SPE 92006

Planning EOR Projects

J. Roger Hite, SPE, Business Fundamentals Group; S.M. (Sam) Avasthi, SPE, Avasthi & Associates, Inc.; and
Paul L. Bondor, SPE, BonTech

Copyright 2004, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2004 SPE International Petroleum Conference
in Mexico held in Puebla, Mexico, 8–9 November 2004.
Millions Barrels / Day
120
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of Actual
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
100 EIA Forecast
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at ASPO - Conv
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 80 ASPO - Total
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. 60
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract 40

High oil prices and concerns about future oil supply are
leading to a renewed emphasis on Enhanced Oil Recovery
(EOR), a group of technologies which can significantly
increase the recovery factor of oil reservoirs. Some of these
EOR technologies are currently producing substantial
incremental oil; others have not yet made a commercial
impact. As all EOR processes are reservoir- and reservoir
fluid-specific, it is necessary to identify the appropriate EOR
technology for use in a reservoir, design the project to achieve
the required economic incremental recovery, and manage the
project to meet or exceed expectations. This paper discusses
how to plan, design and manage an EOR project, proceeding
from process selection through geologic analysis and
modeling, project economics, project design, pilot testing
(when and if required), and project implementation and
surveillance. In each stage, key risks are identified, and
actions to minimize those risks are given.
Background – A Case for Action
World Oil Supply and Demand. The Energy Information
Agency (EIA)1 forecasts that world oil demand will grow to
119 million B/D by 2025, an increase of 55% from current
levels2 (Figure-1). Moreover the Association for the Study of
Peak Oil (ASPO)3 has done considerable work to show that
the peak production of conventional oil is behind us. Future
oil production will come increasingly from non-conventional
resources, such as heavy oil, bitumen, deepwater oil, and Gas-
To-Liquid (GTL). While many feel these resources will be
available, if not ample4,5, it seems likely that all non-
conventional resources, including those from Enhanced Oil
Recovery will be needed to meet the needs of the planet.
20
0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Figure-1: Conventional Oil Production
1,3
Forecasts
Crude Prices. Production from non-conventional oil sources
generally requires higher oil prices. Costs are higher because
of the need for injectants and for better surveillance, and
required surface facilities. As a result, higher product prices
are needed to justify the higher costs.
Over many years, crude prices have averaged about $20/Bbl,
with considerable excursions up and down6 (Figure-2). A
relatively safe proposition is to use this average for planning
purposes. A more realistic planning basis would be to
recognize the stochastic nature of prices and to use a statistical
forecast, calculating annual prices using a mean real price of
$20/Bbl with a standard deviation of $9.70. Using multiple
realizations on this basis will yield a more realistic
understanding of price risk. A single price forecast into the
future belies the simple fact that future crude prices are
unknowable. Those of us who have been involved in
forecasting prices over the years, and who have been
invariably wrong, know this from experience.
2 SPE 92006
60
50
Nominal
Crude Price, $/Bbl
40 Real
30
20
10
0 with frequent checks of performance predictions and
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
6
Figure-2: US First Purchase Prices
It is possible, perhaps even probable, that oil prices have
achieved a new equilibrium over the last 30 years, with the
emergence of OPEC and now that non-conventional oil is
playing a larger role. Since 1973 the average is more like
$25/Bbl with a standard deviation of $10.70. Indeed the
current OPEC target price is $22-28/Bbl, in line with this
higher average. This would make EOR projects more
attractive if this new average holds up over the next few
decades.
EOR Definitions
At present there is considerable confusion in the usage of the
terms EOR and IOR. In fact, a recent informal survey within
the SPE’s EOR/IOR Technical Interest Group (EOIO TIG)
revealed a wide range of views. Some felt the terms were
synonymous. Some felt that IOR covered just about
everything that could be done to increase production,
including infill drilling and reservoir characterization. There
was a range of other views in between as well.
For the purposes of this paper we will use the following
definitions7,8:
1. Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) should refer to
reservoir processes that recover oil not produced by
secondary processes. Primary recovery uses the
natural energy of the reservoir to produce oil or gas.
Secondary recovery uses injectants to re-pressurize
the reservoir and to displace oil to producers. The
main realization of this concept is waterflooding,
although gas re-injection for pressure maintenance is
also included. Enhanced oil recovery processes target
what's left. They focus on the rock/oil/injectant
system and on the interplay of capillary and viscous
forces.
2. Improved oil recovery (IOR) refers to any practice to
increase oil recovery. That can include EOR
processes, as well as practices to increase sweep such
as infill drilling, horizontal wells, and polymers for
mobility control or improved conformance.
EOR Project Planning
Successful EOR project management depends on good
planning – “prior proper planning prevents poor
performance”, they say, and it’s especially true when EOR is
involved. From the outset careful attention to economics and
modeling at every step greatly improves the chances of
success.
Experience has shown that a lot of wasted time can be avoided
economics, while building the engineering design. Figure-3
illustrates the interaction of economics, engineering planning
and data collection, and modeling. All three should go hand-
in-hand at each step.
We have all been involved in EOR developments where
considerable time and effort was spent on projects that had no
hope of achieving adequate profitability. Early screening
studies would have clearly identified the problem and avoided
a great deal of pointless engineering work.
Process Selection. EOR processes fall into two general
categories: those that improve volumetric sweep efficiency,
and those that improve displacement efficiency.
Improving sweep efficiency. Poor sweep efficiency results
from either reservoir heterogeneities, or poor mobility ratio.
The use of methods that improve mobility ratio may also
reduce the impact of reservoir heterogeneity. Mobility ratio
can be affected by decreasing the mobility of the injected fluid
(e.g., polymer flooding), or by increasing the mobility of the
target hydrocarbons (e.g., thermal methods).
Improving displacement efficiency. Displacement efficiency
is controlled by the capillary forces, which hold the oil in the
reservoir matrix. Methods that reduce the impact of these
capillary forces include chemical (surfactant, caustic, alkaline
flooding) and miscible (hydrocarbon gas, carbon dioxide,
nitrogen flooding). Microbial processes rely on the use of in-
situ microbes to generate surfactants and polymers, and so act
to improve displacement efficiency.
Process selection begins with the identification of a target
volume of hydrocarbons not accessible by primary or
secondary means. This identification requires answers to the
following questions:
1) What is the remaining hydrocarbon in-place after
conventional methods?
2) Where is this resource located?
3) What is the reason it has not been recovered?
SPE 92006 3

Effective EOR Project Management

Modeling Engineering Data Economics

EOR Process
Selection
Analog Data Screening

Geologic Studies
Analytic
Tools
Design Parameters
Lab Data (R&D)
Coarse Field Date
Simulation
Pilots / Field
Testing Detailed
Fine
Economic
Simulation
Models
Project
Implementation

Figure-3: Effective EOR Project Management

The determination and confirmation of the target volume and
location is a critical first step in process selection. In order to
answer these questions, a body of information about the
characteristics of both the reservoir and the reservoir fluids is
necessary. Geological analysis and dynamic modeling,
addressed later herein, can help answer these questions, but
should if possible be supported by field data: core analyses,
fluid properties measurement, and detailed production history
and pressure information.
For miscible processes: What is the anticipated phase
behavior between reservoir fluid and injectant? What is the
mobility of the anticipated phase(s)? Will the process be first-
contact miscible, or developed miscibility?
For immiscible gas injection processes: What is the remaining
oil saturation after waterflooding? What is residual to
immiscible gas? How will fault blocks or low permeability
layers be drained?

Once a target volume has been identified, and the relevant
reservoir and fluid information collected, screening of EOR
processes for application takes place. There are screening
criteria in the SPE literature9,10 and commercial software is
also available for this purpose.
Screening will result in a few candidate processes; selection
requires that the specific target reservoir be matched to the
specific process. This is not wholly a technical question; the
economic viability of the project will depend on the matching
process. The detailed work needed will depend on the
process, and will include answers to the following examples:
For chemical processes: What is the design of the chemical
slug to develop the ultra-low interfacial tension necessary for a
successful displacement? To what extent will the chemical
interact with the clays in the reservoir rock through
adsorption? What is the salinity of the reservoir water, and
how will that salinity impact the activity of the chemical slug
and change during the process? How will mobility control of
the oil bank and chemical bank be accomplished?
For polymer processes: What is the polymer concentration
necessary to provide mobility control? What portion of the
polymer slug will be adsorbed on the clays in the reservoir
rock?
4 SPE 92006
For thermal processes: What are the anticipated thermal
losses in the wellbore, to cap and base rock, to water in the
formation? Can the thermal front be controlled in the
reservoir? Can the reservoir pressure be controlled in the
range necessary for efficient heating of the reservoir fluid?
For microbial processes: Can microbes be identified that can
be sustained in the reservoir, utilize in-situ nutrients and/or
oxidants, and generate surfactants and polymers, which will
accomplish the goals of the project? How will the microbes
and/or their products be stably transported through the
reservoir?
For any EOR process: Can the process selected be used in the
selected reservoir, given the reservoir rock and fluid
environment in place? Can this process be implemented in
such a way that it will result in an economically attractive
project?
The answers to the above questions are critical in the final
selection of a process, and must be carried out in conjunction
with geological and laboratory investigations, as well as with
project economic analysis and project design.
Geologic Studies
A good understanding of the reservoir geology is critical to the
success of an EOR project. Because it is vital to contact
remaining oil-in-place with the injectant, the geological
understanding should be in sufficient detail to allow modeling
of these complicated processes. In most cases, the reservoir
will have sufficient production performance so that a history
match can be obtained. This will not necessarily provide a
sufficient geological description for EOR purposes. In EOR,
movement of injectant through a thief zone, causing premature
breakthrough, or loss of injectant out of zone, may result in
failure of the project. Mineralogy of the reservoir, by
determining the amount of adsorption of injectant (in the case
of polymer and chemical methods), will dictate the amount of
injectant necessary for success.
A detailed geologic study should precede any EOR effort.
This study should at a minimum revisit all logs, core and fluid
data, as well as result in a detailed geologic model that
provides a satisfactory history match to production
performance.
In addition, reservoir fluid and core samples should be
obtained and analyzed, and the data specific to the EOR
method to be used for project design identified and gathered.
If a pilot is intended, data should be gathered in the pilot area,
and detailed geologic modeling carried out specific to the
pilot.
Modeling
The modeling of EOR projects is necessary for optimizing the
EOR project design (such as optimizing CO2 slug size, WAG
ratio, CO2 recovery plant size, and well operating conditions
and constraints in CO2 flood EOR projects) and net present
value, and to reduce financial risk for large EOR projects11,12.
The modeling of EOR projects requires that the reservoir
description used for conducting reservoir simulation studies be
consistent with the geological model, and validated with pre-
EOR reservoir performance, and requires much more data and
time than scale-up techniques and waterflood secondary
recovery project design studies.
The modeling of EOR projects is basically a five-step
procedure: (1) selection of an appropriate reservoir simulator
for conducting the project design study, (2) collecting valid
input data, (3) history matching past production-pressure
performance of the reservoir, (4) predicting future EOR
project performance, and (5) determining the optimum EOR
project design, by conducting sensitivity studies.
The procedure for selecting an appropriate reservoir simulator
for conducting an EOR project design study involves selecting
a black oil or modified black oil/pseudo-compositional or fully
compositional or thermal simulator that will accurate predict
the performance of the reservoir under the EOR processes to
be simulated. Since most producing companies these days use
commercially available reservoir simulators, selection of a
reservoir simulator involves not only comparing which of the
commercially available simulators are known to be bug free,
have the necessary and user-friendly pre- and post-processing
interfaces, and run fast on the types of reservoirs and EOR
processes to be simulated, but also the record/reputation of the
software vendor in providing technical support whenever
necessary to ensure that the reservoir simulation studies can
move forward smoothly and the project can be completed in a
timely manner.
Before conducting any major or complex reservoir simulation
study, as for example simulating a miscible gas (CO2)
injection in a gravity drainage naturally fractured reservoir, it
is always a wise move to conduct a small simulation study
using the commercial reservoir simulator selected to test it out
on the EOR processes and the reservoir to be simulated, rather
than having to change the simulator later when the reservoir
simulation study is in progress and finding out that the
simulator being used is either not capable of simulating the
EOR processes properly and/or runs so slow that the project
can not be completed in a timely manner.
The modeling of EOR projects requires much more fluid and
rock properties data than waterflood secondary recovery
project design studies, and the additional data required
depends upon the EOR process to be simulated. As for
example, for predicting CO2 flood EOR project performance,
additional fluid properties data required includes, but is not
limited to, minimum miscibility pressure (MMP), phase
equilibrium, density and viscosity data for CO2 crude oil
mixtures, multiple contact experiments to supplement slim-
tube data for use in fine-tuning an equation–of-state (EOS);
and the additional rock properties data required includes, but
is not limited to, CO2-rich phase and CO2-water relative
permeabilities, and water-alternating-gas (WAG) tests using
SPE 92006 5

CO2. In order to obtain meaningful laboratory data necessary

for simulating an EOR process in a given reservoir, necessary
laboratory tests should be designed and those tests should be
monitored to ensure that the measured rock and fluid
properties data will be meaningful and available before
starting the modeling work.

For a reservoir simulation model to accurately predict EOR

project performance, the reservoir description must
realistically represent geological characteristics of the
reservoir. A reservoir description is developed by collecting,
and interpreting reservoir properties and then is refined by the
history-matching process. Figure-4 is a flow chart11 of a
history-matching process used to refine a reservoir
description.

After an acceptable history-match of the past production-

pressure performance has been obtained (that is, the reservoir
description has been refined such that the model can match the
historical performance), then using the history-matched
reservoir model, future EOR project performance can be
predicted.

To determine the optimum EOR project design, numerous

sensitivity studies are often conducted (that is numerous EOR
project prediction cases are run by varying the values of the
parameters of interest, and the results compared) to determine
the best option related to the injection scheme (as for example,
for a CO2 flood EOR project, WAG ratio, CO2 slug size, and
total CO2 injection volume required, etc.), and well operating
conditions and constraints (as for example, for a CO2 flood
EOR project, well-head/bottom-hole injection pressures for
injectors, bottom-hole production pressures for producers, gas
production rate limit for producers, etc.). The sensitivity
studies may also be conducted to determine the best option
related to, but not limited to, the following: gravity-dominated
floods versus pattern floods, pattern modifications/ balancing,
infill drilling, use of horizontal and multi-lateral wells, types
of production wells (pumped or flowing), phased-in field
11
development, etc. This type of sensitivity studies are necessary Figure-4: Shows a flow chart of a history-matching
for designing and optimizing EOR projects from technical process used to refine a reservoir description. In
point of view, but, thereafter conducting economic sensitivity this chart, the block containing “geological,
studies can make the results even more meaningful to the petrophysical, pressure transient, and seismic data
decision makers (Figure-5). analysis” is placed after the “grid network” block.
The initial analysis of these four sets of data actually
Economics is initiated much earlier, but the data analysis is
incorporated into the reservoir simulator only after
For EOR projects, as in all E&P projects, the primary the grid network is actually determined.
economic driver is project profitability, in most cases. Will
the project meet the necessary economic criteria, and what are
the conditions under which this will occur? In some cases,
development of a reliable production stream, reserves
additions, or employment related to project longevity might
also be considerations.
6 SPE 92006
Figure-5: Shows results of an economic sensitivity
11
study : Normalized net present values of a CO2-
flood for different total volumes of CO2 injected,
percentage of HCPV.
The economics of an EOR project are closely linked to the
technical design of the process. Economic analysis should be
carried out in tandem with the process screening and process
selection steps, progressing from simple to progressively more
complex analyses.
Once the target oil volume is determined, and process
screening has resulted in the choice of a few options on a
technical basis, economic screening should be done. At this
stage, the critical parameters may be the slug size and cost of
the EOR injectant. Using a range of subsurface parameters,
project economics can be estimated.
Simple screens may include rules-of-thumb derived for
existing projects (e.g., X mcf CO2 per bbl oil recovered), and
assumptions that may need to be verified (e.g., impact of
reservoir salinity on amount of polymer necessary to develop a
given viscosity, ability to reduce reservoir pressure to allow
formation of a steam chest).
During the screening step, it is essential that the range of
uncertainty in both the reservoir parameters and the process
parameters be recognized and considered. The process should
be evaluated using optimistic assumptions for those
parameters for which a range of uncertainty exists. At this
stage, the effort should be to identify the critical technical
factors that impact the project, so that subsequent efforts may
be focused on those elements, which most impact the project
viability. Included in this are assumptions regarding the
timing and operation of the project; thus, simple process mod-
eling using parameters of the field project in reservoir
simulations will guide the economic analysis and the process
selection path forward.
Once the process has been selected, both the technical and
economic effort will be focused on those aspects of the
project, which have been identified as critical to success. This
effort will use the results of laboratory investigations and
field-testing, incorporated into more detailed reservoir
geological and simulation models, to better characterize the
project and its viability.
In EOR projects, even more than in conventional E&P
projects, the impact of time is critical. As a result of the need
for costly injectants, and more detailed surveillance, and
required surface facilities, EOR projects are very front-end-
loaded, and tradeoffs between up-front cost and response time
may be critical to the profitability of the project13. In a tertiary
project (following waterflooding), project response may not
occur until a substantial fraction of a pore volume of agent has
been injected; this may be several years after project
inception, and, in the case of chemical methods, after the high
cost chemical slug has been completely injected. Lower-than-
anticipated injectivity may delay the project response
sufficiently to adversely impact economic viability. An
incremental response less than anticipated, or the inability
accurately to predict the reservoir’s response, may have
similar effects.
The economic analysis is critical to the success of an EOR
project, by identifying the critical technical parameters that
govern the project’s profitability and providing the
justification to carry out the necessary work to confirm
assumptions, modify the process, and optimize the results. It
should be an integral part of the project design and
development process.
Design Parameters
The specific EOR process to be implemented will determine
the project design parameters that are critical. Design must be
carried out on the micro scale, as well as the macro scale.
On the micro scale, the parameters that determine an efficient
displacement must be specified. In the case of a miscible
project, for example, results from detailed laboratory tests of
miscibility pressure and multiple contact experiments will be
used to determine the optimum displacement of hydrocarbons.
In chemical processes, adsorption experiments will determine
the rock-slug interaction, and phase behavior studies and
surface tension measurements will allow design of the
displacement process.
On the macro scale, the parameters that determine optimal
sweep must be set. These will include, for instance, chemical
and polymer slug size, WAG ratios for miscible
displacements, and pressure and temperature requirements for
thermal recovery. In addition, those field-operating
parameters that are necessary for any EOR project must be
specified. These include well placement, pattern
determination, injection rates and pressures, and quality
control specifications for the project.
Pilots
There is a misconception that it is necessary, for technical
reasons, to carry out a field pilot of any EOR process. This is
SPE 92006
not true. For example, if there is sufficient analogue
experience, and the reservoir geology is understood, modern
simulation methods may be reliable enough to make a pilot
test unnecessary.
A second misconception is that an “oil in the tank” pilot is
sufficient to be able to predict performance on a field scale.
Such pilots are almost always not sufficient to make a reliable
extrapolation to a full-scale project.
The question should be: “what are the critical unknowns that
may cause a material difference in the response of the
project?” These critical parameters should be known from the
sensitivity studies done in the process selection and design
steps, and their accompanying economic analyses and
reservoir modeling.
If it is concluded that uncertainties in the key parameters are
critical in determining the project’s viability, and that these
uncertainties cannot be resolved in the laboratory or through
modeling, then a pilot test should be considered to reduce
those uncertainties. The pilot should then be designed to
obtain the key information necessary. The pilot should be able
to provide the quantitative information needed to calibrate
models to predict commercial performance, and to reduce the
project risk to acceptable levels.
Pilot tests may range from a simple injectivity test to a full
multipattern injection and production test. Pre- and post-test
cores may be needed; logging and sampling observation wells
and other data gathering methods may be necessary. A good
understanding of the geology of the site, as well as dedicated
production and injection wells, is critical to the success of a
pilot.
Any pilot test should be specifically designed to obtain the key
data required to better make a project decision. An
appropriate test site, dedicated personnel, facilities, and wells
are required, along with a commitment to use these resources
to design, implement and carry the pilot to its conclusion.
Thus, a pilot test must also be staffed with appropriate
personnel, and have effective surveillance and post-test
analysis carried out, in order to add value to the project.
Project Implementation
The project design will include in it recommendations for data
gathering and surveillance activities, as well as operational
guidelines and quality control specifications which will be
essential to its success.
Good installation and implementation of a project, following
the guidelines and recommendations is likewise essential to its
success. Prior to project startup, field personnel must be
trained in the project’s purpose and operations. An EOR
project does not represent “business as usual” in the oil field.
A detailed project management document should be
developed, detailing both the project expectations and the
