DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR SERIES

Tight Gas Sands

Stephen A. Holditch, SPE, Texas A&M U.

Introduction
Tight gas is the term commonly used to refer to low-permeability

Increased Technology
Small volumes;
reservoirs that produce mainly dry natural gas. Many of the low- High 1,000 md
easy to develop

Increased Prices
permeability reservoirs developed in the past are sandstone, but sig- quality
nificant quantities of gas also are produced from low-permeability
carbonates, shales, and coal seams. In this paper, production of gas Medium 10 md
from tight sandstones is the predominant theme. However, much quality
of the same technology applies to tight-carbonate and gas-shale Coalbed
Tight 0.1 md
reservoirs. Large volumes;
gas methane
difficult to
In general, a vertical well drilled and completed in a tight gas develop
reservoir must be successfully stimulated to produce at commercial Low
Gas .001 md
quality
gas-flow rates and produce commercial gas volumes. Normally, a shales
large hydraulic-fracture treatment is required to produce gas eco-
nomically. In some naturally fractured tight gas reservoirs, horizon- Gas hydrates
tal wells can be drilled, but these wells also need to be stimulated.
To optimize development of a tight gas reservoir, a team of geo-
scientists and engineers must optimize the number and locations of Fig. 1—Resource triangle for natural gas.
wells to be drilled, as well as the drilling and completion procedures
for each well. Often, more data and more engineering manpower tors are related by Darcy’s law, as shown in the stabilized, radial-flow
are required to understand and develop tight gas reservoirs than equation, Eq. 1, (Lee 1982).
are required for higher-permeability conventional reservoirs. On
an individual-well basis, a well in a tight gas reservoir will produce µpzpgTqg re
less gas over a longer period of time than one expects from a well pwf2=p2−1,422 ————
kh [ ln (——
r )
−0.75+(s+D|q |)]. (1)
w
g
completed in a higher-permeability conventional reservoir. As such,
many more wells (closer well spacing) must be drilled in a tight gas On the basis of Eq. 1, the flow rate, q, is a function of average res-
reservoir to recover a large percentage of the original gas in place ervoir pressure, p; flowing pressure, pwf; fluid properties, µp and zpg;
compared with a conventional reservoir. reservoir temperature, T; permeability, k; net pay thickness, h; drain-
age radius, re; wellbore radius, rw; skin factor, s; and a non-Darcy
Definition of Tight Gas Reservoir flow constant, D. Thus, to choose a single value of permeability to
In the 1970s, the U.S. government decided that the definition of define tight gas reservoirs is of limited significance. In deep, thick,
a tight gas reservoir is one in which the expected value of perme- high-pressure reservoirs, excellent completions can be achieved
ability to gas flow would be less than 0.1 md. This definition was when the formation permeability to gas is in the microdarcy range
a political definition that has been used to determine which wells (i.e., ∼0.001 md). In shallow, thin, low-pressure reservoirs, perme-
would receive federal and/or state tax credits for producing gas from abilities of several millidarcies might be required to produce the gas
tight reservoirs. Actually, the definition of a tight gas reservoir is a at economic flow rates, even after a successful fracture treatment.
function of many physical and economic factors. The physical fac- The best definition of tight gas reservoir is “a reservoir that can-
not be produced at economic flow rates nor recover economic vol-
umes of natural gas unless the well is stimulated by a large hydraulic
Stephen A. Holditch, SPE, is the department head and Samuel fracture treatment or produced by use of a horizontal wellbore or
Roberts Noble Foundation endowed chair in petroleum at Texas multilateral wellbores.”
A&M U. He previously worked for Schlumberger and continues So what is a typical tight gas reservoir? The answer is that there
to work on projects for Holditch Reservoir Technologies and on are no “typical” tight gas reservoirs. A tight gas reservoir can be
special projects to assist Schlumberger management. Holditch deep or shallow, high-pressure or low-pressure, high-temperature or
also was president of S.A. Holditch & Assocs. He specialized low-temperature, blanket or lenticular, homogeneous or naturally
in analysis of low-permeability gas reservoirs and design of fractured, and can contain a single layer or multiple layers.
hydraulic-fracture treatments. Holditch also was a produc-
tion engineer with Shell Oil Co. He has served as the 2002 Copyright 2006 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This is paper SPE 103356. Distinguished Author Series articles are general, descriptive
SPE President, has served on many SPE committees, and has representations that summarize the state of the art in an area of technology by describing recent
authored many SPE papers. Holditch earned BS, MS, and PhD developments for readers who are not specialists in the topics discussed. Written by individuals
recognized as experts in the area, these articles provide key references to more definitive work
degrees in petroleum engineering from Texas A&M U. and present specific details only to illustrate the technology. Purpose: to inform the general
readership of recent advances in various areas of petroleum engineering.

