1887
25th International Conference and Exhibition – Interpreting the Past, Discovering the Future
  • ISSN: 2202-0586
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

The success of unconventional gas extraction is dependent on establishing sufficient permeability in otherwise low-porosity and low-permeability formations. In the case of shale gas, permeability can be established through hydraulic stimulation of deep formations, either through existing fracture networks or by creating new pathways for fluids to flow. Coal seam gas (CSG) permeability can be established through de-pressurisation of coal beds by extracting existing sub-surface fluids.

The primary geophysical technique for the monitoring of hydraulic stimulation and de-pressurisation has been microseismic, which measures small seismic events associated with rock fractures. The magnetotelluric method (MT) presents itself as an alternative geophysical approach for monitoring unconventional resource development. MT is directly sensitive to electrical resistivity with depth and orientation and could be used to infer fracture orientation, fluid migration and hydraulic conductivity.

We report on the first industrial MT field surveys for the spatial and temporal monitoring of fluid movement resulting from both hydraulic fracturing of a shale gas reservoir and de- pressurisation of a CSG formation. We show that increasing permeability enables conductive fluids to connect resulting in small drops in bulk resistivity. Such changes in resistivity can be mapped through modelling and inversion allowing a determination of areas with greater permeability and hence production capacity.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2016ab231
2016-12-01
2026-01-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aminian, K., and Rodvelt, G., 2014, Evaluation of coalbed methane reservoirs, in Coal Bed Methane: From Prospect to Pipeline: Esevier, 1, 4, 63-91.
  2. Chave, A.D., and Jones, A.G., 2012, The magnetotelluric method: Theory and practice: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Chave, A.D., and Thomson, D.J., 2004, Bounded influence magnetotelluric response function estimation: Geophysical Journal International, 157, 988-1006.
  4. Curtis, J.B., 2002, Fractured shale-gas systems: AAPG bulletin, 86, 1921-1938.
  5. Donaldson, E.C., Alam, W., and Begum, N., 2014, Hydraulic fracturing explained: Evaluation, implementation, and challenges: Elsevier.
  6. Garcia, X. and Jones, A.G., 2002. Atmospheric sources for audiomagnetotellurics (amt) sounding. Geophysics, 67(2): 448 - 458.
  7. Hamilton, S., Golding, S., Baublys, K., and Esterle, J., 2014, Stable isotopic and molecular composition of desorbed coal seam gases from the Walloon Subgroup, eastern Surat Basin, Australia: International Journal of Coal Geology, 122, 21 -36.
  8. Krieger, L., and Peacock, J.R., 2014, MTpy: A Python toolbox for magnetotellurics: Computers & Geosciences, 72, 167-175.
  9. Rodi, W., and Mackie, R.L., 2001, Nonlinear conjugate gradients algorithm for 2-D magnetotelluric inversion: Geophysics, 66, 174-187.
  10. Seidle, J., 2011, Fundamentals of coalbed methane reservoir engineering: PennWell Books. Simpson, F., and Bahr, K., 2005, Practical magnetotellurics: Cambridge University Press.
/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2016ab231
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): coal seam gas; monitoring; permeability; shale gas
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error