Available online at http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq and www.iasj.net Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering Vol.23 No.4 (December 2022) 1 – 6 EISSN: 2618-0707, PISSN: 1997-4884 Corresponding Author: Name: Kasi Njeudjang , Email: kasinj2006@yahoo.fr IJCPE is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Remediation of Oil Production by Matrix Acidizing Method on an Oil Well Kasi Njeudjanga, Justine Yandjimainb, Madeleine Nitcheuc, and Théophile Ndougsa- Mbargab a Department of Quality Industrial Safety and Environment. National Advanced School of Mines and Petroleum Industries. University of Maroua. PO. Box: 46,Maroua, Cameroon b Department of Physics, Advanced Teacher’s Training College, University of Yaoundé I, PO. Box 47, Yaoundé, Cameroon c Department of Basic Scientific Teaching, School of geology and mining engineering, University of Ngaoundere, P.O. Box 115 Meiganga, Cameroon Abstract The remediation oil production by matrix acidizing method on the well named "X" (for confidential reasons) is scrutinized in this paper. Initial production of 1150 bpd, production index of 2.8 STB/Psi/d and permeability of 150md, in 2018 two years down the lane this dropped to 450 bpd, production index 0.7 STB/Psi/d. The declined observed on the production index is trouble shouted and after elimination of (no completion damage/perforation damage), the skin is calculated by carrying out a well test (build-up test) whose extrapolation in excel over times gave us a skin of 40.The reservoir heterogeneity, containing >20% of feldspar, carbonates and paraffin’s guided thematrix acidizing design and treatment proposition to remedy this problem. A positive displacement pump (HT400), boosted by a centrifugal pump were used to pump the acid treatment through high pressure treating line downhole. Halliburton insite for stimulation the (IFS) software monitored treating pressure and surface flow rate, keeping injection rate below fracturing pressure. PipeSim software is used to run the nodal analysis before and after treatment this helped to forecast optimal production rates and pressure after treatments. Matrix acidizing method applied on the well X increased the production to 850 bpd with production index of 2 STD/psi/d, skin - 1.5. The economic benefit to the company stood at (profit oil 21,699,500 USD.) over a two years period of production. Meanwhile uncertainties in demand and supply of crude oil at the international market cause constant fluctuation in oil prices, this should be strongly considered upon execution of this project. Overall applications of this acidizing treatment can be carried out on reservoirs with similar mineralogy. HCl/HF blend dissolves sandstone, mud stone and calcite minerals thus reservoir porosity and permeability can be enhanced in regions extending several meters around the injection well. Keywords: Flow rate, matrix acidizing method, skin, productivity index, well, fluid dynamics. Received on 25/07/2022, Accepted on 03/12/2022, Published on 30/12/2022 https://doi.org/10.31699/IJCPE.2022.4.1 1- Introduction The world energy demand increases by 1, 4% per year (IEA; 2008) with over 60% constituted of hydrocarbons [1-3]. Decline experienced in the oil and gas production coupled, (little/no oil field development in contemporary era, formation damages. According to the international energy agency, the world energy demand will continue to increase from 0,7 to 1,4% per year between 2008 to 2035 following different scenarios envisaged, however this will be dominated by fossil energy, notably hydrocarbons, though with a decline envisage [4-6]. With the continue increase in world demand for hydrocarbon coupled with an annual decline in exploration and drilling of new wells. Stakeholders have developed technologies/methods to sustain oil production in a more economic and profitable way, one of which is matrix acidizing [7-10]. An acidizing treatment is called a “matrix” treatment because the acid is injected at pressures below the parting pressure of the formation so that fractures are not created. Matrix acidizing can significantly enhance the productivity of a well when near-wellbore formation damage is present and, conversely, is of little benefit in an undamaged well [11-15]. The main goal of matrix acidizing is to restore and improve the formation’s productivity by removing the near-wellbore damage and creating flow channels (wormholes) in carbonate formations [16]. Several factors must be considered in the process of choosing an adequate acid, for instance, temperature, pressure, crude composition, formation permeability, acid/crude compatibility, acid/additive compatibility, and compatibility between additives [17]. In matrix acidizing, the production