1. Adsorption and Surfactant Transport in Porous Media Shunhua Liu George J. Hirasaki Clarence A. Miller 06.04.2005

2. Outline  Surfactant Adsorption Test the effect of different potential determining ions Test the nonionic surfactant Test the new surfactant (N67-7PO: IOS=4:1)  The transportation of two surfactants in porous media Background Propagation of the two surfactants

3. Adsorption of Anionic Surfactant (CS330+TDA-4PO 1:1 Blend) with Different Potential Determining Ions on DOLOMITE Powder

4. Zeta Potential at Interfaces -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 024681012 pH Zeta Potential, mv MY1/BrineCalcite/BrineCalcite/Na 2 CO 3 /NaHCO 3

5. Comparisons of Anionic Surfactant (CS330+TDA-4PO 1:1) and Nonionic Surfactant (Nonylphenol-12EO-3PO) Adsorption on DOLOMITE Powder

6. Comparisons of Anionic Surfactant (CS330) and Nonionic Surfactant (Nonylphenol-12EO-3PO) Adsorption on SILICA Powder

7. Absorption Threshold Measurement for Na2CO3 Same Initial surfactant concentration 0.05% Same Solid Liquid Ratio(10:1)

8. Outline  Surfactant Adsorption Test the effect of different potential determining ions Test the nonionic surfactant Test the new surfactant (N67-7PO: IOS=4:1)  The transportation of two surfactants in porous media Background Propagation of the two surfactants

9. Background for two surfactants system Two Surfactants Natural Soap (Naphthenic Acid+Alkali) A hydrophobic surfactant Initial condition for our system Synthetic surfactant A hydrophilic surfactant Boundary condition for our system Partition Coefficient = Concentration in oleic phase Concentration in aqueous phase e.g. where KCi is the partition coefficient of i component ci1 is the concentration in aqueous phase ci2 is the concentration in oleic phase i=3 for synthetic surfactant; i=4 for natural soap

10. The effect of two surfactants Optimal Salinity vs. Soap-Synthetic Surfactant Ratio Curve

11. Contour of IFT (log 10 (IFT)) 10 -1 10 -2 10 -3 Type II Region Type I Region Type III Region (%NaCl)

12. Residual Phase Saturation Curve Ref: L. W. Lake Enhanced Oil Recovery Prentice-Hall, New Jersey,1989 Capillary Number N c IFT=10 -3 IFT=10 -2

13. Contour of Partition Coefficient (log 10 (K)) K>>1 K<<1

14. Adsorption of Synthetic Surfactant Langmuir type isotherm 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 05101520 c 31 C3ads K C max

15. Base Case Parameters Sor=0.3 Oil Viscosity: 8cp Formation brine:4.8%NaClSoap Concentration: c 42 =5  10 -4, C4=1.5  10 -4 NX=100 Surfactant Concentration:1  10 -3 (~0.1%)Slug Size:0.3PV Aqueous phase viscosity: 15 cp Keep the salinity fixed

16. Base Case Effluent History

17. Base Case Surfactants’ Profiles

18. Base Case IFT and Soap Surfactant Ratio Profiles

19. Base Case Oil Profiles

20. Parameter Study (Salinity)

21. Base Case (Salinity=4.8%) At t=0.5PV Salinity=1.0% Salinity=5.5%

22. Parameter Study (Aqueous phase viscosity)

23. Base Case (Viscosity=15cp) At t=0.5PV (Viscosity=1cp)

24. Parameter Study (NX)

25. Conclusion  CO 3 -2 can be used to reduce the adsorption of anionic surfactant on carbonate formation. The threshold is around 0.08% Na 2 CO 3.  When surfactant and natural soap propagate together, we can make the Winsor type II region ahead of the surfactant front and make the type I region behind the front.  The low IFT region will increase as the surfactant and soap propagate.  By manipulating the operational parameters, We can take advantage of the existence of soap and make the low tension region wide enough for recovering all the oil. The usage of surfactant could be very small.

26. Future Work  Add the polymer term to control the viscosity  Add the alkali term to describe the generation of soap  Find an economic strategy by using the simulator  Flooding experiments for the history match.