INCREASED OIL PRODUCTION AND RESERVES UTILIZING SECONDARY/TERTIARY RECOVERY TECHNIQUES ON SMALL RESERVOIRS IN THE PARADOX BASIN, UTAH

摘要

The Paradox Basin of Utah, Colorado, and Arizona contains nearly 100 small oil fields producing from shallow-shelf carbonate buildups or mounds within the Desert Creek zone of the Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian) Paradox Formation. These fields typically have one to four wells with primary production ranging from 700,000 to 2,000,000 barrels (111,300-318,000 m{sup 3}) of oil per field at a 15 to 20 percent recovery rate. Five fields in southeastern Utah were evaluated for waterflood or carbon-dioxide (CO{sub 2})-miscible flood projects based upon geological characterization and reservoir modeling. Geological characterization on a local scale focused on reservoir heterogeneity, quality, and lateral continuity as well as possible compartmentalization within each of the five project fields. The Desert Creek zone includes three generalized facies belts: (1) open-marine, (2) shallow-shelf and shelf-margin, and (3) intra-shelf, salinity-restricted facies. These deposits have modern analogs near the coasts of the Bahamas, Florida, and Australia, respectively, and outcrop analogs along the San Juan River of southeastern Utah. The analogs display reservoir heterogeneity, flow barriers and baffles, and lithofacies geometry observed in the fields; thus, these properties were incorporated in the reservoir simulation models. Productive carbonate buildups consist of three types: (1) phylloid algal, (2) coralline algal, and (3) bryozoan. Phylloid-algal buildups have a mound-core interval and a supra-mound interval. Hydrocarbons are stratigraphically trapped in porous and permeable lithotypes within the mound-core intervals of the lower part of the buildups and the more heterogeneous supramound intervals. To adequately represent the observed spatial heterogeneities in reservoir properties, the phylloid-algal bafflestones of the mound-core interval and the dolomites of the overlying supra-mound interval were subdivided into ten architecturally distinct lithotypes, each of which exhibits a characteristic set of reservoir properties obtained from outcrop analogs, cores, and geophysical logs. The Anasazi and Runway fields were selected for geostatistical modeling and reservoir compositional simulations. Models and simulations incorporated variations in carbonate lithotypes, porosity, and permeability to accurately predict reservoir responses. History matches tied previous production and reservoir pressure histories so that future reservoir performances could be confidently predicted. The simulation studies showed that despite most of the production being from the mound-core intervals, there were no corresponding decreases in the oil in place in these intervals. This behavior indicates gravity drainage of oil from the supra-mound intervals into the lower mound-core intervals from which the producing wells' major share of production arises. The key to increasing ultimate recovery from these fields (and similar fields in the basin) is to design either waterflood or CO{sub 2}-miscible flood projects capable of forcing oil from high-storage-capacity but low-recovery supra-mound units into the high-recovery mound-core units. Simulation of Anasazi field shows that a CO{sub 2} flood is technically superior to a waterflood and economically feasible. For Anasazi field, an optimized CO{sub 2} flood is predicted to recover a total 4.21 million barrels (0.67 million m3) of oil representing in excess of 89 percent of the original oil in place. For Runway field, the best CO{sub 2} flood is predicted to recover a total of 2.4 million barrels (0.38 million m3) of oil representing 71 percent of the original oil in place. If the CO{sub 2} flood performed as predicted, it is a financially robust process for increasing the reserves in the many small fields in the Paradox Basin. The results can be applied to other fields in the Rocky Mountain region, the Michigan and Illinois Basins, and the Midcontinent.