86 JPT • JUNE 2006

 DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR SERIES

GTI estimates the volume of technically recoverable gas from

5,800 known U.S. tight gas accumulations at 185 Tcf. The term “technical-
Reserves— ly recoverable” means that the gas is known to exist (the technology
5,600 92 Tcf is available to drill, complete, and stimulate the wells and produce
Resource, Tcf

5,400 Recoverable— this gas), but the gas cannot be booked as reserves until the wells
185 Tcf are drilled and the reservoirs are developed. The next category in
5,200 Undiscovered— Fig. 2 is called undiscovered, which represents the GTI estimate of
350 Tcf gas that is likely to be discovered in known tight gas basins. Finally,
5,000
Resources— the largest category is called resources. This value represents the gas
4,800 5,000 Tcf in place in the U.S. tight gas basins. Substantial improvements in
technology or changes in the gas market are required before the gas
4,600
in the resources category can be produced economically.
Fig. 2—Resource triangle for tight gas in the U.S.
Tight Gas Estimates Outside the U.S.
The optimum drilling, completion, and stimulation methods for The resource-triangle concept should be valid for all natural resourc-
each well are functions of the reservoir characteristics and the eco- es in all basins in the world, so it is logical to believe that large vol-
nomic situation. Some tight gas reservoirs are in south Texas, while umes of gas in unconventional reservoirs will be found, developed,
others are in South America or the Middle East. The costs to drill, and produced in every basin that now produces significant volumes
complete, and stimulate the wells, plus the gas price and the gas of gas from conventional reservoirs. There are various organizations
market, affect how tight gas reservoirs are developed. that have analyzed parts of the unconventional-gas-resource base
in specific regions of the world; however, no organization regularly
Resource Triangle publishes a comprehensive estimate of the volume of gas that might
The concept of the resource triangle was used by Masters (1979) to be found in unconventional reservoirs around the world.
find a large gas field and build a company in the 1970s. The concept Table 1 presents data from Kawata and Fujita (2001) who took
is that all natural resources are distributed log normally in nature. the data from Rogner (1996). According to the estimates of Rogner,
If you are prospecting for gold, silver, iron, zinc, oil, natural gas, or there are significant volumes of unconventional gas worldwide. The
any resource, you will find that the best or highest-grade deposits largest volumes of unconventional gas are known to exist in North
are small in size and, once found, are easy to extract. The hard part America, which is also the region where there has been the most
is finding these pure veins of gold or high-permeability gas fields. exploration, development, and production of unconventional gas.
Once you find the high-grade deposit, producing the resource is As such, there is more information available to evaluate the uncon-
rather easy and straightforward. Fig. 1 illustrates the principle of ventional gas in North America.
the resource triangle.
As you go deeper into the gas-resource triangle, the reservoirs TABLE 1—TABLE 1—DISTRIBUTION OF WORLDWIDE
are lower grade, which usually means the reservoir permeability is UNCONVENTIONAL-GAS RESOURCES (AFTER ROGNER
decreasing. These low-permeability reservoirs, however, are much 1996, TAKEN FROM KAWATA AND FUJITA 2001)
larger in size than the higher-quality reservoirs. The scale on the
right side of Fig. 1 illustrates typical values of formation permeabil-
Coalbed Shale Tight-Sand
ity for tight gas sands. Other low-quality resources, such as coalbed
Methane Gas Gas Total
methane, gas shales, and gas hydrates, would likely have different
Region (Tcf) (Tcf) (Tcf) (Tcf)
permeability scales.
The common theme is that low-quality deposits of natural gas North America 3,017 3,840 1,371 8,228
require improved technology and adequate gas prices before they Latin America 39 2,116 1,293 3,448
can be developed and produced economically. However, the size Western Europe 157 509 353 1,019
of the deposits can be very large compared with conventional or Central and 118 39 78 235
high-quality reservoirs. The concept of the resource triangle applies Eastern Europe
to every hydrocarbon-producing basin in the world. One should be Former Soviet 3,957 627 901 5,485
able to estimate the volumes of oil and gas trapped in low-quality Union
reservoirs in a specific basin by knowing the volumes of oil and gas Middle East and 0 2,547 823 3,370
that exist in the higher-quality reservoirs. North Africa
Sub-Saharan 39 274 784 1,097
Tight Gas Sands in the U.S. Africa
Estimates of gas production, reserves, and potential from the Centrally planned 1,215 3,526 353 5,094
tight gas basins in the U.S. are compatible with the concept of Asia and China
the resource triangle. Fig. 2 illustrates the tight gas resource-base Pacific 470 2,312 705 3,487
estimates from the Gas Technology Inst. (GTI) (GTI E&P Services (Organization
2001). The gas produced through the year 2000 from tight gas for Economic
reservoirs is estimated to be 58 Tcf. Proven reserves in tight gas Cooperation and
reservoirs are 34 Tcf. Thus, the sum of produced gas plus proven Development)
reserves is 92 Tcf. Currently, the U.S. uses approximately 22 Tcf/yr Other Asia Pacific 0 313 549 862
of natural gas. It is estimated that 20% of the gas production in the South Asia 39 0 196 235
U.S. currently comes from tight gas reservoirs. World 9,051 16,103 7,406 32,560

88 JPT • JUNE 2006

 100
In blanket tight gas reservoirs, the average drainage area of a
10 well largely depends on the number of wells drilled, the size of the
k ∞ at NOB Pressure, md

fracture treatments pumped into the wells, and the time frame being
1 considered. In lenticular or compartmentalized tight gas reservoirs,
the average drainage area is likely a function of the average sand-
0.1
lens size or compartment size and may not be a strong function of
0.01
the size of the fracture treatment.

0.001 Regional Tectonics. Tectonic activity during deposition can affect

n = 291 reservoir continuity and morphology. In addition, regional tecton-
0.0001 ics affect the horizontal stresses in all rock layers. The horizontal
stresses, in turn, affect faulting, rock strength, drilling parameters,
0.00001
hydraulic-fracture propagation, natural fracturing, and borehole
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
stability. The main concerns for tight gas reservoirs are the effects
k ∞ at Nominal Ambient Pressure of regional tectonics on hydraulic-fracture propagation and natural
Fig. 3—Gas permeability at NOB pressure vs. gas perme- fracturing in the formation.
ability at ambient pressure for Howell No. 5 and SFE No. 2
Travis Peak cores. Reservoir Layers. Normally, a tight gas reservoir can be described
as a layered system. In a clastic depositional system, the layers are
It is likely that Rogner has underestimated the volumes of gas in composed of sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, and shale. To optimize
unconventional reservoirs worldwide, because there are fewer data the development of a tight gas reservoir, a team of geoscientists,
to evaluate outside of North America. When the resource-triangle petrophysicists, and engineers must fully characterize all the layers
concept is applied, the volume of gas in unconventional reservoirs of rock above, within, and below the pay zones in the reservoir.
around the world should be much larger than the volume of gas in Data concerning gross pay thickness, net pay thickness, permeabil-
conventional reservoirs. As more worldwide development occurs, ity, porosity, water saturation, pressure, in-situ stress, and Young’s
more data will be available, and the estimates of worldwide uncon- modulus for all layers are required to use 3D reservoir and fracture-
ventional-gas volumes will undoubtedly increase. propagation models to evaluate the formation, design the fracture
Without question, interest in tight gas reservoirs around the world treatment, and forecast production rates and ultimate recovery. The
increased substantially during the 1990s. In many countries, tight raw data used to estimate values for these important parameters
gas is defined by flow rate and not by permeability. Development come from logs, cores, well tests, drilling records, and production
activities and production of gas from tight reservoirs in Canada, from offset wells.
Australia, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina, Indonesia, China, Russia,
Egypt, and Saudi Arabia have occurred during the past decade. Large Log Data. Openhole logs provide the most economical and com-
hydraulic-fracture treatments are used more commonly around the plete source of data for evaluating layered, low-porosity, tight gas
world to stimulate gas flow from low-permeability reservoirs. Such reservoirs. The minimal logging suite for a tight gas reservoir com-
activity will only increase during the coming decades. prises spontaneous potential, gamma ray, formation density, neu-
tron, sonic, and dual (or array) induction logs. Other logs, such as
Reservoir Considerations wellbore-image logs or nuclear-magnetic-resonance logs, also may
Geology. The analysis of a tight gas reservoir should always begin provide useful information in some reservoirs. All openhole logging
with a thorough understanding of the geologic characteristics of the data should be preprocessed before the data are used in any detailed
formation. The important geologic parameters for a trend or basin computations. The steps required to preprocess the logs are as fol-
are the structural and tectonic regime, the regional thermal gradi- lows (Howard and Hunt 1986; Hunt et al. 1996 and 1997).
ents, and the regional pressure gradients. Knowing the stratigraphy 1. Digitize all log data.
in a basin is very important and can affect the drilling, evaluation, 2. Depth shift the data as required.
completion, and stimulation activities. Important geologic param- 3. Perform all environmental corrections.
eters that should be studied for each stratigraphic unit are the depo- 4. Normalize data so that all logs from different wells provide
sitional system, the genetic facies, textural maturity, mineralogy, the same reading in the same zones, such as thick marine shales
diagenetic processes, cements, reservoir dimensions, and presence in which one expects the log readings to be consistent from well
of natural fractures (Fisher and Brown 1972; Berg 1986). to well.

Reservoir Continuity. One of the most difficult parameters to Core Data. Obtaining and analyzing cores are crucial to proper
evaluate in tight gas reservoirs is the drainage-area size and shape. understanding of any layered complex reservoir system. To obtain
In tight reservoirs, months or years of production normally are data needed to understand the fluid-flow properties, mechanical
required before the pressure transients are affected by reservoir properties, and depositional environment of a specific reservoir
boundaries or well-to-well interference. As such, the engineer often requires that cores be cut, handled correctly, and tested in the
has to estimate the drainage-area size and shape for a typical well to laboratory with modern and sophisticated laboratory methods.
estimate reserves. Knowledge is needed of the depositional system Of primary importance is the measuring of rock properties under
and the effects of diagenesis on the rock to estimate the drainage- restored reservoir conditions. The effect of net overburden (NOB)
area size and shape for a specific well. Oblong (or noncircular) pressure must be reproduced in the laboratory to obtain the most
drainage volumes are likely caused by depositional or fracture accurate quantitative information from the cores (Jones and Owens
trends and the orientation of hydraulic fractures. 1980; Soeder and Randolph 1987).

JPT • JUNE 2006 89

 DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR SERIES

100 Resistivity
Gamma Ray
(API) (Ohm⋅m)
In-situ
Cumulative Frequency, %

80 Porosity Thickness Perm Stress

Cotton Valley (fraction) (ft) (md) (psi)
Shale
60 0.10 200 0.0001 7,200
Cleveland

0.12 Sand 50 0.01 6,100

Wilcox Lobo
0.18 Shale 10
40 Sand 50 0.03 6,140
Travis Peak 0.06 Siltstone 0.003 6,550
100
Shale 10
20 0.06 Siltstone 0.003 6,650
100

0 0.10 Shale 200 0.0001 7,650

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Permeability, md

Fig. 4—Comparison of permeability distribution in four tight- Fig. 5—Layer data required for evaluating the formation and
sandstone gas formations in Texas using public data. designing the fracture treatment.

The measurements of porosity and permeability are a function of data sets obtained from public records are presented for discussion.
the net stress applied to the rock when the measurements are taken. The data in Fig. 4 are from the Travis Peak formation in east Texas,
For low-porosity rock, it is very important to take measurements at the Cotton Valley formation in east Texas, the Wilcox Lobo forma-
different values of net stress to understand fully how the reservoir will tion in south Texas, and the Cleveland formation in northwest
behave as the gas is produced and the reservoir pressure declines. Texas. These reservoirs are in different basins, but have very similar
Fig. 3 illustrates the effect of NOB on the measurement of air log-normal permeability distributions. The median permeability
permeability on Travis Peak cores from two wells in east Texas (CER for the four formations ranges from 0.028 to 0.085 md, while the
Corp. and S.A. Holditch & Assocs. 1991). For high-permeability arithmetic mean values of permeability range from 0.179 to 7.378
(10–100 md) core plugs, the permeability under the original over- md. The median permeability value is the best measure of central
burden pressure is slightly less than the value of unstressed perme- tendency. To forecast flow rates from an average well, one should
ability for that same core plug. However, as the permeability of the use the median permeability value.
core plugs decreases, the effect of NOB on the core plug increases
substantially. For the core plugs that had values of unstressed perme- Vertical Profiles. To use either a multilayered reservoir model or a
ability of approximately 0.01 md, the values of permeability under pseudo-3D (P3D) hydraulic-fracture propagation model, the data
NOB were approximately an order of magnitude lower, or 0.001 md. must be entered by reservoir layer. Fig. 5 illustrates the profiles of
The lower-permeability rocks are the most stress sensitive because the important input data required by either the reservoir or the P3D
lower-permeability core samples have smaller pore-throat diameters model. For the situation in Fig. 5, the well is completed and the
than the higher-permeability rocks. To fully understand the properties fracture treatment is initiated in the sandstone reservoir. Typically,
of tight gas formations, special core analyses must be run on selected the fracture grows up and down until a barrier is reached to pre-
core plugs to measure values of gas permeability vs. water saturation, vent additional vertical fracture growth. Normally, siltstones or
resistivity index, formation factor, capillary pressure, acoustic velocity, shaly sandstones have in-situ stresses similar to the sands and do
and the rock mechanical properties (Soeder and Randolph 1987). not prevent vertical fracture growth. However, thick marine shales,
which tend to have in-situ stresses that are higher than those of the
Mechanical Properties. Most tight gas reservoirs are thick, layered sandstones, will be barriers to vertical fracture growth. Coal seams
systems that must be hydraulically fracture treated to produce at also may prevent fractures from growing vertically. Many coal seams
commercial gas-flow rates. To optimize the completion, it is neces- are highly cleated, and when the fracture fluid enters the coal seam,
sary to understand the mechanical properties of all the layers above, it remains contained within the coal seam, which blunts vertical
within, and below the gas pay intervals. Basic rock properties, such growth of the fracture.
as the in-situ stress field, Young’s modulus, and Poisson’s ratio, are
needed to design a fracture treatment. Well Completion and Stimulation Considerations
The most important mechanical property is in-situ stress, often Always of concern in the design of the completion is the number of
called the minimum compressive stress or the fracture-closure producing zones that are separated in the reservoir by vertical-flow-
pressure. When the pressure inside the fracture is greater than the barrier layers. If a single fracture treatment can be used to stimulate
in-situ stress, the fracture is open. When the pressure inside the multiple layers, and no reservoir damage occurs by commingling
fracture is less than the in-situ stress, the fracture is closed. Values the different zones, the well should be completed and stimulated
of in-situ stress can be determined by use of logs, cores, or injection with a single-stage treatment. Normally, in dry-gas reservoirs, no
tests. To optimize the completion, it is very important to know the reservoir damage occurs by commingling different layers. In fact,
values of in-situ stress in every rock layer. it is likely that more gas will be recovered by producing all the lay-
ers in a commingled fashion because the abandonment pressure is
Permeability Distribution. Permeability in a gas formation within lower at any given economic limit when the zones are commingled
a basin is distributed log normally. To illustrate this concept, four vs. producing the zones one at a time.

