No. 1998.
141
Use of Carbon Dioxide to Enhance Heavy Oil Recovery
Kayhan Issever and Ilhan Topkaya, Turkish Petroleum Corporation, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract
Immiscible carbon dioxide application to enhance heavy oil
recovery has been experienced by Turkish Petroleum Corpora-
tion (TPAO) in several fields located at southeastern Turkey.
Because of the high molecular weight of heavy oil contained
in these fields, the miscibility pressure is much higher than the
reservoir pressure. Therefore improved oil recovery by CO2
injection must rely on immiscible displacement which benefits
from the oil swelling effect of CO2 after it goes into solution
and its viscosity — reduction effect.
Immiscible CO2 injection has been successfully applied
since 1986 in the Bati Raman heavy-oil field. The Bati Raman
discovered in 1961,contains low gravity (12°API), high vis-
cosity (600 cp) oil at an average depth of 1,300 m. and the
00IP is 1.85x109 STB. The producing formation is a vuggy
and fractured limestone and exhibits areal and vertical heter-
ogeneities. Due to the low reservoir energy and unfavorable
oil properties, the expected ultimate recovery though primary
production was less than 2% of the initial oil-in-place. The
field oil production rate had declined to 1,500 STB/day after
25 years of production. CO2 injection allowed to establish a
plateau oil production rate of 12,000 STB/day and to double
the cumulative oil production within 10 years.
An immiscible CO2 field pilot was completed successfully
by TPAO, JNOC, and JEORA in Ikiztepe heavy oil field. The
CO2 immiscible process applied in an inverted 5–spot pattern
of 200 m by 200 m. The performance of this pilot test indi-
cated that a CO2 immiscible process can be a viable EOR pro-
cess for such reservoirs.
Several wells in Amurlu heavy oil reservoir have been stim-
ulated with CO2 — richgas using the huff-and-puff technique.
Two- to three-fold increase in the production rate of the wells
have been observed.
This paper concludes that, to get successful results with
immiscible CO2 injection, the application must be tailored for
each reservoir depending on its characteristics. Sound reser-
voir management with careful monitoring, performance eval-
uation and making necessary changes in the mode of
application is very important to get better results.
1
Introduction
The use of carbon dioxide to enhance oil recovery from many
petroleum reservoirs has been investigated for many years.
Both laboratory studies and field applications have established
that carbon dioxide can be an efficient oil-displacing agent.
The various mechanisms by which carbon dioxide can dis-
place oil from porous media have been of particular interest to
the petroleum industry. Carbon dioxide can enhance the
recovery of oil from porous rocks by:
a. Solution gas drive.
b. Immiscible drive through swelling of oil and reduction of
its viscosity.
c. Miscible effects through extraction of hydrocarbons from
the oil in the porous rock.1
Miscibility between the oil and carbon dioxide will occur
when the pressure is high enough to compress the CO2 to a
density at which it becomes a good solvent for the lighter
hydrocarbons in the crude oil. Because of the minimum misci-
bility requirement, depth is an important screening criterion,
and CO2 floods are usually carried out in reservoirs that are
more than 800 m. deep. Oil composition is also important in
achieving the miscibility between oil and carbon dioxide. A
high percentage of intermediate hydrocarbons (especially C5–
C12) is beneficial, and surveys show that the gravity exceeds
30°API for most active CO2 floods.
Martin and Teber presented the results of 15 large CO2 mis-
cible floods in U.S. The SACROC project, started in 1972, is
the largest and oldest one applied in 49,000 acre to enhance
the recovery of 41°API oil. More than half of the large
projects were started during 1984–86. For field-scale miscible
CO2 floods, projected incremental recovery ranges from about
7–23% of the original-oil-in place (OOIP), and the net (i.e.,
purchased) amount of CO2 required is estimated to be about
2.5–11 Mcf/STB of incremental recovery, with an average of
6–7 Mcf/STB.2
Since the pressure required to achieve miscibility between
CO2 and heavy oil is high, the use of CO2 to recover addi-
tional oil from these reservoirs includes immiscible flooding
and individual well stimulation technique known as “huff 'n'
puff”.
Immiscible carbon dioxide application to enhance heavy oil
recovery has been experienced by Turkish Petroleum Corpo-
ration (TPAO) in several fields located at southeastern Turkey.
