SPE 118096

Sweet and Sour Gas Injection as an Enhanced Oil Recovery Method

in Abu Dhabi Offshore Oil Fields
Ryoji Uchiyama, Yutaka Yamada, Hiroshi Ishii (ADOC), Lutfi A. Salameh (ADNOC)

Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 3–6 November 2008.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Oil production from two adjacent offshore fields, ARF and GAF, started in 1989 and 1995 respectively in conjunction with
sweet gas injection, followed by sour gas injection in 2001. The application of sweet and sour gas injection as an EOR
method and transition of these reservoirs’ behavior to date are discussed. Reservoir fluids in these fields comprise two
types: Arab A reservoir is a highly under-saturated black oil reservoir with low GOR. This reservoir has applied the high
pressure gas miscible drive method as an EOR. On the other hand, Arab C reservoir is a near critical fluid reservoir with
high GOR. This reservoir has applied the gas cycling method, i.e. gas injection into the gaseous phase at the crest of the
structure. Miscible displacement can be achieved by gas injection taking advantage of the naturally occurring fluid
properties. Since commencement of production/injection, the produced fluid property has been monitored to optimize
reservoir management. The historical transition of the fluid property is important in understanding the behavior of injected
gas into the reservoirs. H2S/CO2 content is one of the simplest parameters to investigate the behavior of injected gas in
reservoirs. The fluid data with H2S/CO2 content is used to validate the reservoir simulation models. Since the allocation of
the gas injection volume to each reservoir is essential under the limited amount of the total gas, the optimum allocation is
necessary and has been determined through sensitivity studies using the validated models.

Background
The ARF and GAF fields are located in the southern part of the Arabian Gulf about 100km west of Abu Dhabi, United Arab
Emirates. The ARF field, which is located 16km north of Mubarraz Island, possesses a dome structure of 7x8 km2 in area
and 550ft in closure height, as shown in Figure 1. The GAF field, which is located between Mubarraz Island and the ARF
field, possesses a dome structure of 6x7 km2 in area and 450ft in closure height. Hydrocarbon in the ARF and GAF fields
was discovered within the Arab formation (Late Jurassic). The Arab formation reservoir is divided into four zones, Arab A,
B, C and D. Arab D was further subdivided into D1, D2 and D3. Porous zones are dolomite in Arab A, B and C and
limestone in Arab D. Tight zone consists of anhydrite and limestone.

Three types of hydrocarbon, black oil, volatile oil and gas condensate, are identified in the Arab reservoir of both fields. In
the ARF field, Arab A and B reservoir possesses the under-saturated black oil and Arab C and D1 reservoir possesses the
near critical fluid, which is also under-saturated. The composition of near critical fluid varies with depth, while the gas phase
exists in the crest area; the liquid phase exists in the flank area. Arab D23 reservoir possesses gas condensate. On the other
hand, in the GAF field, only Arab A reservoir possesses black oil. Arab B, C and D1 reservoir possesses the volatile oil;
moreover both the gas and liquid phase exist in the reservoir of Arab C and D1. Figure 2 shows the schematic hydrocarbon
distribution in the ARF and GA fields.
2 SPE 118096

Figure 1 Structure Map of ARF and GAF. Figure 2 Field Schematic Cross Section.

The black oil of Arab A and B in the ARF field could create miscibility on the reservoir condition with separator free gas,
which was certified by the PVT analyses. For enhanced oil recovery, the high pressure gas miscible drive was applied to
these reservoirs at the commencement of oil production. In Arab C and D1 reservoir, the reservoir pressure was 1,000psi
higher than the saturation pressure and in each phase, gas and liquid coexisted in the reservoir due to variations in the
composition with depth. To make the best use of this characteristic, the gas cycling method should be applied for these
reservoirs as it could achieve the naturally occurring miscible displacement with gas injection from the crest of the structure.

Based on the above theoretical and experimental evidence, the initial development plan was established in 1985. The sweet
gas injection operation with a di-glycol-amine gas-sweetening unit and high pressure sweet gas injection compressor was
applied in the development plan. As high pressure sour gas injection technology was not available in the mid 1980’s, the
sour and acid gas discharged from the processing plant was flared at the ARF site terminal located in the center of the ARF
field.

The ARF field commenced oil production in February 1989 in conjunction with sweet gas injection; the GAF field
commenced oil production in June 1995 with sweet gas injection similar to the ARF field. Investigation into a possible way
to minimize and eliminate the flaring of sour and acid gas was continuously conducted after the commencement of
production. A study on sulfur recovery was conducted including alternative processing methods, manufacturing plaster board
and disposal of liquid sulfur underground. The study result indicated negative implications.

Health, Safety and Environment Protection (HSE) performance was highlighted in Abu Dhabi in the late 1990’s. Based on
ADNOC’s invaluable information, a preliminary engineering study for the application of the sour gas injection plant was
conducted in April-May 1997. As a result, the study concluded that sour gas injection technology would be applicable to the
ARF/GA field operation with special attention to design, operation, maintenance and safety aspects.

Moreover, it was generally acknowledged that Minimum Miscibility Pressure (MMP) could decrease if gas containing the
rich intermediate composition was injected. In fact, it was certified by the slim tube test that MMP decreased in cases where
the gas containing the rich acid composition was injected. As the sour gas injection plant was applicable in these fields based
on the preliminary study and oil recovery could be improved, sour gas injection into the oil reservoir as the method of
eliminating sour gas flaring was applied. Commissioning of the sour gas plant was completed in October 2001 and the
SPE 118096 3

continuous injection of sour and acid gas has been in operation since mid-October 2001. Consequently, the gas flared at the
site terminal has become nominal, only leaving a small pilot burner. Operations using the sour gas injection plant have been
applied to date without any major problems.

Application of High Pressure Gas Miscible Drive for Arab A Reservoir

Arab A reservoir, one of the main reservoirs, possesses the under-saturated black oil with low gas oil ratio. As Arab A is an
edge water type reservoir and has a tight aquifer, any enhanced oil recovery method is indispensable to maintain the initial
production rate and improve ultimate oil recovery. The high pressure gas miscible drive was nominated as the one to
enhanced oil recovery methods and, initially, the creation of miscibility was investigated by the laboratory analyses.

The slim tube test was carried out by using the reservoir fluid of Arab A to investigate the dynamic miscibility (multiple
contact miscibility). The synthetic gas, which was created based on the separator gas removing H2S and CO2 of Arab C and
D, was used for the slim tube test. While, the MMP was determined from the pressure of the recovery break-over point when
the 1.0 pore volume was injected. As a result of the test, the MMP was approximately 4,250psig and the dynamic miscibility
was certified to be created in a high pressure condition. The initial reservoir pressure of Arab A, which was 5,400 psig, was
sufficiently higher than the MMP and the high pressure miscible drive application was therefore possible to in this reservoir.

Between 2001and 2002, the swelling test and slim tube test with the synthetic sour gas was carried out. To investigate the
static miscibility (first contact miscibility), the swelling test was done with three cases of synthetic sour gas containing
10%H2S+3%CO2, 20%H2S+5%CO2 and 40%H2S+10%CO2. As a result, the required pressure to create the miscibility was
7,500psig, 6,500psig and 5,100psig for each acid content, therefore it was certified that the required pressure has to be
decreased in order to increase the acid content. In addition, the slim tube test with the synthetic sour gas containing
10%H2S+3%CO2 was carried out to investigate the dynamic miscibility. The result showed that the MMP was decreased by
3,950psig if the sour gas was injected, as shown in Figure 3. By injecting sour gas, the MMP was 300psig lower than in a
case of injecting sweet gas.

Generally, it is known that the gas injection, which gas was enriched with the intermediate components including H2S and
CO2, had the advantage of achieving the miscibility more easily. The results of the slim tube test could certify that by
injecting the sour gas, it was easier to create the miscibility than by injecting the sweet gas.

SLIM TUBE TEST

Pressure vs. Oil Recovery at 1 PV Gas Injected
100
Cumulative Oil Recovery For 1.0 p.v.

90 y = 0.0012x + 86.581
of Gas Injection (%)

80

70
y = 0.0334x - 40.74

60
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000
Pressure (psig)

Figure 3 Slim tube test with sour gas.

The application of the high pressure gas miscible drive method was first attempted for the commercial fields in the Middle
East area, therefore the pilot test in the ARF field was carried out in order to prove the effectiveness of this application. The
producer A1 was set as an observation well, which was 510 meters in distance from the gas injector A7. The production
from A1 commenced in January 1989, while the gas injection from A7 commenced in March. It was observed that the GOR
started to increase in September 1989 and it rapidly increased in March 1990, and then A1 was then shut in with the
judgment of the gas breakthrough. The fluid samples of A1 were taken in November 1989 and January 1990, while the
analysis results showed that the fluid had a saturation pressure of more than 4,000psig, which was higher than the original
saturation pressure of 1,600psi. These results helped the fluid to create the gas miscible front. In addition, the early gas
4 SPE 118096

breakthrough due to the fingering was not observed. After that a long term production plan was established with the
simulation model optimized with the history data, the pilot test expanded to full-scale production in 1991.

Near Critical Fluid of Arab C and D1 Reservoir

The near critical fluid of Arab C and D1 has specific characteristics, which are mentioned below; (1) the composition of the
fluid varies with depth, (2) the fluids of these reservoirs are under-saturated, (3) gas phase and liquid phase coexist in the
same reservoir, (4) the reservoirs do not possess a gas cap but do have a phase boundary. The saturation pressure is 1,000
psig higher than the reservoir pressure, and furthermore the critical temperature gradually decreases as the depth becomes
shallow. Therefore, the property of the reservoir fluid varies continuously, i.e. the fluid of the crest area is gas phase and the
fluid of the flank area is liquid phase.

The triangle diagram of the composition for the reservoir fluid in Arab formation is shown in Figure 4. Point “O” shows the
composition of black oil in Arab A and B reservoir, and Point “G” shows the composition of gas condensate in Arab D23
reservoir. The composition of near critical fluid in Arab C and D1 reservoir is similar to the mixed fluid of the above two.
The near critical fluid, which is existed around the phase boundary, is similar as the miscible fluid created by the process of
the multi miscible contact.

With regard to this uniquely characteristic reservoir, the laboratory test showed the successive fluid property by depth. The
performance of liquid phase fraction using a swelling test is shown in Figure 5. It showed that the curves at each depth vary
continuously. The phase envelop of the near critical fluid for Arab C and D1 reservoir is shown in Figure 6. The reservoir
pressure is higher than critical point pressure and the composition varies with depth. Curve 1 indicates a phase envelop of the
fluid at the crest of the structure. With regard to the behavior of curve 1, dew point will be observed when the reservoir
pressure decreases with the application of a constant reservoir temperature. On the other hand, curve 3 indicates phase
envelop of the fluid in the down-flank of structure. With regard to the behavior of curve 3, bubble point will be observed
when the reservoir pressure decreases. Phase boundary is to be located at fluid of which the critical temperature is equal to
the reservoir temperature.

Figure 4 Triangle diagram of the fluid composition in Arab formation. Figure 5 Liquid phase fraction by swelling test.
SPE 118096 5

Figure 6 Phase envelop of the near critical fluid for Arab C and D1 reservoir.

Historical Transition of the Fluid Component

Since commencement of production/injection, the produced fluid property has been monitored to optimize reservoir
management. The historical transition of the fluid property is important in understanding the behavior of injected gas into the
reservoirs. The chronological performances of the fluid components in each reservoir are described below.

ARF Field: Arab A Reservoir. The produced fluid of Arab A reservoir initially consists of low H2S/CO2. However, these
components have gradually increased due to sour gas injection. Separator gas samples from the producer A5 were analyzed
in 1995, 2001 and 2007. Figure 7(left) shows the historical transition of gas phase composition of producer A5. Before sour
gas injection in 2001, H2S/CO2 content had decreased due to sweet gas injection, while H2S/CO2 content has gradually
increased from 2001 to 2007.

ARF Field: Arab C and D1 Reservoir. On the other hand, the produced fluid of Arab C reservoir initially consisted of high
H2S/CO2 which has gradually decreased due to relatively lower concentration in the injection gas. Figure 7(center) shows the
historical transition of gas phase composition of the producer A6. After sour gas injection in 2001, H2S/CO2 content has
decreased until 2007 as occurred previous sour gas injection, since the injection gas includes relatively lower concentration of
H2S/CO2 than the initial concentration in reservoir.

GAF Field. As only sweet gas has been injected into the GAF Field, H2S/CO2 content in produced fluid has decreased.
Figure 7(right) shows the historical transition of gas phase composition of the producer G7. Separator gas samples from
producer G7 were analyzed in 2001, 2006 and 2008. H2S/CO2 content of approximately 6% at the beginning of sour gas
injection in 2001 has decreased to less than 1% in 2008 due to gas breakethrough. After gas breakethrough, it was planned to
shift the bottomhole of such well and re-entry horizontal drilling was carried out in order to decrease the production GOR.
6 SPE 118096

ARF ArabA (A5) ARF ArabC (A6) GAF ArabA (G7)

100% 100% 100%

90% 90% 90%

80% 80% 80%

70% 70% 70%

Gas Phase Composition, Mol%

Gas Phase Composition, Mol%

Gas Phase Composition, Mol%

60% 60% 60%

50% 50% 50%

40% 40% 40%

30% 30% 30%

20% 20% 20%

10% 10% 10%

0% 0% 0%
1995 2001 2007 1995 2001 2007 2001 2006 2008

Producer A5 in Arab A Reservoir of ARF. Producer A6 in Arab C Reservoir of ARF. Producer G7 in Arab C Reservoir of GAF.

P1 : H2S,CO2 P2 : C1,N2 P3 : C2,C3 P4 : C4,C5 P5-P8 : C6+

Figure 7 Comparisons with Gas Phase Compositions.

These fluid data was used to validate the reservoir simulation model. Figure 8 shows the comparison of historical transition
of reservoir fluid compositions between observed and calculated data of the producer A9, which indicates that measured
values and simulated values are sufficiently matched. The optimum allocation of gas injection volume to each reservoir is
determined by sensitivity studies using these verified reservoir simulation model in order to obtain the maximum total oil
recovery in the fields.
SPE 118096 7

Apr-1999 Dec-2001 Dec-2005

100% 100% 100%

90% 90% 90%

80% 80% 80%

70% 70% 70%

Total Phase Composition, Mol%

Total Phase Composition, Mol%

Total Phase Composition, Mol%

60% 60%
Jan-1997 60%
100%

90%

50% 50% 50%

80%

70%
Total Phase Composition, Mol%

60%
40% 40% 40%
50%

40%

30% 30%
30% 30%

20%

10%
20% 20% 20%
0%
Observed Calculated

10% 10% 10%

0% 0% 0%
Observed

Observed

Observed
Calculated

Calculated

Calculated
P1 : H2S,CO2 P2 : C1,N2 P3 : C2,C3 P4 : C4,C5 P5 : C6,C7 P6 : C8-C10 P7,P8 : C11+

Figure 8 Comparisons of reservoir fluid compositions between observed and calculated data of producer A9.

Conclusions
Since commencement of oil production, high pressure gas miscible drive and gas cycling method was applied for ARF and
GAF fields. Furthermore, sour gas injection commenced in 2001, which accelerated enhanced oil recovery. The sweet and
sour gas injection facilities have been successfully implemented while sour gas flaring has been substantially reduced. Since
commencement of production/injection, the produced fluid property has been monitored to optimize reservoir management.
The historical transition of the fluid property is important in understanding the behavior of injected gas into the reservoirs.
These monitoring data was used to validate the reservoir simulation models. The optimum allocation of gas injection volume
to each reservoir is determined by sensitivity studies using these verified reservoir simulation models. Consequently the
maximum total oil recovery in the fields has been obtained.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the management of ADNOC and ADOC for their support and permission to publish this
paper.

References
1. Lutfi A. Salameh, Saoud Al-Mehiribi, Yutaka Yamada and Ryoji Uchiyama : “Successful Development of Offshore
Sour Oil Fields with Applied Sour/Sweet gas injection in Carbonate Reservoirs”, Sour Oil & Gas Advanced Technology,
29 April - 3 May 2007.

2. M. Miwa, Y. Yoshizawa and Y. Sato : “Sour Gas Injection Project”, SPE 78547, Abu Dhabi International Petroleum
Exhibition and Conference, 13 -16 October, 2002.