• 검색 결과가 없습니다.

Prediction of Production Performance Using RTA for Gas Wells in Horn River Shale Gas Field, Canada

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Prediction of Production Performance Using RTA for Gas Wells in Horn River Shale Gas Field, Canada"

Copied!
8
0
0

로드 중.... (전체 텍스트 보기)

전체 글

(1)The Korean Society for Geosystem Engineering, Vol. 49, No. 6 O2012PGpp. 807-814. http://dx.doi.org/10.12972/ksmer.2012.49.6.807. ISSN 1598-8023(print) eISSN 2287-4321(Online). ٍĵȦЛ. ಑‫ۗي‬෻ࠤ়࣊ଵԧਆୢٛԧਆ୨ଭ35"ंজଡധ෉ ԧਆ୨঍ॺনુ౸  . ଲծ୨. .  ন଀ࡦ . Prediction of Production Performance Using RTA for Gas Wells in Horn River Shale Gas Field, Canada Kyejung Lee and Wonmo Sung Abstract : In shale gas reservoirs, the linear flow is the dominating flow regime during the production, which transiently occurs from the rock matrix into the fractures. This study presents the estimated ultimate recovery for 3 gas wells in the Horn River shale gas reservoir by using the ‘RTA’ software which is widely used for tight gas and shale gas reservoir analysis. Based on the Wattenbarger type curve and square root time curve analyses, which were performed to determine the dominated flow regime for the wells, it is found that all the wells are dominated by the linear flow. The square root time curve and flowing material balance analyses were used to determine the CGIP and the formation properties including the matrix permeability, fracture half length and the dimensionless fracture conductivity. The analysis model was built up to calibrate the matrix permeability and calculate the dimensionless fracture conductivity. Finally, EUR for each well was determined by the decline curve analysis(171~238×106m3) and the analytical model(258~324×106m3). Since the linear flow is the dominated flow regime in all wells, we conclude that the higher EUR values from the analytical model are more accurate.. Key words : Shale gas well, RTA analysis, Linear flow, Production prediction, Analytical model, CGIP ‫ أ څ‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫قۻ‬ԴəҼŒَؒߕͿҙࢢŒَͿ‫ۆ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫څܳۋ‬Ԧԓϭ࠶ɦ‫ڮॢ͠ۋ϶ۋݏ‬ʴইԜ‫ں‬ ČͲॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫࠘ي‬нԐؒфՕ‫ێ‬À֟۹Ϊࠗ‫ۆ‬ԦԓۙΒқԵ‫ق‬ȇν‫ڌۋ‬ʼə‘RTA’ ՙ॒࣡‫رڟ‬εট‫ڌ‬ॠ‫ي‬ ঔνѣՕ‫ێ‬À֟‫߸֨قۻ‬ʽ3Ò‫ۆ‬À֟‫ق܁‬Դ‫ۆ‬ٚࠑধսÀɠϔۤ͟‫ں‬ԓ߻ॠٕɰ. Ϥ۹Wattenbarger शܵč ԸęSRT қԵ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬Ԧԓ֨‫ݓۆߕڮ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖқԵ‫ں‬սॱॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬3Ò‫ۆ‬À֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃‫ق‬ԴԸ঍‫ڮ‬ʴ ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ںے‬ঝ‫ۍ‬ॠٕɰ. ÁՕ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձ‫ں‬ԓ߻ॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ڮي‬ʴН‫ݗ‬ս‫ݓ‬қԵ‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫ߤۿي‬À֟ϔ ۤ͟‫ں‬ćԓॠČSRT қԵ‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫ي‬ĵॢLFP‫ق‬Դؒߕ࣊ęʪ‫ٮ‬Œَъţ‫ۋ‬εʪ߻ॠٕɰ. ̚ॢ, ३ԵϿʝ‫ں‬ ‫ॢڌۋ‬ԦԓۙΒ‫ۆٮ‬০֟ࢹνϔࠡ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫࣊ߕؒي‬ęʪε‫܁ܓ‬ॠČŒَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪεԓ߻ॠٕɰ. υ‫ݓ‬φ‫Ϳڷ‬, ԓ߻ʽՕ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձ˞ęԦԓۙΒε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬ԦԓÇࣅčԸę३ԵϿʝқԵ‫ں‬սॱॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬ŔĀę, ÁÁ‫ۆ‬ ѓѪ‫ق‬ʂ३171~238×106m3ę258~324×106m3‫ۆ‬EUR‫ۋ‬ԓ߻ʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. ‫ي‬şԴ३ԵϿʝ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ԓ߻ʽEUR É‫ۋ‬ʌȭ‫ڹ‬É‫ں‬ǣࢍǻəʚ, 3ÒÀ֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃ٖॳъą‫ۋ‬۹Ϊࠗąć‫ق‬ʪɵॠ‫؍ݓ‬؉Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴ ًٖ‫ۍ‬Ԝࢗ‫ۋ‬дͿԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵşѪ‫ق‬Դԓ߻ʽĀę҃ɰ३ԵϿʝ‫ق‬Դ‫ۆ‬ٚࠑÉ‫ۋ‬ʌ‫܁‬ঝॣì‫Ϳڷ‬ ࣺɳʽɰ. ܳ‫  رڅ‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫܁‬, RTA қԵ, Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ, Ԧԓٚ͟ࠑ, ३ԵϿʝ, ‫ߤۿ‬À֟ϔۤ͟. Դ΁ 2012ț9‫ښ‬25‫ۿێ‬ս, 2012ț12‫ښ‬11‫֮ێ‬ԐٰΒ 2012ț12‫ښ‬13‫ێ‬ó‫ۦ‬ঝ‫܁‬ 1) ॢ‫ت‬ʂॡİۙ‫ڙ‬ঞąėॡę 2) KOGAS Canada Ltd. *Corresponding Author(Ձ‫ڙ‬Ͽ) E-mail; [email protected] Address; Department of Natural Resource and Environmental Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea. Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۻ‬ęÏ‫ڹ‬۹࣊ęʪ‫ۆࠗݓ‬ԦԓՁॳԜ‫ڦں‬ ३Դə սؓࣷթ ۚ‫ ۋغ‬ज़ս‫϶ۋۺ‬, ম‫ ۍۺڱ‬Òь‫ں‬ ‫ ߸֨ ॢڦ‬ф ٰĀşց‫ۺ߯ ۆ‬ԺćÀ ‫څ‬ĵʽɰ(Moon and Sung, 2012; Wang et al., 2012). ࠪǣɰঔνѣ‫ݓ‬ ً‫ق‬Դə 2008țҙࢢ Օ‫ێ‬À֟ Òь‫ॱݕ ۋ‬ʼ‫϶ڷؽ‬, ߯‫ ۺ‬Ժćε ‫(غۚ߸֨ ॢڦ‬սथ‫ ܁‬ţ‫ۋ‬, սथ‫ ܁‬Âü) 807.

