Potential for Polymer

Flooding Reservoirs with

Viscous Oils
Randy Seright,
New Mexico Tech

Thermal methods cant be used for some viscous

oilsbecause of thin zones, ambient cold,
environmental constraints, permafrost, etc.

Is polymer flooding viable for viscous oils?

Old (1997) screening criteria for polymer flooding:
~150-cp oil was the upper limit because of
(1) polymer costs and (2) injectivity losses.
Changes since the old screening criteria:
Higher oil prices (~$70 versus ~$20/bbl).
Modest polymer prices ($1.50 versus $2/lb).
Greater use of horizontal wells.
Controlled injection above the parting pressure.

Adequate injectivity requires fractures or horizontal wells.

These provide low- to moderate flux for polymer solutions.
HPAM solution show Newtonian behavior at low flux.

Resistance factor

100
2500 ppm HPAM,
Mw ~6-8 million, 30% hydrolysis
2.52% TDS, 25C
10-cp polymer solution

10
17.5 md
46 md
55 md
269 md
5120 md
viscosity

1
0.001

0.01

0.21 ft/d in 17.5 md rock

0.92 ft/d in 269 md rock
7.5 ft/d in 5120 md rock

0.1

u (1-)/( k)0.5, ft/d-md0.5

10

Even with no heterogeneity (i.e., one layer), reducing

the oil/water viscosity ratio substantially improves oil
displacement efficiency.

Mobile oil recovered, %

100
1 cp oil

90
80
70

krw=0.1 [(Sw-0.12)/(0.76)]4
kro= [(0.88-Sw)/(0.76)]2.5

60
50
40

1-Sor-Swr = 0.76
1 cp water
Injected

10 cp
oil

103 cp

100 cp
104 cp
105 cp oil

30
20
10
0
0.01

One layer, 1 cp water, linear flow,

no polymer, North Slope case

0.1
1
10
Pore volumes of water injected

100

For cases with no crossflow, a 10-cp polymer

solution provides noticeable sweep improvement.
100
Mobile oil recovered, %

90
80
70
60
50
40

1000 cp
polymer

Two layers,
no crossflow,
linear flow,
k1=10k2,
h1=h2,
1000 cp oil,
1 cp water

100 cp
10 cp

1 cp

30
20

North Slope case

1-Sor-Swr = 0.76

10
0
0.01

0.1

10

Pore volumes of polymer or water injected

100

For cases with crossflow, substantial improvements

in sweep efficiency can occur, especially when using
very viscous polymer solutions.
100
1000 cp
polymer

Mobile oil recovered, %

90
80
70
60
50
40
30

100 cp polymer

Two layers,
free crossflow,
linear flow,
k1=10k2,
h1=h2,
1000 cp oil,
1 cp water

10 cp polymer

1 cp water

20

North Slope case

1-Sor-Swr = 0.76

10
0
0.01

0.1

10

Pore volumes of polymer or water injected

100

Polymers are more efficient viscosifiers at high

concentrations: ~ C2 (i.e., only 40% more
polymer is needed to double the viscosity).

Viscosity @ 7.3 s-1, cp

10000

Viscous oil
polymer floods
1000

Most previous
polymer floods

polymer in
2.52% TDS
brine, 25C

100

diutan
xanthan
19 million Mw HPAM
7 million Mw HPAM

10

1
100

1000

10000

Polymer concentration, ppm

100000

Relative profit

If polymer could be injected as readily as water, injection

of very viscous polymer solutions would be preferred.

12
Two layers, free crossflow, North Slope case,
11
1,000 cp oil, k1=10k2, h1=h2, linear flow.
10
1000 cp polymer
9
$20/bbl oil
8
$1.50/lb polymer
$0.25/bbl water
7
6
100 cp polymer
10 cp polymer
5
4
3
1 cp
2
water
1
0
0.01
0.1
1
10
Pore volumes of polymer or water injected

100

Relative profit

If polymer injectivity varies inversely with polymer viscosity,

injection of less viscous polymer solutions would be preferred.
INJECTIVITY MAY BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN POLYMER COST.

