CSUG/SPE 149351

Case Study of Using Basin Analysis to Evaluate Unconventional Gas

Resources in Frontier Basins
Kun Cheng, SPE, Wenyan Wu, SPE, Stephen A. Holditch, SPE, Walter B. Ayers, Jr., SPE, and Duane A. McVay,
SPE, Texas A&M University

Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for at the Canadian Unconventional Resources & International Petroleum Conference held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 15–17 November 2011.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
As gas production from conventional gas reservoirs in the United States decreases, the industry is turning more attention to the
exploration and development of unconventional gas resources (UGRs). This trend is expanding quickly worldwide. However,
unlike in many mature North American basins where significant development of UGRs is now routine, many countries are just
turning to UGRs exploration. Insightful resource assessment is important for tapping UGRs in these frontier basins.
To evaluate the UGRs in frontier basins that are underexplored, we developed basin analysis methodology to 1)
characterize basins; 2) establish analogs between frontier basins and mature North American basins; 3) estimate conventional
and unconventional resources in mature North American basins; and 4) quantitatively predict UGRs in frontier basins by using
information from analogous North American basins. This comprehensive basin analysis study not only validates the resource
triangle, which is characterized by a large ratio of unconventional TRR (technically recoverable resources) to conventional
TRR, but also makes it possible to quantitatively assess unconventional resources in under-explored basins worldwide.
To demonstrate use of basin analysis in evaluating the UGRs of frontier basins, two world hotspots for UGRs exploration
were selected as the target basins: Neuquén basin in South America and Berkine basin in North Africa. Recent assessment
reports and exploration activities indicate that the two basins have substantial unconventional gas resources. As a case study,
basin analysis was used to identify the North American reference basins that are analogous to the Neuquén and Berkine basins,
and to characterize the distributions of UGRs in these frontier basins. Furthermore, the quantitatively estimated unconventional
TRR were compared with those from EIA (Energy Information Administration) and companies to support the effectiveness of
basin analysis results.

Introduction
Unconventional resources encompass a broad range of oil and gas deposits that have been bypassed for decades because they
were not considered economically feasible to produce. While discussions of peak oil and the limitations placed on production
by many foreign countries continue, US companies have quickly moved toward unconventional resources as a viable source of
oil and gas production. Advances in exploration, drilling and completion technologies in the past 20 years have led to the
opening of new areas in the domestic U.S. targeting unconventional resources. In 2009, tight gas production amounted to
roughly 31.5 percent of the total U.S. natural gas production; shale gas and coalbed methane accounted for 15.5 percent and
8.5 percent, respectively (EIA, 2011a).
Recently, this surge in developing recoverable unconventional natural gas has also greatly impacted many countries and
regions outside the US. For example, a recent study by EIA (2011b) reports initial assessments of technically recoverable shale
gas resources in 32 foreign countries. However, these foreign countries are just now beginning to understand and plan the
assessments of unconventional gas resources in the frontier basins with very limited information.
To evaluate UGRs in frontier (or target) basins where the resources have been underexplored, assessments have been
conducted on basin characterization, basin analogy, quantification of UGRs in NA (North America) reference basins, and
estimates of UGRs volumes in the frontier (or target) basins (Singh et al. 2008; Cheng et al. 2011a, 2011c). These results were
integrated to arrive at a frontier basin analysis estimate of UGRs. Generally, the approach identifies the NA reference basins
that are analogous to a frontier basin, and then uses the resource distributions in the analogous basin to estimate the
distribution and volume of UGRs in the frontier basin (Table 1).
2 CSUG/SPE 149351

TABLE 1—BASIN AND PRISE STUDY PROGRESS

Project Description Objective
BASIN Development Summarize the data in NA reference and Characterize the geology and petroleum
(Singh et al. 2008; frontier basins from public literature systems of the reference and target
Cheng et al. 2011a; basins
Cheng et al. 2011b) Develop a method for identifying analogous Effectively and quickly identify the
NA reference basins to match the frontier analogous NA reference basins for the
basin frontier (or target) basin
PRISE Development Investigate and quantify both conventional Evaluate resource distributions in the NA
(Martin et al. 2008; and unconventional resources in the NA reference basins to support resource
Cheng et al. 2010; reference basins triangle concept
Cheng et al. 2011c) Determine methods to calculate the volume Quantitatively estimate the different
of UGRs in frontier basins on the basis of types of UGRs (i.e., coalbed methane,
UGRs distributions in analogous NA basins shale gas, and tight gas sand) in frontier
basins

The basin analysis approach is based on the premise that the oil and gas resource distributions are similar for the
analogous basins. Results of previous work based on analysis of three NA basins as the target basins supported this premise
(Cheng et al. 2011a). Then, we expanded the work to include 21 additional NA basins that contain significant volumes of gas
in unconventional gas reservoirs.
In this research, our basin analysis methodology was used for the first time to evaluate UGRs in international basins. Two
world hotspots for UGRs exploration, the Neuquén basin in South America and Berkine basin in North Africa, were selected
as the target basins, and basin analysis was used to identify the North American reference basins that are analogous to these
basins and to evaluate the distributions and volumes of UGRs in these frontier basins.

The Basin Analysis

Two applications developed for the basin analysis are BASIN and PRISE. Both are part of a software package called
Unconventional Gas Advisor (UGA) system, and BASIN is linked to PRISE by drawing on the same database (Fig. 1).
BASIN is designed to compare the 24 NA reference basins (Table 2) in the database with the target basin and to identify the
most analogous reference basins for the target basin. Then, PRISE uses the resource information for the analog basins from the
database to estimate the distribution and volume of UGRs in the target basin.

Fig. 1—Architecture of the UGA system (Cheng et al. 2011c).

CSUG/SPE 149351 3

TABLE 2—NORTH AMERICAN REFERENCE BASINS ASSESSED

No. Nomenclature Full Name Location
1 ADKB Anadarko Basin OK, TX, KS, CO
PA, NY, WV, TN, VA,
2 APPB Appalachian Basin AL, OH, KT, GA
3 ARK Arkoma Basin AR, OK
4 BHB Big Horn Basin WY, MT
5 BWB Black Warrior Basin AL
6 CHK Cherokee Basin OK, KS,MO
7 DEN Denver Basin CO, WY, NE
8 ETX East Texas Basin TX
9 FCB Forest City Basin KS, MO, NE, IA
10 FWB Fort Worth Basin TX
11 GRB Green River Basin WY
12 IB Illinois Basin IL, IN, KT, TN
13 LAMS Louisiana-Mississippi Salt Basin LA, MS, AL, FL
14 MICH Michigan Basin MI
15 PDX Paradox Basin UT, CO, AZ
16 PERM Permian Basin TX, NM
17 PB Piceance Basin UT, CO
18 PWDR Powder River Basin WY, MT, SD
19 RAT Raton Basin NM, CO
20 SJB San Juan Basin NM, CO
21 TXGC Texas Gulf Coast Basin TX, LA
22 UB Uinta Basin UT, CO
23 WILL Williston Basin ND, SD, MT
24 WRB Wind River Basin WY

Workflow of Basin Analysis. Fig. 2 illustrates the 5-step workflow of a typical application that uses BASIN and PRISE to
estimate TRR (technically recoverable resources) for a frontier basin. In-depth discussions of BASIN parameters and methods
are available in Singh et al. (2008) and Cheng et al. (2011a), and PRISE technology is presented in Martin et al. (2010) and
Cheng et al. (2010 and 2011c). The general workflow for combining BASIN and PRISE to estimate UGRs is as follows.
1) Conduct a preliminary review of the frontier basin, and input the data for 54 geologic and petroleum systems
parameters (Cheng 2011).
2) Select the frontier basin as the target basin, and run the basin analog function in the BASIN software to generate a list
of analogous NA reference basins ranked by their similarities with the target basin.
3) Use PRISE to calculate the TRR distributions for the analogous reference basins in the list: Determine the ratio of the
overall unconventional TRR to conventional TRR, and the proportions of CO (conventional oil), CG (conventional
gas), TGS (tight gas sand), CBM (coalbed methane), and SG (shale gas) TRR in the overall unconventional TRR.
4) (Optional & Recommended) Input the volume of conventional TRR in the target basin. This information is only
necessary for the CTRRI (conventional technically recoverable resources input) method in PRISE to estimate the
unconventional TRR in the target basin (Cheng et al. 2011c).
5) PRISE outputs the total volume of unconventional TRR, and the distributions and volumes of different types of TRR
in the target basin.
4 CSUG/SPE 149351

Fig. 2—Workflow of using BASIN and PRISE to estimate TRR for target basin (Cheng 2011).

The basin analysis is characterized by

1) Efficiency – The basin analog method of evaluating UGRs in frontier basins uses information from mature North
American basins for which UGRs have been significantly developed and well defined. This methodology has a
unique advantage in frontier basins that lack sufficient drilling and production data because it does not require
detailed data and production trends that are necessary for the conventional statistical methodology (USGS Oil and
Gas Resource Assessment Team 1995; Lore 2006; CNPC 2011).
2) Objectivity – To estimate the TRR in frontier basins, EIA (2011a) adopts a method that applies factors to gas in place
that account for the current level of knowledge of the resource and the capability of the technology to eventually tap
into the resource, but the methodology highly depends on consultant’s expert judgment. For the traditional analog
method, quality of the match is subjective and dependent on the experience of the engineer or geoscientist. In
contrast, the basin analysis approach automatically processes data through the BASIN and PRISE software. The
greater subjectivity is in the weighting assigned to various parameters.
3) Quantification – The basin analysis not only qualitatively indicates the total TRR potential, but additionally, it
provides quantitative estimates of UGRs in the frontier basins.

Premise of Basin Analysis. As an analog method, basin analysis is based on the premise that analogous basins have similar
resource distributions. Although previous research indicated that the undiscovered petroleum potential of a target basin could
be predicated by finding a geological analog that has been sufficiently explored and fully realized for its resource potential
(Morton 1998; Abangan 2003; USGS Bighorn Basin Province Assessment Team 2010; CNPC 2011), solid support for such a
concept was missing. Therefore, we tested the premise of basin analysis by comparing the analog results from BASIN
software with the analog results from PRISE software (Cheng et al. 2010; Cheng et al. 2011a). BASIN software identified the
analogous NA reference basins for the target basin based on the geologic and petroleum systems characteristics, and the
PRISE software was used to assess resources (CG, CO, SG, CBM, and TGS) for each of the 24 NA reference basins. In each
comparison, one of the 24 NA basins was selected as the target basin and compared to every other basin in each of the two
programs (PRISE and BASIN).
For each of the 24 North American basins as the target basin, we calculated and plotted the similarity for each pair of the
target and reference basin in both BASIN and PRISE, producing a data point on the BASIN similarity/PRISE similarity plane,
and evaluated the trend for the 24 data points by checking the R2 value (Fig. 3). The R2 for the 24 basins is 0.52, which
indicates that, while basin similarity and resource distribution similarity are correlated, there will be uncertainty in using
BASIN/PRISE for estimating resources in new basins. The uncertainty results from the data used in both BASIN and PRISE,
which are based on published literature (which may not be complete, consistent or current), and/or from the methods used in
BASIN and PRISE, which are deterministic and approximate.
CSUG/SPE 149351 5

Fig. 3—Similarity crossplot of BASIN and PRISE.

Case Study of Using Basin Analysis to Evaluate UGRs in Frontier Basins

To test the use of basin analysis in evaluating the UGRs of frontier basins, two basins, located in Argentina and Algeria, were
selected as the target basins: the Neuquén and Berkine basin, respectively. Then, as introduced in the previous section we
followed the workflow of using BASIN and PRISE to estimate UGRs. Recent assessment reports and exploration activities
indicated that the two basins have potentially vast unconventional gas resources. In the case studies, the basin analysis
applications were used to identify the analogous North American reference basins for the Neuquén and Berkine basins and to
characterize the distribution of UGRs in the target basins. Then, the quantitatively estimated unconventional TRR were
compared with those from EIA and other organizations to support the effectiveness of the basin analysis results.

Case Study I — Neuquén basin

Among the petroleum basins of Argentina, the Neuquén Basin is the leading producer of hydrocarbons. The basin holds 35%
of the country's oil reserves and 47% of its gas reserves (Argentina Energy 2011). The 137,000 km² basin, situated entirely
onshore, is part of the Sub-Andean trend which extends the entire length of South America.

Geology and Petroleum Systems Characteristics. The Neuquén basin contains a near-continuous Late Triassic–Early
Cenozoic succession deposited on the eastern side of the evolving Andean mountain chain. Its formation is characterized by
three main stages of evolution: initial rift stage; subduction-related thermal sag; and foreland stage (Howell et al. 2005). The
source rocks of the Neuquén basin mainly include mudstones of the Lower Jurassic Los Molles Formation, Upper Jurassic-
Lower Cretaceous Vaca Muerta Formation, and Lower Cretaceous Agrio Formation (Fig. 4) (Spalletti and Vergani 2007). The
hydrocarbons migrated laterally and vertically along carrier beds and faults from the deep basin to the basin margin and
platform areas (USGS 2000).
6 CSUG/SPE 149351

Fig. 4—Lithostratigraphy of Neuquén Basin (Spalletti and Vergani 2007).

