SPE-171108-MS

Assessment of Thermal Recovery: Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage

(SAGD) to Improve Recovery Efficiency in the Heavy-Oil Fields of the
Peruvian Jungle
Nestor Antonio Alejandro Palacios Chun, Universidad Nacional de Ingeniera (UNI)

Copyright 2014, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Heavy and Extra Heavy Oil Conference - Latin America held in Medellin, Colombia, 24 26 September 2014.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
The decline of medium and light oil production of most of the fields in Peru in the last years, the increase
of the domestic demand, the rising of oil prices and the recent discoveries of large heavy oil resources in
the Maraon Basin, makes the suitable scenario to economically develop such heavy oil reservoirs. The
technical recoverable volumes estimated for heavy oil fields in Peru (with API degree of 12 or even less)
represent a significant energy resource for the country. Reasons for applying SAGD process to improve
recovery factor in these fields.
Cold production technologies in heavy oil fields with API degree of 12 or even less, yielded low
recovery factors (no more than 15%). The fluid property that most affects the productivity and recovery
of heavy crude oil is viscosity; therefore, it is expected that thermal process like SAGD would increase
the recovery efficiency of heavy oil fields by adding heat.
An screening criteria matrix was prepared based on worldwide analogous projects, which includes the
fluid and rock properties to apply in Heavy Oil Fields of the Peruvian Jungle; then, a conceptual local-grid
refined simulation model was built to evaluate production performance and estimate a recovery factor for
the zone. The SAGD process was compared in performance to conventional cold production methods of
the region (deviated and horizontal wells with ESP pumps).
As a result, a matrix with recovery factors of SAGD process is provided; which with an average
recovery factor of 25% looks very promising for a feasibility study.
With the success of SAGD process in analogous heavy oil fields around the world, this study aims to
bridge the gap that Peru has in Thermal Recovery and EOR processes, with Screening matrix and
Reservoir Simulation of SAGD process to apply a pilot program, increasing the national production.

INTRODUCTION
The worldwide production demand of conventional crude oil and gas is growing steadily, making
insufficient reserves of conventional petroleum in comparison with the increasing energy needs.

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 1SAGD Process1.

Figure 2Location of Maraon Basin in Peru.

The current strain on the supply and demand of light crudes can readily be met by heavy oil potential
resources with low API gravity which in most cases, experience has been shown that most conventional
systems are inefficient.

SPE-171108-MS

Table 1Parameters for SAGD.

Table 2Reservoir Properties Summary.

On the other hand, recent technological advances

in thermal methods have spread worldwide, increasing recovery factors, reducing financial risk and
providing an opportunity to make profitable the
heavy oil resources.
Currently applications of thermal processes includes hot water injection, steam cycling, steam
assisted gravity drainage (SAGD), in situ combustion, Toe-to-Heel (THAI), etc. Success has varied
with recovery levels ranging from as low as 10%
with Water Flooding, and up to 70% with SAGD
and potentially to greater than 80% with THAI.
For the purpose of this study, conventional cold
production technologies (Horizontal and directional drilling with ESP pumps) have been compared with
a SAGD process, to evaluate their competitive advantage towards optimizing field production and
increasing recovery factor of the Peruvian Block AL, in Maraon Basin.

STEAM ASSISTED GRAVITY DRAINAGE (SAGD)

The SAGD process consists of a horizontal well, or a series of vertical wells, injecting steam above
another horizontal well that acts as a producer. As steam is injected, it forms a steam-saturated chamber.
At the edges of the chamber, the Steam condenses, liberating its latent heat and, thus, mobilizing the
bitumen by reducing its viscosity. Then gravity takes charge, driving the condensed water and hydrocarbons to the production well at the bottom of the chamber (Butler 1994).
The expansion of the steam chamber, in the longitudinal and axial directions relative to the wellbore,
can be rather irregular but quite rapid, until it finds the top of the reservoir. The Process relies on the
heated heavy oil being produced as the steam chamber grows. Uniform development of the Steam
chamber remains one of the most critical challenges of the SAGD process because of its direct impact on
heavy oil recovery.
The SAGD process takes place in three distinct phases:

