This application claims priority from Canadian Patent Application 2,693,640 filed Feb. 17, 2010 entitled SOLVENT SEPARATION IN A SOLVENT-DOMINATED RECOVERY PROCESS, the entirety of which is incorporated by reference herein.
The present invention is in the field of In situ hydrocarbon recovery. More particularly, the present invention relates to solvent separation in a solvent-dominated recovery process.
At the present time, solvent-dominated recovery processes (SDRPs) are rarely used to produce highly viscous oil. Highly viscous oils are produced primarily using thermal methods in which heat, typically in the form of steam, is added to the reservoir. Cyclic solvent-dominated recovery processes (CSDRPs) are a subset of SDRPs. A CSDRP is typically, but not necessarily, a non-thermal recovery method that uses a solvent to mobilize viscous oil by cycles of injection and production. Solvent-dominated means that the injectant comprises greater than 50% by mass of solvent or that greater than 50% of the produced oil's viscosity reduction is obtained by chemical solvation rather than by thermal means. One possible laboratory method for roughly comparing the relative contribution of heat and dilution to the viscosity reduction obtained in a proposed oil recovery process is to compare the viscosity obtained by diluting an oil sample with a solvent to the viscosity reduction obtained by heating the sample.
In a CSDRP, a viscosity-reducing solvent is injected through a well into a subterranean viscous-oil reservoir, causing the pressure to increase. Next, the pressure is lowered and reduced-viscosity oil is produced to the surface through the same well through which the solvent was injected. Multiple cycles of injection and production are used. In some instances, a well may not undergo cycles of injection and production, but only cycles of injection or only cycles of production.
CSDRPs may be particularly attractive for thinner or lower-oil-saturation reservoirs. In such reservoirs, thermal methods utilizing heat to reduce viscous oil viscosity may be inefficient due to excessive heat loss to the overburden and/or underburden and/or reservoir with low oil content.
References describing specific CSDRPs include: Canadian Patent No. 2,349,234 (Lim et al.); G. B. Lim et al., “Three-dimensional Scaled Physical Modeling of Solvent Vapour Extraction of Cold Lake Bitumen”, The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 35(4), pp. 32-40, April 1996; G. B. Lim et al., “Cyclic Stimulation of Cold Lake Oil Sand with Supercritical Ethane”, SPE Paper 30298, 1995; U.S. Pat. No. 3,954,141 (Allen et al.); and M. Feali et al., “Feasibility Study of the Cyclic VAPEX Process for Low Permeable Carbonate Systems”, International Petroleum Technology Conference Paper 12833, 2008.
The family of processes within the Lim et al. references describe embodiments of a particular SDRP that is also a cyclic solvent-dominated recovery process (CSDRP). These processes relate to the recovery of heavy oil and bitumen from subterranean reservoirs using cyclic injection of a solvent in the liquid state which vaporizes upon production. The family of processes within the Lim et al. references may be referred to as CSP™ processes.
Solvent-dominated recovery processes (SDRP)s may involve the addition of hydrocarbon solvents (such as propane) to an underground oil reservoir, including a reservoir of viscous oil such as bitumen, to mix with and lower the viscosity of the bitumen, and allow it to be produced. The hydrocarbon portion of the produced mixture includes the solvent and produced oil, in a vapor phase and one or more liquid phases. Depending on the particular pressure and composition, the liquid portion can be in two liquid phases. Previously described SDRPs, such as CSP™ technology, an example of which is described in Canadian Patent No. 2,349,234, involve flashing the solvent in the entire produced mixture, leaving a single produced oil phase. The solvent may then be re-injected into the reservoir.
Whereas in such SDRPs, the solvent is present in the oil stream, in certain instances outside the field of In situ oil recovery, oils are refined through the addition of a solvent, which solvent is then removed from the refined oil. Solvent deasphalting in a refinery environment is known. For instance, U.S. Pat. No. 4,125,458 describes a process to simultaneously deasphalt-extract a mineral oil feedstock comprising both asphaltene and aromatic components. Suitable feedstocks are said to include whole crude oils, atmospheric and vacuum residua, and mixtures thereof having initial boiling points ranging from 500 to 1,100° F. at atmospheric pressure. The feed is contacted with a deasphalting-extraction solvent in one or more mixer-settler units or in one or more countercurrent liquid-liquid converting towers. The solvent is then flashed off from the mixture.
The following four references also relate to the use of solvent to purify an oil feed. U.S. Pat. No. 6,174,431 relates generally to the recovery and regeneration of used lubricant and industrial oils and more specifically to the treatment and refinement of used lubricants and industrial oils to produce re-refined base oil and to remove additives and impurities from used oils and lubricants. A pre-treated used oil may be combined with liquid propane and an extraction vessel and a settling vessel may be used to produce a heavy fraction and a light fraction. The propane may be removed independently from each of these fractions.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,169,044 describes a process for re-refining used lubricating oil. The used lubricating oil is subjected to a solvent extraction in a first extraction zone with a light hydrocarbon solvent to separate a solvent-rich extract oil fraction from a solvent-lean bottoms fraction. Substantially purified lube oil is recovered from the solvent-rich extract oil fraction. The solvent-lean bottoms fraction is subjected to a solvent extraction in a second extraction zone with the light hydrocarbon solvent at a higher solvent-to-oil liquid volume ratio than that of the first solvent extraction to thereby separate a second solvent-rich extract oil fraction from a second solvent-lean bottoms fraction. The substantially purified heavy oil from the second solvent-rich extract oil fraction is recovered. Finally, all remaining solvent from the solids in the second solvent-lean bottoms fraction is removed.
In the field of In situ oil recovery, U.S. Pat. No. 4,476,928 relates to the tertiary recovery of subterranean hydrocarbons using a solvent, and more particularly to a method and apparatus for the generation of a solvent by the recovery of ethers and other light ends from a liquid mixture of organic compounds recovered from the subterranean deposits. Ambient air is bubbled through liquid hydrocarbons in a storage tank to evaporate or boil off light ends which may be used as solvent for injection into the subterranean oil field or coal deposit. The solvent may be used to provide a gas drive or as an extraction solvent for the recovery of crude oil.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2009/0242463 relates to a continuous process for upgrading a heavy hydrocarbon. The heavy hydrocarbon is heated and contacted with a solvent to form a first product comprising a mixture of upgraded hydrocarbons and solvent, and a second product comprising asphaltene waste and water. Solvent is recovered from each of the first and second products.
Mixing solvent with viscous oil may be used in the recovery of the oil from subterranean reservoirs, pipelining the oil to refineries, and in upgrading the oil at refineries. Adding solvent to oil can reduce its viscosity and thus facilitate production and pipelining. Adding certain solvents may also cause low value asphaltic components to precipitate and thus facilitate their separation thus generating an upgraded oil which can simplify later refining. There is a need for an improved method for recovering solvent from fluids produced in solvent-dominated recovery processes so as to optimize the entire production-pipelining-refining chain.
It is an object of the present invention to obviate or mitigate at least one disadvantage of previous processes.
In solvent dominated recovery processes (SDRP)s for recovering in situ oil, including bitumen, the produced fluid stream includes oil and solvent. The solvent is preferably recovered and re-injected into the reservoir. In previously described methods, solvent is removed from the oil/solvent mixture. In methods of embodiments of the present invention, the oil/solvent mixture is first separated into a heavier stream and a lighter stream from which solvent is independently removed.
In a first aspect, the present invention provides a method of producing hydrocarbons from an underground reservoir, the method comprising: (a) injecting a viscosity-reducing solvent into the reservoir; (b) producing a fluid stream from the reservoir comprising one or two liquid hydrocarbon phases; (c) optionally combining the fluid stream with additional solvent such that the number of liquid hydrocarbon phases is increased from one to two; (d) at least partially separating the two liquid hydrocarbon phases into a lighter stream and a heavier stream; (e) at least partially recovering injected solvent from each of the two separated streams to form a lighter solvent-stripped liquid stream and a heavier solvent-stripped liquid stream; and (f) re-injecting at least a portion of the solvent recovered from one or both of the lighter and heavier streams, into the reservoir.
In certain embodiments, the following features may be present.
The fluid stream of step (b) may comprise two liquid hydrocarbon phases.
The viscosity-reducing solvent may be injected as part of a fluid, the fluid comprising greater than 50 mass % of the viscosity-reducing solvent. Immediately after halting injection of the viscosity-reducing solvent into the reservoir, at least 25 mass % of the injected solvent may be in a liquid state in the reservoir. The injected fluid may comprise greater than 75 mass % of the viscosity-reducing solvent.
At least 25 mass %, or at least 50 mass %, of the solvent may enter the reservoir as a liquid.
The solvent may comprise greater than 50 mass % of a C2-C5 paraffinic hydrocarbon solvent. The solvent may comprise greater than 50 mass % propane. The solvent comprises greater than 70 mass % propane. The solvent may comprise greater than 20 mass % ethane. The solvent may comprises CO2.
The phases may be at least partially separated by gravity settling.
The phases may be at least partially separated by applying centrifugal forces.
The solvent may be separated from a stream by lowering a pressure on the stream.
The solvent separation may be effected in a continuous manner, with the feed injected in a separation vessel and the lighter and heavier streams removed from a top and bottom of the separation vessel, respectively.
The heavier solvent-stripped stream may have a MicroCarbon Residue of more than double the MicroCarbon Residue of the lighter solvent-stripped stream.
The heavier solvent-stripped stream may have a density at least 5% greater than a density of the lighter solvent-stripped stream at 25° C. and atmospheric pressure.
The lighter solvent-stripped stream may have a viscosity at 25° C. of at least an order of magnitude less than the heavier solvent-stripped stream.
The method may further comprise pipelining, without adding diluent, the lighter solvent-stripped stream.
The method may further comprise adding diluent to the heavier solvent-stripped stream and then pipelining the resultant stream.
The method may further comprise transporting the lighter and heavier solvent-stripped streams to different locations.
The method may further comprise transporting the lighter and heavier solvent-stripped streams in block operation in a single pipeline.
The method may further comprise using the heavier solvent-stripped stream in the vicinity of the solvent separation, without pipelining. This method may further comprise combusting the heavier solvent-stripped stream to provide power and heat for local oil production or upgrading operations. This method may further comprise combusting the heavier solvent-stripped stream to provide heat for a thermal viscous oil recovery process.
The method may further comprise sending the heavier solvent-stripped stream to an upgrader.
The method may further comprise sending the lighter solvent-stripped stream to a coker.
The method may further comprise using the heavier solvent-stripped stream in asphalt.
The hydrocarbons may be a viscous oil having an in situ viscosity of at least 10 cP (centipoise) at initial reservoir conditions.
The method of producing hydrocarbons may be a cyclic solvent-dominated recovery process. The cyclic solvent-dominated oil recovery process may comprise: (a) injecting the fluid comprising greater than 50 mass % of the viscosity-reducing solvent into an injection well completed in the reservoir; (b) halting injection into the injection well and subsequently producing at least a fraction of the injected fluid and the hydrocarbons from the reservoir through a production well; (c) halting production through the production well; and (d) subsequently repeating the cycle of steps (a) to (c). The injection well and the production well may utilize a common wellbore.
The method may further comprise evaluating a quality of the fluid stream from the reservoir, where, if the quality is above a first quality threshold, at least partially separating solvent therefrom with the lighter stream, without separating it into lighter and heavier streams; where, if the quality is below a second quality threshold, at least partially separating solvent therefrom with the heavier stream, without separating it into lighter and heavier streams; and
where, if the quality is between the first and second quality thresholds, proceeding with the step of at least partially separating the two liquid phases into a lighter stream and a heavier stream prior to solvent separation.
Step (f) may comprise re-injecting at least a portion of the solvent recovered from the lighter stream, and at least a portion of the solvent recovered from the heavier stream, into the reservoir.
Other aspects and features of the present invention will become apparent to those ordinarily skilled in the art upon review of the following description of specific embodiments of the invention in conjunction with the accompanying figures.
Embodiments of the present invention will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the attached Figures, wherein:
The term “viscous oil”, as used herein, means a hydrocarbon, or mixture of hydrocarbons, that occurs naturally and that has a viscosity of at least 10 cP (centipoise) at initial reservoir conditions. Viscous oil includes oils generally defined as “heavy oil” or “bitumen”. Bitumen is classified as an extra heavy oil, with an API gravity of about 10° or less, referring to its gravity as measured in degrees on the American Petroleum Institute (API) Scale. Heavy oil has an API gravity in the range of about 22.3° to about 10°. The terms viscous oil, heavy oil, and bitumen are used interchangeably herein since they may be extracted using similar processes.
In situ is a Latin phrase for “in the place” and, in the context of hydrocarbon recovery, refers generally to a subsurface hydrocarbon-bearing reservoir. For example, In situ temperature means the temperature within the reservoir. In another usage, an In situ oil recovery technique is one that recovers oil from a reservoir within the earth.
The term “formation” as used herein refers to a subterranean body of rock that is distinct and continuous. The terms “reservoir” and “formation” may be used interchangeably.
During a CSDRP, a reservoir accommodates the injected solvent and non-solvent fluid by compressing the pore fluids and, more importantly in some embodiments, by dilating the reservoir pore space when sufficient injection pressure is applied. Pore dilation is a particularly effective mechanism for permitting solvent to enter into reservoirs filled with viscous oils when the reservoir comprises largely unconsolidated sand grains. Injected solvent fingers into the oil sands and mixes with the viscous oil to yield a reduced viscosity mixture with significantly higher mobility than the native viscous oil. Without intending to be bound by theory, the primary mixing mechanism is thought to be dispersive mixing, not diffusion. Preferably, injected fluid in each cycle replaces the volume of previously recovered fluid and then adds sufficient additional fluid to contact previously uncontacted viscous oil. Preferably, the injected fluid comprises greater than 50% by mass of solvent.
On production, the pressure is reduced and the solvent(s), non-solvent injectant, and viscous oil flow back to the same well and are produced to the surface. As the pressure in the reservoir falls, the produced fluid rate declines with time. Production of the solvent/viscous oil mixture and other injectants may be governed by any of the following mechanisms: gas drive via solvent vaporization and native gas exsolution, compaction drive as the reservoir dilation relaxes, fluid expansion, and gravity-driven flow. The relative importance of the mechanisms depends on static properties such as solvent properties, native GOR (Gas to Oil Ratio), fluid and rock compressibility characteristics, and reservoir depth, but also depends on operational practices such as solvent injection volume, producing pressure, and viscous oil recovery to-date, among other factors.
During an injection/production cycle, the volume of produced oil should be above a minimum threshold to economically justify continuing operations. In addition to an acceptably high production rate, the oil should also be recovered in an efficient manner. One measure of the efficiency of a CSDRP is the ratio of produced oil volume to injected solvent volume over a time interval, called the OISR (produced Oil to Injected Solvent Ratio). Typically, the time interval is one complete injection/production cycle. Alternatively, the time interval may be from the beginning of first injection to the present or some other time interval. When the ratio falls below a certain threshold, further solvent injection may become uneconomic, indicating the solvent should be injected into a different well operating at a higher OISR. The exact OISR threshold depends on the relative price of viscous oil and solvent, among other factors. If either the oil production rate or the OISR becomes too low, the CSDRP may be discontinued. Even if oil rates are high and the solvent use is efficient, it is also important to recover as much of the injected solvent as possible if it has economic value. The remaining solvent may be recovered by producing to a low pressure to vaporize the solvent in the reservoir to aid its recovery. One measure of solvent recovery is the percentage of solvent recovered divided by the total injected. In addition, rather than abandoning the well, another recovery process may be initiated. To maximize the economic return of a producing oil well, it is desirable to maintain an economic oil production rate and OISR as long as possible and then recover as much of the solvent as possible.
The OISR is one measure of solvent efficiency. Those skilled in the art will recognize that there are a multitude of other measures of solvent efficiency, such as the inverse of the OISR, or measures of solvent efficiency on a temporal basis that is different from the temporal basis discussed in this disclosure. Solvent recovery percentage is just one measure of solvent recovery. Those skilled in the art will recognize that there are many other measures of solvent recovery, such as the percentage loss, volume of unrecovered solvent per volume of recovered oil, or its inverse, the volume of produced oil to volume of lost solvent ratio (OLSR).
Solvent Composition
The solvent may be a light, but condensable, hydrocarbon or mixture of hydrocarbons comprising ethane, propane, or butane. Additional injectants may include CO2, natural gas, C3+ hydrocarbons, ketones, and alcohols. Non-solvent co-injectants may include steam, hot water, or hydrate inhibitors. Viscosifiers may be useful in adjusting solvent viscosity to reach desired injection pressures at available pump rates and may include diesel, viscous oil, bitumen, or diluent. Viscosifiers may also act as solvents and therefore may provide flow assurance near the wellbore and in the surface facilities in the event of asphaltene precipitation or solvent vaporization during shut-in periods. Carbon dioxide or hydrocarbon mixtures comprising carbon dioxide may also be desirable to use as a solvent.
In one embodiment, the solvent comprises greater than 50% C2-C5 hydrocarbons on a mass basis. In one embodiment, the solvent is primarily propane, optionally with diluent when it is desirable to adjust the properties of the injectant to improve performance. Alternatively, wells may be subjected to compositions other than these main solvents to improve well pattern performance, for example CO2 flooding of a mature operation.
Phase of Injected Solvent
In one embodiment, the solvent is injected into the well at a pressure in the underground reservoir above a liquid/vapor phase change pressure such that at least 25 mass % of the solvent enters the reservoir in the liquid phase. Alternatively, at least 50, 70, or even 90 mass % of the solvent may enter the reservoir in the liquid phase. Injection as a liquid may be preferred for achieving high pressures because pore dilation at high pressures is thought to be a particularly effective mechanism for permitting solvent to enter into reservoirs filled with viscous oils when the reservoir comprises largely unconsolidated sand grains. Injection as a liquid also may allow higher overall injection rates than injection as a gas.
In an alternative embodiment, the solvent volume is injected into the well at rates and pressures such that immediately after halting injection into the injection well, at least 25 mass % of the injected solvent is in a liquid state in the underground reservoir. Injection as a vapor may be preferred in order to enable more uniform solvent distribution along a horizontal well. Depending on the pressure of the reservoir, it may be desirable to significantly heat the solvent in order to inject it as a vapor. Heating of injected vapor or liquid solvent may enhance production through mechanisms described by “Boberg, T. C. and Lantz, R. B., “Calculation of the production of a thermally stimulated well”, JPT, 1613-1623, December 1966. Towards the end of the injection cycle, a portion of the injected solvent, perhaps 25% or more, may become a liquid as pressure rises. Because no special effort is made to maintain the injection pressure at the saturation conditions of the solvent, liquefaction would occur through pressurization, not condensation. Downhole pressure gauges and/or reservoir simulation may be used to estimate the phase of the solvent and other co-injectants at downhole conditions and in the reservoir. A reservoir simulation is carried out using a reservoir simulator, a software program for mathematically modeling the phase and flow behavior of fluids in an underground reservoir. Those skilled in the art understand how to use a reservoir simulator to determine if 25% of the injectant would be in the liquid phase immediately after halting injection. Those skilled in the art may rely on measurements recorded using a downhole pressure gauge in order to increase the accuracy of a reservoir simulator. Alternatively, the downhole pressure gauge measurements may be used to directly make the determination without the use of reservoir simulation.
Although preferably a CSDRP is predominantly a non-thermal process in that heat is not used principally to reduce the viscosity of the viscous oil, the use of heat is not excluded. Heating may be beneficial to principally improve performance, improve process start-up or provide flow assurance during production. For start-up, low-level heating (for example, less than 100° C.) may be appropriate. Low-level heating of the solvent prior to injection may also be performed to prevent hydrate formation in tubulars and in the reservoir. Heating to higher temperatures may benefit recovery.
In a SDRP for bitumen, or other asphaltic oil, when the solvent primarily comprises aliphatic hydrocarbons, such as ethane, propane, butane, pentane, hexane, or heptane, the composition and pressure of the SDRP-produced fluid may be such that the solvent-bitumen mixture within the produced fluid is in a two-liquid phase state. Other solvents, such as carbon dioxide may also form a two-liquid phase mixture. Toluene, xylene, and cyclohexane are examples of solvents that would not form a two-liquid phase mixture. For example, in an embodiment using propane as the solvent, propane-bitumen mixtures exhibit two liquid phases when produced at some pressures above atmospheric pressure and at propane solvent mole concentrations bounded by about 0.7 and about 0.95.
Embodiments of the present invention relate to a method for separation in order to obtain heavier and lighter streams.
The lighter solvent-stripped stream will have a lower density, lower MCR (MicroCarbon Residue, which is a marker for coke yield in a coker), lower (almost zero) asphaltene content, lower metals content (metals foul catalysts in future downstream processing), lower resid (non-distillable petroleum fraction) content and a lower viscosity, than a full solvent-stripped stream. These changes all have economic value. Furthermore, less solvent would be needed for pipelining. The heavier solvent-stripped stream would therefore have a higher asphaltene content and higher MCR. MCR may be determined using several methods, including standard testing methods defined in ASTM D 4530 and ISO 10370. With the lower value molecules thus concentrated in a stream separate from the higher value molecules, the process allows independent disposal of the low value stream, either on-site or off-site.
If off-site disposal of the heavier solvent-stripped stream is preferred, the two solvent-stripped products could be pipelined separately or in block operation in a single pipeline. At the terminus of the pipeline, the heavier stream may be used for asphalt manufacture, or sent to a coker or other upgrading process. Heavy ends may also be emulsified (or emulsion) and trucked off site as an alternative to pipelining.
Alternatively, the heaviest stream may be used on-site (locally), pipelining to an off-site location only the higher value material. Local methods of disposal for the heaviest stream include reinjection into a reservoir, use as fuel in a boiler for steam generation, and/or use as fuel in a power generation system. On-site disposal may be most applicable to extra heavy crudes such as Athabasca 8° API crudes where it is advantageous to reject about 5 to 10% of the very heaviest ends. Rejection of the heaviest ends reduces unwanted heavy metals and other molecules with little value to downstream refining processes. Rejection of the heaviest ends reduces the need for diluent and may increase overall value by rejecting molecules with negative value. Rejection of the heaviest ends may also be necessary to meet pipeline specifications for crude oil blends. Crude oil containing the heaviest ends may be too heavy to readily flow, and may need to be heated in order to be shipped to the point of disposal. Where thermal heavy oil recovery operations are taking place on-site, one disposal option is co-injection of the heavy ends with steam (WO/009014586 A1).
The exact temperature and pressure ranges used in the process vessels (306, 312, and 314) are selected to be compatible with how the SDRP operates, and depend on the pressure-volume-temperature relationships of the exact solvent system. For example, a system that produces an unheated fluid would operate generally at low pressures, generally not more than a few hundred kPa. The specific pressure should, however, be in the range of where there are two liquid phases. The operating temperature would likely be ambient temperature. Many of the process vessels (306, 312, 314) employed are also common to solvent deasphalting processes carried out in a refinery. It may be advantageous to optimize the operations, including operational pressures and temperatures, of the process vessels with other, similar vessels located at a more distant refinery containing similar vessels.
Laboratory work has confirmed that ethane or propane, when combined with bitumen, form two liquid phases, as illustrated in
The embodiment illustrated in
As discussed above, depending on the solvent used, more than two phases could be produced and could be processed as described above. Alternatively, the number of streams could be less than the number of phases. For example, where there are three phases, heavy, middle, and light, the middle phase could be separated with either the heavy or the light phase. As always, the aqueous phase is excluded from this discussion for simplicity of description.
Table 1 outlines the operating ranges for CSDRPs of some embodiments. The present invention is not intended to be limited by such operating ranges.
In Table 1, embodiments may be formed by combining two or more parameters and, for brevity and clarity, each of these combinations will not be individually listed.
In the context of this specification, diluent means a liquid compound that can be used to dilute the solvent and can be used to manipulate the viscosity of any resulting solvent-bitumen mixture. By such manipulation of the viscosity of the solvent-bitumen (and diluent) mixture, the invasion, mobility, and distribution of solvent in the reservoir can be controlled so as to increase viscous oil production.
The diluent is typically a viscous hydrocarbon liquid, especially a C4 to C20 hydrocarbon, or mixture thereof, is commonly locally produced and is typically used to thin bitumen to pipeline specifications. Pentane, hexane, and heptane are commonly components of such diluents. Bitumen itself can be used to modify the viscosity of the injected fluid, often in conjunction with ethane solvent.
In certain embodiments, the diluent may have an average initial boiling point close to the boiling point of pentane (36° C.) or hexane (69° C.) though the average boiling point (defined further below) may change with reuse as the mix changes (some of the solvent originating among the recovered viscous oil fractions). Preferably, more than 50% by weight of the diluent has an average boiling point lower than the boiling point of decane (174° C.). More preferably, more than 75% by weight, especially more than 80% by weight, and particularly more than 90% by weight of the diluent, has an average boiling point between the boiling point of pentane and the boiling point of decane. In further preferred embodiments, the diluent has an average boiling point close to the boiling point of hexane (69° C.) or heptane (98° C.), or even water (100° C.).
In additional embodiments, more than 50% by weight of the diluent (particularly more than 75% or 80% by weight and especially more than 90% by weight) has a boiling point between the boiling points of pentane and decane. In other embodiments, more than 50% by weight of the diluent has a boiling point between the boiling points of hexane (69° C.) and nonane (151° C.), particularly between the boiling points of heptane (98° C.) and octane (126° C.).
By average boiling point of the diluent, we mean the boiling point of the diluent remaining after half (by weight) of a starting amount of diluent has been boiled off as defined by ASTM D 2887 (1997), for example. The average boiling point can be determined by gas chromatographic methods or more tediously by distillation. Boiling points are defined as the boiling points at atmospheric pressure.
In the preceding description, for purposes of explanation, numerous details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the embodiments of the invention. However, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that these specific details are not required in order to practice the invention.
The above-described embodiments of the invention are intended to be examples only. Alterations, modifications and variations can be effected to the particular embodiments by those of skill in the art without departing from the scope of the invention, which is defined solely by the claims appended hereto.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2693640 | Feb 2010 | CA | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
849524 | Baker | Apr 1907 | A |
2188012 | Stanislaw et al. | Jan 1940 | A |
2412765 | Buddrus | Jul 1941 | A |
2365591 | Ranney | Aug 1942 | A |
2358183 | Ostergaard | Sep 1944 | A |
2655465 | Martin | Oct 1953 | A |
3074481 | Habermann | Jan 1963 | A |
3185634 | Craig, Jr. et al. | May 1965 | A |
3274101 | West et al. | Sep 1966 | A |
3323588 | Rai et al. | Jun 1967 | A |
3342256 | Bernard et al. | Sep 1967 | A |
3434544 | Satter et al. | Mar 1969 | A |
3608638 | Terwilliger | Sep 1971 | A |
3671419 | Ireland et al. | Jun 1972 | A |
3704990 | Sarem et al. | Dec 1972 | A |
3705625 | Whitten et al. | Dec 1972 | A |
3707189 | Prats | Dec 1972 | A |
3739852 | Woods et al. | Jun 1973 | A |
3782465 | Bell et al. | Jan 1974 | A |
3811503 | Burnett et al. | May 1974 | A |
3818989 | Christopher, Jr. et al. | Jun 1974 | A |
3823777 | Allen et al. | Jul 1974 | A |
3878892 | Allen et al. | Apr 1975 | A |
3908762 | Redford | Sep 1975 | A |
3945435 | Barry | Mar 1976 | A |
3946809 | Hagedorn | Mar 1976 | A |
3948319 | Pritchett | Apr 1976 | A |
3954141 | Allen et al. | May 1976 | A |
3956145 | Christopher, Jr. et al. | May 1976 | A |
3958636 | Perkins | May 1976 | A |
3960214 | Howell et al. | Jun 1976 | A |
3986557 | Striegler et al. | Oct 1976 | A |
4004636 | Brown et al. | Jan 1977 | A |
4007785 | Allen et al. | Feb 1977 | A |
4007787 | Cottle | Feb 1977 | A |
4008764 | Allen | Feb 1977 | A |
4010799 | Kern et al. | Mar 1977 | A |
4017383 | Beavon | Apr 1977 | A |
4017583 | Motojima et al. | Apr 1977 | A |
4020901 | Pisio et al. | May 1977 | A |
4026358 | Allen | May 1977 | A |
4034812 | Widmyer | Jul 1977 | A |
4037658 | Anderson | Jul 1977 | A |
4067391 | Dewell | Jan 1978 | A |
4085803 | Butler | Apr 1978 | A |
4099568 | Allen | Jul 1978 | A |
4109720 | Allen et al. | Aug 1978 | A |
4125044 | Carrigan et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
4125458 | Bushnell et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
4169044 | Crowley | Sep 1979 | A |
4223728 | Pegg | Sep 1980 | A |
4228853 | Harvey et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
4228854 | Sacuta | Oct 1980 | A |
4260019 | Blair, Jr. | Apr 1981 | A |
4280559 | Best | Jul 1981 | A |
4344485 | Butler | Aug 1982 | A |
4362213 | Tabor | Dec 1982 | A |
4412585 | Bouck | Nov 1983 | A |
4424866 | McGuire | Jan 1984 | A |
4444261 | Islip | Apr 1984 | A |
4450909 | Sacuta | May 1984 | A |
4456065 | Heim et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4459142 | Goddin, Jr. | Jul 1984 | A |
4476928 | Green | Oct 1984 | A |
4489782 | Perkins | Dec 1984 | A |
4495995 | Chen et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
4510997 | Fitch et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4513819 | Islip et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4540050 | Huang et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4617993 | Brown | Oct 1986 | A |
4627495 | Harris et al. | Dec 1986 | A |
4676889 | Hsieh et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4678036 | Hartman et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4687058 | Casad et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4706752 | Holm | Nov 1987 | A |
4819724 | Bou-Mikael et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4856588 | Borchardt | Aug 1989 | A |
4921576 | Hurd | May 1990 | A |
4969130 | Wason et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5025863 | Haines et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5027898 | Naae | Jul 1991 | A |
5052487 | Wall | Oct 1991 | A |
5060727 | Schramm et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5095984 | Irani | Mar 1992 | A |
5105884 | Sydansk | Apr 1992 | A |
5129457 | Sydansk | Jul 1992 | A |
5167280 | Sanchez et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5174377 | Kumar | Dec 1992 | A |
5236577 | Tipman et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5246071 | Chu | Sep 1993 | A |
5350014 | McKay | Sep 1994 | A |
5358046 | Sydansk et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5386875 | Venditto et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5400030 | Duren et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5407009 | Butler et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5607016 | Butler | Mar 1997 | A |
5674816 | Loree | Oct 1997 | A |
5720350 | McGuire | Feb 1998 | A |
5725054 | Shayegi et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5771973 | Jensen et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5826656 | McGuire et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5855243 | Bragg | Jan 1999 | A |
5876592 | Tipman et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5899274 | Frauenfeld et al. | May 1999 | A |
5910467 | Bragg | Jun 1999 | A |
5927404 | Bragg | Jul 1999 | A |
5968349 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6007709 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6039116 | Stevenson et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6068054 | Bragg | May 2000 | A |
6074558 | Tachibana et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6174431 | Williams et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6214175 | Heinemann et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6214213 | Tipman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6244341 | Miller | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6318464 | Mokrys | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6357526 | Abdel-Halim et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6358403 | Brown et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6358404 | Brown et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6405799 | Vallejos et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6484805 | Perkins | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6591908 | Nasr | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6662872 | Gutek et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6708759 | Leaute et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6712215 | Scheybeler | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6769486 | Lim et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6782946 | Perkins et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6800116 | Stevens et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6882607 | Sano et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6883607 | Nenniger et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
7067811 | Long et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7073837 | Madlinger | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7096092 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7141162 | Garner et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7165616 | Jorgensen | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7165621 | Ayoub et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7234524 | Shaw et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7248969 | Patzek et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7259688 | Hirsch et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7272973 | Craig | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7289942 | Yang et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7294156 | Chakrabarty et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7303018 | Cawiezel et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7363973 | Nenniger et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7418307 | Katircioglu | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7434619 | Rossi et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7451066 | Edwards et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7464756 | Gates et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7465389 | Sirota et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7478024 | Gurpinar et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7527096 | Chung et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7540951 | Selmen et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7546228 | Cullick et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7585407 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7711486 | Thigpen et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7769486 | McHenry et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
8118096 | Ayasse | Feb 2012 | B2 |
20020007947 | Patel et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20030015321 | Lim et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030141053 | Yuan et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040149431 | Wylie et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20050150844 | Hyndman et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050263437 | Howdeshell | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060113218 | Hart et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060115221 | Chalifoux et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060138036 | Garner et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060138055 | Garner et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060162922 | Chung et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060260980 | Yeung | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060289157 | Rao | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070106545 | Jowers et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070108098 | Flint et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070111903 | Engel et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070122104 | Chalifoux et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070179766 | Cullick et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070187090 | Shahbazi | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070199710 | Hocking | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080126168 | Carney et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080167511 | Prim | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080262736 | Thigpen et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262737 | Thigpen et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080275796 | Katircioglu | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080277113 | Stegemeier et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080294484 | Furman et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090008290 | Biswas et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090145606 | Hocking | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090159277 | Hocking | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090194282 | Beer et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090242463 | Chirinos et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100006285 | DaSilva et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100032348 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100147516 | Betzer-Zilevitch | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100155062 | Boone et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100218954 | Yale et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100276341 | Speirs et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110120717 | LaMont et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110198086 | Kwan et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110198091 | Sirota et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110224907 | Chalifoux | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110226471 | Wattenbarger et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110264373 | Hehmeyer et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
940853 | Jan 1974 | CA |
1015656 | Aug 1977 | CA |
1059432 | Jul 1979 | CA |
1122115 | Apr 1982 | CA |
1246993 | Dec 1988 | CA |
2043092 | Nov 1992 | CA |
2058812 | Jul 1993 | CA |
2108723 | Oct 1993 | CA |
2108349 | Nov 1993 | CA |
2075108 | Jan 1994 | CA |
2120851 | Aug 1995 | CA |
2232403 | Feb 1998 | CA |
2185837 | Mar 1998 | CA |
2200899 | Sep 1998 | CA |
2232929 | Sep 1998 | CA |
2270703 | Oct 2000 | CA |
2312621 | Dec 2000 | CA |
2243105 | Nov 2001 | CA |
2141112 | Nov 2002 | CA |
2349234 | Nov 2002 | CA |
2353109 | Jan 2003 | CA |
2310959 | Jan 2004 | CA |
2471048 | Mar 2004 | CA |
2527058 | Mar 2004 | CA |
2505411 | Jul 2004 | CA |
2425840 | Oct 2004 | CA |
2306016 | Nov 2004 | CA |
2349234 | Dec 2004 | CA |
2435113 | Jan 2005 | CA |
2493677 | Jun 2005 | CA |
2455011 | Jul 2005 | CA |
2462359 | Sep 2005 | CA |
2520943 | Apr 2006 | CA |
2490734 | Jun 2006 | CA |
2494391 | Jul 2006 | CA |
2502329 | Sep 2006 | CA |
2538464 | Sep 2006 | CA |
2147079 | Oct 2006 | CA |
2235085 | Jan 2007 | CA |
2281276 | Feb 2007 | CA |
2521248 | Mar 2007 | CA |
2587166 | Sep 2007 | CA |
2552482 | Jan 2008 | CA |
2630682 | Jun 2008 | CA |
2351148 | Jul 2008 | CA |
2304938 | Dec 2008 | CA |
2591354 | Dec 2008 | CA |
2332685 | Mar 2010 | CA |
2688392 | Jun 2011 | CA |
2724806 | Jun 2011 | CA |
1355169 | Oct 2003 | EP |
2022936 | Feb 2009 | EP |
1723314 | Mar 1992 | RU |
WO 9933936 | Aug 1999 | WO |
WO 2006044199 | Apr 2006 | WO |
WO 2008009114 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO 2008070990 | Jun 2008 | WO |
WO 2009014586 | Jan 2009 | WO |
WO 2009061433 | May 2009 | WO |
WO 2009067423 | May 2009 | WO |
WO 2009075962 | Jun 2009 | WO |
WO 2010039029 | Apr 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Boberg, T.C., et al. (1966) “Calculation of the production of a thermally stimulated well”, Journal of Petroleum Technology, vol. 18, No. 12 1613-1623, December. |
Feali, M. et al., (2008) “Feasibility Study of the Cyclic VAPEX Process for Low Permeable Carbonate Systems”, International Petroleum Technology Conference Paper 12833; Dec. 3-5, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. |
Lim, G.B. et al., (1995) “Cyclic Stimulation of Cold Lake Oil Sand with Supercritical Ethane”, SPE Paper 30298, SPE International Heavy Oil Symposium; Jun. 19-21, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. |
Lim, G.B., et al., (1996) “Three-dimensional Scaled Physical Modeling of Solvent Vapour Extraction of Cold Lake Bitumen”, The Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 35(4), pp. 32-40, Apr. 1996; SPE/CIM/CANMET International Conference on Recent Advances in Horizontal Well Applications, Mar. 20-23, Calgary, Canada. |
ASTM D 2887 (1997). |
Azin et al. (2007) “Investigation of the Vapex Performance in High Pressure Heavy Oil Reservoirs”. |
Black, L. (2003) “VAPEX—A New Propane Market,” Propane Canada May/Jun. 2003, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi—qa5410/is—200305/ai—n21332180/. |
Budd, G. (2007) “New Technology Could Substantially Boost SAGD Potential,” Oil Sands Review. |
Butler, R. M. et al. (1991) “A New Process (VAPEX) for Recovering Heavy Oils Using Hot Water and Hydrocarbon Vapour,” Jrnl. of Canadian Petroleum Tech., v. 30, pp. 97-106. |
Butler, R. M. et al. (1993) “Recovery of Heavy Oils Using Vapourized Hydrocarbon Solvents: Further Development of the Vapex Process,” Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, June, v. 32, No. 6, pp. 56-62. |
Cuthiell, D. et al. (2003) “Investigation of the VAPEX Process Using CT Scanning and Numerical Simulation,” Jrnl. of Canadian Petroleum Tech., v. 42.2, pp. 41-49. |
Cuthiell, D. et al. (2006) “Viscous Fingering Effects in Solvent Displacement of Heavy Oil,” Jrnl. of Canadian Petroleum Tech., v. 45.7, pp. 29-39. |
Gallant, R. J. et al. (1993) “Steaming and Operating Strategies at a Midlife CSS Operation,” SPE 25794, pp. 183-194. |
Gupta, S. et al. (2001) “Insights into Some Key Issues with Solvent Aided Process,” Petroleum Society-Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy & Petroleum, Paper No. 2001-126. |
Katz et al. (1959) “Handbook of Natural Gas Engineering,” McGraw-Hill, p. 212. |
Nasr, T. N. et al. (1991) “A Novel Scaled Physical Simulator for Horizontal Well Enhanced Oil Recovery,” Petroleum Society of CIM and CANMET, Paper No. 5. |
Rostami, B. et al. (2005) “Investigation of the Vapex Process in High-Pressure Fractured Heavy-Oil Reservoirs,” SPE 97766, Alberta, Canada. |
Sloan, Jr., E. D. (1998) “Clathrate Hydrate of Natural Gases,” 2nd ed. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York, pp. 162, 170, 200-201, 269, 520. |
Turta, A. T. et al. (2004) “Overview of Short-Distance Oil Displacement Processes,” Jrnl. of Canadian Petroleum Tech., v. 43, pp. 29-38. |
Upreti, S. R. et al. (2007) “Vapor Extraction of Heavy Oil and Bitumen: A Review,” Energy & Fuels, v. 21, pp. 1562-1574. |
Vagnetti, R. et al. (2009) “Solvent Based Oil Recovery for In-Situ Upgrading of Heavy Oil,” www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/Petroleum/projects/EP/ImprovedRec/42745SolventEOR.html. |
Vogel, J. V. (1996) “How Solvent Vapors Can Improve Steam Floods,” World Oil, Nov. 1996, pp. 75-77. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110198091 A1 | Aug 2011 | US |