29 views

Uploaded by Solenti D'nou

This paper presents the development of two material-balance methods for unconventional gas reservoirs. One method is appropriate for estimating original gas in place; the second is appropriate for making reservoir predictions. These techniques differ from the material-balance methods for conventional gas reservoirs in that the effects of adsorbed gas are included. For estimating original
gas in place, the assumption of equilibrium between the free- and adsorbed-gas phases is required. No additional assumptions are required for reservoir predictions.

This paper presents the development of two material-balance methods for unconventional gas reservoirs. One method is appropriate for estimating original gas in place; the second is appropriate for making reservoir predictions. These techniques differ from the material-balance methods for conventional gas reservoirs in that the effects of adsorbed gas are included. For estimating original
gas in place, the assumption of equilibrium between the free- and adsorbed-gas phases is required. No additional assumptions are required for reservoir predictions.

© All Rights Reserved

- Modeling the Breakthrough Behavior of an Activated Carbon Fiber Monolith in N-Butane Adsorption From Diluted Streams
- 10.1.1.164.8341
- Operating Problems and Glycol Care
- Adsorptive Desulfurization by Activated Alumina
- Simulation and Design Models for Adsorption Process
- Adsorption Refrigeration Working Pairs the State of the Art in the Application
- Coates
- Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data Shams
- Adsorption Isotherm Dow Chemicals
- Natural Zeolite is One Alternative Adsorbent MateriaL
- Finite Diff.pdf
- A Novel and Efficient Epoxy-chitosan Cement Slurry for Use in Severe Acidic
- Cristalinidad y Absorcion de Agua
- 5. Eng Equlibrium Narayana Saibaba
- Applied-Hydraulic-Transients- Chaudry 1989.pdf
- 10_chapter 2.pdf
- tribology of composites
- 13. Applied - Ijans - The Substituted N-nitroso Piperidin - A.ilamparthi (1)
- Fyp Rice Husk d6467 Nurul Nadia Samin
- art%3A10.1007%2Fs10008-004-0584-z.pdf

You are on page 1of 6

Reservoirs With Limited Water Influx

G.A. King, * SPE, Chevron E&P Services Co.

Summary. This paper presents the development of two material-balance methods for unconventional gas reservoirs. One method

is appropriate for estimating original gas in place; the second is appropriate for making reservoir predictions. These techniques differ

from the material-balance methods for conventional gas reservoirs in that the effects of adsorbed gas are included. For estimating origi-

nal gas in place, the assumption of equilibrium between the free- and adsorbed-gas phases is required. No additional assumptions are

required for reservoir predictions.

Introduction

The material-balance equation is a fundamental tool for determining sequences. First, a large internal surface area exists in the primary-

the original gas in place and production performance of conven- porosity matrix. This surface area contains many potential adsorp-

tional gas reservoirs. For conventional gas reservoirs, the material- tion sites on which large quantities of gas are stored. In general,

balance equation has the form I adsorption is the principal mechanism of gas storage in coal seams

G p = [G(Bg -Bg;} +S.61S(We - WpBw)]lBg, ............ (1)

and Devonian shales. Second, the permeability of the primary-

porosity system is extremely low (in effect, the primary-porosity

or in terms of p/z, system is both impermeable to gas and inaccessible to water). Gas

transport through the primary-porosity system therefore is a diffu-

zscTsc [(l-SWi)Pi Vb2 tf>i sion process.

Gp =--

Psc T Zi Gas stored by adsorption typically is modeled with an adsorp-

P[(l-Swi)Vb2 tf>i -Sz61S(We - WpBw)] J, ........ (2a)

tion isotherm (the amount of gas in equilibrium with the rock sur-

face as a function pressure at a fixed temperature). The adsorption

isotherm most commonly used for unconventional gas reservoirs

is the Langmuir-type isotherm:

which for volumetric reservoirs has the form

CVE=CVLP/(PL +p), .............................. (3)

Gp=G[(P/Zi)-(P/Z)], ............................ (2b)

where CVE is the adsorption isotherm in scf/ft3. The adsorption

Eqs. 1 and 2 are derived with the following assumptions. isotherm also can be written in terms of CME (Ibm mollft 3), where

1. The gas and reservoir rock are nonreactive.

2. The reservoir acts as a constant-volume tank (Le., changes C ME = (Psc/zscRTsc)CVE' ........................... (4)

in porosity with pressure decline are negligible). If the reservoir is undersaturated (Sg=O and all gas is in the ad-

3. The reservoir can be modeled with an average pressure and sorbed state), then the adsorption isotherm has to be held constant

an average saturation (Le., all gradients can be ignored). at the desorption pressure, Pd, where Pd is less than the initial

4. Reliable production and pressure data are available. reservoir pressure. The desorption pressure is the pressure at which

S. Reliable PVT data are available (and applicable at the aver- gas will begin to desorb. Fig, 1 gives the adsorption isotherm for

age reservoir pressure). an undersaturated reservoir.

