The dynamic economic evaluation method of shale gas resources

Gang-yi Zhai; Xiang-lin Chen; Xiang-hua Xia; Zhi Zhou; Tian-xu Guo; Guo-heng Liu; Rui-han Yuan

doi:10.31035/cg2018096

2019 Vol. 2, No. 2

Article Contents

Article navigation > China Geology > 2019 > 2(2): 211-217

Next Article Previous Article

Gang-yi Zhai, Xiang-lin Chen, Xiang-hua Xia, Zhi Zhou, Tian-xu Guo, Guo-heng Liu, Rui-han Yuan, 2019. The dynamic economic evaluation method of shale gas resources, China Geology, 2, 211-217. doi: 10.31035/cg2018096

Citation:

Gang-yi Zhai, Xiang-lin Chen, Xiang-hua Xia, Zhi Zhou, Tian-xu Guo, Guo-heng Liu, Rui-han Yuan, 2019. The dynamic economic evaluation method of shale gas resources, China Geology, 2, 211-217. doi: 10.31035/cg2018096

The dynamic economic evaluation method of shale gas resources

a.
Oil & Gas Survey, China Geological Survey, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100029, China
b.
Unconventional Oil and Gas Geology Laboratory, China Geological Survey, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100029, China
c.
Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China

More Information

Corresponding authors: zhaigangyi@126.com (Gang-yi Zhai); 442620703@qq.com (Xiang-lin Chen)

Received Date: 08 March 2019

Revised Date: 27 April 2019

Accepted Date: 07 May 2019

Available Online: 07 June 2019

Publish Date: 25 June 2019

Abstract

Abstract

At present, most shale gas exploration and development areas in China are difficult to provide sufficient and effective production data to support economic evaluation, since they are still in the initial stage of low exploration level. In addition, ecological and environmental factors are not taken into account in the evaluation process, which does not meet the needs of green energy development of China. Aiming at above problems, the dynamic economic evaluation method of shale gas resources based on calculus principle is proposed. The Arps hyperbolic decreasing curve model will be used in the evaluation of single shale gas well production, which can evaluate single well production of shale gas by fitting the existing dynamic production data to generate the production decreasing curve. Therefore, the variation regularity of the cumulative production of single well shale gas within the study area can be obtained by the model mentioned above. According to the variation regularity of the cumulative production obtained from the Arps hyperbolic decreasing curve model, the recovery period of single well cost, ultimate economic life and the ultimate economic resource can be evaluated dynamically by analyzing the variation regularity of the cumulative sales revenue and cumulative input cost of single shale gas well. Then the evaluation result can be further extend to the whole evaluation areas, in order to analyze shale gas resources’ economic value in evaluation regions under different shale gas price conditions. The results of the above evaluation methods are not only conducive to improving the economic benefits of relative shale gas development enterprises, but also provide a basis for the national energy strategy deployment.
- Shale gas /
- Evaluation method /
- Economic resources /
- Single well cost /
- Economic life

FullText(HTML)

