• 专利附录
  • 专利说明
  • 权利要求
  • 类似技术
  • 同族专利
  • 引用文献
  • 法律状态
  • 优先权
    • 专利摘要:
    A method for consolidating a proppant in a formation comprises injecting in the formation a composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate. The enzyme and the substrate may re-act, optionally in the presence of a precipitating compound, to form a solid precipitate on the surface of proppant particles to consolidate the proppant in situ, e.g., in one or more fractures of the formation.
    公开号:DK201670474A1
    申请号:DKP201670474
    申请日:2016-06-30
    公开日:2016-07-18
    发明作者:Bhagwan Dass Bansal
    申请人:Maersk Olie & Gas；
    IPC主号:
    专利说明:

    Consolidation of Proppant in Hydraulic Fractures
    FIELD OF THE INVENTION
    The present invention relates to methods and systems for consolidating proppant particles In subterranean formation fractures.
    BACKGROUND TO THE INVENTION
    Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking,, is a known process which allows creation of fractures from a wellbore into a formation or reservoir. This technique consists of pumping hydraulic fluid into a wellbore at a pressure and injection rate such that fractures are created Info the formation. These fractures act as channels which facilitate and increase production of hydrocarbons, e,g. oil, from the formation into the wellbore.
    In order to prevent closure or collapse of these fractures under reservoir conditions when the hydraulic fracture pressure is released, it is known to inject solid particles known as proppants into the created fractures, either during, or after, fracturing. The proppants act to “prop” open the fractures once the hydraulic fracturing has ceased.
    A number of materials can be used as proppants, including sand particles such as natural sand particles and/or resin-coated sand particles, ceramic beads,: glass beads, and the like.
    A problem with the use of proppants is that, during subsequent production of the formation, flow of hydrocarbons and/or of aqueous fluids tends to cause a significant amount of proppant to be produced back Into the wellbore, potentially damaging equipment, and requiring separal-on from the produced hydrocarbons.
    Various attempts have been made to seek to consolidate proppants in the formed fractures. Such attempts have been disclosed for example in <3B 1,327,735 (Texaco Development Corp), US 6,582,818 (Borden Chemical Inc), US 7,044,224 (Halliburton Energy Services Inc), which disclose the use of a cement composition to cement the proppants in place. Other attempts have been disclosed for example in US 2012/0281126 Halliburton Energy Services inc, US 4,785,884 (Acme Resin Corp.), US 5,604,184 (Texaco Inc.), US 5,824,488 (Halliburton Energy Services Inc.), US 0,705,400 (Halliburton Energy Services Inc,), US 8,877,560 (Halliburton Energy Services Inc.), US 7,983,330 (Halliburton Energy Services Inc,), US 8,136,596 (Halliburton Energy Services Inc.), WO 2009/078745 (Sehlymberger Holdings Limited), and WO 2009/088315 (Sehlumbergef Holdings Limited), which disclose the use of a polymeric resin to bind the proppants in place. However, a problem with the above prior art methods is that the binder material, whether a cement or a polymeric resin, significantly reduces the permeability of the fractures, thus reducing production rates. Another problem is that, if pumped wrongly, suoh binder materials cannot be removed from the well and may damage the well permanently.
    it is also known to use enzymes systems, whereby calcium carbonate is precipitated fe s/he in methods of sealing or plugging subterranean formations, as disclosed for example In WO 2008/119820 (Maersk), WO 2005/124899 (Stefoll), US 2012/0289584 (Temasi AS), US 7,841,804 (Impermeable AS), WO 2009/008724 (Stiehting Deltares),: US 4,232,740 (Texaco Development Corp), US 5,088,555 (Mobil Oil Corp), US 5,.101,901 (Mobil Oil Corp.), US 7,975/764 (Sehlumberger Technology Corp.), US 8,124,571 (Cieansorb Limited). However, these documents only disclose using such enzyme systems In order to reduce water production by reducing permeability of the formation, or to consolidate the formation itself,
    SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
    According to a first aspect of the present invention there Is provided a method for consolidating a proppant in a formation, the method comprising injecting in the formation a composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate.
    Typically, the reaction of the enzyme with the substrate results In precipitation of a material which may consolidate the proppant in the formation.
    The method may comprise consolidating the proppant in a fractured formation, e,g, in one or more fractures formed therein.
    The method may comprise consolidating the proppant in sty. The method may comprise reacting the enzyme with the substrate in situ.
    The inventors have surprisingly discovered that It is possible to consolidate proppants in situ using a cord position comprising an enzyme and a substrate, without significantly adversely affecting the rate of production of hydrocarbons In the formation. Typically, the reduction in permeability of-the formation may be less than or equal to approximately 95%, e,g. less than or equal to approximately 90%, e,g. less than or equal to approximately 75%, e.g, less than or equal to approximately 50%, e.g. less than or equal to approximately 40%, e.g. less than or equal to approximately 30%, e.g, less than or equal to approximately 20%.
    The method may comprise fracturing the formation. The method may comprise injecting a fracturing fluid in the formation.
    The method may comprise Injecting a proppant, e,g.. proppant particles, in the formation, e.g, In the fractured formation, The method may comprise Injecting the proppant during fracturing. The method may comprise Injecting the proppant after fracturing.
    The method may comprise injecting in the formation the composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate, after fracturing the formation and/or after Injecting a proppant in the formation. By such provision, the proppant, e.g. at least some proppant particles, may be consolidated in situ.
    The method may comprise consolidating at least some proppant particles, in one embodiment the method may comprise -consolidating some of the proppant particles. The method may comprise consolidating proppant particles- located nearest the wellbore. The method may comprise consolidating proppant particles located in a portion of a fracture nearest the wellbore. In use, when the composition is. Injected in the formation, the method may comprise contacting proppant particles located In a portion of a fracture nearest the wellbore. By such provision, consolidation of proppant particles: In a portion of the fracture farthest from the wellbore may he not be necessary. Consolidation of proppant particles nearest the wellbore may be sufficient to prevent displacement or dislodgement of the proppant particles in the fracture. This may advantageously help reduce the amount of composition required to consolidate proppant particles in a fracture.
    In another embodiment, the method may comprise consolidating -a- majority of proppant particles, e,g, a majority of the proppant particles within a fracture. The method may comprise contacting proppant particles with the ccmposnion substantially throughout the fracture.
    The proppant may comprise proppant particles, e,g, macroscopic particles, such as grains, beads, bails, spheres, or the like.
    The proppant may comprise or may be made from a materia! such as sand, ceramic, glass, met8i(s)t metal altoyfs), or the like.
    Typically, the proppants may comprise sands or sand particles, ceramic beads such as Carbolite™, and/or glass beads.
    The proppant may comprise a coating, e.g, a resin coating, in one embodiment the proppant may comprise resin-coated particles, such as resin-coated sand particles, in another embodiment the proppant may comprise resin-coated ceramic heads such as resin-coated Carbolifeul The coating may comprise a thermosensitive polymer, e,g. a heat curable resin. In one embodiment, -the coating may comprise a melamine-formadehyde resin.
    The proppant particles may have a dimension, e.g. diameter, in the range of approximately 100 - 2000 pm, typically 300 - 1700 pm. The proppant particles may have a size corresponding to a 10 - 40 mesh.
    The enzyme may comprise a urease and/or a source thereof.
    The enzyme may typically be water soluble. The composition may be in the form of a solution or a dispersion.
    The enzyme may be thermophilic or thermostable.
    The enzyme may he obtainable from any plant, animal, bacterial or fungal source. The enzyme may comprise a meal of a plant, e.g. a meal of a plant of the family Legumlnosae (Fabaceae), such as Jack bean meal and/or soya bean meal. Preferably, the enzyme may comprise an enzyme obtainable from Jack bean, e.g. Urease Canavaila ensiformls.
    The use of Jack bean meal and/or soya bean meal may provide a cost-effective source of urease, for example compared to purified urease. The use of Jack bean meal may provide increased yields of reaction as compared to other forms of urease and/or source thereof, such as Jack bean extracts. Without wishing to be bound by theory, It is believed that Jack bean meal may exhibit improved enzyme activity and/or stability, as compared to other forms of urease and/or source thereof, suet as Jack bean extract.
