october, page-22

hi bignote,

Development would be either a chemical flood or CO2 flood. It would not be economical to invest in the infrastructure (pipeline, compression, recycling, etc) and pay for the CO2 just to get another 5 or 6MBO even if it were possible after a chemical flood.

I expect uni of Oklahoma to do an economic feasability (including NPV) for a chemical flood. It may be that producing 12MBO from a chemical flood will provide a similar NPV as 18MBO from CO2 flood. The reason being the lower costs involved.

The big attraction of a chemical flood is the lower costs, ready availability of chemicals, short lead time to begin and the possibility of injection well by well. The downside is possibly less total oil recovered.