unconventional hydrocarbonsin poland – dissapointmentor a ......shale gas prospecting in poland -...

www.pgi.gov.pl

Polish Geological Institute

National Research Institute

Unconventionalhydrocarbons in Poland –dissapointment ora lesson for future?

GRZEGORZ PIEŃKOWSKI Polish Geological InstituteNational Research Institute

www.pgi.gov.pl



EU and Poland - energy security – high ratio of

hydrocarbons dependency

www.pgi.gov.pl



Polish present energy mix

Source: EU Commission, EnergyStatistics, update: Jun-15

www.pgi.gov.pl



Poland’s Energy Policy 2050 –

Aug’15 draft

Main goals• Improvement of Poland’s energy security• Growth of economy’s competitiveness and energy

efficiency• Minimalisation of the energy sector environmental

impact

3 Scenarios:• Sustainable• Alternative – nuclear• Alternative – natural gas + Renewables

www.pgi.gov.pl



www.pgi.gov.pl



Unconventional hydrocarbons

www.pgi.gov.pl



Conventional and unconventional hydrocarbons - the same kind of

source rock – hydrocarbons migration makes the difference

conventional

unconventional

www.pgi.gov.pl



Main screening criteria for gas/oil plays

in siliciclastic source rocks - “shale gas/oil”• Presence of conventional hydrocarbons in the basin• Present day Total Organic Carbon (TOC) contents > 2.0 %• Gas saturation and presure caused by hydrocarbon generation• Net thickness of hydrocarbon bearing interval > 15 meters• Preferably marine organic matter• Right thermal maturity („thermometer” Ro > 1.1 %, < 3.5 %)• High silica/carbonate contents, low clay mineral contents – high

brittleness

• Low burial depth (

www.pgi.gov.pl



European onshore resources and the Polish Basin – on this

map from 2012 still marked as a whole of a „high potential”

www.pgi.gov.pl



Short geological introduction - Upper Ordovician – Lower Silurian (c. 430 – 450 Mya) – our main (geological) time of interest in Poland

www.pgi.gov.pl



Polish Basin as a part of trans-European

Caledonian basinCaledonian foredeep basin extends beyond Poland

(Oczlon, 2007)

Baltic Basin

Lublin Basin

www.pgi.gov.pl



Big hopes, then greatdisparities in estimations

Polish shale belt (although generally thick) is far from being uniform in terms of shale gasproperties – this resulted in these dramatically different estimations, (still based on

archival materials!)

Although still limited, (70 wells, of which just 12 hydraulically fractured), the new data allowed better understanding of the shale play in Poland – and actually may tell us what

we can expect elsewhere in Europe

150 Bcm a year! Same amount as Europe importsfrom Gasprom! Thatstirred imagination and entry into Poland of ExxonMobil and other giants.

Recovery factors based on multiple analogous North American shale plays !!!

www.pgi.gov.pl



Shale gas prospecting in Poland - list of completed bor eholes with well stimulation indicated(for 01.01.2015 r.)

Kind of well stimulationNumber of vertical

boreholesNumber of boreholes with

horizontal sectionsTotal

Hydraulic fracturing 13 12 25

Only microfracturing / DFIT* 4 0 4

No hydraulic fracturing 37 4 41

Total 54 16 70

DFIT – Diagnostic Fracture Injection Test

This nubmber is highest in Europe, but very low when comparedto American figures

Still on the way towards first success…

24500 m3/day (achieved in one borehole), and 11.000 to 15.000 in few others -it is not enough to keep a big company in Poland – to mee t the global standards, they would expect at least three times more…

www.pgi.gov.pl



14

Shale gas/oil prone – 700 m

Eifel Tower

Ordovician

Lower Silurian

Hydraulic fracturing – 2894 – 2907 m

PGNiG Lubocino 1 welland main geological targets

www.pgi.gov.pl



THERE IS NO THICK, UNIFORM, HYDROCARBON – RICH, SHALE BELT ACROSS POLAND - ALTHOUGH AT A

FIRST GLANCE IT SEEMED TO BE THE CASE…

IN QUEST FOR SWEET SPOTS

www.pgi.gov.pl



After: Ottmann & Bohacs

WHAT IS SWEET SPOT?

