红山稠油油藏蒸汽吞吐CO产出规律物理模拟研究

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2020.05.015

油气藏评价与开发 ›› 2020, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (5): 103-107.doi: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2020.05.015

红山稠油油藏蒸汽吞吐CO产出规律物理模拟研究

杨生榛¹(),刘冬冬¹,蒲万芬²,朱秋波¹,杨洋²()

1.中国石油克拉玛依红山油田有限责任公司,新疆克拉玛依 834000
2.西南石油大学油气藏地质及开发工程国家重点实验室,四川成都610500

收稿日期:2019-03-27 出版日期:2020-10-26 发布日期:2020-09-24
通讯作者: 杨洋 E-mail:yangsz688@petrochina.com.cn;yy24king@163.com
作者简介:杨生榛（1962 —）,男,博士,教授级高级工程师,主要从事稠油开发方面的研究与生产工作。地址：新疆克拉玛依市克拉玛依区宝石路278号,邮政编码：834000。E-mail： yangsz688@petrochina.com.cn
基金资助:
克拉玛依红山油田有限责任公司技术服务项目“红山油田红003井区CO成因分析及治理对策研究”(HS-2015-JSHZSCQ-WB018)

Physical simulation of output rule for carbon monoxide in cyclic steam stimulation process of Hongshan heavy oil reservoir

YANG Shengzhen¹(),LIU Dongdong¹,PU Wanfen²,ZHU Qiubo¹,YANG Yang²()

1. Karamay Hongshan Oilfield Co. Ltd., CNPC, Karamay, Xinjiang 834000, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610500, China

Received:2019-03-27 Online:2020-10-26 Published:2020-09-24
Contact: YANG Yang E-mail:yangsz688@petrochina.com.cn;yy24king@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对红山油田蒸汽吞吐开发过程中CO生成量超标的问题,开展了相应的室内研究工作。通过物理模拟及多参数敏感性分析研究了蒸汽温度、注汽量、焖井时间等工艺参数对于CO生成量的影响规律,并根据工艺参数交互作用下CO的产出规律提出了相应的防治措施建议。结果表明：蒸汽温度、注汽量、焖井时间三个工艺参数中蒸汽温度是影响最大的主控因素,注汽量影响其次,焖井时间影响最小;降低蒸汽温度可以有效减少CO的生成量,但蒸汽温度降低至220 ℃以下时原油产量会受到较大负面影响。因此,对于红山油田CO超标程度相对较低的井,建议将蒸汽温度降低至220 ℃使CO生成量降低至安全范围以下,对于CO超标程度相对较高的井,建议将蒸汽温度降低至220 ℃以下,同时增大注汽量,在降低CO生成量至安全范围以下的同时保证周期采油量不发生明显的降低。

关键词: 蒸汽吞吐, 稠油, CO, 物理模拟, 主控因素

Abstract:

In order to solve the problem of excess production of carbon monoxide in cyclic steam stimulation process of Hongshan oilfield, the corresponding laboratory researches have been carried out. Through physical simulation experiments and multi-parameter sensitivity analysis, the effect of technological parameters such as steam temperature, steam injection volume, and soaking time on carbon monoxide output concentration have been investigated. Furthermore, the possible solutions for carbon monoxide production have been proposed based on the effects of different factors. The results show that the influencing order of the three dominant factors is steam temperature, steam injection volume and soaking time. Reducing the steam temperature can effectively reduce the carbon monoxide output concentration, but when the steam temperature drops below 220 ℃, the crude oil production will be adversely affected. Therefore, for the wells in Hongshan oilfield with relative low carbon monoxide exceeding degree, it is recommended to reduce the steam temperature to 220 ℃ to keep the carbon monoxide concentrations below safe levels; for those ones with relative high exceeding degree, in addition to the above measures, the steam injection volume should be increased to ensure that the periodic oil production does not decrease significantly.

Key words: cyclic steam stimulation, heavy oil, carbon monoxide, physical analogue, dominant factor

中图分类号:

TE991

杨生榛,刘冬冬,蒲万芬,朱秋波,杨洋. 红山稠油油藏蒸汽吞吐CO产出规律物理模拟研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(5): 103-107.