(2) 808. ‫ۋ‬ć‫ · ܁‬Ձ‫ڙ‬Ͽ. фٰĀۚ‫(غ‬սؓࣷթÂü, ܳ‫ۓ‬սؓࣷթ‫ۆؚ‬ҙक़, Œ َ‫ڦ ں)ت ۆߕݓݓ‬३ ɰ‫ٍ ॢت‬ĵÀ սॱʼČ ‫ە‬ɰ (Mike et al., 2011). Օ‫ێ‬қ‫ݓ‬ѻԦԓÇࣅąॳ‫ܓں‬ԐॢBaihly et al.(2010) ‫˰ق‬βϸ, սथ‫ق܁‬Դ‫ߣۆ‬şԦԓ͟‫ڹ‬۹Ϊࠗؓͳ, ֨ ߸фٰĀѓѪˣ‫ۆق˞ۍڅۆ‬३̤͸ॢ޲‫ۋ‬Àǣࢍ ǣČқ‫͆˰قݓ‬ɰδÇࣅąॳ‫ں‬ǣࢍǸ‫ں‬ьशॠٕɰ. Ŕ͠ǣ, Strickland et al.(2011)‫ڹ‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟ࠗ‫ڹ‬ϔ‫ڍ‬ ǰ‫࣊ ڹ‬ęʪ‫ ٮ‬ʫ࣢ॢ ֨֟ࢰ ࣢Ձ ˺Л‫ڮۋߎ ق‬ʴ (Transient flow)‫ۤۋ‬şÂć՚ʼə࣢‫ںݜ‬ǣࢍǴ϶‫ێ‬ ъÀ֟‫ڌۺقۻ‬ʼəąć‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴ(Boundary dominated flow; BDF)‫ق‬şߣॢԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵ‫Ϳڷ‬əՕ‫ࠗێ‬ ‫ۆ‬Ԧԓ࣢Ձ‫܁ں‬ঝ০ČͲॠş‫ڍͲر‬дͿ۹Ϊࠗ࣢Ձ őϼ‫ڦں‬३۹ΪࠗϿʝτęRate Transient Analysis(RTA) şѪ‫ ۆ‬Ԑ‫܃ ںڌ‬؋ॠٕɰ. ̚ॢ Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۤ ۆ‬ş ԦԓşÂ ʴ؋ ߎ‫ڮۋ‬ʴমę (Pressure transient effect) ˺Л‫ق‬Ԧԓٚ͟ࠑ‫ڍͲرۋ‬ ϶‫ۍۺࣀۻ‬ѓѪ‫ॣڌۺں‬ą‫ڍ‬ȃИ҃ս‫ۍۺ‬ٚࠑĀ ęεǣࢍǴдͿAnderson et al.(2010)‫ڹ‬սؓࣷթʽ Օ‫ێ‬À֟۹Ϊࠗ‫ق‬Դ‫ۆ‬ԦԓۙΒεқԵॠČধսÀɠ ϔۤ͟‫ں‬ٚࠑॠə۹ΪࠗϿʝ‫܃ں‬؋ॠٕɰ. ‫ۋ‬Ͽʝ ‫ ڹ‬Wattenbarger et al.(1998)‫܃ ۋ‬؋ॢ Œَ‫ ۋ‬۹Ϊࠗ ąć‫ق‬ʪɵॢì‫Ϳڷ‬À‫ॢ܁‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ(Linear flow) Ͽ ʝ‫ ق‬şߣॠ‫ ي‬ɰɳć սؓࣷթ սथ‫ ں܁‬ϿԐॠٕɰ. ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬ԴəঔνѣҚ‫ًݓޅ‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟ࠗ‫߸֨ق‬ʽ ɰɳćսؓࣷթսथ‫Ϳڷ܁‬ҙࢢࠄ˛ʽԦԓۙΒεRTA ՙ॒࣡‫ڌۺقرڟ‬ॠ‫ي‬Օ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձ‫ں‬őϼॠČধս ÀɠॢԦԓ͟‫ں‬ٚࠑॠٕɰ. Wattenbarger शܵčԸę ‫ܼۋ‬Ŗ֨Â(Square root time; SRT) қԵ‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫ݓي‬ѕ ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ ں‬ԓ߻ॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬, Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓ ۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ۍ‬ ą‫قڍ‬FMB қԵ‫Ϳڷ‬ԓ߻ʼəCGIPε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ߕؒي‬ ࣊ęʪεćԓॠٕɰ. ३ԵϿʝ‫ں‬ĵՁॠ‫ي‬ԦԓۙΒ‫ٮ‬ ০֟ࢹνϔࠡşѪ‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫ي‬ćԓʽؒߕ࣊ęʪε‫ܓۦ‬ ‫܁‬ॠČŒَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪεĵॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬, ԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵş Ѫę३ԵϿʝ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ٚࠑধսÀɠϔۤ͟(Estimated ultimate recovery;EUR)‫ ں‬ԓ߻ॠČۙ ॠٕɰ.. ‫ݗݓ‬ॡ‫ۺ‬Č޶ ࠪǣɰ‫ ۆ‬ҵν࣯֨࠺ͤҼ؉ܳ‫ۆ‬Қʴ‫ॢ࠘ڦ قޅ‬ ঔνѣқ‫ݓ‬əИ֟ࡾ‫(ٮ‬Muskwa), ١ࢢࣷࡾ(Otter Park), ‫ق‬Ҽ(Evie) ࠗ‫Ϳڷ‬ĵՁʼ϶(Fig. 1), Օ‫ۆࠗێ‬ǫ‫قޅ‬Դ Қ‫(ࢹ۾Ϳڷޅ‬Clay)ࠗęʮͿυ‫ۋࠗ࣡ۋ‬ঊ‫ۦ‬ʽ࣢‫ݜ‬ ‫ۍ҃ں‬ɰ(Fig. 2). ‫ۋ‬қ‫قݓ‬ԴҚ‫ڹًݓ˃ۆޅ‬ՃÒ ‫ۆ‬À֟‫(܁‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟1, 2, 3)˞‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ÀۤԦԓ‫ۋ‬ ॢĶ‫ݓ‬ĵ֨֟ࢰėॡধ‫ݓ‬. Fig. 1. Well location in Horn river, Canada.. Fig. 2. Horn river shale formation. Table 1. Properties of the shale used in model Parameter. Shale gas 1 Shale gas 2 Shale gas 3. Rock type. Shale. Shale. Shale. Formation. . Otter Park. Otter Park. Muskwa. Depth. m. 2,631. 2,607. 2,548. Pay thickness. m. 120. 162. 162. Porosity. %. 3.00. 3.12. 3.12. 78. 76. 76. Gas saturation %. ١͒սॱʼ‫ॳ϶ڷؽ‬঳Ԧԓäʴٚࠑ‫ॣڌۋق‬ս‫ە‬ əÀ‫ڌ‬ԦԓۙΒÀॄҙॢ‫ۋًݓ‬дͿ, ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬Դə ‫ںًݓۋ‬ʂԜ‫ॳͿڷ‬঳Ԧԓ͟‫ں‬қԵॠČۙॠٕɰ. Օ‫ێ‬À֟1 Ǵ‫ۆ‬À֟‫ڹ܁‬ঔνѣҚ‫قًݓޅ‬Դ۹Ϊ ࠗ˃ƍÀҼİ‫(ًݓڹئۺ‬120 m)‫߸֨ق‬ʼ‫϶ڷؽ‬, Օ ‫ێ‬À֟2‫ٮ‬3 À֟‫ڹ܁‬ঔνѣҚ‫قًݓޅ‬Դ۹Ϊࠗ˃ ƍÀ Ҽİ‫˃ ۺ‬ƃ‫(ًݓ ڏ‬162 m)‫߸֨ ق‬ʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. ঔνѣ‫قًݓ‬Դսॱʽսؓࣷթ‫˰ق‬δÀ֟‫܁‬ ԾٖॳқԵĀę‫˰ق‬βϸ, ࣷթۚ‫ࣀںغ‬३ԦՁʽŒ َ‫ࣀںࠗߕۻۋ‬३‫ࣷۻ‬ʽì‫Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǣ‫ںࠗߕۻ‬ ۹Ϊࠗ‫Ϳڷ‬Ժ‫܁‬ॠٕɰ. ֨߸঳սॱʽêࠗۚ‫قغ‬Դ ࠑ‫܁‬ʽՕ‫ۆࠗێ‬НՁÉ˞‫ں‬Table 1‫ق‬ǣࢍǴ‫ؽ‬ɰ. À ֟‫܁‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟1ę2ə١ࢢࣷࡾԜҙࠗ‫ق‬, Օ‫ێ‬À֟3 ‫ڹ‬И֟ࡾ‫ٮ‬ॠҙࠗ‫߸֨ق‬ʼ‫϶ڷؽ‬ÁÀ֟‫֮ۆ܁‬ʪ.

