FRAC FLUIDS AND WATER USAGE Evaluating The Commercial Viability and Success In Using Water-Free Fracs

Transcription

1 FRAC FLUIDS AND WATER USAGE Evaluating The Commercial Viability and Success In Using Water-Free Fracs

2 Overview of Presentation BlackBrush Oil & Gas Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) as frac fluid. Advantages and limitations of using NGLs as frac fluid Well flowback design & operations Case Study of wells stimulated with NGLs vs Water fracs 2

3 BlackBrush Oil & Gas BlackBrush is privately held and was formed in BlackBrush is located in San Antonio, Texas BlackBrush operations are primarily in South Texas Over 130,000 net acres Operates over 200 wells Current operated production of 10,000 BPDe Very active drilling and completion program 200 plus employees including affiliates 3

4 BlackBrush Oil & Gas BlackBrush development plans utilizes horizontal, multi-stage completions. All are oil plays. Pearsall Shale Buda Eagleford Austin Chalk San Miguel Olmos 4

5 GasFrac Technology NGLs - propane, butane, and pentanes gelled using a patented system allowing the fluid to carry proppant. Fluids are handled in pressurized vessels. Proppant blender is pressurized. Safety systems, including LEL, thermal cameras, and Nitrogen system utilized to ensure safe operations 5

6 6

7 7

8 8

9 9

10 10

11 Safety Closed, pressurized system Nitrogen used to maintain pressure throughout operations No exposure to atmosphere Extensive monitoring equipment LEL sensors (lower explosive limit) Cameras (visible spectrum and thermal) Pressure transducers Hazop reviews (Hazard and Operability) Extensive hazop reviews have been performed internally and with expert third-party consultants Hot zone No people are in the hot zone during pumping operations 11

12 Advantages of NGL frac Provide energy to help lift frac fluid and reservoir fluids. It does this while also remaining in liquid phase while treating the well. Does not cause clay swelling. Maintains higher relative perm for oil but not water wetting formation Low surface tension helps during flow-back NGL viscosity is.08 cps versus.66 cps for water Larger effective frac length vs water Require less pressure drive to move fluid psi to move water vs 200 psi for NGL for a formation with a perm of.005md Eliminates cost of obtaining, treating and disposing of water. 12

13 Limitations of Gas Frac vs Conventional Water Frac Job size proppant and fluid volumes Pump rate Wellbore configuration open-hole packers vs. plug and perf Logistics of NGL delivery Frac fluid availability Less forgiving system 13

14 Propane Flowback Line heaters added to keep propane in the gas phase and out of the oil tank. Options for handling propane Deliver directly to pipeline high pressure lines take special considerations Use of JT or refrigeration gas plant to remove propane Use of blending in natural gas to reduce percent of propane in gas stream. Must be able to recover propane as it is cost prohibitive to flare propane during flow-back. 14

15 NGL Phase Diagram Pressure (PSIA) NGL Liquid Phase Temperature ( o F) NGL Gas Phase NGL Mixture Propane 50% i-c4/50% n-c4

16 Modified Flowback For C4+ Fluid Goal is to keep recovered fluid in the liquid phase Blend with lease oil into pressurized frac tanks to keep stable Blended product is transported and sold as oil Residual or flash gas from separator is sent to sales Virtually 100% recovery Minimizes flowback equipment and reduces flowback time/cost. Compressing into a high pressure sales lines is no longer an issue 16

17 Case Study Formation Depth 3,750 ft Bottom-hole pressure of 1650 psig (.44 psi/ft) Bottom-hole temperature 140 degree F Tight oil sand gross pay of 90 ft, high porosity pay section of 27 ft. Perm of md Water saturation of 45% Oil gravity 45 degree API, Gas is over 8 gpm Field has over 200 vertical wells. Average IP of 15 bpd and EUR of 15 Mbbl. 17

18 Comparison of Water & NGL Fracs Water NGL 4,797 bbls per stage 1,233 bbls per stage 85,569 lbs. per stage 66,454 lbs. per stage Frac gradient.94 psi/ft Frac gradient.96 psi/ft Treating Rate 66 BPM Cost per stage of $115M Treating Rate 42 BPM Cost per stage of $165M Expected Future Cost per stage $87M 9 stages per well stages per well

19 Average IP Rate Avg. IP watr frac BPDe Avg. IP NGL frac BPDe 19

20 Average IP per stage Avg. IP per stage water frac BPDe Avg IP per staqge NGL frac BPDe 20

21 Cumulative BOE vs Time Avg. Cum. BOE Water frac Avg. Cum BOE NGL frac 21

22 Cumulative BOE vs Time Avg. Cum. BOE Water frac Avg. Cum BOE NGL frac Avg. Cum BOE Butane Pentane frac 22

23 Rate vs Time Avg. Rate water frac BPDe Avg. Rate NGL frac BPDe 23

24 Flowing Tubing Pressure On gas lift Avg. FTP Water frac psig Avg. FTP NGL frac psig

25 Pump and fluid costs vs. 90 day cum BOE $/90 day Cum BOE Water Cost NGL Cost Future NGL Cost 25

26 Buda formation well Rate vs Time BPDe stage gas frac Open-hole completion BPDe 26

27 1600 Buda formation well Flowing tubing pressure stage gas frac Open-hole completion Tubing Pressure 27

28 Conclusion Use of NGL fracs has greatly increased reserve recovery for oil formations. Future use of Butanes and Pentanes mix will greatly reduce the net cost of NGL fracs. Continued added infrastructure will reduce costs of NGL fracs. NGL fracs should make many of the normal pressure oil windows in shale plays viable. NGL fracs eliminate the problems associated with water fracs. BlackBrush plans to continue to utilize GasFrac in current areas and expand the technology in other formations 28