Technology Enhancements in the Hydraulic Fracturing of Horizontal Wells

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Technology Enhancements in the Hydraulic Fracturing of Horizontal Wells"

Susan Parrish
5 years ago
Views:

1 Technology Enhancements in the Hydraulic Fracturing of Horizontal Wells Brian Clark Senior Production and Completions Engineer Unconventional Resources Group

2 Topics Environmental Horizontal Completion Design Fracture Conductivity in Unconventional Reservoirs

3 Topics Environmental

CemSTRESS* analysis Execution FlexSEAL* / FUTUR* Flexible & Expandable Self-sealing CemCRETE technology high solids content Low

4 IWI* Integrated Well Integrity Hole Quality Caliper Real-Time Borehole Geometry Mud Removal Design Well Clean II* Spacer Design Casing Centralization Slurry Placement Fluid System Design Gas migration control (gel strength; transition time; fluid loss CemSTRESS* analysis Execution FlexSEAL* / FUTUR* Flexible & Expandable Self-sealing CemCRETE technology high solids content Low perm and Porosity Evaluation Cement Isolation Evaluation Isolation Scanner* Process to provide zonal isolation in Shale Resource Plays

Hydraulic Fracturing: Current Political Climate Federal

$Oversight WY & AR require frac fluid disclosure NY, PA,$

5 Hydraulic Fracturing: Current Political Climate Federal Involvement HR 2766 F.R.A.C. ACT of 2009 EPA request for disclosure: 09/10 SEAB: Shale Gas Production Subcommittee: 08/11 State Oversight WY & AR require frac fluid disclosure NY, PA, TX more to come Mainstream Media and Pop Culture Gasland, 60 Minutes Shaleionaires, CSI Fracked

OpenFRAC Fracturing Fluids Fully functional, fully formulated and fully disclosed Designed with additives that avoid the use of Priority Pollutants (USA) and contaminants listed on the National

6 OpenFRAC Fracturing Fluids Fully functional, fully formulated and fully disclosed Designed with additives that avoid the use of Priority Pollutants (USA) and contaminants listed on the National Primary Drinking Water Standard Continual improvement in formulations to reduce trace contaminants and to minimize Priority Pollutants in other fluids Current OpenFRAC Systems OpenACID Spearhead (1 variant) OpenFRAC SW Slickwater (6 variants) OpenFRAC WF Linear Gel (4 variants) OpenFRAC XL X-Link Gel (4 variants)

individual chemicals for a given system Maintain confidentiality of

7 Disclosure Methodology System Style: Fluid Systems with additives, concentrations and volumes listed Disclose total amounts of individual chemicals for a given system Maintain confidentiality of proprietary chemistry Report being automated for delivery at time of service

Appearance in Water Typical FR OF001 OF001 OF001 Quick Hydration in Cold Water OF001 (1.

8 You don t have sacrifice performance Contains no hydrocarbon solvents Flash point > 200 deg F (non-flammable) Low HMIS values (1,0,0) Excellent performance in produced water Improved Appearance in Water Typical FR OF001 OF001 OF001 Quick Hydration in Cold Water OF001 (1.0 gpt) B145 (1.0 gpt) B315 (1.0 gpt) OF001 Superior Hydration in Brine OF001 (0.5 gpt) B145 (0.5 gpt) B315 (0.5 gpt) OF001

9 Topics Horizontal Completion Design

Percent of Perforation Clusters not Flowing Horizontal Shale Well Production Log Analysis Increasing clusters per stage improves operational efficiency, but compromises well productivity 50% 45% 40%

10 Percent of Perforation Clusters not Flowing Horizontal Shale Well Production Log Analysis Increasing clusters per stage improves operational efficiency, but compromises well productivity 50% 45% 40% All Stages Better Stages % of theoretical Non-Producing Perforation Clusters vs Perforation Cluster Density (clusters per stage) Best Stages > 150% of theoretical 48% 38.6% 46.3% 35% 30% 34% 30% 25% 20% 20% 24% 19.9% 23.7% 22.5% 15% 12.4% 15.6% 10% 8.3% 9.4% SPE % 0% 0.0% Perf Clusters / Frac Stage

11 Percent of Perforation Clusters not Flowing Horizontal Shale Well Production Log Analysis Current completion techniques, while very efficient, do not provide optimized production along the lateral 35.0% 30.0% 29.6% All Stages 25.9% Better Stages % of theoretical 26.9% Best Stages > 150% of theoretical 32.2% 25.0% 24.0% 23.5% 22.5% Why? Limited entry not effective? RQ & CQ variations along lateral? Overflushing during pump down? Comingling/Crossflow? SPE % 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 13.5% 9.6% 10.8% 6.0% 21.3% 14.1% 7.3% 16.2% 14.4% 19.4% 17.8% Marcellus Haynesville Eagleford Fayetteville Barnett Woodford 29.6% Not Producing 20% Not Producing 19% Not Producing

12 Tangential Stress (psi/ft) Horizontal Production Improvement Predicting Breakdown Pressure Eh/Ev = 1.0 Eh/Ev = 1.5 Eh/Ev = Eh/Ev = 2.5 Eh/Ev = 3.0 Eh/Ev = 3.5 Eh/Ev = Angle (deg) SPE Minimum Horizontal Stress Breakdown Pressure from Stress Concentration SPE T B T S S

13 Putting it all together: Eagle Ford Shale Example: 17 Geometric Stages Reservoir Quality Completion Quality SPE138427

14 Putting it all together: Eagle Ford Shale Example: 17 Customized Stages Reservoir Quality Completion Quality SPE138427

$Completion Quality Mangrove Horizontal Completions Advisor Perforation placement and fracture staging$

15 Putting it all together: Mangrove Horizontal Well Completion Advisor Composite Score Reservoir Quality Completion Quality Mangrove Horizontal Completions Advisor Perforation placement and fracture staging optimization

16 Putting it All Together Mangrove and HFM Combine

3 Month BOE Optimized Completions: Eagle Ford Shale Results New wells used Reservoir Quality and Completion Quality to optimize completions 33% increase in 3

17 3 Month BOE Optimized Completions: Eagle Ford Shale Results New wells used Reservoir Quality and Completion Quality to optimize completions 33% increase in 3 month average cumulative BOE on new wells compared to offsets SPE Pre Optimization (6 Wells) Post Optimization (3 Wells)

18 Topics Fracture Conductivity in Unconventional Reservoirs

19 Fracture Conductivity Innovation for a Step-Change in Conductivity HiWAY Incremental improvements in: Fluid technology (gel loading, polymer-free) Proppants (size, mesh, strength) Breaker (oxidizer, encapsulated, enzymes) 1947 Theoretical maximum

$Technique that engineers the delivery of stable flow channels into the proppant pack Significantly higher fracture conductivity Improved fracture clean-up Longer effective fracture half-lengths Low$

20 HiWAY Channel Fracturing: What is it? Technique that engineers the delivery of stable flow channels into the proppant pack Significantly higher fracture conductivity Improved fracture clean-up Longer effective fracture half-lengths Low risk of screen-out Increased production Lower operational costs Delivering Channel Structure Ensuring Structure Stability Completion Technique Engineering Design

HiWAY Channel Fracturing Technique Key elements to

candidate selection and job design Specialized

Fit-for-purpose fibers and viscous fluids to

21 HiWAY Channel Fracturing Technique Key elements to HiWAY reliability Geo-mechanical modeling for candidate selection and job design Specialized blender technology to generate proppant pulses Fit-for-purpose fibers and viscous fluids to maintain the integrity of the proppant pulses Tailored perforation strategy

22 Case Study: Eagle Ford Shale Example HiWAY Channel Fracturing Hybrid Treatment Plot

180-day normalized cumulative gas production

Reservoir Simulations Completion & Stimulation

Model Normalized production at equivalent BHP

2XF 100 2LN + LC L N L C L N 50 0 Heim 2H

23 180-day normalized cumulative gas production (MMscf/1000 ft) Productivity Normalization via Reservoir Simulations Completion & Stimulation Parameters* 3D Formation Simulator Calibrated Model Normalized production at equivalent BHP H X F XF 100 2LN + LC L N L C L N 50 0 Heim 2H Offset A Offset B Offset C (Channel Fracturing) SPE136696

24 Wellhead flowing pressure (psi) Choke size Cumulative production (Mscf) Dry Gas Area Heim 2H Offset A 180-day Cumulative Gas Production 1,600,000 Heim 2H (Channel fracturing) 1,400,000 Offset A Offset B 1,200,000 Offset C Offset B 1,000, , ,000 Offset C 400, , mi Time, days 180-day Wellhead Flowing Pressure and Choke Size SPE ,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Heim 2H (Channel fracturing) Offset A Offset B Offset C Time, days Heim 2H (Channel fracturing) Offset A Offset B Offset C Time, days

25 180-day normalized cumulative gas production (MMscf/1000 ft) Dry Gas Area 180-day Normalized Gas Production at Equivalent BHP D = 51% Heim 2H (Channel Fracturing) Offset A Offset B Offset C

$Wellhead flowing pressure (psi) Choke size Cumulative oil production (BBL) Condensate-Rich Area Dilworth 1H 180-day Cumulative Oil Production 120,000 Dilworth 1H (Channel fracturing) Offset D 100,000$

26 Wellhead flowing pressure (psi) Choke size Cumulative oil production (BBL) Condensate-Rich Area Dilworth 1H 180-day Cumulative Oil Production 120,000 Dilworth 1H (Channel fracturing) Offset D 100,000 80,000 60,000 Offset D 40,000 20, mi Time, days 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1, day Wellhead Flowing Pressure and Choke Size Dilworth 1H (Channel fracturing) Offset D Time, days Dilworth 1H (Channel fracturing) Offset D Time, days

27 180-day normalized cumulative oil production (Mbbl/1000 ft) Condensate-Rich Area 180-day Normalized Condensate Production at Equivalent BHP D = 46% Dilworth 1H (Channel Fracturing) Offset D

28 Cumulative Probability Hawkville Field 90 Day Production Do more with less: 1 / 2 the fluid of Slickwater 2 / 3 the proppant of Hybrids Make better wells: 27% more production / ft of lateral 340% more production / bbl of Slickwater 100% more production / lb of proppant Offset C Offset B Offset A Offset D Fracturing technique Channel fracturing (12 wells) Hybrid (8 wells) Heim 2H Dilwortth 1H Range (Bcfe) 0.43 to to 0.65 Average (Bcfe) Slickwater 0.11 to (30 wells) day cumulative production (Bcfe) SPE Basic Completion Data (Average per Well) 90-Day Average Production and Wellhead Flowing Pressures per Well Fracturing technique Cumulative Wellhead Production/ Lateral length Frac fluid Proppant Production / Production / Production flowing Mbbl Frac (ft) (Mbbl) (Mlbm) 1000 ft Lateral Mlbm proppant (MMcfe) pressure (psi) Fluid Channel fracturing (12 wells) [18/64"] Hybrid (8 wells) [18/64"] Slickwater (30 wells) [22/64"]

$production in multi-stage wells Improve frac efficiency Improve fracture conductivity with HiWAY flow-channel fracturing technique (3-well campaign) Results$ 73 MMcf (24%) increase in cumulative production in 180 days Increased flowback rate by 32% SPE140549 Formation type Sandstone/shale TVD 2300 4100 m 7,500

73 MMcf (24%) increase in cumulative production in 180 days Increased flowback rate by 32% SPE140549 Formation type Sandstone/shale TVD 2300 4100 m 7,500

29 Normalization Factor Case Study: Encana, Rocky Mountains Jonah Example HiWAY Delivers 24% More Production from Tight Gas Formation Challenge Improve production in multi-stage wells Improve frac efficiency Improve fracture conductivity with HiWAY flow-channel fracturing technique (3-well campaign) Results 73 MMcf (24%) increase in cumulative production in 180 days Increased flowback rate by 32% SPE Formation type Sandstone/shale TVD m 7,500 13,500 ft Permeability to 0.01 md Porosity 6% to 9% Young s modulus 24x - 41x10 3 MPa million psi BHP Mpa 4,000 10,000 psi BHST ºC ºF

30 Average cumulative gas production per Well (MMcf) Average cumulative gas production per Well (MMcf) Productivity Improvement 30 Day Normalized Cumulative Production 2 Year Decline Curve Analysis EUR (a) (a) Channel Channel Fracturing (model) (model) Conventional (model) (model) (b) (b) D = D +17% = +17% Channel Channel Offset Offset Fracturing Fracturing wells wells D (%) D (%) Statistical Statistical % +23% mean mean Normalized 30-day 30-day Cumulative Production (Mcf/S (Mcf/S g h) g h) Time Time (years) (years) P 30, N P30 s h g s g = Gas saturation, = Porosity, h = height

31 Reduction in growth of Frac Pressure: Reduced risk of screen-out Cumulative Probability Statistical mean Channel Fracturing Offset wells D (%) % Positive net pressure increase (psi)

32 Reduction in Materials Improved supply chain logistics SPE147587

$HiWAY Results for Tight Gas Campaign Reduced risk of screen-out Improved fracture clean-up Higher$ production Ease of operation with proven fluids and equipment Enabler for low-pressure and poor quality

production Ease of operation with proven fluids and equipment Enabler for low-pressure and poor quality

Offset B 30% 40% 50% 60% Fluid Recovery > 625 HiWAY jobs have been pumped in the Jonah Field 10 8 6 4 2

33 Cumulative Gas Production, MMm3 Cumulative Gas Production, MMcf Net pressure increase (ISIP ISDP, psi) HiWAY Results for Tight Gas Campaign Reduced risk of screen-out Improved fracture clean-up Higher production Ease of operation with proven fluids and equipment Enabler for low-pressure and poor quality reservoirs 1,200 1,000 HiWAY Offset A Offset B % Stages HiWAY well Offset A Offset B 30% 40% 50% 60% Fluid Recovery > 625 HiWAY jobs have been pumped in the Jonah Field HiWAY well Offset A Offset B Time, days 24%

34 HiWAY Flow Channel Fracturing Technique SPE Argentina SPE Jonah SPE Eagle Ford SPE Jonah Reliable service > 2,200 treatments performed in 8 countries > 99.9% jobs without screen-outs Variety of formations Significant impact on production Typically > 25% increase Lower cost per production unit Reduced footprint: 200,000,000 lbm proppant and 60,000,000 gal water saved. This avoided: > 14,000 proppant & water hauling road trips > 1,000 proppant hauling rail car trips > 70,000 gal diesel fuel consumption > 1,600,000 lbm CO2 emissions > 7 yrs of engineering & development Paradigm shift in generation of fracture conductivity

Evolving the Approach for Superior Performance Brute Force APPROACH

well performance Compensate by drilling more wells Barnett Shale IP

Appropriate measurements for Reservoir Quality and Completion

35 Evolving the Approach for Superior Performance Brute Force APPROACH Utilize existing geophysical data Accept statistical variation in well performance Compensate by drilling more wells Barnett Shale IP (MSCFD) Drill Only Best Wells Technology and Collaboration APPROACH Appropriate measurements for Reservoir Quality and Completion Quality Technology to drive efficiency Environmental efficiency Flow efficiency

Jerzy M. Rajtar* SHALE GAS HOW IS IT DEVELOPED?

WIERTNICTWO NAFTA GAZ TOM 27 ZESZYT 1 2 2010 Jerzy M. Rajtar* SHALE GAS HOW IS IT DEVELOPED? 1. INTRODUCTION XTO Energy, Inc. has been engaged in development of major gas shale plays in the continental