In Situ Heaters for Subsurface Formation Heating

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for heating subsurface formations to extract hydrocarbons are inefficient, as they often require external energy sources and lack effective temperature control, leading to suboptimal hydrocarbon recovery and increased operational costs.

Innovation Solution

The use of temperature-limited heaters with time-varying current configurations, where multiple elongated heaters are placed in parallel wellbores with specific voltage applications at different ends to achieve uniform heating and reduce energy consumption.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Use of energy by moving object

If traditional heating methods are used to extract hydrocarbons from subsurface formations, then heating can be achieved, but energy consumption is high and temperature control is poor

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveenergy consumptionVSAvoidtemperature control
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The heating system is divided into multiple independent heater zones positioned at different depths within the formation. Each heater can be controlled separately, allowing for segmented temperature management that reduces overall energy consumption while maintaining reliable temperature control in each zone. The heaters are arranged in a pattern that segments the formation into treatable blocks.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different heater types and power levels are applied to different local regions of the formation based on specific geological and hydrocarbon characteristics. This allows optimized energy usage in each local zone while maintaining precise temperature control where needed, resolving the contradiction between energy efficiency and temperature reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Temperature

If external energy sources are used for heating, then heating can be maintained, but operational costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveheating capabilityVSAvoidoperational costs
Core Design Contradiction:
TemperatureVSUse of energy by stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The system utilizes the formation's own thermal properties and the exothermic nature of hydrocarbon decomposition reactions to sustain heating. The chemical energy stored in the hydrocarbons themselves is converted to thermal energy, making the formation self-heating and eliminating the need for continuous external energy input, thus reducing operational costs while maintaining temperature.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the energy source parameter from external electrical or mechanical energy to internal chemical energy through controlled decomposition reactions. This parameter change transforms the heating process from an energy-consuming operation to an energy-generating process, reducing operational costs while maintaining heating capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If uniform heating is applied across the formation, then hydrocarbon recovery is improved, but energy consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehydrocarbon recoveryVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

Heating intensity and duration are tailored to local formation characteristics, hydrocarbon saturation levels, and rock properties in each zone. This localized approach ensures effective hydrocarbon recovery in each area while avoiding unnecessary energy expenditure in zones where heating is less critical, resolving the contradiction between productivity and energy consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies heating selectively to portions of the formation where hydrocarbon saturation and permeability indicate high recovery potential, rather than uniformly heating the entire formation. This partial action approach maintains improved hydrocarbon recovery while significantly reducing overall energy consumption by concentrating thermal energy where it provides maximum benefit.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach allows for more efficient and controlled heating of subsurface formations, enhancing hydrocarbon recovery while minimizing energy usage and operational costs.

Implementation Method 1

The heaters can be any type of heater known in the art, including, but not limited to, electric heaters, combustion heaters, and the like.

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectJoule heating: Joule Heating

Data Source

PatentUS8027571B2In situ conversion process systems utilizing wellbores in at least two regions of a formation
Publication Date: 2011.09.27 SALAMANDER IP HLDG LLC
  • US8027571B2 patent drawing
  • US8027571B2 patent drawing
  • US8027571B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system for heating a subsurface formation is described. The system includes a plurality of elongated heaters located in a plurality of openings in the formation. At least two of the heaters are substantially parallel to each other for at least a portion of the lengths of the heaters. At least two of the heaters have first end portions in a first region of the formation and second end portions in a second region of the formation. A source of time-varying current is configured to apply time-varying current to at least two of the heaters. The first end portions of at least two heaters are configured to have substantially the same voltage applied to them. The second portions of at least two heaters are configured to have substantially the same voltage applied to them.