= Pressure

www.pgi.gov.pl



Going West for dry gas - with deeper burial, higher temperatures and

pressures – however, the depth of target intervals is also increasing…

Oil proneGas prone

Lublin Basin Batlic basin

Lublin Basin

Batlic basin

Maturity map

www.pgi.gov.pl



SCREENING OF AN ORDOVICIAN TARGET BASED ON EXISTING WELLS WITH A HIGHER AVERAGE ORGANIC MATTER (TOC) – HIGHER TOC ALONE IS NOT ENOUGH

Compiled by Adam Wójcicki

? offshore

GoodAverage

IN EACH TARGET INTERVAL:

Thickness - potential volume of gas-in-place+ Composition of bulk rock (carbonate, quartz, total clay) –

brittleness, susceptibility to hydraulic fracturing+ Total organic carbon (TOC) – generation of hydrocarbons____________________________________________________= POTENTIAL SWEET SPOT (however, you have to be lucky to have all these delights occurring together in one place)

After all, the depth of potential sweet spot is alsoimportant – the deeper, the higher the cost

1

www.pgi.gov.pl



A problem: high clay content

Smectite group of clay minerals is particularly unwanted , as theseminerals swell in contact with water, clogging the fract ures

www.pgi.gov.pl



HOW TO BREAK POLISH SHALES?

(a hint: more detailedgeological investigations )

www.pgi.gov.pl



Prehaps, let’s find the spots where the Mother Nature di d the job? In places, tectonized zones can be the most productive one s! A hintfrom China (Fuling field)

After: GUO Tonglou, ZHANG Hanrong

Naturally formed fracturesat the crest of anticline = hydrocarbon pathway to wellbore – enhancement of gas flow into the well

www.pgi.gov.pl



AT FIRST, VERY CAREFUL GEOLOGICAL RESEARCHRegional seismic section, Baltic Basin, Silurian sequence and teconics (Krzywiec et al., 2013)

Lublin Basin is more intensively tectonised – also Carboni ferous may be attractive

Diminishing thickness, less organic carbon, but morecarbonate or silica content – better brittleness

www.pgi.gov.pl



In search for sweetspots – combination of different parameters, paleoceanography, enhanced geological maping

Higher brittlenessMore organic carbon

www.pgi.gov.pl



More effective fracturing, adjusted to local geology - one fracturing linking

two formations – chance to exploit at once separated gas-bearing intervals

(BNK Gapowo well)

Thin organic-rich shale, gas bearing interval

Thin organic-rich shale, gas bearing interval

10-15 m(toothin)

10-15 m(toothin)

Barren marlstoneswell

This situation may be quite common in geological reality - application of thismethod needs a very high pecision in the well guidance and sometimesheavier hydraulical pressures applied. If separating rock represents non-permeable sandstone, combination of shale and tight gas may occur

Sasino Fm.

Jantar Mb.

Prabuty Fm.

www.pgi.gov.pl



Breaking clay-rich shales - massive fracturing (example from China)

Liquid CO2 fracturing? Is it real solution for clayey s hales?

OrdosBasin, Gao Ruimin, YanchangPetroleum

However, it is likely that the applicable technologies have already been captured, and the possible innovations will not bring dramatic progress

www.pgi.gov.pl



CONCLUSIONS FOR EUROPE

www.pgi.gov.pl



North America vs Poland – and Europe – note the sheer s caleof American basins and shale reservoir properties

Polish BasinMain American basins

www.pgi.gov.pl



Polish Silurian shales represents a wide spectrum - other shales

in Europe are within this spectrum (after D. Jarvie, 2012)

Polish Silurian

German Lower Jurassic

www.pgi.gov.pl



We expect that shale play geology in Poland will be similar to other European basins

• Hydrocarbons in the Paleozoic basins of Central Europe werecommonly generated during Variscan time, rising uncertainty

as for gas retention

• Thermal maturity often is not high enough for dry gas, andconsiderable parts of the analyzed basins might have liquids

and oil potential

• European Paleozoic basins with shale gas/oil potential are oftentectonically deformed, causing technological challenges - but in some

places tectonical deformations can help

• In Poland (and elsewhere in Europe) thickness of TOC rich layer (and net pay) is often low

• In Poland (and often in other basins) clay mineral content is relatively high, while brittle mineral content is low

www.pgi.gov.pl



Productivity - American success, European reality

A range to be expected in Polish (and European) basins?

