It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The fractures and kerogen, which generally exist in the shale, are significant to the CO2 huff-n-puff in the shale reservoir. It is important to study the effects of fractures and kerogen on oil recovery during CO2 huff-n-puff operations in the fracture–matrix system. In this study, a modified CO2 huff-n-puff experiment method is developed to estimate the recovery factors and the CO2 injectivity in the fractured organic-rich shales and tight sandstones. The effects of rock properties, injection pressure, and injection time on the recovery factors and CO2 usage efficiency in shales and sandstones are discussed, respectively. The results show that although the CO2 injectivity in the shale is higher than that in the sandstone with the same porosity; besides, the recovery factors of two shale samples are much lower than that of two sandstone samples. This demonstrates that compared with the tight sandstone, more cycles are needed for the shale to reach a higher recovery factor. Furthermore, there are optimal injection pressures (close to the minimum miscible pressure) and CO2 injection volumes for CO2 huff-n-puff in the shale. Since the optimal CO2 injection volume in the shale is higher than that in the sandstone, more injection time is needed to enhance the oil recovery in the shale. There is a reference sense for CO2 huff-n-puff in the fractured shale oil reservoir for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) purposes.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Jilin University, College of Construction Engineering, Changchun, China (GRID:grid.64924.3d) (ISNI:0000 0004 1760 5735); China University of Petroleum (East China), School of Petroleum Engineering, Qingdao, China (GRID:grid.497420.c) (ISNI:0000 0004 1798 1132)
2 Jilin University, College of Construction Engineering, Changchun, China (GRID:grid.64924.3d) (ISNI:0000 0004 1760 5735)
3 Sinopec, Petroleum Exploration and Production Research Institute, Beijing, China (GRID:grid.418531.a) (ISNI:0000 0004 1793 5814)
4 China University of Petroleum (East China), School of Petroleum Engineering, Qingdao, China (GRID:grid.497420.c) (ISNI:0000 0004 1798 1132)
5 China University of Petroleum (East China), School of Petroleum Engineering, Qingdao, China (GRID:grid.497420.c) (ISNI:0000 0004 1798 1132); University of Calgary, Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, Calgary, Canada (GRID:grid.22072.35) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7697)