IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i2p656-d726784.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction of Oil Recovery Factor in Stratified Reservoirs after Immiscible Water-Alternating Gas Injection Based on PSO-, GSA-, GWO-, and GA-LSSVM

Author

Listed:
  • Pål Østebø Andersen

    (Department of Energy Resources, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger, 4021 Stavanger, Norway)

  • Jan Inge Nygård

    (Bouvet, 4020 Stavanger, Norway)

  • Aizhan Kengessova

    (Department of Energy Resources, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger, 4021 Stavanger, Norway
    Timal Consulting Group LLP, Atyrau 060011, Kazakhstan)

Abstract

In this study, we solve the challenge of predicting oil recovery factor ( RF ) in layered heterogeneous reservoirs after 1.5 pore volumes of water-, gas- or water-alternating-gas (WAG) injection. A dataset of ~2500 reservoir simulations is analyzed based on a Black Oil 2D Model with different combinations of reservoir heterogeneity, WAG hysteresis, gravity influence, mobility ratios and WAG ratios. In the first model MOD1, RF is correlated with one input (an effective WAG mobility ratio M * ). Good correlation (Pearson coefficient −0.94), but with scatter, motivated a second model MOD2 using eight input parameters: water–oil and gas–oil mobility ratios, water–oil and gas–oil gravity numbers, a reservoir heterogeneity factor, two hysteresis parameters and water fraction. The two mobility ratios exhibited the strongest correlation with RF (Pearson coefficient −0.57 for gas-oil and −0.48 for water-oil). LSSVM was applied in MOD2 and trained using different optimizers: PSO, GA, GWO and GSA. A physics-based adaptation of the dataset was proposed to properly handle the single-phase injection. A total of 70% of the data was used for training, 15% for validation and 15% for testing. GWO and PSO optimized the model equally well ( R 2 = 0.9965 on the validation set), slightly better than GA and GSA ( R 2 = 0.9963). The performance metrics for MOD1 in the total dataset were: RMSE = 0.050 and R 2 = 0.889; MOD2: RMSE = 0.0080 and R 2 = 0.998. WAG outperformed single-phase injection, in some cases with 0.3 units higher RF. The benefits of WAG increased with stronger hysteresis. The LSSVM model could be trained to be less dependent on hysteresis and the non-injected phase during single-phase injection.

Suggested Citation

  • Pål Østebø Andersen & Jan Inge Nygård & Aizhan Kengessova, 2022. "Prediction of Oil Recovery Factor in Stratified Reservoirs after Immiscible Water-Alternating Gas Injection Based on PSO-, GSA-, GWO-, and GA-LSSVM," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-35, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:2:p:656-:d:726784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/2/656/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/2/656/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elkhan Richard Sadik-Zada & Wilhelm Loewenstein, 2018. "A Note on Revenue Distribution Patterns and Rent-Seeking Incentive," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(2), pages 196-204.
    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. Bocoum, Alassane Oumar & Rasaei, Mohammad Reza, 2023. "Multi-objective optimization of WAG injection using machine learning and data-driven Proxy models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 349(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. Elkhan Richard Sadik-Zada & Wilhelm Loewenstein, 2020. "Drivers of CO 2 -Emissions in Fossil Fuel Abundant Settings: (Pooled) Mean Group and Nonparametric Panel Analyses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Elkhan Richard Sadik-Zada, 2020. "Distributional Bargaining and the Speed of Structural Change in the Petroleum Exporting Labor Surplus Economies," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 32(1), pages 51-98, January.
    3. Radoslaw Wisniewski & Piotr Daniluk & Tomasz Kownacki & Aneta Nowakowska-Krystman, 2022. "Energy System Development Scenarios: Case of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-31, April.
    4. Jianguo Du & Jing Zhang & Xingwei Li, 2020. "What Is the Mechanism of Resource Dependence and High-Quality Economic Development? An Empirical Test from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Niftiyev, Ibrahim, 2022. "Exclusive Linear Modeling Approach to the Natural Resource Curse in the Azerbaijani Economy: Examples of Stepwise Regression," EconStor Preprints 266036, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Sadik-Zada, Elkhan Richard, 2023. "Resource rents, savings behavior, and scenarios of economic development," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    7. A. Suresh & P. Krishnan & Girish K. Jha & A. Amarender Reddy, 2022. "Agricultural Sustainability and Its Trends in India: A Macro-Level Index-Based Empirical Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, February.
    8. Peter Ho & Bin Md Saman Nor-Hisham & Heng Zhao, 2020. "Limits of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in Malaysia: Dam Politics, Rent-Seeking, and Conflict," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Sadik-Zada, Elkhan Richard & Gatto, Andrea, 2021. "The puzzle of greenhouse gas footprints of oil abundance," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    10. Elkhan Richard Sadik‐Zada, 2021. "Natural resources, technological progress, and economic modernization," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 381-404, February.
    11. Sadik-Zada, Elkhan Richard & Gatto, Andrea & Scharfenstein, Manuel, 2023. "Sustainable management of lithium and green hydrogen and long-run perspectives of electromobility," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).

    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:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:2:p:656-:d:726784. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.