SPE 11104
SPE
Enhanced Gas Recovery From Water-Drive Reservoirs-
Methods and Economics
by Femi M, Akindele" and Djebbar Tiab, U. of Oklahoma
Members SPE
* Now with Sohio Petroleum Co,
Copyright 1982, Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME
This paper was presented at the 57th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibilion of lhe Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME,
held In New Orleans, LA, Sept. 26-29, 1982. The malenal IS subject to correction by the author. Permission to
abstract of not more than 300 words. Write: 6200 N. Central Expressway, P.O. Drawer 64706. Dallas, Texas
As the search for additional natural gas con-
tinues, recovery of known reserves must be improved
if the goal of avoiding shortages is to be met. One
area requiring further industry attention for enhanced
gas recovery is the reservoir associated with an
active aquifer. In reservoirs of this type, pressure
maintenance and entrapment of gas by encroaching
water greatly reduce recovery.
This paper discusses the mechanism by which the
aquifer reduces gas recovery and the magnitude of
gas possibly left in place. Three methods of improv-
ing recovery are analyzed including (1) planned water
production, (2) accelerated gas production and (3)
gas by other gas of lower
economic value. The study shows criteria for tech-
nical and economic feasibility of the methods.
Examples are used to illustrate the evaluation
procedures.
Enhanced gas recovery has traditionally been
used to describe methods of unconventional gas re-
covery from tight gas sands, Devonian shales, coal-
bed methane and methane from geopressured aquifers.
These sources of gas have been estimated by experts
to contain between 200 and 3,300 TeF of potentially
recoverable gas in the United States. Both the
industry and Government have addressed and actively
pursued the development of these reserves. However,
numerous difficult issues, particularly the techno-
logy, risk and economics, remain barriers to progress
in this direction. We are probably still far from
commercially developing these reserves.
paper.
Society of' Petrolel.rn Engineel'8 of A1M E
restricted to an
Meanwhile, conventional gas reserves continue
to decline rapidly as demand soars. In the cases
where reservoir pressure depletes naturally with gas
production, recovery efficiency tends to be high,
often approaching 90 percent. Where there is water
encroachment, recovery may be as low as 10 percent of
the original gas in place. The remaining reserves
would be unrecoverable unless external aid is pro-
vided to reduce the water influx and induce pressure
depletion.
In the past, the natural gas price did not
encourage wide application of external aid to produce
these known reserves. With the increasing price
and vnlue of gas, recovery of such reserves should be
given mOTe attention than it_ currently receives.
Since huge investments may be required to enhance
the recovery of these reserves, detailed studies re-
quiring sophisticated evaluation approaches and
computer applications are often required. The field
engineer who is closest to the data and information
on the reservoirs probably has the responsibility of
initiating such studies. Unfortunately, his time is
limited and routine operations may prevent him from
acquiring and applying the necessary tools.
The aims of this work, then, are (1) to provide
some information to the field engineer regarding the
magnitude of gas reserves he may be leaVing in his
water drive reservoir, (2) to review the possible
methods he can apply to improve his gas recovery, (3)
to show procE:~dures for initial reservoir evaluation
which may be used as a basis for detailed studies,
and (4) to discuss the economic analysis method
necessary to justify the project.
2 ENHANCED GAS RECOVERY FROM WATER DRIVE RESERVOIRS--METHODS fu~D ECONOMICS SPE 11104

Naar-Henderson l7 proposed that residual gas

saturation can be obtained from the original gas
The mechanisms by which the aquifer reduces gas saturation. Their expression for consolidated sands
recovery include: is as follows:

(a) Dissolving of gas (1)

(b) Capillary Entrapment
(c) Pressure Maintenance 18
Agarwal obtained the following correlations
by regression analysis:
These are briefly discussed as follows:
2
+ (2 )

for consolidated sandstones,

The diffusion of gas into the encroaching
water generally causes a slight loss of recoverable
gas due to the ability of water to dissolve the gas. "" A 0
l
+ A2 logk + A3S gi + (3)

As shown in Figure 1, gas solubility in water has

for limestone, and
been found to decrease with increasing temperature
and to increase with pressure. In addition, increas-
ing water salinity reduces gas solubility.
S
gr
+ (Sgi 0) + A30 + A4 (4)

for unconsolidated sandstones.

As water invades the gas bearing sand, capillary
effects cause water to move irregularly. Where the
water path forms an enclosure around any gas bubble,
such bubble becomes unrecoverable. See Figure 2.
The amount of gas left in place by this pro~asstends
to decrease linearly with increasing porosity as
depicted in Figure 3.
His values for the coefficients
presented in Table 2. The above
probably provide reliable starting point estimates
if no laboratory data are available. However, actual
measurements must be made to increase confidence in
the quantity estimated for each reservoir.
Experimental evidence is available to show that
reservoir residual gas can closely be predicted
from laboratory tests. See Reference 1.

