Comparative Analysis of Water Drive, Gas Drive and Natural Drive Mechanism for Oil Production using Alwyn North Field as a Case Study



Abstract Views
873

Downloads
532

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Apr 12, 2020
Published Apr 25, 2020
10.24018/ejeng.2020.5.4.1892

Abstract viewed = 873 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

In-situ Crude oil can be produced through several drive mechanisms of which the choice of specific drive mechanism is dependent on several key performance tools. This study examines the Alwyn North field and presents a comparative analysis for producing crude oil using water drive, gas drive and natural drive or depletion drive. The Eclipse Simulator was used to simulate different scenarios of well placement and performance tools such as FOPR, FPR, FWCT, FGOR and FOE was used during simulation to compare the outcomes of the well placement. Economic analysis which is key in decision making was carried out using economic tools such as Gross Profit Margin (GPM), Net Present Value (NPV), Payback Period, Internal Rate Return (IRR) and Profitability Index (PI). The payback period for water injection was 2.1years and 1.99years for gas injection. IRR was 53% and 48% for water and gas injection development schemes respectively and Profitability Index for water injection was 1.73 and 1.36 for gas injection. These economic tools helped to arrive at a conclusion of best drive mechanism for the production of the field.

Keywords: Water Drive Gas Drive Natural Drive CNPV GPM IRR PI Payback Period FOPR FPR FWCT FGOR FOE Eclipse Simulator

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. F. D. Martin and R. M. Colpitts (1996). Reservoir Engineering, Standard Handbook of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Vol. 2, ISBN: 978-0-88415-643-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-88415-643-7.X5007-9
     Google Scholar
  2. G. R. Elliot (1945). Behavior and Control of Natural Water Drive Reservoirs, Phillips Petroleum Co. Bartlesville, Oklahoma.
     Google Scholar
  3. J. U. Akpabio and B. E. Jackson (2019). Switching from Water Injection scheme to Gas Injection scheme for improved oil recovery in Niger Delta Oil Field, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Onepetro, SPE – 198835-MS DOI: https://doi.org/10.2118/198835-MS
     Google Scholar
  4. M. B. Inaloo, F. Jafari and A. Helalizadeh (2014). Comparison of water flooding, Gas injection and WAG injection Scenarios Performance in a Five Spot Pattern, World Applied Sciences Journal 31 (1), ISSN: 1818-4952, DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2014.31.01.1881
     Google Scholar
  5. N. Prince (2019). PPD 804-3; Fundamental of Reservoir Engineering/MBAL [PowerPoint Slides], Institute of Pertoleum Studies, Uniport, Nigeria.
     Google Scholar
  6. O. Naleimolabh (2019). PPD 806-2; Reservoir Simulation [PowerPoint Slides], IFP Training, Institute of Pertoleum Studies, Uniport, Nigeria.
     Google Scholar
  7. Petrowiki (2015). Immiscible gas injection in oil reservoirs https://petrowiki.org/immiscible_gas_injection_in_oil_reservoirs
     Google Scholar
  8. SLB Oilfield Glossary, Production Testing, Enhance Oil Recovery. https://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/en/Terms/r/reservoir-drive_mechanisms.aspx
     Google Scholar
  9. T. Ahmed (2010). Reservoir Engineering Handbook, Gulf Professional Publication, Eldevier/GGP 4th Edition, Burlington.
     Google Scholar
  10. T. Ahmed and D. N. Mechan (2012). Gas cap drive, Advanced Reservoir Management and Engineering, 2nd Edition, Elsevier, ISBN: 9780123855497.
     Google Scholar