(3) 809. ࠪǣɰ ঔνѣ Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۻ‬Ǵ À֟‫ ۆ܁‬RTA қԵ‫ ॢࣀ ں‬À֟‫ ܁‬ԦԓՁ ٚࠑ. əÁÁ2631 m, 2607 m, 2548 m‫ۋ‬ɰ. ‫ۆࠗݓ‬ėŕέ ‫ڹ‬3% Ǵ‫Ϳٽ‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟1‫߸֨ۋ‬ʽ‫ۆࠗݓ‬ėŕέ‫ۋ‬ɰ δ˃‫ۆًݓ‬ėŕέ҃ɰɰՙǰ‫ڹ‬ì‫Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǮɰ. Օ ‫ێ‬À֟1 ‫ۆًݓ‬À֟पজʪÀ78%ͿՕ‫ێ‬À֟2‫ٮ‬3 ‫ۆࠗݓۆ‬À֟पজʪ҃ɰɰՙȭ‫ڹ‬ì‫Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǮɰ.. ঔνѣՕ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۆۻ‬ԦԓۙΒқԵĀę ‫ێ‬ъ‫ Ϳڷۺ‬۹Ϊࠗ‫ق‬Դ ьԦॠə ѓԐ঍‫ڮ‬ʴ(Radial flow; Fig. 3(a))ęɵνՕ‫ێ‬À֟‫قۻ‬ԴəŒَ‫ۋ‬ьԦ ʽĵÂǴ‫ق‬Դ‫ॢۿۍ‬ŒَԐ‫ۆۋ‬ÂԾ‫ۍͿڷ‬३Œَ ‫ۋ‬ьԦॢĵÂǴ‫ق‬ԴχԦԓ‫ۋۋ‬Θ‫ݓر‬ş˺Л‫ق‬Ҽ Œَ ؒߕͿҙࢢ ьԦॠə Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ(Fig. 3(b))‫څܳ ۋ‬ Ԧԓ‫ڮ‬ʴϭ࠶ɦ‫ۋݏ‬ɰ. ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬Դə‫ڮॢ͠ۋ‬ʴইԜ ‫ں‬ČͲॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ࣷي‬թŒَ‫ߕؒۋ‬Ǵ‫࠘ڦق‬ॠəսथ ‫܁‬Ͽʝ(Table 1 and 2)‫ॢڌۋں‬RTAşѪ‫ں‬ট‫ڌ‬ॠٕ ɰ. RTAşѪ‫࠘ڹ‬нԐؒфՕ‫ێ‬À֟۹Ϊࠗ‫ۆ‬Ԧԓۙ ΒқԵ‫ق‬ȇνԐ‫ڌ‬ʼəşѪ‫Ϳڷ‬۹࣊ęʪ۹Ϊࠗ‫ق‬Դ ࣷթŒَ‫ۋ‬Ԧԓ‫ںॳٖق‬й࠘əą‫֨ڍ‬Â‫˰ق‬δÀ֟ ҙ‫ ں͟ܕ‬ٚࠑॠə ą‫ ڍ‬Ԑ‫ڌ‬ʼə ܳ‫ څ‬Ͽʝ‫ۋ‬ɰ (Strickland et al., 2011). ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬ԴəRTAşѪ‫ۺں‬ ‫ ॢڌ‬ՙ॒࣡‫ ܼ رڟ‬Àۤ ȇν Ԑ‫ڌ‬ʼə FeketeԐ‫ۆ‬ ‘RTA’ ՙ॒࣡‫رڟ‬εট‫ڌ‬ॠ‫ي‬ঔνѣՕ‫ێ‬À֟‫ڮۆۻ‬ ʴ࣢Ձę‫࣢ࠗݓ‬Ձ‫ں‬őϼॠČԦԓۙΒεşߣͿॳ঳ Ԧԓ͟‫ں‬ٚࠑॠČۙॠٕɰ. ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬ԴঔνѣՕ‫ێ‬ À֟‫ۆۻ‬ԦԓۙΒεқԵॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ॢڌۺي‬şѪ˞ę Ŕ ę‫ ں˞܁‬Fig. 4‫ ق‬ǣࢍǴ‫ؽ‬ɰ.. À֟‫ۆۻ‬Ԧԓٚ͟ࠑ‫ڦں‬३Դə٤цδқԵʪĵ‫ۆ‬ Ը‫܁‬ęԦԓۙΒεşߣͿॢ‫ࠗݓ‬НՁ‫ۆ‬őϼˣ‫ۋ‬ϔ ‫څܼڍ‬ॠ϶, ‫ۋ‬ε‫ڦ‬३Ԧԓ֨‫ݓۆߕڮࠗݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴٖ ًқԵ‫ۋ‬Ըॱʼ‫ॢآر‬ɰ. ÁÀ֟‫ق܁‬Դ‫ݓۆ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴ ًٖ‫ں‬őϼॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ي‬Wattenbarger शܵčԸę‫ܼۋ‬ Ŗ֨ қԵ(Square root time; SRT)‫ڌۋ ں‬ॠٕɰ. ÁՕ‫࣢ۆ˞ࠗێ‬Ձ‫ں‬ԓ߻ॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ي‬SRT қԵ, ‫ڮ‬ ʴН‫ݗ‬ս‫(ݓ‬Flowing Material Balance; FMB) қԵę३ ԵϿʝ‫ॢڌۋں‬০֟ࢹνϔࠡ(History matching)‫ۋں‬ ‫ڌ‬ॠٕɰ. ؒߕ‫࣊ۆ‬ęʪεқԵॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ي‬SRT Ŕ͒ ॒‫ق‬Դ‫ݔ‬Ը‫ۆ‬ş‫ڐ‬şͿǣࢍǣəԸ঍‫ڮ‬ʴѺս(Linear Flow Parameter;LFP)εćԓॠٕəʚؒߕ࣊ęʪ‫ٮ‬Œ َۙŕϸ‫ۆۺ‬ĕ‫Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǣəLFP‫ق‬Դؒߕ࣊ęʪε ćԓॠş‫ڦ‬३ԴəFMB қԵ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬OGIPεԓ߻ ॠ‫ॢآي‬ɰ. ॠ‫ݓ‬χFMB қԵ‫ڹ‬BDFÀ‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ ‫ۍ‬À֟‫ق܁‬ԴχԐ‫ڌ‬ÀɠॠдͿ, ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬ԴəԸ঍‫ڮ‬ ʴ‫ۋ‬ǣࢍǣəÀ֟‫ق܁‬ԴFMB қԵ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ߤۿي‬ À֟ҙ‫(͟ܕ‬Contacted Gas In Place; CGIP)‫ں‬ԓ߻ॠ‫ي‬ ই‫ۦ‬Ԝࢗ‫ق‬Դ‫࣊ߕؒۆ‬ęʪ‫ٮ‬Œَъţ‫ۋ‬εćԓॠٕ ɰ. ‫ۋ‬Ԝ‫ق‬ԴĵॢՕ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձ˞‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ÁÁ‫ۆ‬ À֟‫ق܁‬ʂॢɰɳćսؓࣷթսथ‫܁‬३ԵϿʝ‫ں‬ĵՁ ॢˏ֬‫܃‬ԦԓۙΒεϔࠡ॥‫׆Ϳڷ‬И޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪ (Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity; FcD)εćԓॠČ,. (a) (b) Fig. 3. Dominant flow regimes for (a) conventional reservoir (radial flow) and (b) unconventional reservoir (linear flow) (Fekete Associates Inc.).. Fig. 4. Overall workflow.. Table 2. Well information drilled and completed Well Length (m). Depth (m). Horizontal Length (m). Fracturing Stage. Fracturing Spacing (m). Shale gas 1. 5006. 2631. 2200. 20. 110. Shale gas 2. 5227. 2607. 2200. 20. 110. Shale gas 3. 5202. 2548. 2640. 24. 110. ‫܃‬49ń ‫܃‬6঒.

