Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
World demand for energy is substantial and continues to grow.
By 2020, it is expected that the world will need approximately
40% more energy than today, for a total of 300 million barrels
of oil-equivalent energy every day. Meeting higher energy
demands will require a portfolio of energy-generation options
including but not limited to oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear,
steam, hydro, biomass, solar and wind.
New horizons are being explored. Wells are drilled in greater
water depths. Drilling units are continually upgraded to target
deeper hydrocarbon-bearing zones. Wellbore tubular
metallurgy is continually upgraded. Drilling, completion and
stimulation fluids are being developed for extreme
temperature and pressure environments.
As the preferred technology to enhance "oilfield" energy
production, well stimulation has and will continue to have an
important role in fulfilling the worlds future energy needs.
Well stimulation generally uses fluids to create or enlarge
formation flow channels, thereby overcoming low
permeability, as in tight formations, and formation damage,
which can occur in any formation type. A common and very
successful stimulation option, matrix acidizing, utilizes acids
that react to remove mineral phases restricting flow.
Depending on the formation and acid type, flow is increased
by removing pore-plugging material; or by creating new or
enlarged flow paths through the natural pore system of the
rock. However, higher-temperature environments present a
challenge to matrix acidizing effectiveness. High temperatures
can negatively affect stimulation fluid properties and certain
acid reactions. Thus, careful fluid choice and treatment
designs are critical to successful high-temperature matrix
acidizing.
With proper fluid selection, design, and execution, matrix
acidizing can be applied successfully to stimulate hightemperature oil & gas wells and geothermal wells. These types
of wells have some common features, but they also have
significant differences (e.g., completions, mineralogy,
formation fluids and formation flow) that influence
stimulation designs and fluid choices.
This paper summarizes best practices for designing matrix
acidizing treatments and choosing stimulation fluids for hightemperature oil & gas wells and geothermal wells. Included
are case histories from Central America. Lessons learned
about differences and commonalities between stimulation
practices in these well types are also discussed.
Introduction
As todays rate of finding new reserves is lower than in
previous decades, exploration has turned more to deeper
basins. Deeper wells are typically hot (greater than 250 F, for
example). Permeabilities are also often lower and occasionally
are the result of a network of natural fissures. Offshore wells
in the Gulf of Mexico are now reported to reach bottomhole
temperatures of 500 F. Recently discovered gas fields
offshore Brazil have bottomhole temperatures ranging from
350 to 400 F.
Over the past years, great improvements in matrix acidizing
have taken place, parallelling the developments in hydraulic
fracturing. Provided that the forecasted production/injection
results make economic sense, matrix acidizing is still simpler,
often less risky, and more economic to implement than
hydraulic fracturing. Sophisticated laboratory equipment,
expertise, and well testing software can help the engineer
diagnose production or injection damage effects and
mechanisms making it easier to select proper well candidates
and optimize job design. Treatment placement is better
ensured through the use of chemical or mechanical diversion
methods and technologies, and placement tools (coiled tubing,
straddle packers, etc.). On-site quality control is enabled by
modern sensors, monitors and software, enabling the engineer
to determine the evolution of skin with time, and radius of
formation treated. Modern blending and pumping equipment
have provided the means to mix acid continuously without the
need for pre-blending fluids. This eliminates the need for
mixing tanks on location, and enhancing safety on location 10.
Matrix acidizing treatments are designed to remove or bypass
formation damage by injecting fluids of low pH into the
SPE 109818
SPE 109818
SPE 109818
SPE 109818
SPE 109818
4)
5)
SPE 109818
Treatment Stage
Treatment Stage
Volume
(gal/ft)
50
100
50
SPE 109818
After the acid stimulation jobs, the wells were shut in for
several weeks to allow temperature build-up. Table 7
compares the pre- and post-job wellhead pressures (psi) and
Power Generation Potential (MWe) at operational power
conditions (100 psi).
WELL
Test
Temp
(F)
15% HCl
AVERAGE
SOLUBILITY
5% SSA
AVERAGE
SOLUBILITY
%
SOLUBILITY
TOTAL
194
27.75 %
50 %
77.75 %
194
9.2 %
26.1 %
35.3 %
WELL
Fow Rate
(bpm)
4% HCl-5% HF +
1.5%
organophosphonic
acid Volume
14
26,418 gal
18,493 gal
14
26,418 gal
15,851 gal
WHP (psi)
Generation
Potential (MWe)
MWe
Increase
(%)
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
322 %
48
131
2.2
7.1
340 %
Not
stable
113
Not
stable
3.4
WELL
Well 1
300
472
634
924
Well 2
255
280
338
436
SPE 109818
Conclusions
Very high-temperature oil and gas wells and geothermal wells
can be acidized successfully.
HPHT wells and geothermal wells can be stimulated
successfully utilizing unique HF systems with higher HF
concentrations.
Experience in acidizing geothermal wells in Central America
indicates that understanding mechanisms restricting
production (or injection), and understanding treatment
objective(s) are the keys to success.
Acid stimulation of geothermal wells, in particular, is underutilized. The potential production enhancement benefit is
tremendous but can only be accomplished through broader
implementation of acidizing in geothermal fields.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank BJ Services for permission to
publish this paper. The authors also wish to thank to LAGEO
S.A de CV for permission to publish well information and preand post-stimulation results. Thanks also to the people
involved in the field execution of the treatments, and for those
tireless scientists and engineers, from the different disciplines,
trying always to reach new frontiers of matrix acidizing, in its
many aspects.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
API
bbl
cp
ft
F
gal
lbm
psi
MW
141.5/(131.5 + API)
1.589 874
1.0*
3.048*
(F 32)/1.8
3.785 412
4.535 924
6.894 757
2.390585
E 01
E 03
E 01
E 03
E 01
E + 00
E 05
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
g/cm3
m3
Pas
m
C
m3
kg
kPa
cal/sec
References
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. Mahajan, M., Pasiki, R., Gilmore, T., Riedel, K., Steinback,
S.,Successes Achieved in Acidizing Geothermal Wells in
Indonesia, paper SPE 100996 presented at the 2006 SPE Asia
Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Adelaide,
Australia, 11-13 September.
11. Taylor, K.C., Nasr-El-Din H.A., Saleem, J.A., Laboratory
Evaluation of Iron-Control Chemicals for High Temperature SourGas Wells, paper SPE 65010 presented at the 2001 SPE
International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry held in Houston,
TX, 13-16 February.
12. Rae, P., Di Lullo, G., Single Step Matrix Acidizing with HF
Eliminating Preflushes Simplifies the Process, Improves the
Results, paper SPE 107296 presented at the 2007 SPE European
Formation Damage Conference held in Scheveningen, The
Netherlands, May 30-June1.
13. Rae, P., Di Lullo, G., Matrix Acid Stimulation A Review of the
State-Of-The-Art, paper SPE 82260 presented at the 2003 SPE
European Formation Damage Conference held in The Hague, The
Netherlands, 13-14 May.
14. Thomas, R.L., Nasr-El-Din H.A., Mehta, S., Hilab, V., Lynn, J.D.,
The Impact of HCl to HF Ratio on Hydrated Silica Formation
During the Acidizing of a High Temperature Sandstone Gas
Reservoir in Saudi Arabia, paper SPE 77370 presented at the 2002
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in San
Antonio, TX, September 19- October 2.
1.
2.
3.
Rae, P., Bte Ahmad A., Portman, L. and Acorda, P.E. Use of
Single Step 9% HF in Geothermal Well Stimulation, paper
108025 presented at the 2007 SPE European Formation Damage
Conference held in Scheveningen, The Netherlands, May 30June1.
16. Smith, P.S., Clement Jr., C.C., Rojas, A.M., Combined Scale
Removal and Scale Inhibition Treatments, paper SPE 60222
presented at the 2000 Second International Symposium on Oilfield
Scale held in Aberdeen, UK, 26-27 January.
4.
10
SPE 109818