SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program

Primary funding is provided by

The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe

The Society is grateful to those companies that allow their professionals to serve as lecturers

Additional support provided by AIME

1

Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl

A New Heavy Oil Recovery Technology to Maximize Performance andto Maximize Performance and

Minimize Environmental Impact

David H.-S. LawSchlumbergerHeavy Oil Technical DirectorNorth America

Society of Petroleum Engineers Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl

2

OutlineOutline• Global perspective of heavy oilp p y• Overview of recovery processes

– Steam-based thermal processesS ea based e a p ocesses• Environmental impacts from current

heavy oil recoveryy y• Technology development to meet

environmental challengesg– Hybrid steam-solvent process: from

research concept to field pilots

3

• Conclusions

Heavy OilHeavy OilHeavy Oil: Crude Oil with API < 22.3°(sp. gr. = 0.92)

API Gravity Viscosity (cp)Heavy Oil 10º – 22.3º 100 – 10,000 Oil Resources

Extra Heavy Oil < 10º 100 – 10,000Bitumen < 10º > 10,000 Conventional

Heavy Oil

15%Conventional

Heavy Oil

15%

Source: 12th World Petroleum Congress (WPC), 1987

Total World Crude Oil Resources:

oil 30% Extra Heavy

Oil 25%

oil 30% Extra Heavy

Oil 25%Total World Crude Oil Resources:

9 – 13 trillion bbls Bitumen & Oil Sands

30%

25%Bitumen & Oil Sands

30%

25%

More than 2/3 of total oil resources

4Source: International Energy Agency (IEA)

More than 2/3 of total oil resources are heavy oil and bitumen

Global Heavy Oil ResourcesGlobal Heavy Oil Resources

5

Heavy oil can be found in all continents both on-shore & off-shore except Antarctica 5

Global Heavy Oil ReservesGlobal Heavy Oil Reserves

Billion bbls in Place(by Country)

6

Heavy oil can be found in all continents both on-shore & off-shore except Antarctica

Source: http://www.HeavyOilinfo.com

(by Country)350+ 10+50+ <10

Global Heavy Oil ProductionGlobal Heavy Oil ProductionCanada

Oil Sands1000

HO ProductionUK

CanadaOil Sands

1000

CanadaOil Sands

1000Oil Sands

1000HO ProductionHO ProductionUKUK1000

InsituBitumen400

USA

KBOPD

Egypt

55

200

API 11-20India

30

API 15-17

1000

InsituBitumen400

1000

InsituBitumen400

1000

InsituBitumen400

USAUSA

KBOPDKBOPD

Egypt

55

Egypt

55

200

API 11-20

200

API 11-20India

30

API 15-17

India30

API 15-17

China180

API 8-18

Mexico

USA

320

API 9-19 Trinidad

55

Iraq65

API 16

API 12-20

China180

China180

API 8-18API 8-18

MexicoMexico

USA

320

API 9-19

USA

320

API 9-19 Trinidad

55

Trinidad

55

Iraq65

API 16

Iraq65

API 16

API 12-20API 12-20

API 12-20

IndonesiaDuriOmanYemen

Venezuela629Colombia

MexicoCantarrel

2080

55

API 15-20API 16

API 12-20API 12-20

IndonesiaDuri

IndonesiaDuriDuriOmanOmanYemenYemen

Venezuela629

Venezuela629ColombiaColombia

MexicoCantarrel

2080

MexicoCantarrel

2080

55

API 15-20

55

API 15-20API 16API 16

HO35

Duri210

API 15-20

Oman35

API 15-20

15API 19-20

629

API 7-20Ecuador25

80

API 12-20HO340

API 11-20

HO35

Duri210

API 15-20

HO35

Duri210HO

35

Duri210

API 15-20

Oman35

API 15-20

Oman35

API 15-20

15API 19-20

15API 19-20

629

API 7-20

629

API 7-20Ecuador25

Ecuador25

80

API 12-20

80

API 12-20HO340

API 11-20

HO340

API 11-20

7

Brazil

250

API 11-20

API 14-20API 11-20

Source : Oil and Gas Journal Dec 2005; Upstream Mar 2006

Brazil

250

API 11-20

Brazil

250

API 11-20

API 14-20API 14-20API 11-20API 11-20

Source : Oil and Gas Journal Dec 2005; Upstream Mar 2006 7

Global in-situ heavy oil production ≈ 5 million bbl/day

Variety of Viscous OilsVariety of Viscous Oils10,000,000

oir T CanadaBitumen

Viscosity Reduction(Add Heat or Solvent)

