SPE 136140
El Borma - Bright Water®: A Tertiary Method for Enhanced Oil Recovery for a
Mature Field
F. Ghaddab, K. Kaddour, and M. Tesconi, SITEP, and A. Brancolini, C. Carniani, and G. Galli, Eni E&P
Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Production and Operations Conference and Exhibition held in Tunis, Tunisia, 8–10 June 2010.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed
by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or
members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is
restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.
Abstract
For some years SITEP and Eni have started to evaluate certain tertiary methods of enhaced oil recovery for El Borma, a mature
tunisian field. A pilot project based on the application of a commercial chemical product called "BRIGHT WATER®" (BW), a
trademark of Tiorco-Nalco, was chosen to verify on a real case its applicability and efficiency. The technology aims at the
improvement of the oil recovery and at the reduction of the water production. This methodology is applied for oil mature fields,
that are subjected to the water injection and that are presenting a heterogeneous reservoir with contrast of permeability. This paper
describes the work performed to design a field test of such a technique in El Borma, with the twofold purpose to achieve the
highest probability of success and gather as much information as possible to use in future applications. The project went through
four phases: 1. Selection of one injector well and one producer; 2. Program of monitoring to verify the connection between the
injector and the producer ( injection of a tracer to determine the arrival time and simulation on a numerical model); 3. Injection of
the polymerics and monitoring; 4. Application on the other zones of the field, in case of the success of the method. The first three
phases were completed at the beginning of 2010. This work also describes the workflow which will be established to follow the
improvements of the oil production.
Background
El Borma field is located in the south-west Sahara of
Tunisia, in the governorate of Tataouine and across the
Tunisian-Algerian border (Figure 1). It extends 200 km ² of
which 160 km ² in Tunisia.
El Borma, the most important hydrocarbon field in Tunisia,
characterised by triassic quartz sandstones with shale
interlayers, is located in the Ghadames Basin area that
includes the South of Tunisia, South-East of Algeria and the
North-West of Libya.
The structure is a Triassic anticline, the reservoir lithology is
sandstones with shales intercalations represented by 4 major
reservoir levels A, B, C and D + E for a total thickness of
about 120 meters at 2400 meters of average-depth. Auxiliary
levels called A Prime and Alpha also exist. The Figure 1- El Borma field location
petrophysical properties are good with a porosity range of
16-18% and permeability from 50 to 1500 mD. The oil The main field development history phases were :
quality is excellent with 41°API. ‐ Natural depletion phase (1966 - 1975 )
‐ Secondary recovery phase by water injection (1976 -
2 SPE 136140
1985) suspension of crosslinked polymer particles which swell up,
‐ Infill–Drilling phase (1986 -1995) increasing their diameter by an order of magnitude, thanks to
‐ Horizontal wells, Optimization of well status & the temperature-triggered hydrolysis of the crosslinking
Application of new technologies ( 1996 - 2003). bonds. This mechanism provides the injection fluid the
‐ Acquisition of a 3D seismic survey in the S-E of the desirable property of a low viscosity in the injection stage of
concession, with some oil&gas discoveries in Trias and the operation, while the viscosity is increased when it is
Ordovician new reservoirs (2004-2010) needed, deep in the formation. Several polymer types may
be produced which provide different swelling velocities at
different temperatures, known as reaction grades. Therefore,
the selection of the polymer with the appropriate reaction
grade depends on the travelling time of the injection fluid in
the reservoir. Injection fluid movement simulations are
required, along with laboratory testing, to choose the
reaction grade material best fitted to the situation. The
applicability of the polymer particle conformance
technology depends on the following factors:
‐ absence of fractures in the formation
‐ water cut less than 98%
‐ water injection running
‐ reservoir temperature above 35°C
Figure 2- El Borma production profile
‐ evidence of water thief zones
The total drilled wells are 176 and the actual field daily The first four points were known to be fulfilled by many El
production is about 9000 bopd with water cut of 93% Borma wells; investigations were required to identify the
(Figure 2). injector-producer pair matching the last requirement.
Discovered in the early 60’s, the El Borma field represents
an example of longevity and capability of revamping itself The main targets of the project are:
by means of constant monitoring and innovation. The ‐ To verify on a real case (El Borma, Reservoir A)
different phases of its life, from natural depletion to water the applicability and efficiency of the process
injection and extensive artificial lifting until horizontal "Bright Water®", a EOR technology considered as
drilling and advanced technology application, testify the the most promising to increase the tertiary oil
possibility of combining profit and accurate reservoir recovery in very mature oil fields.
management. ‐ To evaluate not only the additional oil volumes
The objective of slowing down the natural production produced with the current pilot experience, but also
decline has been reached, during each phase, through the the technical feasibility to extend the BW
efforts made in combining studies and timely on-field application to other candidates
applications and the success is reflected by the progressive ‐ To test extensively some conventional and not
increase of the recovery factor which is currently conventional well & reservoir monitoring
approaching 43%. technologies (Production Logging, Pulse pressure
After 46 years from its discovery, El Borma is now entering Test, Injection-Fall Off Test, Tracers injection) to
a new phase of its life where cost control is the key issue but understand potentialities, optimal conditions and/or
also where optimisation and targeted technological problems in use and possibilities of application in
investments represent the new challenge for the future. other reservoirs
The experience gained by SITEP and Eni E&P through the
exploitation of the El Borma field is a patrimony to be taken Pilot Wells Pair Identification
as reference and guideline for present and future oil field Based on the principles of the method , the petrophysical
developments in Tunisia and worldwide. characteristics of the different reservoirs, the historical
production and injection, the reservoir ''A'' seems a good
Tertiary Recovery Technology candidate for a polymer application of in depth
Bright Water® approach to in-depth conformance control is conformance control.
a relatively recent development in polymer flooding The reservoir ''A'' (in Figure 3 a map of iso-Water Cut) is the
techniques and is described elsewhere (Pritchett, 2003). most important in terms of reserves and production and is
The principle of the method consists in the injection of a composed by two different layers: The uppermost A1 with
SPE 131640 3
silty sandstone, less porous and permeable and the basal
portion A2 characterised by clean sandstone with good
petrophysical properties.
Figure 4- Polymer injection Pilot Zone
The poor openhole log data set (Gamma Ray-Resistivity-
Sonic Log), typical for the wells drilled in the Sixties (1966-
1967) has been integrated with the core data available for the
reservoir “A” in EB-15. The cross-section between the two
wells (distance 1100 m) using GR as correlation log (Figure
5) highlights the continuity of A2 layer with good
petrophysical properties. Core data in EB-15 confirm the
Figure 3- Reservoir A iso Water Cut map permeability contrast between A1 and A2 levels (Figure 6).
The sweeping action of the injected water would have been
limited in certain zones of the field where facies
heterogeneity and permeability contrasts are present. Some
oil would be bypassed behind the front of water and mainly
in the intervals with the worst petrophysical properties (
level A1).
Driven by the iso Water Cut map, a pilot zone including the
couple injector (EB-15) - producer (EB-24) completed in
“A” level has been selected for the polymer test (Figure 4).
A summary of relevant parameters of the selected reservoir
is shown in the following table:
RESERVOIR A
POROSITY RANGE (%) 18-20
PERMEABILITY RANGE (mD) 200-1500 Figure 5- Producer – Injection cross section
RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE (°C) 75
DEPTH (m SSL) 2400
FORMATION WATER SALINITY ppm NaCl eq. 260000
INJECTED WATER SALINITY ppm NaCl eq. 4000
PRODUCED WATER SALINITY ppm NaCl eq. 45000
The presence of 5 injectors (EB-107, EB-104, EB-42, EB-58
and EB-49) around the selected wells provides a “hydraulic
barrier” towards the other active wells nearby (Figure
4).