6. Reservoir water is incompressible. As discussed earlier, gas is transported through the primary-

The assumption of nonreactive rock makes the use ofEqs. 1 and porosity system through diffusion. Gas transport through the

2 inappropriate for coal-seam and Devonian shale reservoirs. Be- primary-porosity matrix obeys Fick's first law 9 ,1O:

cause of the large internal surface area in the coal seam and shale

matrix, many potential sorption sites exist on which large quanti- -DAzscRTsc dC M

ties of gas may be adsorbed (as discussed later). The release of this qg= ............................ (S)

gas is a two-stage process typically modeled as dual-porosity reser- P sc dx

voir behavior. For this reason, Eqs. 1 and 2 have only limited ap- The secondary-porosity system of coal seams and Devonian shales

plications for unconventional gas reservoirs. consists of the natural-fracture system inherent in these reservoirs.

A recent survey of mathematical models for coal-seam gas This fracture system acts as a sink to the primary-porosity system

reservoirs 2 ,3 revealed that material-balance techniques developed and as a conduit to production wells (Fig. 2).

specifically for coal seams currently do not exist. Other

investigators 4-6 also have made this observation. For Devonian MaterlalBalance Equations

shales, Aguilera 7 reported a material-balance equation that in-

cluded the effects of adsorption; however, the analysis techniques A material-balance equation over the entire primary-porosity/sec-

for this equation were not presented. Therefore, the purpose of this ondary-porosity system can be obtained by combining Eqs. 2 and 4:

paper is to provide these basic techniques to engineers working with

unconventional gas reservoirs. G = Vb2tf>iZsJsc([(I-SWi)Pi + RTCMEi ]

p

Psc T Zi tf>i

CoalSeam and Devonian Shale Reservoirs

Coal-seam and Devonian shale reservoirs are characterized by a - [ [1-Cq,(Pi-;)](I-s;:,)P + RT:ME J), ............. (6)

dual-porosity nature (both primary and secondary porosities exist).

The primary-porosity system in these reservoirs is composed of very

fine pores. The dimensions of these pores have two important con-

'Now at Chevron U.K. Ltd.

Also, for the special case of dry reservoirs (We = WI' =0 and

Sw = Swir) , such as Piceance basin coal seams and some Canadian

....... Theo,.elical Isolhe"m --- Aclual Isothe,.m

coal seams, Eqs. 9 become

18 ;:Ad~s:::or.!::pl.::lo:.:..n.:.:lso::::lh::.:e.:..::rm~(s.:::cr-,-/.::cu:...-;:.:l1),--_ _ __ z*=z!{[(l-c.p(Pi -p)](l-Swir)+(zRTCME/~iP)}. . .... (11)

16 These special cases are identified because they result in a defini-

14 tion of z* that is strictly pressure-dependent. Consequently, the tradi-

12 - tional p/z analysis techniques are applicable for these cases provided

10 that z* is substituted for z. For the general case, a slightly more-

8 complicated analysis technique is required. This technique is ilIus-

trated later.

A less restrictive form of the material-balance equation for coal

Pd seams and Devonian shale reservoirs can be obtained by adding

'--_L-_L-----''-----'- _-'-'_-----'_-----'_--'-__---'-_---' a gas desorption term, Gd , to Eq. 2a. This equation has the form

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

p,.essu,.e (psio) Vb2~iZscTsc \" (l-Swi)Pi [l-C.p(Pi -p)](l-Sw)p I

Gp = C j+Gd,

Fig. 1-Adsorptlon Isotherm of a "typical" unconventional p~T ~ z

gas reservoir.

. ................................... (12)

where Gd=Vb2(Gli-GI) ........................... (13a)

Eq. 6 was derived with the assumption that the free- and adsorbed-

gas phases were in equilibrium. This assumption makes Eq. 6 ap-

propriate for drainage volumes that have been shut in after a finite or Gd=Vb2=Vb2DFsI t(Gli-CVE)e-DFs(t-T)dT ....... (l3b)

production period or for reservoirs undergoing rapid desorp- o

tion/diffusion. The first term in the large parentheses accounts for Eq. 12 is a gas-phase material balance over the natural-fracture

free gas; the second accounts for adsorbed gas. Ref. 12 gives the system, while Eqs. 13 are gas-phase material-balance equations over

formal derivation of Eq. 6. the primary-porosity matrix. Eq. 13b assumes pseudo-steady-state

Eq. 7 is a water-phase mass-balance equation over the secondary- flow in the primary-porosity matrix. Eqs. 13, coupled with Eq. 7,

porosity system. This water treatment is also slightly different from are less restrictive than Eq. 6 because they do not require the as-

that used in conventional equations because of the dewatering phase sumption of equilibrium between the free- and adsorbed-gas phases.

required by some unconventional gas reservoirs. While the forma- These equations therefore are appropriate for flowing conditions.

tion and water compressibilities can be neglected for conventional Ref. 12 gives the formal derivation of Eqs. 12 and 13.

gas reservoirs, formation compaction and water expansion wilI sig- The average water saturation, Sw' has been left explicitly in Eqs.

nificantly affect water production during the dewatering phase. 6 and 12 so that it can be incorporated directly if measurements

In all cases, these equations can be put into the familiar form, from well logs are available (e.g., from observation wells).

p PscT z[ z* To ilIustrate the use of Eqs. 6 through 13, a single-well problem

(in two parts) was designed. The first part was to determine the

where in the general case, original gas in place for a production well with Eqs. 7 through 9.

z*=z!{[l-C.p(Pi-P)](I-Sw)+(zRTCME/~iP)} . ....... (9a) The second part was to predict gas and water production rates (and

consequently recoverable gas) with Eqs. 7, 12, and 13b. To en-

Eq. 9a makes use of the fact that initially Sw=Swi. If a sure that the results could be validated, all comparisons were made

Langmuir-type isotherm is used to describe the adsorbed gas, then against finite-difference generated data (as opposed to actual field

z data). Tables 1 through 3 list all petrophysical properties, sorp-

z*= - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ..... (9b) tion properties, and well parameters, respectively.