100,000

1,000,000

at re

serv

o

USVenezuela/ColombiaChinaIndia/Indonesia

Bitumen (Add Heat or Solvent)

100

1,000

10,000

ity (c

p) a India/Indonesia

USCanada

Primary Production;

1

10

100

Visc

osi

ExtraHeavy Oil

Heavy Oil

Water Flooding; EOR

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500.1

1

Source: OGJ EOR Survey (April 2004)API Gravity

There are many ways to recover heavy oil8

Heavy Oil Recovery ProcessesHeavy Oil Recovery ProcessesRecovery Processes Surface Mining

Primary Non-ThermalThermal

Cold ProductionCHOPS

Water FloodingChemical FloodingVAPEX

CombustionFire FloodingTHAI

Steam-BasedCSSFloodingSAGDSAGD

9

CHOPS: Cold Heavy Oil Production with SandsCSS: Cyclic Steam StimulationSAGD: Steam Assisted Gravity DrainageTHAI: Toe-to-Heel Air InjectionVAPEX: Vapour Extraction

Steam-based thermal recovery processes are most extensively used

Cyclic Steam Stimulation (CSS)(CSS)

CSS

• Single well operation• Injection/production• Injection/production

cycle:– Steam injectionj– shut-in (soak)– Oil production

R f (RF)• Recovery factor (RF) ≈15% OOIP (original oil-in-place)

10Source: http://www.HeavyOilinfo.com

SteamfloodingSteamfloodingSteamflooding

• Multi-well operation in regular pattern

g

regular pattern• Inject steam into one or

more wells• Drive oil to separate

producers• Recovery factor (RF) ≈

50% OOIP

11Source: http://www.HeavyOilinfo.com

Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD)(SAGD)

SAGD• Horizontal well pair near

bottom of pay

SAGD

bottom of pay– Upper steam injector – Lower oil producer

S h b i d• Steam chamber rises upward, then, spreads sideway

• Oil drains downward toOil drains downward to producer

• Recovery factor (RF) > 50% OOIP

12

OOIPSource: http://www.HeavyOilinfo.com

Steam-Based Thermal R PRecovery Processes

• Very energy intensive and inefficienty gy

Steam Transmission Well to Flow in Thermal Efficiency for Each Stage:

Generator(75 – 85%)

to Well(75 – 95%)

Reservoir(80 – 95%)

Reservoir(25 – 75%)

• Significant environmental impacts

Source: Butler, “GravDrain’s Blackbook”, (1998)

Final Efficiency: 11% - 58%Significant environmental impacts– Land: Surface footprint– Air: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission

13

g ( )– Water: Water usage and disposal

Surface FootprintSurface Footprint• Small well spacing for heavy oil

– less than 10 acres pattern for CSS and Steam flooding

1 000 ll>15,000 wells in ~60 km2

(~23 mile2)(~23 mile2)

14

Chevron Steamflooding OperationKern River, California, USA

Surface FootprintSurface Footprint• Reduce surface footprint with horizontal or

multi-lateral wells (e.g., SAGD)CNRL CSS Operation with

Horizontal WellsHorizontal WellsPrimrose, Alberta, Canada

(62,000 bbl/d)

ESSO CSS Operation with

Reduce Surface Footprint

ESSO CSS Operation with Vertical Wells

Cold Lake, Alberta, Canada

15

(140,000 bbl/d)

Sources: Google Satellite MapSources: Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) of Alberta

Surface FootprintSurface Footprint• Reduce surface footprint (further) with SAGD p ( )

well pairs

Suncor Firebag SAGD Operation with Horizontal Well-Pairs, Su co ebag S G Ope at o t o o ta e a s,Athabasca, Alberta, Canada (35,000 bbl/day/Stage)

Central Plant Central Plant Stage 2 PadsCentral Plant Stage 2 Pads

Stage 1 PadsPads

Stage 1 Pads

16

Greenhouse Gas EmissionGreenhouse Gas Emission• GHG emission from steam generation at 250°C

– Burning natural gas (CO2 emission = 0.532 tonne/Mscf)Environmental Canada Data158.1160 CSS & Steamflooding

105.4

131.8

100

120

140

CO2

SAGD

Reduced GHG

Emission52.7

79.1

60

80

100Emission (kg) / Oil Recovery

(bbl)

