SPE-184135-MS

Production Optimization in Heavy Oil Recovery Processes

Cenk Temizel, Aera Energy LLC; Harun Kirmaci and Turgay Inceisci, Turkish Petroleum Corporation; Zein Wijaya,
HESS; Ming Zhang, University of Akron; Karthik Balaji, Anuj Suhag, and Rahul Ranjith, University of Southern
California; Basel Al-Otaibi, Kuwait Oil Company; Ahmad Al-Kouh, Middle East Oilfield Services; Ying Zhu,
University of Southern California; Cengiz Yegin, Texas A&M University

Copyright 2016, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference and Exhibition held in Kuwait City, Kuwait, 6-8 December 2016.

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
Asphaltene precipitation is caused by numerous factors such as temperature, pressure and compositional
vartiations. Drilling, completion, acid stimulation, and hydraulic fracturing activities can also result in
settling in the near-wellbore region. Heavier crudes have a fewer precipitation issue becasue of dissolving
more asphaltene. Thus, it is crucial to understand the significance of each uncertainty and control variables
not only theoretically, but also with application to real-life examples, such as with this model that uses a
32-degree API South American oil to demonstrate the importance of each variable to shed light in order
to efficiently manage such reservoirs.
A commercial optimization and uncertainty tool is combined with a full-physics commercial simulator,
which can create a model to investigate the significance of major factors influencing the performance
of wells in temperature-dependent asphaltene precipitation and irreversible flocculation. Temperature-
dependent asphaltene precipitation and irreversible flocculation are modelled where no precipitation occurs
at the original reservoir temperature, and flocculated asphaltene is allowed to deposit through surface
adsorption and pore throat plugging. The exponent in the power law relating porosity reduction to the
permeability resistance factor, is modified to change the effect of asphaltene deposition on permeability
reduction.
Lower temperatures are specified around the wellbore causing asphaltene precipitation. And then,
optimization and sensitivity have been performed on major reservoir parameters including well operational
parameters, and fluid and rock properties. Moreover, each parameter has been demonstrated in tornado
diagrams. It was concluded that employing feasible methods on handling of reservoir uncertainties are as
important as management of well operational parameters for effective reservoir management.
This study provides an in-depth optimization and uncertainty analysis to outline the significance of each
major parameter involved in production performance, and ultimately the recovery efficiency in reservoirs
with temperature-dependent asphaltene precipitation and irreversible flocculation.
2 SPE-184135-MS

Introduction
Asphaltene deposition has been the source of significant problems in the industry causing several upstream,
midstream and downstream projects to be economically unfeasible. The precipitation of asphaltene is a
function of many factors such as temperature and pressure variations, changes in chemical composition
of the crude oil, mixing of oil with diluents and changes during acid stimulation It is fairly common to
observe asphaltene flocculation in the well tubings, outflow valves, well-bore, and finally in the reservoir
itself (Kokal & Sayegh 1995) (Figure 1). Though asphaltene by itself does not cause any reduction in oil
flow, the problem arises when the flow radius, of wells and pore throats, is choked by its presence leading
to a significant drop in production efficiency, thereby increasing the oil production costs.

Figure 1Asphaltene deposition mechanism (Ali et al. 2015)

Applicability of light hydrocarbon gases and CO2 for the purpose of miscible and immiscible flooding
has been known for a while. But commonly, such EOR operations can cause a multitude of changes that
manifest in the form of a phase behavior, and changes in rock properties such as wettability, and precipitation
of asphaltene. Herein, we mention from a few standard EOR operations and their affects on asphaltene
deposition.

CO2 Injection and Asphaltene Precipitation in Light Oil Reservoirs

CO2 injection increases the mobility of oil and decreases the interfacial tension and oil viscosity. It is
considered to be one of the best methods to extract residual oil. CO2 injection, although it is good for overall
oil recovery, alters the colloidal composition of oil, which increases the concentration of unstable asphaltene
and leads to precipitation (Ali et al. 2015). Chukwudeme & Hamouda (2009) recommended restricting
the rate of injection to prevent precipitation under the critical rate, which is determined from laboratory
experiments on core samples.
Ali et al. (2015) reported the effects of injection flow rate and total injection volume of CO2 on the
asphaltene precipitation for three core samples of nearly identical porosity and permeability (Table 1,2 and
3). They concluded that asphaltene deposition increases with increase in injected pore volume of CO2. They
also drew the conclusion that deposition decreases as the rate of injection was increases.
SPE-184135-MS 3

Table 1Asphaltene Content Analysis at 0.4ml/min injection rate (Ali et al 2015)

Injected Pore Volume (PV)0f Asphaltene present in the Asphaltene precipitated in the
CO2 recovered oil (wt %) core (wt %)

0.25 2.42 0.58

0.50 1.94 1.06

0.75 1.46 1.54

1.00 1.04 1.96

Table 2Asphaltene Content Analysis at 0.6 ml/min injection rate (Ali et al 2015)

Injected Pore Volume (PV) Asphaltene present in the Asphaltene precipitated in the
recovered oil (wt %) core (wt %)

0.25 2.53 0.47

0.50 2.19 0.81

0.75 1.91 1.09

1.00 1.53 1.47

Table 3Asphaltene Content Analysis at 0.8 ml/min injection rate (Ali et al 2015)

Injected Pore Volume (PV) Asphaltene present in the Asphaltene precipitated in the
recovered oil (wt %) core (wt %)

0.25 2.61 0.39

0.50 2.28 0.72

0.75 2.07 0.93

1.00 1.76 1.24

Asphaltene Precipitation and Deposition in Hydrocarbon Gas flooding

Hydrocarbon gas flooding has proven its efficacy in tight reservoirs with light to medium API, where water
flooding is not efficient. However, due to changes in reservoir pressure and fluid characteristics, asphaltene
deposition and precipitation is expected to occur. Syed et al. (2012) studied deposition of asphaltene in
core samples of different length, permeability, pore throat size distribution under reservoir and well flowing
pressure (Figure 2). They observed greater deposition of asphaltene at low pressure conditions, which
was due to lower Asphaltene Onset Concentration observed at low pressure. For a given pressure, greater
permeability alteration was observed for core samples with small pore size distribution. For large core
samples, the deposition of asphaltene was more prominent when compared to smaller core samples under
the same operating conditions.
4 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 2Graphical representation of conclusions of Syed et al 2012

Asphaltene Deposition during CO2-Water Alternating Gas (WAG) Injection EOR Operation
Asphaltene deposition can modify the wettability of the rock system and influence the WAG injection
process. Buriro & Shuker (2013) studied the effects of gas volume on phase behavior, and sensitivity to
asphaltene deposition on samples from Field-x, Malaysia. They reported that an increase in volume of CO2
from 40% to 60% (v/v) can increase the instability of asphaltene chains significantly. They also noted,
from the phase isotherms that pressure values at the point of asphaltene deposition at 60% volume of CO2,
was greater than that at 40% CO2, thereby making asphaltene deposition more likely. To counteract the
chemical reactions that set in colloidal instability in crude oil, Buriro & Shuker (2013) recommend injection
of chemical inhibitors that promote dispersion of asphaltene particles and decrease flocculation. They also
concluded that performance of such inhibitors is very sensitive to pH of the system. They suggested the use
of inhibitors according to phase behavior and Asphaltene Onset Pressure.

Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) for Heavy Oils and its impact on asphaltene deposition
In-situ steam injection is a popular thermal recovery method for heavy oils, and one of the pervasive and
efficient methods for steam injection is SAGD. In order to decrease the energy spent on the operation,
industry has altered the existing SAGD process; Solvent Aided Process (SAP), Expanding Solvent SAGD
(ES-SAGD) and Liquid Addition to Steam to Enhance Recovery (LASER) to name a few (Yakubov et al
2014).
These modifications have allowed to decrease operational expenses while succesfully achieving similar
sweep efficiency and asphaltene stability. One of the most impactful conclusions made by Yakubov et al.
(2014) was promoting the use of Maltene, deasphalated oil, to inhibit deposition. They recommend adding
inhibitors prior to alkane solvents. In doing so, they reported an increase in oil recovery and rate of oil
recovery.

Challenges associated with Heavy Oil Production due to Asphaltene

Asphaltene is the heaviest part of the oil and can be solved in benzene, while it is insoluble in low molecular
weight n-alkanes (such as n-heptane or n-pentane) as shown in Figure 3. The amount of precipitation
in n-heptane and heavier n-alkanes show very small difference, and thus n-heptane is said to be the
most reasonable solvent to obtain asphaltenes (Kokal & Sayegh, 1995). It should be noticed that as the
SPE-184135-MS 5

precipitating n-alkane molecule get smaller, the amount of precipitated asphaltenes increases sharply. It
was reported that the amount precipitated by n-butane could be more than five times than that of n-heptane
(Michell & Speight, 1973).

Figure 3Separation of asphaltenes from petrolium heavy ends. (Sometimes n-pentane instead of n-heptane is used)

Asphaltenes are dark brown to black friable solids (Speight & Moschopedis, 1981) without a definite
melting point. Table 4 (Kokal & Sayegh, 1995) lists the common compositions of asphaltene fractions from
different sources. The amounts of carbon is 823 % and the amounts of hydrogen is 8.10.7 %. The H/C ratio
is almost constant at 1.150.05. However, the amount of nitrogen, oxygen and sulfate varied significantly
from different sources. The chemical structure of asphaltenes have proven to be difficult to investigate due
to its complex nature. Previous studies indicate that asphaltenes contain condensed aromatic nuclei, carrying
alicyclic and alkyl components, with hetero-atoms scattered throughout. The proportion and aromaticity of
hetero-atoms increases as the molecular weight of asphaltene increases (Kokal & Sayegh, 1995).

Table 4Elemental compositions of asphaltene fractions from different sources (Reference Kokal & Sayegh, 1995)

Composition (wt %) Atomic Ratios

Source Precipitant C H N O S H/C N/C O/C S/C

n-C5 79.5 8.0 1.2 3.8 7.5 1.21 0.013 0.036 0.035
Canada
n-C7 78.4 7.6 1.4 4.6 8.0 1.16 0.015 0.044 0.038

n-C5 83.8 7.5 1.4 2.3 5.0 1.07 0.014 0.021 0.022
Iran
n-C7 84.2 7.0 1.6 1.4 5.8 1.00 0.016 0.012 0.026

n-C5 81.7 7.9 0.8 1.1 8.5 1.16 0.008 0.010 0.039
Iraq
n-C7 80.7 7.1 0.9 1.5 9.8 1.06 0.010 0.014 0.046

n-C5 82.4 7.9 0.9 1.4 7.4 1.14 0.009 0.014 0.034
Kuwait
n-C7 82.0 7.3 1.0 1.9 7.8 1.07 0.010 0.017 0.036
6 SPE-184135-MS

Asphaltenes carry an intrinsic charge and thus could migrate to the oppositely charged electrode when
placed in an electric field. Depending on the oil composition, change may be positive or negative (Lichaa,
1977; Lichaa & Harrera, 1975). Asphaltenes could form micelles after resins are adsorbed on them. Resins
are highly polar and could act as peptizing agents for asphaltenes. The asphaltene-resin micelle are separate
molecular entities of the crude oil that could be destructed, resulting in irreversible flocculation with an
adequate amount of flocculants (e.g. n-heptane).
Flocculation and precipitation can happen when the asphaltenes flow through capillaries and porous
media. When asphaltene flocculation occurs in reservoir matrix, asphaltene deposition can follow and
cause serious problems. It can severely reduce permeability and/or plugging of the formation, wellbore
and production facilities, which could cause a huge loss in production and profits. Any change in pressure,
composition and temperature can cause asphaltenes flocculation and precipitation (Arciniegas & Babadagli,
2014; Buckley et al., 1998; Hirschberg, Dejong, Schipper, & Meijer, 1984). Thus asphaltenes flocculation
and precipitation commonly occur during the production and processing of oil. Asphaltene precipitation may
be cleaned using different methods, such as mechanical methods, chemical cleaning, production parameter
(such as pressure, temperature and flow rate) manipulations and additive injection (Kokal & Sayegh, 1995;
Ovalles, Rogel, Morazan, Moir, & Characterization, 2015).
Mechanical methods include mechanical scraping and cleaning by wireline, hydro blasting or applying
pressure. Chemical cleaning could be used when mechanical methods are not suitable. Hydrocarbon
solvents, such as xylene and toluene, and other solvents, such as carbon disulphide and pyridine, are effective
in dissolving asphaltenes. However, these chemical cleaning methods cause handling and disposal problems,
along with the problem of not being cost effective. By monitoring and manipulating the operating conditions,
asphaltene deposition could be prevented or reduced thereby proving to be a simple and inexpensive method
for optimizing the oil production (Ali, Fahd, Ul, & Dahraj, 2015; Buriro, Shuker, & Petronas, 2013; Liu
& Glover, 2015; Liu, Jin, Rose, Cui, & Glover, 2014). For additive injection, asphaltene inhibitors and
dispersants can be used to decrease or prevent asphaltene precipitation (Kelland, 2009; Ovalles et al., 2015;
Yakubov et al., 2014). However, more work is required to be done before the method could be effectively
applied.

Asphaltene Precipitation and Flocculation

Asphaltene precipitation is one of the biggest challenges the oil industry faces that can be seen during the
course of production. Asphaltene precipitation is mainly influenced by varioations in temperature, pressure,
composition and shear rate. Reservoir depletion, gas injection, carbon dioxide injection, stimulation
operations, dilution of heavy oil with paraffinic solvent or light oil and comingled production of
incompatible fluids may cause the above mentioned changes, resulting in precipitation and deposition.
Once asphaltene precipitates, it can deposit in any region of the production system including subsurface,
production conduits, well heads, safety valves, flowlines and surface facilities as shown in Figure 4.
With reservoir depletion, fluid properties may change since the conditions such as temperature, pressure
and composition are affected and can precipitate the asphaltene. Although small amounts of asphaltene
precipitation can damage a reservoir and associated facilities, it can be admissible since it will not disrupt
fluid flow too much. However, if the asphaltene deposition is thick, it may create serious problems and
cause damage throughout the production system. This problem can become very costly to get rid. Production
optimization in such cases requires maintaining the conditions in which asphaltenes remain as a solution,
and knowing the fluid composition in order to not only take necessary measures to avoid occurance of
asphaltene precipitation problem but also to surmount difficulties if the precipitation has already occurred
and deposited. For instance, Figure 5 represents the asphaltene precipitation P-T envelope for a specific
crude and reservoir. In the figure, blue filled regions represent the conditions in which asphaltene exists
as a solution in reservoir fluid. On the other hand, light orange filled region represents the area in which
asphaltene comes out from solution and precipitate. Red line shows the stability zone of crude at which the
SPE-184135-MS 7

least soluble asphaltene particles begin to precipitate below this pressure. As can be seen from the figure,
reservoir pressure is higher than asphaltene precipitation pressure line and it is well above the buble point
pressure line. Needless to say, reservoir pressure decreases by depletion and after producing certain amount
hydrocarbon from reservoir, reservoir pressure will decrease to asphaltene precipitation onset pressure
where least-soluble particles start to precipitate. Pressure decreases further by depletion, thereby more
asphaltene precipitates until lower asphaltene precipitation line. When reservoir pressure reaches bubble
point pressure, gas comes out from solution. After more gases are released from the system by pressure
reduction, crude may begin to re-dissolve asphaltene again below lower asphaltene precipitation line.

