Randhol - Ensuring Well Integrity in Connection With CO2 Injection

s
SINTEF Petroleumsforskning AS SINTEF Petroleum Research

NO-7465 Trondheim Telephone: Fax: Enterprise No.: NO 936 882 331 (+47)73 59 11 00 (+47)73 59 11 02 (aut.)
REPORT
TITLE
Ivaretakelse av brnnintegritet ifm CO2 injeksjon (avrop nr: 6098-06-2007 - 705880) Ensuring well integrity in connection with CO2 injection
AUTHOR(S)
Preben Randhol, Karen Valencia, Ali Taghipour, Idar Akervoll, Inge Manfred Carlsen
CLASSIFICATION
CLIENT(S)
Unrestricted
REPORT NO.
Petroleumstilsynet (Petroleum Safety Authority Norway) v/ Monica Ovesen

DATE PROJECT MANAGER SIGN.
31.6920.00/02/07
REG. NO.
2007.091
NO. OF PAGES
27 December 2007
NO. OF APPENDICES
Preben Randhol
LINE MANAGER
59
SUMMARY
Inge Manfred Carlsen
This report reviews the current practices related to well integrity in the petroleum industry. The relevance of such practices to CO2 storage is discussed in detail. Experience from industrial analogs has shown that the biggest risks from CO2 storage will be from leakage from poor quality or aging injection wells, leakage from abandoned wells and from inadequate monitoring that could have been used for early intervention (Benson, 2005). In view of this, the report cover degradation processes due to CO2, standards on the maintenance of the integrity of wells in the petroleum industry, well abandonment regulations, monitoring approaches currently used by the petroleum industry for early detection of leakage, remediation options that could be used to manage leaking wells and a brief discussion of the safety aspect of CO2 wells.
KEYWORDS ENGLISH
KEYWORDS NORWEGIAN
CO2 injection wells CO2 degradation mechanisms Well integrity Well monitoring Well remediation
CO2 injeksjonsbrnner CO2 nedbrytningsmekanismer Brnnintegritet Brnn-monitorering Brnnutbedring
H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\1\27.12.07
-2-
Table of Contents
1. 2. 3. Introduction............................................................................................................4 Scope of work .........................................................................................................4 Degradation processes due to CO2 .......................................................................5 3.1 Potential wellbore leakage pathways..............................................................5 3.2 CO2 equilibrium..............................................................................................5 3.3 Cement............................................................................................................6 3.3.1 Portland cement ................................................................................6 3.3.2 Cement additives ............................................................................11 3.3.3 Acid resistant cements....................................................................11 3.3.4 Cement Testing...............................................................................11 3.4 Steel ..............................................................................................................12 3.5 Elastomers ....................................................................................................14 CO2 injection wells ...............................................................................................15 4.1 Well activities ...............................................................................................15 4.1.1 Drilling Operation ..........................................................................16 4.1.2 Completion .....................................................................................18 4.1.3 Production.......................................................................................19 4.2 Methods to ascertain well integrity prior to hand-over ................................20 4.2.1 Hole Stability and formation properties .........................................21 4.2.2 Casing integrity tests ......................................................................25 4.2.3 Cement Evaluation .........................................................................32 4.3 Maintenance of well integrity of injection wells ..........................................34 Permanent abandonment of CO2 wells ..............................................................35 5.1 Proposed abandonment procedure for CO2 wells (Carlsen and Abdollahi, 2007) ...........................................................................................35 5.2 Comparison of proposed abandonment procedure for CO2 wells with NORSOK guidelines for oil and gas wells...........................................38 5.2.1 Material selection ...........................................................................38 5.2.2 Well barrier.....................................................................................38 5.2.3 Completion string ...........................................................................39 5.2.4 Temporary well abandonment........................................................40 5.2.5 Monitoring of permanently abandoned wells.................................40 Well Monitoring ...................................................................................................41 6.1 Pressure and temperature..............................................................................41 6.2 Resistivity .....................................................................................................42 6.3 Geochemical methods and tracers ................................................................43 6.4 Well logs.......................................................................................................44 6.5 Geophysical monitoring ...............................................................................44 6.6 Fibre optics ...................................................................................................44 Remediation of leakage........................................................................................46 7.1 Expandable tubulars .....................................................................................46 7.2 Squeeze cementing, polymer gels etc...........................................................48 Safety aspect of CO2 wells ...................................................................................49 Further work ........................................................................................................52 9.1 CO2 blowout .................................................................................................52 9.2 Component/Material testing for CO2 environment ......................................52
4.
5.
6.
7. 8. 9.
-3-
10.
9.3 CO2 for EOR.................................................................................................52 9.4 Field communication ....................................................................................52 9.5 CO2 reproduction from storage.....................................................................52 9.6 Converting wells for CO2 and abandoned wells...........................................52 9.7 Safety aspect for CO2 well testing/interventions ..........................................53 References .............................................................................................................54
-4-
1.
Introduction
This report reviews the current practices related to well integrity in the petroleum industry. The relevance of such practices to CO2 storage is discussed in detail. Experience from industrial analogs has shown that the biggest risks from CO2 storage will be from leakage from poor quality or aging injection wells, leakage from abandoned wells and from inadequate monitoring that could have been used for early intervention (Benson, 2005). In view of this, the report cover degradation processes due to CO2, standards on the maintenance of the integrity of wells in the petroleum industry, well abandonment regulations, monitoring approaches currently used by the petroleum industry for early detection of leakage, remediation options that could be used to manage leaking wells and a brief discussion of the safety aspect of CO2 wells.
2.
Scope of work
1. Overview of CO2 degradation mechanisms for the different well barrier components, such as cement, steel and elastomers. a. During injection b. From a permanent plugging aspect 2. Literature study to assess what the industry is doing in connection with CO2 well integrity offshore on NCS and in Europe. 3. Considerations to be assessed in connection with CO2 well integrity for the whole life cycle of the well. How to plug the wells for the future, monitoring of the wells etc... 4. A discussion around the safety aspect of CO2 wells.
-5-
3.
3.1
Degradation processes due to CO2