90 JPT • JUNE 2006

 Reservoir
TABLE 2—TIMES REQUIRED TO REACH LINEAR AND
simulator PSEUDORADIAL FLOW FOR A WELL CONTAINING A
Lf = 1,500 HYDRAULIC FRACTURE
Cumulative Lf = 1,000
production Fracture Start of
Revenue
Lf = 500 Formation Half- Linear End of Start of
Time Fracture length Permeability Length Flow Linear Pseudoradial
(md) (ft) (days) Flow (days) Flow (days)
Revenue 0.001 100 341 1,752 4,545
less
Hydrafrac 500 8,523 43,788 113,636
cost
simulator
1,000 34,091 175,152 454,545
Fracture length 0.01 100 34 175 455
Treatment
volume Cost 500 852 4,379 11,364
1,000 3,409 17,515 45,455
Fracture length Fracture length 0.1 100 3 18 45
500 85 438 1,136
1,000 341 1,752 4,545
Fig. 6—Process to determine the economically optimum frac-
ture length. 1 50 0.1 0.4 1.1
100 0.3 1.8 4.5
250 2.1 10.9 28.4
If two or more productive intervals are separated by a thick,
Assumptions
clean shale (e.g., 50 ft or more) and this shale has enough in-situ
Porosity = 0.1 (fraction)
stress contrast to be a barrier to vertical fracture growth, the design
Viscosity = 0.02 cp
engineer might need to design the completion and stimulation treat-
Compressibility = 0.002 Psi–1
ments to consider that multiple hydraulic fractures will be created.
In such cases, fracture-treatment-diverting techniques must be used
to stimulate all producing intervals properly. The flow regimes of a vertical well containing a finite-conductiv-
The goal of every design engineer is to design the optimum ity vertical fracture can be defined by use of the dimensionless time
fracture treatment for each and every well. Holditch et al. (1978) equation.
discuss the optimization of both the propped fracture length and
0.000264kt
the drainage area (well spacing) for low-permeability gas reservoirs. tD= ————— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(2)
Fig. 6 illustrates the method used to optimize the size of a fracture φ µ ct Lf2
treatment (Veach 1983; Gidley 1989). In a paper by Lee and Holditch (1981), it was shown that linear
Once the optimum fracture half-length has been determined, and flow occurs between dimensionless times of 0.0225 and 0.1156.
the fracture fluid and fracture propping agent have been selected, Pseudoradial flow of a well containing a finite-conductivity hydrau-
the design engineer needs to use a P3D model to determine the lic fracture does not begin until a dimensionless time of 2 to 5,
details of the design, such as the optimum injection rate, optimum depending on the value of dimensionless fracture conductivity.
pad volume, need for fluid-loss additives, proper location for the Before reaching linear flow, the flow often is characterized as bilinear
perforations, and other details. After designing the optimum treat- flow. Between the end of linear flow and the beginning of pseudo-
ment, the design engineer must compute the costs of the proposed radial flow, the regime often is called transitional flow. The data in
treatment to be certain the costs are not much different from the Table 2 illustrate the actual times required to reach linear flow and
costs assumed during the treatment-optimization process. If the pseudoradial flow for typical reservoir situations. Notice that for
treatment costs are substantially different, the entire optimization typical tight gas reservoirs, linear flow lasts for months or years. One
loop (Fig. 6) should be retraced using the correct cost data. should not use semisteady-state analysis methods on any data before
Finally, the design engineer should go to the field to be sure the reaching the start of pseudoradial flow, as shown in Table 2.
optimum treatment is pumped correctly as designed. Field quality So how are early-time transient data from low-permeability gas
control is extremely important. It does no good to collect the data reservoirs containing finite-conductivity fractures analyzed? The
and design the optimum treatment if it is not pumped correctly in answer is that analytical or numerical solutions of Darcy’s law must
the field. be used to analyze data properly in the transient-flow period. Many
analytical transient-flow solutions for hydraulically fractured wells
Post-Fracture Reservoir-Evaluation Methods have been derived and published. In fact, there are too many to list
Analyzing post-fracture production and pressure data requires a in the references, but the first and most important analytical solu-
thorough understanding of the flow patterns in the reservoir (Lee tions were published by Russell and Truitt (1964), Gringarten et al.
and Holditch 1981). The technique applied to analyze the data must (1974), Cinco et al. (1978), and Agarwal et al. (1979).
be compatible with the flow regime that is occurring when the data In addition to the analytical solutions, Lee and Holditch (1981)
are collected. For a well containing a finite-conductivity hydrau- showed that finite-difference modeling could be used to analyze data
lic fracture, the flow regimes consist of bilinear flow, linear flow, from tight gas reservoirs containing a finite-conductivity hydraulic
transitional flow, and pseudoradial flow. These flow regimes can be fracture. Actually, the ideal solution is to first use the analytical
defined in terms of dimensionless time. The times that encompass models to analyze the data to determine first-order estimates of for-
bilinear flow, linear flow, and transitional flow can be termed “tran- mation permeability, fracture half-length, and fracture conductivity
sient flow.” and then use those values as input into a realistic finite-difference

JPT • JUNE 2006 91

DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR SERIES

TABLE 3—RESERVES-ESTIMATION METHODS FOR TIGHT 100,000

GAS SANDS
Conventional Gas
Method Reservoir Tight Gas Sands

Monthly Production, Mcf

Volumetrics Accurate in blanket Used only when
10,000
reservoirs no wells have
been drilled
Material Balance Accurate in Should never
depletion-drive be used
reservoirs
Decline Curves Exponential decline Must use 1,000
usually accurate hyperbolic decline
Reservoir Models Used to simulate the Used to simulate
field individual wells

model. The finite-difference model can be used to determine the 100

final estimates of the formation and fracture properties, taking into 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996
account effects such as non-Darcy flow, fracture closure, and forma- Date
tion compaction. The key is to use transient-flow models to analyze
transient-flow data. If one tries to analyze data in linear flow with Fig. 7—Typical decline curve for a hydraulically fractured
tight gas well.
a pseudoradial-flow model (such as the Horner graph), one gets
incorrect estimates of formation and fracture properties.
Staged Field Experiments
Estimating Reserves in Tight Gas Reservoirs The SPE eLibrary contains many papers that provide case histories
The most common methods used by reservoir engineers to deter- of tight-gas-reservoir development. The GRI sponsored a multiyear
mine reserves are volumetric, material balance, decline curves, and research project to develop technology to design and evaluate
reservoir models. Table 3 presents information concerning how these hydraulic-fracture treatments in real time. The project produced
methods are used to evaluate high- and low-permeability gas reser- data from four staged field experiments (SFEs) that can serve as
voirs. Normally, volumetric methods do not work in tight gas sands templates for others who wish to collect and analyze data from tight
because the proper drainage area to use in the computation is seldom gas sands and then use those data to design and evaluate the opti-
known. Also, material balance seldom works in tight gas sands mal completion and fracture treatment. In addition to four general
because it is almost impossible to shut in wells long enough to deter- papers covering the four SFEs (Holditch et al. 1988; Robinson et al.
mine the current average reservoir pressure. As such, the best method 1991; Robinson et al. 1992; Saunders et al. 1992), there are dozens
to determine reserves in tight gas reservoirs is to analyze production of other papers in the SPE eLibrary. Complete reports are also avail-
data by use of either decline curves or reservoir simulation. able from the SPE store and from GTI, formerly known as the Gas
A typical decline curve for a tight gas well that was fracture treated Research Inst.
in 1981, then recompleted and fracture treated again in 1992, is shown
in Fig. 7. Notice that hydraulically fractured tight gas wells do not Summary
decline exponentially. In almost all cases, they will decline hyperboli- Tight gas sands have been developed in the U.S. for more than 40
cally. Even when using the hyperbolic equation to analyze production years. During that time, substantial technology has been developed
from tight gas reservoirs, one must analyze all the data carefully. For to improve success rate and economics. Much of that technology
example, many wells begin producing at high gas-flow rates along with is now used worldwide to look for and develop tight gas sands.
high flowing tubing pressure. During the first few weeks and months, It is known that all natural resources, including natural gas, are
both the gas-flow rate and the flowing tubing pressure decline. If the distributed log normally in nature. This fact allows the industry
analyst analyzes only the gas-flow-rate data, the extrapolation into the to be certain that in virtually every basin that produces substantial
future is optimistic. Whenever the flowing tubing pressure reaches the volumes of natural gas from conventional reservoirs, large volumes
pipeline pressure, and the flowing tubing pressure becomes steady, the of gas in unconventional reservoirs also will be present.
decline rate of the gas-flow rate increases. Thus, when both the gas- Tight-gas-reservoir characteristics vary considerably and are
flow rate and the flowing tubing pressure are declining, the analyst controlled by what is economic to develop in any given geologic
needs to compute values of q/∆p, or flow rate divided by pressure region. Development costs, gas prices, and gas markets all must be
drop, and use the decline-curve model to match both the decline in considered when evaluating any tight gas play. Most of the known
flow rate and the decline in flowing tubing pressure. tight gas in the world is in North America because of the high activ-
The most accurate method of estimating gas reserves in tight gas ity level and the volume of data available for analysis. However, it is
reservoirs is to use a reservoir model, such as a semianalytical model expected that activity levels in tight gas exploration will increase in
or a numerical reservoir model, to history match gas-production and the future in Latin America, Russia, the Middle East, Asia, and other
flowing-tubing-pressure data from the well. The model should be major gas-producing areas.
capable of simulating layered reservoirs, a finite-conductivity hydrau- To evaluate and develop a tight-gas-sand play properly, consider-
lic fracture, and a changing flowing tubing pressure. In some cases, able data must be collected from cores, logs, drilling records, and
the analyst might also need to simulate non-Darcy flow, formation well tests. Often, more data are needed to evaluate a tight gas sand
compaction, fracture closure, and/or fracture-fluid cleanup effects. than are needed to evaluate a conventional gas sand. In addition,

92 JPT • JUNE 2006

 CER Corp. and S.A. Holditch & Assocs. Inc. 1991. Staged Field
the average tight-gas-sand well will produce less gas than a well in Experiment No. 3: Application of Advanced Technologies in Tight
a conventional gas sand. As such, the geology and engineering team Gas Sandstones—Travis Peak and Cotton Valley Formations, Waskom
needs to develop log/core correlations that can be used to evaluate Field, Harrison County, Texas. Gas Research Inst. Report, GRI-91/0048
tight gas sands with a minimal logging suite. February 1991.
By use of the correlations and openhole logs, the engineer must Cinco, H., Samaniego, F., and Dominquez, N. 1978. Transient Pressure
design the optimum well completion and stimulation treatment. Behavior for a Well With a Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fracture. SPEJ
Normally, a layered reservoir description is needed for the reservoir 18(4):253–264. SPE 6014
Fisher, W.L. and Brown, L.F. Jr. 1972. Clastic Depositional Systems—A
and P3D fracture models to determine where to perforate and what
Genetic Approach to Facies Analysis. Bureau Economic Geology. U. of
kind of fracture treatment is optimal. The engineer then needs
Texas, Austin.
to go to the field to be certain the optimal fracture treatment is Gidley, J.L. et al. 1989. Recent Advances in Hydraulic Fracturing, Monograph
pumped into the well and formation. Series, SPE, Richardson, Texas. 12, 317.
Finally, the only accurate way to forecast reserves is to analyze Gringarten, A.C., Ramey, H.J. Jr., and Raghavan, R. 1974. Unsteady-
gas-production data and flowing tubing pressures. Volumetric State Pressure Distribution Created by a Well With a Single Infinite-
methods will not provide accurate results in tight gas sands because Conductivity Vertical Fracture. SPEJ 14(4):347–360. SPE 4051; Trans.,
the drainage area is not known. Material-balance methods do not AIME, 257.
work in tight gas sands because the wells cannot be shut in long GTI E&P Services. 2001. Tight Gas Resource Map of the United States.
enough to obtain an accurate estimate of average reservoir pressure. GTI E&P Services, Houston, 2001.
Holditch, S.A. et al. 1978. The Optimization of Well Spacing and Fracture
Thus, models must be used to analyze production data to obtain
Length in Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs. Paper SPE 7496 prepared
accurate reserves estimates. Also, models must be used to analyze
for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
gas-production and pressure data to determine the effective fracture Houston, 1–4 October.
length and conductivity. Holditch, S.A. et al. 1988. The GRI Staged Field Experiment. SPEFE
There are large volumes of tight gas worldwide. The technology 3(3):519–533. SPE 16429.
needed to evaluate, develop, and produce tight gas reservoirs has Howard, W.E. and Hunt, E.R. 1986. Travis Peak: An Integrated Approach
been under development for more than 40 years. Much of the tech- to Formation Evaluation. Paper SPE 15208 prepared for presentation
nology can be found in the SPE eLibrary. In the next 40 years, there at the SPE Unconventional Gas Technology Symposium, Louisville,
will be widespread development of tight gas reservoirs worldwide. Kentucky, 18–21 May.
Hunt, E.R. et al. 1996 and 1997 Fundamentals of Log Analysis. 12-part
article in World Oil 217(6,7,9,10,11,12) 218(3,7,9,10,11,12).
Nomenclature
Jones, F.O. Jr. and Owens, W.W. 1980. A Laboratory Study of Low-
c = compressibility, 1/psi
Permeability Gas Sands. JPT 34(9):1631–1640. SPE 7551; Trans., AIME,
D = non-Darcy flow constant, D/Mscf 269.
h = net pay, ft Kawata, Yuko and Fujita, Kazuo. 2001. Some Predictions of Possible
k = permeability, md Unconventional Hydrocarbon Availability Until 2100. Paper SPE 68755
L = fracture half-length, ft prepared for presentation at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference,
p = pressure, psi Jakarta, 17–19 April.
q = flow rate, Mcf/D Lee, W.J. 1982. Well Testing, Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME,
r = radius, ft Dallas, Texas. 80.
s = skin factor Lee, W.J. and Holditch, S.A. 1981. Fracture Evaluation With Pressure
Transient Testing in Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs. JPT 33(9):1776–
t = time, hours or days
1792. SPE 9975; Trans., AIME, 271.
T = reservoir temperature, °R
Masters, J.A. 1979. Deep Basin Gas Trap, Western Canada. AAPG Bulletin
z = gas-law deviation factor, dimensionless 63(2):152.
∆ = difference Robinson, B.M. et al. 1992. Hydraulic Fracturing Research in East Texas:
φ = porosity, fraction Third GRI Staged Field Experiment. JPT 44(1):78–87. SPE 22878
µ = gas viscosity, cp Robinson, B.M., Holditch, S.A., and Peterson, R.E. 1991. The Gas Research
− = overbar: average or mean Institute’s Second Staged Field Experiment: A Study of Hydraulic
Fracturing. Paper SPE 21495 prepared for presentation at the SPE Gas
Subscripts Technology Symposium, Houston, 22–24 January.
D = dimensionless Rogner, Hans-Holger. 1996. An Assessment of World Hydrocarbon
e = at the extremity of the reservoir Resources. IIASA, WP-96–26, Laxenburg, Austria, May 1996.
f = fracture Russell, D.G. and Truitt, N.E. 1964. Transient Pressure Behavior in
g = gas Vertically Fractured Reservoirs. JPT 16(10):1159–1170. SPE 967; Trans.,
p = evaluated at average pressure AIME, 231.
t = total (for compressibility) Saunders, B.F., Robinson, B.M., and Holditch, S.A. 1992. Hydraulic
w = wellbore (for radius) Fracturing Research in the Frontier Formation Through the Gas
Research Institute’s Fourth Staged Field Experiment. Paper SPE 24854
wf = bottomhole flowing (for pressure)
prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Washington, DC, 4–7 October.
References
Soeder, D.J. and Randolph, P.L. 1987. Porosity, Permeability, and Pore
Agarwal, R.G., Carter, R.D., and Pollock, C.B. 1979. Evaluation and
Structure of the Tight Mesaverde Sandstone, Piceance Basin, Colorado.
Performance Prediction of Low-Permeability Gas Wells Stimulated by
SPEFE 2(6):129–136. SPE 13134; Trans., AIME, 283.
Massive Hydraulic Fracturing. JPT 31(3):362–372. SPE 6838; Trans.,
Veatch, R.W. Jr. 1983. Overview of Current Hydraulic Fracture Design and
AIME, 267.
Treatment Technology—Part I. JPT 35(4):677–687. SPE 10039; Trans.,
Berg, R.R. 1986. Reservoir Sandstones. Prentice-Hall Inc. New Jersey.
AIME, 275. JPT

JPT • JUNE 2006 93