Figures from Report, "Drilling California: A Reality Check on the Monterey Shale"

8/13/2019 Figures from Report, "Drilling California: A Reality Check on the Monterey Shale"

1/38

J. David Hughes


2/38

The Monterey Tight Oil Play in California, With Relevant

Sedimentary Basins and Counties

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (play boundaries from EIA/INTEK report, 2011)


3/38

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013

NumberofProducingWe

lls

OilProd

uction(thousandbarrelsperday)

Year

Oil Production

Number of Producing Wells

California Oil Production and Number of Producing Wells,

1980 through May 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (three month trailing moving average; data from Drillinginfo, current through May 2013)

Peak 1985


4/38

Density of Inactive and Active Oil Wells in California

Drilled Between 1977 and 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (data from DI Desktop, August 2013)

Total # of Inactive Wells:

158,549

Total # of Active Wells:

79,574


5/38

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Kern LosAngeles

Fresno Orange Ventura SantaBarbara

Monterey Other

Numbero

fWells

County

Number of Oil and Gas Wells Drilled in California,

by County through May 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (data from Drillinginfo, current through May 2013)

Total Wells = 238,123

Active or Drilling = 79,574

Non-Productive = 158,549

Of the wells classified as Active or

Drilling only about 50,000 arecurrently producing.


6/38

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013

Produc

tion(thousand

barrelsperday)

Year

Other Wells

Cyclic Steam Wells

Conventional Wells

California Oil Production by Well Type,

1980 through May 2013


Peak 1985


7/38

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013

Produc

tion(thousand

barrelsperday)

Year

Monterey Formation

Rest of California

Oil Production from the Monterey Formation and

the Rest of California, 1980 through May 2013


Peak 1985

Rest of California

Monterey Formation


8/38

Distribution of Potential Tight Oil Production from the

Monterey Shale per the EIA/INTEK Report (2011)

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (from EIA/INTEK report, 2011, http://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/usshalegas/pdf/usshaleplays.pdf)


9/38

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013

NumberofProducingWe

lls

OilProd

uction(thousandbarrelsperday)

Year

Oil Production


Monterey Formation Oil Production and Number of

Producing Wells, 1980 through May 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (three month trailing moving average; data from Drillinginfo, September 2013)

Peak 1982


10/38

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Active Drilling Plugged(P&A)

Inactive Dry Hole Other Shut In

Numbero

fWells

Well Status

Status of Monterey Oil and Gas Wells Drilled

From 1980 Through May 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (data from Drillinginfo, September 2013)

Total Wells = 4,921

Active or Drilling = 2,784

Non-Productive = 2,137


11/38

Distribution of Oil Fields, Including Wells Producing From

the Monterey Formation as of May 2013



12/38

Stratigraphic Nomenclature of the Monterey Formation in

the San Joaquin Basin

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (from USGS Bulletin 1713 Chapter 8)


13/38

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013

Production(thousand

barrelsperda

y)

Year

Offshore Santa Barbara

Stevens SandOnshore Santa BarbaraMonterey UndividedDevilwater ShaleMcLure ShaleReef Ridge Shale

Antelope Shale

Oil Production from Subdivisions of the Monterey

Formation, 1980 through May 2013


Peak 1982


14/38

Holly Platform producing from Monterey Formation in the

South Ellwood Offshore Field

Photo by Andy Rusch, licensed under Create Commons, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Platform_Holly,_Santa_Barbara.jpg.


15/38

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

OilProductionperWe

ll(barrelsperd

ay)

Year

Stevens Sand

Antelope Shale

McLure Shale

Reef Ridge Shale

Onshore Santa Barbara

Average Onshore Oil Production per Well from Subdivisions of

the Monterey Formation, 2000 through May 2013

Hughes GSR I nc, 2013 (three month trailing moving average; data from Drillinginfo, September 2013)


16/38

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Production(thousandbarrelsperda

y)

Year

Onshore Santa BarbaraMonterey Undivided

Devilwater ShaleMcLure ShaleReef Ridge ShaleAntelope Shale

Oil Production from Shale Reservoirs

in the Monterey Formation, 2000 through May 2013


Peak 2002


17/38

Distribution and Depth of McLure Shale (left) and Antelope

Shale (right) Source Rocks in the San Joaquin Basin

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (from USGS Professional Paper 1713, Chapter 8)

C S f S


18/38

Cross Sections of McLure Shale and Antelope

Shale Source Rocks in the San Joaquin Basin

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (from USGS Professional Paper 1713, Chapter 8)

