Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1
Outline
Coal/CBM Overview Globally
CBM Basics
Geology
Reservoir characterization
GIIP
CBM Development
Screening CBM Blocks
Production
Drilling and Completions
Non-Technical challenges in CBM development
Typical CBM development Cycle
2
Global Coal Distribution … Where are the Opportunities?
3
Formation of Coal: Modern environments for peat accumulation
Low lying areas like alluvial floodplains, deltas and coastlines can accommodate peats
A Peat Land is an ecosystem where the water table is near or slightly above the mineral soil and
the associated vegetation produces organic matter at a rate faster than the degradation
processes can decompose it
Geology
Reservoir Characterisation
GIIP
5
Reservoir Depths: Conventional Vs Unconventional
6
CBM Vs. Conventional Oil & Gas
Fluid Production Rates - Conventional Gas Production Fluid Production Rates - CBM Production
Water Production
Methane Production Rates
VOLUME
VOLUM E
Water Production
TIME TIME
7
Coal Seam Identification- Petrophysical Logs
8
Gas Content in Coal
GC increases
with Depth
Mannville Depth vs Vro
1.8
RO_R
R2 = 0.7935
Expon. (RO_R)
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
V r o (% )
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Depth (m)
Isotherm describes the volume of gas that can be stored in the coal
as a function of pressure,
10
10
Coal Porosity- Dual Porosity Systems
Primary Porosity
µm
11
Natural Fractures in Coal - Cleats
First reference from 1834. Termed “cleat”, from the wedges that were used to
break the coal from the seam during mining
Occur at right angles (generally) to the bedding
•Primary direction (face cleat)
•Secondary direction (butt cleat)
Origin linked to coalification process
•Dehydration
•Devolatilization
•Confined, stressed system
Primary Darcy flow path
• More open cleat = higher permeability
• More cleats per inch = higher permeability
12
12
Permeability in Coal
Butt Cleat 13
Coal Permeability Vs. Depth
North Shilou Permeability
Surat Permeability
Surat - Juandah Permeability vs Depth
10000
Arrow only
1000 Pangea
100
Permeability, mD
10
0.1
0.01
0.001
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Depth, ft
• Large Scatter
• Permeability decreases with depth
• Huge variability hence Uncertainty
• No definite trend, subject to interpretation
14
Diffusion through
Wellbore
Coal Matrix
Desorption
Diffusion Darcy Flow Darcy Flow
nm nm cm m
through Cleats
Rock_Compressibilty
Frac_Spacing
Matrix_Perm
16
Variability in Production
G a s P r o d u c tio n C u r v e
V e r tic a l 4 F r a c W e lls
1000
10% of the wells produces 90% of the D R -2 8
D R -2 9
800
total production!! D R -3 1
D R -3 2
Gas Rates(MSCF/D)
D R -3 3
D R -3 5
Gas Rate, Mscf/d
D R -3 6
600 D R -2 5
N P -0 5
M G -0 4
M R -2 9
400 M R -3 0
M R -3 1
M R -3 1
M R -3 2
200 M R -3 3
T y p e C u rve - 4 F ra c
0
0 .0 0 2 .0 0 4 .0 0 6 .0 0 8 .0 0 1 0.00 1 2 .0 0 1 4 .0 0
Y rs
W a te r P r o d u c tio n C u r v e
V e r tic a l 4 F r a c w e lls
2 00
1 80
D R -2 8
D R -2 9
Rates(bbls/d)
1 60
D R -3 1
D R -3 2
1 40
D R -3 3
D R -3 5
Mscf/d
1 20 D R -3 6
D R -2 5
Gas Rate,
1 00 N P -0 5
Water
60
• Log normal distribution in production from wells M R -3 0
M R -3 1
M R -3 2
40
M R -3 3
T y p e C u rv e
20
0
0 .0 0 2 .0 0 4 .0 0 6 .0 0 8 .0 0 1 0 .0 0 1 2 .0 0 1 4 .0 0
Y rs
17
Gas In Place- Calculation
Negligible
Where:
18
2.0
CBM DEVELOPMENT
19
GIIP/SFRanalytical estimate
Pinf
GIIP = Ahρaf (1 − a − m)VL Sgc (1− CO2 )
Pinf + PL
RFanalytical
20
Screening assessment methodology: GIIP estimate
High Grade
Thickness distribution Area Shape of
Gas saturation sorption isotherm
(completable coal)
VL / PL
Ash content
N. Shilou
5km
NSL-O1 location
23
Analytical Forecasting
Three Segment Decline curve Analysis Typical Water Saturated Coal bed
Methane Well Performance Profile
Phase1 Phase2 Phase3 Phase2 Phase 3 and 4 are matched with the last two segments of a
3 segment decline curve constructed using the parameters
shown
25 25
CBM- Drilling Evolution
Tried in Arrow
Bowen – Arrow
Australia 26
SRP
ESP
PCP
27
Non Technical Challenges
Dewatering and Initial Gas Peak Water Production
600000 bbl/day Production Profile Surat
900 900000
800 800000
Wells
500 500000
400 400000
300 300000
200 200000
100 100000
- 0
2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 2034 2039 2044 2049
Gas Rate, MMscfd Water Rate, bbld Wells Req LNG Demand, MMscfd
Flaring
Water Management
Forced Evaporation 28
Saline Water Treatment Plant
UNCONVENTIONAL GAS LIFECYCLE GENERIC OVERVIEW
DEFINE
Keys for Play POS: Keys for Materiality POS: Keys for Productivity POS:
- Play “Big Rules” in place - play scope demonstrated - pilot well performance
- pervasive gas accumulation - h, area, phi, P, Sgas and K - match models
- h, phi, P, Sgas and K quantified - increase EUR
demonstrated - Sweetspot identified - reduce costs
- $/mcf metric achievable - $/mcf metric approached - $/mcf metric passed Source: Tom Hyde
29
CBM Development Cycle
Shell Exploration & Production