2012-06

Production Analysis
and Forecasting of
Shale Oil / Gas Formations
SPE France - Clamart
20th June 2012

Olivier Houz

Tight / Shale gas / CBM

Small
Volumes

High Q

10 md

Medium Q
0.1 md

Large
Volumes

Tight
Gas
Shale Gas
Shale Oil

Higher Costs

1,000 md

More Technology

2012-06

CBM

Low
Quality

0.001 md
Hydrates

Resource triangle for natural gas. Holditch, Tight Gas Sands, JPT, June 2006

Main Shale Plays

2012-06

Antrim
Avalon-Wolfberry
Bakken
Barnett
Baxter
Cody
Eagle Ford
Fayetteville
Haynesville-Bossier

Horn River
Lewis
Marcellus
Mississippian
New Albany
Niobrara
Poland
Woodford

Unconventional Consortiums
2012-06

U of Adelaide
U of Calgary
Colorado School of Mines
U of Curtin
U of Oklahoma
Penn State U
Texas A&M
U of Utah

Core Lab
Fekete
ITF
KAPPA

RPSEA
South Australia Gov

Common unconventional issues

2012-06

Extremely low permeability nonlinearities

Multiple scales of porosity and diffusion
Exotic diffusion effects
Stress dependence
Fractured horizontal wells
Poor data (rare PDGs, poor rates)
Under-defined problems

We do not know what we do not know

We may know when it is too late
Metrics to rate Asset Managers

Several scales of diffusion

2012-06

Desorption

Micropores

Fracture
network

macro-macro link:
Darcy or Forcheimer

micro-macro links:
Fick diffusion

Fractured horizontal well

2012-06

From the Canada National Energy Board

Unconventional Models v1.0

2012-06

100

104

106

108

days

Influence of fractures density

2012-06

Analysis tools & proxys

2012-06

Straight lines (flow regimes)

Ad-hoc decline curves
Analytical models
pseudopressures & pseudotimes

Numerical models

Straight lines
2012-06

Advanced Analyses
2012-06

Ad-hoc decline curves

2012-06

= .

Ilk et al.
Arps
= .

Analytical models
2012-06

SRV Bounded
Trilinear

Exact geometry

Advanced Analytical models

2012-06

Numerical Models
2012-06

1000 cells
/ fracture

6000 cells
/ fracture

Further Downscaling for UR

2012-06

k
LA
t Min
ct

Advanced Numerical Models

2012-06

Model water flow back

2012-06

Model stress
2012-06

Walsh

ref

k k0 Cref ln
P

Palmer and Mansoori

P0
k 1
K
P P0 K
P
1 f 1

k0 M
M
0 0 M
P P P0 P

Ostensen

k
ln 1 * n
k0

2 m

ln1

n,0

2 m

From shale gas to shale oil

2012-06

Compositional PVT & desorption model ?

Relative permeabilities hysteresis ?
IOR: Thermal process & CO2 injection ?
Non-Newtonian and threshold effects ?
Need initial state ?
Need to match GOR curves ?

Choice of the right proxy

2012-06

Playing with data

2012-06

Case study
2012-06

Changing Wellbore model

2012-06

Simultaneous correction for casing and tubing flows

Straight line analysis

2012-06

Analytical model
2012-06

Numerical model
2012-06

Ten more months of data !

2012-06

Gas volume [scf]

Gas rate [Mscf/D]

15000

10000

Pressure [psi]

20000
2E+9

10

1E+9

0.1
0.1

5000

10
100
Time [Day]

1000

Pressure -1 [[psi]-1]

Loglog plot: Int[(pi-p)/q]/te and d[Int[(pi-p)/q]/te]/dln(te) [psi] vs te [Day]

Pressure [psia]

0
9000

4000

100

200

300
Time [Day]

400

0.1

500

Production history plot (Gas rate [Mscf/D], Pressure [psia] vs Time [Day])

600

0.1

10
100
Time [Day]

1000

Blasingame plot: q/(pi-p), Int[q/(pi-p)]/te and d[Int[q/(pi-p)]/te]/dlnte [[psi]-1] vs te [Day]

Old Straight line model

2012-06

1E+6

1E+5
Integral of normalized pressure
Integral of normalized pressure Derivative

0.1

10
100
Time [Day]

1000

qg (Production
560 days)
Loglog plot: Int[(m(pi)-m(p))/q]/te and d[Int[(m(pi)-m(p))/q]/te]/dln(te)
[psi2/cp]
vs te [Day]
18000

2.5E+9

14000

Gas volume [scf]

Gas rate [Mscf/D]

Qg
qg model
Qg model

10000

1.5E+9

6000
5E+8

Pressure [psia]

2000

Pi
p (FBHP 560 days)

9000

4000

40

80

120

160

200

240

280
320
Time [Day]

360

400

440

480

520

560

Old analytical model

2012-06

1E+7

1E+6

1E+5

0.1

10
100
Time [Day]

1000

oglog plot: Int[(m(pi)-m(p))/q]/te and d[Int[(m(pi)-m(p))/q]/te]/dln(te) [psi2/cp] vs te [Day]

2.3E+9

1.8E+9

Gas volume [scf]

Gas rate [Mscf/D]

16000

12000

8000

1.3E+9

8E+8
4000

Pressure [psia]

3E+8

9000

4000

40

80

120

160

200

240

280
Time [Day]

320

360

400

440

480

520

560

Improved numerical model

2012-06

10

0.1

0.1

10
Time [Day]

100

Loglog plot: Int[(pi-p)/q]/te and d[Int[(pi-p)/q]/te]/dln(te) [psi] vs te [Day]

Gas volume [scf]

Gas rate [Mscf/D]

18000

13000

8000

Pressure [psia]

3000

2.5E+9

1.5E+9

5E+8

9000

4000

40

80

120

160

200

240

280
320
Time [Day]

360

400

440

480

520

560

600

Comparison
2012-06

20000
Equiv single fracture
Analyt. new data
NL new data

18000

3E+9

16000
Gas volume [scf]

Gas rate [Mscf/D]

2.5E+9
14000
12000
10000
8000

2E+9

1.5E+9

6000

1E+9

4000
5E+8

Pressure [psia]

2000

7000

3000

40

80

120

160

200

240

280

320

360

400

440

480

Time [Day]
Production history plot (Gas rate [Mscf/D], Pressure [psia] vs Time [Day])

520

560

600

Lego development
2012-06

Challenging the basic model

2012-06

Interference during fracturing

Interference during production
Microseismics
Production logs
Ridiculously long linear flows
Where is the water gone?

Discrete Fractures Network

2012-06

Courtesy of IFPEN

Discrete Fractures network

2012-06

Modeling Fracture growth

2012-06

Courtesy of Rob Jeffrey, CSIRO

Reserve calculations
2012-06

Proved Developed (PUD) - 1P, 2P & 3P:

Material Balance
Analogs
Traditional Decline Curve
Arps, Fetkovitch, etc

New Decline Curves

Stretched exp., power-law exp., Dong, etc

Analytical models
Numerical models ?

Proved Undeveloped (PUD):

Probabilistic methods

Terminal decline from numerical model

2012-06

Whats next ?
2012-06

Thank you
2012-06

Gracias !
Grazie!
!
!

Merci !
!
Danke !

Obrigado!
!