    The method may comprise mixing the enzyme with the substrate before Injection,
    The method may comprise mixing the enzyme with the substrate during Injection, or immediately before injection, no more than 1 hours, e.g, no more than 30 minutes, e,g, no more than 10 minutes, before injection. By such provision, premature precipitation of the consolidating material may he avoided,
    The method may comprise milling and/or grinding beans, e.g. Jack beans, before mixing and/or before Injecting the composition. The method may comprise milling and/or grinding beans, e.g. Jack beans, no more than 8 months, e.g, no more than 3 months, e.g, no more than 1 month, typically no more than 1 week, before mixing and/or before- injecting .-the..composition*· By such provision, the Jack bean meal may exhibit improved activity and/or stability, and/or the method may provide improved efficiency and/or yield.
    The activity of the enzyme may be above 1 unii/L of the composition, typically» in the range of about 1 to about 1,000,000 units, e.g. from about 500 to about 800,000 unsts, e.g, from about 1000 to about 300,000 units, e.g. from about 2000 to about 100,000 units, e.g. from about 5000 to about 40,000 units, per L of the composition.
    The imposition may comprise an amount or concentration of the enzyme in the range of
    The substrate may comprise urea..
    Typically, the reaction of the enzyme with the urea as a substrate may comprise a reaction according to scheme (1): (1)
    The composition may comprise an amount or concentration of the substrate in the range of
    The composition -may further-comprise at least one precipitating compound.
    The at least one precipitating compound may comprise one or more metal salts.
    The at least one precipitating compound may comprise one or more salts of one or more metals selected from the list consisting of aluminium, barium, cadmium, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, mercury, nickel, strontium, silver, tin, and/or zinc.
    The at least one precipitating compound may form a carbonate precipitate upon reaction with the aqueous carbonate produced by the reaction between the enzyme and the urea substrate,
    The at least one precipitating compound may comprise at least one salt of calcium, e.g. calcium nitrate and/or calcium chloride.
    Advantageously, the at least one precipitating compound may comprise calcium chloride. The inventors have surprisingly discovered that the use of calcium chloride as a precipitating compound provides superior yields and larger particle sizes of calcium carbonate over alternative precipitating compounds such as calcium nitrate.
    Typically, the reaction, e.g. precipitation, of the carbonate produced by trie reaction between the enzyme and the urea as a substrate, with the metal salt, e.g. calcium, may comprise a reaction according to scheme (2); (2)
    The composition may comprise an amount or concentration of the precipitating compound in trie range of
    The method may comprise reacting the composition to form a solid precipitate, e.g. a calcium carbonate precipitate. The solid precipitate may act to bind the proppant, e.g, at (east some proppant particles, together. The solid precipitate may form a precipitate structure and/or network on the surface of proppant particles. The solid precipitate may comprise solid particles or clusters, e.g, solid calcium carbonate particles or clusters,:
    When the precipitate comprises solid particles, the precipitated particles, e,g. calcium carbonate particles, may have a dimension, e.g. diameter, in the range of approximately 20 - 200 pm, typically 50 - 200 pm, e.g, 50' - 100 pm.
    The composition may further comprise at least one aggregation promoter. The addition of at least one aggregation promoter may Increase the rate, yield, and/or amount of precipitation of carbonate, e.g, calcium carbonate.
    The at least one aggregation promoter may act as a nucleation initiator, promoting precipitation and/or increasing yield of predpitation. The at least one aggregation promoter may act, to increase the size of the precipitated particles, precipitate structure and/or network, e.g. on the surface of proppant particles, as compared to a similar precipitates formed In the absence of any aggregation promoter. This may increase the strength of the consolidation structure and/or precipitate structure formed through reaction of the enzyme with the substrate,
    The at least one aggregation promoter may comprise a silicate compound such as a clay compound. Typically, the at least one aggregation promotor may comprise a bentonite compound, e.g. bentonite and/or cationic bentonite.
    The at least one aggregation promoter may be provided in the form of particulates and/or particles, e.g, microparticles.
    The-composition may comprise an amount or concentration of the aggregation promoter compound in the range of 1 --100 g/L, e.g, 10 -- 50 g/t, typically 10 - 25 g/L,
    The composition may further comprise at least one reinforcing material.
    The at least one reinforcing material may comprise at least one fibrous material.
    The at least one reinforcing material may comprise a polymeric fibrous material such as ceilulosic fibrous material, e.g. cellulose fibres;: an inorganic fibrous material, e.g. glass fibres: or the like.
    Typically, the at least one reinforcing material may-comprise'-glass fibre. Slass fibre may exhibit high compatibility and/or adhesion with the .precipitated compound, e.g, calcium carbonate.
    Without wishing to be bound by theory,: the at least one reinforcing material may provide a structural support and/or network for the precipitate. Thus, provision of at least one reinforcing material may increase the strength and/or 'flexibility of the consolidation structure and/or precipitate structure formed through reaction of the enzyme with the substrate, as compared to a similar consolidation structure- -and/or precipitate structure formed in the absence of any reinforcing material. This may further reduce or prevent flow of proppant Into the wellbore during production of the formation, while maintaining adequate flow of hydrocarbons during production.
    The composition may comprise an amount or concentration of the at least one reinforcing material in the range of
    in one embodiment, the method may comprise injecting in the formation a composition comprising at least one aggregation promoter and at least one reinforcing material. The -combination of at least one aggregation promoter and at least one reinforcing material may Increase the strength, flexibility and size of the consolidation structure and/or precipitate structure formed through reaction of the enzyme with the substrate, which may provide a 'particularly effective method of consolidation.
    In one embodiment, the method may comprise injecting in the formation a composition comprising an enzyme obtainable from Jack bean meal, urea, calcium chloride, and optionally at least one reinforcing material such as glass fibre, and/or at least one aggregation promoter such as bentonite, e.g. cationic bentonite.
    The method may comprise Injecting the composition at a temperature In the range of about 20°C to about 1Q0SC, typically between .20*0 and 8CTC, under formation conditions.
    The method may comprise adjusting the pH of the composition. e.g> in the range of about 7 to 9, e.g, 7.5 to 8.6, typically about 8. In such instance, the composition may comprise a pH adjuster. Such pH control may help optimise reaction between the enzyme and the substrate and/or may increase reaction yield.
    According to a second aspect of the present invention there Is provided a method for fracturing a formation comprising; injecting a proppant in the formation; and injecting in the formation a composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate to consolidate the proppant in still.
    The method may further comprise fracturing the formation. The method may comprise injecting a fracturing fluid in the formation. The method may comprise fracturing the formation before Injecting the.composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate.
    The method may comprise injecting the proppen! during fracturing. The method may comprise injecting the propped after fracturing.
    The features described above in relation to the method according to a first aspect or the invention, can apply in respect of the method according to a second aspect of the present invention, and ere therefore not repeated here for brevity.
    According to a third aspect of the present Invention there is provided a composition for consolidating a proppant, the composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate.
    The enzyme may comprise a urease and/or a source thereof..
    The enzyme may typiealiy be water soluble. The composition may be in the form of a solution or a dispersion.
    The enzyme may be thermophilic or thermostable.
    The enzyme may be obtainable from any plant, animal, bacterial or fungal source. The enzyme may comprise a meal of a plant, e.g, a meal of a plant of the family tegominosae (Fabaceae), such as Jack bean meal and/or soy bean meal. Preferably, the enzyme may comprise en enzyme obtainable from Jack bean, e,g. Urease Canevalia enslfbrmis.
    The use of Jack bean meal and/or soy bean meal may provide a eosf-effeetk« source of urease, for example compared to purified urease. The use of Jack bean meal may. provide increased yields of reaction as compared to other forms of urease and/or source thereof, such as Jack bean extracts. Without wishing to be bound by theory, It is believed that Jack bean meal may exhibit Improved enzyme activity and/or stability, as compared to other forms of urease and/or source thereof, such as Jack bean extract, Storage of Jack bean extract Is considered to be difficult and Jack bean extract is prone to losing its enzyme activity over time, whereas storage of Jack bean is comparatively easy and no or minimum reduction in its enzyme activity is observed when Jack bean Is stored as bean instead of extract,
    The composition may be obtainable by mixing the enzyme with the substrate before injection.
    The composition may fee obtainable by milting and/or grinding beans, e.g, Jack beans, before mixing and/or before injecting the composition. The composition may be obtainable by milling and/or grinding beans, e.g. Jack beans, no more than 6 months* e.g. no more than 3 months, e.g, no more than 1 month, typically no more than 1 week, before mixing and/or before Injecting the composition. By such provision, the Jack bean meal may exhibit improved activity and/or stability, and/or the method may provide improved efficiency and/or yield.
    The activity of the enzyme may be above 1 unit/L of the composition, typically, In the range of about 1 to about 1 ,000,000 units, e.g, from about 500 to about 600,000 units, e.g. from about 1000 to about 300,000 units, e.g. from about ,2000 to -about' 100.000 units, e.g. from about 5000 to about 40,000 units, per L of the composition.
    The composition may comprise an amount or concentration of the enzyme in the range of
    The substrate may comprise urea.
    Typically, the reaction of the enzyme with the urea as a substrate may comprise a reaction according to scheme (1): (1)
    The composition may comprise an amount of the substrate in the range of 1 -
    The .composition may further comprise at least one precipitating compound.
    The at least one precipitating compound may comprise one or more metal salts.
    The at least one precipitating compound may comprise one or more salts of one or more metals selected hem the list consisting of aluminium, barium, cadmium, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, mercury, nickel, strontium, silver, tin, and/or zinc.
    The at least one precipitating compound may form a carbonate precipitate upon reaction with the aqueous carbonate produced by the reaction .between the enzyme and the urea substrate.
    The.at least one precipitating compound may comprise at least one salt of calcium, e.g, calcium nitrate and/or calcium chloride. Advantageously, the at least one precipitating compound may comprise calcium chloride.
    The inventors have surprisingly discovered that the use of calcium chloride as a precipitating compound provides superior yields and larger particle sizes of calcium carbonate over alternative precipitating compounds such as calcium nitrate.
    Typically, the reaction, e.g, precipitation, of the carbonate produced by the reaction between enzyme and the urea as a substrate, with the metal salt, e.g, calcium, may comprise a reaction according to scheme (2): (2)
    The composition may comprise an amount of the precipitating compound in the range of
    The composition may react to form a sold precipitate, e.g/a calcium carbonate precipitate. The solid precipitate may act to bind the proppant, e,g. proppant partides, together. The solid precipitate may form a precipitate structure and/or network on the surface of proppant particles, The sold precipitate may comprise solid particles, e.g. solid calcium carbonate particles.
    When the precipitate comprises solid particles, the precipitated particles, e,g. calcium carbonate particles, may have a dimension, e,g. diameter, in the range of approximately 2:0.- 200 pm, typically SO - 200 pm, e,g, 50 - 100 pm,
    The composition may further comprise at least one aggregation prompter. The addition of at least: one aggregation premeter may Increase the rate, yield, and/or amount of precipitation of carbonate, e,g, calcium carbonate.
    The at least one aggregation promoter may act as a nudeation initiator, promoting precipitation and/or increasing yield of precipitation. The at least one aggregation promoter may act to increase the size of the precipitated particles, precipitate structure and/or network, e,g, on the surface of proppant particles, as compared to a similar precipitates formed In the absence of any aggregation promoter. This may increase the strength of the consolidation structure and/or network formed through reaction of the enzyme with the substrate.
    The at least one aggregation promoter may comprise a silicate compound such as a clay compound. Typically, the at least one aggregation promoter may comprise a bentonite compound, e,g< bentonite and/or oafionic bentonite.
    The at least one aggregation promoter may be provided in the form of particulates and/or particles, e.g, microparticles.
    The composition may comprise an amount of tbe aggregation promoter compound in the range of 1 - 100 g/L, e.g. 10 - 50 g/L, typically 10 - 25 g/L.
    The composition may further comprise at least one reinforcing material.
    The at least one reinforcing materiai may comprise at least one fibrous material.
    The at least one reinforcing material may comprise a polymeric fibrous materiai such as celiulosic fibrous materiai, e.g. cellulose fibres; an inorganic fibrous material, e,g, glass fibres; or the like.
    Typically, the at least one reinforcing material may comprise glass fibre. Glass fibre may exhibit high compatibility and/or adhesion with the precipitated compound, e.g, calcium carbonate.
    Without wishing to be bound by theory, the at least one reinforcing materia! may provide a structural support and/or network for the precipitate. Thus, prevision of at least one reinforcing material may increase the strength and/or flexibility of the consolidation structure and/or precipitate structure formed through reaction of the enzyme with the substrate, as compared to a similar consolidation structure and/or precipitate structure formed in the absence of any reinforcing material. This may further reduce or prevent flow of proppent into the -wellbore during production of the formation, while maintaining adequate flew of hydrocarbons-during production.
    The composition may comprise an amount of the at least: one reinforcing material in the range of 1 - 10 g/L e.g, 1-5g/L typically 2 - 3 g/L
    In' one embodiment, the composition may comprise at least one aggregation promoter and at least one reinforcing material The combination of at least one aggregation promoter and at least one reinforcing material may increase the strength, flexibility and size of the consolidation structure and/or precipitate structure formed through reaction of the enzyme with the substrate, which may provide a- particularly effective method of-consolidation, in one embodiment, the composition may comprise an enzyme obtainable from Jack bean meal, urea, calcium chloride, and optionally at least one reinforcing material such as glass fibre, and/or at least one aggregation promoter such as bentonite.
    The features described above in relation to the method according to a first aspect or a second aspect or the invention, can apply in respect of the composition according to a third aspect of the present Invention, and are therefore not repeated here for brevity.
    According to a fourth aspect of the present Invention there is provided the use of a composition for consolidating a proppaht, the composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate.
    The use may comprise consolidating the proppaht in a formation, The use may comprise consolidating the proppant in situ. The use may comprise reacting the enzyme with the substrate in situ..
    The features described above in relation to the method according to a first or second aspect or the invention or the composition according to a third aspect, can apply in respect of tho use according to a fourth aspect of the present invention, and are therefore not repeated here for brevity.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
    These and other aspects of the present Invention will now be described, by way of example only, with reference ίο the accompanying drawings, In which:
    Figures 1A to I E show sequential schematic views of a process according to an embodimentof the present invention;
    Figures 2A and 28 show schematic views of an alternative embodiment of the process of Figures 1A ίο IE.
    Figure 3 is a graph showing the effect of freshness of the enzyme on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates;
    Figure 4 Is a graph showing the effect of type of precipitating compound on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates, and also showing the effect of bentonite and reinforcing fibres on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates;
    Figure 5 Is a graph showing the precipitation yield of calcium carbonate aggregates as a function of time;
    Figure 6 shows SEM images cf sand particles 'Consolidated with a composition according ίο an embodiment of the present invention, after 1,2,3 and 4 injections;
    Figure le a graph showing the effect of the amount of aggregation promoter in the composition on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates;
    Figure 8 shows the effect of combining bentonite as an aggregation promoter and glass fibres as a reinforcing material on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates;
    Figure 9 shows a schematic view of a coreflood apparatus used in experiments 1-5;
    Figure 10 shows an exploded perspective view of the proppani pack used in the apparatus of Figure 9;
    Figure 11 shows a schematic view of the set-up used for measuring back production of a consolidated proppanf pack;
    Figure 12 is a graph of the injection profile showing differential pressure vs. time In respect of experiment 1;
    Figure 13 is a graph shewing brine permeability In respect of experiment 1;
    Figure 14 is a graph showing proppanf production In respect of experiment 1;
    Figure 15 is a graph of the Injection profile showing differential pressure vs time in respect of experiment 2;
    Figure 18 Is a graph showing brine permeability in respect of experiment 2;
    Figure 17 is a graph shewing proppant production in respect, of .experiment 2;
    Figure 18 is a graph of the injection'profile showing differential pressure vs time In respect of experiment 3;
    Figure 19 Is a graph showing brine permeability in respect of experiment 3:
    Figure 20 Is a graph showing proppant production, in respect of experiment 3;
    Figure 21 is a graph: showing the maximum differentia! pressures reached during Injection 1 and injection 2 In respect of experiments 1,2 and 3;
    Figure 22 is a graph showing brine permeability before treatment and after shut In of injections 1 and 2 in respect of experiments 1, 2 and 3;
    Figure 23 is a graph showing proppant production in respect of experiments 1, 2 and 3;
    Figure 24 is a graph of the Injection profile showing differential pressure vs time In respect of experiment 4;
    Figure 25 Is a graph showing brine permeability in respect of experiment 4;
    Figure 26 is a graph showing proppant production in respect of experiment 4;
    Figure 2 is a graph of the Injection profile showing differential pressure vs time In respect of experiment 5;
    Figure 23 Is a graph shewing brine permeability in respect of experiment 5;
    Figure 29 Is a graph showing proppant production In respect of experiment 5,
    DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
    Figures 1A to I E are sequential schematic views of a process according to an embodiment of the present invention.