YANG Shengzhen,LIU Dongdong,PU Wanfen,ZHU Qiubo,YANG Yang. Physical simulation of output rule for carbon monoxide in cyclic steam stimulation process of Hongshan heavy oil reservoir[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2020, 10(5): 103-107.

图/表 7

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

图2

图3

参考文献 16

[1]	AUSTIN-ADIGIO M, GATES I . Non-condensable gas co-injection with steam for oil sands recovery[J]. Energy, 2019,179:736-746. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2019.05.034
[2]	MOUSAVI S M, MASOUDI R, ATAEI A. Evaluation of steam flooding and cyclic steam stimulation（CSS） for a fractured carbonate heavy oil reservoir[C]// paper IPTC-15454-MS presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, 15-17 November 2011, Bangkok, Thailand.
[3]	TEWARI R D, ABDALLA F, LUTFI H G, et al. Successful cyclic steam stimulation pilot in heavy oilfield of Sudan[C]// paper SPE-144638-MS presented at the SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference, 19-21 July 2011, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
[4]	LIANG Z, DENG J, LEI W , et al. Low-temperature oxidation characteristics and its effect on the critical coking temperature of heavy oils[J]. Energy & Fuels, 2015,29(2):538-545.
[5]	LI Z M, LU T, TAO L , et al. CO₂ and viscosity breaker assisted steam huff and puff technology for horizontal wells in a super-heavy oil reservoir[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2011,38(5):600-605.
[6]	WANG X, WANG J, QIAO M. Horizontal Well, Nitrogen and Viscosity Reducer Assisted Steam Huff and Puff Technology: Taking super heavy oil in shallow and thin beds, Chunfeng Oilfield, Junggar Basin, NW China, as an example[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013,40(1):104-110.
[7]	李星, 关群丽, 费永涛, 等. 河南油田超稠油油藏热化学辅助蒸汽吞吐技术研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2014,4(1):46-49.
	LI X, GUAN Q L, FEI Y T, et al. Study on the thermal-chemical assisted steam huff and puff technology in super heavy oil reservoir of Henan oilfield[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2014,4(1):46-49.
[8]	张彩旗, 刘东, 潘广明, 等. 海上稠油多元热流体吞吐效果评价研究及应用[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2016,6(2):33-36.
	ZHANG C Q, LIU D, PAN G M, et al. Evaluation and application of multiple thermal fluids huff and puff technology for offshore heavy oil[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2016,6(2):33-36.
[9]	MONTGOMERY W, WATSON J S, LEWIS J M T , et al. Role of minerals in hydrogen sulfide generation during steam-assisted recovery of heavy oil[J]. Energy & Fuels, 2018,32(4):4651-4654.
[10]	ZHAO P, LI C, WANG C , et al. The mechanism of H₂S generation in the recovery of heavy oil by steam drive[J]. Petroleum Science and Technology, 2016,34(16):1452-1461.
[11]	ZHU G, ZHANG S, HUANG H , et al. Induced H₂S formation during steam injection recovery process of heavy oil from the Liaohe Basin, NE China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science & Engineering, 2010,71(1-2):30-36.
[12]	AYACHE S V, LAMOUREUX-VAR V, MICHEL P , et al. Reservoir simulation of hydrogen sulfide production during a steam-assisted-gravity-drainage process by use of a new sulfur-based compositional kinetic model[J]. SPE Journal, 2017,22(1):80-93. doi: 10.2118/174441-PA
[13]	张胜, 蒲万芬, 刘冬冬, 等. 蒸汽吞吐生产过程中CO产出超标原因分析——以红山油田为例[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2016,12(8):153-157.
	ZHANG S, PU W F, LIU D D, et al. Cause analysis on excess production of carbon monoxide in cyclic steam stimulation process-Taking Hongshan Oilfield as example[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2016,12(8) : 153-157.
[14]	KAPADIA P R, KALLOS M S, GATES I D . A review of pyrolysis, aquathermolysis, and oxidation of athabasca bitumen[J]. Fuel Processing Technology, 2015,131:270-289. doi: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.11.027
[15]	CLARK P D, HYNE J B . Steam-oil chemical reactions: mechanisms for the aquathermolysis of heavy oil[J]. AOSTRA Journal of Research, 1984,1(1):15-20.
[16]	CALLAGHAN C A . Kinetics and catalysis of the water-gas-shift reaction: A microkinetic and graph theoretic approach[D]. Worcester: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2006.

