SPE 113436

Modelling CO
2
Injection: IOR Potential after Waterflooding
R. Berenblyum, G. Calderon, L. Kollbotn, and L.M. Surguchev, International Research Insitute of Stavanger
Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S.A., 1923April2008.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.


Abstract
This paper combines the knowledge and experience accumulated in IRIS over a number of years from several case studies
involving Tjelbergodden CO
2
value chain, modelling of CO
2
injection at the Ekofisk field and Gullfaks CO
2
injection
compositional simulations.
The paper will discuss the importance of correctly representing the physical effects when modelling miscible or immiscible
CO
2
injection in sandstone and carbonate reservoirs. The following aspects will be evaluated:
Transfer of CO
2
from fractures to matrix involving diffusion and gravity segregation;
Viscous effects;
Formation of low and high concentration liquid hydrocarbon phases;
Compositional effects and oil swelling;
Chemical interaction between CO
2
, formation or injection water and reservoir rock.
The sensitivity and importance of these effects were studied on several simplified mechanistic models and later applied to
actual field cases.
The overview of viscous fingering effect will be presented. Results from mechanistic studies of the CO
2
matrix-fracture
transfer and physical effects will be shown. The paper will also discuss critical aspects of Equation-Of-State (EOS) modelling
and PVT studies necessary for CO
2
flooding. From our experience we will suggest recommendations and cooking recipes
for building reservoir simulation models for CO
2
based IOR process evaluations. Case studies of the CO
2
and CO
2
-WAG IOR
methods for reservoirs on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) will be presented. Oil recovery potential of these IOR
processes will be discussed.

Physical effects during CO
2
flooding
Here a short review of important physical effects is given. The effects of various physical forces are discussed and some
simulation ideas are outlined.

Viscous Fingering
During miscible CO
2
flooding, displacement instabilities are functions of rock-fluid properties, fluid saturation distribution,
viscous forces, and other parameters such as rock wettability, interfacial tension and miscibility. Fluid cross flow and mixing
of the miscible slug with chase gas result in front instabilities which reduce the displacement efficiency. Fingering of an
interface is a hydrodynamic instability that occurs when fluid with higher mobility displaces the one whith lower mobility.
Mobility variations are usually related to differences in viscosity or density of the two fluids considered. The onset of viscous
instability and the subsequent fingering has mostly been studied using a Hele-Shaw cell under conditions of a sharp mobility
contrast for both miscible and immiscible conditions (Homsy et al, 1987). Such experiments do not account for the mass
transfer mechanism of the CO
2
. Nevertheless, the Hele-Shaw cell experiments allow identifying and visualizing the fingering
pattern mechanisms, see Figure 1.
For both miscible and immiscible conditions, propagation of viscous fingering is governed by different mechanisms of
shielding, spreading, and splitting, as well as fjords development (Lajeunesse, 2000). An unfavorable mobility ratio and the
heterogeneity of porous media significantly affect viscous instability (Rogerson, 1993). It has also been shown that
heterogeneities become significant, if the coefficient of permeability variance is greater than 0.4 (Keikar et al, 1991). It was
also shown (Moissis, 1993) that the permeability distribution near the inlet dictated the fingering pattern at early time
independent of the viscosity ratio.
2 SPE 113436
Moreover, when the front thickness is of the same order of magnitude as the correlation length of permeability, the
mobility and permeability contrast can cause an intense amplification of the mobility induced fingering (Chen et al, 1998).
Fingering management by means of WAG injection is shown in Figure 2 (modified from Crump, 1998). It was also showen
that the estimates of the optimum WAG ratio that accounts for viscous fingering are lower than those that ignore viscous
fingering effects (Juanes, 2006).
Splitting
shielding
Fjord
Splitting
shielding
Fjord

Figure 1. Fingering mechanisms observed at Hele-Shaw cell.

Continuous
WAG 1:3
WAG 2:3
Figure 11. Oil saturation distribution
Continuous
WAG 1:3
WAG 2:3
Continuous
WAG 1:3
WAG 2:3
Figure 11. Oil saturation distribution
Figure 2. Fingering suppression in WAG process.