    The process, comprises providing a wellbore 120 in a formation 110, as shown in Figure 1A. In this embodiment, the wellbore 120 is substantially horizontal but in other embodiments the wellbore 120 may be substantially vertical or may be drilled at any other angle, depending on the specific requirements dictated by, for example, the formation to bo produced, A casing 130 is typically provided In the wellbore 120, The casing 130 typically has a number of openings 135 along Its length. Such openings may be provided by perforating the easing 130, for example using a perforating gun.
    While Figure 1Λ shews a cased wellbore 120, in other embodiments, the wellbore 120 may be uncased.
    Figure 18. shows a step of fracturing the formation 110, The process comprises injecting a fracturing fluid into the wellbore in the direction of arrows 150, The pressure of the fracturing fluid creates fractures or fissures 145 from openings 135 in the casing 130 in to the formation 110. Fractures 145 act as'channels which facilitate and increase production of hydrocarbons, e.g. oil, from the formation 110 into the wellbore 120 during-subsequent production, in this embodiment the fracturing fluid also comprises a propped Therefore, in this embodiment, the fracturing step comprises injecting a propped in the formation 110. injection of a proppant assists to reduce or prevent closure or collapse of fractures 145 when the hydraulic fracture pressure is released. In this embodiment the proppant .comprises proppant particles 155, The process comprises, injecting a proppant into the wellbore 120 in the direction of arrows 180, The proppant particles 155 flow info the fractures 145 and “prop” the fractures 145 open.
    While only a portion of the fracture 145 is shown in Figures IB to 1E as being filled with proppant pariides 155, if will be appreciated that in another embodiment, most, of, or substantially all of, the fracture 145 may be filled with proppant particles 155.
    in this embodiment the injection of a proppant Is shown simultaneous to the fracturing step. However, it wifi be appreciated that, in other embodiments, the step of Injecting a proppant may be carried out subsequent to the fracturing step.
    In this embodiment, the proppant partides 155 comprise sand partides, e.g. sand grains, which may optionally be coated by a resin, in other embodiments, the proppant particles 155 may comprise glass beads, ceramic beads, or the like, in order to avoid displacement and producing, of proppant particles 155 during subsequent production of the formation 120, the process comprises consolidating the proppant particles 155 in the fractures 145 in the formation 120 in situ, as shown In Figure 1C< The method comprises injecting a composition Into the wellbore 120 in the direction of arrows 180 .
    An enlarged schematic view of proppant particles 155 consolidated by consolidating structure 185 according to ah embodiment of the present invention is shown in Figure ID. in this embodiment, the composition contacts proppant particles 155 substantially throughout the fractures 145, However, it will be appreciated that in other embodiments the .composition may contact only the proppant particles 155 located in a portion of a fracture nearest the wellbore 120, for example similar to the embodiment depicted in Figure 28;
    The composition comprises an enzyme and a substrate.. The inventors have surprisingly discovered that It Is possible to consolidate proppant particles 155 in situ using a composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate, without significantly adversely affecting the permeability of the formation, and thus the rate of production of hydrocarbons in the formation 110, hi this embodiment the composition comprises: Jack bean meal as the enzyme, and urea as the substrate.
    in this embodiment, the composition also comprises calcium chloride as a precipitating compound. Calcium chloride provides a source of soluble calcium which precipitates with the: carbonate ions produced during the reaction between urea and the enzyme. Calcium carbonate thus forms a precipitate structure or aggregates 165 on the surface of the proppant particles 155.-which assists in consolidating the propped particles 156 in situ and avoid displacement or dislodgement of the proppant particles 155 during subsequent production of the formation 110..
    in this embodiment, the composition further comprises bentonite as an aggregation promoter. The inventors have discovered that Bentonite acts as a nucleate Initiator, promoting precipitation and/or increasing yield of precipitation of calcium carbonate, in this /embodiment the composition further comprises a fibrous material, e.g. glass fibre, as a reinforcing material. Without wishing to be bound by theory, the reinforcing material may provide a'Structural support and/or network for the precipitate. Thus, It has boon discovered that the provision of a reinforcing material may increase the strength and/or flexibility of the calcium carbonate precipitate structure 185 formed through reaction of the enzyme with the urea substrate, as compared to a -similar precipitate structure formed In the absence of any reinforcing material This may further reduce or prevent flow of proppant particles 155 into the wellbore 120 during production of the formation 110.
    Figure IS shows a step of producing the formation 110. The method comprises producing hydrocarbons from the formation 11D into the wellbore 120 In the direction of arrows 170, Advantageously, the proppant particles 155, which have been consolidated in situ in the fractures 145, are dot -displaced or dislodged during production of the formation 110.
    Figures 2A and 2B show schematic views of an alternative embodiment of the process of Figures 1A to IE. The process depleted In Figures 2A and 2B Is generally similar to the process depicted with reference to Figures 1A to IE, like part being denoted by like numerals, supplemented by the suffixK a
    The wellborn 120a of Figure 2A is substantially horizontal but in other embodiments the wellbore. 120a may be substantially vertical, or may be drilled at any other angle, -depending on the specific requirements dictated by, for example, the formation to be produced. A easing 130a is typically provided in the wellbore 120s. The casing 130a is cemented in place by a cemented portion 132a, The casing 130a typically has a number of openings (not shown) along its length, which may be provided by perforating the casing 130a,·for example using a perforating gun.
    As in Figures 1A to 1E, the process of Figures 2A add 2.8 comprises providing a wellbore 120a in a formation 110a, fracturing the formation 110a, injecting proppant particles 155a in the formation 110a {Figure 2A), consolidating the proppant particles 155a in the fractures 145a In the formation 120a m site (Figure 28), and produclngthe formation 110a.
    In this embodiment, as shown In Figure 28 depicting an enlarged schematic view of proppant particles 155a consolidated by consolidating structure 185a, the composition contacts proppant pariides 155a located in a portion 148a of the fracture 146a nearest the wellbore 120a. By such provision, consolidation of proppant partides. 155a in a portion 147a of the fracture 145a farthest from the wellbore 12.0a is not necessary to prevent displacement or disiodgement of the proppant particles 155a during subsequent production of the formation 110a.
    Experimental
    Materials
    The following materials were used during Investigation of the consolidating composition according to the present invention.
    Urea substrate: 100 g/t urea (Fiuka Chemle AG);
    Enzyme; 25 g/'L Jack bean meal (VWR International and Spectrum Chemical Mfg Corp):
    Precipitating compound: 250 g/L CaCp, 2H^O (Sigma-Aldrlch Chemle);
    Aggregation Promoter: cationic bentonite (Fiygtol, Kemira AB);
    Reinforcing material: glass fibres (Fihertec types 3032, 3032VY, 5808 and 7242, Fibertec Inc.: Johns Manvilie types 90,188A and 206, Johns Manville).
    Methods
    Consolidation compositions wore prepared using the above Ingredients, and the resulting aggregates were observed.
    Batch precipitation was carried out in containers placed In a 60*0 water bath for 20 hour's.
    The size distribution of the aggregates was measured by laser diffraction using a Malvern Mastersizer X (long bench) equipped with a 1000 mm lens. Large aggregates {» 1 mm) were quantified by screening on a 1 mm sieve, and subsequently drying and weighing the aggregates.
    Experiments and Results
    The effect of the freshness of the enzyme on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates was investigated. The results are shown In Figure 3, in dry weight of CaCCh aggregates per litre total solution, using two different types of glass fiber reinforcing materials.
    Figure 3 shows that the use of fresh Jack been meal leads to better yields and larger aggregates than the use of bean meal -extracts.
    The effect of the type ef precipitating compound on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates was investigated. The results are shown in Figure 4, in dry weight of CaCOs aggregates per litre of total solution.
    Figure 4 shews that the use of GaCI* as precipitating compound surprisingly leads to better yields and larger aggregates of calcium carbonate than the use of CaNOs, both In the presence or absence of further additives.
    mm
    The precipitation yield of calcium carbonate aggregates was measured as a function of time. The results are shown in Figure 5, in dry weight of CaCO-ϊ aggregates per litre of total solution.