_ zTpsc C VL In this example, a 6-ft coal seam was produced for 10 years. The

[l-C.p(Pi-P)](l-Sw)+-- first 3 years were considered a historical period (i.e., all data used

zscTsc ~i(PL +p) to evaluate the well were collected during this period); the final

7 years were to be predicted. The initial reservoir pressure was

For the special case of volumetric reservoirs (We = Wp =0,

479.7 psia at 1,000 ft true vertical depth subsea (TVD ss) (a hydro-

c.p =c w =0, and Sw = Swir) , Eqs. 9 become

static gradient of 0.465 psi/ft). Initially, the seam was 100% satu-

z*=z![(l-Swir)+(zRTCME/~iP)]' .................. (10) rated with water.

,

rock grain primary - porosity wellbore

..........

......... "'~

. ......

...... .

......... . ..... ..

:::::::: ~ : ::::::::

~

~::::::

:::::::~ .. ::::::::::

. . . . . . ::::::

:::::.!'ii~ ..

::::::'i31~"~

.......

.... ~

. ..........,..

............

: : : ..

:...... ~

.: ...........

:: : : : : : : : : : :.

Fig. 2-Schematic of the transport of gas through coal-seam and Devonian shale gas reser-

voirs (after Ref. 11).

TABLE 1-PETROPHYSICAL AND PVT PROPERTIES TABLE 2-S0RPTION PROPERTIES USED IN TEST PROBLEM*

USED IN TEST PROBLEM

Langmuir volume constant, SCt/ft3 18.6

Langmuir pressure constant, psia 167.5

Depth, TVD ss, ft 1,000.0 Desorption pressure, psia 479.7

Initial porosity 0.01 Diffusion constant, day-l 0.0432

Permeability, md 26.0 Time constant, days 231.4

Klinkenberg factor, psi 4.5

Permeability exponent 3.0 'Isotherm shown in Fig. 1.

Thickness, ft 6.0

Rock compressibility, psi- 1 7.5x10- 6

Water density, of, Ibmlft 3 62.4

Water compressibility, psi- 1 3.2x10- 6 TABLE 3-WELL PARAMETERS USED IN TEST PROBLEM

Water viscosity, cp

Molecular weight of gas, Ibmllbm mol 16.04 Well radius, ft 0.5

Critical pressure, psia 673.1 Drainage radius, ft 1,050.0

Critical temperature, of -115.78 Fracture half-length, ft 125.0

z factor Skin -4.24

Gas viscosity, cp t Production schedule

Standard pressure, psia 14.7

Standard temperature, oR 520.0 'Used in materialbalance simulator only.

"t= 0.0 days, qw =50.0 STB/D

Initial pressure, psia 479.7 90.0 days, p wr = 185.0 psia

Initial saturation 1.0 = 360.0 days, q 9 = 65.0 MscflD

Temperature, oR 530.0 361.0 days, q 9 .43.3 MscflD

0.25 362.0 days, qg -21.7 MscflD

Swlr 363.0 days, q 9 = 0.0 MscflD

Sgc 0.03 =

365.0 days, Pwr = 185.0 psia

krg(Swir) 1.0 725.0 days, q 9 = 51 ,0 Mscf/D

krw(Sgc) 1.0 726.0 days, q 9 34.0 MscflD =

= 727.0 days, q 9 = 17.0 MscflD

Relative permeability

Water encroachment, bbl 0.0 * 728.0 days, q 9 0.0 MscflD

730.0 days, P wr = 185.0 psia

= 1,090.0 days, q 9 = 28.5 MscflD

=

"Hall and Yarborough correlation. = 1,092.0 days, q 9 = 9.8 MscflD

t Carr at a/. correlation. = 1,093.0 days, q 9 = 0.0 MscflD

* Appendix C of Ref. 13. = 1,095.0 days, P wr = 125.0 psia

A fractured production well (Xf = 125 ft) was used to drain the coal seams, the methods of analysis are applicable for Devonian

reservoir. During the historical period, the well was subjected to shale gas reservoirs.

a 5-day test program at the end of each year. These tests consisted

of three 24-hour flow periods at decreasing rates (the production

Estimation of Original Gas in Place. Fig. 4 shows the results of

rate at the beginning of the test, two-thirds of the original rate, and

the first test. The pressures reported are the flowing pressures, Plif.

one-third of the original rate), followed by a 48-hour shut-in peri-

At the end of the first 48-hour shut-in period, an approximate 6-psia

od. The decreasing order of the test rates was chosen to condition

pressure difference (across the 1,050-ft drainage radius) was ob-

the reservoir for the shut-in period (i.e., the reservoir was tested

in a manner that promoted the establishment of equilibrium condi- served. This indicates that the reservoir is not truly stabilized after

tions at shut-in). 48 hours, Therefore, in this example, the use ofEq. 8 must be con-

Because of the high initial water saturation, 3 months of dewater- sidered an approximation. It will be demonstrated that this approx-

ing was required. During this period, water was produced at an imation is reasonably accurate (within 6% for this example).

off-take rate of 50 STBID. During the remainder of the historical In all subsequent gas-in-place calculations, the pressure at the

period, the well was produced at a bottomhole pressure (BHP) of wellbore was used. Although.the finite-difference simulator reports

185 psia. At Year 3, the BHP was reduced to 125 psia. Fig, 3 shows the PV -weighted average reservoir pressure, it was not used be-

the finite-difference-generated production profile. cause this information would not be known in the field and because

The following sections of this paper describe the analysis methods this pressure would give artifically more-accurate estimates of gas

used to evaluate the well. Although this example was designed for in place.

