IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i8p3337-d1119251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proxy Model Development for the Optimization of Water Alternating CO 2 Gas for Enhanced Oil Recovery

Author

Listed:
  • D Aqnan Marusaha Matthew

    (Department of Geoscience and Petroleum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7031 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Ashkan Jahanbani Ghahfarokhi

    (Department of Geoscience and Petroleum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7031 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Cuthbert Shang Wui Ng

    (Department of Geoscience and Petroleum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7031 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Menad Nait Amar

    (Departement Etudes Thermodynamiques, Division Laboratoires, Sonatrach, Boumerdes 35000, Algeria)

Abstract

Optimization studies are an important task in reservoir engineering practices such as production optimization and EOR (Enhanced Oil Recovery) assessments. However, they are extensive studies with many simulations that require huge computational effort and resources. In terms of EOR, CO 2 injection is one of the most common methods employed due to a high recovery potential and environmental benefits. To assess the feasibility of CO 2 -EOR projects, a reservoir design study must be conducted before optimization is performed. Some studies have demonstrated the advantages of employing proxy models to perform this task in terms of saving huge amounts of computer memory space and time. In this study, proxy models were developed to solve a multi-objective optimization problem using NSGA-II (Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II) in two selected reservoir models. The study was performed for a CO 2 -WAG (Water Alternating Gas) application, where gas and water injection rates and half-cycle lengths were assessed to maximize the oil recovery and CO 2 stored in the reservoir. One model represents a simple geological model (the Egg Model), while the other represents a complex model (the Gullfaks Model). In this study, the good performance of the proxy models generated accurate results that could be improved by increasing the amount of sampling and segmenting the behavior of the reservoir model (depending on the complexity of the reservoir model). The developed proxies have an average error of less than 2% (compared with simulation results) and are concluded to be robust based on the blind test results. It has also been found that to reach the maximum oil recovery using CO 2 -WAG, the maximum gas injection rate with the minimum water injection rate is required. However, this configuration may result in a reduction in the total CO 2 stored in the reservoir.

Suggested Citation

  • D Aqnan Marusaha Matthew & Ashkan Jahanbani Ghahfarokhi & Cuthbert Shang Wui Ng & Menad Nait Amar, 2023. "Proxy Model Development for the Optimization of Water Alternating CO 2 Gas for Enhanced Oil Recovery," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-19, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:8:p:3337-:d:1119251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3337/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3337/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hemant Kumar & Shiv Prasad Yadav, 2019. "Fuzzy rule-based reliability analysis using NSGA-II," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 10(5), pages 953-972, October.
    2. World Bank, "undated". "State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2020 [Situación y tendencias de la fijación del precio al carbono 2020]," World Bank Publications - Reports 33809, The World Bank Group.
    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. Vo Thanh, Hung & Sheini Dashtgoli, Danial & Zhang, Hemeng & Min, Baehyun, 2023. "Machine-learning-based prediction of oil recovery factor for experimental CO2-Foam chemical EOR: Implications for carbon utilization projects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PA).

    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. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.
    2. Liotta,Charlotte & Avner,Paolo & Viguié,Vincent & Selod,Harris & Hallegatte,Stephane, 2022. "Climate Policy and Inequality in Urban Areas : Beyond Incomes," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10185, The World Bank.
    3. Yannic Rehm & Lucas Chancel, 2022. "Measuring the Carbon Content of Wealth Evidence from France and Germany," PSE Working Papers halshs-03828939, HAL.
    4. Quemin, Simon & Trotignon, Raphaël, 2021. "Emissions trading with rolling horizons," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    5. Rannou, Yves & Boutabba, Mohamed Amine & Barneto, Pascal, 2021. "Are Green Bond and Carbon Markets in Europe complements or substitutes? Insights from the activity of power firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Ivan Faiella & Luciano Lavecchia, 2021. "Households' energy demand and the effects of carbon pricing in Italy," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 614, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    7. Rohit Azad & Shouvik Chakraborty, 2021. "Toward inverting environmental injustice in Delhi," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 32(2), pages 209-229, June.
    8. Bourgeois, Cyril & Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan & Quirion, Philippe, 2021. "Lump-sum vs. energy-efficiency subsidy recycling of carbon tax revenue in the residential sector: A French assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    9. Oranuch Wongpiyabovorn & Alejandro Plastina & John M. Crespi, 2021. "US Agriculture as a Carbon Sink: From International Agreements to Farm Incentives," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 21-wp627, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    10. Mehling, M. & Ritz, R., 2020. "Going beyond default intensities in an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2087, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    11. Carolyn Fischer & Grant D. Jacobsen, 2021. "The Green New Deal And The Future Of Carbon Pricing," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(3), pages 988-995, June.
    12. Barbara Annicchiarico & Stefano Carattini & Carolyn Fischer & Garth Heutel, 2022. "Business Cycles and Environmental Policy: A Primer," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 221-253.
    13. Grischa Perino & Robert A. Ritz & Arthur van Benthem, 2019. "Overlapping Climate Policies," NBER Working Papers 25643, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Martin Rabbia, 2023. "Why did Argentina and Uruguay decide to pursue a carbon tax? Fiscal reforms and explicit carbon prices," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(2), pages 230-259, March.
    15. Hammerle, Mara & Best, Rohan & Crosby, Paul, 2021. "Public acceptance of carbon taxes in Australia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    16. Baratsas, Stefanos G. & Niziolek, Alexander M. & Onel, Onur & Matthews, Logan R. & Floudas, Christodoulos A. & Hallermann, Detlef R. & Sorescu, Sorin M. & Pistikopoulos, Efstratios N., 2022. "A novel quantitative forecasting framework in energy with applications in designing energy-intelligent tax policies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    17. Rafaty, R. & Dolphin, G. & Pretis, F., 2020. "Carbon pricing and the elasticity of CO2 emissions," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 20116, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    18. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    19. Rosenow, Jan & Thomas, Sam & Gibb, Duncan & Baetens, Ruben & De Brouwer, Andries & Cornillie, Jan, 2023. "Clean heating: Reforming taxes and levies on heating fuels in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Aryal, Kishor & Ojha, Bhuwan Raj & Maraseni, Tek, 2021. "Perceived importance and economic valuation of ecosystem services in Ghodaghodi wetland of Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    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:16:y:2023:i:8:p:3337-:d:1119251. 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.