    Figure 5 shows that approximately 75% of the total yield occurs within the first hour of precipitation. Further, it can be observed that reaction Is virtually complete within 12 hours. This confirms that the composition of the present Invention is suitable for use in situ, as high yields are achieved in a relativeiy short period of time, 4 s Compatibility with prop cam particles
    The compatibility of the consolidating composition with sand proppant particles was investigated. The results are shown in Figure 6, -which shows SEM images of sand particles consolidated with a· composition based on urea, Jack bean meal, and GaCI2s at 80“'C, after 1,2,3 and 4. injections.
    Figure 6 confirms the excellent adhesion of CaCCb aggregates 255 on sand particles 265.
    5) Aggregation promoter
    The effect of an aggregation promoter on fhe precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates was investigated. The results are shown in Figure 4 and Figure 7, in dry weight of CaG03 aggregates per iltre of total solution.
    Figure 4 shows that the use of bentonite in the composition surprisingly loads to better yields and much larger aggregates of calcium carbonate as compared to the same composition free of bentonite. This effect is particularly noticeable-when CaCb is used as precipitating compound.
    Various compositions of bentonite were tested, and the results are shown in Figure 7, Figure shows that a dosage of approximately.20 g/l appears to provide better results than a lower dosage of 1.0 g/L or a much higher dosage of 60 g/L Therefore, an optimum amount of bentonite in the composition may be between 10 and 50 g/L, particularly in. fhe region of about 20 g/L
    61 Reinforcing material
    The effect of a reinforcing material on the precipitation yield and size of calcium carbonate aggregates was investigated. The results are shown in Figure 4, in dry weight of CaCOg. aggregates per litre of total solution.
    Figure 4 shows that the use of glass fibre in the composition leads to better yields and larger aggregates of calcium carbonate as compared to the same composition free of glass fibre. This effect is particularly noticeable when CaGI* is used as precipitating, compound:. The use of glass fibre therefore appears to enhance, the aggregation effect of bentonite. Without wishing to be bound by theory, the provision of glass fibres as a reinforcing material may provide a structural support and/or network for the calcium carbonate precipitate. Thus, provision of glass fibres may increase the strength and/or flexibility of the precipitate structure termed through reaction of the enzyme with the urea substrate, as compared to a similar precipitate structure formed in the absence of any glass fibres. This may further reduce or prevent flow of proppant into the wellbore during production of the formation.
    This effect is also confirmed by the results shewn in Figure 8, which shows the effect of combining bentonite and glass fibres as compared to using each individually, it can be seen that the addition of glass fibres in the composition leads to better yields and much larger aggregates of calcium carbonate as compared to the same composition free of glass fibres.
    Core Flood Experiments
    The purpose of the core flood experiments was to investigate the efficacy of the method according to the present invention under various conditions which mimic the temperature and pressure of the reservoir, and for a number of different proppant materials. The eorefiood experiments aimed to quantify permeability changes upon calcium carbonate precipitation as well as determine the extent of proppen! production via back production tests.
    Material
    The following materials were used during the eorefiood experiments.
    Proppant Sand proppant; natural Polish sand,
    Ceramic proppant 1; Carboiite™ 20/40 mesh size,
    Ceramic proppant 2: resin-coated Carbolite™ .20/40 mesh size;
    Urea substrate: urea {CH4N2O) supplied by Halliburton;
    Enzyme: Jack bean meal (beans supplied by Halliburton};
    Precipitating compound: CaCh supplied by Halliburton;.
    Solvent: Esbjerg tap water;
    Aggregation Promoter: cationic bentonite supplied by Halliburton;
    Preparation
    Two suspensions wore prepared according to the recipe described below In Table 1. The recipe consists entirely of field grade chemicals.
    Component 1 was prepared by suspending the compounds In 30 mL of Esbjerg tap water. The suspension was placed on,a magnetic stirrer and stirred for 15 minutes In order to disperse the insoluble components and dissolve CaC% and urea. The suspension was cooled to 5S'C and poured Into a high-pressure cylinder.
    Component 2 was prepared from whole Jack beans by removing the bean shells, grinding the beans in a coffee grinder, and suspending the bean meal in Esbjerg tap water. The suspension was stirred using magnetic stirring for 15 minutes before being filtered through a 0.2 mm filler (proppant filter, stainless steel wire mesh). The filtrate was cooled to 5S€ into a high-pressure cylinder.
    Both components were prepared Immediately prior to the injection in order to avoid possible degradation of urea and urease in the separate cylinders. The two components are kept at 5 °G and mixed immediately .before injection into core.
    Table 1: Frappant consolidation recipe for toil strength formulation
    1 Cationic bentonite was not included In Experiments 2, 3,4 and 5..
    Sskm
    The proppanf consolidation core Hooding experiments were conducted in purpose-bull coreiiood apparatus 300. The coreflood setup that was used for the experiments is depicted in Figure 9. Pressure, flows and temperatures were logged via LabView software. The apparatus 300 comprises of an inner column 320 packed with the proppant sample 355.
    Component 1 was injected from two high pressure cylinders (at a temperature of about S-X) using a HPLC pump 301 at a rate of 10 mL/mfn, Component 2 was Injected from another high pressure cylinder (at a temperature of about 5aG) using a HPLC pump at a rate of 1.4 mL/mfn, The two components were mixed about 2,5 ml (for about 14 seconds) prior to entering the proppant pack 320, There are temperature sensors 302,303 positioned about 2 ml (about 5 cm) before entering the proppant pack Inlet '304 and 2 ml (5 cm) after leaving the proppant pack outlet 305. A temperature of 55T was used In the coreflood setup to simulate near well cooling, A pressure sensor apparatus 308 is provided to measure the pressure differential ΔΡ between the inlet 304 and the outlet 305.
    The set-up of the proppant pack 320 is described in Figure TO. in each end of the proppant column, proppant filters 307 (with 0,2 mm holes) were used to confine·the proppant 320 inside the column throughout the consolidation experiment. The proppant column Is mounted in a Vlton© sleeve 308 under external pressure to simulate an overburden pressure on the proppant column.
    The consolidation of the proppant pack was measured by back producing the proppant column (from formation to wellbore) and measuring the amount of produced proppant at increasing flow rates of tap water (see Figure 11 and Table 2 below). The flow rate was adjusted to the desired flow before being passed through the proppant pack In a horizontal set-up. In order to simulate the back-flow through 12.7 mm 0 perforations in the producer, the consolidated proppant pack 320 was fitted with a flow restrictor 310 (analogous to the flow disperser 309 in Figure 10). directing the flew through the Centre.with an opening diameter of 9.85 mm. This gave a surface area of the bulk proppant pack of 11A cma and 0:.762 errb through the How restrlctor 310.
    The proppant pack was tested at each flow rate (see Table 2) for TO minutes and the wellbore side was Investigated before Increasing the flow.
    Table 2, Flow rates tested and corresponding velocity through the proppant pack and flew restriction, # Flow rate Velocity through entire proppant Velocity through fiow (mUrairi) pack Iml/mln/cm2! restriction (mUmin/om2] 1 25 2.2 32,8 2 50 4.4 65,8 3 75 6.6 98,4 4 TOO 8.8 131.2 5 150 13,2 198.9 6 200 17,5 262,5 7 300 26.3 393,7 8 400 35.1 524.9 9 500 43.9 856,2 10 600 52.6 787.4 VI 700 61.4 918,8 12 800 70,2 1049,9 13 900 78.9 1181.1 14 1000 87,7 1312,3 15 1100 mS 1443,6 16 1200 105,3; 1574,8 17 1300 114.0 1706.0 18 1400 122.8 1837.3 19 1600 140.4 2099.7 20 1800 157.9 2362.2 21 2000 175.4 2624.7 22 2200 193,0 2887.1 23 2400 210.5 3149,6 24 2600 228.1 3412,1 25 2800 245,6 3674,5 ΜΜίΜ
    The procedure used to perform the proppant consolidation coreflood experiments can be described by the following steps.
    1. The proppant is mixed together with 5 wt% finely ground catelte and washed with toluene (same volume as the proppant), The toluene is decanted off and methanol, is added (same volume as the proppant). After stirring, the methanol is decanted off and the proppant mixture Is stored at 55¾ overnight 2. Pour the proppant mixture In a Viton sleeve fitted with proppant filter and flow disperser and mount it in the core holder.