An important effect which is often neglected in the reservoir simulation is the solubility of the CO
2
in the water phase. For
example, Kulkarni and Rao, 2005 have showed the significance of the CO
2
solubility in brines with different compositions.
The project costs may increase due to delayed oil production and increased CO
2
requirements for immiscible processes. The
WAG injection process showed an effect of brine composition on CO
2
miscible processes. Different solubility models are
curerrently available in reservoir simulators, for example by Chang et al (1996) or Henry law (Atkins, 1998).
WAG injection is only one of the methods of mobility control during the gas injection process. Solvent injection may be
used to enrich the gas, surfactant can be added to reduce the interfacial tension and enhance the miscibility between oil and
gas, foam and polymer may be applied for mobility control (Calderon et al, 2007).

Gravity segregation
Instability of the horizontal interface between fluids of different densities occurs when the heavier fluid is placed on top of
the lighter one in the gravity field. This phenomenon is generally referred to as Rayleigh-Taylor instability or density
fingering. These fingering effects are present in both immiscible and miscible systems. Depending on oil composition,
pressure and temperature, CO
2
might be lighter or heavier than oil, and density fingering and gravity segregation are therefore
important mechanisms to be considered during CO
2
floods. The gravity drainage process was studied by Darvish et al, 2004,
using artificially created fracture in a chalk core. A numerical study of this experiment was performed using a 14-component
EOS of the Ekofisk field.
It is important to point out that the CO
2
density would typically have a stronger response to temperature and pressure
changes compared to crude oils.

Diffusion
Diffusion is a crucial phenomenon in naturally fractured reservoirs. In these reservoirs, viscous forces would primarely
transfer fluids in the fracture system, while diffusion would be the main transfer mechanism for the gas between the matrix and
the fractures (Berenblyum et al, 2007). Figure 3 shows how by enabling diffusion with coeffients taken from the literature, a
significant improvement in history match was achieved for a naturally fractured reservoir.
3-phase effects in oil-water-gas systems (WAG or injection of CO
2
into water flooded reservoirs) are also very important
to account for during the evaluation of the EOR potential. Diffusion of the CO
2
through the water film rather then direcly into
the oil phase, might siginificantly affect the performance of the process (Muller, 1991). Under reservoir conditions, the CO
2

SPE 113436 3
would most probably be in supercritical state (critical point of CO
2
is ca. 31
0
C and 74 bar), which creates additional question if
gas-liquid or liquid-liquid diffusion mechanism takes place.


Figure 3. GOR history match with and without diffusion.

Compositional effects
Additionaly to the effects discussed above, CO
2
would mix with oil. Higher CO
2
content would normally mean higher
saturation pressure for the CO
2
-hydrocarbon systems (Stokka et al, 2007), see Figure 4. Formation of at least two equilibrium
systems would mean that interfacial tensions and capillary effects come into play. In this case gravity-capillary equilibrium
becomes important.
At the typical North Sea reservoir conditions, CO
2
will be first contact miscible process or will develope miscibility with
oil in the range of 200 to 270 bars and 80 to 120
o
C (Surguchev et al, 2007). When CO
2
is injected into a reservoir, it will first
dissolve in the oil. The solution of CO
2
in oil will cause swelling and viscosity reduction effects. At the same time, vaporizing
gas drive will take place, extracting not only light (C
2
-C
6
) hydrocarbons, but also havier components up to C
30
(Gernert, 1964).

