4.7 Article

Surface complexation modeling of calcite zeta potential measurements in brines with mixed potential determining ions (Ca2+, CO32-, Mg2+, SO42-) for characterizing carbonate wettability

期刊

JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
卷 506, 期 -, 页码 169-179

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2017.06.096

关键词

Zeta potential; Surface complexation model; Calcite surface charge; Wettability alteration; Enhanced oil recovery; Smart water flooding

资金

  1. Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates)
  2. Rice University Consortium for Processes in Porous Media (Houston, TX, USA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents experiment and surface complexation modeling (SCM) of synthetic calcite zeta potential in brine with mixed potential determining ions (PDI) under various CO2 partial pressures. Such SCM, based on systematic zeta potential measurement in mixed brines (Mg2+, SO42-, Ca2+ and CO32-), is currently not available in the literature and is expected to facilitate understanding of the role of electrostatic forces in calcite wettability alteration. We first use a double layer SCM to model experimental zeta potential measurements and then systematically analyze the contribution of charged surface species. Calcite surface charge is investigated as a function of four PDIs and CO2 partial pressure. We show that our model can accurately predict calcite zeta potential in brine containing a combination of four PDIs and apply it to predict zeta potential in ultra-low and pressurized CO2 environments for potential application in enhanced oil recovery in carbonate reservoirs. Model prediction reveals that calcite surface will be positively charged in all considered brines in pressurized CO2 environment (> 1 atm). The calcite zeta potential is sensitive to CO2 partial pressure in the various brine in the order of Na2CO3 > Na2SO4 > NaCl > MgCl2 > CaCl2 (Ionic strength = 0.1 M). (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据