Considerations for Reserves Recovery Within the Montney Play

1,448 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,448
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
40
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Compare typecurves by on production yearlook for improvements in recovery – relate back to completion techniques and reservoir quality/geology
  • As of June 2011 – 669 wells on prodn, producing at 1.3 bcf/d, 30% of BC prodnHeritage field chosen for the study - Significant source of production and growth for BC-high HZ drilling density in recent years-impressive production results
  • 2007 – switch from VT to HZ drilling, significant increase in prodn,Focus on normalizing the HZ data from 2007-2010 to look for improvements in gas recovery
  • Each operator has its own strategy for developing the resourceOGC supports the technical learning curve by collecting and publishing public data
  • Significant variations in reservoir quality across the field, need for sub areas
  • 540 HZ wells in study – on production date between 2007 – 2011Today – discussing Swan, Sundown, Dawson, Sunrise & Septimus
  • Dawson – best reservoir qualtiyEncouraging 2011results in the Lower in Swan and Sundown2 prospective targets in the Upper Montney where it thickens to the west
  • Upper – turquoise, Middle – orange
  • Wells targeting the Lower Montney shown in PinkActivity focused in the turbidite channel in Swan and Sundown
  • Green area – condensate rich areaPurple dots = wells with reported condensate production ratio of GT 1bbl/MMcfHi gas liquids content areas – Septimus and SunrisePurple contours CGR 0, 5bbl/MMCF and 10bbl/MMcfGreen areas are the C5+/C1to C4 ratios contoured
  • All HZ wells from 2007-2010Dawson stands out, excellent reservoir quality (porosity)Beyond the limits of geology, how can the well placement & completions improve production resultsWhich areas have made strides to increase recovery in past 4 years?Through innovation in frac fluid & technique, other sub areas, and certain operators in particular, are making significant strides to improve their production
  • Brief history on each (# of wells drilled, upper/lower, completion technique)Animate wells drilled by year?Animate with play trends – condensate, turbidite, pressure & depth?
  • Majority of wells Cased hole (~90%), remaining 10% Openhole in 2007, 2008, 20092007 – 29 wells on prdn, 7 fracs, 69% CO2, 94% Cased2008 – 24 wells, 8 fracs, 75% N2, 88% Cased2009 – 32 wells, 8 fracs, 63% N2, 91% Cased, step out drilling – see next slide2010 – 6 wells, 11 fracs, 83% N2, 100% Cased, back to good reservoir areaProdn increasing each year w/ bigger fracs, w/ except of 2009 – well locations, moving into areas of lower res quality
  • Swan LowerBiggest concentration of Openhole completions among the subareasIncrease from 7-8 fracs in 2007/09 to 9 fracs in 2010/11Predominantly CO2 fracs in 2007,08,09 – moving towards CO2/N2 (~40%) in 2010/11Majority Openhole completions in 2010 (87%), 60% Openhole in 2011
  • EnCana 2011 prodn profile flat at lower rate – need flowing pressures to understand full potential
  • Prodn restricted, need flowing pressures to forecast ultimate recoverableSome of the best reservoir quality in Heritage so far. Mainly dry gas, no condensateMissing some data, predominantly CO2 fracs, 2 slickwater fracs in 2007All cased hole wellsIncreased fracs from 5 in 2007 to 11 in 2010Increased pump rate in 2009/10 from 2m3/min to 6m3/min
  • Overall by year, doesn’t look to be improving.High liquidsLook another layer deeper, 4 different operators with different completion techniques2008 – 100% Shell, 50/50 CO2/N22009 – 63% Shell, 32% Huron, 5% Tourmaline2010 – EnCana, Huron, Shell & Tourmaline
  • Tourmaline – trouble initiating frac w/ perf&plug method, switching to??Majority of wells Cased hole
  • SeptimusChange in completion techniques from PolyCO2 to slickwater2008 – 50% CO2, rest different combinations of N2, CO2/N2, N2 slickwater w/ CO22009 – 57% N2 (CNRL), 43% slickwater (Crew) – operator specific2010 – all data set slickwater, but missing data
  • Beyond the limits of geology, significant differences in recovery based on completion techniqueWe look forward to future improvements to gas recovery through innovative completion techniques.Very helpful to have completions data available when comparing well performance – otherwise not comparing “Apples to apples”
  • All data from this study available online to encourage best practices for increased gas recovery.We are working towards electronic submission of frac reports to get data out to industry quicker.
  • Considerations for Reserves Recovery Within the Montney Play

    1. 1. Considerations for Reserves Recovery Within the Heritage Montney Play, British ColumbiaSPE#-149201-PPKelly Okuszko, P.Eng.Mark Hayes, P. Geo.
    2. 2. PURPOSEStudy Focus: Report on Heritage Montney reservoir &completion data to support technical learning andencourage best practices data available onlineChallenge: Grouping analogous wells to make “Apples toApples” comparisons Lack of flowing pressure data to analyze truedeliverability on rate restricted wells
    3. 3. Heritage Field543,434 hectares Fort St JohnAs of June 2011: Hudson’s Hope669 producing wells,1.3 bcf/d Dawson Creek Chetwynd
    4. 4. Well Performance by spud year – all wells 120 Future improvements to learning curve ? 100 HZ drilling, multi-stage fracs 80Avg Daily rate e3m3/d 2010 60 Vertical drilling 2009 2008 40 2007 20 2006 2005 0 2005-05 2005-11 2006-05 2006-11 2007-05 2007-11 2008-05 2008-11 2009-05 2009-11 2010-05 2010-11 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005
    5. 5. Heritage Montney AMajor Operator areasAs of March 201112 Operators
    6. 6. Grouping the Data: “Apples to Apples” Comparisons Sub Areas (localized reservoir quality) Well Placement (Upper/Middle/Lower) On Production Year (technical learning & technology) Completion Technique (cased/openhole, frac fluid, HZ length)
    7. 7. Sub Areas within the Heritage Montney A Play 46 wells 30 wells 85 wells 54 wells 59 wells 31 wells 224 wells 11 wells
    8. 8. GROUNDBIRCH SUNDOWN SUNRISE PARKLAND SWAN DAWSON Upper Montney Lower Montney
    9. 9. Well Placement: Upper Montney Isopach Thin <50 mThin <75 m Thick >200 m 25m contours
    10. 10. Well Placement: Lower Montney Isopach Thick > 275mThin < 75m Sundown Swan 25m contours
    11. 11. Heritage Condensate TrendSeptimus Sunrise
    12. 12. Sub Areas: HZ Well Typecurve
    13. 13. Sub Areas within the Heritage Montney Play
    14. 14. Swan Upper Montney By On Prodn Year 7 6 5Op Gas Rate (MMscfd) 4 2010 (6 wells) N2 11 fracs (↑), 1807m3 wtr (↑), 1108T sand (↑) 3 2008 (24 wells) N2 8 fracs (↑),1312m3 wtr (↑), 822T sand (↑) 2 1 2007 (29 wells) CO2 7 fracs, 848m3 wtr, 673T sand 0 2009 (32 wells) N2 8 fracs,1112m3 wtr (↓), 763T sand (↓) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    15. 15. Swan – MontneyReservoir Comparison c-56-A c-3-H Upper Montney Lower Montney c-3-H c-56-A Blue – Upper Montney wells Purple – Lower Montney wells
    16. 16. Swan Lower Montney By On Prodn Year 7 6 2011 (15 wells), 60% CO2/N2, 40% CO2, 9 fracs, 60% OH 5Op Gas Rate (MMscfd) 4 3 2010 (47 wells), 60% CO2, 40% N2 or Slickwater, 9 fracs (↑), 90% OH 2 2009 (43 wells), CO2, 7 fracs (↓), 50% OH 1 2008 (18 wells) CO2, 8 fracs (↑) 2007 (7 wells) CO2, 7 fracs 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    17. 17. 2011 Lower Montney SWAN 10 9 8 7 MURPHY 2011 (8 wells) CO2 /N2Op Gas Rate (MMscfd) 6 8 fracs, 2676m completed, 1199m3 wtr, 70% OH 5 ENCANA 2011 (7 wells) 4 CO2 12 fracs, 1641m completed, 2494m3 wtr, 40% OH 3 2 MURPHY 2010 (19 wells) CO2 (70%) 9 fracs, 2676m completed, 1559m3 wtr, 70% OH ENCANA 2010 (27 wells) 1 Mix of CO2, N2, slickwater 10 fracs, 1590m completed, 4165m3 wtr, 96% OH 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    18. 18. 2011 Lower Montney Swan & Sundown 10 9 8 7Op Gas Rate (MMscfd) 6 SWAN - CO2/N2 (8 wells) 8 fracs, 2676m completed, 1199m3 wtr 5 4 SUNDOWN - CO2/N2 (8 wells) 13 fracs, 1525m completed (↓), 1114m3 wtr 3 2 SUNDOWN - CO2 (13 wells) SUNDOWN - Slickwater (4 wells) 1 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    19. 19. Dawson Upper Montney By On Prodn Year 2007 10 2008 2009 2010 8Op Gas Rate (MMscfd) 2009: Bigger CO2 Fracs, Higher Pump Rate 6 10 fracs(↑), 1606m completed(↑), 1578m3 wtr(↑), 960T sand(↑), 1246m3 CO2(↑), 6m3/min(↑) 4 rate restricted ↑ 2 2007: 5 fracs, 1196m completed, 1298m3 wtr, 617T sand, 604m3 CO2, 2m3/min 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    20. 20. Sunrise Upper Montney By On Prodn Year 8 2008 7 2009 6 2010Op Gas Rate (MMscfd) 5 4 New operators - learning curve and infrastructure 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    21. 21. Sunrise Upper Montney 2010 - By Operator 6 All slickwater, except ENCANA N2 5 HURON (4 wells) More water & sand, Higher pump rate 4 Smaller completed intervalOp Gas Rate (MMscfd) 3 SHELL (19 wells) 2 ENCANA (17 wells) 1 TOURMALINE (6 wells) 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    22. 22. Septimus Upper Montney By On Prodn Year 8 7 6 2010 (17 wells) 100% slickwaterOp Gas Rate (MMscfd) 5 4 2009 (7 wells) 3 60% N2 (CNRL), 40% slickwater (Crew) 2 1 2008 (8 wells) 50% CO2, rest N2, CO2/N2 or slickwater 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    23. 23. Septimus Upper Montney 2010 8 7 6 CNRL (10 wells) 9 fracs, 1564m completed, 6582m3 wtr, 963T sand,10m3/minOp Gas Rate (MMscfd) 5 4 Both slickwater CNRL –↑ fracs, ↑ water, ↑ HZ 3 2 CREW(6 wells) 5 fracs, 1268m completed, 4952m3 wtr, 1020T 1 sand, 10.7m3/min 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Cumulative Gas Production (MMscf)
    24. 24. Observations Reservoir trumps completion Notable improvement in gas recovery: 2010 Slickwater fracs (CNRL) Upper Montney at Septimus 2011 Binary CO2/N2 fracs (Murphy) Lower Montney at Swan & Sundown More to come? Frac ≠ Frac ≠ Frac
    25. 25. OPEN FOR STUDY Heritage Montney Completions Database available online:http://www.bcogc.ca/industryzone/forms/resourceconservation.aspxElectronic submission of frac reports coming soon !
    26. 26. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS BC Oil & Gas Commission Mark Hayes – Co-author, Petroleum Geologist Travis Mercure – Engineering Analysis Verna Kazakoff – Completions Analysis Richard Slocomb & Ron Stefik – Engineering Guidance Fekete Associates Inc. Harmony Software – generating typecurves Canadian Discovery Ltd. Frac Database – detailed frac data including costs Operators in Heritage Montney – Excel completions data CNRL Murphy Crew EnCana Shell Tourmaline Huron Storm ARC
    27. 27. Considerations for Reserves Recovery Within theHeritage Montney Play, British Columbia More Information: Kelly Okuszko, P. Eng Mark Hayes, P. Geo BC Oil and Gas Commission 250-419-4433 250-419-4431 www.bcogc.ca Kelly.Okuszko@bcogc.ca Mark.Hayes@bcogc.ca Nov. 2011

    ×