracture creation due to strain mismatch of heterogeneous material during temperature elevation, conducted by Fu et al. (2004) !

5. CONCLUSIONS!
The numerical experiments indicate that:! (1) Stress changes during water injection can improve oil recovery by opening some of the old macro-fractures and creating new micro-fractures at the surface of the matrix blocks to promote shallow water invasion into the rock matrix. ! (2) Osmotic pressure can promote water imbibition process in both non-water-wet and water-wet matrix rock.!

Furthermore, heterogeneous material could promote micro-fractures during temperature variation because thermal expansion contrast can induce strain mismatch.!

CITATIONS:! !1. Kurtoglu, B., Cox, S. A., and Kazemi, H. 2011. Evaluation of Long-Term Performance of Oil Wells in Elm Coulee Field. Paper SPE 149273 presented at the Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Alberta, Canada, 15-17 November.! !2. Wang, C. and Zeng, Z. 2011. Overview of Geomechanical Properties of Bakken Formation in Williston Basin, North Dakota. Paper ARMA 11-199 presented at the 45th US Rock Mechanics Symposium, San Francisco, California, 26-29 June. ! !3. Nottenburg, R., Rajeshwar, K., Rosenvold, and DuBow, J. 1978. Measurement of Thermal Conductivity of Green River Oil Shales by a Thermal Comparator Technique. Fuel, 57(12), 789795. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0016-2361(78)90141-2. ! !4. Fu, Y.-F., Wong, Y.-L., Poon, C.-S., and Lin, P. 2004. Experimental Study of Micro/Macro Crack Development and Stress-Strain Relations of Cement-based Composite Materials at Elevated Temperatures. Cement and Concrete Research, 34 (5): 789-797. .! !