References

[1]	Cao Y, Wang XZ. 2011. Economic evaluation of CBM gas development projects. Natural Gas Industry, 31(11), 103–106 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[2]	Chen SB, Zhu YM, Qin Y, Wang HY, Liu HL. 2014. Reservoir evaluation of the Lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation shale gas in the southern Sichuan Basin of China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 57, 619–630. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.07.008 CrossRef Google Scholar
[3]	Chen ZH, Peter H. 2015. A shale gas resource potential assessment of Devonian Horn River strata using a well-performance method. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 53(2), 156–167. Google Scholar
[4]	Costa D, Neto B, Danko AS, Fiúza A. 2018. Life cycle assessment of a shale gas exploration and exploitation project in the province of Burgos, Spain. Science of the Total Environment, 645, 130–145. Google Scholar
[5]	Elijah AA. 2015. Economic evaluation of Bowland shale gas wells development in the UK. International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, 9(7), 2591–2599. Google Scholar
[6]	Gao SK, Zhu WL, Yin C. 2014. An economic analysis of shale gas resources: A case study of the Marcellus shale play. Natural Gas Industry, 34(6), 141–148 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[7]	Guo QL, Shen CX, Yang T, Xie HB. 2005. Economic evaluation methods for oil and gas resource assessment. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 26(S1), 45–48 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[8]	Guo XQ, Yan Q, Wang AJ. 2017. Assessment of methods for forecasting shale gas supply in China based on economic considerations. Energies, 10(11), 175–189. Google Scholar
[9]	Huang XN, Dong DZ, Wang YM. 2016. Economic assessment method of unconventional oil and gas resources and case study. Natural Ga Geoscience, 27(9), 1651–1658 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[10]	Innikova S, Gülen G, Browning J, Tinkwer SW. 2014. Profitability of shale gas drilling: A case study of the Fayetteville shale play. Energy, 81, 382–393. Google Scholar
[11]	Jia CZ, Zheng M, Zhang YF. 2012. Unconventional hydrocarbon resources in China and the prospect of exploration and development. Petroleum exploration and development, 39(2), 129–136 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[12]	Kaiser, MJ. 2012. Profitability Assessment of Haynesville shale gas wells. Energy, 38, 315–330. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.11.057 CrossRef Google Scholar
[13]	Li W, Zhuang Y, Liu LL, Zhang L, Du J. 2019. Economic evaluation and environmental assessment of shale gas sweetening process. Chemical Engineering & Technology, 42(4), 753–760. Google Scholar
[14]	Luo D, Dai Y. 2009. Economic evaluation of coal bed methane production in China. Energy Policy, 37(10), 3883–3889. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.06.049 CrossRef Google Scholar
[15]	Lin X, Liu M. 2018. Study on optimal economic evaluation of industrial drilling platform for shale oil and gas development. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1176, 32–40. Google Scholar
[16]	Luo DK, Xia LY. 2015. An economic evaluation method of coal bed methane resources during the target selection phase of exploration. Petroleum Science, 12(4), 705–711. doi: 10.1007/s12182-015-0053-6 CrossRef Google Scholar
[17]	McGlade C, Speirs J, Sorrell S. 2013. Unconventional gas—A review of regional and global resource estimates. Energy, 55, 571–584. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2013.01.048 CrossRef Google Scholar
[18]	Mei XD, Zhang SL, Xiong DM, Wang CQ, He M. 2016. Impacts of shale gas exploitation on ecological environment in Fuling and countermeasures. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University (Social Sciences Edition), 18(6), 8–12 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[19]	Mohtar RH, Shafiezadeh H, Blake J, Daher B. 2019. Economic, social, and environmental evaluation of energy development in the Eagle Ford shale play. Science of the Total Environment, 646, 1601–1614. Google Scholar
[20]	Viet NL, Hyundon S. 2019. Development of reservoir economic indicator for Barnett shale gas potential evaluation based on the reservoir and hydraulic fracturing parameters. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 66, 159–167. doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2019.03.024 CrossRef Google Scholar
[21]	Su JC, Zhang JC, Zhu WL. 2018a. Improved methodology of economic evaluation of coal bed methane based on discounted cash flow analysis. Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 47(3), 631–638 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[22]	Su JC, Zhang JC, Zhu WL. 2018b. Study on unconventional natural gas economic evaluation. Natural Gas Geoscience, 29(5), 743–753 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[23]	Williamskovacs JD, Clarkson CR. 2014. A new tool for prospect evaluation in shale gas reservoirs. Journal of Natural Gas Science & Engineering, 18, 90–103. Google Scholar
[24]	Wang HJ, Ma F, Tong X, Liu Z, Zhang X, Wu Z. 2016. Assessment of global unconventional oil and gas resources. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 43(6), 925–940 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.1016/S1876-3804(16)30111-2 CrossRef Google Scholar
[25]	Xie B, Wang SS, Yu XC. 2012. Engineering modes and their economy evaluation. Natural Gas Industry, 32(10), 99–102 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[26]	Xing WT, Zhang ZY, Wu SL. 2016. Quantitative evaluation model of ecological environment influence on shale gas development. China Population, Resources and Environment, 26(7), 137–144 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[27]	Yang S, Kang YS, Zhao Q, Wang HY, Li JM. 2008. Method for predicting economic peak yield for a single well of coalbed methane. Journal of China University of Mining and Technology, 18(4), 521–526. doi: 10.1016/S1006-1266(08)60287-4 CrossRef Google Scholar
[28]	Yuan JH, Luo DK, Feng LY. 2015. A review of the technical and economic evaluation techniques for shale gas development. Applied Energy, 148, 49–65. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.03.040 CrossRef Google Scholar
[29]	Zhai GY, Wang YF, Zhi Z, Yu SF, Chen XL, Zhang YX. 2018. Exploration and research progress of shale gas in China. China Geology, 1(2), 257–272. doi: 10.31035/cg2018024 CrossRef Google Scholar
[30]	Zhang JC, Lin LM, Li YX, Jiang SL, Liu JX, Jiang WL, Tang X, Han SB. 2012. The method of shale gas assessment: Probability volume method. Earth Science Frontiers (China University of Geosciences (Beijing); Peking University), 19(2), 184–191 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar
[31]	Zou Q, Yin XL, Wang KM. 2018. Economic evaluation thoughts in management decision of overseas oil and gas project. China Mining Magazine, 27(3), 54–56 (in Chinese with English abstract). Google Scholar