The present invention relates to extraction of hydrocarbons or other resource such as geothermal energy from a shale or other low-permeability naturally fractured formation, by hydraulic fracturing.
Large quantities of extractable hydrocarbons exist in subsurface shale formations and other low-permeability strata, such as the Monterey Formation in the United States and the Bakken Formation in the United States and Canada. However, extraction of hydrocarbons from certain low-permeability strata at commercially useful rates has proven to be a challenge from technical, economic and environmental perspectives. One approach for extracting hydrocarbons from shale and other low permeability rocks has been to induce the formation of large scale massive fractures through the use of an elevated hydraulic pressure acting on a fluid in contact with the rock through a wellbore. However, this is often accompanied by serious environmental consequences such as a large surface “footprint” for the necessary supplies and equipment, as well as relatively high costs. As well, concerns have been expressed regarding the potential environmental impact from the use of synthetic additives in hydraulic fracturing solutions. These financial and other factors have resulted in difficulties in commercial hydrocarbon extraction from shale oil beds and other low permeability strata. In general, conventional hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” methods generate new fractures or networks of fractures in the rock on a massive scale, and do not take significant advantage of the pre-existing networks of naturally occurring fractures and incipient fractures that typically exist in shale formations.
A typical shale formation or other low-permeability reservoir rock comprises the matrix rock intersected by a network of low conductivity native or natural fractures 10 and fully closed incipient fractures 12 extending throughout the formation, as depicted in
In prior art fracture processes, sometimes referred to as “high rate fracturing” or “frac-n-pack”, a fracture fluid which usually comprises a granular proppant and a carrying fluid, often of high viscosity, is injected “wellbore” 18 into the injection well 19 at a high rate, for example in the range of 15-20 or more barrels per minute bpm. As depicted in
In certain prior art fracturing processes, liquids are deliberately made more viscous through the use of gels, polymers and other additives so that the proppants can be carried far into the fractures, both vertically and horizontally. Furthermore, in said prior art fracturing, extremely fine-grained particulate material may be added to the viscous carrier fluid to further block the porosity and reduce the rate of fluid leak off to the formation so that the fracture fluids can carry the proppant farther into the induced fracture. Prior art fracturing is typically designed as a continuous process with no interruptions in injection and no pressure decay or pressure build-up tests i.e., PFOT, SRT carried out within the process to evaluate the stimulation effects upon the natural fracture 10 network or the flow nature of the generated interconnected extensive fracture network. Prior art fracturing processes typically do not shut down, and in some realizations, increase the proppant concentration in a deliberate process intended to create short fat fractures.
The present invention relates to the use of relatively lower fracture injection rates, longer term injection, and multi-stage and cyclic episodes of fracturing a target formation with water and proppant slurry—called slurry fracture injection “SFI”™—in order to create a large fracture-influenced volume to enhance the extraction of resources such as oil, gas or thermal energy from the formation. In one aspect, the fracturing fluids employed in the process comprise water, saline or water/particulate slurries that are essentially free of additives. In one aspect, the invention relates to processes for generating hydraulic fractures and hydraulically enhancing the natural fracturing of the formation in a manner which accelerates and improves the extraction of hydrocarbons or thermal energy. The invention further relates to systems and methods for generating and enhancing the aperture and conductivity within a network of natural fractures and induced fractures within a subsurface formation that comprises a pre-existing natural fracture system and an induced hydraulic fracture system, in particular within shale, marl, siltstone or other low-permeability formation, by the sequential injections of In one aspect, the invention specifically seeks to maximize the volume change in a large region around the injection point so as to induce large changes in stress in a large volume of the rock mass surrounding the stimulation site, leading to opening of natural fractures, shearing of natural fractures, and developing incipient fractures into actual open fractures. A suitable target formation is shale, although it is contemplated that the method described herein or variants thereof may be adapted for use in any other low permeability rock type.
According to one aspect, the invention relates to a method of generating an enhanced and interconnected network of fractures within a rock formation, including but not limited to shale, that renders the rock mass more suitable for the economical extraction of a hydrocarbon or heat from the formation. A hydrocarbon-containing formation comprises a matrix rock that contains in its porosity substantial amounts of natural hydrocarbons and a network of natural fractures that vary from open to fully closed or incipient in nature. The method comprises in general terms the steps of providing at least one injection well extending into said formation and a source of pressurized water and proppant slurry for injection into said injection well at pressures and conditions suitable for inducing hydraulic fracturing of the said formation, and performing the following stages in sequence:
Stage 1: injecting a particulate-free aqueous solution into injection well 19 under conditions suitable for dilating, shearing offsetting the fracture faces and thereby enhancing the natural fracture network in said formation; and extending the enhanced natural fracture network in said formation. Preferably, the aqueous solution is additive-free water or aqueous saline solution. The solution may not contain particulate matter of any type and that will not precipitate mineral matter in the rock fractures or porosity.
Stage 2: injecting a slurry comprising a carrying fluid and a fine-grained granular proppant into said injection well, under conditions suitable for further extending and propping the natural fracture network that has been opened, enhanced, and interconnected by the actions delineated in stage 1, which may be carried out to such an extent that a large volume change has been permanently generated by the opening, shearing, and propping of natural fractures to the maximum practical economic extent, in order to engender stress changes in the surrounding rock.
Stage 3: injecting a slurry comprising a coarse-grained granular proppant into said injection well, under conditions suitable to fully connect with the stage 2 sand-propped region and to generate, prop and extend newly induced fractures to interact with the enhanced natural fracture network produced in stage 2 and stage 1; and also further enhance the enhanced natural fracture network produced in stage 2 by generating concentrated volume changes that favour continued opening and shear of the natural fractures, and the creation and extension of new fractures through the opening of incipient fracture planes in the far-field away from the wellbore.
In the above process, one may optionally repeat any one of the stages multiple times before proceeding to the next stage. As well. One may repeat any pair of stages 1 and 2 or 2 and 3 before proceeding to the next stage. As well, the entire cycle of stages 1-3 may be repeated multiple times.
In one aspect, stage 2 follows stage 1 with essentially no time gap therebetween.
Stage 2 or 3 may comprise a sequence of discrete sand injection episodes separated by water injection episodes or by periods of no injection. The method may further comprise a plurality of cycles comprising stages 1 through 3, with shut-in periods without injection between said cycles. The method may further comprise a plurality of cycles with periods in between cycles where pressures are allowed to dissipate before recommencing injection. Any one of stages 1-3 may be repeated multiple times before proceeding to the subsequent stage, if any.
The term “formation” as used herein means: a layer or limited set of adjacent layers of rock in the subsurface that is a target for commercial exploitation of contained hydrocarbons or other resource and therefore may be subjected to stimulation methods to facilitate the development of that resource. It is understood that the resource can be hydrocarbons, heat, or other fluid or soluble substance for which an interconnected fracture network can increase the extraction efficiency.
The terms “Slurry Fracture Injection” and interchangeably “SFI” are trademarks, and as used herein refer to a process comprising the injection of a pumpable slurry consisting of a blend of sand/proppant with mix water into a formation at depth under in situ fracturing pressures, employing cyclic injection strategies, long term injection periods generally on the order of 8-16 hrs/day for up to 20-26 days/month, and using process control techniques during injection to: optimize formation injectivity, maximize formation access, and maintain fracture containment within the formation.
The term “fracture” as used herein means: a crack in the rock formation that is either naturally existing or induced by hydraulic fracturing techniques. A fracture can be either open or closed.
The term “enhanced” as used herein means: an improvement in the aperture, fluid conductivity, and/or hydraulic communication of a fracture that is either natural or induced by hydraulic fracturing techniques.
“Natural fractures” or interchangeably “native fractures” as used herein mean: surfaces occurring naturally in the rock formation i.e., not man-made that are fully parted although they may be in intimate contact or surfaces that are partially separated but normally remain in intimate contact and are considered planes of weakness along which fully open fractures can be created.
The term “incipient fracture” means: a natural fracture that is fully closed and incompletely formed in situ but that is a plane of weakness in parting and can be opened and extended through the application of appropriate stimulation approaches such as SFI™.
The terms “induced fracture” or “generated fracture” as used herein mean: a fracture or fractures created in the rock formation by man-made hydraulic fracturing techniques involving or aided by the use of a hydraulic fluid, which in the present process is intended to be clear water along with additives such as friction reducers to aid the hydraulic fracturing process.
The term “slurry” as used herein means: a mixture a granular material sand/proppant along with clear water, which may or may not have additional additives for friction control and fracture development control.
The term “proppant” refers to a solid particulate material employed to maintain induced fractures open once injection has ceased, generally consisting of a quartz sand or artificially manufactured particulate material in the size range of 50 to 2000 microns 0.002 to 0.10 inches in diameter. Herein, the words proppant and sand are usually employed interchangeably.
The abbreviation PFOT means Pressure Fall-Off Test
The abbreviation SRT means Step-Rate Test
The intended meanings of other terms, symbols and units used in the text and figures are those that are generally accepted in the art, and additional clarifications are given only when the use of such terms deviates significantly from commonly accepted meanings.
The present method may be practiced in a geographic region in which an oil or gas-bearing shale formation exists in a relatively deeply buried state. The present method entails the generation of an enhanced network of relatively small fractures occurring naturally within the formation and the opening and extension of incipient natural fractures into the dilated zone 38
Stage 1, as depicted in
One or more of the completed injection well perforated sites 25 is isolated from the rest of the well and then is fed first with pressurized water and later with a water and sand slurry for inducing fracturing within the shale formation. As will be described below, the water or water and sand slurry is fed into the injection well 19 in a designed sequential fashion. The source or sources of slurry may comprise any suitable mechanical system capable of generating a pressurized aqueous slurry with sand or other particulate matter as a fracture proppant and suitable additives on demand and for selected periods. Any suitable source of water may be used for injection or to mix with proppant and additives to make a slurry, including surface water, sea water, or water that was previously produced along with oil or natural gas, on the condition that the water is free of minerals or particles that could impair the ability of the shale to produce the hydrocarbons present in the natural fractures 10 and pore space. If deemed necessary by geochemical analysis or other studies, such water may be treated chemically so as to avoid any deleterious reactions with the natural water and minerals in the formation to be stimulated.
The present method comprises a staged approach to the generation of an extensive conductive and interconnected fracture network within the formation surrounding the wellbore 36 in order to facilitate and accelerate the extraction of hydrocarbons or thermal energy. The entire process is applied at one perforated site 250 along the wellbore 36 and in a series of designed stages, before moving to another perforated site 25 along the same or another wellbore 36. Once the hydraulic fracture stimulation process is completed at that perforated site 25, another perforated site 25 along the wellbore 36 is isolated, and the process is repeated at the new perforated site 25, modified as necessary to account for the effects of previous stimulations along the wellbore 36. This sequential and staged stimulation of a number of perforated sites 25 along the wellbore 36 continues until all of the perforated sites 25 have been appropriately stimulated, then a new wellbore 36 may be treated.
Prior to commencing the injection stages at a specific perforated site 25 along the wellbore 36, a SRT, a stepped-rate fracture pressure assessment is performed. This procedure entails commencing injection of clear water as described above, without additives or particulate matter, at a low but constant injection rate while measuring the pressure response of the water being injected. The initial value of the injection rate is typically on the order of 0.25 to 1.0 bpm, and typically a time period of from 5 minutes to one hour is permitted to allow the injection pressures to approximately achieve a constant value. Then, without ceasing the injection process or altering any other conditions, the injection rate is increased by the same amount, on the order of 0.25-1.0 bpm, and the pressure is once again allowed to equilibrate. The injection rate and the pressures of injection are plotted on a graph in such a manner as to permit the operator to determine at which injection rate and pressure a substantial hydraulic fracture was generated at the injection site. This information is also used to assess the value of the minimum fracturing pressure, and is thence used in the design of the subsequent hydraulic fracturing process stages. In particular, an injection rate that is somewhat above the minimum fracturing pressure will be specifically chosen to conduct the fracture stimulation initially, and a higher or lower rate may be used thereafter, in cycles if required, depending on the effects measured by the monitoring. Furthermore, the SRT may be repeated during the hydraulic fracture stimulation process described below in order to evaluate stress changes and injectivity changes in the target formation and thereby gather more data that can help to alter and re-design the injection strategy to achieve optimum results.
Stage 1—Enhancement of the Natural Fracture System
Stage 1 comprises relatively longer injection times and lower fracture injection rates compared to prior art fracturing processes for water-generated hydraulic fracture stimulation of the target formation at and around the selected perforated site 25 of a wellbore 36. In the preferred embodiment, the injected water preferably contains no additives and no particulate matter, and it thereby has the effect of increasing the pore pressure within the formation and thus extending enhanced hydraulic fracturing stimulation effects on the native fractures 10 and incipient fractures 12 as far out as possible into the formation from the perforated site 25. This increase in pore pressure in a formation that is acted upon by the naturally existing stresses in the earth triggers an increase in both the natural fracture aperture width and a shear dilation effect that leads to self-propping
The specific time length of the water fracturing is variable depending on the characteristics of the natural fracture 10 network and their response to the injection process. Stage 1 consists of a single or several prolonged injection episodes and their duration and characteristics rate, pressure, time period, shut-in period, flowback period, additives may be determined with various types of well testing, deformation measurements, microseismic emission measurements, or a combination of these methods. Specifically, the stage 1 process involving aggressive water injection can be continued, optionally using a number of cycles of varying lengths, until the process has closely attained the maximum possible stimulated volume around the injection location. In the use of deformation data, high precision inclinometers i.e., 112, 114 or other appropriate devices can be used to measure the deformation of the rocks and the surface of the earth in response to the high rate injection of water. The amount of volume increase and its spatial distribution are mathematically analyzed as injection continues, allowing a determination to be made as to when the injection can be ceased. For example, when the deformation data show that there is no longer a significant increase in the volume of rock that is undergoing dilation around the injection site, one may cease injection. Similarly, microseismic emissions may be studied in a similar manner; the number, location, nature and amplitude of the emissions, each of which represents a shearing event around the injection location, are mapped and studied as the injection continues. Because each shearing event detected through the use of microseismic monitoring is associated with a shear displacement episode, active monitoring and mapping of these events is akin to mapping the propagation and extent of the zone where shearing and self-propping are occurring. For example, once the outward propagation rate of microseismic events slows down sufficiently so that it is apparent that further injection can have at best a marginal benefit on the volume of the stimulated zone, one may cease injection. Once injection during stage 1 has ceased, or if it is desired to perform an evaluation of the injected zone during the progress of the stage 1 water injection, the effect of the stimulation of the injection zone can be evaluated by measuring the rate of pressure decay 140 without allowing water flowback PFOT, or by the change of rate and volume of flowback if the well is allowed to flow, or by the use of specific pressurization or injection tests such as a SRT carried out to specifically assess the extent and nature of the region around the wellbore 36 that has been affected by the stage 1 injection process. If the well test results described in the previous sentence indicate that further benefit could be achieved through continuing injection, the stage 1 water injection is re-initiated and continued until there is a reasonable certainty that a stimulation close to the maximum achievable has been attained for the conditions at the site. Alternatively, a suitable duration for stage 1 is between 4 and 72 hours. As described, stage 1 may be repeated for a number of cycles, either upon concluding the initial stage 1, or upon concluding a subsequent stage in the multi-stage hydraulic fracture cycling process described below.
Optionally, at the end of the first injection cycle but not after subsequent stage 1 injections, the well can be shut in for approximately a 12 hour period to measure the decay rate at the bottom hole pressure. This PFOT assesses the behaviour of the shut-in well and will provide a quantitative assessment of the enhancement of the natural fracture system in terms of permeability fracture conductivity or transmissivity change, radius or volume of change, and the development or improvements of the fluid flow behaviour and components around the injection location linear flow, bilinear flow, radial flow, boundary condition effects, etc. This formation response information is essential to refining and improving on the stage 1 injection strategy, as well as to aid in designing and implementing the injection characteristics for the proppant slurry for stage 2. There are a number of alternatives to the pressure fall-off measurements, and several are delineated. One possibility for the evaluation of the volume and nature of the stimulated zone is, after the stage 1 injection, to allow the well to flow-back under a constant stipulated back pressure. The rate of water flow is measured over time until flow-back has almost ceased, then the back pressure in the well is dropped and the renewed flow-back is monitored carefully. The process is repeated and the results analyzed. Another alternative approach to evaluating the effect of the stage 1 stimulation is to execute one or more of a variety of injection tests and pressurization-decay tests SRT, PFOT or modifications thereto that are described in prior art, and that may also be monitored at the same time for deformation and for microseismic emissions.
Stage 2—Propping of the Natural Fracture System
Stage 2 may be commenced immediately or shortly after the conclusion of the final part of stage 1, or without any substantial break in the injection process if so decided by previous analysis and evaluation, but usually after an extended PFOT. Stage 2 comprises the injection of slurry comprising water and a fine-grained proppant, for example a 100-mesh quartz sand proppant. A suitable particle range for the fine-grained particulate material is from 50 to 250 microns 0.002 to 0.01 inches in grain diameter. The injection rate is relatively modest during stage 2 and can vary widely depending on equipment, depth, stress and so on, but is generally in the range of 3-8 bpm. The objective of stage 2 is to introduce the fine-grained sand/particles and have them move far out into the formation, so as to prop open the apertures generated in stage 1 through filling the apertures of opened natural fractures 69 and enhanced natural fractures with the particular matter. Stage 2 thus corresponds with
Stage 2 may comprise multiple cycles consisting of discrete sand injection episodes, perhaps of different concentrations, each of which is followed by a PFOT, preferably for at least 12 hours but as much as 20 hours or more, prior to commencing the next sand injection episode. The PFOT results are analyzed mathematically to help decide the proppant concentration and injection rate and time length for the next cycle. Typically, once injection of water with a particulate propping material is commenced, one should not allow fluid flow-back into the injection well 19 as this may plug the well. For each of the fall-off periods the pressure data for the wellbore 36 is collected to a sufficient precision so that the operations personnel may analyze the pressure change with time Δp/Δt in a consistent manner to allow a consistent PFOT interpretation permitting the continued evaluation of the stimulation process.
Each sand fracture episode commences with injection of clear water at a constant volume rate. Specific protocols for the injection rates may be provided, using the same value for each episode, and measuring the pressure build-up during the placement of a pre-slurry water pad over a 15 to 30 minute period. If this step is done consistently, it can also be analyzed consistently, giving confirmatory information about the changes in effective transmissivity and to a lesser degree the extent of the flow zone around the well. This is another measure used along with the others to execute the on-going process design.
After the fine-grained proppant enhancement of the natural fracture system is generated through the above steps which may consist of many cycles of proppant injection, fall-off periods and clear water injection, a shut-in period of, preferably, no less than 12 hours is performed to assess the formation flow conditions and changes from the 12 hour shut-in after the baseline PFOT in stage 1, including the decay rate of the pressure. This is analyzed with one or more methods, including multiple circumferential zones of different permeability, as well as a classical fracture wing length analysis. The PFOT analyses of the shut in data provides a quantitative assessment of the ‘enhancement’ of the natural fracture 10 system in terms of permeability fracture conductivity change, radius of volume change leading to conductivity improvements, and the development and improvements in the fluid flow components over time once injection is ceased linear flow, bilinear flow, radial flow, boundary condition effects, etc.
The formation response information generated in the above steps is useful for refining and improving on the stage 2 injection strategy and also for the design and stipulation of the injection strategy and proppant characteristics for the subsequent stage 3 injection activity.
Stage 3—Creating a Large Induced Fracture System as a Secondary Flow System
One or more episodes of stage 3 are conducted to create or induce a large fracture system that is in suitable hydraulic communication with the induced fractures and the enhanced natural fracture system developed in stages 1-2. The SFI™ process allows for a large fracture system to be created by propagating a series of fracturing events in a controlled manner with good volumetric sweep of the formation in the near-wellbore area out into the formation—not with the use of a massive single fracture with large dimensions great height and great length, which is often the goal that is stipulated in prior art.
It is preferable to allow the stage 2 fracturing process to ‘stabilize’ before proceeding with stage 3. In most cases, after a relatively prolonged shut-in period following stage 2, the final injection comprising stage 3 using a coarse-grained sand or particulate proppant material can be implemented. In some applications, the sand may constitute a 16-32 sand or 20-40 quartz sand proppant, and in any case may be a sand of grain diameter in the range of 200 to 2000 microns, comprising medium-grained to coarse-grained sand classification sizes. However, the type of proppant in this stage is not critical, providing it is a relatively strong and reasonably rigid granular material that preferably consists entirely of moderately to well-rounded grains. One aspect of this stage is that the associated fracture water pads pre- and post-fracture water injection periods are carefully done in a consistent manner with full pressure and rate measurements so as to reduce the chances of plugging the injection well and to improve the chances of analyzing the data in a useful manner.
Issues that can be addressed in order to ensure an optimal proppant design for the stage 3 induced fracture system include:
i. fracture propping issues—the nature of the pressure-time-propping process that leads to induced fractures 11 of wide aperture, with the success being linked to the width of the near-wellbore induced fractures 11 and to the degree of interconnectedness of the induced fractures 11 and the natural fractures 10. In this case,
ii. placement issues—the success of the sand placement process in terms of the consistency of sand placement far into the induced and enhanced natural fracture system.
iii. conductivity issues—the magnitude and extent of the improvement of flow capacity of the region around the treatment point as the result of the combination of the enhanced natural and incipient fracture through aperture propping, shear displacement and self-propping, and interconnection with the hydraulically induced fractures and the wellbore 36.
iv. in situ stress changes—the changes in the fracturing pressure in the near-wellbore vicinity as measured by step-rate tests, or as estimated by fracture flow-back or PFOTs. Specifically, the significant additional volume change implemented during Stage 3 will have effects on formation stresses that are a function of the magnitude of the volume change in the region nearer to the wellbore 36; and controlling and optimizing this volume-stress change in order to facilitate stress rotations and fracture rotations is a critical factor in the present process.
The coarse-grained sand in stage 3 should be injected more aggressively than the fine-grained sand of stage 2, and in general a higher injection rate of 5 bpm or more, and as high as 10 bpm or more, if the physical facilities so permit, may be employed so as to avoid any premature blockages and to establish a good hydraulic communication with the enhanced network generated in stages 1 and 2.
Before and during stage 3, the pressure monitoring and other monitoring steps associated with stages 1 and 2 are continued and repeated in essentially the same manner pre-fracture pad, and post-fracture shut-in to permit a comparison of the formation responses between stages 2 and 3. Once sand placement is finished, one may repeat the PFOT analysis of the post-fracture stage for a minimum of 12 hours, although one may extend the shut in period for a longer time to allow the effect of the more remote propped fractures to be assessed.
Once the pressure decay data has been collected, a SRT stress measurement may be performed after the last active injection before full flow-back and attempting to bring the well on production.
Using the SFI™ process during stage 3, the volume of sand pumped during the various stages can be more important than the concentration of sand pumped i.e., the rate at which the sand is placed, and one can inject more sand volume with longer periods of injection time at lower sand concentrations. Specific values of sand proppant concentration and injection rate during stages 2 and 3 are determined through consistent analysis of the data collected during the treatment process starting from the initial step-rate tests carried out before stage 1, and including all data subsequent to that test.
Cycling of Stages
The present method may comprise repeated cycles and/or subcycles, which may consist of the following:
1. repetition of any individual stage before proceeding to the next stage;
2. sequentially repeating any two stages, before proceeding to the next stage, for example stages 1 and 2 may be repeated in sequence multiple times, before proceeding to stage 3, or stages 2 and 3 may be repeated multiple times before concluding the process or proceeding back to stage 1;
3. sequentially repeating all 3 stages, for a selected multiple number of times.
4. Changing the parameters or extents of the injection or shut-in periods.
Stages 1 through 3 are collectively considered a complete “fracture cycle”. In one embodiment, a shut-in time is provided between repetitions of the fracture cycle. In one embodiment, the shut-in time is at least 24 hours. This shut-in period allows for one or more of the following:
i. In situ stress redistribution/stabilization.
ii. Facilitation of fracture rotation.
iii. Evaluation of PFOT to assess improvement in overall formation permeability.
iv. Maximizing or managing formation shear stress development which can lead to shear movements in shale and subsequent improvements in self-propping activity.
Minimizing large-scale shear stress concentrations along interfaces that may have a possible impact on wellbore integrity, especially for vertical wells that are prone to shear along horizontal geological interfaces.
The shut-in time between cycles can be based on the following parameters:
i. Volume of sand pumped
ii. Duration of pumping
iii. PFOT characteristics of the formation
The stages can be repeated within a cycle as necessary depending on the results of the fracture enhancements. For example, several sub-cycles of stage 1 and 2 may be applied for effective enhancement and propping the natural fracture network. The entire cycle can be repeated stages 1-3 to effectively develop a large hydraulic communication and drainage area that develops from the wellbore 36 out into the formation in a controlled manner.
It may also be desirable to increase the concentration of the proppant at the end of last stage 3 to ‘pack-off’ the wellbore 36 area in order to create a highly conductive path around the wellbore 36 allowing for good flow from all flow systems into the wellbore 36. In prior art this process has been referred to as “forced fracture tip screen-out” or “frac-'n-pack”.
The injection strategy with each additional stage/cycle may vary as the number of cycles increases. For example, a coarse-grained proppant 20-40 may be used in stage 3 during the initial cycles. The proppant may change to 60-40 for stage 3 in later cycles. A coarse-grained sand may be used for stage 2 in subsequent cycles, compared to the first cycle in the sequence of stage 2.
The application of SFI™ in the form of repeated cycles and stages as described herein carries sand deeply into the formation. Sand deposits within the formation cause increases in local formation stresses with each cycle. Local formation stresses of this nature cause reorientation of new fractures generated in a subsequent cycle when opening of natural fractures 10 is re-initiated through the use of high pressure slurry injection, resulting in the fracture rotation illustrated schematically in
In a further aspect, the injectate may comprise a slurry that incorporates a waste substance, such as contaminated sand or other wastes. This serves the dual purposes of enhancing hydrocarbon production, as well as a convenient means to dispose of granular operational wastes in a permanent fashion, constituting a novel approach to achieve multiple goals.
The present invention has been described herein by way of detailed descriptions of embodiments and aspects thereof. Persons skilled in the art will understand that the present invention is not limited in its scope to the particular embodiments and aspects, including individual steps, processes, components, and the like. The present invention is best understood by reference to this patent specification as a whole, including the claims thereof, and including certain functional or mechanical equivalents and substitutions of elements described herein.
This application is a National Phase of PCT application No. PCT/CA2011/050802, filed on Dec. 12, 2011, and claims benefit of U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 61/426,131, filed on Dec. 22, 2010 and U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 61/428,911 filed Dec. 31, 2010. Each of the aforementioned related patent applications is herein incorporated by reference.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/CA2011/050802 | 12/22/2011 | WO | 00 | 8/13/2012 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2012/083463 | 6/28/2012 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3050119 | Fast et al. | Aug 1962 | A |
3372752 | Prater | Mar 1968 | A |
3917345 | Davidson et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
4220205 | Coursen et al. | Sep 1980 | A |
4549608 | Stowe et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
5875843 | Hill | Mar 1999 | A |
7210528 | Brannon et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7472751 | Brannon et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7918277 | Brannon et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8127850 | Brannon et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
20040211567 | Aud | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20060131031 | McKeachnie et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060157243 | Nguyen | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070215345 | Lafferty et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20090107674 | Brannon et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090301731 | McDaniel et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100059226 | Termine et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20110120702 | Craig | May 2011 | A1 |
20110120705 | Walters et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110120718 | Craig | May 2011 | A1 |
20110180259 | Willberg et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110180260 | Brannon et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20130014951 | Fitzpatrick | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130105157 | Barmatov et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2008004172 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO 2010021563 | Feb 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Schlumberger Oilfield Glossary entries for “pad” and “staged fracturing”, accessed on Aug. 23, 2013 via www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com. |
Dictionary definitions of “granular” and “granule”, accessed Feb. 11, 2014 via thefreedictionary.com. |
Dictionary definitions of “adequate” and “sufficient”, accessed Jul. 7, 2014 via thefreedictionary.com. |
Schlumberger Oilfiield Glossary entry for “fracturing pressure”, accessed Jul. 7, 2014 via www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com. |
International search report for application No. PCT/CA2011/050802 dated Mar. 27, 2012. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130284438 A1 | Oct 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61426131 | Dec 2010 | US | |
61428911 | Dec 2010 | US |