It is well known that a gas reservoir derives

most of its producing energy from the expansion of
gas itself. Where water influx occurs, pressure
The magnitude of residual gas possibly left in
reduction and, therefore, gas expansion are restricted.
place after water influx suggests the need for im-
In effect, at the time the reservoir is abandoned,
proved recovery methods for this system of reservoir.
the reservoir pressure may be too high to allow
Total prevention of water encroachment would be pre-
maximum recovery of in place. Results of
ferred in most cases. Unfortunately, no practical
several investigations indicate that residual
approach has been found for this. Even if found, the
gas in a water invaded reservoir is dependent mainly
technique may not be completely acceptable due to the
on the strength of the aquifer, the original gas
advantage of water influx in maintaining deliver-
saturation, and the production rate. In general,
ability. In addition, where substantial oil reserves
the stronger the aquifer, the larger the residual gas.
exist between the gas zone and the aquifer, preventing
water influx could reduce oil recovery. These must
be considered in curtailing the effects of aquifer
response.
Years ago residual gas after water influx was
To improve gas recovery when water influx may be
considered to be between 5 and 15 percent. Accord-
a problem, three reservoir management techniques
ing to Ref. 1, this was based on the relative ease
have been found applicable. These are (1) planned
of gas movement as compared to water and on the
water production, (2) accelerated gas production,
assumption that gas displacement by water would give
and (3) natural gas displacement. A review of these
results similar to liquid displacement by gas. Labor-
techniques follows.
atoryand field tests of Geffen et.al~, and other
researchers have put the size of such residual gas
at between 10 and 68 percent. Table 1 summarizes
the results of different investigations on the magni-
This method involves simultaneously producing
tude of residual gas saturation.
gas and water using separate wells. The aim is to
reduce reservoir pressure to a level below what would
It is noteworthy that a wide range exists in
otherwise result from aquifer influence. This is
the results presented in the table. Many investi-
essentially reducing the aquifer strength as it
gators have attempted correlations between reservoir
affects the gas zone.
parameters and residual gas after water encroachment.
At least two such expressions exist.
SPE 11104 F.M. AKINDELE AND D. TIAB 3

The application of this technique may be studied

using the line source equation. One form is given by:
This approach is dependent on being able to pro-
per,t) : : : Pi - (-EL(-12h.lC t //0. 00105kt (5) duce the gas reserves at a rate that will deplete
the pressure rapidly relative to aquifer response.
Several aspects of the operation must therefore be
where pressure at a distance (r) from a producer and considered including:
time (t) is defined to be equal to initial pressure
(Pi) less pressure drop due to production. The Ei (1)
function is easily evaluated using published tables. 19 (2) allowable.
(3) such as water
Observation of the expression shows that care- coning, paraffin.
fully locating wells to produce the aquifer at planned
rates and times would cause the reservoir pressure to The general procedure for evaluating the
drop. Consider a hypothetical well producing 200 Bbls. viability of this approach follows.
of water from a 16 foot thick reservoir with an 1n1-
tial pressure of 3200 psi. Other reservoir and fluid (A) Match pressure and production histories
properties are: for existing producers. For a new field,
pressure and production profiles must be
12% -6 predicted.
13xl0 /psi (B) Predict reservoir pressure, water influx
13 md. and ultimate recovery for various pro-
u .8 cpo duction rates.
(C) Predict coning rate.
Pressure at a particular time and location may be (D) Predict de1iverability.
predicted using Equation 5 and assuming the water (E) Optimize production rate based on maximum
formation volume factor is 1. For example, after 30 recoverable reserves.
minutes of production, the pressure at any distance
(r) is: The above steps can be accomplished by combining
material balance with coning and deliverability cal-
P(r,O.S) culations which are based on relationships between
-6 ? time, pressure and production rate. These variables
P -'--__---::-::----::--;:-!----'-----'- (-E' (-. 12) ( . 8) (13xl 0 ) r ,- ) are the essential basis of accelerated gas production
i -
1(0.00105)(13)(0.5) which must be optimized as illustrated in the follow-
-4 r
2 ing discussion.
= Pi - 54.35(-Ei(-1.82xI0
Examine the volumetric balance equation given by:
Similarly, after 50 hours
-6 ? 0AhdP.-P)
. 1 + (6)
P(r,50) = Pi - 54.35(-Ei(-L82xlO r-)
Define O.02829ZT/P CF/SCF (7)
It is readily shown that by properly choosing the
distance between the water well and the gas producer, By assuming an appropriate water influx model,
the rate of water production and the duration of pro- can be obtained. For example, if an aquifer of
duction, a required pressure drop at the gas producer extent is considered to respond radially,
can be obtained. In the case illustrated, at 50 feet water influx is:
from the water producer, the aquifer pressure of 2j =n-l
3200 psi would drop to about 2939 psi at the end of HeCSCF) = 6.2830c.r hZAP.Q (8)
50 hours. . e j=:oO J t

