In Potwar Basin, Tight Naturally Fractured carbonate reservoirs usually have matrix porosity of the 2-3% and permeability less than 1 mD. It is very challenging to evaluate Gas initial in-place (GIIP) and reserves accurately in these type of reservoirs. The objective of this study is to evaluate Gas in-place and to characterize the reservoir energy mechanism using rate transient analysis (RTA). A comparison has also been made for Gas in-place from conventional material balance analysis and from rate transient analysis.
In this study, rate transient analysis has been performed in a well, located in Potwar with thirteen years of production history. The well is completed in Chorgali and Sakesar formations. Different scenarios of initial reservoir pressure, geo-mechanical effects during initial production of the well and aquifer volume were sensitized to evaluate the Gas initial in-place (GIIP) and reserves. Different type curves such as Agarwal Gardner, Blasingame and flowing material balance and analytical aquifer modelling with / without geo-mechanical effects were applied and matched with the production history. Production logging data was also incorporated in the study. During history matching (gas-rate and bottom-hole flowing pressure), different sensitivities were run to quantify the uncertain parameters and level of uncertainty in the simulator.
While history matching and evaluating GIIP/reserves, it was observed that 8,060 psi reservoir pressure measured in the well was not stabilized and the reservoir was dominated initially by geo-mechanical effects. The best match was achieved with 10,935 psi initial reservoir pressure which was measured in the first well of the field. Without considering this pressure and geo-mechanical effects, the best match could not be obtained. It was also confirmed by different type curves that reservoir was geo-mechanically pressured during the early life of the well and also, it has a weak aquifer support during the late life of the well. The GIIP evaluated from these type curves are in the range of 75-90 BSCF whereas conventional material balance showed 60-70 BSCF indicative volume associated with the well. This study exhibited a significant difference in GIIP/reserves evaluated from conventional material balance and rate transient analysis, indicating remaining hydrocarbon potential in the region i.e. approximately 10-13 BSCF.
If the static reservoir pressure is taking too long to stabilize, the conventional material balance approach always depicts lower hydrocarbon volume associated with the well due to the tight and heterogeneous nature of the reservoirs. Therefore, conventional material balance cannot be applied in these reservoirs and unconventional approach such as rate transient analysis should be applied to evaluate GIIP / reserves and reservoir energy mechanism.