of single and dominant wormholes is preferred. Previous experimental studies in the literature have shown the existence of an optimal acid injection rate at which maximum wormholing efficiency is produced [18-22]. Hence, the purpose of many laboratories’ research focuses on finding this optimal injection rate, which could be defined as the injection rate that would produce the best wormhole with the lowest volume of acid. http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/ http://www.iasj.net/ mailto:kasinj2006@yahoo.fr http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.31699/IJCPE.2022.4.1 K. Njeudjang et al. / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 23,4 (2022) 1 - 6 2 Matrix acidizing method is applied in field named "Y" (for confidential reasons and its location not given) to enhance productivity and maximise recovery in its mature fields thus generating extra production capacity and restore original productivity in damage wells. The aim of this paper is therefore to remedy oil production by matrix acidizing method on the well X which belongs to the field Y and in an efficient manner. The objectives of this paper are as follows: Perform the nodal analysis to affirm the present state of this well (current permeability and production index); justify the choice of matrix acidizing by (13.5: 1.5% HCl:HF blend); perform the acid stimulation design (acid volumes and strengths); execute the acid stimulation job; perform well testing (build –up test) and run the nodal analysis to ascertain treated well ameliorated parameters (Permeability and Production index) and perform an Economic evaluation. To successfully achieve the set goals, this paper is divided into three sections: The first section deals with the introduction, the second section presents the data, tools and the obtained results. The paper ends by general conclusion. 2- Data, Methods and Result The well X was worked over in 2018 and has never been stimulated, after completion the well-produced, with water production trend decreasing while oil production increasing. Before the production got stabilized, choke was opened, water production increased while we witnessed a drop in oil percentage. The well X is an oil producer well. Before the production got stabilized, choke was opened and then water production started increasing and oil decreasing. This suggests a possible water coning and water flow suggests presence of scales and suspected damage mechanism could be fines migration. Thus a drop in draw down at the level of the perforations which is choked due to drop in pressure and temperatures experienced at this node. Oil sample provided was an emulsion made of 40% water and 60% of oil. No incompatibility was observed when mixed to different fluids. However moderate sludge was observed with 10%HCl, with no rust added. Based on the lab testing, solvent preflush (Xylene + Diesel) and an emulsifier is added to the injectivity test fluid and in the non-acidic preflush, as they will be the first aqueous fluids to interact with the formation. Main treatment proposed for LRA- 007 is 13.5:1.5% HCl: HF blend. This blend helps to remove damage from fines and clays as they might have accumulated near wellbore and reducing production on this formation. It contains acetic acid used to control aluminum scaling and iron precipitation, surfactant, clay and fines control additive. Table 1 presents the well X data. The Excel software, IFS software, PipeSim software, matrix acidizing method and economic evaluation are used to attain the aims of this paper. This is made possible through the presentation of the injection path from surface lines to downhole, description and interpretation of the different graph’s obtained before and after acidification and at the end present the economic evaluation. Table 1. Well X Data Well data Well Name X Field Y Well type Oil producer well Treatment type Matrix acidizing Completion data Xmas tree FMC 3 1/8” 5K Tubing 3 1/2" L80 9.2# VAM Tubing volume 60 bbl Perforated interval data Height 10,000 ft MD/SV Top 10,500ftTVD/SV Total length 14.4m Reservoir data Permeability(K) before treatment 150md Permeability(K) after treatment 50 md Porosity 29% BHT 200 degF Skin before treatment 40 Skin after Treatment -1.5 Ks1 0.04K Height (h) 48ft Rw 0.5ft Rs 2ft Re 2000 ft Oil formation volume factor 1.2 Gas oil ratio 500 Viscosity of Oil 1.2cp Viscosity of Acid 1.7cp BHTP 1171.6 psi Frac gradient 0.33 psi/ft Frac Pressure 3500 psi Hydrostatic Pressure (with PAD Acid) 2078 psi Friction pressure @ 4bpm 210psi Maximum surface pressure 1632psi 80% Safety Factor 1305psi Production data Oil flow rate 457 bpd BSW 50.3% Production index 0.7 STB/d/psi TOS NA Matrix acidizing design data 𝑋𝐻𝐹 0.08 𝛽𝐻𝐹 0.21 𝑋15% 𝐻𝐶𝐿 0.35 