Table 3 presents calculated pressures at indicate Thus, the rate of gas production can be represented
distances (30 minutes and 50 hours) from the water by
producer. These are graphed as shown in Figure 4. q(SCF/D) = Al (Pi - + A i.6P.Q (9)
2 J t
It is clear from the graph that higher pressure drops
are obtained near the water producer. This suggests \vhere Al and A2 are constants.
that the water well must be located as close as
possible to the gas-water contact for maximum effect. By assuming various pressure drops over a certain
period of time, the required production rate can be
The foregoing analysis clearly shows that timing obtained, which maximizes recoverv for the period.
and location of the water producer are major con- Theoretically, it appears that reservoir pressure
trolling factors in this method of enhanced gas re- drop can be imposed as high as desired for a maximum
covery. Optimizing the operation may, therefore, call production rate. This may be achieved using several
for using existing watered-out wells or drilling new wells produced at capacity. However, there is a
water producers in the aquifer. On the other hand, maximum number of wells that can be justified econom-
the appropriate well location may be in the aquifer ically for a gas reserve. In addition, de1iverability
before or after the start of water encroachment. Each and coning constraints must be considered.
option must be examined vis-a-vis the expected add-
itional gas recovery. The final choice would depend
on economics.
4 ENHANCED GAS RECOVERY FROM WATER DRIVE RESERVOIRS--METHODS AND ECONOMICS
The maximum production rate of a gas well may be
determined from the following expression:
q (10)
Furthermore, allowable production is a fraction of
the absolute open flow potential and may be expressed
as:
q = (11)
where X = fraction of open flow potential.
Equation (11) represents the maximum production
rate that a gas well may produce. It, therefore,
indicates the rate that will give the highest pressure
drop possible for the reservoir if depletion is to be
accomplished by only one well. It is clearly seen
that the highest production rate is obtained when
X is 1, i.e., the well produces at capacity. Thus,
recoverable reserves increase with X. It is easy to
see that if the reservoir is depleted by two or more
wells, recoverable reserves should increase.
It may be operationally unwise to produce a gas
well underlain by water at capacity due to coning
tendencies. This is examined next.
Consider a well in a gas reservoir associated
with an aquifer. Assume that the relevant reservoir
and well data are as shown in Table 4. If we further
assume that the graphical coning evaluation technique
proposed by Meyer and Garder 22 is adequate, then we
can predict the maximum gas production rate to avoid
water coning as follows:
For a cone height, h 30'
Apparent rate q' = 2000 MCF/D 5)
q' q In (re/r w) /k (12)
q q'k/ In(re/rw)
1 MMCF/D
Thus, the maximum production rate for this well should
be about 1 MMCF/D if coning is to be avoided. The
absolute open flow obtained by Equation (11) is
q Cp2n
10(4000)1.6
5.8 MMCF/D
These rates indicate that coning would restrict pro-
duction to about 17 percent of absolute flow potential.
Earlier discussion. however, indicated that the
reservoir must be produced as fast as possible. It,
therefore, becomes necessary to evaluate the feas-
ibility of additional drilling. Although following
this evaluation, increased density may be desirable,
it may be prohibited by spacing rules and economics.
These factors must be carefully considered in applying
this method of improved gas recovery.
SPE 11104
In view of the fact that water encroachment may
not completely be avoided and due to the restrictions
that may be imposed by possible operational problems
outlined above, this method may not result in maximum
gas recovery. Therefore, completing wells to produce
the encroaching water may still be necessary if sub-
stantial residual gas remains in place.
A major setback with the acceleration method is
that if the gas zone is separated from the aquifer by
an oil rim, it may be technically unwise or uneconomic
to produce the gas. The accelerated gas production
may need to be delayed in favor of oil production.
This, in turn, may reduce the present worth of the
gas. The next section discusses a method to alleviate
this problem.
In order to avoid undue delay in recovery and
possible entrapment of natural gas in a gas-oil-
water system, it may be prudent to replace the natural
gas by injecting another gas of lower economic value.
This method of enhanced gas recovery is particularly
encouraged by the increasing demand for aild price of
natural gas.
The main purpose of this method is to maintain
adequate pressure in the gas zone for maximum oil
recovery without delaying gas sales. Residue gas,
carbon dioxide and nitrogen could be used to replace
natural gas since they are worth less than natural
gas. These options must be evaluated, however, based
on
(1) Price of the replacement gas
(2) Availability
(3) Favorable physical and chemical properties
The use of residue gas may be precluded by un-
necessary sales deferment thereby restricting the
choice to carbon dioxide and nitrogen. In terms
cost, availability, and ease of operation,
have shown that nitrogen is superior to carbon dioxide
Therefore, the following discussion will concern
nitrogen injection.
Typically, nitrogen is injected high in the
structure. Natural gas and oil are then produced
simultaneously from their respective zones. The
main factors that must be analyzed to usc this
technique include
(1)
Nitrogen is readily obtainable on site from
air. This involves cryogenic separation of air
components--a process consisting of air compression,
followed cooling and distillation. Plants may be
owned by operator or nitrogen supplied by a con-
tractor who owns and operates the plants.
~len compared to other gases, nitrogen appears
cheaper for injection purposes. Cost comparisons
found in the literature indicate the average price of
ni trogen is about $0.45 per MCF while flue gas and
carbon dioxide cost approximately $0.69 and $1.13
respectively. About 51 percent of nitrogen injection
cost is attributed typically to the electric power
requirement. Compression accounts for 15 percent
while nitrogen itself takes 34 percent.
SPE 11104 F.M. AKINDELE
(2)
(a) Segregation Tendency. In view of density
similarity for nitrogen and natural gas, the injected
nitrogen tends to be retained above the reservoir gas.
Figure 6 presents density trends for nitrogen and
natural gas under various temperature and pressure
conditions.
(b) The viscosities of nitrogen and methane are
compared in Figure 7. In the range of temperatures
and pressures normally encountered in the reservoir,
nitrogen appears more viscous than methane. This
indicates a fingering tendency. This tendency can
generally be overcome, however, if the nitrogen
injection rate is controlled.
(3)
Solubility of nitrogen in the contacted reservoir
content does not appear to be a major problem in the
application of this method. In a reservoir containing
natural gas, oil and water, upstructure injected
nitrogen may contact oil and connate water. These
two fluids are capable of dissolving nitrogen thereby
reducing the efficiency of the operation. In Figure
8, nitrogen solubility in water of various salinities
is shown with respect to temperature and pressure.
The curves agree with the earlier discussion of gas
solubility with respect to changing temperatures,
pressures and the salinity of water. Notice that
only about 10 cubic feet of nitrogen would dissolve
in 1 barrel of connate water of 55,000 ppm at 4000 psi
and between 100 and 200F. The solubility of nitro-
gen is higher in high-gravity than low-gravity crude
oil. The temperature effect appears negligible but
oil composition may be important in establishing this
factor. Figure 9 is a general trend of nitrogen sol-
ubility in oil of 20-40 0 API gravity. At about
4000 psi, approximately 100 standard cubic feet of
nitrogen would dissolve in one stock tank barrel of
oil.
(4)
Contacting the reservoir fluids with nitrogen may
alter the phase behavior of the hydrocarbons. For
example, the dew point pressure of the gas may be
increased causing retrograde condensation. Although
some of the liquid dropping out in the reservoir may
re-vaporize upon further nitrogen contact, the portion
left in the reservoir may be permanently lost due to
relative permeability effect. Stripping the crude
oil of its light to intermediate components by con-
tacting with nitrogen has been observed in laboratory
experiments. IS This causes reduced formation volume
factor, increased oil viscosity and lower API gravity.
These changes are generally minimal as shown in
Table S where density and viscosity alterations are
indicated due to nitrogen-oil contact.
These effects must be determined for individual
reservoir fluids and conditions. They must be con-
sidered in the project feasibility study and in the
process design.
AND D. TIAB 5
(5)
The volumetric replacement property of nitrogen
is a key factor in the application of gas injection
for enhanced gas recovery. In general, the volume
of nitrogen required to fill a certain amount of
reservoir space is lower than the volume of natural
gas. Figure 10 shows the fraction of nitrogen that
will replace a unit volume of methane for various
temperatures and pressures. This is a definite ad-
vantage in natural gas replacement by nitrogen.
(6)
Natural gas in contact with nitrogen during this
recovery process may gradually lose heating value.
This may reduce the pipeline quality and cause devia-
tion from an existing contract. It may be necessary
to renegotiate the gas price since this is directly
dependent on the BTU content of the gas. In general,
the higher the nitrogen proportion in the nitrogen-
natural gas stream, the lower the obtainable heating
value.
Figure 11 is adapted from Ref. 14. It depicts
curves of BTU content as a function of nitrogen con-
tent. Similar curves must be established for each
individual case as reservoir fluid characteristics
may affect the trend. Such curves would aid in
determining adherence to the sales contract or the
need to reject nitrogen from the natural gas produced.
(7)
The process by which diluted natural gas in
contact with nitrogen is purified is known as nitro-
gen rejection. This process involves a cryogenic
distillation of the nitrogen-natural gas mixture at
the end of which nitrogen is separated from the
methane. A variety of processes exist. In
when the nitrogen content is high over the
the process, it becomes complicated and may be pro-
hibitively expensive. It has been shown, however,
that there are cases when installation of the process
may yield better economics than when a provision is
not made to reject the nitrogen for natural gas
purification. See Figure 12 where the economics of