Improved

Emission26.4

20

40(bbl)

17

Improved SOR0

1 2 3 4 5 6

Steam-Oil Ratio (SOR)

Water Usage and Disposal• Water usage for steam generation

Water Usage and Disposal

5

6

5

6 CSS & Steamflooding

SAGD

3

44Water Usage (bbl)

SAGD

Reduced

2

3

2

3/ Oil Recovery

(bbl)

Water Usage

1

0

1

1 2 3 4 5 6

Improved SOR

18

1 2 3 4 5 6

Steam-Oil Ratio (SOR)SOR

Concept for New TechnologyConcept for New Technology• Steam-only

M th d t

Fasty

– Heat transfer controlled– High oil rate– High energy and water

Methods to Reduce

Viscosity: – High energy and water requirements

– Commercial applicationsSolvent only

Slow

• Solvent-only– Diffusion/dispersion

controlled– Low oil rate– Low energy and water

requirements

19

– Field pilot stage

Courtesy of Alberta Research Council (ARC)

Hybrid Steam-Solvent ProcessesHybrid Steam Solvent Processes• Synergize advantages Heaty g g

of steam and solvent processes

• Enhance oil rates and lower SOR

• Reduce environmental• Reduce environmental impact

Hybrid Steam-Solvent

SteamSolvent Steam + SolventSolvent + Steam

20

Co-inject small amount small amount of solvent with steam

Technology DevelopmentH b id St S l t PHybrid Steam-Solvent Processes

Laboratory Studies• Proof of concept• Property measurements• Scale up• Scale-up

Workflow

N i l M d lli

Workflow

Numerical Modelling• Model validation• Mechanistic Analysis• Field-scale prediction

Field Application• Pilot tests• Commercial Operation

21

Field scale prediction

Hybrid Steam-Solvent ProcessesHybrid Steam Solvent Processes

• Nomenclature SAGD mode: ES-SAGD and SAPNomenclature– Expanding Solvent-SAGD

(ES-SAGD)– Solvent Aided-Process– Solvent Aided-Process

(SAP)– Liquid Addition to Steam for

Enhancing RecoveryEnhancing Recovery (LASER)

– Many more ….• Different strategies:

CSS mode: LASER• Different strategies:

– Solvent selection– Steam - solvent ratio

22

– Continuous or cyclic

Laboratory StudiesS l t S l tiSolvent Selection

• Hexane and diluents (a solvent mixture)– Evaporation temperatures closest to steam temperature– Steam-solvent ratio = 64 (by vol.)

“1-D” ES-SAGD Experiments

23ES-SAGD: Nasr, et al., JCPT (2003)

Courtesy of Alberta Research Council (ARC), Canada

Laboratory StudiesP f f C tProof of Concept

• ES-SAGD versus steam-only• Continuous diluents co-injected with steam

– Steam-solvent ratio = 6.9 (by vol.)12

“2-D” Scale-Model Experiments

8

10

12

e (g

/min

) ES-SAGDSAGD

4

6od

uctio

n Ra

te

0

2Oil

Pro

24Nasr and Ayodele, SPE 101717 (2006)Deng, et al., WHOC (2006)

Courtesy of Alberta Research Council (ARC), Canada0 90 180 270 360 450

Time (min)

ES-SAGD:

Numerical ModelingM d l V lid tiModel Validation

• History match of 2 D scale model experiments• History match of 2-D scale-model experiments

9

12

g/m

in) Test

Simulation

Oil

Temperature Profile @ 240 minutes °C

3

6

Oil

Prod

uctio

n Ra

te (Oil

Production Rate

@ 240 minutes C

00 90 180 270 360 450

Time (min)

O

6

min

) Test

Lab Test

2

4

Pro

duct

ion

Rat

e (g

/m Simulation

Solvent Production

Rate

25ES-SAGD: Deng, et al., WHOC (2006)

00 90 180 270 360 450

Time (min)

Sol

vent

PRate(85% Recovery)

Si l ti R lt Simulation

Numerical ModelingM h i ti A l iMechanistic Analysis

• Understand ES-SAGD process mechanisms– Solvent appears along slope of steam chamber– Observation not available from experiments

Profile @ 240 minutes

Oil SaturationGas Saturation

26ES-SAGD: Deng, et al., WHOC (2006)Diluents mole fraction in Oil PhaseDiluents mole fraction in Gas Phase

