An M.

sc Thesis Proposal

By

BASSEY SAMUEL HOGAN

(B.Eng Petroleum Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Owerri.)

Matric No: 197022

On

“IMPROVING WELL DELIVERABILITY IN GAS-CONDENSATE

RESERVOIR USING GAS INJECTION”

Submitted to

DR. OLUGBENGA FALODE.

In the Department of Petroleum Engineering, University of Ibadan as requirement

for Thesis undertaking for the award of a master’s degree

June 2017.
 ABSTRACT

In this age of ever increasing Energy demand for various economic, social,

welfare purposes, there is an ever growing need for advancement in Energy

sourcing. Thus search for fossil fuels has moved from easy to produce reserves

(due to scarcity of new reserves, depletion of hydrocarbon reserves and increasing

demand for energy resource) to more complex to produce reserves. In gas

condensate reservoirs, depletion results in the condensation of valuable fluids

(condensate) in the reservoir resulting in condensate blockage which can cause a

considerable loss in the well productivity by blocking the flow of gas to the well

and substantially reduces the overall energy output.

An ECLIPSE 3D simulator would be the main tool used to carry out this

work and it is hoped that upon its conclusion the unwanted effect(s) of condensate

blockage can be remediated in gas-condensate reservoirs.

1.1 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
Gas condensate reservoir differs from dry gas reservoir tremendously, it also
cannot be considered as an oil reservoir. One would not be wrong in saying that a
gas condensate reservoir is an intermediate between Oil and Gas reservoirs. The
gas condensate reservoir produces to a large extent mostly gas with minimal
amount of liquid droplets frequently occurring at the separator. Condensate can be
defined as a low-density, high-API gravity(usually 50-120 degrees) mixture of
hydrocarbon (mostly pentane and heavier fraction) phase that generally occurs in Commented [LO1]: METHANE I THINK

association with Natural gas. Its appearance as liquid phase is dependent on

temperature and pressure conditions in the reservoir allowing condensation of
liquid from vapor. The production of the condensate can however be very technical
and complicated due to the pressure sensitivity of some condensates: During
production, there exist the risk of these condensate changing from gas to liquid if
the reservoir pressure drops below the dew point. Reservoir pressure can be
maintained above the dew point pressure by means of fluid injection if gas
production is preferable to liquid production. (Schlumberger Oilfield Glossary).

As the bottom hole flowing pressure (BHFP) decreases below the dewpoint, there
is a liquid dropout around the wellbore. This eventually results in an oil saturation
above the critical saturation and start of two-phase flow into the wellbore. The
radius of this two-phase flow region depends upon the pressure drop profile in the
reservoir. When the reservoir pressure reaches below the dewpoint, overall liquids
dropout in the reservoir does not usually result in liquid saturations above the
critical values. Therefore, the liquid phase in the reservoir as a whole remains
immobile. But the relative permeability to gas is now reduced in the reservoir as
well as the two phase region around the wellbore.
 Determination of deliverability in gas condensate well has been a long
standing challenge without an easy solution. When BHFP drops below the dew
point, a region of high condensate drop out accumulates near the wellbore,
resulting in reduced gas permeability and lower gas deliverability. The effect of
condensate blockage region depends on PVT, absolute and relative permeability
and how the well is being produced. Reduced gas permeability because of
condensate blockage is important only when condensate blockage pressure drop is
significant relative to the total-well (tubing and reservoir) pressure drop and the
BHFP reaches a minimum and the well is forced to go on decline. Well
deliverability is an important issue in the development of many gas condensate
reservoirs. When the well bottom hole flowing pressure falls below the dew point,
condensate liquid builds up around the well bore, causing a reduction in gas
permeability and well productivity. The liquid saturation may reach values as high
as 50 or 60 per cent, and the well deliverability may be reduced by up to an order
of magnitude (Robert Mott 1999).Most of the pressure drop from condensate Commented [LO2]:

blockage occurs within a few feet of the well bore, where flow rates are very high. Commented [LO3R2]:

There is a growing body of evidence from laboratory coreflood experiments to

suggest that gas condensate relative permeabilities increase at high flow rates, and
that these changes can be correlated against the capillary number (Henderson 1996,
G.D. et al, Ali 1997, J.K. et al2007). The capillary number is a dimensionless
Commented [LO4R2]:
number which measures the relative strength of viscous and capillary forces. The Commented [LO5R2]: Add previous scholars who have
researched on something similar to your work but couldn’t get d
increase in mobility at high capillary number is sometimes termed ‘velocity desired outcome as yours. Show why your project is relevant.