Figure 4Asphaltene buid-up in production system (Akbarzadeh 2007)

8 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 5Asphaltene precipitation envelope (Jamaluddin et al, 2002)

Effect of Temperature on Asphaltene Precipitation

Asphaltene precipitation is mainly dependent on changes on temperature, pressure and composition. There
are vast amounts of articles and reports that focus on the parameters that affect asphaltene precipitation.
Similarly, effects of temperature on precipitated asphaltene amount have been widely studied and reported
(Ali et al, 1981, Hirshberg et al, 1984, Andersan and Birdi, 1990). As per the Andersan and Birdi (1990)
study, asphaltene precipitation increases initially by increasing temperature with different solvents and
continues decrease is observed after maximum precipitation has been seen as shown in Figure 6. According
to other studies in the literature, it can be claimed that there is a direct relation between temperature and
precipitated asphaltene amount, which shows continuous reduction on precipitated asphaltene amount with
increasing temperature. Herein this paper, we are aiming to investigate and share the main findings of
importance of main parameters on performance of wells in temperature-dependent asphaltene precipitation
and irreversible flocculation.

Figure 6Temperature vs. Asphaltene Precipitation (%w/w) (Andersan et al, 1990).

SPE-184135-MS 9

Asphaltene Flocculation
Although small amounts of asphaltene precipitation can damage reservoir, production conduit, wellheads,
flowlines and surface facilities, it is not sufficient to individually create an obstacle for flow. Deposition of
asphaltene particles that can form thicker structure by sticking to a wall of reservoir, production conduit or
surface facilities after asphaltene precipitation can create flow assurance problems. Although precipitation
is caused mainly by changes on temperature, pressure and composition, some additional parameters are
playing a role in asphaltene deposition, such as, shear rate, surface type and characteristics, particle size and
particle-surface interactions. In this context, Figure 7 illustrates the multi-step mechanism for asphaltene
precipitation, aggregation and aging that is proposed by Mullins et al.

Figure 7Multi-Step Mechanism for Asphaltene Precipitation, Aggregation and Aging (Mullins et al., 2010, 2012).

It is obvious that determination of asphaltene precipitation onset pressure and precipitation envelope is not
enough to model asphaltene precipitation and deposition, which requires some additional analysis and tests.
These allow to model asphaltene precipitation and deposition at the full range of conditions that the fluid pass
through reservoir to production lines and facilities. Therefore, herein below sections, we are summarizing
laboratory experiments and models available in the literature to better understand the asphaltene behavior.

Laboratory Experiments Asphaltene Precipitation

It is worth to mention, there is no correlation between the precipitation and the asphaltene amount that
exists in crude oil. In other words, the amount of asphaltene that exists in crude oil is not an indication
of precipitation problems. For instance, heavy oil includes a higher asphaltene concentration than light
oils, although the heavy oils are stable during the course of production. This is because asphaltene solving
capability of such heavy crudes is greather than light oil. Precipitation problem is observed commonly
in light oil reservoirs that contain little amounts of asphaltene, high amount of gas content and reservoir
pressure well above the hydrocarbon buble point pressure. Since the asphaltene precipitation problem can
be severe in terms of reservoir and production system performance, a variety of techniques as listed below
have been developed to investigate asphaltene and heavy fractions properties and behaviors under different
conditions (Akbarzadeh 2007):

Mass spectrometry,

Nuclear magnetic resonance,

10 SPE-184135-MS

Dynamic light scattering,

Gel permeation chromatography,

X-ray scattering,

Electron microscopy,

Small angle neutron,

Ultrasonic spectroscopy,

Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy,

Fluorescence depolarization,

Vapor-pressure osmometry,

There are numerous studies in the literature about the details of these techniques, which are aiming to
determine asphaltene precipitation envelope. However, above listed laboratory experiments are insufficient
to fully model the asphaltene precipitation phenomena throughout the conditions that fluid passes through
reservoir to stock tank or export pipelines. This is due to the fact that laboratory experiments are conducted
usually with the limited set of pressure and temperatures points that are not enough to represent all real
conditions of the production system.

Asphaltene Precipitation Models

There are various challenges associated with modelling asphaltene precipitation. Becasue asphaltenes are
a mixure of ill-defined components, they are self-associated even if the consantration is very low, and the
form of asphaltene (colloidal or macromoleculs) in crude oil is still unknown exactly. Therefore, research
have been made on understanding and modelling asphaltene precipitation and flocculation phenomena in
the last two decades. Despite widely used laboratory experiments in the oil industry are good enough to draw
general charecteristics and precipitation envelope of asphaltene precipitation, and are capable of answering
many questions and concerns about it, laboratory tests are limited with some predefined P-T conditions
that are not enough to cover full range of the conditions the reservoir fluid passes through. Therefore, to be
able to understand asphaltene precipitation and deposition better, a few models have been developed and
proposed in the literature for modeling asphaltene precipitation and deposition at the full range of conditions
that reservoir fluid is passing through, i.e., from reservoir to stock tank or export pipes. Proposed models
in the literature can be divided into two main categories: Colloidal models and Thermodynamic models.
Thermodynamic models can be divided into two sub-categories: Solution-based and Equation-of-State-
based models. Figure 8 shows the main categories of proposed models available in the literature that are
aiming to model precipitation and deposition phenomena at the full range of conditions.
SPE-184135-MS 11

Figure 8Asphaltene Precipitation Models.

Colloidal Models
Main assumption of colloidal models is that asphaltenes are dispersed in crude as solid colloidal particles
that are stabilized by resins, adsorbed on their surfaces. In opposition to solution based models, colloidal
models are assume that crude oil maintains asphaltenes as a colloidal dispersion by resins. Also, these are
assumed to be acting as peptizing agents.
In these models, it is assumed that asphaltene precipitation is mainly dependent on chemical potential of
resins. Therefore, asphaltene precipitation is measured for specified conditions that are used to interprete
the chemical potential of resins. Then, these measurements and interpretations are used as main inputs in
order to forecast asphaltene precipitation in other conditions.

Thermodynamic Models
Thermodynamic models assume that asphaltene behavior is mainly guided by general rules of
thermodynamics, and that asphaltenes are a component of the non-ideal mixtures. In these models,
precipitation is assumed as liquid-liquid or liquid-solid phase transition and predictions are based on these
assumptions. Although reversibility of asphaltene precipitation is argued widely in the literature, there is no
clear answer whether it is reversible or not. Thermodynamic models assume that asphaltene precipitation
is reversible (Tharanivasan, 2012).