Figure 6- EB-15 Core Petrophysics
4 SPE 136140
Pre-Treatment Monitoring
This part is focused on wells monitoring in the initial phase
of “In Depth Conformance Control” project in the selected
pilot area of El Borma field (Tunisia).
The main objectives of the PLT, Pulse Pressure Test and
Injection and Fall-Off test, carried out between 25-Feb-2009
and 10-Mar-2009, were to:
‐ Access flow profile while water injection in EB-15
(Injector).
‐ Verify the bridge plug sealing below the active
perforations.
‐ Verify interwell connectivity between EB-15
(Injector) and EB-24 (Producer). Figure 8- PLT Injection profile at 250 m3/d
‐ Chart reservoir response before Bright Water®
Treatment. The PLT recording at the injection rate of 500 m3/d show at
The pre-treatment monitoring plan using the PLT string as bottom a single thief zone (2411.3-2412.7 m MD) that
downhole gauges has been scheduled and carried out as “takes “ the 90% of the injected water.
follow:
Figure 9- PLT Injection profile at 500 m3/d
With the PLT string positioned at the top of perforations in
EB-15 (injector) a pulse pressure test has been carried out
using the production logging pressure gauge to confirm the
Figure 7- Pre treatment monitoring plan connectivity between injector and producer.
With the injector in shut-in condition, two different cycles of
The baseline production log string recorded in the injector flowing & shut-in (respectively 12 & 24hrs and 8 & 30hrs
EB-15 included a gamma ray, fullbore spinner, pressure and have been done in the producer (EB-24) (Figure 10).
temperature devices with the well in shut-in and injection
conditions (Qw=250 m3/d and 500 m3/d). The interpretation
of the spinner response in Figure 8 during the first injection
rate (250 m3/d) confirmed that the injection profile is drived
by the reservoir petrophysical properties (good correlation
spinner – core permeability) and highlighted two different
thief zones (25 and 60% of the total water injection).
Figure 10- Pulse Pressure Test
SPE 131640 5
The pressure monitoring in EB-15 confirm the connectivity have the correct requirements for a good “in depth
between the well pair showing an effect due to cyclic conformance control” using polymer.
production in EB-24 with a lag time of 23 hours (zoom of
pressure monitoring in Figure 11). An interwell average A tracer injection has been carried out in March, 10th 2009 in
permeability between EB-15 and EB-24 in the order of 500- EB-15. After a tracer compatibility study in order to
700 mD has been evaluated. determine the suitability of tracer in this application,
Trifluoro-p-toluic acid (150 litres) has been injected to
verify:
‐ The hydraulic connectivity between EB-15 and EB-
24
‐ The water breakthrough time at the producer
(estimated in 500 days from the simulation model).
Treatment Design
The performance of a polymer particulate for in-depth
conformance operation depends on a number of factors, the
most important of which are the concentration of polymer,
temperature, pH and saline concentration in the injection
brine. The relevant parameters for El Borma pilot area are
summarized below.
Figure 11- Pulse Pressure Test interpretation
Temperature °C 75
Also the injection and fall-of test (injection phase of 12 hrs pH 7
and fall off of 30 hrs) has been carried out using PLT string K ppm 39
as P&T gauges. The pressure monitoring during the test is Na 1012
given in Figure 12. A near wellbore region permeability of Ca ppm 282
1400 mD has been estimated. Mg ppm 74
Cl 1641
SO4 912
The coexistence of a low salinity and a temperature poses a
challenge to identify the correct grade of the particulate
polymer, since most application have been performed in
higher salinity brines (Ohms 2009, Paez Yanez 2007,
Frampton 2004). Low salinity means a greater initial
viscosity compared to high salinity brines at the same
temperature, which reduces the mobility of the polymer in
the formation.
