10.1007/s40095-020-00367-9

Twelve years of unconventional oil and gas development: production performance and economic analysis

  • M. E. Wigwe*1,
  • A. Giussani1,
  • M. C. Watson1,
  1. Bob. L. Herd Department of Petroleum Engineering, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, US

Published in Issue 2021-02-10

How to Cite

Wigwe, M. E., Giussani, A., & Watson, M. C. (2021). Twelve years of unconventional oil and gas development: production performance and economic analysis. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering, 12(2 (June 2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-020-00367-9
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Abstract Unconventional formations have been actively developed in the US since 2008. However, it is challenging to quantify the impact of technological advancement and geology on production. In addition, the economics of unconventionals is not well-understood. In this paper, we studied five major unconventional formations in the US: the Bakken, Eagleford, Haynesville, Marcellus, and Wolfcamp formations. We used historical data to quantify the impact of technological and geological variations on production. To accomplish this, we identified four phases of unconventional development over the past 12 years during which drilling and completion technology, initial investment, and commodity prices were similar: Phases 1–4. Using statistical analysis, we compared well performance of each phase. Then, we generated type curves for each phase for economic studies. Initial analysis shows that between January 2008 and December 2019, 60,611 horizontal wells were completed in these formations, producing about 8.185 billion barrels of oil, 90 trillion cubic feet of gas, and generating an estimated $816 billion in gross revenue. For the statistical analysis, the level of uncertainty ( P10/P90\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${P}_{10}/{P}_{90}$$\end{document} ratio) reduced from Phase 1 to Phase 4 across all formations, suggesting consistent improvements in well productivity over time while county-level analysis shows spatial disparity in well performance. We infer that technology drives temporal changes while geology drives spatial differences in well performance. From economic analysis, Phase 4 type wells had the best production performance, partly, due to improved drilling and completion efficiency. It was also because operators targeted their best acreage to maximize their asset’s potential.

Keywords

  • Unconventional formations,
  • Statistical performance,
  • Economic analysis,
  • Uncertainty assessment,
  • Decline curve analysis

