Words shape our thoughts, influence perceptions, and drive actions. The language we use frames how we interpret experiences and make decisions, shaping realities and guiding industry practices. In the oil industry, one example of this influence is the long-standing “Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Oil Recovery” approach. While this framework has driven field development for decades, the results it yields warrant closer examination.
One major issue is the low recovery rates. Despite technological advancements, secondary recovery methods still leave up to 70% of oil untapped (IEA). With only a 30% recovery rate, it’s clear that current methods demand reevaluation. Why not use all available techniques from the start to improve recovery? Additionally, secondary processes often lead to high water production, which requires energy-intensive management. This reliance on waterflooding, without integrating other techniques upfront, deserves to be questioned by engineers.
Another challenge arises from diminishing returns after water breakthrough. Reservoir heterogeneity can lead to early conformance issues, making it difficult to address problems after water breakthrough occurs. Ignoring these challenges early on not only reduces the effectiveness of subsequent recovery methods but also overlooks the unpredictable nature of reservoirs.
So why does the industry continue to follow this well-worn path despite advancements in knowledge and technology? The answer often comes down to economics and profitability. Financial metrics like discounted cash flow or net present value (NPV) are typically used to gauge success, yet a high NPV doesn’t always align with maximum recovery efficiency and can be energetically inefficient.
In this paper, we will explore recent evidence that supports the benefits of incorporating Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) techniques early in a field’s development, or at least not delaying their implementation. Case studies from Argentina, Alaska, and the Middle East will illustrate the advantages of early chemical EOR adoption, as well as the drawbacks of late deployment. A comparison of secondary versus tertiary polymer flooding implementation by Hilcorp in Milne Point will further demonstrate the clear benefits of this optimal strategy.