I had the privilege of participating in a workshop organized by CNPC R&D on waterflooding in carbonate reservoirs in Dubai in November 2024. The topic was “Development Strategy and Waterflood Design in Carbonate Reservoirs”. I gave a presentation of the first day about the status of Primary, Secondary, Tertiary development mindsets at the light of psychology and field data… Strange combination one could say. I let you have a look at the slides of the presentation.
The abstract: Rethinking the ‘Primary, Secondary, Tertiary’ Approach
Words shape our thoughts, influence perceptions, and drive actions. The language we use frames how we interpret experiences and make decisions, actively shaping realities and guiding industry practices.
An example in the oil industry is the “Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Oil Recovery” approach which is a deeply ingrained concept. While this method has driven field development for decades, its results warrant scrutiny.
- Low Recovery Rates: Despite advancements, secondary recovery leaves up to 70% of oil untapped (IEA). A 30% recovery rate demands a reevaluation of current methods. Why not employ all available techniques to improve recovery from the start?
- High Water Production: Secondary processes yield excessive water, requiring energy-intensive management. Engineers should question the heavy reliance on waterflooding without integrating additional techniques upfront.
- Diminishing Returns Post-Water Breakthrough: Reservoir heterogeneity leads to early conformance issues, making it difficult to resolve problems once water breakthrough occurs. Ignoring these challenges early on limits the effectiveness of subsequent recovery methods and overlooks the inherent unpredictability of reservoirs.
Why does the industry continue to follow the same patterns despite advances in knowledge and technology? The primary reason often comes down to economics and profitability. Parameters like discounted cash flow or net present value (NPV) are commonly used to gauge financial success. However, a high NPV doesn’t always equate to maximum recovery efficiency and can be energetically inefficient (Farajzadeh, 2019; van Essen, 2019; Farajzadeh, 2021). When water cuts exceed 90%, a significant portion of the energy derived from oil is consumed in managing injected and produced water, resulting in high CO2 emissions. Essentially, at such high-water cuts, the energy needed to handle large water volumes relative to the oil produced increases sharply. Below a 70% water cut, extraction remains efficient and could be driven by Net Present Value (NPV). However, it still demands a careful, engineering-based approach. Proactively combining Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) techniques with conformance control is crucial to prevent the system from reaching an irreversible decline in performance.
In this presentation, we will explore recent evidence highlighting the benefits of incorporating Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) techniques early in a field’s development or at least not delaying their implementation. We’ll examine case studies from Argentina, Alaska, and the Middle East, demonstrating the advantages of early chemical EOR adoption. A comparison of secondary versus tertiary polymer flooding implementation by Hilcorp in Milne Point will showcase the clear benefits of the optimal strategy. We will also discuss the potential challenges to quicker implementation in sandstone and carbonate reservoirs, focusing on a holistic approach to address these issues.
Bibliography
van Essen, G., Zandvliet, M., Van den Hof, P., Bosgra, O. & Jansen, J.-D. Robust waterflooding optimization of multiple geological scenarios. SPEJ. 14, 202–210 (2009).
Farajzadeh, R., Kahrobaei, S., Eftekhari, A.A. et al. Chemical enhanced oil recovery and the dilemma of more and cleaner energy. Sci Rep 11, 829 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80369-z
Farajzadeh, R. Sustainable production of hydrocarbon fields guided by full-cycle exergy analysis. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 181, 106204 (2019).
Farajzadeh, R., Zaal, C., van den Hoek, P. & Bruining, J. Life-cycle assessment of water injection into hydrocarbon reservoirs using exergy concept. J. Clean. Prod. 235, 812–821 (2019).
Farajzadeh, R., Wassing, B. L. & Lake, L. W. Insights into design of mobility control for chemical enhanced oil recovery. Energy Rep. 5, 570–578 (2019).
Farajzadeh, R., Kahrobaei, S. S., de Zwart, A. H. & Boersma, D. Life-cycle production optimization of hydrocarbon fields: Thermoeconomics perspective. Sustain. Energy Fuels 3, 3050–3060 (2019).
IEA : https://www.iea.org/commentaries/whatever-happened-to-enhanced-oil-recovery#