DOE/MC/28 176-95/C0468

Atlas of Major Appalachian Basin Gas Plays

Authors:

K. Aminian K. Avary M. Baranoski K. Flaherty M. Humphreys R. Smosna

Con tractor:

Appalachian Oil and Natural Gas Research Consortium P.O. Box 6064 Morgantown, WV 26506-6064

Contract Number:

DE-FC21-91MC28176

Conference Title:

Natural Gas RD&D Contractor’s Review Meeting

Conference Location:

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Conference Dates:

April 4 - 6, 1995

Conference Sponsor:

Co-Hosted by Department of Energy (DOE) Morgantown Energy Technology Center Morgantown, West Virginia and Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Baton Rouge, Louisiana

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infiinge privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.

Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, 175 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available at (61 5 ) 576-840 1.

Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22 161 ; phone orders accepted at (703) 487-4650.

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.

t

ATLAS OF MAJOR APPALACHIAN BASIN GAS PLAYS

CONTRACT INFORMATION

Contract Number DE-FC2 1-9 1 MC28 176

Contractor Appalachian Oil and Natural Gas Research Consortium P.O. Box 6064 Morgantown, WV 26506-6064 Voice: (304) 293-2867 Fax: (304) 293-3749

Contractor Project Manager Douglas G. Patchen

Principal Investigators Kashy Aminian Katharine Lee Avary Mark T. Baranoski Kathy Flaherty Matt Humphreys Richard A. Smosna

METC Project Manager Harold D. Shoemaker

Period of Performance October 1, 1991 to September 30, 1995

Schedule and Milestones

FY 96 Program Schedule O N D J F M A M J J A S

Finish manuscripts X Finish illustrations X Complete review and edit X Receive field data X Complete data base X Submit atlas to printer X Received printed atlases X

-/ - DlSTRiSUTlON OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED 9 s

OBJECTIVES

This regional study of gas reservoirs in the Appalachian basin has four main objectives: to organize all of the gas reservoirs in the Appalachian basin into unique plays based on common age, lithology, trap type and other geologic similarities; to write, illustrate and publish an atlas of major gas plays; to prepare and submit a digital data base of geologic, engineering and reservoir parameters for each gas field; and technology transfer to the oil and gas industry during the preparation of the atlas and data base.

BACKGROUND

This project was designed in 1991 in response to DOES "Gas Research Program Implementation Plan" (April 1990). In that document DOE stressed the need to develop an appropriate reservoir classification scheme that assigned gas reservoirs in a basin into groups with common geologic and engineering characteristics as a preliminary step before consolidating existing data bases and producing gas atlases. However, DOE envisioned a close linkage among the three endeavors, with data flowing among all three projects as they were being performed concurrently.

Using the play concept is a logical approach to developing a reservoir classification scheme that ultimately will result in a data base of field-specific parameters and a gas atlas of a basin. Plays are defined as a group of geologically similar drilling prospects having basically the same source, reservoir, and trap controls of gas migration, accumulation and storage (modified from White, 1980; 1988). Thus, they share some common elements of risk with respect to the possible occurrence of natural gas. Plays are commonly designated by their reservoir lithology (the Oriskany Sandstone Play), although play names can be modified by reference to trap type (the Oriskany

Pinchout Play) and other geologic similarities (the Knox Unconformity Play). The play approach has been used to prepare an atlas of major gas plays in the Texas Gulf Coast (Kosters, et al, 1989) and other areas. In the Appalachian basin the U.S. Geological Survey defined seven broad plays in their first approach to preparing a resource assessment of the basin. The USGS currently is preparing a revision in which they have organized reservoirs into more than 20 oil and gas plays. Our approach has been to define stratigraphically and geographically restricted geologic plays based largely on age, lithology and deposition of reservoir rocks under similar environments of deposition that have undergone similar structural and diagenetic histories. The end result should be a set of reservoirs with common geologic and engineering characteristics.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Appalachian Oil and Natural Gas Research Consortium (AONGRC) organized a research team that is familiar with the geology and oil and gas fields in each of the Appalachian basin states that will be covered by the atlas. This team included members of the Oil and Gas Sections at the Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia Geologic Surveys; Research Professors in the departments of Geology and Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering at West Virginia University; professionals at the U.S. Geological Survey; and private consultants. All of the gas reservoirs in each of these states were listed in stratigraphic order, correlated with reservoirs in other states, and then grouped together in plays based on age, lithology, environments of deposition, degree and type of structural control, or a combination of stratigraphic and structural control. Preliminary maps were prepared showing production fairways for each of these plays to define the initial study area for each play description.

Once plays had been defined, authors were recruited to write and illustrate each play, and two tasks were performed concurrently: a geologic and engineering study of each play; and data collection for every field and reservoir in each play. Play descriptions were subjected to sequential internal reviews by project team members, external reviews by industry geologists, review by geologists and engineers at the Morgantown Energy Technology Center, and technical edit by a professional editor hired to guarantee standardization of the final products .

RESULTS

Play Designation

Thirty-one unique gas plays were defined, ranging in age from Middle Pennsylvanian to Late Cambrian. These plays can be further organized by reservoir lithology, depositional environment of the reservoir rock, structural control, importance of fractures, and combination of stratigraphic and structural control. In general, plays in younger reservoir rocks (Pennsylvanian through Devonian) are confined to the center of the basin in northeast to southwest trends, whereas plays in older reservoirs rocks (Silurian to Cambrian) are confined to the northern and western sides of the basin where these rocks occur at shallower drilling depths.

Initially, plays were organized geologically by depositional environments, fractured reservoirs, and structural plays with the intent of presenting them in that order in the atlas. However, it was determined that a straight forward approach would be more user friendly. Thus, plays will be organized and presented in the atlas based on increasing geologic age, and will be named, whenever possible, after stratigraphic units familiar to most geologists and engineers working in the basin.

Play Descriptions

Play descriptions follow a standard format that includes these major headings: Location, Production History, Stratigraphy, Structure, Reservoir, Key Fields, Resources and Reserves, and Future Trends (Table 1). Required illustrations include: a pool map on a standard basin base map with play outline (Figure 1); a regional map with all key fields identified (Figure 2); a stratigraphic column with both formal and drillers' terms (Figure 3); a correlation chart (Figure 4); an isopach of the reservoir unit or structure map on the unit (Figure 5a and 5b); a cross section (either stratigraphic or structural; Figure 6); a type log for key fields (Figure 7); and a pay or porosity map for key fields (Figure 8). Other illustrations that are encouraged are models of depositional systems or environment, types of traps, and decline curves (Figure 9a and 9b). An attempt has been made to reduce text whenever possible and increase the number of maps and illustrations.

All 31 play descriptions have been written and have passed through internal review. However, several have not yet passed through the required external review stage prior to revision and submission to the Technical Editor. The Technical Editor has received and read 25 play descriptions, and has completed nine of them. He is working with the authors on various versions of the other descriptions.

Find scale mock-ups have been prepared of 15 of the 3 1 plays and all 15 have been reviewed by METC. In every case a second version is prepared that incorporates all changes suggested by METC reviewers and is resubmitted to METC and the authors.

Each play description also includes a table of geologic and engineering data for key fields within the play (Table 2). Data are organized into basic reservoir data (depth, age, formation, lithology, environment, trap type, drive mechanism, etc); reservoir parameters (pay thickness, porosity,

-3-

temperature, pressure); fluid and gas properties (Rw, gravity, saturations, Btu's); and volumetric data (original gas in place and reserves, production, remaining gas in place and reserves).

Data Base

Table 1 in each play description contains average values for key fields described or mentioned in the play description. A separate deliverable is a digitized data base that contains the same parameters as well as a few additional parameters for all, or nearly all, of the fields in each play. Data entered into this data base were gathered from the literature, from industry, and fiom the oil and gas files and data bases at the various state geological surveys. In most cases data were collected for a representative set of wells for each reservoir in each field and used to estimate average field values. These included original data from log and core analyses made specifically for this project.

Technology Transfer

During the past three and a half years numerous papers and posters have been presented and exhibits have been taken to professional and trade association meetings to describe the project and its products. These meetings include DOE Contractor meetings in Morgantown; meetings of the Independent Oil and Gas Associations in Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia; the Eastern Section of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in Champaign, IL, Williamsburg, VA, and East Lansing, MI; and the 25th Appalachian Petroleum Geology Symposium (APGS) in Morgantown, WV. During the two-day APGS meeting, papers or posters were presented on each of the 3 1 gas plays.

FUTURE WORK

All figures for the atlas are being computer drafted and prepared for printing in the Publications Section of the West Virginia Geological Survey. Many of these illustrations are being modified for standardization using digital files submitted electronically by the other state surveys. However, because the atlas will contain more than 600 illustrations, computer drafting and quality control have been major tasks. Much remains to be done between this writing and the deadline of June 1, 1995.

Several of the manuscripts are still out for external review. These must be retrieved and authors' changes made so that they can be submitted to the Technical Editor, the Publication Editor, and METC for review. The remaining manuscripts are in the technical edit process. Various versions are being circulated between the Technical Editor and the authors for final revisions.

Digital data submitted by four state surveys and two consultants are being combined into one data base at the West Virginia Geological Survey. Validation of these data has not been completed as yet. In some cases, data have had to be returned to the surveys to be corrected. We still expect to meet the June 1 deadline for completion of this task.

REFERENCES

Kosters, E.C., and others. 1989. Atlas of Major Texas Gas Reservoirs. Gas Research Institute and Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, Austin, TX., 161 p., 4 plates.

White, D.A. 1980.Assessing oil and gas plays in facies-cycle wedges. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 64, p. 1 158-1 178.

White, D.A. 1988. Oil and gas play maps in exploration and assessment. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 72, p. 944-949.

N

Figure 1. Outline of the Lower Mississippian-Upper Devonian Berea and equivalent sandstones play in the Appalachian basin. Dots represent individual gas wells; areas where dots have merged represent fields.

-&

Figure 2. Locations of Lower and Middle Pennsylvanian fields discussed in text or listed in TabIe 1. Other productive areas illustrated in Figure 1 are not shown.

-7-

0 Ashland Oil

No.3 M. L Skaggs Johnson County, Kentucky Carter Coordinate: 94-79

Permit No. 28198 0mnUR.l onrr

Ohio Shale

runconformity

%nondaga Limestone p k a n y a n d s t o n e Lunconformio

HeMerberg Limestone *

-

Z

5 9 % x g

* 2 6 2

-2 E

3 5

Salina Dolomite

Lockport Dolomite 3%

Big Six or A d s t o n e

LEGEND

Pmduang FwmaWn

Explanation for Lithology Dolwnite

3 Ltmestme

3 Sandstone and DOlomihc sandstone 0 Chert A Anhydnte

a Sh;tle

efer

Crab Orchard Formation (Clinton Shale)

Figure 3. Type log from the Ashland Oil, No. 3 M.L. Skaggs, Johnson County, Kentucky, showing the vertical succession of formations from the Ohio Shale to the Crab Orchard Formation. The gamma- ray curves, density curves, and interpreted lithologies are also shown. The intervals representing the drillers’ terms Corniferous and Big Six are also shown.

-8-

L a a Q 3

L

P 0 1

L a a- Q 3

Eastern Kentucky

Lockport Dolomite

Ohio Pennsylvania

Lock port Lockport Dolomite Dolomite

Shale Member

Keefer Sandstone

West Virginia Southwestern West East! Virginia

Rochester Shale

"Keefer" Sandstone

Keefer Sandstone

J u n iata J u n iata

I . Figure 4. Stratigraphic correlation chart showing the Tuscarora Sandstone and its stratigraphic equivalents.

-9-

I N

- Well Control

Contour interval = 25 feet

0 10 20 ' - - . I ___ I / I 0 10 20 30 40 50 Kilometers

30 40 50 Miles i

5-4

Figure 5a. Isopach map of the Big Injun sandstone in West Virginia. The effect of the pre-Greenbrier unconformity on the Big Injun sandstone is evident, particularly around the West Virginia Dome. This map was compiled by the authors using wireline logs represented by control points.

- / d -

Figure 5b. Regional structure mapped on the top of the Newburg sandstone, and locations of Newburg gas fields. Locations of at least five of the seven gas fields are controlled by structure. With the exception of Cooper Creek field, updip loss of permeability is a second trapping mechanism. From Cardwell (1971).

McDowell909 Gamma Ray Denstty

API Una Stratigraphic Units

6950

7000

7050

71W

715C

72OC

725t

73OC

735(

K 74a

7454

7501

7551

>

k=-

5 3 ..D. 76 '.B.T.C

1 Cacapon Sandstone

Member

Tuscarora Sandstone

Juniata Formation

Thrust Fault

Tuscarora Sandstone

I

Jmata Formation 1

Figure 7. Portion of the gamma-ray and bulk density logs for Conoco, Inc., No. 1 Clarence Billups (McDowell909), Cucumber Creek field discovery well, McDowell County, West Virginia, showing repetition of the Tuscarora Sandstone by thrust faulting.

I 1 I

ti04

I I I

i I

I I I

-t-

I

I

I i

I I I

i

I

I

_._ .

Figure 8. Isopach map of the upper Keefer Sandstone at North Taulbee field, Breathitt County, Kentucky, showing net feet of porosity greater than or equal to 10 percent.

Beekrnantown dolomite Rose Run sandstone

Copper dolomite Ridge

Bzone

Figure 9a. Block diagram illustrating trapping mechanisms for the knox unconformity play.

31 -I 2

IO000

- m 3 t c a 1000

100

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. i.... . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0 5 70 15 20 Years

25 30 35 40 123-701

Figure 9b. Production decline curves for an average Keefer Sandstone well in Breathitt County, Kentucky. Actual data curve (shown as small dots) and best fit curve (shown as continuous line) are shown.

Table 1. Outline for Play Descriptions

~

TITLE (play number, name, and author(s)

Location Include a brief description of identifling features of the play if appropriate

Production History Discovery, development, cumulative production

Stratigraphy Producing forrnation(s), member(s), sand(s), zone(s), etc. Age of producing units Lateral equivalents of producing unit(s)

Structure

Reservoir Type of trap(s) Source rock (age, lithology, maturity) Migration of fluids Depth to pay--range and average Thickness--range and average Rock pressure--range and average Initial open flow--range and average Final open flow--range and average Heterogeneity (porosity types, porosity--range and average, permeability--range

and average, type of reservoir [single layer, multi-layer] drive mechanism, completion strategies, production [per well--range and average, per acre-- range and average], decline curves [typical well(s), typical pool(s)])

Description of Key Fields (use field name to begin each description)

Resources and Reserves

Future Trends

References Cited

- /7-

Table 2. Reservoir Data for Key Fields in the Newburg Play