Advancing Understanding of Resource Recovery and Environmental Impacts via

Field LaboratoriesJared Ciferno – Oil and Gas Technology

Manager, NETL

Upstream WorkshopHouston, TXFebruary 14, 2018

2

The National Laboratory System

Office of ScienceNational Nuclear Security AdministrationEnvironmental ManagementFossil EnergyNuclear EnergyEnergy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Pacific NorthwestNational Lab

Berkeley Lab

SLAC National Accelerator

Lawrence LivermoreNational Lab

SandiaNational Lab

BrookhavenNational Lab

Princeton Plasma Physics Lab

Thomas JeffersonNational Accelerator

Savannah RiverNational Lab

Oak RidgeNational Lab

ArgonneNational Lab

Fermilab

Ames Lab

Idaho National Lab

National Renewable Energy LabLos Alamos

National Lab

National Energy Technology Laboratory

3

• Demonstrate and test new technologies in the fieldin a scientifically objective manner

• Gather and publish comprehensive, integrated well site data sets that can be shared by researchers across technology categories (drilling and completion, production, environmental) and stakeholder groups (producers, service companies, academia, regulators)

• Catalyze industry/academic research collaboration and facilitate data sharing for mutual benefit

Why Field Laboratories?

4

• Multi-well Experiment (MWX) and M-Site project sites in the Piceance Basin where tight gas sand research was done by DOE and GRI in the 1980s

• Data and analysis provided an extraordinary view of reservoir complexities and “… played a significant role in altering the conventional procedures, techniques, and methodolog y in the development of tight reservoirs.” – Paul Branagan, SPE Distinguished Lecturer*

Past DOE Field LaboratoriesPiceance Basin

MWX site, Piceance Basin in 1980s

*Branagan, P., 2009, “An Accurate Physical Model: Essential for the Economic Development of Complex Reservoirs,” SPE Distinguished Lecture Series

5

• Multiple well experiments carried out by DOE as part of the Eastern Gas Shales Program (EGSP) in the 1970s and 1980s

• EGSP Appalachian Basin “firsts” include:• First nitrogen foam fracturing• First oriented coring• First high-angle shale directional wells• First air-drilled horizontal shale well• First large volume hydraulic fracturing• First CO2/Sand fracturing

Past DOE Field ObservatoriesAppalachian Basin

6

• Solicited in FY14 to advance UOG R&D objectives: reduce development intensity and fresh water use, enhance wellbore integrity, assess air and water impacts and investigate induced seismicity

• Long-term access to shale development sites is required for long-term, multi-disciplinary, integrated, science-based research

• Industry partnerships to obtain site and wellbore access can be a challenge to develop because:

• DOE cannot accept liability for risks with field projects• Research can delay production and increase risks• Industry economics can hinder collaborative opportunities

FY14 DOE-FE Field Laboratory Initiative

7

Two Current Field Laboratories

• Dedicated science wells; instrumented production wells

• Baseline and real-time observation/monitoring

• New technology testing and demonstration

• Public and international training and outreach

• Broad collaborative opportunities Hydraulic Fracture Test Site

Liquid RichGas Tech. Institute

Marcellus Shale Energy and Environment Laboratory

Marcellus/Dry GasWest Virginia Univ.

8

Key Features of Site:• Partners: DOE-NETL, WVU, Northeast Natural Energy (operator), Schlumberger,

Ohio State• Well-documented baseline of production and environmental data from two previous

wells drilled at location• A dedicated vertical observation well to collect detailed subsurface data and to monitor

hydraulic fracturing of project well 3H• Multiple events over the course of the five-year project, separated by periods sufficient

to analyze data

Marcellus Shale Energy and Environmental Laboratory (MSEEL)

9

Marcellus Shale Energy and Environmental Laboratory (MSEEL)

Drilling

Fracturing

Location of horizontal wells and science well

10

• NNE drilled two wells (MIP 3H & 5H) in 2015 and obtained 111 feet of 4” whole core through the Marcellus and 50+ sidewall cores in the 3H well.

• The 3H well was instrumented with fiber optic cable for distributed acoustic and temperature measurements throughout the full lateral length.

• A dedicated vertical science well, situated between the two horizontal production wells, was drilled and logged with ~150 sidewall cores obtained.

• The science well was instrumented with borehole microseismicsensors to gather data during the 3H well hydraulic fracture stimulation.

• A surface seismic array was also used to monitor the stimulation.• Baseline noise, air and surface water data were collected before,

during, and after operations.

MSEEL Project Elements

11

MSEEL Subsurface ScienceMSEEL Project TeamGeochemistry (Sharma, Weislogel, Donovan - WVU; Cole, Darrah - OSU)• Rock – Kerogen; TOC; C/N/S; XRD; FIB/SM; cryo-laser ablation; Hg porosimetry• Fluids/Gases – Continuous monitoring S/C/O/H isotopes, organics, DOC, NORM,

noble gases

Microbiology (Mouser, Wrighton - OSU; Sharma - WVU)• Biomass; microbial lipids, metagenomics

Petrophysics/Geomechanics (Aminian, Wang, Siriwardane – WVU)• Steady-state permeability (in situ P/T); porosity; pore-size; adsorption dynamic

petrophysics f(P); vertical/lateral heterogeneity.• Mechanical strength measurements (laboratory and well-log)• FIB/SEM: pore and mineralogical structure• Log to core calibration; comparison to industry standard methods; • Real-time, actionable data for HF operations; comparative geometric (5H) and

engineered (3H) completions• natural fracture imaging; fiber-optics monitoring Multi-scale (nano-scale to SRV)

numerical simulation.

Geophysics (Wilson – WVU)• Borehole microseismic – SRV characterization in multi-well context

Additional Science (enabled by NETL/MSEEL) From NETL-ORD• Crandall (NETL): multi-scale CT imaging/micro-scale structure; MSCL• Hakala (NETL): Sr/Li isotopes; major cation/anion/trace elements• Hammack (NETL): surface micro-science array; fracturing and relaxation• Soeder (NETL): SRA/TOC • Boyle (NETL): fracture modeling (FMI)

From Existing National Laboratory Contributors*,#

• Xu (LANL): XRD, XRF, DSC/TG, SEM, TEM characterization and LBM modeling; SANS hydrocarbon phase and flow behavior

• Carey (LANL): tri-axial core-flood w/tracers & AE in situ fracture formation and permeability; X-ray tomography apertures and conductivity.

• Wang (SNL): thermodynamics of CH4-CO2-H2O under nano-pore confinement; Hi T/P sorption measurement methods.

• Moridis (LBNL): thermodynamic; X-Ray CT production strategies

From Collaborating Federal Agencies• Orem (USGS): contaminants in drill cuttings – wastewater evaluations

From Shale Gas Cooperative Agreement Contributors*,+

• Zhu (TAMU): fracture conductivity• Daigle (UT-A): tri-axial compressive strength; ultrasonic velocity; NMR during fracture; SEM and FIB• Jessen (USC): shale-rock interactions• Puckett (Ok. St.): petrophysical protocols: shale-fluid interaction

12

• While produced water recycle rate is high (85%), there is still a need for efficient brine treatment/management

• Secondary containment/casing integrity are effective in preventing off site contamination by produced water spills

• Radium trends > 20,000 pCi/L several months into the produced water cycle• Ra precipitates as tank/pond precipitates-radioactive but low volume• Drill cuttings should be subject to TCLP testing and if pass, then handle as non-

hazardous to save landfill space and cost.• Strong evidence that green drilling fluids can produce non hazardous drill cuttings

that may be neither hazardous (per RCRA) nor radioactive (per WV policy)

MSEEL Findings (Water and Waste)

13

• Engineered completion design results in ~20% increase in production compared to standard NNE completion techniques based on data obtained at MSEEL.

• EUR for future wells could be ~10-20% greater if we can exploit the technologic advantages observed at MSEEL in a cost-effective fashion.