Challenges in Asphaltene Precipitation Modeling

In field production, prediction of asphaltene precipitation, flocculation and deposition in the reservoir
and wellbore considerably reduces the costs associated with reservoir remediation, well intervention
techniques and field production interruption. Since asphaltene precipitation and deposition depends strongly
on temperature, pressure and compositional variations, it is significant to model the fluid behavior during
the entire production process. To investigate the effect of asphlatene deposition on oil recovery, it is required
to model the phase behavior of asphaltene in the reservoir and wellbore by using multiphase wellbore/
12 SPE-184135-MS

reservoir simulators. This enables comprehensive production system analysis. Basically there are several
steps that we need to do to model asphaltenes precipitation (L. Figuera, M. Marin, 2010) in reservoir model.
The steps summarized below can be integrated in the workflow shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9Integrated Asphalthene Workflow Program for Managing

Asphaltene Related to Oil field Production Problems (Nagarayan, 2012)

Fluid characterization and EOS matching

Characterization and specification of asphaltene content

Analysis of the asphaltene content versus depth

Aspahltene precipitation model

Deposition model and core plugging

Conceptual simulation

Cross-sectional simulation
SPE-184135-MS 13

At low pressures or in case of introduction of light hydrocarbons or other gaseous injectants, asphaltene
and resin molecules may precipitate due to colloidal instability. Figure 10 depicts an example high pressure
microscope observation. The onset pressure is described as the maximum pressure that the asphaltenes begin
settling down for a given oil or oil/solvent mixture. Decreasing the pressure to below this level facilitates
the precipitation and flocculation of the particles. The vapor-liquid saturation pressure is the level at which
the highest precipitation occurs. Further decrease in the pressure and the accompanying liberation of gas
from the oil phase, results in enhanced solvating power of oil. Thus, precipitated asphaltenes will go back
into solution.

Figure 10Example High Pressure Microscope Observation at 250 Deg F for Sample SSB 91959-MA (Gulf of Mexico Asset)

The asphaltene precipitation above can be modelled by using PC Saft (Perturbed Chain Statistical
Assocation Fluid Theory) method. Some PC SAFT theory assumptions can be explained as follows,

Molecules in a fluid exist as hard spheres or segments

Asphaltene molecules appear as monomers in the crude oil, and aggregates in an associated state
in the precipitation phase
Asphaltene association gives rise to asphaltene precipitation

Precipitation process is thermodynamically reversible

Segments representing asphaltenes or resins under certain circumstances can combine to form hard
chain molecules
Hard chain molecules can interact to from aggregates

Total energy of the system can be calculated based on parameters associated with the hard spheres,
segments and chains
If the asphaltene splitting into a separate phase lowers the total energy of the system, asphaltene
flocculation and precipitation occurs
Asphaltene precipitation phase is assumed as pseudo liquid phase for calculation purposes
14 SPE-184135-MS

The basis of the PC SAFT method can be translated to the Helmholtz energy equation,
[1]
where,
Amix=Helmholtz Free Energy (A) of oil containing Asphaltenes and Resins
Aid = Ideal gas contribution to A of the mixture
Ahs= Hard Sphere contribution to A of the mixture
Avdw= Van Der Waals contribution to A of the mixture
Achain = Entropic contribution to A from connectivity of resin chains of the mixture
Aassoc = Asphaltene asphaltene and asphaltene-resin associations contribution to A of the mixture
An Equation-of-State (EOS) compositional reservoir simulator has been utilized while incorporating
asphaltene precipitation, flocculation and deposition in the reservoir model. Fluid phase behavior in the
simulator is represented with a standard cubic EOS. Asphaltenes are modeled in the reservoir simulator as a
solubility limited component in the oleic phase that once precipitated may become trapped within the pore
structure of the rock reducing permeability. These parameters are defined as follows:

Floculated properties
The flocculation density is used to relate the mass and volume of trapped asphaltene for permeability
reduction. Diameter distribution of the flocculated asphaltenes is 14haracterized by a flocculated size
distribution index (m) and a maximum diameter (Dmax). Mass fraction of the flocculated asphaltene with a
diameter greater than D is given by the following power law equation (Eq.2):

[2]

Solubility
Solubility of asphaltene is assumed to be strongly pressure dependent, generally falling as pressure falls
towards the bubble point (i.e. here 3000 psig), then rising as pressure continues to fall below the bubble point.
This data is entered as a table of solubility for monotonically increasing pressure and is not extrapolated.
Solubility is defined as a mass/mass (ppm) concentration.
Regarding rock dependent properties, permeability reduction and rock grain structure properties are
important factors that can affect field recovery factor. These parameters will be defined for each rock type.
Those variables can be explained as shown below:

Trapped asphaltene - Insoluble asphaltene will flocculate with a distribution of particle sizes.
Flocculated asphaltene with a diameter greater than the trapping diameter will be trapped and
contribute to permeability reduction. The trapping diameter is a function of the average grain
diameter and the trapping diameter multiplier. If the latest is set to zero, all the solid asphaltenes
will be trapped. This can be explained via Eq.3;

[3]

Where, alpha is a dimensionless trapping diameter multiplier used for matching and, Dg, is the
grain diameter. To trap all of the solid asphaltene, set alpha to zero.
Reversibility - If the model is irreversible, then only the solid asphaltene that is not already trapped
may irreversibly accumulate as trapped asphaltene. If the model is reversible, then all of the solid
asphaltene, including that previously trapped, will be partitioned between trapped and non-trapped
solids according to particle size distribution.
SPE-184135-MS 15

Permeability reduction the higher the permeability reduction index is, the more important the
permeability reduction is due to asphaltene. This can be explained with equation given below,

[4]

where, C, is the trapped mass of asphaltene per unit grid block volume, a, is the trapped asphaltene density
and, n, is a permeability reduction index. In the simulation study, initially dissolved asphaltene concentration
within the oil phase should be specified in the initialization section. Then, once the simulation model has
been run some of following results can be observed (See Figure 11).

Figure 11Example Simulation Study for Asphaltene Precipitation by using Reveal Simulator

Due to production, reservoir pressure will decline. This pressure decline will lead to a decrease in
the asphaltene solubility that is translated in the form of solid asphaltenes in the system.
The formation of these solid asphaltenes will lead to a reduction in reservoir permeability.

In modeling asphaltene precipitation, there are several challenges that need to be considered,

To predict asphaltene precipitation onset in live oils, we need to have representative oil samples
from the field having history with asphaltene problem during production. These samples can both
validate the proposed model and verify that asphaltene phase behavior can only be defined via van
der Waals interactions and molecular size.
There are several factors of compositional variations in live oils, where these variations originate
from two typical processes: Oil-Based-Mud (OBM) contamination and reinjection of associated
gas. Former includes the contamination of downhole oil samples with OBM, which results in
different lab-scale measurements of bubble point and asphaltene precipitation from the reservoir
fluid to the prediction from reservoir simulator. In the latter process, reinjection of gas into the field
increases GasOil ratio (GOR) of the oil. Volumetric increase of gas in the mixture can cause the
precipitation and deposition of asphaletene because of the increase of light components that reduce
the solubility of asphaletene. This can affect the accuracy of asphaltene precipitation prediction
from reservoir simulator.
16 SPE-184135-MS

Classification of Heavy Oils

Oil can be defined as different groups according to their properties such as viscosity and gravity. Most
popular classification method is proposed by American Petroleum Institution, which use relative gravity as
the criteria. API, the ratio of oil density to that of water, is used to describe the property of oil at 60 F.
API is calculated as follows:

According to the API gravity standard, when API is larger than 31.1, it is named as light oil, medium oil
is for that between 22.3 and 31.1, heavy oil is for that less than 22.3, and extra heavy oil is for those with
API less than 10. Oil also can be classified according to the sulfur content. When the content is 0% to 1%, it
is called sweet crude. The others are called sour crude. Heavy oil's viscosity is larger than 0.01pa.s [10cp].
Since viscosity depends on many factors, such as, chemical properties and temperatures, it is hard to get
the exact range of values. All the data is a relevant value based on different conditions. Osamah Alomair
studied heavy oil viscosity and density with various API and temperatures. In the paper, 30 oil samples were
tested giving lots of data for reference.
The distribution of total world oil resources is depicted in Figure 12: conventional oil at 30%, heavy oil
at 15%, extra-heavy oil at 25%, oil sands and bitumen at 30%. Since heavy oil occupies a large percentage
of total oil reserves, it is promising to recover and use such a large amount of energy. It is estimated that
OPEC member countries own 1,213.43 billion barrels, which accounts for 80% of the world's proven oil
reserves. According to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) report at the end of 2015,
Venezuela had reserves to the tune of 24.8% of the oil reserves in the world and rank first in this list. Other
top ten members are Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar and
Algeria. From the aspect of geography, Middle East contains more than 50% of the world's total oil amount.

