Friday, June 10, 2016

Random Update Of The Marcellus - Utica -- June 10, 2016

This post is added to put the Piceance Basin in western Colorado in perspective. See this link to the Piceance, June 9, 2016.

Utica:
  • EIA produces new maps of the Utica shale, May 2, 2016. Some data points:
    • the Utica includes two formations: the Utica formation and the deeper Point Pleasant formation
    • 60,000 square miles: Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York
    •  the deeper Point Pleasant is more often targeted right now, more productive
    • most of the most productive Point Pleasant in eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania
    • Point Pleasant deepest in SW Pennsylvania; depths more than 13,000 feet
    • most productive wells in the Utica formation: 5,000 to 11,000 feet
    • Utica: as thick as 200 - 300 feet in northwest Pennsylvania
    • Point Pleasant: more than 200 feet thick in central Pennsylvania
  • 2012, USGS survey: 38 trillion cubic feet; 940 million bbls oil technically recoverable
  • From a July, 2015, West Virginia study
    • original gas-in-place (OGIP): 3,192 trillion cubic feet
    • original oil-in-place (OOIP): 82,903 million bbls (sic)
    • current technology, recovery factor:
    • gas: 28%
    • oil: 3%
    • technically recoverable
    • gas: 782 trillion cubic ft (vs USGS estimate of 38 trillion cubic feet)
    • oil: 1.96 billion bo (vs USGS 940 million bo)
Marcellus:
Burket/Geneseo:
  • or, "the upper Devonian Burket/Geneseo shale" 
  • first posted at the blog here
  • Ohio Oil & Gas Journal, May 14, 2015
  • Appalachia's 3rd resource lay 
  • probably not as big as the other two, but likely to be significant as a stacked play
  • liquids-rich; possibly with flat decline curves
  • Burket: all of West Virginia, most of Pennsylvania
  • Geneseo: northwest Pennsylvania, New York state
  • thickness: from a few feet to 150 feet in central Pennsylvania
  • early indications: significantly over-pressured; significant geo-steering problems
  • gas: 2 trillion cubic feet
  • NGLs: 0.01 billion bbls

No comments:

Post a Comment