Potential wellbore leakage pathways
Possible leakage pathways through an abandoned well are shown in Figure 3.1 (Celia et al., 2004). It can be seen from the figure that leakage could occur due to poorly cemented casing, casing failure and improper abandonment. Cement that has properly set has very low permeability, in the order of 10-2 m2. No significant flow of CO2 can occur unless the cement has degraded or has not set properly. Casing failure on the other hand could occur due to corrosion, erosion or improper design.
Figure 3.1
Schematic of possible leakage pathways through an abandoned well (a) between casing and cement (b) between cement plug and casing (c) through the cement pore space (d) through the casing (e) through fractures in cement (d) between cement and rock (Celia et al., 2004)
Possible leakage pathways for CO2 injection wells are the same as in Figure 3.1 except that there is no cement plug in place. In addition, as the pressure inside the wellbore is higher than the pressure outside, the preferential flow path will be in the opposite direction. 3.2 CO2 equilibrium
When ordinary cement is exposed to CO2 gas it will react with it especially in a wet environment. CO2 gas will be in equilibrium with the water phase through the equilibria: CO2 (g) = CO2 (aq) CO2 (aq) + H2O = H2CO3 (aq)
-6-
H2CO3 = HCO3- + H+ HCO3- = CO32- + H+ An increase in gas pressure or CO2 content in the gas phase will lead to an increase in CO2 in the aqueous phase and consequently a drop in pH. CO2 is therefore in reality a carbonic acid. High concentrations of CO2 will lead to a very low pH of the water phase. It is therefore very corrosive to materials such as cement and steel. 3.3 Cement
Cement containing Ca(OH)2 will react with the CO2 in the air or water phase as shown in the two equations below respectively: Ca(OH)2 + CO2 (g) = CaCO3 (s) + H2O Ca(OH)2 + H2CO3 (aq) = CaCO3 (s) + 2 H2O This process is called carbonation and leads to a lower porosity due to the precipitation of calcium carbonate takes up a larger volume than the Ca(OH)2. The second reaction that can occur in air and water respectively are: 3CO2 (g) + Ca3Si2O7*4H2O = 3 CaCO3 + 2SiO2*2H2O 3H2CO3 (aq) + Ca3Si2O7*4H2O = 3 CaCO3 + 2SiO2*2H2O + 3H2O This reaction leads to an increase in porosity due to that the volume of Ca3Si2O7*4H2O is larger than CaCO3(s). It is common to generalize the calcium silicate hydrate to the form: C-S-H as the amounts of calcium to silicate to hydrate varies. However, the reactions above are true for the different types of C-S-H. The silicate hydrate product from the reactions above is also usually an amorphous phase and not crystalline which gives poorer strength of the cement. However when there is excess CO2 with a low pH the CaCO3 will dissolve. The net result is the porosity increases and the strength deteriorates and it leads to a further carbonation of the cement.
3.3.1 Portland cement Portland cement is the most widely used cement in the industry. The problem is however that Portland cement is not resistant to CO2. It is not thermodynamically stable in contact with CO2 and will deteriorate over time, Krilov et al. (2000). For CO2 storage over a long time (1000 year perspective) wells with Portland cement will oppose a leakage risk. It was found by Onan et al. (1984) that at supercritical CO2 conditions the rate of carbonation was influenced by the partial pressure of the CO2 and the temperature. The
-7-
water content level was found to be secondary with respect to the rate. Carbonation was only observed in the outer regions of the samples at low temperatures and pressures while complete carbonation was observed at high temperatures and pressures. At low temperatures and pressures it was also observed that dynamic systems lead to more carbonation than static system. Milestone et al. (1986) tested cement slurries with different amount of silicates. They found that at 150 C and 8 bar CO2 pressure the samples without silicate had only a small carbonation front around the outer surface. For the samples containing lot of silicate the carbonation front was much deeper. This may be due to the increase in porosity that occurs when silicate reacts with CO2 thus the CO2 can penetrate the sample further. However, 20% silicate is needed to get below the permeability of 0.1mD which is the API recommendation. Milestone et al. (1990) did similar but more realistic experiments. The samples with silicate had a higher strength than the samples without prior to the experiments. After exposing the samples for 10 months to CO2 the samples with silicate had lost 60% of the volume while the samples without had lost 35% of the volume.
Figure 3.2
Experimental setup for testing cement at supercritical CO2 conditions Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006)
-8-
Portland cement was tested by Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006) in an autoclave. Samples were tested in both CO2 saturated water and in supercritical CO2 atmosphere at 90 C. A drawing of the apparatus is shown in Figure 3.2. The rate of carbonation in both media can be seen from Figure 3.3. The carbonation and porosity alteration of the Portland cement can be seen in Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 respectively.
Figure 3.3
Rate of carbonation for Portland cement, Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006)
-9-
Figure 3.4
The carbonation for Portland cement, Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006)
Figure 3.5
The porosity alterations in Portland cement. Excerpt of Figure 3.4, Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006)
- 10 -
Carey et. al. (2007) did a study of the cement from the SACROC unit in West Texas, USA. The 240 m thick reservoir is located at 2100 m depth and has a temperature of 54C and a pressure of 180 bar. The reservoir is limestone with 10-100 mD permeability and around 10% porosity. The cementing at total depth was neat Portland cement. The well 49-6 was drilled in 1950 and was first exposed to CO2 in 1975. In the following years it was a producer for 10 years in low pressure environment. The next 7 years it was an injector (high pressure) and 110 000 tonnes of CO2 passed through the well according to Carey et. al. (2007) Samples of the casing and cement was taken from about 6-4m above the caprock-reservoir contact, see Figure 3.6. Shale sample was also collected. The cement was analysed and it was found that it had been partly carbonated. The cement that was in contact with the shale rock is heavily carbonated. The cement close to the casing is pure carbonate like a vein filling. No obvious proof of direct CO2 interaction with the shale was found. The permeability of the cement was found to be higher than pristine Portland cement. SEM imaging showed that CaCO3 had precipitated in the void spaced. Generally it was concluded that the structural integrity of the Portland cement was adequate to prevent significant transport of fluids. However, CO2 was found to have migrated along the cement casing and cement shale interfaces for some time.
Figure 3.6
Photograph of samples recovered from well 49-6 showing the casing (left), gray cement with a dark rind adjacent to the casing, 5-cm core of gray cement, gray cement with an orange alteration zone in contact with a zone of fragmented shale, and the shale country rock, Carey et. al (2007)
The low temperature in the SACROC field is probably the most important factor for the level of carbonation observed. Tests done by Kutchko el al. (2007) at 50 C and BarletGoudard et al. (2006) at 90 C showed that carbonation is much faster at higher temperatures. Onan et al. (1984) also found higher carbonation at higher temperatures. One factor can be the slow kinetics of CaCO3 at low temperatures. What the SACROC cores show is that flow paths existed especially at the cement interfaces.
- 11 -
3.3.2 Cement additives According to Beddoe et. al. (2005) adding quartz to Portland cement in order to make it more acid resistant will leave only the cement paste affected by CO2. The cement can therefore be enhanced in order to reduce the carbonation rate. Cement deterioration will still occur but the degree of tortuosity induced by the aggregate particles will decrease the rate. Addition of Microsilica to the Portland Grade G cement gave lower permeability and better mechanical strength according to Noik et al (1998) The CO2 resistance was not tested though. It is reasonable to assume that additives to Portland cement such as silicates, microsilicate, latex, polymers, can change the properties of the cement and reduce the amount of Portland cement, but it will not hinder the carbonation from occurring due to that the Portland cement is thermodynamically unstable in contact with CO2. 3.3.3 Acid resistant cements
Schlumberger has developed a new CO2 resistant cement which they have tested, Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006). The cement is not described other than that it has reduced amount of Portland cement. The test revealed that carbonation occurred, but that the level was lower and more homogeneously. Comparing to pure Portland cement it was concluded that this cement was more CO2 resistant. Brookhaven National Laboratory supported by DOE, Halliburton, UnoCal Corporation, and CalEnergy Operating Corporation has developed a phosphate based cement. The cement is claimed to have outstanding resistance to CO2 and acid at brine temperatures up to 320C, Sugama T (2006). The CaP cement is commercialised by Halliburton under the name ThermaLock. Test has been performed in H2SO4 solutions of low pH~1.1 with HCO3- as CO2 source. According to Brothers (2005) testing showed that Thermalock had a 3 % weight loss compared to 50 % weight loss of Portland cement. The Thermalock cement has been used in geothermal wells and CO2 injection wells. Another phosphate based cement has been developed by Argonne National Laboratory, Wagh AS (2005a, 2005b). It is based on Magnesium Potassium Phosphate. Magensium is less prone to carbonation compared to calcium and should have better resistance to CO2. The cement is developed for the Arctic conditions with very low temperatures. No tests for the resistance to CO2 have been found so how well the cement behaves in a CO2 environment is not known. 3.3.4 Cement Testing There is no standard method of testing cement for CO2 wells. But the cement should be tested both in supercritical CO2 atmosphere and saturated water solution. Before and after testing the properties such as permeability and porosity should be measured. SEM and XRD analysis should also be used to determine the alteration of the minerals. Scratch test and triaxial tests can also be used to determine the strength of cores. ICP measurements of the water phase can determine the amount of dissolved ions from the samples.
- 12 -
Both SINTEF Petroleum Research and Schlumberger have developed methodology and apparatus for testing cements at supercritical CO2 conditions. The equipments are quite similar. The equipment used by Schlumberger can be seen in Figure 3.2. One difference to the Schlumberger apparatus is that the SINTEF apparatus can be agitated during the experiment by connecting a motor which rocks the whole contained back and forth. By doing this one can prevent that the solution around the core is stagnant and that new solution comes into contact with the core. The samples in the SINTEF apparatus are suspended inside the autoclave due to the agitation. The experiments can be run at temperatures up to 200 C and high pressures (1000 bar) to test the resistance to CO2 on cement samples. Various configurations can be tested some examples are shown in Figure 3.7.
Figure 3.7.
Possible composite test plugs. Left: plugs for triaxial testing; right: hollow cylinder plugs with steel tubes inside or outside cement bond testing (last plug with cement on top). The cement is shown in grey.
3.4
Steel
Acidic environments can induce corrosion in different types of steel. Acids used for acidation, H2S, CO2 and oxygen and chloride can all lead to corrosion of the well. The main reaction in carbon steel is: Fe + 2H+ Fe2+ + H2
The iron dissolves into iron ions in the solution and leaves a corroded surface. The important factor is the pH of the solution in contact with the steel. The pH can be calculated accurately using thermodynamic models and the corrosion rates for carbon steel can be calculated using the NORSOK M-506. Usually carbon steel is not sufficient for normal well conditions. According to NORSOK M-001 the limits for stainless steel AISI 316 is max temperature of 60 C and minimum pH of 3.5. If steel with higher chromium concentrations content is used one can obtain better corrosion protection. 13% Cr can have a max temperature of 90 C at pH 3.5 while 22% and 25% Cr can have a max temperature of 150 C given critical H2S levels.
- 13 -
Zhang H et al (2005) tested the temperature effects of 13% Cr stainless steel. At 90 C when the specimens are exposed to CO2 environment, the corrosion process primarily composes dissolution and growth of passive film according to the following scheme: Cr + 3H2O Cr(OH)3 + 3H+ + 3e-
As the temperature is increased, corrosion is high, thereby the passive film is destroyed. Possible corrosion process is given by the following reaction Fe2+ + CO32Fe + HCO3FeCO3(s) FeCO3 + H+ + 2e-
It was found that there is little corrosion product on the specimen surface at 90 C, more product deposit at 120 C, a layer of corrosion product film appears at 150 C. Moreira et al (2004) studied CO2 corrosion of 13% Cr vs 13Cr-5Ni-2Mo stainless steel. At 90 C and 120 C, there were some visible defects existing in the passive film, but at 150 C, integrity and compact corrosion product layer covered the passive film, less defect in the corrosion product layer. Both static and dynamic conditions where studied. During dynamic conditions the flow velocity was 1 m/s. For both conditions the temperatures were 125 C, 150 C and 175 C with a CO2 partial pressure of 0.482 MPa. The static test showed that the 13% Cr steel corroded faster than the 13Cr-5Ni-2Mo. The ratio between the 13% Cr steel and the 13Cr5Ni2Mo steel corrosion rates were found to be: 8 times at 125 C, 12 times at 150 C and 44 times at 175 C.
1.6 13 Cr - Static (mm/y) 13Cr5Ni2Mo - Static (mm/y) 13Cr - Dynamic (mm/y) 13Cr5Ni2Mo - Dynamic (mm/y)
1.4
1.2
