Presentation of a completion method of shale demonstrated through an - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presentation of a completion method of shale demonstrated through an example of the Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania, USA

Joseph Sites Horizontal Wireline Services Joseph Sites ‐ Horizontal Wireline Services.

Outline Outline

• Pumpdown operations in the Marcellus Shale

– Gun configurations, stage length Gun configurations, stage length – Application of wireline RF‐Safe options to horizontal pumpdown market

• Marcellus Shale
• Marcellus Shale

– Market – Cost considerations for tight economics and poor commodity price commodity price

• Field data and case study

– Conventional vs. Reactive Liner Charges

• Wireline company data – Marcellus Shale market vs.

firing methods

Marcellus Shale Completions Marcellus Shale Completions

Marcellus Shale Pumpdown Marcellus Shale Pumpdown

Marcellus Shale Gun Configurations Marcellus Shale Gun Configurations

• 3‐8 guns

3 8 guns

• 3.125” to 3.375”

36 2

• 36 to 72

shots/stage

• 0.42”‐0.56” EHD
• Stage spacing

g p g 175’ to 350’

Application of RF‐Safe Technology in ll h l Marcellus Shale

• How to

How to implement RP‐67 and RP 67, and more specifically specifically Radio Silence on Silence on location?

The answer was to show the cost benefits to the client

RF‐Safe Comparison Perfect World RF Safe Comparison Perfect World

1) Pumpdown in Well A (2.5 hours) ‐ Frac 1) Pumpdown in Well A (2.5 hours) ‐ Frac

Standard RF‐Safe

( ) Well B 2) Call for Radio Silence (45 min). Stop at surface wait ( ) Well B 2) Come back to surface – Frac is done p for frac to finish 3) Lay down gunstring, verify radio silence (15min). 3) Lay down gunstring – Frac begins (15) 4) Stab new string, Pick up and 4) Still Radio Silence, stab on to new gunstring (15 min) 5) Pick up and p equalize(30min)….r epeat TOTAL – 3:15 Daylight Operations – 4

40 stages standard: 13 3 days

equalize, RIH to 200 ft (30 min)….repeat TOTAL – 4:15 y g p stages / day = 13 hours

40 stages standard: 13.3 days 40 stages RF‐Safe: 10 days 3.3 day difference: Spread rate per day of ops (not including

Daylight Operations – 3 stages / day = 12:45 hours

anything on a per stage basis) $25,000 ‐ >$83,250 saved Cost or RF Safe: $40,000

Rf‐Safe Unintended Consequences Rf Safe Unintended Consequences

A little bit of a wiring issue – not hard, just not that easy Components like PX‐1 and RED introduce one more point for failure Thus, even though there was a safety and economic gain, some (or all at times) of the gain (or all at times) of the gain could be absorbed by the dreaded misrun l f Plugs not RF‐Safe

What about RF‐Safe Addressables What about RF Safe Addressables

• Wire complexity
• RF Safe guns and plug
• RF‐Safe guns and plug,

yes

• System can be checked

y

• n surface with test

box

• Case study data shows
• Case study data shows

far lower failure rates than other RF‐Safe systems

• SQ improved along

with Safety with Safety

Case Study – Client SQ KPIs All Misruns All Misruns

450 500 350 400

RF-Safe Addressable

RF‐Safe Only

250 300 100 150 200

Runs / MisRun Guns Fired / MisFire

50 100 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2009 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 -2009 Q3-2009 Q4-2009 Q1-2010 Q2-2010 Q3-2010 Q4-2010 Q1-2011 Q2-2011 Q3-2011 Q4-2011 Q1-2012

Marcellus Shale Horizontal Rigs vs. Nat d Gas Commodity Price

$6.00 200 160 180 $4.00 100 120 140

Horizontal Rig Count Commodity Price

60 80 $2.00 20 40 7‐Dec‐08 7‐Apr‐09 7‐Aug‐09 7‐Dec‐09 7‐Apr‐10 7‐Aug‐10 7‐Dec‐10 7‐Apr‐11 7‐Aug‐11 7‐Dec‐11

Rig counts from Rigdata, Wellhead price source EIA

RF‐Safe Addressables cost $ h $ d How can we pass that $ in a downturn

• It is easy if – operating company understands the total

cost of operations including impacts for SQ and HSE

• Client quote from last month

“ with the last project (34 stages) calculated a savings …with the last project (34 stages)…calculated a savings

• f 59.5 hours”

$25,000 per day spread ($61,975 – savings) $34,000 additional cost (Net savings $27,975) Safer Operations / Better SQ (less misruns, less fishing, etc) What is the real cost then? etc). What is the real cost then? The Results: Those companies that are running “Addressables” in the Marcellus are still growing despite the market despite the market.

Magic Shale“Bullet” – Maybe? Reactive Liner Charges in Shale Reactive Liner Charges in Shale

23 gram Reactive Liner GH Conventional 23g GH 0.54in. / 17.84 in.* 0.56 in. / 26.2 in.* Objective – Improve Hydraulic Fracturing Of Shale

Pictures from Section 2 Reactive Liner tests: 6‐Jun‐2011) * id d b f * Provided by manufacturer

(GH) vs (Reactive Liner) ( ) ( )

(GH) vs. Reactive Liner

GH vs. Reactive Liner

Reactive Liner (Limited) Results Reactive Liner (Limited) Results

• 30 tests performed

30 tests performed

• Reactive liner broke down formation either

the same or better (lower psi) the same or better (lower psi)

• After breakdown and frac begins – no

i bl diff appreciable difference

• So much for the magic bullet – for now