Figure 12Total World Oil Resources

Extending the horizon globally, western hemisphere might be the preferred location of heavy and bitumen
deposits. From the 80% of heavy oil reserves located in the western hemisphere, 69% of them can be
technically recovered. They also have 82% of bitumen that can be recovered through specific technology,
which are a huge percentage of crude oil reserves. However, 85% of light oil is in the eastern hemisphere.
Venezuela, is famous for the Orinoco heavy oil belt. Considering the fact that around ninety percent of
world's extra-heavy oil, it is reasonable to rank 1st in worldwide oil reserves countries. Besides Orinoco
heavy oil, South America is abundant in recoverable heavy oil as well. It is estimated that the US has 40
SPE-184135-MS 17

billion barrels of useable heavy oil, which is 61% of known technically recoverable heavy oil in the world.
As for bitumen, around 81% of recoverable bitumen to the amount of 3600 billion barrels is in Canada. In
US, the amount of bitumen is around 6.1 billion barrels.

Importance of heavy oil

As market demand is increasing, the requirement of convenient oil is more and harder to meet the needs.
Even though people keep exploring light oil reservoirs to supply oil, time required to find new resources
will be more as a large amount of basins have already been exploited. In the future, balance between demand
and supply will be broken since the need of energy will increase dramatically without doubt when the global
population increases. With this concern, people are seeking for technologies to make use of heavy oil to
increase ultimate recovery from these reservoirs. Taking the feasibility and economy into consideration, the
best way is to use the huge amount of heavy oil reserves instead of spending so much money and time to
exploit deep and remote basins of light oil.

Figure 13Predicted Oil Reserves Forecast

According to report, conventional oil only constitutes only 2% of the total hydrocarbons in sedimentary
basin, while heavy oil is 5%-7%, coal and lignite seams is 20%-30% and oil in shales would be 30%-50%.
When mature technology is developed, more and more substance can be used as a replacement of oil, such
as, ethanol or other bio-resources. Considering the U.S. and Canadian oil consumption rate of 1.2 109
m3/yr, there is a very large amount of heavy oil resources available in Canada alone (~400 109 m3) that
there is enough heavy oil to meet 100% of the demand of both countries for more than 80 years, with an
overall extraction efficiency of 30%. Thus, heavy oil can make up for the decrease in light oil production in
the future with the benefit of larger resources and lower costs. The reason why making use of heavy oil is
feasible, is when the technology is improved, it will be more efficient and economic to meet the requirement.
Secondly, oil price will be stable and it will not influence the market. What's more is that, as more and more
feedback is collected, the technology can be improved and ultimate oil recovery can be increased.
18 SPE-184135-MS

Table 5Relative hydrocarbon resource size

Estimated Total Hydrocarbon

Hydrocarbon Resource
in Sedimentary Basins (%)
Conventional Oil, >20 API 2 to 3
Heavy oil, <20API 5 to 7*
Natural gas 4 to 6
**
Gas hydrates 10 to 30
Kerogen and oil in shales 30 to 50
Coal and lignite seams 20 to 30

* Mostly in UCSS.
** Mainly subocean floor.
Extremely uncertain because of poor and spotty data.

Production Optimization
In the oil industry, production optimization is a the general concept used for determination of optimum
parameters in a production system to obtain the maximum production rate, or minimize the costs under
different technical and economical conditions (Guo et al., 2007). The term production optimization is similar
to reservoir management in the manner that can be interchangeable. The purpose of reservoir management
can also be summarized as the use of all financial, technological and human resources to maximize the
recovery of oil/gas from a reservoir, and minimize total production expenditures (Thakur, 1997).
As a general concept, all types of attempts to increase production and reduce production costs can be
considered as production optimization. It can be applied at the reservoir, production conduits, surface flow
lines and facilities. From another point of view, production optimization can be established at different levels
such as platform or facility level, well level, and field level (Guo, 2007). Although the cost of oil lifting is
examined on a field or reservoir basis, it should be conducted on an individual well basis in order to get
the maximum benefit (O'How & Kubat, 1996). It may be necessary to note that the well level and surface
facilities level optimization can be done with Nodal Analysis (Gilbert, 1954), field-level computations
frequently require simulators.
A naturally-flowing well is the most basic system in production optimization. The production rate of
a single flowing well can be optimized by evaluating the tubing size, inflow performance, and wellhead
pressure controlled by choke size. The optimization of gas-lift wells aims for the determination of optimal
gas-lift and gas injection rate, since over injection of gas-lift gas has a high cost and reduces the production
rate. Volumetric efficiency of the plunger pump and energy efficiency of the pumping unit may be improved
by using the information from a dynamometer card that records polished rod load.
Another area of application of optimization methods is the surface facilities. For example, by adjusting
the operation parameters (temperature and pressure) of the separator, the amount of recovered oil in the
separator can be optimized. Based on field experiences, lower the operating temperature of a separator
higher the liquid recovery. In case of pipeline network, restrictive pipeline segments can be detected by
analyzing flow in pipelines. If gas is limited for gas lift operations, the lift gas should be distributed to wells
that are most capable of increasing production to optimize gas lift distribution amongst the gas lifted wells.
Field level optimization can be achieved by simulation approach or optimization approach. In the
simulation approach, a trial and error method, simulations of pressure and flow rates with fixed values
of variables are carried out by a computer program. By supplying different sets of input data, different
scenarios are examined. As a result, optimal solution is selected based on the results of simulation runs. The
optimization approach allows some values of parameters to be checked by the computer program to assure
the objective function is either maximized (in case of production rate) or minimized (in case of costs) under
the assigned techno-economical constraints (Guo, 2007). Today, because of the improvements in technology,
SPE-184135-MS 19

the combination of reservoir simulation software and optimization software in a single platform, it is possible
to be able to find the optimum solution defined by an objective function. Optimization can be applied to
any type of reservoir regardless of the fluid type produced or rock type that forms the reservoir. Heavy
oil reservoirs present a wide spectrum where optimization approaches can be applied extensively. Heavy
oil resources in the world are greater than 4 trillion barrels. Therefore, heavy oil reservoir management
gains great importance in our days (Thakur, 1997). Heavy oil reservoirs are low energy reservoirs which
contain very high viscosity fluid. The quality of produced crude is not favorable. The recovery factor of
these reservoirs is generally low and the cost of production from them is high as compared to low viscosity
fluid reservoirs. So, every effort to decrease production costs and increase recovery of such a reservoir can
be considered as an optimization study. The following projects for production optimization in heavy oil
reservoirs are from the literature. Of course, the optimization works are not limited with the ones presented
here, but it is not possible to summarize all of them in the scope of this paper.

