4.7 Article

Simulation of gas desorption and geomechanics effects for unconventional gas reservoirs

Journal

FUEL
Volume 116, Issue -, Pages 455-464

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2013.08.032

Keywords

Gas desorption; Geomechanics; History matching; Shale gas; Sensitivity analysis

Funding

  1. Hilcorp Energy Company

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hydraulic fracturing of horizontal wells is crucial for economic production of shale gas. Impacts of gas desorption and geomechanics in hydraulic fractures on ultimate gas recovery are not clearly understood and systematically investigated. In this paper, we perform history matching with two field gas production data from Barnett Shale and Marcellus Shale, and first analyze the positive contribution of gas desorption and the negative effect of geomechanics on gas production, respectively, and then compare these two effects on gas production with the purpose of identifying which effect is dominant in the whole process of gas production. Furthermore, we numerically study the effect of gas desorption on gas recovery with available laboratory data of Langmuir isotherm from five different shale formations including Barnett Shale, New Albany Shale, Eagleford Shale, Marcellus Shale, and Haynesville Shale. Also, we use the method of Design of Experiment to perform sensitivity studies with six uncertain parameters such as reservoir permeability, bottom hole pressure, fracture conductivity, initial reservoir pressure, porosity, and fracture spacing to screen insignificant parameters and obtain critical parameters that control this process. This paper enables operators to develop an early better understanding of the effects of gas desorption and geomechanics on shale gas well performance, and provides insights into history matching and optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment design for shale gas production. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available