1887
Volume 63, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

As motivation for considering new electromagnetic techniques for hydraulic fracture monitoring, we develop a simple financial model for the net present value offered by geophysical characterization to reduce the error in stimulated reservoir volume calculations. This model shows that even a 5% improvement in stimulated reservoir volume for a 1 billion barrel (bbl.) field results in over 1 billion U.S. dollars (US$) in net present value over 24 years for US$100/bbl. oil and US$0.5 billion for US$50/bbl. oil. The application of conductivity upscaling, often used in electromagnetic modeling to reduce mesh size and thus simulation runtimes, is shown to be inaccurate for the high electrical contrasts needed to represent steel‐cased wells in the earth. Fine‐scale finite‐difference modeling with 12.22‐mm cells to capture the steel casing and fractures shows that the steel casing provides a direct current pathway to a created fracture that significantly enhances the response compared with neglecting the steel casing. We consider conductively enhanced proppant, such as coke‐breeze‐coated sand, and a highly saline brine solution to produce electrically conductive fractures. For a relatively small frac job at a depth of 3 km, involving 5,000 bbl. of slurry and a source midpoint to receiver separation of 50 m, the models show that the conductively enhanced proppant produces a 15% increase in the electric field strength (in‐line with the transmitter) in a 10‐Ωm background. In a 100‐Ωm background, the response due to the proppant increases to 213%. Replacing the conductive proppant by brine with a concentration of 100,000‐ppm NaCl, the field strength is increased by 23% in the 100‐Ωm background and by 2.3% in the 10‐Ωm background. All but the 100,000‐ppm NaCl brine in a 10‐Ωm background produce calculated fracture‐induced electric field increases that are significantly above 2%, a value that has been demonstrated to be observable in field measurements.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12300
2015-10-01
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BerrymanJ.G. and HoverstenG.M.2013. Modeling electrical conductivity for earth media with macroscopic fluid filled fractures. Geophysical Prospecting61, 471–493.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Caudillo‐MataL.A., HaberE., HeagyL.J. and OldenburgD.W.2014. Numerical upscaling of electrical conductivity: A problem specific approach to generate coarse‐scale models. 84th SEG meeting, Denver, Colorado, Expanded Abstracts, 680–684.
  3. CommerM. and NewmanG.A.2004. A parallel finite‐difference approach for 3D transient electromagnetic modelling with galvanic sources. Geophysics69, 1192–1202.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CommerM. and NewmanG.A.2006. An accelerated time domain finite difference simulation scheme for three‐dimensional transient electromagnetic modelling using geometric multigrid concepts. Radio Science41, RS3007.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CommerM., HoverstenG.M. and UmE.S.2015. Transient‐electromagnetic finite‐difference time‐domain earth modeling over steel infrastructure. Geophysics80, E147–E162.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. DailyW.D., OwenE. and LaBrecqueD.J.1990. Cross‐borehole electrical resistivity tomography. 1990 60th SEG meeting, San Francisco, CA, Expanded Abstracts, 573–574.
  7. Graphite
    Graphite2012. Coke breeze backfills for cathodic protection. [Online].
  8. HibbsA.D.2015. Evaluation of deep subsurface resistivity imaging for hydrofracture monitoring. In: U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Fifth Quarterly Progress Report, Project Number: DE‐FE0013902.
  9. HoverstenG.M., CommerM., HaberE. and SchwarzbachC.2014. Hydro‐frac monitoring using ground time‐domain EM. 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Expanded Abstracts, WS09–C08.
  10. HoverstenG.M., CommerM., SchwarzbachC. and HaberE.2015. Electromagnetic Characterization of Hydraulic Fracture Shape and Permeability. 77th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Madrid, Spain, Expanded Abstracts, Tu N107 02.
  11. KleinJ.D., MartinP.R. and MillerA.E.1993. Cement resistivity and implications for measurement of formation resistivity through casing. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, pp. 365–380. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. MarsalaA.F., HibbsA.D. and MorrisonH.F.2014. Borehole casing sources for electromagnetic imaging of deep formations. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, Netherlands, October 27–29, 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. NovotnyE.J.1977. Proppant transport. Presented at the 52nd Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, October 1977. Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME.
  14. PardoD. and Torres‐VerdinC.2013. Sensitivity analysis for the appraisal of hydrofractures in horizontal wells with borehole resistivity measurements. Geophysics78, D209–D222.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. RocroiJ.P. and KoulikovA.V.1985. The use of vertical line sources in Electrical Prospecting for Hydrocarbon. Geophysical Prospecting33, 138–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. RuppelS.C., JonesR.H., BretonC.L. and KaneJ.A.2005. Preparation of maps depicting geothermal gradient and Precambrian structure in the Permian basin. In: USGS Order no. 04CRSA0834 and Requisition no. 04CRPR01474.
  17. Schlumberger Interpretation Charts
    Schlumberger Interpretation Charts1997. SMP‐7006.
  18. TakacsE.1998. A nonconventional geoelectric method using em field generated by steel‐casing excitation. SEG meeting, New Orleans, LA, Expanded Abstracts, 452–455.
  19. Yang, W., Torres‐Verdin, C., Hou, J., Zhang, Z.2009. 1D subsurface electromagnetic fields excited by energized steel casing. Geophysics74, E159–E180.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12300
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12300
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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