Top 3 plays= 66%

www.pgi.gov.pl



Polish Geological InstituteNational Research Institute

Dr. Monika KonieczyńskaDr. Małgorzata Woźnicka

www.pgi.gov.pl



NOISEGASES & DUSTS

PRESSURERESPONSE

WASTESWATER

SOIL

Geological conditions

LANDSCAPE

The aim of the research32

www.pgi.gov.pl



Geological conditions

1

2

Level of HydraulicFracturing

Silu

rian

Sea

ling

Com

plex

ZechsteinSealing Complex1000

2000

3000

m bgl

Pomerania Region

Lublin Region

1387 m


857 m

840 m


1000

2000

1000

2000

33

www.pgi.gov.pl



Seismometric survey

Syczyn

Zawada

Gapowo

No quakes caused by rock cracking downholeregistered on ground surface during boreholesstimulation.

Some vibrations generated by high-volumes pumpsoperations did not exceed values considered assave by Polish construction standards and did notaffect building stability or work conditions inbuildings.

Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences

Central Mining Institute

34

Łebień

www.pgi.gov.pl



Air emissions

Test siteSO2 NOx Methane

C2-C12hydrocarbons

VOC BTEX Benzen

[µg/m3]

Value of reference averaged for 1 h

350 200 nr 3000 nn 850 30

Lubocino 169 (t) 109 (t) 10108 (t) 7620 (t) 11177 (t) 23,5 (t) 6,0 (t)

Stare Miasto 815 (f) 105 (f) 1300 (f) 2900 (f) 5500 (f) 485 (f)

www.pgi.gov.pl



Technological fluidsComponent

Fracturing fluid Flowback

mg/l

Ba 0,0000963 – 2,02 0,00128 – 59,50

Ca 0,0018 – 3,15 0,23 – 199,56

Cs 0,0008 – 0,17 0,00161– 54,57

K 0,0822 – 289,28 1,67 – 86,68

Na 0,0782 – 36,29 0,84 – 601,65

Se 0,0904 – 1,40 0,0419 – 40,58

Sr 0,000894 – 0,89 0,00088 – 23,45

Ag 0,0008 – 0,0119 0,0113 – 0,0304

Al 0,000849 – 0,9 0,0152 – 2,36

As 0,00876 – 0,12 0,00552 – 1,1

Cd 0,000974 – 0,000144 0,0077 – 0,012

S 0,00673 – 21,71 0,43 – 120,36

RadioactivityFracturing fluid Flowback

Bq/kg

40 K

www.pgi.gov.pl



Groundwater reserves versus water consumption for fracturing purposes

Test site

Available

groundwater

resources

Reserve

groundwater

resources Fracturing water

withdrawal

%

of available

groundwater

resources used for

fracturing purposes

%of reserve

groundwaterresources used for

fracturing purposes (as of 2012)

103 m3/year 103 m3/year 103 m3 % %

Lubocino 110 650 56 161 7.967 0.007 0.014

Stare Miasto 111 930 103 737 3.212 0.003 0.00319

Syczyn 79 034 66 476 37.849 0.05 0.057

Wysin 119 951 107 375 No fracturing

Zawada 256 792 213 472 1.284 0.0005 0.0006

Łebień 208 828 190 539 17.322 0.008 0.009

Gapowo 110 650 56 161 25.360 0.023 0.045

37

www.pgi.gov.pl



Conclusions

• Shale gas exploration activities generate mainly short time impact (noise) on the environment, also easy to minimaze, providing that all HSE standards

and best operation practice with special regard to local conditions are

implemented.

