a low co 2 hybrid in situ shale liquid production process
play

A LOW CO 2 HYBRID IN-SITU SHALE LIQUID PRODUCTION PROCESS Jacob - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

30 th Oil Shale Symposium Colorado School of Mines A LOW CO 2 HYBRID IN-SITU SHALE LIQUID PRODUCTION PROCESS Jacob Bauman, Prashanth Mandalaparty, Pankaj Tiwari and Milind Deo Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake


  1. 30 th Oil Shale Symposium Colorado School of Mines A LOW CO 2 HYBRID IN-SITU SHALE LIQUID PRODUCTION PROCESS Jacob Bauman, Prashanth Mandalaparty, Pankaj Tiwari and Milind Deo Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT

  2. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 OIL SHALE CHALLENGES Ò Oil shale pyrolysis is an energy intensive process. Ò Heating rate is typically slow. Ò Initial permeability is low. Ò Heating requirements, hydrocarbon products, and carbonate decomposition contribute to CO 2 and other emissions.

  3. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 CONCEPT Step 1:Pyrolysis - Heating wells rapidly heat the formation near the well. Products are generated, including coke. Permeability is increased in “hot” zones according to a model relating fluid porosity and permeability. k mul = 5 in these simulations. Step 2: In-situ combustion - After initial pyrolysis period air is injected into the formation. Coke combustion supplies heat to formation far from heating wells. Step 3: CO 2 injection - CO 2 is injected to drive out remaining oil, and for CO 2 storage

  4. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 SI SIMULATI TION N 50 ft thickness. 26.5 ft between Injector 1 and Injector 2.

  5. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 ENERGY S SAVINGS W WITH I IN-SITU C COMBUSTION 112 MBTU savings with in-situ combustion switching at 600 days. 5.00E+08 U) (BTU) Pyrolysis 4.50E+08 followed by y Heaters ( 4.00E+08 combustion 3.50E+08 by H 3.00E+08 Pyrolysis lied b 2.50E+08 only 2.00E+08 y Suppli 1.50E+08 nergy S 1.00E+08 Ene 5.00E+07 0.00E+00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Time me ( (days ys)

  6. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 PRODUCTION C COMPAR ARISON 157 bbl more oil is produced when pyrolysis is followed by combustion although products could be consumed during the combustion stage. 500 l) (bbl) 450 l Produced ( Oil Production 400 with combustion 350 300 Oil P 250 Pyrolysis only lative O 200 150 mula Cumu 100 50 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Time me ( (days ys)

  7. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 PRODUCTION COMPARISON Gas production is also significantly improved with combustion period. This is somewhat counterintuitive. 500000 Gas 450000 production 400000 (scf) with 350000 combustion produced ( 300000 250000 Pyrolysis only 200000 Gas p 150000 Ga 100000 50000 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Time me ( (days ys)

  8. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 OBSERVATION Product mobility is an issue in the “cold zone” at the bottom of the resource. This causes oil to pool.

  9. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 OB OBSER ERVATION ION With higher heating rate 373 bbl oil are produced compared to 280 bbl with lower heating rate. With pyrolysis only there is a tradeoff between recovery and heating requirement. 7.00E+08 Pyrolysis followed by combustion 6.00E+08 U) (BTU) Pyrolysis only y Heaters ( 5.00E+08 Pyrolysis only (higher heating rate) by H 4.00E+08 lied b 3.00E+08 y Suppli nergy S 2.00E+08 Ene 1.00E+08 0.00E+00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Time me ( (days ys)

  10. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 CO 2 BALANCE Ò Pyrolysis followed by CO 2 injection É Net CO 2 injected = 8040 ft 3 Ð Most CO 2 injected is produced. Oil pools at the bottom of the resource. Ð No carbonate decomposition reactions included. Ò Pyrolysis followed by In-situ combustion and CO 2 injection É Net CO 2 injected = - 597,000 ft 3 Ð 600,000 ft 3 CO 2 are generated from combustion Ð Only a small fraction of the generated CO 2 is injected.

  11. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 GEOCHEMICAL STUDY Ø To study the geochemical implications of injecting CO 2 into the spent shale formation Ø Most of the organic content is driven out as oil and gas Ø The subsurface has the geochemical complexity to drive the sequestration reactions Ø Current effort focuses on ü Understanding the fate of CO 2 in the spent shale formation ü Studying the basic reactivity of CO 2 -brine mixtures with rocks in the formation. ü The mineralogical changes in the rock ü The changes in brine chemistry

  12. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 SPENT S SHAL ALE U USED F FOR G GEOCHEMICAL AL S STUDY • Green River formation – Oil shale u Core sample- ¾ ” diameter ü Pyrolysis (N 2 ) - 60ml/min ü Temperature -350C ü Duration - 24 hrs ü Weight loss 12.61% ü Oil yield 4.84%

