POTENTIAL COALBED GAS RESOURCE IN THE HUDSON’S HOPE AREA OF NORTHEAST BRITISH COLUMBIA Barry Ryan1, Randy Karst2, George Owsiacki3 and Garry Payie3 ABSTRACT The Gething Formation, which underlies an area around Hudson’s Hope, east of the disturbed belt in northeast British Columbia, is perspective for coal bed gas (CBG or CBM). The formation has experienced little deformation and contains cumulative coal thicknesses that range up to 17 metres . Coal rank is generally higher than high-volatile A bituminous. North and south of Hudson’s Hope the formation dips moderately to the east and it is generally too deep for CBM exploration. However in the vicinity of Hudson’s Hope dips are less and a substantial area is prospective for CBM. This study estimates a potential resource of up to 25 tcf in the area and concentrations in places of more than 10 bcf/section. Barry Ryan, Randy Karst, George Owsiacki and Garry Payie., Potential coalbed gas resource in the Hudson’s Hope area of Northeast British Columbia in Summary of Activities 2005, BC Ministry of Energy and Mines, pages 15-37. 1Resource Development and Geoscience Branch, PO Box 9323, Stn Prov Govt, Victoria, BC, V8W 9N3 2Karst Canadian Spirit Resources Inc., Calgary Place One, Suite 1220, 330 5th Ave S.W. Calgary Alberta. T2P 0L4 3Consultant, Total Earth Science Services, 1350 Kristine Rae Lane, Victoria, B.C., V8Z 7L1; e-mail: [email protected] Keywords: Gething Formation, coalbed gas resource, isotherms, rank, coal resource database. Manville, which explains a trend towards higher rank in the Gething Formation in the area. The edge of the disturbed belt, which trends northwest from the Alberta INTRODUCTION border to Chetwynd, deflects more to a northerly trend at The Gething Formation, which underlies an area about the location where it abuts the Peace River Arch. around Hudson’s Hope in northeast British Columbia, is In the battle of units it seems that a compromise may prospective for coal bed gas (CBG or coalbed methane, be developing in the world of CBM in Canada. Depths CBM) for a number of reasons. The formation in the area and coal thicknesses are usually given in metres; gas contains a number of thin seams, that when thicknesses contents may be in cc/g or cubic metres/tonne or scf/t, are cumulated, provide a total thickness that averages however gas resource numbers are more often given in about 8 metres with values ranging up to 17 metres in imperial units of bcf/section and tcf. A tcf =28.32 billion some areas. The area is east of the edge of the disturbed cubic metres and 1 cc/g = 32.037 scf /ton. Converting belt and has experienced little deformation. Coal rank any resource, in the area discussed here, into a reserve varies but in much of the area is higher than high-volatile depends on the degree of gas saturation of the coals, the A bituminous (mean maximum reflectance Rmax values ability to extract gas over intermediate distances through greater than 0.8%). The combination of depth, thin seams and on the composition of the gas. A previous cumulative coal thickness and rank mean that a resource assessment of the area (Smith et al., 1991) substantial coalbed gas resource may exist in the area. estimated a resource in the Gething Formation of 34.9 tcf Many regional maps contain a line marking the to a depth of 1800 metres. The area they studied included boundary between the Western Canadian Sedimentary part of the disturbed belt, which is not included in this Basin and the “disturbed belt “ or “deformation front”, study. which marks the eastward extent of the Rocky Mountain A number of companies have acquired oil and gas Foothills (Figure 1). In reality the degree of deformation exploration rights in the area and Figure 2 illustrates the increases gradually towards the west and a single line on a land position as of August 2004. Companies have drilled map can be very deceptive in terms of defining areas of at least 8 holes in the area and there has been limited test increased CBM potential. This is very much the case in production from 2 holes. the Hudson’s Hope-Chetwynd area. However for convenience the area of the Gething Formation discussed here is defined by the edge of the disturbed belt (if some what arbitrarily defined) and in part by the Peace River COAL RESOURCE DATABASE Arch as outlined by Marchioni and Kalkreuth (1992). The Arch was an area of increased subsidence and The 121 holes utilized in this study are located east of deposition in Manville (Lower Cretaceous) times that the disturbed belt (Figure 3). Coal intercepts in the resulted in a weakly defined thickening of the Gething Gething Formation were picked using a combination of Formation trending northeast along the trace of the Arch. density, caliper and gamma logs that are available from The Arch is also overlain by thicker deposits of the Upper the Ministry of Energy and Mines in Victoria. The Summary of Activities 2005 15 Figure 1. Physiographic divisions NE BC from Stott (1982). Ministry of Energy and Mines Titles Division Hudson’s Hope Tenure Activity Hudson Hope 0312065 Active Tenures Roads 1:125,000 02134 Ki lometr es Figure 2. Coalbed gas tenures NE BC as of August 2004. 16 British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines 6330000 120' Alberta 6290000 BC 6250000 Fort St John Hudson Hope 6210000 56' 122'/56' Dawson Chetwynd Creek 6170000 Foothills Plains 6130000 122'/55' 55' Tumbler Ridge 6090000 505000 545000 585000 625000 665000 Figure 3. Map of holes used in the study. Black diamonds represent holes for which logs were picked in this study open diamond represent holes for which logs were picked in previous unpublished study. Solid squares are coal properties where coal thicknesses were estimated. The location of Dension hole 80-1 is indicated by a triangle. tops. Data for the Gething Formation includes depth, resolution of oil and gas logs is marginal for picking thin thickness and ash code (3 low to 1 high) of all seams. All coal seams because the detector-source spacing and travel data were krieged and gridded using Surfer software® in rate for the tool do not allow good definition of the such a way that grid nodes overlap and can be thickness or density of thin seams (Figure 4). Longer manipulated to produce computed node values. At each spaced detector-source spacing tends to result in an over node the average depth of the coal section and average estimation of seam thickness with an over estimation of Mean maximum reflectance (Rmax%) values were used ash content. There may also be an asymmetrical effect in conjunction with the cumulative coal thickness to that smears the hanging wall signal based on logging calculate a potential gas content using the Ryan Equation speed (Figure 4). If seam thickness is over estimated and (Ryan, 1992). Rmax values were derived from this is accompanied by an over estimate of seam density, Marchioni, and Kalkrueth (1992) who provide values for then the estimation of the amount of carbon in the section the top and bottom of the Gething and their data were re- will not be affected as much as might be expected and digitized. Individual ash contents were not incorporated consequently errors in estimating the CBM resource will into the calculation and average values were assumed for be minimized. all seams. The database generated from the 121 holes includes An excel spreadsheet capable of handling up to 5 grid hole location, collar elevation and the depth to formation matrixes, each with 5500 nodes, was used to manipulate Summary of Activities 2005 17 Fast slow Logging speed BRD bed resolution density HRD High resolution density LSD long space density GR Gamma ray LSD GR HRD 1 metre BRD HRD LSD Caliper Figure 4. Schematic for log resolution. and Richardson, 2004) and values for NE BC average the data. The spreadsheet applies conditions to resource about 27ºC /kilometer with a surface temperature of 5ºC; calculations and generates derived grid matrixes for based on a depth of about 750 metres the average contouring in surfer. Grid nodes west of the disturbed temperature should be in the range of 26ºC. belt were blanked and do not add to the resource calculation. The CBM resource is calculated using the cumulate coal thickness assigned a single depth that is the mid Any calculation of resource is based on an depth of the coal bearing section at that location. The assumption of what seams may be able to hold under average ash contents used (20% and 30%) are depth and rank conditions and must therefore be conservative and depth cutoffs are set so that no resource considered an estimate of maximum potential resource. is calculated above a depth of 100 metres (plus depth to The Ryan equation provides estimates of maximum mid point of the coal bearing section at that location) and potential gas content based on rank, ash content and below depths ranging from 800 to 1400 metres (Table 2). depth. The equation works for ranks greater than Rmax A more detailed calculation could apply the Ryan 0.7% and tends to under predict for ranks above 1.5%. equation to each individual seam with individual Ranks in the area range from Rmax=0.80% to 1.63% and estimates of ash content. The process may appear to Figure 5 illustrates the range of gas contents predicted by provide a more precise number but with uncertainties the Ryan Equation. about degree of coal saturation it is unlikely that the result A sample of Gething coal from a hole drilled in the would be any more useful.