stripping’.
A gas condensate reservoir as earlier discussed is a single phase fluid in the
reservoir. It consists predominantly of Methane (C1) and other short-chain
Hydrocarbons, but it also consist of long-chain Hydrocarbons which are the heavy
fractions. Under certain temperature and pressure conditions, this fluid will
separate into two phase, a gas and a liquid that is termed retrograde condensation.
As reservoir produces, the formations temperature is rarely altered but
pressure continues to decline. The largest drop in pressure is often observed near
the producing wells. When the pressure in a gas condensate reservoir decrease to a
certain point which is termed the saturation pressure or the dew point, a rich liquid
phase comprising of heavy ends drop out of the solution; the gas phase is slightly
depleted of heavy ends. A continued decrease in pressure increases the volume of
liquid phase up to the maximum amount; liquid then decreases. This behavior is
displayed in PVT diagram (Fig 1.1) below.
The amount of liquid present depends not only on the pressure and
temperature but also on the fluid composition. A dry gas by definition has
insufficient heavy components to generate liquids in the reservoir, even with near
wellbore drawdown. A lean gas condensate generates a small volume of liquid
phase, less than 100bbl/MMcuft and a rich gas condensate generates a larger
volume of liquid, general greater than 150bb/MMcuft. There are no established
values in the definition of lean and rich, and further description such as very lean
are also applied, so these figure should be taken merely as indicators of range.(Li
Fan et al, 2005)
Fig 1.1 A Pressure, Volume and Temperature (PVT) diagram show a single
phase behavior outside the two-phase region(Li Fan et al, 2005)

Fig 1.2 Rich gas condensate behavior. (Li Fan et al, 2005)
 Fig 1.3 Lean gas condensate behavior.(Li Fan et al, 2005)

Determining the fluid properties is vital in any given reservoir even more so
in gas condensate reservoirs. For example, condensate/gas ratio plays an important
role in the estimates for the sales potential of both liquid and gas, which are needed
to size surface production facilities. The amount of liquid that maybe stranded in
the reservoir also requires some economic consideration. These considerations and
others such as artificial lift and stimulation technologies depends on accurate fluid
sampling. Small errors in capturing samples, such as incorrect amount of captured
liquid, can have far reaching errors in measured behavior; some utmost care must
be taken in the sampling process.

Once reservoir fluids enter the wellbore, both temperature and pressure
conditions may change. Condensate fluid can be produced into the wellbore, but
the liquid can also drop out within the wellbore because of changes in condition. If
gas does not have sufficient energy to carry the liquid to the surface, liquid loading
or fallback in the wellbore occurs because the liquid is denser than the gas phase
traveling along with it. If the liquid falls back down the wellbore, the liquid
percentage will increase and may potentially restrict production. (Fleshmanet
al1996)

When condensate liquid first condense out of the gas, it is immobile because
of capillary pressure acting on the fluids. That is, a microscopic liquid droplet,
once formed will tend to be trapped in the pore throats. Even for rich gas
condensates with substantial liquid dropout, condensate mobility, which is the
ratio of relative permeability to viscosity, remains insignificant away from
wellbores. As a consequence, the condensate that forms in most of the reservoir is
lost to production unless the depletion plan includes gas cycling. The effect of this
drop out on gas mobility is typically negligible. Near a producing well, the
situation is different. Once bottomhole pressure drops below the dew point, a near-
well pressure sink forms around the well. As gas is drawn into the pressure sink,
liquid drops out. After a brief transient period, enough liquid accumulates and its
mobility becomes significant. The gas and liquid competes for flow paths as
described by the formation’s relative permeability relationships. Condensate
blockage is a result of decreased gas mobility around a producing well below dew
point. Reservoir pressure dropping below dew point has two main results, both
negative: gas and condensate production decrease because of near-well blockage,
and the produced gas contains fewer valuable heavy ends because of drop out
throughout the reservoir, where the condensate have insufficient mobility to flow
towards the well.(Li Fan et al, 2005)
Fig 1.4 Condensate blockage diagramatic representation.(Li Fan et al, 2005)

