Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) is widely used in the Athabasca oil sands deposit to recover bitumen. Since the viscosity of bitumen is high at original reservoir conditions, heat is required to lower its viscosity to the point it becomes mobile enough to be recovered under gravity drainage. To heat the reservoir, steam is injected into the formation and thus SAGD is energy intense. Given that the fuel used to generate steam is the largest operating cost, the steam-to-oil ratio is one of the key parameter for evaluating the economics of any SAGD project. Here, the use of dynamic distributed steam injection within a pad of SAGD wellpairs is explored. The results demonstrate that feedback control leads to improvements of the SOR over that of constant pressure. The results show that the controller is able to detect the “sweet spots” (oil zones with better geological properties) in the reservoir and dynamically deliver more steam to that region. Meanwhile, it reduces the steam injection towards relatively worse quality zones to lower the local SOR.
Acknowledgements
The Authors acknowledge financial support from the Carbon Management Canada (CMC-NCE), Schlumberger for use of its geological modelling software Petrel, and Computer Modelling Group for use of its thermal reservoir simulator, STARS™. Funding is acknowledged from the University of Calgary Canada First Research Excellence Fund -Global Research Initiative in Sustainable Low Carbon Unconventional Resources and support from the University of Calgary Beijing Research Site.
| [1] |
R.M. Butler, GravDrains's Blackbook: Thermal Recovery of Oil and Bitumen, GravDrain Inc, Calgary, Alberta, 1997. ISBN 0-9682563-0-9.
|
| [2] |
I.D. Gates, Basic Reservoir Engineering first ed., 2013. ISBN:978-1-4652-3684-5, Kendall-Hunt, Iowa.
|
| [3] |
D.R. Gotawala, I.D. Gates,SAGD subcool control with smart injection wells, in:Paper SPE 122014 Presented at the SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition, June 2009. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 8-11.
|
| [4] |
T. Stone, B. Guyaguler, W.I. Bailey, C.E.P. Damas, P.F. Naccache, A. Morton,Dynamic SAGD well flow control simulation, in:Paper CSUG/SPE 138054 Presented at the Canadian Unconventional Resources & International Petroleum Conference, October 2009. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 19-21.
|
| [5] |
T. Stone, G. Brown, B. Guyagular, W.I. Bailey, D.H.S. Law,Practical control of SAGD wells with dual tubing strings, in:Paper CSUG/SPE 149352 Presented at the Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, November 2011, pp. 15e17.
|
| [6] |
T. Stone, C.E.P. Damas, G. Woiceshyn, D.H.S. Law, G. Brown, P. Olapade, W.I. Bailey,Advanced wellbore simulation of flow control devices with feedback control for thermal operations, in:Paper SPE 163594 Presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium. Woodlands, Texas, USA, February 2013, pp. 18e20.
|
| [7] |
T. Stone, D.H.S. Law, W.I. Bailey,Control of reservoir heterogeneity in SAGD bitumen processes, in:Paper PSE 165388 Presented at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference Canada, June 2013, pp. 11-13. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
|
| [8] |
D.R. Gotawala, I.D. Gates, A basis for automated control of steam trap subcool in SAGD, SPE J. 17 (3) (2012) 680-686.
|
| [9] |
ConocoPhillips, ERCB annual update: Surmont project. In-situ process Reports, in: Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board, Calgary, Alberta, 2006-2010.
|
| [10] |
Schlumberger Petrel User's Manual, 2012.
|
| [11] |
Accumap Database. IHS Markit, 2012.
|
| [12] |
CMG Computer Modelling Group STARSTMUser Manual, Version, 2012.
|
| [13] |
K. Astrom, T. Hagglund, PID Controllers: Theory, Design, and Tuning, Instrument Society of America, 1995. ISBN 1-55617-516-7.
|
| [14] |
B. Guyaguler, A.T. Papadopoulos, I.A. Philpot,Feedback controllers for the simulation of field processes, in:Paper SPE 118969 Presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Woodlands, Texas, USA. 2-4, February 2009.
|
| [15] |
Mathworks Matlab User's Manual Massachusetts, U.S.A, 2012.
|
| [16] |
L. Li, H. Zhou, J.J. Gómez-Hernández, S. Srinivasan, A comparison of EnKF and EnPAT inverse methods: non-gaussianity,in: J. Rodrigo- Ilarri, M. Rodrigo-Clavero, E. Cassiraga, J. Vargas-Guzmán (Eds.), Geostatistics Valencia 2016. Quantitative Geology and Geostatistics, vol. 19, Springer, Cham, 2017, pp. 837e841.
|
PDF
