Next Article in Journal
Enhancing Azo Dye Mineralization and Bioelectricity Generation through Biocathode-Microbial Fuel Cell Integration with Aerobic Bioreactor
Previous Article in Journal
Probabilistic Power and Energy Balance Risk Scheduling Method Based on Distributed Robust Optimization
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 17
Issue 19
10.3390/en17194895
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Review of Reservoir Damage Mechanisms Induced by Working Fluids and the Design Principles of Reservoir Protection Fluids: From Oil–Gas Reservoirs to Geothermal Reservoirs

by
Ou Jiang
1,
Ling Cao
1,
Wenxi Zhu
2 and
Xiuhua Zheng
1,*
1
School of Engineering and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China
2
School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2024, 17(19), 4895; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17194895 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 18 August 2024 / Revised: 16 September 2024 / Accepted: 26 September 2024 / Published: 29 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section H2: Geothermal)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Various working fluids are applied during geothermal reservoir development, and geothermal reservoir damage induced by contacts between working fluids and reservoir formations are inevitable. Reservoir damage mechanisms, including solid and colloidal plugging, fluid sensitivity, stress sensitivity, and water locking, provide guidance for designing reservoir protection working fluids. In this paper, based on the design principles of reservoir protection working fluids applied in oil–gas reservoirs, four design principles of reservoir protection working fluids are proposed to eliminate potential geothermal reservoir damage for geothermal reservoirs, containing solid-free, facilitated flowback, temporary plugging, and inhibition. Solid-free is achieved by replacing solids with polymers in working fluids. Surfactant and materials with low affinity towards rock surfaces are applied for the facilitated flowback of working fluids from reservoir formations. Temporary plugging is achieved by using temporary plugging materials, some of which are polymers that also apply to solid-free working fluids. Besides, some of the temporary plugging materials, such as surfactant, are applicable for both the facilitated flowback and inhibition of working fluids. The inhibition of working fluids include the inhibition of clay minerals, which can be attributed to clay mineral inhibitors or activity regulators in working fluids, as well as the inhibition of mineral precipitations. This review aims to provide insights for geothermal reservoir protection working fluids, contributing to achieving an efficient development of geothermal resources.

1. Introduction

As a green energy, geothermal resources have been long exploited and provide various benefits for human life [1]. Geothermal resources are stored within geothermal reservoirs, and the development of geothermal reservoirs includes geothermal drilling, completion, and heat extraction processes, which require the utilization of working fluids [2]. The working fluids will inevitably make contact with geothermal reservoir formations, causing potential reservoir damage to geothermal reservoirs [3,4]. Reservoir damage caused by working fluids could lead to a significant decline in reservoir productivity, subsequently reducing the economic efficiency of reservoir resource exploitation [5]. Therefore, reducing formation damage by applying working fluids that protect geothermal reservoirs is of crucial importance.
There is extensive research on reservoir protection working fluids, as seen in Table 1 [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. No standard formulas of reservoir protection working fluids is available, as their designs require the understanding of reservoir damage mechanisms [16]. To investigate potential reservoir damage mechanisms, an analysis of reservoir rock characteristics, including mineral characteristics and rock pore structure, is initially carried out [17,18,19]. Reservoir damage induced by working fluids results from the invasion of working fluids into reservoir formations [20]. Therefore, a reservoir sensitivity analysis is conducted by flowing working fluids through rock cores. Reservoir sensitivity includes fluid sensitivity and stress sensitivity, which are indicated by the permeability changes of reservoir rocks that result from working fluid properties and effective stress variation [18,21].
Based on reservoir damage mechanisms, various methods are applied for reservoir protection working fluids, which successfully control reservoir damage in engineering practices. The elimination of solids in working fluids is an effective method, as the solids in working fluids block the reservoir pores and fractures; for example, drill-in fluids especially refer to a type of reservoir protection drilling fluids that have no clay solids [6,7]. Other than solids plugging, precipitation, hydration swelling, and dispersion of minerals in the reservoir also lead to the blockage of reservoir pores and fractures, and hence, chemical agents are added into the working fluids to inhibit them [7,9,10,12,13]. Last but not least, eliminating the invasion of working fluids is the fundamental method to reduce reservoir damage, which is achieved by adding plugging material in working fluids [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. Nevertheless, studies on reservoir protection working fluids have been focused on oil–gas reservoirs, which have similarities to geothermal reservoirs, but also differ from geothermal reservoirs in terms of reservoir environment conditions and development technologies [2,22]. Based on the similarities, the design principles of reservoir protection working fluids in oil–gas reservoirs can provide insights for working fluids in geothermal reservoirs.
In this paper, literature research on reservoir damage mechanisms was initially carried out, providing a theoretical basis for the design principles of reservoir protection working fluids. In order to mitigate reservoir damage, based on reservoir protection working fluids utilized in oil–gas reservoirs, several design principles of reservoir protection working fluids were proposed for the development of geothermal reservoirs. The design principles can be simultaneously achieved by various techniques, which will contribute to a more efficient geothermal reservoir development.

2. Reservoir Damage Mechanisms Induced by Working Fluids

2.1. Solids and Colloidal Plugging

2.1.1. External Solids Invasion

There are conventionally solid particles, such as bentonite, weighing agents, and bridging agents, in drilling fluids, which enter the pores and fractures in reservoir formations, along with the lost circulation of drilling fluids, thereby blocking the pores and fractures and causing a decline in reservoir permeability [17,23]. The size of solid particles and the original reservoir pore structure are two main factors impacting the degree of solid plugging. Larger particles block the pores and fractures near the well, while the smaller ones invade deeper and block distant pores and fractures [24]. Besides, the rock cuttings are transported by drilling fluid, which can also enter the pores and fractures with the lost circulation of drilling fluids [25].

