Recovery Efficiency in Hydraulically Fractured Shale Gas Reservoirs

Maxian B. Seales, Turgay Ertekin, John Yilin Wang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

At the end of 2015 the U.S. held 5.6% or approximately 369 Tcf of worldwide conventional natural gas proved reserves (British Petroleum Company, 2016, "BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2016," British Petroleum Co., London). If unconventional gas sources are considered, natural gas reserves rise steeply to 2276 Tcf. Shale gas alone accounts for approximately 750 Tcf of the technically recoverable gas reserves in the U.S. (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011, "Review of Emerging Resources: U.S. Shale Gas and Shale Oil plays," U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC). However, this represents only a very small fraction of the gas associated with shale formations and is indicative of current technological limits. This manuscript addresses the question of recovery efficiency/recovery factor (RF) in fractured gas shales. Predictions of gas RF in fractured shale gas reservoirs are presented as a function of operating conditions, non-Darcy flow, gas slippage, proppant crushing, and proppant diagenesis. Recovery factors are simulated using a fully implicit, three-dimensional, two-phase, dual-porosity finite difference model that was developed specifically for this purpose. The results presented in this article provide clear insight into the range of recovery factors one can expect from a fractured shale gas formation, the impact that operation procedures and other phenomena have on these recovery factors, and the efficiency or inefficiency of contemporary shale gas production technology.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number042901
JournalJournal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME
Volume139
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2017

Fingerprint

Recovery
Gases
Proppants
gas
Petroleum
natural gas
Natural gas
Crude oil
petroleum
Associated gas
Shale oil
energy
dual porosity
oil shale
Crushing
Shale
Gas oils
crushing
gas flow
gas production

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
  • Fuel Technology
  • Energy Engineering and Power Technology
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Geochemistry and Petrology

Cite this

Seales, Maxian B. ; Ertekin, Turgay ; Yilin Wang, John. / Recovery Efficiency in Hydraulically Fractured Shale Gas Reservoirs. In: Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME. 2017 ; Vol. 139, No. 4.
@article{d061be091b7848cbb0f920e91e6341cd,
title = "Recovery Efficiency in Hydraulically Fractured Shale Gas Reservoirs",
abstract = "At the end of 2015 the U.S. held 5.6{\%} or approximately 369 Tcf of worldwide conventional natural gas proved reserves (British Petroleum Company, 2016, {"}BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2016,{"} British Petroleum Co., London). If unconventional gas sources are considered, natural gas reserves rise steeply to 2276 Tcf. Shale gas alone accounts for approximately 750 Tcf of the technically recoverable gas reserves in the U.S. (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011, {"}Review of Emerging Resources: U.S. Shale Gas and Shale Oil plays,{"} U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC). However, this represents only a very small fraction of the gas associated with shale formations and is indicative of current technological limits. This manuscript addresses the question of recovery efficiency/recovery factor (RF) in fractured gas shales. Predictions of gas RF in fractured shale gas reservoirs are presented as a function of operating conditions, non-Darcy flow, gas slippage, proppant crushing, and proppant diagenesis. Recovery factors are simulated using a fully implicit, three-dimensional, two-phase, dual-porosity finite difference model that was developed specifically for this purpose. The results presented in this article provide clear insight into the range of recovery factors one can expect from a fractured shale gas formation, the impact that operation procedures and other phenomena have on these recovery factors, and the efficiency or inefficiency of contemporary shale gas production technology.",
author = "Seales, {Maxian B.} and Turgay Ertekin and {Yilin Wang}, John",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1115/1.4036043",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "139",
journal = "Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME",
issn = "0195-0738",
publisher = "American Society of Mechanical Engineers(ASME)",
number = "4",

}

Recovery Efficiency in Hydraulically Fractured Shale Gas Reservoirs. / Seales, Maxian B.; Ertekin, Turgay; Yilin Wang, John.

In: Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 139, No. 4, 042901, 01.07.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recovery Efficiency in Hydraulically Fractured Shale Gas Reservoirs

AU - Seales, Maxian B.

AU - Ertekin, Turgay

AU - Yilin Wang, John

PY - 2017/7/1

Y1 - 2017/7/1

N2 - At the end of 2015 the U.S. held 5.6% or approximately 369 Tcf of worldwide conventional natural gas proved reserves (British Petroleum Company, 2016, "BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2016," British Petroleum Co., London). If unconventional gas sources are considered, natural gas reserves rise steeply to 2276 Tcf. Shale gas alone accounts for approximately 750 Tcf of the technically recoverable gas reserves in the U.S. (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011, "Review of Emerging Resources: U.S. Shale Gas and Shale Oil plays," U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC). However, this represents only a very small fraction of the gas associated with shale formations and is indicative of current technological limits. This manuscript addresses the question of recovery efficiency/recovery factor (RF) in fractured gas shales. Predictions of gas RF in fractured shale gas reservoirs are presented as a function of operating conditions, non-Darcy flow, gas slippage, proppant crushing, and proppant diagenesis. Recovery factors are simulated using a fully implicit, three-dimensional, two-phase, dual-porosity finite difference model that was developed specifically for this purpose. The results presented in this article provide clear insight into the range of recovery factors one can expect from a fractured shale gas formation, the impact that operation procedures and other phenomena have on these recovery factors, and the efficiency or inefficiency of contemporary shale gas production technology.

AB - At the end of 2015 the U.S. held 5.6% or approximately 369 Tcf of worldwide conventional natural gas proved reserves (British Petroleum Company, 2016, "BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2016," British Petroleum Co., London). If unconventional gas sources are considered, natural gas reserves rise steeply to 2276 Tcf. Shale gas alone accounts for approximately 750 Tcf of the technically recoverable gas reserves in the U.S. (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011, "Review of Emerging Resources: U.S. Shale Gas and Shale Oil plays," U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC). However, this represents only a very small fraction of the gas associated with shale formations and is indicative of current technological limits. This manuscript addresses the question of recovery efficiency/recovery factor (RF) in fractured gas shales. Predictions of gas RF in fractured shale gas reservoirs are presented as a function of operating conditions, non-Darcy flow, gas slippage, proppant crushing, and proppant diagenesis. Recovery factors are simulated using a fully implicit, three-dimensional, two-phase, dual-porosity finite difference model that was developed specifically for this purpose. The results presented in this article provide clear insight into the range of recovery factors one can expect from a fractured shale gas formation, the impact that operation procedures and other phenomena have on these recovery factors, and the efficiency or inefficiency of contemporary shale gas production technology.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018267957&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85018267957&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1115/1.4036043

DO - 10.1115/1.4036043

M3 - Article

VL - 139

JO - Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME

JF - Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME

SN - 0195-0738

IS - 4

M1 - 042901

ER -