Speaftp120620 Houze Clamart

8/9/2019 Speaftp120620 Houze Clamart

1/42

2012-06

Production Analysis

and Forecasting of

Shale Oil / Gas Formations

SPE France - Clamart

20th June 2012

Olivier Houzé


2/42

2012-06

Tight / Shale gas / CBM

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

1,000 md

10 md

0.1 md

0.001 md

SmallVolumes

Large

Volumes

Tight

Gas

Shale GasShale Oil Hydrates

CBM

High Q

Medium Q

LowQuality

H i g h e r

C o s t s

M o r e T e c

h n o l o g y


3/42

2012-06

Main Shale Plays

• Antrim• Avalon-Wolfberry

•

Bakken• Barnett

• Baxter• Cody

• Eagle Ford• Fayetteville

• Haynesville-Bossier

• Horn River• Lewis

•

Marcellus• Mississippian

• New Albany• Niobrara

• Poland• Woodford


4/42

2012-06

Unconventional Consortiums

• 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


5/42

2012-06

Common unconventional issues

• Extremely low permeability ► nonlinearities

• Multiple scales of porosity and diffusion

• Exotic diffusion effects

•

Stress dependence• Fractured horizontal wells

• Poor data (rare PDG’s, 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


6/42

2012-06

Several scales of diffusion

micro-macro links:

Fick diffusion

macro-macro link:

Darcy or Forcheimer

Fracture

network

Desorption Micropores


7/42


8/42

2012-06

Unconventional Models v1.0

1 104 106 108100 days


9/42


10/42

2012-06

Analysis tools & proxys

• Straight lines (flow regimes)

• Ad-hoc decline curves

• Analytical models

pseudopressures & pseudotimes

•

Numerical models


11/42

2012-06

Straight lines

∆


12/42

2012-06

Advanced Analyses


13/42

2012-06

Ad-hoc decline curves

= . −∞−

= . −∞

Arps

Ilk et al.


14/42

2012-06

Analytical models

SRV Bounded

Trilinear

Exact geometry


15/42

2012-06

Advanced Analytical models


16/42

2012-06

Numerical Models

6000 cells

/ fracture

1000 cells

/ fracture


17/42

2012-06

Further Downscaling for UR

Min

t

t c

k A L


18/42

2012-06

Advanced Numerical Models


19/42


20/42

2012-06

Model stress

3

0 ln

P C k k

ref

ref

• Walsh

• Palmer and Mansoori

• Ostensen

3

0

0

00

0

0

111

1

P P

P

P P

P

M

K P P f

M

K

M k

k

mn

m

nk

k 20,

*2*

0

1ln1ln


21/42

2012-06

From shale gas to shale oil

• 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 ?


22/42

2012-06

Choice of the right proxy


23/42

2012-06

Playing with data


24/42

2012-06

Case study


25/42

2012-06

Changing Wellbore model

• Simultaneous correction for casing and tubing flows


26/42

2012-06

Straight line analysis

∆


27/42

2012-06

Analytical model


28/42

2012-06

Numerical model


29/42

2012-06

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

G a s r a t e [ M s c f / D ]

0

1E+9

2E+9

0 100 200 300 400 500

Time [Day]

4000

9000

P r e s s u r e

[ p s i a ]

0.1 1 10 100 1000Time [Day]

0.1

1

10

0.1 1 10 100 1000Time [Day]

0.1

1

Ten more months of data !


30/42

2012-06

Old Straight line model

2000

6000

10000

14000

18000

G a s r a t e [ M s c f / D ]

5E+8

1.5E+9

2.5E+9

q g P ro d u c t io n 5 6 0 d a ys )

Qg

q g m o d e l

Q g m o d e l

0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560

Time Da

4000

9000

P r e s s u r e [ p s i a ]

Pi

p F B H P 5 6 0 d a y s )

0.1 1 10 100 1000Time [Day]

1E+5

1E+6

Integral of normalized pressure

Integral of normalized pressure erivative


31/42

2012-06

Old analytical model

0.1 1 10 100 1000

Time [Day]

1E+5

1E+6

1E+7

4000

8000

12000

16000

G a s r a t

e [ M s c f / D ]

3E+8

8E+8

1.3E+9

1.8E+9

2.3E+9

0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560

Time [Day]

4000

9000



32/42

2012-06

Improved numerical model

0.1 1 10 100Time [Day]

0.1

1

10

3000

8000

13000

18000

G a s r a

t e [ M s c f / D ]

5E+8

1.5E+9

2.5E+9

0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 6

Time [Day]

4000

9000



33/42

2012-06

Comparison

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

G a s

r a t e [ M s c f / D ]

5E+8

1E+9

1.5E+9

2E+9

2.5E+9

3E+9

Equiv s ingle f racture

Ana ly t . new da ta

NL new da ta

0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 6

Time [Day]

3000

7000



34/42

2012-06

Lego™ development


35/42

2012-06

Challenging the basic model

• Interference during fracturing

• Interference during production

• Microseismics

• Production logs

• Ridiculously long linear flows

• Where is the water gone?


36/42

2012-06

Discrete Fractures Network

Courtesy of IFPEN


37/42

2012-06

Discrete Fractures network


38/42

2012-06

Modeling Fracture growth

Cou rtesy o f Rob Jeffrey, CSIRO


39/42

2012-06

Reserve calculations

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


40/42

2012-06

Terminal decline from numerical model


41/42

2012-06

What’s next ?


42/42

2012-06

Thank you

Merci !

Danke !

Спасибо !

¡ Gracias !

Obrigado!

!

りがと

!Grazie!

Дякую!Зур рахмəт!

Documents

Speaftp120620 Houze Clamart