SPE/Petroleum Society of CIM/CHOA Paper Number 79007 Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability

Reservoir
T. G. Harding, /Nexen Petroleum International Ltd., K. H Smith/Canadian Nexen Petroleum Yemen Ltd., B. Norris/ Nexen Petroleum International Ltd.
Copyright 2002, SPE ITOHOS/ICHWT conference. This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium and International Horizontal Well Technology Conference held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 47 November 2002. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE ITOHOS/ICHWT Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers, the Petroleum Society of CIM/CHOA and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, the Petroleum Society of CIM/CHOA, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE ITOHOS/ICHWT meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes 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 where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

will reduce the number of wells that will need to be drilled to handle this volume, thereby improving overall project value. Introduction The Masila Block in the Republic of Yemen is operated by Nexen Petroleum International Ltd. on behalf of its partners Occidental Petroleum Ltd., Consolidated Contractors Company S.A.L. and the Government of the Republic of Yemen. Oil production from the block began in 1993 and current field oil, gas and water production rates average 230,000 BOPD, 7 MMSCFD and 1,000,000 BWPD. Figure 1 shows the location of the block and Figure 2 shows the location of the 15 main producing fields, the central processing facility (CPF) and the hydrocyclone installations at main producing fields. These hydrocyclones are used to achieve initial separation of oil from water at the individual pools remote from the CPF. The operation of the Masila project is described in an earlier paper with particular attention paid to disposal of produced water1. The majority of oil produced to date has been from the Upper Qishn Formation, which is supported by a strong natural water drive. Other producing horizons include the Lower Qishn Clastics, Upper Saar clastics, Saar carbonate, Madbi limestone, Basal sand and the fractured granitic Basement (Figure 3). Most produced water is currently reinjected into the S3 and S2 members of the Upper Qishn Formation, and it is therefore worthwhile to review the geology of these 2 members. The S3, at the base of the Upper Qishn Formation, is an amalgamated fluvial channel sequence. As such, it appears on logs to be a blanket sand, with little apparent variation in sand or reservoir quality laterally or vertically. Data from the FMI tool shows that the paleoflow direction during S3 time was generally from the west to the east. As such, permeability anisotropies should be anticipated along this axis. The S3 comprises very clean quartz arenite, medium to coarse grained sand, with little shale volume until the top 5 to 10 feet, where shale volume typically increases slightly. The unit is 30 to 70 feet thick, with an average thickness of 50 feet across the Heijah Field. The average NTG ratio in the S3 is 90%. The S3 has the best reservoir characteristics of any of the producing units at Heijah, with a median porosity permeability of 20.5% and 1900 mD respectively. The data are from wells

Abstract Nexen Petroleum International Ltd. (Nexen) has a 52 percent interest and is operator of the Masila Block in the Republic of Yemen. Oil and water are produced mainly from the under pressured Qishn Formation, a non-marine to marine clastic sequence of Lower Cretaceous Age, which is roughly 200 feet thick and lies at a depth of 5500 feet from surface. Currently oil production is 230,000 BOPD at a water cut of about 80 percent. The one million barrels of water produced each day are currently reinjected under matrix injection pressures into 24 vertical and 4 horizontal wells. These are completed in the best quality sands (the S2/S3 members of the Upper Qishn Formation) that have average porosity and permeability of 20% and 3700 md, respectively. Despite the exceptional disposal reservoir quality, injection problems continue to exist that have caused Nexen to study and evaluate numerous methods of improving injectivity. After extensive laboratory core and field testing, hypotheses have been developed to explain the behaviour of the water disposal wells including the so-called check-valve effect. Horizontal wells and proppant fractured wells were employed to test the hypotheses and to improve injectivity. This paper reviews the laboratory results and discusses the placement of horizontal injectors along with the drilling and completion details of the wells. The performance of the horizontal disposal wells under matrix injection is compared to conventional vertical disposal wells and proppant fractured vertical wells. Produced water is expected to reach 1.5 MMBWPD and improvements in disposal well performance

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

SPE/Petroleum Society of CIM/CHOA 2002-79007

Heijah 1 to Heijah 17, after porosity and permeability cutoffs are applied (porosity greater than 10%; permeability greater than 10 mD). Overlying the S3, the S2 is a fluvial sequence that is characterized by a more classic fining upward sequence on logs. It comprises a series of identifiable channels, stacked upward, but with poorer and poorer quality rock upward stratigraphically, composed of small individual fining upward cycles often only one or two feet thick. Thin shales can cap these cycles. The base of these cycles can begin with a scour surface and channel lag deposit offering some of the cleanest, coarsest-grained and highest permeability rock in the section. In contrast to the S3, the S2 contains fine grained (e.g. mud) coastal plain sediments. The top of the S2 completely shales out, with little sand present. As with the S3, FMI data indicate that these channels were flowing from the west to the east. Fine to coarse grained quartz arenite is the dominant facies. More shale is present within the S2 compared with the S3, and more marine influence can be seen in the core compared to the S3. The S2 varies from 40 to 100 feet gross thickness, and averages 73 feet thick across the Heijah Field. The average NTG in the S2 is 70%. After porosity and permeability cutoffs are applied (porosity greater than 10%; permeability greater than 10 mD), the median porosity and permeability of the S2 sands is 19.4% and 1150 mD respectively (data from wells Heijah 1 to Heijah 17). Although porosity is generally consistent, there are significant variations in permeability caused by differences in grain size, sorting and fines content. Injectivity can be reduced in some wells due to calcite partly occluding pore space and by the presence of residual hydrocarbon. These materials are often found at or just below the oil-water contact. Injection Behaviour Produced water re-injection into the Upper Qishn sands has been characterized by much lower injectivity than expected. There are two ways in which injectivity losses manifest themselves. The first type of injectivity loss is expressed as a substantial reduction of Injectivity Index compared to Productivity Index upon completion of the well. This instantaneous loss is referred to as the Check Valve Effect. Based on productivity measured during pump tests conducted immediately after drilling and completion of a disposal well, injectivity obtained upon commencement of water injection is typically at least an order of magnitude less than the measured productivity. The Check Valve Effect is thought to be caused by fines migration and/or stresses created as a result of the perforation process. The second type of injectivity problem is expressed as a gradual decline in injectivity over time related to the volume and quality of water injected. This long-term decline is a result of solid particles found in the disposal water that result in formation plugging. Laboratory results show that the

disposal water in the Masila Block contains calcite, quartz as well as metal sulphides. This particulate matter is thought to be caused by a combination of solids and oil carryover and the precipitation of calcite scale. Similar injectivity problems have been reported by others in the literature2. Filtration Systems Nominal 10 micron cartridge filters are used within the Masila Block. These cartridges are placed in pot filters that hold 113 individual cartridge filters. The cartridge filters have an effeciency rating of 70%, meaning that 30% of all particles that pass through these filters are larger than 10 microns. Assuming a solid matter concentration of 5ppm, the fluid throughput for a filter pot containing 113 cartridge filters should be in the range of 100,000 bbls of water. Lastly, the design specifications of the filter pots and cartridges call for a water throughput rate of no more than 35,000 bwpd. Masila disposal water was analyzed to obtain the particulate matter size distribution (Figure 4), plotted against the filter performance curve. The solids in the disposal water are composed mainly of iron sulphide corrosion products from corrosion of the surface lines and formation particulates produced with the fluids from the wells. Treatments are conducted bi-monthly using a series of biocides to control corrosion in the surface piping. Concentrations of solids and oil in disposal water both average about 15 ppm. It is important to understand this size distribution relative to the pore throat distribution of the rock matrix that is being injected into. In brief, if particles are less than 1/7 the pore throat diameter, then little to no damage can be expected. If particles are to 1/7 the pore throat diameter, deep damage occurs. If particles are to equal to pore throat diameters, then sandface plugging results. Sandface damage can be treated readily, as it occurs at the wellbore. However, deep damage is very difficult to correct, as it causes damage far away from the wellbore and is therefore difficult to access. Further, the higher the permeabilty of the formation, the deeper the particles travel into the formation away from the wellbore. It is the near wellbore damage that will have the most significant effect on injectivity. The performance curves of the PX10 filters have been plotted with the grain size distribution of the particulate matter contained in the Masila disposal water (Figure 5), and the different types of damage particle ranges are indicated. It can be seen that considerable deep damage material (1/7 to pore throat diamter particulate matter) is passing through the filters, assuming that the filters are being operated within their design limits. Under ideal conditions, it would appear that these filters would remove most of the sandface plugging material. It is a common practice in Masila to perform regular acid treatments (a mixture of toluene and hydrochloric acid), which often has an immediate benefit of reducing wellhead pressures and increasing injection rates. This strongly suggests sandface plugging by acid soluble particulate matter. However, it is less

79007

HORIZONTAL WATER DISPOSAL WELL PERFORMANCE IN A HIGH POROSITY AND PERMEABILITY RESERVOIR

likely that continued acid treatment can access the deep damage material. Ideal operating conditions for these filter pots do not exist within the Masila Block, primarily due to the extremely high rates of injection that are achieved in the disposal wells (20,000 to 90,000 bwpd). Operationally, it is difficult to perform the cartridge filter changes as required since each filter change takes a couple of hours to perform. For example, if a disposal well is taking 60,000 bwpd, two filter pots are required, and each filter pot should be changed every three days. The only way around this operational reality would be to use a very different type of filtration system (e.g. a high rate absolute filter system that would be extremely costly) or to find another method to reduce damage and maintain high injection rates. Field trials of more stringent wellhead filtration were also conducted but it proved impractical at the injection rates typical of individual wells to filter to a smaller particle size. Trials using 5 and 10 micron absolute filtration resulted in too frequent plugging of the filters to be operationally feasible. Alternate Drilling and Stimulation Options The majority of water disposal wells are vertical, cased and perforated under-balanced. As part of an on-going effort to improve injection capacity of the disposal wells, field trials involving 4 horizontal water disposal wells and 4 propped hydraulic fracture vertical disposal wells were conducted. It was hypothesized that both the horizontal and propped frac vertical wells would suffer less from injectivity loss due to fines migration by increasing near well bore area for fluid flow and thus reducing fluid velocity. It was also expected that the mean time between stimulation treatments would be increased because of the larger rock surface exposed to injected fluid and therefore the rate of plugging and injectivity decline would be less than in vertical wells. The use of horizontal wells for productivity enhancement is well known and while still somewhat rare, horizontal injection wells have been proposed and implemented in a wide variety of applications3-7. The technology of hydraulic fracturing of high permeability formations is quite advanced and there is much experience from which to draw8-15. The drilling, completion and operation of horizontal wells and propped fracture wells are presented and the performance of these wells is compared to unfractured vertical water disposal wells. These field trials are part of an on-going program to enhance the water disposal capacity of the Masila operation and to develop a disposal system with sustainable capability of 1.5 MMBWPD. It is imperative that the produced water disposal system operates efficiently in order to keep costs low and to allow maximum oil production as field water-cut increases. Horizontal Drilling Program Design parameters for the wells included the following:

Provide 500 to 1000 ft. of open hole section within the Qishn S3 reservoir. Drill the horizontal leg along a north-south axis (perpendicular to channel flow direction) to intersect as many S3 channels as possible, rather than tracking parallel to a single channel Provide 200-500 ft. of cased hole section in the disposal zone to be perforated later as a back up to open hole section if it plugged or collapsed.

The multidisciplinary asset team wanted to minimize the potential for drilling mud, fines or cuttings plugging the sand matrix pore throats. After eliminating drilling mud or completion fluid chemicals as options, air drilling was chosen for the open hole section. However, under balanced drilling could not be maintained as the formation has a Production Index (PI) exceeding 400 bbl/d/psia. The connate water influx from under balanced drilling would rapidly overcome the air compressors ability to airlift the well. Therefore the open hole was drilled in a balanced condition with no directional control. There was also a danger that air entrainment in the underbalanced reservoir could induce a near well bore gas relative permablility and result in a lower water injection rate into the formation. No pilot hole was drilled to fix formation depths for the horizontal drilling. Therefore, the horizontal well would be drilled until it penetrated the formation below the target, Qishn S3, zone and then be steered back up into the target zone for drilling the open hole section (see Figure 6). The Heijah horizontal wells were drilled as stand alone wells. The Naar wells were drilled from the same lease but would enter the formation 4900 ft. apart so that there would not be interference affects during injection. Well schematics from Heijah-19, representing a typical open hole disposal well design and Naar 2, representing a typical open hole disposal well design with a slotted liner installed are shown in Figures 7 and 8. The wells were air hammer drilled through the Umm Er Radhuma cap rock formation to approximately 1100-ft. using air-foam in 12 hours. Set 13 3/8 surface casing approximately 30 ft. into the Sharwayn formation. Then 12 hole was rotary drilled vertically into the Harshiyat formation at ~ 3500 ft. From this depth the wells were directionally drilled with oil based gel 8.7 8.8 ppg chem mud. A build rate of 2o/100 ft. until 25o inclination is reached then 5o/100 ft. until and inclination of 75 85o from vertical is reached entering the Qishn formation. When the well bore entered the Qishn S3 sand the build rate was limited to 1.5o/100 ft. until the intermediate casing point was reached in the bottom 1/3 of the Upper Qishn S3 formation. The well was pointed up towards

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

SPE/Petroleum Society of CIM/CHOA 2002-79007

the top 1/3 of the formation to allow for pitching the bit during air drilling. This design was chosen because directional drilling steering equipment would not operate in air drilling environment. The final angle of the intermediate casing was chosen so that 500 to 1000 ft. of horizontal section could be drilled before gravity pulled the drill bit back down to the bottom of the formation. The well path from this design can be seen in Figure 6. The hole was back reamed on every single on connections when using the steerable assembly. At which point, the well was logged with a DLL-SP-BHC-LDTCNL-NGT-GR log. The 9 5/8 casing was set. While air drilling the open hole section, the major concern was the significant inflow of connate water at the casing shoe and a lower annular velocity from air foam and water influx at the bit. This could result in poor removal of drilling fines or in the extreme case losses would occur at the bit. Loss circulation would not be apparent at surface, as aerated returns would continue to flow. The air drilling equipment was then hooked up and 8 hole was under balanced and balanced drilled with a rotary speed of 80 rpm and air foam for 500 to 1000 ft. with a build of 5o/100 ft. The air package provided 2100 to 3500 cfm of air and 30 gpm of water with 1-2% foam. The open hole section was circulated clean with water to remove drilling fines. The open hole was then logged using tough logging condition (TLC) equipment. The log suite was an LDT-CNL-NGT-GR log. On the first horizontal the drilling rig ran well the LDT-CNL-NGT-GR log. On the subsequent wells, the log was run with the surface rig. Well completions occurred about 30 days after rig release and this redueced the entrained air in the open hole section the CNL was still affected. Cementing and Completion Programs Surface Casing The surface casing is cemented with the following slurry using the following additives: Density 15.8 ppg Class G cement GPS liquid anti-foam 1% BWOC fluid loss additive 0.08 GPS dispersant 0.5% BWOC accelerator 4.95 GPS H2O Intermediate Casing The intermediate casing is cemented with the following two slurries using the following additives: Lead Slurry Density 12.8 ppg Class G cement GPS liquid anti-foam 2.5% BWOC bentonite extendor 0.08 GPS diapersant 0.25% BWOC fluid loss additive 10.95 GPS H2O

Tail Slurry (Enough volume to cover to Qishn Formation) Density 15.8 ppg Class G cement 0.01 GPS liquid anti-foam 0.08 GPS dispersant 0.02 GPS retarder 4.95 GPS H2O Completion Program Run a CBL log to be sure there is isolation across the Upper and Lower Qishn formations. Tag bottom to determine PBTD and make sure no shale stringers have collapsed. Install an ESP to pump drilling fines out of the well bore. Pump was capable of pumping about 25-30% of the volumes that could be lifted with the drilling air package. Pump was run until discharge water was the same quality as connate water. Full cleaning to the horizontal toe could not be achieved because of the high formation PI. Likely most of the cleaning action occurred within feet of the 9 5/8 casing shoe. The well was shut-in for 24 hours to get a build up test to determine its productivity index (PI). In Naar 2, the 5 slotted liner was run to PBTD to prevent shale stringers from sloughing into the open hole section. The Naar 3 and Heijah wells were completed bare foot. The 7 injection string was run in the well and set at the top of the Qishn formation. The casing annulus was filled with inhibited fluid and pressurized to 500 psi. The well was put on injection at a rate of 5000 bwpd and ramped up in 5000 bwpd increments every 6 hours until the well stabilized on the 300 psi flow line pressure. The ramping up of the well was done to reduce fine migration in the near well bore area that could plug the sand matrix pore throats. Stimulation Results As the wells injectivity performance deteriorates with time, Nexen has tried several chemical and mechanical stimulation techniques to maintain injectivity with limited results. Injectivity gains last on average 75 days though some wells have deteriorated in as little as 10 days and lasted as long as 245 days. Table 1 summarizes the results of 42 simulation jobs completed in the Masila Block Disposal Wells over the last four years. Propped Fracture Stimulation of Vertical Wells In October and November of 2000, propped fracture stimulations were conducted on five Masila block injection wells. The chosen fracture stimulation design was based on the tip-screen-out frac pack method in hopes that the optimum economical return is achieved with short, wide fractures to reduce the skin factor to zero.13 Four of these wells were stimulated to raise injectivity for produced water

79007

HORIZONTAL WATER DISPOSAL WELL PERFORMANCE IN A HIGH POROSITY AND PERMEABILITY RESERVOIR

disposal into the Upper Qishn S2/S3 zones. The other well was stimulated for water injection for pressure maintenance and will not be discussed further. These were some of the highest permeability wells in the world ever stimulated in this manner. Also, these were the first fracture stimulation jobs conducted in the Republic of Yemen. All equipment and materials had to be mobilized from outside the country. The fact that these are water disposal and not production wells also makes these stimulation jobs somewhat unusual. Table 2 shows the perforated intervals in the four disposal wells that were given propped frac stimulations. All wells had been initially perforated with 12 shots per foot using 66 gram, gravel pack charges with 135/45 degree phasing. Moderate under balance during perforating was employed in order to obtain a back surge rate of about 500 BWPD/perforation to clean up perforation damage. For the Upper Qishn S2/S3, results from parametric studies support the values of modulus of elasticity (E) derived from dipole sonic logs and core measurements. Reasonable values of E range from 1 to 2 E6 psi for these sands. The minimum horizontal stress gradient was determined from calibration fracs to range between 0.48 and 0.5 psi/ft. for the Upper Qishn sands and there was a high degree of consistency across the fields. Prior to conducting the proppant frac stimulations, there were concerns about the feasibility of creating sufficient fracture width in these high permeability sands to allow the proppant to enter. The combination of high moduli of elasticity (>1 E 6 psi) and high permeability (>2000 md) make the stimulations unique. The challenge existed to create fractures with high conductivity that demonstrated long term benefits in these high permeability sands. Stimulation treatments were designed using Frac-Pack as a basis. Pad volume was selected in order to create a narrow fracture but with sufficient width to accept a low concentration proppant slurry. The volume of proppant slurry was designed to cause tip screen-out at the leading edge of the fracture13. Continued injection after tip screen-out began was done to increase net fracture pressure and cause an enlarging of the fracture width. Following enlargement of the fracture, higher concentration proppant slurry was injected to fill the fracture from the tip back towards the well. Important design considerations included: ensuring high fluid leak-off rate during fracture fill-up to allow sufficient slurry to be injected in such high permeability zones ensuring fracture inflation and full packing of the fracture during the final stages, matching injection rate to declining fracture leak-off rate efficient post-frac clean-up to ensure high fracture conductivity through proppant

compatibility of frac fluid with reservoir rock and fluids

Design and execution of the fracture stimulations were conducted in the following general manner: 1. well data was gathered from the files and fracture treatment modeled 2. pre-frac acid stimulation was conducted to remove damage from impurities in previously injected water 3. pre-injection temperature log was run 4. bottom hole pressure gauges were run on wireline and set below the bottom set of perforations 5. calibration fracs were performed and values determined for closure stress, fluid efficiency, net frac pressure and frac height 6. temperature profile logs run after calibration fracs were used to calibrate the model and compare with frac height calculations 7. a 3-D frac simulator was matched to measured values of bottom hole pressure, net fracture pressure, fracture height and rate of pressure decline 8. re-simulation of the stimulation treatments was done and modifications made to the fracture program 9. fracture stimulations were conducted as programmed 10. well bore clean-out operations were carried out Guar based fluid, cross linked with boric acid was employed with fluid densities of 40#/Mgal and 30#/Mgal. These fluids are fast cross linking, can be used in pH ranges from 8 to 12 and have an upper temperature limit of about 250F. They exhibit high friction losses and low shear degradation. They are salt tolerant and are easy to break with oxidizers, enzymes and low pH fluids. Ammonium persulfate, triethanolamine and Duran encapsulated breakers were employed. The breaker schedules used are shown in Table 3. Proppant used in all fracs was 20/40 Carbolite ceramic. Fracture pump schedules were prepared with 20% excess proppant slurry to ensure that the treatment was pumped to a complete screen-out condition thus maximizing the near well bore fracture conductivity. Table 4 shows fluid volumes pumped. Post-frac well bore clean-outs were required and these were accomplished using a bull-dog sand bailer to remove the excess proppant. Table 5 summarizes results of the completed fracture treatments. Modeling studies provided estimates of fracture dimensions and conductivity following the treatments. For wells Camaal-30, Heijah-11, and Tawila-26 almost all of the proppant pumped was successfully placed but in the case of Tawila-25, only 63% was placed in the fracture. Table 6 compares injectivity indexes (II) over the life of the four propped frac wells. IIs were calculated from injection data over approximately one month periods (the dates covered are shown in brackets). IIs are given for the first month the well was on injection, the month before the proppant fracture stimulation and at periods of 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following the treatment. In some cases, the post-frac IIs are affected by

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

SPE/Petroleum Society of CIM/CHOA 2002-79007

acid stimulation jobs conducted on the wells. Comparing preand post-frac IIs, it may be noted that all wells showed an improvement following the proppant frac. The Tawila-25 stimulation showed a very small improvement after 1 month of injection while the other 3 wells showed an average II increase of 3 fold. However, after 3 months, the average gain for these 3 wells had dropped to 2 fold and after 1 year to 1.7. Without the acid stimulations, the injectivity would have declined to pre-frac levels or lower after 6 months to 1 year. Comparison of Horizontal, Propped Frac and Vertical Disposal Well Performance Figure 9 compares the performance of 20 cased and perforated vertical water disposal wells with the 4 horizontal and 4 vertical propped frac wells. The water injection rate is plotted against cumulative water injection. The water injection rate plotted is the average for each of the well groups. The cumulative volume injected is also an average for the wells in each group. It should be noted that as time and cumulative volume increase, the number of wells in each group may decrease since some wells have longer history of injection than others and therefore larger cumulative injected volumes. Also, for data plotted on a cumulative scale, the best or highest rate disposal wells tend to dominate the data set at large cumulative volume injected. The data plotted in Figure 9 clearly indicate that initially the horizontal wells achieve much higher injection rates than the vertical wells as would be expected. This is because of the significantly greater wellbore area exposed to flow and the reduced fluid velocity which results in the near wellbore area. The injectivity of the horizontal wells declines steeply and eventually falls below the average performance of the cased and perforated vertical wells that have not been proppant fracture stimulated. The proppant fracture stimulated well group starts only slightly higher than the non-proppant fracture stimulated group. The propped frac wells also drop below the vertical non-propped frac wells with increasing cumulative injected volume. The proppant frac wells have lower injection rate than the horizontal wells throughout their history and are the poorest performing group. On the other hand, the non-fracture stimulated vertical wells actually show an improvement in injection rate over time. This is thought to be due in part to increases in water disposal system pressure but also to the successful application of acid/solvent stimulation treatments. It is also possible that the higher fluid velocities encountered in the vertical wells carry fines and solid particulated in the disposal water away from the near wellbore while in the horizontal and propped frac wells there may be a tendency for these to build-up more near the sand face causing greater deterioration in injectivity. Figure 10 compares the injectivity performance of the 4 horizontal disposal wells. It may be observed that the best performing well is Naar-2 and that Heijah-21 is superior to

Heijah-19. Petrophysical logs indicate that the better performing wells encountered better quality sands in the horizontal section. Figures 11 and 12 show injection data for Heijah-19 and Naar-2. The effect of acid stimulation treatments on Heijah-19 is obvious on the injection plots as well as the Hall and Hearn plots. However, the injection rate rapidly deteriorates showing the effects of oil and fines in the disposal water can be seen after the well has been stimulated. This deterioration in injectivity is most evident on the Hearn plot for Naar-2. Discussion All types of wells generally experience declining injectivity related to total volume of fluid injected. This is thought to be caused by the impurities in the disposal water which consist of oil carry over from the separation process, reservoir fines carried through the surface equipment and returned to the reservoir via the disposal wells and corrosion products originating in the surface and downhole equipment. While the concentrations of the materials are relatively low at about 15 ppm of oil and 15 ppm of total suspended solids, the volumes of water injected into individual disposal wells are large enough, averaging 20,000 to 60,000 bwpd, to create plugging problems if the majority of these impurities lodge in or near the formation face. The success of acid/solvent stimulation treatments in restoring injectivity on vertical wells attests to the fact that the impurities are indeed lodging in the near well bore region. The acid/solvent stimulations tend to be shortlived in their benefit however. The stimulation treatments are easier and less expensive to conduct on the vertical wells compared to horizontal wells. In general, while the application of horizontal and proppant fracture stimulated vertical wells held much promise to raise injection rates and injectivity, they have failed to perform as well as the conventionally completed vertical wells. Because of the operational impracticality of filtering the disposal water to a higher quality before injection, recent efforts have focussed on bringing less water to surface through water shutoff techniques and anti-coning strategies. Investigation of continuous high rate injection above formation parting pressure has also been conducted. This latter method holds much promise of being able to create small fractures in order to break through near well formation plugging and thereby maintain continuous high rate injection. Variations in disposal water quality caused by operational adjustments or problems on surface will have less detrimental effects on disposal well performance under high pressure injection. Conclusions 1. For the high permeability sands of the Upper Qishn formation in the Masila Block, there is no advantage to the use of horizontal wells over conventionally completed vertical wells. The additional costs associated with drilling, completing and stimulating horizontal wells are not justified in this case. 2. The additional costs associated with proppant fracture

79007

HORIZONTAL WATER DISPOSAL WELL PERFORMANCE IN A HIGH POROSITY AND PERMEABILITY RESERVOIR

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

stimulation of vertical water disposal wells are also not justified. Given the high disposal rates within the Masila Block, conventional filtration systems are operationally impractical to prevent particulate matter entering the formation and causing both sandface plugging and deep damage. All of the water disposal wells are positively affected for a short time by repeated acid/solvent stimulation of the wells, which removes the material causing the sandface plugging, but acid stimulation likely has little impact on deep damage. However, since it is more difficult to workover and selectively stimulate horizontal and propped frac wells than vertical wells, in this application the conventional cased/perforated vertical well completions are favoured. The most promising solution for more efficient water disposal appears to be the use of higher pressure injection to exceed formation parting pressure, which likely breaks down the ongoing near wellbore damage and minimizes the effect of deep damage that cannot be effectively accessed by acid stimulation. Horizontal wells may not receive the benefit of continuous breaking pressure due to the substantially increased sandface, and therefore are more susceptible to long-term degredation by formation damage mechanisms. If disposal water cannot practically be filtered adequately for the formation being injected into, then horizontal disposal wells may not be a good choice.

4.

5.

6. 7.

8.

9.

10.

Acknowledgements The authors thank Nexen Inc. and its partners Occidental Petroleum Ltd., Consolidated Contractors Company S.A.L. and the Government of the Republic of Yemen for their permission to present this material. The contributions of the following individuals are recognized and appreciated: Wendy Heuver for the particle size analysis and filter performance charts, Wendy Busher for the well performance plots and Ben Wong for the drilling schematics. References
1. Harding, T.G., Smith, K.H., Al-Hakimi, E., Al-Seyani, A., Wilkie, D.I., and Willson, N.D.: Produced Water Management: Masila Block Yemen, presented at the 2nd International Yemen Oil and Gas Conference, Sanaa, Republic of Yemen, 24 - 25 June 2002. Sharma, M.M., Pang, S., Wennberg, K.E., and Morgenthaler, L.: Injectivity Decline in Water Injection Wells: An Offshore Gulf of Mexico Case Study, SPE 38180, presented at the 1997 SPE European Formation Damage Conference in the Hague, Netherlands, 2 - 3 June 1997. Paige, R.W., Murray, L.R., Martins, J.P., and Marsh, S.M.: Optimising Water Injection Performance, SPE 29774

11.

12.

13.

2.

14. 15.

3.

presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, 11 14 March, 1995. Graves, K.S., Valentine, A.V., Dolman, M.A., and Morton, E.K.: Design and Implementation of a Horizontal Injector Program for the Benchamas Waterflood Gulf of Thailand, SPE 68638 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia, 17 - 19 April 2001. Huang, W-S., Kaetzer, T.R., and Bowlin, K.R.: Design and Performance of a Horizontal Well Waterflood Project in New Hope Shallow Unit, Franklin County, Texas," SPE th 24940 presented at the SPE 67 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington, D.C., 4 - 7 October 1992. Nasrulla, I.M.and Rana, L.A.: Planning of a Horizontal Well Offshore Qatar, SPE 21348 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, 16 - 19 November 1991. Dake, L.P., Sutcliffe, P.G., and Tweedie, A.A.P.: Improving Hydrocarbon Recovery Efficiency Utilizing Horizontal Production and/or Injection Wells, 9th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, The Hague, The Netherlands, 20 - 22 October 1997. Smith, M.B. and Hannah, R.R.: High-Permeability Fracturing: The Evolution of a Technology, SPE 27984 presented at the Tulsa Centennial Petroleum Engineering Symposium, Tulsa, OK, 29 - 31 August 1994. Goo, J., Li, Y., and Zhao, J.: Simulation and Evaluation of Frac and Pack Completion in High Permeability Formations, Paper 2001-055 presented at the Petroleum Societys Canadian International Petroleum Conference 2001, Calgary, Alberta, 12 - 14 June, 2001. Davidson, B.M., Franco, V.H., Gonzalez, S., and Robinson, B.M.: Stimulation Program in High Permeability Oil Sands Case Study, SPE 39050 presented at the th SPE 5 Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 30 August 3 September 1997. Soedarsono, G., Harding, C, Said, R. and Suchart, J.: The Application of Fracturing to Bypass Severe Formation Damage in an Ultra-high Permeability Formation, Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Convention of the Indonesian Petroleum Association, October 1994. Hunt, J.L., Chen, C-C, and Soliman, M.Y.: Performance of Hydraulic Fractures in High Permeability Formations, SPE 28530 presented at the SPE 69th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisianan, 25 28 September 1994. Al-Haddad, S., Arbaugh, R., McKnight, D.: Hydraulic Fracturing in High Permeability Wells, SPE 40008 presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta 15 - 18 March 1998. Dusterhoft, R.G., and Chapman, B.J.: Fracturing Highpermeability Reservoirs Increases Productivity, Oil & Gas Journal, 20 June 1994, pp. 40 44. Aggour, T.M., and Economides, M.J.: Optimization of the Performance of High-permeability Fractured Wells, SPE 39474 presented at the SPE International Symposium on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, 18 - 19 February 1998.

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

Table 1
Well Stimulation Results

Well Type Horizontal Heijah -19 Heijah-21 Vertical Average Average Average

Stimulation Type Acid Acid Acid Propped Frac Air Lift 4

Average 15% Average HCl Treatment Injection Gain Size Number (bwpd) (bbl) of Jobs 31 42 27 3 4 4 100 90 70 N/A N/A 10897 13333 11026 12867 14243

Average Duration of Gain (Days) 67 125 102 187 145

Notes: 1 33 % of treatments used divertor agent. 2 25 % of treatments used divertor agent. 3 31 % of treatments used divertor agent. 4 Air lifting may appear better than other techniques but one job included reperforating the well as well. 5 Divertor agent did not deliver a statistically different result than bullheaded acid treatments.

79007

Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability Reservoir

Table 2
Masila Propped Frac Well Perforated Intervals
Well Zone Perforated Intervals (ft. kB) 5820-5858 5876-5912 5746-5756 5766-5776 5786-5796 5806-5816 6186-6195 6210-6214.3 6220-6232 6238-6247.5 6252.5-6264 6274-6281 6286-6292 6185-6233 6255-6263 6278-6282 MPP (ft. kB) 5867 5781 Reservoir Pressure at MPP (psia) 1745 1648 Reservoir Temp (F) 160 159

Camaal-30 Heijah-11

S2 S3 S2C S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3

Tawila-25

6239

1817

167

Tawila-26

6233

1808

159

Table 3
Breaker Schedules for Proppant Fracs Breaker 40#/Mgal
A B

Breaker 30#/Mgal C 1 24 28 2 10
A

B 1 1 1 1

C 1 1 12 26

Pad 1 ppa prop 2 - 6 ppa > 8 ppa

0.25 0.5 1.0 1.5

1 1 1 1

0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2

Breaker A ammonium persulfate (low temperature oxidizer) Breaker B TEA (triethanolamine) accelerates effect of Breaker A Breaker C Duran encapsulated breaker

10

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

Table 4
Proppant Frac Pump Summary Well Camaal-30 Heijah-11 Tawila-25 Tawila-26 Injection Fluid Type Pad Vol. Rate (bpm) (bbl) 55 51 50 55 30#/Mgal 40#/Mgal 30#/Mgal 40#/Mgal 420 426 380 440 Slurry Proppant Proppant Vol. (lbs) Pumped (lbs) Placed (lbs) 258 371 334 306 55,200 62,000 89,000 48,500 44,000 60,800 56,000 45,300 Net Fracture Pressure (psi) 1200+ 150 1200+ 1100

Table 5
Predicted Geometry and Conductivity of Proppant Fracs Well Camaal-30 Heijah-11 Tawila-25 Tawila-26 Zone S2 S3 S3 S3 Frac Length (ft.) 60 180 80 60 Frac Height (ft.) 42 75 50 70 Frac Width (in) 1.2 0.4 1.0 1.0 Frac Conductivity (md-ft) 30,000 9,000 25,000 27,000

Table 6
Masila Propped Fracture Stimulations
Well Zone* Frac Date Initial Injectivity Index (bwpd/psi) 17.2 (02/07/99 to 01/08/99) 45.9 (20/04/97 to 20/05/97) 7.5 (17/11/99 to 6/12/99) 2.5 (19/11/99 to 6/12/99) Pre-Frac Injectivity Index (bwpd/psi) 28.6 (30/09/00 to 30/10/00) 18.9 (10/09/00 to 10/10/00) 19.0 (15/9/00 to 15/10/00) 12.0 (1/09/00 to 1/10/00) Post-Frac Injectivity Index (bwpd/psi) 3 Months 6 Months 59.4 (26/01/01 to 25/02/01) 36.7 (30/12/00 to 29/01/01) 16.2 (15/01/01 to 14/01/01) 28.6 (15/01/01 to 14/02/01) 56.9+ (26/04/01 to 26/05/01) 29.7 (10/04/01 to 10/05/01) 20.7+ (19/04/01 to 19/05/01) 37.4+ (19/04/01 to 19/05/01)

1 Month 97.0 (26/11/00 to 26/12/00) 41.6 (10/11/00 to 10/12/00) 21.4 (17/11/00 to 17/12/00) 53.1 (13/11/00 to 13/12/00)

I Year 33.6 (26/10/01 to 25/11/01) 14.8 (10/10/01 to 9/11/01) 4.7 (19/10/01 to 18/11/01) 52.2+ (9/10/01 to 8/11/01)

Camaal-30

UQ S2/S3

3/11/00

Heijah-11

UQ S2/S3

14/10/00

Tawila-25

UQ S3

19/10/00

Tawila-26

UQ S3

9/10/00

* UQ = Upper Qishn
+ following acid stimulation

79007

Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability Reservoir

11

Figure 1. Project Area Location Map

12

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

Figure 2. Field and Water Disposal Well Location Map

79007

Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability Reservoir

13

Figure 3. Generalized Stratigraphy of Masila Block

14

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

0.16 0.14 F ra c t io n o f F re q u e n c y 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0 10

Particle size distribution within Masila disposal water Particles removed by PX10 filters Under ideal conditions, all particles over 24 micron are removed

Particles passing through

20 30

40

50

60

70

Size of Particle (m)

Figure 4. Disposal water particle-size distribution and filter performance curves.

0.16 0.14 F ra c t io n o f F re q u e n c y 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0 10

Particles <1/7: no damage Particles 1/2 to 1/7: deep damage

Particles 1/2 to 1: sandface plugging

20

30

40

50

60

70

Size of Particle (m)

Figure 5. Damage types within disposal water particle-size distribution and filter performance curves.

79007

Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability Reservoir

15

Proposed Directional Plan for Naar 2 Horizontal Well

2250 307500 307750 308000 Easting (m) 308250 308500 308750 309000 1735250

2500 600' past csg. pt. 2750 Co-ord. for heel (Int. Csg. Point)

Harshiyat 1735000

1734750 3000 Northing (m)

3250 Naar 2 Surface Naar 3 Surface

1734500

3500

1734250

3750 Co-ord. for heel Depth (ft.) 4000

1734000

1733750 4250

4500 Naar 2 Wellpath 4750

Qishn Carbonate 5000 Red Shale 5250 Qishn C3 Marker Qishn S1A Qishn S2 5500 S3 Reservoir LQ1

5750

Air Drilled Open Hole Section

6000 0.00 250.00 500.00 750.00 1000.00 1250.00 1500.00 Vertical Section (ft.) 1750.00 2000.00 2250.00 2500.00 2750.00 Basement

Figure 6. Typical Open Hole Horizontal Well Directional Drilling Plan Showing the Air Drilling Pitch

16

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

Wellbore Schematic
Well Name: Surface Location: Heijah 19 HZT (I10-44) Well North (m): 1720935 East (m): 287435 Elevations: Drilling AFE: AFE#: 349002 SAP Ref#: D&A: $1,500,000 D&C: $1,500,000 Surveyed GL: 3207.5 Est'd GL: Est'd KB: 3237.3 Spud to TD: Spud to RR: 19.5 Directional Plan: Horizontal 1st Target: N: 1720432 E: 287435

Est'd Drilling Time (Days):

Wellhead Equipment: Wellhead Equipment: Formations

* Primary ** Secondary

Tubing Spool : 13-5/8" 2M x 11" 3M Casing bowl: 13-3/8" X 13-5/8" 2M (SOW/stub nipple) Casing & Cementing 20" Conductor Drilling Considerations Wellbore Evaluation Mud Properties

MD (ft) RKB 40.0'

TVD (ft) RKB 40.0'

Hole Size

Directional Plan

20" Csg Shoe UMM ER RADHUMA

18-1/4" Hole SHARWAYN 13-3/8" Csg Shoe MUKALLA 886.0' 900.0' 912.0' 886.0' 900.0' 912.0'

Casing: 13-3/8" Casing, 54.5#, K-55 BTC

None Air Drill 18-1/4" Hole Terminate drilling 35' into the Sharwayn

Air/foam

Cement: 15.8 ppg Class 'G' + additives (see GDP) Surface - Casing Point Casing: 9-5/8" 47#, L-80, BTC Surface - ITD 1st KOP at 3680ft with build rate at 2.5 deg per 100 feet to 1st end of build at 4910ft / 31 deg to 2nd KOP at 4910ft with build rate at 5 deg per 100 feet to 2nd end of build at 5610ft / 55 deg then dropping angle to FTD at 6027ft / 88 deg Drill 12-1/4" Hole Terminate drilling 100' into the Basement TLC Log Run 1: Supercombo Run 2: LDT,CNL,NGT Potential lost circulation in Mukalla/Harshiyat Gel/Chem 8.38.9 ppg; 10 13% oil to top of RS Marker; Nitrate Tracer from top of QC to ITD

FARTAQ HARSHIYAT

2565.0' 2695.0'

2565.0' 2695.0'

QISHN CARBONATE RED SHALE MARKER QISHN C3 MARKER * QISHN CLASTICS - S1A QISHN CLASTICS - S1B QISHN CLASTICS - S1C QISHN CLASTICS - S2 QISHN CLASTICS - S2 Paleosol QISHN CLASTICS - S3 LOWER QISHN CLASTICS 1 LOWER QISHN CLASTICS 2 UPPER SAAR CLASTICS 1 UPPER SAAR CLASTICS 2 SAAR CARBONATE

5094.0' 5376.0' 5469.0' 5570.0' 5612.0' 5658.0' 5714.0' N/P 5940.0' 6240.0'

5035.0' 5262.0' 5327.0' 5392.0' 5416.0' 5441.0' 5471.0' N/P 5554.0' 5602.0'

Coring: None

12-1/4" Hole

Cement: Prelflush: As per GDP Lead: 12.8 ppg Class 'G' + additives (see GDP) TOC: 300' into surface csg Tail: 15.8 ppg Class 'G' + additives (see GDP) TOC: 500' above Qishn S1A top

** BASEMENT ITD: 9-5/8" Csg Shoe Casing: None Drill 8-1/2" Hole to TD Main Hole Logs: Run 1: LDT,CNL,NGT 8-1/2" Open Hole Cement: None planned - cement plugs possible if well to be P&A Air/Fresh Water

Coring: None FTD 6270.0' 5629.0'

Not to scale

Figure 7. Well bore Schematic of Open Hole Horizontal Well

79007

Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability Reservoir

17

Well bore Schematic

Well Name: Naar 2 HZT (F15-5) Well Directional Plan: Surface Location: North (m): 1734324 East (m): 307750 Drilling AFE: AFE#: 340A13 SAP Ref#: D&A: $1,388,200 D&C: $1,388,200 Elevations: Horizontal 1st Target: N: 1734826 E: 307932 2nd Target: N: 1734997 E: 307994 Surveyed GL:3312.7 Est'd GL: 3316.0 Est'd KB: 3345.0 Spud to TD: 17.9 Spud to RR: 19.6

Est'd Drilling Time (Days):

Wellhead Equipment: Wellhead Equipment: Tubing Spool: 13-5/8" 2M x 11" 3M Casing bowl: 13-3/8" X 13-5/8" 2M (SOW/stub nipple) Casing & Cementing 20" Conductor

Formations
* Primary ** Secondary

MD (ft.) RKB 40.0' 165.0'

TVD (ft.) RKB 40.0' 165.0'

Hole Size

Directional Plan

Drilling Considerations

Well bore Evaluation

Mud Properties

20" Csg Shoe UMM ER RADHUMA

18-1/4" Hole SHARWAYN 13-3/8" Csg Shoe MUKALLA 1221.0' 1256.0' 1305.0' 1221.0' 1256.0' 1305.0'

Casing: 13-3/8" Casing, 54.5#, K-55 BTC

None Air Drill 18-1/4" Hole Terminate drilling 35' into the Sharwayn

Air/foam

Cement: 15.8 ppg Class 'G' + additives (see GDP) Surface - Casing Point Casing: 9-5/8" 47#, L-80, BTC Surface - ITD 1st KOP at 3700ft. with build rate at 2 deg per 100 feet to 1st end of build at 4800ft. / 22 deg Change build rate to 5 deg per 100 feet from 4962ft. to 5900ft. at 72 deg then to FT.D at 7438ft. / 78 deg Drill 12-1/4" Hole Terminate drilling 100' into the Basement TLC Log Run 1: Supercombo Potential lost circulation in Mukalla/Harshiyat Gel/Chem 8.38.9 ppg; 10 13% oil to top of RS Marker; Nitrate Tracer from top of QC to ITD

FARTAQ HARSHIYAT

2355.0' 2525.0'

2355.0' 2525.0'

QISHN CARBONATE RED SHALE MARKER QISHN C3 MARKER * QISHN CLASTICS - S1A QISHN CLASTICS - S1B QISHN CLASTICS - S1C QISHN CLASTICS - S2 QISHN CLASTICS - S2 Paleosol QISHN CLASTICS - S3 LOWER QISHN CLASTICS 1 LOWER QISHN CLASTICS 2 UPPER SAAR CLASTICS 1 UPPER SAAR CLASTICS 2 SAAR CARBONATE

4982.0' 5367.0' N/P 5553.0' 5588.0' 5610.0' 5667.0' N/P 5990.0' 6316.0'

4940.0' 5250.0' N/P 5369.0' 5389.0' 5401.0' 5430.0' N/P 5548.0' 5610.0'

Coring: None

12-1/4" Hole

Cement: Prelflush: As per GDP Lead: 12.8 ppg Class 'G' + additives (see GDP) TOC: 300' into surface csg Tail: 15.8 ppg Class 'G' + additives (see GDP) TOC: 500' above Qishn S1A top

** BASEMENT ITD: 9-5/8" Csg Shoe Casing: None Drill 8-1/2" Hole to TD LWD GR 8-1/2" Open Hole with 5 Slotted liner Cement: None planned - cement plugs possible if well to be P&A

Air/Fresh Water

TD: 5-1/2 Slotted liner FT.D 7435.0' 5610.0'

Coring: None

Not to scale

Figure 8. Well bore Schematic of Open Hole Horizontal Well with Slotted Liner Installed

18

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

Figure 9. Comparison of Performance of Disposal Well Types

Figure 10. Comparison of Performance of Horizontal Water Disposal Wells

79007

Horizontal Water Disposal Well Performance in a High Porosity and Permeability Reservoir

19

02/10/2001 Acid Job

09/14/2001 Acid Job 06/30/2000 Acid Job 03/10/2000 Acid Job

06/24/1999 S2/LQ Disposal

09/14/2001 Acid Job 02/10/2001 Acid Job

06/30/2000 Acid Job

03/10/2000 Acid Job

06/24/1999 S2/LQ Disposal

Figure 11. Injectivity Data for Heijah-19 Horizontal Well

20

HARDING, SMITH & NORRIS

79007

CPF Water

Conversion to Hydrocyclone

Hydrocyclone Water

Figure 12. Injectivity Data for Naar-2 Horizontal Well