sign in sign up
<<
Home , Conasauga shale, Floyd Shale

EMD Mid-Year Leadership Meeting November 14, 2007 Gas Shale Committee Report Brian Cardott, Chairman

1. Active Gas Shale Plays Many black shale hydrocarbon source rocks across the U.S. and Canada are currently being evaluated as gas shales. There are too many potential gas shales to describe each in detail. Below are a few highlights.

(a) Fort Worth Basin, : (Mississippian). The Barnett Shale is still the most active gas-shale play in the United States. According to the Texas Railroad Commission web site (http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/divisions/og/statistics/fielddata/barnettshale.pdf) as of August 15, 2007 there were a total of 6,519 Barnett wells and 4,051 permitted locations in the Newark East Field of the Fort Worth Basin. During calendar year 2006, 686 BCF gas was produced from the field, accounting for 12% of Texas gas production. Of a total of 161 operators in the Newark East Field, the top 10 operators are: (1) Devon Energy Production Co. (2) XTO Energy Inc. (3) Chesapeake Operating Inc. (4) EOG Resources Inc. (5) Encana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. (6) Burlington Resources O&G Co. LP (7) Range Production Co. (8) J-W Operating Co. (9) Denbury Onshore, LLC (10) Quicksilver Resources Inc.

(b) Arkoma Basin, Arkansas: (Mississippian). According to the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission web site (http://www.aogc.state.ar.us/Fayprodinfo.htm), there are a total of 453 active Fayetteville Shale wells (completed or permitted, as of August 31, 2007). A map of Fayetteville Shale wells is available at http://www.geostor.arkansas.gov/apps/aogc/index.htm. The top five operators of the Fayetteville gas shale play are: (1) Seeco Inc. (2) Chesapeake Operating (3) Alta Operating Co. LLC (4) KCS Resources Inc. (5) Hallwood Petroleum Additional information is available at the Arkansas Geological Survey web site (http://www.state.ar.us/agc/agc.htm).

(c) Arkoma Basin, Oklahoma: Woodford Shale (Late Devonian-Early Mississippian). According to the Oklahoma Geological Survey, as of October 19, 2007 there were a total of 220 Woodford Shale gas-well completions since 2004 (first application of advanced completion technology), primarily in the western part of the Arkoma Basin in eastern Oklahoma. Of a total of 125 horizontal Woodford Shale gas wells from 2005-2007, initial potential gas rates ranged from 47 to 11,200 MCFGPD. A gas shale completions database, lists of references, maps, and several presentations are available on the OGS web site (http://www.ogs.ou.edu/oilgas.php). Of 30 operators in calendar year 2006, the top five operators are: (1) Newfield Exploration Mid-Continent Inc. (2) Devon Energy Production Co. LP (3) Antero Resources Corporation (4) Resource Development Technology LLC (5) St. Mary Land & Exporation Co. Caney Shale (Mississippian) gas-well completions dropped from 27 in 2004 to 8 in 2006 due to problems completing the clay-rich shale. A new Woodford gas-shale play is in the Ardmore Basin in southern Oklahoma. (http://www.ogj.com/display_article/310348/7/ONART/none/ExplD/1/Wood ford-shale-gas-target-in-Ardmore-basin/)

(d) Michigan Basin, Michigan: (Devonian). Well activity and production data are not available.

(e) Appalachian Basin, multi-state: /Marcellus Shale (Devonian). [Marcellus Shale, Unconventional Report feature for October 2007] Well activity and production data by state or individual shale are not available.

Current interest in the Marcellus Shale continues in the Appalachian Basin. Operators are also continuing to drill wells targeting the Lower Huron Shale, the traditional Devonian shale reservoir. Some horizontal wells have been permitted in West Virginia; some are multi-lateral horizontal wells (a la CBM multilaterals) while others are single leg horizontal wells. One massive “Barnett style” hydraulic fracture job in southwestern Pennsylvania has attracted attention. A number of presentations at the Eastern Section AAPG meeting focused on shales. (http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/documents/2007/07069east_sect_ab s/index.htm)

In New York, the Ordovician has 1.5-3% TOC and Type III to IV kerogen; the Devonian Marcellus Shale has 0.3-11% TOC and Type II to III kerogen. Source: Nyahay, R., J. Leone, L. Smith, J. Martin, and D. Jarvie, 2007, Update on the regional assessment of gas potential in the Devonian Marcellus and Ordovician Utica shales in New York: AAPG Search and Discovery Article 10136. http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/documents/2007/07101nyahay/index.h tm Northwestern Ohio Shale and Marcellus Shale assessment units, see Milici, R.C., and C.S. Swezey, 2006, Assessment of Appalachian Basin oil and gas resources: Devonian Shale-Middle and Upper Paleozoic Total Petroleum System: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1237, 70 p. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1237/ Eastern Gas Shales Project Maps in Ohio (http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/geosurvey/pub/openfile/gasshale/tabid/7204/D efault.aspx)