Corrosion rate (mm/y)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 125 135 145 155 165 175
Temperature (C)
Figure 3.8
Corrosion rates of 13Cr and 13Cr5Ni2Mo steel for dynamic and static conditions at temperatures 125 to 175 , Moreira et al (2004)
- 14 -
s
Dynamic 13Cr5Ni2Mo 238 204 179
Table 3.1
Number of years it takes to corrode through a tubing with OD=9 5/8 and ID=8 based on data from Moreira et al (2004)
13Cr 357 110 13 Static 13Cr5Ni2Mo 2858 1299 550 13Cr 95 17 10
Temperature C 125 150 175
According to Havlik et al (2007), 13% Cr shows good performance in CO2 environment. However, it is not applicable in higher temperatures and in combination with low amounts of H2S. 13Cr is also sensitive to oxygen corrosion. 22% or 25% Cr duplex steel is very costly and usually not an option for long pipe sections. However, even if 22% or 25% Cr is better suited at high temperature and H2S content it can suffer severe corrosion during acid treatment. It is therefore very important that if using this type of material the operational constraint is not to acid wash the well. It needs to be well documented so that it is understood by the different disciplines during the life cycle of the well. Nickel alloys can also be considered if duplex steel cannot be used. Another option could be to use a lower grade steel with an internal coating. However, the coating is not reliable and any breach will lead to rapid corrosion and deterioration of the steel. So the choice of material will largely depend on the conditions expected for the CO2 well. It is important not to mix low grade seals with high grade tubing/casing metal for example. This will lead to galvanic corrosion due to the difference in electric potential between the metals. All components: tubing, casing, wellhead, hangers, liner etc should be chosen to be of same steel quality. It is therefore also very important that one quality checks the materials from the suppliers before installing them in the well as a wrong steel quality of metal seal for example may rapidly lead to a well integrity failure. As metals are prone to corrode it is not suited to be left in contact with CO2 when the well is abandoned. 3.5 Elastomers
Searching for literature on behaviour of elastomers in CO2 environment did not give any results unfortunately.
- 15 -
4.
CO2 injection wells
A CO2 injection well is very similar to a typical gas injection well except that downhole components have higher pressure ratings and corrosion resistance. Experience with regards to CO2 handling has already been gained from EOR operations and for acid gas disposal (IPCC, 2005). A typical built-for-purpose CO2 injection well and a wellhead are shown in Figure 4.1 (RITE, 2007). Downhole configuration of a typical injection well includes a packer, an on-off tool and a downhole shutoff valve. These wells are usually equipped with annular pressure monitors to help detect leaks in packers and tubing. This is important for taking rapid corrective action.
Figure 4.1
Typical built-for-purpose CO2 injection well (after RITE, 2007).
In most cases, production or injection wells in depleted oil/gas fields are also reused as CO2 injection wells. When wells are re-used for CO2 injection, it is important to review the activities conducted during the wells operating life as they affect the well integrity. In this section, the different activities that may be carried out in the wells lifetime prior to conversion as CO2 injector and their possible effect on well integrity are first reviewed. Second, the different methods used to check the well integrity for further use as a CO2 injector are discussed. Finally, existing guidelines to maintain well integrity of injection wells are covered. 4.1 Well activities
The impact on well integrity of the different activities that may be carried out during the wells operating life prior to conversion as a CO2 injector is discussed in this section. The different well activities include drilling operations, completion and production
- 16 -
operations. For built-for-purpose CO2 injectors, discussions on the drilling and completion operations are applicable. 4.1.1 Drilling Operation Drilling activity starts with spudding and concludes with preparation of the well for testing, completion or suspension/abandonment. The drilling activity could impact wellbore stability, casing integrity and the cement integrity. 4.1.1.1 Drilling and borehole stability During drilling, the primary pressure barrier is the fluid column. The drilling mud also forms a filter cake to prevent wall collapse. Keeping the borehole wall intact ensures that the cement column would be properly set during completion. Borehole cave-ins result in an under-reamed hole which could affect the cementing operation. 4.1.1.2 Casing setting There is higher risk of compromising the casing integrity during drilling operations. Prior to landing, all components of casing string including connections, circulation devices and landing string shall be subject to load case verification. For through-tubing drilling operations, the tubing and accessories shall be reclassified to casing and redesigned to meet drilling loads (NORSOK, 2004). The following points should be considered in casing design (NORSOK, 2004): Planned well trajectory and bending stresses induced by doglegs and curvature Maximum allowable setting depth with regards to kick margin Estimated pore pressure development Estimated formation strength Estimated temperature gradient Drilling fluids and cement program Loads induced by well services and operations Estimated casing wear Setting depth restrictions due to formation evaluation requirements Potential for H2S and/or CO2 Metallurgical considerations ECD and surge/swab effects due to narrow clearances Isolation of weak formation, potential loss zones, sloughing and caving formations and protection of reservoirs Geo-tectonic forces applicable Incident scenarios during drilling which could serve as basis for estimating expected loads should include occurrence of gas kick and dynamic loads from running of casing, including overpull to free stuck casing, inflow or fluid loss while running or pulling string, presence of solids/sands, presence of H2S, hydrates, wax and emulsions. When hydrates, wax or emulsions are present, contingency measures could be to supply heat to the affected area or inject suitable chemical inhibitors. It should be noted that
- 17 -
heating the affected area results in thermal loads while injection of suitable chemical inhibitors results in higher internal pressure. 4.1.1.3 Cementing the casing/liner The quality of the cementing operation is also crucial in maintaining wellbore integrity. The most widely used cements in the petroleum industry are the Portland-type cements. When it is properly set, the cement slurry can become a nearly impermeable and durable material. Cement bonds to rock by a process of crystal growth while cement bonds to casing by filling the pit spaces in the surface of the casing. Good quality cementing will likely protect against cement degradation and casing corrosion. In a CO2-rich environment, Portland cement is known to be thermodynamically unstable. It tends to strongly degrade once exposed to such acid gases, by reacting with calcium hydroxide formed from hydrated calcium silicate phases. An EOR site where cements and casing were exposed to carbon dioxide for 17 years (Sacroc reservoir) showed that cement can retain integrity for some decades (Carey, 2005). It should be noted that the temperature in the Sacroc reservoir was only ~50 C. In another simulation of downhole conditions for both wet supercritical CO2 and CO2saturated water, an alteration of 100mm after 20 years of CO2 attack is possible in Portland cements. Non-Portland based cements (calcium phosphate cement ThermalockTM) which contain aluminum hydrates, calcium phosphate hydrates and mica-like aluminosilicates are now used as alternatives in carbon dioxide injection wells, sour-gas disposal wells and geothermal wells with high carbon dioxide content. An alternative is to use fortified Portland cement where resistance is increased by adding a latex diluent of a specific particle size and adding a non-standard, high alumina cement to reduce the amount of Portland cement. This has been used in the well completion design for acid gas (65% hydrogen sulfide, 35% carbon dioxide) injection over a 50-year period in Labarge area, Wyoming (Benge, 2005). Relevant cement additives that help to maintain well integrity include hydrazine which is used to control corrosion of the casing and radioactive tracers to assess where the cement has been placed. (Barlet-Gouedard et al, 2006). Besides the cementing material, the placement of cement is also important in maintaining the wellbore integrity. It is very important to do a thorough clean out of the well prior to cementing in order to prevent mud mixed into the cement causing cavities or channels. This will not only degrade the strength of the cement, but can also create leakage pathways for CO2. Well deviation can affect cement as cement sets differently in deviated wells and vertical wells. Drilling mud is first circulated in the hole to ensure that cuttings and borehole wall cavings have been removed before running the casing. The mill varnish is also removed from the surface of the casing to ensure that the cement will bond to the steel surface. Centralizers are then used to ensure that the casing is placed in the center of the borehole. For under-reamed or washed out holes, bow spring centralizers are used. After the cement slurry is pumped downhole, a lighter drilling mud follows. In
- 18 -
this way, the casing is under compression from a higher differential pressure on the outside of the casing. Thus, when the cement sets and drilling or production operation continues, the casing will always have an elastic load on the cement-casing interface. This elastic load is considered essential for maintenance of the cement-casing bond and to prevent leakage between the cement and casing. Sixty to seventy percent of the wells in the Gulf of Mexico are affected by sustained casing pressures (SCP). The main cause is believed to be gas flow through the cement matrix. This could be due to gas flow through unset cement and due to cement shrinkage after completion. Remediation which included injection of high density brine in the annulus and pumping of high density fluid into the casing have little success (Crow, 2006). This problem has also been observed after routine well pressure tests. In summary, the cementing problems that could cause SCP include: (1) micro annuli caused by casing contraction and/or expansion (2) channels caused by improper mud removal prior to and during cementing (3) lost circulation of cement into fractured formations during cementing (4) flow after cementing by failure to maintain an overbalance pressure (5) mud cake leaks (6) tensile cracks in cement caused by temperature and pressure cycles (Sweatman, 2006).
4.1.2 Completion A study of a CO2 injection well at the K-12B gas field in the Dutch sector of the North Sea showed that 25% of the tubulars are degraded. The pitting increased significantly in the year of the CO2 injection and could therefore be the result of corrosion or erosion (Mulders, 2006). Aside from this, experience from conversion of a mature oilfield in West Texas into a carbon dioxide injection field showed that recovered metal liners have extensive corrosion (prior to carbon dioxide injection) possibly due to chlorine based attack from the formation water (Power, 2006). This emphasises the importance of material selection when designing well completions. Tubing movements which include piston, ballooning, helical buckling and thermal effects should also be estimated considering the different well operations throughout the operating life of the well. Collapse and burst pressure should also be estimated. When designing for burst, collapse and axial load, the following load cases shall be considered (NORSOK, 2004): Leak testing of the completion string Leak testing annulus Shut in of well Dynamic flowing conditions Shut in of well by closing SCSSV Tubing collapse as a function of minimum tubing pressure (plugged perforations or low test separator pressure) at the same time as a high operating annulus (maximum allowable) pressure is present Injection Overpull Firing of TCP guns
- 19 -
Artificial lift requirements For HPHT wells, emphasis should be placed on (NORSOK, 2004): Dimensional stability of well as a function of temperature and pressure Sealing capacity of metal to metal seals as a function of wellbore fluids, pressure and temperature Stability of explosive and chemical perforating charges as function of temperature/pressure exposure time Clearance and tolerances as function of temperature and differential pressure exposure Deterioration of elastomer seals and components as function of temperature/pressure exposure time and wellbore fluids Common failure occurrences in the North Slope of Alaska are erosion, well subsidence, leaking elastomers and external corrosion. Conclusions from the BP experience in the North Sea and North Slope of Alaska include (Anders, 2006): Elastomer problems and casing corrosion problem occur after well completion Tubing needs to be replaced at 5-20 year intervals and after 3 replacements the wells should be plugged and abandoned
4.1.3 Production Reservoir pressure depletion due to production can induce formation compaction. Formation compaction can cause casing damage. Casing deformation occurs due to axial buckling in the reservoir or sub horizontal shear in the overburden. Figure 4.2 shows the distribution of casing failures for the Belridge diatomite field. The peak zones of failure are at the boundary between the diatomite reservoir and the overlying sand or within the sand itself. At the Belridge diatomite field in California, nearly 1000 wells had severe casing damage by depletion-induced compaction (Fredrich et al., 2000). In the North Sea chalk basin, more than 90 casing failures had been observed, which were related to the increase of axial and radial loads on the wellbore caused by compaction of the high-porosity chalk during reservoir depletion (de Silva et al., 1990).
- 20 -
Figure 4.2
The location and incidence of casing failures at the Belridge field from 1984 to 1994 (Nagel, 2001).
Several efforts to combat casing deformation include water injection (Dale et al., 1996). Telescoping joints have also been employed in the reservoir section in order to reduce the build up of axial strain (Eriksen et al., 1998). In the overburden, the wellbore is underreamed in order to allow additional shear movement before the rock strata impinges on the casing (Bickley and Curry, 1992). Aside from casing damage due to reservoir subsidence, sand production could also cause casing damage as observed in Canada heavy oil sand (Wagg et al., 1999). In the same manner, in Chinas Daqing oilfiled, the casing damage reached 6860 after 40 years which is 16% of the total wells in the field (Lan et al., 2000). In the Gudao reservoir of Shengli oilfield, forty oil production and water injection wells were recently abandoned due to casing failures (Peng, et al, 2007). Due to the severity of the consequences, sand production should be continuously monitored. Maximum allowable sand production and maximum allowable equipment wear loss should be established. 4.2 Methods to ascertain well integrity prior to hand-over
Prior to converting a well for CO2 injection, the well should undergo testing to ensure its integrity under pressure. Even if oil production wells have no leakage during their operating life, it is still possible that these wells could leak during gas injection. It is therefore necessary to conduct a pressure test using gas (e.g. CO2) for a period of time before commencing actual CO2 injection. For wells which formerly used artificial lift, it is important to ensure that the valves are intact prior to use of the well as a CO2 injector. It is also important to seal the valves prior to use of the tubing string for CO2 injection. Subsurface safety valves should be
- 21 -
checked and cleaned from deposits. They must also be checked for compatibility with gas injection. In the following subsections, the different routine methodologies used to ascertain wellbore integrity are discussed in detail. This covers methods which deals with hole stability, casing and cement integrity.
4.2.1 Hole Stability and formation properties Information regarding formation properties could give an indication of the possible leakage pathways from the formation to the wellbore. This requires identification of formation intervals where there is leakage risk such as weak formations. While unstable/weak formation is in itself a possible leakage pathway, it can also affect borehole stability hence casing integrity. Wellbore wall failure results in enlarged and elliptical borehole. This irregularity could be a problem during casing string cementing and could potentially result in failed cement jobs. Wellbore instability could be due to complex geological conditions such as intervals with different properties (e.g. weak, brittle, fractured, chemically reactive). The manifestation of wellbore instability include hole pack off, excessive reaming, overpull, torque and drag or stuck pipe. Figure 4.3 is an example of an open-hole caliper log showing wellbore wall support possible and mud invasion. As mud weight increased from 70 PCF to 76 PCF, wellbore wall stabilization is observed. However, as it is increased to more than 76 PCF, hole size is increased in certain locations. This is possibly due to mud invasion (Mohiuddin, et al. 2006).
Figure 4.3
Open hole caliper log showing mud invasion and wellbore wall support (Mohiuddin, et al. 2006).
Production-induced subsidence/compaction of the formation is also a function of the formation properties. This phenomenon could result in casing damage (e.g. Bolivar Coastal Fields, Venezuela; South Pass Block 24 & 27, Gulf of Mexico; South Belridge
- 22 -
Field, California). In Ekofisk Field, it was observed that casing deformations align with high porosity intervals contributing most to production. Compaction of chalk was suspected to induce buckling (Schwall et. al. 1996) 4.2.1.1 Pressure and formation permeability Review of the formation pressure data, permeability and in-situ stresses could also help identify intervals which are potential leakage pathways. Estimates of pore pressure and permeability could be obtained from well tests. Horizontal in-situ stress magnitude and formation breakdown pressure could be estimated from leak-off or fracturing tests (e.g. mini frac) which may be calibrated by laboratory testing of core samples. A typical bottomhole pressure profile during fracturing is as shown in Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.4
Idealized curve bottomhole pressure vs time during injection with constant flow rate (Schechter 1992).
The Figure shows the following important points (Schechter 1992): Breakdown pressure: the pressure required to break down the formation from the wellbore, and initiate the fracture. Propagation pressure: the pressure required to continually enlarge the fracture. Instantaneous shut-in pressure: the pressure that is required to just hold the fracture open after the injection is stopped. Vertical stress magnitude on the other hand could be estimated from density logs or seismic data while elastic modulus of the formation could be obtained from laboratory
- 23 -
rock mechanical testing. Knowledge of the rock mechanical properties (e.g. stresses, formation breakdown pressure, etc.) is significant especially if it is planned to reuse abandoned wells as carbon dioxide injection points. For instance, fracturing the formation could be avoided by injecting below the formation breakdown pressure. If during injection, fracturing the pay zone is inevitable, the fracture treatment could be designed in such a way that the resulting fracture will not breach the bounding strata. Another important use of information on reservoir properties is to enable estimation of production-induced stress changes and reservoir compaction/subsidence. This entails coupling of geomechanical with production model. Besides the rock mechanical properties and reservoir properties, production history data is necessary to calibrate the reservoir simulation model. Risk of damage to the casing string due to this phenomenon could then be evaluated. Preferential orientation of borehole trajectory for borehole stability is primarily based on the orientation of the principal in-situ stresses. If the well trajectory is not preferentially oriented, wellbore instability could be a problem. Knowledge of the direction of the in-situ stresses is therefore required for planning a well. Directions of horizontal forces are investigated by conducting a borehole breakout analysis. Borehole breakouts (Figure 4.5) will orient themselves in the direction of the minimum horizontal stress, and hence can be used to determine this direction. There are several tools used to conduct breakout analysis. Some of the common tools used for this analysis include borehole televiewer logs (BHTV), dip-meter logs, and caliper logs.
- 24 -
Figure 4.5
Example of different types of borehole cross-section elongation as observed from a six-arm dipmeter log (after Jarosinski, 2005).
4.2.1.2 Mud logs Mudlog interpreted lithology description should also be checked in relation to casing stability. For instance, unconsolidated formations are particularly vulnerable to instability and possibly loose sand grains could erode the uncemented portion of the casing. In addition, certain lithologies are particularly suitable as casing seats. Clean shale for example is the ideal casing seat formation. In the field, however, the formation selected for the seat is usually the best compromise between the ideal and what is possible. Intervals which pose leakage risk could also be identified from mud losses/gains observed during drilling. Drilling dynamics information from mud log data indicates mud inflow/outflow. Daily drilling reports (DDR) should also be reviewed and intervals where mud losses/gains are experienced should be noted as possible conduits for fluids. DDRs give details of events and actions taken for the duration of the drilling operation.
- 25 -
4.2.2 Casing integrity tests Corrosion and cement bond logs are amongst the most common techniques used to evaluate casing mechanical damage. Wireline tools available for casing observation range from the simple mechanical devices (e.g. caliper) to ultrasonic measurement techniques designed specifically for steel casing and the cement environment. However, conventional devices normally measure casing parameters, such as internal radius, in a 2D horizontal plane within the wellbore. The ultrasonic borehole televiewer on the other hand is able to image the casing accurately in three dimensions. Figure 4.6 shows a 3D casing image and the longitudinal section in a production well. It can be seen from the figure that the casing is deformed by shearing. In (b), the center line is the original casing axis. The lines to the left and right of the center axis show the deformed casing outline (Peng et. al., 2007). Various types of casing damage captured by the borehole televiewer are shown in Figure 4.7, Figure 4.8, Figure 4.9, Figure 4.10 (Peng et al., 2007).
Figure 4.6
Casing damage observed from an ultrasonic borehole televiewer (a) 3D view (b) longitudinal section of the casing (Peng et al., 2007).
- 26 -
Figure 4.7
Casing enlargement captured by ultrasonic borehole televiewer. Left: 3D view; Right: longitudinal outline (Peng et al., 2007).
Figure 4.8
Casing failure induced at perforations. Left: 3D view; Middle: longitudinal view; Right: cross section (Peng et al., 2007)
- 27 -
Figure 4.9
Broken casing. Left: 3D view; Middle: longitudinal view; Right: cross section (Peng et al., 2007)
Figure 4.10
Cracked casing. Left: 3D view; Middle: longitudinal view; Right: cross section (Peng et al., 2007)
Field observations in the Gudao reservoir in China show that casing damage is mainly caused by casing buckling and fracturing. The location of the casing damage is concentrated on the unconsolidated sandstone around the perforated areas. Cavities were produced around the casing in the unconsolidated sandstone due to sand production. The casing loses lateral constraints in the location of the cavities, inducing non-uniform pressures around the casing and causing buckling and shear failure (Peng et al., 2007). 4.2.2.1 Casing evaluation Casing inspection prior to landing should include visual inspection regarding corrosion, mechanical coupling, micro annulus formation and other casing failures. It is also imperative to make sure that the casing material is resistant to CO2-brine environment.
- 28 -
It should also be noted that the weakest point in the casing string is the coupling where three types of failure could occur at the joint: jumpout, fracture, or thread shear. When jumpout failure occurs the pin and box separate with little or no damage to the thread element. In a compression failure, the pin moves further into the box while in fracturing the pin-threaded section separates from the pipe body or axial splitting of the coupling occurs. Thread shear on the other hand refers to the stripping off of threads from the pin and/or box. The casing joint must also provide an effective seal to prevent leakage of the fluids or gases. This requires large interface pressure between the mating threads in a joint. This is done by use of thread interference, metal-to-metal seal, resilient ring or combination seals. 4.2.2.2 Casing design Casing design report which includes load calculations (e.g. thermal, buckling, piston etc.) should be reviewed and compared with the well history. Differences in the design and the actual well events should be noted as the selected casing may have been underdesigned and could fail earlier than expected. Pressure test reports should also be reviewed and checked for irregularities. The casing is exposed to different loading conditions during various well operations (landing, cementing, drilling, production). It has to be designed to withstand tensile, burst and collapse loads. However, it is impossible to predict the magnitude of these loads during the life of the casing. Therefore the design is based on the worst case scenario. The casing rating also deteriorates with time (wear and tear). Thus safety factors are used to make sure that the casing could withstand expected loading conditions. Collapse pressure is mainly due to the fluid pressure outside the casing. This could be drilling fluid or cement slurry. Overpressure zones could also subject the casing to high collapse pressure. The casings critical collapse strength is a function of its length, diameter, wall thickness and physical properties (e.g. yield point, elastic limit, Poissons ratio, etc.). Burst loading on the other hand is due to the fluid pressure inside the casing. Severe burst pressure occurs if there is a kick during drilling operations. The tensile stress on the other hand originates from pipe weight, bending load and shock load. The axial force due to pipe weight is its weight in air less the buoyancy force (Archimedes principle). Bending force results when the casing is run in deviated wells where the upper portion of the casing is in tension whereas the lower part is in compression. Shock load on the other hand is generated by setting of the slips and application of hoisting brakes. The sudden stoppage when casing is run generates stress waves along the casing string. In addition to the three loading conditions described above, casing design should also consider the likelihood of buckling, piston and thermal effects. Buckling results when the casing is unstable (e.g. partially cemented). The casing string will exhibit a helical configuration below the neutral point. This results in rapid wear at this point which can eventually lead to casing failure. Piston force on the other hand is due to the
- 29 -
hydrostatic pressure acting on the internal and external shoulders of the casing string while thermal effects refer to the expansion or shortening of the casing due to increase or decrease in temperature. 4.2.2.3 Casing leaks Reported well leaks during the operating life of the well and the corresponding remedial action taken should be examined. Details of workover operations (e.g. squeeze cementing) should be investigated to determine whether well integrity has been adequately restored. Radioactive (RA) tracers can be used to locate leakage in casings or packers. The RA tracer could be used both in injection and production wells. It only uses a small amount of radioactive materials relative to the amount of the other fluids therefore there is no measurable surface radiation. There is no health risk in a tracer survey but alternatively pulsed neutron tool could be used if there is concern for release or storage of radioactive material (Johnson et. al, 2002). Ultrasonic leak detectors could also be used to detect casing leaks. The frequency spectrum that a leak produces is a function of differential pressure, leak magnitude, and leak geometry. These properties determine whether the frequency is audible in the ultrasonic spectrum. The ultrasonic logging tool makes use of a sensor that detects the frequency spectrum produced by leaks. The tool can be run inside the tubing and could detect leak from (Tecwel, 2007): 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) production packer expansion joint, or any other subassembly tubing Downhole Safety Valve (DHSV) control line to the DHSV any of the casings in the well wellhead
- 30 -
Figure 4.11
Possible leakage sources that ultrasonic tool can detect (Tecwel, 2007).
Other conventional leak detection logs (LDLs) include temperature, pressure and casing collar locator (CCL) sondes. In 1995, distributed temperature sensing (DTS) was introduced giving real-time thermal profile of the wellbore. An example is shown in Figure 4.12 (Julian et al, 2007).
- 31 -
Figure 4.12
Comparison of conventional wireline temperature, memory temperature and DTS logs showing leak (Julian et al, 2007)
4.2.2.4 Corrosion and Erosion The simplest method to measure downhole corrosion and erosion is through the use of multi-finger calipers. Electromagnetic thickness measurement tools (see Figure 4.13) could also be used to measure downhole corrosion/erosion. Typically, a low frequency electromagnetic wave is transmitted from a transmitter element inside the tool body. The electromagnetic wave travels radially through the well-fluid before going through the tubing wall and traveling along the length of the tubular. It then re-enters the pipe where it is intercepted by the sensors. The wall thickness can be estimated from the transmitter-sensor transit time and the amplitude of the electromagnetic wave (Readgroup, 2007).
- 32 -
Figure 4.13
Typical electromagnetic thickness measurement tool (Readgroup, 2007).
Downhole video cameras (See Figure 4.14) are also useful in imaging downhole corrosion. Centralizers are used to position the camera within the wellbore to provide an even spread of light from the LED light source. Typical images captured by downhole video cameras are shown in Figure 4.6, Figure 4.7, Figure 4.8, Figure 4.9 and Figure 4.10.
Figure 4.14
Downhole camera (Readgroup, 2007)
4.2.3 Cement Evaluation In this section, we review post cementing evaluation tools.
4.2.3.1 Temperature measurement Temperature surveys could also be used to locate cement tops. Temperature surveys should be run a few hours after mixing, when the heat of the setting cement is distinct.
- 33 -
4.2.3.2 Cement Bond Logs (CBL) Bond logs may also be used to determine cement tops as well as the quality of the cement-to-casing bond. In some cement jobs, pressure is held on the casing until the cement sets. When the pressure is released, the casing contracts and breaks the cement bond. This results in creation of microannulus gap between casing and cement. This annular space between cement and casing causes the CBL to respond as if the cement had channeled. If this is the case, the CBL can be run with a pressurized casing. The microannulus closes when the casing expands and the CBL will indicate good bonding if the cement job is otherwise successful. In some cases, poor centralization of the logging tool could also make the cement appear to have good bonding (Figure 4.15).
Figure 4.15
Example of cement bond log with ultrasonic imaging tool and variable density log (after Boyd et al, 2006).
4.2.3.3 Pressure testing It is customary to pressure test the shoe after drilling out the cement shoe on the surface and intermediate casing strings. This involves pressuring up inside the casing until the pressure at the shoe exceeds the maximum hydrostatic pressure expected at that point during subsequent drilling operations. Failure of cement around the shoe is usually due to contamination, either from the original drilling mud or from the displacement fluid. It is the result of poor cement technique rather than poor quality materials as hard-set neat cement has sufficient strength to withstand pressure tests.
- 34 -
4.3
Maintenance of well integrity of injection wells
A number of standard technologies are available for monitoring the integrity of active injection wells. Some of which have already been described in Section 4.2. Proper maintenance of CO2 injection wells is necessary to avoid leakage and well failures. Practical procedures that can be used to reduce probabilities of CO2 blow-out (uncontrolled flow) and mitigate the adverse effects if one should occur include periodic well integrity surveys, improved blow-out prevention (BOP) maintenance, improved crew awareness, contingency planning and emergency response training. During injection, the operating pressure should be kept to a minimum to reduce the risk of leakage. This maximum allowable injection pressure is also constrained by reservoir properties and surface facilities. The pressure in the annulus can also be monitored during injection to ensure the integrity of the packer, casing and the injection pipe. Changes in pressure or gas composition in the annulus should alert the operator to possible leakage.
- 35 -
5.
Permanent abandonment of CO2 wells
In this Chapter, procedures to carry out permanent abandonment of wells for CO2 storage is described (Carlsen and Abdollahi, 2007). The proposed procedures are then compared with existing NORSOK guidelines on permanent abandonment of oil and gas wells. The purpose of which is to see the gaps between the current guidelines and the minimum requirements for CO2 storage. Bridging this gap will ensure that the integrity of abandoned wells is intact and allow for future use of depleted hydrocarbon fields for CO2 injection. 5.1 Proposed abandonment procedure for CO2 wells (Carlsen and Abdollahi, 2007)
Generally, the well should preferably be placed at the flank of the storage anticline for displacement of the CO2 away from the vicinity of the well and avoiding early exposure. Sealing plugs can be mechanical, cement or a combination. A cemented casing with mechanical plugs will not be sufficient. Casing corrosion may create channelling and possible leakage. Shrinkage or expansion of both casing and the cement may create micro-channels in the cement bonding and leakage. The sealing elements should provide comply with the following requirements: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Multiple pressure barriers Avoiding underground cross-flow between layers Zero transmissibility Chemically inert Provide sufficient bonding strength
Figure 5.1 schematically illustrates a typical CO2 injection well before abandonment in the crest of the storage reservoir. Special care should be taken when constructing these wells. The procedure is as follows: 1) Set production casing in the middle of cap rock 2) Minimize liner overlap length 3) Use specialized cement and casing materials
- 36 -
s
Wellhead and X-mass tree Surface casing
Before abandonment
Intermediate casing
Impermeable cap rock
Production casing
Perforations
Liner
Figure 5.1
CO2 storage well before abandonment
It is assumed that the sealing qualities of the caprock are generally maintained with zero permeability to gas or injectivity to well fluids or cement. The production casing and the liner penetrating the cap rock should be milled out with a casing cutter as potential corrosion of the steel may create leakage channels. Figure 5.2 schematically illustrates the well after abandonment. The operational procedures are as follows: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Remove tubing and packer Set cement plug at the bottom of the well (sub-barrier) Mill out casing from liner lap to end of perforations Inject cement in perforations and cement the open hole interval Squeeze cement in the lower and upper cap rock formation Set mechanical bridge plug Remove upper free-cement casing Mill out intermediate casing and squeeze cement Remove wellhead and mill out surface casings and squeeze cement
- 37 -
After abandonment
Surface barrier
Extra barrier
Potential secondary impermeable geology layer
Non corrosive completion fluid
Bridge plug
Main barrier Impermeable cap rock
Perforations
Flushed zone Sub-barrier
Figure 5.2
CO2 storage well after abandonment
The cement plug will act as the main future CO2 barrier. The major concern is related to the sealing quality of the cement plug and the bonding quality to the penetrated caprock. Micro channels created near the wellbore by the drilling or milling operations is believed to be closed by squeezed cement. A possible fluid could also possible be flushed into the storage reservoir to displace the CO2 and help to improve the cementing quality and bonding to the sealing cap rock. A mechanical bridge plug is set inside the well and the well should be filled with a non-corrosive completion fluid. An extra cement barrier should be made higher up in the well. The casing should be milled out also here to seal off potential casing corrosion, bridge plug leakage and possible CO2 migration through the cement to the lower part of the well. If a secondary geological sealing layer is present this barrier should be positioned here as indicated. At the surface, the wellhead should be removed, the casing strings cut and a last cement plug put in place. Figure 5.3 illustrates a flow chart of the well barriers now in place inside and outside the well. It is possible that other types of materials such as polymer or resin that are inert to CO2 must be pumped into the near bore well area to prevent direct exposure of cement to CO2. One example of such a material is ThermaSet developed by WellCem AS that is
- 38 -
claimed to be inert to CO2. Any such material should however be tested in supercritical CO2 before approved/deployed.
Surface barrier
Surface barrier
Extra barrier
Extra barrier Bridge plug
Main barrier
Main barrier
Sub-barrier
Outside the well
Inside the well
CO2 migration
Figure 5.3
Well barriers after abandonment
Casing protective materials and alternative casing materials, as for example composites, should possibly also be evaluated for possible and alternative abandonment procedures. 5.2 Comparison of proposed abandonment procedure for CO2 wells with NORSOK guidelines for oil and gas wells
Fundamentally, the NORSOK standard for permanent abandonment of wells could serve as a basis for setting guidelines for CO2 storage wells. However, more stringent requirements should be set in some areas for CO2 application. 5.2.1 Material selection NORSOK standard requires that permanent barriers for abandoned wells are impermeable, have long term integrity, non-shrinking, ductile, resistant to different substances and have sufficient bonding to the casing. The material requirement described by the NORSOK standard is general and do not provide any specific details (e.g. type of steel, cement, etc.). For CO2 applications where material selection is very important, specific material requirement should be set in the guidelines. Steel and cement quality should be of higher grade so they can handle CO2. 5.2.2 Well barrier In the NORSOK guidelines, no cement plug is placed in the cap rock (Figure 5.4). This is insufficient for wells exposed to CO2. The casing will corrode at a much faster rate than that of wells without CO2. This will result in micro channels allowing CO2
- 39 -
migration from the reservoir section upwards. In which case, it is good practice to millout the casing within the cap rock and place a cement plug in the milled out section. As cement is more resistant to CO2 than casing, this will provide a much better seal than the cemented casing alone.
Open hole to surface barrier: 1. Casing cement 2. Cement plug
Secondary well barriers: 3. Casing cement 4. Cement plug
Primary well barriers: 5. Casing cement 6. Cement plug
Figure 5.4
Example case (after NORSOK Standard D010, 2004)
5.2.3 Completion string According to the NORSOK standard, the tubing can be left in place (Figure 5.5) when the well is to be permanently abandoned. For CO2 applications, however, this is inadequate. When the tubing corrodes, leakage pathways will be formed. This can be prevented by pulling out the tubing prior to setting the cement plug. An alternative is to mill out the tubing at the point where the cement plug is to be set.
- 40 -
Open hole to surface barrier: 1. Casing cement 2. Cement plug
Secondary well barriers: 5. Casing cement 6. Cement plug
Primary well barriers: 3. Liner cement 4. Cement plug
Figure 5.5
Case on the right hand side of the axis where tubing could be left inside the well (NORSOK Standard D010, 2004)
5.2.4 Temporary well abandonment By NORSOK standards, temporary well abandonment is not regulated to a certain time frame. This should be done if the well is exposed to CO2 as there is higher risk of corrosion. The duration of temporary well abandonment should be evaluated based on the well fluid composition, the type of completion as well as completion materials used. 5.2.5 Monitoring of permanently abandoned wells NORSOK do not prescribe guidelines for monitoring permanently abandoned wells. For CO2 applications, it is important that also permanently abandoned wells are monitored for potential leaks. Different monitoring techniques are described in Chapter 6.
- 41 -
6.
6.1
Well Monitoring
Pressure and temperature
The simplest way to detect leak is by pressure monitoring. Conventionally, pressure sensors at the wellhead and downhole provide real-time pressure readouts in the tubing and in the different annuli. Leakage through any of the barriers can be easily detected from the wellhead pressure readings. Leaks could be between the different volumes (e.g. between the tubing and annulus A) as shown in Figure 6.1. In some cases leaks can also occur within one volume as across the safety valves (e.g. across the annular safety valve of annulus A). See Figure 6.2 .
Tubing Annulus A
Annulus B
Figure 6.1
Leaks between different volumes.
Tubing Annulus A
Annulus B
Figure 6.2
Leaks within one volume.