(4) 810. ‫ۋ‬ć‫ · ܁‬Ձ‫ڙ‬Ͽ. ॳ঳ Ԧԓ͟ ٚࠑ‫ ق‬ট‫ڌ‬ॠٕɰ. υ‫ݓ‬φ‫Ϳڷ‬, ԓ߻ʽՕ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձ˞ęԦԓۙΒε‫ۋ‬ ‫ڌ‬ॠ‫ي‬ÇࣅčԸę३ԵϿʝқԵ‫ں‬սॱॠ‫ي‬ঔνѣՕ ‫ ۆࠗێ‬EUR‫ ں‬ԓ߻ॠٕɰ. ‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖőϼ Wattenbarger शܵčԸ‫ق‬Դə‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ۋ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ ʴ‫ۋ‬ϸ0.5‫ۆ‬ş‫ڐ‬şεÀ‫ݓ‬ČBDF‫ۋ‬ϸ1‫ۆ‬ş‫ڐ‬şও ‫ݓڹ‬սÇթ(exponential decline)Ϳǣࢍǣóʼ϶, ‫ۋ‬ε ࣀ३ ‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ ں‬ĵқॣ ս ‫ە‬ɰ(Wattenbarger et al., 1998). ॠ‫ݓ‬χ, Wattenbarger शܵčԸ‫ݓॢڌۋں‬ ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖқԵ֨À֟‫(ࢇ֟ق܁‬skin)‫ەۋ‬əą‫ۋڍ‬ ‫ۆق‬३À֟‫ۆ‬Ԧԓäʴ‫ۋ‬BDFͿǣࢍǨս‫ڷە‬дͿ (Nobakht and Mattar, 2012) ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬ԴəSRT қԵę ঔ‫ڌ‬ॠ‫ݓي‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ں‬қԵॠٕɰ. ԦԓۙΒεSRT Ŕ॒͒Ϳ ǣࢍǴ‫ ˺ ںؽ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݔ ڹ‬Ը‫Ϳڷ‬, BDFə ‫ ࠚڍ࠘ Ϳڷޅڦ‬čԸ‫ Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǣó ʽɰ(Anderson, 2010). Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۆ܁‬ԦԓՁٚࠑ‫ؘق‬ԴÁÀ֟‫قۻ‬Դ ۹Ϊࠗ‫Ϳڷ‬ҙࢢԦԓ‫ۆͿڷ܁‬À֟‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ں‬őϼॠٕ ɰ. Á‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ں‬ʪ߻ॠş‫ڦ‬३Wattenbarger श ܵčԸęSRT қԵ‫ࣀں‬३ÁÀ֟‫قۻ‬Դ‫ॳٖۆ‬ъą ‫ ۋ‬۹Ϊࠗ‫ ۆ‬ąć‫ ق‬ʪɵॠٕə‫ࣺ ݓ‬ɳॠČۙ ॠٕɰ. ̚ॢSRT Ŕ॒͒Ԝ‫ق‬ԴÀ֟‫ܓٖڏۆ܁‬æѺজͿ‫ۍ‬ ॠ‫ي‬қԓʽۙΒÀǣࢍǦĵÂ‫ەۋ‬ş˺Л‫ۋق‬ε߯ ՙজॠş‫ڦ‬३Super-position time şѪ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬қ Ե‫޷ ق‬Čॠٕɰ. Օ‫ێ‬À֟1‫ۆ‬Wattenbarger शܵčԸқԵĀę(Fig. 5) ε҃ϸ, ԦԓۙΒ‫ۆ‬ş‫ڐ‬şÀ‫ۆࠑڍ‬BDF ş‫ڐ‬ş‫ق‬ʪ ɵॠ‫ݓ‬Їॠٕ‫ڷ‬дͿ؉‫ݔ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫؎ںڼەق‬ս ‫ە‬ɰ. ̚ॢFig. 6‫ۆ‬SRT Ŕ॒͒‫ق‬Դ҇ս‫ە‬ˢ‫ۋۋ‬ À֟‫ܓٖڏۆ܁‬æѺজͿ‫ۍ‬ॠ‫ۙي‬ΒÀқԓʼ‫ڷەر‬ ǣ‫Ϳڷۺߕۻ‬ə̤͸ॠó‫ݔ‬Ը‫ں‬ǣࢍǴČ‫ڷە‬дͿ؉. Fig. 5. Wattenbarger type curve in shale gas 1.. ॢĶ‫ݓ‬ĵ֨֟ࢰėॡধ‫ݓ‬. ‫ݔ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ەق‬əì‫ࣺͿڷ‬ɳʽɰ. Օ‫ێ‬À֟2‫ٮ‬ 3 À֟‫ۆ܁‬ą‫ڍ‬, Wattenbarger शܵčԸқԵĀęε҃ ϸ˃Ò‫ۆ‬À֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃࠶ҵ‫ۆ‬ş‫ڐ‬şÀ‫ۆࠑڍ‬BDF ş ‫ڐ‬ş‫ق‬ʪɵॠ‫ݓ‬Їॠٕ‫ڷ‬дͿ‫ڮߕڮ‬ʴ‫ۋ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴٖ ً‫ەق‬əì‫؎ں‬ս‫ە‬ɰ(Fig. 7 and 9). ̚ॢ, Fig. 8 and 10‫ۆ‬SRT Ŕ॒͒‫ق‬Դʪ˃À֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃̤͸ॠó. Fig. 6. Square root time in shale gas 1.. Fig. 7. Wattenbarger type curve in shale gas 2.. Fig. 8. Square root time plot in shale gas 2..

(5) ࠪǣɰ ঔνѣ Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۻ‬Ǵ À֟‫ ۆ܁‬RTA қԵ‫ ॢࣀ ں‬À֟‫ ܁‬ԦԓՁ ٚࠑ. ֩(2)‫ق‬Դxəսथ‫ۆ܁‬ţ‫ۋ‬, xfəŒَъţ‫ۋ‬, L‫ڹ‬ ࣷթŒَ‫ۆ‬Âü(fracture spacing), yəŒَۙŕʽ۹Ϊ ࠗ‫ۆ‬फ(stimulated reservoir width), hə۹Ϊࠗ‫˃ۆ‬ƍ (reservoir thickness), ASRVəŒَ‫ॳٖۆ‬ϸ‫(ۺ‬Area of Stimulated Reservoir Volume) ‫ۋ‬ɰ. LFPə ؒߕ࣊ęʪ‫ ٮ‬Ac‫ ۆ‬ĕ‫ Ϳڷ‬ćԓʼş ˺Л‫ق‬ ş‫ۆܕ‬ѓѪ‫Ϳڷ‬ÁÁ‫ۆ‬É‫ں‬ćԓॠəì‫ڹ‬BDFÀǣ ࢍǣəą‫ڍ‬FMB ࠶ҵεࣀॠ‫آي‬χÀɠॠɰ. ॠ‫ݓ‬χ ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬ԴԸ‫ॢ܁‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ق܁‬ԴəԸ঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǣş ˺Л‫ ق‬Nobakht and Clarkson (2011)‫܃ۋ‬؋ॢCGIPε‫ڌۋ‬ॠٕɰ. CGIP͈۹Ϊࠗ‫ۋ‬ ߎ‫ڮۋ‬ʴও‫ڹ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴԜࢗ‫ॳٖ˺ێ‬ъąǴ‫ق‬ҙ‫ܕ‬ ॠə À֟‫֨ڙ‬ϔۤ͟‫ۆ ں‬йॢɰ. ҆ ٍĵ‫ق‬Դə SRT Ŕ॒͒‫ق‬Դ‫ۆ‬υ‫ݓ‬φप‫࣡ۍ‬εBDF ֨ۚ‫Ϳڷ۾‬À‫܁‬ॠ Č‫ۋ‬ε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬FMB ࠶ҵε‫ٽ‬ԙॠ‫ي‬CGIPεćԓॠ ٕɰ. ‫ي‬şԴ‫ڹص‬CGIPε‫ڌۋ‬, ֩(3)‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫ي‬ই‫ۦ‬Ԝ ࢗ‫ق‬Դ‫ۆ‬ASRVÉ‫ں‬ćԓॣս‫ە‬ɰ. ćԓʽASRVε‫ڌۋ‬ ॠ‫( ֩ ي‬1)ę (2)ε ࣀ३ ؒߕ࣊ęʪε ĵॣ ս ‫ە‬ɰ.. Fig. 9. Wattenbarger type curve in shale gas 3.. œ ¢© Z ›ƅƇ 𬫝 á ć ŋƆ¬ƅ. Fig. 10. Square root time plot in shale gas 3.. ‫ݔ‬Ը‫ں‬ǣࢍǴČ‫ە‬ş˺Л‫ڮߕڮق‬ʴ‫ڹ‬Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ ‫ەق‬əì‫ࣺͿڷ‬ɳॠٕɰ. ՃÀ֟‫ڮۆ܁‬ʴ࣢Ձ‫ں‬ő ϼॢĀę, ՃÀ֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃‫ق‬ԴԸ঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ‫ڮۍۺ‬ ʴ ःࢤ‫ Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǣə ì‫ Ϳڷ‬қԵʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. Օ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձԓ߻ 3Ò À֟‫ ܁‬Ͽ˃‫ق‬Դ Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓ ۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫Ϳڷ‬ ǣࢍǣəì‫Ϳڷ‬қԵʼ‫ڷؽ‬дͿ, SRT Ŕ॒͒ε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ ‫ي‬LFPεćԓॠČՕ‫ێ‬À֟Ԧԓٚ͟ࠑϿʝ‫ڌۺق‬ ॠČۙॠٕɰ. LFPə֩(1)ęÏ‫ۋ‬ǣࢍǣ϶शܵজ ؓͳ(Normalized pressure)ę SRT Ŕ॒͒‫ق‬Դ ‫ݔ‬Ը‫ۆ‬ ş‫ڐ‬şε ࣀ३ ćԓॣ ս ‫ە‬ɰ. ¥Ÿ© á šƁöć ƉƋ. 811. (3). ҆ ٍĵ‫ق‬Դə FMB‫ ٮ‬SRT қԵ‫ࣀ ں‬ॠ‫ ي‬ASRV‫ٮ‬ LFPεćԓॠٕČ, ‫ۋ‬ε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬थŒؒߕ࣊ęʪ‫ٮ‬Œ َъţ‫ۋ‬εԓ߻ॠٕɰ. ‫ۙۋ‬Β˞‫ں‬ট‫ڌ‬ॠ‫ي‬३ԵϿʝ ‫ں‬ĵՁॠČ֬‫܃‬ԦԓۙΒε‫ॢڌۋ‬০֟ࢹνϔࠡş Ѫ‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫࣊ߕؒي‬ęʪε‫܁ܓۦ‬ॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪ ε ćԓॠٕɰ. ÁÀ֟‫ۆ܁‬SRT қԵĀę, LFPəÁÁ1.27, 1.96, 4 1/2 2 2.31×10 md m ͿՕ‫ێ‬À֟1‫ۆ‬LFPÀÀۤǰČ, Օ ‫ێ‬À֟3‫ۆ‬LFPÀÀۤȭóǣࢍǮɰ(Fig. 7, 9 and 11). ԦԓۙΒε Normalized Rate‫ ٮ‬Normalized Cum.. (1). ֩(1)‫ق‬Դkm‫࣊ۆߕؒڹ‬ęʪ‫϶ۋ‬, AcəŒَ‫ؒۋ‬ ߕ‫ߤۿٮ‬ॠəߪϸ‫Ϳڷۺ‬ɰɳćսؓࣷթսथ‫ۆ܁‬ą ‫قڍ‬ə֩(2)‫ٮ‬Ï‫ۋ‬ćԓʽɰ(Anderson et al., 2010). šƁ á. š. Ɩ. ¬«¯ Ɔ āƗƆ á 㥠ÞÏƖ ß Ɔ á ć ¥ Ƅ Ɨ. (2). Fig. 11. Flowing material balance curve of shale 1.. ‫܃‬49ń ‫܃‬6঒.

