carbon dioxide flooding in kansas reservoirs g. paul willhite tertiary oil recovery project 14 th...

Carbon Dioxide Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Flooding in Kansas Kansas ReservoirsReservoirs

G. Paul WillhiteG. Paul Willhite

Tertiary Oil Recovery Tertiary Oil Recovery ProjectProject

14th Oil Recovery Conference, March 14-15,2001

Minimum Miscibility Minimum Miscibility PressurePressure

Requirements for Carbon Requirements for Carbon Dioxide Miscible FloodingDioxide Miscible Flooding

Minimum miscibility pressure must Minimum miscibility pressure must be determined for Kansas crude be determined for Kansas crude oilsoils

Must be possible to re-pressure Must be possible to re-pressure reservoir to reach MMP during the reservoir to reach MMP during the displacement processdisplacement process

Carbon dioxide must be available Carbon dioxide must be available at a price that will make the at a price that will make the process economicprocess economic

Tertiary Oil Recovery Project

Minimum Miscibility Minimum Miscibility Pressure in Hall-Gurney Pressure in Hall-Gurney LKCLKC

Sample Information Average LabSlimtube Slimtube Measured

Field Field Sample Pressure Percent APIName Operator Location (psig) Recovery Gravity

Hall-Gurney Shields Oil Producers Letsch #10 1006 47.4 37.51208 85.31210 86.31297 90.2

Hall-Gurney Hallwood Petroleum Olson C#5 1225 89.1 38.4


Outline of PresentationOutline of Presentation

Research on Carbon Dioxide Research on Carbon Dioxide Miscible Flooding Technology Miscible Flooding Technology Applied to Kansas ReservoirsApplied to Kansas Reservoirs

Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Central Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Central Kansas ReservoirsKansas Reservoirs

Field Demonstration Project Hall-Field Demonstration Project Hall-Gurney FieldGurney Field

The Carbon Dioxide SupplyThe Carbon Dioxide Supply


Research on Carbon Research on Carbon Dioxide Miscible Flooding Dioxide Miscible Flooding TechnologyTechnology

Potential Application of CO2 Process Potential Application of CO2 Process in Kansas(1979-1981)in Kansas(1979-1981)

Evaluation of LKC CO2 Evaluation of LKC CO2 Potential(1986-1989)Potential(1986-1989)

The Southwest Kansas CO2 The Southwest Kansas CO2 Initiative (1997-1998)Initiative (1997-1998)

The Central Kansas Initiative(1998- The Central Kansas Initiative(1998- ))




Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Central Kansas ReservoirsCentral Kansas Reservoirs




Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Central Kansas ReservoirsCentral Kansas Reservoirs

Central Kansas Initiative Central Kansas Initiative (1998-(1998- KTEC (1999-2000)KTEC (1999-2000)DOE Class Revisited Project DOE Class Revisited Project

(2000-2005)(2000-2005)


Carbon Dioxide Carbon Dioxide Flooding in Flooding in Central Kansas Central Kansas ReservoirsReservoirs

A Cooperative Program Involving A Cooperative Program Involving Shell COShell CO22 Ltd(Kinder Morgan), Ltd(Kinder Morgan),

Energy Research Center at Energy Research Center at University of Kansas( TORP, KGS) University of Kansas( TORP, KGS)

Overall ObjectiveOverall Objective

Verify technical and economic viability Verify technical and economic viability of the application of CO2 miscible of the application of CO2 miscible flooding to Central Kansas oil fieldsflooding to Central Kansas oil fields

Critical element: Demonstrate sufficient Critical element: Demonstrate sufficient field performance(oil in the tank) to field performance(oil in the tank) to justify the development of a carbon justify the development of a carbon dioxide pipeline into Central Kansasdioxide pipeline into Central Kansas


Components of Carbon Components of Carbon Dioxide ProgramDioxide Program

Phase I:Conduct a feasibility study Phase I:Conduct a feasibility study on Arbuckle and Lansing Kansas on Arbuckle and Lansing Kansas City Reservoirs(City Reservoirs(KTEC ContractKTEC Contract))

Phase II: Select a site and design Phase II: Select a site and design one or more field pilot COone or more field pilot CO22 miscible miscible floods(floods(DOE Class Program DOE Class Program RevisitedRevisited))


Components of Carbon Components of Carbon Dioxide Dioxide Program(Continued)Program(Continued)

Phase III: Construct and operate the COPhase III: Construct and operate the CO22 pilot(pilot(DOE Class Program RevisitedDOE Class Program Revisited))

Phase IV: Evaluate technical and economic Phase IV: Evaluate technical and economic performance of pilot(performance of pilot(DOE Class Program DOE Class Program RevisitedRevisited))

Phase V: Build a COPhase V: Build a CO22 pipeline into Central pipeline into Central Kansas(Shell COKansas(Shell CO22, Ltd/Kinder Morgan), Ltd/Kinder Morgan)


KTEC Contract ResultsKTEC Contract Results

Collected representative Arbuckle Collected representative Arbuckle oil samples and determined the oil samples and determined the MMP and basic properties of these MMP and basic properties of these oilsoils

Compiled a data base of LKC Compiled a data base of LKC reservoirs and identified potential reservoirs and identified potential sites where pilot-scale sites where pilot-scale demonstrations would be effectivedemonstrations would be effective


KTEC Contract-KTEC Contract-Results(Continued)Results(Continued)

Measured rock properties to Measured rock properties to provide input to reservoir provide input to reservoir characterization and simulationcharacterization and simulation

Performed reservoir Performed reservoir characterization of potential LKC characterization of potential LKC sites within Hall Gurney and to sites within Hall Gurney and to identify optimal sites for CO2 identify optimal sites for CO2 screening simulationsscreening simulations


KTEC Contract-KTEC Contract-Results(Continued)Results(Continued)

Simulated CO2 miscible flood response at Simulated CO2 miscible flood response at selected sites with screening modelsselected sites with screening models

Developed an economic model of the Developed an economic model of the demonstration sites and the regional demonstration sites and the regional resourceresource

Prepared a proposal for the DOE Class Prepared a proposal for the DOE Class Revisited Program to support a field Revisited Program to support a field demonstration program in the Hall-Gurney demonstration program in the Hall-Gurney Field(May 1999)Field(May 1999)

Project Completion Report(September Project Completion Report(September 2000)2000)


Hall-Gurney

LKC Oil Resource-10 County Area

Lease Scale Economic Lease Scale Economic Variables-CO2 FloodingVariables-CO2 Flooding

CO2 cost $1/mcfOil price $20/bblCapital cost $4,000,000/secCO2 utilization 5/10 mcf/bbl (net/gross)Recovery 30% Primary + SecondaryOperations $400-600M/yr/secNRI 84%Residual Oil Volume ????

CO2 cost $1/mcfOil price $20/bblCapital cost $4,000,000/secCO2 utilization 5/10 mcf/bbl (net/gross)Recovery 30% Primary + SecondaryOperations $400-600M/yr/secNRI 84%Residual Oil Volume ????

Kansas Geological SurveyKansas Geological Survey

COCO2 2 Costs vs. Oil Price for 20 % Costs vs. Oil Price for 20 % IRRIRR

$1.00

$2.50

$2.00

$1.50

$0.50

$15 $20 $25 $30

$1.66 / M CF C O 2

Oil Price / BBL

CO

Co

st /

MC

F2

$17

Assumes all other param eters in "Base Case"

remain constant

Base Case:

$20/bbl Oil

$1.00/mcf CO2

12% OOIP


Sensitivity to Oil PriceSensitivity to Oil Price

Approximate LowerEconomic Limit

Probable Upper LimitL-KC Reservoirs

Central Kansas Uplift

2.1

MB

O

3.5

Ne

t M

BO

/ Acr

e

$15 Oil

$20 Oil

$25 Oil

IRR

(B

FIT

)Base Case:

$20/bbl Oil

$1.00/mcf CO2

12% OOIP


Required Recovery for 20% Required Recovery for 20% IRRIRR

$20 OilRecovery Required: 2,500 gross BO/acreRecovery Factor Resource Threshold 30% P+S 8,500 BO/acre25% P+S 10,200 BO/acre

