West Virginia Geological & Economic Survey RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Michael Hohn, Susan Pool, and Jessica Moore West Virginia Geological & Economic Survey Title slide for each presenter’s section –blue/green rectangle border at top; major and minor headings, as per workshop agenda

Background Approaches to estimating hydrocarbon volumes for continuous unconventional reservoirs: Use production data to estimate recoverable resources directly Use geologic data to estimate original hydrocarbons-in-place from which recoverable resources can be determined Example slide with map graphics

Background All hydrocarbon that could be produced (varies): Technically recoverable (TRR)-- function of geology and technology Economically recoverable (ERR)--function of geology, technology, and economics All the hydrocarbon that exists (fixed): Original hydrocarbon-in-place (OHIP)--function of geology Example slide with map graphics Modified from Boswell

Assessment of Utica Shale Play Remaining Resources Title slide for each presenter’s section – major and minor headings, as per workshop agenda

Methodology Probability-based U.S. Geological Survey method Uses distributions for total assessment unit area, areas of sweet spots, EUR, and success rates Excludes wells already producing Monte Carlo sampling of distributions for mean, median, 5%, 95% values for total resource White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Steps Definition of total assessment units Delineation of minimum, median, maximum area of sweet spots Decline curve analysis for determining estimated ultimate recoveries Success ratios Drainage areas White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Assessment Units

Producing Oil Wells

Condensate/NGL Production

Producing Gas Wells

Definition of Assessment Units: Thermal Maturity Gas Prone Overmature Oil Prone Wet Gas

Definition of Assessment Units: Oil Sweet Spot

Definition of Assessment Units: Oil Sweet Spot

Definition of Assessment Units: Wet Gas Sweet Spot

Assessment Units and Sweet Spots Dry Gas Sweet Spot Maximum Wet Gas Sweet Spot Maximum Oil Sweet Spot Maximum Oil Sweet Spot Minimum Oil Sweet Spot Minimum Dry Gas Sweet Spot Minimum Wet Gas Sweet Spot Minimum

Estimated Ultimate Recovery

Estimated Ultimate Recovery Example slide with map graphics

Estimated Ultimate Recovery Example slide with map graphics

EUR Model Example slide with map graphics

EUR Distributions Oil AU (MMbo) Min Med Max Sweet Spot 0.022 0.199 0.628 Non Sweet Spot 0.002 0.049 Wet Gas AU (Bcf) Min Med Max Sweet Spot 0.64 5.76 18.84 Non Sweet Spot 0.20 1.19 White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Gas AU (Bcf) Min Med Max Sweet Spot 0.19 7.09 30.37 Non Sweet Spot 0.039 0.32

Success Rates Oil AU (%) Min Med Max Sweet Spot 90 95 99 Non Sweet Spot 1 3 5 Wet Gas AU (%) Min Med Max Sweet Spot 90 95 99 Non Sweet Spot 5 10 40 White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Gas AU (%) Min Med Max Sweet Spot 90 95 99 Non Sweet Spot 5 10 40

Wet Gas Assessment Unit Results Oil Assessment Unit OIL MMbo Gas Bcf F95 F50 F5 Mean Sweet Spot 733 1,677 3,744 1,908 2,231 6,636 17,722 7,949 NonSweet Spot 23 49 91 52 69 191 446 216 Total 791 1,728 3,788 1,960 2,370 6,858 17,960 8,165 Wet Gas Assessment Unit   23,840 49,601 106,550 55,980 99 379 1,023 447 24,484 50,037 106,852 56,427 Gas Assessment Unit 220,473 590,680 1,542,873 710,341 2,862 6,584 13,835 7,238 228,478 598,026 1,549,586 717,579 White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

ORIGINAL IN-PLACE RESOURCES Assessment of Utica Shale Play In-Place Resources using Volumetric Approach Title slide for each presenter’s section – major and minor headings, as per workshop agenda

Purpose Estimate original hydrocarbon-in-place volumes for selected stratigraphic units Determine general overall hydrocarbon distribution Examine key parameters that may impact hydrocarbon distribution Example slide with map graphics

Methodology and Data Use geologic data and volumetric approach to estimate total original hydrocarbon-in-place (OHIP): OHIP = Free + Adsorbed Example slide with map graphics

Methodology and Data Use geologic data and volumetric approach to estimate total original hydrocarbon-in-place (OHIP): OHIP = Free + Adsorbed Free Hydrocarbon-in-Place OGIPfree = (feff * (1-Sw) * (1-Qnc) * Hfm * Ar * 4.346*10-5 ) / FVFg OOIPfree = (feff * (1-Sw) * Hfm * Ar * 7758) / FVFo Adsorbed Hydrocarbon-in-Place OGIPadsorb = Gc * rfm * Hfm * Ar * 1.3597*10-6 ?OOIPadsorb= S2 * 0.001 * rfm * Hfm * Ar * 7758 Example slide with map graphics

Methodology and Data Hfm , rfm , f, and Sw are derived from Utica Project well logs with f and Sw adjusted for Vsh and Vker TOC is from Utica Project sample/well log data Gc is from publicly-available isotherms given TOC and pressure FVF is derived from Utica Project well logs and other publicly-available data given temperature, pressure, and gas compressibility White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Methodology and Data Identify and select wells meeting approach criteria Examine stratigraphic picks and well log data Select and extract well log data Compile and derive additional required data Process data and estimate volumes Correct and refine data Example slide with map graphics

Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Methodology and Data Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Searching for: Utica, Point Pleasant, Logana penetrations Top depth no less than 2,500 feet (initial); ~3,000 feet (final) Digital well logs with, at minimum, gamma ray, bulk density/porosity, resistivity traces Vertical non-faulted wells Even geographic distribution White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Methodology and Data Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Digital logs for wells with Utica, Point Pleasant, and/or Logana identified plus top depth greater than 2500 feet White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Methodology and Data Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Full suite digital logs for wells with Utica, Point Pleasant, and/or Logana identified plus top depth greater than 2500 feet White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Note: Limited digital well log data Methodology and Data Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Full suite digital logs for wells with Utica, Point Pleasant, and/or Logana identified plus top depth greater than 2500 feet White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Note: Limited digital well log data

Methodology and Data Step 1—Identify and Select Wells Thermal maturity as determined from equivalent %Ro Determined level of maturity for selected wells based on equivalent %Ro map Divided in-place assessment into gas and oil regions Assumed single phase in each hydrocarbon region White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Methodology and Data Step 2—Examine Stratigraphic Picks and Logs Example digital well log data with stratigraphic units identified; used to review log availability through units plus assess log quality White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Methodology and Data Step 3—Select and Extract Log Data Example digital well log data with stratigraphic units identified; used to review log availability through units plus assess log quality Log data: Gamma ray Density and porosity Resistivity Temperature TOC White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Notes: Normalized Sample interval=0.5 feet

Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Including: Total Organic Carbon Pressure Volume of Shale Temperature Gas Content White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Mean total organic carbon (%) for Utica Shale as derived from Consortium analytical data White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides TOC

Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Mean total organic carbon (%) for Point Pleasant Formation as derived from Consortium analytical data White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides TOC

Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Mean total organic carbon (%) for Logana Member of Trenton Limestone as derived from Consortium analytical data White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides TOC

Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Had limited reservoir pressure data. From formation-specific well data for WV and OH, Consortium partner input, and publicly-available data; assumed pressure gradients (psi/ft) of: 0.433 for NY and 0.6 for remaining area except... 0.5 in very small portion of southern NY 0.7 in small portion of north central PA 0.7-0.9 in small area including southwestern PA, northern WV panhandle, and east central OH White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Pressure

Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Corrected for volume of shale as extracted from: X-ray diffraction (XRD) data Maps from XRD data Gamma ray well logs plus XRD data White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Volume of Shale

Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Temperature gradient as derived from the National Geothermal Project data White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Temperature

Methodology and Data Step 4—Compile and Derive Additional Data Gas content determined from publicly-available isotherms given total organic carbon (TOC) and pressure CH4 isotherm for NY Isotherm used for NY, majority of PA, and WV given TOC and pressure CH4 isotherm for various states Isotherm used for OH given TOC and pressure Isotherm values from NY and OH averaged for northwestern corner of PA given TOC and pressure White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Gas Content Advanced Resources International, Inc.

Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Estimate effective porosity Estimate water saturation Estimate formation volume factor Estimate free hydrocarbon volumes Estimate adsorbed hydrocarbon volumes White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Porosity Notes: Determined density porosity from bulk density or used density porosity Used both density and neutron porosity if available Corrected for Vsh as extracted from XRD data, maps from XRD data, and gamma ray well logs+XRD data Corrected for Vker as extracted from maps assuming linear relationship between TOC and Vker White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Water Saturation Notes: Used Simandoux equation Used A=1, M=1.7, and N=1.7 Corrected for Vsh as extracted from XRD data, maps from XRD data, and gamma ray well logs+XRD data Corrected for Vker as extracted from maps assuming linear relationship between TOC and Vker White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Additional Notes: Used TOC from Utica Project analytical data and maps rather than using TOC from Passey method White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides

Original In-Place Resources, Average Volumes Per Unit Area Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Preliminary summary results Stratigraphic Unit Original In-Place Resources, Average Volumes Per Unit Area Oil (MMbo/mi2)* Gas (Bcf/mi2)* Utica Shale 20.8 53.5 Point Pleasant Formation 15.8 85.1 Logana Member of Trenton Limestone 3.0 17.0 White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides * = average volume per square mile in the sweet spot area; sweet spot area is as defined to estimate remaining recoverable resources using the probabilistic (USGS-style) approach

Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Utica Shale original in-place volumes per unit area, preliminary summary results DISCLAIMER: This map is a preliminary draft which reflects data and analyses current as of July 14, 2015. The volumetric calculations and derivative maps will likely change as additional data become available and techniques are refined.  Users are cautioned that this map represents only a best estimate of trends given limited available data and should not be used as a stand-alone product. White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides average volume per square mile in the sweet spot area; sweet spot area is as defined to estimate remaining recoverable resources using the probabilistic (USGS-style) approach Supplemental Slide 1

Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Point Pleasant Formation original in-place volumes per unit area, preliminary summary results DISCLAIMER: This map is a preliminary draft which reflects data and analyses current as of July 14, 2015. The volumetric calculations and derivative maps will likely change as additional data become available and techniques are refined.  Users are cautioned that this map represents only a best estimate of trends given limited available data and should not be used as a stand-alone product. White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides average volume per square mile in the sweet spot area; sweet spot area is as defined to estimate remaining recoverable resources using the probabilistic (USGS-style) approach Supplemental Slide 2

Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Logana Member of Trenton Limestone original in-place volumes per unit area, preliminary summary results DISCLAIMER: This map is a preliminary draft which reflects data and analyses current as of July 14, 2015. The volumetric calculations and derivative maps will likely change as additional data become available and techniques are refined.  Users are cautioned that this map represents only a best estimate of trends given limited available data and should not be used as a stand-alone product. White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides average volume per square mile in the sweet spot area; sweet spot area is as defined to estimate remaining recoverable resources using the probabilistic (USGS-style) approach Supplemental Slide 3

Original In-Place Resources, Methodology and Data Step 5—Process Data and Estimate Volumes Preliminary summary results Stratigraphic Unit Original In-Place Resources, Total Volumes Oil (MMbo)* Gas (Bcf)* Utica Shale 43,508 1,098,119 Point Pleasant Formation 33,050 1,745,803 Logana Member of Trenton Limestone 6,345 348,476 White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides * = estimated volume in the sweet spot area; sweet spot area is as defined to estimate remaining recoverable resources using the probabilistic (USGS-style) approach

Comparison of Results Resources Oil (MMbo)* Gas (Bcf)* Recoverable Resources 2,611 889,972 Original In-Place Resources 82,903 3,192,398 Current Recovery Factors 3% 28% White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides * = estimated volume in the sweet spot area; sweet spot area is as defined to estimate remaining recoverable resources using the probabilistic (USGS-style) approach

Issues Limited amount of full-suite well log data especially for Pennsylvania and West Virginia Limited formation pressure data Limited core data for log-to-core calibration White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Supplemental Slide 4

Potential Future Work Incorporate additional data from supplemental sources (e.g. IHS) Incorporate additional data from wells with less than full suites of log data Investigate additional data processing techniques Conduct sensitivity analysis Update EUR’s and sweet spots as play develops White background, dark blue text, and Arial font type to be used for all slides Supplemental Slide 5