Abstract
Unconventional formations have been actively developed in the US since 2008. However, it is challenging to quantify the impact of technological advancement and geology on production. In addition, the economics of unconventionals is not well-understood. In this paper, we studied five major unconventional formations in the US: the Bakken, Eagleford, Haynesville, Marcellus, and Wolfcamp formations. We used historical data to quantify the impact of technological and geological variations on production. To accomplish this, we identified four phases of unconventional development over the past 12 years during which drilling and completion technology, initial investment, and commodity prices were similar: Phases 1–4. Using statistical analysis, we compared well performance of each phase. Then, we generated type curves for each phase for economic studies. Initial analysis shows that between January 2008 and December 2019, 60,611 horizontal wells were completed in these formations, producing about 8.185 billion barrels of oil, 90 trillion cubic feet of gas, and generating an estimated $816 billion in gross revenue. For the statistical analysis, the level of uncertainty (\({P}_{10}/{P}_{90}\) ratio) reduced from Phase 1 to Phase 4 across all formations, suggesting consistent improvements in well productivity over time while county-level analysis shows spatial disparity in well performance. We infer that technology drives temporal changes while geology drives spatial differences in well performance. From economic analysis, Phase 4 type wells had the best production performance, partly, due to improved drilling and completion efficiency. It was also because operators targeted their best acreage to maximize their asset’s potential.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- \({q}_{i}\) :
-
Initial production rate, L3 T−1, volume/unit time
- \(q\) :
-
Production rate after time \("t"\), L3 T−1, volume/unit time
- \({D}_{i}\) :
-
Initial nominal decline rate, T−1, 1/time
- \(\mathrm{De}\) :
-
Effective decline rate, T−1, 1/time
- \(b\) :
-
Hyperbolic exponent
- \(t\) :
-
Time between \({q}_{i}\) and \(q\), T, time
- \(f\) :
-
Time conversion factor
- TOC:
-
Total organic carbon
- D&C:
-
Drilling and completion
- RQ:
-
Reservoir quality
- CQ, CE:
-
Completion quality, completion efficiency
- GIIP:
-
Gas initially in place, L3, volume
- OOIP:
-
Oil originally in place, L3, volume
- LWD:
-
Logging while drilling
- NPV:
-
Net present value, $
- ROR, IRR:
-
Rate of return, internal rate of return, %
- ROI:
-
Return on investment
- NCF:
-
Net cash flow, $
- \({i}_{\mathrm{op}}\) :
-
Investment opportunity (or discount) rates, %
- PVP:
-
Present value profile
- EUR:
-
Estimated ultimate recovery, L3, volume
- \({P}_{10}, {P}_{90}\) :
-
10%, 90% Probability to meet or exceed this value
- PRMS:
-
Petroleum Resource Management System
- BK, EF, HV, MC, WC:
-
Bakken, Eagleford, Haynesville, Marcellus, Wolfcamp
- nD, mD:
-
Permeability, L2, nanodarcy, millidarcy
- API:
-
American Petroleum Institute
- TPS:
-
Total Petroleum System
- TVD:
-
True vertical depth, L, ft
- \({R}_{\mathrm{o}}\) :
-
Vitrinite reflectance
- NGL:
-
Natural gas liquid
- BTU:
-
British thermal unit, ML2 T−2
- NPT:
-
Non-productive time, T, time
- SPE:
-
Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Opex:
-
Operating expenditure
- \(\mathrm{Tcf},\mathrm{ Bcf},\mathrm{ MMcf},\mathrm{Mcf}\) :
-
\(\mathrm{Trillion},\mathrm{ billion},\mathrm{ million},\mathrm{ thousand cubic feet}\)
- \(\mathrm{BBbl},\mathrm{ MMbbl},\mathrm{ Mbbl},\mathrm{ bbl }\) :
-
\(\mathrm{ Billion},\mathrm{ million},\mathrm{ thousand barrel},\mathrm{ barrel}\)
- \(1\mathrm{ bbl }\) :
-
\(42\mathrm{ gal}=5.615 {\mathrm{ft}}^{3}=0.159 {\mathrm{m}}^{3}\)
- \(1\mathrm{ ft }\) :
-
\(0.3048\mathrm{ m}\)
- \(1\mathrm{ lbs }\) :
-
\(4.54 \times {10}^{-4}\mathrm{ Metric ton}\)
References
Browning, J., Ikonnikova, S., Gülen, G., Tinker, S.: Barnett shale production outlook. SPE Econ. Manag. 5(03), 89–104 (2013)
Rickman, R., Mullen, M.J., Petre, J.E., Grieser, W.V., Kundert, D.: A practical use of shale petrophysics for stimulation design optimization: all shale plays are not clones of the barnett shale. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Denver, Colorado, USA, p. 11, 2008
Li, B.: Natural fractures in unconventional shale reservoirs in US and their roles in well completion design and improving hydraulic fracturing stimulation efficiency and production. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, p. 19, 2014
Kolawole, O., Ispas, I.: Interaction between hydraulic fractures and natural fractures: current status and prospective directions. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 10, 1613–1634 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-019-00778-3
Sharma A., et al.: horizontal well development in unconventional resource play using an integrated completion and production workflow: delaware basin case study. In: SPE/EAGE European unconventional resources conference and exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Vienna, Austria, p. 9, 2014
Cipolla, C.L., Lewis, R.E., Maxwell, S.C., Mack, M.G.: Appraising Unconventional Resource Plays: Separating Reservoir Quality from Completion Effectiveness. In: International Petroleum Technology Conference, 2011
Miller, C.K., Waters, G.A., Rylander, E.I.: Evaluation of production log data from horizontal wells drilled in organic shales. In: North American Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, p. 23, 2011
Chong, K.K., Grieser, W.V., Passman, A., Tamayo, H.C., Modeland, N., Burke, B.E.: A completions guide book to shale-play development: a review of successful approaches toward shale-play stimulation in the last two decades. In: Canadian Unconventional Resources and International Petroleum Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, p. 27, 2010
Enverus: Built on data. engineered for insight, enverus. 2020. [Online]. https://www.enverus.com/. Accessed 4 Jan 2020
EIA: EIA/FRED excel data add-in. 2020.