(f) Black Warrior Basin, and Mississippi: Neal/Floyd/Conasauga [, Unconventional Natural Gas Report feature for March 2007][, Unconventional Natural Gas Report feature for August 2007] Totten, M.W., and A.S. Oko, 2007, Unconventional shale gas potential of the Floyd Shale in the Black Warrior Basin, northwestern Alabama (abstract): 2007 AAPG Annual Convention Abstracts CD. http://aapg.confex.com/aapg/2007am/techprogram/A110400.htm “An overview of the Conasauga Shale gas play in Alabama (June 2007)” (http://www.ogb.state.al.us/documents/misc_ogb/Overview_jun2007.pdf) Big Canoe Creek Field in St. Clair Co. (http://www.gsa.state.al.us/documents/misc_ogb/bcc_geo.pdf) (http://www.gsa.state.al.us/documents/misc_ogb/bcc_topo.pdf) Well activity and production data are not available.

(g) Devonian Shale: Kentucky. According to the Kentucky Geological Survey web site (http://www.uky.edu/KGS/emsweb/oginfo/resource.html, http://www.uky.edu/KGS/emsweb/oginfo/devsh_reserves.pdf), the estimated proven reserves in the Ohio/New Albany/Chattanooga black shale of Kentucky (Illinois and Appalachian basins) is 12 TCF gas. “Gas reservoir character of Devonian shales of Kentucky” (http://www.uky.edu/KGS/emsweb/devsh/dvnnsh.html) “Predicting cumulative production of Devonian shale gas wells from early well performance data, Appalachian Basin of eastern Kentucky” (http://www.uky.edu/KGS/emsweb/devsh/production/) Well activity and production data are not available.

(h) Illinois Basin, Indiana: (Devonian)

According to the well record tables of the “Petroleum Database Management System” on the Indiana Geological Survey web site (http://igs.indiana.edu/pdms/), there are a total of 542 New Albany Shale gas wells completed since 1885. Most of the wells, drilled since the mid 1990s, are in Harrison Co. at depths of 500-1,100 ft and production rates of 20-450 MCFGPD. Recent exploration is in Daviess Co. Gas production is thermogenic and mixed thermogenic/biogenic primarily from the organic-rich Clegg Creek Member. Source: Comer, J.B., N.R. Hasenmueller, M.D. Mastalerz, J.A. Rupp, N.R. Shaffer, and C.W. Zuppann, 2006, The New Albany Shale gas play in southern Indiana (abstract): 2006 AAPG Eastern Section meeting, Program with Abstracts, p. 17. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/handle/2022/712

(i) Palo Duro Basin, Texas: Bend Shale (Lower Pennsylvanian). [Unconventional Natural Gas Report feature for May 2007]

(j) Utah:

In the northern Paradox Basin of UT/CO, at least four companies are pursuing fractured shale reservoirs of the Pennsylvanian Paradox Formation: (1) Bill Barrett Corporation (2 wells drilled, Yellow Jacket prospect), (2) Tidewater Oil and Gas Company, (3) Delta Petroleum (2 wells drilled, Greentown prospect), and (4) Samson Resources. Information on their shale gas prospects can be found on most respective company web sites.

In central Utah, Bill Barrett Corporation (Hook and Woodside projects) and Shell Oil Company are investigating the shale gas potential of the Mississippian Manning Canyon Formation.

In central Utah and the Uinta Basin, Bill Barrett Corporation (Hook project) and Wind River Resources (N. Hill Creek prospect, 6 wells completed) are investigating the shale gas potential of parts of the Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale.

The recent AAPG Rocky Mountain Section meeting, October 7-9, 2007, had a sold-out core workshop, "Geological Aspects of Shale Gas Exploration, Exploitation, and Development", as well as two sessions on shale gas plays: 1) Emerging Shale Gas Resources of the Rockies (8 papers), and 2) Shale Gas Secrets - Lessons from other North American Shale Gas Plays (EMD sponsored, 9 papers).

Also see Schamel (2005, 2006) Schamel, S., 2005, Shale-gas reservoirs of Utah: Survey of an unexploited potential energy resource: Utah Geological Survey Open-File Report 461, CD-ROM (114 p., appendix of core photos and databases) Schamel, S., 2006, Shale gas resources of Utah: Assessment of previously undeveloped gas discoveries: Utah Geological Survey Open- File Report 499, CD-ROM, 85 p.

(k) Canada. Yamaska Shale Gas Project (http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=783413) Also see Hamblin (2006); Ross and Bustin (2007) Hamblin, A.P., 2006, The “shale gas” concept in Canada: a preliminary inventory of possibilities: Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 5384, 108 p. http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/bookstore/circ/ofiles_e.php#5384 Ross, D.J.K., and R.M. Bustin, 2007, Shale gas potential of the Lower Jurassic Gordondale member, northeastern British Columbia, Canada: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 55, p. 51-75.

2. Gas Shale research and sources of funding. Gas shale research is being conducted by private industry, consortia, and government. (1) Private Industry (e.g., Devon Energy): not for public distribution.

(2) Consortia: (a) Core Lab “Gas shales reservoir characterization and production properties” (http://www.corelab.com/IRS/Studies/GasShaleFinal.asp); (b) Colorado School of Mines FAST (Fracturing, Acidizing, Stimulation Technology) Consortium Project 9: stimulation of “shale” reservoirs (http://www.mines.edu/fast/). (c) Humble Geochemical Services (http://www.humble-inc.com/) “Rocky Mountain shale gas evaluation project” (13 basins) “Ouachita foreland basins” (6 basins) New York Marcellus and Utica geochemical database New Albany geochemical database (d) GeoMark Research (http://www.geomarkresearch.com/studies_northamerica.cfm) Appalachian Basin Shale Gas Study (2005) (e) Baseline Resolution Black Warrior Basin Study (http://www.baselinedgsi.com/contents/black_warrior_basin.htm)

(3) Government (a) RPSEA (Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America) http://www.rpsea.org/ Request For Proposals released (including shale gas; proposals due 12/3/2007): (1) Unconventional gas and other petroleum resources program, (2) Small producers program. (b) USGS. The U.S. Geological Survey is updating the National Assessment of Oil and Gas Resources, including shale gas in the Arkoma Basin, Oklahoma. http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/oilgas/noga/ass_updates.html Michigan Basin assessment http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2005/3070/2005- 3070.pdf Bend Arch/Fort Worth Basin assessment http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2004/3022/fs-2004-3022.pdf The USGS Eastern Energy Resources Team has initiated a project that pertains to the organic geochemistry of the Devonian shale formations in the Appalachian Basin. The project is being conducted in cooperation with the State geological surveys of Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. The State geological surveys are collecting samples of Devonian shale, which they ship to the USGS for analyses. The analyses are, for the most part, being conducted by a commercial laboratory. Newly obtained data will eventually be integrated with previously published analyses to prepare a regional summary of Devonian shale geochemistry.

3. What EMD technical session, publications, workshops, etc. exist or are planned that are relevant to this commodity? 2008 AAPG Annual Convention: proposed gas shale sessions: (1) Overview of shale gas resources (EMD/AAPG); (2) Genesis of unconventional gases: coalbed methane, shale gas and gas hydrates (EMD/SEPM); (3) Geology of shale/mudrock reservoir systems (EMD/SEPM); (4) Improvements in shale gas drilling and completion (EMD/AAPG).

4. Sources of Information (a) References (see gas shale bibliography on Gas Shale Committee web site (http://emd.aapg.org/members_only/gas_shales/index.cfm)) (b) Trade Journals (articles included in bibliography above) (1) Powell Barnett Shale Newsletter (http://www.barnettshalenews.com/) (2) American Oil and Gas Reporter (3) Oil and Gas Investor (4) Oil and Gas Journal (5) Hart’s E & P (6) AAPG Explorer (c) Subscription Services (1) Unconventional Natural Gas Report by Ann Priestman (720-261- 4126) (2) IHS Energy (http://energy.ihs.com/) (3) Warlick International Report (http://www.warlick.net/) (http://www.warlick.net/id21.html)

5. Calendar November 14-16, 2007: 9th Annual Unconventional Gas Conference, Calgary, AB, Canada. Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas. http://www.csug.ca/calc.html

November 29-30, 2007: 5th Annual Unconventional Gas Resources– Production & Potential (Coalbed Methane, , Shale Gas) Denver, CO. Strategic Research Institute http://www.almevents.com/conf_page.cfm?instance_id=30&web_id=1046&pid =572

February 10-12, 2008: Unconventional Reservoirs Conference: New Strategies for Shale, Tight Gas, and Coalbed Methane, Keystone, CO. Society of Petroleum Engineers. http://www.spe.org/spe- app/spe/meetings/URC/2008/index.htm

March 18-19, 2008: Stimulating Shale Reservoirs. Pittsburgh, PA. Society of Petroleum Engineers. http://www.spe.org/spe- app/spe/meetings/07APIT/2008/index.htm

October 3-4, 2008: U.S. Gulf Region Mudstones as Unconventional Shale Gas/Oil Reservoirs, Fractured and Non-Fractured, Houston, TX. Houston Geological Society.

October 22-23, 2008: Oklahoma Gas Shales Conference and Field Trip, Oklahoma City, OK. Oklahoma Geological Survey.

6. Committee Members (in alphabetical order) Bill Ambrose, Lee Avary, Kent Bowker, Charles Boyer, Dwight Brown, Marc Bustin, Brian Cardott, John Curtis, Bradley Dean, Wally Dow, Lisa Hunt, Dan Jarvie, Chris Johnson, Doug Kenaley, Jean Kulla, Charlie Landis, Jeff Levine, Peter Lufholm, Jock McCracken, Bob Milici, Mike Party, Doug Patchen, Jeremy Platt, Rick Richardson, Steve Ruhl, Steven Schamel, Loren Schmidt, John Sherborne, Dave Tabet, Bob Timmer, Frank Walles, Peter Warwick, Mark Whitney, Charles Wickstrom