u.s. shale reserves and production

34
Tinker, 2013 Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin IOGCC Nov, 2013 U.S. Shale Reserves and Production Scott W. Tinker John Browning, Svetlana Ikonnikova , William Fisher, Qilong Fu, Gürcan Gülen, Susan Horvath, Frank Male, Ken Medlock, Tad Patzek, Eric Potter, Forrest Roberts, and Katie Smye

Upload: others

Post on 12-Feb-2022

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Tinker, 2013

Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin

IOGCC Nov, 2013

U.S. Shale

Reserves and Production

Scott W. Tinker

John Browning, Svetlana Ikonnikova , William Fisher, Qilong Fu,

Gürcan Gülen, Susan Horvath, Frank Male, Ken Medlock, Tad Patzek, Eric Potter, Forrest Roberts, and Katie Smye

Tinker, 2013

The Role of Shale

Reserves and Production Forecasting

Implications and Considerations

Outline

Tinker, 2013

U.S. Energy Mix (%)

QAd8174

Source: EIA, 2012

Oil

Natural gas

Coal

Nuclear energy

Hydro electricity

Renewables

Tinker, 2013

U.S. Energy Mix (%)

QAd8174

Source: EIA, 2012

Oil

Natural gas

Coal

Nuclear energy

Hydro electricity

Renewables

Oil

Natural gas

Coal

Nuclear energy

Hydro electricity

Renewables

Tinker, 2013

Th

ou

sa

nd

ba

rre

ls/y

ear

From: James D. Hamilton, Working Paper 17759, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2012

Annual US Oil Production Annual US Oil Production

Tinker, 2013

Long-Term Oil Supply Resources and Cost

0 2000 4000 10,000 6000 8000

140

20

0

Resources (billion barrels)

Pro

du

cti

on

co

st

(2

00

8 $

)

MB

/d

Coal

to

liquids

Gas

to

liquids

Oil shales

Shale oil

Pro-

duced MENA

Other conventional

oil

Deepwater and

ultra-deepwater

40

60

80

100

120

Heavy

oil

&

bitumen

EOR

Arctic

CO2 EOR

140

100

120

Source: IEA World Energy Outlook (2009)

2X

Tinker, 2013

Monterey Woodford/Anadarko

Utica Barnett

Uinta Niobrara

Permian Midland

Permian Delaware Granite wash

Eagle Ford

Bakken

2010 U.S. SHALE LIQUIDS

PROJECTION 5

4

3

2

1

0

2010

U.S

sh

ale

liq

uid

s p

roje

cte

d g

row

th

.(M

bp

d)

2012 2014 2016 2018 2022 2020

After Morse et. al., 2012, Energy 2020: North America, the new Middle

East: Citi GPS: Global Perspectives & Solutions, figure 14, p. 17.

QAe465

3.8 mmbod by 2022…

10% IRR: $44/bbl

10% IRR: $50/bbl

10% IRR: $68/bbl

10% IRR: $44/bbl

10% IRR: $50/bbl

10% IRR: $51/bbl

IRR Source: Rystad Energy

Tinker, 2012

US Shale and Tight Oil Production

QAe2254

0.0

2.0

2.5

2007 2009

Year

2011 2013

1.5

1.0

Milli

on

ba

rre

ls p

er

da

y

0.5

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Bonespring (TX Permian)

B a kk en ( ND )

E a g l e F o r d ( T X )

Granite Wash (OK and TX)

Wolfcamp (TX Permian)

Monterey (CA)

Niobrara-Codell (CO)

Sprayberry (TX Permian)

Austin Chalk (LA and TX)

Woodford (OK)

Right on Pace…

Tinker, 2013

Annual US Oil Production

From: James D. Hamilton, Working Paper 17759, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2012

1.4 Bby

shale oil

by 2022

Th

ou

sa

nd

ba

rre

ls/y

ear

Tinker, 2013

Natural Gas Supply

Resources and Cost

QAe980

Source: IEA World Energy Outlook (2009)

0 100 200 400 300 500 1,000 1,100 600 700 800 900

Resources (trillion cubic meters)

Pro

du

cti

on

co

st

(200

8 $

/Mb

tu)

LNG

Sour

Arc

tic

De

ep

Wa

ter

Shale C

oa

l B

ed

M

eth

an

e

Pro

du

ce

d

Co

nv

en

tio

na

l

Tight

15

10

5

0

4X

Tinker, 2013

5

10

15

20

25

30

Mark

ete

d P

rod

ucti

on

(Tcf)

0 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Pro

ved

Reserv

es (T

cf)

U.S. Natural Gas Production and Reserves

Data: BP World Energy 2012

End-of-Year

U.S. Proved Reserves

Annual

U.S. Production

Tinker, 2013

U.S. Natural Gas Production (TcF)

http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/about_shale_gas.cfm

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Shale gas

Coalbed methane

Tight gas

Non-associated offshore Alaska

Associated with oil

Non-associated onshore

14 TcF

9 TcF

23 TcF

Tinker, 2013

U.S. Natural Gas Production (TcF)

http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/about_shale_gas.cfm

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Shale gas

Coalbed methane

Tight gas

Non-associated offshore Alaska

Associated with oil

Non-associated onshore

14 TcF

9 TcF

23 TcF Conventional Gas

Total Natural Gas

From a 2004 Tinker Talk to the IPAA US Natural Gas 2004 forecast

Unconventional Gas

1949 1955 1961 1967 1973 1979 1985 1991 1997 2003 2009 2015

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

An

nu

al

Na

tura

l G

as P

rod

ucti

on

(B

cf)