CO
2
-reach liquid phase formation
Many laboratory experiments with CO
2
mixed with real and synthesized oils have shown three non acqueous phase
behavior (Lee, 1988 and Orr, 1981). These three phases are: a hydrocarbon liquid phase, a CO
2
-rich liquid phase and a dense
CO
2
gas phase. The detailed overview of the CO
2
-reach behavior was presented by Calderon et al (2007). The important
obsevations are that the liquid CO
2
-reach phase can contain up to 30% hydrocarbons (Orr, 1983) and that the CO
2
-reach liquid
phase significantly effects oil recovery (LaForce, 2005). The phase diagram for the system with the CO
2
-reach phase in
Pressure-Mole Perceant of CO
2
coordinates is shown in Figure 4. Region I corresponds to single phase hydrocarbon liquid (L)
with dissolved CO
2
. Region II is hydrocarbon liquid phase (L) in equilibrium with CO
2
vapor (V). Region III is a three phase
region with two liquid phases hydrocarbon liquid (L), CO
2
reach liquid (CO2L) and a vapor phase (V). Region IV is a two
liquid phase region. It should be pointed out that the CO
2
-reach liquid phase might be heavier than oil (Lansangan et al, 2000).


Figure 4. Phase diagram showing formation of CO2-reach liquid phase

Region I
L
Region II
L+V
Region IV
L+CO2L
Region III
L+CO2L+V
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

M
P
a

Mole Percent CO
2

40
80
16
8
4 SPE 113436
Several approaches to modeling formation of the second liquid phase are presented in the literature (McGuire et al, 1994;
Godbole, 1995; Bhabri and Mohanti, 2005).

On naturally fractured reservoirs
As mentioned before, diffusion from fracture into matrix and diffusion through the water films are extremely important for
naturally fractured reservoirs. For many naturally fractured reservoirs under waterflooding, single porosity models have been
successfully used (da Silva, 1989; Agarwal et al, 1997). The single porosity model of the fractured reservoir waterflood may
be history matched to the existing injection and production data. During the history match an effective porosity and phase
relative permeabilites are tuned to emulate a fractured reservoir using single porosity approach. For the gas injection
process, there would be no history data available to tune the single porosity model. Additionally single porosity approach
would result in significant discrpenacies for the cases where matrix-fracture flow is a dominating parameter.
Additional studies of the dual-porosity models are currently on-going at IRIS. Some preliminary results (Berenblyum et al,
2008) showed that dual-porosity models have limitations for CO
2
injection modelling, see Figure 5. In some cases the results
obtained with the dual-porosity model did not correspond to the single porosity mechanistic simulation, mimicing matrix-
fracture interaction. When supercritical CO
2
is perceived as liquid in the model the normal gravity drainage formulations do
not apply and alternative gravity segregation model does not match with mechanistic simulations, see Figure 6.

Dual porosity model
Single porosity mechanistic model
Fracture
M
atr
ix
Fracture
M
atr
ix
CO2 CO2
Oil Oil
3.5 m

Figure 5. Schematics of dual prosity test models


Figure 6. Discrepancy between mechanistic single porosity and dual porosity test models.

Chemistry
The North Sea chalks are naturally fractured with low matrix permeability, but very high porosity of up to 35-40%. Sea
water injection appeares to have made the chalk more water wet (Austad, 2007). Extensive compaction has also been
observed. Dissolution of CO
2
in the aqueos phase leads to formation of carbonate (CO
3
-
) and bi-carbonate (HCO
3
-
) ions with
the bicarbonate dominating in the sea water (Jolly, 1991). The effect on oil recovery and rock properties for the carbonates
under co-injection of CO
2
with brine was studied by Grape et al (1990), Grigg and Svec (2003) and Izgec et al (2005). In
typical carbonate rock usually permeability increase was observed due to chemical reactions under CO
2
flood. In the chalk the
effect of chemical reaction may be more complicated due to the more prononoced compaction effects.
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Time (Days)
M
a
t
r
i
x

r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
F
r
a
c
)
Dual porosity
Mechanistic
SPE 113436 5

Simulation aspects
Several simulation tools are capable to model EOR processes. These are ranging from analytical tools, research or
university codes to commercial packages. Additonally to that, some of the oil companies have in-house simulators.
Significant research is also dedicated to the application of the streamline methods to the gas injection technology (Jessen
and Orr, 2002; Bhambri, 2005; Di Donato, 2007).
Many of these simulation tools can be used for modelling CO
2
injection. Correct representation of physical effect is a key
for accurate modeling of CO
2
injection process.

