# Post

- frac Flowback Analysis and Reuse Implications

OOGA SPE Fall Technical Meeting Dec 7, 2011



# John W Cramer, PE
Superior Well Services

# Shale Frac Sequential Flowback Analyses and Reuse

Implications

EPA Technical Workshop, March 30, 2011



# Matt Blauch
Superior Well Services

# The Ideal Engineered Reuse Solution

Should Be...

• Able to Reduce


# Environmental Risk

• Effective for Fracturing

• Practical & Economic



# • Able to Provide microbiological Control

• Non

- Damaging to


# Production

# What is needed for reuse? Sequential Flowback Analyses

Multiple Ion Trend Iron Trend

2500 bbls 5000 bbls 14000 bbls

# Sequential Flowback Analysis

• Collect a water sample every 500 bbl of flowback

• Analyze key constituents
over time

• Provides trends for 

# impurities of concern

• Confirms efficacy of frac fluid design

• Calculates necessary changes to fluid design for subsequent wells Ref: US EPA Workshop, March 2011

# Importance of Sequential
Flowback Analyses

• Insight of impurities over time and 

# volume of flowback

• Playbook for necessary blending and/or remediation strategies for safe reuse

• Gives the operator intelligence of how best to manage water

• Optimizes frac fluid design in subsequent work in that geography

• Informs public that we do know what is coming back over time Ref: US EPA Workshop, March 2011

# Total Dissolved Constituents by Region

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)

Flowback (bbls) NW Marcellus

SW Bakken

NW Bakken

E Marcellus

Haynesville/Bossier

Permian

SW Marcellus Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch , et.al. 2009

# Flowback and Frac Waters Data Set

• 235 Frac Water Sources

• 524 Flowback Samples

• 25 Sequential Flowback Studies

# Distribution of Marcellus Sequential

Flowback Studies

Susquehanna Potter

Jefferson

Armstrong

Allegheny Butler

Westmoreland

Fayette WashingtonR2 = 0.9954

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 Chloride (mg/L)

TDS (mg/L) 

## Chloride Content vs Total Dissolved Solids

In Marcellus Formation0

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Constituent (mg/L)

Flowback ( bbls ) Barium Sulfate 

## Barium & Sulfate Trend
In Marcellus Formation0

25,000 50,000 75,000 100,000 125,000 150,000

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)

Flowback ( bbls ) Susquehanna Jefferson

Armstrong Fayette 

## TDS Content vs. Marcellus Flowback

# Distribution of Marcellus Sequential

Flowback Studies

Susquehanna Potter

Jefferson

Armstrong

Allegheny Butler

Westmoreland

Fayette Washington0

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Total Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3)

Flowback ( bbls ) Susquehanna Jefferson

Armstrong Fayette 

## Hardness vs Marcellus Flowback Volume by Region0

200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Barium (mg/L)

Flowback ( bbls ) Susquehanna Jefferson

Armstrong Fayette 

## Barium Content vs Marcellus Flowback0

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000

- 80.5

- 80.0

- 79.5

- 79.0

- 78.5

- 78.0

- 77.5 Calcium Content (mg/L)

GPS (Longitude) 

## Calcium Content of Flowback @ 7,500bbl

East West

## Post

- Frac Water Load Recovery

39.5 40.0 40.5 41.0 41.5 42.0

- 10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

- 80.5

- 79.5

- 78.5

- 77.5 GPS (Latitude) Load recovery (%)

GPS (Longitude) Longitude Latitude

West East North South

# Marcellus Well Sites

– Fluid Pumped

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000

417 418 419 421 422 423 425 426 427 428 219 225 287 304 340 352 Fluid Pumped ( bbls )

Project Number (well site)

# Marcellus Well Sites

– Load Recovery(%)

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

417 418 419 421 422 423 425 426 427 428 219 225 287 304 340 352 Percent Fluid Recovery ( bbls )

Project Number (well site)0

25,000 50,000 75,000 100,000 125,000 150,000

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)

Flowback ( bbls ) Susquehanna Jefferson Armstrong Fayette Texas(1) Texas(2)



## TDS Content 

## Haynesville vs Marcellus Flowback

# What is needed for reuse?

Geochemical Controls

• Sophisticated Geochemical Scale Modeling Simulator



## • Specific to Downhole Conditions

DownHole SAT Rx
INJECTION WATER CHEMISTRY INPUT

# Bad things can happen if we ignore water chemistry

• Fluid design chemistry must 

# consider water chemistry

• Certain fluid designs aren't
effective in stressed water

• Hardness on guar hydration

• Chlorides with cationic FR



# • You don't want to discover 

# that there is a problem in
the blender tub!

# The correct frac fluid additives will

consider all base fluid properties

• The Correct Frac Fluid 

# Design Chemistry

• Brine Tolerant Friction Reducer Chemistry



# • Scale, Iron, and Microbiological
Considerations



# • Compatible With the
Formation SWSI / KWS Core Flow Analyzer

# Understand the Variables

• Frac fluids / treated 

# water compatibility

• Detailed water analyses



# • Fluid design performance
confirmation



# • Scale modeling
determinations

# Fluid Design Considerations

• Non

- damaging to formation

• Thermally stable

• Regain perm

• Non

- emulsifying

• Environmentally responsible

• Non

- persistent

• Safe to handle

• Chemical compatibility / synergy



# • Soluble in brines

• Maximize well IP

# Considerations for
Effective Water Reuse

• Prefrac water analyses

• Proper frac fluid design

• FR studies



## • Geochemical modeling

• Comprehensive microbiological
evaluations



## • Sequential flowback studies

# Conclusions

• Shale Frac Sequential Flowback Analysis have become important to HVHR fracturing in the
Marcellus shale

• Variations in flowback geochemistry are observed both spatially and volumetrically



# • Predictive analysis tools such as geochemical scale modeling and geochemical simulation play an important role in water reuse and treatment design



# • Functional performance testing of flowback water
for reuse is recommended

# Acknowledgements

• Thanks to:

– OOGA / SPE for the opportunity to present

– Superior Well Services and Nabors

– Kroff Well Services

• Paul Rey, Dave Grottenthaler and Dave Kern

# Geologic Hypotheses for Flowback Chemistry

Marcellus Paleogeography

Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009 Figure after Lash, 2009

# Deep Basinal Hypersaline Fluids

Oriskany Waters Across Pennsylvania Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009

# Hypothesis Testing

–

Core Analysis

Cation Bulk Core Salt Scraping

Ba 1% 2%

Ca 40% 42%

Fe 46% 5%

K 4% 7%

Mg 6% 3%

Na 2% 40%

Sr 1% 1%

Total 100% 100%

Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009

# Hypothesis Testing

– Drilled Cuttings

Analysis

# Hypothesis Testing Diagnostic Tool

–

Piper Analysis

Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009