• DAS and DTS fiber-optic data can be used to better understand hydraulic fracture propagation.

• At the MSEEL site, completion efficiency along the lateral is affected by preexisting fractures oriented at an angle to existing principal stresses and strongly influence hydraulic fracture propagation.

• An Unconventional Fracture Model (UFM) approach appears to more accurately simulate hydraulic fractures. This approach combines geomechanics with natural fracture interactions for hydraulic fracture geometry estimation.

MSEEL Findings (Well Completions)

14

• Interactive website has been operating since project launch

• Physical samples distributed to 12 universities, 5 national labs, and USGS

• Well over 100 publications and presentations to date

MSEEL Data Distribution

• Hundreds of visitors and students have toured the field lab• Data on restricted portal being moved to publically

accessible system on MSEEL.ORG and NETL-EDX• Core archived at NETL Morgantown

15

• Maintain MSEEL web application and data portal online at mseel.org• Continue air, surface water, and production monitoring activities• Publish results of portfolio of analyses• Plan and execute additional data gathering and experimental activities as appropriate

MSEEL Next Steps

16

Key Features of Site:• Partners: DOE-NETL, GTI, Laredo Petroleum (operator), seven other

producers, Halliburton, CoreLabs, University of Texas at Austin, BEG• Location in Permian’s Reagan Co. is well characterized (87 nearby wells)• Observatory Site includes 11 horizontal wells, in Upper and Middle Wolfcamp

formations (10,000 ft. horizontal legs)• Two re-fractured horizontal wells adjacent to pad wells• Vertical pilot well drilled for sidewall cores, logs, and injection test data• Slant hole core well located between horizontal wells to intersect hydraulic

fractures

Permian Basin Hydraulic Fracturing Test Site (HFTS)

17

Permian Basin Hydraulic Fracturing Test Site (HFTS)

PIONEERNatural Resources

18

• Water and air sampling prior, during, after HF• Cross-well seismic surveys prior to and after HF• Diagnostic fracture injection tests• 400+ fracture stages completed in 11 wells; radioactive and

chemical tracers employed, as well as colored proppant in wells close to slant core well

• Microseismic monitoring conducted during fracturing treatments

• Slant core well drilled through stimulated rock volume; 595 feet of core recovered in Wolfcamp zones

• Pressure sensors installed in slant well to monitor pressure during production

HFTS Project Elements

19

• Air quality data and analysis indicated little to no increase in toxic compounds during fracturing and production operations for eleven wells

• Elevated levels of BTEX measured during flowback period, short time frame, engineering controls exist to mitigate emissions

• No evidence of natural gas or produced water migration to groundwater aquifer

• Drawdown of water required for hydraulic fracturing had a temporary impact on groundwater salinity

• High levels of sulfate in groundwater and use of recycled produced water may contribute to microbially-influenced corrosion

HFTS Findings (Air and Water)

20

• Fracture quantity and complexity far beyond what current models predict• Five times as many fractures observed in the Upper Wolfcamp as in the Middle Wolfcamp• More perforations clusters and tighter stage spacing is needed in the Middle Wolfcamp to

create additional SRV

• Variable rate fracturing significantly increases production• Microseismic and tiltmeter data show fractures do not grow into fresh water zones• Novel proppant quantification techniques provide useful insights

• Proppant distribution is limited to <10% of vertical microseismic height• Bed boundaries have significant impact on limiting vertical proppant transport• Significant proppant trapped where fractures intersect, limiting lateral transport

HFTS Findings (Well Completions)

21

• Website for partner data sharing being maintained and updated www.thepermianproject.com

• Reservoir pressure monitoring underway during production

• Core characterization underway• Water and air sampling continues during

production operations• Hydraulic fracture modeling is in progress• PVT testing is ongoing• Plans are being developed to slab the core and

collect samples that will be distributed to the National Labs

• Microbial and water analyses to be completed in the next six months

HFTS Current Status

22

• Interactive website has been operating since project launch

• 23 workshops, reports, and presentations delivered to date

• Over 60 weekly/bi-weekly WebEx meetings highlighting current results and activities

HFTS Data Distribution

• Special technology session (1-day) being planned for URTeC 2018.• Multiple papers, posters, and presentations in US and abroad, including:

SPE, URTeC (SPE, SEG, AAPG), IGRC, and others

23

• Continue field data collection: interference testing, pressure and production monitoring, environmental sampling

• Plan and execute additional data gathering and experimental activities for remainder of project period

• Publish results of analyses on:• Inter-well interference• Stimulated rock volume (SRV) & reservoir depletion over

time• Effectiveness of geological fracture barriers • Effectiveness of alternative HF designs • Variations in performance by stage/perf cluster post-

stimulation

HFTS Next Steps

Slant well core in core barrel. This is the first time a public research well has been cored through the stimulated rock volume of a horizontal well

24

NEW (2018) Field Laboratory SitesField Laboratory for Emerging Stacked

Unconventional Plays in Central AppalachiaRogersville Shale/Nora Field

Virginia Tech

Hydraulic Fracture Test Site IIWolfcamp Shale/Delaware Basin

Gas Tech. Institute

The Eagle Ford Shale LaboratoryEagle Ford Shale/TX, LA, MS Salt Basin

Texas A&M

Tuscaloosa Marine Shale LaboratoryTuscaloosa Marine Shale/TX, LA, MS Salt

BasinUniv. of Louisiana

25

Hydraulic Fracture Test Site II (HFTS2) –Delaware Basin

Permian basin map illustrating the two major basins (Midland and Delaware) which combine to form the Permian basin

Performer: Gas Technology Institute

PROJECT TEAM

• Evaluate well completion optimization and environmental impact

• Determine optimum well spacing and fracture propagation and design

• Stage-based production performance testing• Evaluate microbial impacts on reservoir quality• Complete 3D earth models of reservoir simulation and fracture

evaluation, including micro-seismicity

26

The Eagle Ford Shale Laboratory: A Field Study of Stimulated Reservoir Volume, Detailed Fracture Characteristics, and EOR PotentialPerformer: Texas A&M University

Eagle Ford Shale Laboratory site

PROJECT TEAM

• Employ advanced hydraulic fracturing and geosteeringtechnology in two new wells

• Employ newly developed technologies to monitor the refracturing of a previously fractured legacy well that has been characterized in detail

• Test the efficiency of huff-and-puff gas injection as an EOR method

27

Tuscaloosa Marine Shale Laboratory (TMSL)Performer: University of Louisiana at Lafayette

Mineral Composition of TMS (Besov et al. 2017; Lu et al. 2015; Lu et al. 2011) compared to Eagle Ford Marl and Buda Limestone (Jiang, Mokhtari and

Borrok 2017)

PROJECT TEAM

• Improve drilling and completion efficiency by better understanding the source of wellbore instability issues

• Improve the estimation of reservoir quality using advanced TOC calculations, water analysis, and geophysical analysis

• Determine the role of discontinuities on fracture growth and shale creep behavior using digital image correlation

• Improve hydraulic fracturing through the use of stable CO2foam and super-hydrophobic proppants

• Improve understanding of the nature of flow and fluid interaction in the high clay/organic content TMS

28

Emerging Stacked Unconventional Plays (ESUP) in Central AppalachiaPerformer: Virginia Tech

Map of the Conasauga-Rome Petroleum System (Ryder, Harris et al. 2014)

PROJECT TEAM

• Characterize the resource potential for multi-play production of emerging unconventional reservoirs in the Nora Gas Field

• Characterize the geology and potential deep pay zones of Cambrian-age formations (including the Rogersville shale) in Central Appalachia by drilling, logging, and coring a deep vertical test well up to 15,000 feet

• Evaluate the potential benefits of novel well completion strategies by monitoring the drilling and completion of at least one multi-stage lateral well in the Lower Huron Shale using CO2-based fracturing fluid and advanced proppants

THANK YOU!