International Shale Development Optimization

Unconventional Resources Development

Reserv

oir Q

uality

Comple

tion Q

uality

Controls for Reservoir ProductivityDefining Reservoir Quality TOC and maturation Mineralogy Pore Pressure Petrophysics: porosity, saturations, permeability, thickness Gas in place: adsorbed, interstitial

Defining Completion Quality Structure: faults, natural fractures, curvature Hydraulic fracture containment: geomechanical anisotropy, in-situ stress Rock fracturability: surface area per reservoir volume, texture, complexity Retention of surface area and fracture conductivity: stress, mechanical properties Fracturing fluid sensitivity: mineralogy, fluid chemistry

Good Reservoir Quality + Good Completion Quality = Economic Success

MarcellusHaynesvilleBarnett Woodford Fayetteville Eagle Ford Eagle Ford (oil)

Each Shale is UniqueShales are Vertically Variable

Core/Log Petrophysical AnalysisECSXRD

SwPorosity

TOCPermPorosity

Gasin PlaceELAN

RHOBRHOMResGR

TOC: > 2 wt %Permeability: > 100 nd

Effective phi: 4 to 12 puSaturations: Sliquid < 45%

Shale in Perspective: Permeability 100 nD = 0.0000001 D = 1 ten millionth of a Darcy

Consequence of Extremely Low Matrix Permeabilities:

Matrix-Block - Gas Pressure (psia)

12/28/2003 00:00:00 180.0000 days

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

10 ft

10 Year Pressure Profile

Shale in Perspective: Permeability

– Majority of Pressure Drop at Fracture Face– At Initial Reservoir Pressure 10s of meters from fracture for years– Hydraulic Fracturing is a REQUIREMENT– Hydraulic Fracture Complexity can induce a pressure drop from multiple directions

5 Year Pressure Transient

10 Year Pressure Transient

60 Year Pressure Transient

5 Year Pressure Transient

10 Year Pressure Transient

60 Year Pressure Transient

Hydraulic Fractures at 250 ft Spacing (400 nd)

100 nD = 0.0000001 D = 1 ten millionth of a Darcy

Shale in Perspective: Large Stimulation Treatments

Initial Completion Quality Evaluation:8

0 m

300 m

Vertical Fracture Height Growth

80

m

Initial Completion Quality Evaluation:Vertical Fracture Conductivity

Completion Quality Variability

Reservoir 3Reservoir 2Reservoir 1

Formation Micro-Imaging Logs (FMI)

Fayetteville Shale Outcrop

Lateral Heterogeneity – Horizontal Image Logs

Reservoir 3

Reservoir 2

Reservoir 1

600 m

500 m

700 m

Production Along the Lateral is Not Uniform

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33

Perforation Clusters

Prod

uctio

nPer

cent

age

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33

Perforation Clusters

Prod

uctio

nPe

rcen

tage

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39

Perforation Clusters

Prod

uctio

nPe

rcen

tage

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

Perforation Clusters

Prod

uctio

nPe

rcen

tage

51%

53%

54%

47%

14%

18%

31%

37%

Clusters producing no more than 2% of total production

Non-producing clusters

Well 3 Well 4

Well 1Well 2

Addressing Variable Completion QualityWireline Horizontal Geomechanical Analysis Quantify lateral stress variation Indentify stress anisotropy Group frac stages in “Like Rock” Perforate similarly stressed rock

Stage 1Stage 2Stage 3Stage 4

Addressing Variable Completion Quality

Formation Dips from Images

AB BC CH H HG GF FE ED DI IG

Gam

ma

Ray

Res

istiv

ityD

en /N

euPo

rosi

tySt

atic

D

en Im

age

Dyn

amic

D

en Im

age

GR

Imag

e

Planned Trajectory

Actual Trajectory

LWD Horizontal Geomechanical Analysis

Ÿ Ÿ ŸŸ Ÿ Ÿ ŸŸ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ ŸŸŸ

ŸŸ ŸŸ Ÿ

Addressing Variable Completion QualityImages can Identify Natural Fractures

Putting it All Together

Reservoir Quality

Completion Quality

Den Image

Spectroscopy

Volumetric

Porosity /Saturations

TOC

HC in Place

Reservoir, Pay

Rock Strength

Frac gradient

Addressing Variable Completion QualityEagle Ford Shale Example – Geometrical Staging

SPE134827

Addressing Variable Completion QualityEagle Ford Shale Example – Selective Staging

SPE134827

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

Pre Optimization (6 Wells) Post Optimization (3 Wells)

3 M

onth

BO

E

Completion Optimization to Maximize Production 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

SPE134827

3 Dimensional View of Reservoir

Integrating Seismic Attributes with Fracture Geometry

Microseismic event locations along with the azimuth of most negative curvature (arrows) and magnitude of most positive curvature (background color)

SPE131779

Coupling Fracture Geometry to Reservoir SimulationEvaluation of Completion Quality

hmax

hmin

Unconventional Fracture Geometry Model

Eclipse Reservoir Simulation

Petrel platform allows stress heterogeneity integration

Eclipse Reservoir Simulation Production History Match

Production Match Pressure Match

Reservoir Exploitation

Estimated Ultimate

Recoveries

Recovery Factors

Reservoir Development

Completion Quality Optimization

Minimum data utilized Accept statistical variation in well performance Compensate by drilling more wells Factory approach to drilling and completion Large footprint – high rates & large fluid volumes

Collect optimum data Understand the reservoir and completion quality Reservoir based well placement Utilize technology to improve drilling & completion efficiency Reduced equipment footprint and fluid volumes

Model 1… Model 2…

What is the right model for success?

Good Reservoir Quality + Good Completion Quality = Economic Success

Thank You

Contour map of Reservoir Quality

Contour map of Completion Quality

Good Reservoir Quality + Good Completion Quality = Economic Success