Showing posts with label oil and gas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oil and gas. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Shocking News.........

The following article about fracking and how the truth is distorted is not new news, nor is it shocking.  People calling themselves "environmentalists" have a long and shameful history of "distorting the facts" when criticizing or protesting everything from climate change, to mining activity, to farming, to wildlife management, and now the process of hydraulic fracturing of underground rock formations to enhance the production of oil and gas.  More often than not they resort to emotional fear tactics and leave science by the wayside.

The late, great author Michael Crichton even wrote an excellent book on the subject, titled "State Of Fear".  For more about that book go here:

Jul 17, 2008
Jul 17, 2008
Michael Crichton does not believe it is. He makes some very astute comments. Also, I highly recommend Crichton's book, "State of Fear". There is much more about Michael Crichton on this blog, do a search on his name.
 
Nov 06, 2008
Nov 06, 2008
Michael Crichton Gone. What a shame, what timing. His writing, his insight, his intellect remain. Do a search on this blog and read more. In tribute, a humble hats off. Peter More on Michael Crichton: Predicted Demise of MSM ...
 
May 02, 2007
May 02, 2007
Michael Crichton: Our Environmental Future. I wish I could post this entire speech, but I can only quote parts of it and encourage you to read it all here: http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/npc-speech.html. In the speech ...
 
Aug 24, 2007
Aug 24, 2007
Michael Crichton Speech: Environmentalism As Religion. I can't post the entire speech here without his permission, but this by Michael Crichton is worth reading and saving and contemplating. He sees environmentalism as ...
 

Experts: Some fracking critics use bad science
PITTSBURGH (AP) — In the debate over natural gas drilling, the companies are often the ones accused of twisting the facts. But scientists say opponents sometimes mislead the public, too.
Critics of fracking often raise alarms about groundwater pollution, air pollution, and cancer risks, and there are still many uncertainties. But some of the claims have little — or nothing— to back them.
For example, reports that breast cancer rates rose in a region with heavy gas drilling are false, researchers told The Associated Press.

Fears that natural radioactivity in drilling waste could contaminate drinking water aren't being confirmed by monitoring, either.

And concerns about air pollution from the industry often don't acknowledge that natural gas is a far cleaner burning fuel than coal.

"The debate is becoming very emotional. And basically not using science" on either side, said Avner Vengosh, a Duke University professor studying groundwater contamination who has been praised and criticized by both sides.

Shale gas drilling has attracted national attention because advances in technology have unlocked billions of dollars of gas reserves, leading to a boom in production, jobs, and profits, as well as concerns about pollution and public health. Shale is a gas-rich rock formation thousands of feet underground, and the gas is freed through a process called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in which large volumes of water, plus sand and chemicals, are injected to break the rock apart.

Continued:  http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jCUQcMjaT-TJqizs7WRB1zIw8rzA?docId=cef00570f618477d8e9fcb53579af91c&goback=%2Egde_156898_member_138056030

FILE - In this file photo from Nov. 3, 2010, documentary filmmaker Josh Fox speaks at a rally of protesters against Marcellus Shale drilling and hydraulic fracturing in Pittsburgh. Researchers say the claim that fracking has been linked to increased cancer rates in Texas is simply wrong. Fox, an Oscar-nominated filmmaker who uses the claim in a new film, declined to acknowledge the error when told of researchers who say he's doing a disservice to people with cancer by misrepresenting health data. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic, File)

(A "disservice" to people is too kind.  He's lying to the public for his own personal gain.  In my mind that is despicable.  Peter)

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Economic Optimism For Ohio And Utica Shale Oil And Gas

It sure looks to me like Ohio and the rest of the "Rust Belt" could use some positive economic news.  Let's hope the development of the Utica Shale (and the other shale formations) for oil and gas works out.  The area has attracted a lot of industry interest, and usually these companies do not invest the amounts of money they have been putting into leasing up acreage in Ohio without being pretty certain of success.  This is an emerging play to pay close attention to.
Peter


BP CEO: In Early Stages Of Evaluating Ohio's Shale Potential
 
BP PLC is in the early stages of evaluating Ohio's energy potential but believes the state--which is home to the emerging Utica shale--could be a significant contributor to the energy industry, Chief Executive Bob Dudley said Friday.

In a speech in Cleveland, Mr. Dudley said BP technicians are already on the ground "advancing a plan to safely appraise the resources" the company is prospecting in leases acquired about four months ago in the Utica and Point Pleasant shales, according to a transcript of the speech.
The executive cited estimates by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources that put the state's recoverable shale potential at up to 5.5 billion barrels of oil and 15.7 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
"In the coming months, we expect to acquire seismic surveys, prepare a development plan and survey land for initial wells to be drilled next year," Mr. Dudley said.

BP is one of several companies seeking to tap the unconventional oil resources that have revolutionized energy production in the U.S
.
Production of natural gas in the neighboring Marcellus shale, which underlies several northeastern states, has revitalized formerly depressed areas by providing cheap energy for steel manufacturing and low-cost feedstock for chemical products. The oil industry hopes that the shales underlying Ohio could have large deposits of profitable crude oil.
Copyright (c) 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc

EnCana Success In The Mancos Shale In New Mexico's San Juan Basin

The Mancos Shale and its stratigraphic equivalents can be found containing oil and gas from New Mexico, north throught the American Rocky Mountains, into Canada, and actually up into the North Slope of Alaska.  There's no reason a lot of it can not be productive.  I think we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg.
Peter

The Next Oil Rich Shale on the Block? Encana Corp. releases first Mancos Shale results
  Encana Corp. releases first Mancos Shale resultsdaily-times.com
             

The well, Lybrook H36, yielded a 30-day initial production rate of about 440 barrels of oil per day, Encana disclosed to investors.
An Encana spokesman said the initial production was enough to warrant further development. "That's an indication that we're pleased with the results we've seen to date," Encana's Doug Hock said.

The figure is the first publicly released data from a test well targeting Mancos Shale oil.

Geologists and industry officials have expressed hope that technological advances would enable wells to reach the oil-rich shale in the San Juan Basin, an area better known for producing natural gas.

Encana is partnering with local firms, including Aztec Well Servicing Co. and Dugan Production Corp., to exploit leases in the southern portion of the basin targeting oil-rich formations. Aztec is drilling the wells, and Dugan has taken advantage of its property interests in the area.

A sharp decline in natural gas prices has driven drillers to search for oil.

"Our strategy as a company right now is to increase the amount of natural gas liquids and oil in our portfolio," Hock said. "Given that, our exploration in the San Juan Basin is a key part of that, and that's why you've seen the commitment there to explore that."

Encana has a 174,000-net-acre position in the basin, the company said.

A major firm based in Calgary, Alberta, Encana has four Mancos Shale wells producing oil and a fifth being drilled, the company disclosed. Lybrook H36 was drilled into the Gallup formation, part of the Mancos Shale, to a lateral length of 4,100 feet and at a cost of $4.3 million.

The well is located about 50 miles south of Bloomfield in Sandoval County.

At current oil prices, the well is producing more than $35,000 a day.   (Beats a government subsidy all to heck.  Peter)
The production is about 10 times what one would expect from a traditional vertical well in the Gallup formation, said John Byrom, president and CEO of D.J. Simmons Inc., a Farmington independent producer.

"I'd take it," Byrom said.

Steve Dunn, drilling and production manager at Merrion Oil & Gas in Farmington, said the results are "very encouraging."

Merrion also is active in the Mancos Shale, partnering with a larger company to drill four wells. Dunn said he cannot disclose the partner. Merrion plans to drill its wells in September, he said.

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Another New Shale Play: Newfoundland, Canada

It looks like a new oil exploration and development play might be taking shape in Canada's northeastern Province of Newfoundland.  The target appears to be the stratigraphic equivalent of the Utica Shale of the Ohio, and New York areas in the United States.  In the area of interest off the west coast of Newfoundland around Port au Port Bay, they call this the "Green Point Shale".

source: http://seekingalpha.com/article/412511-newfound-billions-of-barrels-of-shale-oil-in-newfoundland?source=email_macro_view&ifp=0



Source: Shoal Point Energy website.
Here is a link to a map showing all of the oil and gas activity in eastern Canada.

Oil exploration and production is well established in the offshore basins of eastern Newfoundland with fields such as Hibernia, Terra Nova, and White Rose producing around 300,00 barrels of light crude per day.  (One wonders why exploration and production off Canada's east coast has been allowed where geologically similar areas off the U.S. east coast are off limits.)  Newfoundland is also "friendly" to the oil and gas business, both environmentally and economically.  There is even a refinery in Newfoundland , a good infrastructure network, and a trained workforce in place, presumably eager to expand and grow.  Again this is a refreshing contrast to the U.S.

The Green Point Shale in Newfoundland apparently compares well with the south Texas Eagle Ford Shale that is attracting so much attention.  These factors include total organic content (TOC) of the shales and the thermal maturity of the shales, that is their ability to contain and produce both oil and gas.  One major difference is the Green Point Shale is far thicker in this area than the Eagle Ford Shale is in Texas.

Apparently the Green Point Shale is much thicker than the Eagle Ford Shale, (and many other shales) because it has been through at least one episode of comressional tectonics, or mountain-building.  This has taken the layers of shale, and compressed them, pushing them together like a deck of cards on a table would be pushed together to overlap into a single large deck of cards.  This is a positive aspect to this play.  The negative to this "mountain building" is the layers of rock are much more structurally complex than the shales in for example, the Eagle Ford Shale, Barnett Shale, Haynesville Shale, and the Bakken Formation.  This makes for more difficult drilling and development.  On the other hand, these shales probably compare more favorably with the successfully developing Marcellus Shale in the Pennsylvania area of the eastern U.S.

The exploration of the Green Point Shale is in its preliminary stages but there are some very positive initial results in the area.  However the claims of "Billions" of barrels of oil seem premature and a bit sensational to me, still this area is very much worth watching.

This activity is discussed in more detail here:

Peter

Thursday, February 23, 2012

"Unconventional" Resources? No, New And Exciting!

Exactly what we need, a multidisciplinary approach, people working together and solving problems, making the world a better place.  Bravo.  I would love to see you all there.
Peter

Unconventional Resources Technology Conference — a new event from SPE, AAPG and SEG
Tulsa, OK, February 22, 2012: Three of the world’s leading oil and gas professional societies will launch the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference (URTeC) 12-14 August 2013 at the Colorado Convention Center in Denver. A joint venture between the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), the Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG), and the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG), URTeC will for the first time bring together the key disciplines and technologies engaged in the development of North American unconventional resource plays.
“URTeC will offer multidisciplinary technical and applied science sessions of broad interest,” said Ganesh Thakur, SPE 2012 President “and the accompanying exhibition will showcase cutting-edge developments in applications such as horizontal drilling, fracture technology, testing, logging and geophysics.”
“Successful resource plays demand a multidisciplinary approach; it’s the way we’re all working,” said SEG President Bob Hardage. “Geology, geophysics and engineering are essential components, but individual expertise is no longer enough. In order to effectively develop these resources, our members must collaborate across disciplines. URTeC is designed to support that objective.”
The URTeC concept was developed with direction from an industry advisory group led by representatives from Chesapeake, Devon, Anadarko, Shell, Statoil, ConocoPhillips, Schlumberger and many others.
“The oil and gas industry has been encouraging AAPG, SPE and SEG to collaborate in this area for some time,” said Paul Weimer, AAPG President. “Although our societies frequently work together, URTeC may rank as our most significant joint venture in the United States since we all joined the Offshore Technology Conference in the late 1960s.” Collectively, the three societies represent more than 170,000 members worldwide.
Recruitment for the URTeC technical program committee is under way. For more information and/or to participate on the committee visit the URTeC website at www.urtec.org
About the societies
aapg
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
AAPG has been a leading organization for the science of geology worldwide. AAPG fosters scientific research and promotes technology in the field of geology. The Association serves members in more than 120 countries with publications, meetings, professional development and networking opportunities.
seg
Society of Exploration Geophysicists
SEG promotes the science of exploration geophysics and related fields, including applications and research, fosters the common scientific interests of geophysicists, and maintains a high professional standing among its members. The Society, which has members in 138 countries, fulfills its mission through its publications, conferences, forums, website, and educational opportunities.
spe
Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE serves more than 104,000 members in 123 countries. SPE is a key resource for technical knowledge related to the oil and gas exploration and production industry and provides services through its publications, conferences, workshops and forums.

URTeC is managed by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists
1444 S. Boulder Ave. | Tulsa, OK 74119-3604 USA

Friday, August 21, 2009

Is America Committing Economic Suicide?

I wonder how much of the information in the following article is true. Is America committing economic suicide by chasing "alternative energy" (solar, wind, biofuels, etc.) while demonizing the oil and gas industry? This is where the radical environmentalists and global warming alarmists have led us. It is way past time to turn this "ship of state" around, because we're headed in the wrong direction.
Peter

A rush for black gold in the Gulf

Examiner Editorial

August 20, 2009

Major new offshore drilling for oil and natural gas in the Gulf of Mexico will soon be a reality. The big question is whether Americans will be part of it. Brazil, China, India, Norway, Spain and Russia have all signed agreements with Cuba and the Bahamas to initiate exploration and production in the Gulf of Mexico within the next two years. So the prospect of seeing Russian oil rigs 45 miles off the Florida Keys -- where American oil companies are now forbidden to drill -- is a very real possibility.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the eastern Gulf region contains 3 billion barrels of oil and more than 11 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Last summer, former President George W. Bush lifted the executive branch moratorium his father signed in 1990 on new drilling in 85 percent of America's territorial waters. The Democratic Congress then wisely let the congressional ban expire as well. So the only thing keeping U.S. firms from drilling off our own continental shelf is President Barack Obama and his secretary of the interior, Ken Salazar, who is slow-walking the approval process that must be cleared before the work can begin. Meanwhile, foreign nations are jockeying for the best spots. The Obama administration, incredibly enough, is giving Brazil a $2 billion loan from U.S. taxpayers to finance that nation's development of its own off-shore energy resources in the Atlantic.

According to the American Petroleum Institute, the development of America's coastal oil and gas resources would generate more than $1.3 trillion in new government revenue and 160,000 high-paying jobs over the next two decades. Senators Lisa Murkowski, R-Ark., and Mary Landrieu, D-La., are bipartisan co-sponsors of a bill that provides coastal states such as Florida their fair share of revenues produced by off-shore drilling and production. The same thing should be done for states on the East and West coasts. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state's lawmakers hope to tap deposits off Santa Barbara to generate billions in royalties, and Virginia's front-running gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell has made drilling 50 miles off that state's coast a key component of his energy plan.

Many environmental objections to deepwater drilling have been overcome. For example, 4-D seismic surveys provide pinpoint accuracy for well location. New technology also enables one drilling platform to reach deposits 40 miles away in water up to 10,000 feet deep (note the same technology could help other nations drill just outside our coastal limits while tapping into resources inside the boundary). According to the U.S. Minerals Management Service, less than 0.0001 percent of the 1.4 billion barrels of oil pumped offshore since 1980 has been spilled -- a remarkable safety record and a tribute to American energy ingenuity.

Find this article at:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/A-rush-for-black-gold-in-the-Gulf-8127872-53705292.html

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

The Woodford Shale, A Major New Play

The Woodford Shale, A Major New Unconventional Oil And Gas Play
With the advent of new horizontal drilling and frac techniques, the Woodford Shale exhibits the potential to become a major new oil and gas play in the Midcontinent and West Texas areas of the Unitied States. Look at the numbers given for the potentially recoverable volumes of oil and gas. Can we "drill our way" out of America's dependence on foreign oil? GP


Special Focus: NORTH AMERICAN OUTLOOK-UNCONVENTIONAL RESOURCES

Reservoir characteristics and production potential of the Woodford Shale
With enough oil and gas to potentially become a major unconventional hydrocarbon reservoir, the Woodford is a viable play.

John B. Comer , Indiana Geological Survey, Bloomington, Indiana

The Woodford Shale is an attractive target for unconventional oil and gas development because it is a mature source rock that is widely distributed throughout the southern midcontinent, and because it locally produces oil and gas from naturally fractured intervals in conventionally completed wells. 1 In addition, drilled intervals yield oil shows from cuttings and cores, and produce a gas response on mudlogs, confirming that the Woodford Shale contains anomalously high oil and gas. Finally, the Woodford play that has developed in Oklahoma (279 wells drilled from 2004 to 2007 with cumulative production of nearly 64 Bcf gas and 66,538 bbl oil/condensate)2 confirms the commercial viability of the Woodford and provides incentive for additional exploration and development.

The following provides a regional overview of the oil and gas producing potential of the Woodford Shale in the US southern midcontinent. The article focuses on the Anadarko and Permian Basin depocenters and adjacent provinces, where organic-rich Woodford facies are thickest, and where conventional oil and gas production and infrastructure are extensive, Fig. 1. Of particular importance are source rock properties, especially Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and thermal maturity, and lithologic properties, especially silica content and type. Also, the geographic distribution of lithofacies, organic hydrogen content and thickness are important in deciding where to drill, and they allow volumes of oil-in-place and gas-in-place to be estimated. 3
Fig. 1 . Map showing geologic provinces with Woodford Shale in the (A) Anadarko Basin and (B) Permian Basin. 3

SOURCE ROCK PROPERTIES
Hydrocarbon source rocks (> 0.5 weight percent TOC) are attractive targets for unconventional drilling because their hydrocarbons are indigenous and their hydrocarbon charge does not depend on the fortuitous and inefficient processes of expulsion from a fine-grained source bed, secondary migration through porous and permeable carrier beds, and accumulation in an adequately sealed reservoir.

Source rocks that contain the highest concentrations of organic hydrogen generate the most hydrocarbons. These are typically beds of lacustrine and marine origin that contain Type I and Type II kerogen and generate both oil and gas during thermal maturation.
Oil-to-rock correlation studies document that the Woodford Shale is a prolific oil source, 4-13 and estimates indicate that as much as 85% of the oil produced in central and southern Oklahoma originated in the Woodford. 13 The Woodford Shale contains high concentrations of marine organic matter, 14-19 with mean organic carbon concentrations of 4.9 percent weight for the Permian Basin (Texas and New Mexico), 5.7 percent weight for the Anadarko Basin (Oklahoma and Arkansas) and 5.2 percent weight for both regions combined, Fig. 2. Organic carbon concentrations range from less than 0.1 percent weight in some chert beds 15 to 35 percent weight in black shale, 18 and the organic matter is mostly oil-prone Type II kerogen. 1,14,15,18 Across the region, the Woodford Shale exhibits a wide range of thermal maturities from marginally immature to metamorphic (Ro = 0.37-4.89 %). 15,20



Fig. 2 . TOC concentrations (weight percent) and statistics for geologic provinces in the southern midcontinent. Mean organic carbon concentration exceeds 2.0 weight percent in each of the provinces listed.

STRATIGRAPHY
The Woodford Shale is mostly Late Devonian, but ranges in age from Middle Devonian to Early Mississippian. 21-24 Age-equivalent strata include the Chattanooga Shale, Misener Sandstone, Sylamore Sandstone, the middle division of the Arkansas Novaculite, upper part of the Caballos Novaculite, Houy Formation, Percha Shale and the Sly Gap Formation. 21,24-30 These units were deposited over a major regional unconformity and represent diachronous onlapping sediments. 21,31-35 In the southern midcontinent, these units are the stratigraphic record of worldwide Late Devonian marine transgression. The Woodford is stratigraphically equivalent to several North American Devonian black shales with active and potential unconventional oil and gas production, including the Antrim Shale (Michigan Basin), Ohio Shale (Appalachian Basin), New Albany Shale (Illinois Basin), Bakken Shale (Williston Basin) and Exshaw Formation (Western Canada Basin).

WELL LOG CHARACTERISTICS
The Woodford is identified primarily by high radioactivity on the gamma-ray log and by its stratigraphic position between carbonates, Fig. 3. The Woodford exhibits low sonic velocity, low resistivity and low neutron-induced radiation. Three subdivisions (the lower, middle and upper units) are commonly recognized in the Woodford, and can be correlated regionally based on well log signatures. 36 The lower unit immediately overlies the regional unconformity, has the lowest radioactivity, and contains more carbonate, silt and sand than the other two units. The middle unit has the highest radioactivity, is the most widespread lithofacies, and consists of black shale with high concentrations of organic carbon, abundant pyrite, resinous spores and parallel laminae. The upper unit has intermediate radioactivity and consists of black shale with few resinous spores and mostly parallel laminae.

Fig. 3 . Characteristic well logs for the Permian Basin and Anadarko Basin regions. (A) Permian Basin, Winkler County, Texas.36 (B) Anadarko Basin, Major County, Oklahoma. 37

LITHOLOGY AND FACIES DISTRIBUTION
The most widespread and characteristic Woodford Shale lithology is black shale. Other common lithologies include chert, siltstone, sandstone, dolostone and light-colored shale, with hybrid mixtures between them. 14,15,21-23,38 Optimum reservoir lithologies are siliceous and include the cherts, siltstones, cherty black shales and silty black shales that are dense and brittle and, when fractured, retain open fracture networks. Production potential is greatest where these lithologies are organic-rich, thermally mature and highly fractured. Naturally-fractured Woodford Shale reservoirs, which have produced hydrocarbons for many decades, are completed in organic-rich chert intervals. 1 Figure 4 displays photomicrographs of cherty black shale in a naturally-fractured Woodford reservoir with bitumen-filled fractures from an oil-producing zone. Figure 4A was taken at a depth of 3,056 ft and has 4.5% TOC, and Figure 4B was taken at 3,065 ft and has 7.8% TOC. The association of chert and fractures in producing reservoirs suggests that the best unconventional wells are likely to be completed in the cherty facies.


Fig. 4 . Photomicrographs of core from Texaco No. 1K Drummond, Marshall County, Oklahoma, 11-6S-6E, North Aylesworth field. 1 White elliptical bodies are recrystallized Radiolaria. Photographed in transmitted plane polarized light.

The Woodford facies distribution is the result of Late Devonian paleogeography and depositional processes. During the Late Devonian, the southern midcontinent lay along the western margin of North America in the warm dry tropics near 15° south latitude. 14,39 Woodford deposition began as sea level rose, drowning marine embayments in what are now the deepest parts of the Delaware, Val Verde, Anadarko and Arkoma Basins, and advancing over subaerially eroded, dissected terrane consisting of Ordovician to Middle Devonian carbonate rocks. The broad epeiric sea that formed had irregular bottom topography and scattered, low-relief land masses which supported little vegetation and few rivers.

Oceanic water from an area of coastal upwelling flowed into the expanding epeiric sea and maintained a normal marine biota in the upper levels of the water column. Net evaporation locally produced hypersaline brine, and strong density stratification developed that restricted vertical circulation and resulted in bottom waters depleted in oxygen. Pelagic debris from the thriving biomass settled to the anoxic sea floor where organic- and sulfide-rich mud accumulated. The slow, continuous settling of pelagic debris was interrupted periodically by frequent storms and occasional earthquakes that triggered turbid bottom flows that supplied silt and mud to proximal shelves and basin depocenters, and caused resedimentation throughout the epeiric sea.

This depositional model explains why quartz grains and chert have very different distributions. Quartz grains represent terrigenous detritus transported from exposed older sources. Chert is biogenic and represents siliceous microorganisms (mostly Radiolaria) that bloomed in the nutrient-rich, upwelled water of the ocean and recrystallized after deposition on the sea floor. Detrital quartz is most abundant in areas near land, especially along the northwestern shelf and in the northwestern part of the Anadarko Basin, and in basin depocenters where turbid bottom flows finally converged. Chert beds increase in abundance and thickness toward the open ocean and are common along the continental margin and in distal parts of the major cratonic basins (Delaware, Anadarko, Marietta, Ardmore and Arkoma). The most distal allochthonous beds in the central area and core area of the Ouachita Tectonic Belt are almost pure radiolarian chert. High concentrations of radiolarian chert coincide with high concentrations of organic carbon along distal highs, such as the Central Basin Platform, Pecos Arch and Nemaha Uplift, and along the craton margin in the Arbuckle Mountain Uplift, Marietta and Ardmore Basins, western Arkoma Basin and frontal zone of the Ouachita Tectonic Belt. Where thermally mature, the organic-rich cherts and cherty black shales in these areas are optimum exploration targets.

THERMAL MATURITY
Thermal maturity follows Woodford structure, with the highest maturities in the deep basins and in orogenic belts, and the lowest maturities along structural highs, Fig. 5. 14,15,18,20,40-43 The Woodford Shale reaches its highest thermally maturity in the Anadarko, Delaware and Arkoma Basins where it is most deeply buried, and in the Ouachita Tectonic Belt where stratigraphically equivalent beds have been locally metamorphosed. Intermediate maturities occur in shelf settings, and the lowest maturities occur on structural highs such as the Central Basin Platform, Pecos Arch, Nemaha Uplift, Arbuckle Mountain Uplift and the frontal zone of the Ouachita Tectonic Belt. In deep basins, the Woodford Shale is in the gas generation window, whereas in the shelf and platform settings, the Woodford is in the oil generation window. 14,15


Fig. 5 . Map showing thermal maturity of Woodford Shale and age-equivalent units in (A) Anadarko and (B) Permian Basin regions. 3 Patterns are based on vitrinite reflectance (%Ro).

POTENTIAL PRODUCTION TRENDS
Potential production trends have been qualitatively ranked based on the probability that brittle or naturally fractured, thermally mature organic-rich beds of Woodford Shale are present in the subsurface, Fig. 6. The trends are designated as areas of probable, possible, local and poor success as follows. Probable success areas are those where organic-rich Woodford Shale is in the gas generation stage of thermally maturity and where large volumes of gas are likely to reside. Possible success areas are those where organic-rich Woodford beds are in the oil window and where the formation is shallow enough for economic drilling and for open fracture networks to persist. Local success areas are those in shelf settings where the Woodford Shale is relatively thin, but thermally mature and at a relatively shallow depth. Poor success areas are those where the formation is exposed at the surface or is shallow and unconfined, and where Woodford Shale or equivalent units have been metamorphosed or have very low organic carbon content.


Fig. 6 . Map showing hydrocarbon production potential and estimated volumes of oil-in-place and gas-in-place for Woodford Shale and age-equivalent units in the (A) Anadarko and (B) Permian Basin regions. 3

ESTIMATION OF RESOURCE POTENTIAL
The resource potential estimations assume that oil and gas in the Woodford Shale are indigenous, and were calculated based on organic carbon concentration, organic hydrogen concentration, organic matter type, thermal maturity and facies volumes (thickness times area), Fig. 6. 3 While this is not an assessment of recoverable oil and gas, it does estimate total gas-in-place and oil-in-place through mass balance calculations based on the concentration of organic hydrogen in the source beds. 3 The data suggest that total in-place gas in the Woodford Shale is on the order of 830 Tcf and total in-place oil is on the order of 250 Bbbl in the southern midcontinent. These volumes include 130 Bbbl of oil-in-place in the Anadarko Basin region, and 230 Tcf of gas-in-place and 120 Bbbl of oil-in-place in the Permian Basin region.

In the Anadarko Basin region, the estimated gas potential is 600 Tcf in the area of probable success, an area that includes the Anadarko and Arkoma Basins. The estimated gas potential is 0.24 Tcf and the estimated oil potential is 70 Bbbl in the area of possible success, encompassing the Nemaha Uplift, Marietta and Ardmore Basins, Arbuckle Mountain Uplift, southern flank of the Anadarko Basin, and frontal zone of the Ouachita Tectonic Belt in Oklahoma. About 4.4 Tcf of gas-in-place and 60 Bbbl of oil-in-place are estimated for the area of local success, which includes most of the northern and central Oklahoma Platforms.

In the Permian Basin region, the estimated gas potential is 220 Tcf in the area of probable success, which includes the Delaware and Val Verde Basins. The estimated gas potential is 0.11 Tcf and the estimated oil potential is 35 Bbbl in the area of possible success, encompassing the Central Basin Platform and northern flank of the Pecos Arch. About 9 Tcf of gas-in-place and 84 Bbbl of oil-in-place are estimated for the area of local success, which encompasses much of the shelf and platform provinces and most of the Midland Basin.

Although estimates of the volume of undiscovered hydrocarbons are inherently problematic because of the assumptions that must be made to complete the calculations, the mass balance approach yields orders-of-magnitude for in-place oil and gas, and provide a consistent means to compare and rank different areas of interest as to their hydrocarbon production potential.

CONCLUSIONS
The Woodford Shale is a major unconventional energy resource with the potential for producing significant volumes of both oil and gas. Intuitively, its status as a world-class oil source rock indicates that the formation should contain large residual concentrations of hydrocarbons, and analytical data from numerous studies confirm this inference. The inherent inefficiency of hydrocarbon expulsion is the primary reason why source rocks like the Woodford retain large volumes of oil and gas and are attractive targets for unconventional exploration. Given the ubiquity and magnitude of oil and gas shows, local production from naturally fractured reservoirs, recent unconventional production from the Woodford Shale in Oklahoma, successes in unconventional resource recovery from analogous formations, and current oil and gas prices, the Woodford Shale in the southern midcontinent is a compelling exploration target.

Optimum locations for exploration are where organic-rich beds are currently in the oil or gas generation window. Optimum reservoir facies are those comprising brittle lithologies capable of maintaining open fracture networks. The best reservoirs are likely to be completed in mature organic-rich cherts and cherty black shales but other lithologies, such as sandstone, organic-rich siltstone, and silty black shale, can also be expected to produce locally. Areas having the greatest production potential and most prospective lithologies are the Anadarko Basin in Oklahoma, Marietta and Ardmore Basins in Oklahoma, Arkoma Basin in Oklahoma and Arkansas, frontal zone of the Ouachita Tectonic Belt, Delaware Basin in Texas and New Mexico, Central Basin Platform in Texas and New Mexico and the Val Verde and Midland Basins in Texas.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author is indebted to Indiana Geological Survey colleagues Kimberly H. Sowder, Barbara T. Hill and Renee D. Stubenrauch, who drafted the figures and formatted the photographs for this article. Also, IGS staff scientists Margaret V. Ennis, Nancy R. Hasenmueller, Maria D. Mastalerz, and Charles W. Zuppann reviewed the article and offered constructive criticisms. IGS editor Deborah A. DeChurch proofread the manuscript. Publication is authorized by John C. Steinmetz, State Geologist and Director of the Indiana Geological Survey.

LITERATURE CITED
1 Comer, J. B. and H. H. Hinch, “Recognizing and quantifying expulsion of oil from the Woodford Formation and age-equivalent rocks in Oklahoma and Arkansas,” AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 71, No. 7, 1987, pp. 844-858.

2 Cardott, B. J., “Overview of Woodford gas-shale play of Oklahoma, US,” Oklahoma Geological Survey, http://www.ogs.ou.edu/pdf/AAPG08woodford.pdf, accessed May 28, 2008.

3 Comer, J. B., “Facies distribution and hydrocarbon production potential of Woodford Shale in the southern Midcontinent,” in Cardott, B. J., ed., Unconventional Energy Resources in the Southern Midcontinent, 2004 Symposium, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 110, Norman, Okla., 2005, pp. 51-62.

4 Brenneman, M. C. and P. V. Smith, “The chemical relationships between crude oils and their source rocks,” in Weeks, L. G., ed., Habitat of Oil, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1958, pp. 818-849.

5 Welte, D. H., Hagemann, H. W., Hollerbach, A., Leythaeuser, D. and W. Stahl, “Correlation between petroleum and source rock,” Proceedings of the Ninth World Petroleum Congress, Vol. 2, 1975, pp. 179-191.

6 Lewan, M. D., Winters, J. C. and J. H. McDonald, “Generation of oil-like pyrolyzates from organic-rich shales,” Science, Vol. 203 No. 4383, 1979, pp. 897-899.

7 Winters, J. C., Williams, J. A. and M. D. Lewan, “A laboratory study of petroleum generation by hydrous pyrolysis,” in Bjoroy, M. et al., eds., Advances in Organic Geochemistry 1981, John Wiley, Chichester, United Kingdom, 1983, pp. 524-533.

8 Iztan, Y. H., “Geochemical correlation between crude oils from Misener reservoirs and potential source rocks in central and north-central Oklahoma,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Tulsa, 1985, p. 191.

9 Reber, J. J., “Correlation and biomarker characterization of Woodford-type oil and source rock, Aylesworth Field, Marshall County, Oklahoma,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Tulsa, 1988, p. 96.

10 Burruss, R. C. and J. R. Hatch, “Geochemistry of oils and hydrocarbon source rocks, greater Anadarko Basin: Evidence for multiple sources of oils and long-distance oil migration,” in Johnson, K. S., ed., Anadarko Basin Symposium, 1988, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 90, Norman, Okla., 1989, pp. 53-64.

11 Philp, R. P., Jones, P. J., Lin, L. H., Michael, G. E. and C. A. Lewis, “An organic geochemical study of oils, source rocks, and tar sands in the Ardmore and Anadarko Basins,” in Johnson, K. S., ed., Anadarko Basin Symposium, 1988, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 90, Norman, Okla., 1989, pp. 65-76.

12 Rice, D. D., Threlkeld, C. N. and A. K. Vuletich, “Characterization and origin of natural gases of the Anadarko Basin,” in Johnson, K. S., ed., Anadarko Basin Symposium, 1988, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 90, Norman, Okla., 1989, pp. 47-52.

13 Jones, P. J. and R. P. Philp, “Oils and source rocks from Pauls Valley, Anadarko Basin, Oklahoma, US,” Applied Geochemistry, Vol. 5, No.4, 1990, pp. 429-448.
14 Comer, J. B., “Stratigraphic analysis of the Upper Devonian Woodford Formation, Permian Basin, West Texas and southeastern New Mexico,” Report of Investigations 201, Bureau of Economic Geology, Austin, Texas, 1991, p. 63.

15 Comer, J. B., “Organic geochemistry and paleogeography of Upper Devonian formations in Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas,” in Johnson, K. S. and B. J. Cardott, eds., Source Rocks in the Southern Midcontinent, 1990 Symposium, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 93, Norman, Okla., 1992, pp. 70-93.

16 Curiale, J. A., “Petroleum occurrences and source rock potential of the Ouachita Mountains, southeastern Oklahoma,” Oklahoma Geological Survey, Bulletin 135, Norman, Okla., 1983, p. 65.

17 Wang, H. D. and R. P. Philp, “Geochemical study of potential source rocks and crude oils in the Anadarko Basin, Okla.,” AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 81, No. 2, 1997, pp. 249-275.

18 Landis, C. R., Trabelsi, A. and G. Strathearn, “Hydrocarbon potential of selected Permian Basin shales as classified within the organic facies concept,” in Johnson, K. S. and B. J. Cardott, eds., Source Rocks in the Southern Midcontinent, 1990 Symposium, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 93, Norman, Okla., 1992, pp. 229-247.

19 Sullivan, K. L., “Organic facies variation of the Woodford Shale in western Oklahoma,” Shale Shaker, Vol. 35, No. 4, 1985, pp. 76-89.

20 Cardott, B. J., “Thermal maturation of the Woodford Shale in the Anadarko Basin,” in Johnson, K. S., ed., Anadarko Basin Symposium, 1988, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 90, Norman, Okla., 1989, pp. 32-46.

21 Amsden, T. W. et al., “Devonian of the southern midcontinent area, United States,” in Oswald, D. H., ed., International Symposium on the Devonian System, Alberta Society of Petroleum Geologists, Calgary, Canada, 1967, pp. 913-932.
22 Amsden, T. W., “Hunton Group (Late Ordovician, Silurian and Early Devonian) in the Arkoma Basin of Oklahoma,” Oklahoma Geological Survey, Bulletin 129, Norman, Okla., 1980, p. 136.

23 Amsden, T. W., “Hunton Group (Late Ordovician, Silurian, and Early Devonian) in the Anadarko Basin of Oklahoma,” Oklahoma Geological Survey, Bulletin 121, Norman, Okla., 1975, p. 214.

24 Hass, W. H. and J. W. Huddle, “Late Devonian and Early Mississippian age of the Woodford Shale in Oklahoma, as determined from conodonts,” US Geological Survey Professional Paper 525-D, 1965, pp. D125-D132.

25 Huffman, G. G., “Geology of the flanks of the Ozark uplift,” Oklahoma Geological Survey, Bulletin 77, 1958, p. 281.

26 Cloud, P. E., Barnes, V. E. and W. H. Hass, “Devonian-Mississippian transition in central Texas,” GSA Bulletin, Vol. 68, No. 7, 1957, pp. 807-816.

27 Graves, R. W., “Devonian conodonts from the Caballos Novaculite,” Journal of Paleontology, Vol. 26, No. 4, 1952, pp. 610-612.

28 Laudon, L. R. and A. L. Bowsher, “Mississippian formations of southwestern New Mexico,” GSA Bulletin, Vol. 60, No. 1, 1949, pp. 1-88.

29 King, P. B., King, R. E. and J. B. Knight, “Geology of the Hueco Mountains, El Paso and Hudspeth Counties, Texas,” Oil and Gas Investigations Preliminary Map 36, US Geological Survey, 1945.

30 Stevenson, F. V., “Devonian of New Mexico,” Journal of Geology, Vol. 53, No. 4, 1945, pp. 217-245.

31 Amsden, T. W. and G. Klapper, “Misener Sandstone (Middle-Upper Devonian), north-central Oklahoma,” AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 56, No. 12, 1972, pp. 2323-2334.

32 Galley, J. E., “Oil and geology in the Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico,” in Weeks, L. G., ed., Habitat of Oil, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1958, pp. 395-446.

33 Ham, W. E., “Regional geology of the Arbuckle Mountains, Oklahoma,” in Ham, W. E., ed., Geology of the Arbuckle Mountains, Oklahoma Geological Survey, 1969, pp. 5-21.

34 Ham, W. E. and J. L. Wilson, “Paleozoic epeirogeny and orogeny in the central United States,” American Journal of Science, Vol. 265, No. 5, 1967, pp. 332-407.

35 Freeman, T. and D. Schumacher, “Qualitative pre-Sylamore (Devonian-Mississippian) physiography delineated by onlapping conodont zones, northern Arkansas,” GSA Bulletin, Vol. 80, No.11, 1969, pp. 2327-2334.

36 Ellison, S. P., “Subsurface Woodford black shale, west Texas and southeast New Mexico,” Report of Investigations 7, Bureau of Economic Geology, Austin, Texas, 1950, p. 20.

37 Hester, T. C., Schmoker, J. W. and H. L. Sahl, “Log-derived regional source-rock characteristics of the Woodford Shale, Anadarko Basin, Oklahoma,” US Geological Survey Bulletin 1866-D, 1990, pp. D1-D38.

38 Harlton, B. H., “The Harrisburg trough, Stevens and Carter Counties, Oklahoma,” in Hicks, I. C. et al., eds., Petroleum Geology of Southern Oklahoma, v. 1, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956, pp. 135-143.

39 Heckel, P. H. and B. J. Witzke, “Devonian world palaeogeography determined from distribution of carbonates and related lithic palaeoclimatic indicators,” in House, M. R., Scrutton, C. T. and M. G. Bassett, eds., Special Papers in Palaeontology No. 23, The Devonian System: A Palaeontological Association International Symposium, Palaeontological Association, London, 1979, pp. 99-123.

40 Carr, J. L., “The thermal maturity of the Chattanooga Formation along a transect from the Ozark Uplift to the Arkoma Basin,” Shale Shaker, Vol. 38, No. 3, 1987, pp. 32-40.

41 Cardott, B. J. and M. W. Lambert, “Thermal maturation by vitrinite reflectance of Woodford Shale, Anadarko Basin, Oklahoma,” AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 69, No. 11, 1985, pp. 1982-1998.

42 Houseknecht, D. W., Hathon, L. A. and T. A. McGilvery, “Thermal maturity of Paleozoic strata in the Arkoma Basin,” in Johnson, K. S. and B. J. Cardott, eds., Source Rocks in the Southern Midcontinent, 1990 Symposium, Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular 93, Norman, Okla., 1992, pp. 122-132.

43 Houseknecht, D. W. and S. M. Matthews, “Thermal maturity of Carboniferous strata, Ouachita Mountains,” AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 69, No. 3, 1985, pp. 335-345.
.
THE AUTHOR
John B. Comer is a Senior Scientist at the Indiana Geological Survey with an academic appointment at Indiana University. He earned a BA from Ohio Wesleyan University, an MS from The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and a PhD from The University of Texas at Austin, all in geology. During his 36-year career, he worked as a research scientist in the geochemistry group at the Amoco Production Company Research Center in Tulsa, an assistant and associate professor at Tulsa University and the Geochemistry Section Head at the Indiana Geological Survey. Dr. Comer has conducted research in organic, inorganic and environmental geochemistry, clastic sedimentation, sedimentary petrology and the deposition and diagenesis of organic-rich rocks. He is an active member of AAPG, SEPM and GSA and has authored more than 120 scholarly papers and technical reports in geology and geochemistry.