SPEE Monograph 3: Guidelines For The practical evaluation of undeveloped reserves in resource plays. In: Houston, Texas: SPEE, 2010
Wright, J.D.: Oil and gas property evaluation. Thompson-Wright LLC, Golden (2015)
Wigwe, M.: Twelve years of unconventional development—results of cash flow sensitivity analysis on price and cost. Mendeley Data, 2020
Wigwe, M.E.: MEW-App EcoSensi: unconventional economic analysis and sensitivity—Shiny Web App. RStudio, Inc., 2020
Pollastro, R.M., Roberts, L.N.R., Cook, T.A., Lewan, M.D.: Assessment of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources of the Bakken formation, Williston Basin, Montana and North Dakota, 2008, 2008
Zander, D.M., Czehura, M.P., Snyder, D., Seale, R.A.: Well completion optimization in a north dakota bakken oilfield. In: IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, p. 12, 2010
Cox, S.A., Cook, D., Dunek, K., Daniels, G.R., Jump, C.J., Barree, R.D.: Unconventional resource play evaluation: a look at the Bakken Shale Play of North Dakota. In: SPE Unconventional Reservoirs Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Keystone, Colorado, USA, p. 14, 2008
Houston, M.C., McCallister, M.A., Jany, J.D., Audet, J.: Next generation multi-stage completion technology and risk sharing accelerates development of the Bakken Play. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 13, 2010
USGS: Assessment of undiscovered oil resources in the Devonian-Mississippian Bakken Formation, Williston Basin Province, Montana and North Dakota, 2008, 2008
Sonnenberg, S.A.: The Upper Bakken Shale Resource Play, Williston Basin. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG unconventional resources technology conference, 2014, p. 12
Pitman, J.K., Price, L.C., LeFever, J.A.: Diagenesis and fracture development in the Bakken formation, Williston Basin: implications for reservoir quality in the middle member, 2001
LeFever, J.A.: Structural contour and isopach maps of the Bakken Formation in North Dakota: North Dakota Geological Survey Geologic Investigations no. 59, one CD-ROM., 2008
Clark, A.J.: Determination of recovery factor in the Bakken Formation, Mountrail County, ND. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 2009, p. 10
Bybee, K.: Improved horizontal-well stimulations in the Bakken Formation. J. Pet. Technol. 56(11), 49–50 (2004)
Helms, L.: Economic impact—PowerPoint presentation by Director, 2020.
Koesoemadinata, A., et al.: seismic reservoir characterization in Marcellus Shale. In: 2011 SEG annual meeting. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, San Antonio, Texas, p. 5, 2011
Bartuska, J.E., Pechiney, J.J., Leonard, R.S., Woodroof, R.A.: Optimizing completion designs for horizontal shale gas wells using completion diagnostics. In: SPE Americas Unconventional Resources Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA, p. 21, 2012
NETL: Modern shale gas development in the united states: a primer, 2009
EIA: Marcellus Shale Play, Geology review, 2017
Myers, R.R.: Stimulation and production analysis of underpressured (Marcellus) shale gas. In: SPE Shale Gas Production Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Fort Worth, Texas, USA, p. 8, 2008
Agrawal, A., Wei, Y., Cheng, K., Holditch, S.A.: A technical and economic study of completion techniques in five emerging US gas shales. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 16, 2010
Kocoglu, Y., Wigwe, M.E., Sheldon, G., Watson, C.: Machine learning based decline curve—spatial method to estimate production potential of proposed wells in unconventional shale gas reservoirs. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Virtual, p. 19, 2020
Zhou, Q., Dilmore, R., Kleit, A., Wang, J.Y.: Evaluating gas production performances in marcellus using data mining technologies. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 20, 109–120 (2014)
Cunningham, C.F., Cooley, L., Wozniak, G., Pancake, J.: Using multiple linear regression to model EURs of horizontal marcellus wells. In: SPE Eastern Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Lexington, Kentucky, USA, 2012
Liu, C.H., Martinez-Rahoe, B., Fleckenstein, W., Park, Y., Shi, F.: Economic feasibility analysis of the Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, p. 10, 2013
Ventura, J., et al.: The discovery of the Marcellus Shale play, an operator’s experience. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, p. 15, 2013
PSU-MCOR: How much natural gas can the Marcellus shale produce? 2012
Higley, D.K., et al.: Assessment of undiscovered gas resources in the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale of the Appalachian Basin Province, 2019, Reston,VA, 2019
Considine, T.J.: The economic impacts of the Marcellus shale: implications for New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, 2010
Chevron: Supporting communities, Chevron News, 2017
EIA: Trends in U.S. oil and natural gas upstream costs, 2016
Rankin, R.R., Thibodeau, M., Vincent, M.C., Palisch, T.: Improved production and profitability achieved with superior completions in horizontal wells: a Bakken/three forks case history. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 22, 2010
Pope, C.D., Palisch, T.T., Lolon, E., Dzubin, B., Chapman, M.A.: Improving stimulation effectiveness: field results in the haynesville shale. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Florence, Italy, p. 18, 2010
Pope, C., Peters, B., Benton, T., Palisch, T.: Haynesville shale—one operator’s approach to well completions in this evolving play. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, p. 12, 2009
Wigwe, M.E., Bougre, E.S., Watson, M.C., Giussani, A.: Spatio-temporal models for big data and applications on unconventional production evaluation. In: SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, 2020
Wigwe, M.E., Watson, M.C.: Presentation of oil and gas spatiotemporal big data visualization techniques as tools to aid in dynamic spatio-temporal models—SPE-200864-MS. In: SPE western regional meeting, 2021
Wigwe, E.A., Westfall, M.E., Watson, P.H., Giussani, M.C., Nasir, A.: Evaluation of the effect of well parameters on oil production. In: JSM Proceedings, Statistical Computing Section, 2019, pp. 1781–1803
Fulks, R., Hughes, S., Geldmacher, I.: Optimizing unconventional completions—an integrated approach. In: Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Abu Dhabi, UAE, p. 21, 2016
Carpenter, C.: Normalized cumulative production curves estimate ultimate recovery. J. Pet. Technol. 72(7), 67–68 (2020). https://doi.org/10.2118/0720-0067-JPT
Ezisi, I., Hale, B.W., Watson, M.C., Heinze, L.: Assessment of probabilistic parameters for barnett shale recoverable volumes. In: SPE Hydrocarbon Economics and Evaluation Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, p. 16, 2012
Zhang, H., Cocco, M., Rietz, D., Cagle, A., Lee, J.: An empirical extended exponential decline curve for shale reservoirs. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 2015.
Arps, J.J.: Analysis of decline curves. Trans. AIME 160(01), 228–247 (1945)
Ikonnikova, S., Gülen, G., Browning, J.: Impacts of price differentials, taxation, and costs on shale gas drilling: a marcellus case study. In: SPE/IAEE Hydrocarbon Economics and Evaluation Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Houston, Texas, USA, pp. 10, 2016
Crowley, K.: A tale of two oil giants, with two strategies that aren’t working. World Oil eNews (2020). https://www.worldoil.com/news/2020/1/31/a-tale-of-two-oil-giants-with-two-strategies-that-aren-t-working
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge Enverus (formerly DrillingInfo) for providing datasets used for this research. We acknowledge the use of public license for R programming language, RStudio IDE for R, and contributed libraries. We also acknowledge TRC Consultants for providing license to their economic program, PHDWin.
Funding
This research was not supported by any funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Availability of data and material (data transparency)
The data that support the findings of this study are publicly available from state agencies but were retrieved from DrillingInfo. But restrictions apply to the availability of these data from Drillinginfo (subscription required). Also, additional datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available publicaly in the Mendeley repository, [https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/rfkxk455mx/1].
Code availability (software application or custom code)
Data were analysed using PHDWIN for creating type curves. Other analyses were carried out using a custom code (in R language) that is available upon reasonable request. However, a web application developed for this paper can be used as well. It is based on the custom code. The link to the program is https://wimarshez.shinyapps.io/EcoSensi_App.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wigwe, M.E., Giussani, A. & Watson, M.C. Twelve years of unconventional oil and gas development: production performance and economic analysis. Int J Energy Environ Eng 12, 151–174 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-020-00367-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-020-00367-9