CO 2 Injection and Enhanced Oil Recovery in Ohio Oil Reservoirs—An Experimental Approach to Process Understanding

Manoj Kumar Valluri, Jimin Zhou, Srikanta Mishra and Kishore Mohanty
Additional contact information
Manoj Kumar Valluri: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA
Jimin Zhou: Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA
Srikanta Mishra: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA
Kishore Mohanty: Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA

Energies, 2020, vol. 13, issue 23, 1-16

Abstract: Process understanding of CO 2 injection into a reservoir is a crucial step for planning a CO 2 injection operation. CO 2 injection was investigated for Ohio oil reservoirs which have access to abundant CO 2 from local coal-fired power plants and industrial facilities. In a first of its kind study in Ohio, lab-scale core characterization and flooding experiments were conducted on two of Ohio’s most prolific oil and gas reservoirs—the Copper Ridge dolomite and Clinton sandstone. Reservoir properties such as porosity, permeability, capillary pressure, and oil–water relative permeability were measured prior to injecting CO 2 under and above the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) of the reservoir. These evaluations generated reservoir rock-fluid data that are essential for building reservoir models in addition to providing insights on injection below and above the MMP. Results suggested that the two Ohio reservoirs responded positively to CO 2 injection and recovered additional oil. Copper Ridge reservoir’s incremental recovery ranged between 20% and 50% oil originally in place while that of Clinton sandstone ranged between 33% and 36% oil originally in place. It was also deduced that water-alternating-gas injection schemes can be detrimental to production from tight reservoirs such as the Clinton sandstone.

Keywords: CO 2 sequestration; core flood; enhanced oil recovery; pilot injection; Copper Ridge dolomite; Clinton sandstone (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/23/6215/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/23/6215/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:23:p:6215-:d:451249

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().