. Povg (psio) - Gas Rate (MSCro) I ....... Pwf (psio) - Gas Rate (MSCFD) I

Production Rate (MSCFD) Reservoir Pressure (psio) 70 Production Rot. (MSCFD) flowing Pressure (psio)

100 500 400

60 350

--_ .... -_ ....

400

Hr,tory I

Pr.dlelJon

50 . ' . ......... 300

250

300 40

30

- .................... -.. .. 200

200 150

100

Time (Days) Time (Days)

Fig. 3-Slmulated history and prediction for test problem. 365 days).

I~ Calc. Bulk-Volume ....... Assumed Bulk-Volume I -B- Produced Gas (MMSCF)

100,-------------------~------------------_,

30

BO

25

20 60

15

40

10

20

5 a

o 10 15 20 25 30 35 o 10 15 20 25

Assumed Bulk-Volume (MM cu-ft) P /Z* (Thousands)

Fig. 5-Solution of the graphical procedure for the original- Fig. 6-Converged solution of the iterative procedure for the

gas-in-place test problem. original-gas-in-place test problem.

The method for estimating the original gas in place was devel- is 6 % less than the finite-difference simulator value of 387 MMscf.

oped with Eqs. 7 through 9. As in traditional material-balance These values were obtained after three iterations of the aforemen-

methods, Eq. 8 is a straight line inplz*. The analysis method, how- tioned algorithm. Note that the straight line was obtained and the

ever, is slightly more complicated because of the nonvolumetric gas-in-place estimate made after the water saturation went through

nature of the example. The added complication arises because the a change of more than 35 saturation units.

unknown (in this case, Vb2 ) appears in both the material-balance One drawback in the analysis techniques for estimating original

equation and the definition of z*. A graphical solution to the gas in place exists: there is no internal method of estimating the

material-balance problem can be obtained with the following water encroachment, We' Methods for estimating water encroach-

procedure. ment within the scope of the proposed material-balance technique

1. Assume several values of Vb2 that span the anticipated range are being developed.

of the drainage area.

2. For each value of Vb2 , calculate the average water saturation Estimation of Future Reservoir Performance. Eqs. 7, 12, and

(with Eq. 7) at each pressure. 13b were used to estimate the production profile of the well. A com-

3. For each value of Vb2 , calculate z* (with Eqs. 9) at each puter program was written to solve these three equations simulta-

pressure. neously. All input data used in the finite-difference simulator were

4. For each value of Vb2 , plot plz* vs. Gp . assigned in the material-balance simulator.

5. For each value of Vb2 , determine the slope, m, of the plz* The relative permeability data were incorporated into the material-

plot. balance simulator through the inflow performance relationships

6. From the slope of the plz* plot, calculate the bulk volume,

Vb2 , from

Vb2 = -mPscT/f/JizscTsC" ........................... (14)

7. Plot the calculated bulk volume vs. the assumed bulk volume.

8. The point of intersection of the calculated bulk volume and

a line of unit slope through the origin is the actual bulk volume.

9. Calculate the original gas in place with the bulk volume, ini-

In the material-balance simulator, the relative permeabilities are

tial gas saturation, initial reservoir pressure, and initial adsorbed-

evaluated explicitly (i.e., at the beginning of the timestep).

gas content.

The production during the historical period was matched with

In this procedure, the slope of the plz* plot, rather than the tradi-

tional use of the intercept at plz*=O, is used (in Steps 6 and 7) , the well skin factor as a matching parameter. The skin factor was

to determine the bulk volume. The reason is that the use ofthe slope used for the following reasons.

involves purely historical data and thus no extrapolations are re- 1. A fundamental difference exists between finite-difference simu-

quired. If an estimate of the water production at abandonment can lator well PI's and the field-scale well PI's used in the material-

be made, then the plot of plz* can be used to estimate recoverable balance simulator. 14-16

gas. 2. The skin caused by rapid gas desorption in the near-wellbore

Fig. 5 plots calculated vs. assumed bulk volume for the exam- vicinity 17 cannot be modeled properly in a material-balance

ple. The nearly horizontal slope of the calculated bulk volume sug- simulator.

gests that the graphical solution can be replaced by a rapidly 3. The skin caused by the hydraulic fracture is handled implicitly

convergent iterative procedure. in the finite-difference simulator (in this study, the finite-difference

1. Assume a value of Vb2 . simulator uses an elliptical coordinate formulation 13.18). This skin

2. Calculate the average water saturation (with Eq. 7). must be explicitly entered into the material-balance simulator.

3. Calculate z* (with Eqs. 9). The skin factor used in the material-balance simulator was -4.25.

4. Plot plz* vs. Gp- This is 23% greater than the theoretical values of -5.52 obtained

5. Determine the slope of the plz* plot. from

6. From the slope of the plz* plot, calculate the bulk volume (with s= -In(xjlrw )' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (17)

Eq. 14).

7. Return to Step 2 and continue until convergence. All other input data were identical for the two simulators.

Fig. 6 shows the plz* plot for the converged solution. A drainage Figs. 7 and 8 show the match between the finite-difference and

radius of 1,007 ft was obtained from this iterative procedure. This material-balance simulators. The average pressure reported for the

is 4 % less than the finite-difference simulator value of 1,050 ft. finite-difference simulator in Fig. 8 is the PV -weighted average pres-

This corresponds to an original gas-in-place of 356 MMscf, which sure. Note that both simulators were run from time zero. Thus;

Gas Rate (F-D Sim.) Wtr Rate (F-D Slm.) - P aV9 (F-D Sim.) $g avg (F-O Sim.)

o Gas Rate (~at. Bal.) o Wtr Rate (~at. Bal.) a P avg (Mat. 801.) o 59 avg (Mat. Bolo)

Gas Rate (MSCFD) Water Rate (ST80) Average Pressure (psia) Average Gas Saturation (percent) 50

70.---~~~--------------------------~--~60 500

50 400 00 40

0 ....0 .00 .

0

50

40 300 30

30

200 20

20

100 10

10

0 0

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

Time (Days)

Time (Days)

Fig. 7-Comparison of the finite-difference and materlal- Fig. 8-Comparlson of the finite-difference and material

balance solutions for the flowing well test problem: gas and balance solutions for the flowing well test problem: average

water rates. pressure and saturation.

the material-balance approach can be used to predict the "negative onstrated that adequate qtatches could be obtained during history

decline" period observed in unconventional gas reservoirs. matching and precise predictions (compared with a finite-difference

simulator) could be made for future reservoir performance.

Description of Computer Programs From the work presented here, the following conclusions were

The finite-difference simulator used in this study is a modified ver- drawn.

sion of the GRUSSP (PSU-I version) simulator 2,3, 13, 18 updated to I. Material-balance techniques can be used for unconventional

run on a personal computer. The GRUSSP simulator was written gas reservoirs.

specifically for unconventional gas reservoirs and has none of the 2. Aplz* analysis method was developed to analyze the nonvolu-

limitations typically associated with material-balance techniques. metric behavior of coal-seam and Devonian shale gas reservoirs.

Both algorithms used for the determination of original gas in place This method can be applied to any nonvolumetric gas reservoir.

were written with commercial spreadsheet software. No manual 3. For the example problem, the 48-hour shut-in periods were

intervention was required to estimate gas in place except for the sufficient to estimate the original gas in place to within 6 %.

initial assumption of bulk volume in Step I of the iterative algorithm. 4. For flowing wells, the material-balance approach can be used

The program used for predicting reservoir performance from coal to predict the negative decline observed in unconventional gas

seams and Devonian shale reservoirs (Eqs. 7, 12, and 13) was writ-

reservoirs.

ten in VS-FORTRAN. The convolution integral in Eq. 13b was evalu-

5. For flowing wells, predictions from the material-balance ap-

ated numerically with cubic spline integration coupled with fast

convolution techniques. 19 The final solution was obtained with a proach and a finite-difference simulator were in agreement. Only

Newton-Raphson iteration. minor adjustments to the theoretical skin factor were required to

The speedup factor for the material-balance simulator over the obtain a match.

finite-difference simulator was about 44. Although it may seem in- 6. The proposed material-balance methods presented provide an

appropriate to compare the timings of the two different approaches, independent source of validation for finite-difference simulators.

in a personal-computing environment, this corresponds to an en- To my knowledge, the solution to the flowing well problem dis-

tire history match and several sensitivity cases (a total of 44 cases) cussed here represents the first semianalytical work that includes

using the material-balance approach in the same real time required the effects of both two-phase flow and desorption/diffusion. Ap-

to make one history-match run with the finite-difference simulator. pendices describing equations used in this paper are included in

The material-balance approach presented here is not intended to the original version of the paper (see Ref. 12).

be a substitute for finite-difference simulators, but simply another

tool for engineers working with unconventional gas reservoirs. For Nomenclature

the simple problem discussed, this method was an appropriate tool.

A = area, L2 ft2

For field cases where the study objectives may include analyzing

pressure-transient tests, optimizing well spacing, and optimizing Bg = gas FVF, ft 3 /scf

completion intervals, or for complex stratigraphy, such as multi- Bgi = initial gas FVF, ft 3/scf

ple reservoirs or sand/shale/coal sequences, the finite-difference Bw = water FVF, bbllSTB

method would be preferred. Cw = water compressibility, Lt 2 /m, psi- I

C'" = porosity compressibility, Lt 2 /m, psi- I

Review and Conclusions CM = molar concentration, m/L3, Ibm mollft 3

Material-balance techniques were presented for estimating the origi- CME = molar equilibrium isotherm, m/L3, Ibm mollft 3

nal gas in place and future well performance of coal seam and Devo- CMEi = initial molar concentration, m/L3, Ibm mollft 3

nian shale gas reservoirs. For estimating the original gas in place, Cv = volumetric concentration, scf/ft 3

a generalized equation was developed that assumes equilibrium be- C VE = volumetric equilibrium isotherm, scf/ft 3

tween the free- and adsorbed-gas phases. For convenience, the gen- CVL = volume constant for Langmuir isotherm, scf/ft 3

eralized equation was linearized with plz*. Two algorithms, one D = diffusion coefficient, L2/t, ft2fD

graphical and one iterative, were developed to solve the generalized

Fs = shape factor, L2, ft- 2

material-balance equation. The methods used to estimate the gas

in place were successfully validated against a finite-difference G = original gas in place, L3, scf

simulator. Gd = desorbed gas, L3, scf

A material-balance method was developed for estimating future Gp = produced gas, L3, scf

reservoir performance that assumes pseudo-steady-state desorp- G = gas in primary porosity, scf/ft 3