$25 OilRecovery Required: 1,650 gross BO/acreRecovery Factor Resource Threshold30% P+S 5,500 BO/acre25% P+S 6,600 BO/acre

$20 OilRecovery Required: 2,500 gross BO/acreRecovery Factor Resource Threshold 30% P+S 8,500 BO/acre25% P+S 10,200 BO/acre

$25 OilRecovery Required: 1,650 gross BO/acreRecovery Factor Resource Threshold30% P+S 5,500 BO/acre25% P+S 6,600 BO/acre





Field Demonstration Project Field Demonstration Project Hall-Gurney FieldHall-Gurney Field



Field Demonstration of COField Demonstration of CO22 Miscible Miscible Flooding in the L-KC, Flooding in the L-KC, Central KansasCentral Kansas

Field Demonstration of COField Demonstration of CO22 Miscible Miscible Flooding in the L-KC, Flooding in the L-KC, Central KansasCentral Kansas

Class II Revisited DE-AC26-00BC15124


MV Energy LLC

March 7,2000

L-KC Recoveries L-KC Recoveries in Hall-Gurney and Trappin Hall-Gurney and TrappL-KC Recoveries L-KC Recoveries in Hall-Gurney and Trappin Hall-Gurney and Trapp

> 8 MBO/acre> 8 MBO/acre

6-8 MBO/acre6-8 MBO/acre



Cumulative ProductionPrimary + SecondaryLansing-Kansas City

(Per Section Basis)

Cumulative ProductionPrimary + SecondaryLansing-Kansas City

(Per Section Basis)

Trapp

Hall-Gurney

P ilo t S ite


Project EconomicsProject EconomicsProject EconomicsProject Economics Total Project – $5.4 millionTotal Project – $5.4 million

$2.0M – CO$2.0M – CO22 Purchase, transport, recycling Purchase, transport, recycling $1.5M – Research, Technology Transfer $1.5M – Research, Technology Transfer $1.1M – Capital Costs (wells, etc.)$1.1M – Capital Costs (wells, etc.) $0.8M – Operations (6 years)$0.8M – Operations (6 years)

FundingFunding $2.4M Kinder-Morgan CO$2.4M Kinder-Morgan CO22 Co. LP and Co. LP and

Murfin Drilling CompanyMurfin Drilling Company $1.9M U.S. Department of Energy$1.9M U.S. Department of Energy $1.0M KGS and TORP$1.0M KGS and TORP $0.1M Kansas Department of Commerce$0.1M Kansas Department of Commerce

Total Project – $5.4 millionTotal Project – $5.4 million $2.0M – CO$2.0M – CO22 Purchase, transport, recycling Purchase, transport, recycling $1.5M – Research, Technology Transfer $1.5M – Research, Technology Transfer $1.1M – Capital Costs (wells, etc.)$1.1M – Capital Costs (wells, etc.) $0.8M – Operations (6 years)$0.8M – Operations (6 years)

FundingFunding $2.4M Kinder-Morgan CO$2.4M Kinder-Morgan CO22 Co. LP and Co. LP and

Murfin Drilling CompanyMurfin Drilling Company $1.9M U.S. Department of Energy$1.9M U.S. Department of Energy $1.0M KGS and TORP$1.0M KGS and TORP $0.1M Kansas Department of Commerce$0.1M Kansas Department of Commerce

DOE Class Program DOE Class Program RevisitedRevisited

Central Kansas COCentral Kansas CO22 Demonstration Project Demonstration Project

Phase 1-Reservoir Characterization( 1 Phase 1-Reservoir Characterization( 1 Year)Year)

Phase 2-Field Demonstration(4 years)Phase 2-Field Demonstration(4 years)

Phase 3-Monitoring(1 year)Phase 3-Monitoring(1 year)

DemonstratiDemonstration Design on Design SummarySummary 55 acre, nine-spot55 acre, nine-spot 2 CO2 CO22 injectors injectors 7 Producers7 Producers 5 Containment Water 5 Containment Water