    3. Pressurize the core and -overburden to 15 bar using tap water.
    4. Heat up to 85 :'C.
    5. increase overburden pressure to 50 bar, 5. Flush with brine (2 PV (Pore Volume)).
    7,. Flush with laboratory oil (2 PV) and then with brine (2 PV), Pleasure both permeabilities.
    8. Pro-flush seawater (5 PV), then seawater with 15% glycol (5 PV) for hydrate prevention added, then seawater with 15% EGMBE (5 PV) --- mutual solvent for wettability alteration (cleaning/wetting).
    9. Cool to 65 “C to simulate near wellbore cooling, (seawater with 15% EGMBE remains In the proppant during the cooling (about 2 hours).
    10, Esbjerg tap (2 FV) is flushed through the proppant pack Immediately prior to treatment, 11, inject first main treatment (10 PVj. Effluent sampling of eaeh PV' for calcium analysis:, 12, Shut in overnight.
    13, Measure brine permeability.
    14, Open core, cheek end piece for consolidation. Take photograph of both ends of core, 15, Close, reheat to 55 °C.
    18. inject second main treatment .(10 FV), Effluent-sampling of each PV for calcium analysis.
    17, Shut in overnight.
    18. Measure brine permeability, 19, Open core, check end piece for consolidation. Take photograph of both ends of core, 20. Proppant production test.
    Results 11 Natural Polish Sand in order to determine optimum conditions, three experiments on natural Polish sand proppant were: carried using the pumping procedure described below in Table 3 below;
    Table 3
    Flowrate Number of pore Shut in time Number of Core Overburden volumes per Injection injection- cycles pressure pressure 0.5 10 14-21 h 2 15 bar 50 bar PV/rnin (overnight)
    The difference in these three experiments was In the formulation of the two components 1 -and 2 injected into the proppant pack 320, The two components were cooled to 5C'C and mixed when entering the proppant pack in the core flooding setup in order to avoid premature precipitation of calcium carbonate.
    The experimental values of natural Polish sand proppant, based on 10 experiments, were found to .be as shown in Table 4 below.
    Table 4
    Parameter Average value Standard deviation
    Pore volume [ml]; 23,12 ±1,56
    Porosity [voi.%]: 33,02 ± 2.23
    Density [g/ml]; 2.304 ± 0.187
    Experiment 1
    The characteristics of the first experiment are described in Table 5 below.
    Table S
    Formulation Bentonite Injection Injection Number of Core Overburden strength volume rale injections Pressure Pressure (PV) (PV/min) (bar) (bar)
    Half Yes 10 0.5 2 15 50
    The injection profile for experiment 1 Is shown in Figure 12, During injection 1, the differential pressure increased steadily to a maximum of 358 mbar at the endpoint of the injection, During injection 2, there was a similar development In differential pressure that increased to a maximum of 385 mbar at the endpoint of the injection.
    The measurements obtained for brine permeability are shown in Table 6 below, and in Figure IS,
    Table Si Experimental values of the permeability of brine at SSKC Soivenl Permeability (rnD) Standard deviation (mD) Relative value (%)
    Pre-treatmerrt at 85eC 11830 ± 2613 100
    After Injection 1 950 ± 46 8.0
    After injection 2 54 ±6 4.6 ft can be observed from these results that there was a significant decrease In the permeability after the first treatment cycle to about :8 while the second treatment reduces the permeability to 4,6 %.
    The proppant pack 320 (still mounted in the Vilen® sleeve 308) was fitted with flow restrictor 310 and set up for proppant production measurements. The proppant production (g)vs; How rate (rnL/min) is shown in Figure 14
    Experiment 2
    The characteHstids;of the second experiment are described in Table 7 below.
    Table 7
    Formulation Bentonite Injection Injection Number of Gore Overburden strength volume rate injections Pressure Pressure (FV) (PV/rmn) (bar) (bar)
    Half Ho 10 0,5 2 15 50
    The injection profile for experiment 2 is shown in Figure 15. During injection 1 s the differential pressure increased steadily to a maximum of 133 mbar and then dropped to 111 robsr at the endpoint of the injection. During injection 2. there was a similar development In differentia! pressure that increased to a maximum of 228 mbar and then dropped to 194 mbar at the endpoint of the injection. There were some pressure spikes during injection 2 that caused the differential pressure to reach 271 mbar.
    The measurements obtained for brine permeability are shown in Table 8 below, and in Figure 16,
    Table 8: Experimental values of the permeability Of brine at 55 C Solvent Permeability (mD) Standard deviation (mD) Relative value (%)
    Pre-treatment at 85*0 11830 ±2613 100
    After injection 1 1558 ±54 13.2
    After Injection 2 769 ±22 6.5 it can be observed from these results that there was a decrease in the permeability after the first treatment cycle to about 13,2 %, while the second treatment reduces the permeability to 8.5 %,
    The proppant pack 320 (still mounted in the Won® sleeve 308} was fitted with flow restrictor 310 and set up for proppant production measurements. The proppant production (g) vs. flow rate (mL/min) is shown in Figure IT.
    Experiment 3
    The characteristics of the second experiment are described in Table 3 below.
    Table 9
    Formulation Bentonite Injection Injection Number of Core Overburden strength volume rate injections Pressure Pressure (PV) {Pv'/min} (ter) (bar)
    Full No 10 0.5 2 15 50
    The irtjectiort profile for experiment: 3 is shown in Figure 18. During injection 1. the differential pressure increased steadily to a maximum of 185 mbar and then dropped to 14B mbar at the endpoint of the injection. During injection 2, there was a steady increase in differential pressure to a maximum of 630 mbar at the endpoint of the injection,
    The measurements obtained for brine permeability are shown in Table 10 below, aind in Figure 19.
    Table 10: Experimental values of the permeability of brine at 55* G Solvent Permeability (mD) Standard deviation (mD) Relative value (%)
    Pre-treatment at 85eC 11830 ± 2613 100
    After Injection 1 1025 ±30 8,7
    After'Injection 2' 14,9 ±0.6 0,1
    It can be observed from these results that there was a decrease In the permeability after the first treatment cycle to about 8.7 %, while the second treatment reduces the permeability to 0,1 %,
    The proppant pack 320 (still mounted in the Viton® sleeve 308) was fitted with flow restrictor 310 and set up for proppant production measurements. The proppant production (g) vs. flow rate.(mL/min) is shown in Figure 20.
    Discussion
    In.summary, experiment 1 used half concentration oflhe'two components: with cationic bentonite. Experiment 2 also used half concentration of the two components, but with no cationic: bentonite. Experiment 3 was carried out with no cationic bentonite, but with a full concentration of the two components.
    The differentia! pressure during injections and the brine permeability relates to how densely the calcium carbonate is formed between the proppants. A key parameter of the success of the experiments Is the proppant production test, where it is desirable to achieve higher flow rates before failure of proppant consolidation occurs, A combination of having a relatively high permeability and ah ability to withstand high flow rate before failure of proppant consolidation, is advantageous.
    Figure 21 depicts a graph showing the maximum differentia! pressures reached during injection 1 and injection 2 of experiments 1, 2 and 3, From the maximum differential pressures during the first injection stage, it appears that -the bentonite may act as a plug. The differentia! pressure is higher than both experiment 2 and 3, This can also be related to a more efficient nueieation of the calcium carbonate that should be the case of experiment 1 with the bentonite present For the second injection stage there is only a slight increase in differential pressure of experiment 1, This: can be explained by the efficient nueieation in the first injection stage, which renders the second stage less efficient. For experiment 3, there is greater increase In the differentia! pressure of Injection 2, which suggest that second stage continues to effectively consolidate the proppant pack at higher concentrations.
    Figure 22 Is a graph showing brine permeability before treatment and after shut in of injections 1 and 2 in respect of experiments 1.,. 2 and 3. The brine permeability after the two injection stages correlates well with the maximum differentia! pressure during the injections. It is apparent that there is a higher degree of plugging overall for experiment 3, while experiment 2 displays the least degree of plugging based on differential pressure and brine permeability.