EIA (1949-1990) and NPC (1991-2015)

15 TcF

10 TcF

25 TcF

An Anticipated Evolution

Tinker, 2013

0

30

35

2007 2009 Year

2011 2013

25

20

Billio

n c

ub

ic f

eet

per

day

10

5

15

Woodford (OK)

Bakken (ND) Eagle Ford (TX)

Rest of US

Fayetteville (AR)

Haynesville (LA and TX)

Barnett (TX) Antrim (MI, IM, and OH)

Marcellus (PA and WV)

10

TcF

/Year

5

2013 Dry Shale Gas Production

QAe2255 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Tinker, 2013

2013 Dry Shale Gas Production

QAe2255 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Model: Rice University, Medlock, 2012

Actual

Tinker, 2013

2013 Dry Shale Gas Production

2010 forecast is low to actual. Why?

In spite of continued popular prognostications

about the poor economics of shale, the reality is

that parts of several basins are economic, and

technology and price allow for continued drilling

and production.

Rigorous, integrated, bottom-up geologic,

engineering and economic studies provide a

realistic look at the future.

Tinker, 2013

The Role of Shale

Reserves and Production Forecasting

Implications and Considerations

Outline

Tinker, 2013

Reserves and Production

Forecasting

3-year project, funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

Multidisciplinary team of geoscientists, engineers, and economists.

Four plays: Barnett, Fayetteville, Haynesville, Marcellus

Rapidly developing, some mature, others just starting

Uncertainties about well performance and drivers

Low price environment

Bureau of Economic Geology Program

Goal: Contribute to the objective understanding of

the capability of U.S. shale gas to contribute to

natural gas supply for the next 20 years

Tinker, 2013

Framing Questions

What is the resource base in place?

What portion of that resource is recoverable?

What pace of drilling activity will be necessary to sustain production at various levels?

How achievable is this activity level, given advances in technology and prices?

What impact will these levels of production have on infrastructure, roads, water, regulation, jobs, taxes…

Tinker, 2013

U.S. Shale Gas Plays

Tinker, 2013

Orange dots are 20 nm in diameter

T.P. Sims #2; 7625’

200 nm

0.2 m

After Reed, BEG

Barnett Shale

Nanopores in Organics

Tinker, 2013

Ikonnikova S., et al. 2013. SPE Res. Eval & Eng (resubmitted)

Tinker, 2013

Barnett Production Outlook

Model forecast

was accurate

for 2011-2012

~15,000 wells ~11,000 wells ~3,000 wells

Browning, J. et al. 2013. SPE Econ & Mgmt

Tinker, 2013

Economic Production Distribution

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045

0.050

29 34 39 44 49 55 60 65 70

Re

lati

ve

Fre

qu

en

cy

Cumulative Production (Tcf)

Barnett

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045

0.050

29 34 39 44 49 55 60 65 70

Re

lati

ve

Fre

qu

en

cy

Cumulative Production (Tcf)

35 Tcf

56 Tcf

45 Tcf

Browning, J. et al. 2013. SPE Econ & Mgmt

Tinker, 2013

The Role of Shale

Reserves and Production Forecasting

Implications and Considerations

Outline

Tinker, 2013

After Nicot and Wolaver, BEG, 2013

Unconventional Reservoirs

Tinker, 2013

After Nicot and Wolaver, BEG, 2013

Unconventional Reservoirs

1000’s of Feet of Rock

Tinker, 2013

Unconventional Reservoirs

Tinker, 2013

Emissions Considerations

Infrared cameras and Organic/Toxic Vapor Analyzer to detect leaks

Electric or CNG motors

“Green completions”

Well pad location to account for wind

Capture gas and limit flaring/venting

After Nicot and Wolaver, BEG, 2013

Tinker, 2013

Water Considerations

Harvest rain water (impoundments)

Re-use and recycle brackish, flowback and formation water

Chemicals that perform with high TDS

Biodegradable chemicals

“Dry” fracturing

After Nicot and Wolaver, BEG, 2013

Tinker, 2013

Surface Considerations

Location selection

Noise control/sound barriers

Mobile water tanks and centralized impoundments instead of pits

Use of waste heat/stranded natural gas

Well pad footprint

Re-vegetate pad to limit erosion

Multi-well pads After Nicot and Wolaver, BEG, 2013

Tinker, 2013

Subsurface Considerations

Cement all gas producing zones

Subsurface characterization for disposal

Disclosure of all chemicals

Baseline data ahead of drilling Thermal

Chemical

Conductive

Hydro

Seismic

After Nicot and Wolaver, BEG, 2013

Tinker, 2013 Unconventional Summary

“Trade Offs”

Environmental Risks and Impacts Traffic/noise/light

Surface

Groundwater

Quakes

Local and atmospheric emissions

Energy Security and Economic Benefits Available

Affordable

Reliable

Atmospheric emissions

Jobs and Taxes

These are not mutually exclusive!

Tinker, 2013

• Balance of Trade

Exports: Natural gas, liquids, products

Imports: Oil

• Regulation and Planning

Infrastructure

Resources

Permitting

• Emissions

• Energy Security

Unconventional Reservoirs Implications