SPE-171108-MS

Table 3Matrix Screening Crite

y Startup (circulation): Aimed at mobilizing

the bitumen close to and between the injector
and producer to establish communication
between the wells. The most widely used
method for startup is circulating steam in
both wells for as long as 90 days.
y Normal SAGD operation: Involves injecting
Steam and producing bitumen to form the
steam chamber above the well pairs. This
provides access to the maximum amount of
Figure 3Refined Sector Model, 3D view.
resources within the drainage area. This
phase lasts as many years as necessary, so
that the maximum amount of oil is recovered from the drainage volume.
y Wind down: Consists of a series of operations aimed at reducing the amount of Steam injected and
using auxiliary operating patterns to maximize Recovery.
The estimated recovery factor for this method ranges from 50 to 70%. However, the formation
stratification can significantly affect SAGD recovery.
SAGD method is used in many fields in Rumania, China, Canada, including fields Christina Lake and
MacKay River.
Process Characteristic
y Pressure at steam chamber is constant.
y Steam and water condensed together with the gas in solution, plus thermal expansion, work to keep
pressure around the producing well at optimal levels, avoiding any possible instability, such as
coning and channeling.
y The steam chamber grows proportional to oil production; empty spaces in pores, as created by
production, are filled with the steam injected to the field, thus allowing steam to fusion more
immobile oil.
y The maximum oil production rate usually occurs when the steam chamber reaches the top of the
formation.
y First breakthrough occurs at the beginning of the horizontal section, forcing steam to heat the

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 4 Base Case.

Figure 5Oil Production Rate (STB/D) vs Time (years).

surrounding formation by thermal conduction, and make oil less viscous; this allows for injecting
more steam, forcing it to drain the oil field, preferably at the heel of both wells.
y The main function of the Steam Trap control mechanism is to allow the formation of the steam
chamber for preventing the production of live steam.
Advantages
y Drainage area is increased, due to horizontal well, allowing reaching reserves that could not be
drained with vertical wells.
y Better manage of thin oil formations of great lateral continuity, with gas layers, or aquifer bottom.

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 6 Cumulative Oil (green), Water (blue) and Gas (red) vs Time (years).

Table 4 Sensitivity analysis for Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage.

Better sweep efficiency, reduction of the steam canalization processes, better recovery rate.
Override elimination.
Reduces water coning possibilities, due to less pressure drop per length unit.
Greater crude-oil mobility. Once the oil contacts steam, this remains hot until drained to the
production well.
y Dos not require formation fracturing to achieve steam distribution; therefore, steam injecting
pressures can be low.
y Depending on the depth and pressure of the oil field, most SAGD projects have not required
artificial lifting methods to carry the fluid to the surface.
Disadvantages
y
y
y
y

y Handling high steam quantities, particularly for thin and low-quality oil fields.
y Heat losses due to larger overburden.

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 7SAGD Case, 3D view.

Figure 8 Oil Production Rate (STB/D) vs Time (years).

y Needs an enormous source of fresh water.

y Limited by oil-well depths, as imposed by steams critical pressure.

APPLICATION CRITERIA OF THE SAGD TECHNOLOGY

The main variables in the selection of the reservoirs in which the technology is going to be implemented
are:
These parameters were taken from the available information of worldwide projects in Canada, USA,
Venezuela, Romania and China.

LOCATION
The SAGD project will be developed in the Maraon basin, reservoir Vivian, North Jungle of Peru.

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 9 Cumulative Oil (STB/D) vs Time (years).

Figure 10 Cumulative Water (STB/D) vs Time (years).

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 11Cumulative Gas (MSCF/D) vs Time (years).

Figure 12Oil Production Rate Comparative Graph between SAGD and Cold Production Recovery.

10

SPE-171108-MS

Figure 13Oil Production Cumulative Comparative Graph between SAGD and Cold Production Recovery.

RESERVOIR CHARACTERIZATION
The following reservoir properties were taken from the heavy oil fields of the Peruvian Jungle, which are
summarized in the following Table.
For the purpose of this study the SAGD process will be compared with the cold production recovery,
these methods require a study that incorporates factors such as:
y
y
y
y
y
y
y

Reserves.
Fluid properties
Reservoir continuity.
Reservoir quality.
Surface facilities.
Expected recovery factors and production rates.
Environmental sensitivity.