Analogous Basins. After entering the geologic and engineering petroleum systems data of the Neuquén basin in the BASIN
database, we selected the Neuquén basin as the target basin and ran BASIN software. The analog results (Fig. 5) indicate that
the Arkoma basin is the most analogous basin for the Neuquén Basin with a 62% match. The Big Horn basin is the second-
most analogous basin for the Neuquén Basin with a 55% match.
CSUG/SPE 149351 7

Fig. 5— BASIN Analog results for target Neuquén Basin.

TRR Distribution and Quantification. For the TRR quantification, we used Tankard’s (1995) estimate that recoverable and
probable conventional hydrocarbon reserves in Neuquén Basin are approximately 2.3 billion bbl of oil equivalent. Thus, we
input 13.8 Tcfe (one barrel of oil equivalent is roughly equivalent to 6 Mscf of typical natural gas) for the conventional
H H

resources in PRISE software. Based on the TRR distribution in Arkoma basin (Fig. 6), the PRISE software calculated that the
volume of unconventional TRR in the Neuquén basin is 331.2 Tcfe, including 321.2 Tcfe technically recoverable shale gas
resources. Based on the TRR distribution in Big Horn basin (Fig. 7), the PRISE software indicated that the volume of
unconventional TRR in the Neuquén basin is 62.8 Tcfe, including 59.2 Tcfe technically recoverable tight gas sand resources
(Table 3). Both of the estimates based on the Arkoma basin and Big Horn basin are possible, because there are different types
of unconventional resources in the Neuquén Basin.

Fig 6—TRR distribution of the Arkoma basin.

Fig 7—TRR distribution of the Big Horn basin.

8 CSUG/SPE 149351

TABLE 3—Neuquén Basin TRR Estimation Based on TRR Distribution in Analogous Basins
Rank Basin TGS (tcfe) SG (tcfe) CBM (tcfe) Total Unconventional Gas (tcfe)
1 Arkoma 0 321.2 10 331.2
2 Big Horn 59.2 0 3.6 62.8

Argentina's Neuquén Basin is fast becoming a world hotspot for shale exploration, and it is already well known as an area that
is rich in tight-gas potential (Unconventional Oil & Gas Center 2011). EIA (2011b) estimates that the volume of technically
recoverable shale gas resources in Argentina is 774 Tcf. The Neuquén Basin contains more than half of the country's
technically recoverable shale gas resources (Eurasia Review 2011). Thus, technically recoverable shale gas resources in the
Neuquén Basin estimated from the most analogous reference basin (Arkoma basin) as approximately 321.2 Tcf is quite close
to the published estimates. For tight gas sand, exploration activities in the Neuquén basin have been widely reported (Coppoli
et al. 2007; Moreyra and García 2007; Naides 2010).

TABLE 4— Major petroleum companies’ Shale Gas activities in Neuquén basin

Date Events Sources
“Baker Hughes has completed its first unconventional hydrocarbon shale hydraulic Petroleum
July-11
fracturing and stimulation project in Argentina for YPF in the Neuquén basin.” Economist 2011
“Total announces that it has acquired interests in four exploration licenses in
Argentina in partnership with YPF in order to appraise their shale gas potential.
Jan-11 TOTAL 2011
Located in the Neuquén Basin, the licenses were awarded by the provincial
authorities for a six-year period.”
“ExxonMobil plans to explore for shale gas in Argentina following the award of two
blocks in the western Neuquén province. ExxonMobil spokesman Patrick McGinn told
Jan-11 World Oil 2011
Dow Jones news service that the exploration agreements were signed in December
2010.”
“YPF announced the discovery of 4.5 Tcf of proven shale gas reserves in the
Dec-10 World Oil 2010
Patagonia area of the Neuquén Basin.”