(6) 812. ‫ۋ‬ć‫ · ܁‬Ձ‫ڙ‬Ͽ. ProductionͿ ʪ֨ॢ FMB ࠶ҵ‫ق‬Դ ۙΒε ‫ݔ‬Ը‫Ϳڷ‬ ‫ٽ‬ԙॠ‫ي‬CGIPεԓ߻ॠٕČ֩(1)ę(2)ε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬ थŒؒߕ࣊ęʪεćԓॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬, Օ‫ێ‬À֟1‫ۆ‬Āęε ʪ֨ॠٕɰ(Fig. 12). Օ‫ێ‬À֟1, 2, 3‫࣊ߕؒۆ‬ęʪə -4 ÁÁ2.68, 5.47, 5.89×10 mdͿՕ‫ێ‬À֟1‫࣊ۆ‬ęʪÀ ÀۤǰČՕ‫ێ‬À֟3‫࣊ۆ‬ęʪÀÀۤȭ‫ڹ‬ì‫Ϳڷ‬ǣ ࢍǮČ(Table 3), Œَъţ‫ۋ‬əÁÁ81, 64, 61 mͿć ԓʼ‫ر‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟1‫ࣷق‬թʽŒَ‫ۆ‬ţ‫ۋ‬ÀÀۤšì ‫ Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǮɰ. ३ԵϿʝ‫ق‬Դə Ԝş‫ق‬Դ ԓ߻ʽ ؒߕ࣊ęʪ‫ ٮ‬Œَ. ъţ‫ۋ‬ε‫ॢڌۺ‬ɰɳćսؓࣷթսथ‫҄܁‬०Ͽʝ(Fig. 12)ę֬‫܃‬Ԧԓ‫͟ڮ‬, ؓͳۙΒε০֟ࢹνϔࠡ॥‫Ϳڷ‬ ‫׆‬ÁԦԓ‫ق܁‬Դ‫ۆ‬И޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪεćԓॠٕ‫ڷ‬ ϶, Օ‫ێ‬À֟1‫ۆ‬Āęεʪ֨ॠٕɰ(Fig. 13). Օ‫ێ‬À֟ 1‫ق‬Դ74‫ۆ‬И޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪÀԓ߻ʼ‫ؽ‬Č, Օ‫ێ‬À֟ 2‫ٮ‬3‫ق‬Դə28, 34‫ۆ‬И޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪÀԓ߻ʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ (Table 3). Ԧԓٚ͟ࠑ ঔνѣ Օ‫ ێ‬À֟‫قۻ‬Դ‫ ۆ‬EUR‫ ں‬ԓ߻ॠş ‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ي‬, ԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵę३ԵϿʝқԵ‫ں‬սॱॠٕɰ. ३Ե Ͽʝ‫ڹ‬À֟‫ۍۙ˥܁‬, ۹Ϊࠗ࣢Ձ, Œَъţ‫ߕؒٮۋ‬ ࣊ęʪ, И޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬ĵՁॠٕ‫ۋ϶ڷ‬ ε֬‫܃‬ԦԓۙΒ‫ٮ‬ϔࠡ॥‫Ϳڷ‬Դॳ঳Ԧԓ͟‫ں‬ٚࠑॠ ٕɰ. ̚ॢ, ३ԵϿʝ‫ق‬Դʪ߻ʽÉęҼİॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ‫ي‬ ԦԓÇࣅčԸ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬Ԧԓ͟‫ں‬ٚࠑॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬Ԧԓ ÇࣅčԸқԵ‫ق‬Դəই‫۾֨ۦ‬঳‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ں‬ąć ‫ݓ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴ‫Ϳڷ‬ČͲॠ‫ي‬Hyperbolic ÇࣅčԸ‫ࣀں‬३Ԧ ԓ͟‫ ں‬ٚࠑॠٕɰ. Ϥ۹, ԦԓÇࣅčԸ‫ۆق‬३ٚࠑॢԦԓ͟қԵĀę 6 3 ε҃ϸ, Օ‫ێ‬À֟1 À֟‫ق܁‬Դə171×10 m (Fig. 14), Օ‫ێ‬À֟2‫ٮ‬3 À֟‫ق܁‬ԴəÁÁ202, 238×106m3‫ۆ‬ À֟ÀধսÀɠॢì‫ࣺͿڷ‬ɳʽɰ(Table 4). ३ԵϿ. Fig. 12. Wellbore schematic of shale gas 1. Table 3. Calculated properties from square root time curve and analytical model analysis . xf (m). LFP 1/2 2 (md m ). km (md). FcD. Shale gas 1. 81. 1.27E+04. 2.68E-04. 74. Shale gas 2. 64. 1.96E+04. 5.47E-04. 28. Shale gas 3. 61. 2.31E+04. 5.89E-04. 34. Fig. 14. Production forecast using decline curve in shale gas 1. Table 4. Production forecast using DCA and analytical model. Fig. 13. Rate and pressure history match in shale gas 1.. ॢĶ‫ݓ‬ĵ֨֟ࢰėॡধ‫ݓ‬. EURDCA 6 3 (10 m ). EURAnalytical model 6 3 (10 m ). Shale gas 1. 171. 258. Shale gas 2. 202. 289. Shale gas 3. 238. 324.