As a result of this complete analysis a matrix was prepared with the data of the Table 1 and the
characteristic of the Maraon Basin.

SAGD SIMULATION IN THE RESERVOIR

The numeric simulation of the SAGD process was carried out in a conceptual model of the Block AL, with
the aim to understand the dynamic fluid behaviour, optimize the development plan and estimate the
recovery factor.
The assumptions and input data for the sector model are summarized below:
y The model grid cells dimensions are 20 8 10. With a refining of 3 to 1 over the main area.
y The model is dipping in order to represent the structure geological features surrounding AL-1 well
area.

SPE-171108-MS

11

Figure 14 Diagram to apply an EOR process2.

One equilibrium region with one PVT region to represent the fluid of Vivian.
Three saturation functions based on the available Special Core Analysis report.
The initial water saturations are adjusted to match the petrophysical interpretation.
Permeability, porosity and Kv/Kh were taken from core data. Average rock and fluid properties
were assigned for each layer.
y A strong water drive mechanism type Carter- Tracy was included, with porosity of 25%, permeability of 4 Darcy, depth of 4700 ft.
Base Case
y
y
y
y

y A Cold Production Recovery.

y Vertical producer well AL-1.
y Parameters:

Layers OPEN are from number 5 to number 10.

Maximum Liquid Rate 1200 STB/D.
Minimum Oil Rate 50 STB/D.
Maximum Water Cut 98%.
Years of simulation: 16 years.

As an example, 3D view of Base Case is shown:

The results of this process were:
SAGD Cases
The main Parameters for the SAGD Cases are:

One horizontal producer well AL-1 in layer 17.

One horizontal injector well INJ-1 in layer 12.
Steam Quality of 70%.

12

SPE-171108-MS

Table 5OOIP, FOPT, FGPT, FWPT and RF by method.

Maximum Liquid Rate 1200 STB/D.

Minimum Oil Rate 50 STB/D.
Maximum Gas Rate 4500 MSCF/D.
Maximum Water Cut 98%.
Years of simulation: 16 years.

To realize a complete study of the impact of this technology, a sensitivity analysis was made with the
following special parameters:
As an example, 3D view of a General SAGD Case is shown:
The results of the SAGD sensitivity analysis were:
Comparison of Results
The following graphics compare the results of the SAGD process and the cold production recovery.
Analysis of Recovery Factor
In order to determine the Original Oil in place of each case, the following assumptions were taken:

For Base Case we assume a vertical well with a drainage radio of 720 ft and the volume in place
was determined as the volume of a cylinder with this radio.
For SAGD Case we assume an elliptical area in the base with axes of 720 ft and 1000 ft
respectively and also the same height was assumed.
As result of this analysis, the following table summarizes the OOIP, Cumulative Oil Production and
Recovery Factor of the different Cases:
The study show us that the case SAGD 2 is the best case to apply, due to has the highest recovery factor
(25.7%), which is around 400% in addition of the Case Base.

CONCLUSIONS
1. Almost all the alternative cold production technologies such as CHOPS and Waterflooding, but
horizontal and multilateral wells, were disregarded from this study due to their expected low
impact in increasing recovery factor of heavy oil production.
2. Thermal oil recovery processes, are based on the decreased viscosity, which plays an important
role in the mobilization and recovery of oil. That is why; currently many countries are showing
interest in applying this technology in order to make better use of their resources.
3. The use of thermal methods is a good option for reservoirs where viscosity is quite high and makes
almost impossible to produce the oil without blending with any kind of diluents (NAFTA, Diesel
or light oil).
4. The use of screening, allows a more accurate perspective of the recovery methods with the greatest
potential application, when you have little information of a field/reservoir.

SPE-171108-MS

13

5. As it was expected according to screening criteria matrix, SAGD appears to be a good alternative
to develop heavy oil resources of Block AL with a significant higher recovery factor (in between
20% to 25%). Wells located at the top of structure can be selected for this technology while others
located at the flank may be used for watering out.
6. The SAGD process is a good alternative for heavy oil recovery compared with cyclic steam
injection, because it uses the gravity drainage as the only mechanism of production and uses short
distances between wells.
7. With the results obtained in this study provides a guide for the selection of heavy oil reservoirs
candidates for SAGD application in Maraon Basin.