Case Study II — Berkine Basin

The Berkine (Ghadames) Basin with an area of 120,000 km2 is a subcircular, intracratonic, extensional basin that is situated in
eastern Algeria and extends into Tunisia and Libya. This basin is separated from the Hoggar crystalline basement to the south
by the Illizi basin. The western edge of the basin is defined by the El Biod-Hassi Messaoud structural axis and is bounded to
the north by the Daharridge (Yahi et al. 2001).

Geology and Petroleum System Characteristics. The Berkine basin contains a thick section of Paleozoic and Mesozoic-
Cenozoic sediments. The first hydrocarbon source rock in the basin corresponds to the Lower Silurian bituminous and
micaceous mudstones. Upper Devonian shales are considered as the secondary hydrocarbon source rocks in the basin
(Schlumberger 2007). There are several significant reservoirs in Berkine Basin; these include the Upper Triassic clay
sandstone, the Triassic limestone–Intermediate Triassic, and the Lower Triassic clay sandstone (Fig. 8).
CSUG/SPE 149351 9

Fig. 8—Stratigraphic column of the Berkine basin (Schlumberger 2007).

Analogous Basins – After inputting the geology and petroleum systems data of the Berkine basin into the BASIN database,
we selected the basin as the target basin and ran BASIN software. The analog result (Fig. 9) indicates that the Michigan basin
is the most analogous basin for the Berkine Basin with a 51% match, closely followed by the Williston basin as the second-
most analogous basin with a 49% match.
10 CSUG/SPE 149351

Fig. 9—Analog results after running BASIN for Berkine Basin.

TRR Distribution and Quantification. For the TRR quantification, the recoverable oil discovered to date is in excess of 3.5
billion bbl (Underdown et al. 2007) and the conventional recoverable gas is at least 2.2 Tcf (First Calgary Petroleums Ltd
2005) in the Berkine basin. Thus, after converting barrels to Tcfe, we input 23.2 Tcfe for the conventional resources in PRISE
software. Based on the TRR distribution in Michigan basin (Fig. 10), the PRISE software estimates that the volume of
unconventional TRR in the Berkine basin is 73.5 Tcfe, including 66.2 Tcfe technically recoverable shale gas resources.
Estimates of TRR distribution in Williston (Fig. 11) basin are very similar to those of the Michigan basin. Based on the
Williston basin, the volume of unconventional TRR in the Berkine basin is 66.0 Tcfe, including 65.1 Tcfe technically
recoverable shale gas resources (Table 5).

Fig. 10—TRR distribution of the Michigan basin.

Fig. 11—TRR distribution of the Williston basin.

CSUG/SPE 149351 11

TABLE 5—Berkine Basin TRR Estimation Based on TRR Distribution in Analogous Basins
Rank Basin TGS (tcfe) SG (tcfe) CBM (tcfe) Total Unconventional Gas (tcfe)
1 Michigan 0 66.2 7.3 73.5
2 Williston 0 65.1 0.9 66

EIA (2011b) estimates about 231 Tcf shale gas are technically recoverable in Algeria, with the Berkine and Illiz basins having
the most prospective shale gas potential (Hill et al. 2010). It should be pointed that our basin analysis investigation does not
include Bakken shale oil resources in the Williston basin evaluation. Development of unconventional gas resources in Berkine
basin is at the early stage, and we have yet to find any news about developing unconventional gas reservoirs in this basin.

Conclusions
Based on the results of testing BASIN and PRISE, we conclude that our evaluation of 24 North American basins supports
the premise that basin analysis can be used to estimate UGRs. That is, (1) basin similarity based on the geologic and petroleum
systems characteristics and basin similarity based on the resource distributions have a positive correlation, which means that
more analogous basins generally have more similar resource distributions, and (2) integration of BASIN and PRISE provides a
reasonable screening method for estimating the UGRs in international (or frontier) basins by using resource distributions in
analogous basins. In the case study, basin analysis indicated that the reference Arkoma basin is most analogous to the Neuquén
basin, and the Michigan basin is the most analogous basin to the Berkine Basin. The resource quantification results indicate
that the Neuquén basin has large shale gas and/or tight gas sand resource potential, and the Berkine basin has shale gas
resource potential.
While the results presented are quite encouraging, we acknowledge that some factors may contribute to uncertainty in the
current results or limit the use of basin analysis. First, in this basin analysis we have used the resource distributions of only the
top two analogous basins to estimate the UGRs in international basins. However, the top two basins’ distributions can be quite
different, leading to uncertainty in the results. This could be improved by using a probabilistic approach. Finally, the UGRs in
the current study do not consider shale oil.

References
Abangan, E.S. 2003. The Sulu Sea/East Palawan Basins Resource Assessment. www.ccop.or.th/ppm/document/PHWS1/
Sulu%20Sea%20Resource%20Assessment.pdf. Downloaded 3 August 2011.
Argentina Energy. Exploration and Production, http://argentinaenergy.com/. Downloaded 3 August 2011.
Cheng, K. 2011. Evaluation and Prediction of Unconventional Gas Resources In Underexplored Basins Worldwide. PhD dissertation, Texas
A&M University, College Station, Texas.
Cheng, K., Wu, W., Holditch, S.A., Ayers, W.B., and McVay, D.A. 2010. Assessment of the Distribution of Technically Recoverable
Resources in North American Basins. Paper SPE 137599 presented at the SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources & International
Petroleum Conference, Alberta, Canada, 19-21 October. doi: 10.2118/137599-MS.
Cheng, K., Wu, W., Holditch, S.A., Ayers, W.B., and McVay, D.A. 2011a. Improved Basin Analog Approach to Characterizing Frontier
Basins for Unconventional Gas Resource Potential. Paper SPE 144240 presented at SPE Digital Energy Conference and Exhibition,
Woodlands, Texas, USA, 19–21 April. doi: 10.2118/144240-MS.
Cheng, K., Wu, W., Holditch, S.A. 2011b. Integrated Management and Visualization of Unconventional Resource Evaluation Data.
Presentation Paper SPE 143882 143822 given presentation at the SPE Digital Energy Conference and Exhibition held in The
Woodlands, Texas, USA, 19–21 April 2011. Doi: 143822-MS.
Cheng, K., Wu, W., Holditch, S.A., Ayers, W.B., and McVay, D.A. 2011c. Quantified Prediction of Technically Recoverable Resources for
Unconventional Gas in Frontier Basins. Paper SPE 140497 presented at SPE Production and Operations, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
USA, 27–29 March. Doi: 10.2118/140497-MS.
China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC). Progress of Exploration and Development of Shale Gas in China.
www.usea.org/Programs/OGIF/10thOGIF/Presentations/Sep15/9_-_CNPC_-_Oil_shale_gas_development_case_studies_-_EN.pdf.
Downloaded 3 August 2011.
Coppoli, A., Ghiggeri, B., Zardo, E., d`Huteau, E., Cabañas, P., and Martínez Cal, V. 2007. Tight gas in the Neuquén Basin, Argentina.
Paper presented at 69th European Association Geoscientists & Engineers Conference & Exhibition.
EIA. 2011a. World Shale Gas Resources: An Initial Assessment of 14 Regions Outside the United States, http://www.eia.gov/ analysis/
studies/worldshalegas/. Downloaded 14 August 2011.
EIA. 2011b. The Annual Energy Outlook 2011, http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/ 0383(2011).pdf. Downloaded 13 August 2011.
Eurasia Review. 2011. Argentina Energy Profile: Production Declining While Demand Growing – Analysis.
http://www.eurasiareview.com/argentina-energy-profile-production-declining-while-demand-growing-analysis-07072011/.
Downloaded 13 August 2011.
First Calgary Petroleums Ltd. 2005. Commentary on First Calgary Petroleums Ltd. http://www.hulfhamilton.com/downloads/
Existing%20Company%20-%20First%20Calgary.pdf. Downloaded 12 August 2011.
Hill, J., and Whiteley, S. 2010. Shale Gas Potential of Selected Countries in Europe, North Africa and the Near East.
http://www.findingpetroleum.com/files/event10/petrenel.pdf. Downloaded 12 August 2011.
Howell, J., E. Schwarz, L. Spalletti and G. Veiga. 2005. The Neuquén Basin: An overview. In: Veiga, G., Spalletti, L., Howell, J., Schwarz,
E. (Eds.) The Neuquén Basin: a Case Study in Sequence Stratigraphy and Basin Dynamics. Geological Society, Special Publication
252, pp. 1-14.
12 CSUG/SPE 149351

