SPE 127422 Cement-Sheath Wellbore Integrity for CO2 Injection and Storage Wells

Koji Takase, Japan CCS Co., Ltd; Yogesh Barhate, Hiroyuki Hashimoto, SPE, Halliburton; and Siddhartha F. Lunkad, Formerly Halliburton

Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Oil and Gas India Conference and Exhibition held in Mumbai, India, 2022 January 2010. 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 It is critical that CO2 injection and storage wells have wellbore integrity to help prevent leakage of CO2 during the injection period, as well as long-term zonal isolation to sustain the loading conditions of pressure testing, completions, injection, shut-in, and stimulation treatment. This paper highlights the salient engineering design features of planning a successful cementing-job operation for extended-reach drilled (ERD), carbon capture and storage (CCS) wells. Corrosion in Portland cement caused by carbonic acid is a well-documented phenomenon. CO2 injected into geologic formations for underground storage purposes can be converted into various concentrations of carbonic acid with different levels of pH in the formation water surrounding the well, depending on conditions such as temperature, pressure, and the formation rock chemical components. The use of non-Portland cement is often recommended in harsh environments (pH<4) to help avoid any negative impact on long-term well integrity. In addition, the cement should have long-term mechanical resiliency against the anticipated future loading conditions of pressure testing, completions, injection, shut-in, and stimulation treatment. A detailed transient wellbore-temperature analysis was carried out for estimating the wellbore and tubular fluid-temperature profiles during the planned well operations. Based on the estimated temperature profiles, wellbore-pressure conditions, and fluid properties, a rigorous cement-sheath mechanical-integrity analysis was performed following a finite-element analysis (FEA) approach. It was found that the use of non-Portland cement alone might not be sufficient for long-term wellbore integrity. Customized non-Portland cement systems were developed with modified mechanical properties to help ensure appropriate mechanically resilient properties for the long life of a CCS well. Comparative FEA with non-Portland cement and mechanically modified non-Portland cement at the top of tail cement and casing shoe for ERD CCS wells is detailed. Introduction Global warming and climate change is one of the biggest concerns in the world today. The increased emission of greenhouse gases, like CO2, has been cited as one of the causes of global warming. Among the various techniques to combat the situation, capturing and geological sequestration of CO2 is believed to be one of the most cost-effective and safest techniques (Santra et al. 2009). It involves injection of CO2 in large quantities in the geological formations and leak-proof retention for hundreds of years. Major companies in Japan have taken a step forward and formed a consortium to research and demonstrate the technologies required for capturing CO2 and its storage in reservoirs. The main purpose of this incorporation is to achieve early massive reduction of CO2 by CCS. Achieving complete zonal isolation in the CO2 environment is identified as one of the important tasks for the overall success of a CCS project. The main objective of a primary cementing job is to impart zonal isolation for the life of the well. Complete zonal isolation with cement helps protect casing from corrosion, helps prevent sustained casing pressure, helps reduce premature water production, helps limit interzonal communication, and helps reduce the need for remedial work on a well. For successful zonal isolation, the cement slurry should be designed to maintain its chemical, mechanical, and thermal integrity during the life of the well. Cementing CCS wells is even more critical because of carbonation of neat Portland-cement systems in CO2 environments, and severe stresses imposed by changes of pressure regime during the life of the well caused by CO2-injection cycles and stimulation treatments. CO2 injected into geological formations for underground storage purposes can be converted into various concentrations

