Evaluation of the Salinity Gradient Concept in Surfactant Flooding

Abstract

Abstract Salinity design goals are to keep as much surfactant as possible in the active region and to minimize surfactant possible in the active region and to minimize surfactant retention. Achieving these is complicated becausecompositions change as a result of dispersion, chromatographic separation of components distributed among two or more phases, and retention by adsorption onto rock and/or absorption in a trapped phase-.in the presence of divalent ions, optimal salinity is not constant but a function of surfactant concentration and calcium/sodium ratio: andthe changing composition of a system strongly influences transport of the components. A one-dimensional (ID) six-component finite-difference simulator was used to compare a salinity gradient design with a constant salinity design. Numerical dispersion was used to evaluate the effects of dispersive mixing. These simulations show that, with a salinity gradient, change of phase behavior with salinity can be used to advantage both to keep surfactant in the active region and to minimize retention. By contrast, under some conditions with a constant salinity design. it is possible to have early surfactant breakthrough and/or large surfactant retention. Other experiments conducted showed that high salinity does retard surfactant, and, if the drive has high salinity. a great amount of surfactant retention can result. The design that produced the best recovery had the water flood brine over optimum and the drive under optimum; the peak surfactant concentration occurred in the active region and oil production ceased at the same point. Introduction The phase behavior of surfactant/oil/brine systems for different salinities is shown in Fig. 1. Low salinities. called "underoptimum" or "Type II(−)" phase behavior, are shown at the top of Fig. 1. In this kind of system, surfactant is partitioned predominantly into the aqueous phase. predominantly into the aqueous phase. High salinities, called "overoptimum" or "Type II(+)" phase behavior, are shown at the bottom of Fig. 1. In this kind of system, surfactant is partitioned predominantly into the oleic phase. When the oleic phase predominantly into the oleic phase. When the oleic phase has a low oil concentration, the oil is said to be "swollen" by the surfactant and brine. At moderate salinities, the system can have up to three phases and is called "Type III." This is illustrated in the phases and is called "Type III." This is illustrated in the middle of Fig. 1. The salinity at which the middle phase has a WOR of unity is called "optimal salinity" because the lowest interfacial tensions (IFT's) usually occur near this salinity. As salinity increases, there is a steady progression from Type II(−) to Type III to Type II(+) phase behavior. The middle-phase composition moves from the brine side of the diagram to the oil side. The two-phase regions that correspond to the Type II(−) and Type II( +) systems can be seen above the three-phase region in Fig. 1.