- 42 -
The presence of a CO2 cap in the aquifer will influence the formation pressure. A cap of 10 m is estimated to increase the pressure with 0.3 bar. Figure 6.3 indicates that a permanently installed pressure sensor with 10 bar full measurement range typically will drift off 0.01bar over a life span of 20 years. Such sensors will soon be available off-the-shelf and ready for installation, - demonstrations are seen via similar sensors available for other applications. The main challenge is to protect the relatively soft membrane needed for 10 bar measurement range during installation. The drift of sensors are normally a portion of full range (<1% for the sensor referenced above), so 10 bar full range seem to be a maximum with todays sensors. Pressure monitoring (combined with temperature), or differential pressure monitoring between top and bottom of cap, can be utilized for CO2 monitoring purposes. A pressure change may be difficult to interpret. An observed pressure reduction may be due to sensor drift, leak into cap-rock or CO2 solubility in brine. The measurement should thus be combined with other observations.
Pressure sensor characteristics 0.2
No leak
Drift <1% over 20 years. 10bar Full Scale
Future sensors: Improved drift characteristics, extended life span?
Pressure (bar)
0.1
Leakout in 100 years
50
100
Time (years)
Figure 6.3
Permanent pressure sensors and the uncertainty due to drift in output signal. The drift characteristics are derived from a one month test on permanent well sensors from Weatherford (preliminary data).
6.2
Resistivity
The formation water in the formation has salinity comparable to sea water. CO2 in the formation has isolating electrical properties. Resistivity or conductivity measurements
- 43 -
are thus well suited for estimation of CO2 saturation in the formation (when the porosity is known). Saturation models commonly applied in wire-line logging for estimation of hydrocarbon saturation (i.e.Archie equation) can be directly applied. Permanently installed sensors have the capability of monitoring time developing trends with high resolution. Two basic sensor principles are available, electrodes in galvanic coupling to the formation or induction sensors. A conducting casing will dramatically influence formation electrical measurements from a borehole. The spatial resolution and detection range depends on sensor geometry and frequency. When calibrated against wireline logs the saturation estimate will have an accuracy within 5%. An array of 8 sensor nodes, carefully distributed in the well would probably give sufficient lateral resolution. Expected lifetime of a permanent sensor system is typically 5 years. 6.3 Geochemical methods and tracers
Geochemical tracers such as perfluorocarbon tracers (PFT) can be used to estimate CO2 leakage rates. This technology has been applied in a pilot sequestration study site in the West Pearl Queen depleted oil formation in SE New Mexico. PFTs were added as three 12 h slugs at about one week intervals during CO2 injection. Leakage was monitored using 40 capillary adsorbent tubes left in the soil for periods ranging from days to months. The tracers were analysed using thermal desorption and gas chromatography with electron capture detection. In this study, the CO2 leak rate was estimated at about 0.0085% of the total CO2 sequestered per annum. Moreover, CO2 appears to have emanated from the vicinity of the injection well in a radial pattern to about 100 m and in directional patterns to 300 m (Wells et al., 2007). Chemical tracers such as SF6, CH3F and CH2F2 can be analysed by laser photothermal spectroscopy or by gas chromatography with electron capture or mass spectrometric detectors. Radiological tracers on the other hand, such as 14CO2, 42Ar and 39Ar could be detected by a scintillating grid radiometric gas sensor (Saripalli et al., 2006). Small amounts of noble gas isotopes can also be dissolved into the CO2 being injected for storage and used as tracers to monitor CO2 movement. Noble gases are chemically inert, environmentally safe and are stable in the environment. The unique isotopic compositions that can be imparted to the CO2 can be unambiguously identified during monitoring. Among the noble gases, xenon isotopes have commercial costs and availability suitable for use in large CO2 storage operations. Multiple batches of injected CO2 at the same site could be imparted with different xenon isotopic compositions so that they can be identified with only a single xenon analysis. These characteristics are believed to make xenon a superior tracer to other options such as SF6 and 14CO2 (Nimz and Hudson, 2005).
- 44 -
Fluid samples can also be analyzed for major ions, pH, alkalinity, stable isotopes and gases. Standard analytical methods are available to monitor all of these parameters, including the possibility of continuous real-time monitoring for some geochemical parameters. 6.4 Well logs
Different well logging techniques as described previously could be routinely used to monitor CO2 leakage in casing and cement. 6.5 Geophysical monitoring
Time-lapse seismic surveying has been found to be a highly suitable geophysical technique for monitoring CO2 injection into a saline aquifer. The effects of the CO2 on the seismic data are large in terms of seismic amplitude and in observed velocity pushdown effects (Arts et al. 2004). See Figure 6.4.
Figure 6.4 6.6
An inline through the injection area in Sleipner for the 1994, 1999 and 2001 surveys (Arts et al, 2004).
Fibre optics
Development of fibre optics to use for well monitoring is championed by BP, but most oil companies are testing/developing the technology. According to Wright JP: This technology, already in use to measure temperature distribution in landbased wells, can also be used to monitor continuous pipeline temperature from the well to the platform. This can provide early warning of waxing or hydrate formation, or monitoring of pipeline temperature change during a shut in. Optical fiber offers the next major step change in sensor technology for the subsea and downhole arenas. Optical fiber sensors can be used to measure
- 45 -
effects as diverse as: (1) Position and movement with fiber gyroscopes. (2) Acoustics with fiber hydrophones. (3) Strain in smart structures. (4) Chemicals and reactions. (5) Electrical supply characteristics. Fiber will be used to provide high bandwidth, electrical noise (EMI) immune, environmentally stable communication with multiplexed sophisticated subsea and downhole equipment. Optical fiber will also provide communication to a range of discrete passive optical sensor heads, measuring temperature, pressure, flow, and vibration. The fiber itself, can be used as a distributed sensor, using either the Brillouin or Raman scattering effects, inherent in all fiber, to measure temperature and strain over fiber lengths of up to 30 km. This length will extend, as more sensitive detection systems become available. Fibre optics may be used in the future to detect internal or external leakages and be able to accurately localise the leakage in the well. It can then be used as a permanent monitoring tool.
- 46 -
7.
Remediation of leakage
Materials that can be used to remediate SCP include micro fine cements and low solid density sealants (polymers, gels, resins). Gels can be used to remediate cement bond failure, tubing and casing leaks. Resins can be used to seal casing leaks and SCP as well as for shutting off gas for abandonment. Expandable tubulars can also be used (run in a smaller ID pipe and expand against existing well). Use of different techniques is situation-dependent and mostly for short term application only. 7.1 Expandable tubulars
Casing leaks or corroded sections can be isolated without running a liner hanger using expandable tubulars. A metal-to-metal seal is formed, and the wellbore ID is not reduced significantly as with conventional liners. This technology has been successfully tested in Wyoming and Texas to remedy leaks due to corrosion (Anders and Winters, 2005). Expandable systems can be used externally or internally. In cases where it is more economical to replace the casing above or below the damaged section than run several casing patches, expandable external casing patch (tie-back) connections could effectively provide a hydraulic and gas-tight connection between the new casing joint and the old casing stub. The connection principle is based on the elastic/plastic expansion and subsequent relaxation of metals. An example is shown in Figure 7.1 where a 9 5/8 casing is cut below the corrosion and leak site and the upper casing removed. The new completion assembly is run consisting of 9 5/8 by 13 3/8 packer assembly, a short section of 9 5/8 casing and the patch (Readgroup, 2007).
- 47 -
Figure 7.1
External expandable casing patch (Readgroup, 2007).
Expandable tubulars could also be used internally. The expandable metal sleeve maybe attached to a CT/wireline/tubing-conveyed expansion tool. The patch is plastically expanded using hydraulic pressure. The patch will conform to the inside surface of the casing/liner/tubing wall resulting in a metal-to-metal seal. This can be successfully used to repair leaking casing or reinforce corroded liner. This technology has been successfully used to isolate a casing leak in a 7 3/4 oil well casing which failed the pressure test in the Gulf of Mexico (Chustz et al., 2005).
- 48 -
Figure 7.2 7.2
Internal casing patch (Readgroup, 2007).
Squeeze cementing, polymer gels etc.
Squeeze cementing can also be used to repair casing leaks (e.g. joint leaks, split casing, parted casing, corroded casing). In general, squeeze cementing operation forces the cement slurry into casing perforations/leaks under low pressure. Hesitation method of applying pressure (intermittent application of pressure separated by a period of pressure leak-off) is applicable to low pressure cementing. In some circumstances, polymer gels can also be used as an alternative to cement. The type of polymer depends on the location and severity of the leak and whether or not the polymer will be required to hold a pressure or simply shut-off water production. Acrylic monomer grouts are suitable for tight casing leaks and pressure leak-off situations. High concentration low molecular weight polymers are suitable for a variety of leaks such as tight pressure leak-off situations to moderate leaks. For channeling behind pipes and for lost circulation applications, high molecular weight polymers are effective. Cement/polymer combination squeeze on the other hand is suitable for severe casing leaks. In here, the polymer acts as a filler/buffer of larger voids, coats formation surfaces and prevents water loss and cement contamination by formation fluids (Polymergel, 2007).
- 49 -
8.
Safety aspect of CO2 wells
CO2 wells are different from normal gas wells due to the nature of CO2. CO2 leads to a very corrosive environment which easily can lead to loss of integrity. Not only internal well integrity can be lost, but also external which is much harder to stop. In the US a lot of CO2 wells have been running for decades. A new problem is CO2 blowouts in these old wells as they loose integrity. An excellent overview of the specific problems related to CO2 blowouts was written by Skinner, L (2003): Response measures to safely handle CO2 blowouts require an awareness that these blowouts are not the same as gas well or oil well blowouts. With proper training and planning, and a firm knowledge about the peculiarities of supercritical CO2, the industry can respond to these events and, hopefully, prevent the recent increase in CO2 blowout frequency from becoming an epidemic. When pressure containment is lost, two processes occur simultaneously. 1. The CO2 (and a fraction of miscible products) converts from a supercritical fluid to a vapour with significant expansion. This vapour continues to expand with decreasing confining pressure as it moves up the wellbore. Flow velocities increase accordingly. Any mud or other fluid in the well is expelled quickly leaving little hydrostatic pressure to resist influx from the reservoir. The result is that more supercritical CO2 flows into the wellbore expanding as it does. This flow behavior is almost explosive in its violence. One experienced well control specialist compared the flow from a CO2 blowout to a BLEVE (boiling liquid/expanding vapour explosion). The violence of the surface flow is usually not expected by field workers. Often, only a small volume of supercritical liquid CO2 in the wellbore is enough to trigger the process causing the well to blowout in a matter of seconds. Reaction time is minimal and some equipment, particularly manual BOPs and stab-in safety valves, cannot be installed and closed fast enough to avoid complete expulsion of all liquid from the well and total loss of pressure control. 2. Rapid cooling of the wellbore and fluid stream occurs due to expansion. Once the CO2 stream falls below the triple point temperature and pressure of -63F and 76 psi, respectively, solid dry ice particles can form quickly. Several special problems result from the unique CO2 phase behavior: 1. High flow rates complicate surface intervention work and expose workers to gas moving at high velocities, which can injure exposed skin due to high rate blow-by (i.e., eddy currents and friction).
- 50 -
2. CO2 and produced fluids form hydrates that can collect in blowout preventers, the wellhead and other surface equipment and around the wellhead complicating well control intervention methods. 3. The cold CO2 condenses water in the atmosphere resulting in reduced visibility in the white cloud around the wellbore. The plume is also a cold hazard for workers near the well. 4. Free oil and condensed miscible fluids swept out of the near-wellbore area can collect on the surface creating a ground-fire hazard. 5. Dry ice formation often results in pea- to marble-size projectiles that are expelled from the well at very high velocities, sufficient to injure workers on location. Once it collects on the ground, and before it sublimes to gaseous CO2, dry ice can also be a significant cold hazard. In one CO2 blowout, a worker got too near the plume and reported bruising on the insides of his calves due to his coverall legs whipping in the induced flow stream near the plume. This high rate gas flow can rapidly cut grooves in tubular goods, damage rubber sealing elements and strip paint off equipment. Both SINTEF and Petroleum Safety Authorities Norway, has done well integrity studies on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). Injectors were found to be much more prone to well integrity failures, see Figure 8.1. Injectors are 2 to 3 times more likely to leak than producer wells. The two studies were conducted on different fields with only limited overlap. Two important reasons for the high number of leakages can be: (1) Large cycling loads on the injector wells due to injection of cold fluids. This can cause leakages if the well is not designed to manage these loads. (2) Injectors have low status compared to producers.
