页岩气井泡沫排水采气技术应用研究——以平桥南区为例

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2020.05.013

Abstract

Abstract:

Foam drainage-gas recovery technology is the most common nowadays and is the most effective application technique. However, due to the certain difference in production conditions of different gas fields, the mode, type, and foam drainage system of foaming agents are different. At present, southern Pingqiao adopts the method of 24 h continuous injection which is commonly used in other gas fields. It works in some wells, but for other wells, this technology dose not works well. In order to form a set of foam drainage model suitable for shale gas wells in southern Pingqiao, combined with laboratory evaluation, field test and economic evaluation, it is proved that the foam drainage process can effectively carry out the bottom hole liquid accumulation and achieve a certain degree of production increase. But in the later stage, it is more focused on reducing the production decline of shale gas wells and ensuring the stable production of gas wells. The XHY-4M type liquid foaming agent is optimized for foaming. When the concentration of defoamer is 0.3 %, the concentration of defoamer is 5 % ~ 20 %, the ratio of defoamer and foaming dose is 1.2∶1, the ratio of water to gas in the well is greater than 0.5, and the overall foam drainage effect is better. Meanwhile, the foam drainage system is constantly adjusted and optimized, and the intermittent foam drainage system of “less injection and multiple times” is adopted, which is more applicable and the effect of economic evaluation is optimal. The results of this study have certain reference for the stable production of similar shale gas wells.

Key words: shale gas, southern Pingqiao, foam drainage-gas recovery technology, foaming agent, intermittence foam drainage system

CLC Number:

TE37

LI Jiaxin,ZHANG Ningbo,ZHOU Chengxiang. Application of foam drainage-gas recovery technology in shale gas wells: A case study of southern Pingqiao[J].Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2020, 10(5): 91-97.

