Meana Petro

Reservoir

EOR method screening

Ten EOR methods checked against your reservoir and fluid properties, each one told to say exactly which criterion rules it out.

Inputs

Results

Loading the calculation…

This calculation ran in your browser. No value you entered was sent anywhere, and nothing was stored.

How it is calculated

  • Eight criteria per method — oil gravity, viscosity, depth, temperature, permeability, porosity, oil saturation and lithology — checked against published screening windows.
  • The windows are compiled from Taber, Martin and Seright (SPE 35385) and the US DOE criteria: they describe where a method has an established field record, not where it is theoretically possible.
  • A method is reported as inside the window only when every criterion passes, and the first failing criterion is named.

Standards it speaks

Where this stops being true

Screening criteria are a summary of where projects have been done, and they carry every bias of that record: they are dominated by North American sandstones, they say little about fractured carbonates, and they encode 1990s technology. They also ignore everything that actually decides an EOR project — CO₂ supply, water chemistry, surfactant cost at reservoir salinity, well spacing, and whether the field has the surface plant to handle the produced fluid. A method inside the window is a candidate for a pilot, nothing more.

Related tools

  • PVT from correlations

    Bubble point, solution GOR, Bo, oil and gas viscosity, z-factor and Bg from gravity, temperature and pressure — the module the other reservoir tools call.

  • Volumetric OOIP / OGIP with Monte Carlo

    The volumetric equation run tens of thousands of times over triangular distributions, returning P90, P50 and P10 instead of one number that pretends to be certain.

  • Gas material balance — P/z

    Paste reservoir pressure against cumulative production and read gas in place off the intercept, with z computed at every point rather than assumed constant.

  • Minimum miscibility pressure

    CO₂ and lean-gas MMP from three independent correlations, corrected for injectant impurities, with the spread between them shown rather than averaged away.