<5th International Conference on Oil and Gas DepletionThe Oil DrumDemocratic Governor's Conference Call on Energy>
<DrumBeat: June 21, 2006DrumBeatDrumBeat: June 23, 2006>

337 comments on DrumBeat: June 22, 2006

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

boby on June 22, 2006 - 11:58am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
If the Saudis are going to inject 1.1 million
barrels of sea water a day to get 500,000 barrels
of oil, it would stand to reason they were going
to be taking out an amount daily equal to the
amount injected daily plus the oil. 500,000 barrels of oil
for 1.1 million barrels of sea water injected would
be a 31% water cut wouldn't it?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Nick on June 22, 2006 - 12:00pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think that's a 69% water cut. Pretty high.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
boby on June 22, 2006 - 12:25pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Woops! You are correct, 8th grade math,duh!
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
oilmanbob on June 22, 2006 - 12:28pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Its pretty high, but profitable.In the US some fields make as high as 99% water(East Texas field) but are still profitable. However, the wells may not be making that high a water cut. If they are trying to raise the pressure then water injected in to the bottom of the formation would help raise the pressure.
The amounts that they inject would be plus the formation water that they are already producing so the 69% water cut may be quite a bit higher.
   On the injection wells you have two main constraints, how much water the formation will take and how much water can be injected without formation damage.
  One other thing-sulphur gas,or sour gas is not produced with light, sweet crude. So I question just how sweet this oil is that they are planning to waterflood.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
plucky underdog on June 22, 2006 - 8:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
No reason to assume WI will be operating at full capacity, or even at all, from Day 1. May not even be fully planted yet, just foundations and blank flanges for pumps and drivers. It's often easier and cheaper to do most of the civils, major pipework, craneage etc. up front rather than working around a running plant when you want to expand it.

Click the link below for my earlier explanation of why 100% reservoir voidage replacement (means: putting back what you take out) requires that you ALWAYS inject more water than you produce oil, even if you aren't producing any water or free gas (briefly: 1 barrel of oil on the surface previously occupied 1.2 to 2 barrels in the reservoir). In this case we're looking at an implicit GOR of 600 so I wouldn't expect a formation volume factor above 1.3 or so, implying a water injection rate of 650 Mb/d. Of course that 300 MMscf/d may not bear very much relation at all to what's in the wellstream.

http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/2/8/233314/5260 and scroll down about 20% or search for the phrase "formation volume factor".

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.