𝛽𝐻𝐶𝐿 0.12 Economic evaluation Capex Opex Net Profit Value 2 years Royalty 10% Oil price 70 USD per barrel 2.1. Description and interpretation of the different graph’s obtained before and after acidification The well profile is illustrated in Fig. 1. The well production condition over the years are concerned with the pressure transient over times was recorded and a nodal analysis performed to corroborate the drop in production rate, with PI 0.75 STB/Psi/d as shown in Fig. 2. K. Njeudjang et al. / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 23,4 (2022) 1 - 6 3 Fig. 1. Well Schematic Fig. 2. Nodal Analysis before Treatment In Fig. 2, the rate is way below the economic objectives of this well set after completion which stood at 1150 bpd and bottom hole pressure 3500 psi. The inflow performance relationship (IPR) represents the oil flowing from reservoir drainage into the well bore area meanwhile vertical lift performance (VLP) represents the oil flowing to surface and the point of intersection stands for the optimal flowing condition of the well with reservoir damage. Based on the well log obtained during drilling well X is a high permeability well with more than 20 % Feldspar mineral, the heterogeneous nature of our reservoir allows us to envisage the presence of clay and carbonates in small quantities. The acid treatment is scheduled to be a 30:70 % coupled with a diverter to increase downhole treating surface area. A formation opening test is initially performed to ascertain opening pressures and maximum surface pressures, tubing cleaning is performed with 15% HCL acid. The main job treatments: 15% HCL –acidic preflush, Vol of HCL =2327 gal; main treatment 13.5:1.5% HCL/HF acid, Vol of HF = 6330gal; over flush 5% HCl, vol of 5% = 3554 gal; pumping rate = 4 bpm; and well surface pressure = 1632psi. Nevertheless, haven carried out laboratory analysis and simulation, once on the field. The formation is said to be tide, since we could only execute this job at an average 2.2 bpm and pumping intermittently as shown in Fig. 3. However, all treatment volumes are successfully injected. The pumping schedule obtained from IFS (30:70 %) sequence of every fluid was respected. Though with longer treatment hours due to the formation tideness. Fluid volume are pumped accordingly and at the end of this treatment a tubing volume is considered to spot all treatment fluids into the formation as shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 3. Live Well Parameters K. Njeudjang et al. / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 23,4 (2022) 1 - 6 4 Fig. 4. Pumping Stages This is the pressure transient test performed after the treatment. The bottom hole pressure here is given by the reservoir pressure minus the draw down pressure given by Horner’s formula (see Table 2 and Fig. 5). Table 2. Build–up Test Data Recorded after Treatment Reservoir Pressure (pwf)(psi) Bottom hole pressure (pi-pwf)(psi) Horner’s Time (dt+tp)/tp 3075 425 0.00597314 3125 375 0.01091003 3150 350 0.01474476 3175 325 0.01992734 3200 300 0.02693152 3225 275 0.03639758 3250 250 0.04919082 3275 225 0.06648071 3300 200 0.08984776 3325 175 0.12142801 3350 150 0.16410827 3400 100 0.29974617 3450 50 0.54749079 3500 0 1 Fig. 5. Build – up Test Graph after Treatment This analysis carried out after stimulation, optimal production rate of oil at our point of intersection stands at 850 bpd, bottom hole pressure 3076 psi as shown in Fig. 6. This rate approaches us closer to the initial reservoir production condition just after drilling thus keeping us not to far from the well initial objectives. Fig. 6. Nodal Analysis after Treatment 2.2. Economical evaluation The matrix acid method execution and production profile of the well X is obtained by simulation with the help of IFSand PipeSim software which constituted the first parts and the second consisted of carrying out an economic evaluation and to estimate gains to be generated by the company should this project be executed with this degree of success. To this effect consideration are made on the capital expenditures (Capex), operating expenditures (Opex) and the discount rate as shown in K. Njeudjang et al. / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 23,4 (2022) 1 - 6 5 Table 3. The simulated results are 2 years for the return on investment. Table 3. Equipment Well Data: Capex, Opex and Profit Capex Opex Oil Market Equipment rentals, Chemicals used 720,000 USD Platform intergrity, Pump Hours, Accommodation 250,000USD Selling Price for a barrel of crude oil : 70 USD Cost of producing a Barrel of oil :10$ Oil Daily Price Taxes is 10% Discount rate : 20% The revenue generated is based solely on oil produced from the well, the oil production rate per day for this well stands at 850 