Case studies
This section summarizes the experience from Gullfaks, Ekofisk and Heidrun reservoir studies. The experimental and
simulation studies of the CO
2
potential were performed in IRIS under various research programs like RUTH, SPOR, ICIOR
and COREC. These studies showed promising results for CO
2
injection, especially in a WAG mode. Other authors, for
example, Jensen et al, 2000, confirmed large reserves potential for the Ekofisk CO
2
flood accompanied by significant
dissolution/compaction process. A good technical potential of the CO
2
flood was reported by Agustson and Grinestaff (2004)
for Gulfaks field.
Waterflooding at many large fiels on the NCS demonstrates very good performance, with up to 50-70% of STOOIP
recovery. Such high waterflood performance often decreases the potential of tertiary CO
2
floods at these fields.

Latest case study investigated was the Tjeldbergodden CO
2
value chain project (Lackner, 2007; Stokka, 2007). The case
study involved an in-depth laboratory experimental work with live oil reservoir condition floods. Laboratory experiments
included 5-point swelling test, slimtube performed at 5 different pressures and WAG core flood experiments. A new EOS was
constructed based on the obtained experimental resuls.
A sencitivity study has shown that a 7-component EOS was sufficient to correctly describe the CO
2
injection process
(Medianestrian, 2006), however an 11-component model as a more representative was used in a field scale simulations. The
11-component EOS was allowing for better account of lateral compositional variation in the reservoir. The match of the
saturation pressure, density and the viscosities during the swelling experiment is shown in Figure 7.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0
Mole of CO2 added, %
P
s
a
t
,

b
a
r



.
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
D
e
n
i
s
t
y
,

g
/
s
c
c
Sat P
Psat - measured
Density g/cm
Density- measured

0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Pressure, bar
L
i
q
u
i
d

v
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y





.

27.7
65.5
97.3
161.7
27.7 - lab
65.5 - lab
97.3 - lab
161.7 - lab
Figure 7. Saturation pressure, density and viscosity match for the swelling experiment.

The slimtube experiment was simulated using 1D model with linear relative permeabilities (Figure 8).


Figure 8. Slimtube experiment simulation.
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340
Pressure, bar
O
i
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d
,

m
l
lab
model1
95.9%
recovery
6 SPE 113436

Convergance of the numerical simulation was verified using 100, 500, 1000 and 5000 grid blocks. Overestimation of the
oil recovery below Minimum Miscibility Pressure (MMP) seen in Figure 8 is due to the use of linear relative permeability
curves and neglect of capillary pressures.
The Heidrun field is a complex geological structure with a number of large faults separating the reservoirs into segments.
The eastern segements contain the gas cap which is in hydrodynamic communication with the upper reservoir. As mentioned
ealier, the properties of the reservoir oil vary not only with depth, but also laterally, creating a variation of oil properties from
approximately 20
0
API to around 40
0
API. The oil density variation as function of spacial coordinate is shown in Figure 9. The
differences between measured oil density and the simulation data lie within 2-5%. The largest differences are in the south-east,
where oil density is undestimated by about 5-10%. The simulations have shown that the effect on the reservoir production and
pressure behavior from using lateral compositional variation is rather small. The simulation model where composition varies
only with depths was later used in the reservoir study.

Figure 9. Oil density variation as a function of spacial coordinate.

A detailed analysis of various CO
2
-WAG scenarios was performed (Lackner, 2007; Stokka, 2007). It was shown that the
additional oil recovery in some of the segments may reach 7% of STOOIP in comparison with waterflood, see Figure 10. The
main influencing parameters were well placement optimization and advanced well control (ability to shut reservoir zones with
high saturation of CO
2
). It was also shown that pressure support is important to maintaim MMP condition and may be a
chalange to achieve on a field scale due to MMP values very close to the reservoir pressure and highly faulted areas with
significant variation of reservoir properties. Insufficient pressure support in some of the segments due to either well placement
or operational constraints may result in reduction of the CO
2
-WAG efficiency by up to 4-5% of STOOIP.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
07.1995 08.2000 08.2005 09.2010 10.2015 10.2020 11.2025 11.2030 12.2035
Date
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

c
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

o
i
l

r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
WI
WAG

Figure 10. Relative cumulative oil recoveries for WI and CO2-WAG scenarios.

Approxiamtely 3-4 years from the beginning of CO
2
injection, the produced gas would start to be contaminated by carbon
dioxide. Several years later most of the wells would be producing gas with more then 30% of CO
2
. This gas can not be sold
with out separation of CO
2
, but can be re-injected and recirculated into the reservoir. The amount of the additional oil
produced per one Sm
3
of CO
2
injected is getting reduced with time. It takes approximately 20 to 30% of reservoir pore volume
SPE 113436 7
of CO
2
to be injected before the tapering effect occures. In the current base case CO
2
injection scenario, only around 15% of
reservoir pore volume of CO
2
needed could be available from the potential gas power plant at Tjeldbergodden. Re-injection of
produced gas with high CO
2
content not only serves to increase gas utilization factor (amount of oil produced per unit volume
of gas injected), but it is actually utilizing the same CO
2
several times. In the re-injection scenario, efficiency of the process in
Sm
3
of oil produced per each Sm
3
of clean CO
2
from the Tjeldbergodden power plant is more then twice higher compared to
CO
2
-base case without re-injection. This makes the re-injection scenario very attractive.
The contamination of the gas cap with the CO
2
is an issue, since blowdown of the gas cap is in plans after oil production
period. Lackner (2007) showed that the advanced well control / workovers might significantly reduce the contamination of the
gas cap.

Conclusions
CO
2
is an effective oil displacing agent and CO
2
injection has significan tertiary EOR potential for many fields.
However, physical effects occurring at CO2 flood need accurate modeling.
For each particular field case it is necessary to evaluate which effects are of importance and choose the right
modeling and simulation approach. Numerical models may not account propelly for CO
2
diffusion through the
water phase.Formation of the CO
2
-rich liquid phase and thermodynamic aspect of its formation need to be
modeled in order to properly account for fingering effects at multiple displacement fronts.
Most of the CO
2
injection processes on the NCS are considered on quite late stage of reservoir life after rather
efficient water flooding (up to 50% of STOOIP recovery and above), which decreases the remaining EOR
potential for tertiary CO
2
floods.
The evaluations of CO
2
or CO
2
-WAG processes were performed for many reservoirs on the NCS. Most of these
studies concluded technical feasibility of the EOR process. However, economic or logistical aspects often prevent
projects from continuation. Among project stoppers, the most common ones are:
o Availability of large quantities of low cost CO
2
in the area;
o Transport and storage of CO
2
on the offshore platforms;
o Surface facilities not fit for potential corrosion associated with carbonated water;
o Availability of gas handling capacity on the platform;
o Contamination of produced gas;
o Low EOR potential and not attractive project economics.
Important measures that can increase EOR potential of CO
2
injection in heterogeneous reservoirs could be:
o Re-injection of the produced gas;
o Re-allocation of injected CO
2
volumes between existing and optimized well patterns;
o Continuous well control, isolation of offended perforation intervals, well re-perforation programs;
o Methods of fluid mobility control and sweep improvement;
o Optimization of injection scenarios.



