Re-Fracturing vs. CO2 Huff-n-Puff Injection in a Tight Shale Reservoir for Enhancing Gas Production

5Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Field production data indicate that the shale gas production rate decreases sharply after a few years of the first fracking. Feasible enhanced gas recovery (EGR) approaches are very necessary to be investigated. In this study, we compared re-fracturing with a huff-n-puff gas injection scheme in a shale gas reservoir for EGR. A fully compositional simulation approach coupled with a dual porosity and dual permeability model is used. The gas production performances by using different fracturing fluids (i.e., slickwater and supercritical CO2) are evaluated. The effects of huff-n-puff parameters and matrix permeability on the gas production rate and carbon sequestration are investigated. The results show that using a re-fracturing approach yields a better recovery performance than the huff-n-puff gas injection method. Re-fracturing using supercritical CO2 performs better than using slickwater because the former can create complex three-dimensional fracture networks. Huff-n-puff CO2 injection can enhance the gas recovery effectively in ultra-tight formations. In a relatively high permeable formation, viscous flow instead of adsorption-desorption isotherms becomes the primary mass transfer mechanisms, resulting in a lower gas recovery. Both the re-fracturing treatment and huff-n-puff CO2 injection are profitable from a long-term cash flowback perspective.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wang, D., Li, Y., Wang, B., Shan, J., & Dai, L. (2023). Re-Fracturing vs. CO2 Huff-n-Puff Injection in a Tight Shale Reservoir for Enhancing Gas Production. Frontiers in Energy Research, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.922860

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free