SPE 142665

Lessons Learned from the First Miscible CO2-EOR Pilot Project in

Heterogeneous Carbonate Oil Reservoir in Abu Dhabi, UAE
A. Al Basry, S. Al Hajeri, H. Saadawi, F. Al Aryani, A. Obeidi, S. Negahban, G. Al Yafei, Abu Dhabi Company for
Onshore Oil Operations (ADCO)

Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference held in Manama, Bahrain, 25-28 September 2011.
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
In 2009, ADCO implemented the first ever CO2 EOR pilot in the Middle. The pilot project is part of the Company overall strategy
evaluate the feasibility of CO2 injection as an EOR process and in order to address key technical and business uncertainties as well
as the risks associated with CO2 injection The pilot project includes three wells, a CO2 injection well, an observation well and an
oil producing well. The pilot has been operated for one year now to achieve a set of pre-defined objectives. During this period, a
comprehensive data acquisition program was conducted and collected data from wells and reservoir performance was analyzed to
address key uncertainties related to miscible CO2-EOR injection process.
Upon the completion of the project objectives in June 2010, a decision was taken to expand the project scope and target with new
objectives that will help understanding another challenging anomaly in the oil fields (CO2 performance in the transition zones).
This paper shares the challenges faced, lessons learnt and experience gained during the implementation, operation, and monitoring
of the First Miscible CO2-EOR pilot project in a heterogeneous carbonate oil reservoir in Abu Dhabi, UAE.

1. Background
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is considered to be the most serious Green House Gas (GHG) in the atmosphere and the key contributor to
the Climate Change [1]. In 2006, the Government of the UAE launched Abu Dhabi Future Energy Company (MASDAR) to
implement a large-scale carbon capture project to reduce greenhouse gas emission by capturing and transporting the CO2 to
oilfields for sequestration and/or Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) processes
In November 2009, Abu Dhabi Company for Onshore Oil Operations (ADCO), in collaboration with Abu Dhabi National Oil
Company (ADNOC), Industry Shareholders (BP, Shell, Total, ExxonMobil, and Partex) and MASDAR, implemented ADCOs
first CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) Pilot Project by injecting CO2 in a complex carbonate oil reservoir.
ADCO initiated the CO2 EOR study during mid 2008 with the main objective being to develop a CO2 EOR portfolio based on
detailed laboratory studies, simulation studies, and field pilot studies. The ADCO CO2 pilot project started with a company-wide
screening study identifying both the most appropriate EOR option and most likely reservoir candidates. The preparation phase
started early April 2008 with the in-house studies commencing August 2008. In November 2008, the project was reviewed by key
stakeholders and was approved in January 2009.

SPE 142665

The key objectives of ADCO CO2 pilot were to:

x
x
x
x
x

Assess CO2 injectivity in tight reservoir

Examine Asphaltene deposition during CO2 injection
Assess CO2 breakthrough time
Assess vertical sweep efficiency
Identify issues related to surface facilities and well integrity with CO2

The pilot was originally planned to operate for one year, from November 2009 to November 2010. However, upon the completion
of the approved project objectives in June 2010, a decision was taken to expand the project scope to evaluate the CO2 performance
in the transition zones.
The pilot design aspects were addressed in a previous paper [2]. Design of the pilot facilities and the various studies on the surface
facilities were discussed in references [3], [4]. The emphasis in this paper is on the experience gained to date from the pilot
implementation, operation, and monitoring.
2. Pilot design and implementation
ADCO CO2 pilot was designed to achieve the stated objectives. The pilot is located within an undeveloped area where the
reservoir is above Minimum Miscibility Pressure (MMP) of CO2. It consists of three vertical wells; single producer, single
injector and one observer between the producer and injector. The injector well is perforated in a lower sub zone while the producer
is perforated in three sub zones (lower and upper). The well spacing between producer and injector is about 70 meter.
The simulation model was used to assess the well spacing and the perforation selection. Based on different perforation scenarios,
the model result indicates that CO2 breakthrough can occur in 20 to 130 days as shown in Figure [1], which represents the GOR
predictions with CO2 injection. The pilot history match study is addressed in another paper [5].

Figure 1: Model Predictions for GOR vs. Time

The vertical wells with a narrow spacing and selective perforation interval facilitate obtaining quick results with a minimum risk
and cost. To assess the well integrity during CO2 injection, the wells were equipped with different completion materials where the
corrosion resistant material of 13 Chrome was used in the injector and L80 carbon steel was used in the producer. Both wells were

SPE 142665

cemented with a CO2 resistant cement to ensure long term casing integrity and good zonal isolation during CO2 injection. A
schematic diagram for the pilot wells is shown in Figure [2].

CO2Injector

Observer

OilProducer
MPFM+CO2
2.7/8CarbonSteelTBG

2.7/8CarbonSteelTBG

3.1/2Chrome13TBG

33Meters

Module

DTS/PDHG

37Meters

Figure 2: ADCO CO2 Pilot wells design

During the design and implementation phase of the project, the project team overcame many challenges and constraints related to
the pilot duration (one year injection only), CO2 volume availability, and lack of experience in modeling, operating, monitoring
and handling the CO2 (first project in the region).
As a fast track project and with the objective to accelerate the project implementation, integrated ADCO multi-discipline teams
with clear roles and responsibilities were formed in February 2009 involving subsurface, surface facilities, field operations,
drilling, EOR expertise, and automation field staff to ensure successful project implementation. The teams were empowered to
address and solve various issues via weekly team meetings; which enhanced communications between all stakeholders and
eliminated unnecessary delays. Project progress was reported on a monthly basis to the Carbon Lead Steering Committee,
composed of ADNOC, ADCO and MASDAR (CO2 gas provider) management representatives. The steering committee provided
clarity of direction, task resource, support, and encouragement. Close coordination was also developed with the various contractors
and suppliers to ensure timely delivery.
Resources and schedules were identified and actual progress was monitored according to the plan. Remedial action was taken,
where necessary, to keep the task on track and to ensure that work is performed according to ADCO quality standards. Moreover,
variations to the original project scope, budget and schedule were avoided as much as possible.
More than 300 team members were involved in the initiation, implementation, commissioning, monitoring and controlling phases
of the project including technical experts, engineers, technicians, workers, contractors, and administrators. The team performance
was improved by building team cohesiveness, leading, mentoring, training and motivating in order to facilitate cooperation, ensure
project efficiency and boost morale.
The implementation phase, which involved drilling new wells, constructing new surface facilities, installation of advance
technologies, gathering of dynamic data, and commissioning of several equipments simultaneously, was completed successfully
with no incident and with high safety standards.
The main lessons learned from pilot design and implementation is:
x Strong leadership with maximum delegation was the driver for this successful pilot project
x Integration between the multi-discipline teams was key to success: extraordinary meetings, direct contact, quick response,
listening to others will make the big difference
x Complexity and duration of the pilot is dependent on when the results are needed for full field technical commercial
evaluation
x The focus should be on achieving the pilot objectives only as the reservoir uncertainties are huge and will not be re-solved
in a single pilot

SPE 142665

x
x
x

Budget, tendering, single sourcing, labs availability, and resources are to be considered as constrains if not well handled
The small team approach allows a project team to remain flexible and effective
Simulation model is important in designing and interpreting pilot performance

The following is recommended for future CO2 pilot design and implementation projects:
x Set pilot objectives that are easily measurable and design the pilot accordingly
x Select the pilot location in a well controlled area with minimum uncertainties in structure and reservoir rock and fluid
properties description
x Allocate resources and requirements according to pilot objectives and size
x Delegate by using the team approach whenever possible for planning and execution, guided by the project lead
x Perform frequent technical review sessions with Shareholders to keep the project team focused on the correct path

3. Pilot Production and Injection Performance

The CO2 injection was commissioned on November 2009. The pilot was operating under stabilized production and injection
conditions (fixed choke settings). Figure [3] shows the production and injection performance of ADCO CO2 pilot. After 60 days
of injection, the CO2 breakthrough was observed at producer location through the increase of the wellhead pressure, GOR, and the
CO2% at surface and the decrease in the downhole reservoir temperature Figure [4].

Oil rate (STB/D)

CO2 Injection Rate

Produced CO2 Mole (%)

1400

100

600

400

70
60
50
40
30
20

200
10
0
Nov-09

Dec-09

Jan-10

Feb-10

Mar-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jun-10

Jul-10

Jul-10

Aug-10

Date

Figure 3: Performance of Production and Injection of ADCO CO2 Pilot

0
Sep-10

Produced CO2 Mole %

800

Data not available

1000

80

Operational Activities

Operational Activities

Oil rate (BOPD),

CO2 injection rate (MSCF/D)

90
1200

SPE 142665

Cooling effect due to

CO2 Breakthrough

Figure 4: Downhole reservoir temperature profile before and after breakthrough

During the injection, it was observed that the production rate increased gradually by 5-7% prior to the CO2 breakthrough, and
immediately dropped by 30%-40% after the breakthrough under the same flowing/operation condition, as shown in Figures [5]
and [6]. While in the injection side, the injectivity was almost constant prior to the breakthrough and improved by 40% after
breakthrough.

Water rate (STB/D)

Oil rate (STB/D)

800

1600

700

WHFP (psi)

1400

600

1200
500
1000
400
800
300
600
200

400

100

200
0
Nov-09

Dec-09

Feb-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jul-10

Aug-10

0
Oct-10

Date

Figure 5: Performance of Production Increase and Decline Before and After BT

Oil rate, Water rate (STB/D)

WHFP (psi)
1800

2.00

2,500

1.60

2,000

1.20

1,500

0.80

1,000

0.40

500

0.00
Dec-09

Well Head Inj Pressure (psi)

SPE 142665

CO2 Injection Rate (MMSCFD)

Feb-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jul-10

Date

Aug-10

Qinj

WHIP

Figure 6: Performance of Injection Injectivity Enhanced by 30-40% after BT

Four Pressure Build-up tests were conducted, in the pilot producer between October 2009 and April 2010. Table 1 represents the
summary results of the pressure transient tests analysis. The data showed that the skin factor (although it is relatively low) remains
almost constant after the start-up of the injection (November 2009) and the occurrence of breakthrough.
Table 1: Summary Results of Pressure Build-up Test Analysis for the Pilot Producer well
Date

kh

skin

08-Oct-09
09-Nov-09
21-Dec-09
04-Apr-10

[mD*ft]
83
98
88
90

mD
1.2
1.47
1.32
1.34

[-]
-3.6
-4.3
-3.9
-4

Two Pressure Fall-Off tests were conducted at the pilot injector, in December 2009 and April 2010 to measure the average
permeability and skin factor. Table 2 represents the summary results for the CO2 injector pressure transient tests analysis which
showed that the skin factor almost doubled after the breakthrough occurrence.
Table 2: Summary Results of Pressure Transient Tests Analysis for Pilot injector
Date

kh

04-Apr-10
25-Dec-09

[md*ft]
30
38

md
1.38
1.73

[-]
-3.4
-5.6

SPE 142665

4. Surveillance Program
The physics, chemistry and simulation of miscible CO2 EOR process are very challenging, as the process introduces major changes
in the reservoir fluid and possibly rock properties, which should be monitored and effectively managed (e.g. asphaltene
precipitation management). For ADCO CO2 Pilot, a comprehensive surveillance plan was designed to collect consistent and
representative static and dynamic data. The strategy was to establish a base line data repository, prior to start up of the CO2
injection and to conduct a time-lapsed monitoring surveys post CO2 injection.
The CO2 pilot wells were connected at surface to an automation system in which the production and injection data can be received
on a daily basis (e.g., fluid rates, WHIP, WHIT, WHFP, and Choke settings). Moreover, a comprehensive data collection activities
was selected for monitoring the project performance including the conventional monitoring activities (PBU, PFO, multi-rate tests,
communication test, and production and cased hole saturation logs ) and the advanced logging tools like cross well seismic, fiber
optics (Distributed Temperature Sensor, DTS) and CO2 saturation detector around well bore. Permanent Multi-Phase Flow Meter
(MPFM) and CO2 analyzer are connected to the producer at surface, where the CO2 concentration and rate changes with time are
measured on a daily basis. Also, retrievable down hole gauges (corrosion resistant gauges) are used for continuous pressure
measurements. Moreover, wellhead surface samples (gas and liquid samples) from producer well, are collected and analyzed to
evaluate fluid compositional changes during CO2 injection.
Time Lapsed Logging Techniques
Two types of saturation logs from two different service providers were carried out to monitor the saturations change during the
injection and production:
x Reservoir Performance Monitoring, RPM-C
x Reservoir Saturation Tool, RST.
All saturation logs showed that CO2 remained in the injection sub zone and partially migrated to the above sub zone which is not
perforated in the injector, while no CO2 was detected in the most upper sub zone of reservoir. This result is consistent with the
field observations, core data, MDT measurements and simulation studies, where well developed dense layers or baffles between
sub zones, particularly upper and lower sub zone, are expected.
However, for the residual oil saturation to CO2, different results obtained for each well and from each log type. For the injector and
observer wells, the RST saturation logs showed very low residual oil saturation (almost Zero% oil saturation), at the
good/permeable intervals while it reached 5-7% in the less permeable interval. The RPM-C logs showed high residual oil
saturation in the injector and observer wells, in excess of 10%.
Borehole environment has a significant impact on the measurement particularly at the producer well; many aspects were reviewed
that have a potential impact on the measurement including the well history, completion, drill fluid and invasion profiles at various
times, stimulation of perforated intervals by acid, fluid loss during cement squeeze operation and cross flow anomaly that was
observed between producing perforations.
Both RST and RPM-C faced difficulties in interpreting the fluids saturation in the producer well due to mentioned challenges at
this particular environment. RST showed relatively good and reasonable analysis in the producer as a function of the predetermined interpretation approach including the environmental correction (borehole CO2 correction), and integrated approach of
interpreting data including Capture count-rate (Sigma), Hydrogen Index (HI), and the elemental yield particularly the carbon (CYield).
The following is recommended for future CO2 saturation logging:
x Base run logs (pre-injection) are essential
x In order to mitigate the effect of completion fluids; mud must be designed properly to minimize the filtration loss, ensure
good cementation, and allow sufficient time between drilling and commencing injection in order to allow adequate filtrate
dissipation.
x Integration of data is essential particularly the direct measurement of the flow profile (spinner measurement) with other
production logging tools, it would help a lot in pulsed neutron interpretation and understanding of the flow and hold-up
distribution.

SPE 142665

CO2 Concentration Monitoring

The CO2 mole percent is being measured through two different techniques:
x CO2 Analyzer Module: A chromatograph that is connected to the MPFM at the surface. It measures the CO2 concentration
every second and transmits the results to ADCO Head Quarter through wireless system into V-Monitor program. The CO2
analyzer is calibrated with wellhead samples after any major change in the pilot performance (particularly in the fluid
properties at surface). CO2 analyzer measures percentages of CO2 only (not full fluid composition analysis). The sampling
point is fixed and the uncertainty in the sampling technique is relatively low.
x

Daily Wellhead Samples (WHS): samples that are obtained manually from a specific wellhead sampling point on the
producer. Field lab chromatograph is used to conduct limited compositional gas analysis (CO2% and C1-C6+). The lab
chromatograph is calibrated every three months. In the WHS technique, if the sampling point changed, the CO2% will not
be comparable to the previous readings.

It was found that both CO2 analyzer module and WHS were consistent in CO2% measurements except in the period starting from
July 2010 where WHS showed higher CO2% than that measured in CO2 analyzer by 5% to 7%, as shown in Figure [7]. This
difference was looking very minor and within measurements error, but with the attempts to history match the CO2% and GOR, it
was observed that difference is dramatically affecting the GOR history match and prediction. The GOR can vary from 3000 to
4000 with CO2% equal to 74% and 81% respectively.
CO2% - Analyzer vs. WHS
1
0.9
0.8

CO2 (fraction)

0.7
0.6
CO2 - WHS

0.5

CO2 - Analyzer

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
14-Oct-09

3-Dec-09

22-Jan-10

13-Mar-10

2-May-10

21-Jun-10

10-Aug-10

29-Sep-10

DATE

Figure 7: CO2 Measurements Analyzer Module vs. CO2 WHS Data

The following is recommended for future CO2 concentration measurements:
x The calibration of the testing tools should be carried out in a regular basic especially if the change in fluids density and
CO2% is rapid (mainly after breakthrough).
x The wellhead sampling point/condition/procedure should be the same for each sample
x In the small scale pilot, like ADCO pilot, the sampling frequency should be increased to capture the details of pilot
performance

SPE 142665

Distributed Temperature Sensor (DTS) Technique

A Distributed Temperature Sensor (DTS) was installed to continuously monitor the temperature profile in the pilot producer. The
transmitted data was converted into temperature and displayed in specialized software. The producing well was also connected to
downhole pressure transmitter (PT). Both DTS and PT were calibrated and found operational; however three months after
installation and prior to CO2 breakthrough, the received data revealed anomalies in temperature profile. Several factors were
identified as the causes and several solutions were devised to overcome the DTS unanticipated problem:
x Failure of laser power generator: It was calibrated to a portable powerful laser generator and proved to work properly.
x Optical fibre breakdown due to unconditional downhole effects that are beyond fibre specifications (mainly high
temperature): This could be the most likely reason; input vs. output data were analyzed, and sudden reduction in output
data was observed assuming failure of the majority of fibber optics.
x CO2 breakthrough might have impacted the fibre functionality: This could be a reason as only one DTS cable showed
continuity and gave erroneous reading below packer across perforated intervals.
The following is recommended for future DTS installations:
x All down hole assemblies should be tested against the down hole conditions before installations
x More attention should be given to splicing method and to minimize fibber optic cable splicing as much as possible.
x Use High temperature/pressure rated splice protector that meets down hole conditions
x Future installation of optical pressure and temperature transmitters to include another two single mode fibres, providing
additional redundant optical paths in event of any splice problem.
x Schedule to test the system once again if the tie in duration is less.
x Money retention/penalizing clause should be included in the contract terms to address premature failures.
x Calibrate the installed DTS system with a portable powerful laser generator regularly to ensure functionality of the
power.
Cross Well Seismic Technique
Cross well seismic fills the gap between data types that provide high resolution output such as logs and cores and data types with
lower resolution output such as VSP and 3D seismic. It is conducted between wells with the source and receivers placed inside the
well bore. The receiver arrays are held fixed in one well while the source is slowly pulled upwards in the other well and is fired at
preset intervals. After one source run, the receivers are relocated and the source run is repeated. The typical spacing between
adjacent source points ranges from 2.5 feet (0.8 meter) to 20 feet (six meters). Receiver separation is usually similar
The main objectives of applying this technology in ADCO CO2 pilot are:
1. To obtain a high-resolution image of the pilot area in order to understand the heterogeneities, layering, faults and natural
fractures of the reservoir and determine their impact on planned CO2 Flood Project.
2. To perform time-lapse cross-well surveys to evaluate CO2 flood conformance and sweep efficiency between the pilot
wells.
The first objective was achieved successfully. However, cross well tomography was not successful to quantify CO2 saturation and
track CO2 front between the wells in this pilot. The reasons could mainly be due to:
x The CO2 injection is being introduced to a reservoir at initial condition
x The density difference between oil and CO2 is minimal (injection under miscible condition)
x The small well spacing might introduce higher noise than expected during logging
The following is recommended for successful cross well seismic logging:
x Avoid cross well seismic in secondary miscible CO2 injection where the CO2 density and oil density are similar
x In case of WAG CO2 injection or tertiary CO2 injection, cross well seismic or EMI might be utilized
x Minimum well spacing should be chosen to yield a pickable (above noise) time difference between base and repeat
surveys

10

SPE 142665

Asphaltene Deposition during CO2 Injection:

Asphaltene deposition could introduce serious problems in producer wells and/or in surface facilities by blocking the well bore or
reducing the production rate. In order to assess these problems, the pilot is a good candidate to examine the tendency of reservoir
fluid to precipitate Asphaltene during CO2 injection.
In this project, the Asphaltene deposition during CO2 injection was evaluated through the laboratory studies and pilot results. The
laboratory studies resulted on the following:
x Original reservoir fluid is stable and does not show the tendency to precipitate Asphaltene during pressure reduction
where the flow path is outside the Asphaltene phase envelope.
x After increasing CO2 concentration in reservoir fluid to 29%, reservoir fluid becomes unstable and has higher tendency to
precipitate Asphaltene. The cause of instability can be referred to the change in reservoir fluid composition, which makes
the Asphaltene phase envelop getting wider. In this case the flow path is penetrating that envelop causing Asphaltene
precipitation as shown in Figure [8].
During the pilot operation, the Asphaltene deposition was mainly assessed by tubing clearance and well intervention. It was
observed that the tubing of the producer well was clean prior to CO2 breakthrough. However, Asphaltene deposition was observed
in the well bore at a shallow depth, only after breakthrough when the CO2 concentration at surface reached to 30%. Also it was
observed that the tendency of Asphaltene deposition increases with the increase in CO2 concentration. This observation is
consistent with the laboratory results.

Ponset, 17.1 wt% CO2

Measured onset at 17.1 wt% CO2

Psat, base case

Onset, base case

Psat, 17.1 wt% CO2

5000
4500

Pressure, psi

4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Temperature, C

Figure 8: Reservoir Asphaltene stability; Onset T-dependence different 17 wt% ~ 29 mol% CO2
The following is recommended for Asphaltene deposition monitoring and management during CO2 injection:
x Producing the well at high rate could be a solution to avoid the Asphaltene deposition in the tubing and move the
deposition to surface which will be easier to handle.
x Introducing Asphaltene inhibitor may delay the process of Asphaltene deposition but will not eliminate it.
x Frequent cleaning program could be executed, if the Asphaltene deposition occurred in limited number of wells.

SPE 142665

11

Well Integrity during CO2 injection:

In this project, corrosion logging was used to evaluate the tubing and casing integrity against corrosion. Although the water
production is minimal (less than 5%), it is important to understand the development of corrosion during CO2 injection Several
corrosion logging techniques are available in the market, Electromagnetic which inspects both internal and external corrosion in
the casing/tubing and Multi-Finger Caliper which is used to identify the internal deformity in the casing or tubing and locate
mechanical damage. The combination of both techniques is very advantageous to achieve high resolution and detailed pipe
evaluation.
A base line corrosion log (pre CO2 injection) was conducted in the observation well to identify the integrity of casing as this well
was drilled in 196. Severe corrosion was detected across the casing in the logged interval revealing the perforation sections very
clearly. In CO2 Injection well, casing was particularly designed as corrosion-resistant so-called Chrome-13 casing. The corrosion
log was run several weeks post CO2 injection, and logged interval was shown as clean.
For the production well, which was completed with a perforated tail pipe, the completion tubing is restricted by nipple size which
obstructs the accessibility of larger tool like Electromagnetic; consequently, it was not easy to detect the corrosion across
interested zones. However, and despite the presence of blast joint across tubing, a hole was identified by Multi-Finger Caliper and
interpreted as jetting from a perforated high permeability zone as represented in Figure 9.
After one year of CO2 injection and during the work over for the pilot producing well, as part of the pilot extension plan, serious
external corrosion was observed across the tubing on surface by physical inspection (Figures 10 and 11). This corrosion was
undetectable downhole by Electromagnetic corrosion logging tool due to tubing size restrictions as mentioned earlier in this
section.

Figure 9: Multi-Finger Caliper across tubing for the Pilot producer.

Figure 10: The Observed Hole on the Tubing at Surface

12

SPE 142665

Figure 11: Visual Corrosion Inspection of the Pilot Producer

The following is recommended for future corrosion logging:
x It is highly recommended to take in consideration the effectiveness of well design and completion in accessibility of
corrosion logging tools.
x Careful logging planning must be ensured in order to attain integratable well evaluation.
x Immediate logging of the well with corrosion tool if water production has increased in CO2 producing well.
x Corrosion inhibitor must be employed from first day of CO2 injection commissioning particularly if conventional
completion equipments are used.
5. Experience with the facilities
Since commissioning the pilot, the facilities have been operating smoothly and without any major problems. Some of the
experiences gained with the facilities are outlined in this section.
Safety and operator training
A potential asphyxiation hazard exists when carbon dioxide is released. Special training was conducted for operators to raise the
awareness about CO2 hazards. It is important that operators have an understanding of how CO2 can sublimes and form dry ice
upon depressurization. A minor incident took place when an operator was venting CO2 to the atmosphere and dry ice formed
projectiles.
During engineering, a HAZID (Hazard Identification) workshop was conducted. Transportation of liquid CO2 by roads was
identified as a high risk hazard. The CO2 tankers were fitted with vehicle monitoring equipment. Tanker drivers were given special
training. The layout of the injection facilities took into consideration the space required for truck maneuvering during unloading
the liquid carbon dioxide.
Christmas tree of the CO2 injection well
The Christmas tree for the CO2 injection well was specified to be similar to the Christmas trees used in other ADCO gas injection
wells. It is a 7-valve tree with a 10,000 psi pressure rating. The tree had an actuated wing valve and an actuated lower master
valve, which would be closed when the well trips.
During the engineering phase of the project, a HAZOP study was carried out on the facilities. While examining a high temperature
scenario, a problem was identified with this arrangement. In the event of a trip, the trapped volume of supercritical CO2 can be
exposed to the extreme high ambient temperature of the Middle East desert. The solar radiation will result is rapid expansion of the

SPE 142665

13

trapped CO2. Because of its peculiar thermodynamic properties of the super-critical carbon dioxide, the pressure will exceed the
pressure rating of the Christmas tree.
The tree was modified such and the master valve was made manual. The control panel logic was modified so that:
x The subsurface safety valve is only activated in the event of an external fire.
x The outer wing valve is actuated only in the event of low pressure signal from the flow line (i.e. line rupture).

(New producer)

4 km

Cluster

Central Processing
Plant (CPP)

Figure 12 Facilities Schematic

Material performance
Carbon steel was used for the producing well and the flow line. The well was completed using L80 tubing and the flowline
material is API 5 L Grade B. The rationale for using carbon steel was:
x Short Pilot duration (two years only)
x Minimize costs
x Obtain data on the performance of carbon steel tubing & flow lines, which can be used if & when larger projects are
implemented
x Project implementation on a fast track basis
Such high levels of CO2 are outside the boundary of the corrosion rate prediction models and unrealistically high rates are
predicted. Corrosion inhibition relies on establishing a good corrosion protective film. Then, continuous treatment is necessary to
maintain the integrity of that film. Consultations were made with the various suppliers of corrosion inhibitors. The dosing rates of
inhibitors were initially increased from 10 to 100 ppm for 6 days. After that, the dosing rates were reduced to 40 ppm. Such high
levels of CO2 are outside the boundary of the corrosion rate prediction models and unrealistically high rates are predicted.

14

SPE 142665

The monitoring program includes the following:

x Continue monitoring corrosion of rates (coupon & probe)
x UT (ultrasonic testing) of 250 strategic locations in the facilities initially every two weeks
x Chemical analysis of water at inlet & outlet of the pipeline
Other measures to protect the transfer line from gathering station to the Central Processing Plant include:
x Shut down wells with high water cut in order to protect the transfer line Figure [12]
x Visual inspection
x Ensure availability of repair kits (clamps, etc) in case of any leaks in the pipeline
x Plan for an intelligent pigging of the transfer line at the end of the pilot.
After more than a year of operation, there have been no major corrosion issues in the surface facilities.
6. Conclusions
ADCOs first CO2-EOR pilot has been in operation since November 2009 with no HSE incident and no major outage. A
comprehensive data gathering and monitoring program is in place. Challenges, lessons learnt and experienced gain during the
design, implementation, operation and data acquisition of this CO2-EOR pilot is discussed in this paper.
The following observations are made as the result of conducting this pilot:
1.

Strong management support, maximum delegation to the team and multi-discipline integration between, surface,
subsurface and operation is the key to successful and fast track design and implementation.

2.

Continuous monitoring and data acquisition on well and operations integrity, reservoir performance, in-situ saturation and
static and transient pressure behavior, and conformance (injection and production profiles) are the key for understanding
and interpretation of the pilot performance.

3.

Distributed Temperature Sensing (DTS) is a powerful monitoring tool, but must be carefully designed for your reservoir
conditions. It is recommended to have a secondary mitigation plan, e.g. conventional production logging, in place in case
of DTS failure.

4.

Cross Well Seismic should be avoided in case of similar fluid densities between the injected and in-place fluids; e.g.
secondary CO2 injection in a dry oil column where the CO2 and oil densities are similar, and not having the minimum
well spacing required to obtain a pickable (above noise) time lapse between the base and repeat surveys (the ADCO CO2
EOR pilot well spacing was about 70 meters).

5.

The performance of the CO2 pilot facilities has been reliable.

6.

A combination of different techniques is being adopted as part of the corrosion mitigation plan in the oil producing
facilities. Continuous monitoring is key to the success of this plan

7.

Corrosion experienced in the tail pipe of the tubing of the producing well below the chemical injection point.

8.

Finally, the pilot project provided an excellent opportunity for ADCO to develop in-house expertise in the various aspects
of CO2-EOR technology.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank ADNOC and ADCO Managements for their support and permission to publish this paper. In
addition, the authors would like to acknowledge the CO2 team in ADCO and its affiliates who have contributed in the development
and implementation of the first CO2 Pilot in ADCO.

SPE 142665

15

References
1.

IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, Storing CO2 Underground, 2, 2007.

2.

Al-Hajeri, S., Negahban, S., Al-Yafei, G., Al Basry, A.: Design and Implementation of the First CO2-EOR Pilot in Abu
Dhabi, SPE paper no. 129609, presented at the SPE West Asia EOR Conference, Muscat, Oman, 11-13 April 2010.

3.

Saadawi, H.: Surface Facilities for a Pilot CO2-EOR Project in Abu Dhabi, SPE paper No. 127765, presented at the
SPE West Asia EOR Conference, Muscat, Oman, 11 - 13 April 2010.

4.

Saadawi, H., Johns, A., and Walter, K.:A Study to evaluate the Impact of CO2-EOR on Existing Oil Field facilities,
SPE paper no. 141629, presented at the SPE Projects and Facilities Conference, Doha, Qatar, 13-16 February 2011.

5.

Al-Hajeri, S., Ghedan, S., Negahban, S., Al-Yafei, G., Al Basry, A.: Integrated History Matching Simulation Study of
the First Miscible CO2-EOR Pilot in Abu Dhabi Heterogeneous Carbonate Oil Reservoir" SPE paper No. 142623,
Submitted to SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference held in Manama, Bahrain, 2023 March 2011.