Polymer Flooding in Space-Constrained Reservoirs: Technical and Economic Assessment of Liquid vs. Powder Polymers

空间受限油藏中的聚合物驱油:液态聚合物与粉末状聚合物的技术经济评估

阅读:1

Abstract

This study evaluates the technical and economic feasibility of liquid polymer emulsions as substitutes for powder polymers in polymer flooding applications, particularly in space-constrained, low-permeability reservoirs in Austria. Rheological tests determined that target viscosities of 20 mPa·s at 20 °C and a shear rate of 7.94 s(-1) were achieved using concentrations of 1200 ppm for liquid polymer 1 (LP1), 2250 ppm for liquid polymer 2 (LP2), and 1200-1400 ppm for powder polymers. Injectivity tests revealed that liquid polymers encountered challenges in 60 mD and 300 mD core plugs, with pressure stabilization not achieved at injection rates of 1-2.5 ft/day. Powder polymers demonstrated stable injectivity, with powder polymer 1 (PP1) showing an optimal performance at 10 ft/day and a low residual resistance factor (RRF). Two-phase core floods using PP1 and powder polymer 2 (PP2) at 1 ft/day yielded incremental oil recovery factors of approximately 5%, with a maximum of 8% observed for higher viscosity slugs. Economic analysis indicated that over a 3-year horizon, liquid polymers are 30% cheaper than powder polymer Option 1 but 100% more expensive than Option 2. Over a 10-year horizon, liquid polymers are 50% more expensive than both powder polymer options. Although liquid polymers offer logistical advantages, they are unsuitable for low-permeability reservoirs. Powdered polymers, particularly PP1, are recommended for pilot implementation due to superior injectivity, mechanical stability, and recovery performance.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。