    Figure 23 is a graph showing proppant production in respect of experiments 1, 2 and 3, The proppant production test gives direct evidence of the quality of consoiidation. Surprisingly, it can be observed that experiment 1 (containing cationic bentonite aggregation promoter) experiences failure at a flow rate of 1200 ml/min corresponding to· a velocity at the flew restrictor of 1574,8 mL/min/em2, Experiment 2 which also has the half concentration of foe formulation, but without cationic bentonite, reaches a flow of 2200 ml/min (flow restriction velocity of 2887.1 mL/min/cmz) before failing. This indicates that the amount of calcium carbonate precipitation in the proppant pack cannot directly be related to the quality of the proppant consolidation expressed by the flow rate that causes the consolidated proppant pack to be produced. Experiment 3, which also does not contain cationic bentonite, show the highest stability at a flow rate of 2400 ml/min (How restriction velocity of 3149.6 mt/rnio/ooV).
    The overall resuits support removing cationic bentonite for a more consolidated precipitation of calcium carbonate. Although it is believed that the cationic bentonite may catalyze the precipitation of calcium carbonate by functioning as the nudeation centre, it may not cause the calcium carbonate to fully enclose the proppants and thus consolidation may be less effective. Experiment 2 and 3 produced less calcium carbonate precipitation in the proppant pack In relation to the concentration of the treatment, but resulted in more consolidated proppant packs during the proppant production test. This may be due to the proppants functioning as the nucieatlon centre causing the calcium carbonate to better enclose--and consolidate the proppant particles.
    2}.,;Carbg|ite,^,, 20/40 mesh size
    The .experimental values of Carbollte™ 20/40, based on 10 experiments, were found to be as shown In Table 11 below.
    Table 11
    Parameter Value
    Pore volume fmLJ; 26.8
    Porosity fvoi.%i: 38.3
    Density [g/mLJ; 2.54
    Experiment 4
    Experiment 4 was carried out using the same procedure described above in paragraphs "set-up” and “methods but using CarbOlite™ 20/40 rather than natural Polish sand as the proppant material, The characteristics of the fourth experiment are described In Table 12 below.
    Table 12
    Formulation Bentonite injection Injection Number of Core Overburden strength volume rale injections Pressure Pressure (PV) (PV/min) (bar) (bar)
    Ha! No 10 0.5 2 15 50
    The injection profile for experiment 4 is shown in Figure 24. During injection 1* the dffferer&ial pressure increased steadily to a maximum of 7 rhbar. During injection 2,. there was a steady increase in differential pressure with pressure spikes to a maximum of 42 mbar at pressure spike and 34 mbar at the endpoint of the injection.
    The measurements obtained for brine permeability are shown in Table 13 below, and in Figure 25.
    Table 13; Experimental values of the permeability of brine at 55' G Solvent Permeability (mD) StandaExi deviation (rnD) Relative value (%}
    Predreatmentat 85*0 13236 +261 100
    After injection 1 7448 ±272 58
    After Injection 2 1923 ±87 IS
    it can be observed from these results that there was a gradual-decrease In the permeability after the first and the second treatment cycles to about. 56 % and IS % respe<. w/eiy.
    The proppant pack 320 (still mounted in the Won® sleeve 308) was fitted with flow restrictor 310 and set up for proppant production measurements. The proppant production (g) vs. flow rate (mUmin) is shown in Figure 26.
    31.ResjniceaiedGaM
    The experimental values of resin-coated Carbolite™ 20/40, based on 10 experiments, were found to-be as shown in Table 14below.
    Table 14
    Parameter Value
    Pore volume jml.j: 29.1
    Porosity [yol.:%]; 4.1,8
    Density jg/ml]; 2.36
    Experiment S
    Experiments was carried out using the same procedure as in experiment.4,. but using resin-coated Carboilte™ 20/40 as the proppant material Trie characteristics of the fourth experiment are described in Table IS below;
    Table 15
    Formulation Bentonite Injection Injection Number of Core Overburden strength volume rate injections- Pressure Pressure (PV) (PV/min) (bar) (bar)
    Half No 10 0.5 2 15 SO
    The injection profile for experiment 5 is shown in Figure 27. During injection 1, the differential pressure increased steadily to a maximum of 16 mfear. During injection 2, there was a steady increase in differential pressure to a maximum of 37 mhar at the endpoint of the injection.
    The measurements obtained for brine permeability are shown in Table 18 below, and In Figur© 28,
    Table 16; Experimental values of trie permeability of brine at 5Si:C Solvent Permeability (mP) Standard deviation (mP) Relative value (%)
    Pre-treatment at 85*0 24921 ±819 100
    After Injection 1 6750 ±85 27
    After Injection 2 2377 ± 37 10 it can be observed from these results that there was a decrease in the permeability after the first injection cycle to about 27 %, and then to about 10 % after the second injection cycle.
    The proppant pack 320 (still mounted in the Viton® sleeve 308) was fitted with flow restrictor 310 and set up for proppant production measurements. The proppant production (g) vs. flow rate CmL/min) giving both trie weight of the proppant and trie percentage of trie total proppant: pack, as well as the pressure build-up within trie consolidated proppant pack, is shown in Figure 29;
    Disamsfoti
    Based on the results of Experiments 4 and 5. if can be seen that: consolidation using the ceramic man-made proppants Carboiite™ 20/40 and resin-coated
    Carbolite™ 20/40 gave an overall higher permeability after the two injections, as compared to using a natural Polish sand proppant. This trend is also observed in the differential pressure during injections, which is lower for the man-made proppants.
    Without wishing to be hound by theory, it is believed that natural Polish sand proppant contains grains of different sizes and geometries, which allows for a better consolidation of the precipitated CaCQg. As compared to ceramic proppants having a more homogeneous shape and size, Carbolite 20/40 consists of spherical grains with a relatively smooth surface, and this is believed to makes it more difficult for the precipitated CaCQs to adhere to and/or consolidate the grains. However, foe consolidated: proppants were able to withstand a flow rate of up to 500 mL/mln without failure (15 % proppant failure at 500 mL/mln).
    The resin-coated Carbolite 20/40 is a similar type of grain as normal Carbolite 20/40, but it is believed that the resin may cause the grains to adhere to each other as well as providing a rough surface for the precipitated CaGCfo to consolidate. This is observed in the proppant production test, where the consolidated proppant pack did not fail at the maximum flow rate of 2800 mL/mln, It Is also observed that the provision of a resin coating on proppant particles does not reduce the effectiveness of proppant consolidation.
    Various modifications may foe made to the embodiment described without departing from the scope of foe invention.
    权利要求:
    Claims (15)
    [1] 1. A method for consolidating a proppant in a formation, the method comprising injecting in the formation a composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate.
    [2] 2. The method according to claim 1, comprising reacting the enzyme with the substrate to cause precipitation of a material to consolidate the proppant in the formation.
    [3] 3. The method according to any preceding claim, comprising consolidating the proppant in situ, or comprising consolidating the proppant in one or more fractures of the formation, or comprising fracturing the formation, or comprising injecting a proppant in the formation, or comprising injecting in the formation the composition after fracturing the formation and/or after injecting the proppant in the formation, or comprising consolidating proppant particles located nearest the wellbore, or comprising consolidating proppant particles substantially throughout at least one fracture.
    [4] 4. The method according to any preceding claim, wherein the proppant comprises proppant particles, optionally wherein the proppant particles comprise grains, beads, balls, and/or spheres, or wherein the proppant comprises or is made from sand, ceramic, glass, metal(s), or metal alloy(s).
    [5] 5. The method according to any preceding claim, wherein the enzyme comprises a urease and/or a source thereof, or wherein the enzyme comprises Jack bean meal and/or soya bean meal, or wherein the composition comprises an amount or concentration of the enzyme in the range of 10 - 30 g/L.
    [6] 6. The method according to any preceding claim, wherein the substrate comprises urea, or wherein the composition comprises an amount or concentration of the substrate in the range of 50 - 250 g/L.
    [7] 7 The method according to any preceding claim, comprising mixing the enzyme with the substrate during injection, or immediately before injection.
    [8] 8. The method according to any preceding claim, wherein the composition further comprises at least one precipitating compound, optionally wherein the at least one precipitating compound comprises one or more metal salts of one or more metals selected from the list consisting of aluminium, barium, cadmium, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, mercury, nickel, strontium, silver, tin, and/or zinc, or optionally wherein the at least one precipitating compound comprises calcium chloride, or optionally wherein the composition comprises an amount or concentration of the precipitating compound in the range of 100 - 300 g/L.
