1 / 40

Plugging Wells With Hydrated Bentonite

Plugging Wells With Hydrated Bentonite. Brian F. Towler University of Wyoming Denver SPE Section, December 17, 2008. Outline. Introduction Advantages of Bentonite Plugs Previous Work Experimental Procedure Experimental Results Conclusions. Permanent abandonment well schematic.

plato
Download Presentation

Plugging Wells With Hydrated Bentonite

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Plugging Wells With Hydrated Bentonite Brian F. Towler University of Wyoming Denver SPE Section, December 17, 2008

  2. Outline • Introduction • Advantages of Bentonite Plugs • Previous Work • Experimental Procedure • Experimental Results • Conclusions

  3. Permanent abandonment well schematic

  4. Temporary abandonment well schematic

  5. Advantages of Bentonite Plugs • Heals itself if disturbed • Immune to seismic events, deformation of casing, salt intrusion etc. • Workover Rig often not required • Cheaper

  6. Previous Work • James (1984-96) Wyoming OGC • Wheaton et.al. (1994) Montana BOM • Ogden and Ruff (1989-1992) CSU • Towler and Ehlers (1997) • Englehardt et al. (2001) Chevron • Clark and Salsbury (2003) Chevron • Idaliu et al. (2004) Chevron

  7. Gulf of Mexico History

  8. Annual number of wells permanently and temporarily plugged and abandoned in theGOM (1947–2006)

  9. Average P&A aggregate cost per well ($1000/well), 2002–2007

  10. Field Trials in California Performed in Coalinga, California by Chevron Environmental Management Company in 2001 Well included primary producers, waterflood producers/injectors, and steamflood producers Three generalized abandonment designs 19 total wells

  11. Case 1 No Freshwater 25 ft plug at surface 100 ft plug at top of perforations or liner top 11 wells

  12. Case 2 Freshwater present Cement in annulus covers freshwater 100’ bentonite needs to cover freshwater interface, 4 wells

  13. Case 3 Freshwater present Cement in annulus does not cover freshwater Cavity shot is required Completed in two phases 4 wells

  14. Field Results All 19 of the plugs met California’s Department of Conservations Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) approval Hydrating time of bentonite was observed to be affected by water temperature Bridging observed with bentonite nodules

  15. Field Trial in Australia • Barrow Island field, Windalia Reservoir • Single trial in 2002 • Planned to apply it to a 100 well abandonment program.

  16. Plugging cost comparison (Australia)

  17. Some Problems • In oil and gas wells with standing water column granulated bentonite can swell and bridge off when it hits the water column, creating a plug at the wrong location. • Integrity and strength in Saline Water is unproven • Temperature Effects unproven

  18. Bentonite bars • We have developed compressed cylindrical bullet shaped bentonite bars as a plugging product, designed to overcome the bridging problem. • Salinity and Temperature effects being investigated in lab.

  19. DROP DIRECTION 2.75” 8.25” LENGTH

  20. 1.25” HOLE DROP DIRECTION 4” 8.25” LENGTH

  21. Characteristics • Material: Sodium Bentonite • Granulation: 5/16-3/8” • Binding Agent- Water Soluble • Forming under high pressure • Length of the Bars: 8.25” (29.55 mm) • Diameter: - 2.75”( 69.8 mm)- No hole; Weight: approx: 2 kg - 3.5” ( ¾” dia. axial hole) - 4.00 ” dia. - 4.00” ( 1” dia. axial hole); Weight: approx: 3.6 kg. Other options at request

  22. Pressure Containment • Important question to answer. • What pressure differential can the bentonite plug withstand?

  23. Theory: Towler and Ehlers (1997) • Where • H = height of bentonite plug • D = diameter of plug • Kb = friction factor • γb =SG of Bentonite • ρw= density of water

  24. Hence Plot

  25. Towler and Ehlers Results

  26. Towler and Ehlers Results • Friction Factor, Kb = 0.8

  27. Density of Bentonite • Brunton (1988): the density of bentonite particles is 2.457 g/cc • Clark and Salsbury (2003): compressed bentonite nodules as 2.05-2.2 g/cc. • Englehardt et al. (2001) hydrated bentonite density: 1.75 g/cc. • Towler and Ehlers (1997) hydrated bentonite1.616 g/cc

  28. Density of Bentonite • Our Results: • Compressed: 2.31 g/cc • Hydrated: 1.489-1.846 g/cc (depends on moisture content)

  29. Experimental setup

  30. Diam 6” PIPE ID 3 BENTONITE PLUGS Diam 2.75” / 8.25” LONG

  31. Conclusions • Compressed bentonite bars have shown a friction factor for hydrated bentonite plugs in steel casing of 1.886. • This compares with previously measured values 0.8 for hydrated bentonite pellets in steel.

  32. Conclusions • The friction factor is function of the moisture content of the hydrated bentonite contributing to scatter in the friction factor plot. • Expansion of the bullets (or bars) of 85% to 300% was observed when hydrated.

  33. Conclusions • The density of the hydrated plugs varied from 1.489 to 1.846 g/cc depending on the moisture content. • It is expected that these bars will be effective for sealing pressures in the plugging and abandonment of oil and gas wells.

More Related