0
Wells-Injection/Oil/Gas/Geothermal

Factors Affecting Hydraulically Fractured Well Performance in the Marcellus Shale Gas Reservoirs

[+] Author and Article Information
Tunde Osholake

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard,
New Orleans, LA 70123

John Yilin Wang

e-mail: john.wang@psu.edu

Turgay Ertekin

Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering,
EMS Energy Institute,
The Pennsylvania State University,
202 Hosler Building,
University Park, PA 16802

1Corresponding author. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering program.

Contributed by the Petroleum Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Energy Resources Technology. Manuscript received January 11, 2012; final manuscript received September 17, 2012; published online December 12, 2012. Assoc. Editor: Jonggeun Choe.

J. Energy Resour. Technol 135(1), 013402 (Dec 12, 2012) (10 pages) Paper No: JERT-12-1007; doi: 10.1115/1.4007766 History: Received January 11, 2012; Revised September 17, 2012

Development of shale gas reservoirs has become an integral part of the North American gas supply. The Marcellus shale reservoir contains large untapped natural gas resources and its proximity to high demand markets along the East Coast of the United State makes it an attractive target for energy development. The economic viability of such unconventional gas development hinges on the effective stimulation of extremely low permeability reservoir rocks. Horizontal wells with multistage hydraulic fracturing technique are the stimulation method of choice and have been successful in shale gas reservoirs. However, the fundamental science and engineering of the process are yet to be fully understood and hence the protocol that needs to be followed in the stimulation process needs to be optimized. There are several factors affecting the hydraulic fracture treatment and the postfracture gas production in shale gas reservoirs. In this paper, we used numerical reservoir simulation techniques and quantified the effect of the following pertinent factors: multiphase flow, proppant crushing, proppant diagenesis, reservoir compaction, and operating conditions on the performance of the designed multistage hydraulic fracturing process. The knowledge generated in this study is expected to enable engineers to better design fracture treatments and operators to better manage the wells in the Marcellus shale gas reservoir.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Blauch, M. E., Myers, R. R., Moore, T. R., Lipinski, B. A., and Houston, N. A., 2009, “Marcellus Shale Post-Frac Flowback Waters—Where is All the Salt Coming From and What are the Implications?” 2009SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Charleston, WV, Sept. 23–25, Paper No. 125740-MS. [CrossRef]
Cipolla, C. L., Lolon, E. P, Erdle, J. C., and Rubin, B., 2010, “Reservoir Modeling in Shale-Gas Reservoirs,” SPE Res. Eval. Eng., 13(4), Paper No. SPE-125530-PA. [CrossRef]
Cooke, C. E., Jr., 1973, “Conductivity of Fracture Proppants in Multiple Layers,” J. Petro. Technol., 25(9), Paper No. 4117-PA. [CrossRef]
Rubin, M. B.,1983, “Experimental Study of Hydraulic Fracturing in an Impermeable Material,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 105, pp. 116–124. [CrossRef]
Weaver, J., Parker, M., Batenburg, D., and Nguyen, P., 2007, “Fracture-Related Diagenesis May Impact Conductivity,” SPE J., 12(3), Paper No. SPE-98236-PA. [CrossRef]
Lee, D. S., Elsworth, D., Yasuhara, H., Weaver, J., and Rickman, R., 2009, “An Evaluation of the Effects of Fracture Diagenesis on Fracture Treatments: Modeled Response,” 43rd Rock Mechanics Symposium and 4th U.S.-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, Asheville, NC, June 28–July 1, Paper No. ARMA 09-104.
Tao, Q., Ehlig-Economides, C. A., and Ghassemi, A., 2009, “Investigation of Stress-Dependent Fracture Permeability in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs Using a Fully Coupled Poroelastic Displacement Discontinuity Model,” SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, Oct. 4–7, Paper No. 124745-MS. [CrossRef]
Fahrenthold, E. P., and Gray, K. E., 1988, “Compaction Performance of Geopressured-Geothermal Reservoir Rock,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 110, pp. 189–195. [CrossRef]
Reyes, L., and Osisanya, S. O., 2002, “Empirical Correlation of Effective Stress Dependent Shale Rock Properties,” J. Can. Pet. Technol., 41(12), Paper No. 02-12-02. [CrossRef]
Crafton, J. W., 2008, “Modeling Flowback Behavior or Flowback Equals ‘Slowback,'” SPE Shale Gas Production Conference, Fort Worth, TX, Nov. 16–18, Paper No. 119894-MS. [CrossRef]
Yeh, N. S., Davison, M. J., and Raghavan, R., 1986, “Fractured Well Responses in Heterogeneous Systems—Aplication to Devonian Shale and Austin Chalk Reservoirs,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 108, pp. 120–130. [CrossRef]
Sherman, J. B., and Holditch, S. A., 1991, “Effect of Injected Fracture Fluids and Operating Procedures on Ultimate Gas Recovery,” SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Houston, TX, Jan. 22–24, Paper No. 21496-MS. [CrossRef]
Wang, J. Y., 2012, “Well Completion for Effective Deliquification of Natural Gas Wells,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 134(1), p. 013102. [CrossRef]
Wang, J. Y., Holditch, S. A., and McVay, D. A., 2010, “Modeling of Fracture-Fluid Cleanup in Tight-Gas Wells,” SPE J., 15(3), Paper No. SPE-119624-PA. [CrossRef]
Kucuk, F., Sawyer, W. K., and Alam, J., 1981, “Modeling Capabilities for the Devonian Gas Shales,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 103, pp. 270–276. [CrossRef]
Osholake, T., 2010, “Factors Affecting Hydraulically Fractured Well Performances in the Marcellus Shale Gas Reservoirs,” M.S. thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Palisch, T., Duenckel, R., Bazan, L., Heidt, H. J., and Turk, G., 2007, “Determining Realistic Fracture Conductivity and Understanding its Impact on Well Performance—Theory and Field Examples,” 2007 SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, College Station, TX, Jan. 29–31, Paper No. 106301-MS. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of proppant pack diagenesis process over time (Lee et al. 2009)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

160 acre drainage area with a hydraulically vertical well located at the top corner

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Cumulative gas production of various proppants with different hydraulic fracture conductivity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Gas flow rate of various proppants with different hydraulic fracture conductivity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Water injected and water produce from highly and lowly conductive hydraulic fracture

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Cumulative gas production from high and low-conductivity hydraulic fracture

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Gas production rate from high and low-conductivity hydraulic fracture

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Proppant crushing effect on gas recovery for selected proppants

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Proppant crushing effect on gas production rate for selected proppants

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Proppant diagenesis effect on selected proppants (highly conductive hydraulic fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Proppant diagenesis effect on selected proppants (lowly conductive hydraulic fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Reservoir compaction effect on selected proppants (highly conductive hydraulic fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Reservoir compaction effect on selected proppants (low conductive hydraulic fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Effect of several BHP on overall gas production (high permeability fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Effect of several BHP on overall gas production (low permeability fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Effect of several BHP on overall water production (high conductivity fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Effect of several BHP on overall water production (low-conductivity fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Cumulative impact of various effects on overall gas recovery (high conductivity hydraulic fracture)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Cumulative impact of various effects on overall gas recovery (low-conductivity hydraulic fracture)

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