This paper presents the recovery mechanisms in immiscible
carbon dioxide application in heavy oil reservoirs and the
results obtained from CO2 application in Bati Raman, Ikiztepe
and Camurlu oil fields.
Use of Carbon Dioxide to
Enhance Heavy Oil Recovery
Recovery Mechanisms
Because of the high molecular weight of heavy oils, the misci-
bility pressure is usually higher than the reservoir pressure.
Therefore, the success of CO2 injection in heavy oil fields
should rely primarily on the oil-swelling effect of CO2 after it
goes into solution and its viscosity-reduction effect. Typical
figures for heavy crude are 10–22% increase in oil volume and
viscosity reduction to less than 0.1 of original value at 120°F
and 800–1,200 psi. Other immiscible mechanisms that
enhance oil recovery by CO2 injection are dissolved gas drive
and reduction of interfacial tension. Also the change in the
carbonate-bicarbonate equilibria due to increase of the CO2 in
the formation water resulting in a possible improvement in
pore volume and permeability and finally the gravity drainage
effect as experienced in all gas applications are the positive
factors to enhance the system performance.
However, in order a flood to benefit from these improved
characteristics, the reservoir oil must be contacted by CO2.
Field applications and pilot tests done by TPAO demonstrate
that a fissured network in the reservoir plays a significant role
in having the reservoir oil and injected gas to be contacted and
allowing the gas to diffuse into the oil.
In a fissured system, the success of the injection process
relies on the diffusion of gas in the fissures into oil in the
matrix. The gas rapidly moves through the fissures, saturating
the fissure oil in the swept areas. Due to the very adverse
mobility ratio, the amount of free gas in the fissures remains
very low. But the difference in concentration of dissolved gas
between the oil in fissures and the matrix allows for a signifi-
cant diffusion of gas inside the oil phase. As the gas concen-
tration increases, the matrix oil swells and is expelled into the
fissure network. The speed of diffusion process is directly
related to the density of the fissure network. The diffusion
from the gas bearing fissure into the oil bearing matrix is illus-
trated in Figure 1.4
Matrix to fracture flow in a dual porosity system described
by Warren and Root5 and Kazemi et al.,6 can be expressed in
terms of a fracture to matrix exchange transmissibility:7
kro co xi krg cg yi
q i = Tmf [( ) (Pf-Pm) + [( ) (Pf-Pm + Pcgof - Pcgom)]
mg mg
Tmf = k s Dx Dy Dz (2)
The parameter s is a “matrix shape factor”, which character-
izes the matrix block surface per unit volume. For three-
dimensional, numerical models Kazemi proposed the follow-
ing expression for the shape factor:
s = 4 ( 12 + 12 + 12 )
Lx Lx Lx (3)
The rate of diffusion between fractures and matrix is related to
mass transfer coefficients that are defined for both the liquid
and vapor phases:
Ji = com Ko Som (*xif - Xim) + cgm Kg Sgm (*yif - yim) (4)
The mass transfer coefficients, Ko and Kg are determined by
comparing Fick's first law of diffusion with Darcy's law for
flow in a porous medium:
JA = -c DAB A ÑXB (5)
kA
q= ÑP (6)
m
Since the differential expressions for diffusion and for flow in
a porous medium are identical in form, the matrix shape factor
that applies to matrix flow should also apply to fracture to
matrix diffusion. Therefore, the mass transfer coefficients for
oil and gas are defined as follows:
Ko = Do sD x Dy Dz (7)
Kg = Dg sD x Dy Dz (8)
The diffusion coefficient determines the rate of CO2 diffusion.
However, what is more important is the matrix shape factor, s,
which is a function of matrix block sizes. The smaller matrix
sizes, which is indicative of denser fissure network, allows for
increased contact area between gas and oil in order for diffu-
sion to take place. Therefore, it may be concluded that a
denser fissured system enhances the fracture/matrix diffusion
which is the basic mechanism to enhance oil recovery in an
immiscible CO2 injection application.
Bati Raman Heavy Oil Field
Reservoir Characteristics
Bati Raman field is located in the southeastern Turkey and
contains 1.85 billion STB low gravity (10–13°API), high vis-
cosity (592 cp) oil at an average depth of 1,300 m. The pro-
ducing formation is Cretaceous Garzan limestone of reefal
(1)
origin and the structure is an asymmetrical anticline oriented
in the east-west direction. The field is 17 km. long and 4 km.
wide and the reservoir is limited in the north and west by an
oil-water contact at 600 m. subsea, in the southwest by a fault,
and in the south and southeast by a permeability barrier.
