0
TECHNICAL BRIEF

Evaluation of a Statistical Method for Assessing Infill Production Potential in Mature, Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs

[+] Author and Article Information
L. Guan

ChevronTexaco, 4800 Fournace Place, Room E537, Bellaire, TX 77401  

D. A. McVay

Department of Petroleum Engineering, Texas A&M University, 3116 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-3116  

J. L. Jensen

Department of Petroleum Engineering, Texas A&M University, 3116 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-3116  

G. W. Voneiff

MGV Energy, #2000 125-9th Ave SE Calgary, AB Canada T2G 0P8

J. Energy Resour. Technol 126(3), 241-245 (Oct 19, 2004) (5 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1781672 History: Received December 11, 2003; Revised June 17, 2004; Online October 19, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Hohn, M. E., 1999, “Geostatistics and Petroleum Geology,” Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 98–101.
McCain, W. D., Jr., Voneiff, G. W., Hunt, E. R., and Semmelbeck, M. E., 1993, “A Tight Gas Field Study: Carthage (Cotton Valley) Field,” paper SPE 26141 presented at the SPE Gas Tech. Symp., Calgary, 28–30 June.
Voneiff, G. W., and Cipolla, C., 1996, “A New Approach to Large-Scale Infill Evaluations Applied to the Ozona (Canyon) Gas Field,” paper SPE 35203 presented at the SPE Permian Oil and Gas Recovery Conf., Midland, Texas, 27–29 Mar.
Hudson, J. W., Jochen, J. E., and Jochen, V. A., 2000, “Practical Technique to Identify Infill Potential in Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs Applied to the Milk River Formation in Canada,” paper SPE 59779 presented at the SPE/CERI Gas Tech. Symp., Calgary, 3–5 April.
Hudson, J. W., Jochen, J. E., and Spivey, J. P., 2001, “Practical Methods to High-Grade Infill Opportunities Applied to the Mesaverde, Morrow, and Cotton Valley Formations,” paper SPE 68598 presented at the SPE Hydrocarbon Economics and Evaluation Symp., Dallas, 2–3 April.
Guan, L., 2003, “Evaluation of a Statistical Infill Candidate Selection Technique,” MS thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
Jensen, J. L., Lake, L. W., Corbett, P. W. M., and Goggin, D. J., 2003, Statistics for Petroleum Engineers and Geoscientists, 2nd ed., Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 66 and 115.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Largest heterogeneity permeability distribution (Case 4) used for the simulation and MMWM testing. Scale is in md (10−3 μm2). The small white circles are the locations of the 100 wells. Cases 2 and 3 distributions have less variability but longer correlation lengths.
Grahic Jump Location
Distributions of well spacing and date of first production for the 100 wells.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of the infill well maximum production predictions from simulation and MMWM for Case 4 shows MMWM performing poorly in this highly heterogeneous reservoir
Grahic Jump Location
Variability of difference between MMWM and simulation infill potential estimates decreases as number of wells, N, increases. Lines are least-squares fit to points and all have insignificant non-zero Y-axis intercepts at the 90% level. Values in parenthesis are the line slopes.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In