Less Water Usage
Heavy Oil Potential Globally
Million in R&D
Years of Development
8 Trillion Barrels of oil available globally
40%+ global heavy oil reserves, Our Focus!
US Oil Potential in Billions
Tea Pot Dome Testing of QUAD-S System
Tea Pot Dome Test Results
Well Life – normal, water flooding and CO2 injection production methods.
RMOTC Field Testing
A primary goal of field-testing at RMOTC was equipment functionality. It should be noted that at the time of our testing at NPR-3, our Superheated Steam Supply System, the QUAD-S™, was less advanced than today’s model. The temperatures and volume of steam achieved were sufficient at the time to accomplish our testing protocol, however, since 2011, the QUAD-S™ has significantly improved in performance, primarily thermal stability of its alloys and materials resulting in ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) certification, refinement of custom high-temp heaters, implementation of a more sophisticated water delivery system, full automation, and sustainability, e.g. duration of operation. The Company was able to observe equipment systems performance in a real world, non-commercial environment. Not having to meet the expectations or concerns about constant production let us focus on observing and making changes to the water treatment and delivery systems and experiment with program changes affecting water injection and temperature control. This experimentation led us to significant improvements in system design and process control operation. These findings have already been incorporated with great success into the company’s newest equipment.
Another target goal was to develop and perfect the Company’s unique installation methodology for which a Methodology Utility Patent was filed in November 2012. The Trimeteor process is distinctive in that it is primarily well specific and oil production continues during the delivery of steam down the production wellbore through the use of high-temp insulated tubing, which is attached to the production tubing. Injection wells are not necessary, although our process could be adapted to such a configuration. We were able to practice, perfect and document this process at RMOTC. The availability of qualified personnel to operate work over rigs, workshops with “oil field” ready tools facilitated immediate changes to equipment made it possible to refine this procedure quickly.
Lastly, the Company wanted to test the QUAD-S™’ ability to both deparaffin wells and achieve lateral distribution. The buildup of paraffin and the resulting decrease in production is a common problem in the production of oil. Current methods for mitigating this problem include chemical treatments and circulating hot oil through the well bore. These methods are expensive, environmentally unfriendly and not wholly successful. The results of the superheated steam injection were immediate. Paraffin build up in each well bore was melted and removed within the first 24 hours. Flush production (“a high flow rate reached with a new well” Schlumberger Oil Glossary) occurred in each well up to a maximum of 38.41 barrels in one well after clean out.
RMOTC provided the company with four primary wells and four monitor wells, which had been shut-in since 2008-2009. These wells were an average depth of 1,700 to 485 ft. and were located in the Shannon, an area known for its sandstone formation. All of the wells were paraffinitic and on the periphery of the producing zone. Each monitor well was located within 300 to 600 feet of a corresponding primary well and were included in the test parameters to discover what, if any, lateral distribution of steam would be achieved. The QUAD-S™ was installed and operated on the primary wells during the months of June through the first of September 2011. Fluid production was recorded on both the primary and monitor wells. Superheated steam was introduced in the primary wells one well at a time. Baseline oil production was established for each well prior to the commencement of steam injection.
Results from two of the four primary production wells and their corresponding monitor wells are explained below. Baseline production on these wells was an average of .2 to .97 BOPD as reported by the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission (WOGC) for the period 2000-2008 and 2009 when last active. It should be noted that the decrease in production over time is an inherent problem in the oil industry and is directly related to decreased reservoir drive and insufficient EOR technology to reach the remaining oil at Teapot Dome.
Average production over the test period ranged from 5.4 to 12.2 BOPD in the primary wells and 7 BOPD(1) in the monitor wells. It should be noted that during our test period, RMOTC had approximately 71 to 78 producing wells averaging 1.9 to 2.1 BOPD(2). Trimeteor’s test wells were the highest producing wells at NPR-3. These production increases represent significant percentage increases. The oil recovered from the test wells was pipeline ready and needed no treatment.
Another significant detail is that the DOE resumed production on Trimeteor’s test wells in April of 2013 using their conventional steam methodology. Average production on the two primary wells were 1.61 and .58 BOPD from April through September 2012 compared to Trimeteor’s test production as stated above of 12.2 and 5.4 BOPD, respectively. Production on the two monitor wells for the same period, as reported to the WOGC, were an average of .90 and .21 BOPD compared to Trimeteor’s test production of 6.9 and 7.0 BOPD, respectively.
Technical Frequently Asked Questions
Technical frequently asked questions details.
Superiority of SHS Flooding
Superiority On Thermal Recovery
New Findings on Heatloss of Superheated Steam
Super Heated Steam Huff and Puff Heavy Oil
Super Heated Steam In Shallow
This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer or solicitation to sell shares or securities in the Company or any related or associated company. Any such offer or solicitation will be made only in accordance with the terms of all applicable securities and other laws. None of the information or analyses presented is intended to form the basis for any investment decision, and no specific recommendations are intended. Accordingly this website does not constitute investment advice or counsel or solicitation for investment in any security. This website does not constitute or form part of, and should not be construed as, any offer for sale or subscription of, or any invitation to offer to buy or subscribe for, any securities, nor should it or any part of it form the basis of, or be relied on in any connection with, any contract or commitment whatsoever. The Company expressly disclaims any and all responsibility for any direct or consequential loss or damage of any kind whatsoever arising directly or indirectly from: (i) reliance on any information contained in the website, (ii) any error, omission or inaccuracy in any such information or (iii) any action resulting therefrom.