Presentation of a completion method of shale demonstrated through an - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presentation of a completion method of shale demonstrated through an example of the Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania, USA Joseph Sites Horizontal Wireline Services Joseph Sites ‐ Horizontal Wireline Services.

Outline Outline • Pumpdown operations in the Marcellus Shale – Gun configurations, stage length Gun configurations, stage length – Application of wireline RF ‐ Safe options to horizontal pumpdown market • Marcellus Shale • Marcellus Shale – Market – Cost considerations for tight economics and poor commodity price commodity price • Field data and case study – Conventional vs. Reactive Liner Charges • Wireline company data – Marcellus Shale market vs. firing methods

Marcellus Shale Completions Marcellus Shale Completions

Marcellus Shale Pumpdown Marcellus Shale Pumpdown

Marcellus Shale Gun Configurations Marcellus Shale Gun Configurations • 3 ‐ 8 guns 3 8 guns • 3.125” to 3.375” • 36 to 72 36 2 shots/stage • 0.42” ‐ 0.56” EHD • Stage spacing g p g 175’ to 350’

Application of RF ‐ Safe Technology in Marcellus Shale ll h l • How to How to implement RP 67, and RP ‐ 67 and more specifically specifically Radio Silence on Silence on location? The answer was to show the cost benefits to the client

RF ‐ Safe Comparison Perfect World RF Safe Comparison Perfect World Standard RF ‐ Safe 1) Pumpdown in Well 1) Pumpdown in Well A (2.5 hours) ‐ Frac ( ) A (2.5 hours) ‐ Frac ( ) Well B Well B 2) Call for Radio 2) Come back to Silence (45 min). surface – Frac is Stop at surface wait p done for frac to finish 3) Lay down gunstring 3) Lay down gunstring, – Frac begins (15) verify radio silence 4) Stab new string, (15min). Pick up and p 4) Still Radio Silence, equalize(30min)….r stab on to new epeat gunstring (15 min) TOTAL – 3:15 5) Pick up and Daylight Operations – 4 y g p 40 stages standard: 13 3 days 40 stages standard: 13.3 days equalize, RIH to stages / day = 13 40 stages RF ‐ Safe: 10 days 200 ft (30 hours 3.3 day difference: Spread rate min)….repeat per day of ops (not including TOTAL – 4:15 anything on a per stage basis) Daylight Operations – 3 stages / day = 12:45 $25,000 ‐ >$83,250 saved hours Cost or RF Safe: $40,000

Rf ‐ Safe Unintended Consequences Rf Safe Unintended Consequences A little bit of a wiring issue – not hard, just not that easy Components like PX ‐ 1 and RED introduce one more point for failure Thus, even though there was a safety and economic gain, some (or all at times) of the gain (or all at times) of the gain could be absorbed by the dreaded misrun Plugs not RF ‐ Safe l f

What about RF ‐ Safe Addressables What about RF Safe Addressables • Wire complexity • RF Safe guns and plug • RF ‐ Safe guns and plug, yes • System can be checked y on surface with test box • Case study data shows • Case study data shows far lower failure rates than other RF ‐ Safe systems • SQ improved along with Safety with Safety

Case Study – Client SQ KPIs All Misruns All Misruns 500 450 RF ‐ Safe Only 400 RF-Safe Addressable 350 300 250 200 150 Runs / MisRun Guns Fired / MisFire 100 100 50 0 Q2 2009 Q2 -2009 Q3 2009 Q3-2009 Q4-2009 Q4 2009 Q1-2010 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q2-2010 Q3-2010 Q3 2010 Q4-2010 Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q1-2011 Q2 2011 Q2-2011 Q3 2011 Q3-2011 Q4 2011 Q4-2011 Q1 2012 Q1-2012

Marcellus Shale Horizontal Rigs vs. Nat Gas Commodity Price d 200 $6.00 180 160 140 Horizontal Rig Count 120 Commodity Price 100 $4.00 80 60 40 20 0 $2.00 7 ‐ Dec ‐ 08 7 ‐ Apr ‐ 09 7 ‐ Aug ‐ 09 7 ‐ Dec ‐ 09 7 ‐ Apr ‐ 10 7 ‐ Aug ‐ 10 7 ‐ Dec ‐ 10 7 ‐ Apr ‐ 11 7 ‐ Aug ‐ 11 7 ‐ Dec ‐ 11 Rig counts from Rigdata, Wellhead price source EIA

RF ‐ Safe Addressables cost $ How can we pass that $ in a downturn h $ d • It is easy if – operating company understands the total cost of operations including impacts for SQ and HSE • Client quote from last month “ …with the last project (34 stages)…calculated a savings with the last project (34 stages) calculated a savings of 59.5 hours” $25,000 per day spread ($61,975 – savings) $34,000 additional cost (Net savings $27,975) Safer Operations / Better SQ (less misruns, less fishing, etc) What is the real cost then? etc). What is the real cost then? The Results: Those companies that are running “Addressables” in the Marcellus are still growing despite the market despite the market.

Magic Shale“Bullet” – Maybe? Reactive Liner Charges in Shale Reactive Liner Charges in Shale 23 gram Reactive Liner GH Conventional 23g GH 0.54in. / 17.84 in.* 0.56 in. / 26.2 in.* Objective – Improve Hydraulic Fracturing Of Shale Pictures from Section 2 Reactive Liner tests: 6 ‐ Jun ‐ 2011) * * Provided by manufacturer id d b f

(GH) vs (Reactive Liner) ( ) ( )

(GH) vs. Reactive Liner

GH vs. Reactive Liner

Reactive Liner (Limited) Results Reactive Liner (Limited) Results • 30 tests performed 30 tests performed • Reactive liner broke down formation either the same or better (lower psi) the same or better (lower psi) • After breakdown and frac begins – no appreciable difference i bl diff • So much for the magic bullet – for now