Page 156 - Fundamentals of Gas Shale Reservoirs

136 PETROPHYSICAL EVALUATION OF GAS SHALE RESERVOIRS

Lu XC, Li FC, Watson AT. Adsorption measurements in Devonian Rickman R, Mullen MJ, Petre JE, Grieser WV, Kundert D. A
shales. Fuel 1995;74:599–603. practical use of shale petrophysics for stimulation design
Luffel DL. Advances in shale core analysis. Gas Research Institute optimization: All shale plays are not clones of the Barnett
Report. GRI‐93/0297. Houston (TX): Gas Research Institute; Shale. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition;
1993. 138 pp. Denver, CO, USA. SPE115258; September 21–24, 2008.
Luffel DL, Guidry FK. New core analysis methods for measuring SPE.
reservoir rock properties of Devonian Shale. SPE J Petrol Rider MH. The Geological Interpretation of Well Logs. 2nd ed.
Technol 1992;44:1184–1190. Scotland: Whittles Publishing; 1991.
Miller M. Gas shale evaluation techniques: things to think about. Ross DJK. Investigation into the importance of geochemical and
Internal Workshop on ‘New perspectives on shales’. Oklahama pore structure heterogeneities for gas shale reservoir evaluation
University, USA; 2010. [PhD Thesis]. University of British Columbia, BC, Canada;
Modica CJ, Lapierre SG. Estimation of kerogen porosity in source 2007. 373 pp.
rocks as a function of thermal transformation: Example from Ross DJK, Bustin RM. Characterizing the gas shale resource poten­
the Mowry Shale in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming. tial of Devonian‐Mississipian strata in the Western Canada sed­
AAPG Bull 2012;96:87–108. imentary basin: Application of an integrated formation
Nelson PH. Pore‐throat sizes in sandstones, tight sandstones, and evaluation. AAPG Bull 2007a;92:87–125.
shales. AAPG Bull 2009;93:329–340. Ross DJK, Bustin RM. Impact of mass balance calculations on
Passey QR, Bohacs K, Esch WL, Klimentidis R, Sinha S. From adsorption capacities in microporous gas shale reservoirs. Fuel
oil‐prone source rock to gas‐producing shale reservoir— 2007b;86:2696–2706.
geologic and petrophysical characterization of unconventional Ross DJK, Bustin RM. The importance of shale composition and
gas shale reservoirs. International Oil and Gas Conference and pore structure upon gas storage potential of gas shale reservoirs.
Exhibition in China; Beijing, China. SPE131350; June 8–10, Mar Petrol Geol 2009;26:916–927.
2010. Rouquerol J, Avnir D, Fairbridge CW, Everett DH, Haynes JH,
Passey QR, Creaney S, Kulla JB, Moretti FJ, Stroud JD. A practical Pernicone N, Ramsay JDF, Sing KSW, Unger K.
model for organic richness from porosity and resistivity logs. Recommendations for the characterization of porous solids.
AAPG Bull 1990;74:1777–1794. International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. Pure Appl
Pemper RR, Han X, Mendez FE, Jacobi D, LeCompte B, Bratovich Chem 1994;68:1739–1758.
M, Feuerbacher G, Bruner M, Bliven S. The Direct measurement Schmoker JW. Determination of organic content of Appalachian
of carbon in wells containing oil and natural gas using a pulsed Devonian shales from formation‐density logs. AAPG Bull
neutron mineralogy tool. SPE Annual Technical Conference 1979;63:1504–1509.
and Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, USA. SPE124234; October Schmoker JW, Hester TC. Organic carbon in Bakken Formation,
4–7, 2009. United States portion of Williston Basin. AAPG Bull
Pemper RR, Sommer A, Guo P, Jacobi D, Longo J, Bliven S, 1983;67:2165–2174.
Rodriguez E, Mendez F, Han, X. A new pulsed neutron sonde Serra O. Clay, Silt, Sand, Shales: A Guide for Well‐Log Inter­
for derivation of formation lithology and mineralogy. SPE pretation of Siliciclastic Deposits. Schlumberger Publication;
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, 1988. p 609.
USA. SPE102770; September 24–27, 2006. SPE. Sigal R, Odusina E. Laboratory NMR measurements on methane
Pittman ED. Relationship of porosity and permeability to various saturated Barnett Shale samples. Petrophysics 2011;52:
parameters derived from mercury injection‐capillary pressure 32–49.
curves for sandstone. AAPG 1992;76 (2):191–198. Soeder DJ. Porosity and permeability of Eastern Devonian gas
Quantachrome. Autosorb As‐1/Aswin Gas Sorption System Operation shale. SPE Formation Eval 1988;3:116–124.
Manual. Boynton Beach (FL): Quantachrome Instruments; 2008. Sondergeld CH, Newsham KE, Comisky JT, Rice MC, Rai CS.
Ramirez TR, Klein JD, Bonnie R, Howard JJ. Comparative study of Petrophysical considerations in evaluating and producing gas
formation evaluation methods for unconventional gas shale res­ shale resources. SPE Unconventional Gas Conference; Pittsburgh,
ervoirs: Application to the Haynesville Shale (Texas). North PA, USA. SPE131768; February 23–25, 2010. SPE.
American Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition; The Swanson BF. A simple correlation between permeabilities
Woodlands, TX, USA. SPE144062; June 14–16, 2011. SPE. and mercury capillary pressures. J Petrol Technol 1981;33:
Rezaee R, Saeedi A, Clennell B. Tight gas sands permeability 2498–2504.
estimation from mercury injection capillary pressure and Tang XM, Patterson D, Hinds M. Evaluating hydraulic fracturing in
nuclear magnetic resonance data. J Petrol Sci Eng 2012; cased holes with cross‐dipole acoustic technology. SPE Reserv
88–89:92–99. Eval Eng 2001;4:281–288.
Rezaee MR, Jafari A, Kazemzadeh E. Relationships between per­ Van Krevelen DW. Coal: typology‐chemistry‐physics‐constitution.
meability, porosity and pore throat size in carbonate rocks using Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 1961. 514 p.
regression analysis and neural networks. J Geophys Eng Vernik L, Milovac J. Rock physics of organic shales. Leading Edge
2006;3:370–376. 2011;30:318–323.