InjectorsInjectors 0.843 BCF CO0.843 BCF CO22

injected-WAGinjected-WAG 4.6 year operating life 4.6 year operating life >80,000 BO estimated >80,000 BO estimated

recovery during DOErecovery during DOE >20,000 BO in 3 years >20,000 BO in 3 years

after DOE Projectafter DOE Project

55 acre, nine-spot55 acre, nine-spot 2 CO2 CO22 injectors injectors 7 Producers7 Producers 5 Containment Water 5 Containment Water

InjectorsInjectors 0.843 BCF CO0.843 BCF CO22

injected-WAGinjected-WAG 4.6 year operating life 4.6 year operating life >80,000 BO estimated >80,000 BO estimated

recovery during DOErecovery during DOE >20,000 BO in 3 years >20,000 BO in 3 years

after DOE Projectafter DOE Project

Carbon Dioxide SupplyCarbon Dioxide Supply

Is the resource base in LKC Is the resource base in LKC reservoirs large enough to support reservoirs large enough to support a pipeline that could deliver CO2 at a pipeline that could deliver CO2 at $1.00/mcf?$1.00/mcf?

Can the “Golden Trend” in the Hall-Can the “Golden Trend” in the Hall-Gurney Field anchor a pipeline?Gurney Field anchor a pipeline?


Pipeline Cost Estimates*Pipeline Cost Estimates*

Distance is 220 miles to Hall-GurneyDistance is 220 miles to Hall-Gurney Other LKC areas would require 110 Other LKC areas would require 110

miles of lateral linesmiles of lateral lines Pipeline cost is $22,000/inch-milePipeline cost is $22,000/inch-mile Ten year amortization of capital cost Ten year amortization of capital cost

at 10% based on 80% of line at 10% based on 80% of line capacitycapacity

CO2 is available at Postle Field at CO2 is available at Postle Field at pipeline pressurepipeline pressure

*William Flanders, Transpetco Engineering

Pipeline ConsiderationsPipeline Considerations

CO2 oil recovered is 25% of CO2 oil recovered is 25% of Primary and SecondaryPrimary and Secondary

Net CO2 required is ~4 mcf/BONet CO2 required is ~4 mcf/BO Risk assessment=fraction of Risk assessment=fraction of

operators who would install floodsoperators who would install floods Hall Gurney “Golden Trend”Hall Gurney “Golden Trend”70%70% Nearby LKC areas(Lateral)Nearby LKC areas(Lateral)50%50%

Central Kansas LKC Pipeline

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Guarantee/Risked CO2 Purchase Bcf

CO2 C

ost $

/mcf

220 Miles-->Hall-Gurney Field110 Miles to Lateral Fields

4" 6" 10"8"

Required VolumeHGHG

LKC LKC

William Flanders

LKC Pipeline ResultsLKC Pipeline Results

Risk weighted CO2 for LKC is ~60-65 Risk weighted CO2 for LKC is ~60-65 BCF +-10%BCF +-10%

CO2 oil potential from LKC ~15-CO2 oil potential from LKC ~15-16MMBO16MMBO

Not enough LKC resource base to Not enough LKC resource base to anchor pipelineanchor pipeline

Need ~184 BCF risk weighted CO2 to Need ~184 BCF risk weighted CO2 to deliver at $1.00/mcf at 10% IRR/10 deliver at $1.00/mcf at 10% IRR/10 year amortizationyear amortization

Carbon Dioxide PipelineCarbon Dioxide Pipeline

Need an additional 120 BCF risk Need an additional 120 BCF risk weighted CO2 potential to build 8” weighted CO2 potential to build 8” pipeline to Central Kansaspipeline to Central Kansas

Are Arbuckle reservoirs potential Are Arbuckle reservoirs potential carbon dioxide miscible flood carbon dioxide miscible flood candidates?candidates? Minimum miscibility pressure ~1600 psiMinimum miscibility pressure ~1600 psi Initial reservoir pressure~1050-1150 psiInitial reservoir pressure~1050-1150 psi Well connected to an aquiferWell connected to an aquifer

Determining Distribution of Determining Distribution of “Low” Pressure Arbuckle“Low” Pressure Arbuckle

Concept: Low SIP on DST’s in mature production indicatesless effective water drive than in areas with higher SIP

Methodology: Map SIP for infill and replacement wells inmature Arbuckle fields. DST’s in top 30 feet and> 80 feet of fluid recovery.

