何时、何地以及如何权衡所有选择

在决定如何恢复枯竭油井的产量时,专家们会权衡战略考虑。

专家在决定如何恢复枯竭油井的产量时,会考虑战略因素。  (来源:Shutterstock) 

这些技术被称为重复压裂、重复进入、重复完井和其他重复术语的变体。无论名称如何,目的都是一样的——重新进入现有的、正在衰退的油井,以获取更多的岩石,并从中抽出新的生命——而且这对运营商来说正成为一种越来越常见的做法。 

“捶打并祈祷”

重复压裂主要有两种类型:硬头式和水泥衬管式。第一种类型定向性较差,因此成本较低。第二种类型主要用于岩石未触及较多的较老井。 

建模公司ResFrac的首席运营官加勒特·福勒 (Garrett Fowler ) 表示,硬头式再压裂装置并不引导压裂液。

“你只是希望它能进入正确的地方。我们看到了很好的结果,但它肯定不太稳定。有时我们称它们为‘敲打并祈祷’,”他告诉 E&P。

相比之下,水泥衬管重复压裂涉及在现有套管内安装新的衬管,该套管覆盖所有先前的压裂。 

“然后你像对付一口新井一样对它进行压裂,”福勒说。 

在设置新的塞子并进行穿孔后,将增产剂泵入井的目标部分,通常比第一次压裂的量要多得多,从而产生比硬头套管“更高的启动新压裂的可能性”。新的压裂成为重新进入的点;然而,值得注意的是,水泥衬管重复压裂的成本远远高于硬头套管重复压裂,库存可能受到原始套管尺寸的限制。

后一种工艺的最佳目标大多位于早期压裂区,如巴奈特、巴肯和鹰福特,这些地方的未压裂岩层较多。福勒说,二叠纪压裂法发展得较晚,因此该区每英尺的压裂岩层较多,可供重复压裂的原始岩层较少。

福勒表示,各公司考虑重复压裂的原因有几个。 

他说:“重复压裂的一个主要动机是在之前没有裂缝的地方产生裂缝。”另一个原因可能是在刺激相邻井时保护现有井。

他说,通过在压裂加密井之前压裂枯竭井,“在现有井周围形成应力屏障或边界,有助于缓解或至少限制加密井与现有井之间相互作用的严重程度。”如果没有这种屏障,子井可能会抢走母井的产能。

此外,他说,这种“保护性再压裂”还可以增加现有油井的裂缝面积,这些油井可能比较老,原始压裂区较少,导致一些岩石尚未开发。

重复压裂为何日益增多?

福勒认为,人们对重新探查老井的兴趣日益浓厚,很大程度上要归功于重复压裂技术风险的降低。他指出,公共信息有助于降低该技术的风险,包括 2022 年由能源部资助的运营商联盟,该联盟通过鹰福特和其他地方的水力压裂试验场项目收集了有关重复压裂程序的诊断信息。

再压裂后再压裂
折返后。  (来源:ResFrac)

受科技和经济推动

另一个推动因素是该技术自早期以来取得了长足进步。在大多数现代压裂技术的发源地巴肯,早期的压裂很少见。它们采用裸眼程序完成,限制了隔离,“大约每 300 英尺产生一个裂缝”,福勒说。 

另一方面,2024 年的裂缝涉及 15 英尺至 25 英尺的簇间距。 

他说,结果是“每单位横向长度上可能有10到20倍以上的起始点”。 

福勒认为间距的缩小是经济学和工具的进化。 

“我们在制造能够承受更高压力的强力工具方面取得了进步,我们可以隔离更多的井下部分等等。同时,技术的进步使得这些技术变得更加便宜,”他说。

即便如此,每次额外的压裂都会增加完井成本。运营商必须权衡投资多少的财务平衡,因为回报在递减。“最佳决策很少是采用 15 英尺的簇间距、5,000 磅/英尺的支撑剂和 70 桶/英尺的流体,因为你可能无法获得该投资所需的经济回报,”福勒说。

1 年
第 1 年。这些图像显示了连续几年重复压裂前后的耗竭率。重复压裂发生在三年后。(来源:ResFrac)
3年
三年后。  (来源:ResFrac)
5年
五年后。  (来源:ResFrac)
7年
7 年后。  (来源:ResFrac)
十年后
10 年后压力耗尽。  (来源:ResFrac)

决定如何重新完成

是否以及如何进行再压裂取决于经济因素。简而言之:该程序是否能带来足够的额外产量来提高利润?