FUTURE
y A further detailed feasibility study should be recommended for an integrated development plan.
y Make a sensitivity analysis with different steam qualities to improve the project.
y To apply a pilot program for case SAGD 2, it is recommended to follow the next
diagram:
y The variations of the SAGD process as ES-SAGD, FA-SAGD and downhole
steam generator for SAGD should analyzed to apply screening criteria.
REFERENCES
1. B. Verkaczy, K, N, Jha and Saskoil, Screening of Heavy Oil Reservoir for Enhanced Oil
Recovery by Thermal, SPE 85-36-32.
2. Bruno G. Pinguet, More than 10 years experience with multiphase flowmeter in Heavy Oil with
either Cold or Thermal Production, WHOC12-131.
3. Erik Giovany Montes Pez, Aplicacin de Nuevas Tecnologas Para la Recuperacin de Crudo
Pesado en Yacimientos Profundos, UIS Ingenieras: 4150.
4. Vladimir Alvarado and Eduardo Manrique, Enhanced Oil Recovery: An Update Review,
Energies ISSN 1996-1073.
5. Schlumberger, The importance of Heavy Oil, Oilfield Review Fall 2006.
6. Schlumberger, Highlighting Heavy Oil, Oilfield Review Summer 2006.
7. Schlumberger, Yacimientos de Petrleo Pesado, Oilfield Review Invierno 2003.
8. Robles J., Application of Advanced Heavy Oil Production Technologies in the Orinoco HeavyOil- Belt, Venezuela, SPE 69848, presented at SPE International Thermal Operations and Heavy
Oil Symposium, Porlamar, Marguerita Island, Venezuela, March 2001.
9. Capeleiro Pinto A.C., Branco C.C., de Matos J.S., Vieira P.M., Da Silva Guedes S., Pedros C.J.,
Decnop Coelho A.C. and Ceciliano M.M., Offshore Heavy Oil in Campos Basin: The Petrobras
Experience. Paper OTC 15823 presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, May
2003.
10. T.B. Jensen, K.J. Harpole, and A. sthus, EOR Screening for Ekofisk, Phillips Petroleum
Company.
11. Elizabeth Segama Candiotti, Victor a. Huerta Quiones, Visualization of technological alternatives to maximize the recovery of heavy oil fields. HOLA-Mexico-2013
12. P.E. Llaguno, F. Moreno, R. Garcia, Z. Mndez and E. Escobar A Reservoir Screening
Methodology for SAGD Applications, PDVSA-INTEVEP, S.A.
13. J.J Taber, F.D. Martin, and R.S. Seright, EOR Screening Criteria Revisited- Part 1: Introduction
to Screening Criteria and Enhanced Recovery Field Projects, New Mexico Petroleum Recovery
Research Center.

14

SPE-171108-MS

14. J.J Taber, F.D. Martin, and R.S. Seright, EOR Screening Criteria Revisited- Part 2: Introduction
to Screening Criteria and Enhanced Recovery Field Projects, New Mexico Petroleum Recovery
Research Center.
15. Yaser Souraki, Mohammad Ashrafi and Ole Torsaeter, A Comparative Field-Scale Simulation
Study on Feasibility of SAGD and ES-SAGD Processes in Naturally Fractured Bitumen Reservoirs, NTNU Trondheim - Norway.
16. Max Medina, SAGD: R&D for Unlocking Unconventional Heavy-Oil Resources, Weatherford
Completion and Liner Services - Canada.
17. Nestor Palacios Chun, Assessment of Thermal Processes to Improve the Recovery Efficiency in
Heavy Oil Fields of the Peruvian Jungle, EMW International Student Petroleum Congress &
Career Expo 2014
18. Edwin Rodriguez and Jaime Orjuela, Feasibility to apply the Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage
(SAGD) technique in the countrys heavy crude-oil fields, Ecopetrol and Hocol.
19. Apuntes de clase de Geologa Estructural, Universidad Nacional de Ingeniera.
20. Surmont Energy, SAGD Technology1.
21. Schlumberger, Has the time come for EOR?2.