2
 Garzan limestone is a vuggy and fissured formation show-
ing heterogeneities areally and vertically. Towards the east,
the formation becomes tighter and chalky. Average porosity is
18%, and average core permeability's range from 10–100 md.
However, permeability's obtained from well tests range from
200–500 md, confirming the existence of secondary porosity.
The primary production mechanism is rock and fluid
expansion. Water drive effect is insignificant except for a very
weak aquifer influence at the central north flank wells. The
original reservoir pressure is 1,800 psi and the solution GOR
is 18 SCF/STB. This low GOR results in a low bubble point
pressure of 160 psi. Before the start of CO2 injection, the aver-
age reservoir pressure had dropped to 400 psi, which was still
above the bubble point pressure, after a cumulative production
of 32 MMSTB.
The field had been developed on 62 acres/well spaced ini-
tially. Before the project was initiated, 65 active wells were
pumping with a total production rate 1500 STB/D.
The rapid decline in reservoir pressure suggested the need
for a suitable EOR application to increase the ultimate recov-
ery from the field. Initially it was estimated that the primary
recovery would be 1.5% of OOIP.
After extensive laboratory studies, modeling and engineer-
ing studies, TPAO decided that an immiscible CO2 injection
would be the most efficient method as an EOR technique. The
existence of a CO2 reservoir (Dodan) 85 km. away from Bati
Raman made the project feasible.
PVT data for CO2 saturated Bati Raman oil is shown in
Figure 2.
Application
Initially a huff-and-puff application in a 5 km2 pilot area con-
taining 33 wells was planned. The objective was to inject
enough gas into each well to raise the reservoir pressure in the
vicinity of each well to 2,000 psi, 20% higher than the original
reservoir pressure. After the oil is saturated at this pressure
and after a short stabilization period, the well would be put on
production. The well would remain in production cycle until
an economic limit is reached, then would be put on injection
cycle again.
After having prepared surface and subsurface facilities in
Bati Raman and Dodan fields, TPAO started to inject CO2 in
1986 from 17 wells in the demonstration area. Each well
showed a different performance. The wellhead pressures of
some wells increased immediately, while the others stabilized
at 700–800 psi. For most of the wells, the injected gas was not
confined within the vicinity of the wellbore but instead moved
towards the parts of the reservoir that prevented the increase
of pressure to the desired level. In the other injectors, the
injected gas could not move away from the wellbore vicinity
because of the unfavorable reservoir conditions and it was
compressed as free gas. This caused a rapid pressure build up
3
around the wellbore and when the well was put on production,
the pressure declined sharply. Because of the high gas satura-
tion around the wellbore, a kind of “gas blockage” formed.
After experiencing these facts, it was decided that a gas drive
application would give better results and the process was con-
verted to a gas drive.8,9
TPAO decided to expand the application to the whole field
after evaluating the results of gas drive in the demonstration
area for 2 years. From 1988–1993, the application area was
enlarged step by step, and as of January 1993, the whole field
was under gas injection. Within the scope of the project, infill
wells were also drilled to decrease the well spacing. From
1987–1998, 88 infill wells were drilled.
Daily oil production of the field has reached 13,000 STB in
May 1992, up from 1,500 STB prior to CO2 injection. The
production history of Bati Raman field is presented in Figure
3. As of January 1998, 34 million STB incremental oil has
been recovered from Bati Raman field by CO22 injection. The
cumulative CO2 injection is 124 MMMSCF and cumulative
CO2 production is 68 MMMSCF.Some of the produced CO2
were started to be recycled in 1991 by the installation of recy-
cle compressors in the Bati Raman field. 25 MMMSCF of
CO2 was reinjected by January 1998. The CO2 Flood Perfor-
mance of Bati Raman field is presented in Figure 4.
There are 212 production wells and 67 injection wells in
the field. The production capacity is 11,000 STB/day and the
daily injection rate is 30–40 MMSCF/D.
