Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Moderator: Pops

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby sparky » Thu 20 Oct 2016, 21:03:49

.
Thanks for the answer , a quick check gave some truly impressive dept for oil wells
and I take your point about temperature being the critical boundary

I'm just waiting for someone to write ...then again , It all depend !
User avatar
sparky
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2955
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Sydney , OZ

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby sparky » Thu 20 Oct 2016, 21:17:48

.
I've found this lovely old book , Basics of reservoir engineering , it has a simple graph which even a tyro like me can understand ,


https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Z1 ... en&f=false
User avatar
sparky
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2955
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Sydney , OZ

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 20 Oct 2016, 22:28:49

There are some very good books on the source, maturation, generation and migration of hydrocarbons. Some that are more high level and others that are extremely techincial requiring a bit of understanding regarding organic geochemistry and the equation for fluid flow.

One I often point people towards who are interested is

Tissot, B.P. and Welte, D.H., 1978. Petroleum Formation and Occurrence. Springer Verlag. 538 pp.

one of the better papers that describes pretty much everything you might want to know by Doug Waples:

Waples. D., 1980. Time and Temperature in Petroleum Formation: Applications of Lopatin’s Method to Petroleum Exploration. AAPG, V64. P 916-926

Probably a good primer on the subject is found here:
http://www.mhnederlof.nl/petroleumsystem.html
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4847
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 20 Oct 2016, 22:46:01

Sparky - And that "biogenic CH4" in that chart: wanna sound like one of us oil field hands...we call it "swamp gas". LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby Yoshua » Fri 21 Oct 2016, 03:26:46

Rockman - Commodity Price Index, 2005 = 100, includes both Fuel and Non-Fuel Price Indices.

http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/? ... months=360
Yoshua
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat 28 May 2016, 05:45:42

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 21 Oct 2016, 06:28:52

Coffee - 35,000' or 31,000' below the midline...not clear from the press releases. But still very deep. More important pretty dang hot...350° or so and perhaps as high as 20,000 psi. I couldn't find actual test info so not sure what the gas/oil ratio might be: sloppy writers swing back and forth between bbls and bbls equivalents. Also no weight reported...just "light oil" which I assume is condensate. Also implications of rather low recover expectations based on experience with other fields in the trend. Just a guess but sounds like a gas/condensate reservoir with a pressure depletion drive. Recovery guesses are 5% to 20%. The billions of bbls numbers tossed around appear to be in place reserves and not recoverable. But still a lot of oil.

No indication of what they'll do with the NG: reinject or flare. But sounds like hundreds of bcf will come up with the oil. Back to the temperature issue. From researching the developing concepts is that oil degradation is more complex the just a function of temp although it is still a limiting factor.

The mechanical engineering complexity is huge. An entire new generation of equipment has to be developed. Another company trying to produce a similar high temp/pressure reservoir spent $250 million on its first well and couldn't produce it. And it was in 20' of water...not 4,000' like Tiber. And while the reserves at Tiber truly are huge there's some indication it will be at least 5 years before production begins and it might not be at an initial rate above 100,000 bopd.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 21 Oct 2016, 06:34:09

Y - Thanks. Was confused because I couldn't see how you were relating oil prices to the huge increase in coal prices.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Fri 21 Oct 2016, 07:43:18

Rock man
Thanks for the info.
Before I posted, I also did some checking because I recalled a bit of the hype surrounding the Deepwater Horizon having accomplushed the drilling.
The write-ups were the normal jumble of 'almost accurate' descriptions.
Whether 30,000' or 35,000', pretty deep.
Regarding temperature and hydrocarbon formation, for years the consensus seemed that any gas in the so-called Deep Utica (areas of PA and WV over 12/14,000' deep), would not be present as it would have cooked off.
This is increasingly being shown to be inaccurate as productive Utica wells are coming online in North Central, Central, and South west Pennsylvania and WV in depths approaching 14,000'.
This is adding significant amounts of prospective acreage for future development.

