Hydraulic Fracturing: Trends and Implications for Data Management

Transcription

1 PROFESSIONAL PETROLEUM DATA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION Hydraulic Fracturing: Trends and Implications for Data Management Bruce Smith PPDM Fall Conference October 2011

2 2 Author Photos

3 Today s Presentation 1. Overview of Recent Rules changes in U.S. 2. Recent data management initiatives for Fracturing 3. Discuss PPDM Well Treatment Table in comparison to New Reporting Requirements and to Frac Reports issued by service companies 3

4 Several States have modified Hydraulic Fracturing Rules Texas: May 2011 Montana: August 2011 Louisiana: October 2011 New York released draft rules in October 2011 Many other states are reviewing rules Colorado and Pennsylvania reviewing disclosure of Frac Fluids in queryable state databases British Columbia will have online registry of Hydraulic Fracturing information starting in January

5 New Rules Focus on Frac Fluids Disclosure of frac fluid chemistry including concentrations Enough information to understand fluids but not disclose proprietary technology Casing and pressure testing requirements FracFocus.org reporting website Focus on Water Sources and Water Disposal U.S. EPA developing rules for surface disposal of frac flowback 5

6 FracFocus.org Joint effort of Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC) and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC) for reporting of Frac Fluids Website Started in April 2011 Industry usage growing with 69 companies registered and 44 companies filing reports 5400 wells reported as of early October Reporting of Frac Fluid chemistry Voluntary reporting in most areas FracFocus reporting is beginning to be cited in new rules (e.g., Montana) Current reporting is PDF and not digital data exchange 6

7 FracFocus.org 7 Well Identification 1/26/2011

8 Sample Report from FracFocus Trade Name Supplier Purpose Ingredients Chemical Abstract Number Maximum Ingredient % in Additive Maximum Ingredient % in HF Fluid 8 Well Identification 1/26/2011

9 9 Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC) Modeling of Hydraulic Fracturing Data

10 Data Management with RBDMS System RBDMS is Risk-Based Data Management System RBDMS is used by more than 20 U.S. regulators for management of well, production, injection, surface facilities, permitting and many other data management requirements RBDMS team has developed data model to address Hydraulic Fracturing for regulatory use Seven regulators provided requirements - Colorado, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, Indiana 10 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

11 RBDMS Hydraulic Fracturing Model 11 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

12 Data Captured by RBDMS Fracturing Model The date the well was fractured The chemicals or trade names of the chemicals that are used in fracturing fluids The source of the water used for the well stimulation The method of disposal used for hydraulic fracturing fluids The results of water well sampling and analysis The mechanical integrity of hydraulically fractured wells 12 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

13 Data Captured by RBDMS Fracturing Model The date the well was fractured The chemicals or trade names of the chemicals that are used in fracturing fluids The source of the water used for the well stimulation The method of disposal used for hydraulic fracturing fluids The results of water well sampling and analysis The mechanical integrity of hydraulically fractured wells 13 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

14 Overview of RBDMS Model for Fracturing Stimulation: Parent table for the HF module, with a many-to-one relationship with the Construct table. Tracks summary stimulation data such as the date, formation name, and interval. Since each well treatment is performed in stages, Stimulation has a one-to-many relationship with Stage. Stage: Tracks the pressures measured during the stage of treatment, duration of the stage, and the means of isolating the fracturing operation. FracFluid: Because each stage may involve the use of multiple fracturing fluids, this table, which tracks the physical makeup of each fluid batch, has a many-toone relationship with Stage. 14 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

15 Overview of RBDMS Model for Fracturing FracFluidProduct: Since each fracturing fluid batch can contain multiple products, this table links FracFluid and Product. Product: Tracks trade name, product usage, product MSDS number, secrecy determination, current registration, and disclosure. ProductChemical: Since many chemicals can be in multiple products, this is a linking table for the chemicals in the products along with the percent by weight of the chemicals in the products. Chemical: Tracks such data as chemical name, CAS number, and MSDS number. 15 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

16 Overview of RBDMS Model for Fracturing Water: Tracks the sources and quantities of water used for each stage of well treatment and has many-to-one relationship with Stage. Flowback: Tracks the HF fluids collected during the well treatment with respect to duration, volume, and containment methods. Because flowback occurs once after all stages have completed, it has a one-to-one relationship with Stimulation. Disposal: Tracks volumes disposed and methods of disposal for HF fluids from each stage. Since some portion of the fluid also may be reused, Disposal is in a many-to-one relationship with Stage. 16 RBDMS slides are courtesy of Don Drazan of NY DEC and Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC)

17 Post Frac Information Needs of Operators Record of Job Energistics has developed a Data Exchange object StimJob Object for exchange of post-stimulation information between Service Company and Operator - Implementation work group to promote use of this standard was announced in mid October Regulatory filing requirements Engineering analysis requirement 17

18 Post Frac Information Needs of Operators Small Company Engineering manager s view Emphasis on treatment information in offset wells to help design next jobs for operated wells - Size of job total fluid, proppant amount - Type of Fluid slickwater vs gelled water - Proppant type Number and depth interval (length) of Stages Treatment pressure and rate to determine horsepower requirements and therefore to estimate job costs - Treatment pressure per depth-based stage can indicate interference across different frac jobs Leakoff test showing change in pressure in time at completion of frac job to estimate post-frac permeability 18

19 PPDM Well Treatment Table Summary level data on fluid, proppant, pressure Stage Number: Number identifying the stage involved in the treatment. Fracturing is done in stages as fluids are injected into the well. Enough changes in frac reporting for regulators and in information from service companies that PPDM should look at the model Some confusion of terms, such as Stages are worth reviewing for possible clarification or definition 19

20 Acknowledgements Don Drazan, New York DEC for information on RBDMS Hydraulic Fracturing model Tom Richmond, Montana Oil and Gas Board presentation on new Montana rules for - Available at IOGCC website 20