Figure 8.1
Percent leakage in Producers and Injectors on the NCS
- 51 -
It is important that CO2 injectors are considered as high status wells as well integrity breaches can have serious consequences. Due to the corrosive nature of CO2 is also important that when abandoning the well CO2 is not in contact with non-acid-resistant cement or steel. For a 1000 year perspective it is important that the materials used are inert to the CO2. The proposed well abandonment in this report is not fully covered by the NORSOK D-010 standard. Whether the safety standard need to be upgraded for CO2 wells can be debated, but the well integrity needs to improve from the current well integrity of ordinary injectors. Generally it should be noted that HPHT fields are less suitable for CO2 injection as the high temperature and pressure worsens the degradation of cement and steel and may lead to a rapid well integrity problem. Besides thermal loads in HPHT wells are much larger and it may lead to radial fracturing of the cement or internal leakage in the well due to tubing expansion beyond what the well components can handle.
- 52 -
9.
9.1
Further work
CO2 blowout
CO2 blowout is different from normal gas blowout. Blowouts in the US have shown that CO2 blowout are more violent and introduces new problems in killing the well. The safety procedures for a possible CO2 blowout should be evaluated. 9.2 Component/Material testing for CO2 environment
CO2 gives a harsh environment down hole. Currently there is no standardised way of testing well components or materials like cement, polymers and similar materials. There has been some laboratory testing of cement. Some criticism has been raised due to that there seem to be a difference in degradation rate between laboratory results and cores taken from real CO2 wells. Test procedures should be developed and verified to assess the CO2 impact on materials/components in a short and long term aspect. 9.3 CO2 for EOR
Using CO2 as an EOR measurement can be desirable in that one not only get rid of the CO2 but that it can give increased recovery. The CO2 injector needs to be designed to handle large amount of CO2 over long time. Also the producers must be able to handle CO2 as it will reach the producers long before the field is depleted. The safety level of producers and level of required monitoring should be assessed. Especially, subsea wells which traditionally have a very low data coverage compared to platform operated wells. Subsea leakage monitoring is also an important aspect. 9.4 Field communication
How injected CO2, for storage or EOR, spreads in a field can be modelled by the field model. However, it is also important to model the communication between fields in a province or basin. Many fields can share the same aquifer and thus CO2 can end up in a neighbouring field where the production wells are not designed for high CO2 content leading to well integrity failures. 9.5 CO2 reproduction from storage
One scenario that can be of interest is to reproduce CO2 from a CO2 storage in order to use this CO2 for EOR in another field. Does drilling and completing a well in a CO2 storage necessitate new procedures compared to traditional well constructions? 9.6 Converting wells for CO2 and abandoned wells
In order to store CO2 or use it for EOR, it is necessary to consider the status of the wells already in the area either abandoned or not. What will it take to convert a well to handle CO2. Do abandoned wells need to be re-abandoned so that they won't start leaking CO2 in the future?
- 53 -
9.7
Safety aspect for CO2 well testing/interventions
Experience, mainly from the US, has shown that well interventions in old CO2 wells lead to well integrity failures or blowouts. Testing and intervention procedures should be evaluated to reduce the risk of well integrity failure.
- 54 -
10.
References
Anders S and Winters WJ (2005) Versatile expandables technology for casing repair. SPE/IADC paper 92330. Proceedings SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 23-25 February 2005. Anders, J (2006) Studies on wellbore integrity. Proceedings of the 2nd Wellbore Integrity Network Meeting, Princeton, New Jersey, 28-29 March, 2006. Arts R, Eiken O, Chadwick A, Zweigel P, van der Meer L and Zinszner B (2004). Monitoring of CO2 injected at Sleipner using time-lapse seismic data. Energy, 29 (2004) 1383-1392. Barlet-Gouedard V, Rimmele B, Goffe B and Porcherie O (2006) Mitigation strategies for the risk of CO2 migration through wellbores. SPE paper 98924. Proceedings of the 2006 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami Florida, 21-23 February 2006. Beddoe RE, Dorner HW, (2005) Modelling acid attack on concrete: Pert I. The essential mechanisms, Cement and Concrete Research 35, 2333-2339 Benge, G (2005) Meeting the challenges in design and execution of two high rate acid gas injection wells. Proceedings of the 1st Wellbore Integrity Workshop. Houston, Texas. Benson S (2005) Lessons learned from industrial and natural analogs for health, safety and environmental risk assessment for geologic storage of carbon dioxide. Carbon Dioxide Capture for Storage - Results from the CO2 Capture Project. Elsevier, 1133 pp. Bickley MC and Curry WE (1992) Designing wells for subsidence in the Greater Ekofisk Area. SPE paper 24966. Proceedings SPe Europe Petrol Conf., Cannes, France, 16-18 November 1992. Boyd D, Al-Kubti S, Khedr OH, Khan N, Al-Nayadi K, Degouy D, Elkadi A, Al Kindi Z (2006) Reliability of cement-bond-log interpretations compared to physical communication tests between formations. SPE paper 101420. 2006 SPE Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
- 55 -
Brothers, L (2005) Corrosion resistant cements for carbonic acid environments. Proceedings of the 1st Wellbore Integrity Workshop. Houston, Texas. Carey JW (2005) Character of the wellbore seal at 49-6 in the SACROC reservoir, West Texas. Proceedings of the 1st Wellbore Integrity Workshop. Houston, Texas. Carey JW, Wigand M, Chipera SJ, WoldeGabriel G, Pawar R, Lichtner PC, Wehner SC, Raines MA, and Guthrie Jr GD, (2007) Analysis and performance of oil well cement with 30 years of CO2 exposure from the SACROC Unit, West Texas, USA, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control I 75-85 Carlsen IM and Abdollahi J (2007) Permanent abandonment of CO2 storage wells. SINTEF Report 54523200. Celia MA, Bachu S, Nordbotten JM, Gasda SE and Dahle HK (2004) Quantitative estimation of CO2 leakage from geological storage: analytical models, numerical models and data needs. Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. Volume 1: Peer reviewed papers and plenary presentations. IEA Greenhouse Gas Programme, Cheltenham, UK. Chustz M, Mason D, Schober J, de Lucia F, Butterfiel C and Didyk Vn (2005) Expandable liner installation avoids sidetracking following production casing failure in the Gulf of Mexico. SPE paper 91923. Proceedings of the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 23-25 February 2005. Crow, W (2006) Studies on wellbore integrity. Proceedings of the 2nd Wellbore Integrity Network Meeting, Princeton, New Jersey, 28-29 March, 2006. Dale BA, Narahara GM and Stevens RM (1996) A case history of reservoir subsidence and wellbore damage management in the South Belridge Diatomite Field. SPE paper 35658. Proceedings 66th Annual SPE West Reg Mtg., Anchorage, Alaska, 22-24 May, 1996. de Silva FV, Debande GF, Pereira CA, Plischke B (1990) Casing collapse analysis associated with reservoir compaction and overburden subsidence. SPE paper 20953. Proceedings Europec 90, The Netherlands.
- 56 -
Eriksen EPV, Schwall G and Mahmoud S (1998) Solving casing subsidence problems with downhole activate casing slip joints. SPE/IADC paper 47816. Proceedings IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference, Jakarta, Indonesia, 7-9 Septemper, 1998. Fredrich JT, Arguello JG, Deitrick GL, de Rouffignac EP (2000) Geomechanical modeling of reservoir compaction, surface subsidence and casing damage at the Belridge field, paper SPE 65354, SPEREE.
Havlik W, Thayer K, Oberndorfer M, (2007) Production of Wet Natural Gas Containing Corrosive Components: Four Case Histories, SPE Production & Operations, August, 319-325 IPCC (2005) IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Cambridge University Press, 231 pp. Jarosinski, M (2005) Ongoing tectonic reactivation of the Outer Carpathians and its impact on the foreland: Results of borehole breakout measurements in Poland. Tectonophysics, 410 (2005) 189-216. Johnson DE and Pile KE (2002) Well Logging in Nontechnical Language. PennWell Books, 227 pp. Julian JY, King GE, Cismoki DA, Younger RO, Brown DL, Brown GA, Richards KM, Meyer CA, Sierra JR, Leckband WT, Sack JK, Julian FC (2007) Downhole leak determination using fiber-optic distributed-temperature surveys at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. SPE paper 107070. 2007 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, USA. Krilov Z, Loncaric B and Miksa Z, (2000) Investigation of a Long-Term Cement Deterioration under a High-Temperature, Sour Gas Downhole Environment, SPE paper 58771, , 547-555 Kutchko BG, Strazisar BR, Dzombak DA Lowry GV, and Thaulow N, (2007) Degradation of wellbore cement by CO2 under geologic sequestration conditions, Environ Sci. Technol. 41(13), 4787-4792 Lan Z, Xia Y and Zhang C (2000) The repairing technology of driving channel on small drifting-diameters casing damage in Daqing Oilfield. SPE paper 65099 presented at SPE Int. Oil and Gas Conf. Exhibition, Beijing, China.
- 57 -
Milestone NB, Sugama T, Kukacka LE, and Carciello N, (1986) Carbonation of Geothermal Grouts - Part 1: CO2 Attack at 150 C, Cement and Concrete Research, 16, 941-950 Milestone NB and Aldridge LP, (1990) Corrosion of Cement Grouts in Aggressive Geothermal Fluids, Geothermal Resources Council Transactions, 14, Part 1, 423-429 Mohiuddin MA, Khan K, Abdulraheem A, Al-Majed A, Awal MR (2006) Analysis of wellbore instability in vertical, directional, and horizontal wells using field data. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 55, 83-92. Moreira RM, Franco CV, Joia CJBM, Giordana S and Mattos OR, (2004) The effect of temperature and hydrodynamics on the CO2 corrosion of 13Cr and 13Cr5Ni2Mo stainless steels in the presence of free acetic acid, Corrosion Science 46, 2987-3003 Mulders, F (2006) Studies on wellbore integrity. Proceedings of the 2nd Wellbore Integrity Network Meeting, Princeton, New Jersey, 28-29 March, 2006. Nagel NB (2001) Compaction and subsidence issues within the petroleum industry: from Wilmington to Ekofisk and beyond. Phys. Chem. Earth (A), 26 (1-2) 3-14. Nimz G and Hudson GB (2007) Carbon Dioxide Capture for Storage in Deep Geologic Formations, Elsevier, 2005. Noik C, Rivereau A, and Bouygues CV, (1998) Novel Cement Materials for High-Pressure / High-Temperature Wells, SPE paper 50589, 189-194 NORSOK (2004) Well integrity in drilling and well operations, NORSOK Standard D-010 Rev. 3, August 2004. Onan DD, (1984) Effect of Supercritical carbon dioxide on well cement, SPE paper 12593, 161-172 Peng S, Fu J, Zhang J (2007) Borehole casing failure analysis in unconsolidated sandstone: A case study. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering.
- 58 -
Polymer Services, LLC. Internet link: http://www.polymergel.com Power, M (2006) Studies on wellbore integrity. Proceedings of the 2nd Wellbore Integrity Network Meeting, Princeton, New Jersey, 28-29 March, 2006. READ ASA. Internet link: http://www.readgroup.com RITE (2007). Internet link: http://www.rite.or.jp Saripalli P, Amonette J, Rutz F and Gupta N (2006) Design of sensor networks for long term monitoring of geological sequestration. Energy Conversion and Management, 47, 1968-1974. Schechter RS (1992) Oil Well Stimulation. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 602 Schwall GH, Slack MW, Kaiser TMV (1996) Reservoir compaction well design for the Ekofisk field. SPE paper 36621, Proceedings SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 6-9 October 1996. Denver, Colorado. Skinner, L. (2003) CO2 Blowouts: An Emerging Problem, World Oil, Vol. 224, No. 1. Sugama T, (2006) Advanced Cements for Geothermal Wells, BNL-77901-2007IR, http://www.pubs.bnl.gov/documents/35393.pdf, July 2006 Sweatman, R (2006) Studies on wellbore integrity. Proceedings of the 2nd Wellbore Integrity Network Meeting, Princeton, New Jersey, 28-29 March, 2006. TEC Well Service, Inc. Internet link: http://www.tecwell.com Wagh AS, Natarajan R, McDaniel RL and Patil S, (2005a) New phosphate-based cement useful for drilling, completions in arctic, Oil & Gas Journal, May 9th 2005 Wagh AS, Natarajan R, McDaniel RL and Patil S, (2005b) Ceramicrete blends produce strong, low-permeability cements for arctic use, Oil & Gas Journal, May 16th 2005
- 59 -
Wagg B, Xie J, Solanki SC and Arndt S (1999) Evaluating casing deformation mechanisms in primary heavy-oil production. SPE paper 54116 presented at the SPE Int. Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symp., Bakersfield, Calif. USA. Wells AW, Diehl JR, Bromhal G, Strazisar BR, Wilson TH and White CM. (2007) The use of tracers to assess leakage from the sequestration of CO2 in a depleted oil reservoir, New Mexico, USA. Applied Geochemistry, 22, 996-1016. Wright JP, The Future of Fiber Optics in the Offshore Oil Industry (A review of the subsea applications of optical fiber), Ocean Design, Inc, http://www.odi.com/ODI_Documents/Articles_and_Papers/word_doc/Fut ure%20of%20Fiber%20Optics.doc Zhang H, Zhao YL and Jiang ZD, (2005) Effects of temperature on the corrosion behavior of 13Cr martensitic stainless steel during exposure to CO2 and Cl- environment, Materials Letters 59, 3370-3374

