America's Oil Output Refuses to Collapse. Here's One Reason Why. -
Rigzone/Bloomberg is reporting:
Somewhere amid the maze of wells that Murphy Oil Corp. has scattered
across Texas’s sprawling Eagle Ford shale formation, Brett Pennington
is carrying out a little experiment.
What will happen, the exploration chief wants to know, when he jams
huge quantities of sand down the narrow mouth of one of these wells.
Will more crude seep out? Or, rather, will he smother the opening and
choke off the flow?
For the experiment, he’s amped up the sand meter all the way to 3,000
pounds per foot, almost double the average that each well in the Eagle
Ford gets nowadays. If Pennington’s project seems a bit extreme, it also
serves to underscore a trend spreading rapidly across a shale industry
that’s scrambling to remain profitable after oil prices sank 50 percent.
More and more sand is getting stuffed down wells to try to better pry
open the rock and bolster output.
Some of this is just a cost phenomenon. In the wake of crude’s
selloff, the sand market collapsed too, driving down the price 30
percent and making it cheaper to shovel more grit in. The initiative,
though, began years earlier, the result of engineers tinkering with
inputs and discovering one of the many little technological
breakthroughs that have helped the shale industry weather the downturn
better than their legions of skeptics predicted. For proof of greater
productivity, look no further than total U.S. output: It remains within 3
percent of a 40-year high even though drillers have idled more than
half of their rigs.
"I can’t control the price of the commodity," Pennington said in a
recent interview. "The only thing we can do is get better and faster and
cheaper. There’s a general correlation that more sand equates to a
better well."
The increase in sand usage has been steady. Back in 2012, the average
well in the Eagle Ford received less than 1,000 pounds for every foot
that the opening snaked down into the ground, according to energy
consulting firm Wood Mackenzie Ltd. By 2013, that number was about 1,200
pounds. And last year it climbed to over 1,500 pounds. A study of more
than 1,000 wells in the Eagle Ford -- a region that accounts for 15
percent of all U.S. oil output -- revealed that the injection of
additional sand can triple output in some cases.
Sand, of course, has been used in the oil industry for decades. But
the traditional vertical wells that dominated the landscape for much of
that time needed little more than a sprinkling. The rock in those wells
tends to be porous and permeable, allowing natural underground pressure
to squeeze the oil up to the surface.
Shale rock is different. It’s more like concrete. Hydraulic fracking
relies on large quantities of both sand and water to tease the oil out.
The water is blasted into the well at high pressure to create tens of
thousands of tiny cracks in the rock. The sand keeps the cracks open,
elongates them and makes them more jagged. Increase the amount of sand
and you increase the amount of fractures that stay open.
What Murphy Oil, EOG Resources Inc. and other shale drillers are
trying to figure out is when does it become too much. At some point, all
the fractures are propped open, and the extra sand just becomes a cost
with no benefit. The Bloomberg Intelligence study indicated there are
diminishing returns at the highest levels of sand use.
Worse yet, too
much sand could wind up clogging the cracks instead of holding them
open.
Much more at the link.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.