  13. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 SEQUESTRATION EXPERIMENTS Ø High temperature, high pressure experiments Ø 316 stainless steel reactors Ø Feed samples – spent shale Conditions Ø Brine composition: 3-5 weight% Ø Temperature: 200 0 C Ø Feed gas composition: CO 2 Ø Reaction period: 7-35 Days Ø Analysis • Rock Chemistry: XR XRD, (X-ray Diffraction) • SEM, (Scanning Electron Microscope ) SEM • EDS DS, (Energy Dispersive X-ray analysis) • • Brine Chemistry: IC ICP-M -MS, (Inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrography) •

  14. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP SO 2 , N SO , NH 3 3 , H , H 2 S S P as f feed g gases with C h CO 2 2 P N 2 N 2 for leak test P SO 2 , N SO , NH 3 3 , H , H 2 S S as f feed g gases Te Temperature with C h CO 2 2 Cont ntrolle ller Single P Supercritical cylinder CO 2 positive displacement CO 2 pump Pump

  15. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 INITIAL XRD ANALYSIS Illite 3.8% Dolomite 69% Quartz 8.0% Albite 10.8% Orthoclase 6.4% Analcime 2.1% Interlayered chlorite/smectite (or C/S) also observed, but is below the detection limit (~1*) for the bulk analysis.

  16. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 METHODOLOGY v The reactors fed with the sample and brine- allowed to equilibrate v CO 2 is fed into the reactors and the reactors are isolated and allowed to cook at temperature v Each reactor is cooled and degassed in time intervals of 7 days to analyze the reaction progress v After the experiment reactor is degassed and products analyzed v The results compared with the initial XRD analyses and the products identified through XRD and SEM analyses v The correlation of the rock chemistry with changes in brine chemistry is identified

  17. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 PRINCIPAL REACTIONS CO 2 (g) CO 2 (aq) H 2 O + CO 2 H 2 CO 3 H 2 CO 3 H + + HCO 3 - CaCO 3 +H + Ca 2+ + HCO 3 - Ca 2+ + CO 3 2- CaCO 3 2H + + CaAl 2 Si 2 O 8 + H 2 O Ca 2+ + Al 2 Si 2 O 5 (OH) 4 CaAl 2 Si 2 O 8 + H 2 CO 3 + H 2 O CaCO 3 + Al 2 Si 2 O 5 (OH) 4 NaAlSi 3 O 8 + 3 H 2 O NaAlSi 2 O 6 .H 2 O + H 4 SiO 4 2KAlSi 3 O 8 + 9H 2 O + 2H + Al 2 Si 2 O 5 (OH) 4 + 2 K + + 4H 4 SiO 4

  18. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 2 WEEKS Omni-present woody fragments

  19. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 2 WEEKS Signs ns o of C Ca-z -zeoli lites p precipitation n

  20. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 3 WEEKS Hollo llow p prism o m of C Ca-z -zeoli lite growing ng o on w n weathe hering ng ortho hocla lase

  21. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 3 WEEKS EDS DS a ana nalys lysis o of C Ca-z -zeoli lite

  22. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 3 WEEKS Ano nothe her ho hollo llow Z Zeoli lite c crys ystal l growing ng o on a n a q quartz g grain n

  23. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 3 WEEKS Pha hase a alt lteration o n of i illi llite t to c chlo hlorite

  24. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 4 WEEKS Di Dissolu lution o n of d dolo lomi mite g grain n

  25. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 4 WEEKS Precipitated d dolo lomi mite Etche hed d dolo lomi mite g grain n

  26. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 4 WEEKS Dolo Do lomi mite g grain e n etche hed Kaoli lin d n deposition n

  27. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 4 WEEKS Kaoli lin d n deposition o n on i n illi llite

  28. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 4 WEEKS Etche hed o ortho hocla lase feld ldspar w with t h traces o of dolo lomi mite p precipitates

  29. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 5 WEEKS Poorly c ly crys ystalli llized k kaoli lini nite w with s h some me w well c ll crys ystalli llized v veriform k m kaoli lini nite

  30. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 RESULTS AFTER 5 WEEKS Dolo Do lomi mite g growth i h in i n int nterstitial s l spaces i in q n quartz

  31. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 BRINE CHEMISTRY Ion Na Mg Al K Ca Fe Ba Si Cl Conc (mg/l) 10675 0.0009 0.10 <0.005 0.8 <6 0.003 <8 19060 • Brine prepared from laboratory grade NaCl • 3 g of brine in 30 cc DI water

  32. 20 20 th th O October er 2 2010 BRINE CHEMISTRY 60 180.0 160.0 50 140.0 n mg/l l 40 ntration mg n mg/l l Mg 120.0 ntration mg 30 K 100.0 ncent Al Conc 20 Fe Ca 80.0 ncent Si Si Conc 60.0 10 40.0 0 0 weeks 2 weeks 3 weeks 4 weeks 5 weeks 20.0 Time me 0.0 0 weeks 2 weeks 3 weeks 4 weeks 5 weeks Time me

Recommend


More recommend