(7) ࠪǣɰ ঔνѣ Օ‫ێ‬À֟‫ۻ‬Ǵ À֟‫ ۆ܁‬RTA қԵ‫ ॢࣀ ں‬À֟‫ ܁‬ԦԓՁ ٚࠑ. Fig. 15. Production forecast using analytical model in shale gas 1.. ʝ‫ॢڌۋں‬қԵ‫ق‬ԴəՕ‫ێ‬À֟1 À֟‫ق܁‬Դ258×106 m3(Fig. 15), Օ‫ێ‬À֟2‫ٮ‬3‫ق‬Դ‫ۆ‬EUR‫ڹ‬289×106 m3, 6 3 324×10 m Ϳԓ߻ʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. ‫ۋ‬Ԝ‫ق‬Դԓ߻ʽĀęε҃ ϸ, ԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵę३ԵϿʝ‫ق‬Դԓ߻ʽÁÀ֟ ‫ۆ܁‬EURÉ‫ۋ‬қԵѓѪѻͿ޲‫ۋ‬ε҃‫ݓۋ‬χ, ʴ‫ێ‬қ ԵѓѪ‫Ϳڷ‬ԓ߻ʽEURÉ‫ڹ‬Օ‫࣢ۆࠗێ‬Ձܼ‫ق‬Դؒ ߕ࣊ęʪ‫ٮ‬Œَъţ‫ںॳٖࢀقۋ‬ыəì‫؎ں‬ս‫ە‬ ɰ(Table 3). ̚ॢ३ԵϿʝ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ԓ߻ʽEURÉ ‫ۋ‬ʌȭ‫ڹ‬É‫ں‬ǣࢍǻəʚ, ՃÀ֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃ٖॳъą‫ۋ‬ ۹Ϊࠗąć‫ق‬ʪɵॠ‫؍ݓ‬؉Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ ‫ۍ‬Ԝࢗ‫ۋ‬дͿԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵşѪ‫ق‬Դԓ߻ʽĀę ҃ɰ३ԵϿʝ‫ق‬Դ‫ۆ‬ٚࠑÉ‫ۋ‬ʌ‫܁‬ঝॣì‫ࣺͿڷ‬ɳ ʽɰ.. Ā΁ ٍ҆ĵ‫ق‬Դəঔνѣ қ‫ۆݓ‬Қ‫قًݓ ޅ‬Դࠄ˛ʽ սथ‫܁‬ԦԓۙΒε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ݓي‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖęՕ‫ۆࠗێ‬ ࣢Ձ‫ں‬ԓ߻ॠČÇࣅčԸę३ԵϿʝ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ধս ÀɠԦԓ͟‫ں‬ٚࠑॠٕ‫϶ڷ‬, ɰ‫ڼ‬ęÏ‫ڹ‬Āęεʪ߻ ॠٕɰ. 1. ঔνѣՕ‫߸֨قࠗێ‬ʽՃÒ‫ۆ‬À֟‫ق܁‬Դ‫ڮۆ‬ ͟ęؓͳۙΒεWattenbarger शܵčԸęSRT Ŕ ॒͒ε‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬қԵॢĀę, Օ‫ێ‬À֟1, 2, 3 Ͽ ˃‫ڮߕڮ‬ʴ‫ۋ‬۹Ϊࠗąć‫ق‬ʪɵॠ‫ڹ؍ݓ‬Ը঍ ‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ ں‬ǣࢍǴČ ‫ە‬ə ì‫ Ϳڷ‬қԵʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. 2. ՃÒ‫ۆ‬À֟‫܁‬Ͽ˃‫ق‬ԴԸ঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ ‫ Ϳڷ‬ǣࢍǣəì‫ Ϳڷ‬қԵʼ‫ڷؽ‬дͿ, SRT қԵ ‫ࣀں‬ॠ‫ي‬LFPεԓ߻ॠČFMB қԵ‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬ CGIPεćԓॠٕɰ. ćԓʽÉ˞‫ڌۋں‬ॠ‫ي‬३Ե. 813. Ͽʝ‫ॢڌۋں‬০֟ࢹνϔࠡ‫ࣀں‬३ؒߕ࣊ęʪε ‫܁ܓ‬ॠČИ޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪεćԓॠ‫ي‬Օ‫ێ‬À֟ Ԧԓٚ͟ࠑ‫ق‬ট‫ڌ‬ॠٕɰ. ŔĀęՕ‫ێ‬À֟1, 2, -4 3‫࣊ߕؒۆ‬ęʪəÁÁ2.68, 5.47, 5.89×10 mdͿ ǣࢍǮ‫϶ڷ‬, 74, 28, 34‫ۆ‬И޲‫ڙ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪÀԓ ߻ʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. 3. ঔνѣՕ‫ ێ‬À֟‫قۻ‬Դ‫ۆ‬EUR‫ں‬ԓ߻ॠş‫ڦ‬ॠ ‫ي‬, Ԝş‫ق‬Դ ԓ߻ʽ ؒߕ࣊ęʪ‫ ٮ‬Œَ‫ۻ‬ʪʪε ট‫ڌ‬ॠ‫ي‬ԦԓÇࣅčԸқԵę३ԵϿʝқԵ‫ں‬ս 6 3 ॱॢĀę, ÁÁ‫ۆ‬ѓѪ‫ق‬ʂ३171~238×10 m ę 6 3 258~324×10 m ‫ۆ‬EUR‫ۋ‬ԓ߻ʼ‫ؽ‬ɰ. ३ԵϿʝ‫ں‬ ‫ڌۋ‬ॠ‫ي‬ԓ߻ʽEURÉ‫ۋ‬ʌȭ‫ڹ‬É‫ں‬ǣࢍǻə ʚ, 3Ò‫܁‬Ͽ˃ٖॳъą‫ۋ‬۹Ϊࠗąć‫ق‬ʪɵॠ ‫؍ݓ‬؉Ը঍‫ڮ‬ʴ‫ݓۋ‬ѕ‫ڮ‬ʴًٖ‫ۍ‬Ԝࢗ‫ۋ‬дͿԦ ԓÇࣅčԸқԵşѪ‫ق‬Դԓ߻ʽĀę҃ɰ३ԵϿ ʝ‫ق‬Դ‫ ۆ‬ٚࠑ É‫ ۋ‬ʌ ‫܁‬ঝॣ ì‫ࣺ Ϳڷ‬ɳʽɰ. 4. ՃÒ‫ۆ‬À֟‫ق܁‬ʂ३ԓ߻ʽEURÉ‫ں‬қԵॢĀ ę, ՃÒ‫ۆ‬À֟‫ق܁‬Դ‫ۆ‬EUR‫ڹ‬LFPÀÀۤࢀ Օ‫ێ‬À֟ 3‫ق‬Դ ȭó ǣࢍǮČ, LFPÀ Àۤ ǰ‫ڹ‬ É‫ ں‬À‫ݓ‬ə Օ‫ێ‬À֟ 1‫ق‬Դ ۚó ǣࢍǮɰ.. ޷ČЛॶ Anderson, D.M., Nobakht, M., Moghadam, S. and Mattar, L., 2010. “Analysis of production data from fractured shale gas well,” SPE Unconventional Gas Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, Feb. 23-25, pp 1-6, SPE 131787. Baihly, J.D., Altman, R.M., Malpani, R. and Luo, F., 2010, “Shale gas production decline trend comparison over time and basins,” SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, Sep. 19-22, pp. 1-24, SPE 135555. Fekete Associates Inc, 2012. 8. 16, www.fekete.com. Mike G., Smith, K. and Thorn, D., 2011, “Encana corporation 2011 Key resource play conference call series - Horn river,” Encana, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 4. Moon, S.H. and Sung, W.M., 2012, “The optimal design to recover NGL from the wet gas reservoir at Chinkeh formation of Maxhamish Field, Canada,” The Korean Society for Geosystem Engineering, Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 129-137. Nobakht, M. and Clarkson, C. R., 2011, “Estimation of Contacted and Original Gas-in-Place for Low Permeability Reservoirs Exhibiting Linear Flow,” Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Alberta, Canada, Nov. 15-17, SPE 149398. Nobakht, M. and Mattar, L., 2012, “Analyzing Production. ‫܃‬49ń ‫܃‬6঒.

