A Strategy for Attacking Excess Water Production

A Strategy for Attacking Excess Water Production R.S. Seright; R.S. Seright New Mexico Petroleum Recovery Research Center Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar R.H. Lane; R.H. Lane Northstar Technologies International Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar R.D. Sydansk R.D. Sydansk Sydansk Consulting Services Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, May 2001. Paper Number: SPE-70067-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/70067-MS Published: May 15 2001 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Seright, R.S., Lane, R.H., and R.D. Sydansk. "A Strategy for Attacking Excess Water Production." Paper presented at the SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, May 2001. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/70067-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference Search Advanced Search AbstractThis paper describes a straightforward strategy for diagnosing and solving excess water production problems. The strategy advocates that the easiest problems should be attacked first and diagnosis of water production problems should begin with information already at hand. A listing of water production problems is provided, along with a ranking of their relative ease of solution.Conventional methods (e.g., cement, mechanical devices) normally should be applied first to treat the easiest problems-i.e., casing leaks and flow behind pipe where cement can be placed effectively and for unfractured wells where impermeable barriers separate water and hydrocarbon zones. Gelant treatments normally are the best option for casing leaks and flow behind pipe with flow restrictions that prevent effective cement placement. Both gelants and preformed gels have been successfully applied to treat hydraulic or natural fractures that connect to an aquifer. Treatments with preformed gels normally are the best option for faults or fractures crossing a deviated or horizontal well, for a single fracture causing channeling between wells, or for a natural fracture system that allows channeling between wells. Gel treatments should not be used to treat the most difficult problems—i.e., three-dimensional coning, cusping, or channeling through strata with crossflow.IntroductionOn average in the United States, more than seven barrels of water are produced for each barrel of oil.1 Worldwide, an average of three barrels of water are produced for each barrel of oil.2 The annual cost of disposing of this water is estimated to be 5–10 billion dollars in the US and around 40 billion dollars worldwide.2Many different causes of excess water production exist (Table 1). Each of these problems requires a different approach to find the optimum solution. Therefore, to achieve a high success rate when treating water production problems, the nature of the problem must first be correctly identified.3 Many different materials and methods can be used to attack excess water production problems. Generally, these methods can be categorized as chemical or mechanical (see Table 2). Each of these methods may work very well for certain types of problems but are usually ineffective for other types of problems. Again, for effective treatment, the nature of the problem must first be correctly identified.Four problem categories are listed in Table 1 in the general order of increasing treatment difficulty. Within each category, the order of listing is only roughly related to the degree of treatment difficulty. Category A, "Conventional" Treatments Normally Are an Effective Choice, includes the application of water shutoff techniques that are generally well established, utilize materials with high mechanical strength, and function in or very near the wellbore. Examples include Portland cement, mechanical tubing patches, bridge plugs, straddle packers, and wellbore sand plugs.A few comments may be helpful to clarify some of the listings in Table 1. First, the difference between Problems 1 and 4 is simply a matter of aperture size of the casing leak and size of the flow channel behind the casing leak. Problem 1, involving casing leaks without flow restrictions, is where the leak is occurring through a large aperture breach in the piping (greater than roughly 1/8 in.) and a large flow conduit (greater than roughly 1/16 in.) behind the leak. The use of Portland cement is favored for treating Problem 1. Problem 4, involving casing leaks with flow restrictions, is where the leak is occurring through a small aperture breach (e.g., "pinhole" and tread leaks) in the piping (less than roughly 1/8 in.) and a small flow conduit (less than roughly 1/16 in.) behind the leak. The use of gel is favored to successfully treat Problem 4. In this paper, the gels under discussion may include those formed fromchemically crosslinking water-soluble organic polymers,water-based organic monomers, orsilicates. Keywords: gelant, upstream oil & gas, placement, gel, production well, pipe, reservoir, permeability, leak, waterflooding Subjects: Improved and Enhanced Recovery, Waterflooding This content is only available via PDF. 2001. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.