Randhol - Ensuring Well Integrity in Connection With CO2 Injection

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Randhol - Ensuring Well Integrity in Connection With CO2 Injection

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

s

SINTEF Petroleumsforskning AS SINTEF Petroleum Research

Petroleumstilsynet (Petroleum Safety Authority Norway) v/ Monica Ovesen

Inge Manfred Carlsen

CO2 injeksjonsbrnner CO2 nedbrytningsmekanismer Brnnintegritet Brnn-monitorering Brnnutbedring

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\1\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\2\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\3\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\4\27.12.07

Degradation processes due to CO2

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\6\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\7\27.12.07

Rate of carbonation for Portland cement, Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006)

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\8\27.12.07

The carbonation for Portland cement, Barlet-Goudard et al. (2006)

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\9\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\10\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\11\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\12\27.12.07

Corrosion rate (mm/y)

0 125 135 145 155 165 175

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\13\27.12.07

Temperature C 125 150 175

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\14\27.12.07

CO2 injection wells

Typical built-for-purpose CO2 injection well (after RITE, 2007).

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\15\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\16\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\17\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\18\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\19\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\20\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\21\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\23\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\24\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\25\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\26\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\27\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\28\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\29\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\30\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\31\27.12.07

Typical electromagnetic thickness measurement tool (Readgroup, 2007).

Downhole camera (Readgroup, 2007)

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\32\27.12.07

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\33\27.12.07

Maintenance of well integrity of injection wells

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\34\27.12.07

Permanent abandonment of CO2 wells

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\35\27.12.07

Impermeable cap rock

CO2 storage well before abandonment

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\36\27.12.07

Potential secondary impermeable geology layer

Non corrosive completion fluid

Main barrier Impermeable cap rock

Flushed zone Sub-barrier

CO2 storage well after abandonment

H:\tilsyn p nettet\!!desember07\sluttrapport_brnnintegritet_co2\web_sluttrapport bronnintegritet_co2.doc\H\37\27.12.07

Extra barrier Bridge plug

Outside the well

Inside the well

Well barriers after abandonment