Thanks for the info, buzzp.
Right now, no one cares about saving a few bucks on expenses. We're just trying to get every well pumping SOME oil, and don't care about efficiency.
We have an old field that makes 10,000 bbls of fluid PER DAY, with little gas and 50 bbls of oil. Getting rid of the water is a BIG deal, and we are injecting it all back into the formation. If we could handle more water, we could make about 60 more barrels of oil per day (and at $60/bbl...). Needless to say, we need to get rid of the water, someway, somehow.
We have to dispose of or inject all the produced water. I don't know of any well that doesn't contain enough chloride to kill off old farmer Johns wheat field. The EPA frowns, penalizes, fines, etc ANY water that is not handled properly (i.e. spilled).
I think the idea has merit too. Most of our injectors are taking the water on a vacuum. If we stick a sub in the hole to generate electricity, it might backfire and block the hole enough to the point where we'd have to pump it under pressure, and there go your savings.
But if you could put a sub pump at the bottom of the hole, and still have the water flow on a vacuum, you "should" be able to create enough electricity to run SOMETHING, depending on the voltage.
There is a reason this HASN'T been done yet. I am looking for why.
Regards,
SuckerRod