Chemical enhanced oil recovery and the dilemma of more and cleaner energy

被引:31
作者
Farajzadeh, Rouhi [1 ,4 ]
Kahrobaei, Siavash [2 ]
Eftekhari, Ali Akbari [3 ]
Mjeni, Rifaat A. [4 ]
Boersma, Diederik [2 ]
Bruining, Johannes [1 ]
机构
[1] Delft Univ Technol, Delft, Netherlands
[2] Shell Global Solut Int, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Tech Univ Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
[4] Petr Dev Oman LLC, Muscat, Oman
关键词
D O I
10.1038/s41598-020-80369-z
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
A method based on the concept of exergy-return on exergy-investment is developed to determine the energy efficiency and CO2 intensity of polymer and surfactant enhanced oil recovery techniques. Exergy is the useful work obtained from a system at a given thermodynamics state. The main exergy investment in oil recovery by water injection is related to the circulation of water required to produce oil. At water cuts (water fraction in the total liquid produced) greater than 90%, more than 70% of the total invested energy is spent on injection and lift pumps, resulting in large CO2 intensity for the produced oil. It is shown that injection of polymer with or without surfactant can considerably reduce CO2 intensity of the mature waterflood projects by decreasing the volume of produced water and the exergy investment associated with its circulation. In the field examples considered in this paper, a barrel of oil produced by injection of polymer has 2-5 times less CO2 intensity compared to the baseline waterflood oil. Due to large manufacturing exergy of the synthetic polymers and surfactants, in some cases, the unit exergy investment for production of oil could be larger than that of the waterflooding. It is asserted that polymer injection into reservoirs with large water cut can be a solution for two major challenges of the energy transition period: (1) meet the global energy demand via an increase in oil recovery and (2) reduce the CO2 intensity of oil production (more and cleaner energy).
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2010, PROCESS EC PROGRAM P
[2]   Exergy analysis of the process of wet-process phosphoric acid production with full utilisation of sulphur contained in the waste phosphogypsum [J].
Atanasova, Lubka G. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EXERGY, 2010, 7 (06) :678-692
[3]   Economical and ecological comparison of granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorber refill strategies [J].
Bayer, P ;
Heuer, E ;
Karl, U ;
Finkel, M .
WATER RESEARCH, 2005, 39 (09) :1719-1728
[4]  
Bedrikovetsky P., 1993, Mathematical theory of oil gas recovery, DOI [10.1007/978-94-017-2205-6, DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-2205-6]
[5]  
Bodansky D., 2008, NUCL ENERGY PRINCIPL, V2nd
[6]  
Dake L. P., 1978, Developments in Petroleum Science
[7]   Cumulative exergy extraction from the natural environment (CEENE):: a comprehensive life cycle impact assessment method for resource accounting [J].
Dewulf, J. ;
Boesch, M. E. ;
De Meester, B. ;
Van der Vorst, G. ;
Van Langenhove, H. ;
Hellweg, S. ;
Huijbregts, M. A. J. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2007, 41 (24) :8477-8483
[8]  
Dincer I, 2013, EXERGY: ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION, P51, DOI 10.1016/B978-0-08-097089-9.00004-8
[9]  
Ecoinvent Database accessed through CCalc tool, 2007, EHM07077PM CCALC CAR
[10]   Exergy analysis of underground coal gasification with simultaneous storage of carbon dioxide [J].
Eftekhari, Ali Akbar ;
Van der Kooi, Hedzer ;
Bruining, Hans .
ENERGY, 2012, 45 (01) :729-745