Advertisement

CO2 foam for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) applications using low adsorption surfactant structure

  • Muhammad Sagir
  • Muhammad Mushtaq
  • Muhammad Bilal Tahir
  • Muhammad Suleman Tahir
  • Sami Ullah
  • Khurum Shahzad
  • Umer Rashid
Original Paper
  • 45 Downloads

Abstract

The ability of surfactants to interact with CO2 is essential if the CO2 foam is intended to augment a water flooding process as a method to displace oil from a reservoir. Apart from improved sweep efficiency of foam, CO2 reduces the oil viscosity, causes the oil to swell, lowers the high interfacial tension between oil and rock, dislodges the immobile oil, and hence increases the volumetric sweep efficiency. The surfactant must possess suitable structure to successfully play these roles. In this context, a new surfactant with different functionalities has been synthesized to examine its CO2-philicity. The surfactant was evaluated for the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) suitability by firstly examining the fluid–fluid compatibility in various temperatures, salinity, and hardness conditions. The foaming properties were also assessed. The interfacial tension (IFT) between the surfactant and CO2 gas at 90 °C and up to 2700 psi pressure revealed some interesting findings. The IFT of CO2–brine without surfactant dropped from a value of 70 to 30 mN/m when CO2 critical pressure approached 1070 psi, and it remained at 30 mN/m at higher pressures. The incorporation of surfactant achieved the lowest IFT of 1.76 mN/m at critical pressure conditions at 90 °C. The foam stability of the surfactants was also evaluated. In the core flooding test, the mobility reduction factor (MRF) values reflected the same trend as that of IFT lowering and foam stability. The three-tailed surfactant showed the MRF of 3.4 while alpha olefin sulfonate (AOS) (commercial surfactant) had the MRF value of 1.3. The three-tailed surfactant provided the highest recovery of 96% of residual oil in place (ROOIP). The adsorption of the surfactant was low at less than 0.5 mg/g.