    [9] 9. The method according to any preceding claim, comprising reacting the composition to form a solid precipitate on the surface of proppant particles.
    [10] 10. The method according to any preceding claim, wherein the composition further comprises at least one aggregation promoter, optionally wherein the at least one aggregation promoter comprises bentonite and/or cationic bentonite, or optionally wherein the composition comprises an amount or concentration of the aggregation promoter compound in the range of 10 - 50 g/L.
    [11] 11. The method according to any preceding claim, wherein the composition further comprises at least one reinforcing material, optionally wherein the at least one reinforcing material comprises glass fibre, or optionally wherein the composition comprises an amount or concentration of the at least one reinforcing material in the range of 1 - 10 g/L.
    [12] 12. The method according to according to any preceding claim, comprising injecting the composition at a temperature in the range of between about 20°C and 80°C, under formation conditions, or comprising adjusting the pH of the composition to between about 7 and 9.
    [13] 13. A method for fracturing a formation comprising: injecting a proppant in the formation; and injecting in the formation a composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate to consolidate the proppant in situ.
    [14] 14. A composition for consolidating a proppant, the composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate.
    [15] 15. Use of a composition for consolidating a proppant, the composition comprising an enzyme and a substrate, optionally comprising consolidating the proppant in a formation in situ.
    类似技术:
    公开号 | 公开日 | 专利标题
    CA2659114C|2014-12-30|Well treating materials and methods
    EP1398458B1|2008-03-26|Reducing particulate flow-back in wells
    US5381864A|1995-01-17|Well treating methods using particulate blends
    US5330005A|1994-07-19|Control of particulate flowback in subterranean wells
    US10851290B2|2020-12-01|Methods and compositions for use of proppant surface chemistry and internal porosity to consolidate proppant particulates
    CA2826697C|2016-09-13|Methods for enhancing well productivity and minimizing water production using swellable polymers
    CA2931183A1|2015-07-30|Clusters of micron-and nano-sized proppant for use in subterranean operations
    US20200291290A1|2020-09-17|Fluids containing cellulose fibers and cellulose nanoparticles for oilfield applications
    EP2989177A2|2016-03-02|Compositions and methods for use of proppant surface chemistry to improve proppant consolidation and flowback control
    DK201670474A1|2016-07-18|Consolidation of proppant in hydraulic fractures
    EP3286278B1|2021-06-02|Shaped compressed pellets for slow release of well treatment agents into a well and methods of using the same
    WO2017069782A1|2017-04-27|Use of food grade particulates to form fractures having increased porosity and conductivity
    US20210214602A1|2021-07-15|Compositions and methods for controlling migration of particulates
    CN110700808A|2020-01-17|End sand-removing fracturing method
    CA2138346A1|1996-06-17|Well treating methods and devices using particulate blends
    同族专利:
    公开号 | 公开日
    EA201691274A1|2016-12-30|
    EP3083875A1|2016-10-26|
    DK3083875T3|2019-09-30|
    CA2934798A1|2015-06-25|
    US10215007B2|2019-02-26|
    US20160355725A1|2016-12-08|
    EA034471B1|2020-02-11|
    EP3083875B1|2019-06-19|
    WO2015091712A1|2015-06-25|
    GB201322756D0|2014-02-05|
    引用文献:
    公开号 | 申请日 | 公开日 | 申请人 | 专利标题
    GB1327735A|1972-02-19|1973-08-22|Texaco Development Corp|Method of fracturing fluid bearing underground formations|
    US4002204A|1975-11-13|1977-01-11|Shell Oil Company|Timing the deposition of an asphalt plugging material from an asphalt-cationic emulsion|
    US4232740A|1979-05-23|1980-11-11|Texaco Development Corp.|High temperature stable sand control method|
    US4785884A|1986-05-23|1988-11-22|Acme Resin Corporation|Consolidation of partially cured resin coated particulate material|
    US5101901A|1990-12-03|1992-04-07|Mobil Oil Corporation|Sand control agent and process|
    US5088555A|1990-12-03|1992-02-18|Mobil Oil Corporation|Consolidation agent and method|
    US5143155A|1991-03-05|1992-09-01|Husky Oil Operations Ltd.|Bacteriogenic mineral plugging|
    US5604184A|1995-04-10|1997-02-18|Texaco, Inc.|Chemically inert resin coated proppant system for control of proppant flowback in hydraulically fractured wells|
    US5730873A|1995-08-29|1998-03-24|E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And Company|Method for precipitating a solid phase of metal|
    US5924488A|1997-06-11|1999-07-20|Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.|Methods of preventing well fracture proppant flow-back|
    CA2296357C|1997-07-23|2006-07-04|Cleansorb Limited|Methods for deposition of materials in underground reservoirs|
    US6582819B2|1998-07-22|2003-06-24|Borden Chemical, Inc.|Low density composite proppant, filtration media, gravel packing media, and sports field media, and methods for making and using same|
    US6877560B2|2002-07-19|2005-04-12|Halliburton Energy Services|Methods of preventing the flow-back of particulates deposited in subterranean formations|
    US6705400B1|2002-08-28|2004-03-16|Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.|Methods and compositions for forming subterranean fractures containing resilient proppant packs|
    US7044224B2|2003-06-27|2006-05-16|Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.|Permeable cement and methods of fracturing utilizing permeable cement in subterranean well bores|
    US7021379B2|2003-07-07|2006-04-04|Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.|Methods and compositions for enhancing consolidation strength of proppant in subterranean fractures|
    US20050173116A1|2004-02-10|2005-08-11|Nguyen Philip D.|Resin compositions and methods of using resin compositions to control proppant flow-back|
    AU2005254780C1|2004-06-17|2010-01-14|Equinor Energy As|Well treatment|
    GB0422191D0|2004-10-06|2004-11-03|Cleansorb Ltd|Process for treating an underground formation|
    US7318474B2|2005-07-11|2008-01-15|Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.|Methods and compositions for controlling formation fines and reducing proppant flow-back|
    NO326444B1|2005-11-09|2009-01-19|Temasi As|Method and means for stabilizing and sealing underground formations or preventing soil erosion|
    DE06769529T1|2006-01-27|2009-04-16|Schlumberger Holdings Ltd.|METHOD FOR HYDRAULIC COLUMN FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND FORMATION|
    EP1980604A1|2007-04-03|2008-10-15|Maersk Olie Og Gas A/S|Plugging of high permeability regions of subterranean formations|
    EP2017321A1|2007-07-11|2009-01-21|Stichting Deltares|A method for avoiding or reducing permeation of soil particles in a hydrocarbon well|
    US7975764B2|2007-09-26|2011-07-12|Schlumberger Technology Corporation|Emulsion system for sand consolidation|
    WO2009078745A1|2007-12-14|2009-06-25|Schlumberger Canada Limited|Proppant flowback control using encapsulated adhesive materials|
    WO2009088315A1|2007-12-29|2009-07-16|Schlumberger Canada Limited|Coated proppant and method of proppant flowback control|
    US8136595B2|2009-08-07|2012-03-20|Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.|Methods for controlling particulate flowback and migration in a subterranean formation|
    NO331200B1|2009-12-21|2011-10-31|Temasi As|Procedure for stabilizing sand|
    GB201118838D0|2011-10-31|2011-12-14|Cleansorb Ltd|Process for treating an underground formation|
    SE537061C2|2012-11-23|2014-12-23|Triomed Ab|Device for adsorbing potassium ions from a peritoneal dialysis fluid or hemodialysis fluid|
    GB201322756D0|2013-12-20|2014-02-05|Maersk Olie & Gas|Consolidation of proppant sand in hydraulic fractures|GB201322756D0|2013-12-20|2014-02-05|Maersk Olie & Gas|Consolidation of proppant sand in hydraulic fractures|
    US10125303B2|2015-07-31|2018-11-13|Baker Hughes, A Ge Company, Llc|Compositions and methods for cementing a wellbore using microbes or enzymes|
    法律状态:
    优先权:
    申请号 | 申请日 | 专利标题
    GBGB1322756.6A|GB201322756D0|2013-12-20|2013-12-20|Consolidation of proppant sand in hydraulic fractures|
    PCT/EP2014/078334|WO2015091712A1|2013-12-20|2014-12-17|Consolidation of proppant in hydraulic fractures|
    [返回顶部]