因素水平	参数
因素水平	蒸汽温度/℃	焖井时间/d	注汽量/g
-1	150	1	20
0	210	3	40
1	270	5	60

模型类型	模型响应项目	P值	决定系数R²
线性模型	CO生成量/ （mg·m^-3）	0.02	0.539 6
二因素交互模型		0.44	0.546 6
二次方模型		0.03	0.897 9

红山稠油油藏蒸汽吞吐CO产出规律物理模拟研究

Physical simulation of output rule for carbon monoxide in cyclic steam stimulation process of Hongshan heavy oil reservoir

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 16

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

序号	蒸汽温度	焖井时间	注汽量	CO生成量/（mg·m^-3）
1	1	1	0	35.5
2	-1	0	-1	19.1
3	1	0	1	46.2
4	-1	1	0	13.6
5	1	0	-1	35.2
6	0	-1	1	32.1
7	0	0	0	33.6
8	-1	0	1	25.6
9	-1	-1	0	8.0
10	0	1	-1	24.9
11	0	1	1	17.2
12	1	-1	0	32.4
13	0	-1	-1	13.9

[1]	吴财芳,高彬,李清,陈贞龙. 气体水合物合成研究进展 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(2): 267-276.
[2]	唐建东, 王智林, 葛政俊. 苏北盆地江苏油田CO₂驱油技术进展及应用 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 18-25.
[3]	李建山, 高浩, 鄢长灏, 王石头, 王亮亮. 原油-CO₂相互作用机理分子动力学模拟研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 26-34.
[4]	董利飞, 董文卓, 张旗, 钟品志, 王苗, 余波, 韦海宇, 杨超. 咸水层中CO₂溶解性能预测方法优选 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 35-41.
[5]	张志超,柏明星,杜思宇. 页岩油藏注CO₂驱孔隙动用特征研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 42-47.
[6]	王军,邱伟生. 高含水油藏CO₂人工气顶驱油-封存适宜条件研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 48-54.
[7]	孙宜丽. 注CO₂改善河南双河油田低渗储层注水能力机理研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 55-63.
[8]	陈兴明,何志山. 模块化撬装化CO₂回收技术研究与应用 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 64-69.
[9]	石彦, 谢俊辉, 郭小婷, 吴通, 陈德全, 孙琳, 杜代军. 新疆油田中深层稠油CO₂驱/吞吐实验研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 76-82.
[10]	赵坤,李泽阳,刘娟丽,胡可,江冉冉,王伟祥,刘秀珍. 吉木萨尔页岩油井区CO₂前置压裂工艺参数优化及现场实践 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 83-90.
[11]	张志升, 吴向阳, 吴倩, 王冀星, 林汉弛, 郭军红, 王锐, 李金花, 林千果. CO₂驱油封存泄漏风险管理系统及应用研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 91-101.
[12]	张庄, 章顺利, 何秀彬, 谢丹, 刘妍鷨. 川西坳陷须家河组二段裂缝发育特征及形成主控因素——以合兴场气田为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 581-590.
[13]	施雷庭, 赵启明, 任镇宇, 朱诗杰, 朱珊珊. 煤岩裂隙形态对渗流能力影响数值模拟研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(4): 424-432.
[14]	李士伦,汤勇,段胜才,秦佳正,陈一诺,刘雅昕,郑鹏,赵国庆. CO₂地质封存源汇匹配及安全性评价进展 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(3): 269-297.
[15]	杨宇,徐启林,刘荣和,黄东杰,颜平,王建猛. 枯竭气藏CO₂封存中的相平衡规律研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(3): 280-287.