Pre-Injection Reservoir Modeling and Uncertainty Study for Illinois Basin-Decatur Project Ozgur Senel (Schlumberger Carbon Services) Nikita Chugunov (Schlumberger - Doll Research)

© 2011 Schlumberger. All rights reserved. An asterisk is used throughout this presentation to denote a mark of Schlumberger. Other company, product, and service names are the properties of their respective owners.

Outline

●  Introduction

● Reservoir Model Workflow ― Upscaling ― Reservoir Model Calibration ― Base Case

● Uncertainty Analysis ― Wellbore Pressures and CO2 Mass Partitioning ― Reservoir Scale: Plume and Pressure Pulse Extent ― Verification Well: Westbay* multilevel groundwater characterization

and monitoring system responses

Introduction

2800 ft

STRAT COLUMN OF THE ILLINOIS BASIN

2800 ft

Injector

Verification

Workflow

Seismic Data

Seismic Data Attribute Analysis

Petrophysics

Geological Model

Facies Model

Porosity Model

Permeability Model

Upscaling

Predictive Reservoir Simulations

Uncertainty Analysis

Upscaling

Geological Model:

● 1298 × 1308 × 534 ~ 906M Cells

● 150 × 150 ft cells

Reservoir Model:

● 20 × 20 mile

● 143 × 143 ×148 ~ 3M Cells

● 50ft to 1500ft lateral cells

Static Model Upscaled Model

Eau Claire

Mount Simon

Water Injection/Fall Off Test Reservoir Model Calibration

Reservoir Model calibrated on skin and global permeability

multiplier.

Time, days

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pres

sure

, psi

3000

32

00

3400

36

00

3800

40

00

4200

44

00

4600

Base Case - Simulation Results

Injection Rate & Pressure Profiles

Injection Ramp-Up Time

7 Days

Time, years

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pres

sure

, psi

C

O2 Flow

Rate, M

t/d

Injection Pressure & Rate Profile 80

0 12

00

1600

20

00

2400

28

00

3200

36

00

4000

Wellhead Pressure

Bottomhole Pressure

Injection Rate

Fracturing Pressure ~ 5025 psig at 7025 ft

0 500

1000

CO2 Mass Partitioning

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Mas

s Fr

actio

n, %

Time, years

CO2 Mass Partitioning

Unbounded, %

Trapped, %

Dissolved, %

IBDP - CO2 Plume & Pressure Pulse Evolution

50 Years

Pressure - Saturation Plume Evolution

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 1 2 3 4

Rad

ius,

ft

Time, Years

Equivalent Radius of 184 psi Pulse

Pressure Pulse Radius

0

75

150

225

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Are

a, a

cres

Time, Years

CO2 Plume Area

IBDP

Uncertainty Analysis

Input Parameters

Parameter Distribution-Range

Number of Realizations 128

Residual H2O Saturation (Swr) Uniform(0.15, 0.55)

Residual CO2 Saturation (Sgr) Uniform(0.05, 0.30)

CO2 Relative Permeability @ Swr Uniform(0.30, 0.70)

kv/kh Reservoir Unit Uniform(0.20, 0.70)

kv/kh Non-Reservoir Unit Uniform(0.01, 0.05)

Upper Perforation Skin Uniform(-0.7, 0)

Lower Perforation Skin Uniform(-0.7, -1.4)

Output Parameters

●  Injection Ramp-Up Time

●  Injector & Verification Well Bottomhole Pressures

●  Injector Tubing Head Pressure

● CO2 Mass Partitioning

● CO2 Saturation Plume & Pressure Pulse Development

● Westbay – Saturation & Pressure Profiles

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

2nd Analysis

Time, Days

Injection Rate Ramp-Up Time

Cum

ulat

ive

Prob

abili

ty

CDF

Injection Ramp-Up Time

P10: 10 days P50: 22 days P90: 80 days

Best Case: 5 days

Worst Case: 307 days

1600

1700

1800

1900

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pres

sure

, psi

a

Time, years

Base

P10

P50

P90

3000

3200

3400

3600

3800

4000

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pres

sure

, psi

Time, Years

Base Case

P10

P50

P90

Pressure Profiles

Injector – Wellhead Pressure (120°F)

Injector – Bottomhole Pressure

Compression capacity is 2000psi

Verification – Bottomhole Pressure

Max injection bottomhole pressure is 80% of fracturing pressure

3200

3250

3300

3350

3400

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pres

sure

, psi

Time, years

Base Case

P10

P50

P90

1600

1700

1800

1900

0 1 2 3 4 5

Pres

sure

, psi

a

Time, years

Base

P10

P50

P90

1550

1350

1450

1250

Injector – Wellhead Pressure (90°F)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40 50

Mas

s, F

ract

ion

Time, Years

Trapped CO2

P10

P50

P90

Base

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0 10 20 30 40 50

Mas

s, F

ract

ion

Time, Years

Dissolved CO2

P10

P50

P90

Base

CO2 Mass Partitioning

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40 50

Mas

s, F

ract

ion

Time, Years

Unbounded CO2

P10

P50

P90

Base

Pressure Profile at Verification Well

Color-profile indicates the probability of ΔP at a given depth along verification well.

Pressure Profile at Verification Well

Color-profile indicates the probability of ΔP at a given depth along verification well.

CO2 Saturation Profile at Verification Well

Color-profile indicates the probability of CO2 saturation at a given depth along verification well.

Concluding Remarks

● Reservoir model consistent with all available data

●  Injection rate ramp-up time (P10-P90): 10 - 80 days

● CO2 mass partitioning (P10-P90): ― 15 - 25% CO2 dissolved by 2062 ― 40 - 65% CO2 residually trapped by 2062

● Plume containment and Area of Review (AOR): ― No vertical migration above 6,350 ft ― Spatial extent (P10-P90): 134.5 - 254 Acres by 2062 (N-NW) ― AOR (P10-P90): 450 - 630 ft radius during injection (ΔP = 184psi)

● Verification well: probability estimates for Westbay responses

CO2 Injection in a Saline Formation: Pre-Injection Reservoir Modeling and Uncertainty Study for Illinois Basin-Decatur Project

Ozgur Senel (Schlumberger Carbon Services)

Nikita Chugunov (Schlumberger - Doll Research)