the following are compared.
(1) Produce gas, recover natural gas liquid
and re-inject residue gas.
(2) Produce gas and sell without liquid
extraction.
(3) Produce gas, recover liquid and reject
nitrogen before selling residue.
The results indicate that Case 3, rejecting
nitrogen, provides better economics since the value
of the residue gas is improved due to high BTU
content. Notice that projecting the curves would
indicate a break-even point at which Case 3 gives
equal economics with Case 1 or 2. At this point,
the nitrogen content of the stream is so high that
the cost of rejection is prohibitive.
6 ENHANCED GAS RECOVERY FROM WATER DRIVE
The final decision to install this facility must
be based on incremental economic analysis. Such
analysis must include all alternatives of operational
method and equipment design.
The foregoing discusses various key aspects of
this enhanced gas recovery method that must be in-
vestigated before application. The steps to follow
for quantitative analysis can be summarized as follows:
(a) Determine gas reserves for the project.
(b) Assemble data on the properties of
reservoir fluids.
(c) Establish compatibility of nitrogen
with reservoir fluids.
Cd) Evaluate nitrogen requirement and compare
sources and price.
(e) Identify market and establish price for
the quantity and quality of the gas to
be produced; do the same for any liquids.
Cf) Analyze profitability.
It is obvious that most of the information re-
quired for project design must be obtained by laba-
tory measurements or correlations. Contacts must
also be made with gas and liquid purchasers as well
as nitrogen suppliers. After all these have been
done, we can obtain the required nitrogen quantity
from the relationships of Figure 10. For example,
if the gas reservoir has a 300g psi pressure and a
bottom hole temperature of 150 F, about 84 SCF of
nitrogen will be required to replace 100 SCF of
methane. We must then project the rate of gas pro-
duction for the field by year. Nitrogen requirement
is then equal to 84 percent of yearly gas production
if the reservoir pressure remains constant at 3000
psi. Otherwise, the nitrogen requirement must be re-
evaluated at the expected pressures.
The gas price negotiated prior to the start of
nitrogen injection may warrant nitrogen rejection to
meet the contract BTU content. Model studies to
predict the nitrogen content of the produced gas
would be required. A typical trend of nitrogen con-
tent with respect to time is shown in Figure 13. In
general, the nitrogen concentration rate increases
with time and must be established for each reservoir.
So far , ~.;re have shown that there is usually a
size of residual gas in the reservoir operated
the influence of an active aquifer. It has also been
discussed that methods exist which may be used to
improve recovery from this system of reservoir. Since
technical feasibility must be complemented by economic
viability for a project to be acceptable to an opera-
tor, we offer some comments on the appropriate method
of profitability analysis.
Enhanced gas recovery necessitates providing
additional funds over what would ordinarily be spent
to develop the gas reserves. Thus the options exist-
ing are (1) spending minimum money to produce the
RESERVOIRs--~mTHODS AND ECONOMICS SPE 11104
?;as with water influx which reduces recovery and (2)
enhancing recovery by incr.easing the investment using
one or more of the methods discussed herein.
When comparing alternatives as required here, the
profitability must be based on incremental economic
analysis. This permits the assessment of the economic
advantage of additional investment to recover add-
itional gas. An alternative (A) requiring certain
investment may yield a higher economic indicator,
for example rate of return, than another alternative
(B) requiring higher investment. This may not
necessarily mean that (A) is mOre profitable than (B).
To properly evaluate (A) and (B), an acceptable pro-
fitability index must be established and each invest-
ment option must be analyzed and compared to the
index. The economics of the extra cost of (B) must
then be evaluated to account for the added benefits.
The result is then compared to the index. If this
last comparison indicates an equal or better result
than the acceptable index, investment (B) should
probably be undertaken provided funds are available.
CONCLUSIONS
This presentation has reviewed the problems of
gas recovery from reservoirs associated with active
aquifer and some possible solutions. The following
conclusions are made.
(1) Residual gas saturation in reservoirs
which are subject to water encroachment can be
high unless proper methods are devised to enhance
the recovery of the gas.
(2) Carefully designed reservoir engineering
and production plans such as those discussed here
can result in improved gas recovery over which is
otherwise recoverable from aquifer supported
reservoirs.
(3) In view of its increasing value, natural
gas replacement in water drive reservoirs using gas
such as nitrogen is likely to become popular.
(4) Compared to other enhanced gas recovery
options (unconventional gas), the technology of each
method discussed here is relatively uncomplicated.
These methods offer an economic source of additional
natural gas with virtually no risk.
We
acknm"ledge the \'lOrk of the referenced authors whose
figures were adapted for illustrations here.
SPE 11104 F.M. AKINDELE AND D. TIAB 7

7. Kumar, A.: "Strength of Water Drive or Fluid

Injection From Transient Well Test Data", J.
A Drainage area, sq. ft. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1977) 1497-1508.
Bg Gas formation volume factor, CF/SCF
Bw Water formation volume factor, RB/STB 8. Kumar, A.: "Drainage Areas for Wells in Edge
C Well performance coefficient -1 Water-Drive Reservoirs", (Dec.
Ct Total effective compressibility, psi 1977) 1673-1682.
Ei Exponential integral
h Formation thickness, ft. 9. Knapp, R.M., Henderson, J.H., Dempsey, J.R. and
k Formation permeability, md. Coats, K.H.: "Calculation of Gas Recovery Upon
n Flow exponent Ultimate Depletion of Aquifer Storage", J. Pet.
P(r,t) Reservoir pressure at point and (Oct. 1968) 1129-1132.
time, psi
Pressure at the wellbore 10. Lutes, J.L., Chiang, C.P., Rossen, R.H. and
Average reservoir pressure, psi Brady, M.M.: "Accelerated Blowdown of a Strong
Dimensionless water infulx Water Drive Gas Reservoir", J. Pet. Tech.
Rate of production, BPD or MSCF/D (Dec. 1977) 1533-1538.
Drainage radius, ft.
Wellbore radius, ft. 11. Calvin, J.W. and Vogel, J.1.: "An Evaluation
Initial gas saturation, fraction of Nitrogen Injection As A Method of Increasing
Residual gas saturation, fraction Gas Cap Reserves and Accelerating Depletion--
Temperature, oR Ryckman Creek Field, Unita County, Wyoming",
Time, hours Paper presented at the 54th Annual Fall
Water encroachment, SCF and Exhibition, Las Vegas,
Gas deviation factor Nevada, Sept. 23-26, 1979.
u Viscosity, cp
o Porosity, fraction 12. Brinkman, F.P.: "Increased Gas Recovery From A
Moderate Water Drive Reservoir", Paper SPE 9473
presented at the 55th Annual Fall Technical
REFERENCES Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, Sept.
21-24, 1980.
1. Geffen, T.M., Parrish, D.R., Haynes, G.W. and
Morse, R.A.: of Gas Displacement 13. Chesney, T.P., Lewis, R.C. and Trice, H.L.:
from Porous Hedia by Liquid Floodingtl, "Enhanced Gas Recovery From A Moderately Strong
Vol. 195, (1952) Water Drive Reservoir", Paper presented
at the 56th Annual Fall
and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, Oct. 5-7,
2. Chierici, G.L., Cuicci, G.M. and Long, G.: 1981.
"Experimental Research on Gas Saturation Behind
the Water Front in Gas Reservoirs Subjected to 14. Vines, H.L. and Hilton, M.F.: "Nitrogen Rejection
\.Jater Drive", Presented at the 6th Increases Sales Gas Revenues", (Unpublished)
World Petroleum Francfort, Hain, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., (1982).
(19th-26th June, 1963).
15. Anada, H.R. and Watts, R.J.: "State of the Art
3. Agarwal, R.C., Al-Hussainy, R. and Ramey, H.J.: Review of Nitrogen and Flue Gas Flooding in
"The Importance of Water Influx in Gas Reservoirs" Enhanced Oil Recovery", U.S. Department of
(Nov. 1965) 1336-1342. Energy ~~~~~~~~~===-~~~~~~~~
Report,
4. Crowell, D.C., Dean, G.W. and Loomis, A.G.:
"Efficiency of Gas Displacement From A Water 16. U.S. Department of Energy, "Unconventional Gas
Drive Reservoir", Report of Investigations 6735, Recovery, (Enhanced Gas " DOE/EDP 0049,
United States Department of Interior, Bureau of (Oct. 1979).
Mines, (1966).
17. Naar, J. and Henderson, J.H., "An Imbibition
5. Keelan, D.K. and Pugh, V.J.: "Trapped Gas Model - Its Application to Flow Behavior and
Saturations in Carbonate Formations", Paper The Prediction of Oil Recovery",
presented at the SPE-AIME 48th Annual (June, 1961) 61.
Las Vegas, Nev., (Sept.30-0ct. 3,
1973). 18. Agarwal, R.G.: "Unsteady State Performance of
Water Drive Gas Reservoirs",
6. Bruns, J.R., Fetkovich, M.J. and Meitzen, V.C.: Texas A&M University, (May
tiThe Effect of Water Influx on pig Cumulative
Gas Production Curves", (March, 19. Ramey, H.J., Kumar, A. and Gu1ati, M.S.: "Gas
1965) 287-291. Well Test Analysis Under Water-Drive Conditions",
Arlington, Va. (1973).
8 ENHANCED GAS RECOVERY FROM WATER DRIVE RESERVOIRS--METHODS AND ECONOMICS SPE 11104