O t f M t F ti t t t V d b Ai


19/38

Outcrop of Monterey Formation strata at Vandenberg Air

Force Base Illustrating Complex Meso-scale Deformation

(AAPG Explorer, February 2013, https://www.aapg.org/explorer/2013/02feb/monterey_shale0213.cfm.) Hughes GSR Inc, 2013

T i l T D li C f M t Sh l W ll


20/38

Typical Type Decline Curves for Monterey Shale Wells

Provided in the EIA/INTEK Report

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (from EIA/INTEK report, 2011, http://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/usshalegas/pdf/usshaleplays.pdf)

Elk Hill Fi ld O id t l W ll I iti l P d ti (BOE)


21/38

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

In

itialProduction(BOE/day)

Directional Wells Vertical Wells

Elk Hills FieldOccidental WellsInitial Production (BOE)

grouped by Year of First Production, 2007 through June 2013

(data from Drillinginfo, current through June 2013)

Average Well Since 2007

Directional = 108 BOE/day

Vertical = 96 BOE/day

2007 2008 2009-

2010

2011 2012 2013

Elk Hills shale vertical well IP (INTEK)

Horizontal well IP (INTEK)

Vertical well IP (INTEK)

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013

Elk Hill Fi ld O id t l W ll I iti l Oil P d ti d


22/38

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Init

ialOilProduction(bbls/day)


Elk Hills FieldOccidental WellsInitial Oil Production grouped

by Year of First Production, 2007 through June 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (data from Drillinginfo, current through June 2013)


Directional = 46 bbls/day

Vertical = 46 bbls/day

2007 2008 2009-

2010

2011 2012 2013




S i i A l D fi i th R d N th Sh ft Fi ld


23/38

Seismic Anomaly Defining the Rose and North Shafter Fields

(Grau et al., 2003, http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/2003/grau/index.htm) Hughes GSR Inc, 2013

2 miles

Rose Field

North Shafter Field

N th Sh ft d R Fi ld Oil P d ti d N b f


24/38

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Numberof

ProducingWells

OilProd

uction(thousa

ndbarrelsperday)

Year

Oil Production


North Shafter and Rose Fields - Oil Production and Number of

Producing Wells, 1990 through June 2013


Peak 2002

Distribution of Wells by Status in


25/38

Rose Field

North Shafter Field

Distribution of Wells by Status in

the Rose and North Shafter Fields as of mid-2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (California Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), October 2013)

View of Central Part of North Shafter Field


26/38

R.A. Shafter-1 Discovery Well

1 mile

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (California Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), October 2013)

View of Central Part of North Shafter Field

Illustrating Well Footprint as of mid-2013

Rose & North Shafter Fields Initial Production (BOE) grouped by


27/38

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

In

itialProductio

n(BOE/day)


1983-

1999

2000 2001 2002-

2003

2004-

2010

2011 2012 2013

Rose & North Shafter Fields Initial Production (BOE) grouped by

Year of First Production, 1980 through June 2013


Average Well 2005-2013

Directional = 157 BOE/d

Vertical = 94 BOE/dElk Hills shale vertical well IP (INTEK)



Rose & North Shafter Fields Cumulative Oil Production grouped by


28/38

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Cu

mulativeOilProduction(Kbbl

)Directional Wells Vertical Wells

Rose & North Shafter Fields Cumulative Oil Production grouped by

Year of First Production, 1980 through June 2013


EIA/INTEK projection is that

Monterey wells will produce

550 Kbbls on average

Average Well > 10 years old

Directional = 197 Kbbls

Vertical = 180 Kbbls

1983-

1999

2000 2001 2002-

2003

2004-

2010

2011 2012 2013

San Joaquin Basin (All Monterey Wells) Initial Production (BOE)


29/38

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

InitialProducti

on(BOE/day)


2005-

2009

2010-

2011

2012-

2013

San Joaquin Basin (All Monterey Wells) Initial Production (BOE)






1980-

1984

1985-

1989

1990-

1994

1995-

1999

2000-

2004




San Joaquin Basin (All Monterey Wells) Cumulative Oil Production


30/38

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Cu

mulativeOilPr

oduction(Kbbl)


San Joaquin Basin (All Monterey Wells) Cumulative Oil Production



EIA/INTEK projection is that

Monterey wells will produce




Vertical = 127 Kbbls

1980-

1984

1985-

1989

1990-

1994

1995-

1999

2000-

2004

2005-

2009

2010-

2011

2012-

2013

Santa Maria Basin (Onshore Monterey Wells) Initial Production


31/38

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

InitialProductio

n(BOE/day)


Santa Maria Basin (Onshore Monterey Wells) Initial Production

(BOE) grouped by Year of First Production, 1980 through June 2013





1980 1981 1982-

1983

1984 1985-

1987

1988-

1989

2000-

2010

2011-

2013

1990-

1999




Santa Maria Basin (Onshore Monterey Wells) Cumulative Oil


32/38

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Cu

mulativeOilPr

oduction(Kbbl)


Santa Maria Basin (Onshore Monterey Wells) Cumulative Oil

Production by Year of First Production, 1980 through June 2013


EIA/INTEK projection is thatMonterey wells will produce




Vertical = 67 Kbbls

1980 1981 1982-

1983

1984 1985-

1987

1988-

1989

2000-

2010

2011-

2013

1990-

1999

Scenarios of Increases in Oil Production from the Monterey


33/38

Scenarios of Increases in Oil Production from the Monterey

Shale in the USC study, 2015-2013

(USC study, March 2013, http://gen.usc.edu/assets/001/84955.pdf) Hughes GSR Inc, 2013

Depending on assumptions, Monterey production is forecast by the USC

study to grow by between 0.18 and 1.1 million barrels per day by 2020.

Increase in California Oil Production fromMonterey Tight Oil (mbd)

Scenario 2015 2020 2025 2030

Decline Curve Analysis (1) 0.16 1.1 1.6 1.6

Decline Curve Analysis (2) 0.15 1.1 2.4 3.3

Modified Decline Curve Analysis (1) 0.15 0.69 0.67 0.42

Modified Decline Curve Analysis (2) 0.077 0.58 1.2 1.7

Incremental Advanced-Technology Oil Production 0.13 0.18 0.17 0.15

Average of all scenarios 0.1334 0.73 1.208 1.434

Average of highest and lowest scenarios 0.14 0.64 1.285 1.725

USC Economic Study Assumptions of Growth in Monterey


34/38

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

TotalCaliforniaOilProduction(Kbbls/d

ay)

Year

Existing Production with Flat Projection

USC Study Decline Curve Analysis 1

USC Study Decline Curve Analysis 2

USC Study Modified Decline Curve Analysis 1

USC Study Modified Decline Curve Analysis 2

Incremental Advanced-Technology Oil ProductionAverage of all scenarios

History Forecast

USC Economic Study Assumptions of Growth in Monterey

Tight Oil Production, 2013-2030

7 times current

California production

(Based on scenarios in USC study, March 2013, http://gen.usc.edu/assets/001/84955.pdf) Hughes GSR Inc, 2013

USC Economic Study Estimates of the Number of Wells


35/38

USC Economic Study Estimates of the Number of Wells

Required for Monterey Tight Oil Production Growth


The high case would see production grow seven-fold

through 2030, and the average of all scenarios would see

California production more than double by 2020.

Reference Well Production Used by USC Economic Study to Estimate


36/38

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011

Oil

Production(ba

rrelsperday)

Year

USC Type Well RA-1

USC Type Well 3-1

Reference Well Production Used by USC Economic Study to Estimate

Monterey Tight Oil Production, 1984 through February 2013

Hughes GSR Inc, 2013 (data from Drillinginfo, August 2013)

RA-1 Well:8.1 bbls/day

125,533 bbls cumulative

3-1 Well:0.5 bbls/day

74,482 bbls cumulative

Actual Number of Wells Required to Meet USC 2030


37/38

USC Scenario

USCReference

Well

USC 2030

MontereyProduction

(million barrelsper day)

USCNumberof Wells

Actual Number ofWells Required to Meet

USC Forecast withUSC Reference Well

USC Oil

Recoverythrough 2030

(billionbarrels)

Decline CurveAnalysis 1

3-1 1.6 4,112 117,269 6.89

Decline CurveAnalysis 2

RA-1 3.3 4,112 232,562 10.20

Modified Decline CurveAnalysis 1

3-1 0.42 4,112 49,119 3.14

Modified Decline CurveAnalysis 2

RA-1 1.7 4,112 119,532 5.21

Actual Number of Wells Required to Meet USC 2030

Oil Production Estimates


The highest oil production scenario would see the recovery of some

10.2 billion barrels by 2030, or 66 percent of the purported 15.4 billion barrels of

technically recoverable Monterey tight oil resources in the EIA/INTEK report.


38/38

Figures from Dril l ing Californ ia:A Reali ty Check on the Monterey Shale

by J. David Hughes (2013).

Read the whole report at

montereyoil.org

All material copyright 2013 by J. David

Hughes unless otherwise indicated.

For reprint requests and other inquiries,

please contact Post Carbon Institute at

postcarbon.org
http://montereyoil.org/http://postcarbon.org/http://postcarbon.org/http://montereyoil.org/

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	post-carbon-institute
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Figures from Report, "Drilling California: A Reality Check on the Monterey Shale"

Documents