References

  1. Browning et al. (2013) Barnett shale production outlook 5(03) (pp. 89-104) https://doi.org/10.2118/165585-PA
  2. Rickman, R., Mullen, M.J., Petre, J.E., Grieser, W.V., Kundert, D.: A practical use of shale petrophysics for stimulation design optimization: all shale plays are not clones of the barnett shale. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Denver, Colorado, USA, p. 11, 2008
  3. Li, B.: Natural fractures in unconventional shale reservoirs in US and their roles in well completion design and improving hydraulic fracturing stimulation efficiency and production. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, p. 19, 2014
  4. Kolawole and Ispas (2020) Interaction between hydraulic fractures and natural fractures: current status and prospective directions (pp. 1613-1634) https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-019-00778-3
  5. Sharma A., et al.: horizontal well development in unconventional resource play using an integrated completion and production workflow: delaware basin case study. In: SPE/EAGE European unconventional resources conference and exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Vienna, Austria, p. 9, 2014
  6. Cipolla, C.L., Lewis, R.E., Maxwell, S.C., Mack, M.G.: Appraising Unconventional Resource Plays: Separating Reservoir Quality from Completion Effectiveness. In: International Petroleum Technology Conference, 2011
  7. Miller, C.K., Waters, G.A., Rylander, E.I.: Evaluation of production log data from horizontal wells drilled in organic shales. In: North American Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, p. 23, 2011
  8. Chong, K.K., Grieser, W.V., Passman, A., Tamayo, H.C., Modeland, N., Burke, B.E.: A completions guide book to shale-play development: a review of successful approaches toward shale-play stimulation in the last two decades. In: Canadian Unconventional Resources and International Petroleum Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, p. 27, 2010
  9. Enverus: Built on data. engineered for insight, enverus. 2020. [Online].
  10. https://www.enverus.com/
  11. . Accessed 4 Jan 2020
  12. EIA: EIA/FRED excel data add-in. 2020.
  13. SPEE Monograph 3: Guidelines For The practical evaluation of undeveloped reserves in resource plays. In: Houston, Texas: SPEE, 2010
  14. Wright (2015) Thompson-Wright LLC
  15. Wigwe, M.: Twelve years of unconventional development—results of cash flow sensitivity analysis on price and cost. Mendeley Data, 2020
  16. Wigwe, M.E.: MEW-App EcoSensi: unconventional economic analysis and sensitivity—Shiny Web App. RStudio, Inc., 2020
  17. Pollastro, R.M., Roberts, L.N.R., Cook, T.A., Lewan, M.D.: Assessment of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources of the Bakken formation, Williston Basin, Montana and North Dakota, 2008, 2008
  18. Zander, D.M., Czehura, M.P., Snyder, D., Seale, R.A.: Well completion optimization in a north dakota bakken oilfield. In: IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, p. 12, 2010
  19. Cox, S.A., Cook, D., Dunek, K., Daniels, G.R., Jump, C.J., Barree, R.D.: Unconventional resource play evaluation: a look at the Bakken Shale Play of North Dakota. In: SPE Unconventional Reservoirs Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Keystone, Colorado, USA, p. 14, 2008
  20. Houston, M.C., McCallister, M.A., Jany, J.D., Audet, J.: Next generation multi-stage completion technology and risk sharing accelerates development of the Bakken Play. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 13, 2010
  21. USGS: Assessment of undiscovered oil resources in the Devonian-Mississippian Bakken Formation, Williston Basin Province, Montana and North Dakota, 2008, 2008
  22. Sonnenberg, S.A.: The Upper Bakken Shale Resource Play, Williston Basin. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG unconventional resources technology conference, 2014, p. 12
  23. Pitman, J.K., Price, L.C., LeFever, J.A.: Diagenesis and fracture development in the Bakken formation, Williston Basin: implications for reservoir quality in the middle member, 2001
  24. LeFever, J.A.: Structural contour and isopach maps of the Bakken Formation in North Dakota: North Dakota Geological Survey Geologic Investigations no. 59, one CD-ROM., 2008
  25. Clark, A.J.: Determination of recovery factor in the Bakken Formation, Mountrail County, ND. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 2009, p. 10
  26. Bybee (2004) Improved horizontal-well stimulations in the Bakken Formation 56(11) (pp. 49-50) https://doi.org/10.2118/1104-0049-JPT
  27. Helms, L.: Economic impact—PowerPoint presentation by Director, 2020.
  28. Koesoemadinata, A., et al.: seismic reservoir characterization in Marcellus Shale. In: 2011 SEG annual meeting. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, San Antonio, Texas, p. 5, 2011
  29. Bartuska, J.E., Pechiney, J.J., Leonard, R.S., Woodroof, R.A.: Optimizing completion designs for horizontal shale gas wells using completion diagnostics. In: SPE Americas Unconventional Resources Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA, p. 21, 2012
  30. NETL: Modern shale gas development in the united states: a primer, 2009
  31. EIA: Marcellus Shale Play, Geology review, 2017
  32. Myers, R.R.: Stimulation and production analysis of underpressured (Marcellus) shale gas. In: SPE Shale Gas Production Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Fort Worth, Texas, USA, p. 8, 2008
  33. Agrawal, A., Wei, Y., Cheng, K., Holditch, S.A.: A technical and economic study of completion techniques in five emerging US gas shales. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 16, 2010
  34. Kocoglu, Y., Wigwe, M.E., Sheldon, G., Watson, C.: Machine learning based decline curve—spatial method to estimate production potential of proposed wells in unconventional shale gas reservoirs. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Virtual, p. 19, 2020
  35. Zhou et al. (2014) Evaluating gas production performances in marcellus using data mining technologies (pp. 109-120) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2014.06.014
  36. Cunningham, C.F., Cooley, L., Wozniak, G., Pancake, J.: Using multiple linear regression to model EURs of horizontal marcellus wells. In: SPE Eastern Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Lexington, Kentucky, USA, 2012
  37. Liu, C.H., Martinez-Rahoe, B., Fleckenstein, W., Park, Y., Shi, F.: Economic feasibility analysis of the Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, p. 10, 2013
  38. Ventura, J., et al.: The discovery of the Marcellus Shale play, an operator’s experience. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, p. 15, 2013
  39. PSU-MCOR: How much natural gas can the Marcellus shale produce? 2012
  40. Higley, D.K., et al.: Assessment of undiscovered gas resources in the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale of the Appalachian Basin Province, 2019, Reston,VA, 2019
  41. Considine, T.J.: The economic impacts of the Marcellus shale: implications for New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, 2010
  42. Chevron: Supporting communities, Chevron News, 2017
  43. EIA: Trends in U.S. oil and natural gas upstream costs, 2016
  44. Rankin, R.R., Thibodeau, M., Vincent, M.C., Palisch, T.: Improved production and profitability achieved with superior completions in horizontal wells: a Bakken/three forks case history. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 22, 2010
  45. Pope, C.D., Palisch, T.T., Lolon, E., Dzubin, B., Chapman, M.A.: Improving stimulation effectiveness: field results in the haynesville shale. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 18, 2010
  46. Pope, C., Peters, B., Benton, T., Palisch, T.: Haynesville shale—one operator’s approach to well completions in this evolving play. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, p. 12, 2009
  47. Wigwe, M.E., Bougre, E.S., Watson, M.C., Giussani, A.: Spatio-temporal models for big data and applications on unconventional production evaluation. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, 2020
  48. Wigwe, M.E., Watson, M.C.: Presentation of oil and gas spatiotemporal big data visualization techniques as tools to aid in dynamic spatio-temporal models—SPE-200864-MS. In: SPE western regional meeting, 2021
  49. Wigwe, E.A., Westfall, M.E., Watson, P.H., Giussani, M.C., Nasir, A.: Evaluation of the effect of well parameters on oil production. In: JSM Proceedings, Statistical Computing Section, 2019, pp. 1781–1803
  50. Fulks, R., Hughes, S., Geldmacher, I.: Optimizing unconventional completions—an integrated approach. In: Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Abu Dhabi, UAE, p. 21, 2016
  51. Carpenter (2020) Normalized cumulative production curves estimate ultimate recovery 72(7) (pp. 67-68) https://doi.org/10.2118/0720-0067-JPT
  52. Ezisi, I., Hale, B.W., Watson, M.C., Heinze, L.: Assessment of probabilistic parameters for barnett shale recoverable volumes. In: SPE Hydrocarbon Economics and Evaluation Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, p. 16, 2012
  53. Zhang, H., Cocco, M., Rietz, D., Cagle, A., Lee, J.: An empirical extended exponential decline curve for shale reservoirs. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 2015.
  54. Arps (1945) Analysis of decline curves 160(01) (pp. 228-247) https://doi.org/10.2118/945228-G
  55. Ikonnikova, S., Gülen, G., Browning, J.: Impacts of price differentials, taxation, and costs on shale gas drilling: a marcellus case study. In: SPE/IAEE Hydrocarbon Economics and Evaluation Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Houston, Texas, USA, pp. 10, 2016
  56. Crowley, K.: A tale of two oil giants, with two strategies that aren’t working. World Oil eNews (2020).
  57. https://www.worldoil.com/news/2020/1/31/a-tale-of-two-oil-giants-with-two-strategies-that-aren-t-working