Crisman Annual Report 2009 - Harold Vance Department of ...

Accomplishments
The main conclusions of the study are made based
on the horizontal cell runs.
» For the two runs with steam surfactant, average
oil recovery was 55% OIP compared to an average
48% OIP with pure steam injection (Fig. 3).
That is, the average incremental oil recovery with
steam surfactant flood was 7.0% OIP above that
with pure steam injection.
» As the run progressed, viscosity at 23°C of
produced oil decreased from 497 cp to 13.4 cp
(steam injection) and to 1.7 cp (steam surfactant
injection). The oil gravity increased from 19.1°API
to 35.0°AIP (steam injection) and to 36.6°API
(steam-surfactant injection).
60
60
50
50
SI oil recovery, % OIP
40
30
20
10
cum. oil production SI
cum. oil production 5
cum. oil production 6
40
30
20
10
SSI oil recovery, % OIP
0
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
Steam injected, PV
Fig. 3. Oil recovery with steam-surfactant injection (55%) is 7% OIP
more than that with steam injection (48%).
Note that IFT’s for the average produced oil and
water are smaller when compared to that of the
original oil and water.
Crisman Annual Report 2009
39