1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

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

5. 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

6. 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

7. Assessment Units

8. Producing Oil Wells

9. Condensate/NGL Production

10. Producing Gas Wells

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

12. Definition of Assessment Units: Oil Sweet Spot

13. Definition of Assessment Units: Oil Sweet Spot

14. Definition of Assessment Units: Wet Gas Sweet Spot

15. 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

16. Estimated Ultimate Recovery

17. Estimated Ultimate Recovery
Example slide with map graphics

18. Estimated Ultimate Recovery
Example slide with map graphics

19. EUR Model
Example slide with map graphics

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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 * *10-6
?OOIPadsorb= S2 * * rfm * Hfm * Ar * 7758
Example slide with map graphics

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. 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

38. 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

39. 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

40. 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
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

41. 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

42. 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

43. 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.

44. 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

45. 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

46. 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

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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

51. 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

52. 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

53. 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

54. 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

55. 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