surveillance activities to be carried out during the life of the
7
project. Included should be scheduled well and project
reviews on a regular basis.
Recommended surveillance may include taking of pressure or
temperature data in observation wells, obtaining production
fluid samples, carrying out quality control activities on
injection fluid facilities, as well as the normal field operations
activities.
The availability of new surveillance methods and tools –
continuous downhole pressure, temperature and flow rate
measurements, cross-well tomography, 4-D seismic, for
example, may be used to provide detailed surveillance data
which were not available to earlier generations of EOR
projects.
Proper surveillance will provide assurance that the project is
performing as expected, and will also provide early warnings
if deviations from expectation occur. This early warning is
critical to allow time to respond to the problem. Sometimes
better-than-expected response is an indication that the project
is not behaving as expected – an early response, for example,
could be a warning of the existence of a thief zone, or the
breakdown of a displacement front.
The use of a suite of reservoir simulation models which
encompass the range of uncertainties in the process and
project, as part of the normal reservoir management and
surveillance process, will provide the ability to incorporate the
data gathered and diagnose the behavior of the project. These
models should be extensions of those used for project design,
to provide a tie to the original project justification.
EOR is a technique, which can provide significant increases in
recovery from a reservoir, but those increases depend on
appropriate process selection, good project design, recognition
and addressing of critical uncertainties, and attention to details
in the implementation and management of the project.
Conclusions
Higher oil prices and concerns about future oil supplies are
leading to increased interest in enhanced oil recovery
processes around the world. Even small incremental
improvements in recovery efficiency can add significant
reserves.
Because EOR projects are generally more expensive and
involve higher front end costs than conventional secondary
projects, effective planning takes on added importance. Good
EOR planning combines modeling and economic studies at
each step throughout the engineering design process.
Experience tells us that a great deal of wasted time and effort
can be avoided in this way.
Ultimately, it is profitability that drives an EOR project.
Profitability estimates need good models for a basis. Good
models depend on engineering design data. And the
engineering design process is guided by economics. In the
8 SPE 92006
end all three should proceed in parallel, guiding and leading
each other, for effective and efficient EOR project designs.
Acknowledgement
We thank Avasthi & Associates, Inc., Business Fundamentals
Group, and BonTech for permission to prepare and present
this paper.
References
1. “Energy Information Administration / International Energy
Outlook 2003, Energy Information Administration (EIA):
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/index.html
2. “BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June 2004”:
http://www.bp.com
3. “ASPO Statistical Review of World Oil and Gas”, June 6,
2002, Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO):
http://www.peakoil.net/ASPOstatrew/ASPO-Stat-Rev.html
4. Holditch, S A, “The Increasing Role of Unconventional
Reservoirs in the Future of the oil and Gas Business”, J
Petroleum Technology (November, 2003) 34.
5. Skov, Arlie M, “World Energy Beyond 2050”, J Petroleum
Technology (January 2003) 34.
6. "Crude Oil Domestic First Purchase Prices, 1949-2003”,
Energy Information Agency (EIA):
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb0518.html
7. Stosur, G J, Hite, J Roger, Carnahan, Norman F, Karl
Miller, “The Alphabet Soup of IOR, EOR and AOR:
Effective Communication Requires a Definition of Terms",
SPE 84908, 2003. Also, “Definition of EOR and IOR”,
Journal of Petroleum Technology, June 2003.
8. Annual EOR Survey, Oil and Gas Journal, April 15, 2004.
9. Taber, J.J., Martin, F.D., and Seright, R.S., “EOR
Screening Criteria Revisited: Part 1 – Introduction to
Screening Criteria and Enhanced Recovery Field Projects”,
SPERE, August 1997.
10. Taber, J.J., Martin, F.D., and Seright, R.S., “EOR
Screening Criteria Revisited: Part 2 – Applications and
Impact of Oil Prices”, SPERE, August 1997.
11. Jarrell, P.M., Fox, C.E., Stein, M.H. and Webb, S. L.,
“Practical Aspects of CO2 Flooding”, SPE Monograph
Volume 22, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2002.
12. Fox, C.E. and Avasthi, S.M., “Practical Aspects of CO2
Flooding and Sequestration”, SPE Short-Course Manual,
Presented at the SPE/DOE Fourteenth Symposium on
Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, April 18, 2004:
http://www.spe.org/spe/jsp/shortcourse/0,2466,1104_1615
_2238886,00.html
13. Bondor, P.L., “Dilute Surfactant Flooding for North Sea
Applications - Technical and Economic Considerations”,
Proceedings, Sixth European Symposium on Improved Oil
Recovery, Stavanger, Norway, 21 - 23 May 1991.