94-04-04

Electrical Heating

K. VINSOME
Dyad Engineering Inc.
B.C.W. McGEE
McMillan-McGee Canada Company
FE.VERMEULEN,FS.CHUTE
University of Alberta

Power
Conditioning
Unit
Current Flow

----,~

Surface
---~~----~

Ground Return Power Delivery

System System
(Casing String) (Tubing String)'

Overburden

Reservoir

Underburden
5 meters

FIGURE 1: Electrical heating single wellbore configuration (oil

Introduction production equipment not shown).

Electrical Resistance Heating
Electrical heating is a thermal process which can be applied to
a well to increase its productivity. The productivity increase is
substantial and comes about because of the removal of thermal
adaptable skin effects (visco-skin for example) and the reduction
of the oil viscosity in the vicinity of the wellbore. Salient features
of the process are:
• It is a continuous, not a cyclic process. Electrical heating
occurs simultaneously with production of fluids.
• Low frequency power (not microwave frequency) is used.
• All the downhole equipment can be contained within a
single wellbore.
Figure I describes how the process works. The specific system
described here is similar to Gill, 1969; Spencer, 1988; and Rice,
1992.
The essential components of an electrical heating system are:
• power supply,
• power delivery system,
• electrode assembly, and
• ground return.
The variable frequency (2 to 60 Hz), power supply (Isted,
1992), is capable of delivering up to 300 kW of power. The power
delivery system may consist of tubing, cables or a combination of
both. The electrode assembly consists of bare casing pipe with

April 1994, Volume 33, NO.4 29

 Reservoir
Pressure
Pressure
Live Oil
Gas in Solution
Live Oil Viscosity
Dead Oil (no gas) Oil Viscosity
(Drawn to emphasize concept, not to scale)
Rw Radius Re
FIGURE 2: Visco-skin concept.
fiberglass electrical isolation joints attached to the ends. The
length of the electrode and location in the reservoir is a matter of
engineering design. The current return or ground can be the casing
string above the fiberglass insulation.
Current leaves the power supply and is conducted down the
power delivery system to the electrode assembly. The electrode is
in electrical contact with the reservoir formation. From the elec-
trode, the current is forced to flow through the reservoir and return
to the power supply up the casing.
The electrical path in the reservoir is primarily electrolytic
because the conducting path is through the connate water in the
reservoir. The connate water is heated by electrical losses and the
remaining fluids and rock are heated by thermal conduction. The
heated radius, the distance at which the oil viscosity is much
reduced, can be three to seven metres (Vermeulen, 1988).
The amount of power to stimulate the well effectively is gov-
erned by the production rate as cooler fluids flow from the reser-
voir towards the well as the hot fluids are produced. Too much
power can result in excessive temperatures and can damage the
electrode assembly. The use of reservoir simulation to define
operating power for a particular flowrate is therefore critically
important.
Visco-skin
The visco-skin is a zone of high oil viscosity that develops in
the low-pressure region near the wellbore. It occurs in most natu-
rally producing oil wells, but is especially prevalent in saturated
heavy oils of 10 to 24° API gravity (McGee, 1989). Visco-skin
can best be described by reference to Figure 2.
Radially approaching the wellbore from the reservoir, the pres-
sure decreases rapidly to the producing pressure. As the pressure
drops, more and more gas evolves from the oil into the gaseous
phase. A result of gas evolving from the oil is a viscosity profile
like that shown in Figure 2. The oil viscosity reaches a maximum
at the wellbore and decreases rapidly to the original oil viscosity
in the reservoir. The region of high oil viscosity usually extends
only 1 to 2 meters into the reservoir.
As a result, the flow is impaired. The magnitude of the produc-
tivity decrease (visco-skin) depends on the ratio of the oil viscosi-
ty at the wellbore to live oil viscosity, (viscosity parameter PIl). In
heavy oil reservoirs, PIl is typically greater than 10 and the pro-
ductivity decrease caused by visco-skin is typically two to three
times (McGee, 1991).
30
TETRAD
TETRAD is a commercial numerical reservoir simulator that
can operate in four main modes; a) black oil, b) multicomponent,
c) thermal, or d) geothermal. It is the simulator which was modi-
fied to incorporate electrical heating.
For the electrical heating process, the simulator is used to:
Calculate the amount of power required to maintain a
desired operating electrode temperature for any given
flow rate. When the well is initially on production, the
flowrate is less than during electrical heating. Since the
flowrate is expected to increase over a period of days before
stabilizing, the amount of power must be controlled to main-
tain the desired temperature of the electrode and to ensure
that the heating rate is consistent with the production.
Determine the location and design the length of the elec-
trode for a particular reservoir. The objective in locating the
electrode is to maximize the amount of oil heating and there-
fore confine the current distribution within the reservoir.
Also, the electrode is located away from high conductivity
regions so current does not bypass resistive oil zones. The
length of the electrode is limited by the pay thickness and
overall energy efficiency. The longer the electrode, the
smaller the electrode resistance and thus relatively more
power is consumed in the cables, tubing, and ground
systems.
Design the ground system. Establishing the electrical ground
so that the current distribution from the electrode is mini-
mally affected by the ground system.
Establish production forecasts for economic and engineer-
ing analysis.
Investigative research. In several instances, unique reservoir
characteristics or well designs, such as electrical heating of
horizontal wells, may require special calculations to deter-
mine the interaction of electrical heating and flow dynamics.
Modifications to TETRAD
Governing Equations
The partial differential equation for the electric potential is:
V' . 0' V'\jf ± J = 0 (1)
where J represents source (positive) or sink (negative) current
densities, usually from wells. The above equation represents the
conservation of current.
The time average rate of energy generation per unit volume is:
qe =O'V'\jf'V'\jf (2)
where the variable \jf is the root mean square (rms) value.
The electrical conductivity is given by an Archie type equation:
S2
0,=~nO'w---..l£.+(1-~)·O'r
a (3)
where the electrical conductivity of the water and rock, O'w and O'r
are temperature dependent functions.
Model Formulation
Equation (1) is of a form familiar in reservoir simulation, and
can be treated as such using standard finite differencing tech-
niques. However Equation (2) is more problematical because of
the quadratic nature of the way the potential enters into it.
Standard forms of differencing on this equation can lead to signif-
icant errors in the calculation of the energy generation within a
grid block. The best way we have found to eliminate this problem
.is to avoid finite difference forms of (2) altogether, and use
The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
 Which using the preceding relationships can be shown to
integrate to:

-2h (\IIm-\IIi)2
Qe - n cr i 1 rm
n-
ri (10)

The total energy generation in a grid block is the sum of terms

(10) over all three directions, and is strongly geometry dependent.
These integrals replace a finite difference approximation of the
energy generation. The formulation is completely conservative in
current and energy.
The geometries currently considered in the code are:
• Radial with variable grid thickness. The preceding example
is a special case of this with constant thickness.
• Curvilinear with variable thickness. The more normal cases
of a rectangular aerial grid with variable or constant thick-
ness are both special cases of the formulation.

FIGURE 3: Notation for finite difference scheme. The Well Model

instead analytical integration of the finite difference form of (1).
The method will be illustrated for the case of a block centred radi-
al grid of constant thickness, although it applies to grids of any
geometry.
The current flowing in the radial direction is:
The boundary conditions for current sources and sinks at wells
are handled in an analogous way to Peaceman's well model for
fluid flow (Peaceman, 1978). For example, for a well in the centre
of a square grid block we obtain:

1= -2nrhcr d\ll
Iw ~ 21thcr ('InI'r '1';)
Gt'1
rw (11)
dr (4)
where G is the geometrical factor, in this case equal to
Let i and j denote two adjacent grid blocks, and let 'lfm be the 11:

potential on the interface between them (see Figure 3). e -2 = 0.208

By integrating (4) By using superposition and the method of images the geometri-
cal factor can be calculated for all other common geometric
shapes such as non-square grid blocks, radial coordinates, blocks
with electrically impermeable boundaries, and so forth (Au et aI.,
1980).
..........................................(5) There is also an extra contribution to the energy generation
from the well model, in addition to the interblock flow terms (10).
Rearranging This is given by the current times the potential difference:

cri\lli + cr j\ll j
Qe = I w '(\IIw -\IIi) (12)
In(~) In( ~)
\11m = cr. cr· Boundary conditions at wells can be specified as either current
__ I_+ __J _ or potentials, in much the same way as rates or bottom hole pres-
In( r~) In( ;~ ) .......................................................................(6) sures can be imposed for regular wells. Automatic switching
between the constraints is also available, so that for example a
(\IIj-\IIi) well can have a current constraint Iw subject to a maximum bot-
I =- 2n rmh cr eft -'---'----'-- tom hole potential 'lfw' The techniques that have been developed
L1 (7) for multicompletion wells are also directly applicable, and have
been implemented.
where ~ is the spacing between the grid nodes, and
Solution Procedure
L1 rm
_ _ _ =_r_i + ~
In In.!l The solution of the finite difference equations for the electric
rmcreft. cr i crj (8)
potential is decoupled from the reservoir fluid flow and energy
conservation equations. The procedure is straightforward and very
efficient. It involves the following steps:
Equation (7) is the finite difference form for the current
1. Calculate the conductivity explicitly at the beginning of each
between two grid blocks. Because of the radial geometry the
time step.
effective conductivity (8) for calculating the interblock transmissi-
2. Solve the finite difference equations for the electric potential
bility is a harmonic radial average. Other geometric shapes give
other averages, but they are all some variation of a harmonic aver-
'If. This is done once per time step.
3. Evaluate the energy generation rate Qe in each grid block.
age. In the absence of sources and sinks, the finite difference form
of (1) is a sum of terms like (7) over all grid block faces. This is also only required once per time step.
The rate of energy generation in grid block i between points i 4. Use the Qe as source terms in the energy equation and solve
the reservoir flow and energy conservation equations in the
and m is then given by:
normal fashion (usually fully implicitly via a Newton-
Raphson iteration).
r 2
No stability problems have ever been encountered due to the
J
Qe = 2nrhcri ( ~~) dr explicit calculation of the conductivity. It appears to be a perfectly
ri (9) adequate approximation for all reasonable ranges of conditions

April 1994, Volume 33, NO.4 31

likely to be encountered. Equations
If an iterative solution is used in Step 2 for the solution of the
potential field, then scaling of the equations is useful to make the It is assumed that the amount of gas dissolved in the oil has a
convergence tolerance easy to choose. This is often done for the significant effect on the oil viscosity. The volume of free gas in
fluid flow equations by dividing each mass conservation equation the heavy oil reservoir, however, is assumed to have a small effect
by the total mass in the grid block, and the energy conservation on the pressure distribution. It is assumed that a steady state pres-
equation by the total energy in the grid block. The residuals all sure distribution in the reservoir has developed and is determined
then look like saturations. A similar scaling factor can be found by the following equation:
for the electric potential equation on dimensional grounds. With
the equation written in the form: In--L...
p(r) =Pw + I ;v (Pe - Pw)
n-f....
Vb V . crV\Jf + I w =0 rw (16)
.............................................................................(13)

The above equation combined with the Antoine K-value vapor

where Vb is the grid block volume, then the scaling factor is;
pressure correlation for the oil is used to estimate the distribution
of dissolved gas as a function of radius. Assuming a single com-
a units crETotal ponent in the gas phase from the oil phase, the Antoine K value
VbLlt correlation becomes:
.......................................................................(14)

where ETotal is the total internal energy in the grid block, ~t is the A.exp[_D)
time step, cxunits is the unit conversion factor, and L is a length 1 Tabs - E
K - - - - -----'-,.------'-
characteristic of the grid block. It has been found by trial and error - x(r) - p(r)
..........................................................(17)
that if:
where x is the mole fraction of gas component in the oil phase.
L = min( Llx, Lly, Llz) (15) Thus at constant temperature, combining Equation (16) with
Equation (17), results in the following mole fraction distribution
then exactly the same convergence tolerance can be chosen as for away from the wellbore:
the normal simulator conservation equations.

Practical Considerations *1 = l~";: )[p,ln( ,~)+ pw In(-+)]

rw (18)
Most simulations of electrical heating are in cylindrical coordi-
nates with the electrode well at the origin. A ground is also
required to close the electrical circuit, and this is generally located
on the casing. It can however be put somewhere near the exterior
A
vpc
= A· D_)
exp[__
T-E
abs (19)
radius of the grid via a ground well.
The heated zone does not extend very far from the electrode
The radial oil viscosity distribution can be determined by the
well, only a few metres, and the energy generation rates change
mixing rule for a two component oil. It is thus:
very rapidly with distance from the wellbore. This means that
small grid blocks are often used around the well. Experience has
( )_ x(r) l-x(r)
shown that to obtain a representative temperature of the electrode, /lo r - /l SGL . /l DO (20)
the size of the first grid block around the well should not be more
that five times the wellbore radius. During the transient period, the Starting with Darcy's radial-flow equation,
size of the first grid block should be about the size of the wellbore
radius. A gradual increase of the power during the transient period
can sometimes reduce the need for very small inner grid blocks.
Q = -2nkh . dP
o /lo(r) dr ................................................................................(21)
Fluid throughputs can then be extremely large, so it is necessary
to have a simulator that is fully implicit in the flow terms. Local
mesh refinement around the well is also a useful option, especially and separating the variables, substituting the viscosity equation,
at the ends of the electrode where the current density is greatest. and integrating gives the following equation:
A couple of further options are required for the practical simu-
lation of electrical heating. Firstly the total power has to be con-
trolled so that it does not exceed that of the generator. Secondly
the power has to be limited such that the temperature of the grid
block in which the electrode is completed is kept below the maxi- ..........................................................(22)
mum operating temperature of the electrode. Both these are
achieved by automatically adjusting electrode voltages to meet the where,
required constraints.

Semi-analytical Model
TETRAD is compared to a semi-analytical model developed
for scouting electrical heating for heavy oil type calculations
(McGee, 1990). The model takes into account the visco-skin. The
viscosity, pressure and temperature dependencies are coupled with The above equations can be rewritten in the traditional form of
Darcy's steady state radial-flow and transient-energy equations. Darcy's radial flow equation and a visco-skin:
The energy equation is solved analytically. Initially a steady state
pressure distribution is assumed. A pressure and temperature per-
turbation is introduced into the equations and the flow rate 2nkh(Pe - Pwj )
Qo = ----;::-'-------"----:0-
obtained from the perturbed solution. The procedure is iterative
/l wBo [In( ;: )+ svs ]
until the flowrate converges to a solution. . (24)

32 The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

 where the visco-sIan, svs is calculated from: TABLE 1: Input data for the model and field eases.

Parameter Model Case Field Case Units

'" = In( :: )[ IIP;(p" ) I]
............................................................. (25)
Total Heat Capacity
Oil Heat Capacity
1,875,000
2,100,000
1,875,000
2,100,000
J/(m3 OK)
J/(m3 OK)
Electrode Temperature 100.00 100.00 °C
Note that since the oil viscosity is indirectly a function of the Initial Temperature 24.00 24.00 °C
pressure, expressed in terms of the radial coordinate, the limits of Depth 423 423 meter
integration are from rw to reo Wellbore Radius .09 .09 meter
The above equation corrects for the pressure drop in the near Dri;linage Radius 100.00 100.00 meter
wellbore region caused by the changing oil viscosity.. The equa- Thickness 10.00 6.00 meter
tion is also useful when used with reservoir simulation. The visco- Porosity ,2p to .35 .25 to .35 fraction
skin is calculated and input in the skin definition of the well Permeability 2.00 10.00 D
model. Oil Viscosity @ T 1 80 120 mPa·sec
The procedure for calculating the temperature profile follows Oil Viscosity @ T 2 5,000 13,500 mPa·sec
Killough, 1986. The voltage in radial coordinates is: Reservoir Pressure 4,500 4,000 kPa
Wellbore Pressure 200.00 101.32 kPa
w
1n( -f-) Gas Solubility 25.00 15.00 sm 3/m 3
\If(r) = \lfwb - Ie 2nh eJ
......................................................................(26) Oil Density 950 985 kg/m 3
Oil Molecular Wt. 400 600