1.1.1 CONDENSATE BANKING

Gas condensate reservoirs typically are single-phase gas in the reservoir at point of
discovery, but yields small amount of oil at the surface (approximately 10-
300STB/MMscf). They have a composition of mainly Methane and small fractions
of intermediate and heavy ends (87% C1, 9% C2-6, and 4% C7+). The temperature
encountered in this reservoirs (200-400oF) are higher than the critical temperature
of temperature of the fluid but lower than the maximum temperature extent of its
two phase region. The figure below illustrates these: Commented [LO6]: U didn’t explain condensate banking again.
If a technocrat reads it, na F you go get ohhh., Avoid regurgitation
and get to the point.
 Fig 1.5 Phase Diagram of Gas Condensate system, g= gas and
c=condensate.(Jairam Kamath, 2007)
As illustrated in the figure above, the gas is extracted, the pressure
isothermally declines and at the dew point, the first droplet of liquid formed from
the heavier hydrocarbon components appear. The injected gas can also modify the
phase behavior of the reservoir fluids leading to positive or negative implications
with regard to the recovery of the heavy fraction. The injection can cause an
increase in the dewpoint pressure of the reservoir fluid and leads consequently to
the retrograde condensation of the heavy

Fraction at the dew point pressure of the original reservoir fluid. The injected gas
can on the other hand result in the revaporization of the liquid previously formed m
the reservoir. The ultimate recovery will strongly depend on the phase behavior of
the mixture reservoir/injected fluid.(Jairam Kamath, 2007)
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Accurate fluid sampling.
PVT modelling of reservoir parameters.
Wettability effect in the reservoir.
Composition variation which aim to study how the compositions of heavy
components of a gas condensate system change with time around production wells
during depletion, and how the rate of the composition variation influences the fluid
thermodynamic properties. Commented [LO7]: NA!!!!! Eyes up!

1.3 AIM
The general aim of this work is to propose an accurate model to mitigate against
loss of valuable fluid(oil) to the reservoir in gas-condensate reservoirs, as such
greatly improving the well deliverability. Commented [LO8]: BRAVO

1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

 The first objective of this research is to better understand the negative
impact condensate-blockage has on total gas production in gas condensate
reservoirs. When condensate blockage occurs, it effects gas relative
permeability. Previous work done by Narayanaswamy (1998) suggests Non
Darcy effects tend to reduce the pressure and further produce more
condensate dropout. Commented [LO9]: U don’t need this, better placed in problem
statement.

 The next objective of this work was to develop and deploy a model to Commented [LO10]: Use “is”, it’s a proposal. Or better still, say
“the next objective will be to”

increase the productivity of gas/condensate from gas-condensate reservoirs

by way of gas injection.
 To assess the feasibility of reducing wellbore liquid blockage by gas
injection process.
  Development of required PVT property correlations, condensate
compressibility factor, density, viscosity and formation volume factor for
improved well deliverability prediction.
 Validation and comparison of improved model performance with a standard
industry reservoir simulator. Commented [LO11]: Objective 3 should come last, economic
analysis and feasibility should be done after the results have been
gotten.
Commented [LO12]: Eclipse is a standard reservoir simulator.
Try comparing with a previous work similar to yours. You don’t
need to put that in the objective
1.5 LITERATURE REVIEW
Many experimental and numerical studies have been completed which show
various ways to reduce condensate saturation around the wellbore. Some studies
have focused on increasing viscous forces and decreasing interfacial tension, while
others have focused on gas injection and decreasing liquid wetness. Ali et al.
(1993) explored decreasing interfacial tension in order to reduce condensate
saturation. They identified problem areas in condensate behavior, and proposed the
need for coreflooding research and physical equilibrium property measurements.
Ali et al. (1993) also showed how interfacial tension can influence liquid mobility
in a gas condensate system for near critical fluids. They questioned the effect of
IFT on liquid mobility, showed the potential of low-tension partial pressure
maintenance as an efficient production technique, and found that gravity plays a
strong effect on low-tension depletion. Boom etal. (1996) increased viscous forces
to reduce condensate blockage near the wellbore. They used model experiments to
study gas condensate mobility in the near-wellbore region, and found that both the
wetting and non-wetting phase are significantly increased in the model
experiments. They also found that the wetting phase relative permeability from the
experiments can be incorporated into the field. Ahmed et al. (1998) analyzed gas
injection methods as a solution to reducing condensate saturation around the
wellbore. They studied the feasibility of reducing wellbore liquid blockage by the
Huff ‘n’ Puff gas injection process, and found that the Huff ‘n’ Puff process is a
feasible option for reducing the liquid blockage in the near wellbore region.
Ahmed et al. (1998) also found that the process works best when it is initiated
before maximum liquid dropout. Li and Firoozabadi (June 2000) also
experimented with increasing viscous forces in order to reduce condensate
saturation. They used a phenomenological simple network model to study the
effects of gravity, viscous forces, interfacial tension, wettability, and relative
permeability of gas condensate systems. They found that wettability largely
impacts both critical condensate saturation and relative permeability, and that the
relative permeability may increase as the contact angle increases at certain
saturations. Li and Firoozabadi (April 2000) tried decreasing liquid wetness in
order to decrease condensate saturation in the near wellbore. They found that oil
recovery and phase relative permeability in gas-oil systems could be increased by
using FC-722 to alter the wettability of the matrix. They also found that the
wettability of porous media can be changed permanently to gas-wetting.