Therefore, extensive laboratory testing was necessary to
select the most appropriate reaction grade polymer for the El
Borma pilot area. A first screening of the candidate
Figure 12- Injection & Fall Off test
polymers was performed via bulk viscosity measurements at
the temperatures of interest, namely at room conditions and
The pre-treatment monitoring highlighted the following pilot
at reservoir conditions (75°C), using a synthetic injection
properties:
brine matching the composition of El Borma one. Then,
‐ The PLT in EB-15 confirmed the presence of water
sandpack and core flooding tests were performed to measure
thief zones in the most permeable bottom part of
the strength and timing of the plugging effect given by the
the reservoir (in agreement with the openhole logs
polymer particles. Flood tests were performed on plugs were
& Core Analysis).
taken from relevant intervals of the EB 15 core, using
‐ The Pulse Pressure Test verified the connectivity
synthetic brine as carrier fluid which 1% particulate polymer
between EB-15 and EB-24.
was added. Resistance Factors were obtained, according to a
‐ The Injection and Fall Off Test provided an
procedure like the one described in Frampton, 2004. Typical
estimated near wellbore permeability of 1400 mD
Resistance Factors were in the order of 20 units after 35 days
(in agreement with Core Analysis).
of residence in the plug, whose permeability was about 700
These considerations confirmed that the selected wells pair
mD.
6 SPE 136140
The final decision about the polymer grade to be used also
took into account the results of the tracer migration. No
tracer was detected at EB 24 after six months since its
injection in March 2009 at EB 15, then a medium grade
polymer was selected for the field application.
The evaluation of injection process efficiency highlighted
many aspects about an appropriated simulation of polymer
injection. A new Eni workflow 1 using Eclipse simulation
software had to be defined and listed below:
1. The first step is to compute a temperature map (Figure 13
) and a concentration map of the polymer while it is inactive,
in order to support the decision on polymer grade. This step
allows evaluating the overall activation time (time for
traveling to hot zone plus polymer activation time) for the
model. Figure 14- polymer distribution at swelling time
2. The second step is to compute the distribution of polymer
at the time of activation (Figure 14). Since numerical This workflow has been applied to El Borma field, firstly on
diffusion leads to a smearing of polymer front, a diffusion a qualitative study aimed at understanding how the polymer
control algorithm has been applied. alters water flow in this reservoir and then on an quantitative
3. The third step requires to correlate the concentration map study for optimizing water injection parameters.
with transmissibility The qualitative study shows that the polymer injection
4. Finally, a constant water injection phase is required to increments overall oil production for different simulated
sweep the oil stored in region where water is diverted into. cases at different injection rate.
The quantitative study has been performed varying rate of
water injection during displacing BW phase and after-
activation phase and essentially highlights two main
aspects:
‐ Incremental oil increases when injection rate is high
during polymer displacement.
‐ Incremental oil increases if injection rate is low
after activation.
In the first period it is better to push the polymer as far as
possible from the injector, avoiding the reduction of
permeability in overlapping zones in all layers, thus creating
an insurmountable barrier for the flux. On the contrary, in
the second period it is desirable to operate with the lowest
water injection rate in order to displace the oil in the most
appropriate way.
Best case, considering the simulations and the wellsite water
Figure 13 - Temperature map computation injection facilities has been defined using displacement rate
of 500 m3/day and forecast rate of 250 m3/day. In this case
the polymer application at these injection rates leads to:
‐ Oil Production Total: 122.431 Sm3 (+6581 Sm3);
‐ Increment: + 5.68%
‐ No benefit can be noticed in the first two years and
half after BW injection
1
“Evaluation of Injection Process Efficency based on
Conformance Control Techniques through Numerical
Simulation” G.Gallo, E. Vignati; Eni E&P Internal
Technical Report, May 2009
SPE 131640 7
‐ Injected water
‐ Polymer
‐ Dispersant
‐ Treated injected water
‐ Injected water and polymer mix after heating
Figure 15- Numerical simulation – Forecast results Figure 16- Water Injection Rate vs WHP
Wellsite Polymer Treatment
The selected polymer Bright Water® (provided by Tiorco-
Nalco) has been injected following the procedures already
used by the service company in the applications described in
References.