Preliminary results: Significant contiguous areas have lowerpressures than would be anticipated for strong water drives.

Original BHP 1150#“Normal” pressured areas 1050#Moderate pressured areas 550-750#“Low” pressured areas 300-550#

Concept: Low SIP on DST’s in mature production indicatesless effective water drive than in areas with higher SIP

Methodology: Map SIP for infill and replacement wells inmature Arbuckle fields. DST’s in top 30 feet and> 80 feet of fluid recovery.

Preliminary results: Significant contiguous areas have lowerpressures than would be anticipated for strong water drives.

Original BHP 1150#“Normal” pressured areas 1050#Moderate pressured areas 550-750#“Low” pressured areas 300-550#


““Low” Pressure Arbuckle, Low” Pressure Arbuckle, Bemis Field, Ellis Co. KansasBemis Field, Ellis Co. Kansas

DST SIP overlain by Arbuckle StructureDST SIP overlain by Arbuckle Structure

Arbuckle ProductionTotal Cum.: 221 MMBO

More than 8 MBO/acreAll 200 MMBO550-750 psi* 70 MMBO<550 psi* 20 MMBO*recent DST’s in top of Arbuckle

Note: Data is very preliminary

Arbuckle ProductionTotal Cum.: 221 MMBO

More than 8 MBO/acreAll 200 MMBO550-750 psi* 70 MMBO<550 psi* 20 MMBO*recent DST’s in top of Arbuckle

Note: Data is very preliminary

LowLow

ModerateModerate

“High”“High”


Carbon Dioxide SupplyCarbon Dioxide Supply

ICM(U.S. Energy Partners, LLC) ICM(U.S. Energy Partners, LLC) announces ethanol plant to be announces ethanol plant to be constructed in Russell(February constructed in Russell(February 5,2001)5,2001)

On stream ~November 1,2001On stream ~November 1,2001 CO2 production 3.4 MMCFD(wet at CO2 production 3.4 MMCFD(wet at

atmospheric pressure) atmospheric pressure) 8.5 miles from CO2 demonstration 8.5 miles from CO2 demonstration

project project Tertiary Oil Recovery Project

Location of Location of Ethanol Plant Ethanol Plant & CO2 EOR & CO2 EOR SiteSite


Carbon Dioxide Supply-ICM PlantCarbon Dioxide Supply-ICM Plant

CO2 supply capable of supporting small scale CO2 supply capable of supporting small scale commercial operation in the Hall Gurney commercial operation in the Hall Gurney Field(~1 BCF/year)Field(~1 BCF/year)

Cost to deliver CO2 at 1500 psi at the field is Cost to deliver CO2 at 1500 psi at the field is on the order of $1.00/mcf for commercial scale on the order of $1.00/mcf for commercial scale operationoperation

Working with ICM to secure CO2 supply for LKC Working with ICM to secure CO2 supply for LKC CO2 demonstration projectCO2 demonstration project


UPDATE: Field Demonstration of COUPDATE: Field Demonstration of CO22 Miscible Flooding in the L-KC, Miscible Flooding in the L-KC, Central KansasCentral Kansas

UPDATE: Field Demonstration of COUPDATE: Field Demonstration of CO22 Miscible Flooding in the L-KC, Miscible Flooding in the L-KC, Central KansasCentral Kansas

Martin K. DuboisKansas Geological Survey

Martin K. DuboisKansas Geological Survey



MV Energy LLC

KGSociety Tech Meeting, March 1, 2001

http://www.kgs.ukans.edu/CO2/reports.html

COCO22 Pilot Project Pilot Project TeamTeamCOCO22 Pilot Project Pilot Project TeamTeam

Kansas Geological SurveyKansas Geological Survey Alan P. ByrnesAlan P. Byrnes Marty DuboisMarty Dubois W. Lynn WatneyW. Lynn Watney Timothy R. CarrTimothy R. Carr Willard J. GuyWillard J. Guy John DovetonJohn Doveton Dana Adkins-HeljesonDana Adkins-Heljeson Kenneth StalderKenneth Stalder

Kinder-Morgan COKinder-Morgan CO22 Co. LP Co. LP Russell MartinRussell Martin Paul NunleyPaul Nunley William William

Flanders(consultant)Flanders(consultant)

U.S. Department of EnergyU.S. Department of Energy Edith C. Allison (Prgrm Edith C. Allison (Prgrm

Mngr)Mngr) Daniel Ferguson (Project Daniel Ferguson (Project

Mngr)Mngr)

Kansas Geological SurveyKansas Geological Survey Alan P. ByrnesAlan P. Byrnes Marty DuboisMarty Dubois W. Lynn WatneyW. Lynn Watney Timothy R. CarrTimothy R. Carr Willard J. GuyWillard J. Guy John DovetonJohn Doveton Dana Adkins-HeljesonDana Adkins-Heljeson Kenneth StalderKenneth Stalder

Kinder-Morgan COKinder-Morgan CO22 Co. LP Co. LP Russell MartinRussell Martin Paul NunleyPaul Nunley William William

Flanders(consultant)Flanders(consultant)

U.S. Department of EnergyU.S. Department of Energy Edith C. Allison (Prgrm Edith C. Allison (Prgrm

Mngr)Mngr) Daniel Ferguson (Project Daniel Ferguson (Project

Mngr)Mngr)

Tertiary Oil Recovery ProjectTertiary Oil Recovery Project G. Paul WillhiteG. Paul Willhite Don W. GreenDon W. Green Shapour VossoughiShapour Vossoughi Jyun-Syung TsauJyun-Syung Tsau Richard PancakeRichard Pancake Rodney ReynoldsRodney Reynolds Rajesh KunjithayaRajesh Kunjithaya Ed ClarkEd Clark

MV Energy LLCMV Energy LLC Dave MurfinDave Murfin Jim DanielsJim Daniels Larry JackLarry Jack Niall AvisonNiall Avison

State of Kansas State of Kansas (Dept. of (Dept. of Commerce)Commerce)

ICM, Inc. Dave Vander GriendICM, Inc. Dave Vander Griend

Tertiary Oil Recovery ProjectTertiary Oil Recovery Project G. Paul WillhiteG. Paul Willhite Don W. GreenDon W. Green Shapour VossoughiShapour Vossoughi Jyun-Syung TsauJyun-Syung Tsau Richard PancakeRichard Pancake Rodney ReynoldsRodney Reynolds Rajesh KunjithayaRajesh Kunjithaya Ed ClarkEd Clark

MV Energy LLCMV Energy LLC Dave MurfinDave Murfin Jim DanielsJim Daniels Larry JackLarry Jack Niall AvisonNiall Avison

State of Kansas State of Kansas (Dept. of (Dept. of Commerce)Commerce)

ICM, Inc. Dave Vander GriendICM, Inc. Dave Vander GriendKansas Geological SurveyKansas Geological Survey Tertiary Oil Recovery Project

The Potential for The Potential for Carbon Dioxide Carbon Dioxide Flooding in KansasFlooding in Kansas

Kansas oil production 96,000 Kansas oil production 96,000 B/DB/D

Oil production from CO2* 12,500 Oil production from CO2* 12,500 B/DB/D

*CO2 Pipeline @ 50 MMCFD*CO2 Pipeline @ 50 MMCFD

CO2 oil production at 4 MCF/BOCO2 oil production at 4 MCF/BO


carbon dioxide flooding in kansas reservoirs g. paul willhite tertiary oil recovery project 14 th...

Documents

carbon dioxide pipeline

kansas reservoirsg

central kansasshell

co2 pipeline

university of kansas

kansas crude oilsmust

hall gurney

shell co2 ltdkinder