1.6 METHODOLOGY Commented [LO13]: The flowchart for the methodology

should be basic cos you haven’t gone deep into the project., its only
a synopsis. However, the flow chart for the main project should tell
the full story.
The study will be carried out using a numerical reservoir simulation of fluid
flow in a Gas condensate reservoir. A commercial simulator would be adopted
(Eclipse 3D Compositional simulator, E300) and used in this thesis to study how
well productivity can be enhanced by gas injection. The fluid data that will be used
is assumed to be accurate and will not result in errors that will affect the outcome
of the research. PVT modeling would be fine-tuned with the help of the PVTi file
section on the Eclipse simulator using the Peng Robinson EOS. This study would
not be complete if the economic viability of gas injection is not taken into
consideration, as such the expected outcome will be compared against current and
future economic indicators to verify its viability.
 Data Collection

Quantitative Qualitative
Research Research

Generation of Compositional model A comprehensive Literature review on Gas

using Eclipse 300 simulator condensate reservoir, effects of condensate
banking on deliverability and attempted
methodologies used to improve
deliverability.
PVT property correlations Development of injector
model for Gas injection

Analysis and discussion of Gas condensate

well deliverability Pre and post gas injection

Economic analysis and feasibility study on the

application of gas injection in gas condensate
reservoir productivity using SWOT analysis
and tornado plot.

Conclusion and
Recommendation
1.7 ETHICS AND RISK ASSESSMENT

There are no risks or ethical technicalities with regards to this research. Secondary data will be used and will
be sourced online from previously related work(s) especially from the Ph.D. thesis from which this work was
inspired. Also, there are no specialized equipment or laboratory experiments to be utilized in achievement of the
objectives of this research.

1.8 CONCLUSION
 This study is designed to provide an insight into the mechanism of gas injection process in reducing gas-well
productivity losses due to condensate blocking in the near wellbore region. At the end of this study, I hope to show
that gas injection tremendously affect production from gas condensate reservoirs positively.

REFERENCES
Ahmed, T., Evans, J., Kwan, R., and Vivian, T. (1998). Wellbore Liquid Blockage
inGas-Condensate Reservoirs. Paper SPE 51050 presented at the SPE
Eastern Regional Meeting, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 9 -11 November.

Ali, J., Butler, S., Allen, L., and Wardle, P. (1993). The Influence of Interfacial
 Tension onLiquid Mobility in Gas Condensate Systems. Paper SPE 26783
presented at the SPEOffshore European Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland,
7 -10 September.

Ali, J.K. et al (1997): “The Effects of High-Velocity Flow and PVT Changes the
Wellbore on Condensate Well Performance, “paper SPE 39823,presented
at the SPEAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, 5-8
October.
Boom, W., Wit, K., Zeelenberg, J., Weeda, H., and Maas, J. (1996). On the Use of
Model Experiments for Assessing Improved Gas-Condensate Mobility
under Near-WellboreFlow Condition. Paper SPE 36714 presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conferenceand Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 6-9
October.

Fleshman R, Harryson and Lekic O (Spring 1999): “Artificial lift for high-volume
Production,” Oilfield Review 11, no 1: 48-63.
Henderson, G.D. et al. (June 1996): “Measurement and Correlation of Gas
Condensate Relative Permeability by the Steady-StateMethod,”SPEJ.
Jairam Kamath (April 2007): Deliverability of Gas Condensate reservoirs – Field
Experience and Prediction techniques, Chevron.

Li Fan et al (2005): “Understanding Gas-Condensate Reservoirs” Oilfield review

 winter.
Li, K. and Firoozabadi, A. (June 2000). Phenomenological Modeling of Critical
CondensateSaturation and Relative Permeabilities in Gas Condensate
Systems, SPEJ 5 (2):138-147.

Narayanaswamy, G. (1998). Well Productivity of Gas Condensate Reservoirs.

M.Sc Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas.

Robert Mott, SPE, Andrew Cable and Mike Spearing (3-6 October 1999), SPE,
AEATechnology:“A New Method of Measuring RelativePermeabilities
for Calculating Gas-Condensate Well Deliverability”.
Schlumberger oil field glossary: “Condensate- geology”.