SPE-SAS-541 Dealing with Uncertainty of Reservoir Heterogeneity and Pressure Depletion to Optimize Acid Placement in Thick Carbonate Reservoirs

Albertus Retnanto, SPE, Edin Orellana, SPE, Abraham Ryan, SPE, Schlumberger

Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE SAS Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition held in Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia, 1922 May 2013. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract For carbonate reservoirs, it is common for completed intervals to intersect several layered reservoirs, commingling multiple zones, and to extend hundreds to more than a thousand feet in length. The long interval presents uncertainty on the key formation parameters considered in acid stimulation even with the best petrophysical measurement and interpretation available in the industry. Stimulation of such intervals can be further complicated by differential depletion between the zones and large differences in hydrostatic pressure during stimulation treatment. This paper strives to outline some of the key pitfalls that can occur due to the uncertainty in this data. Using reservoir simulations, the long term adverse impact of these pitfalls on both production and overall recovery can be shown. Based on degradable fiber and visco-elastic surfactant technologies, a new acid diverter, has been applied, along with a placement model, to optimize treatment design and to maximize diversion in heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs. The system is robust, diverting from high permeability streaks, fissures and natural fractures with very little diverting effect from the low permeability zones, and therefore generates a more uniform stimulation than conventional fluid systems. This approach has been used to optimize various stimulation campaigns on carbonate fields throughout the Middle East. The diversion technique does not overly rely on the accuracy of petrophysical data, such as permeability and porosity, or reservoir pressure and can be successful in a variety of potential scenarios. Maximizing treatment fluid coverage across the entire intervals can be achieved across thick, even naturally fractured, carbonate intervals using degradable fiber technology within a visco-elastic surfactant fluid.

Introduction The majority of Middle East hydrocarbon reserves are being produced from giant oil and gas fields. Besides their massive reserves, these fields share the characteristics of being carbonates, very heterogeneous, complex and difficult to be characterized. This heterogeneity and complexity poses a great challenge in achieving effective and consistent stimulation results. The main purpose of stimulation in carbonate reservoirs is to increase the connectivity between the formation and the wellbore in the entire zone of interest. Carbonate reservoirs are routinely stimulated with acid to improve production. Matrix acidizing in carbonates provides an opportunity not only to bypass damage around the wellbore, but to also improve the nearwellbore permeability by creating large flow channels (wormholes) with acid dissolution. Acid stimulation of carbonate formations using (HCl) acid-based systems to improve hydrocarbon production has been a common practice since the early days of the oil and gas industry. Obtaining optimum stimulation of the entire interval of interest has proven to be very challenging, despite the quick productivity gains often seen with acid stimulation of carbonates. High reservoir permeability contrasts, non-uniform damage distribution in targeted zones, and differential pressure depletion between the zones can cause stimulation fluids to take the path of least resistance and preferentially entering the thief zones, with insufficient amount of the acid being injected into lower-quality zones. Furthermore, in thick carbonates with variable reservoir pressures along the perforated interval, net injection pressures can vary greatly from zone to zone, further exacerbating the problem. Excessive fluid loss to either the high-quality or underpressurized thief zones results in a non-homogeneous distribution of stimulation fluid across the targeted interval. The higher-quality zones are then essentially over stimulated, allowing them to dominate post-treatment production, more so then their initial permeabilities relative to other zones would predict. This leaves neighboring lower-quality zones unstimulated, preventing them from reaching their maximum potential. This may not be a problem in the initial production of

SPE-SAS-541

the well or field, especially in gas wells that are not produced to their maximum potential, but there can be significant consequences to the long term production and recovery of the field. (Abou-Sayed et al. 2007 ; Postl et al. 2009; Shuchart et al. 2009). Successful matrix treatments therefore require the achievement of stimulation targets for each zone across the entire interval, with targets being based on the long term well and field productivity. The challenge of achieving full zonal coverage and optimal placement with matrix acidizing fluids still persists today (Cohen et al. 2010; Jairo et al. 2010; Thabet et al. 2009). Quality data input describing reservoir properties such as permeability, porosity, pressure, lithology, mineralogy etc. are required for reliable design preparation. Using a large number of precisely characterized and described zones enables stimulation software to predict stimulation treatments performance with greater accuracy. Using less than optimum zone data that is simplified or averaged due to the complexity and uncertainty of the reservoir tends to lead to an overestimation of the performance of many stimulation treatments. In practice, the complete and representative data necessary for optimum stimulation treatment design are rarely available. Even in the cases where a high quality data set is available, the key formation parameters considered in acid stimulation are still clouded by uncertainty. In many cases, during the execution of stimulations on wells with a poorly characterized reservoir, the treatment parameters (pump rate, wellhead pressure etc.) significantly differ from those predicted by the design software simulator, which often leads to a less than optimum treatment design and well stimulation.

