Effective Use of Partial Monolayer Proppants to Enhance Production in a Tight Gas Reservoir.

Transcription

1 South Dakota School of Mines & Technology 2010 New Horizons in Oil & Gas Conference Effective Use of Partial Monolayer Proppants to Enhance Production in a Tight Gas Reservoir. Presented By: Wendell Salas Co-Author Kumar Ramurthy October 8 th, 2010 Denver Technical Solutions Team, Halliburton

2 Outline Challenges & Benefits Challenges to Operations Benefits of Monoprop Completions GOHFER Modeling Upper and lower Pictured Cliff sandstone horizontals using the following proppants and fluid systems: 70Q N 2 Foam X-link Frac with 20/40 mesh Brady sand 60Q N 2 Foam X-link Frac with Monoprop TM Modeled Production and Conductivity Analysis of Conventional vs. Partial Monolayer Completions Case Study San Juan PC Horizontal Completions 5 Conventionally completed horizontals vs. 2 Partial Monolayer completed horizontals Summary

3 Some Challenges that Operators Face Limited Location Space Other wells on location Multiple treatments require more ancillary equipment space Can only set so many frac tanks Availability of frac sand Laying temporary water supply lines requires EA s not a real option

4 Partial Monolayer Completions Operational Benefits Less pumping equipment required Less proppant and fluid per stage Screen-out is not a big issue in horizontal wellbores when using low density proppant Coiled Tubing operations take less time Pump changes/workovers less costly Technical Benefits Smaller Pad volumes needed Good regained permeability/conductivity Clean-up faster All stages should be open no sand bridgeoff Well performance on par or better than conventional sand propped wells Source: SPE-ATW April, 2010 Presentation by Patricio Sanchez District Engineer, Energen Resources

5 Multiple Transverse Fractures SIDE VIEW HYDRAULIC FRACTURE Thick reservoirs Long Xf possible Low perm Efficient stimulations Compartmentalized reservoirs Linear reservoir flow channels L f Source: Unconventional Reservoir Stimulation Class by Barree & Associates and Halliburton

6 Log Used in the Model Well X1

7 DFIT Summary Well X2 Lower PC BH-ISIP = 2,162 psi; FG = 0.53 psi/ft Leakoff type = Pressure Dependent Leakoff (PDL) Hydraulic Fracture Closure = 1,897 psi Closure Gradient = 0.47 psi/ft PDL Co-efficient = NA Moderate to low Process Zone Stress (PZS) was observed from this test ~ 265 psi. After-closure pseudolinear flow was observed during shut-in After-closure horizontal pseudoradial flow was NOT observed during shut-in. Pore pressure from after-closure pseudolinear flow = ~1,379 psi Pore pressure gradient ~ 0.34 psi/ft K h H from early-time normal leakoff data ~ 0.57 md-ft

8 Lower PC Design-20/40 Mesh Sand Traditional Treatment Design Per Stage 70Q N2 X-Link Foam Total BH Clean Volume ~ 114,701 gallons Total 20/40 Proppant ~ 120,000 lbs

9 Lower PC-Proppant Distribution (lbs/sq.ft)

10 Lower PC Design-MonoProp TM Mono-Layer Treatment Design per Stage 60Q N2 X-link Foam BH Clean Volume ~ 54,701 gallons Proppant Volume ~ 6,000 lbs

11 Lower PC-Proppant Distribution (lbs/sq.ft)

12 Upper PC Design-20/40 Mesh Sand Traditional Treatment Design Per Stage 70Q N2 X-Link Foam Total BH Clean Volume ~ 114,701 gallons Total 20/40 Proppant ~ 120,000 lbs

13 Upper PC-Proppant Distribution (lbs/sq.ft)

14 Upper PC Design-MonoProp TM Mono-Layer Treatment Design per Stage 60Q N2 X-link Foam BH Clean Volume ~ 54,701 gallons Proppant Volume ~ 6,000 lbs

15 Upper PC-Proppant Distribution (lbs/sq.ft)

16 PredictK Production Rates (20/40 Brady)

17 Baseline Monolayer Conductivity, md*ft MonoProp TM Baseline Conductivity Conductivity - MonoProp - varying Stress Curves 1000 psi 1500 psi 2000 psi 2500 psi 3000 psi Initial Frac Porosity, % Customer: Job Date: Ticket #: Well Desc: Job Type: H A L L IB U R T O N Material Library Mar-10 18:07

18 20/40 Brady Baseline Conductivity

19 Monthly Gas Production Rate, Mcf/month Partial Monolayer vs. Conventional Completions Monthly Gas Production Time, Months 255H-GAS 252H-GAS 257H-GAS 258H-GAS 251H-GAS MP1-GAS MP2-GAS

20 Summary Partial Monolayer completions provide benefits that help solve some Operational and Completion challenges. Lower fluid volumes, proppant volumes, and pump rates help to keep the treatments in zone. Potential for much higher dynamic conductivity with MonoProp TM Partial Monolayer models predict much higher fracture conductivities than conventional proppants can provide. Increase the number of stage Based on the available reservoir data, it appears that more stages help the PC horizontal well completions. Offset production comparisons confirm that Partial Monolayer completions perform as well, if not better than Conventional completions that pumped larger treatment volumes at higher rates.