Figures/Tables 16

Table 1

Fig. 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Table 6

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Table 7

References 21

[1]	于相东, 陈天应, 张克杨, 等. 苏里格气田泡沫排水采气技术工艺应用效果分析[J]. 油气井测试, 2017,26(3):56-57.
	YU X D, CHEN T Y, ZHANG K Y, et al. Application of foam draining and extraction technology of sulige gas field and its effect analysis[J]. Well Testing, 2017,26(3):56-57.
[2]	张文红, 王京舰, 李建奇. 泡沫排水采气工艺技术在苏里格气田的应用[J]. 油气井测试, 2005,14(4):42-44.
	ZHANG W H, WANG J J, LI J Q. Application of foam draining and extraction technology of sulige gas field[J]. Well Testing, 2005,14(4):42-44.
[3]	赵晓东. 泡沫稳定性综述[J]. 钻井液与完井液, 1992,9(1):7-14.
	ZHAO X D. Review of foam stability[J]. Drilling Fluid & Completion Fluid, 1992,9(1):7-14.
[4]	詹姆斯·利, 亨利·尼肯斯, 迈克尔·韦尔斯. 气井排水采气[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2001.
	LEE J, NICKINS H, WELLS M. Gas well deliquification[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2001.
[5]	杨公田, 邹一峰, 周兴付, 等. 斜井携液临界流量模型研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2012,2(1):33-36.
	YANG G T, ZOU Y F, ZHOU X F, et al. Research on the model of liquid-carrying critical flow rate of inclined well[J]. Research Evaluation and Development, 2012,2(1):33-36.
[6]	夏斌. 定向气井泡沫排水技术研究[J]. 钻采工艺, 2007,30(5):149-150.
	XIA B. Research on foam drainage technology in directional gas wells[J]. Drilling & Production Technology, 2007,30(5):149-150.
[7]	许园, 蒋泽银, 李伟, 等. 水平井对泡排携液效果的影响[J]. 石油与天然气化工, 2018,47(1):65-68.
	XU Y, JIANG Z Y, LI W, et al. Influence research of horizontal well on foam-dewatering effect[J]. Chemical Engineering of Oil & Gas, 2018,47(1):65-68.
[8]	刘竞, 徐海棠, 余果, 等. 四川盆地页岩气开发指标与开发潜力分析[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2014,37(2):45-47.
	LIU J, XU H T, YU G, et al. Development indices and potential of shale gas, Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Exploration & Development, 2014,37(2):45-47.
[9]	蒋泽银, 李伟, 罗鑫, 等. 长宁页岩气井泡沫排水起泡剂优选及现场应用[J]. 石油与天然气化工, 2018,47(4):73-76.
	JIANG Z Y, LI W, LUO X, et al. Optimization and application of foam-dewatering agents in Changning shale gas wells[J]. Chemical Engineering of Oil & Gas, 2018,47(4):73-76.
[10]	游利军, 谢本彬, 杨建, 等. 页岩气井压裂返排液对储层裂缝的损害机理[J]. 天然气工业, 2018,38(12):61-69.
	YOU L J, XIE B B, YANG J, et al. Mechanism of fracture damage induced by fracturing fluid flowback in shale gas reservoirs[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018,38(12):61-69.
[11]	肖高棉, 李颖川, 喻欣. 气藏水平井连续携液理论与实践[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2010,32(3):122-126.
	XIAO G M, LI Y C, YU X. Theory and experiment research on the liquid continuous removal of horizontal gas well[J]. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University(Science & Technology Edition), 2010,32(3):122-126.
[12]	薛方刚, 薛刚计. 天然气井排水采气技术研究与应用[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2014,37(3):49-51.
	XUE F G, XUE G J. Drainage gas recovery technology[J]. Natural Gas Exploration & Development, 2014,37(3):49-51.
[13]	熊颖, 贾静, 刘爽, 等. 抗高温泡沫排水用起泡剂的研究与性能评价[J]. 石油与天然气化工, 2012,41(3):308-310.
	XIONG Y, JIA J, LIU S, et al. Research and performance evaluation of a high temperature resistant foaming agent for drainage[J]. Chemical Engineering of Oil & Gas, 2012,41(3):308-310.
[14]	何云, 杨益荣, 刘争芬. 大牛地气田水平井携液规律及排液对策研究[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2013,36(3):38-41.
	HE Y, YANG Y R, LIU Z F. Study on the law of fluid carrying and drainage Countermeasures of horizontal well in Daniudi gas field[J]. Natural Gas Exploration & Development, 2013,36(3):38-41.
[15]	梁全权, 邹啁, 王维娜, 等. 产水凝析气井积液诊断研究[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2015,38(1):57-59.
	LIANG Q Q, ZOU Z, WANG W N, et al. Liquid-loading diagnosis of water-producing condensate gas well[J]. Natural Gas Exploration & Development, 2015,38(1):57-59.
[16]	田发国, 冯朋鑫, 徐文龙, 等. 泡沫排水采气工艺在苏里格气田的应用[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2014,37(3):57-60.
	TIAN F G, FENG P X, XU W L, et al. Application of foam drainage gas recovery to Sulige gasfield[J]. Natural Gas Exploration & Development, 2014,37(3):57-60.
[17]	王川杰, 袁续组, 高威, 等. 威远气田页岩气井产量递减分析方法研究[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2014,37(1):56-59.
	WANG C J, YUAN X Z, GAO W, et al. Methods to analyze production decline of shale-Gas wells in Weiyuan gasfield[J]. Natural Gas Exploration & Development, 2014,37(1):56-59.
[18]	高德利, 刘奎. 页岩气井井筒完整性若干研究进展[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019,40(3):602-615.
	GAO D L, LIU K. Progresses in shale gas well integrity research[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2019,40(3):602-615.
[19]	李勇明, 陈希, 江有适, 等. 页岩储层压裂水平井气—水两相产能分析[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2019,26(3):117-122.
	LI Y M, CHEN X, JIANG Y S, et al. Gas-water two-phase productivity analysis for the fractured horizontal well in shale reservoirs[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2019,26(3):117-122.
[20]	端祥刚, 胡志明, 常进, 等. 页岩储层气体流动能力实验研究[J]. 特种油气藏, 2019,26(3):143-147.
	DUAN X G, HU Z M, CHANG J, et al. Gas flow capacity experiment in shale reservoir[J]. Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, 2019,26(3):143-147.
[21]	王飞, 边会媛, 张永浩, 等. 不同温压下页岩动态与静态弹性模量转换研究[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018,39(5):1048-1055.
	WANG F, BIAN H Y, ZHANG Y H, et al. Experimental study on dynamic and static elastic modulus conversion for shale under different temperatures and pressures[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2018,39(5):1048-1055.

药剂型号	药剂浓度/ %	起泡力/ mm	5 min泡高/ mm	泡沫密度/ （g·cm^-3）	携液率
XHY-4M	0.3	160	150	0.008 1	165
KD-06	0.3	125	110	0.011 0	120

药剂浓度/ %	起泡力/ mm	5 min泡高/ mm	泡沫含水率/ %	泡沫密度/ （g·cm^-3）	携液量/ mL
0.1	130	110	0.99	0.009 9	118
0.3	160	150	0.81	0.008 1	165
0.5	170	160	0.72	0.007 2	186
0.7	190	190	0.70	0.007 0	185
1.0	210	210	0.81	0.008 1	187

矿化度/（g·mL^-1）	携液率/%	备注
0.05	93	排空
0.10	92	排空
0.15	93	排空
0.20	91	排空
0.25	92	排空
0.30	92	排空

井号	ρ/（mg·L^-1）						pH	矿化度/（g·mL^-1）	水型
井号	Na⁺	K⁺	Ca²⁺	Mg²⁺	Cl^-	HCO₃^-	pH	矿化度/（g·mL^-1）	水型
A	4 306	195	68	416	10 589	793	7	0.02	氯化钙
B	9 686	404	54	445	20 854	442	6	0.03	氯化钙
C	17 988	422	53	478	26 543	458	6	0.05	氯化钙
D	7 551	308	54	438	16 619	717	6	0.03	氯化钙
E	16 102	445	57	1 207	26 284	676	8	0.04	氯化钙
平均值	11 126	355	57	597	20 178	617	7	0.03

井号	套压/MPa	油压/MPa	油套压差/MPa	产气量/ （10⁴ m³·d^-1）	产水量/（m³·d^-1）	水气比	泡排制度	泡排效果
A	4.7	1.1	3.6	2.3	8.5	3.7 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
B	7.7	3.0	4.7	7.5	11.6	1.6 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
C	4.3	3.4	0.9	4.2	13.1	3.1 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
D	5.0	1.6	3.4	2.8	2.2	0.8 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
E	3.0	1.4	1.6	6.7	7.0	1.0 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
F	3.8	1.5	2.4	4.4	3.7	0.8 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
G	3.2	1.1	2.1	4.9	11.9	2.4 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果好
H	3.2	1.3	1.9	4.2	1.1	0.3 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果不明显
I	3.9	2.6	1.3	4.8	1.5	0.3 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果不明显
J	4.3	2.3	2.0	5.4	1.0	0.2 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果不明显
K	2.9	1.3	1.6	2.7	1.3	0.5 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果不明显
L	3.1	1.6	1.4	4.5	1.0	0.2 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果不明显
M	3.1	1.4	1.7	5.5	2.2	0.4 ×10^-4	24 h加注	效果不明显

Application of foam drainage-gas recovery technology in shale gas wells: A case study of southern Pingqiao

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 16

References 21

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

井号	完钻井深/m	人工井底/m	A点井深/m	A点垂深/m	B点垂深/m	AB 高差/m	油管下深/m
A	5 810	5 755	4 235	3 569	3 892	323	4 100
B	5 550	5 476	4 010	3 198	3 408	210	3 911