Numerical ModelingM h i ti A l iMechanistic Analysis

Temperature Profile @ 240 minutes

• Understand ES-SAGD process mechanisms– Solvent further

reduces oil viscosity along the slope ofOil along the slope of steam chamber

Oil With Solvent

27ES-SAGD: Deng, et al., WHOC (2006)

Numerical ModelingFi ld S l P di tiField-Scale Prediction

• A bitumen asset in Western Canada– Preheat: 100 days; SAGD: 150 days– ES-SAGD: after 250 days– Solvent composition: 98% C4 & 2% C1

0So

z x

y

0

1Height of reservoir

is exaggerated

170 ft

28ES-SAGD: Akinboyewa, et al., SPE 129963 (2010)

SAGD Well Pair LocationSaturation Distribution1 gg

Numerical ModelingFi ld S l P di tiField-Scale Prediction

Oil Production and Steam InjectionIncrease Solvent

Concentration SAGD Base Case

Increase Solvent ConcentrationSAGD Base Case

• Improve oil production with solvent% Solvent in Steam (by vol.)

Improve oil production with solvent• Reduce steam injection with solvent

29ES-SAGD: Akinboyewa, et al., SPE 129963 (2010)

Numerical ModelingFi ld S l P di tiField-Scale Prediction

Increase SolventIncrease Solvent Concentration

In-Situ Upgrading

SAGD Base Case

• The presence of solvent in produced oil improves its APIThe presence of solvent in produced oil improves its API– API is calculated based on composition of produced oil

30ES-SAGD: Akinboyewa, et al., SPE 129963 (2010)

Numerical ModelingFi ld S l P di tiField-Scale Prediction

Gas Saturation Distribution

Steam Chamber with SAGD Base Case

Gas Saturation Distribution

Steam Chamber with 5% Solvent Injection

S l t l ti l th f t h b

Low High

• Solvent slows vertical growth of steam chamber (reduces heat loss) and allows it to grow more laterally

31ES-SAGD: Akinboyewa, et al., SPE 129963 (2010)

Challenges from Lab to Field O ti l S l t I j ti St tOptimal Solvent Injection Strategy

Continuous solvent injectionContinuous solvent injection

Cyclic solvent injectionConstant Rate Ramp-Up Ramp-Down

Cyclic solvent injection

Unrealistic to test all strategies in the fieldConstant Rate Ramp-Up Ramp-Down

• Unrealistic to test all strategies in the field• Lab experiments and numerical studies can be useful

32

Challenges from Lab to FieldO ti l A t f S l tOptimal Amount of Solvent

Not eno gh sol ent SAGD Steam• Not enough solvent– Less solvent dissolution in

oleic phase

SAGD Steam Chamber Interface

Steam+ Gas

oiloleic phase

– Less oil viscosity reduction• Too much solvent

Not Enough Solvent

St ilEquilibrium

– Excessive solvent in gaseous phase that forms

i l ti bl k t

Steam + Gas

oil

Optimal Amount of Solventan insulation blanket near steam chamber interface

– Hinder propagation of

p

Steam + Gas

oilInsulation Blanket

Hinder propagation of steam front

33SAP: Gupta, et al., SPE 137543 (2010)

Too Much Solvent Solvent

Challenges from Lab to FieldO ti l A t f S l tOptimal Amount of Solvent

. fr.)

N i l P di tiM i

SAGD Steam Chamber

nc. (

olei

c m

ol.

Oil RateSolvent Rate

Solvent Conc. at Interface

Numerical PredictionMaximum

m);

Solv

ent C

on Solvent Rate at Interface

Solvent at steam chamber interface

ent R

ate

(t/d/

mO

il / S

olve

Time (days)

• Optimal amount of solvent varies throughout lifetime of process

34SAP: Gupta, et al., SPE 137543 (2010)

Field Pilot Tests in CanadaField Pilot Tests in CanadaHybrid Process Field Pilots:Suncor / CNRL Burnt Lake – ES-SAGDAthabasca

ALBERTASuncor / CNRL Burnt Lake – ES-SAGDSuncor Firebag – ES-SAGDNexen Long Lake – ES-SAGDEnCana Senlac – SAP

PeaceRiver

Athabasca

Fort McMurray EnCana Senlac SAPEnCana Christina Lake – SAPImperial Oil Cold Lake – LASER

y

EdmontonCold Lake

Calgary

LloydminsterHeavy Oil / Bitumen D it

35

CanadaU.S.A.

100 mile

125 km

Deposits

Saskatchewan

Field Pilot TestE C S l (J 2002)EnCana Senlac (January 2002)

• One well pair already in SAGD operation– Achieved peak rate

• Butane (C4) was used as solventOil Production Rate (bbl/d) SOR and Energy Intensity (EI)

Solvent Solvent

Expected SAGD Performance

Expected SAGD Performance

36SAP: Gupta, et al., CIPC (2002) & Gupta, et al., JCPT (2005)

Field Pilot TestEnCana Christina Lake (April 2004)

• One well pair already in SAGD operation– Achieved peak rate (after two years)– Worst performance in 4 side-by-side well pairs

• Butane (C4) was used as solventButane (C4) was used as solventOil Production Rate (tonne/d) SOR

Solvent SolventPlant Shutdown

Instrument Malfunction

37SAP: Gupta and Gittins, CIPC (2005) & Gupta and Gittins, JCPT (2006)

04-Mar 01-Aug 20-Dec04-Mar 01-Aug 20-Dec

Field Pilot Test PerformanceE C S l & Ch i ti L kEnCana Senlac & Christina Lake Ver enco raging pilot res lts• Very encouraging pilot results– Improved initial oil rate over 50% in Senlac and 150%

in Christina Lakein Christina Lake– Reduced SOR– Improved API°gravity of produced oil over a range

of 0.7° - 1°• Economic improvement – Senlac

• Cenovus (previously EnCana) is planning SAP

Gupta, et al., CIPC (2002) & Gupta, et al., JCPT (2005)

Gupta and Gittins, CIPC (2005) & Gupta and Gittins, JCPT (2006)SAP:

38

( y ) gcommercialization near Christina Lake

Field Pilot TestI i l Oil C ld L k (M h 2002)Imperial Oil Cold Lake (March 2002)

• One CSS pad chosen from two adjacent id ti ll f d d id didentically performed pads considered– Cycle 6 – CSS; Cycle 7 - LASER

• Diluent (C5+ condensate) was used as solventDiluent (C5+ condensate) was used as solventOil Production Rate (m3/d) & Cumulative

OSR Base CSS wells

LASER Injection wells

CCS wells influenced by other operations

LASER CSS

CSS wells produced substantial diluent

39LASER: Leaute and Carey, CIPC (2005)

Field Pilot Test PerformanceI i l Oil C ld L kImperial Oil Cold Lake

• Very encouraging first LASER cycle• Very encouraging first LASER cycle (cycle 7) results– Recovered 80% of injected diluent– OSR declined for CSS pad but p

increased for LASER pad– Achieved an incremental “oil-to-solventAchieved an incremental oil to solvent

storage ratio*” of 10* m3 oil produced / m3 solvent retained in reservoir

40

* m3 oil produced / m3 solvent retained in reservoir

LASER: Leaute and Carey, CIPC (2005)

LASER CommercializationI i l Oil C ld L kImperial Oil Cold Lake

• 10 pads• Diluent

injection (Q3 2007 – April2007 April 2009) in 10 pads

• Production is• Production is expected to reach peak rate in laterate in late 2010 to early 2011

41

LASER: Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) of Alberta (2010)

Hybrid Steam-Solvent ProcessesR d ti f E i t l I tReduction of Environmental Impacts• Reduce surface footprintReduce surface footprint

– Use horizontal wells (e.g., SAGD)• Reduce GHG and water usageReduce GHG and water usage

– Reduce SOR by 1 in a 100,000 bbl/day project

350–MW Coal-FiredPower Plant

(3 million tonnes CO2/year)• Reduce ∼1 million tonnes/year of

CO2 emission• Reduce 100,000 bbl/day of water

(3 million tonnes CO2/year)

usage for steam generation

• Reduce water disposalR l i ifi t t f

42

– Recycle significant amount of produced water

ConclusionsConclusions• Hybrid steam-solvent process is a feasible

h il t h lheavy oil recovery technology– Concept proven - lab and numerical results– Technically successful field pilot tests

• Hybrid steam-solvent processes can:y– Improved oil rate and SOR– Reduce environmental impactsp– Improve quality of produced oilThere is continuous improvement on heavy

43

There is continuous improvement on heavy oil recovery technologies to meet the challenges of environmental issues