Keywords

Surfactants Mobility reduction factor Interfacial tension Enhanced oil recovery 

References

  1. Farzaneh SA, Sohrabi M (2013) A review of the status of foam application in enhanced oil recovery. Presented at the SPE-164917-MS. EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition incorporating SPE Europec, London, UK, 10–13 June, 2013Google Scholar
  2. Gold S, Eastoe J, Grilli R, Steytler DC (2006) Branched trichain sulfosuccinates as novel water in CO2 dispersants. Colloid Polym Sci 284(11):1333–1337.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00396-006-1519-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Golkari A, Riazi M (2017) Experimental investigation of miscibility conditions of dead and live asphaltenic crude oil–CO2 systems. J Pet Explor Prod Technol 7(2):597–609.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-016-0280-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kamali F, Hussain F (2017) Field-scale simulation of CO2 enhanced oil recovery and storage through SWAG injection using laboratory estimated relative permeabilities. J Pet Sci Eng 156:396–407.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2017.06.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Khalil F, Asghari K (2006) Application of CO2-foam as a means of reducing carbon dioxide mobility. J Can Pet Technol 45(5).  https://doi.org/10.2118/06-05-02
  6. Kuuskraa VA, Godec ML, Dipietro P (2013) CO2 utilization from “next generation” CO2 enhanced oil recovery technology. Energy Procedia 37:6854–6866.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.618 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Liu Y, Grigg RB, Svec RK (2005) CO2 foam behavior: influence of temperature, pressure, and concentration of surfactant. Presented at SPE Production Operations Symposium. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, US, 16–19 April, 2005Google Scholar
  8. Mohamed A, Sagisaka M, Hollamby M, Rogers SE, Heenan RK, Dyer R (2012) Hybrid CO2-philic surfactants with low fluorine content. Langmuir 28:6299–6306.  https://doi.org/10.1021/la3005322 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Myers D (2006) Surfactant science and technology, 3rd edn. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  10. Pal S, Mushtaq M, Banat F, Al Sumaiti AM (2018) Review of surfactant-assisted chemical enhanced oil recovery for carbonate reservoirs: challenges and future perspectives. Pet Sci 15(1):77–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Perera MSA, Gamage RP, Rathnaweera TD, Ranathunga AS, Koay A, Choi X (2016) A review of CO2-enhanced oil recovery with a simulated sensitivity analysis. Energies 9(7):481.  https://doi.org/10.3390/en9070481 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Piang-Siong W, De Caro P, Lacaze-Dufaure C, Shum CSA, Hoareau W (2012) Effect of catalytic conditions on the synthesis of new aconitate esters. Ind Crop Prod 35:203–210.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2011.06.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Puerto M, Hirasaki GJ, Miller CA, Barnes JR (2012) Surfactant systems for EOR in high-temperature, high-salinity environments. SPE J 17(1):11–19.  https://doi.org/10.2118/129675-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sagir M, Tan IM, Mushtaq M, Nadeem M (2013) CO2 mobility and CO2/brine interfacial tension reduction by using a new surfactant for EOR applications. J Dispers Sci Technol 35(11):1512–1519.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01932691.2013.859087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sagir M, Tan IM, Mushtaq M, Lukman I, Nadeem M, Azam MR, Hashmet MR (2014a) Novel surfactant for the reduction of CO2/brine interfacial tension. J Dispers Sci Technol 35(3):463–470.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01932691.2013.794111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sagir M, Tan IM, Mushtaq M, Talebian SH (2014b) FAWAG using CO2 philic surfactants for CO2 mobility control for enhanced oil recovery applications. Presented at SPE Saudi Arabia Section Technical Symposium and Exhibition, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia, 21–24 April, 2014.  https://doi.org/10.2118/172189-MS
  17. Simjoo M, Dong Y, Andrianov A, Talanana M, Zitha PLJ (2011) Novel insight into foam mobility control. Presented at International Petroleum Technology Conference. International Petroleum Technology Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, 15–17 November, 2011.  https://doi.org/10.2523/iptc-15338-ms
  18. Skrzypek J, Lachowska M, Kulawska M, Moroz H (2008) Synthesis of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate over methane sulfonic acid catalyst. Kinetic investigations. React Kinet Catal Lett 93(2):281–286.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11144-008-5250-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tapriyal D (2009) Design of non-fluorous CO2 soluble compounds. PhD thesis, Swanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. Xing D, Wei B, McLendon WJ, Enick RM, McNulty S, Trickett K (2012) CO2-soluble, nonionic, water-soluble surfactants that stabilize CO2-in-brine foams. SPE J 17(4):1172–1185.  https://doi.org/10.2118/129907-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yadav GD, Kulkarni HB (2000) Ion-exchange resin catalysis in the synthesis of isopropyl lactate. React Funct Polym 44(2):153–165.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1381-5148(99)00090-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhang Z, Cai J, Chen F, Li H, Zhang W, Qi W (2018) Progress in enhancement of CO2 absorption by nanofluids: a mini review of mechanisms and current status. Renew Energy 118:527–535.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.11.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Sagir
    • 1
  • Muhammad Mushtaq
    • 2
  • Muhammad Bilal Tahir
    • 3
  • Muhammad Suleman Tahir
    • 1
  • Sami Ullah
    • 1
  • Khurum Shahzad
    • 4
  • Umer Rashid
    • 5
  1. 1.Chemical Engineering DepartmentUniversity of GujratGujratPakistan
  2. 2.ADNOC Research and Innovation CenterKhalifa University of Science & TechnologyAbu DhabiUnited Arab Emirates
  3. 3.Department of PhysicsUniversity of GujratGujratPakistan
  4. 4.Center of Excellence in Environmental Studies (CEES)King Abdul Aziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia
  5. 5.Institute of Advanced TechnologyUniversiti Putra MalaysiaSerdangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations