IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v181y2019icp162-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exergy return on exergy investment analysis of natural-polymer (Guar-Arabic gum) enhanced oil recovery process

Author

Listed:
  • Hassan, Anas M.
  • Ayoub, M.
  • Eissa, M.
  • Musa, T.
  • Bruining, Hans
  • Farajzadeh, R.

Abstract

It has been estimated that 17% of the recovered hydrocarbon exergy in oil fields [1] is spent on fluid handling and recovery costs. Therefore, improving the efficiency of oil production can give an some contribution to more efficient energy usage and therefore minimizing to some extent the carbon footprint. By way of example we present in this paper a work-flow, which can serve as a template for computing the fluid handling and recovery costs for natural polymer (Guar-Arabic Gum) flooding. The main contributors to the exergy investment in an Exergy Return on Exergy Investment analysis (ERoEI) are, the fluid circulation costs, the steel costs of the tubing and casing and to some degree the drilling costs. The main contributor to the exergy gain is the exergy of the produced oil. The fluid circulation costs represent the largest exergy investment and usually approximately accounts for 80% of the exergy used for the recovery of oil. For quantifying the circulation costs, the paper uses a 1-D displacement model of polymer flooding of oil to compare the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) history for three scenarios, i.e., (1) water injection, (2) natural-polymer water injection and (3) natural-polymer slug injection. The advantage of a 1-D model is that it allows multiple comparisons of many scenario's avoiding time consuming simulations but this goes at the expense of ignoring 3-D effects. The 1-D model can be extended to a 2-D or 3-D model, which makes it possible to include the improvement of vertical and areal sweep-efficiency. A numerical solution of the EOR model is obtained with COMSOL. We analyze the exergy balance of viscosified water, e.g., with natural-polymer. A comparison as to the displacement efficiency is made between the three scenarios, viz., water, Guar-Arabic gum, and slug injection. The viscosity behavior of Guar-Arabic gum is obtained from laboratory data. It is argued that an ERoEI analysis, which is used on its own or complementary to an economic analysis, can be used to show the advantage of using Guar-Arabic gum slugs with respect to permanent polymer-injection to enhance the oil recovery. Moreover, the analysis shows that at the end of the project, the concept of exergy-zero recovery time or zero-time marks, for each scenario the termination point, i.e., when the circulation exergy costs (exergy investment) become equal to the recovery exergy (exergy return), and thus recovery should be abandoned. For the conditions considered a single polymer injection displacement leads to optimal results.

Suggested Citation

  • Hassan, Anas M. & Ayoub, M. & Eissa, M. & Musa, T. & Bruining, Hans & Farajzadeh, R., 2019. "Exergy return on exergy investment analysis of natural-polymer (Guar-Arabic gum) enhanced oil recovery process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 162-172.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:181:y:2019:i:c:p:162-172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2019.05.137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544219310199
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2019.05.137?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ferroni, Ferruccio & Hopkirk, Robert J., 2016. "Energy Return on Energy Invested (ERoEI) for photovoltaic solar systems in regions of moderate insolation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 336-344.
    2. Matthew Martin, 1997. "Introduction," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19.
    3. Morosuk, Tatiana & Tsatsaronis, George, 2019. "Splitting physical exergy: Theory and application," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 698-707.
    4. Li, Jingrui & Wang, Rui & Wang, Jianzhou & Li, Yifan, 2018. "Analysis and forecasting of the oil consumption in China based on combination models optimized by artificial intelligence algorithms," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 243-264.
    5. Atlason, Reynir & Unnthorsson, Runar, 2014. "Ideal EROI (energy return on investment) deepens the understanding of energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 241-245.
    6. Pope, K. & Dincer, I. & Naterer, G.F., 2010. "Energy and exergy efficiency comparison of horizontal and vertical axis wind turbines," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 2102-2113.
    7. Ahmadi, Pouria & Dincer, Ibrahim & Rosen, Marc A., 2013. "Development and assessment of an integrated biomass-based multi-generation energy system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 155-166.
    8. Adam R. Brandt, 2011. "Oil Depletion and the Energy Efficiency of Oil Production: The Case of California," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(10), pages 1-22, October.
    9. Eftekhari, Ali Akbar & Van Der Kooi, Hedzer & Bruining, Hans, 2012. "Exergy analysis of underground coal gasification with simultaneous storage of carbon dioxide," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 729-745.
    10. Costa, V.A.F., 2016. "On the exergy balance equation and the exergy destruction," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 824-835.
    11. Limpens, Gauthier & Jeanmart, Hervé, 2018. "Electricity storage needs for the energy transition: An EROI based analysis illustrated by the case of Belgium," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 960-973.
    12. Morosuk, Tatiana & Tsatsaronis, George, 2019. "Advanced exergy-based methods used to understand and improve energy-conversion systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 238-246.
    13. Hu, Yan & Hall, Charles A.S. & Wang, Jianliang & Feng, Lianyong & Poisson, Alexandre, 2013. "Energy Return on Investment (EROI) of China's conventional fossil fuels: Historical and future trends," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 352-364.
    14. Palmer, Graham, 2017. "An input-output based net-energy assessment of an electricity supply industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1504-1516.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Pengliang & Liu, Zhenyi & Li, Mingzhi & Zhao, Yao & Li, Xuan & Wan, Song & Ma, Yuanyuan & He, Yanghua, 2021. "Investigation on the limiting oxygen concentration of combustible gas at high pressures and temperatures during oil recovery process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PB).
    2. da Silva Neves, Marcus Vinicius & Szklo, Alexandre & Schaeffer, Roberto, 2023. "Fossil fuel facilities exergy return for a frontier of analysis incorporating CO2 capture: The case of a coal power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    3. Hu, Zhengbiao & He, Dongfeng & Zhao, Hongbo, 2023. "Multi-objective optimization of energy distribution in steel enterprises considering both exergy efficiency and energy cost," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PB).
    4. Sun, Jingchao & Na, Hongming & Yan, Tianyi & Qiu, Ziyang & Yuan, Yuxing & He, Jianfei & Li, Yingnan & Wang, Yisong & Du, Tao, 2021. "A comprehensive assessment on material, exergy and emission networks for the integrated iron and steel industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhaoyang Kong & Xiucheng Dong & Bo Xu & Rui Li & Qiang Yin & Cuifang Song, 2015. "EROI Analysis for Direct Coal Liquefaction without and with CCS: The Case of the Shenhua DCL Project in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-22, January.
    2. David J. Murphy & Marco Raugei & Michael Carbajales-Dale & Brenda Rubio Estrada, 2022. "Energy Return on Investment of Major Energy Carriers: Review and Harmonization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Kis, Zoltán & Pandya, Nikul & Koppelaar, Rembrandt H.E.M., 2018. "Electricity generation technologies: Comparison of materials use, energy return on investment, jobs creation and CO2 emissions reduction," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 144-157.
    4. Raugei, Marco & Sgouridis, Sgouris & Murphy, David & Fthenakis, Vasilis & Frischknecht, Rolf & Breyer, Christian & Bardi, Ugo & Barnhart, Charles & Buckley, Alastair & Carbajales-Dale, Michael & Csala, 2017. "Energy Return on Energy Invested (ERoEI) for photovoltaic solar systems in regions of moderate insolation: A comprehensive response," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 377-384.
    5. Ke Wang & Harrie Vredenburg & Jianliang Wang & Yi Xiong & Lianyong Feng, 2017. "Energy Return on Investment of Canadian Oil Sands Extraction from 2009 to 2015," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    6. Delannoy, Louis & Longaretti, Pierre-Yves & Murphy, David J. & Prados, Emmanuel, 2021. "Peak oil and the low-carbon energy transition: A net-energy perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    7. Yang, Siyu & Yang, Qingchun & Qian, Yu, 2013. "A composite efficiency metrics for evaluation of resource and energy utilization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 455-462.
    8. Dmytro Levchenko & Andrii Manzharov & Artem Artyukhov & Nadiya Artyukhova & Jan Krmela, 2021. "Comparative Exergy Analysis of Units for the Porous Ammonium Nitrate Granulation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Incer-Valverde, Jimena & Hamdy, Sarah & Morosuk, Tatiana & Tsatsaronis, George, 2021. "Improvement perspectives of cryogenics-based energy storage," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 629-640.
    10. Diesendorf, M. & Wiedmann, T., 2020. "Implications of Trends in Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) for Transitioning to Renewable Electricity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    11. Feng, Chao & Zhu, Rong & Wei, Guangsheng & Dong, Kai & Xia, Tao, 2023. "Typical case of CO2 capture in Chinese iron and steel enterprises: Exergy analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    12. Verma, Aman & Kumar, Amit, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 556-568.
    13. Schmidt, Manfred G., 2001. "Parteien und Staatstätigkeit," Working papers of the ZeS 02/2001, University of Bremen, Centre for Social Policy Research (ZeS).
    14. Anahita Moharamian & Saeed Soltani & Faramarz Ranjbar & Mortaza Yari & Marc A Rosen, 2017. "Thermodynamic analysis of a wall mounted gas boiler with an organic Rankine cycle and hydrogen production unit," Energy & Environment, , vol. 28(7), pages 725-743, November.
    15. khanmohammadi, Shoaib & Saadat-Targhi, Morteza, 2019. "Performance enhancement of an integrated system with solar flat plate collector for hydrogen production using waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 1066-1076.
    16. Tarighi, Sina & Shavvalpour, Saeed, 2021. "Technological development of E&P companies in developing countries: An integrative approach to define and prioritize customized elements of technological capability in EOR," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    17. Jonathan Dumas & Antoine Dubois & Paolo Thiran & Pierre Jacques & Francesco Contino & Bertrand Cornélusse & Gauthier Limpens, 2022. "The Energy Return on Investment of Whole-Energy Systems: Application to Belgium," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 1-34, December.
    18. Sikarwar, Shailesh Singh & Surywanshi, Gajanan Dattarao & Patnaikuni, Venkata Suresh & Kakunuri, Manohar & Vooradi, Ramsagar, 2020. "Chemical looping combustion integrated Organic Rankine Cycled biomass-fired power plant – Energy and exergy analyses," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 931-949.
    19. Lukáš Režný & Vladimír Bureš, 2019. "Energy Transition Scenarios and Their Economic Impacts in the Extended Neoclassical Model of Economic Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-25, July.
    20. Ahmadi, Pouria & Dincer, Ibrahim & Rosen, Marc A., 2014. "Thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization of a novel biomass-based integrated energy system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 958-970.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:181:y:2019:i:c:p:162-172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.