Evaluation of the Performance
For the evaluation of the performance of immiscible CO2
injection in Bati Raman, a full field, dual porosity simulation
model was built and history matched. About 6% of the initial
oil in place is expected to be recovered by the CO2 injection
process.3,4
The success of the injection process is directly related to
amount of oil contacted by the injected gas. During the first
seven years of application, that; in the western area 40–80%
and in the central area 16–60% of the injected gas was back-
produced. A material balance calculation done in the applica-
tion area during this period showed that most of the gas
remaining in the reservoir must be in solution in the reservoir
oil. Considering the gas solubility at the average reservoir
pressure and the volume of gas in solution, it was found that
10–30% of the reservoir oil has been contacted by gas. Such a
high sweep efficiency despite a very unfavorable mobility
ratio can be related to the fissured nature of the reservoir.
In a dual porosity reservoir, the success of injection process
relies on the diffusion of gas in the fissures into oil in the
matrix. The speed of diffusion process is directly related to the
density of the fissure network. In the central area where the
fissure network is assumed to be denser, the GOR in the pro-
ducers increases progressively, reaching an average 2,000
SCF/STB after three years. The percent of backproduced gas
does not exceed 60%. This behavior indicates a relatively high
diffusion rate which delays the movement of the gas in the fis-
sure network. In the western area the fissure density is lower,
the GOR increases rapidly after the breakthrough and stabi-
lizes at 2,000–4,000 SCF/STB, and the percent of backpro-
duced gas reaches 80%. This indicates that a fair amount of
invasion of the fissure network by the gas is required to yield a
significant contribution of the matrix to oil production because
of a lower diffusion rate.
The initial ratio of injected CO2 to incremental oil produc-
tion was significantly high, because of the fill up time required
to pressure-up the depleted reservoir. The peak values over 20
MMSCF/bbl started to drop after February 1987, and now
continuing at a very economical level of 3.5–4.0MMSCF/bbl.
Bati Raman immiscible CO2 injection project, for more
than 10 years of application, proves the effectiveness of CO2
to enhance heavy oil recovery. Sound project management for
making necessary changes in the mode of application, in time,
is very important in the success of the project. Depending on
the reservoir response, the application was changed from
“huff-and-puff” to gas drive, and then enlarged to the whole
field. After starting to inject CO2 to the whole field, recycling
facilities were constructed in order to save Dodan reserves.
For the future, no major change in immiscible CO2 injection
in Bati Raman field is foreseen. The reservoir management
applied by TPAO to monitor the producing GOR's of the wells
will be continued, and an infill drilling program with horizon-
tal wells will be applied in the Eastern area where the well
productivity is the smallest.
Ikiztepe Oil Field
Reservoir Characteristics
Ikiztepe field is located in the southeastern Turkey and con-
tains 127 MMSTB low gravity (10–12°API), high viscosity
(936 cp) oil at an average depth of 1,350 m. The producing
formation is the Sinan limestone of Cretaceous age, and is
occasionally dolomitic and irregularly vuggy and fissured.
The average porosity is 15–23%, and the average permeability
is estimated to be within 50–400 md. The cumulative oil pro-
duction was 88 MSTB, due to the low oil mobility (high mo),
rapid decline rate and a high water cut. There is a thin gas
zone, of about 10 ft, but it is not strong enough to resist the
rapid decline rate.
Immiscible CO 2 Field Pilot
An immiscible CO2 field pilot was carried out by Japan
National Oil Corporation (JNOC) and Turkish Petroleum Cor-
poration (TPAO) in collaboration with the Japan EOR
Research Association (JEORA) in Ikiztepe field (10).
4
The immiscible CO2 process was applied in an inverted 5-
spot pattern in an area 200 m by 200 m. The following factors
were, important in the consideration for the immiscible CO2
process
1. The availability of a natural CO2 reserve in the neighbor-
ing Camurlu field.
2. Favorable degree of solubility of the «amurlu CO2 gas
with the reservoir oil as indicated by the swelling tests.
3. The degree of oil-viscosity reduction brought about by
such solubility. Results of swelling factor and viscosity
reduction test are given in Figure 5.
An inverted 5–spot pattern configuration was chosen for the
pilot. CO2 was injected through the center well, CI, and the
production was obtained through corner wells: CP1, CP2,
CP3, and CP4. Also, an observation well, CO, was drilled to
get periodic samples and was equipped with bottom hole pres-
sure monitoring devices.
Prior to starting the CO2 flood, three cycles of CO2 huff-
and-puff were carried out through the injection well, CI, dur-
ing May-October 1993. During this period 6.86 MMSCF gas
was injected and 921 bbls of oil was recovered. Continuous
CO2 injection was started with a limiting injection pressure of
2,500 psi. The injectivity at CI increased from 0.9 MSCF/d/psi
to 3.8 MSCF/d/psi by March 1985 suggesting an improved
permeability to gas (from 0.2–0.3 md to 4–5 md) due to
increasing gas saturation within the reservoir. The CO2 injec-
tion was maintained at 0.8–0.9 MMSCF/D until the termina-
tion of the project in March 1995. During continuous CO2
injection, a total of 339.42 MMSCF gas was injected which
resulted in the recovery of 17284 bbls of oil. The ratio of
injected CO2 to incremental production is 19.6 MSCF/bbl. Oil
production and gas injection performance of the pilot test is
presented in Figure 6.
The performance history was simulated using a 3-D multi-
phase, multi-component simulator to develop a better under-
standing of the displacement and recovery mechanisms in the
immiscible CO2 flooding process applied. The history match
and subsequent simulation studies indicated conclusively that
a good CO2 — reservoir oil solubility was the primary factor
that contributed to the improved oil recovery. If the pilot test
were continued until existing conditions until an arbitrarily set
limit of the well GOR = 16 MSCF/bbl was reached, the recov-
ery would be 8.6% for 90% pure CO2.
If a HC gas were used instead of CO2, the breakthrough of
injected gas at the producers would be much earlier than was
the case in the actual pilot performance. HC gas had much
lower solubility with the oil and was not as effective as CO2 in
causing oil viscosity reduction and swelling. The recovery
with HC gas injection would be 3.5%. The evaluation of pilot
performance indicates that the high solubility of CO2 in the
reservoir oil was the most dominant factor contributing to the
recovery.
Camurlu Oil Field Reservoir management with careful monitoring and perfor-
mance evaluation, and making necessary changes in the mode
Reservoir Characteristics of application is very important to get successful results.
Camurlu field is located in the southeastern Turkey, at Syrian Bati Raman immiscible CO2 injection project, for more
border, contains 380MMSTB low gravity (10–12°API), high than 10 years of application proves the effectiveness of CO2 to
viscosity (284 cp) oil at an average depth of 1250 m. The poor
enhance heavy oil recovery.
quality of the oil, the heterogeneity of the reservoir and the
presence of a large gas cap are responsible for the low primary
recovery estimated at less than 1%. The “Mus” formation,
located beneath the oil bearing Alt Sinan formation, contains a
CO2-rich natural gas (73%). Nomenclature
A Area open to flow, length squared
Dx x-direction grid cell size, length
q Molar flow rate, moles per unit time
CO 2 “Huff-and-Puff ” Applications Dy y-direction grid cell size, length
The existence of a gas cap, the high viscosity of the oil and the k permeability, md
heterogeneity of the reservoir were taken into consideration in
Dz z-direction grid cell size, length
the design of the project. For the pilot test, two wells located
as far as possible from the gas cap were selected. The test kr Relative permeability, dimensionless
involved well stimulation, with limited amounts of CO2 being m Viscosity, cp
injected during each cycle, instead of continuous injection in c Molar concentration, moles per unit volume
order to eliminate the risk of an early breakthrough of CO2 L Matrix block dimensions, length
into the gas cap.11
x Mole fraction in the liquid
Three cycles of CO2 injection were applied in both wells.
J Molar diffusion rate, moles per unit time
Following a soaking period, production started by the flow of
P Pressure, force per unit area
oil and gas, and then continued with pumping. It was observed
2.5 times increase in the production rates of the wells. S Saturation, dimensionless
Several other wells were also stimulated by cyclic CO2 Pc Capillary pressure, force per unit area
injection, and two- to three-fold increase in the production of D Diffusively, length squared per unit time
the wells were observed. y Vapor mole fraction
s Matrix block shape factor, dimensionless
*x Equilibrium vapor mole fraction
Conclusions *y Equilibrium vapor mole fraction
Since the pressure required to achieve miscibility between Subscripts
CO2 and heavy oil is high and exceeds the fracturing pressure A Component number in a binary fluid
of the formation, immiscible CO2 injection can be applied in B Component number in a binary fluid
heavy oil fields. f Fracture fluid property
Immiscible CO2 injection can be an efficient process to m Matrix fluid property
enhance heavy oil recovery. The main recovery mechanisms i Component number in a multicomponent fluid
are oil swelling, due to CO2 diffusion and solubilization into
o Oil phase property
the oil, and matrix oil gravity drainage enhanced by the oil
viscosity reduction due to CO2. g Gas phase property

In fissured reservoirs, diffusion of CO2 into oil is more effi-

cient due to large contact area. This increases the technical
success of the application. Acknowledgment
In order to get successful results with immiscible CO2 The authors wish to thank the management of Turkish Petro-
injection, the application should be tailored for each reservoir leum Corporation (TPAO) for permission to publish this
depending on its characteristics. paper.

5
References
1. Holm, L.W. and Josendal,V.A. “Mechanisms of Oil Dis-
placement by Carbon Dioxide”, Jour. of Petr. Techn.,
December 1974, 1427.
2. Martin, F.D. and Taber, J.J. “Carbon Dioxide Flooding”
Jour. of Petr. Techn., April 1992, 396.
3. Combe, J., Faure, F., Issever, K., and Topkaya, I. “Bati
Raman Heavy Oil Field: Reservoir Management of CO2
Injection in Fractured Limestone Formations”, paper pre-
sented at the Offshore Mediterranean Conference and
Exhibition, Ravenna, Italy, March 19–21, 1997.
4. Faure, F., Bakiler, C.S., Kose, A., and Pellissier, G.
“Numerical Simulation of CO2 Injection in a Heavy Oil
Fractured Reservoir-Case Study of Bati Raman Field,
Turkey”, paper presented at the 9th European Symposium
on Improved Oil Recovery, The Hauge, The Netherlands,
Oct. 20–22, 1997.
5. Warren, J.E. and Root, P.J. “The Behavior of Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs”, SPEJ, September 1963. Trans.
AIME, 228.
6. Kazemi, H., Merrill, L.S., Jr., and Zeman, P.K. “Numeri-
cal Simulation of Water-Oil Flow in Naturally Fractured
Reservoirs”, SPEJ, December 1976.
6
7. Spivak, A., Karaouz, D., Issever, K., and Nolen, J.S.
“Simulation of Immiscible CO2 Injection in a Fractured
Carbonate Reservoir, Bati raman Field, Turkey”, paper
SPE 18765 presented at the SPE California Meeting,
Bakersfield, April 5–7, 1989.
8. Karaoguz, D., Issever, K., Pamir, N., and Tirek. A.: “Per-
formance of a Heavy-Oil Recovery Process by an Immis-
cible CO2 Application, Bati Raman Field”, paper SPE
18002 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Technical
Conference, Bahrain, March 11–14, 1989.
9. Issever, K., Pamir, N., and Tirek, A. “Performance of a
Heavy Oil Field Under Carbon Dioxide Injection, B.
Raman, Turkey”, paper SPE 20883 presented at the SPE
Europec 90, The Hauge, The Netherlands, 22–24 Octo-
ber, 1990.
10. Ishii, H., Sarma, H.K., Ono, Kenji, and Issever, K. “A
Successful Immiscible CO2 Field Pilot In A Carbonate
Heavy Oil Reservoir in the Ikiztepe Field, Turkey”, paper
presented at the 9th European Symposium on Improved
Oil Recovery, The Hauge, The Netherlands, Oct. 20–22,
1997.
11. Bardon, C.P., Karaoguz, D., and Tholance, M. “Well
Stimulation by CO2 in the Heavy Oil Field of Camurlu in
Turkey”, paper SPE/DOE 14943 presented at the SPE/
DOE 5th Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Tulsa,
OK, April 20–23, 1986.
Figure 1: Diffusion in an Oil Saturated Matrix Block in Contact with Gas Saturated Fissures

Figure 2: PVT Data for CO2 Saturated Bati Raman Oil

7
 Figure 3: Production History of Bati Raman Field

Figure 4: Bati Raman CO2 Flood Performance

Figure 5: Swelling Factor and Oil Viscosity Reduction — Ikiztepe Oil

8
Figure 6: Oil Production and Gas Injection Performance — Ikiztepe 5-Spot Immiscible CO2 Injection Pilot Test