bpd, the company is said to pay taxes representing 10% of the revenue generated per year, with oil price at 70USD per barrel. Table 4 shows profit generated without taxes deducted. Table 4. Oil Production Profit Well Type STB/d STB/year Per year ($) Oil Production 850 310,250 21.717.500 Haven subtracted the expenses from our income generated; we deduced how much profit was generated by the company during this period. Let’s note that matrix acid stimulation is successful and oil production following our nodal analysis is said to be stable for a period of 2 years. The net present value (NPV) which represents the company return on investment given by NPV = Gross oil – (Total cost+ discount rate). The results of its operation are highlighted in Table 5. Table 5. Company NPV for the Next Two Years Total cost= (Capex + Opex + Taxes ) USD Profit Oil (USD) NPV (USD) 5,313,500 43.435.000 29,434,500 Cost of Oil = 10USD * 850BPD * 365 * 2 = 6, 205,000 USD; profit oil (Gross oil) = 850BPD * 70 USD/B * 365 * 2 = 43,435,000 USD; taxes = 10% * profit oil = 4,343,500 USD; total cost = Capex + Opex + Taxes = 5,313,500 USD; discount rate = 20% * gross oil = 8,687.000 USD; NPV = Gross oil – (Total cost + discount rate) = 43,435,000 USD – (5, 313,500 USD + 8,687.000 USD) = 21,699,500 USD. The return on investment is the ratio between net income and investment, it’s equally another economic criteria used to determine the profitability of the project: ROI = NPV / Total cost (without taxes) = 29,434,500/ 970,000USD = 30.3. The economic results show a strong positive NPV and a good ROI though with oil price fixed at 70USD/barrel. The choice of production enhance is said to yield profit because it increases the percentage of oil recuperated with minimal cost on investment. Coupled with a possible increase in oil prices this methods remains the best alternative. The payback period (PBP) refers to the amount of time it takes to recover the cost of an investment, that’s the length of time an investment reaches a break-even point. The data and procedure necessary to accomplish this calculation is given by: The total cost to carry out a matrix acid stimulation job; the cost of a barrel of oil per day (taxes inclusive = 10%) of total oil production; and oil price standing at 70 USD/STB. This is therefore given by: PBP = Total cost (USD) / Daily oil price (USD/d) as shown in Table 6. Table 6. Company Payback Period Total cost= (Capex + Opex + Taxes ) USD Oil Prices (USD/STB) Daily Oil Sales PBP Days 5,313,500 70 59,500 90 days Thus, after 90 days of production we start making profit from the investment, however let’s not that, this matrix acidizing treatment is said to sustain the permeability of 50 md and a Skin of -1.5 for a period of two years, with this in mind we remain even more profitable should oil prices increase. 3- Conclusion Sandstone-acidizing treatments were successfully performed in the field Y and encouraging results were obtained on well X. This study aimed to show case to matrix acidizing candidate selection; acid stimulation execution; and economic evaluation for a successful stimulation jobs. Considering the data obtained during mud logging, the different assumptions about the fluid and rock compositions, can be ascertain. The injection of 13.5:1.5% HCL/HF acid solution results in dissolution of calcite, clays and feldspar minerals. However, reservoir porosity and permeability can be enhanced in a region extending several meters around the injection well (Further studies can be carried out to ascertain this). Nevertheless, the high reactivity of the acid coupled with downhole temperatures of 200°F and a weak flow prevented the penetration of acid. This high reactivity also involves the risk of creating wormholes, able to increase the porosity but not always the permeability of the fractured reservoir, reasons why an over flush was performed. This technique is considered risky, due to the secondary and tertiary reactions between the spent acid and the rock. Precipitates form resulting from these reactions can be deposit in the pores and fractures of the rock and eventually negate the positive impact of the primary reaction. Surface pressure drops on the graph revealed that the treatment has touch the perforation. Consequently, being able to assess the extent of the secondary and tertiary reactions under reservoir conditions is therefore critical for the acid treatment success, during this job the acid reaction time was reduce to bear minimal (time to recommence the gas lift system of the well). Horner’s equation was used on the plot of reservoir pressure over time, the slope of (m) was used to obtain the new skin and verify the permeability, and with these new set of reservoir properties a simulation performed in PipeSim software could gave the following: Production index = 2; production rate = 845bpd; skin = - 1.5; and permeability = 50. The reservoir heterogeneity did not facilitate the smooth modelling of the treatment K. Njeudjang et al. / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 23,4 (2022) 1 - 6 6 proposed, because we lack accurate data on the initial reservoir petrophysical properties, however the economic evaluation carried out showed the following: Discount rate = 20% * Gross oil = 8,687.000 USD; net present value = Gross oil – (Total cost + discount rate) = 21,699,500 USD; return on investment = 30.3; and payback period = 90 days. References [1] R. John and L. Richard, Introduction to petroleum engineering. Wiley, New Jersey (2017). [2] M. Economides and D. Hill, Petroleum production systems, 2nd ed. Westford: Prentice-Hall (2013). [3] L. Dake, Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, Elsevier, Amsterdam (1978). [4] R, S. Schechter, Oil Well Stimulation, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs-NJ (1992). [5] R.S. Schechter and J.L. Gidley, The Change in Pore Size Distributions from Surface Reactions in Porous Media. AICHE J, 339 (1969). [6] M. Davorin, Sand control in well construction and operation, Springer (2012). [7] H. Fogler and C. McCune, Predicting the Flow and Reaction of HCI / HF Mixtures in Porous Sandstone Cores. SPEJ, 248 (1976). [8] S.L. Bryant, An Improved Model of Mud Acid / Sandstone Chemistry, SPE Paper, 22855 (1991). [9] I. Bergman, The long-term dissolution of silica powders in dilute hydrofluoric acid, Appl. Chem. 3, 356 (1963). [10] S. L. Bryant, An Improved Model of Mud Acid / Sandstone Chemistry, SPE Paper, 22855 (1991). [11] M.J. Economides, Petroleum Production System Ch- 13 and 14, Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey (2002). [12] M. P. D. Aurianto, D. T. Maulana and S. Chandra, Evaluation of Successful Matrix Acidizing Method in A Geothermal Well with Comparative Sensitivity of Acid Fluid Models, Volume, and Concentration: A Case Study on Well “X”, IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1014, 012015 (2022). [13] C. W. Crowe and S. S. Minor, Effect of Corrosion Inhibitors on Matrix Stimulation Results, JPT, 1853 (1985). [14] E. P. Motta, Matrix Acidizing of Horizontal Wells. Published Ph.D, Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin (1993). [15] D. Brannon and P. Grimmer, Matrix Acidizing Design and Quality-Control Techniques Prove Successful in Main Pass Area Sandstone, JPT, 931 (1987). [16] C.N. Fredd and H.S. Fogler, Alternative Stimulation Fluids and Their Impact on Carbonate Acidizing, In Proceedings of the SPE Formation Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette, LA, USA (1996). [17] O. Gomez Chacon and M. Pournik, Matrix Acidizing in Carbonate Formations, Processes 10, 174 (2022). [18] S. Pal, M. Mushtaq, F. Banat, A.M. Al Sumaiti, Review of surfactant-assisted chemical enhanced oil recovery for carbonate reservoirs: Challenges and future perspectives. Pet. Sci. 15, 77 (2018). [19] M. Prasetya Dwi Aurianto, D. Taha Maulana and S. Chandra, Evaluation of Successful Matrix Acidizing Method in A Geothermal Well with Comparative Sensitivity of Acid Fluid Models, Volume, and Concentration: A Case Study on Well “X”, IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1014, 012015 (2022). [20] Z. Rahim, H. Al-Anazi, Mahbub Ahmed, A. Al- Kanaan and W. El-Mofty, Matrix Acidizing Innovation Surpasses Competing Methods in Saudi Carbonate, J. Pet. Technol. 66, 32 (2014). [21] G. Zimmermann, G. Blöcher, A. Reinicke and W. Brandt, Rock specific hydraulic fracturing and matrix acidizing to enhance a geothermal system – concepts and field results, Tectonophysics 503, 146 (2011). [22] T.W. Teklu, H.H. Abass, R. Hanashmooni, J.C. Carratu and M. Ermila, Experimental investigation of acid imbibition on matrix and fractured carbonate rich shales, J. Natural Gas Sci. Eng. 45, 706 (2017). https://books.google.iq/books?hl=en&lr=&id=DBIPDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP13&dq=%5B1%5D%09R.+John+and+L.+Richard,+Introduction+to+petroleum+engineering.+Wiley,+New+Jersey+(2017).&ots=aHAGjJzkJL&sig=PVHbPEzsHTMU_6AxuV2_Lxxr8fk&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%5B1%5D%09R.%20John%20and%20L.%20Richard%2C%20Introduction%20to%20petroleum%20engineering.%20Wiley%2C%20New%20Jersey%20(2017).&f=false https://books.google.iq/books?hl=en&lr=&id=DBIPDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP13&dq=%5B1%5D%09R.+John+and+L.+Richard,+Introduction+to+petroleum+engineering.+Wiley,+New+Jersey+(2017).&ots=aHAGjJzkJL&sig=PVHbPEzsHTMU_6AxuV2_Lxxr8fk&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%5B1%5D%09R.%20John%20and%20L.%20Richard%2C%20Introduction%20to%20petroleum%20engineering.%20Wiley%2C%20New%20Jersey%20(2017).&f=false https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aic.690150309 https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aic.690150309 https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aic.690150309 https://books.google.iq/books?hl=en&lr=&id=oOJd8vLZXNMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%5B6%5D%09M.+Davorin,+Sand+control+in+well+construction+and+operation,+Springer+(2012).+&ots=sAZMuNyJvc&sig=N3zAzFZBBXiQ2PgW0kIgWpVY9R8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%5B6%5D%09M.%20Davorin%2C%20Sand%20control%20in%20well%20construction%20and%20operation%2C%20Springer%20(2012).&f=false https://books.google.iq/books?hl=en&lr=&id=oOJd8vLZXNMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%5B6%5D%09M.+Davorin,+Sand+control+in+well+construction+and+operation,+Springer+(2012).+&ots=sAZMuNyJvc&sig=N3zAzFZBBXiQ2PgW0kIgWpVY9R8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%5B6%5D%09M.%20Davorin%2C%20Sand%20control%20in%20well%20construction%20and%20operation%2C%20Springer%20(2012).&f=false https://onepetro.org/spejournal/article-abstract/16/05/248/167771/Predicting-the-Flow-and-Reaction-of-HCl-HF-Acid https://onepetro.org/spejournal/article-abstract/16/05/248/167771/Predicting-the-Flow-and-Reaction-of-HCl-HF-Acid https://onepetro.org/spejournal/article-abstract/16/05/248/167771/Predicting-the-Flow-and-Reaction-of-HCl-HF-Acid https://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-abstract/91SPE/All-91SPE/SPE-22855-MS/53069 https://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-abstract/91SPE/All-91SPE/SPE-22855-MS/53069 https://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-abstract/91SPE/All-91SPE/SPE-22855-MS/53069 https://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-abstract/91SPE/All-91SPE/SPE-22855-MS/53069 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/37/10/1853/73206/Effect-of-Acid-Corrosion-Inhibitors-On-Matrix https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/37/10/1853/73206/Effect-of-Acid-Corrosion-Inhibitors-On-Matrix https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/37/10/1853/73206/Effect-of-Acid-Corrosion-Inhibitors-On-Matrix https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/39/08/931/73874/Matrix-Acidizing-Design-and-Quality-Control https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/39/08/931/73874/Matrix-Acidizing-Design-and-Quality-Control https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/39/08/931/73874/Matrix-Acidizing-Design-and-Quality-Control https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/39/08/931/73874/Matrix-Acidizing-Design-and-Quality-Control https://onepetro.org/SJ/article-abstract/3/01/34/170181/Alternative-Stimulation-Fluids-and-Their-Impact-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://onepetro.org/SJ/article-abstract/3/01/34/170181/Alternative-Stimulation-Fluids-and-Their-Impact-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://onepetro.org/SJ/article-abstract/3/01/34/170181/Alternative-Stimulation-Fluids-and-Their-Impact-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://onepetro.org/SJ/article-abstract/3/01/34/170181/Alternative-Stimulation-Fluids-and-Their-Impact-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/10/1/174 https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/10/1/174 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12182-017-0198-6 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12182-017-0198-6 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12182-017-0198-6 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12182-017-0198-6 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1014/1/012015/meta https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/66/05/32/207045/Matrix-Acidizing-Innovation-Surpasses-Competing https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/66/05/32/207045/Matrix-Acidizing-Innovation-Surpasses-Competing https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/66/05/32/207045/Matrix-Acidizing-Innovation-Surpasses-Competing https://onepetro.org/JPT/article-abstract/66/05/32/207045/Matrix-Acidizing-Innovation-Surpasses-Competing https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040195110003872 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040195110003872 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040195110003872 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040195110003872 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1875510017302470 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1875510017302470 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1875510017302470 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1875510017302470