Summary of the analyses for recovery factors
Links
- Document: Report (198 KB pdf)
- Larger Work: This publication is Chapter E of Three approaches for estimating recovery factors in carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery
- Download citation as: RIS | Dublin Core
Introduction
In order to determine the hydrocarbon potential of oil reservoirs within the U.S. sedimentary basins for which the carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) process has been considered suitable, the CO2 Prophet model was chosen by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to be the primary source for estimating recovery-factor values for individual reservoirs. The choice was made because of the model’s reliability and the ease with which it can be used to assess a large number of reservoirs. The other two approaches—the empirical decline curve analysis (DCA) method and a review of published literature on CO2-EOR projects—were deployed to verify the results of the CO2 Prophet model. This chapter discusses the results from CO2 Prophet (chapter B, by Emil D. Attanasi, this report) and compares them with results from decline curve analysis (chapter C, by Hossein Jahediesfanjani) and those reported in the literature for selected reservoirs with adequate data for analyses (chapter D, by Ricardo A. Olea).
To estimate the technically recoverable hydrocarbon potential for oil reservoirs where CO2-EOR has been applied, two of the three approaches—CO2 Prophet modeling and DCA—do not include analysis of economic factors, while the third approach—review of published literature—implicitly includes economics. For selected reservoirs, DCA has provided estimates of the technically recoverable hydrocarbon volumes, which, in combination with calculated amounts of original oil in place (OOIP), helped establish incremental CO2-EOR recovery factors for individual reservoirs.
The review of published technical papers and reports has provided substantial information on recovery factors for 70 CO2-EOR projects that are either commercially profitable or classified as pilot tests. When comparing the results, it is important to bear in mind the differences and limitations of these three approaches.
Suggested Citation
Verma, M.K., 2017, Summary of the analyses for recovery factors, chap. E of Verma, M.K., ed., Three approaches for estimating recovery factors in carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062, p. E1–E2, https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175062E.
ISSN: 2328-0328 (online)
Table of Contents
- Overview
- Discussion of Recovery Factors with CO2-EOR from Three Sources
- Discussion of Some Important Variables That Have Significant Effects on RF Values
- References Cited
| Publication type | Report |
|---|---|
| Publication Subtype | USGS Numbered Series |
| Title | Summary of the analyses for recovery factors |
| Series title | Scientific Investigations Report |
| Series number | 2017-5062 |
| Chapter | E |
| DOI | 10.3133/sir20175062E |
| Year Published | 2017 |
| Language | English |
| Publisher | U.S. Geological Survey |
| Publisher location | Reston, VA |
| Contributing office(s) | Eastern Energy Resources Science Center |
| Description | iii, 2 p. |
| Larger Work Type | Report |
| Larger Work Subtype | USGS Numbered Series |
| Larger Work Title | Three approaches for estimating recovery factors in carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5062) |
| Online Only (Y/N) | Y |
| Additional Online Files (Y/N) | N |
| Google Analytic Metrics | Metrics page |