Evaluating Stimulation Effectiveness in Unconventional Gas Reservoirs

Abstract

This paper presents production evaluation criteria that can be used to compare the overall stimulation effectiveness in unconventional gas reservoirs. Characterizing the "relative" conductivity of the fracture network and primary fracture are critical to evaluating stimulation performance. Due to the uncertainty in matrix permeability and network fracture spacing (i.e. -complexity), it is difficult to find unique solutions when modeling production data in unconventional gas reservoirs. However, it may be sufficient to identify qualitative behaviors that can distinguish between key production mechanisms. This paper utilizes numerical reservoir simulation combined with advanced decline curve analyses to identify expected production signatures that can be used to evaluate stimulation effectiveness in unconventional gas reservoirs. The paper documents production signatures for low conductivity and high conductivity networks and primary fractures and discusses non-uniqueness issues with production data analysis in unconventional reservoirs. There are issues with non-unique production signatures and similar signatures may result from different combinations of matrix permeability, network block size and conductivity, and network size. However, the production signatures for high and low conductivity networks and primary fractures may be distinguished using advanced type curve graphing techniques. In addition, insights into total network size and block spacing may be possible.The paper concludes with the evaluation of production data from 41 Barnett shale fracture treatments, including fracture and re-fracture treatments. The dataset included vertical and horizontal wells stimulated using water-fracs and cross-linked (XL) gel treatment designs. Four treatments included microseismic mapping to further constrain the interpretations. More than 60% of the XL gel treatments in vertical wells exhibited production signatures that could be interpreted as either (1) a high conductivity primary fracture connected to a low conductivity network or (2) a uniformly high conductivity network. The remaining XL gel treatments in vertical wells exhibited mostly moderate conductivity fracture network signatures. Most of the vertical wells re-fractured using slick-water treatments (water-fracs) exhibited low conductivity fracture network production signatures, with over 60% of the wells evaluated showing this signature and the remaining wells exhibiting moderate conductivity fracture network signatures. Although the initial XL gel treatments showed production signatures indicating higher fracture conductivity than the subsequent water-frac re-fracs, all of the water-frac re-fracs significantly improved gas production. Microseismic mapping has shown that water-frac restimulation treatments create larger and more complex fracture networks in the Barnett shale, contacting much more reservoir surface area, which explains the superior production despite the lower fracture conductivity. The majority of the horizontal wells, over 70%, showed modera...

Stochastic optimization of hydraulic fracture and horizontal well parameters in shale gas reservoirs

“…This paper extended previous shale gas reservoir simulation modeling work (Mayerhofer et al 2006(Mayerhofer et al , 2010Warpinski et al 2008;Cipolla et al 2008aCipolla et al , 2009b, which discussed the impact of stress-sensitive fracture conductivity and gas adsorption or desorption effect on well performance.…”

Integration of microseismic and other post-fracture surveillance with production analysis: A tight gas study

“…A qualitative production analysis approach was recently provided by Cipolla et al (2009) emphasizing the use of Blasingame and logelog diagnostic plots to derive information about the hydraulic fracture system. We anticipate several complications in trying to apply the approach used in this paper to shale gas:…”

Numerical simulation of hydraulic fracture propagation in tight oil reservoirs by volumetric fracturing

“…The main mechanism (King 2010) is to open natural fractures and expand them until shear sliding occurs in the process of hydraulic fracturing. The multistage, multi-perforation clusters per fracturing treatment in a horizontal wellbore and the natural fractures may create a fracture network system that may enhance the stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) and improve both the initial production and the ultimate recovery factor (Mayerhofer et al 2008;Cipolla et al 2009). There are many factors which influence the fracture propagation, like the horizontal stress difference, density of natural fractures, injection rate, number of perforation clusters, and the spacing of clusters (Yost et al 1988;Palmer et al 2007;Cipolla et al 2011;Olson and Wu 2012).…”