(8) 814. ‫ۋ‬ć‫ · ܁‬Ձ‫ڙ‬Ͽ. Data From Unconventional Gas Reservoirs With Linear Flow and Apparent Skin,” Jounal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 52-59. Strickland, R.F., Purvis, D.C. and Blasingame, T.A., 2011, “Practical aspects of reserve determination for shale gas,” SPE North American Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition, Woodlands, Texas, USA, Jun. 12-16, pp 10-15, SPE 144357. Wang, J., Jung, W. and Ghassemi, A., 2012, “Deformation. and Failure Properties of Newberry Welded Tuff,” ARMA 46th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, Chicago, Illinois, USA, Jun. 24-27, ARMA 2012-415. Wattenbarger, R.A., El-Banbi, A.H., Villegas, M.E. and Maggard, J.B., 1998, “Production analysis of linear flow into fractured tight gas well,” SPE Rocky Mountain Regional/Low Permeability Reservoir Symposium and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, USA, Apr. 5-8, SPE 39931.. ଲծ୨. ন଀ࡦ. ই‫تॢۦ‬ʂॡİۙ‫ڙ‬ঞąėॡęчԐę‫܁‬, ॢĶÀ֟ėԐࠪǣɰ Ѫ‫ۤ޲ ۍ‬ (欧G 彳櫾躇G 缧49嘳G 缧3埲G 垾畢). ই‫تॢ ۦ‬ʂॡİ ۙ‫ڙ‬ঞąėॡę İս (欧G 彳櫾躇G 缧49嘳G 缧5埲G 垾畢). ॢĶ‫ݓ‬ĵ֨֟ࢰėॡধ‫ݓ‬.

(9)

참조

관련 문서

Others: waste heat in distillation tower, waste heat recovery, natural gas pressure turbine, by-product gas Source: The monthly report on major electric power statistics,

Meanwhile, the Shale Gas energy revolution by the US is raising the competition for securing stable energy in Northeast Asian countries, and it is time

Major improvements on the contract are offered. First, a broader menu of gas supply services is called for including interruptible and priority services. In

In this study, the mercury in exhaust gas was measured from three large coal-fired power plants in Korea using the continuous emission monitoring system

For this reason, in this study, comparing the traditional manufacturing process and relatively high temperature of exhaust gas heat and CO2 laser

~ a model in which the entire resistance to diffusion from the liquid surface to the main gas stream is assumed to occur in a stagnant or laminar film of constant thickness

– Given an equilibrated gas-liquid system containing only a single condensable component A, a correlation for , and any two of the variables y A (mole fraction of A in

Shale Gas