Tim Armitage

 Shale Gas Reservoir's  The problems with Shale Reservoirs  What is needed to Create a usable model  Possible solutions to Porosity calculations  Total Gas in place  Pore connectivity  Sweet spots  Sensitivity analysis  Conclusion

 Shale Gas Reservoir's need to contain kerogen

 No established database of key well data  Heterogeneous reservoir conditions create the need for multiple calculations of total gas in place  Kerogen: Gas storage  Micro fractures: core sample analysis

 Spontaneous Potential logs, Pressure, temperature, resistivity, gamma ray, neutron, sonic and density.  X-ray diffraction, X-ray fluorescence, fluid extraction, Nuclear magnetic resonance, Pyrolysis, and Pulse decay permeability readings from Core sampels.

 The equation below represents the relationship between total porosity and the many different density’s of the various shale gas components

 Tabel 3 shows the variation in calculations due to the need for exact values of the density of kerogen.

 Each reservoir zone needs its own set of average parameters. based on well specific core log data  Then the gas in place calculation can be used

 Nanopores- kerogin and intergranular shale  Micropores - intergranular shale  Macropores – “cleaner units of the reservoir”  Natural fractures

 Low water saturation with high TOC content  Low clay content  Higher porosity  Higher interparticle permeability  Low fracture initiation pressure

 Key parameters that have the greatest impact on the estimation of gas in place, productivity and hydraulic fracture design