• The study showed no negative impact of exploration on the surface and groundwater quality in the observed period of time.

• No indirect impact on water-dependent ecosystems was detected.

• Gas and dust emissions from drilling equipment are not significant, GHG emissions not measured, difficult to estimate.

• Flowback chemical characteristics is site-specific and depend both on frack fluid composition and local geochemistry of stimulated formation

38

www.pgi.gov.pl



Recommendations:• Special concern should be put on waste management, as high quantities of

drilling wastes, flowback and produced water might pose hazards to natural

environment on site and elsewhere.

• Ensuring safety of the environment and sufficient public perception and safety in production areas will require an adequate control of technical

operations and the establishment of uniform monitoring system. Further exploratory/production operations should be preceded by:

• site specific water supply study (incl. alternative water sources)

• baseline status of surface and groundwater (quality and quantity),

• background concentrations of methane in groundwater,

• baseline concentrations of methane in soil gas.

39

www.pgi.gov.pl



General public opinion support

www.pgi.gov.pl



WHAT ABOUT OTHER UNCONVENTIONAL

RESOURCES?

www.pgi.gov.pl



OTHER UNCONVENTIONAL HYDROCARBONS IN POLAND – TIGHT GAS

Tight gas

Coal Bed Methane

CONVENTIONAL TIGHT GAS

www.pgi.gov.pl



Tight gas, Poland: undiscovered (risked) GIP values for the reservoir formations of Rotliegend, Carboniferous and Cambrian; given in Tcf.

Reservoir formation Depth[m] b.s.l. Minimum [Tcf] Best estimate [Tcf] Maximum [Tcf]

I – Permian (Rotliegend)sandstones

5500-6000or 5100-6000

3.57or 7.62

12.18or 28.66

31.21or 81.47

II – Carboniferoussandstones

1800-3500 15.99 40.22 99.62

III – Cambrian sandstones 2800-3100 0.60 1.34 2.82

TOTAL-

20.16÷24.22 53.94÷70.42 133.65÷183.91

www.pgi.gov.pl



CBM (Coal Bed Methane) – the first coal hydraulic fracturingoperation in a working coal mine (Wesoła, Poland)

Recoverable resources in Poland – c. 170 billion m3 (bcm)Current emission of CH4 – 660 million m

3/year, 190 million m3 – captured

Safety – 64 casualties since 2000 Climate impact - 660 million m3 of CH4 = approximately 15,5 billion m

3 of CO2

www.pgi.gov.pl



Final conclusions:EU is still in early exploration phase. Poland and currently England are the only two countries in Europe having scenario of possible economic growth, based on shale gas production. We cannot simply adapt neither U.S. (exceptionally good geological conditions, different regulatory framework, environmental issues), nor (subsidised) Chinese shale gas exploration experiences, as a model for Europe (although, in terms of geology China is more compatible).

HOWEVER:

Today’s pessimism about shale gas in Poland reflects (in a reversed sense) the early frenzy- and is just as overblown

Currently, we can map more accurately early commercial potential of the Polish shales, there is alsoa progress in gas output results, so we are on a learning curve. There is still no substitute for ‘learning-by-doing’, i.e. the knowledge that comes from drilling and completing wells.

Higher amounts of condensate/oil than anticipated, whereas natural gas production is lower than had been hoped. Importantly, wet gas (higher content of natural gas liquids) is economically attractive

Forget about 150 bcm/year – as originally hoped for. But even 5 bcm/year might be important (itwould be a 1/3 of current annual consumption in Poland). Tight gas and CBM can provide additionalproduction, and conventional accumulations can be associated with unconventional plays. Many hitherto reports are strongly oriented to think in a way of production from conventional gas reserves –which is a misleading approach. In a sense, Polish experience can serve as a hugedemonstration project for the rest of Europe. No long- lasting impact of hydraulic fracturing on environment has been observed.

unconventional hydrocarbonsin poland – dissapointmentor a ......shale gas prospecting in poland -...

Documents