20. Katz, D.L. and Coats, K.B.: "Underground Storage

of Fluids", Ulrich's Books, Inc., Ann Arbor,
Michigan, (1968).

21. Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., "Physical

Properties of Nitrogen for Use in Petroleum
Reservoirs", (September 1977).

22. Meyer, H.I. and Garder, A.O.: "Mechanics of Two

Immiscible Fluids in Porous Media", Journal of
25, No. 11, (Nov. 1954) 1400-

23. Craft, B.C. and Hawkins, M.F.: "Applied Petroleum

Reservoir Engineering", Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (1959) 129-130.

24. Stermole, F.J.: "Economic Evaluation and Invest-

ment Decision Methods", Investment Evaluations
Corporation, Golden, Colorado (1974).

25. Agarwal, R.G.: Personal Communication

3
bb1 x 1.589 873 E-Ol m
cp x 1.000* E-03 Pas
ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
psi, psia x 6.894 757 E+OO kPa
sq ft x 9.290 304 E-02 m2

~<Conver s ion factor is exac t.

TABLE 1

RESIDUAL GAS ~~GNITUDE AFTER HATER INFLUX

PERCENT RESIDUAL GAS BY RESEARCHER

Geffen l Chierici 2 Crowe11'+ Keelan5
Rock Type et al et a1 et a1 & Pugh

Unconsolidated Sand 16 18-26 --- ---

Slightly Consolo Sand 21 --- --- ---

Consolidated Sand 17-24 --- ---
Consolo Sandstone 34-50 18-31 14-45 ---
Limestone 50 10-22 --- 23-68
 TABLE 2

AGARWAL' S- B~EG1RESS ICm COEFFICIENTS

2
Eq. 0.80841168 -0.63869116x10-

Eq. -0.53482234 0.33555165x10 0.15458573 o. 14403977x10 2

2
Eq. 4 -0.51255987 o. -0.26769575 0.14796539x10

TABLE 3

EXAMPLE PRESSURE PROFILE BY Ei-FUNCTION

(A) Time, t = 30 minutes TABLE 4

Distance From the Producer~ ft. Resultant Pre.ssure, psi DATA FOR EXAMPLE CALCULATION
0.33 2643
1 2765 h 30'
6 1
5 2939 c 300 x 10- pSi-
t
10 3014 k 100 md.
50 3167 0 0.15
100 3197 r 3000 ft.
e
500 3200 li 0.02 cp
1000 3200 g 0.9
B
g
0.0065 cf/cf
(B) Time, t "" 50 hours P. 4000 psia
1
r 0.25'
Distance. From the Producer, ft. Resultant Pressure, nsi w
T 180F
0.33 2396 n 0.8
1 '2516 C 10
5 2699 S 0.1
wi
10 2765
50 2939
100 3015
500 3167
1000 3197

TABLE 5

EFFECT OF NITROGEN ON OIL DENSITY

AND VISCOSITY @ 3000 PSI

Before N2 Contact
Temperature K Viscosity
(OF) (cr~)

60 288.7 49.45 50.69

80 299.8 48.93 1.6 50.19 2.6

100 310.9 48.39 1.4 49.73 2.1

120 322.1 47.91 1.2 49.26 1.7

140 333.2 47.38 1.0 48.79 1.4

Source: Ref. 15
 26~~~~--~~~~~~~~--~~~~--~~~--~~~

24
22
.20
~18
en 16
0::
Wl4
Q..
.12
t-
lLlO
.
::> 8
U
6
4
2

o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
PRESSURE - PSIA

FIG. I - SOLUBILITY OF NATURAL GAS IN WATER

("<ef. 7.3)

Time 3

Time 2

DGas

_ Water

Time 1
~Sand

FIG.2 - GAS ENTRAPMENT BY CAPILLARY

(T(d. 2(l)
 ~ 50
rt
(/)

w
~ 40
a..
"*
Z 30
o
~
cr::
=>
~ 20
(/)
(/)

~
~ 10
=>
o
(j)
w
cr::
OL-~~~~-L-L~~~~
o 0.2. 0.4
POROSITY - FRACTION

FIG.3 - TRAPPED GAS SATURATION

AFTER FLOODING VS POROSITY
(Ref. 20)

3200~~~~~~O~R~/~G~/N~A~L~A~Q~U=/=F=R==P=R='=~=S=U=R============1

t=50HOURS
~
~2800
0::
::>
~2600
w
a:
a..
2400

2200

20000~~~~~~--~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~IO~OO
200 300 400 500
DISTANCE FROM WATER PRODUCER - FT.