Heavy oil production optimization methods

In beam pump artificial methods, the presence of free gas has damaging effects on the efficiency of downhole
pumps, since it causes decrease in production considerably (gas locking) and sometimes damages the
equipment. Besides, it leads to slugging problems in horizontal wells when producing from thin layer heavy
oil reservoirs with high GOR. Gas anchor technology can be a solution in horizontal wells of this kind
of reservoir. To apply this method, the well is pumped through a tubing and the annulus between casing
and tubing is left open, to allow gas produced together with the liquid bypassing the pump protected by
a gas-anchor (Randy, Cholet, Federer, 1993). The authors indicate that gas anchors can reduce the risk of
gas locking of the pump and can cope with large slugs of gas and liquid without losing production from
pump cycling.
In heavy oil fields, high viscosity can cause production problems in beam pump artificial lifting method.
Broken rods and polished rod, pump and gear box increase production costs notably. The application
of progressive cavity pump in Bolivar Coast fields yielded successful results in terms of low energy
consumption and increased well production in extraheavy and heavy type crude oils (Uzcategui and
Vasquez, 1980). The authors point out that operational costs in Maraven field has been reduced by 10 million
dollars/year with the aid of the application of the method.
Another technology used for heavy oil extraction is the application of Electrical Submersible Pump
(ESP). Although the capability of extracting large fluid volumes, more resistance to corrosion and abrasive
solids because of their resistant metal content, stronger shafts and working at high pressure and high
temperature conditions are the achieved advancements in ESP technology, the high energy need makes them
unsuitable for high viscosity fluid production. However, the proper assessment of downhole conditions and
fluid behaviour (espacially viscosity-temperature relationship) may allow to use ESPs in high viscosity
heavy oil production at rather acceptable costs. ESP technology could be used efficiently in Chichimene
field in Columbia by optimizing design of the ESP string, size of the pumps and wellhead conditions. Gas
separators were used with ESP in high GOR wells. Oversized ESPs were more efficient in line with the
results of run life of the pumps. Diluent was injected to the pipelines of the injection system in order to
reduce wellhead pressure (Lopes & Jimenez Morales, 2014).
Horizontal wells are widely used in heavy oil reservoir to improve oil recovery. The placement of
horizontal wells in reservoirs plays a key role to achieve the goal of recovery improvement. Geology (the
extent and the thickness of the barriers affecting the flow), reservoir properties and production data should
be carefully studied to understand reservoir flow and well inflow mechanisms for better horizontal well
placement optimization. In Qin Huang Dao 32-6 oil field, China, the optimization study of horizontal well
placement before drilling new wells by keeping the well length within the barriers allowed for development
of the field at less cost (Qinghong et al.,2009). Girassol heavy oil field in Columbia is another application
of horizontal well placement optimization. After the approval of field development plan through horizontal
20 SPE-184135-MS

wells, several challenges had to be overcome in order to maximize oil recovery economically in this
shallow, thin and friable formation. Deep directional electromagnetic logging during drilling technology
was introduced to find the optimum placement of horizontal wells, while minimizing the risk of reservoir
exit by enabling reservoir geometry mapping in real time. The application of this technology together with
continuous inclination measurement near the bit and advanced geosteering process allowed to minimize the
drilling time and risk of sidetracks in several horizontal wells (Cuadros et al., 2010).
Some of the production optimization techniques for improving heavy oil recovery from the literature have
been summarized above. It is worth to note that asphaltene precipitation problems are commonly observed in
light oil reservoirs rather than heavy oil reservoirs, since heavy oils are more capable to dissolve asphaltene
than light oil as summarized in the above sections. It was also emphasized that asphaltene precipitation is
affected by changes in pressure, temperature, fluid composition and acid treatments, etc. Therefore, before
applying any production optimization techniques in reservoirs where asphaltene precipitation is an issue,
some extra precautions should be taken. It is needless to say that removal of asphaltene precipitation may
cost more than the incremental production gathered from the production optimization technique applied.
The following production optimization techniques given, which are widely applied for the improvement of
the recovery in the world, may trigger asphaltene precipitation due to the above mentioned reasons.
Acid fracturing is an effective stimulation technique in carbonate reservoirs. The gelled acids are widely
used in acid fracturing applications due to their higher viscosities, which prevent fluid losses and friction
pressures and their longer retardation time as compared to straight acids. The application of gelled acids in
LN reservoir of TARIM region in China improved heavy oil production considerably. Another optimization
that contributed to the recovery of heavy oil was pumping of light oil to the bottom hole in order to increase
mobility of oil after acid fracturing stimulation (Wang et al., 2003). As stated above, acid treatment is one of
the reasons for asphaltene precipitation. Therefore, before applying acid treatments to the reservoirs where
asphaltene precipitation may occur, the selection of acids shall be carefully analyzed in the laboratories.
The production from heavy oil reservoirs is usually based on viscosity reduction by application of thermal
energy. Steamflooding is one of the techniques that covers the injection of heat into the reservoir to increase
mobility of reservoir fluid. The efficiency of steamflooding can be enhanced with the addition of solvent
reducing interfacial tension and promoting production of heavy oil. The application of solvent injection
with steam creates a low viscosity zone due to the condensation of vaporized solvent in the cooler parts of
the reservoir, and this increases the mobility of displaced fluid. Thus, it leads to higher oil recoveries and
higher rates. Experimental results showed that warm oil arrived to the production well earlier in solvent-
steam co-injection case than steam only injected case. Therefore, early termination of solvent-steam co-
injection causes lower energy needs and consumption of water that eventually gives rise to saving money
(Pinherio Galvao et al., 2009). Although the addition of solvent in steamflooding operations can improve
recovery by reducing viscosity, solvent injection may cause asphaltene precipitation. Therefore, if fluid in
the reservoir in which solvent injection treatment is applied has the tendency of asphaltene precipitation,
interaction between the solvent and crude oil in terms of asphaltene precipitation shall be examined carefully
prior to such application.
Formation damage can occur when applying acid fracturing to reservoirs containing asphaltic crude. The
addition of HCl acid to asphaltic crudes may lead to sludge precipitation. This formation damage in the
wellbore area may restrict flow for cleaning of the reservoir and may block the flow of reservoir fluid totally.
It is critical to clean the inside of tubing from iron scale by back-washing, before applying acid fracturing
to asphaltic crude containing oil wells. The use of iron control additives together with antisludging agent
and corrosion inhibitor may prevent the precipitation of asphaltene (Jakobs & Thorne, 1986).
CO2 injection is one of the most efficient methods, applied widely in heavy oil reservoirs to increase
mobility and reduce viscosity and interfacial tension. However, injection of CO2 into a reservoir may
result in the precipitation of asphaltene since it changes the composition of reservoir fluid suddenly due to
SPE-184135-MS 21

