Montney Part 3: Players, Type Curves & Maps

(Part of a joint series combining the power of VISAGE visual analytics software with geoLOGIC’s value-added data live from the gDC)

Today’s blog will cover quite a spectrum of information including The Montney Players, the top wells, type curves and maps generated by taking VISAGE percentile information and plotting it in geoScout. So let’s jump right in….

The Montney Players

The top 12 companies (18% of the companies in the Montney) accounted for 90% of May’s production. Those same 12 companies have 79% of the producing wells. The chart below shows a breakdown of all of the producers with the following information being shown:  COMPANY (producing well count): (mmcf/day) % of Total production

 

Top 10 Wells (based on May 2011 production rate)

Well UWI CD Avg Gas (mcf/day) Field On Production Date Well Name
100/12-03-082-19W6/00 8,991 HERITAGE 01-Apr-11 CREW HZ SEPTIMUS C09-03-082-19
100/08-06-078-17W6/00 7,990 HERITAGE 01-Apr-11 MURPHY HZ SUNDOWN 15-32-077-17
100/01-18-056-05W6/00 7,482 FINDLEY 01-Jul-07 TALISMAN ET AL MINNOW 1-18-56-5
102/12-02-060-20W5/00 6,962 KAYBOB SOUTH 01-Mar-11 TRILOGY HZ 102 KAYBOBS 12-2-60-20
100/13-12-060-20W5/00 6,322 KAYBOB SOUTH 01-Mar-11 TRILOGY HZ KAYBOBS 13-12-60-20
200/A-056-J-094-B-09/00 6,243 KOBES 01-Dec-10 PROGRESS HZ W GUNDY D-B067-J/094-B-09
100/14-22-080-16W6/00 5,972 HERITAGE 01-Nov-10 TOURMALINE ET AL HZ SUNRISE A05-23-080-16
100/04-24-079-17W6/00 5,798 HERITAGE 01-Oct-10 ECA HZ SUNRISE A04-26-079-17
100/02-28-077-17W6/00 5,703 HERITAGE 01-Mar-11 MURPHY HZ SUNDOWN A16-29-077-17
200/D-080-A-093-P-09/00 5,518 HERITAGE 01-Jan-11 ECA HZ SWAN B- 092-B/093-P-09

See this VISAGE Well Ticket (top 10 montney wells in may 2011) for more details about these wells.

Top 10 Wells (based on cumulative production)

Well UWI mmcf Produced Operator On Prod Year Well Name Well Profile
100/11-15-061-21W5/00 42,128 APACHE CDA LTD 1980 ACL KAYBOBS 11-15-61-21 Vertical
100/10-29-058-21W5/00 34,242 TALISMAN ENRG INC 1977 TALISMAN FIR 10-29-58-21 Vertical
100/06-01-058-21W5/00 32,744 SHELL CDA LMTD 1977 DUVERNAY FIR 6-1-58-21 Vertical
100/11-14-057-20W5/00 27,359 APACHE CDA LTD 1991 ACL PINE CK 11-14-57-20 Vertical
100/11-16-059-21W5/00 21,285 APACHE CDA LTD 1977 ACL FIR 11-16-59-21 Vertical
100/08-27-052-01W6/05 20,931 CONOCOPHILLIPS CDA C 2002 CONOCO SOLOMON 8-27-52-1 Deviated
100/01-18-056-05W6/00 20,527 TALISMAN ENRG INC 2007 TALISMAN ET AL MINNOW 1-18-56-5 Horizontal
100/16-34-074-11W6/00 16,404 CDN NAT RSRCS LMTD 1997 CNRL KNOPCIK 16-34-74-11 Vertical
100/14-24-056-21W5/00 15,256 APACHE CDA LTD 1991 ACL OLDMAN 14-24-56-21 Vertical
100/06-22-057-20W5/00 14,634 HUSKY OIL OPRTNS LTD 1993 MOBIL PINE CREEK 6-22-57-20 Vertical

See this VISAGE well ticket (top 10 montney wells in may 2011) for more details about these wells.

Type Curves Part 1: Comparison of Well Profile Types

Normalized Comparison of Well Profile Types

 

Type Curves Part 2: Normalized Distribution of Initial Production Rates

Before we show any additional type curves of Horizontal Montney Wells it is important that we provide a context for what we will be looking at. The remaining horizontal well analyses will be for all producing horizontal wells that came on production in 2007 or later. This collection of wells has some massive producers that have the potential to significantly skew data results. therefore it is important when doing any of this analysis to support decisions that the collection of wells has been scrutinized by professional engineers and geologists familiar with the play. The follow chart identifies six anomalously large wells that fall outside the main distribution of initial rates (i.e. average of months 2 and 3).

Distribution of Initial Production Rates

 

 Type Curves Part 3: Comparison of Normalized Production Profiles by On Production Year

The best year for the Montney (in terms of average production profiles was 2007). Subsequent to that production profiles have tried to catch up to these rates, with 2011 looking to be the most promising. Something anyone analysing data needs to be aware for future analyses is that there was a temporary shut-in of production in May of this year. This will profoundly impact type curves as can be seen in the 2011 values in this chart.

Normalized Production by On Production Year

 

Type Curves Part 4: Percentile Trendlines

Another method for understanding the variability in production rates that make up a type curve are Percentile Trendlines (read about this VISAGE feature in our blog So What Is The Problem With Production Type Curves?). Here we can see that the average initial rate is about 2600 mcf/day, 80% of the values that make up this number fall between 331 mcf/day and 5295 mcf/day.

P10 to P90 Percentiles of HZ Well Type Curve

 

 Type Curves Part 5: How azimuth affects horizontal well production

How azimuth affects horizontal well production

 

Type Curves Part 6: How azimuth affects horizontal well rates vs cumulative production

How azimuth affect rate vs cumulative production

 

Maps: Taking VISAGE data and plotting it in geoSCOUT
 A picture is worth a thousand words … and two pictures are worth two thousand words or more? That’s why VISAGE and geoSCOUT compliment one another so nicely. VISAGE allows you to visually explore data with slice and dice capabilities using charts … while geoSCOUT lets you take the same data and view it in a geospatial context. The combination of the two can garner tremendous insights (I’ll be doing a future blog with someone who uses VISAGE to calculate remaining reserves and geoSCOUT to plot them on a map). So for this example we took 342 wells that we could get horizontal length and frac count from (derived in VISAGE) and plotted them on a series of charts. The one chart that seemed to present a (more) meaningful picture was a normalized type curve by Frac Spacing. The chart is shown below … click here to go to the gDC blog to see some map illustrations.
Normalized Type Curve by Frac Spacing

________________________________________________________________________

Disclaimer of Analysis Results
It is important to note when doing any of this kind of analysis that the selection of wells be scrutinized for meaningful results. The results presented are intended to fuel your understanding of VISAGE capabilities with gDC data. We would be happy to run analyses for specific well lists that you may have. Please feel free to contact us.

Data Disclaimer: gDC is the data source for the information presented in this blog post. If you see issues with the data or have concerns about the well list used for this posting please contact us.

Sep 13 2011
Share
share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>