Quad II is here – Prepare for Awesome!

Chris Fuglerud

Technical Service Representative

Roke Technologies

The Calgary presentation at the Geoconvention was on the third day of the Conference, May 11th. The subject matter was the analysis of 270m of core with comparisons to open hole and speciality log data. The feedback was quite positive. There was quite an interest in calculation porosity in formations with changing lithology. The oblivious rhetorical question was asked, “What other hydrocarbon bearing formations haven’t been found yet?”

The following week on May 17th and 18th was the Pittsburgh Northeast Shale Gas Conference by the American Institute. I had the chance to sit in a few excellent presentations. I especially enjoyed the Talisman presentation by Danielle Deemur and the EQT presentation by Alfred Lacazette. I was initially worried that our presentation, Lessons Learned: The Art of Sustained Casing Pressure, Surface Casing Vent Flow and Gas Migration, would need significant explaining. This was not the case as there has been increased media coverage on the topic since the study from Duke University came out on increased methane near gas wells. The presentation was quite topical. Danielle asked if I would be able to meet with their SCP/SCVF/GM team the following Friday. I was impressed with the technical team and the resources that Talisman is applying to this issue. There is a good chance that they will ask the Roke SCP/SCVF/GM/Abandonment team to assist in their difficult wells.

The short abstract is 300m of core was cut in the Talisman Altares 16-17 well with 270m of core recovered. The core data is compared to OH and Speciality log data from Schlumberger, Baker, Roke and Geolog.

The Open Hole data set from Schlumberger includes:

–Density

–Compensated Neutron

–Natural Gamma Ray

–Array Induction

–Microlog

The Speciality data set includes:

–Accelerator Porosity Sonde (Schlumberger)

–Formation Lithology eXplorer™(Baker Atlas)

–Cross-Multipole Array™ (Baker Atlas)

–Quad Neutron™ Array (Roke)

–Pulsed Neutron Neutron (Hotwell)

–Cased Hole Analysis Tool (Geolog)

Highlighted are Porosity, Clay Content and Total Organic Carbon correlations.

The abstract and additional information can be accessed by the links below.

http://www.geoconvention.com/conference/technical-program/wednesday/pm-3/montney-iii.html

http://www.geoconvention.com/uploads/2011abstracts/303-Montney_Shale_Formation_Evaluation.pdf

*World Oil, October 2006, ‘Estimating SW with a volume measurement”

I recently had a question when chatting with a production engineer at Baytex to see if we could help to identify the difference between gas charged bypass pay that may have had water influx after the original open hole logs were run. The open hole logs are of decent quality from the late 1980′s. The zone is a shaley sand in central Alberta. The well was originally drilled for a deeper oil target and this zone is being abandoned.

I think with all the cased hole technology that we have at our disposal that we should be able to solve his formation evaluation problem.

Any comments or recommendations? Would the Hotwell Pulsed Neutron Neutron or Roke Quad Neutron Array be a better solution? Do you think the Cased Hole Analysis Tool (CHAT) tool from Geolog would be better in this case? Are there other technologies that would be a better fit, Dipole Sonic? Would the Gas Flag Shading from the Quad Neutron help distinguish the difference?

Much appreciated,

Jay

Removing this nuisance gas is part of the good corporate governance by the oil and gas industry as we put our best efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Hermann was chosen for the society because of his expertise in identifying the gas source potentials from deep down using Cased Hole Analysis tools and technology, such as the Pulsed Neutron Neutron (PNN), Quad Neutron and High Resolution Noise logs.

A few of our best clients, Penn West, Husky and Talisman, are part of the founding members of the society. The Alberta government regulatory body, Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) is also represented at the meetings. They ensure that all exploration and producing companies exploit the resource in a responsible manner trying to take into consideration all of the stakeholders.

Penn West was particular impressed with the formation evaluation we did for them. We identified coal through casing to look for coal bed methane (coal seam gas). The Gas Flag Shading that we developed a year ago was also successful in identifying stored gas. Hermann will be chatting about the new society via the blog in the near future.

This winter was very exciting. We got a chance to evaluate very interesting reservoirs, such as Muskwa and Otterpark in the Horn River Basin as well as the Unconventional Montney in Northeast British Columbia, Unconventional Cardium in the Pembina field in Central Alberta, Marcellus shale in Northeast United States, Coal Bed Methane (Coal Seam Gas) in Pennsylvania and the Horseshoe Canyon in Central Alberta.

Currently we’re chatting about providing reservoir characterization for a few unconventional light oil Viking pools as well as bypassed gas pay potential on wells that are having deeper producing horizons abandoned. The cased hole analysis tool of the Quad Neutron is excellent for both of these plays. We’re very excited about the upcoming season.

Recently Hermann got back from Pennsylvania after meeting with a few clients to review the formation evaluation of the Marcellus shale. We got excellent feedback and it looks to be our largest area of growth. We’re hoping to start expansion in that area soon.