References

Agarwal, B., Thomas, L.K., Sylte, J.E. and OMeara, D.J. 1997. Reservoir Characterization of Ekofisk Field: A Giant, fractured Chalk
Reservoir in the Norwegian North Sea Upscaling. Paper SPE 38875 presented at the 1997 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 5-8 October 1997.
Agustsson, H., and Grnestaff, G.H. 2004. A Study of CO
2
Injection in the Gullfaks Field, Offshore Norway. Paper SPE 89338-MS presented
at SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 17-24 April.
Atkins, P.W. ed. Physical Chemistry. 6
th
ed. Oxford University Press.
Austad, T., Strand, S., Madland, M.V., Puntervold, T., and Korsnes, R.I. 2007. Seawater in Chalk: An EOR and Compaction Fluid.
International Petroleum Technology Conference, Paper IPTC 11370, presented at International Petroleum Technology Conference,
Dubai, 4-6 October.
Berenblyum, R., Kollbotn, L., Surguchev, L. 2007. EOR Potential of Naturally Fractured Supercritical Fluid Field. Presented at 14
th

European Symposium on Imporved Oil Recovery, Cairo, Egypt, 22-24 April.
Berenblyum, R., Calderon, G., Kollbotn, L., and Surguchev, L. 2008. Simulation Aspects of the CO
2
flooding. Sensitivity and case study.
Presented at EAGE Symposium, Saint Petersburg, Russia, 4-7 April. .
Bhambri, P. and Mohanty, K.K. 2005. Streamline Simulation of 4-Phase WAG Process. Paper SPE 96940 presented at the 2005 Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dalas, Texas, 9-12 October.
Calderon, G., Surguchev, L. and Skjaeveland, S. 2007. Fingering Mechanism in Heterogeneous Porous Media. Presented at IEA
Collaborative Project on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Vedbaek, Denmark, 5-7 September.
Chang, Y-B., Coats, B.K. and Nolen, J.S. 1996. A compositional Model for CO
2
Floods Including Solubility in Water. SPEREE, 1(2): 155-
160. SPE-35164-PA.
Chen C-Y. and Meiburg E. 1998. Miscible Porous Media Displacement in the Quarter Five-Spot Configuration. Part 2: Effect of
Heterogeneities. Journal Fluid Mech. 371: 269-299.
8 SPE 113436
Crump, J.G. 1988. Detailed Simulations of the Effects of Process Parameters on Adverse Mobility Ratio Displacements. Paper SPE 17337
presented at SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 16-21 April.
Darvish, G.R., Lindeberg, E., Kleppe, J. and Torsaeter, O. 2004. Numerical Simulations For Designing Oil/CO
2
Gravity Drainage
Laboratory Experiments Of A Naturally Fractured Reservoir. Presented at 7th international conference on greenhouse gas control
technologies, Vancouver, Canada, 5-9 September.
da Silva, F.V. 1989. Primary and Enhanced Recovery of Ekofisk Field: A Single- and Double-Porosity Numerical Simulation Study. Paper
SPE 19840 presented at the 1989 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8-11 October
Di Donato, G., Lu, H., Tavassoli, Z. and Blunt, M.J. 2007. Multirate-Transfer Dual-Porosity Modeling of Gravity Drainage and Imbibiton.
SPEJ, March: 77-88. SPE 93144.
Gernert, J.M. and Bringman, W.E. 1964. Meadow Creek Unit Lakota B Combination Water-Miscible Flood. JPT, Sep: 993-997. SPE-824-
PA.
Godbole, S., Thele, K. and Reinbold, E., 1995. EOS Modeling and Experimental Observations of Three-Hydrocarbon-Phase Equilibria.
SPERE, March: 101-108. SPE-24936-PA
Grape, S.G., Poston, S.W. and Osoba, J.S. 1990. Imbibition Flooding with CO
2
-Enriched Water. Presented at Intenation Symposium of Core
Analysits, SCA-1990-18.
Grigg, R.B., and Svec, R.K. 2003. Co-injected CO
2
-brine Interactions with Indiana Limestone. International Symposium of Core Analysts,
SCA-2003-19.