SPE 127422

of carbonic acid with different levels of pH in the formation water surrounding the well, depending on conditions such as temperature, pressure, and the formation-rock chemical components. The carbonation is of significant concern if the CO2 can enter the cemented annulus through microcracks. Carbonation affects the microstructure of cement, affecting both porosity and compressive strength. (Onan et al. 1984). The surface area of the cement sheath that contacts CO2 should be minimized to help prevent carbonation. This can be achieved by reducing the permeability and reducing the components in the cement sheath prone to attack from CO2 (Moroni et al. 2009). In addition to chemically combating the carbonation issue, it is equally important that the cement sheath be mechanically durable to withstand severe stresses experienced throughout the life of the well. If the cement sheath develops cracks and/or microannuli during well operations, then the cement sheath can act as potential flow paths for CO2 and other well fluids in the annular space, which can affect wellbore integrity (Moroni et al. 2009). A sophisticated hydraulic simulator was used to design efficient cement placement in an eccentric annulus (ERD well) and state-of-art FEA modeling was implemented to evaluate the cementsheath integrity during the main operational events (i.e., cement hydration, pressure testing, drilling shock waves, fluid injection, shut-in, and stimulation treatment). This paper discusses the cement-system design for the planned CCS well in Japan. The cement system was designed to withstand the stresses imposed by changes in pressure regime by improving elasticity, thus helping prevent damage to the cement sheath. In addition, the potential for carbonation was limited by reducing the components in the slurry formulation that could react with CO2. Well Configuration The well in consideration is ERD, as shown in Fig. 1. A conductor pipe covered the formation down to a 300-m (984 ft) depth. This provided the initial conduit to commence drilling and prevent well fluids from washing out unconsolidated shallow formations with the potential consequence of leakage to surface. The setting depth of the intermediate casing was designed at 1539 m (5,050 ft) TVD. (This casing helped isolate shallow aquifers from contamination by well fluids) The liner was attached to the bottom of the intermediate casing. The liner size was 7 5/8 in., which was cemented in a 9 7/8-in hole. This liner also provided the seal receptacle for the production tubing. The liner was highly inclined and the holding angle was 84. The zone of interest consisted of unconsolidated sandstone with porosity of 30% and permeability of 10mD, and was from ~2200 m (7,218 ft) top to ~2400m (7,874 ft) bottom TVD. A slotted 4 -in. liner was attached to the 7 5/8-in. liner slightly above the zone of interest. The slotted liner was placed in the 6 -in hole that was drilled in the zone of interest. The bottom TVD of the slotted liner was designed to be 2500 m (8,202 ft). For designing of the cement system, conservatively, it was assumed that CO2 would be injected continuously for 365 days with a maximum injection pressure of ~4,765 psi. The bottomhole static temperature was predicted to be 192F. During the cementsystem design, it was decided to consider loads of probable stimulation treatment that could be performed in the future. The cement system under discussion was designed for the annulus of the 7 5/8-in. liner. Non-Portland Cement System CO2 reacts with Portland cement and forms calcium carbonate, calcium bicarbonate, and an amorphous silica gel as a byproduct (reaction sequence 14). At lower pH (<4) reaction of calcium carbonate to calcium bicarbonate is facilitated and the later being soluble in water can eventually cause the cement sheath to literally dissolve leading to improper or no zonal isolation (Santra et al. 2009). This dissolution phenomenon is accelerated under dynamic conditions where the cement sheath may experience a flow of acidic fluid (pH<4). CO2 + H2O H2CO3 --------------------- (1) H2CO3 + C-S-H silica gel + CaCO3 ---------- (2) H2CO3 + Ca(OH)2 CaCO3 + 2H2O ----------- (3) H2CO3 + CaCO3 Ca(HCO3)2 --------------- (4) To tackle the problem of Portland-cement carbonation and dissolution in an extreme CO2 environment, a customized nonPortland cement system was developed and recommended as an ideal solution. The hydration products that are formed by nonPortland cement systems are resistant to CO2. Wellbore-Temperature Analysis The design group decided that using a typical American Petroleum Institute (API) calculation of bottomhole circulating temperature (BHCT) might be inadequate for designing cement slurries because of the following reasons: The length of the cement-slurry column was long, helping to ensure there was adequate time for safe placement of the slurry.

SPE 127422

It is important to predict the expected temperature of the cement sheath after placement of the slurry and during CO2 injection. Accurate temperature estimation is vital for injection, shut-in, and stimulation-treatment stages to carry out a robust transient FEA for cement-sheath integrity. The cement sheath could be subjected to (cyclic) thermal stresses because of the increase in cement-sheath temperature during CO2 injection. (Ravi et al. 2008).

A temperature simulator was used to understand the temperature during drilling and production. It performs a finite job by considering drilling and completion operations as well as production/injection. The use of the temperature simulator aided in designing the cement system by enabling better understanding of how the slurry design could be affected during placement and long-term well events, such as stimulation treatments. Accurate temperature analysis leads to execution of detailed and realistic lab testing for typical slurry properties as well as cement-sheath mechanical properties. The best available data was used as input to predict the temperatures at different wellconstruction stages. It is also recommended to verify the inputs used during this simulation with actual field values. Mechanical and thermal loads during various well-construction stages viz. drilling, cementing, completions, injection, and shut-in were modeled. Fig. 2 indicates the casing temperature profile at the start and end of waiting on cement (WOC), and Fig. 3 shows the wellbore-temperature profile during WOC, while Figs. 4 and 5 illustrate temperature profiles for the injection-load case. A special consideration was given to estimate the temperatures at fracturing/killing, depicted in Fig. 6. Laboratory Testing The specific gravity of the cement system used in this study varies between 2.30 and 2.45, depending on its ingredients. All the slurries were prepared using distilled water. All the slurries mixed well in a blending jar. The rheology of these slurries was determined using a vane-shaped yield-stress adapter (on a conventional bob and sleeve viscometer) because some of these slurries contained some larger-sized particles as mechanical property enhancing aid. The thickening time (Fig. 7), ultrasonic compressive strength, fluid loss, free water, and viscosity measurements were carried out in accordance with API Specification 10A "Specification for Cements and Materials for Well Cementing," 23rd edition, January 2005 and API RP-10B-2, 1st edition, July 2005. Spacer fluid was designed to optimize surfactant concentration to effectively wet the surfaces and for effective mud removal and cement-slurry placement. Uni-axial stress-strain tests were performed on these samples to determine Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio (Fig. 8), and compressive strength (Fig. 9). The tensile strength of the cement sheath was determined using a Brazilian test. These tests were performed according to ASTM D 3148-02 and D 2664-95a. FEA for Cement-Sheath Integrity A state-of-art FEA program based on the procedure designed by Bosma and Ravi (1999) was used to analyze the well integrity for the life of the well. The program simulates the sealing capacity in terms of radial cracking of the cement sheath, debonding at cement faces, and shear deterioration in the cement, as shown in Fig. 10. The inputs to this program were the properties of formation, casing, and cement sheath, along with the details of the well operation, as indicated in Tables 1 and 2 (Ravi et al. 2002; Heathman et al. 2006; Hunter et al. 2007). The output from the analysis was refereed to as remaining capacity. This is a capacity remaining in the cement sheath subsequent to a well operation. If the value is zero, the model indicates that the sheath may have failed from the well operation. A low value indicates that the cement sheath has not failed but that the load on it was high and stresses created in the cement sheath are close to failure value. A high value for remaining capacity means that the cement sheath is not only intact but that stresses are far from the failure value, hence having a higher probability of withstanding cyclic loads (Ravi et al. 2007). Two analysis points are strategically located to simulate cement stresses that will occur because of the different boundary conditions. Top of tail cement 6020 m MD (19,750 ft ) Bottom of the liner 6320 m MD (20,734 ft) The analysis discussed in this paper takes into account the effects of the following events on the integrity of the cement sheath: Cement hydration Changeover from displacement fluid to completion fluid Pressure testing CO2 injection Stimulation treatment

SPE 127422

Two possible critical casing-operation scenarios in highly deviated wells/extended-reach drilled wells for 30% and 50% eccentricities are analyzed. Results and Discussions The remaining capacities for two different cements were compared for their capability to withstand selected operations in the CCS well under discussion. The Youngs modulus value of 0.317 Mpsi was derived from the test (Fig. 8) for the modified non-Portland cement slurry (Sealant 2). This compares with typically unmodified cement with Youngs modulus values of ~1.5 Mpsi (Sealant 1). Results for Analysis Point 1 are presented as remaining capacity (%) in cement sheath after a well operation in Fig. 11 and Fig. 12. It shows that Cement Sealant 2 is consistently able to withstand well operations (curing, pressure test, completions, shut-in, and CO2 injection) at 30% and 50% casing-eccentricity risk cases, and remaining capacity is > 50%. Analysis Point 2 is the bottom of liner string. The drilling program indicated that openhole completions would be followed after 7 5/8-in. liner string, with 4 -in. slotted liner to be run in the ERD section. Figs. 13 and 14 illustrate that Cement Sealant 2 is consistently able to withstand fracturing/high-rate killing at 30% and 50% casing-eccentricity risk cases, and remaining capacity is more than 50%. This positive remaining capacity (%) can be interpreted as the reserve strength that would help in withstanding the additional load events the well might see during its life cycle. As seen from the results, the remaining capacity in case of the 30% casing offset is more than that in case of 50% at both locations. It is strongly recommended to centralize the casing to maintain the well integrity and for effective hole cleaning. It is observed that Sealant 1 did not fail in the stimulation (fracturing) load case, but the remaining capacity was only 8%, and there is a danger when using a cement system that is close to potential failure level in the case of unplanned well loading. As can be seen, an optimized elastic-thermal cement system (i.e., Sealant 2) was found to offer a much better remaining capacity and is therefore recommended. Conclusions The following conclusions are a result of this work. Non-Portland cement systems with optimized mechanical properties for well integrity are a recommended solution for CCS wells. By performing temperature and cement-sheath integrity analysis, the well-construction team can design cement sheaths to withstand well operations for the life of the well. References Bosma, M., Ravi, K., van Driel, W., and Schreppers, G.J. 1999. Design Approach to Sealant Selection for the Life of the Well. Paper SPE 56536 presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 36 October. DOI: 10.2118/56536-MS. Heathman, J. and Beck, F.E. 2006. Finite Element Analysis Couples Casing and Cement Designs for HPHT Wells in East Texas. Paper SPE 98869 presented at IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami, Florida, 2123 February. DOI: 10.2118/98869-MS. Moroni, N., Repetto, E., and Ravi, K. 2008. Zonal Isolation in Reservoir Containing CO2 and H2S. Paper SPE 112703 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, 46 March. DOI: 10.2118/112703-MS. Moroni, N. Santra, A. Ravi, K., and W. Hunter 2009a. Holistic Design of Cement Systems to Survive CO2 Envioenment. Paper SPE 124733 presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 47 October. DOI: 10.2118/124733-MS. Moroni, N., Repetto, C., Dettori, N., Ravi, K. 2009b. Zonal Isolation Achieved in Kashagan Field through Integrated Approach. Paper SPE/IADC 119296 presented at Drilling Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1719 March, DOI: 10.2118/119296-MS. OConnor, P.E., Bucknell, J.R., DeFranco, S.j., Westlake, H.S., and Puskar, S.J. 2005. Structural Integrity Management (SIM) of Offshore Facilities. Paper OTC 17545 presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 26 May. DOI: 10.4043/17545-MS. Ravi, K., Bosma, M., and Gastebled, O. 2002. Improve the Economics of Oil and Gas Wells by Reducing the Risk of Cement Failure. Paper SPE 74497 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Texas, 2628 February. DOI: 10.2118/74497-MS. Santra, A., Reddy, B.R., Liang, F., and Fitzgerald, R. 2009. Reaction of CO2 with Portland Cement at Downhole Conditions and the Role of Pozzolanic Supplements. Paper SPE 121103 presented at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, The Woodlands, Texas, 2022 April. DOI: 10.2118/121103-MS.

SPE 127422

Table 1Borehole and Formation Details Item Mean sea level Straight Vertical Well Seabed level Borehole diameter Well bottom TMD Vertical stress Overburden Thermal gradient Surface undisturbed temperature Location (Top TVD) Thermal gradient Young's modulus Sandstone Formation (unconsolidated) Poison's ratio Vertical stress Horizontal stress Specific heat Thermal conductivity Thermal expansion Description : 0 ft (0 m) : 0 ft (0 m) : 9.875 in. : 20,734 ft (6320 m) : 18.74 lbm/gal : 1.05156C/100ft : 15.6C : 3,573 ft (1089 m) : 1.05C/100ft : 1.0157 Mpsi : 0.3 : 19.00 lbm/gal : 7.17bm/gal : 23.89 Btu/(ft *F) : 1.058 Btu/(hr * ft *F) : 5.56 10 /F
-6 3

Table 2Operational Loads Item Drilling-fluid density Casing Casing eccentricity Displacement-fluid density Operational Spacer density Lead-cement density Tail-cement density Testing-surface pressure Test-fluid density Completion-fluid density TMD Analysis Point 1 (Top of tail cement) Beginning temperature Injection fluid pressure Injection fluid temperature Time of continuous injection Formation pore pressure TMD Beginning temperature Analysis Point 2 (Bottom of Liner) Injection fluid pressure Injection fluid temperature Time of continuous injection Formation pore pressure Fracture fluid pressure Fracture fluid temperature Exposure time Description : 10.4125 ppg : 7 5/8 in. : 30 % and 50 % : 10.4125 lbm/gal : 11 lbm/gal : 12.5 lbm/gal : 14.0 lbm/gal : 2134 psi : 10.4125 lbm/gal : 10.4125 lbm/gal : 19,750.6 ft (6020 m) : 182.55 F : 4,765 psi : 150F : 365 days : 3079.2 psi : 20735 ft (6320 m) : 191.7F : 4765 psi : 192.2F : 365 days : 3309 psi : 4509 psi : 88F : 12 hr
o

SPE 127422

Fig. 1ERD well profile.

Fig. 2Wellbore temperature profile for WOC duration.

SPE 127422

Fig. 3WOC temperature profile.

Fig. 4Tubular temperature profile for CO2 injection operation.

SPE 127422

Fig. 5Fluids temperature profile for CO2 injection operation.

Fig. 6Wellbore temperature profile for stimulation-treatment operation.

SPE 127422

Fig. 7Thickening time test for 14-lbm/gal modified cement.

Fig. 8Youngs modulus calculation for 14-lbm/gal modified cement.

10

SPE 127422

Fig. 9Compression test for 14-lbm/gal modified cement.

Fig. 10Typical cement-failure modes.

Fig. 11Risk of damage overload phases at a 6020-m depth with eccentricity of 30%.

Fig. 12Risk of damage overload phases at a 6020-m depth with eccentricity of 50%.

SPE 127422

11

Fig. 13Risk of damage ove load phases at a 6320-m depth with eccentricity of 30%.

Fig. 14Risk of damage overload phases at a 6320-m depth with eccentricity of 50%.