井号	泡排前				泡排后				对比
井号	压差/ MPa	产气量/ （10⁴ m³·d^-1）	产水量/ （m³·d^-1）	产量递减率/ %	压差/ MPa	产气量/ （10⁴ m³·d^-1）	产水量/ （m³·d^-1）	产量递减率/ %	压差降低/MPa	产量递减率/ %
A	3.7	2.3	8.5	25.1	1.2	3.5	7.5	12.0	2.5	13.1
B	4.7	7.5	11.6	43.7	1.4	8.6	18.5	16.1	3.3	27.6
平均值	4.2	4.9	10.1		1.3	6.1	13.0			20.4

[1]	YAO Hongsheng, WANG Wei, HE Xipeng, ZHENG Yongwang, NI Zhenyu. Development practices of geology-engineering integration in complex structural area of Nanchuan normal pressure shale gas field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 537-547.
[2]	LI Jingchang, LU Ting, NIE Haikuan, FENG Dongjun, DU Wei, SUN Chuanxiang, LI Wangpeng. Confidence evaluation of fractures seismic detection in shale gas formations on WY23 Pad in Weirong [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 614-626.
[3]	XIA Haibang, HAN Kening, SONG Wenhui, WANG Wei, YAO Jun. Pore scale fracturing fluid occurrence mechanisms in multi-scale matrix-fracture system of shale gas reservoir [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 627-635.
[4]	HAN Kening, WANG Wei, FAN Dongyan, YAO Jun, LUO Fei, YANG Can. Production forecasting for normal pressure shale gas wells based on coupling of production decline method and LSTM model [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 647-656.
[5]	XUE Gang, XIONG Wei, ZHANG Peixian. Genesis analysis and effective development of normal pressure shale gas reservoir: A case of Wufeng-Longmaxi shale gas reservoir in southeast margin of Sichuan Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 668-675.
[6]	LOU Zhanghua, ZHANG Xinke, WU Yuchen, GAO Yuqiao, ZHANG Peixian, JIN Aimin, ZHU Rong. Fluid response characteristics of shale gas preservation differences in Nanchuan and its adjacent blocks in Sichuan Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 451-458.
[7]	HU Zhijian, LI Shuxin, WANG Jianjun, ZHOU Hong, ZHAO Yulong, ZHANG Liehui. Productivity evaluation of multi-stage fracturing horizontal wells in shale gas reservoir with complex artificial fracture occurrence [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 459-466.
[8]	LIN Hun, SUN Xinyi, SONG Xixiang, MENG Chun, XIONG Wenxin, HUANG Junhe, LIU Hongbo, LIU Cheng. A model for shale gas well production prediction based on improved artificial neural network [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 467-473.
[9]	LIU Honglin,ZHOU Shangwen,LI Xiaobo. Application of PCA plus OPLS method in rapid reserve production rate prediction of shale gas wells [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 474-483.
[10]	LU Bi,HU Chunfeng,MA Jun. Influencing factors and countermeasures of inter-well interference of fracturing horizontal wells in Nanchuan shale gas field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 330-339.
[11]	QIU Xiaoxue,ZHONG Guanghai,LI Xiansheng,CHEN Meng,LING Weitong. CFD simulation of flow characteristics of shale gas horizontal wells with different inclination [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 340-347.
[12]	NIE Yunli, GAO Guozhong. Classification of shale gas “sweet spot” based on Random Forest machine learning [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 358-367.
[13]	ZHANG Longsheng,WANG Weiheng. Study and application of a high temperature foaming agent in anionic-nonionic system namely HDHP: A case study of shale gas wells in Dongsheng Block, Sichuan Basin [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(2): 240-246.
[14]	ZHAO Renwen,XIAO Dianshi,LU Shuangfang,ZHOU Nengwu. Comparison of reservoir characteristics between continental shale from faulted basin and marine shale under high-over mature stage: Taking Shahezi Formation in Xujiaweizi faulted basin and Longmaxi Formation in Sichuan Basin as an example [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 52-63.
[15]	LI Ying,LI Maomao,LI Haitao,YU Hao,ZHANG Qihui,LUO Hongwen. Physicochemical mechanism of water phase imbibition in shale reservoirs [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 64-73.