Homsy, G., 1987. Viscous Fingering in Porous Media. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 19:271.
Izgec, O., Demiral, B., and Akin, S. 2005. CO
2
injection in Carbonates. Paper SPE 93773 presented at SPE Western Regional Meeting,
Irvine, California, Mar30-Apr01. .
Jensen, T.B., Harpole, K.J. and Osthus, A. 2000. EOR Screening for Ekofisk. Paper SPE 65124 presented at SPE European Petroleum
Conference, Paris, France, 24-25 October.
Jessen, K. and Orr, F.M. Jr. 2004. Gravity Segregation and Compositional Streamline Simulation. Paper SPE 89448 presented at SPE/DOE
Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 17-21 April.
Jolly, W.L. 1991. Modern Inorganic Chemistry (2
nd
edition). New York City: McGraw-Hill.
Juanes, R., and Blunt, M. 2006. Impact of Viscous Fingering on the Prediction of Optimum WAG Ratio. SPEJ, 12(4):486-495. SPE-99721-
PA.
Kelkar, M. and Gupta, A. 1991. A Numerical Studyof Viscous Instabilities:Effect of Controling Parameters and Sacling Considerations.
SPEJ, 6(1):121-128. SPE-18094-PA.
Kulkarni, M. and Rao, D. 2005. Experimental investigation of miscible and immiscible Water-Alternating-Gas (WAG) process performance.
JPSE, 48: 1-20.
La Force, T., PhD Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
Lansangan, R. and Smith, J.L. 1991. Viscosity, Density, and Composition Measurements of CO2/West Texas Oil Systems. SPERE, 8(3):
175-182. SPE-21017-PA.
Lajeunesse, E. and Couder Y., 2000. On the Tip-Splitting Instability of Viscous Fingers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 419: 125-149.
Lackner, A.S., Janssen, P.H., Stensen, J.A. and Haugse, V. 2007. Offshore CO
2
-EOR in the Heidrun Field. Presented at EAGE 14th
Symposium on IOR.Cayro, Egypt, 22-24 April.
Lee, S-T., Lo, H. and Dharmawardhana. 1988. Analysis of Mass Transfer Mechanisms Occurring in Rich Gas Displacement Process. Paper
SPE 8062 presented at the 1988 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 2-5 October.
McGuire, P., Spence, A. and Redman, R. Core Acquisition and Analysis for Optimization of the Prudhoe Bay Miscible-Gas Project. SPERE.
10(2): 94-100. SPE 27759-PA.
Medianestrian M., 2006. Fluid Characterization for CO
2
Injection Process. Masters thesis at University of Stavanger.
Moissis D.E., Wheeler, M.F. and Miller, C.A. 1993. Simulation of Miscible Viscous Fingering Using a Modified Method of Characteristics:
Effects of Gravity and Heterogeneity. SPE Advance Technology Series. 1(1): 62-70. SPE 18440.
Muller, T. and Larry, W. 1991. Theoretical Study of Water Blocking in Miscible Flooding. SPERE 6(4):445-451. SPE 20206.
Orr, F.M.Jr., Yu, A. and Lien, C. 1981. Phase Behavior of CO2 and Crude Oil in Low-Temperature Reservoirs. SPEJ 21: 480-492. SPE
8813
Orr, F.M.Jr,, Silva, M. and Lien, C. 1983. Equilibrium Phase Compositions of CO2/Crude Oil Mixtures-Part 2: Comparison of Continuous
Multiple-Contact and Slim-Tube Displacement Tests. SPEJ 10:117-133. SPE 10725.
Rogerson A. and Meiburg E. 1993. Numerical Simulation of Miscible Displacement Processes in Porous Media Flows under Gravity, Phys.
Fluids A 5(11): 2644-2660.
Surguchev L., Berenblyum R., Kollbotn L. 2007. Critical parameters of CO2 IOR process. Presented at FORCE seminar "CO
2
seen from the
undeground, NPD, Stavanger, 30 October.
Stokka, S., Surguchev, L., Berenblyum, R., Fjelde, I., Stensen, J.A., Jannsen, P.H., and Lackner, A.S. 2007. Tjeldbergodden CO
2
value
chain: gas from onshore power plant for IOR at the Heidrun field. Presented at IEA Collaborative Project on Enhanced Oil Recovery,
Vedbaek, Denmark, 5-7 September.