enrichment of injection gas with lighter components of crude oil. The application of CO2 Water Alternating
Gas (WAG) injection should be conducted carefully if the reservoir fluid contains unstable asphaltene
because it may plug pore spaces in the reservoir. It can also restrict flow in the production systems partially or
fully, and cause high costs for treating them. Asphaltene onset pressure and stability of asphaltene should be
measured before applying CO2 injection. The use of compatible inhibitors may prevent asphaltene particles
to be dispersed in the reservoir (Buriro & Shuker, 2013). Another crucial point for applying CO2 injection
in heavy oil reservoir is that the injection rate of CO2 plays very important role for asphaltene precipitation.
The higher the injection rate, lesser will be the asphaltene precipitation.
Prevention of asphaltene precipitation with additives is a promising technique, but selection of the
compatible additive is very time consuming and costly. Application of High Pressure Liquid Tomography
enables the selection of additives at reservoir conditions faster than the traditional methods conducted in
laboratories (Ovalles et al, 2015).
Having a stabilizing effect on emulsions, asphaltene may assist in forming very tight emulsions. The
cluster of asphaltene particles can form thick emulsions at the water-oil interface in the dehydration
equipments of the surface facility system, and this will increase the cost of demulsification of oil. Emulsions
also cause high pressure drops in flow lines and trips in the equipments of surface facilities. The emulsion
problem can be overcome with the use of asphaltene dispersants and surfactants. These chemical additives
lower the accumulation of asphaltene at the oil-water interface by increasing the solubility of asphaltene in
crude oil and improve the demulsification process, if they are used with regular commercial demulsifiers.
Authors pointed out that the use of chemical additives for preventing emulsion has given the opportunity to
save over $500,000 annually. The optimization of demulsifier injection should be carried out periodically
to find the cost-effective demulsifier, since the reservoir and fluid conditions change over time (Kokal &
Al-Juraid, 1998).
Some of the measures taken in order not to face with asphaltene precipitation problem were summarized
in above sections. Although there may be enough effort to prevent asphaltene precipitation when applying
some techniques for higher oil recovery, some oil producing companies may discard the necessary cautions
because of unwillingness to spend time or money for asphaltene precipitation tests. As a result, they may
have asphaltene precipitation problem in their production conduit. The common methods for removal
of asphaltene precipitated in the production string are mechanical, thermal and chemical treatments.
Mechanical methods are based on the removal of asphaltene by the use of rod and wireline scrapers. Thermal
methods include the use of heaters, which are lowered by wireline in the tubing where precipitation occurs.
Although these methods provide good cleaning in the production circuit, their application is limited to the
wellbore and does not help to overcome the precipitation problem associated with near-wellbore formation
plugging. Chemical methods may also be used in removal of asphaltene in the tubing, but they are the only
option to remove the precipitation of asphaltene near wellbore conditions. Ultrasonic treatments (Gollapudi
et al., 1994) and laser energy applications (Zekri et al., 2001) can be other alternatives used for the removal
of asphaltenes precipitated in the vicinity of producing wells.

Reservoir Model and Simulations

The reservoir simulation model used is:

718 GRID

13 COMPONENTS

RADIAL GRID

Temperature-dependent asphaltene precipitation and irreversible flocculation is modelled using a 32-

degree API oil. No precipitation occurs at the original reservoir temperature. Lower temperatures are
22 SPE-184135-MS

specified around the wellbore, causing asphaltene recipitation. Flocculated asphaltene is allowed to deposit
via surface adsorption and pore throat plugging. The exponent in the power law relating porosity reduction
to the permeability resistance factor (RF_EXPONENT) can be modified to change the effect of asphaltene
deposition on permeability reduction. Sensitivity study has been carried out on the following parameters
mentioned in Table 6 below. The tables and figures outline the model specifications including the wells.
The figures show the initial and final conditions of the base-case simulation for important parameters.

Table 6Sensitivity parameters

Name Active Default Value Source

1 PERMK_VERT Yes 5 Continuous Real

2 PERM_HOR Yes 50 Continuous Real

3 PROD_RATE Yes 754.773 Continuous Real

4 RF_EXPONENT Yes 7.5 Continuous Real

5 TRES Yes 190 Continuous Real

Figure 14Top view of the reservoir

SPE-184135-MS 23

Figure 153D view of the reservoir

Figure 16Phase diagram

24 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 17Wellbore diagram - producer

Figure 18Initial oil saturation distribution

SPE-184135-MS 25

Figure 19Final oil saturation distribution

Figure 20Initial distribution of Asph. Deposited Mass per Bulk Volume

26 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 21Final distribution of Asph. Deposited Mass per Bulk Volume

Figure 22Initial distribution of asphaltene flocculated mass per bulk volume

SPE-184135-MS 27

Figure 23Final distribution of asphaltene flocculated mass per bulk volume

Figure 24Initial distribution of asphaltene deposited mass

28 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 25Final distribution of asphaltene deposited mass

Figure 26Initial distribution of asphaltene flocculated mass

SPE-184135-MS 29

Figure 27Final distribution of asphaltene flocculated mass

Figure 28Initial distribution of oil resistance factor

30 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 29Final distribution of oil resistance factor

Figure 30Distribution of temperature

SPE-184135-MS 31

Figure 31Initial distribution of water saturation

Figure 32Final distribution of water saturation

32 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 33Initial distribution of gas saturation

Figure 34Final distribution of gas saturation

SPE-184135-MS 33

Figure 35Initial distribution of pressure

Figure 36Final distribution of pressure

34 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 37Oil production rate

Figure 38Cumulative oil mass (C30+ASP)

SPE-184135-MS 35

Figure 39Cumulative oil mass (C30+)

Figure 40Oil mass rate (C30+ASP)

36 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 41Oil mass rate (C30+)

Figure 42Input range for vertical permeability

Figure 43Input range for horizontal permeability

SPE-184135-MS 37

Figure 44Input range for procution rate

Figure 45Input range for RF Exponent

Figure 46Input range for reservoir temperature

38 SPE-184135-MS

Figure 47Simulation results vs proxy predicted results

Results and Discussion

The study investigated the effects of both uncertainty parameters that pertain to the reservoir and the
oil and the decision parameters relating to the operational variables. Figure 48 shows the cumulative oil
production vs time for different cases with different values for the sensitivity parameters. It is observed
that horizontal permability plays an important role followed by fraction of different components that
make up the oil. Vertical permeability has less influence than that of horizontal permeability. The relative
significance of each parameter may change from one model to another, or the magnitudes may differ with
similar relative significance, thus, the main point here is the understanding of the physical process and how
reservoir management practice can be improved through better allocation of resources and time. This along
with similar studies, however, illustrates the significance of management of uncertainty and operational
parameters and the room of improvement and thus they serve as a starting point in reservoir management
processes. Future work will involve further investigation of chemistry that lead to precipitation and modeling
studies parallel to experimental or field data with heavy oil.

Figure 48Cumulative oil production for different runs

SPE-184135-MS 39

Figure 49Tornado chart

Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank Aera Energy LLC, Turkish Petroleum Corporation, Pinoeer Exploration,
University of Southern California, HESS, Kuwait Oil Company, University of Akron, Middle East Oilfield
Services, VaalbaraSoft LLC and Texas A&M University for their support. Authors would like to thank
Suryansh Purwar for his valuable review and contribution to the manuscript.

References
1. Tharanivasan, A.K., 2012. Asphaltene Precipitation from Crude Oil Blends, Conventional Oils,
and Oils with Emulsified Water. Doctor of Philosophy Thesis Submitted to the Department of
Chemical and Petroleum Engineering of University of Calgary.
2. Akbarzadeh, K., et al., 2007. Asphaltenes Problematic but Rich in Potential. Oilfield Review.
3. Jamaluddin A.K.M., et al., 2002. Laboratory Techniques to Measure Thermodynamic Asphaltene
Instability. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology 41, No.7, 44-52.
4. Andersen, S.I., Birdi, K.S., 1990. Influence of Temperature and Solvent on the Precipitation of
Asphaltene. Fuel Science and Technology Intl., 8(6), pp 593-615.
5. Ali, L.H. and Al-Ghannam, K.A., 1981. Investigation into Asphaltenes in Heavy Oils: Effects of
Temperature on Precipitation of Asphaltenes by Alkane Solvents. Fuel, 60, pp 1043-1046.
6. Hirshberg, A., Dejong, L.N.J., Schipper, B.A., and Meijer, J.G., 1984. Influence of Temperature
and Pressure on Asphaltene Flocculation. SPE J., pp. 283-293.
7. Mullins, O.C., et al. 2010. Energy & Fuels, 24, 2179 2207.
8. Guo, B. (2007). Petroleum Production Engineering, A Computer Assisted Approach, 1st Edition,
Elsevier Science of Technology Books, 268-280
9. Thakur, G.C. (1997). SPE-39233-MS Heavy Oil Reservoir Management.
10. O'How, D., Kubat, G. (1996). PETSOC-96-31 Advances in Production Optimization and
Production
11. Gilbert, W.E. (1954). Flowing and Gas-Lift Well Performance. Drill. & Prod. Prac. 126-57.
Dallas, Texas: API.
40 SPE-184135-MS

