Shaochang Wo Gillette, Wyoming June 4, 2014 E N H A N C E D O I L - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The 2 nd Minnelusa Workshop of EORI Timber Creek Field Study for Improving Waterflooding Shaochang Wo Gillette, Wyoming June 4, 2014 E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Project Summary and Timeline • A collaborative study between EORI and Merit Energy Company under the Minnelusa Consortium • The primary objective of the project is to evaluate various development plans for improving the waterflooding in its Minnelusa Reservoir • The Timber Creek Field Geologic Study was completed by Gene George in Feb. 2010 • The Modeling and Simulation Study was started in Nov. 2009 and a final report was submitted to Merit in Feb. 2011 • A new injector was drilled in late 2011, named Gene George #1, and water injection initiated in Oct. 2012 • Monthly oil production has risen to 36,317 STBO/month in Aug. 2013 from 16,800 STBO/month in Feb. 2010 • Updated the TC model in late 2013 to include GG #1. Extended E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E history matching and production forecast was performed

Oil and Gas Fields in Wyoming Basins Powder River Bighorn Basin Basin Jackson Hole Areas with oil producing Minnelusa reservoirs Wind River Basin Overthrust Belt Shirley Basin Greater Hanna Green River Basin Denver Basin E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Laramie Basin Basin

Minnelusa Reservoirs in the Northern Powder River Basin Timber Creek Field (T49N R70W) Gillette E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Oil and Reservoir Properties of the Minnelusa Reservoir at the Timber Creek Field Depth of Minnelusa Top 9100 ft Initial Reservoir Pressure 3655(B), 3629(C) psi Average Core Porosity 13.8(B)%, 11.1(C)% Oil Gravity 31(B), 27(C) o API Average Core Permeability 77(B) md, 47(C) md Bubble Point Pressure (BPP) 770(B), 599(C) psi Average Gross Pay 60(B) ft, 50(C) ft Gas Oil Ratio at BPP 85(B), 65(C) SCF/STB Average Net Pay 34.4(B) ft, 21.7(C) ft Est. OOIP 35(B), 20(C) MMBO Oil Column 125(B), 118(C) ft Cum. Oil Production 14(B), 6(C) MMBO Oil/Water Contact Various Oil Recovery 40(B)%, 30(C)% Reservoir Temperature 204 o F Well Spacing 40 acre Primary Drive Mechanism Water and solution gas Est. CO2 MMP 3500 psi (B): B Sand (C): C Sand E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Typical Workflow in Reservoir Modeling & Simulation Description of Laboratory Data Reservoir Structure & Faults Fluid & Rock Properties: PVT, Rock Facies & Flow Units Kro , Krw , Krg , … Fracture Network & Connection Production & 3D Grid System Geologic Model Simulation Model Injection ɸ & K of Grids (Petrel) (Eclipse, CMG) History Initial So, Sg, Sw Well Logs Remaining oil History Matching Well Completions Distribution in Core ɸ, K, Sw, So Reservoir Seismic Survey Operator Evaluation of Requests EOR/IOR Floods E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Reports & Recommendations

? CROSS SECTION LINE ? E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Minnelusa Top and Possible Faults at Timber Creek Field - By Gene George

Three B Sand Units (Sand Compartments) Identified by Gene George RED = UPPER HIGH RESISTIVITY (>10 OHMS) BLUE = MIDDLE LOWER RESISTIVITY (<10 OHMS) GREEN = LOWER LOW RESISTIVITY (<3 OHMS) E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

The Model Boundary and the Three B Sand Units Mapped by Gene George Aquifer Water Influx Model Boundary E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Aquifer Water Influx

1 mile E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

What A Simulation Model Needs from A Geologic Model • A structured grid system of the reservoir — It is desirable to configure flow units, e.g. sand compartments, as layers in the grid system • Rock/formation properties of grids — Such as porosity and permeability • Initial oil, gas, and water saturations of grids — Commonly estimated from Archie relations E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

F. E. COOK #1 F. E. COOK #2 F. E. COOK #3 F. E. COOK #4 F. E. COOK #5 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 9150 9000 9100 9000 9100 9050 9200 9050 9150 9150 9100 9100 9250 9200 9200 9150 9150 9300 9250 9250 9200 9200 9350 9300 9300 9250 9250 9350 9300 9400 9300 9350 FED 311 CAMPBELL #2 FED 311 CAMPBELL #1 LE SUEUR #3-S LE SUEUR #2-S 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 9000 9200 9100 9100 Porosity Water Saturation 9050 9150 9150 9220 10*(Bulk Volume Water) 9100 B Zone Perforation 9200 9200 C Zone Perforation 9240 9150 9250 9250 9200 9300 9260 9300 E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E 9250 9350 Measured core porosity 9280 9350 and water saturation in 9300 9400 Cook, LeSueur and 12 Campbell wells 9450 9350 9300 9400

V. H. WOLFF #1 V. H. WOLFF #2 V. H. WOLFF #3 V. H. WOLFF #4 V. H. WOLFF #5 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 9000 9100 9100 9100 9100 9050 9150 9150 9150 9150 9100 9200 9200 9200 9150 9200 9250 9250 9250 9200 9300 9250 9300 9300 9250 9350 9350 9300 9300 9350 9400 TIMBER CREEK USA #1 TORO #1 TORO #2 TIMBER CREEK USA #2 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 9100 9200 9200 9100 Porosity Water Saturation 9150 9150 10*(Bulk Volume Water) 9250 9250 B Zone Perforation C Zone Perforation 9200 9200 9300 9300 9250 9350 9250 E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Measured core porosity 9350 9300 and water saturation in 9400 9300 Wolff, Toro and TC USA wells 13 9350 9450 9350 9400

The 7-layer and 4-region Configuration of the Simulation Model for the Minnelusa Reservoir at Timber Creek Field B Sand Red B Sand Blue B Region B Sand Green B Dolomite B Dolomite Region Upper C Sand Upper C Region Middle C Sand Lower C Sand Lower C Region E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Making Sand Units in Petrel E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Loading Log and Core Measurements in Petrel E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Modeled Minnelusa Structural Top at Timber Creek Field E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

A 3D View of the Layer and Grid Configuration E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Grid pore volume distributions in the Red (top left), Blue (top right) and Green (bottom right) units of the B Sand. E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Grid pore volume distributions in the Upper (top left), Middle (top right) and Lower (bottom right) units of the C Sand E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Core Porosity-Permeability Correlation within Each Layer E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

A 3D View of the Porosity Distribution in the Model E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

A 3D View of the Permeability Distribution in the Model E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Original Questions set for History Matching • What would the initial oil-water contacts be in the B and C Sands and where does the oil remain today? • How much is the C Sand contribution in the total oil production of wells that have commingled production from both B and C Sands? • Can a good history matching be achieved without assuming fault-separated compartments? • Aquifer water influx, from where and how much? • How does fluid move among the 3 pods in the B Sand? E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E • Any infill drilling opportunities?

Some Data Issues in the History Matching • A few BHP or fluid level measurements • No gas production record before 1975 • About 2.8 million barrels of oil produced without gas producing records between 1975 and 1998 • Gaps in water producing records • Only partial PVT report of the C sand oil • No data of laboratory measured relative permeability E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E

Period of IWR > 1.0 End of WF ( IWR < 1.0) 10,000 25 20 15 10 Average Monthly Rates No of Producing Wells 5 1,000 0 bopd bwpd bWINJpd Well Count 100 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Timber Creek Field – Production History. This figure is copied from “Timber Creek Field: Exploitation Review”, an internal report of Merit Energy Company by Brad Bauer

Well monthly oil production rates at Timber Creek Field 100,000 Cook 1 Cook 2/2R Cook 3/3R Cook 4 10,000 Cook 5 Fed 311 1 Monthly Oil Production Rate, BO/month Fed 311 2 LeSueur 1 LeSueur 2 1,000 LeSueur 1-S LeSueur 2-S LeSueur 1-M LeSueur 2-M 100 LeSueur 3-M TC USA 1 TC USA 2 Toro 2 Toro 3 10 Toro Fed 23-6 Wolff 1 E N H A N C E D O I L R E C O V E R Y I N S T I T U T E Wolff 2 Wolff 3 Wolff 4 1 Wolff 5 Jan-57 Jan-67 Jan-77 Jan-87 Jan-97 Jan-07 Jan-17