I would have a look at Steve Cuddy's posts on Linked in for Saturation Height functions - he knows more about this topic
@erbterb3 ай бұрын
I have watched several videos on EOR, specifically steam flooding as a good way to change the viscosity. Others have shown CO2 injection as a way to normalise the hydrocarbons. Gas/heavy oil and gas/gas exchange. So why does one not start each project with high temp CO2 injection? You flush the pores with gas, while still at pressure and get the benefits of viscosity changes. You also please the frequent flyer climate hypocrites by pumping down their emissions from cross continental flights. Why start with just normal suction, when you can start with EOR directly?
@AlanFoumGeophysicist3 ай бұрын
It is probably a matter of cost vs return - A recovery method for an oilfield is determined in the initial development plan to give the maximum return for the money invested - EOR can be done from day one - but a. you need a source of CO2 or steam and significant extra engineering which costs b. the extra oil recovered by EOR needs to be worth more than the cost of the EOR c. The operator needs to really understand EOR - the more complex a project (and EOR is complex to implement) the more scope there is for cost and time over runs d. Most large oilfields for which EOR is suitable were first developed a long time ago (decades) when EOR was a mere glint in an engineers eye rather than a proven technology, hence late implementation e. There is a not invented here mentality among some operators which can hinder progress