I

tion/diffusion. For the single-well problem investigated, it was dem- h = reservoir thickness, L, ft

SPE Reservoir Engineering, February 1993 71

Author and L. Cross and D.A. Provias of Chevron U.K. Ltd. for their

reviews and critiques of the original manuscript.

Gregory R. King is a reservoir engineer

with Chevron U.K. Ltd. Previously, he References

was with Chevron E&P Services in 1. Ikoku, C.U.: Natural Gas Reservoir Engineering, John Wiley & Sons

Houston. His responsibilities include Inc., New York City (1984) 6.

reservoir engineering studies of produc- 2. King, G.R. and Ertekin, T.: "A Survey of Mathematical Models Re-

ing fields and fields under appraisal.

lated to Methane Production From Coal Seams: Part I, Empirical and

King holds BS, MS, and PhD degrees in

Equilibrium Sorption Models," paper 8951 presented at the 1989 U.

petroleum and natural gas engineering

of Alabama Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, April 17-20.

from Pennsylvania State U. He is a mem-

3. King, G .R. and Ertekin, T.: "A Survey of Mathematical Models Re-

ber of the Editorial Review Committee

and a coauthor of the upcoming SPE lated to Methane Production From Coal Seams: Part II, Non-Equilibrium

textbook on reservoir simulation. Sorption Models," paper 8951 presented at the 1989 U. of Alabama

Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, April 17-20.

4. Zuber, M.D. and Kuuskraa, V .A.: "A Reservoir Simulator-Based Meth-

k = permeability, L2, md odology for Calculating Reserves of Coalbed Methane Wells," paper

8952 presented at the 1989 U. of Alabama Coalbed Methane Symposium,

krg = relative permeability to gas, dimensionless Tuscaloosa, April 17-20.

krw = relative permeability to water, dimensionless 5. Kuuskraa, V.A. and McBane, R.A.: "Coalbed Methane, Part 7: Steps

m = slope of plz* plot, L 4t 2 1m, sef/psi To Assess Resource Economics Covered," Oil & Gas J. (Dec. 25, 1989)

m(p) = real-gas pseudopressure=2i(pIJL gz)dp, m/Lt3, 121-25.

psi 2 /cp 6. Energy Focus "Forum Series," JPT (Feb. 1990) 158.

m(pwf) = flowing pseudopressure, m/Lt3, psi 2 /cp 7. Aguilera, R.: Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, PennWell Publishing Co.,

nd = moles of desorbed gas, m, Ibm mol Tulsa, OK (1980) 395-400.

8. Smith, D.M. and Williams, F.L.: "Diffusional Effects in the Recovery

np = moles of produced gas, m, Ibm mol

of Methane From Coalbeds," SPEJ (Oct. 1984) 529-35.

n1 = moles in primary porosity, m, Ibm mol 9. Sevenster, P.G.: "Diffusion of Gas through Coal," Fuel (1959) 38,

n2 = moles in secondary porosity, m, Ibm mol 403-15.

p = pressure,m/Lt2, psia 10. Thimons, E.P. and Kissell, F.N.: "Diffusion of Methane through Coal,"

Pd = desorption pressure, m/Lt2, psia Fuel (1973) 53, 274-80.

Pi = initial reservoir pressure, m/Lt 2 , psia 11. King, G.R., Ertekin, T., and Schwerer, F.C.: "Numerical Simulation

PL = Langmuir pressure constant, m/Lt2, psia of the Transient Behavior of Coal-Seam Degasification Wells," SPEFE

Psc = standard pressure, m/Lt 2 , psia (April 1986) 165-83; Trans., AIME, 281.

12. King, G.R.: "Material-Balance Techniques for Coal Seam and Devo-

Pwf = flowing well pressure, m/Lt2, psia nian Shale Reservoirs," paper SPE 20730 presented at the 1990 SPE

qd = desorption rate, L3 It, sefID Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept.

qg = gas production rate, L3 It, Mscf/D 23-26.

qw = water production rate, L3/t, STB/D 13. King, G.R.: "Numerical Simulation of the Simultaneous Flow of

R = universal gas constant, mL2/t 2T, 10.73 psia-ft 3/(lbm Methane and Water Through Dual Porosity Coal Seams During the

mol-OR) Degasification Process," PhD dissertation, Pennsylvania State U.,

s = skin factor, dimensionless University Park, PA (May 1985).

14. Peaceman, D.W.: "Interpretation of Well-Block Pressures in Numer-

Sg = gas saturation, dimensionless, fraction

ical Reservoir Simulation," SPEJ (June 1978) 183-94; Trans., AIME,

Sgc = critical gas saturation, dimensionless, fraction 265.

Sw = average water saturation, dimensionless, fraction 15. Peacernan, D.W.: "Interpretation of Well-Block Pressures in Numerical

Swi = initial water saturation, dimensionless, fraction Reservoir Simulation With Nonsquare Grid Blocks and Anisotropic Per-

Swir = irreducible water saturation, dimensionless, fraction meability," SPEJ (June 1983) 531-43.

t = time, t, days 16. Peaceman, D.W.: "Interpretation of Wellblock Pressures in Numeri-

cal Reservoir Simulation: Part 3-0ff-Center and Multiple Wells Within

T = reservoir temperature, T, oR

a Wellblock," SPERE (May 1990) 227-32; Trans., AIME, 289.

Tsc = standard temperature, T, oR 17. Remner; D.J. eta!.: "A Parametric Study of the Effects of Coal Seam

Vb = bulk volume, L3, ft3 Properties on Gas Drainage Efficiency," SPERE (Nov. 1986) 633-46.

V b2 = bulk volume of secondary-porosity system, L3, ft3 18. King, G.R. and Ertekin, T.: "Comparative Evaluation of Vertical and

We = encroached water, L3, bbl Horizontal Drainage Wells for the Degasification of Coal Seams,"

Wp = produced water, L3, STB SPERE (May 1988) 720-34.

xf = fracture half-length, L, ft 19. Leung, W.: "A Fast Convolution Method for Implementing Single-

z= gas supercompressibility factor, dimensionless Porosity Finite/Infinite Aquifer Models for Water-Influx Calculations,"

SPERE (Sept. 1986) 490-510; Trans., AIME, 282.

z* = gas factor for unconventional gas reservoir,

dimensionless 51 Metric Conversion Factors

zt = initial gas factor for unconventional gas reservoir,

bbl x 1.589873 E-Ol m3

dimensionless

cp x 1.0* E+OO mPa's

JLg = dynamic gas viscosity, miLt, cp

ft x 3.048* E-Ol m

JLw = dynamic water viscosity, miLt, cp ft3 x 2.831 685 E-02 m3

<p = porosity, dimensionless, fraction OF (OF-32)/1.8 C

<p i = initial porosity, dimensionless, fraction Ibm x 4.535924 E-Ol kg

md x 9.869233 E-04 JLm 2

Subscripts OR R/1.8 K

1 = primary porosity psi x 6.894757 E+OO kPa

2 = secondary porosity psi -1 x 1.450377 E-Ol kPa- 1

Acknowledgments * Conversion factor is exact. SPERE

I thank the management of Chevron E&P Services Co. and Chevron Original SPE manuscript received for review Sept. 2, 1990. Revised manuscript received

Feb. 24, 1992. Paper accepted for publication Aug. 24, 1992. Paper (SPE 20730) first

U.K. Ltd. for permission to publish this work. I also thank R. Fink presented at the 1990 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in New

of Chevron U. S. A. for her encouragement to publish this material Orleans. Sept. 23-26.

- Modeling the Breakthrough Behavior of an Activated Carbon Fiber Monolith in N-Butane Adsorption From Diluted StreamsUploaded byAltus Schoeman
- 10.1.1.164.8341Uploaded byMohamed Anouar Nciri
- Operating Problems and Glycol CareUploaded byJonathan Mike
- Adsorptive Desulfurization by Activated AluminaUploaded bydarllan08025
- Simulation and Design Models for Adsorption ProcessUploaded byAlbert Bittencourt
- Adsorption Refrigeration Working Pairs the State of the Art in the ApplicationUploaded byJohannes Angga Panjaitan
- CoatesUploaded byapi-27483824
- Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data ShamsUploaded byShamsMohd
- Adsorption Isotherm Dow ChemicalsUploaded bygautam_96948069
- Natural Zeolite is One Alternative Adsorbent MateriaLUploaded byByakuya Kuchiki
- Finite Diff.pdfUploaded byElshan Aliyev
- A Novel and Efficient Epoxy-chitosan Cement Slurry for Use in Severe AcidicUploaded byEllen Costa
- Cristalinidad y Absorcion de AguaUploaded byLuis Mesen
- 5. Eng Equlibrium Narayana SaibabaUploaded byImpact Journals
- Applied-Hydraulic-Transients- Chaudry 1989.pdfUploaded bykglorstad
- 10_chapter 2.pdfUploaded byAwais Sargodian
- tribology of compositesUploaded byAshok Kumar
- 13. Applied - Ijans - The Substituted N-nitroso Piperidin - A.ilamparthi (1)Uploaded byiaset123
- Fyp Rice Husk d6467 Nurul Nadia SaminUploaded byVeiliLook
- art%3A10.1007%2Fs10008-004-0584-z.pdfUploaded byOmar Rodriguez Villarreal
- NoorSyazanaNgarisanMFS2014Uploaded byMushahid Yasin Kiyani
- Coating Fe 3 o 4 Magnetic Nanoparticles With Humic Acid for High Efficient Removal of Heavy Metals in WaterUploaded bySyarifatul Muniroh
- Kim 2016Uploaded byZahra Gh
- AMM.798.384.pdfUploaded byBudi Hastuti
- Aluminophosphate monolithsUploaded byFarid Akhtar
- P-CP on Basic AC StaticUploaded byEtelka David
- Biosorption capacity of Lonchocarpus laxiflorus Leaves biomass for adsorption of metal ions (Fe3+, Pb2+, Cr2+, Cd2+ and Ni2+) from aqueous solutionUploaded byIJSRP ORG
- Hsu 2010Uploaded bydevil cry
- he2016Uploaded byMichelle Arredondo
- Orange Peel KinetikUploaded byDinda Juwita

- 62882-ms Improvements to Reservoir Material-Balance MethodsUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- Gringarten SPE16388R Type-Curve Analysis: What It Can and Cannot DoUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- SPE-134534-MSUploaded byaida
- L20 SPE-8279 Agarwal, R.G. Real gas pseudo-time - a new function for pressure buildup analysis of mhf gas wells.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- 10. Review of Geology of a Giant Carbonate Bitumen Reservoir, Grosmont Formation, Saleski, AlbertaUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- 1. Heavy-Oil Reservoirs Their Characterization and ProductionUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- L6 SPE-1305-PA Chatas A.T. Unsteady Spherical Flow in Petroleum Reservoirs.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- L21 SPE-1235-G Simplified equations of flow in gas-drive reservoirs.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- 11. Deterministic Mapping of Reservoir Heterogeneity in Athabasca Oil Sands Using Surface Seismic DataUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- 8. Elastic Property Changes in a Bitumen Reservoir During Steam InjectionUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- L11 SPE-8029-PA Chun W., García J. & Raghavan R. Analysis of Interference Test DataUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- L14 SPE-16470 Nelson R.A. Fractured reservoirs - Turning knowledge into practice.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- 7. Prediction of Pore Fluid Viscosity Effects on P-Wave Attenuation in Reservoir SandstonesUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- Implementing Convection in a Reservoir Simulator: A Key Feature in Adequately Modeling the Exploitation of the Cantarell ComplexUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- Naturally Fractured ReservoirsUploaded bytassili17
- Dynamic Material BalanceUploaded bymoncho000
- SPE-20730-PA King G.R. Material·Balance Techniques for Coal-Seam and Devonian Shale Gas Reservoirs With Limited Water InfluxUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- PETSOC-98-02-06 Mattar, L. McNeil, R. The Flowing Gas-Material Balance.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- SPE-116688 Lewis, A.M. Hughes, R.G. Production Data Analysis of Shale Gas Reservoirs.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- PETSOC-07!04!01 Adil I. Role of Asphaltenes in Foamy Oil FlowUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- SPE-1480-PA Chierici, G.L. et al. Water Drive Gas Reservoirs Uncertainty in Reserves Evaluation From Past History.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- SPE-28630-PA Sills, S.R. Improved Material-Balance Regression Analysis for Waterdrive Oil and Gas Reservoirs.pdfUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- FPQ-329!22!31 Quiñones S.E. an Efﬁcient Algorithm for the Calculation of Phase Envelopes of Fluid MixturesUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- SPE-28589 Merril and Hartman a Comparison of Equation of State Tuning MethodsUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- SPE-91505-MSUploaded byAlex Castañeda
- Romero, A. and Hefferan, J. an Application of Diffusity and Material-Balance Equations to a High Relief PoolUploaded bySolenti D'nou
- Buckley, S.E. and Leverett, M.C. Mechanism of Fluid Displacement in SandsUploaded bySolenti D'nou

- 1-s2.0-S1441352312001167-mainUploaded byViki-Rao Nalaya
- copyofterm2listeninganalysisUploaded byapi-285933035
- 4 EscalatorsUploaded bytangtszloong
- Technology and Innovation in Financial Services: Scenarios to 2020: Executive SummaryUploaded byWorld Economic Forum
- VMate Campus-0710.pdfUploaded byYameen Khan
- SANTOPRENE 101-73Uploaded byEwerthon Brand's
- Renewable Energy-28 4 10Uploaded byMeenakumari Ramachandran
- Hubli Bye LawsUploaded byShrinivas Sonnad
- HEAVY METAL BIOSORPTION POTENTIAL OF PSEUDOMONAS SP. ISOLATED FROM INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER OF HARIDWAR DISTRICT, INDIA.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- Example_ Software Architecture DocumentUploaded bySubbu6502
- Akhtar HussainUploaded byAkhtarHussain
- evil-twinUploaded byDimas Setiawan
- SteelWise- Tolerances Illustrated(2).pdfUploaded byLalu Rajendran
- Bsff New Protocol 01-01-2010Uploaded byLighth
- Physicochemical Properties of Drug SubstancesUploaded byAbdul Qadir
- File HandlingUploaded byranjan_prashant52
- Brake.pdfUploaded byduongpn
- Project ReportUploaded byFurkan Isikdogan
- RES 323Uploaded byShyrene Joy Vidal
- Martin Mac 250 ManualUploaded byReuben Morrison
- Unix ScriptsUploaded byShakeel Mohammed
- rizalUploaded byshea adormeo
- Module17-RoadwayCrossSectionsandQuantitiesUploaded byKishiwa
- On Rabbits and ElephantsUploaded byGavin M. Roy
- t420s_t420si_ug_en.pdfUploaded bySesujTrisch
- Parker Heavy Duty Hydraulic Cylinders 2H, 2HD, 3H, 3HD.PDFUploaded bymackana69
- Time Offset Estimation for OFDM Using MATLABUploaded byGautham Kannan
- Confirm - Asset Managment - Brochure FinalUploaded byDeck Magana
- Dominican Sweet House.pptxUploaded byMaicol B.
- 2011 Instructions for Registration Be Te ExmsUploaded bykyumajm9290