Hope things are going well for you, RM.
coffeeguyzz
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 15:09:47

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 21 Oct 2016, 09:30:13

Has anyone ever experimented with injecting hydrogen gas into hot deep light oil formations in an attempt to hydrogenate the molecules and make them heavier? For near a hundred years companies like Proctor & Gamble were taking very light vegetable oil and hydrogenating it into grease.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13024
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 21 Oct 2016, 13:23:50

T - Not hydrogen. But:

"Gas injection or miscible flooding is presently the most-commonly used approach in enhanced oil recovery. Miscible flooding is a general term for injection processes that introduce miscible gases into the reservoir. A miscible displacement process maintains reservoir pressure and improves oil displacement because the interfacial tension between oil and water is reduced. This refers to removing the interface between the two interacting fluids. This allows for total displacement efficiency. Gases used include CO2, natural gas or nitrogen. The fluid most commonly used for miscible displacement is carbon dioxide because it reduces the oil viscosity and is less expensive than liquefied petroleum gas. Oil displacement by carbon dioxide injection relies on the phase behavior of the mixtures of that gas and the crude, which are strongly dependent on reservoir temperature, pressure and crude oil composition."
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 22 Oct 2016, 14:48:02

Hmm...might explain why some NY politicians wanted to prevent new pipelines to allow more cheap NG from PA.

Nuclear and natural gas in tug of war over energy future in New York

A challenge by natural gas power plant owners to a multibillion dollar state subsidy for nuclear plants revealed a tug of war between nuclear and gas interests that has been playing out behind the scenes in a New York climate change program. Gas plant owners sued this week to block a new state subsidy — called a zero emissions credit — that could be worth billions over the next 12 years to four upstate nuclear power plants under Gov. Andrew Cuomo's administration's new Clean Energy Standard.

The ZEC is meant to keep financially stressed nuclear plants from closing down, which could require more fossil-fuel power plants or alternative energy sources, like wind and solar, to make up for the lost power. Now that it has gotten its lifeline subsidy, the nuclear industry appears to be seeking further advantage.

Filings with the state Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which limits climate-changing emissions from power plants, show the state's largest nuclear energy company is urging changes to the program that could raise costs on competitors in the natural gas plant industry. Officials in New York and eight other Northeast states are reviewing potential changes to the eight-year-old RGGI program, which was spearheaded by former Gov. George Pataki. So far, New York has collected nearly $1 billion from selling state-issued RGGI (pronounced Reggie) credits to power plant owners. The owners must buy a credit for every ton of greenhouse gas emitted into the air.

Nuclear and natural gas plants, which combined now supply nearly three-quarters of the state's electricity, are jockeying for position, according to two longtime energy market observers. Natural gas recently overtook nuclear as the leading source of electrical generation, at 37 percent to 35 percent. "The nuclear industry got their ZEC 'cookie' to help support their industry, and now want the frosting on top — higher RGGI prices to drive up the costs on their competitors in the natural gas industry," said one observer, who asked his name not be used.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 22 Oct 2016, 15:11:53

Rather odd that this is presented as a surprise. Natural oil and NG seeps from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico were documented decades ago. In fact that was my wife's biological oceanography masters thesis in 1974. Folks that have bothered to study such matters eastimate that the hydrocarbons currently trapped in the earth are just a very tiny % of what has been generated over time. In fact perhaps as much as 99% has seeped out of the ground.

An enormous NG seep along the west coast

A recent deep ocean mapping survey has learned that a geologically-active strip of seafloor called the Cascadia Subduction Zone is bubbling methane like mad. It could be one of the most active methane seeps on the planet.

For years, scientists have been aware that methane, an odorless, colorless gas produced naturally during microbial digestion (and more famously, by farting cows) bubbles up from the seafloor where the conditions are right. Recent scientific surveys have discovered hundreds of methane seeps along the Atlantic continental margin, and it’s believed there could be thousands more across the world.

A NOAA-led survey of the Cascadia Subduction Zone, performed by the E/V Nautilus over the summer, was a first attempt to get a handle on how much natural methane seepage is occurring over this geologically-active area. Although the ROV only mapped a small fraction of the subduction zone in detail, it identified some 450 individual bubble streams, which nearly doubles the number of methane vents that have been spotted along US coastlines.

Washington University oceanographer Paul Johnson, a collaborator on the survey, called the finding a “very significant discovery,” adding that there are likely a lot more methane plumes that E/V Nautilus missed. “The capability to image methane bubble streams in the water column is relatively new, so it is fair to say that the more we look, the more we find,” he said.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 22 Oct 2016, 15:38:23

Wonder how this may, or may not, tie to the NY story. Also interesting that some greenies who once saw NG as a weapon to use against coal burners are not targeting NG. From

https://www.ft.com/content/4583a4cc-977 ... d69f323a8b

Prepare for the US post-election natural-gas war

"You might be living in hope that election day will mark the end of vicious political infighting and blackmail through leaks of emails and old recordings. From what I see inside the energy industry and the permanent government, forget it. Once the Democratic party no longer has Donald Trump to unify it in opposition, you can expect a range war between the pro natural-gas factions and the well-organised and litigious environmentalists.

Not for the first time, Wall Street and its customers are missing a few points. The Street has been transfixed by the seemingly unstoppable increases in the production of gas from the Marcellus mega-basin in the northeastern US, which has driven the gas price down to the point where not many coal plants can compete. The analysts’ base assump-
tion is that between 11 and 13bn cubic feet per day of new gas production from the Marcellus will come on line next year, as pipelines are permitted and built to take out the already-found gas from fracked shale deposits.

Maybe not. Eric Brooks, the energy analyst for north-east natural gas at S&P Global Platts, the benchmark provider, believes only 2 bcf/day of pipeline capacity will be added in the Marcellus basin. This comports with what I have been seeing in regulatory and court-ordered delays. Behind the optimistic uptrends, the pipeliners are terribly worried about their prospects. The pipeliners are not paranoid. Their enemies are plotting their economic demise. Earthjustice, a litigation group, has a webpage headlined “stopping infrastructure investments”. Anti-fracking activists believe the simplest way to keep gas producers from pumping out cheap fossil fuel is to keep pipelines from connecting the wells.

Along with the Wall Streeters, I had assumed that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s authority to license pipelines could overcome any green or local government opposition. The FERC, worried about energy supply security, had been openly working to fast track pipelines and liquid natural gas export terminals. The environmentalists, though, would not give up. Abigail Dillen, vice-president of litigation for climate and energy at Earthjustice, says: “We believe a rush to gas slows a rush to clean energy. If we invest in a whole new generation of gas infrastructure from expensive pipelines to power plants, we are creating stranded assets.”

From Abigail's lips to Dog's ear. Anything that curtails NG production from the Marcellus would be music to many ears in Texas and La. Now if they could just do something to curtail Canadian oil imports it would be party time in the Lone Star state. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 26 Oct 2016, 21:25:03

So my Yankee cousins don't like NG pipelines. That's OK...their choice. IOW they get to pay a lot more for NG and produce more GHG burning oil. But it is a democracy... Of sorts.

"The Northeast is still a highly constrained gas market and much of the region doesn’t have access to the local gas surge because there aren’t enough pipelines to take the gas away to markets. In fact, combined with low prices, this lack of infrastructure often has companies in the region curtailing gas production because there’s no way to move the gas out. Cabot Oil & Gas, which has been ranked as the 2nd biggest PA Marcellus producer (here), had to curtail 75 Bcf in 2015, or enough gas to heat more than 1.1 million homes for a year.

New England in particular has suffered and is easily the highest priced gas and power market in the country, with respective rates of 45% and 55% higher than the national average. Natural gas is promoted as a way to reduce oil demand averaging a whopping 16.2 GWh/day in Winter 2014. When gas demand rises in New England, a lack of pipelines means pricer LNG imports from as far away as Yemen. Remember that residential heating gets priority over gas needed for utilities.

The “Not in My Backyard” obstacle is very strong in the Northeast. One problem has been that the Northeast is a relatively new area of major gas production, so residents aren’t used to the infrastructure required to produce more, unlike, say, Texans or Oklahomans. Moreover, the Northeast is generally more environmentally conscious and has a higher population density, which makes it tougher to lay pipelines."

More "environmentally conscious". Except, of course, when it cvcvomes to heating their homes with OIL instead of NG.