对于哈里伯顿公司技术顾问杰弗里·古利克森 (Geoffrey Gullickson) 来说,这归结为“服务强度桶”,其中考虑了进行重复压裂的时间和成本。在常见的重复压裂方法(包括管中管或套管中套管再入或包括化学处理的硬头重复压裂)中做出决定,这就是古利克森所说的“对整个重复压裂的整体看法”。

硬头钻井更为普遍,无需对井进行重新衬砌。“硬头钻井在巴肯-三叉河系统中非常常见,并且也开始在 [丹佛-朱尔斯堡] 盆地中流行起来,”Gullickson 说道,并补充说 Eagle Ford 和 Haynesville 也已看到这种方法取得了成功。

化学处理在那里也越来越受欢迎,“因为它们的服务强度非常低,并且几乎属于经典的生产类型的工作,”他说。

他说,成本更高的管中管方法往往对间距较大的井最为有效,即用新管道覆盖旧压裂层以创建全新的压裂设计,而硬头管更适合具有更多压裂区的新建井。

简而言之,压裂间距是决定采用何种重复压裂类型的关键因素,Gullickson 说。 

他说道:“这些决定实际上取决于油藏中还剩下多少有效空白空间,以及这些空白空间相对于干预风险和与重复压裂相关的财务数据的价值主张。”

古利克森表示,自 2017 年以来取得的一些突破性成功并非归功于宏观统计方法。相反,这是“经验模型,它将治疗的实际物理反应与一些服务密集型诊断策略相匹配”,例如光纤技术和硬头井中的放射性示踪剂,以了解如何实现更好的分布,他说。

油井寿命规划

许多重复压裂候选材料已有数年历史,但有些已有十年或更长时间。 

古利克森表示,“这里有一个维护的概念,几乎就像是一种‘早期且经常’的再刺激方法,事实证明,这种方法在提高整体资产价值以及预计采收率方面非常有效。”

他指出,对于生产盈利能力岌岌可危的二级油井来说尤其如此。

他说,在油井的早期规划阶段,哈里伯顿现在建议采用“油井寿命作业计划”来帮助长期生产。随着技术的不断改进,该计划还延伸到预测未来的重复压裂。

封堵先前的裂缝

大多数非硬头式重复压裂都需要对整个井进行水泥固化和重新衬砌,以防止旧压裂吸收新压裂中的支撑剂。Coretrax 首席技术官 Scott Benzie 表示,这一程序虽然非常有效,但成本高昂,尤其是对于长水平井的井而言。Coretrax开发了一种使用可膨胀管重新衬砌现有射孔簇的系统,从而无需重新衬砌整个水平井,从而减少了操作时间和成本。

本齐指出,该系统专为压裂簇较少的老井而设计,可以节省大量成本。对于拥有四个压裂簇的 2000 英尺井,该系统将使用约 200 英尺的管道,而不是重新铺设整个井所需的 2000 英尺。

由于该系统是可扩展的,因此它保留了几乎所有原始管道的内径 (ID),Benzie 说道。

保留较大的内径有两个好处:首先,传统内衬重复压裂可将流体流量降低高达 50%。这会增加增产成本,因为较小的井眼需要更多的马力来恢复流量。其次,保留较大的井眼可容纳标准井下工具和压裂塞,而不需要更昂贵的细井眼设备。可膨胀管还可以在 HP/HT 环境中工作,从而进一步节省成本。

本齐解释说,补丁可以通过电缆插入,这意味着修井机可以在作业过程中保持在原位,从而加快进程。 

“进行大量重复压裂作业时,你必须使用钻杆或盘管安装和清理井。一些运营商发现使用自己的人员来完成这些清理工作很有价值,”他说。 

在这种情况下,操作员会在让 Coretrax 通过电缆运行修补程序之前准备好油井,以最大限度地降低重复压裂中常见的待机和扩散率成本。

本齐表示,重复压裂并不只适用于水平井,并指出许多垂直井也正在更新。 

他说道:“此类井通常有多个目标深度和现有的穿孔,需要将其密封才能到达位于先前压裂阶段之间的新岩层或进入新目标地层。” 

Coretrax-ReLine
Coretrax 的 ReLine HYD 可膨胀管解决方案提供短管和长管隔离解决方案,内径损失最小,同时提供高爆破和塌陷等级。(来源:Coretrax) 

他发现,在老的垂直井中,重复压裂作业越来越少,尤其是在二叠纪盆地。这些垂直重复压裂作业通常不需要花费大量钻机费用。 

“我们发现 ID 在传统垂直资产中具有重要意义,”Benzie 说道。“通过使用电缆修补,我们帮助保持井筒 ID 适合标准人工举升方法,无需将泵移上井,也无需重新设计之前已优化以匹配标准井筒配置的生产设备。”  

修补也是新井的一种选择。如果套管破裂、套管过早打开,或者原来的穿孔位置不正确,修补可以在一开始就拯救一口井,避免大规模且昂贵的修井作业,Benzie 说。

原文链接/HartEnergy

Where, When and How to Refrac—Weighing All the Options

Experts weigh in on strategic considerations when deciding how to rejuvenate production from a tired well.

Experts weigh in on strategic considerations when deciding how to rejuvenate production from a tired well. (Source: Shutterstock) 

They are called re-fracs, re-entries, re-completions and other variations on re-peat terms. Whatever the name, the purpose is the same—to re-enter an existing and declining well to access more rock and pump new life out of it—and it is becoming a much more common practice for operators. 

‘Pump and pray'

There are two main types of refracs: bullhead and cemented liner. The first is less directed and therefore less costly. The second is used mainly in older wells with more untouched rock. 

Garrett Fowler, COO of modeling company ResFrac, said that a bullhead refrac does not direct frac fluid.

“You’re just kind of hoping that it goes into the right place. We’ve seen great results, but it’s certainly less consistent. Sometimes we call them ‘pump and pray,’” he told E&P.

By contrast, a cemented liner refrac involves installing a new liner inside the existing casing, which covers all the previous fracs. 

“Then you frac it as if it were a new well,” Fowler said. 

After setting new plugs and perforating, stimulation is pumped into targeted sections of the well, usually many more than were fracked the first time, generating “a much higher likelihood of initiating new fracs” than with a bullhead. The new fracs become the point of re-entry; however, it is important to note that cemented liner refracs cost substantially more than bullhead refracs, and inventory can be limited by the size of the original casing.

Most good targets for the latter procedure are in early frac plays such as the Barnett, Bakken and Eagle Ford, where  there is more unfractured rock. Permian fracking developed later, so that play has more fracs per foot, leaving less virgin rock to target with a refrac, Fowler said.

Companies are considering refracs for several reasons, according to Fowler. 

“One motivation for refracs would be creating fractures where there were not fractures previously,” he said. Another reason could be to protect an existing well when stimulating an adjacent well.

By fracturing the depleted well before fracturing an infill well, “a stress barrier or boundary around that existing well is created, which helps to mitigate, or at least limit, the severity of the interaction between the infill and the existing well,” he said. Without that barrier, the child well could rob productivity from the parent.

Additionally, he said this “protective refrac” also can add to the fracture area in the existing well, which is likely older and might have fewer original frac zones, which leaves some rock untapped.

Why is refracturing growing?

Fowler credits de-risking of refrac technology for much of the growing interest in revisiting older wells, noting that public information, including a 2022 Department of Energy-funded consortium of operators that gathered diagnostics on refrac procedures through the Hydraulic Fracture Test Sites projects in the Eagle Ford and elsewhere, has helped de-risk the technology.

ResFrac-post-refrac
Post refrac. (Source: ResFrac)

Boosted by tech, economics

Another boost comes from how far the technology has come since its early days. In the Bakken, the birthplace of most modern fracturing, early fracs were few and far between. They were completed with openhole procedures, which limited isolation, “roughly producing one fracture every 300 feet,” Fowler said. 

Fractures in 2024, on the other hand, involve 15-ft to 25-ft cluster spacing. 

The result is “there are potentially 10-20 times more initiation points per unit of lateral length,” he said. 

Fowler sees the decreased spacing as an evolution in economics and in tools. 

“We’ve gotten better at strong tools that can withstand higher pressures, and we can isolate more sections downhole, etc. Simultaneously, that evolution of technology has resulted in those technologies becoming much cheaper,” he said.

Even so, every additional frac adds dollars to the completion cost. Operators must weigh the financial balance of how much more to invest because there are diminishing returns. “The optimal decision is rarely to have 15-ft cluster spacing with 5,000 pounds per foot of proppant and 70 bbl/ft of fluid, because you may not get the requisite economic return on that investment,” Fowler said.

1 yr
Year 1. These images show the depletion rates before and after a refrac over a series of years. The refrac occurred after three years. (Source: ResFrac)
3 Years
After 3 years. (Source: ResFrac)
5 years
After 5 years. (Source: ResFrac)
7 years
After 7 years. (Source: ResFrac)
After 10 years
Pressure depletion after 10 years. (Source: ResFrac)

Deciding how to recomplete

Whether and how to refrac revolves around economics. In short: Will the procedure net enough additional production to boost the bottom line?

For Geoffrey Gullickson, technical adviser for Halliburton, it comes down to “service intensity buckets,” which take into account the time and cost of doing a refrac. Deciding among the common refrac approaches, including pipe-in-pipe or casing-in-casing reentries or a bullhead refrac, which would include chemical treatments, is what Gullickson calls “the holistic view of recompletions at large.”

Bullheads are more general, involving no relining of the well. “The bullhead is very common in the Bakken-Three Forks system and has started gaining popularity in the [Denver-Julesburg] Basin as well,” Gullickson said, adding that the Eagle Ford and Haynesville have also seen this method succeed.

Chemical treatments have been increasing in popularity there as well, “as they’re very low in service intensity and fall under the pale of almost classic production type work,” he said.

The more costly pipe-in-pipe method, where a new pipe covers old fracs to create an entirely new frac design, tends to be most effective on wells with large spacing intervals, he said, while bullheads are more appropriate for recent wells with more frac zones.

To put it simply, frac spacing is the key factor in deciding what type of refrac to employ, Gullickson said. 

“Those decisions really come down to how much effective white space is left in the reservoir, and the value proposition of that white space against the intervention risks and the financial figures associated with the refrac,” he said.

According to Gullickson, some of the breakout successes since 2017, were not due to a macrostatistical approach. Rather, it has been “empirical modeling that has matched the actual physical response of treatments against some of the more service-intensive diagnostic tactics” used, such as fiber-optic technologies and radioactive tracers in bullhead refracs to understand how to get better distribution, he said.

Life-of-well planning

Many refrac candidates are several years old, although some are a decade or more. 

“There’s a concept of maintenance, almost like an ‘early and often’ approach with restimulation that has proven incredibly effective in increasing overall asset value and also in estimated recovery,” Gullickson said.

This is especially true for Tier 2 wells whose profitability is on the line in terms of production, he noted.

In a well’s earliest planning stage, Halliburton now recommends “a life-of-well operations plan” to aid in the long-term production effort, he said. That plan extends to anticipating future refracs as the technology continues to improve.

Sealing previous fracs

Most non-bullhead refracs involve cementing and relining the entire well to keep old fracs from absorbing the proppant from the new one. This procedure, while very effective, is costly, especially for wells with long laterals, said Scott Benzie, CTO of Coretrax, a company that has developed a system for using expandable pipe to reline the existing perf clusters, eliminating the need to reline the entire lateral and reducing the time and cost of the operation.

Benzie notes that this system, designed for older wells with few frac clusters, can deliver considerable savings. For a 2000-ft well with four frac clusters, the system would use about 200 ft of pipe instead of the 2,000 ft required to reline the whole well.

Because it is expandable, the system retains almost all the original pipe’s inside diameter (ID), Benzie said.

Retaining the larger ID offers two advantages: First, a traditionally lined refrac can reduce fluid flow rates by up to 50%. This can increase stimulation costs because the smaller wellbore requires more horsepower to restore the flow rates. Second, retaining the larger wellbore accommodates standard downhole tools and frac plugs rather than requiring slimbore equipment, which is more expensive. The expandable pipe also can function in HP/HT environments, providing further cost savings.

Benzie explained that patches can be inserted by wireline, which means the workover rig can stay in place during the procedure, expediting the process. 

“With a lot of refracs, you have to rig up and clean out the well using stick pipe or coil. Some operators have seen value using their own personnel to complete these cleanouts,” he said. 

In such cases, the operator would prep the well before having Coretrax run the patches on wireline to minimize standby and spread rate costs that are typical with refracs.

Refracs do not pertain only to laterals, Benzie said, noting that a number of vertical wells also are being updated. 

“There are often multiple target depths and existing perforations in such wells that need to be sealed in order to reach new rock located between the previously fracked stages or to access a newly targeted formation,” he said. 

Coretrax-ReLine
Coretrax’s ReLine HYD expandable tubular solution provides both short- and long-length isolation solutions with minimal loss of inner diameter, while providing high burst and collapse ratings. (Source: Coretrax) 

He has seen fewer refracs in old vertical wells, especially in the Permian Basin. These vertical refracs often do not require the expense of a rig. 

“We’ve found ID to be of significant importance in legacy vertical assets,” Benzie said. “By using wireline patches, we help keep the wellbore ID-friendly for standard artificial lift methods, eliminating the need for pumps to be moved uphole, along with the need for a redesign of production equipment that has previously been optimized to match a standard wellbore configuration.”  

Patches are an option for new wells, too. If the casing ruptures, sleeves open prematurely, or if the original perforations are placed incorrectly, patches can rescue a well from a major and expensive workover right at the start, Benzie said.