Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Aramco to inject CO2 into biggest oilfield by 2012

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 11:24 AM
Original message
Aramco to inject CO2 into biggest oilfield by 2012
Fractional. Flow. Curve.

JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia, Feb 15 (Reuters) - State oil giant Saudi Aramco plans to inject carbon dioxide into the world's biggest oilfield by 2012, a year ahead of previous plans, a government official said on Monday.

The giant field Ghawar pumped 5 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2008, more than half of top oil exporter Saudi Arabia's output. The kingdom announced plans last year for a pilot project to pump the climate-warming gas into the field to both improve production and reduce emissions.

...

The project would be entirely financed by Aramco, he added.

The kingdom plans to inject 40 million standard cubic feet per day (cfd) of CO2 into the field, and has said this is part of the global push to trap emissions rather than because it needs to enhance oil recovery from the field.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE61E0TW20100215?rpc=401&feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssEnergyNews&rpc=401


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. Oops.
CO2 injection is an Enhanced Oil Recovery technique that is typically used when a field's output starts to decline. The fact that they have advanced their schedule is a possible signal that Ghawar has peaked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. For those who don't know about fractional flow curves and CO2
Edited on Mon Feb-15-10 01:01 PM by GliderGuider
Here is an excerpt on the topic from a (somewhat technical) discussion of Saudi Arabia's oil supply problems on The Oil Drum.

Now, your first thought might be this: if there is 10% water and 90% oil in a particular volume of rock (pink areas in the figure above), then a well into that part of the rock would be receiving 10% water and 90% oil. Similarly, an area with 60% water and 40% oil might be producing at 60% water cut into a well into that area. However, this is not so: the difference is much more dramatic than that. The reason has to do with the physics of two phase flow in a permeable medium. If you want a mathematical treatment, try this, but let me try to illustrate the basic idea.

In a set of interconnected pores through which oil and water are being forced at pressure, the flow is too turbulent for large areas of the two fluids to separate out from one another. And yet, oil and water do not like to mix, and will tend to bead up in the presence of the other. If there is only a little water and a lot of oil, then the oil will form an interconnected network of fluid throughout the rock pores, whereas the water will tend to make small beads within the oil. Conversely, a little oil in a lot of water will result in a network of water throughout the rock, and small beads of oil within that network. Now, in either situation, the fluid that is interconnected can flow through the rock without making any change in the arrangement of beads and surfaces between oil and water. However, the fluid that is beaded up can only move by the beads physically moving around, and they are going to tend to get trapped by the rock pores.

So for this reason, in a mixture of almost all oil, the water cannot flow at all. Conversely, once there is almost all water, the oil cannot flow at all (which sets an upper limit on the amount of oil that can ever be recovered by a water flood). In between, there is a changeover in which the proportion of oil flowing to water flowing changes much more rapidly than the changeover of the actual mixing ratio. The curve that describes this is called the fractional flow curve.



So the way to read this is that when we are below 20% on the X-axis (less than 20% water in the oil), there is zero on the y-axis (the water will not flow through the rock at all). As we get above 20% water saturation, the flow of water increases rapidly, until above 80% water, there is no flow of oil at all. In the linear region at the center of the curve, the slope is about 3.6. That is, each 1 percentage point increase in water saturation results in a 3.6 percentage point increase in water flow in the rock.

The whole article is worth reading if you're into oil issues, but the takeaway is that Ghawar has probably hit the very steep central portion of that curve, and they're switching from water (immiscible) to CO2 (miscible) injection to maintain their output for a bit longer. The fact that they advanced the CO2 injection start by a year means they've probably had an "Oh shit" moment.

Ghawar is also one of the most porous oil-bearing formations on Earth, so the fact that they're going to CO2 means that it may be almost empty.

Once you really get FF curves, you won't sleep nearly so well at night.

Edited to add: The carbon sequestration angle is nothing but camouflage IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I expect you're right
I also was amused by this story (Saudi Arabia fears that demand is peaking, not supply)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=230566&mesg_id=230566
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. Well, let's face it.
7 million barrels of sea water per day just doesn't go as far as it used to.

But remember: KSA has ~260B barrels of proven reserves. They said so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. I, for one, welcome our carbon-capture overlords
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC