Zona Isolation of Geothermal Wells

PROCEEDINGS, Fortieth Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering
Stanford University, Stanford, California, January 26-28, 2015
SGP-TR-204
Zonal Isolation in Geothermal Wells
Arash Shadravan, Baker Hughes, Mohammadreza Ghasemi and Mehrdad Alfi, Texas A&M University
11211 FM 2920 Road, Tomball, Texas, 77375
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Keywords: Zonal Isolation, Well Integrity, Geothermal Cement, Lost Circulation and Corrosion.
ABSTRACT
Well integrity has had an utmost importance for oil and gas wells and many studies have been conducted to improve zonal isolation.
However, few papers comprehensively investigated the elements conducive to well integrity and zonal isolation in geothermal wells.
Geothermal energy is generated in over 20 countries and the United States is the world's largest producer. This clean source of energy
has been benefiting the nation from the operational geothermal projects in California, Nevada, Alaska and Hawaii as well as around the
world. Geothermal energy has been considered as one of the main clean resources of energy which its fields produce only about onesixth of the carbon dioxide that a relatively clean natural-gas-fueled power plant produces. The objective of this paper is to investigate
the practical solutions for effective zonal isolation in geothermal wells. Viable solutions for extreme high temperatures, lost circulation,
CO2 attack, in addition to cement and casing integrity are defined and applied. The case studies reviewed demonstrates the crucial role
of these critical elements for safe and environmentally friendly geothermal wells. This analysis helps providing proper wellbore
integrity for safe geothermal operation which doubtlessly is the most critical factor towards providing good zonal isolation.
1. INTRODUCTION
The growth in global geothermal power market created opportunities for energy demand around the globe. As of August 2013, the
global geothermal industry reached 11,770 MW of installed geothermal capacity. Currently there are 11,770 MW of planned capacity
additions of geothermal power in the early stages of development or under construction in 70 countries and territories around the world.
Additionally, developers are actively engaged with 27 gigawatts of geothermal resource globally. Figure 1 shows the geothermal
resources in the United Stated which are identified for hydrothermal sites and deep Enhanced Geothermal systems (ESG). Unlike most
of the oil and gas wells, geothermal operations face with extreme high temperatures. Utilizing downhole tools and the selection of
cement, drilling fluid, spacer and casings must consider such thresholds. In the enhanced geothermal systems, water is pumped
underground through piping to maintain the steam production. This carbon-neutral, inexhaustible energy source could meet 15 percent
of America's electricity needs by 2030. Safe geothermal operations provide clean energy 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Therefore,
there has been an evolving progression in high-temperature instrumentations and seals, logging, casing thermal expansion, drilling
fluids, drill bits and increased rate of penetration, lost circulation prevention and directional drilling in Geothermal wells. This paper
identifies the main zonal isolation challenges and presents the fit to purpose solutions.
Figure 1: US geothermal resources map and their thermal gradient.
2. ZONAL ISOLATION
Each reservoir zones should be isolated to control flow. Zonal isolation needs to be integrated into drilling and cementing planning and
development strategies in a way that wellbore integrity is ensured and the fracture conductivity in either production or injection is not
compromised. Walters et al. (2012) listed 10 options to achieve zonal isolation in geothermal wells:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Drill to the total depth and use an open hole packer string
Cemented Liner
Sanded Liner
Cemented liner with stage cementing collars
1
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
Liner with external casing packers
Liner with swellable packers
Plug and go: drilling to each fracture and stimulate using solid expandables
Plug and go: drilling to each fracture and stimulate using liner and swell packers
Access fracture zones by multilateral wellbores
Access fracture zones by multiple sidetracks
Available current packer technologies assisting zonal isolation are:
1)
2)
Open Hole:
a. External inflatable casing packers (ECPs) (rated to 600°F)
b. Multiple frac system using open hole packer and pressure actuating sleeve (rated to 338°F)
Cased Hole
a. High temperature packer systems (rated to 600°F)
Cement systems must be effectively designed to improve zonal isolation. They should contain flexible additives which can increase the
elasticity and decrease the compressibility and permeability of cement. Le Roy et al. (2010) investigated cement systems composed of
the lime-magnesia-silica-water and lime-alumina-silica-water systems (45-65%) and found out the magnesium compositions were found
to be stable. The bottomhole temperature of geothermal wells can be as high as 700°F. The ultimate desired compressive strength was
2,000 to 3,000 psi, accepted by most of the operators for geothermal operations. While the cement has to have a certain thickening time
for placement, it was required to have 500 psi within 24 hours and 1,000 psi after seven days. The maximum preferred permeability for
slurries above and equal to 15 ppg was 0.1md and for slurries below 15 ppg was 0.25md. 100 psi was determined as the minimum
requirement of cement-casing bond strength. The expansion of 0.2 to 0.4 percent was considered optimum (Nelson, Eilers, & Spangle,
1981). It is also recommended to add silica to cement formulations designed for high temperatures in order to maintain the required
compressive strength and permeability.
Slurry design is affected by well depth, bottom hole temperature (static and circulating) type of drilling fluid, slurry density, pumping
time, quality of mixed water, fluid loss control, flow regime, mechanical properties, free water and quality of cement. Most geothermal
wells are not cemented under geothermal conditions but circulation of drilling fluids in the well for several hours reduce well
temperature. Experimental results indicated that the thermal and stress induced affect the integrity of cement sheath. Figure 2
demonstrates different well design concepts for deep geothermal wells. It is necessary in geothermal wells to have the casings fully
cemented to minimize the casing expansion especially during steam production and prevent buckling. Casing is selected based on the
subsurface characteristics of the well, including the diameter of the well and the pressures and temperatures the well is expected to
experience over its full producing lifetime. However, casing must be properly run into the borehole to ensure it meets all of its specified
ratings. When the casing is in place, proper well cementing is essential to protect subsurface aquifers and to prevent gas migration for
the full expected lifetime of the well. It is also relevant to maintain a good rheological and friction pressure hierarchy when pumping the
mud, spacer and cement. This would tremendously help with minimizing any fluid intermixing.
Figure 2: Various Geothermal Well Designs
After cement placement, it is important to predict the long term cement integrity with computer models. Downhole conditions, cement
and formation mechanical and thermal properties would be inputted in computer models to predict the success of cement jobs. Figure 3
shows an example of such analysis in which the mechanical properties of cement sheath which passed the radial stresses but exceeded
the tangential threshold and consequently failed in tension. Such model would help engineers to redesign the cement slurries and predict
the assurance of the integrity of the cement sheath.
2
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
Figure 3: Cement Integrity Simulator
Table 1 shows the consequences of poor zonal isolation before and at the time of production. This could be detrimental to the
environment and the integrity of geothermal wells.
Table 1: Wellbore integrity: what can go wrong?
Formation damage during drilling (caving)
Casing decentralization (incomplete cementing)
Inadequate drilling mud removal
Pre-Production
Incomplete cement placement
Inadequate formation-cement/cement-casing bond
Cement shrinkage
Contamination of cement by mud or formation fluids
Micro-annulus at casing-cement interface
Production
Mechanical Stress/Strain
Disruption of formation cement bond
Fracture formation within cement
One of the common problems occurring during primary cementing is the invasion of gas into the cement during the setting process. As
cement gels, it loses the ability to transmit hydrostatic pressure. During this period, fluids (water and/or gas) can invade the cement and
form channels. This flow of formation fluids can be from the pay zone to the surface or can be cross-flow between zones of differing
pressure. This type of short term fluid migration problem often leads to long term zonal isolation problems and sustained casing
pressure.
Changes in pressure and temperature or exposure to extreme high temperature can cause cement to debond from the casing. Portland
cement is a brittle material and susceptible to cracking when exposed to thermally induced or pressure induced tensile loads. Long-term
gas migration occurs due to cracks in the cement sheath, microannuli, or channels in the set cement. Numerous factors during drilling
operation such as poor mud removal, poor casing centralization, excessive free water and cement sheath shrinkage directly affect the
long term well integrity. After drilling and reaching the total depth, corrosion, depletion, and workover or other remedial treatments
considerably affect the integrity of cement sheath. In addition, extreme high pressure conditions impose a huge risk on effective zonal
isolation in geothermal wells if the cement slurry is not properly designed. Cement sheath failures occur as a result of temperatureinduced stresses.
Flexible and expanding cements with enhanced mechanical properties have been introduced. Such flexible cements provide controlled
expansion and have high tensile strength and improved young modulus. Resistance to corrosive gases such as CO2 is very important in
order to reduce long term gas migration. Self-healing cement (SHC) provides long-term zonal isolation with a sealing material that has
an intrinsic self-healing property. Hydrocarbons activate the self-healing material whenever the integrity of the cement sheath is
compromised (e.g., cracks and microannuli) and would then efficiently seal the leak path by swelling when in contact with
hydrocarbons. Engineering analysis must be utilized in order to assess stresses on the cement sheath during various well operations.
Such a study keeps the cement sheath below its endurance limit and improves cement sheath integrity during the well life. With the
current momentum of tapping the new geothermal resources, cement integrity analysis is a key to operate securely.
3
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
3. LOST CIRCULATION
Lost circulation treatment can take up to 15% of the well cost and there has been some geothermal wells that were abandoned due to
massive lost circulation and complete loss of returns at pumping rate of hundreds of barrels per hour (Finger & Blankenship, 2010). If
the loss zone cannot be fixed before running casing, there should be more challenging cementing procedure to undertake an effective
casing cement job. Shadravan et al. (2009) explained the effective utilization of underbalanced drilling in Iran. Making the hydrostatic
fluid lighter and managing the ECD personifies in underbalanced and managed pressure drilling techniques. Also, during cementing
operations, the utilization of sealant spacer fluid could be conducive to cure loss circulation. Farahani et al. (2014) and Budiawan et al.
(2014) reviewed 60 case studies where lost circulation was resolved by the application of a biodegradable sealing spacer system. Brandl
et al. (2013) improved displacement efficiency by applying a spacer system designed with microemulsion technology in the South
China Sea. Kefi et al. (2014) performed a statistical analysis for surfactant selections. Mansure (2002) used polyurethane at Rye Patch
for cementing and overcoming loss circulation. Foam cementing has been also a very effective way to cure loss circulation challenges
and providing effective zonal isolation in geothermal wells. The battle of lost circulation seems to be everlasting in geothermal wells
however with the right solution it could be prevented or minimized.
4. MODELING
Temperature is one the most crucial factors strongly affecting the cement placement time and loss of mechanical strength. Correct
estimate of temperature and pressure profile along the wellbore in geothermal wells can facilitate the drilling operation by planning the
proper slurry design. After drilling, it is necessary to monitor periodically the characteristics of a geothermal well, by measuring the
thermodynamic parameters of the flow. However, it is not always possible to run pressure temperature survey (PTS) due to the high cost
and limited availability of wells for testing. In order to avoid shutting in a producing well, it is common practice to employ a wellbore
flow simulator to estimate the bottomhole operating conditions from wellhead measurements.
Some geothermal reservoirs are super-heated and the producers have single phase flow (steam) through the entire wellbore, yet the flow
in most of the geothermal wells, are two phase (steam and water). The goal is to find the pressure, temperature, and enthalpy profile of
the well by knowing the well head conditions. This will help analyze the range of temperature and heat to which casing, cement, and the
formation are constantly exposed. The two phase geothermal wells are discussed, however the single phase flow ones can be found
similarly.
4.1 Conservation of Mass
Based on the continuity equation, the changes in the mass flow rate of liquid and gas at a section of the pipe should be constant
(assuming pipe section is constant). Thus, it can be formulated as (Gudmundsdottir, Jonsson, & Palsson, 2012):
One can expand this equation as,
𝑑
(𝑚̇ + 𝑚̇𝑔 ) = 0
𝑑𝑧 𝑙
(1)
𝑑
(𝜌 𝑢 𝐴 + 𝜌𝑔 𝑢𝑔 𝐴𝑔 ) = 0
𝑑𝑧 𝑙 𝑙 𝑙
(2)
4.2 Conservation of Energy
The conservation of energy states that changes in the specific enthalpy (𝑑ℎ/𝑑𝑧) is equal to the heat exchange with rock formation (𝑄̇ ),
and the changes in the kinetic and potential energy for each phase as,
𝑢𝑔2
𝑑
𝑢𝑙2
(𝑚̇ 𝑙 ( + 𝑔𝑧 + ℎ𝑙 ) + 𝑚𝑔̇ ( + 𝑔𝑧 + ℎ𝑔 )) + 𝑄̇ = 0
𝑑𝑧
2
2
(3)
By using the mass fraction 𝑥 = 𝑚̇𝑔 /(𝑚̇𝑙 + 𝑚̇𝑔 ) and rewriting the actual phases velocities in terms of the uniform flow velocity as
𝑢𝑙 =
𝑚̇𝑙
1−𝑥
=
𝑢,
𝜌𝑙 𝐴𝑙 1 − 𝛼
𝑢𝑔 =
𝑚̇𝑔
𝑥 𝜌𝑙
=
𝑢
𝜌𝑔 𝐴𝑔 𝛼 𝜌𝑔
(4)
the equation in (3) can be written as,
𝑚̇
𝑑 (1 − 𝑥)3 𝑢2 𝜌𝑙3 𝑥 3 𝑢2
𝑑ℎ
(
+
) + 𝑚̇𝑔 + 𝑚̇
+ 𝑄̇ = 0
𝑑𝑧 (1 − 𝛼)2 2 𝜌𝑔2 𝛼 2 2
𝑑𝑧
(5)
where 𝛼 is a void fraction that is a critical factor in predicting the pressure and temperature behavior. Here we just mention the
homogenous model, however one can look into (Guomundsdottir, 2012) for further discussion. The mixture of water and vapor
considered homogenous if they both travel at the same velocity. If it is assumed that these two phases are separated into two streams that
flow in different velocities, then one can use slip ratio, 𝑆, to generalize the homogenous model as,
4
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
−1
𝑥
𝑥 1−𝑥
𝛼 = ( )( +
𝑆)
𝜌𝑔 𝜌𝑔
𝜌𝑙
(6)
4.3 Conservation of Momentum
The momentum equation consists of pressure changes, friction, acceleration (kinetic), and gravity forces. The density should be the
averaged density based on void fraction and the velocity should be the flow velocity. This equation is given as,
𝑑
𝑑𝑝
𝜙 2 𝜌𝑓 2
(𝑚̇𝑙 𝑢𝑙 + 𝑚̇𝑔 𝑢𝑔 ) + 𝐴
+ 𝐴 ((1 − 𝛼)𝜌𝑙 + 𝛼𝜌𝑔 ) 𝑔 +
𝑢 =0
𝑑𝑧
𝑑𝑧
2𝐷
(7)
where the 𝑓 is the Fanning friction factor for calculation, 𝜌 is the fluid density, 𝐷 is the wellbore diameter, 𝑢 is the fluid velocity, and 𝑔
is the gravitational acceleration, 𝜙 2 is the frictional correction factor (Gudmundsdottir, Jonsson, & Palsson, 2012).
The wellbore simulator is developed by solving the equations (1) - (7) numerically assuming that the pressure, temperature and flow rate
is known at the well head. A geothermal wellbore simulator for single and two phase flow in a vertical well with multiple feedzones was
developed by (Björnsson, 1987). Later, Aunzo et al. (1991) extended this simulator to H2O-CO2 and H2O-NaCl systems. Chen et al.
(2003) developed a simulator for deviated geothermal wells with multiple feed zones based on finite difference. Recently there has been
some development on an integrated reservoir-wellbore-pipeline model to simulate the surface facility coupled with subsurface flow
(Butler & Enedy, 2010). This may lead to a large scale model that can be computationally expensive to run. However, one can reduce
this complexity by applying multiscale simulation (Ghasemi et al., 2015) or model order reduction (Gildin et al., 2013).Various
commercial software for simulations related to oil and reservoir production can also be modified to be used in geothermal wells (by
considering water and steam properties). This modeling tool provides a good estimate of temperature and pressure profile for wells
without pressure temperature survey. It is also capable of modeling heat loss in the casing, cement, and reservoir rock. Figure 4 shows
a comparison of temperature and pressure profile for a well in The Geysers with available PTS data. This figure indicates a good match
between the model and the actual measurement. The temperature profile is in the 2% bound and the pressure is in the 5% bound of the
nominal model. Note that the PTS data for pressure at the lower depth diverges due to the fact that the well was shut in towards end of
this test.
Figure 4: Pressure and temperature profile compared with PTS data for a geothermal well in the Geysers, CA
5. CORROSION
Geothermal wells continuously produce endogenous corrosive fluids, such as H2S, requiring operators to plan for safety precautions.
The extreme high temperature produced from geothermal wells creates a detrimental environment to production casing and wellhead.
As an important consideration in every geothermal well, one can mention corrosion and scaling problems. Chemical components
present in geothermal fluids can be highly corrosive for metallic and nonmetallic parts of geothermal wells. Materials such as carbon
dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, oxygen, hydrogen and chloride can play a dominant role in corrosion of metallic parts. So far,
there have been several investigations for identification of corrosion effects on different types of material (Conover, Ellis, & Curzon,
1981). Alescio et al. (1999) also presented installing coiled tubing injection strings before putting the geothermal wells on production in
Italy. This method due to using corrosion resistant alloys is expensive however it would reduce the need for work over operations.
5
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
5.1 Corrosion Mechanism
Corrosion and erosion in underground wells can be caused by internal or external elements. These elements could be listed as below:
5.1.1 General Corrosion
One of the main corrosion agents in almost every geothermal well is carbon dioxide. When CO2 comes with water or steam, it forms
carbonic acid, which is a main reason for metal corrosion. There are two principal forms of CO 2 corrosion: mesa attack, which is a
localized CO2 corrosion form, and pitting, which is a localized attack with penetration and removal of metal. The most common
mechanisms of CO2 corrosion process is listed as below:
𝐻2 𝐶𝑂3 + 𝑒 − → 𝐻 + 𝐻𝐶𝑂3 −
2𝐻 → 𝐻2
Which can turn iron to ferro
𝐹𝑒 → 𝐹𝑒 2+ + 2𝑒 −
So we have the overall reaction as
𝐶𝑂2 + 𝐻2 𝑂 + 𝐹𝑒 → 𝐹𝑒𝐶𝑂3 + 𝐻2
As a result, iron carbonate FeCO3 precipitates on metal surfaces.
5.1.2 Erosion Corrosion
Mechanical removal of passive layer of the casing is caused by well fluid flow. This can end up having higher rate of chemical
corrosion. The passive layer can protect metal parts from chemical corrosion by the means of the cover formed by precipitated layer on
the surface (Hassani, et al., 2012). This kind of corrosion is always seen in high flow rate wells (Sami & Mohammed, 2008). Presence
of solid particles or bubbles in liquid flow can increase the rate of erosion corrosion through the wear they make on inner surfaces.
5.1.3 Sour Corrosion (by H2S)
Metal parts can be deteriorated when they get in contact with H2S and water. Water is an important element to make H2S a corrosive
material (Ray, Randall, & Parker, 1978). As for all the weak acids, the acid made by reaction of H2S and water can release hydrogen
ions. The remaining products are iron sulfides (FeSx). This can lead to another form of passive layer deposition. The overall equation
can be written as:
𝐻2 𝑆 + 𝐹𝑒 + 𝐻2 𝑂 → 𝐹𝑒𝑆𝑥 + 2𝐻 + 𝐻2 𝑂
5.1.4 Pitting Corrosion
This is a highly localized corrosion type that can lead to creation of holes on metal surfaces. The first element causing pitting is chloride
ion. Other ions like sulfate or heavy metal ions can also be effective in pitting corrosion. First, oxidation of metallic elements (mostly
Fe) occurs:
𝐹𝑒 → 𝐹𝑒 2+ + 2𝑒 −
And the anode forms a site for pit. Then, at cathode side, reduction of oxygen takes place as:
𝑂2 + 2𝐻2 𝑂 + 4𝑒 − → 4𝑂𝐻 −
As the process continues by oxidation of Fe, ferro ions accumulate at pitted site of the anodic side. Accumulation of positive charge on
pitted sites attracts chloride ions present in the fluid, leading to the reaction followed:
𝐹𝑒 2 + 𝐶𝑙 − → 𝐹𝑒𝐶𝑙2
The chain reactions can continue till all the Fe metal is transformed. However, because of low concentrations of oxygen in geothermal
wells, chloride ion tends to participate in general corrosion process.
5.2 Corrosion Rate
Material used in geothermal wells can show different resistance to corrosion agents. In order to get a sensible time for corrosion effects,
we need to quantify corrosion rate for each case, all of which have the basis of distance over time. As a very common unit, one can
mention mile per year (mpy) which is the rate of penetration into the metallic material. As an example for the relation of resistance
quality and corrosion rate, Fontana (1986) presented some results as shown in Table 2.
6
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
Relative to
Corrosion resistance
Table 2: Corrosion resistance and corrosion rate relativity
Corrosion rate
Outstanding
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Unacceptable
(mpy)
<1
1-5
5 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 200
200 ++
(mm/year)
<0.025
0.025 - 0.1
0.1 - 0.5
0.5 - 1.27
1.27 - 5.08
5.08 ++
5.3 Cement Corrosion
Another essential consideration in drilling geothermal wells is the corrosion of cement in the well. Two major categories of cement used
in geothermal wells are calcium silicate hydrates (CaO-SiO2-H2O) and calcium aluminum silicate hydrates (CaO-Al2O3-SiO2-H2O)
which are considerably susceptible to CO2 corrosion. Since CO2 has the highest concentration among corrosion agents in geothermal
wells, an especial attention should be given to cement corrosion which can cause major problems to the drilled well.
Due to interaction of CO2 with calcium silicate in CO2-rich wells, carbonation happens, which is the major cause for cement corrosion.
The product, which is calcite, interacts with CO2 and H2O and forms calcium bicarbonate:
𝐶𝑎𝐶𝑂3 + 𝐶𝑂2 + 𝐻2 𝑂 → 𝐶𝑎(𝐻𝐶𝑂3 )2
As a result, Ca(HCO3)2 leaches out of the hydrate phase of cement. This process leads to deterioration of cement and in some cases end
up with collapsing the casing (Sugama & Carciello, 1992).
Another important corrosion agent in geothermal wells is sulfuric acid. When cement hydrates approach H2SO4, below reaction happens
leading to deposition of gypsum gel:
𝐻2 𝑆𝑂4 → 2𝐻 + + 𝑆𝑂42−
𝐶𝑎2+ + 𝑆𝑂42− → 𝐶𝑎𝑆𝑂4 . 2𝐻2 𝑂
Although the deposition formed here can be protective against further corrosion, its progress can lead to swelling and crack formation
inside cement structures.
Nowadays, many investigations have been done towards optimizing cement properties to prepare a cement fluid which best fits the
specific shape of casing (Alfi, Banarjee, Feys, & Park, 2013). Additionally, some novel techniques have been suggested to give more
corrosion resistivity to concrete structures (Mehdipour, Seyed Razzaghi, Amini, & Shekarchi, 2013).
6. LOGGING
Cement bonds logs are also indicative of the top of cement and cement quality. The temperature and caliper logs are very helpful in
planning a cementing operation as well. Temperature logs provide:
1)
Determination of hole temperature
2)
Locations of aquifers and loss zones
3)
Cross flow between aquifers
4)
Locating top of cement
7. CASE STUDY: FOAMED CEMENTING
The geothermal field in Blue Mountain, near Winnemucca, Nevada, is a high temperature water dominated geothermal reservoir. This
reservoir is located within a fault and naturally fractured formation. Although these are desirable factors for a successful geothermal
well in production phase, it can make the drilling and cementing job of a geothermal well very challenging.
The high temperature of geothermal wells results in dehydration of Portland cement and reduces its solidifying time, while highly
fractured formation with high permeability causes lost circulation during primary cementing of well casings. The approximate
temperature of geothermal wells in this field is around 370°F that can be reduced before starting cement job by pumping high volume of
cold water. It is also common to add synthetic additives and retarders to extend the thickening time of cement slurries. For resolving the
lost circulation problem, lost circulation materials (LCM) are added to the drilling fluid to plug the loss zones. Another common
practice is to use lost-circulation cement plugs across these zones (Niggermann, Samuel, V, & Hernandez, 2009).
Usually a lower density cement slurry is required during cementing to reduce the equivalent circulation density (ECD) in order to
minimize losses and cement fallback. Regular additives that are used in oil and gas industry, such as bentonite, fly ash, etc., are not
suitable for high temperature geothermal wells because they might lose their integrity and strength. The common practice in geothermal
7
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
industry is to make lightweight cement and to use high strength microspheres. However, this could be expensive and requires special
bulk handling for a consistent slurry. An alternative choice for having lightweight cement is to use foamed cement, which is a mixture
of cement slurry, foaming agents, and nitrogen. This option is economically more preferable when used in large volume, Figure 5, and
it can produce lightweight, low permeable, with high compressive strength cement jobs, Figure 6. It also makes cement job design
easier by eliminating the requirement for having multiple mixture for different zones and also reducing the cement fallback. As it was
discussed in (Niggermann, Samuel, V, & Hernandez, 2009), two foamed cement jobs has been performed successfully in Blue
Mountain field.
Figure 5: Cost per barrel of cement versus required volume (Niggermann, Samuel, V, & Hernandez, 2009)
Figure 6: Young's Modulus of different type of cements (Niggermann, Samuel, V, & Hernandez, 2009)
8. CONCLUSION
The success of geothermal operations lies in effective zonal isolation. This paper reviewed the challenges and the solutions for
geothermal cementing. The utilization of these practical solutions will help ensuring zonal isolation in geothermal wells. Sealing spacers
will tremendously help lost circulation problems during cementing challenging zones. Such spacers minimizes lost circulation issues at
temperatures up to 204°C, strengthens the wellbore and allows higher ECDs during cementing without cement top fallback while they
do not damage producing formations. Foam cementing and underbalanced drilling also prevent the occurrence of lost circulation during
cementing and drilling operations. Packers and properly designed cement slurries contribute to effective zonal isolation; this indeed
would not be possible without a strong capability of temperature simulator. Effective and optimum slurry design is crucial to long
lasting cement mechanical integrity and CO2 resistance. The effectiveness of cement formulations will also be evaluated by computer
models ensuring long-term zonal isolation. Utilizing all of these practical solutions allows reaping the benefits of this clean source of
energy and safeguarding the integrity of geothermal wells.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Deepak Khatri, Samuel Abraham, David Susko and Baker Hughes for the permission to
publish this work.
8
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
REFERENCES
Alescio, S., Roberto, R., Vallini, A., & Caponi, N. (1999). Coiled Tubing Injection String for Geothermal Wells. SPE/ICoTA Coiled
Tubing Roundtable. Houston, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Alfi, M., Banarjee, N., Feys, D., & Park, J. (2013). Simulation of Formwork Filling by Cement Fluid: the Effect of the Formwork
Structure on Yield-stress Fluid. COMSOL Conference. Boston, MA: COMSOL.
Aunzo, Z., Bjornsson, G., & Bodvarsson, G. (1991). Wellbore Models GWELL, GWNACL and HOLA User's Guide. Berkeley:
Berkeley, University of California.
Björnsson, G. (1987). A Multi-Feedzone Geothermal Wellbore Simulator. Berkeley, USA: Earth Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley
Laboratory.
Brandl, A., Acorda, E., Ellis, T., & Bray, W. (2013). Improving Mud Removal and Simplifying Challenging Cement Design: A
Deepwater Case History in the South China Sea. International Petroleum Technology Conference. Beijing, China: Society of
Petroleum Engineers.
Butler, S. J., & Enedy, S. L. (2010). Numerical Reservoir-Wellbore-Pipeline Simulation Model of The Geysers Geothermal Field,
California, USA. World Geothermal Congress. Bali, Indonesia.
Chen, Z., & Novotny, R. J. (2003). Accurate Prediction Wellbore Transient Temperature Profile Under Multiple Temperature
Gradients: Finite Difference Approach and Case Hisotry. ATCE. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Chow, S. Y., & Kalousek, G. L. (1976). Research on Cements for Geothermal and Deep Oil Wells. SPE Journal.
Conover, M., Ellis, P., & Curzon, A. (1981). Material selection Guidelines for Geothermal System. washington: US DOE.
Eilers, L. H., & Nelson, E. B. (1979). Effect Of Silica Particle Size On Degradation Of Silica Stabilized Portland Cement. SPE Oilfield
and Geothermal Chemistry Symposium. Houston, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Eilers, L. H., & Nelson, E. B. (1979). Effect Of Silica Particle Size On Degradation Of Silica Stabilized Portland Cement. SPE Oilfield
and Geothermal Chemistry Symposium. Houston, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Farahani, H., Brandl, A., & Durachman, R. (2014). Unique Cement and Spacer Design for Setting Horizontal Cement Plugs in SBM
Environment: Deepwater Indonesia Case History. Offshore Technology Conference. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Finger, J., & Blankenship, D. (2010). Handbook of Best Practices for Geothermal Drilling. Albuquerque, New Mexico : Sandia
National Laboratories.
Fontana, M. (1986). Corrosion Engineering. McGraw-Hill.
Gallus, J. P. (1979). Physical And Chemical Properties Of Cement Exposed To Geothermal Dry Steam. SPE Oilfield and Geothermal
Chemistry Symposium. Houston, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Ghasemi, M., Yang, Y., Gildin, E., Efendiev, Y., & Calo, V. (2015). Fast Multiscale Reservoir Simulations using POD-DEIM Model
Reduction,. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium. Houston, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Gildin, E., Ghasemi, M., Romanovskay, N., & Efendiev, Y. (2013). Nonlinear Complexity Reduction for Fast Simulation of Flow in
Heterogeneous Porous Media. SPE Reseervoir Simulation Symposium. Woodlands, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Gudmundsdottir, H., Jonsson, M. T., & Palsson, H. (2012). COUPLING WELLBORE SIMULATOR WITH RESERVOIR
SIMULATOR. Thirty-Seventh Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering. Stanford, California: Stanford University.
Guomundsdottir, H. (2012). A Coupled Wellbore Reservoir Simulator Utilizing Measured Wellhead Conditions. University of Icelan.
Hassani, S., Roberts, K., Shirazi, S., Shadley, J., Rybicki, E., & Joia, C. (2012). Flow loop study of NaCl concentration effect on erosion
corrosion of carbon steel in CO2 saturated systems. Corrosion.
Kefi, S., Pershikova, E., Docherty, K., Barral, Q., Droger, N., Regnault De La Mothe, L., & Khaifallah, I. (2014). Successful Cementing
Based on New Design Methodology for Displacement of Non-Aqueous Drilling Fluid. IADC/SPE Drilling Conference and
Exhibition. Fort Worth, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Le Roy-Delage, S., Baumgarte, C., Thiercelin, M., & Vidick, B. (2000). New Cement Systems for Durable Zonal Isolation. IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference. New Orleans, Louisiana: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Lee, J., Shadravan, A., & Young, S. (2012). Rheological Properties of Invert Emulsion Drilling Fluid under Extreme HPHT Conditions.
IADC/SPE Drilling Conference and Exhibition. San Diego, California: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
9
Shadravan, Ghasemi and Alfi
Mansure, A. J. (2002). Polyurethane Grouting Geothermal Lost Circulation Zones. IADC/SPE Drilling Conference. Dallas, Texas:
Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Mehdipour, I., Seyed Razzaghi, M., Amini, K., & Shekarchi, M. (2013). Effect of mineral admixtures on fluidity and stability of selfconsolidating mortar subjected to prolonged mixing time. Construction and Building Materials, 1029–1037.
Nelson, E. B., Eilers, L. H., & Spangle, L. B. (1981). Evaluation and Development of Cement Systems for Geothermal Wells. SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Niggermann, K., Samuel, A., V, A. M., & Hernandez, R. (2009). Foamed Cementing Geothermal 13 3/8-in. Intermediate Casing: NGP
#61-22. GRC Transaction, 217--222.
Ray, J., Randall, B., & Parker, J. (1978). Use of reactive iron oxide to remove H2S from drilling fluid. 53rd Annual Fall Tech. Conf. of
AIME. Houston.
Roy, D. M., Langton, C. A., Grutzek, M. W., & White, E. L. (1980). Hydrothermal High Temperature Cements For Potential
Geothermal Applications. SPE Oilfield and Geothermal Chemistry Symposium. Stanford, California: Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
Sami, A., & Mohammed, A. (2008). Study synergy effect on erosion-corrosion in oil and gas pipelines. Energy and Technology.
Shadravan, A., & Amani, M. (2012). HPHT 101: What Every Engineer or Geoscientist Should Know about High Pressure
HighTemperature Wells. SPE Kuwait International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition. Kuwait City, Kuwait: Society of
Petroleum Engineers.
Shadravan, A., Khodadadian, M., Roohi, A., & Amani, M. (2009). Underbalanced Drilling in Depleted Formation Achieves Great
Success: Case Study. EUROPEC/EAGE Conference and Exhibition. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
Shadravan, A., Nabaei, M., & Amani, M. (2009). Dealing with the Challenges of UBD Implementation in Southern Iranian Oilfields.
Middle East Drilling Technology Conference & Exhibition. Manama, Bahrain: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Sugama, T., & Carciello, N. (1992). Carbonation of hydrothermally treated phosphate-bonded calcium aluminate cements. Cement and
Concrete Research, 783-792.
Teufel, L. W., & Clark, J. A. (1984). Hydraulic Fracture Propagation in Layered Rock: Experimental Studies of Fracture Containment.
SPE Journal.
Walters, J., Thorhallsson, S., & Wood, E. (2012). Zonal Isolation for Geothermal Wells. International Partnership for Geothermal
Technology.
10