Lore, G. 2006. Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf. In
U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Fact Sheet RED-2006-01b.
Martin, S.O., Holditch, S.A., Ayers, W.B., and McVay, D.A. 2010. PRISE Validates Resource Triangle Concept. SPE Economics &
Management 2 (1): 51-60. SPE-117703-PA. doi: 10.2118/117703-PA.
Morton, J.G.G. 1998. Undiscovered petroleum resources. In The Petroleum Geology of South Australia, Volume 4: Cooper Basi, ed.
Gravestock, D.I., Hibburt, J.E. and Drexel, J.F. Chap. 14, 203-205.
Moreyra, J., and García, D. 2007. UBD Technology for the Exploration in Tight Gas Sands in Neuquén Basin, an Evaluation of Results
Evaluation from 11 Wells. Paper SPE 108335 presented at Underbalanced Technology Conference and Exhibition, Galveston, USA,
28-29 March 2007. doi: 10.2118/108335-MS.
Naides, C. 2010. Petrophysical Analysis Method to Identify “Sweet Spots” in Tight Reservoirs: Case Study From Punta Rosada Formation
in Neuquen Basin, Argentina. Paper SPE 121313 presented at the e SPE Latin American & Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
Conference, Lima, Peru, 1–3 December 2010. doi: 10.2118/121313-MS.
Petroleum Economist. 2011. Baker Hughes Gets Fracking in Argentina. http://www.petroleum-economist.com/Article/2874466/Baker-
Hughes-gets-fracking-in-Argentina.html. Downloaded 3 August 2011.
Schlumberger. 2007. Petroleum Geology of Algeria. Algeria Well Evaluation Conference. http://www.slb.com/resources/publications/
roc/algeria07.aspx. Downloaded 2 February 2010.
Spalletti, L.A. and Vergani, G.D. 2007. Variability of Continental Depositional Systems during Lowstand Sedimentation: An Example from
the Kimmeridgian of the Neuquen Basin, Argentina. Latin American journal of sedimentology and basin analysis 14 (2): 85-104.
Singh, K., Holditch, S.A., and Ayers, W.B. Jr. 2008. Basin Analog Investigations Answer Characterization Challenges of Unconventional
Gas Potential in Frontier Basins. J. Energy Resource. Technol. 130 (4): 043202-1-43202-7. doi: 10.1115/1.3000104.
Tankard, A.J., Soruco, R.S., and Welsink, H.J. 1995. Petroleum basins of South America (AAPG Memoir, 62).
Unconventional Oil & Gas Center. E&P Momentum: Argentina's Neuquén Basin Shales. http://www.ugcenter.com/International-Shales/EP-
Momentum-Argentinas-Neuqun-Basin-Shales_85832. Downloaded 3 August 2011.
Underdown, R., Redfern, J., and Lisker, F. 2007. Constraining the burial history of the Ghadames Basin, North Africa:
anintegratedanalysisusingsonic velocities, vitrinite reflectance dataandapatite fission track ages. Basin Research. doi: 10.1111/j.1365 -
2117.2007.0 0335.x.
U.S. Geological Survey National (USGS) Oil and Gas Resource Assessment Team. 1995 National Assessment of United States oil and gas
resources. http://geology.cr.usgs.gov/energy/circ1118.pdf. Downloaded 12 August 2011.
United States Geological Survey (USGS). USGS World Petroleum Assessment 2000: Description and Result. http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-
060/. Downloaded 12 August 2011.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Bighorn Basin Province Assessment Team. 2010. Executive Summary—Assessment of undiscovered oil
and gas resources of the Bighorn Basin Province, Wyoming and Montana, 2008. In U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS–
69–V. Chap. 1, 1-7.
Total. 2011. Total acquires interests in several licenses in Argentina to appraise their shale gas potential. http://www.total.com/en/
investors/press-releases/press-releases-922799.html&idActu=2511. Downloaded 3 August 2011.
World Oil. 2010. YPF announced the discovery of 4.5 Tcf. http://www.worldoil.com/Argentinas_YPF_makes_4.5Tcf_shale_ find.html.
Downloaded 8 December 2010.
World Oil. 2011. ExxonMobil to explore for shale gas in Argentina. http://www.worldoil.com/ ExxonMobil_to_explore_for_shale_
gas_in_Argentina%E2%80%99s_Neuquen_province.html. Downloaded 5 January 2011.
Yahi, N., Schaefer, R.G., Littke, R. 2001. Petroleum generation and accumulation in Berkine basin, eastern Algeria. AAPG Bulletin 85(8):
1439–1467. Doi: 10.1306/8626CAD7-173B-11D7-8645000102C1865D.