Stimulation Design Data Requirement Carbonates were made up of fossil fragments and other grains of widely varying morphology, and generally composed of comparatively unstable mineral species. Petrophysics in carbonates has always proven challenging due to difficulties in estimating basic petrophysical properties such as saturation and permeability from conventional log data (Ramamoorthy et al. 2010). The wide variability in morphology or carbonate grains can lead to highly complex pore shapes and size, and a range of dissolution, precipitation, and recrystallization processes can lead to additional complexity through ongoing modification of this pore geometry. A comprehensive petrophysical evaluation such as lithology and mineralogy, pressure, porosity, petrophysical rock types, and permeability are required as main inputs for a stimulation design. Accurate petrophysical evaluation requires the integration of texture-sensitive logs such as nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), borehole images, full waveform acoustic, and dielectric. Mineralogy evaluation of carbonates may not be difficult and can sometimes be accomplished with basic logs. Lithology and porosity evaluations in the presence of anhydrite or other minerals may require neutron to capture spectroscopy logs. This is true for several major carbonate formations. Distinction between calcite and dolomite can be done with a good photoelectric absorption (PEF) log available from most density logs today. In the absence of gas or very light hydrocarbons, calcite and dolomite can also be quantified using neutron and density logs. However, if the PEF log is affected by the presence of barite in the drilling mud or if anhydrite is present in the formation or if substantial light hydrocarbon effects are present, then accurate mineralogy is not possible from basic logs. Neutron-captured spectroscopy provides a measure of sulfur, which can be used to estimate an accurate anhydrite volume. This also provides a measure of magnesium, which can be used to discriminate dolomite from calcite in the absence of or in conjunction with the PEF. Permeability is the most important property that controls fluid flow in a porous media in most cases. For carbonate reservoirs, where there is no simple relationship between porosity and permeability, the petrophysicist faces the difficult task of relating the measured log properties to core permeability. Historically, permeability has been estimated using porositypermeability transforms generated through regression of core porosity and permeability data. These relationships, however, fail in predicting permeability in complex carbonates where digenetic processes introduce a higher degree of heterogeneity. The most obvious case where the relationship fails is with mouldic limestones, where significant non-connected porosity is present, giving permeabilities that are unproportionally low relative to porosity. Direct measurement of permeability, as a log, has not been accomplished. Carbonates are characterized by different porosity types with complex pore size distributions, which result in wide permeability variations for a given level of total porosity. A reservoir interval may appear to be reasonably homogeneous as uniform resistivity and porosity can lead to reasonably constant permeability over the main reservoir interval based on triplecombo logs. However, an NMR log may shows different pore size for the same value of porosity and such a change in pore size would result in a several orders of magnitude change in permeability. This makes it difficult to predict the rock fluid flow characteristics. Responses of logs vary according to rock properties. Other petrophysical features that can have significant impact on both stimulation design and production are the presence of matrix anomalies such as fissures, fractures and faults, which are very common in carbonates. Although losses while drilling and image logs can indicate their presences and position, their overall effect on production and injectivity (in the case of acidizing) is not well understood, but can be very significant. Additionally, logs in general have a limited depth of investigation, often in the order of 6-12 inches. This means that even with an ideal interpretation and understanding of properties within the radius, significant variations may exist further away from the wellbore. With large stimulation treatments of optimal design and fluid characteristics, wormhole lengths are often 10 ft or longer (120). Therefore, it is very high potential for the acid treatment to encounter a natural fracture or vugular zone that is present away from the wellbore. It can have significant impact on the performance of the stimulation, but may not be practically identifiable beforehand.

SPE-SAS-541

Several principal design parameters cannot be assessed at all from petrophysical logs. For example of this is the damage skin of each zone, often created during the drilling and completion process for new wells. Although logs, with deep resistivity, can estimate the depth of fluid or filtrate invasion, quantifying skin can only truly be done with a well test performed on each individual zone, something that is rarely done before stimulation. As a result, default values are often assumed, despite the fact that the contrast of initial skin along the interval, similar to the contrast of permeabilities and pressures, may have a strong impact on the original injectivity profile and the performance of the stimulation. Overall, it is clear that carbonates can show a very wide range of reservoir quality through pore-size distribution, pore connectivity, fracturing, and the degree of dolomitization. This variability poses significant challenges to data acquisition and petrophysical evaluation. Although maximizing the amount and quality of log data can prove very valuable in designing effective stimulations, even with the best petrophysical measurement and interpretation currently available, the main formation parameters considered in these designs are often still clouded by uncertainty. Figs. 1 and 2 show an example of how this uncertainty can effect a stimulation treatment. Fig. 1 shows the permeability profile and expected acid penetration in various zones within a thick carbonate treated with a chemical diverter. Although, certainly not a well distributed stimulation fluid, there is significant amount of acid penetrating each of the key reservoir layers. However, when a natural fracture (not identified in the original petrophysical data) is taken into account, the distribution is much different (Fig. 2). The initial production from the overstimulated region around the natural fracture may be strong, until it depletes. The long term production and recovery will be affected as the lower permeable zones were not properly stimulated. In addition of understanding the petrophysics of the reservoir, one of the most important factors affecting the success or failure of a matrix acid treatment is the correct downhole placement of the acid for optimal zonal coverage. Over the years there have been many products and techniques developed in the industry for acid diversion. Generally, the various techniques have advantages and disadvantages, but in terms of uncertainty, each technique has various pitfalls that can be encountered when the formation is not completely or accurately characterized. The various techniques and their pitfalls have to be understood before managing the uncertainty.

Fig.1 Original Permeability profile and acid penetration profile generated from a treatment using chemical diversion

Fig.2 Adjusted permeability profile with a natural fracture introduced and acid penetration profile with same chemical diversion treatment

Stimulation Techniques in Carbonate Formation Deciding an appropriate completion and stimulation technique depends on several important criteria. Often the production mechanism of the reservoir and the inflow to the wellbore over the lifetime of the project will dictate the selection. Generally, a stimulation technique is selected to ensure all zones have maximum potential to flow following periods of differential depletion. Adequate stimulation of the higher quality zones can contribute greatly to overall productivity gains of the well. On the other hand, the lower quality zones in carbonates may also contain significant volumes of hydrocarbon and adequate stimulation would be crucial for the long term productivity of the well. Furthermore, pressure effects and differential depletion has to be accounted for in thick carbonates especially, as this will dictate the preferred path of treatment fluids. To ensure the success of matrix acid treatments diversion is required as critical step. Unless effectively diverted, the treated region eventually becomes the sink for the acid, leaving other regions not adequately acidized. Two techniques can be applied

SPE-SAS-541

to achieve acid diversion: mechanical diversion and chemical diversion. The fundamental difference between chemical and mechanical diversion is that a chemical diverting agent achieves diversion by increasing flow resistance insides the created channels and the matrix, whereas a mechanical diversion process controls the fluid entry point from the wellbore. Hence chemical diverting agents can be considered as an internal diverting agent, as opposed to the external mechanical diversion. Combination of these techniques is often practiced for added efficiency. The conventional diversion techniques that have been used (individually or in combination) to matrix acidize thick carbonate reservoirs include the following: Independent Multi-Stage Approach Multi-stage approach (with non-independent stages) Coiled Tubing Conveyed Ball Sealers Limited-Entry Perforation High-Rate Pumping Chemical Diverters Combination approach Each of these techniques has advantages and disadvantages; but also each has certain drawbacks in terms of uncertainty. Independent Multi-Stage Approach. Mechanical diversion system is the most common and simple approach to be used in carbonate diversion. The diversion can be obtained by isolating each target interval by straddle packer or multistage sliding packer. For the new drilled well, this approach may be one of the appropriate approach as the target perforation intervals have not been determined yet. On the new well, the perforation interval may be determined for the planned stimulation treatment. The perforation interval may be designed for several short length intervals with certain clearance in the blank casing in between the intervals to accommodate zonal isolation by straddle packer for stimulation purposes. Each of the sections can also be tested independently before and after stimulation, thereby obtaining accurate reservoir properties as well as poststimulation skin reduction for each zone. For the existing well, sometimes the target intervals have been perforated and leave no space for straddle packer to be set in the blank casing. On the existing well, the usage of mechanical diversion such as straddle packer may encounter several problems such as fluid communication issue. The communication issue may occur due to improper sealing of straddle packer (as it sets in the middle of perforation interval) and the communication issue behind the casing due to some vertical channel in the formation or bad bonding between cement and the formation. Another main concern of the mechanical diversion is the total interval length related to the rig time available. In thick carbonate formations, several short target intervals for the mechanical diversion leads to excessive rig time and could be no longer cost efficient for the total treatment. This approach may be suitable for the exploration well with several short test intervals. In the exploration well, especially with single short perforation well test, the stimulation can be carried out by treating individually the test interval. For the other interval that may need to be stimulated, the previous stimulated interval can be plugged off. Due to the obvious operational and financial limitations involved in making numerous small stages across thick carbonates, this technique is usually combined with others, such as chemical diverters. The chemical diverters will account for permeability contrast within individual stages, however, if contrast is too high (i.e. natural fractures or fissures are present), or overall permeability-height (kh) is too large relative to pump rate, stimulation coverage may still suffer. Multi-stage Approach (with non-independent stages). Multi-stage approach without independent stage is performed involving the perforation strategy and stimulation strategy at the same time. The long thick carbonate reservoirs are classified by the permeability range. The lowest permeability formation will be perforated and stimulated first before the higher permeability range. The higher permeability intervals are then perforated and the stimulation treatment is applied to both of high and low permeability intervals at the same time. The advantage of this approach is a controlled stimulation treatment on the low permeability intervals. Without any high permeability formations opened, the volume and rate of the stimulation treatment can be optimized for the low permeability. Some adverse concerns for this approach are the insufficient petrophysical understanding, extremely high permeability contrast, and excessive stimulation result on the lower permeability intervals. Stimulation result on the first stage in the low permeability intervals may result in extremely high post stimulation kh. Some of them might be much higher than pre-stimulation kh in the higher permeability zone. By having this condition, the stimulation treatment may sacrifice the higher permeability interval as the stimulation fluid will still be injected to the stimulated low permeability intervals. There is a strong dependence between the stages and uncertainty or inaccuracy in one stage will affect the results of the next stage. Strong petrophysical understanding is required to master this technique, because there is a strong dependence between the stages and uncertainty or inaccuracy in one stage will affect the results of the next stage Coiled-Tubing Conveyed Treatments. Coiled-tubing offers several advantages over the conventional bullheading treatments during a matrix acid stimulation and is often used as a conveyance method for the stimulation treatment, especially in horizontal well. By having coiled-tubing conveyance, the stimulation fluid can be spotted on the toe passing by all the possible thief zones in the lateral section. From the completion standpoint, coiled-tubing conveyance prevents the corrosive fluid to

SPE-SAS-541

contact with the entire string or casing. Another advantage for having coiled-tubing stimulation treatment is to minimize the completion fluid in the wellbore to be injected to the formation. By having less completion fluid in the formation, the less possible additional damage created in the formation. Performing acid treatment through coiled-tubing avoids exposing the wellhead or completion tubular to direct contact with corrosive fluids. Spotting the treatment fluid with coiled-tubing will ensure the delivery of the treatment fluid against the target section, and will minimize initial wellbore fluids from being injected into the formation. When combined with chemical diverters, coiled-tubing provides much better chance for success in acid coverage. Coiled-tubing stimulation approach is commonly used to perform near-wellbore wash by jetting the acid across the openhole lateral. Jetting tools in the coiled-tubing nozzle provides high pressure injection radially along the lateral section. By jetting acid throughout the wellbore, mechanical damage from filter cake can be removed. This method is good for near wellbore wash only as the stimulation fluid will still be injected to the least resistance formation (higher permeability) across the lateral section leaving the lower permeability formation unstimulated. On the thick carbonate formation, coiled-tubing stimulation is not preferred due to rate and friction pressure limitation. Small diameter of the coiled-tubing leads to high friction pressure on the surface that limits the pumping rate. Pumping rate is an important parameter to be achieved in carbonate stimulation to obtain proper wormhole in the formation. Therefore, the injection rate is limited in the situation when sustained high rate and pressure are required. Another disadvantage of using coiled-tubing is that although it can be used to control where the acid initiates flow across the interval, it can not control where it is injected into the formation. Generally for stimulating thick carbonates with high conductivity, unless independent stages are being used, powerful diversion and/or high pump rates are needed. These high rates are often not achievable through coiled-tubing. Ball Sealers. Ball sealers are used to temporary block mechanically some perforation intervals during stimulation treatment. The purpose of blocking some perforation intervals is to divert the stimulation fluid to the unblocked ones. Ball sealers may provide powerful diversion if the selection of ball sealers property is suitable with the stimulation treatment. In contrary to the powerful diversion mechanism, ball sealers may not work at all should there is a failure on the design or the execution phase. The most common issue is improper sealing of ball sealers on the targeted formation hence the stimulation fluid is not properly diverted. Another issue for ball sealers is the knowledge of the reservoir petrophysics and the ball sealers schedules. Ball sealers might seals the perforation regardless the particular formation has been stimulated or not. In the other words, the ball sealers may seals the unstimulated intervals as the stimulation fluid goes to the higher permeability which is not sealed. In this case, lower permeability formation will not be stimulated and the higher permeability formation will be excessively stimulated. Limited Entry Perforation. Limited entry diversion approach is diverting mechanism by having additional pressure as a barrier to divert the stimulation fluid to the low-permeability formation. Pressure barrier is created by low shot density perforation across the thich carbonate reservoirs. Combining this method with the chemical diverter approach will have powerful diversion mechanism for stimulation treatment. The main disadvantage for this approach is completion skin during production. By having limited entry for stimulation fluid to get into the formation, the perforation also limits the hydrocarbon to be produced. In the high rate gas producer, high drawdown is required overcome the perforation skin. Especially in wells that have very thin, high permeability streaks, converging turbulent non-darcy flow is created which can literally choke the well. Ideally, perforation shot density could be adapted to promote/divert stimulation flow based on permeability to create an even flow injection profiles during stimulation, but given the significant uncertainty involved, the risks would be great. High-Rate Pumping. By chasing the pumping rate on the stimulation treatment, a back pressure in the wellbore will push the stimulation treatment to the less injectivity interval. In normal case, higher permeability formation will have more injectivity rather than low permeability interval. This approach also helps to overcome the diversion problem in the depleted zone or various differential pressures (reservoir pressure and wellbore pressure). High rate pumping also helps on the diversion in thick gas carbonate reservoirs when the hydrostatic column in the wellbore is extremely higher than hydrostatic column in the formation. The differences between the hydrostatic column is occurred due to different fluid type between wellbore and formation during stimulation treatment. This approach is the alternative approach for the limited entry diversion approach. Instead of reducing the perforation density, increasing the pumping rate will relatively creates the similar back pressure in the wellbore that promote the stimulation fluid to be injected to the formation with less injectivity profile. High rate pumping diversion approach has a limitation on the completion that may not allow the pumping rate to exceed certain number. On bottomhole side, the fracture pressure limits the pumping rate as well. The limitation both from fracture pressure and well completion come up in maximum surface allowable pressure during pumping. The fracture pressure shall not be exceeded as the excessive pressure will break the formation and change the fluid flow become linear flow instead of radial flow from the wellbore. On the other hand, by having fracture in the formation, the fluid leakoff will be higher as the surface contact is wider. On the operational side, having massive hydraulic horsepower to create the high pumping rate for stimulation treatment is also impractical.

SPE-SAS-541

Chemical Diverters. Chemical diversion can be achieved by using the fluid that provides temporary barrier to the diverted formation and alter the direction of the stimulation fluid to the desired ones. Typical chemical diversion treatment is viscous fluid and/or foam fluid. Viscous fluid can be generated downhole by pumping diverters. There is several mechanism of viscosity generation in various types of chemical diverters. pH-based, cation-based, filter-cake-based and kinetic-based viscosity generations are the most common chemical diverters in the industries. The usage of chemical diverters is strongly related to the severity of the permeability streaks across the formation. Gelled fluids are one of the fluids that provide temporary barrier for stimulation fluid by creating the high viscosity material in the targeted zones. Another method to provide high viscosity fluid is by foaming the fluid using nitrogen and surfactant. The foam and viscous fluids will block the higher permeability formation (or higher post stimulation permeability) and diverts the next stimulation fluids to the lower permeability formation (or unstimulated formation). The main advantage of chemical diverters approach is single package of pumping service without any requirement of mechanical diversion, such as packers, to be run in the well. Some chemicals have a feature to perform the stimulation and diversion at the same time. Rig-less stimulation treatments take this approach as the best solution as no longer rig required running the mechanical zonal isolation. The main drawback for this chemical diversion system is the extreme permeability difference that may occur in natural fractures, fissures, and faults. A fault has extreme permeability streaks compare to the surrounding carbonate formations. By having extremely high permeability compared to the surrounding formations, the chemical diverters may be injected entirely to the fault and leave the surrounding formation unstimulated. Although there are benefits to having diversion deep in the matrix, to help manage heterogeneity beyond the near-wellbore, diversion near the wellbore has a stronger impact on overall treatment pressure and the distribution of fluids. Another drawback for the chemical diverters is water zone. In this case, improper design of the chemical diverter will lead to stimulation against water zone. Combination approach. To obtain the best approach of the diversion method, combination of some techniques above has to be applied in the stimulation treatment design. The combination of mechanical and chemical diversion approach lead to powerful stimulation treatment across the long interval carbonate formation. The main advantage of combination approach is reducing the treatment time by eliminating the time frame for mechanical approach and at the same time the mechanical approach that is incorporated in the chemical approach will enhance the diversion mechanism. Fiber-based diversion approach implements the chemical and mechanical diversion approach. The fibers are used in the diverter fluid and provide mechanical diverter temporarily across the high permeability streaks or the depleted formation. As stated previously, the stimulation fluid (also with fiber in it) tends to go to the least resistance formation, i.e the high permeability formation and/or the depleted formation. By having fiber material on the stimulation fluid, the fibers will provide restriction similar to the ball sealers mechanism in the targeted interval and/or far inside the wormhole and divert the remaining stimulation fluid to the unstimulated interval or zone. The diversion of the treatment will be indicated on the pressure spike during the treatment showing that the fiber materials mechanically divert the fluid to the other zones. While the fiber diverting the treatment from the higher permeability or the depleted reservoir, the stimulation fluid will start to react on the tighter formation or higher reservoir pressure zone. The advantage of this fiber based diversion approach is on the fiber material that will degrade over the time. By having fiber degradation, there will be no fiber residue in the formation that will reduce the clean up efficiency. On the extremely high permeability contrast, fiber based diversion approach can be combined also with high rate pumping to provide ultimate diversion across the possible faults, fissures, and natural fractures along the carbonate formation.

Dealing with Carbonates Formation Uncertainty in the Stimulation Design Diversion technique is a mandatory for dealing with the uncertainty in the carbonate formation. It will help to address the fluid distribution automatically when it faces some resistancies of the fluid flows, especially from the unknown parameter in the carbonate formation. On the discussed diversion method in the previous section, every diversion method has its own pitfalls and could provide higher diversion capability if they were combined. The most applicable combination of diversion system is using the mechanical diversion technique with chemical diversion technique. It can be done not only by using proper chemical diverter in proper zonal isolation but also can be combined with the optimization of the wellbore condition or pumping condition. The latest technology that can be applied is combining both techniques in the diverter fluid itself. The usage of degradable fiber-based diverter fluid will allow this combination to occur. The degradable fiber will allow fluid diversion by blocking temporarily the lower resistance fluid path. This fiber will act similar to ball sealers with higher diversion efficiency as it will block temporarily the perforation tunnel or natural fractures of the lower resistance fluid path by accumulating the fiber in it. The fiber itself is carried by the acidic viscoelastic based diverter that will build the viscosity upon reacting with carbonate rocks. Therefore while the fibers temporarily plug the perforation tunnel or the natural fractures mechanically, the viscoelastic based diverter acid will self-build the viscosity to help restricting the fluid flows to the particular lower resistance fluid path. For post stimulation condition, the plugged fiber will degrade as the well heat up and the viscoelastic based diverter fluid will be broken, i.e reducing its viscosity, upon contacting with hydrocarbon based fluid. Some stimulation designs use the mutual solvent preflush and overflush to enhance the breaking process of the self-diverting acid hence enhance the

SPE-SAS-541

hydrocarbon flows to increase the temperature and eventually degrade the fibers. The soluble byproducts are then flowed-back and can be handled at surface using conventional techniques, as the stimulated reservoir is produced. The robust diversion, production enhancement and operational efficiency of this diverter is well documented, but one less obvious but important feature is its ability to give robust performance with predictable results, despite the significant petrophysical uncertainty involved. This has been shown in stimulation treatments of thick carbonates throughout the middleeast. One of the main reasons for its ability to overcome uncertainty is due to an inherent property of the fiber itself, which allows for an automatic diversion adjustment downhole. When a media with infinite permeability, such as a perforation tunnel or natural fracture, is filled and bridged with a material of finite permeability such as degradable fiber, this creates a temporary skin to injectivity in that zone. It can be mathematically shown that the magnitude of this skin is proportional to the permeability of the formation; therefore the strongest impact is made on the most permeable zones with negligible effect on the least permeable zones (Cohen et al. 2010, Table 1). This is a powerful concept, as it is a way, despite uncertainty from a lack of logging data or uncertainty in the data, of dampening the natural permeability contrast of the reservoir. It does not rely on petrophysical certainty to design a successful treatment. Revisiting the simulated well stimulation of a thick heterogeneous carbonate, in Fig. 3, we show the same well treated using the fiber-laden diverter technology. Despite the highly permeable thief zone created by a natural fracture, the technology was able to divert flow to less permeable zones and get a much more even flow distribution than with the chemical diverter alone. These simulation results comply well with actual pressurematched treatment results, with even wells that had significant drilling losses due to fractures showing significant pressure increases due to diversion. It is also important to consider to the difference between fiber-laden chemical diverters and ball sealers. Although both provide mechanical diversion through interaction with the perforations, the mechanism and effects are different in important ways. Firstly, fiber laden chemical diverters have a liquid base that is a chemical diverter, so they can give diversion not only in the perforations but also in the formation, i.e preventing branching in the wormhole to avoid ramified wormhole condition.Therefore, the wormhole created may reach deeper penetration. Furthermore, fiber laden diverters do not depend on having properly sized perforation entry holes and are more reliable than ball sealer. The fibers flow into the perforation tunnel and wormholes and gradually build a fiber cake and a diversion plug. Although the plug is strong, it is still permeable, and does not completely shut-off flow like a sealing ball. This means that the most permeable zones will continue to get fluid injection through the treatment, making the downside risk very low. After all, these zones are the most important to the overall productivity of a well, and therefore their adequate stimulation is essential. Flow is gradually diverted into a more even profile as more diverter is pumped, and this creates a more consistant diversion that is much less sensitive to uncertainty. Finally, the fibers degrade with temperature in a simple and reliable way and are therefore operationally easier to manage than ball sealers, with no detrimental effects to production.

Reservoir Permeability mD 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Fig.3 Permeability profile with a natural fracture and resulting acid penetration after a treatment with degradable fiber diversion

Skin due to Fiber 0.077 0.47 3.3 19.4 103 783

Eff. Perm due to Fiber mD 0.1 0.9 6.8 26.5 63.6 88.6

Table 1 Temporary Skin to Injectivity Note. Results generated based on a specific perforation geometry. Different perforations will produce different results, and can be design accordingly.

SPE-SAS-541

Effect of Uncertainty on Stimulation and Long-term Production Performance To know the potential impact of uncertainty on stimulation performance, and on ultimate well production performance, a single-well radial model was developed. An r-z radial model with cell radii ri+1/ri=constant is used with a well radius rw=0.35 ft. Detailed gridding and layering are presented in Table 2. A set of gas condensate fluid properties has been used in the modeling work. The permeability profile of three different cases is available. Those are: i) base case; ii) base case with increase permeability contrast but equivalent overall kh; iii) base case with high perm streak in one layer. This can demonstrate the potential effects of permeability uncertainty on plateau production and wellbore production profile.

Gridding model Well radius (rw), ft Outer boundary radius (re), ft Average z, ft Depth to top of formation, ft Initial pressure, psia Reservoir temperature, oF

24 x 1 x 54 0.35 5,500 10 10,000 5200 220

Table 2 Geometric model

Base Case. A gas well with 5 different reservoir sections, with a contrast of permeability (max:min) of about 25:1 case, can be seen in Fig. 4. The intervals contain a mixture lithologies, including dolomites, limestones, and mouldic limestones. Mouldic limestones can represent critical layers, as they have significant porosity, and hence gas in place, however due to very limited permeability, are more challenging to stimulate. A treatment pump rate was selected so that a basic gelled diverting acid could be used with a conventional shot density (6 SPF) to obtain reasonable stimulation coverage along the interval with at least 3 ft of wormhole penetration in all zones. For each case, a 2nd diverter scenario is simulated using a fibered diverting acid. Fig. 5 depicts the simulated wormhole penetration for each of the zones, and Fig. 6 depicts the post-stimulation skin reduction. As noted, due to hydrostatic preferences (hydrostatic gradient in wellbore is greater than the gas gradient in the reservoir) the lower zones tend to be preferred for injection.

Fig.4 Permeability profile base case

Fig.5 Wormhole penetration base case

SPE-SAS-541

Fig 6 Skin post stimulation base case

Case 1. Higher than expected permeability contrast but equivalent overall permeability-height (kh). This case considers a scenario in which there is greater than greater than expected permeability in some of the layers, but reduced permeability in others. This represent general uncertainty in predicting permeability in carbonates, but removes the effects of an increase in kh that was present in the earlier example with the added high perm streak Figs. 7, 8, and 9 show the permeability profile, the wormhole penetration, and the post-stimulation skin, respectively. Similar to the previous case, the lower zones are still hydrostatically preferred, but the zones with increased permeability are now getting more fluid than before. Accordingly, the zones with reduced permeability are now getting significantly less stimulation fluid. Fig. 10 shows the long term production profile. Again, although the source of the uncertainty is different, the key benefits are the same: increased flowing pressures as well as a longer period (approximately one extra year) at plateau production. Figs. 11 and 12 depict production rate and pressure profile respectively for this case. Figs. 13 and 14 show the effect of pressure depletion for the above case. The two lowest layers have been depleted for 200-psi as initial condition. Comparing Figs. 8 and 13 and also Figs. 9 and 13 clearly shows the combine effect of permeability contrast and pressure depletion on wormhole penetration and post-stimulation skin. Case 2. High permeability streak. This case considers a scenario in which an unidentified high permeability streak, perhaps due to a fracture or fissures being present. Figs. 15, 16 and 17 show the permeability profile, the wormhole penetration, and the post-stimulation skin, respectively. Ensuring a sufficient stimulation of all zones along the interval is the main challenge for this case, especially as the lower zones are preferred not only due to hydrostatics but due to the high permeability streak. Fig. 18 shows the long term production profile. Note the key benefits of the stronger diversion: increased flowing pressures as well as a longer period (approximately two extra years) at plateau production. Figs. 19 and 20 depict production rate and pressure profile respectively for this case. Figs. 21 and 22 depict the effect of pressure depletion for the unidentified high permeability streak. The two lowest layers have been depleted for 200-psi as initial condition. Comparing Figs. 16 and 21 and also Figs. 17 and 22 clearly shows the combine effect of high permeability streak and pressure depletion on wormhole penetration and post-stimulation skin.

10

SPE-SAS-541

Fig.7 Permeability profile higher permeability contrast

Fig.8 Wormhole penetration higher permeability contrast

Fig.9 Skin post stimulation higher permeability contrast

Fig.10 Long term production higher permeability contrast

SPE-SAS-541

11

Fig.11 Bottomhole flowing pressure higher permeability contrast

Fig.12 Production Profile higher permeability contrast

Fig.13 Wormhole penetration higher permeability contrast and pressure depletion

Fig.14 Skin post stimulation higher permeability contrast and pressure depletion

12

SPE-SAS-541

Fig.15 Permeability profile high permeability streak

Fig.16 Wormhole penetration high permeability streak

Fig.17 Skin post stimulation high permeability streak

Fig.18 Long term production high permeability streak

SPE-SAS-541

13

Fig.19 Bottomhole flowing pressure high permeability streak

Fig.20 - Production profile high permeability streak

Fig.21 Wormhole penetration high permeability streak and pressure depletion

Fig.22 Skin post stimulation high permeability streak and pressure depletion

14

SPE-SAS-541

In many cases, basic acid based stimulation fluids and diverters systems are erroneously shown to achieve more than adequate treatment performance results; however the results may not match the reality. This concept is illustrated in Figs. 5 and 6. In Fig. 5, the well was zoned based on permeability data that did not take into account a very thin high permeability streak created by natural fractures that could be evident from an image log. The stimulation software predicts the final fluid invasion by zone, after a treatment with alternating stages of 28% HCl and a diverting acid system. Although it is not an ideal case, the acid covers all the significant intervals of the well. This design represents oversights due to uncertainty that is most likely occured in most carbonate stimulation designs, and the results are optimistic. If however, a thin high permeability streak is added to simulate the effect of a natural fracture, the results are shown to be significantly different, with that single high perm streak is taking all the acid that was designed for other zones (lower permeability zones, higher reservoir pressure zones, and/or higher restriction zones). Single chemical diversion would not powerful enough to divert from the natural fracture. As a result, using a single chemical diverter sacrificed the current productivity (represented by higher drawdowns required compared to a more even stimulation from a fiber-based diverter) as well as reduced long term productivity. Similar trends are also shown by the results of the case with the increased permeability contrast. Another critical point that can be observed from the production profile plots is the differences in production profile. Despite the significant difference in performance between diversion systems, the differences in the resulting production profile is not obvious. This is important as it infers that using production logging tools (PLT) to assess the performance of a diverter may not be always conclusive. An example of this fact is shown by wells with high permeability contrast, in which zones with low permeability are not likely to produce for many years until more significant zones deplete and drawdown pressures increase. In these cases, if low permeable zones are shown to produce significantly in initial production, it is much more likely to be the case that their permeability was significantly under-estimated. Assessing skin reduction due to acidizing can be therefore clouded due to the large uncertainties in carbonates.

Conclusions Stimulation design is based on the data quality, data interpretation, and consideration of the various parameter including uncertainty. In order to have accurate stimulation design that address the main stimulation target, it is recommended to have best data quality and accuracy. By having those good quality data, the zoning of the formation can be more detail and specific based on the possible uncertainty. In the case of less quality of the data or data interpretation, all stimulation designs in carbonate have to be considered as high uncertainty formation and have to be addressed with the stimulation design that covers uncertainties. Most of the cases, the stimulation design are prepared with the incomplete data set or poor reservoir data quality. Underestimate the uncertainty in the poor data condition will lead to ineffective stimulation treatment as it may not overcome the thief zones of the formation that takes most of the fluids. The inaccurate stimulation design will also lead to deviation from the initial stimulation objectives. For the stimulation design preparation, knowledge about the uncertainty based on the previous treatment is also providing additional value to petrophysic information. By knowing them, the treatment can be optimized from the fluid volume and fluid placement point of view. The treatment pumping rate and volume can be designed to deal with high permeability streak, natural fractures, and low reservoir pressure zone by maximizing its diversion system. The selection of combined diversion system between mechanical and chemical diversion approach provide the most optimum solution. On the mechanical diversion side, the selection will be mostly affected by the operation easiness and also the cost efficiency. On the chemical diversion side, the diverter fluid would be better to have high diversion efficiency, no damage to the formation and easy to recover or clean up after the stimulation treatment. For the diverter fluid, fiber-laden self-diverting viscoelastic diverter acid provides above features. The information on this paper is aligned with the stimulation result obtained from the experience in the Middle East region. The stimulation treatments in the Middle East region deals with the thick carbonates reservoir that has various permeability streaks across the thick formation, high natural fracture density, and various range of the reservoir pressure. The various range of the reservoir pressures are obtained as some formations has already been stimulated and start depleting. It is therefore recommended that fiber-loaded and viscoelastic-based diverter are not only used for the most challenging stimulation applications with extreme permeability contrast, but also in combination with various other techniques, to accommodate stimulation design for the high levels of uncertainty that are always present in carbonate stimulation.

References
Abou-Sayed, I.S., Shuchart, C.E., Choi, et al. 2007. Well Stimulation Technology for Thick, Middle East Carbonate Reservoirs. Paper IPTC 11660 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dubai, U.A.E., 4-6 December. Ansari, A. and Mahmoud, Y. 2009. Multi-Layer Testing: Theory and Practice. Paper IPTC 13546 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 7-9 December.

SPE-SAS-541

15

Chang, F.F. and Abbad, M. 2008. Optimizing Well Productivity by Controlling Acid Dissolution Pattern During Matrix Acidizing of Carbonate Reservoirs. Paper IPTC 12368 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 3-5 December. Chang, F.F., Qiu, X., and Nasr-El-Din, H.A. 2007. Chemical Diversion Techniques used for Carbonate matrix Acidizing: An Overview and Case Histories. Paper SPE 106444 presented at the SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 28 February-2 March. Cohen, C.E., Tardy, P.M.J, Lesko,T., et al. 2010. Understanding Diversion with a Novel Fiber-Laden Acid System for Matrix Acidizing of Carbonate Formations. Paper SPE 134495 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, 19-22 September. Jairo, A., Ataur, R., Walter, N., et al. 2010. Field Trials of a Novel Fiber-Laden Self-Diverting Acid System for Carbonates in Saudi Arabia. Paper SPE 132003 presented at the SPE Deep Gas Conference, Manama, Bahrain, 24-26 January. Khalaf, A.S. 1997. Prediction of Flow Units of the Khuff Formation. Paper SPE 37739 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show, Manama, Bahrain, 15-18 March. Postl, D., Ellison, T.K., Chang, D., et al. 2009. Optimization of Carbonate Stimulation based on Long-Term Well Performance Predictions. Paper IPTC 13622 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 7-9 December. Shuchart, C.E., Jackson, S.K., Mendez-Santiago, J., et al. 2009. Effective Stimulation of Very Thick, Layered Carbonate Reservoirs Without the Use of Mechanical Isolation. Paper IPTC 13621 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 7-9 December. Ramamoorthy, R., Boyd, A., Neville, T. J., et al. 2010. A New Workflow for Petrophysical and Textural Evaluation of Carbonate Reservoirs. Petrophysics 51 (1): 17-31. Thabet, S., Brady, M., Parsons, et al. 2009. Changing the Game in the Stimulation of Thick Carbonate Gas Reservoirs. Paper IPTC 13097 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 7-9 December. Whitson, C.H. and Kuntadi, A. 2005. Khuff Gas Condensate Development. Paper IPTC 10692 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 21-23 November.