3 steps to enhancing oil

recovery rates with low

salinity waterflooding.

Last year, global oil consumption that the economic (achievable) EOR Low Salinity Waterflooding (LSWF)
growth averaged 1.6 million barrels potential for the top 20 fields alone
per day. The demand for oil is could amount to 500 million barrels of LSWF, sometimes also called modified
expected to continue growing oil equivalent, which is comparable in salinity or tuned ionic composition,
towards 20401. But, while demand size to the top 20 new projects that has been a topic of research since
continues to grow, production from were approved for development early 2010. Screening work we carried
mature basins, such as the North Sea, between 1998 and 20134. out, using high-powered analytic and
is declining. Based on current simulation tools shows there is a
production rates, industry estimates EOR technologies are being significant number of North Sea fields
suggest that only 43%2 of UK considered. In the North Sea, for which could be suitable for
Continental Shelf (UKCS) oil will be example, low salinity waterflooding consideration for LSWF.
produced, resulting in more than half (LSWF) and polymer injection EOR
of the oil in place not being technologies are thought to have the The first commercial offshore
commercialised. most potential to economically deployment of the technology is
increase recovery rates. Both are expected in the second half of this
By adopting enhanced oil recovery included in an Oil and Gas Authority year, when BP launches its Clair Ridge
(EOR) techniques, the amount of oil (OGA) industry target to reach 250 project. BP will use its own
that could be recovered could be million barrels of incremental proprietary LSWF technology on the
increased by as much as 30% to 70%3. reserves using EOR by 2021. project, called LoSal®, as a secondary
A UK EOR work group has estimated waterflood from the start of field life.

1
https://www.iea.org/tcp/fossilfuels/eor/
2
https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/energy-outlook.html
3
https://www.ogauthority.co.uk/news-publications/publications/2017/recovery-factor-benchmarking-report-uk-continental-shelf-ukcs-oilfields/
4
https://www.ogauthority.co.uk/media/1143/eor_strategy_final-2016.pdf

Lloyd’s Register 3 steps to enhancing oil recovery rates with low salinity waterflooding | 01
The development, which involved
installing new infrastructure West of Low Salinity Waterflooding
Shetland on the UKCS, is expected to
deliver an additional 40 million The technique involves injecting treated seawater or treated produced
barrels of oil above that which could water into the reservoir.
be recovered using untreated sea
water. Creating low salinity water for LSWF involves stripping certain
compounds from seawater or produced water, especially sulphide and
Not all fields are big enough to justify salt, before it is injected or re-injected into the reservoir. This process is
this additional infrastructure expense, relatively less complex, less costly, and more readily available than other
which means applying EOR EOR technologies, which may require chemicals (such as surfactants,
technologies on a field could be polymers, etc.) or gas to be sourced, transported, stored and prepared,
reliant on use of existing as well as a need for additional infrastructure.
infrastructure. Our recent North Sea
EOR-focused client event, hosted in
partnership with Heriot-Watt
University, CMG Ltd. and Nalco
Champion found that there was a
concern that looming
decommissioning plans could result
in the removal of this infrastructure,
resulting in fields being abandoned
before their maximum potential
recovery is reached through use of
EOR.

Other barriers to EOR implementation

include proving the benefits of EOR
for a given field, in order to verify the
investment required, and aversion to
risk, particularly the perceived risk
associated with using new and
unfamiliar technologies. Topside
constraints could also limit the ability
to invest in the equipment required to
treat seawater for LSWF.

Finally, while it is widely agreed that

LSWF can lead to increased recovery
rates, following a number of projects, Depletion EOR mechanism, could help to either
all onshore, the mechanisms by further extend the life of a field,
which it occurs are not that well Oil fields tend to be produced in up to reduce water cut (the amount of
understood. Thorough laboratory three phases: primary, secondary and water produced alongside any oil
analysis, which accurately reflects a tertiary recovery. Primary drive production – which in some fields is
given field’s conditions, is key to mechanisms are pressure depletion more than 90%) or improve oil
reducing risk and uncertainty when and either gas cap or aquifer drive, all production rates.
assessing a field’s eligibility for LSWF of which tend to leave a large
EOR. proportion of the oil in place at the While most mature fields will have
end of economic field life. Secondary undergone secondary waterflooding
drive processes, which include before low salinity waterflood is
reinjection of gas or injection of water considered, the technique could be
(formation or another source of used as a secondary drive
water), can increase recovery rates mechanism. Evidence from most EOR
and extend field life, but may still fall processes suggests that the earlier
short of unlocking a reservoir’s full EOR techniques are implemented the
potential. Tertiary recovery, using an better.

Lloyd’s Register 3 steps to enhancing oil recovery rates with low salinity waterflooding | 02
 What we observe is not nature
itself, but nature exposed to
our method of questioning.
Werner Heisenberg,
German physicist,
1901-1975

LSWF is a potential EOR tool for Rock - fluid interactions 2. Osmosis: an even less well
clastic, most types of conventional understood process where low
reservoir lithology, chalk and 1. Uncertainties relating to chemistry: salinity water is introduced to one
limestone reservoirs. It could help some research suggests calcium, side of an oil column and creates
increase recovery rates from 2% to magnesium and sulphate ions to an osmotic potential with the
22%5. The technology takes be the most important influencers separated formation water across
advantage of an imbalance in ions in on EOR drive. Other suggested the oil column, resulting in
the low salinity water, compared to LSWF mechanisms are: fines droplets of water moving through
the formation water within the migration, i.e. the movement of the oil column.
reservoir. fine clay, or quartz particles within
the reservoir, which can divert the Other mechanisms thought to
Some fields already may be taking injection water and or reduce influence LSWF include pH and
advantage of the effects of using low productivity; and other interaction temperature. The combination of
salinity water. This could be because with clays, e.g. clay swelling or mechanisms involved in any one field,
the source of water used for injection expansion of the double layer, and therefore their potential to
is not from the aquifer or reservoir, or weakening surface bonds and improve recovery rates, will vary
because the sea water being injected releasing additional oil. depending on the properties of each
has a lower, or significantly modified, field, including the properties of the
salinity compared to the formation 2. Dissolution: where the injected rock, the formation water, the
water, which has seen to be the case water dissolves chalk reservoir, injected water and the oil in place. Oil
in some North Sea chalk formations6. releasing oil. This process can also contains millions of compounds,
potentially cause subsidence, as water has more than 20-30 different
Assessing the field of uncertainty has been experienced in the ions, and reservoir rock fascia are a
Ekofisk field in the Norwegian mix of many different elements. The
A major challenge for LSWF North Sea. interplay of all these components and
implementation is that some of the elements create a complex system to
fundamental mechanisms on how it Fluid – fluid interactions be assessed.
works involve complex chemical
physics, around which there remain 1. Micro emulsions: the interaction of Core analysis for better recovery
uncertainties. Several hypotheses new water with oil, which creates a
exist, as well as evidence of certain micro emulsion. The micro Coreflood analysis, using samples of
contributing factors. These include: emulsion can disperse through the core taken from the reservoir, is
oil or water phase, creating micro required to better understand the
dispersions, and allowing droplets fundamental mechanisms in a given
of oil to be produced where they reservoir and therefore assess the
hadn’t previously. eligibility and potential for LSWF
application.

5
Secondary and Tertiary Recovery of Crude Oil from Outcrop and Reservoir Rocks by Low Salinity Waterflooding. W. Winoto, et al. SPE paper 154209, 2012
6
Water Based EOR in Carbonates and Sandstones: New Chemical Understanding of the EOR-Potential Using “Smart Water”. Tor Austad, University of
Stavanger, 2012

Lloyd’s Register 3 steps to enhancing oil recovery rates with low salinity waterflooding | 03
Coreflood analysis will not only help
assess feasibility, but also potential Most laboratories overestimate the additional recovery from EOR
pitfalls. For example, while LSWF processes. At the same time, many laboratory tests overestimate the
might produce more oil from a value of residual oil saturations, which will then impact the result of any
reservoir, it may cause scaling or fines economic analysis of EOR potential in a field, usually underestimating
migration, which could then obstruct the potential. It has been suggested that residual oil saturation in most
the reservoir flow paths, reducing North Sea fields is overestimated by 10-15% of the field’s volume7, thus
permeability. Decreased permeability underestimating reserves by this amount. Reserves underestimation
would result in the need for higher could be enough to deter some companies from considering EOR,
injection pressures or would reduce because they do not see its full potential. Not everyone sees the
production rates. importance of a correct assessment of true residual oil saturation – in the
belief a field will never achieve it – though, there will be portions of a
Although core analysis should field that do and if incorrectly assessed, may lead to adverse decisions,
improve understanding, as indicated neglecting potential additional economic recovery that true residual oil
in the book “Core Analysis: A Best saturation may imply when correct analyses are implemented.
Practice Guide,” there are several
potential issues with experimental
and analytical processes that can
increase uncertainty and create poor Impact from test methodology Boundary effects
quality data. These include: variable
laboratory standards; inexperienced The method used to obtain data can Core samples will only reflect
design and supervision of test impact the result, if the fundamental properties within the boundaries (or
programmes; lack of cause-effect physics of the test and its impact on physics) of the sample size, not across
understanding of individual the data is not understood, leading to an entire reservoir zone, which could
processes; unrepresentative sample incorrect assumptions in analytic be multitudes in scale larger and not
selection; inappropriate data calculation processes. a homogenous structure. Standard
interpretation; poor reporting analytical methods for calculating
standards, etc. Testing real-world injectant properties, such as relative
permeability, often assume no impact
Specific issues can arise around: Simulated water is often used in by these boundary effects.
laboratory testing. In the field, it
Inappropriate coring and core could be treated sea water or Insufficient data acquisition
handling procedures produced water, which could be
contaminated with sediment and/or Correction of boundary effects
• Every core has to go through droplets of oil, both of which could requires measurements of all physical
multiple acquisition and impact the EOR mechanism, within properties that may influence
preparation stages, from its the reservoir. While contamination experimental results. These are not
extraction to the laboratory. The would likely not impact relative captured in a coreflood experiment
core could be damaged at and permeability, since this focuses on but require supporting properties,
between each stage. deep reservoir flow, where any such as capillary pressure. Without
• Samples may not be homogenous. impurities most probably have not knowledge of supporting properties,
The most representative samples reached, having dropped out, it may correct data may not be acquired.
need to be identified for testing. impact the near wellbore region.
• During a laboratory process, Thus, while production potential may Steps to improving your core
samples can begin to exhibit increase in the reservoir, the result analysis
anomalous properties, outside of may not be so positive if the injection
what would be considered well is damaged. With appropriate processes and
representative, which, if not analyses, potential for low salinity
identified, will lead to inaccurate waterflooding can be assessed and
results. data provided for input into dynamic
reservoir models.

7
https://www.iea.org/tcp/fossilfuels/eor/

Lloyd’s Register 3 steps to enhancing oil recovery rates with low salinity waterflooding | 04
There are three main requirements for • The composition of the injection Conclusion
more accurate feasibility assessment water and aquifer water, i.e. the
of LSWF: reducing uncertainties by difference in ion composition To effectively assess the feasibility of
applying best practices; acquiring the • Effluent water measurements – LSWF, it is essential to perform
correct data necessary to evaluate composition and properties appropriate core handling and
and simulate any observed low • Reservoir minerology laboratory analyses that use best
salinity effect; assessing possible practice processes and provide
formation damage and 3. Assess possible formation damage sufficient analytical results to allow
geomechanical alteration. and geomechanical alteration: detailed quality control and
interpretation of the data. Moreover, it
1. Reduce uncertainties by applying • Dissolution around the wellbore is crucial to investigate the potential
best practice: will increase near wellbore detrimental impact LSWF may have
permeability, but potentially on aspects of formation damage and
• Through appropriate core weaken wellbore stability, and geomechanics.
acquisition and core handling may also precipitate deeper in
best practise. the reservoir, reducing While other forms of EOR have been
• Using best practice in preparing permeability. This requires an seen to have the potential to produce
and selecting the core samples, understanding of geomechanics better results, such as gas injection,
to ensure they are as and rock strength. the requirement to source and
representative of the reservoir as • The impact of possible solids or transport gas for injection, for
possible oil in injection water needs to be example, limits its applicability and
• Quality control throughout the understood. economics. LSWF, on the other hand,
entire process, through: • The potential for fines migration is more flexible and lower cost, with a
cleaning; measuring base and swelling and the impact of readily accessible feedstock –
properties; obtaining fluid minerology. seawater. BP’s successful introduction
distribution representative of the of its LoSal® technology to the Clair
reservoir; restoring wettability Simulating the test, using relative Ridge development could help raise
representative of the reservoir; permeability and pressure properties, the profile of the potential for LSWF to
and assuring that permeability and comparing the results will reduce increase oil recovery rates.
and saturation properties reflect uncertainty relating to the boundary
those of the reservoir. effect.

2. Acquire the correct data necessary

to evaluate and simulate any Lloyd’s Register Reservoir Expertise
observed low salinity effect,
including: Our team of geologists, geophysicists, petrophysicists, reservoir engineers
and subsurface specialists can help you to optimise performance across
• Testing under representative your reservoirs.
reservoir conditions
• Relative permeability for both We deliver solutions to help optimise reservoir performance; from
water types (aquifer/formation development and extraction from new reservoirs, enhancing recovery from
water, for a base case, and fields that have been unreachable in the past, to maximising depleting
injection water). reservoirs and extending the life of mature assets.
• Imbibition capillary pressure for
both water types For more information visit lr.org or contact oilandgas@lr.org

Get in touch Lloyd’s Register

Please visit www.lr.org/oilandgas Kingswells Causeway
for more information Prime Four Business Park
Or call +44 (0)1224 398 398 Kingswell, Aberdeen
email oilandgas@lr.org United Kingdom
AB15 8PU

Lloyd’s Register is a trading name of Lloyd’s Register Group

Limited and its subsidiaries. For further details
please see www.lr.org/entities
© Lloyd’s Register Group Limited 2018