From Forbes
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby dashster » Thu 27 Oct 2016, 00:44:10

For future reference:
Image
dashster
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri 28 Dec 2012, 07:39:24
Location: California

Re: THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Thu 27 Oct 2016, 08:36:36

IMO the folks in the major oil zones of the early 20th Century through mid century got a huge advantage regarding Natural Gas. Seen as an unwanted byproduct by the oil industry it was only the law against flaring that made it a saleable product. Before that time most places that had any kind of a gas network used 'town gas' that was a mix of Carbon Monoxide and Hydrogen often diluted with a lot of Nitrogen. The original purpose of the odorant found in gas was to alert people that carbon monoxide was leaking because unlike methane carbon monoxide is quite lethal. Because 'Town Gas' was locally manufactured there were no long pipelines to transport it, but the prohibition on flaring Natural Gas meant they had to build pipelines, or reinject the gas. Places where oil had a lot of associated gas then built those pipelines back in the era before NIMBY and nuisance lawsuits had much of an impact. Now two full generations later when deep fracking has found abundant natural gas in New England the pattern is very different because today NIMBY and nuisance lawsuits are a major factor.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13024
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby Tanada » Thu 27 Oct 2016, 08:52:03

dashster wrote:For future reference:
Image


The Utica here in Ohio is an interesting case. It was selected for exploitation not for the 'dry gas' component but because it is very 'wet' with a large percentage of condensate coming from most wells. This had lead to one regional conflict through Wood County south of Toledo Ohio where a law suit just blocked the planned Ethane gas line. Ethane, Propane and Butane are large fractions of the gas coming from the Utica and compression liquification makes it easy to put Butane and Propane into tankers for transport. Ethane however requires either very low temperatures or relatively high pressure to be liquified for transport. My understanding is in Western Europe ethane is simply left in the 'dry gas' sold to end consumers but in North America it is mostly separated out and used for polyethylene plastic manufacturing.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13024
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 27 Oct 2016, 09:37:56

T - "It was selected for exploitation not for the 'dry gas' component but because it is very 'wet' with a large percentage of condensate coming from most wells". Accutually that has been the motivation in most of the NG plays in the US for many years. During the first 3 years of my company's start up we participated in $400 million in NG exploration in S La BUT only in high condensate yield trends...100+ bbl per million cubic feet of NG. That yield was critical to make the economics works given the low price of NG. A price that was higher then we have today.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Natural Gas Thread (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 27 Oct 2016, 09:53:10

T - "...folks in the major oil zones of the early 20th Century through mid century got a huge advantage regarding Natural Gas." An extreme example north of Houston...Tomball Field:

"It was on May 27th, 1933 when the Humble Oil Company struck oil southwest of town earning Tomball the nickname, “Oiltown USA”. Humble Oil Company, now known as ExxonMobil, and more than 20 other energy companies worked the fields around the City for many years producing more than 100 million barrels of oil and 316 billion cubic feet of natural gas.".

" A mutually beneficial contract was negotiated by Humble Oil (ExxonMobil) and the City of Tomball. Under the agreement, in exchange for exclusive drilling rights within the city limits, the residents of Tomball were promised free water and natural gas for 90 years. The unique contract landed Tomball in the syndicated newspaper series Ripley’s Believe it or Not as being the only city with free gas and water and no cemetery."

Better PR giving it away the flaring it.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9087
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: natural gas production

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 27 Oct 2016, 11:07:42

The Utica here in Ohio is an interesting case. It was selected for exploitation not for the 'dry gas' component but because it is very 'wet' with a large percentage of condensate coming from most wells.


that has been something driving the unconventionals for the past few years for a couple of reasons. With high oil price condensates were worth a lot even though natural gas prices were low. But given the very low (nanodarcies) permeability associated with the shales too much "richness" resulted in low flow rates (there is an optimum somewhere around 35 bbls/MMcf as I remember). So the trick to maximizing profit was to drill for gas (max flow rate) but have the highest liquid content that didn't adversely affect flow rate (max cashflow per well). The situation is a wee bit different now with propane at low prices due to high supply and condensate tied to oil price. This has resulted in the breakeven price between dry and wet gas in various plays moving closer towards one another as of late. If natural gas price's increase this winter as many predict then that gap will likely close further.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4847
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests