Environmentally Friendly Drilling Systems (EFD) Technology Integration Program

Transcription

1 Environmentally Friendly Drilling Systems (EFD) Technology Integration Program Tom Williams, LEID, LLC Carolyn LaFleur, Houston Advanced Research Center Best of RPSEA 10 Years of Research - Ultra-Deepwater and Onshore Technology Conference August 30-31, 2016 The San Luis Resort, Spa & Conference Center, Galveston, TX 1 rpsea.org

2 Items to Discuss o Project Objectives o Tasks o Touch on some of the Accomplishments o Task Results o Summary and Conclusions o Deliverables o Tech Transfer 2

3 Acknowledgements 3 The EFD TIP Program was managed by the Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC). TIP was led by Rich Haut, with key project task management roles by Andra Wilcox, Carolyn LaFleur, HARC; David Burnett and Susan Stuver; TAMU; and Tom Williams, LEID. The investment in this project has leveraged a substantial amount of addition R&D through cost share, assisted other RPSEA contractors, operator costs were reduced, new tools and services were commercialized and are generating revenue, while improving environmental performance has improved. The final report, a number of related reports, complementary project publications and presentations can be found on Funding for the project is provided through the Ultra-Deepwater and Unconventional Natural Gas and Other Petroleum Resources Research and Development Program authorized by the Energy Policy Act of This program funded from lease bonuses and royalties paid by industry to produce oil and gas on federal lands is designed to assess and mitigate risk enhancing the environmental sustainability of oil and gas exploration and production activities. RPSEA is under contract with the U.S. Department of Energy s National Energy Technology Laboratory to administer three areas of research. RPSEA is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit consortium with more than 120 members, including 16 of the nation's premier research universities, five national laboratories, other major research institutions, large and small energy producers and energy consumers.

4 EFD Team Management Team SPONSORS COLLABORATORS Together ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS Everyone EFD Alliance Achieves More 4

5 TIP Project Objectives / Goals Overall mission: to identify and facilitate the integration of various projects/programs that can impact the unconventional natural gas developments in an environmentally sensitive and cost effective manner. Goals: o Speed the commercial development of technology developed through RPSEA programs. o Create an organizational structure that includes a network of regional centers that facilitate and coordinate field deployment of such technologies and document effectiveness of field operations. o Perform field trials so that results could be evaluated efficiently as to benefit both the industry, the organizations with the technology, and the public sector. o Document and provide the results of technology field trials so that promising processes, systems and products could be utilized in a wider range of unconventional natural gas plays. o Emphasize programs that reduce cost and improve performance, lessen the environmental impacts, or address the societal issues associated with unconventional natural gas development. o Include and report on safety improvements in the planning/demonstration of technologies, emphasizing technologies that foster a culture of health / safety / environmental protection. 5

6 EFD-TIP: Work Breakdown from Project Management Plan PHASE I Planning Activities Task 1.0 Project Management Plan Task 2.0 Tech. Status Assessment Task 3.0 Tech. Transfer Plan Task 4.0 Other Reports/Special Items Task 5.0 RPSEA Program Assessment, Regional Centers and Field Testing Plans 5.1 Assessment of RPSEA Projects 5.2 Initial Meetings/Workshops 5.3 West EFD Center Field Test Plans Eagle Ford Characterization Field Tests Locating Sites Field Tests Water Mngmnt Field Tests D&C Ops Field Tests Community Iss Field Tests Air Qual./Emns. 5.3.x Field Tests TBD 5.4 East EFD Center Field Test Plans 5.4.x Field Tests TBD PHASE II Field Test/Research Activities Task 6.0 Field Test Activities Task 7.0 Access to Data 7.1 Web Site Development 7.2 GIS Analytical Tool 7.3 Sensorpedia Network 7.4 Presentations, Exhibits, Technology Outreach 6

7 Eagle Ford Characterization (Task 5.3.1) Report identifies all sources of water in the Eagle Ford. Results transferred by BEG and EFD utilized industry including Pioneer Natural Resources, Statoil to identify lower cost sources of water for operations. 7

8 EFD Field Trial Sites (Task 5.3.2) Locations of Field Trials Focuses on field trials, documenting and reporting. EFD provides unbiased science to ensure that environmental and societal aspects are addressed in all oil and gas activities. 8

9 Water Management Strategy Support (Task 5.3.3) Assisted development of water management strategies. 9

10 Water Management West TX EFD TIP Program Brine Re-Use Permian Basin 10

11 Goal for tasks 5.3.4, o Encourage the efficient use of natural gas in oil and gas operations. o Monetize stranded, flared and easily accessible field gas. o Reduce costs of operations, assist solution providers and manufactures on how to improve performance and reduce non combusted methane, and improve overall environmental performance. o Provide a resource for industry to obtain objective data on these solution options. 11

12 12 D&C Ops: Field Setup - Instruments / Sampling (Task 5.3.4)

13 Methane (CH4) [g/hr] Emissions from Hydraulic Fracturing Engines Determined emission differences between hydraulic fracturing engines powered by diesel and engines powered with natural gas/diesel dual fuel. Natural gas dual fuel engine does not have clear advantages in emissions compared with diesel, further studies needed Un-combusted Methane is up to 30% of total natural gas fuel supply under high substitution rate, reduces fuel economy Further research is needed to address these issues Have tested four different pump engines rpm 1600 rpm 1700 rpm 1800 rpm 1900 rpm 1950 rpm Dual Fuel % 65% 85% 45% 65% 85% Diesel 45% 65% 85% Pump Load 45% 65% 85% 45% 65% 85% 45% 65% 85%

14 D&C Ops (Task 5.3.4) EFD Scorecard ( 14

15 Drilling Fluid Systems in the Utica and Marcellus Shales 2016 AADE TECHNICAL CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION The Global Premier Drilling, Completion, Cementing & Fracturing Fluids Conference Ian Collins, West Virginia University Co-authors: Garrett Hadley, Mike Malecki Advising Professor: Dr. Ilkin Bilgesu Introduction The Marcellus Shale and the Utica Shale cover a large area in the northeastern region of the US, and their geologic and geographic attributes are responsible for unique approaches to drilling in the area. Background Approach The study began with research into the well and completions reports available from the public records of the targeted states. This information was then applied in the production of a survey that addressed questions concerning fluid types, regulations, implicit and performance factors, and waste disposal. Key Findings / Results Applicability This data can be used by the drilling fluid service providers take into account the factors that the operators in the region deem most important. This research can also provide perspective for any potential regulation in the region on drilling fluids and cuttings. Conclusions Many companies do not follow environmental stewardship beyond following regulations, likely because regulations are meant to protect the environment. The study also found the reduction of cost to be the greatest influence on fluid selection. 15 Prior to the completion of this study, there was a phase 1. This was a joint effort in which a group worked to determine the laws that restricted the use of drilling fluids in some way. Experimental Facility This research was conducted using an online survey distributed to active companies in the area. The study was funded by the Environmentally Friendly Drilling Program.

16 16 Community Issues / Public Perception (Task 5.3.5)

17 Selected Findings 1. Perception is a key factor in explaining: a. attitudes toward, and b. actions taken either in support of or opposition to the development of oil and gas. 2. Transparent communication between/ among all stakeholders is paramount a) Potentially positive aspects and negative consequences b) Industry share more information about shale gas technologies with government and regulatory officials and the general citizenry 3. Probability of risks exists 17 Of rapid industrialization (boom and bust) Of uneven distribution of cost and benefit Of social-psychological stress

18 Field Test Flaring Mitigation (Task Air Quality) Objectives Identify & test simple/robust technologies to reduce flaring Location Field trials in the Bakken Field Trial Team Status Technology identified through assessment of RPSEA technologies. (Task 5.1) ORC equipment installed, commissioned, operated. 18

19 Power From Produced Water (Previous RPSEA Funded Effort) 19

20 Results 1857 HR Study by Texas A&M/Institute of Renewable Natural Resources October

21 Land Use Site Selection Information Tool LUSSIT (Task 7.2) Development of LUSSIT o GIS based analytical tool that aggregates spatially distributed attributes and considerations in the region(s) of interest to support site selection decisions. o Tool beta tested in Sept/Oct o Tool now commercial! Tools for planning and evaluating infrastructure placement anyone can use 21 Simulate spill flow and termination scenarios

22 Technology Transfer YTD Publications Presentations Workshops Webinars 1 5 Exhibits Oil and Gas Awards VZ Environmental Award for Excellence in Environmental Stewardship Finalist Best Health, Safety, Environmental Program Onshore, World Oil Awards Nominated Protection of the Environment Prize, Eni Award Impact Award Nominee, 2014 Eagle Ford Excellence Awards, South Texas Energy Economic Roundtable Finalist Best Outreach Program, World Oil Awards Nominated Energy Education Category, IOGCC Chairman s Stewardship Awards

23 Best Management Practices ( Maintained and expanded the website for best management practices to address environmental rules and regulations. Initiated comparative law study. The database contains 8,500 BMPs, from nearly 500 source documents in categories such as Wildlife, Water, Air, Health, Soils, and Vegetation. 23

24 Contacts 24 Principal Investigator: Rich Haut Houston Advanced Research Center Presenters: Tom Williams LEID, LLC Carolyn LaFleur Houston Advanced Research Center Project Manager: Sandy McSurdy NETL Technical Coordinator: Kent Perry RPSEA