EOR Enhanced Oil Recovery 3535 W. 16 th . St. Odessa, Texas 79763 - - PDF document

EOR Enhanced Oil Recovery 3535 W. 16th. St. Odessa, Texas 79763

• Tel. (432) 381-6540 Fax (432) 381-2205

Assets in the Ground

Two thirds of the United States oil reserves are still in the ground and becoming increasingly difficult to pump out. The use of existing technology to extract this oil is limited and costly. EMC and its Cava-Chem tool will dramatically change the

• il industry as it is known today.
• EMC’s success is in its ability to free oil and gas from sand,

shale and rock in the drilling zone.

• EMC eliminates the interfacial surface tension between all

matter, thus they repel each other like magnets.

The Process

The magic of EMC is transferred to other elements or compounds through a process. The EMC process is proprietary. When it is at work, in laymen’s terms, the EMC “touches” the oil, salt, sediment, bedrock, paraffin and other matter in the well and changes their chemistry.

Lighter Crude – Cleaner Well

EMC alters the quality of the crude oil and prevents

• lefins, paraffin and asphaltines from bonding – keeping

them suspended in an emulsification state. This results in minimizing heavy hydrocarbons (olefins, paraffin and asphaltines) from plugging the production zone.

Three Treatment Methods Cold Injection Hot Injection All methods clean the well.

EMC Characteristics for All Treatments ( diluted form) Non-toxic Non-caustic Non-corrosive Non-hazardous Non-flammable Stable up to 3000°F 24 to 48 Hour application times Easy to store and transport Environmentally friendly

EMC The Best of All Worlds

Traditional

Enhanced Oil Recovery Treatments

• Water Flooding
• Carbon Dioxide
• Chemical Treatment
• Steam Injection

Water Flooding Treatment versus EMC Advantage: Inexpensive and results are predictable. Disadvantage: It cannot displace all of the

• il from the formation – even under the best
• f circumstances.

EMC is able to displace nearly all the oil from the formation. If EMC touches it, you will pump it.

Carbon Dioxide Treatment versus EMC

• Advantage: Vaporization begins at pressures between 1,000 and

2,000 PSI at temperatures below 200°F and with crude oils having an API gravity above 30.

• Disadvantage: It leaves large areas of the reservoir untreated

and it IS expensive.

• EMC can be injected at high pressures, improve the recovery

without the limitations and specific requirements needed with carbon dioxide and, most important, without creating hazardous by-products and equipment corrosion.

• Advantage: It helps free oil in the production zone.
• Disadvantage: Sodium Carbonate, Sodium Orthosilicate,

Sodium Metasilicate, Ammonia, and Sodium Hydroxide tend to be highly corrosive and damaging to skin, eyes and mucous

• membranes. Ammonia, besides being a health hazard, can

become combustible.

• EMC is an alkaline product with a high pH of 13.7± EMC is

not corrosive, explosive, flammable, hazardous or toxic.

Chemical Treatment versus EMC

Steam Treatment versus EMC

Advantage: Steam is a proven method for improved recovery from heavy-oil reservoirs. Disadvantage: Steam drive cannot be used in deep reservoirs, thin formations, or formations with low permeability. Cava-Chem delivers EMC to the reservoir using cavitational waves to achieve optimal penetration throughout the production zone.

Cold Water Treatment

1% to 1.5% solution of EMC

• A positive displacement pump is used at ambient

temperature.

• Base Measurement: a cold treatment will require 120

barrels of solution for 3000 feet of well depth and total number and length of perforations. – The volume of water is dependent upon the depth of the well and the length of the well perforations.

• The well history will provide an approximate

period for determining the time and volume needed to reduce BS&W from the well.

• Additional time may be required to further

penetrate the productive oil zone.

Hot Water Treatment

• Average rule of thumb – 3500 gallons of hot water (140°F

to 160°F) solution at 1% to 1 ½ % solution.

• This treatment is effective in reducing paraffins, olefins and
• asphaltines. This results in lighter oil and increasing oil

yields.

• This treatment alters heavy hydrocarbon creating an

emulsification which minimizes problems such as paraffin build ups inside the production tubing, sucker rods and down hole pumps.