FIG.4 - PRESSURE AS A FUNCTION OF DISTANCE FROM PRODUCER

 50,000

~ 10.000

40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

h=HEIGHT OF CONE- FEET

FIG.5 - MAXIMUM GAS PRODUCTION FROM A GAS-WATER SYSTEM

WITHOUT WATER PRODUCTION
(Ref. 22)
 O.30r-----+----+------~--4-~~~~~

8
........
<.!) 0.20t-----\----I-- -f-+-~--bJoIc--_+____+-f____1
I
~
Vi 0.15t----+---~----::l~
Z
W
o
(J)
~ 0.1 Ol----~~~~---+----+---+--+--~

1500 2000 3000 4000 6000 8000

PRESSURE - PSIG

FI G. 6A - NITROGEN DENSITY VS PRESSURE AN D TEMPERATURE

(Ref. 21)

0.401------+---+----+----I---t.,..--I--f-----1

0.30t----+---I-----+ -/-+--I--~'9---1

u
u
........
<.!) 0.20t----+---+
I
>-
t-
en 0 .15t----+--~-+--
Z
W
o
(J)
~ 0.1 Ot--~--+--.I"---1'-

0.05L..-...L--"""'--_---l.._ _ _..1..-_--'-_....!..---i-_..i..-.-J
1000 1500 2000 3000 4000 6000 8000
PRESSURE - PS I G

FIG.69-NATURAL GAS DENSITY VS PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE

 0.05 .----....,.-------~---.,...___--_,_~-__r_-~~

0.04 I-----+----+----i---+-----+--~<_+_--~

c::.
.::.
>-
.~ 0.03 1---_ _-+-__-+_ _--+_ _---,~p:_--j-~!C--~-_::.II'fIC--,
o
U

::>'"
'"
ra
lJ

0.01 1..-_ _........_ _--1.._ _ _I _ _ _:...-_ _..1-_ _ _ _ __

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Pressure (OSi2)

FIG.7 - GAS VISCOSITY VS TEMPERATURE

AND PRESSURE
(Ref. 21)

20

0.04
\ I

$
0::
...."
U
'C
15
0.03
\
"I~--
>- is
;::; I-
:c Vl
~
:::l
"0
""'-u g
Vl Vl

~~ 0.02
C
QJ
0.0 10 ..........
g
~
.Q '"
<lJ
:::l
Z "0 c:
Vl
Z~
0.01
I---
-

o
2000 4000 6000 8000
Pressure (psig)
Ol..-_~ ________________ ~ __ ~

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Pressure (psigl
FIG.9 - SOLUBI L1TY OF NITROGEN
IN CRUDE OIL
FIG.8 - SOLUBI UTY VS SALI N ITY (l\ef. 21)

TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE

(P.ef. 21)
 0.941-'t-'-..-.+--+--+--+---+---+----I

0.92 ft--\---'\--J---'oor.:--t---t--+--+----j----I

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Pressure (psiRl

FIG. 10 - NITROGEN-METHANE VOLUME FRACTION

(Tlef. 21)

-.J
~
::::> 800
~
Z
LL 600
o
w
:3 400
~
~ 200
~
W
:I:
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PERCENT NITROGEN IN GAS MIXTURE

FIG. II - BTU/SCF VS NITROGEN CONTENT

(Ref. 14)
 BASIS: 40MM SCFD
$5.00/MM BTU FUEL VALUE
10/GAL. NGL OVER FUEL VALUE
6
40 MIL/KWH ELECTRIC POWER
HYDROCARBON FRACTION OF GAS
82.0% C,
10.0% C2
5.0% C3
4
2.0% C4's
$/M SCF OF 1.0% CS's
FEED GAS

o 10 20 30 40 50 60
% N2 IN FEED GAS

FIG.12 - COMPARISON OF ECONOMICS

NITROGEN INJECTION PROJECTS
(Ref. 14)

~ 100
<.j
t-::

z 80
z
z
w 60
<.j
0
0:
t- 40
z
t-
Z
w 20
U
cr:
w
a.. a
TIME-YEARS

FIG. 13 - TYPICAL TREND OF INJECTED NITROGEN

CONCENTRATION IN PRODUCED GAS
(Ref. 14)