12. Randy, P., Cholet, H.J., Federer, U. (1993) SPE-26555-MS Optimization of Heavy Oil and Gas
Pumping in Horizontal Wells.
13. Uzcategui, E.A., Vasquez, H.R. (1980). SPE-21127-MS. An Improved Method for Heavy Oil
Fields Production and Cost Optimization.
14. Lopez, J. E., & Jimenez Morales, G. E. (2014). SPE-170039-MS ESP Optimization in an Extra
Heavy Oil Field: Case Study in Colombian Llanos Basin
15. Wang, X., Zou, H., Zheng, X., Zhang, F., Fan, Y., Cheng, X., & Zhang, R. (2003). SPE-80897-
MS Optimization of Acid Fracturing to Improve Heavy Oil Production in Naturally Fractured
Carbonates.
16. Qinghong, Y., Lizhen, G., Peng, Z., Thomas, T., He, G., Tong, Y. M., & Li, X. Q. (2009).
SPE-123504-MS Production Optimization of Horizontal Wells in a Heavy-Oil Field.
17. Cuadros, J., Ossa Duque, N., Cuadros, G., & Rojas, E. (2010). SPE-132884-MS Horizontal Well
Placement Optimization for Heavy Oil Production in Girasol Field.
18. Wang, X., Zou, H., Zheng, X., Zhang, F., Fan, Y., Cheng, X., & Zhang, R. (2003). SPE-80897-
MS Optimization of Acid Fracturing to Improve Heavy Oil Production in Naturally Fractured
Carbonates.
19. Pinheiro Galvao, E. R. V., Rodrigues, M., Barillas, J. L. M., Dutra, T., & da Mata, W. (2009).
SPE-122078-MS Optimization of Operational Parameters on Steamflooding with Solvent in
Heavy Oil Reservoirs.
20. Jacobs, I. C., & Thorne, M. A. (1986). SPE-14823-MS Asphaltene Precipitation during Acid
Stimulation Treatments.
21. Ali Buriro, M., & Shuker, M. T. (2013). SPE168105-MS Minimizing Asphaltene Precipitation in
Malaysian Reservoir.
22. Ovalles, C., Rogel, E., Morazan, H., & Moir, M. E. (2015, April 13). SPE-173733-MS Method
for Rapid Assessment of Additives to Prevent Asphaltene Precipitation at Reservoir Conditions.
23. Kokal, S., & Al-Juraid, J. (1998). SPE-48995-MS Reducing Emulsion Problems by Controlling
Asphaltene Solubility and Precipitation.
24. Gollapudi, U. K., Bang, S. S., Islam, M. R. (1994). SPE-27377-MS Ultrasonic Treatment for
Removal of Asphaltene Deposits during Petroleum Production.
25. Zekri, A. Y., Shedid, S. A., Alkashef, H. (2001). SPE-70050-MS A Novel Technique for Treating
Asphaltene Deposition Using Laser Technology.
26. Ali, M., Fahd, K., Ul, N., & Dahraj, H. (2015). Study of Asphaltene Precipitation during CO2
Injection in Light Oil Reservoirs. In SPE/PAPG Annual Technical Conference. Islamabad,
Pakistan.
27. Arciniegas, L. M., & Babadagli, T. (2014). Asphaltene precipitation, flocculation and deposition
during solvent injection at elevated temperatures for heavy oil recovery. FUEL, 124, 202211.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.02.003
28. Buckley, J. S., Hirasaki, G. J., Liu, Y., Von Drase, S., Wang, H. X., & Gill, B. S. (1998).
ASPHALTENE PRECIPITATION AND SOLVENT PROPERTIES OF CRUDE OILS.
Petroleum Science and Technology, 16(34), 251285.
29. Buriro, M. A., Shuker, M. T., & Petronas, U. T. (2013). Minimizing Asphaltene Precipitation in
Malaysian Reservoir, (May), 1922.
30. Hirschberg, A., Dejong, L. N. J., Schipper, B. A., & Meijer, J. G. (1984). Influence of
Temperature and Pressure on Asphaltene Flocculation. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal,
24(3).
31. Kelland. (2009). Production Chemicals for the Oil and Gas Industry. CRC Press.
SPE-184135-MS 41

32. Kokal, S. L., & Sayegh, S. G. (1995). Asphaltenes: The Cholesterol of Petroleum. SPE Middle
East Oil Show. http://doi.org/10.2118/29787-MS
33. Lichaa, P. M. (1977). Asphaltene Deposition Problems in Venezuelan Crudes-Usage of Asphalnes
in Emulsion Stability. In CIM Conference on the Oil Sands of Canada and Venezuela (pp.
609624).
34. Lichaa, P. M., & Harrera, L. (1975). Electrical and Other Effects Related to the Formation and
Prevention of Asphaltene Deposition. In International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry. Dallas,
Texas.
35. Liu, G., & Glover, C. J. (2015). A study on the oxidation kinetics of warm mix asphalt. Chemical
Engineering Journal, 280(November 2015), 115120. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.05.074
36. Liu, G., Jin, X., Rose, A., Cui, Y., & Glover, C. J. (2014). Application of density gradient column
to flexible pavement materials: Aggregate characteristics and asphalt absorption. Construction
and Building Materials, 72, 182188.
37. Michell, D. L., & Speight, J. G. (1973). The Solubility of Asphaltenes in Hydrocarbon in
Hydrocarbon Solvents. Fuel, 53, 149152.
38. Ovalles, C., Rogel, E., Morazan, H., Moir, M. E., & Characterization, M. (2015). Method for
Rapid Assessment of Additives to Prevent Asphaltene.
39. Speight, J. G., & Moschopedis, S. E. (1981). On the Molecular Nature of Petroleum Asphaltenes.
Advances in Chemistry Series, 195, 115.
40. Yakubov, M. R.., Yakubova, S. G.., Borisov, D. N.., Romanov, G. V.., Arbuzov, A. E.., &
Yakubson, K. I.. (2014). Asphaltene precipitation Inhibitors and Phase Behaviour Control for
Bitumen Recovery by Solvent Injection. In SPE Heavy Oil Conference Canada.
41. Ali, M., Naeem, U., I., Dahraj, H., Haider, S.A., 2015. Study of Asphaltene Precipitation during
CO2 Injection in Light Oil Reservoirs, SPE-181130, SPE/PAPG Annual Technical Conference.
42. Kokal, S., L., Sayegh, S., G., 1995. Asphaltenes: The Cholestrol of Petroleum. SPE 29787. SPE
Middle East Oil Show
43. Syed, F., I., Ghedan, S., G., Hage, A., R., Tariq, S., M., Shebl, H., 2012, Formation Flow
Impairment in Carbonate Reservoirs Due to Asphaltene Precipitation and Deposition during
Hydrocarbon Gas Flooding. Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference.
44. Buriro, M.A., Shuker, M., T., 2013. Minimizing Asphaltene Precipitation in Malaysian Reservoir,