The injection in EB-15 started January, 9th 2010 with the
following parameters:
WATER INJECTION RATE (M3/H) 15 Figure 17- Wellsite Test (polymer reaction)
POLYMER INJECTION (LT/MIN) 2,4
POLYMER CONCENTRATION (%) 1 Conclusion
DISPERSANT INJECTION (LT/MIN) 1,09 All the monitoring operations done in El Borma pilot area
DISPERSANT CONCENTRATION (%) 0.45 confirmed that a polymer treatment to improve sweep
INITIAL WELLHEAD PRESSURE (BAR) 49 efficiency was found to be applicable with a potential benefit
in oil production.
The chemicals (52,3 m3 of polymer and 23,8 m3 of The pre-treatment monitoring program including Production
dispersant) were injected for a period of 14 days with a Logging, Pulse Pressure Test, Injection & Fall Off Test
constant monitoring of the wellhead pressure. highlighted the presence of injected water thief zones and
As shown in the graph in Figure 16 during the first 120 the injector-producer connectivity in the reservoir “A”.
hours the water injection rate and the wellhead pressure The tracer injected in march 2009 (breakthrough at the
presented a parallel trend. After a planned water injection producer estimated by the simulation model in the order of
shut down (pumps system maintenance) a wellhead pressure 500 days) is not present yet in the producer water at EB-24.
increase and a constant decrease of injectivity has been A sample of produced fluid is taken every week for Water
detected. At the end of the polymer injection the WHP Cut measurement and for tracer analysis.
reached the final value of 84 bars to indicate an initial The expected polymer reaction and consequent particles
polymer swelling in reservoir during the operation. swelling and increase in viscosity are expected 7-8 months
A very simple test about the polymer swelling has been done (August-September 2010) after polymer injection (January
at wellsite mixing 50% injected water and 50% polymer and 2010).
leaving the mixture under the sun for 6-8 hours. The reaction A continuous data collection and well parameters monitoring
at the external high temperature is a consistent increase of (including PLT & Injection and Fall Off Test) are ongoing to
viscosity as shown in Figure 17. From left to right the confirm the efficiency of this in-depth conformance control.
different containers are filled with:
8 SPE 136140
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of:
E. Vignati, Eni E&P for the modeling activity, M. Bartosek
and L. Del Gaudio (Eni E&P) and J. C. Morgan (JimTech)
for the laboratory support, E. Manassero and G.Tripaldi (Eni
E&P) for the welltest interpretation, the TIORCO Team (A.
Arezo, G. Freeman, J. Fuqua) for support before and during
the field test. The authors thank the SITEP personnel in El
Borma for the cooperation, in particular mr. Jamel Miladi.
References
Frampton H., J.C. Morgan, S.K. Cheung, L. Munson,
K.T. Chang, D. Williams SPE Paper 89391 presented
at the 2004 SPE/DOE 14th Symposium on Improved
Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 17-21 April
2004.
Ohms J., McLeod, C. J. Graff, H. Frampton, J.C.
Morgan, S.K. Cheung, K. Yancey, K.T. Chang; SPE
paper 121761 presented at 2009 SPE International
Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, the Woodlands,
Texas, USA, 20-22 April 2009
Paez Yanez P.A., J.L. Mustoni, M. F. Reilling, K.T.
Chang, P. Hopkinson, H. Frampton; SPE paper
107923 presented at 2007 Latin American and
Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference,
Buenos Aires, Argentina, 15-128 April 2007
Pritchett J., H. Frampton, J. Brinkman, S.K. Cheung,
J.C. Morgan, K.T. Chang, D. Williams, J. Goodgame
SPE Paper 84987 presented at the SPE International
Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, 20-21 October 2003.