=[ ~:(~) 1(0/" -o/wb)

Oil Saturation .75 fraction
I,
..............................................................(27) Q = 2nkhIJ..p

As current flows through the reservoir connate water, the water

a 1~o;r) dr
heats up mainly because of resistance heating. If heat conduction rw (33)
is neglected, then the heat equation can be written as:
The oil viscosity as a function of temperature is calculated
2
=~[(\lfWb
using the following (Puttagunta, 1988):
(pc) aT (pC)oQo. aT -\lfre)1
2
In( ;: )
~DO(r)
t at 2nhr ar r
.............................(28) = antilo g1o { a
[1 + T(r)/135]
b L2}
The above energy balance accounts for convective cooling, .....................................(34)
accumulation of heat in the reservoir, and electrical heating.
Define the following constants: The above is combined with Equation (20) to obtain the oil
viscosity as a function of radius and substituted into the flow
integral.
(pC)o Qo The solution is carried out by first assuming a flow rate and
cl=--'--
(pC) t 2nhr
(29) then solving for the temperature distribution. A corrected flow
2
rate is then determined by integrating the radial-flow equation

c2 = _ e J [ (\If wb - \If re ) 1 over the length of the system with Gaussian quadratures. This
process continues until convergence is achieved.
(pC)t 1n( ;: )
.............. ; (30)

Then the solution to Equation (28) is,~ Analytical Comparison and Field Case
Numerical Simulation Study
C2 (r)
T(r,t)=T * (r,t)+T re +~ln-f Two sets of data are summarized in Table 1. Data associated
1 (31) with the "Model Case" are used to compare the numerical simula-
tor to the semi-analytical model. The "Field Case" data are used to
T*(r,t)=-C2 1n [ re ] compare the numerical calculations to a field test of the electrical
cl ~r2 +2c1t heating process. The Field Case data are obtained from the Frog
..........................................................(32) Lake Well llD-15-56-3W4M.

if
Semi-analytical Comparison
The purpose of this comparison is to demonstrate the utility of
the visco-skin equation [Equation (25)] when used in combination
with TETRAD. This example is for simulation of electrical heat-
Otherwise, ing in a reservoir with visco-sIan.
The utility of Equation (25) comes from being able to model
the visco-skin problem using a single component oil in TETRAD.
T*(r,t)=O.
A constant oil viscosity as a function of pressure and thus radius
during primary production results. Therefore, to account for the
The flow rate term in Equation (29) is determined iteratively visco-skin resultant of a varying oil viscosity in the reservoir, the
because of the dependency of viscosity on temperature and pres- wellbore radius and the drainage radius are used in Equation (25).
sure. However, the temperature distribution is not known, so the If the oil phase is defined to vary as a function of pressure in
flow integral must be solved numerically. The following equation TETRAD, then the wellbore radius and the radius of the first grid
is used to calculate the flow rate with the flow integral in the block are used to define the visco-skin. The oil viscosity Ilw, used
denominator: in Equation (25), and TETRAD is the estimated oil viscosity at

April 1994, Volume 33, No.4 33

 120

1"\
.... 100
~

~
l!! 80

60
"'.; -x- TETRAD
---+-

_x_
TETRAD
Field
Analytical
Q)
c.
40
i---- ---+-

E
Q)
I- I
20
I
o +--- 50 100 150 200 250
o 4 10
Production Days
Radius [meters]

FIGURE 4: TETRAD and analytical model temperature FIGURE 5: Production history of the field case well and TETRAD
distribution. match.

TABLE 2: TETRAD-analytical model comparison.
Parameter TETRAD Analytical Model
Primary Production 3.60 m3/day 3.60 m3/day
Stimulat$d Production 17.32 m3/day 17.06 m3/da.y
Productivity Factor 4.81
initial reservoir conditions (the live oil viscosity with dissolved
gas at initial reservoir pressure) The procedure is straightforward:
1. Construct the grid, fluid, rock, and thermal properties to be
consistent with the analytical model, (note that heat loss is
not accounted for in the analytical model, so is disabled in
TETRAD).
2. Calculate the visco-skin factor using Equation (25).
3. Set the skin value in the wellbore model of the simulator to
the calculation made in Step 1,
4. At the onset of electrical heating set the skin value to zero
(the high temperature around the wellbore caused by electri-
cal heating has dramatically reduced the oil viscosity there
and therefore removed the visco-skin),
The results of the calculations demonstrate the accuracy of the
simulator when compared to the simple analytical model. Both
results are essentially the same (11/2 % difference) as shown in
Table 2.
Very little difference is found in the temperature profiles
between the numerical simulation calculations and analytical as
shown in Figure 4.
It is noted that heat conduction in the analytical model is
assumed to be negligible in comparison to the other heat transfer
mechanisms; electrical heating and convective heat transfer.
TETRAD does account for conductive heat transfer from the well-
bore which may be significant in electrical heating of a horizontal
well, where the fluid flow velocities are much smaller and heat
transfer by conduction may be comparatively significant.
Field Case Comparison
The well was drilled into the Sparky formation in the Frog
Lake area and completed for electrical heating in June 1988. The
oil there is heavy and oil can be produced under primary condi-
tions. Figure 5 shows the production history of the well. Peak pro-
duction was 7.1 m 3/day and declined to 3.0 m3/day before electri-
cal heating. The well produced for 153 operating days and then
was electrically stimulated Immediately the production rate
increased to over 12 m3/day. The input power during stimulation
averaged 15 kW.
The development and subsequent removal of the visco-skin in
the near-wellbore region is one explanation to account for the oil
production during primary production and the rapid increase in
production after a short period of thermal stimulation. TETRAD,
in 2D radial coordinates, was used to match the production
response of the well during primary production and electrical
heating. As well, the simulator was used to determine the power
requirements to maintain an electrode operating temperature of
100°C for varying flow conditions.
34
The extent of the visco-skin during primary production had to
be calculated. The simulator was set to compositional mode and
the oil viscosity distribution after 153 days was calculated and is
shown in Figure 6. As shown in the figure, the region of high oil
viscosity is within one meter of the wellbore. The viscosity para-
meter is assumed to be about ten, which is based on the experi-
mental work of Beal (Beal, 1946). History matching the primary
production is based on the cumulative oil production, and is
shown in Figure 5.
At the onset of electrical heating, more than a threefold
increase in production was observed in the field. This was
achieved at initial power rates of less than 5 kW. When the elec-
trical heating option was turned on in the simulator, a production
response match was attained. The simulator verified the removal
of a visco-skin as a mechanism of production stimulation.
The actual productivity in the field was more than 4 times the
primary production. The calculated was close to 3112 times prima-
ry. The discrepancies in the calculations with the field data are
probably from the assumptions regarding the viscosity parameter,
other reservoir and fluid properties and the presence of skin other
than visco-skin. What is deemed important is the response of the
well to electrical heating and verification by numerical simulation.
It is important to estimate the operating temperature of the elec-
trode during electrical heating since the downhole equipment may
fail at temperatures above 100°C. Figure 7 shows the calculated
temperature distribution in the reservoir around the electrode.
These calculations are based on oil flow of 10 m3/day and input
power of 30 kW. Since the flowrate changes during the life of the
well, a curve showing the input power necessary for an electrode
temperature of 100°C for various flowrates is required. This curve
is shown in Figure 8, and is referred to as the P-Q Curve (Power
Flowrate). Operating the system above the line will result in peak
temperatures greater than 100°e.
The analytical model predicts a productivity increase of 4.1 for
our Field Case. The difference between the analytical and simula-
tion calculation is the assumption of a uniform temperature distri-
bution along the entire length of the electrode for the case of the
analytical model. In actuality, the power intensity is greater at the
ends of the electrode because of its finite length and a temperature
distribution such as shown in Figure 7 is more realistic. Thus the
average temperature of the electrode is lower and so the produc-
tion increase calculated will also be lower These differences are
consistent with calculations made by Baylor (Baylor, 1990). The
analytical model calculates an optimistic productivity increase.
Conclusions
A reservoir simulator, TETRAD, has been modified to incorpo-
rate the electrical heating equations. The simulator includes treat-
ment of the electrical conductivity as a function of temperature,
salinity, and saturation. The simulator was validated against ana-
lytical calculations and field data. It has been used to design sev-
eral electrode completions and assist in developing operating
strategies for field implementation of the electrical heating
process.
The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
 Top of Reservoir

.2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 Meters
8
13,500 cP"
50 -
~
~

.-/
6 1,500 cp 40 11 Peak Electrode Temperature> 100 Ci ~

Electrode &
i ./"
~
Perforated ~ 30 V
Interval 4 =.. V
Lines of Constant
~ 20
V
Oil Viscosity a.
10
/ IPeak Electrode Temperature < 100 g
2 /V J
o
o 2.5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20

Bottom of Reservoir Oil Production Rate [m3/day]

o
FIGURE 8: PQ Curve for field test well calculated using
FIGURE 6: Oil viscosity distribution during primary production. TETRAD.

h thickness metres
I current amps
Top of Reservoir
Iw well current amps
.2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 Meters J current density amp/m3
8 L characteristic grid block length metres
\

121 deg C"

\
\ n exponent in Archie equation
~'4 \ p pressure kPa
6 62 deg C
(.) (.) (.) P viscosity parameter
Electrode & C)
CI)
C)
CI)
C)
CI) qe rate of energy generation J/m3
Perforated "C "C "C power generation in a grid block watts
Interval 4 Qe
0 0 0
en co to- r radius metres
/I. /I. A re drainage radius metres
rw wellbore (electrode) radius metres
2 Lines of Constant t time seconds
Oil Temperature
T temperature °C
Sw water saturation
Bottom of Reservoir
o Vb grid block volume m3
x gas molar fraction
FIGURE 7: Temperature distribution during electrical heating.
Greek Symbols
(X,units unit conversion factor
The simulator verified the existence of a visco-skin in the near \If electric potential volts
wellbore region of a heavy oil well and the subsequent response \lfw well electric potential volts
of the well to electrical heating and removal of the visco-skin. The (j electrical conductivity S/m
calculations also indicate the electrical heating process can sub- (jeff effective electrical conductivity S/m
stantially increase the production froW- a well. Because of the (jr rock electrical conductivity S/m
small heated radius, the process is more a wellbore stimulation
(jw H 2 0 electrical conductivity S/m
process than a reservoir heating scheme. However, since the
~ grid spacing metres
visco-skin is tightly bound to the wellbore, the process is effective
<I> porosity
in increasing productivity.
~DO dead oil viscosity mFa· sec
An analytical model has been developed which is useful for
~o live oil viscosity mPa· sec
simple scouting calculations, although it tends to give optimistic
~SGL apparent liquid viscosity of gas mPa· sec
results. This is because of the assumption of an even temperature
distribution along the length of the electrode.
REFERENCES
1. AU, A.D.K., BEHIE, A., RUBIN, B., and VINSOME, K.,
Acknowledgement Techniques for Fully Implicit Reservoir Simulation; paper SPE 9302
presented at the 1980, 55th SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference
The support and permission to publish this work from Mr. and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, Sept. 21-24, 1980.
Homer Spencer of EOR International is gratefully acknowledged. 2. BAYLOR, B. A., MAGGARD, J. B., and WATTENBARGER, R.
A, Impoved Calculation of Oil Production Response to Electrical
NOMENCLATURE Resistance Heating (ERH); paper SPE 20482 presented at the 1990
65th SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Symbol Description Sf Units Orleans, LA, September 23-26.
a coefficient in Archie equation 3. GILL, W. G., Method and Apparatus for Recovery of Minerals From
A coefficient in Antoine equation Sub-surface Formations Using Electricity; United States Patent No.
Bo formation volume factor 3,547,193 (October, 1969).
Etotal total energy in grid block kJoules 4. ISTED, R. E., Madis Engineering Operations Manual for the
Fs scaling factor Electrical Heating Process Power Conditioning Unit; Madis
G geometrical factor Engineering Limited, 1992, Calgary, Alberta.

April 1994, Volume 33, NO.4 35

 5. McGEE, B.C.W., The 'Visco-skin' Effect in Heavy Oil Reservoirs;
ME Thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, 1989.
6. McGEE, B.C.W., EORSIM: An Electromagnetic Stimulation
Productivity Calculation Program; SPE Computer Applications,
Sept.lOct. 1990, pp. 24-30.
7. MCGEE, B.C.W., SIGMUND, P., and SPENCER H. L., Visco-skin
Effect in Heavy Oil Reservoir; paper presented at the 5th UNITAR
International Conference on Heavy Crude and Tar Sands, Caracas,
Venez,uela., August 6-14, 1991.
8. KILLOUGH, J.E. and GONZALEZ, J.A, A Fully Implicit Model
for Electrically Enhanced Oil Recovery; paper SPE 15605 presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, LA, October 5-8 1986.
9. PEACEMAN, D.W., Interpretation of Well-block Pressures in
Numerical Reservoir Simulation; SPEJ, June 1988, pp. 183-194.
10. PUTTAGUNTA, Y.R., SINGH B., and COOPER, E., A Generalized
Viscosity Correlation for Alberta Heavy Oil and Bitumen; paper
presented at the 1988 UNITARIUNDP Conference on Heavy Crude
and Tar Sands, Edmonton, Alberta, August 6-14, 1988.
11. RICE, S. A, KOK, A L., and NEATE, C. J., A Test of the Electric
Heating Process as a Means of Stimulating the Productivity of an Oil
Well in the Schoonebeek Field; CIM Conference, June 1992,
Calgary, Alberta.
12. SPENCER, H. L., BENNETT, K. A., and BRIDGES, 1. E.,
Application of the IITRI/Uentech Electromagnetic Stimulation
Process to Canadian Heavy Oil Reservoirs; Fourth International
Conference On Heavy Crude and Tar Sands, UNITARIUNDP,
Edmonton, August 7-12, Canada, 1988, paper 42.
13. VERMEULEN, F.E., CHUTE, F.W., and MCPHERSON, R.G.,
Physical Modeling of Electrothermal Processes in Oil Sand;
AOSTRA Journal of Research, Vol. 4, Number 4, Fall, 1988, p. 299.
14. VINSOME, P.K.W., TETRAD Users Manual; Dyad 88 Software
Inc., 1992, Calgary, Alberta.
Paper reviewed and accepted for publication by the Editorial
Board o(The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology.~
36
Authors' Biographies
Kaz Vinsome is currently president of
Dyad Engineering Inc. of Calgary, Alberta.
He obtained his Ph.D. in Physics from the
University of Newcastle upon Tyne in
England. He has been active in the field of
numerical simulation for over twenty years.
Bruce McGee is currently a Ph.D. student
. at the University of Alberta conducting
research on electrical heating of long hori-
zontal wells. He received his B.Sc.E.E. in
1980 and M.Eng. Oil Sands (E.E.) in 1984
from the University of Alberta, and M.E.
Chem. E. in 1989 from the University of
Calgary. He has about ten years of varied
experience in the oil and gas industry.
Fred Vermeulen is currently a professor in
the department of Electrical Engineering at
the University of Alberta. He received his
B.Sc. from the University of Alberta, his
M.A.Sc. from the University of British
Columbia, and a Ph.D. degree from the
University of Alberta in 1966, all in electri-
cal engineering. His teaching and research
interests are in the areas of electromagnet-
ics and mathematical methods in physical
and numerical simulation of problems in applied electromagnet-
ics. He has been involved in the research of electromagnetic heat-
ing of the oil sands since 1976.
Steve Chute is currently a professor in the
department of Electrical Engineering at the
University of Alberta. He received his
B.Sc. and M.A.Sc. from the University of
British Columbia, and a Ph.D. degree from
the University of Alberta in 1966, all in
electrical engineering. His research work
relates primarily to applied electromagnet-
ics with a special interest in the numerical
and physical modelling of electromagnetic
systems designed to heat materials. He has been involved in the
research of electromagnetic heating of the oil sands since 1976.
The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology