PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION USING SURFACTANT STIMULATION HUFF & PUFF AND CONTINUES INJECTION (O field – South Sumatera basin)

2. PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION
USING SURFACTANT STIMULATION HUFF & PUFF
AND CONTINUES INJECTION
(O field – South Sumatera basin)
By
Andi Anriansyah

3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION USING SURFACTANT STIMULATION HUFF & PUFF
AND CONTINUES INJECTION (O field – South Sumatera basin)
The purpose Surfactant Stimulation Huff & Puff and Continues Injection using
SeMAR Technology is to Enhance Oil Production and Recovery by Stimulating the
Reservoir Behavior and Performance, Situation of Reservoir Surrounding the Oil
Wellbore as Condition of Mature Oil Production & Recovery. Huff and Puff is a process
of injecting surfactant solution into a well, and then allowed to stand (soaking) sometime
after it was produced again. So Huff & Puff was injecting chemicals into a well and
produce at the same well.
The Candidate wells are divided into two types of methods, namely the
stimulation of huff & puff which are some for reopening wells and continues injection are
for the current injector wells. Subsurface Evaluation of recent Reopening wells, that the
wells as canditate for Surfactan Stimulation by Huff & Puff or continues Injection has
been performed. There are 23 wells of Reopening wells & 4 or 5 wells of waste water
injection as pressure maintenance.
Based on the historical performance & the average production of the wells
in The O field, for each well to be stimulated either with surfactan huff & puff or
continues injection is expected to produce a minimum gain of 6 bopd. The production
forecast of all wells with the assumption that The Operator conducted 2 (two)
Stimulation Surfactant job per month, it shall finished all the wells in the month of 14th
that production will reach minimum 119 BOPD in the 1st
year and average 125 BOPD in
the 2nd
year also peak production gain will reach minimum 138 BOPD in the month 15th
.
(Figure -1).
In order Field Development and maximize the production, mainly ongoing / continues
Evaluation related to full scale EOR then there are some activity should be conducted
as follows:
1. Laboratory Test from sample on area block fault and layer of the wells (Table-1),
the same area block fault and layer with different wells should be have the same
result.
2. Consult with the provider for the result laboratory recommendation for SeMAR
stimulation by huff & puff and continues injection planning and execution
(including the facility unit and budget). Additional facility unit will be suggested by
Facility engineer, Civil Engineer, and Process engineer.
3. Monitor and evaluate the program by huff & puff and continues injection result.
4. Other Activity that support optimizing the Production of The O Field related with
SeMAR Technology (Stimulating the Reservoir Behavior and Performance).

4. Table-1. Candidates wells screening summary
Figure 1. Production forecast with 2 (two) wells per month
ZONES Open Layer BOPD
Qoi
(BOPD)
Rate
Max
Cum.
(MBO)
Proven
(MBO)
Remaining
(MBO)
1 KM-289 H 3 S3 S3(259.0 - 262.0) 6 12.58 15.8 23.51 3-S3 62.8 39.29
2 KM 196 - 5 S5 S5 (311.12-328) 6 157 41.4 175.56 5-S5 182 6.44
3 KM 127 - 4 S2 S2 (222.21 – 223) 6 629 ? ? 4-S2 20.4 ?
4 KM-061 H 3 S3
S3A (232.0 - 263.0); S3B (254.5
- 255.5)
6 ? 16.3 8.9 3-S3 68.3 59.4
5 KM-092 - 4 S2 or S1 S2 or S1 (181.29-187.1) 6 19 ? 2.15 4-S2 20.4 18.25
6 KM-202 F 2 S1 or STC S1 or STC (185.0 - 192.0) 6 251 8.6 24.98 2-STC 40.8 15.82
7 KM-099 G 2 S5 S5(328.0-330.5; 320.0-324.5) 6 18.86 12.2 18.7 2-S5 86.4 67.7
8 KM-230 D 1 STC STC(158.5-166) 6 189 16.5 103.14 1-STC 116.6 13.46
9 KM-227 C 1 STC STC (167-179.2) 6 75 57.7 45.9 1-STC 99.5 53.6
10 KM-232 D 1 STC STC (173.4-190.65) 6 ? 41.4 56.4 1-STC 98 41.6
11 KM-185 E 2 STC STC (123.3-127.9) 6 30 ? 6.7 2-STC 68.4 61.7
12 KM-206 D 1 S1 or STC STC (146.5-147) 6 63 ? 22.7 1-STC 49.8 27.1
13 KM-299 H 3 S5 S5 (339-345) 6 13 17.7 27.15 3-S5 31.3 4.15
14 KM-010 M 8 S5 S5 or S6 (303.61-311) 6 ? 6 27.16 8-S5 32.4 5.24
15 KM-128 E 2 S1 S1 (194-201) 6 ? 19.8 22.5 2-S1 102.1 79.6
16 KM-065 F 2 S1 S1 (?-248) 6 ? ? 10.1 2-S1 63.8 53.7
17 KM-209 - 8 S3 S3(246.17-257.36) 6 541 3.2 98.2 8-S3 98.3 0.1
18 KM-029 M 7 S5 S5(320.09-327.5) 6 ? ? 27.1 7-S5 34.6 7.5
19 KM-211 L 7 S3 S3 (?-227 ) 6 ? 21.6 25.6 7-S3 57.3 31.7
20 KM-290 M 7 S7 S7 (421.8-423.0) 6 6 38.5 17.1 7-S7 65 47.9
21 KM-067 G 3 S3 S3(232.25-248.5) 6 126 32.3 85.18 3-S3 87.4 2.22
22 KM-217 - 9 STC STC (167.8-168)OH 6 19 25.6 33.7 9-STC 77.8 44.1
23 KM-316 G 2 S5 - S6 S5 - S6 (286.2-402.0) 6 7.5 ? 2.5 2-S5 22.7 20.2
24 KM-150 - 5 STC
LSTC ( 101.0-102.5 ; 98.0-99.0 ;
91.0-94.0), S1 (197.5-199.0)
6 ? 47.4 83.7 5-STC 124.4 40.7
25 KM-017 M 8 S3/ S5 (305.36-310.8) 6 31 24.4 70.1 8-S5 94 23.9
KM-097 - 4 STC (85.5-102.0) 6 157 67.7 38.1 4-STC 96.4 58.3
26 KM-087A H 3 STC ? 6 ? 62.8 16.3 3-STC 71.5 55.2
27 KM-522 - 4 STC LSTC (83.0-89.5 ; 73.5-81.5) 6 19.4 37.1 4.16 4-STC 71.5 67.34
Prod History Reserve
Pattern
location
Block
Fault
SampleNo Well Name
TARGET
In The month of 14th (119 BOPD)
All wells shall completed

6. i
FOREWORD
This Book ‘PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION USING SURFACTANT
STIMULATION HUFF & PUFF AND CONTINUES INJECTION (O field – South
Sumatera basin)’ is an evaluation that was developed based on the idea of ‘Proposal
Evaluation of Chemical EOR Potential for O Field (SeMAR / SurPlus)’ and related with
the Result of Reopening Activity of some wells that was low influx or high water as
candidate wells to be stimulated.
The surfactant stimulation of candidate wells are divided into two types of
methods, namely the stimulation of huff & puff (for some reopening wells) and continues
injection (for the current injector wells). Subsurface Evaluation of recent Reopening
wells, that the wells as canditate for Surfactan Stimulation by Huff & Puff or continues
Injection has been performed. There are 23 wells of Reopening wells & 4 or 5 wells of
waste water injection as pressure maintenance.
Huff and Puff is a process of injecting surfactant solution into a well, and then
allowed to stand (soaking) sometime after it was produced again. So Huff & Puff was
injecting chemicals into a well and produce at the same well. Production optimization
using surfactant stimulation Huff & Puff shall rental facility unit but continues injection
using existing gathering station at injector wells. For proper engineering practices
should be suggested by Facility engineer, Civil Engineer, and Process engineer.
Based on the historical performance & the average production of the wells in O
field, for each well to be stimulated either with huff & puff or continues injection is
expected to produce a minimum gain of 6 BOPD. The production forecast of all wells
with the assumption that The O field Operator conducted 2 (two) Stimulation Surfactant
job per month, it shall finished all the wells in the month of 14th
that production will reach
minimum 119 BOPD in the 1st
year and average 125 BOPD in the 2nd
year also peak
production gain will reach minimum 138 BOPD in the month 15th
.
The purpose of compiling this book is to provide simple alternative method or
work in Evaluating Subsurface reservoir for Production optimization, and the data used
with different name with Original data and the exact location is untold. Suggestions and
constructive criticism is expected in the preparation of the next book.
ANDI ANRIANSYAH

7. ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD ....................................................................................................................... ¡
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................... ¡ ¡
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................1
1.1 The O field Location .................................................................................................1
1.2 Regional Geology.....................................................................................................1
2 GEOLOGY OF THE O FIELD ..........................................................................................7
2.1 Stratigraphy and Structure........................................................................................7
2.2 Reservoir description................................................................................................9
2.3 Production history...................................................................................................12
3 SURFACTANT STIMULATION HUFF & PUFF AND CONTINUES INJECTION .............13
3.1 Reservoir Screening...............................................................................................14
3.1.a. Pattern Area and well Selection.................................................................14
3.1.b. Summary Data Initial Screening................................................................15
3.1.c. Verification of Reserves........ ....................................................................17
3.2 Subsurface Analysis Candidate wells…………………………………………………..18
3.2.a. Reopening wells........................................................................................18
3.2.b. water injection wells...................................................................................41
3.3 Laboratory Test.......................................................................................................47
3.3.a. Fluid properties Test..................................................................................47
3.3.b. SeMAR Screening -Phase Behavior Test..................................................47
3.3.c. SeMAR Screening -Spontaneous Imbibition Test......................................47
3.3.d. Mixture Viscosity Test ………………………...............................................47
3.4 Surface Facility……………………….........................................................................47
3.4.a. Stimulation Huff & Puff...............................................................................48
3.4.b. Continues Injection.....................................................................................49
4 FORECAST PRODUCTION .........................................................................................50
5. CONCLUSION & RECOMENDATION............................................................................52
5.1 Conclusion .............................................................................................................52
5.2 Recomendation ......................................................................................................52
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................54
APPENDIX
Well Correlation of Candidate Wells for Surfactant Stimulation...................................... A
Reserve Estimation of Candidate Wells for Surfactant Stimulation................................ B
Well Diagram & Well History of Candidate Wells for Surfactant Stimulation .................C
Proposal Evaluation of Chemical EOR Potential for O Field..........................................D

8. iii
Contact: andy_83brur@yahoo.co.uk

9. ABOUT THE WRITER
Having more than 10 years of work experiences in Oil and
Gas Industry both exploration and development such as
Bandarjaya / Lampung III Project (at PT. Harpindo Mitra
Kharisama), Reevaluation of Diski Oil field - North Sumatra
basin (at TAC PEP – PKDP), and Preliminary Fractured
evaluation some oil fields (at PT. OPAC Barata-Kejora Gas
Bumi Mandiri), Evaluation for Klamono Block - Salawati Basin
and Evaluation for Tebat Agung Block - South Sumatera Basin (at Trada Petroleum Pte.
Ltd.), Operation of Kampung Minyak oilfield (at KSO Pertamina EP – PKM) and
Formation Evaluation of Tsimororo Field - Madagascar (at Lemigas), J1J3 Oil Fields -
NW Java basin (at ECC).
He was graduated from Institute Technology of Bandung, Geology Engineering
Department in 2006 as S.T. (Sarjana Teknik) or Bachelor degree in Geology. Before that
He was graduated from SMUN 2 Cimahi (Senior High School) in 2001, and from SLTPN
9 Cimahi (Junior High School) in 1998, also graduated from SDN KIHAPIT I (Elementary
school) in 1995.