2.1.2. Incompatibility in and between Working Fluids

Flocculation precipitates will be generated due to the incompatibility within a working fluid system and between working fluids, which block the pores and fractures and subsequently cause reservoir damage [26]. For a single working fluid, it is reported that in polyacrylamide fracturing fluid, iron ions can chelate with the carboxylate groups of the polyacrylamide chains, generating precipitates [27]. For several working fluids, the sequential invasion of several working fluids can exacerbate the clogging of a rock core compared to the invasion of one working fluid, as represented by a greater decline in rock core permeability [28].

2.1.3. Chemical Adsorption and Wettability Alteration

Polymers are commonly utilized in working fluids, which can adsorb onto the surfaces of reservoir rocks and block the seepage channels [29]. Subsequently, chemical adsorption alters the wettability between working fluids and reservoir rocks, which is associated with the movability of fluids in reservoir rocks. The fluid movability change caused by wettability alteration lead to changes in reservoir rock permeability [26,30]. The joint effect of chemical adsorption and wettability alteration results in reservoir damage.

2.1.4. Fines Migration

Fines detached from the surfaces of reservoir rocks can migrate with working fluids, which is attributed to a high shear rate of fluid flow, dissolution of cementing minerals in the rock framework, and the dispersion of minerals induced by fluid–mineral interactions. The migrating fines will block the pores and fractures at pore throats when the radius of a particle exceeds that of a pore throat, which causes a decline in reservoir rock permeability [20,31].

2.1.5. Biological Activity

Bacteria can be introduced into the reservoir formation during drilling near the well, and the biological metabolite of bacteria can block the pores and fractures, causing a reduction in near-well reservoir permeability [23]. Additionally, carbonate minerals can precipitate under the induction effect of bacteria, as the biochemical actions of bacteria, including iron reduction, sulfate reduction, ureolysis, and denitrification, contribute to the supersaturation condition that is propitious to carbonate mineral precipitation in a solution [32].

2.2. Fluid Sensitivity

2.2.1. Flow Rate Sensitivity

Flow rate sensitivity refers to a phenomenon when the flow rate of working fluid reaches a critical value, which causes the blocking of pore throats by detached fines resulted from the critical flow rate [17]. On the one hand, a high flow rate reduces the critical retention concentration; that is, the concentration of fines adsorbed on the rock surface at the critical flow rate, which contributes to enlarge the void space within pores and fractures [33]. On the other hand, a high flow rate has a high shear rate and enhances the detachment of fines from rock surface, which may lead to severe particle plugging at pore throats.

2.2.2. Water Sensitivity and Salinity Sensitivity

Water sensitivity indicates the permeability reduction resulted from the hydration swelling and dispersion of clay minerals due to contact between the working fluids with a lower salinity than the formation water and the rock minerals. The water molecules spread into the interlayers between the crystal lattices of clay minerals along the salinity difference, thereby leading to the hydration of minerals. Conversely, salinity sensitivity indicates the permeability decline caused by the shrinkage, detachment, and migration of clay minerals due to contact between the working fluids with a higher salinity than the formation water and the rock minerals. The shrinkage of minerals is attributed to a compressed electric double layer on clay mineral surfaces in a high-salinity aqueous environment, which reduces the attraction between clay minerals [17]. Ions in a solution can counteract the charges on clay mineral surfaces, and hence, electrostatic attraction between clay mineral particles is shielded [34].

2.2.3. Alkali Sensitivity and Acidic Sensitivity

Certain minerals, such as quartz, feldspar, clay minerals, muscovite, and dolomite, can react with working fluids with a higher pH value than the formation water, leading to the blockage of pores and fractures, that is, alkali sensitivity. The dissolution and alteration of quartz and feldspar in an alkali environment release aqueous silica into fluids, which subsequently form silica precipitations that narrow seepage channels under certain conditions. The reaction between dolomite, clay minerals, and muscovite and alkali working fluids causes the dispersion of minerals, thus generating fines that block pore throats. The dispersion of clay minerals results from an enhanced repulsive force between clay mineral crystal lattices, as the Al-O-H bonds within alumina octahedral react with the hydroxide ions in working fluids and are ionized by negative charges [20,31].
Conversely, certain minerals, such as chlorite and ankerite, which are iron-bearing minerals, can interact with working fluids with a lower pH value than the formation water. The minerals initially release iron ions into working fluids, and then, the iron ions can form precipitations under an acidic environment, blocking seepage channels [16,20].

2.3. Stress Sensitivity

Stress sensitivity refers to the alteration in reservoir permeability induced by variations in effective stress during drilling, completion, and production processes [20]. Fluid sensitivity, the lubrication effect of working fluids, and fines migration aggravate stress sensitivity after working fluid invasion. The narrowness of void spaces within the pores and fractures due to fluid sensitivity of minerals exacerbates the influence of effective stress on the aperture of seepage channels. The surfaces of minerals are also loosened by fluid sensitivity, facilitating the compression of fracture aperture under effective stress. Furthermore, there is a liquid film formed by the adsorbed chemicals of working fluids on the surfaces of reservoir rocks, and the liquid film has a lubrication effect that reduces the sliding friction on the contacting asperities within fractures, which also facilitates the effective stress compression of fracture aperture. Last but not least, stress sensitivity contributes to the reservoir damage induced by fines migration, as more fines migration is triggered by stress sensitivity, and the particle plugging at pore throats transfers from particle bridging to a single particle plugging [35,36].

2.4. Water Locking

Water locking, also known as water phase trapping, refers to a phenomenon when a water-saturated near-well formation, which results from the invasion of water-based working fluids, hinders the transportation of gas and oil from reservoir formations to a wellbore [37]. There is barely water locking in terms of geothermal reservoir development, as the products of a geothermal well are usually hot water.

2.5. Geothermal Reservoir Damage Mechanisms

In summary, geothermal reservoir damage mechanisms contain solids and colloidal plugging, fluid sensitivity, as well as stress sensitivity. Stress sensitivity is influenced by the other two mechanisms, as illustrated in Figure 1. Fluid sensitivity could lead fines migration, which results from a high flow rate that exceeds the critical flow rate, the dispersion of minerals, and mineral reactions.

3. Design Principles of Geothermal Reservoir Protection Working Fluids

3.1. Solid-Free

The elimination of solids in working fluids can effectively eliminate the reservoir damage induced by external solids invasion. Initially, drill-in fluids, which refer to drilling fluids with no bentonite and a fairly low solid content, were proposed. Polymers, such as xanthan gums, cellulose, starch, and guar gum, are applied to modify the rheological properties of drilling fluids, so as to achieve hole cleaning and filtration control [38,39]. Acid-soluble fine-sized calcium carbonate particles are utilized along with polymers as a bridging agent to control filtration and as a weighting agent, which are removed during acidizing [38,40]. Nevertheless, solids lead to reservoir damage, and solid-free drilling fluids have been proposed. Instead of calcium carbonate particles, polymers that can be easily removed from reservoir formations are utilized [14,15].

3.2. Facilitated Flowback

The working fluids can remain within reservoir formations through the adsorption of working fluid chemicals [41,42]. Therefore, it is necessary to facilitate the flowback of working fluids from reservoir formations. The basic mechanism of facilitated flowback of working fluids is a low affinity between working fluids and rock surfaces, as shown in Figure 2. The addition of surfactant in working fluids is a primary method to guarantee a facilitated flowback, as surfactant can adsorb onto the surfaces of rocks and reduces the hydrophilicity of rock surfaces, decreasing the affinity between working fluids and rock surfaces, thereby improving the mobility of working fluids within rocks and facilitating their flowback [43]. Furthermore, the foaming of working fluids by foaming agents, which are mainly surfactant, contributes to the facilitated flowback, as certain foams, such as aphrons, show little affinity between each other and towards the surfaces of rocks [44]. The application of plugging gels that have little affinity to the surfaces of rocks can also easily be flushed out of reservoir formations. Prior to flowback, the plugging of reservoir formations, which controls working fluid loss, is achieved by a low-permeability gel layer that forms between working fluids and formations by the compaction effect of the fluid pressure [45] or by a reaction triggered under down-hole conditions [46].

3.3. Temporary Plugging

Temporary plugging refers to the plugging of pores and fractures during drilling, as well as the subsequent unplugging of pores and fractures before production. It can significantly eliminate reservoir damage, as it not only diminishes the invasion of working fluids, but also achieves the removal of plugging materials in reservoir formations [46].
Temporary plugging materials can achieve temporary plugging by containing temporary plugging agents and temporary plugging cements, as seen in Figure 3. Temporary plugging agents can be classified as particulate, fiber-pattern, gel-pattern, as well as surfactant based on their shape, pattern, and composition. Particulate and fiber-pattern temporary plugging agents are tailored to match the size of pores and fractures and penetrate into the pores and fractures along with working fluids, creating a plugging zone with enough strength to withstand the working fluid pressure, as well as obstructing fluid loss pathways. Gel-pattern temporary plugging agents achieve temporary plugging through high viscosity and can flexibly adapt to various sizes of pores and fractures. Surfactant works as temporary plugging agents in two methods: One is to cause the viscosity alteration of working fluids by the changes in surfactant agglomeration under specific conditions; whereas, the specific conditions are related to an oil–field environment, which is not applicable to geothermal reservoirs [47]. Another one is to function as foaming agents in working fluids. Foams in foamed working fluids can enter the pores and fractures of near-well rocks [48]. The entered foams plug the pores and fractures due to the high viscosity of working fluids under a low shear rate, the Jamin effect of foams when crossing a pore throat, and the expansion of foams [44,49].
Temporary plugging cements are individually utilized for temporary well cementation operation. The cements are injected into the down-hole target plugging formations and form a cementation between reservoir formations and the borehole, thereby preventing the subsequently applied working fluids from invading into the formations [50]. The plugging materials can be either soluble in certain fluids [14,51], capable of gel-breaking, self-degradable [52], or easily flushed out of pores and fractures [53], allowing their removal before production.

3.4. Inhibition

The inhibition mechanisms of working fluids are classified as the inhibition of hydration swelling, the dispersion of clay minerals, and the inhibition of mineral precipitations, as illustrated in Figure 4. The inhibition of clay minerals is achieved by adding an inhibitor and activity regulator [54,55]. There are four inhibition mechanisms of a clay mineral inhibitor, including cation exchange, wettability alteration, sealing of clay minerals, and activity regulating. Cation exchange refers to the exchange of cation ions, such as potassium ions and ammonium ions, into the interlayers of crystal lattices of clay minerals, which attracts the crystal lattices through electrostatic force and, subsequently, reduces the interlayer spacing, thereby preventing water molecules entering into the interlayers [56]. The wettability alteration is achieved by the adsorption of surfactant onto clay mineral surfaces. The hydrophilic parts of the surfactant are connected with the surfaces of clay minerals, while the hydrophobic parts of the surfactant contact with the working fluids and hinder the contact between water molecules and clay minerals. Additionally, water molecules can be prevented from entering clay minerals by sealing the pores and fractures that allow water molecules to have contact with clay minerals [54,56]. Activity regulators control the water molecule activity of working fluids to be similar to that of the formation water in clay minerals, which impedes the transfer of water molecules from working fluids to near-well formations, thus inhibiting the hydration of clay mineral hydration [55].
For the inhibition of mineral precipitations, on the one hand, it can be achieved by mineral precipitation inhibitors, such as chelating agents, which are commonly organic salts and can chelate with the released metal cations from minerals, preventing them from precipitating [57]. On the other hand, ensuring the compatibility between chemical contents released from fluid–rock interactions as well as chemical contents of reservoir formation water, and chemicals contents in working fluids can eliminate mineral precipitations [58,59].

4. Conclusions

In this paper, reservoir mechanisms induced by working fluids are summarized. Based on this, four design principles of reservoir protection working fluids are proposed for the development of geothermal reservoirs by reviewing the reservoir protection working fluids utilized in oil–gas reservoirs, as seen in Figure 5. The main conclusions are as follows:
  • The potential geothermal reservoir damage induced by working fluids include solids and colloidal plugging, fluid sensitivity, and stress sensitivity. Stress sensitivity can be exacerbated by solids and colloidal plugging as well as fluid sensitivity.
  • The design principles of geothermal reservoir protection working fluids include solid-free, facilitated flowback, temporary plugging, and inhibition, which aims to reduce geothermal reservoir damage.
  • The facilitated flowback, temporary plugging, and inhibition of working fluids can be accomplished by adding surfactant, emphasizing the application of surfactant in geothermal reservoir protection working fluids.
  • The proposed design principles have been practically applied during geothermal reservoir development, for example, solid-free drilling fluid during carbonate geothermal reservoir drilling in Xiong’an New Area [60], as well as facilitated flowback and inhibition during carbonate geothermal reservoir stimulation in North China Plain [61,62]. However, the application cases are limited, and the geothermal reservoir protection working fluid technology is still under development. Future works can be focused on the application, validation, and remediation of the proposed design principles of geothermal reservoir working fluids, thus improving their reservoir protection capacity.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, O.J. and X.Z.; methodology, O.J.; investigation, O.J., L.C. and W.Z.; writing—original draft, O.J. and X.Z.; writing—review and editing, L.C. and W.Z.; supervision, X.Z.; project administration, X.Z.; funding acquisition, X.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology of People’s Republic of China, project number 2022XAGG0500, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 42172342, and the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, grant number 2023M730947.

Acknowledgments

We thank the geothermal engineering practice experiences provided by Luyao Ma and Deren Hou from Smart Energy Co. Ltd., China Xiong’an Group, Xiong’an New Area, Hebei, China.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Kaur, S.; Yadav, S.J.; Bhambri, R.; Sain, K.; Tiwari, S.K. Assessment of geothermal potential of Kumaun Himalaya: A perspective for harnessing green energy. Renew. Energy 2023, 212, 940–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Song, X.Z.; Li, G.S.; Huang, Z.W.; Shi, Y.; Wang, G.S.; Song, G.F.; Xu, F.Q. Review of high-temperature geothermal drilling and exploitation technologies. Gondwana Res. 2023, 12, 315–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zhao, Y.; Feng, B.; Zhang, G.; Shangguan, S.; Qi, X.; Li, X.; Qiao, Y.; Xu, J. Study of the interaction between the granitic hot-dry rock (HDR) and different injection waters. Acta Geol. Sin. 2020, 94, 2115–2123. [Google Scholar]
  4. Yuan, B.; Wood, D.A. A holistic review of geosystem damage during unconventional oil, gas and geothermal energy recovery. Fuel 2018, 227, 99–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Xu, C.Y.; Xie, Z.C.; Kang, Y.L.; Yu, G.Y.; You, Z.J.; You, L.J.; Zhang, J.Y.; Yan, X.P. A novel material evaluation method for lost circulation control and formation damage prevention in deep fractured tight reservoir. Energy 2020, 210, 118574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chen, Z.J.; Li, J.M.; Yang, B.; Yang, C.D.; Jin, X.Z. Drilling and completion fluid technology for long horizontal openhole completion Changbei Gas Field. Nat. Gas Ind. 2007, 27, 49–51. [Google Scholar]
  7. Jia, H.; Yang, X.M.; Pu, W.F.; Zhao, J.Z.; Fu, H.; Guo, S.S.; Liu, P.C.; Wang, Q. Technology of optimized completion fluid in low-porosity and low-permeability gas fields at the East China Sea. Nat. Gas Ind. 2010, 30, 60–64. [Google Scholar]
  8. Huo, B.Y.; Cheng, T.; Zhang, X.W.; Wang, G.P.; Liu, D.H. High temperature resisting well completion fluid of organic acid salt. Oilfield Chem. 2013, 30, 500–504. [Google Scholar]
  9. Jiang, G.C.; Ni, X.X.; Li, W.Q.; Quan, X.H.; Luo, X.W. Super-amphiphobic, strong self-cleaning and high-efficiency water-based drilling fluids. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2020, 47, 421–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Xia, Z.Y.; Jiang, G.C.; Fan, Z.K.; Jia, J.; Xie, J.C.; Sha, N.Y. Strong inhibition and low damage water-based drilling fluid suitable for Linxing Well Area. Drill. Prod. Technol. 2022, 45, 160–164. [Google Scholar]
  11. Zhu, W.X.; Zheng, X.H.; Shi, J.J.; Wang, Y.F. A high-temperature resistant colloid gas aphron drilling fluid system prepared by using a novel graft copolymer xanthan gum-AA/AM/AMPS. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2021, 205, 108821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mao, H.B.; Liu, Y.; Li, L.; Yue, L.; Gao, J.; Qiu, F.; Jia, Z.L. Study on new nitrogen foam fracturing fluid system and its application in coalbed methane reservoir. Drill. Prod. Technol. 2022, 45, 139–143. [Google Scholar]
  13. Lin, S.Y.; Lu, Y.H.; Liu, Z.Q.; Lu, W.; Hu, P. Novel water-based mud for low-permeable reservoir in South China Sea. Energies 2023, 16, 1738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhang, X.L.; Dang, B.H.; Wang, X.C.; Luo, S.; Chen, B.G.; Zheng, L.H. Acid-soluble drilling fluid in the northern carbonate reservoir of the Yishan Slope in the Ordos Basin. Energies 2023, 16, 6020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. You, F.C.; Zeng, J.; Gong, C.W.; Shen, Y.L. Experimental study of a degradable solid-free drill-in fluid system and its reservoir protection mechanism. SPE J. 2024, 29, 1337–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ezzat, A.M. Completion fluids design criteria and current technology weakness. In Proceedings of the SPE Formation Damage Control Symposium of the Conference, Lafayette, LA, USA, 22–23 February 1990. [Google Scholar]
  17. Zhao, X.; Qiu, Z.S.; Sun, B.J.; Liu, S.J.; Xing, X.J.; Wang, M.L. Formation damage mechanisms associated with drilling and completion fluids for deepwater reservoirs. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2019, 173, 112–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gu, J.; Xiang, Y.; He, X.Q.; Jia, B. Research of the drilling and completion fluid system for fracture-pore type reservoir protection. J. Chengdu Univ. Technol. (Sci. Technol. Ed.) 2003, 30, 184–186. [Google Scholar]
  19. Wang, C.W.; Wang, Y.J.; Kuru, E.; Chen, E.; Xiao, F.F.; Chen, Z.H.; Yang, D.Y. A new low-damage drilling fluid for sandstone reservoirs with low-permeability: Formulation, evaluation, and applications. J. Energy Resour. Technol. 2021, 143, 053004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Klungtvedt, K.R.; Saasen, A. A method for assessing drilling fluid induced formation damage in permeable formations using ceramic discs. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2022, 213, 110324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tan, Q.G.; You, L.j.; Kang, Y.L.; Xu, C.Y. Formation damage mechanisms in tight carbonate reservoirs: The typical illustrations in Qaidam Basin and Sichuan Basin. China. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2021, 95, 104193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, Z.Y.; Liu, Y.G.; Li, T.X.; Wei, M.H. Seepage and heat transfer of dominant flow in fractured geothermal reservoirs: A review and outlook. Water 2023, 15, 2953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bennion, D.B.; Thomas, F.B. Underbalanced drilling of horizontal wells: Does it really eliminate formation damage. In Proceedings of the SPE Formation Damage Control Symposium of the Conference, Lafayette, LA, USA, 7–10 February 1994. [Google Scholar]
  24. Shi, X.Y.; Prodanović, M.; Holder, J.; Gray, K.E.; DiCarlo, D. Coupled solid and fluid mechanics modelling of formation damage near wellbore. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2013, 112, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. He, W.W.; Liu, Z.Q. Numerical simulation of formation damage by drilling fluid in low permeability sandstone reservoirs. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 2021, 11, 1865–1871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kang, Y.L.; Zhang, L.Y.; Li, X.C.; Zhou, L.C. Experimental evaluation of coalbed reservoir damage induced by sequential contacts with working fluids. Coal Geol. Explor. 2015, 43, 128–132. [Google Scholar]
  27. Xu, Z.Z.; Zhao, M.W.; Liu, J.W.; Zhang, Y.M.; Gao, M.W.; Song, X.G.; Sun, N.; Li, L.; Wu, Y.N.; Dai, C.L. Study on formation process and reservoir damage mechanism of blockages caused by polyacrylamide fracturing fluid in production wells. Fuel 2024, 358, 130154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Xin, X.Z.; Zhao, J.M.; Xu, Y.W.; Jin, C.H.; Luo, Z.F.; Wang, Y.M.; Fu, H.R. Study on the spatial damage characteristics of working fluid in a sandstone reservoir and an unplugged fluid system. ACS Omega 2024, 9, 18400–18411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Li, X.J.; Zhang, Q.J.; Liu, P.; Li, T.; Liu, G.F.; Liu, Z.K.; Zhao, H.F. Investigation on the microscopic damage mechanism of fracturing fluids to low-permeability sandstone oil reservoir by nuclear magnetic resonance. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2022, 209, 109821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yang, S.G.; Yu, Q.C. The role of fluid-rock interactions in permeability behavior of shale with different pore fluids. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 2022, 150, 105023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ma, K.; Jiang, H.Q.; Li, J.J.; Zhao, L. Experimental study on the micro alkali sensitivity damage mechanism in low-permeability reservoirs using QEMSCAN. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2016, 36, 1004–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, Y.Z.; Konstantinou, C.; Tang, S.K.; Chen, H.Y. Applications of microbial-induced carbonate precipitation: A state-of-the-art review. Biogeotechnics 2023, 1, 100008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Badalyan, A.; Carageorgos, T.; Bedrikovetsky, P.; You, Z.J.; Zeinijahromi, A.; Aji, K. Critical analysis of uncertainties during particle filtration. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2012, 83, 095106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Le, T.T.B.; Finney, A.R.; Zen, A.; Bui, T.; Tay, W.J.; Chellappah, K.; Salvalaglio, M.; Micharlides, A.; Striolo, A. Mesoscale simulations reveal how salt influences clay particles agglomeration in aqueous dispersions. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2024, 20, 1612–1624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. He, J.G.; Kang, Y.L.; You, L.J.; Cheng, Q.J. Influence of fluid damage on shale reservoir stress sensitivity. Nat. Gas Geosci. 2011, 22, 915–919. [Google Scholar]
  36. Huang, C.; Kang, Y.L.; You, L.J.; Li, X.L.; Tan, W.X.; Bai, R.T. Research on stress sensitivity of fracture-hole carbonate reservoirs under drilling fluid immersion. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 2024, 223, 212537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. You, L.J.; Kang, Y.L.; Chen, Y.J.; Hao, S.M.; Cheng, Q.J. Experiments and applications of water phase trapping in tight gas sand reservoirs. Drill. Fluid Complet. Fluid 2006, 23, 4–7. [Google Scholar]
  38. Siddiqui, M.A.; Nasr-EI-Din, H.A. Evaluation of special enzymes as a means to remove formation damage induced by drill -in fluids in horizontal gas wells in tight reservoirs. SPE Prod. Fac. 2005, 20, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tuttle, J.D.; Listi, R. ‘Drill-in’ fluids and drilling practices drilling more productive, less costly geothermal wells. Geotherm. Resour. Counc. Trans. 2016, 40. Available online: https://www.geothermal-library.org/index.php?mode=pubs&action=view&record=1032335 (accessed on 17 August 2024).
  40. Yang, B.; Huang, L.J. No bentonite and low solids drilling fluids based on the formate brines. Drill. Prod. Technol. 2001, 24, 58–60. [Google Scholar]
  41. Liang, X.Y.; Zhou, F.J.; Liang, T.B.; Wang, C.Z.; Wang, J.; Yuan, S. Impacts of low harm fracturing fluid on fossil hydrogen energy production in tight reservoirs. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 21195–22120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Wang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Dai, H.; Zhang, N.K.; Long, S.M. Study on formulation and properties of a new thickened acid. Nat. Gas Ind. 2007, 27, 85–87. [Google Scholar]
  43. Kang, Y.L.; Zhang, D.J.; You, L.J.; Xu, C.Y.; Yu, H.F. Mechanism and control methods of the working fluid damages in fractured tight reservoirs. J. Southwest Pet. Univ. (Sci. Technol. Ed.) 2015, 37, 77–84. [Google Scholar]
  44. Growcock, F.B.; Belkin, A.; Fosdick, M.; Irving, M.; O’Connor, B.; Brookey, T. Recent advances in aphron drilling fluids. In Proceedings of the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference of the Conference, Miami, FL, USA, 21–23 February 2006. [Google Scholar]
  45. Lv, K.H.; Qiu, Z.S.; Wang, Z.M. Techniques of auto-adapting shielding and temporary plugging drilling fluid. J. China Univ. Pet. (Sci. Technol. Ed.) 2008, 32, 68–71+75. [Google Scholar]
  46. Jiang, W.; Zhang, J.; Wang, J.J.; Peng, S.P.; Huang, W.Y.; Wang, G.P. Shielding and temporary plugging technology and application in the Biancheng Area of North Jiangsu Province. Nat. Gas Ind. 2006, 26, 81–83. [Google Scholar]
  47. Mu, M.; Tang, X.T.; Wang, L.S.; Zhang, X.; Liu, H.; Jiang, M.Z.; Jiang, D.; Zhang, Y.M. Progress of fabrications, properties and applications of chemical temporary plugging systems. Oilfield Chem. 2022, 39, 735–744+760. [Google Scholar]
  48. Lv, Q.C.; Li, Z.M.; Li, B.F.; Li, S.Y.; Sun, Q. Study of nanoparticle-surfactant-stabilized foam as a fracturing fluid. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 9468–9477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Liu, H.Z.; Li, L.C. Study and application of micro bubble temporary plugging technology. Pet. Drill. Tech. 2012, 40, 71–73. [Google Scholar]
  50. Tan, H.J.; Zheng, X.H.; Ma, L.M.L.; Huang, H.X.; Xia, B.R. A study on the effects of starches on the properties of alkali-activated cement and the potential of starch as a self-degradable additive. Energies 2017, 10, 1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Li, Z.Y.; Qi, L.; Gu, T.; Sun, J.F.; Guo, X.Y. Effect of micron-CaCO3 and nano-CaCO3 on the acid-soluble performance of oil-well cement stone. Bull. Chin. Ceram. Soc. 2018, 37, 2576–2582. [Google Scholar]
  52. Yang, H.B.; Lv, Z.Q.; Li, Z.; Guo, B.M.; Zhao, J.; Xu, Y.T.; Xu, W.J.; Kang, W.L. Laboratory evaluation of a controllable self-degradable temporary plugging agent in fractured reservoir. Phys. Fluids 2023, 35, 083314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhao, X.; Ceng, Q.; Qi, Z.S.; Ceng, T.; Zhou, G.W.; Xing, X.J. Gel-breaking free drill-in fluid technology for deepwater high-porosity and high-permeability reservoirs. Nat. Gas Ind. 2021, 41, 107–114. [Google Scholar]
  54. Luo, C.D.; Wang, Q.Y.; Wang, F.B.; Feng, Q.Y.; Zeng, C.; Bai, X.D. Study and application of low branched polyamine inhibitor. Drill. Prod. Technol. 2023, 46, 151–156. [Google Scholar]
  55. Cao, L.; Yu, P.Z. Research and application of activity regulator in low activity water-based drilling fluid system. Appl. Chem. Ind. 2022, 51, 2344–2347+2361. [Google Scholar]
  56. Qin, G.C.; He, M.; Xu, M.B.; Chen, K.; Zhao, C.Y. Research progress of shale water-based drilling fluid inhibitors at home and abroad. Appl. Chem. Ind. 2020, 49, 1802–1806. [Google Scholar]
  57. Spinthaki, A.; Kamaratou, M.; Disci, D.; Hater, W.; Demadis, K.D. Inhibition of aluminum silicate scaling by phosphonate additives under geothermal stresses. Geothermics 2023, 111, 102690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chen, J.Y.; Xu, T.F.; Jiang, Z.J.; Feng, B.; Liang, X. Reducing formation damage by artificially controlling the fluid-rock chemical interaction in a double-well geothermal heat production system. Renew. Energy 2020, 149, 455–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Holmslykke, H.D.; Weibel, R.; Olsen, D.; Anthonsen, K.L. Geochemical reactions upon injection of heated formation water in a Danish geothermal reservoir. ACS Earth Space Chem. 2023, 7, 1635–1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhao, C.L.; Wang, Y.J.; Nie, D.J.; Wang, L. Gas lift reverse circulation drilling technology for D19 well in broken thermal reservoir in Xiong’an New Area. Drill. Eng. 2022, 49, 137–143. [Google Scholar]
  61. Zhao, Z.H.; Xu, H.R.; Chen, S.C.; Ma, F.; Wang, G.L. Numerical modeling on acid stimulation in carbonate geothermal reservoir in Xiong’an New Area. J. China Coal Soc. 2023, 48, 2691–2699. [Google Scholar]
  62. Wang, G.L.; Yue, G.F.; Lin, W.J.; Ma, F.; Liu, Y.G. Deep carbonate geothermal reservoir production enhancement technology in North China Plain. Earth Sci. 2024, 49, 1470–1486. [Google Scholar]
Energies 17 04895 g001
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of reservoir damage mechanisms induced by working fluids.
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of reservoir damage mechanisms induced by working fluids.
Energies 17 04895 g001
Energies 17 04895 g002
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of facilitated flowback mechanisms: (a) Facilitated flowback mechanism achieved by surfactant; (b) Facilitated flowback mechanism achieved by materials that have low affinity towards rock surfaces, which achieve temporary plugging through a doubled plugging layer by carbonization; (c) Facilitated flowback mechanism achieved by materials that have low affinity towards rock surfaces, which achieve temporary plugging through a compaction effect by fluid pressure. Note that the thickness of surfactant layer is very thin, and its impact on void space of seepage channels is negligible.
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of facilitated flowback mechanisms: (a) Facilitated flowback mechanism achieved by surfactant; (b) Facilitated flowback mechanism achieved by materials that have low affinity towards rock surfaces, which achieve temporary plugging through a doubled plugging layer by carbonization; (c) Facilitated flowback mechanism achieved by materials that have low affinity towards rock surfaces, which achieve temporary plugging through a compaction effect by fluid pressure. Note that the thickness of surfactant layer is very thin, and its impact on void space of seepage channels is negligible.
Energies 17 04895 g002
Energies 17 04895 g003
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of temporary plugging mechanisms.
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of temporary plugging mechanisms.
Energies 17 04895 g003
Energies 17 04895 g004
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of inhibition mechanisms.
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of inhibition mechanisms.
Energies 17 04895 g004
Energies 17 04895 g005
Figure 5. Design principles of geothermal reservoir protection working fluids based on reservoir damage mechanisms.
Figure 5. Design principles of geothermal reservoir protection working fluids based on reservoir damage mechanisms.
Energies 17 04895 g005
Table 1. Application cases of reservoir protection working fluids in oil–gas reservoirs.
Table 1. Application cases of reservoir protection working fluids in oil–gas reservoirs.
Ref.Application ScenarioWorking Fluid TypeFormula and FunctionProtection Mechanism
[6]Changbei gas reservoir, Yulin, Shanxi, ChinaDrill-in fluidWater + 1~3% filtration reducer + 0.1~0.3% tackifier and shear strength improving agent + 2~4% temporary plugging agent + 1~3% QS-2 + 0.2~0.5% MgO + 0.5~1% lubricant: non-fluorescent DRH + NaCOOH + preservative(a) Eliminated solid plugging due to no clay solids
(b) Temporary plugging by soluble and degradable plugging materials
[7]Gas reservoir, East China Sea District Drill-in fluidWater + 0.5% Chelating agent + 1~2% temporary plugging agent: gelatinizer SW-1 + 0.5% rheological modifier: WDJ-1(a) Eliminated solid plugging due to no clay solids
(b) Inhibition of precipitation
(c) Temporary plugging by gel that is easy to flow back and capable of gel-breaking
[8]Yuanba gas reservoir, Sichuan, ChinaDrill-in fluidWater + density regulator: formate + 0.5% rheological regulator: modified XC DHV + 2% filtration reducer: PAC-142 + 1% corrosion inhibitor: SD-2 + 0.8% cleanup additive: zwitterionic surfactant SAT + 0.2% pH adjuster: NaOH + 0.5% deoxidizer: Na2SO3(a) No solid plugging due to no solids
(b) Eliminated fluid loss of working fluids by plugging agents
(c) Facilitated flowback of working fluids from reservoir formation by surfactant
[9] Unconventional oil–gas reservoirDrilling fluidWater + 3% bentonite + 0.5% filtration reducer + 1% plugging agent + 1% filtration reducer: starch + density regulator: BaSO4 + 3% reservoir protectant: individually synthesized supper-amphiphobic (SA) agent(a) Inhibition of clay minerals by cation exchange and by preventing water contact through the adsorption of SA agent onto rock surfaces
(b) Reducing fluid loss by wettability alteration due to the adsorption of SA agent onto rock surfaces
(c) Eliminated fluid loss of working fluids by plugging agents
[10]Gas reservoir, Linxing District, Ordos Basin, Inner Mongolia, ChinaDrilling fluidWater + 1.0% bentonite + 0.3% filtration reducer: LV-CMC + 0.1% 0.5% rheological regulator: XC + 2.5% filtration reducer: starch + 3.0% plugging agent: white asphalt + 2.0% CaCO3 + 1.5% reservoir protectant: SA agent + 5% density regulator and inhibitor: KCl + density regulator: BaSO4
[11]Under-pressure zone of oil reservoirDrilling fluidWater + 3% bentonite + 0.2% pH buffer: Na2CO3 + 0.5~1.5% foam stabilizer: individually synthesized XG-AA/AM/AMPS + 0.286% foaming agent: SDS + air(a) Temporary plugging and facilitated flowback of working fluids by foaming
(b) Eliminated fluid loss of working fluids by foaming
[12]Coalbed methane reservoir, Qingshui Basin, Shanxi, ChinaFracturing fluidWater + 0.2% foaming agent: SK-1 + 0.3% foaming agent: SK-2 + 0.2% foam stabilizer: WP-11 + 2.0% inhibitor: KCl + N2(a) Eliminated fluid loss of working fluids by foaming
(b) Inhibition of clay minerals by cation exchange
[13]Weizhou oil reservoir, Weizhou Depression, Beibu Gulf Basin, South China SeaDrilling fluidWater + 3.0% pH adjuster: NaOH + 2.0% PF-FLOTROL + 20% PF-GBL + 1.5% PF-LPFH + PF-CONA + PF-HCOOK + 0.7% PF-VIS + 2% PF-GJC + 3% CaCO3(a) Eliminated solid plugging due to no clay solids
(b) Inhibition of clay minerals by cation exchange and by the sealing between water and mineral surfaces
(c) Eliminated fluid loss of working fluids by plugging agents
[14]Daniudi gas reservoir, Yishan Slope, Ordos Basin, Inner Mongolia, ChinaDrilling fluidWater + 0.3~0.8% filtration reducer: LV-CMC + tackifier, shear strength improving agent and temporary plugging agent: 1~2% starch and 0.1~0.3% HV-CMC + 2~3% lubricant: vegetable oil + 0.05~0.1% fungicide: glutaraldehyde + 0.05~0.1% pH adjuster: NaOH(a) No solid plugging due to no solids
(b) Temporary plugging due to soluble and degradable properties of working fluids
(c) Eliminated fluid loss of working fluids by plugging agents
[15]Oil and gas reservoir, South China SeaDrill-in fluidSea water + 0.2% pH adjuster: NaOH + 0.2% pH buffer: Na2CO3 + 2.85% filtration reducer + 0.82% lubricant + 1.63% inhibitor + 0.49% tackifier and shear strength improving agent: individually synthesized modified xanthan gum XC-LT + density regulator: KCl
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jiang, O.; Cao, L.; Zhu, W.; Zheng, X. Review of Reservoir Damage Mechanisms Induced by Working Fluids and the Design Principles of Reservoir Protection Fluids: From Oil–Gas Reservoirs to Geothermal Reservoirs. Energies 2024, 17, 4895. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17194895

AMA Style

Jiang O, Cao L, Zhu W, Zheng X. Review of Reservoir Damage Mechanisms Induced by Working Fluids and the Design Principles of Reservoir Protection Fluids: From Oil–Gas Reservoirs to Geothermal Reservoirs. Energies. 2024; 17(19):4895. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17194895

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jiang, Ou, Ling Cao, Wenxi Zhu, and Xiuhua Zheng. 2024. "Review of Reservoir Damage Mechanisms Induced by Working Fluids and the Design Principles of Reservoir Protection Fluids: From Oil–Gas Reservoirs to Geothermal Reservoirs" Energies 17, no. 19: 4895. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17194895

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop