Tinker, 2012 Scott W. Tinker Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of Geosciences The University of Texas at Austin Unconventional Oil and Gas Reservoirs Mountain or Molehill? ASPO November, 2012
Tinker, 2012
Scott W. Tinker Bureau of Economic Geology
Jackson School of Geosciences
The University of Texas at Austin
Unconventional
Oil and Gas Reservoirs
Mountain or Molehill?
ASPO November, 2012
Tinker, 2012
Global Population and Energy
http://www.eia.gov/iea/wecbtu.html QAe874
Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2012
0
Po
pu
lati
on
(m
illi
on
s)
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
0
100
200
300
400
500
Pri
ma
ry e
ne
rgy (
qu
ad
s)
Year
2010 2005 2000 1995 1990 1985 1980
Energy demand is about people
Tinker, 2012
Unconventional Gas Reservoirs
To “Frack” or not to “Frack”
Unconventional Oil Reservoirs
Mountain or Molehill
Options to Oil
Nothing is Perfect
Outline
Tinker, 2012
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Ma
rke
ted
Pro
du
cti
on
(Tc
f)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Pro
ve
d R
es
erv
es
(Tc
f) End-of-Year
U.S. Proved Reserves
Annual
U.S. Production
U.S. Natural Gas Production and Reserves
After Steve Harvey, EIA
Tinker, 2012
U.S. Natural Gas Production (TcF)
http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/about_shale_gas.cfm
0
5
10
15
20
25
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Shale gas
Coalbed methane
Tight gas
Non-associated offshore
Alaska
Associated with oil
Non-associated onshore
Tinker, 2012
3,000 to
10,000+ feet
3,000 – 10,000 feet
Shale
Hydraulic Fracturing
“Fracking”
Tinker, 2012
Woodford Shale Frac Depth
Tinker, 2012
U.S. Gas Shale Production
QAe63
Boyer, C., Clark, B., Jochen, V., Lewis, R., and Miller, C. K., 2011, Shale gas: a global resource: Oilfield Review, Autumn, p. 30
[adapted from U.S. DOE and NETL, 2011, “Shale Gas: Applying Technology to solve America’s Energy Challenges,” Washington,
D.C.: http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/publications/brochures/Shale_Gas_March_2011.pdf (accessed 8-22-11)].
An
nu
al sh
ale
ga
s p
rod
uction
, Tcf
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
2.5
2.0
1.5
0.5
0 2000 2001 2002
3.0
1.0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
Eagle Ford Shale
Marcellus Shale
Haynesville-Bossier Shale
Fayetteville Shale
Barnett Shale
Antrim Shale
Woodford Shale
5 Tcf/y today
Barnett
Model: Rice University, Medlock, 2012 Model: Rice University, Medlock, 2012
Tinker, 2012
Orange dots are 20 nm in diameter
T.P. Sims #2; 7625’
200 nm
0.2 m
50 µm
Hum
an
Hair
After Reed, BEG
Barnett Shale
Nanopores in Organics
Tinker, 2012
Tinker, 2012
Environmental Traffic/noise/light
Water
Land Use
NORM
Methane
Quakes
Carbon
Energy Security Available
Affordable
Reliable
Clean
Unconventional Reservoirs Implications
Tinker, 2012
Carrizo location – UT Arlington
Barnett drilling location
University of Texas at
Arlington From XTO annual report
Innovation driven by necessity
Tinker, 2012
1 mile
Tinker, 2012
Source: IHS CERA Potential Global Shale Gas Basins
Landowner
Royalty
Negative
Neg Positive
Positive Positive
Mixed
Tinker, 2012
Natural Gas Supply -
Resources and Production
QAe980
Source: IEA World Energy Outlook (2009)
0 100 200 400 300 500 1,000 1,100 600 700 800 900
Resources (trillion cubic meters)
Pro
du
cti
on
co
st
(20
08
$/M
btu
)
LNG
Sour
Arc
tic
De
ep
Wate
r
Shale C
oal
Bed
M
eth
an
e
Pro
du
ced
Co
nven
tio
na
l
Tight
15
10
5
0
4X Natural gas will be more expensive
Tinker, 2012
Tri
llio
n c
ub
ic f
eet
U.S. Unconventional Gas Reserves
QAe873
Note: Materials Management Service (MMS) no longer exists,
its functions are now administered by the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement.
4000
3000
2000
1000
0 1999 2000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
National Petroleum Council
NPC Survey Low
NPC Survey Mid
NPC Survey High
Potential Gas Committee
Energy Information Administration/ Department of Energy/Minerals Management Service
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America
ICF International, Inc.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
American Natural Gas Alliance
Tinker, 2012
Unconventional Gas Reservoirs
To “Frack” or not to “Frack”
Unconventional Oil Reservoirs
Mountain or Molehill
Options to Oil
Nothing is Perfect
Outline
Tinker, 2012
U.S. Oil Production
Tinker, 2012
Oil Supply Resources and Cost
0 2000 4000 10,000 6000 8000
140
20
0
Resources (billion barrels)
Pro
du
cti
on
co
st
(2
00
8 $
)
MB
/d
Coal
to
liquids
Gas
to
liquids
Oil shales
Shale oil
Pro-
duced MENA
Other conventional
oil
Deepwater and
ultra-deepwater
40
60
80
100
120
Heavy
oil
&
bitumen
EOR
Arctic
CO2 EOR
140
100
120
Source: IEA World Energy Outlook (2009)
2X 2X
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50 100 150 200 250
Campos,
Brazil
Deg C
psi
Reservoir Temp v Pressure
Blind Faith,
Gulf of Mexico
Scorpio,
Gulf of Mexico
Krishna,
India
Ghawar,
Saudi Arabia
Norne,
Norway
Conventional operating envelope
Deepwater / HPHT
1950s 1980s 2000sSource: Rod Nelson, Schlumberger
Oil will be more expensive
Tinker, 2012
US Oil Production
From: James D. Hamilton, Working Paper 17759, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2012
Source: EIA
Tinker, 2012
Monterey Woodford/Anadarko
Utica Barnett
Uinta Niobrara
Permian Midland
Permian Delaware Granite wash
Eagle Ford
Bakken
U.S. SHALE LIQUIDS PROJECTIONS
5
4
3
2
1
0
2010
U.S
sh
ale
liq
uid
s p
roje
cte
d g
row
th
.(M
bp
d)
2012 2014 2016 2018 2022 2020
After Morse et. al., 2012, Energy 2020: North America, the new Middle
East: Citi GPS: Global Perspectives & Solutions, figure 14, p. 17.
QAe465
3.8 mmbod by 2022…
10% IRR: $44/bbl
10% IRR: $50/bbl
10% IRR: $68/bbl
10% IRR: $44/bbl
10% IRR: $50/bbl
10% IRR: $51/bbl
IRR Source: Rystad Energy
Tinker, 2012
US Oil Production (BBY)
From: James D. Hamilton, Working Paper 17759, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2012
1.4 bby
shale oil
by 2022
Th
ou
san
d b
arr
els
/year
Tinker, 2012
Global Conventional Oil
after Ahlbrandt et al., 2005
1
2
3
4
5
6
Tri
llio
n B
arr
els
of
Oil
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Each color represents a
different forecaster
Resource Forecasts
Tinker, 2012
Unconventional Gas Reservoirs
To “Frack” or not to “Frack”
Unconventional Oil Reservoirs
Mountain or Molehill
Options to Oil
Nothing is Perfect
Outline
Tinker, 2012
Options to Oil for Transport
I. Biofuels
o Valuable supplement, lower carbon
o Scale, land use, cost
II. CNG, LPG, LNG, GTL
o Cleaner than oil, regionally cheap, available
o Dirtier than others, regionally expensive
III. Electricity
o Clean depending on source, efficient engine
o Expensive, chemicals, range
IV. Hydrogen
o Ten years away
No form of energy is perfect
Tinker, 2012