UNFC-2009 and Unconventional Resources · 2011. 2. 15. · PRMS and Unconventional resources •...
Transcript of UNFC-2009 and Unconventional Resources · 2011. 2. 15. · PRMS and Unconventional resources •...
UNFC-2009 and Unconventional ResourcesA review of problems in reporting Unconventional Energy Resources and potential applications of UNFC-2009
Jan RoelofsenSr. Product Manager Unconventional EnergyIHS Global SA Geneva
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
What is unconventional?• Better definitions:
• continuous-type hydrocarbon deposits• gas / oil resource plays
• Should we also include:• Oil sand / bitumen: a deposit that can be mined and from which oil can be
extracted as a chemical process
2
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 3
Unconventional-Conventional: the difference• Both produce gas, but they should be considered as two different
resources Conventional accumulation• trap defined by oil / gas water contact• volume to be determined by modern technology (seismic, reservoir models)• porous reservoir• movable hydrocarbons
GIP = volume * Ø * (1-Sw) * FVF
Unconventional resources• no clear extent, continuous• no clear volume to be determined• technology limitations (so far)• micro-pores, limited connectivity• hydrocarbons adsorbed to shale, coal
determinedby “sweet spot” measured
calculatedvariable
GIP = area * pay thickness * gas content
estimatedvariable
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Determining unconventional plays• Determine prospective area / pay based on:
• extent of shale, coal layers• richness in kerogen• maturity (transformation of kerogen in oil/gas)• depth (adequate for production)• rock properties (fracturing)
• Gas Content:• direct core measurements (Langmuir constants)• but what is variation over distance?• calculated using kerogen transformation - reliable?
• How to quantify uncertainty?
4
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Sweet spot definition• Understanding play characteristics takes time and much drilling• Steep learning curve has effect on initial project economics
5
0200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Gas
Pro
duct
ion
(MM
scfd
)
Quarters from first well in play
HaynesvilleFayettevilleMarcellusEaglefordWoodford
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recovery factor• Only a very small part will be produced• Example from Cambrian shale in North Europe• How can we determine recovery at an early project stage?
6
Net recoverable
63 Tcf(20%)
GIP 315 Tcf Risked
recoverable6 Tcf(1.9%
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Different exploration & development concepts• different time-scales require different legislative concepts
7
SeismicExpl. drilling
(1 well)
Appraisal(1-2 wells) Development Production
SeismicExploration drilling
“sweet spot” location(10-15 wells)
Appraisal“sweet spot” testing
(production)Dev Production
Geological knowledge
Project feasibility
Economic viability
Low Moderate High
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Geological knowledge
Project feasibility
Economic viability
Low Moderate High
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Exploration licensetypically 3-5 years Production license
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Resources definition• Geological knowledge:
• reaches high confidence level not before production is established• “proven” reserves only for producing part• difficult to extrapolate play characteristics over long distances
• Project feasibility: • steep learning curve, different for each play• many wells required to establish sweet spot and production profile
• Economic viability:• legislation not adapted, uncertainty about exploration license duration• production uncertainties
8
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PRMS and Unconventional resources• SPE paper by Barker (2008) describes problems in definition of Proven,
Probable and Possible• Conventional: reserves based on uncertainty in recovery• Unconventional: reserves based on maturity of development
9
G.J. Barker (2008), Application of the PRMS to Coal Seam Gas, SPE 117124
1P
2P
3P
Res
erve
s
Time and maturity of project
1P
2P
3P
Res
erve
s
Time and maturity of project
Conventional projects Unconventional projects
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
CBM testing / production• CBM pilot projects: long dewatering phase and
unknown desorption behaviour
10
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Gas contentscf/ton
Pressure (psi)
Pseudo‐isotherm curve for coalIsotherm
Langmuir at PL
Storage Capacilty
Gas content
Initial pressure
Critical desorption pressure
Abandonment press.
Production start at critical desorption pressure
Dewatering phase
Pilot project to test desorption behaviour
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PRMS and Unconventionals• CBM pilot projects or sweet-spot drilling of shale gas projects:
where does it fit?
11
Pilot?
Pilot?
Pilot?
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Defining proven reserves• Drainage area around producing well with proven and probable areas
12
One block is a “section”640 acres = 2.91 km2
Proven area
Probable area area
Possible area
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Current block-bounded approach• producing area bounded by sections (640 acres)
13
Case 1:proven: 6 sections = 3,840 acres = 16 km2
probable: 80 sections = 51,200 acres = 208 km2
Case 2:proven: 28 sections = 17,920 acres = 73 km2
probable: 58 sections = 37,120 acres = 150 km2
1P or 2P ?1P
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Circular drainage areas?
14
Proven area
Probable area
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Horizontal wells• Drainage area not rectangular or circular
15
Proven area
Probable area area
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
More realistic approach• Based on geological evidence, UNFC gives more detail
16
proven: 39,680 acres = 161 km2
probable: 32,000 acres = 129 km2
long-term pilot test112 or 222?
producing from few wells111 or 112?
CBM well drilledbut not yet tested222 or 223?
334
344
333
Class acres sq km112 16,000 65222 10,880 44223 12800 52333 23,040 93334 8,960 36
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
UNFC-2009 for CBM
17
F4
E1
E2
E3
F1
F3
F2
G2G1
G3G4
Geological knowledge
Project feasibility
Socio
-eco
nom
ic via
bilit
y
CBM producing or tested
CBM prospective area
CBM possible area
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Example• classification based on degree of pilot tests and geological knowledge
18
111
222
223
233
343223
344
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
UNFC-2009 for shale gas resources
19
Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The END
20
F4
E1
E2
E3
F1
F3
F2
G2G1
G3G4