• Calcium, sodium, chloride, magnesium, sulfides and other

elements are minimized too.

• Procedure minimizes particulates and solid matter from

coming up with oil.

• The equipment used for this treatment includes a triplex

pump, fluid pump, to introduce the hot water.

• Warmer temperatures (>160°F) are more effective,

especially in a vapor phase (steam).

• Solution enters the production zone realizing a final

pressure drop which liberates dissolved gasses in the treating chemical increasing the displacement of the EMC solution further into the well production zone.

• Vapor travels through the production zone before

condensing and returning into a condensate.

• At elevated temperatures – EMC reduces foaming and

frothing which enhances oil and gas production.

Hot Water Treatment Continued

• The equipment used for this treatment includes a triplex

pump, fluid pump, to introduce the hot water.

• Warmer temperatures (>160°F) are more effective,

especially in a vapor phase (steam).

• Solution enters the production zone realizing a final

pressure drop which liberates dissolved gasses in the treating chemical increasing the displacement of the EMC solution further into the well production zone.

• Vapor travels through the production zone before

condensing and returning into a condensate.

• At elevated temperatures – EMC reduces foaming and

frothing which enhances oil and gas production.

Texas Well History

• Greyburg Formation

The well had oil production of 3 barrels per day. The well was treated and then closed for twenty four hours. Production the next day was 9 barrels. For the next two months production fluctuated as high as 10.5 barrels to the lowest of 7.5 barrels. Production stabilized at 9.0 barrels per day.

• San Andres Formation – Well#1

The well had oil production of 1.5 barrels per day. The well was treated and then closed for twenty four hours. Production the next day was 12 barrels. For the next two months production fluctuated as high as 16 barrels to the lowest of 11 barrels. Production stabilized at 14.5 to 15 barrels per day.

• San Andres Formation – Well #2

The well had oil production of 3 barrels per day. The well was treated and then closed for twenty four hours. Production the next day was 10 barrels. For the next two months production fluctuated as high as 9 barrels to the lowest of 6 barrels. Production stabilized at 8.0 barrels per day.

Continued

• Yates Formation

The well had oil production of 0.5 barrels per day. The well was treated and then closed for twenty four hours. Upon opening the well it was found that the pump saddle bearing had broken. It was 13 days before repairs were

• completed. Production began at 5 barrels. For the next

month production fluctuated as high as 6.5 barrels to the lowest of 4.5 barrels. Production stabilized at 5.0 barrels per day.

• Queen Formation

The well had oil production of 1.5 barrels per day. The well was treated and then closed for twenty four hours. Production the next day was 21 barrels. Production stabilized at 9.0 barrels per day.

CENTRAL TEXAS AREA, AUSTIN CHALK, HORIZONTAL WELLS BURLESON COUNTY Well: Burleson I Total Depth: 13,000 feet, Horizontal Hole 9,500' to 13,000' Casing: 7 5/8" O.D. Set Vertically at 9,500' Producing Formation: Austin Chalk Production Method: Natural Flow Production Before EMC Treatment: 14 BOPD; 170,000 Cubic Feet Gas/Day Reason For Treatment: Treated due to erratic flow of oil and gas from horizontal hole into vertical production casing at 9,500 feet. A strong indication existed that the horizontal hole was being "plugged" because other recently drilled wells were dead. Production After EMC Treatment: 27 BOPD; 225,000 Cubic Feet Gas/Day Sustained new production levels for eleven months before starting a gradual

• decline. Possible problem: Perforations need cleaning

The operating company had elected to use very large volumes of water for an "imbibition" type fracture, utilizing three stages of acid with the intent to open flow channels from the highly fractured Austin Chalk Formation through which the horizontal hole is drilled. The operating company field manager was informed of the ability of EMC to break down the acid/chalk residue, common in this type of operation. The EMC would coat all loose formation particles in the horizontal hole and thus eliminate conglomeration of these solids and allow them to pass restrictions that are always present in the horizontal hole (restriction caused by a result of small pieces of chalk falling into the horizontal hole from fractures which the hole is drilled). A procedure was recommended that EMC be used behind each acid stage. This well flowed back frac water in less time than required in previous wells that did not have EMC assistance. The well cleaned up much faster and produced oil and gas for six months at a greater volume than before treatment. It is worthy to mention that: Sustained oil and gas producing rates at or above rates before treatment with EMC has effected a profit for the operating company; Sustained producing rates have proven that EMC destroys acid/chalk reside as it does acid/limestone residue after acid treatments; more specifically, no plugging of the Burleson I well occurred after treatment.

Well: Burleson II (well died, purchased for Rehabilitation) Total Depth: 13,100 feet, Horizontal Hole 9,550' to 13,000' Casing: 7 5/8" O.D. Set Vertically at 9,550' Producing Formation: Austin Chalk Production Method: Natural Flow Production before EMC Treatment:

• 0-

Production After EMC: 26 BOPD; 110,000 Cubic Feet of Gas/Day Sustained new production levels for thirteen months. The operating company elected to use 21,000 barrels of water for an "imbibition" type fracture, utilizing one stage of acid in amount 100 barrels of 15% HCL and 5 barrels EMC in an effort to rehabilitate the dead Fitch No. 1 Well. The identical procedure as used on the Burleson I well was used in the treatment of this well. EMC was placed behind the single stage of acid and followed with 1,400 pounds of wax beads. Injection pressure was very near the casing limit and required many hours because of fixed pressure requirements resulting in lower injection rate for frac

• fluid. There was no break in pressure that would indicate more than one

fracture was treated. Please see the attached chart which shows that oil and gas production from this "dead" well has, in fact, become a more profitable venture with almost constant gas production since June of 1993 and with typical Austin Chalk oil production decline from the horizontal hole. Remediation with a solution such as EMC will again enhance oil and gas production with the same treatment. This is classified as routing remedial work on horizontal wells and can be done with EMC in fresh water, alone.

Well: Burleson III (Completed as a Gas condensate, high API gravity crude oil) Total Depth: 13,000 feet, Horizontal Hole 9,500' to 13,000' Casing: 7 5/8" O.D. Set Vertically at 9,500' Horizontal Hole Size: 6-3/4" Diameter Producing Formation: Austin Chalk Production Method: Natural Flow Production Before EMC Treatment: 10 BOPD; 180,000 Cubic Ft. of Gas/Day Reason for Treatment: The operating company observed intermittent, erratic flow of

• il and gas, soon after completion.

Production After EMC Treatment: Avg. 34 BOPD; 430,000 Cubic Ft. of Gas/Day Sustained new production levels for ten months before starting a gradual decline. The operating company accepted recommendations to treat the Burleson III well with EMC only, due to results attained in previous two treatments. The 250 barrel solution was pumped through the 2 3/8" tubing in the well, through the 7 5/8" casing then to the 6 3/4" horizontal hole. Immediately, when the well became full of the solution, the pump truck chart recorded six different breaks at or near 3,000 PSI each time; this action confirmed concern by all that the horizontal hole had become plugged causing a sharp decline in oil and gas production along with a rapid decline in flowing tubing pressure. Subsequent to the sixth break in pressure within the first ten minutes of pumping time, injection pressure was constant at 2,000 to 2,500 PSI until 245 barrels of solution was

• pumped. At that time, well went on a strong vacuum, indicating treatment solution had

broken into a fracture. That fracture supplied a flow channel to the well bore and the Burleson III well flowed back the small volume of frac fluid used and has been producing oil and gas continuously.

10 20 30 40 Burleson I Burleson II Burleson III

Oil Production

Before After

100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 Burleson I Burleson II Burleson III

Gas Production

Before After

RESULTS OF THREE WELL TESTS UTILIZING EMC FOR FRACTURING HORIZONTALLY DRILLED WELLS IN THE AUSTIN CHALK DEPTHS - 13,000 FEET to 13,500 FEET Burleson I was treated with 11 drums of EMC and 30,000 barrels of water with a 15 percent HCL acid solution. Burleson II was treated with 5 drums of EMC and 21,000 barrels of water with 15 percent HCL acid solution. Burleson III was treated only with 5 drums of EMC in 250 barrels of water. Once all possible fracture water was recovered, the following daily production records were reported.. Please note that production continued to increase in every instance. Three (3 ) Central Texas Wells

LONGVIEW/KILGORE AREA, EAST TEXAS FIELD RUSK COUNTY Well: Rusk I Total Depth: 3,000 feet, Horizontal Hole 9,500' to 13,000' Producing Formation: Woodbine Production Method: Artificial Lift-Rod Pump Production Before EMC Treatment: 3 BOPD; 7 BWPD, No Gas Production After EMC Treatment: 5.25 BOPD; 4 BWPD, N Gas Sustained new production levels for nine months before starting a gradual decline. This was a "control" well and the first well treated in the Woodbine Production zone

• f the giant "East Texas Field". Production had continually declined and was allowed

to do so in order to obtain data on length of sustained increase of production from a single treatment of EMC. The well was treated with 27.5 gallons of EMC pre-mixed in 20 barrels of fresh water, pumped into tubing-casing annulus with a 2" centrifugal pump a -0- PSI (well did not go in vacuum). Well was shut in for twenty four hours, then the tubing was opened to the flow line and pumping of the well began. After recovering oil present in tubing before treatment, the well was opened to test tank on location. Very heavy emulsified oil with formation solids was recovered for four hours before turning well through flow line to tank battery facility. Individual samples were caught each day at the wellhead for eleven days. This confirmed the increase in oil cut from 30% during past yearly production to 60% with the treatment using EMC.

BEAUMONT AREA, BATSON FIELD, SOUTH EAST TEXAS HARDIN COUNTY Well: Hardin I Total Depth: 754 feet Producing Formation: Frio Sand Production Method: Artificial Lift - Rod Pump Packing: Gravel Packed Screen Production before EMC Treatment: 3 BOPD, 10% water, No Gas Production After EMC: 5.3 BOPD; 10% Water, No Gas Sustained new production levels for seven months. Normal procedure for treatment with pre-mixed EMC in fresh water entailed pumping the solution into the tubing-casing annulus through production casing

• connection. Well was shut in for twenty four hours.

EMC is not soluble in oil and broke heavy emulsion containing crude oil, formation water and formation particles seen in produced liquid. This opened flow channels leading to producing reservoirs as attested by higher working fluid levels in the well. The friction reducing capabilities of EMC have extended pump life in the well. ________________________________________________________________________ Well: Hardin II Total Depth: 1254 feet Producing Formation: Frio Sand Production Method: Artificial Lift - Rod Pump Packing: Gravel Packed Screen Production before EMC Treatment: 1 BOPD, No water, No Gas Production After EMC: 2.55 BOPD; No Water, No Gas Sustained new production levels for seven months. Well was treated four times, each treatment consisted of 1.48 percent solution in fresh

• water. Total fluid was 55 gallons per treatment. API gravity of produced crude from

this well was in the range of 13 gravity. EMC wet the inside tubing and flow line to such an extent that the oil passed to the tank battery without the previously necessary introduction of water in the flow line to move the oil to the treating facility. Rod pump life has been extended and profit is being attained sufficiently to continue well maintenance, in addition, operating costs have been reduced.

Well: Hardin III Total Depth: 1252 feet Producing Formation: Frio Sand Production Method: Artificial Lift - Rod Pump Packing: Gravel Packed Screen Production before EMC Treatment: 1.25 BOPD, No water, No Gas Production After EMC: 3.12 BOPD; No Water, No Gas Sustained new production levels for ten months. This well was treated four times using the same procedure as on the Hardin II. API gravity is similar to the Hardin II well and results obtained were equally as good. ________________________________________________________________________ Well: Hardin IV Total Depth: 2370 feet Producing Formation: Frio Sand Production Method: Artificial Lift - Rod Pump Packing: Gravel Packed Screen Production before EMC Treatment: 2.5 BOPD, No water, No Gas Production After EMC: 4.8 BOPD; No Water, No Gas Sustained new production levels for ten months. It was only necessary to treat this well twice to maintain a 100% increase of production. Excellent production increase was effected by use of EMC in fresh water. Cost of electricity to run the pump was reduced and rod pump life was increased. Again, good evidence that the EMC not only increases production and consequently revenues but decreases operating costs as well.