12
Two layers, free crossflow, North Slope case
11
1,000 cp oil, k1=10k2, h1=h2
10
1000 cp
polymer
9
$20/bbl oil
8
$1.50/lb polymer
100 cp
$0.25/bbl water
7
polymer
6
10 cp polymer
5
1 cp water
4
3
2
1
0
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
Relative time

1000

Scheme to Maximize Polymer Injectivity/Productivity

Horizontal
Injector

Injector
Fractures

Minimum
stress
direction

Horizontal
Producer

Producer
Fractures

Does a delay before starting the

polymer flood hurt performance?
100
Mobile oil recovered, %

90
80
70
60
50
40

Two-layers,
free crossflow,
k1/k2=10, h1/h2=1,
Base case

0.53
PV

2.7
PV

100 cp polymer
1-Sor-Swr = 0.4

No delay
(polymer flood
from the start)

30
20

0.26
PV

10
0
0.01

1.06
PV

0.1

5.3
PV

Waterflood
only
1000 cp oil,
1 cp water
10

Pore volumes of polymer or water injected

100

Can viscoelastic polymer solutions reduce the

Sor below that for waterflooding?.
Daqing says yes; UT Austin says maybe not.
Does it matter for viscous oils?

CONCLUSIONS
1. Higher oil prices, modest polymer prices, increased use of
horizontal wells, and controlled injection above the formation
parting pressure all help considerably to extend the applicability
of polymer flooding in reservoirs with viscous oils.
2. The high mobile oil saturation, degree of heterogeneity, and
relatively free potential for crossflow in our target North Slope
reservoirs also promote the potential for polymer flooding.
3. For existing EOR polymers, viscosity increases roughly with the
square of polymer concentrationa fact that aids the economics
for polymer flooding of viscous oils.
4. Reduced injectivity may be a greater concern for polymer flood
application than the chemical cost of viscous polymer solutions.
A scheme was identified using fractures and horizontal wells to
maximize injectivity.
5. For viscous oils, a delay in starting the polymer flood (e.g., a 5 PV
waterflood displacing 1,000-cp oil) still leaves a large potential
EOR for a polymer flood.
6. The Sor during a polymer flood does matter.

IMPACT OF RHEOLOGY
Based on numerical work, Delshad et al. and AlSofi et al.
suggested that shear-thinning rheology has a substantial
negative impact on sweep efficiency.
In part, their argument is based on work from Jones (1980), where
layers with different permeability were completely filled with
polymer. However, a very different result occurs if polymer is
injected to DISPLACE water/oil from a multilayer system!
Our analysis indicates:
Shear-thinning fluids can provide a much worse vertical
sweep than Newtonian or shear-thickening fluids IF (1) no
crossflow occurs between layers AND (2) the injection rates
and pressure gradients are unrealistically high.
However, for realistic reservoir conditions and polymer
properties, rheology has very little impact on vertical sweep,
especially for adjacent layers with free crossflow.
The overall resistance factor at low flux has a greater impact
vertical sweep efficiency.
Experimental verification can be found at:
http://baervan.nmt.edu/randy.

UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT OF RHEOLOGY

AND CROSSFLOW ON VERTICAL FLOW PROFILES
p, L
Zone 2, k2, Fr2
Zone 1, k1, Fr1

v2 p k2 / ( 2 L)
v1 p k1 / ( Fr1 1 L)

At the front,v2 /v1 Fr1 k2 1 / ( k1 2)

For a shear-thinning fluid, Fr ~ (v)(n-1) (k/)(1-n)/2

Near the well, if n=0.5, v1/v2 ~ (k1/k2)1.5, so the flow
profile appears worse, even though vertical sweep
is as good as it can be.