Coal Bed Methane

Dr. Keka Ojha

Department of Petroleum Engineering
Indian School of Mines
Dhanbad
India
COAL BED METHANE- CONTENT
 Present Scenario of CBM: Global & Indian
 Generation of methane
 Occurrence of Methane in Coal Seams
 Importance of geological structure on gas content
 Petrophysical Characteristics of coal
 Coal Characterization
 Comparison of Conventional gas reservoir & CBM
 Estimation of gas reserve
 Adsorption-desorption of methane gas in Coal Seams
 Drilling & Completion
 Logging of CBM wells
 Production installation and operation of CBM Wells
 Hydro-fracturing
 Dewatering of CBM Wells
 Testing of coal bed methane wells
INDIA: SUPPLY FAILING TO KEEP PACE WITH DEMAND -“NATURAL
GAS ”
45.0

40.0

35.0

30.0
Billion m3

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006
NG Production NG Consumption Year
Source: BP Statistical Review 2007

 Evolving Gas Market

 Demand- supply gap started widening
 Less volatile gas price
 N/Gas - Better alternate for oil based industry
Ever increasing gas demand
Expected CBM contribution to
natural gas supply in India
WHY CBM?
 Increasing global energy demand
 Depletion of conventional energy resources
 Presence of huge CBM resource, which otherwise
creates problem
 Quality of CBM gas
 Demand supply gap in India

ENERGY SCENARIO IN INDIA
 The estimated reserves of crude oil and natural gas in India as on 31.03.2010
stood at 1206 million metric tonnes (MMT) and 1453 billion cubic meters
(BCM), Respectively
 As on 31.03.10 the estimated reserves of coal was around 277 billion tones, an
addition of 10 billion over the last year. Coal deposits are mainly confined to
eastern and south central parts of the country. The states of Jharkhand, Orissa,
Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh
account for more than 99% of the total coal reserves in the country.
 There is high potential for generation of renewable energy from various
sourceswind, solar, biomass, small hydro and cogeneration bagasse. The total
potential for renewable power generation in the country as on 31.03.2010 is
estimated at 90,313 MW (Table 1.3). This includes an estimated wind power
potential of 48,561 MW (54%), SHP (small-hydro power) potential of 15,385
MW (17%) and 22,536 MW (25%) from bagasse-based cogeneration in sugar
mills.
WHY CLEAN ENERGY
 Natural gas –cleaner fuel compared to petroleum oil’
 Marketable Quality of CBM gas - no extra energy require for treatment
 No methane emission during coal mining- no emission to air, prevents accident,
save money
 CO2 sequestration for enhanced methane recovery- solve multi purposes
 Coal reserve in India
Citing the National Inventory on Indian Coal Resources published by the
Geological Survey of India, the Indian newspaper Business Line reported that the
proven reserves to be 114 billion tons, or 40 percent of the total reserves
(~277billion tonnes). The latest proven reserves represent a 3.6 percent increase
over the previous year’s 110 billion tons.
According to the report, at current level of production of about 550 million tons,
the coal reserves will last for more than 100 years, Coal Minister told the upper
house of the parliament (Rajya Sabha) in a written reply.
 WHAT IS CBM
 CBM is a form of natural gas that is trapped inside the coal seams.
 CBM is naturally occurring methane with small amount of other
hydrocarbon and non hydrocarbon gases that are content in coal
seam as result of coalification.
 Coal is the most abundant energy source in the world. It is a well
recognized source of hydrocarbons, particularly gas.
 CBM is often produced at shallow depths & is often produced with
large volumes of water.
 GLOBAL CBM ACTIVITIES

69 Coal Bearing Basin : activity in 35 countries

Global CBM Resource : 270 TCM (9500 TCF)
Source: Oilfield Review Summer 2009
 Total coal resource: 241
billion tons.

 Estimated CBM resource

- ~4.6 TCM .

 Preliminary assessment
indicates that Damodar
Valley Coalfields viz.
Jharia, Bokaro, North
Karanpura and Raniganj
to be most prospective
CBM field. 14
 CBM in India

Highlights - India
Blocks allotted: 26
Total resource in the allotted block: 1.4 TCM
Area opened up for exploration: 13600 sq km
Production potential from the allotted block: 38 MMSCMD
Power generation potential: 6700 MW
Reduction in CO2 emissions, if compared with coal
fired electricity generation of similar capacity: 27 MTY

Ref: CMPDI, 2009

:

IV ROUND BIDING
 Government of India has awarded 7 CBM Blocks under fourth round of CBM bidding. The contracts for these 7 blocks were signed
on 29th July 2010.
The awarded blocks covering an area of 3727 sq.km. are located in the states of Assam (1), Jharkhand (1), Orissa (2), Madhya Pradesh
(1), Madhya Pradesh & Chhattisgarh (1) and Tamil Nadu (1).
The estimated CBM resources of these 7 Blocks is about 330 BCM with expected production potential of 9 MMSCMD.

List of 7 Blocks for which CBM Contracts were signed on 29th July 2010

S.NO. Block Location Awardees

1. RM(E)-CBM-2008/IV Jharkhand Essar Oil Limited

2. TL-CBM-2008/IV Orissa Essar Oil Limited

3. IB-CBM-2008/IV Orissa Essar Oil Limited

Madhya Pradesh &

4. SP(NE)-CBM-2008/IV Essar Oil Limited
Chhattisgarh

Arrow Energy-TATA
5. ST-CBM-2008/IV Madhya Pradesh
Power
Arrow Energy- Oil India
6. AS-CBM-2008/IV Assam
Ltd

7. MG-CBM-2008/IV Tamil Nadu GEECL

 GLOBAL RESOURCE BASE & POTENTIAL FOR
UTILISATION

The largest CBM resource bases lie in the former Soviet Union, Canada, China,
Australia and the United States. However, much of the world’s CBM recovery potential
remains untapped. In 2006 (IEA, 2007) it was estimated that of global resources
totalling 143 trillion cubic metres, only 1 trillion cubic metres was actually recovered
from reserves.

Country Estimated CBM Resource Base (trillion

cubic metres)
Canada 17 to 92
Russia 17 to 80
China 30 to 35
Australia 8 to 14
USA 4 to 11
CBM & CONVENTIONAL RESERVOIR
 UNIQUE QUALITIES OF COAL
 Coals are extremely friable; i.e., they
crumble and break easily . It creates problem
in hydraulic fracturing of coal prior to
production.
 Nearly impossible to recover a whole core
 Intrusive properties measurement is nearly
impossible (permeability, porosity,
compressibility and relative permeability)
must rely on indirect measurement.
 Accurate measurement of petrophysical
properties required long core analysis.
 Proper well testing is need to model dual
porosity system as well as characterizing
the reservoir which is rarely done as it takes
long time
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONVENTIONAL GAS RESERVOIR
AND CBM RESERVOIR
Characteristics Conventional CBM

Gas Generation Gas is generated in the source Gas is generated and trapped
rock within
and then migrates into the the coal.
reservoir.
Structure Randomly-spaced Fractures Uniformly-spaced Cleats

Gas Storage Compression Adsorption

Mechanism
Transport Pressure Gradient (Darcy’s Law) Concentration Gradient (Fick’s
Mechanism Law)
and
Pressure Gradient (Darcy’s Law)
Production Gas rate starts high then Gas rate increases with time
Performance decline. then
Little or no water initially. declines.
GWR decrease with time. Initially the production is
mainly water.
GWR increases with time.
Mechanical Young Modules ~ 106 Young Modules ~ 105
Properties Pore Compressibility ~10-6 Pore Compressibility ~10-4
Drilling strategy Conventional drilling fluids are Under balanced drilling with
used, mostly overbalances foam, air or water
Pertophysics Porosity and permeability is Need fracturing due to low
GENERATION OF METHANE
Theories involved into generation of methane
 Biogenic methane

 Thermogenic methane
GENERATION OF METHANE
 Coal is a carbon-rich rock derived from plant material (peat) that
accumulated in swamps and was subsequently buried by ongoing
geological processes.
 With increasing depth of burial, the plant material undergoes
coalification, releasing volatile matter (water, carbon dioxide, light
hydrocarbons, including methane) as it begins to transform into coal.
With ongoing coalification, the coal becomes progressively enriched
in carbon and continues to expel volatile matter.
 Generation of methane and other hydrocarbons is a result of thermal
maturation in coals, and begins around the sub-bituminous "A" to
high volatile bituminous “C” rank stage, with amounts of methane
generated increasing significantly throughout the medium to low
volatile bituminous coal ranks.
GENERATION OF CBM
 CBM is generated either from a biological process as a result of microbial action
or from a thermal process as a result of increasing heat with depth of the coal.
 Stages of coalification incorporating four successive steps:
 Peatification (anaerobic degradation of organic materials in the peat swamp)
 Humification (formation of dark coloured humic substances an organic
residue of decaying organic matter. organic compound - any
compound of carbon and another element or a radical ) by anaerobic
degradation)
 Bituminization (generation of hydrocarbons with increase in temperature and
pressure)
 Debituminization (thermal degradation of matter and generated hydrocarbons)
COALIFICATION PROCESS
BIOGENIC METHANE &THERMOGENIC
METHANE
 CHARACTERIZATION OF COAL

• Proximate analysis
• Elemental Analysis
• Petrographic analysis
• Gas content
• Porosity
• Permeability
• Compressibility of rock
 PROXIMATE ANALYSIS PROCESS

Friday, October 4, 2019

Moisture

Whole Coal
1gm, 72 mesh
1gm, 72 mesh
Heating at 108ºC, 1.5hr.

Coking at Volatile
500ºC, 30 min Combustion at 750 ºC, 910 ºC 7 Matter
30-60 minutes minutes

Ash Non Volatile

Residual
Fixed Carbon

27
Fixed Carbon = 100-(Ash%+ M% + V.M. %)
Proximate analysis result of samples from Well

Friday, October 4, 2019

J1 of Jharia coalfield
Sample Interval Mean Intv.
(m) Moist Ash VM VM (daf) FC (daf)
FC (%)
from (m) to (m) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

680.35 680.66 680.505 0.64 11.54 24.90 28.35 62.92 71.65

682.33 682.7 682.515 0.72 13.00 21.03 24.37 65.25 75.63

684.35 684.68 684.515 0.73 15.25 21.11 25.12 62.91 74.88

769.37 769.69 769.53 0.71 12.00 19.52 22.36 67.77 77.64

771.03 771.33 771.18 0.68 16.21 17.64 21.22 65.47 78.78

908.34 908.94 908.64 0.67 12.42 17.33 19.94 69.58 80.06

973.20 973.50 973.35 0.65 16.26 14.91 17.94 68.18 82.06

1060.17 1060.47 1060.32 0.51 24.85 14.03 18.80 60.61 81.20

1061.81 1062.11 1061.96 0.53 18.81 14.86 18.42 65.8 81.58

1064.07 1064.37 1064.22 0.55 18.92 15.52 19.27 65.01 80.73

1067.03 1067.33 1067.18 0.52 17.51 13.50 16.46 68.47 83.53

1068.94 1069.24 1069.09 0.52 26.63 13.26 18.20 59.59 81.80

28
1071.53 1071.83 1071.68 0.50 21.02 14.83 18.90 63.65 81.10
Proximate analysis result of samples from Well

Friday, October 4, 2019

J3 of Jharia coalfield
Sample Interval Mean depth Moist Ash VM VM FC FC
(m) (%) (%) (%) (daf) (%) (daf)
from (m) to (m)
(%) (%)
1073.36 1073.86 1073.61 0.35 30.11 16.64 23.92 52.9 76.07

1074.25 1074.75 1074.5 0.30 15.02 18.20 21.50 66.48 78.51

1127.31 1127.61 1127.46 0.26 14.50 17.54 20.57 67.7 79.42

1127.95 1128.26 1128.105 0.25 23.16 19.80 25.85 56.79 74.15

1128.82 1129.12 1128.97 0.35 16.68 16.80 20.24 66.17 79.75

1186.72 1187.02 1186.87 0.22 21.96 15.83 20.34 61.99 79.66

1187.49 1187.79 1187.64 0.25 40.06 14.55 24.37 45.14 75.62

1132.90 1233.20 1183.05 0.18 14.46 16.33 19.13 69.03 80.87

1233.39 1233.69 1233.54 0.25 23.27 15.63 20.43 60.85 79.56

1234.10 1234.40 1234.25 0.22 27.84 14.28 19.84 57.66 80.15

1451.00 1456.25 1453.625 0.20 16.15 12.80 15.30 70.85 84.7029

VARIATION OF ASH CONTENT WITH
DEPTH
Variation of Moisture content with
depth

30

Friday, October 4, 2019

 ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS

Friday, October 4, 2019

The coal samples were analyzed using an elementar analyzer (Elementar Vario EL
III- CHNS analyzer)

CHNS analyser 31
van Krevelen diagram
Composition of generated Hydrocarbons

Diagenesis

Catanesis

Meta
 Friday, October 4, 2019
Kerogen Origin of organic Petroleum
H:C ratio O:C ratio
type material products

Algae in lacustrine Light, high-

Type I 1.7–0.3 0.1–0.02 and/or lagoonal quality oil and
environments some natural gas

Mixture of plant Main source of

Type II 1.4–0.3 0.2–0.02 debris and marine crude oil and
microorganisms some natural gas

Mainly natural
Land plants in
Type III 1.0–0.3 0.4–0.02 gas with very
coaly sediments
little oil
Oxidised and No petroleum 33
Type IV 0.45–0.3 0.3–0.02
charred wood potential
 Elemental analysis result of samples from

Friday, October 4, 2019

Well J1 of Jharia coalfield

mean depth Elemental data (%), daf basis Atomic ratios

(m) C H N S O H/C O/C
680.66 79.64 4.16 2.16 0.80 13.24 0.63 0.03
682.7 82.52 4.06 1.74 0.70 10.99 0.59 0.03
684.68 85.46 4.28 1.55 0.76 7.95 0.60 0.03
769.69 84.58 3.85 1.58 0.62 9.37 0.55 0.02
771.33 82.54 5.17 0.60 2.17 9.52 0.75 0.04
908.94 82.99 4.60 0.58 1.96 9.87 0.67 0.02
973.50 82.56 5.30 0.60 1.44 10.10 0.77 0.03
1060.47 88.29 4.56 1.74 0.80 4.61 0.62 0.02
1062.11 91.52 4.60 1.52 0.50 1.86 0.60 0.02
1064.37 90.03 4.35 1.74 0.62 3.27 0.58 0.02
1067.33 81.37 5.25 1.83 0.73 10.82 0.77 0.02
1069.24 87.71 5.07 2.03 0.52 4.68 0.69 0.02
1071.83 87.16 5.30 2.12 0.59 4.84 0.73 0.04
1074.20 90.24 4.66 1.65 0.69 2.77 0.62 0.02 34
 Elemental analysis result of samples from
Well J2 of Jharia coalfield

Friday, October 4, 2019

mean depth Elemental data (%), daf basis Atomic Ratios
(m) H/C O/C
C H N S O
1116.97 85.30 5.23 1.96 0.88 6.63 0.74 0.03
1118.13 87.04 4.34 1.67 0.87 6.08 0.60 0.02
1130.47 87.04 4.91 1.75 0.58 5.71 0.68 0.03
1183.895 86.81 4.25 1.73 0.80 6.42 0.59 0.02
1185.11 86.86 5.09 1.51 0.77 5.77 0.70 0.04
1409.99 85.74 4.89 1.65 0.56 7.15 0.68 0.04
1412.74 87.12 5.26 1.80 0.58 5.23 0.72 0.03
1417.19 86.90 5.01 0.58 1.63 5.88 0.69 0.03
1418.485 84.50 4.82 0.75 1.72 8.20 0.69 0.03
1420.835 87.72 4.70 0.60 1.57 5.42 0.64 0.03
1422.91 88.09 4.57 1.99 0.66 4.69 0.62 0.01
1459.31 84.34 4.50 1.45 0.77 8.94 0.64 0.03

35
 Carbon content Hydrogen content
well J1: 79.64 % to 90.23 % and well J1: 3.84 % to 5.30 % and

well J2: 84.34 % to 88.09 % well J2: 4.25 % to 5.26 %

Nitrogen content Sulfur content Oxygen content

well J1: 0.60 % to 2.11 % and well J1: 0.49 % to 2.10 % and well J1: 3.26 % to 10.98 % and

well J2: 0.58 % to 1.99 % well J2: 0.56 % to 1.72 % well J2: 4.69 % to 8.94 %.

J1 J2

Friday, October 4, 2019 36

 Ven Krevelen Diagram for evaluation of
kerogen type

37

Friday, October 4, 2019

 Friday, October 4, 2019
38
Combination of Wells
 PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
Laboratory Study
Coal petrographic analysis for collected coal samples from different coalfields and
different wells were carried out at the Central Institute for Mining and Fuel Research,
Dhanbad.
Instrument: Leica DMRXP-HC advance research polarizing microscope
Analysis: Maceral Group
Vitrinite reflectance

From Empirical equation: The vitrinite reflectance value of coals is calculated by

using the following formula (Rice 1993):
Ro %= -2.712 × log (VM) + 5.092

For studied coal samples, modified rice equation was also used to calculate the value of
vitrinite reflectance (Ro %)
Ro %= -2.056 × log (VM) + 4.203.
39
Friday, October 4, 2019
 Well No. Maceral (Vol.)% Mean
Vitrinite Semi- Liptinite Inertinite Mineral Ro%
vitrinite matter

Well J1 32.04 to 73.35 0.60 to 4.10 0.02 to 15.02 to 51.03 5.73 to 23.00 1.23 to 1.65
0.98
Well J2 41.20 to 74.90 1.80 to 2.60 0.20 18.20 to 35.00 4.60 to 5.80 1.58 to 2.03

Well J3 43.70 to 59.00 0.60 to 2.00 0.20 to 20.00 to 45.10 6.20 to 35.10 1.42 to 1.79
0.40
J J
J 3
1 2

Friday, October 4, 2019 40

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF COAL

 Porosity
 Permeability

 Density

 Strength

 Compressibility

 Rank (Reflectance R)

 Fixed carbon or heating value

 CLEATS

 Face Cleat: Dominant fracture system. It is comprised of well developed,

throughgoing, nearly parallel fissures
 Butt Cleat: Secondary fracture system, perpendicular to the face cleat. It is less
well-developed and of limited length

In-situ cleat widths affect coal seam permeability, but difficult to quantify. Width
aperture may vary from mm to nm range, and height may range from microscopic
to seam thickness.

Cleats occur in coals of all geologic ages and are related to coal rank. Cleat
developments begins in lignites, which often exhibit poorly develped cleats with
irregular spacing and limited lengths.
Bituminus coals frequently show well-developed face and butt cleats with small
aperture spacingd.
Anthracite are often poorly cleated due to cleat healing during metamorphosis.
Better cleat development is associated with less mineral matter and ash.
 POROSITY
 Dual porosity system: Cleat or fracture porosity & matrix
porosity
 Butt and face cleats porosity of coal of medium volatile
bituminus through anthracite rank is typically less than
5%: often less than 1%
 Coal gas reservoir Engg is concerned with mobile water
porosity which is defined as the void space in a coal
containing water that will flow through the fracture in
response to a applied pressure differential.
 Matrix porosity is comprised of irregular shaped voids in
organic matrix. Some porosity is due to relict of plant
while some is the product of coalification.
 DENSITY
 Coal density is less than conventional rock, varying from 1.25 -
1.70 (mineable coal) and increase with rank.
 Bulk density of coal may be written as

 Where ρ= coal bulk density, ρa = ash density ,ρo, ρw=water

density
 VARIATION OF POROSITY AND PERMEABILITY
Assuming cleat aperture is smaller than cleat spacing, porosity can be expressed as , where Φ is the cleat
porosity, ‘a’ is the cleat width and ‘b’ is the cleat spacing

If ‘a’ is expressed in micron and ‘b’ is expressed in mm, then the equation becomes

Flow rate in the cleat system described by Poiseulli’s equation:

For ‘n’ no of cleats Flow rate in the cleat system described by Poiseulli’s equation becomes:

Flow rate in the cleat system described by Darcy’s equation:

Comparing the last two equations we get

Where

And for stiff coal with

constant coal
spacing
 STRESS DEPENDENT PERMEABILITY
For matchstick geometry, permeability is exponentially related to stress

Where is the hydrostatic stress, cf is the cleat compressibility. With vertical and hydrostatic stresses equal, the variation of permeability with depth
can be written as

where S is the overburden stress and P is the pore pressure.

Assuming a lithostatic gradient of 1psi/ft and a normally pressure basin with pressure gradient of 0.433psi/ft
=0.567d
At a particular depth or constant lithostatic pressure, the permeability variation with change in pore pressure may be expressed as (in hydrostatic stress
regime)
Hence, variation of permeability with depth can be expressed as

Assuming mean stress regime,

Where ‘ is the Poison’s ratio.

Assuming uniaxial stress with permeability controlled by horizontal stress

PREDICTED COAL PERMEABILITY DECLINE
WITH DEPLETION

1
mean stress
Horizontal stress
0.1 Hydrostatic stress

0.01

1E-3
K/Ki)

1E-4

1E-5

1E-6
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Pi-P (psia)
RESERVOIR PROPERTIES

Extended Langmuir Equation

Correction in sorbed volume

 Estimation of Reserve
The equation which is used for calculation of CBM reserve is:
 f (1  S wfi ) 
Gi  Ah  C gi  c (1  f a  f m )
 Bgi 

Where Gi=gas in place (total reserve),A= drainage area,h= coal thickness

f  Fracture effective porosity, Swfi = fracture water saturation,
Bgi = formation volume factor of gas at initial reservoir pressure, Cgi = initial Adsorbed gas concentration (gas content).

 C gi  C ga 
Recovery Factor RF    Cgi = initial gas content,
 C gi  Cga = abandonment gas content,
 f
= Fracture effective porosity,
Swfi = fracture water saturation (=0.80)
Bgi = initial gas formation volume factor
ρc = pure coal density,
fa = fractional ash content by weight,
fm = fractional moisture content by weight
Gi = Initial gas content
RF = Recovery Factor
The gas-in-place equation is:

G =1359.7AhρCgi
Where:
G = gas-in-place volume, scf
A = reservoir area, acres
h = reservoir thickness, feet
r = average in-situ rock density at the average
insitu rock composition, g/cm3
Cgi = average gas content at the average in-situ rock composition,
scf/to
 PARAMETERS INFLUENCING THE TOTAL GAS-
IN-PLACE AND DELIVERABILITY

•Coal Source: Number, Thickness, and extent of

Coal seams
•Coal Rank, Type and quality
•Coal cleats and natural fracture
•Gas content and composition
•Sorption and diffusion properties
•Geologic structure
•Stress setting
•Hydrological characteristics
Storage of Methane in Coal

Coal

53
METHODOLOGY FOR CBM
PRODUCTION
A fully fractured coal may have the following natural fractures:
•Face cleats (primary).
•Butt cleats (secondary).
•Tertiary cleats.
•Fourth-order cleats.
•Joints.
 CHANGE OF PERMEABILITY WITH
PRODUCTION:

 Permeability of coal is very much stress dependant

parameter. Two main phenomena are associate
depletion of reservoir pressure causing reduction of
coal permeability :
 Reservoir compaction,
 Gas desorption (mainly methane)
 Change of permeability of coal is primarily control by
effective horizontal stress.
SORPTION

“A surface phenomenon which may be either absorption

or adsorption, or a combination of the two”
 Adsorption
Adsorption is the association of an adsorbate compound
onto a surface (sorbent), usually in a liquid/solid or
vapor-solid system
 Absorption
absorption involves the redistribution of a compound
from the aqueous phase into a volume of material. In
geochemical systems,
Methane Gas Generation And
Adsorption
 Adsorption of Gas
Two types of adsorption are believed to occur
between the gaseous methane phase and the coal
(solid phase). These two types of adsorption are:

1. Physical Adsorption
2. Chemical or Chemisorption
 Physical Adsorption
Involves intermolecular forces (van der Waals
forces) between the gas molecules and the
coal (solid) molecules.
Chemisorption
Chemisorption's usually involves transfer
of electrons.
Desorption of Methane
PROPERTIES EFFECTING ADSORPTION CAPACITY

The following properties of coal are most important for

adsorption capacity of methane into the coal surface:
 Moisture content

 Ash content

 Volatile matter

 Rank of coal that is depends upon the above properties.

Diffusion to Cleat system

POVBN

PPORE

Cleat
Desorption
width

Adsorption
Flow through cleats

Coal
 SCHEMATIC OF SORPTION CAPACITY WITH
GEOLOGIC PARAMETERS.
 The typical formulation of Langmuir isotherm is:


 where:
 P = pressure (psia)
 V = amount of gas at P, also known as gas content (scf/ton)
 VL = Langmuir volume parameter (scf/ton)
 PL = Langmuir pressure parameter (psia)
 The Langmuir isotherm equation has 2 parameters:
 1. Langmuir Volume (VL): This is the maximum amount of gas that can be adsorbed on a piece
of coal at infinite pressure. This value is asymptotically approached by the isotherm as the
pressure increases. The following image is of a typical isotherm and shows its relationship with
VL:
 Typically, the units for the Langmuir volume parameter (VL) are scf/ton (volume gas per mass of
unit coal). The volume parameter can be converted to a scf/ft3 (volume gas per volume unit coal)
by multiplying it by the coal bulk density.
 2. Langmuir Pressure (PL): This parameter affects the shape of the isotherm. The Langmuir
pressure is the pressure at which the Langmuir volume can be adsorbed.

Adsorption capacity of different rank of
coal as a function of pressure
MEASUREMENT OF IN-SITU GAS CONTENT
The Direct method involves following
components :
 Sampling of Coal cores.
 Lost Gas Estimation
 Measurement of Desorbed Gas
 Determination of Residual Gas
 Total Gas Volume
Gas content (cc/g) Q= (Q1+Q2+Q3)/W, Canister for desorption study
Q= gas content
Q1= lost gas
Q2=desorbed gas
Q3=residual gas
W=weight of sample
77

Crushing apparatus
78
 Desorption Test Lost Gas
Lost Gas Calculation
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1000 0 5 10 15 20
2000

Cumm. Gas vol. at NTP (cc)

3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Lost Gas Calculation 8000
4000 9000
3000 y = 946.54x - 12440 10000
2000 R² = 0.9367 11000
1000
0 12000
1000 13 14 14 15 15 13000
Cumm. Gas vol. at NTP (cc)

2000 14000
3000 Sq.Rt. of lost time (min)
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
13000
14000
Sq.Rt. of lost time (min)
RELATION BETWEEN MEAN MAXIMUM REFLECTANCE OF
VITRINITE AND VOLATILE MATTER

0.9

0.8
Volatile matter (%, dry)

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Vitrinite Reflectance (R0, max)
PROXIMATE ANALYSIS OF COAL
  Dry basis :
 Moisture Ash % = (Ash% as received basis /100 – M) × 100

 Ash FC % = (FC % as received/100-M) ×100

 Volatile matter
Vm % = (Vm % as received/100-M) ×100
 Dry ash free basis (daf):
 Fixed carbon

VM% = (%VM as received/ 100 – M+A)) × 100

FC% = 100 –Vmdaf

fixed carbon = 100-(M% + Ash% + Vm %)

82
 Reserve Estimation of CBM in Place by USBM method

 Recovery factor (Rf)

 Csgi  Csga 
Where Gi=gas in place (total reserve), Rf   
A= drainage area,
 Csgi 
h= coal thickness
Φf = Fracture effective porosity, Rf = recovery factor
Swfi = fracture water saturation, Csgi= initial gas content
Cgi = initial Adsorbed gas concentration Csga=abandonment gas content
lc = pure coal density.
Bgi = formation volume factor of gas at initial reservoir pressure,
Fa = ash content by weight
Fm = moisture content by weight, 83
 10
3
Gsaf, m /ton
9 Best Fit Line

Dry Gas Content (m /ton)

8

3
7
Y= -10.61x+10.47
2
R =0.998
6

3
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Ash + Moisture Content(fraction)

Relationship between Total Gas Content and Non- Coal content

Kim’s correlation:
 RELATION BETWEEN LANGMUIR VOLUME AND
ASH CONTENT

36

34
Langmuir Volume (VL)

32

30

28

26

24

22

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Ash Content (%)

RELATION BETWEEN MEAN MAXIMUM REFLECTANCE
OF VITRINITE AND LANGMUIR PRESSURE

2.18
2.16
2.14
2.12
Langmuir Pressure (MPa)

2.10
2.08
2.06
2.04
2.02
2.00
1.98
1.96
1.94
1.92
1.90
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Vitrinite Reflectance (R0, max)
87
 Output results Moisture Equibrated (daf) 88
Langmuir Volume (VL) (cc/g) 14.2 16.12
Langmuir Pressure (PL) (kPa) 3954 4027
Output results Moisture Equilibrated daf
89
Langmuir Volume (VL) (cc/g) 14.70 16.39
Langmuir Pressure (PL) (kPa) 4123 4213
Methane Adsorption Methane Adsorption
Isotherm Sample No: Isotherm Sample No:
RC01 RC02

90
 91

Result of methane Adsorption Isotherm of Kulti block Coal Sample RC01

 92

Result of methane Adsorption Isotherm of Kulti block Coal Sample RC02

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF COAL

 Porosity
 Permeability

 Density

 Strength

 Compressibility

 Rank (Reflectance R)

 Fixed carbon or heating value

POROSITY
 Dual porosity system
 Butt ad face cleatsporosity of coal of medium
volatile bituminus through anthracite rank is
typically less than 5%
PRODUCTION PROFILE
COAL CLASSIFICATION BY RANK (STACH ET
AL., 1982)
DRILLING AND COMPLETION
 Drilling
 Conventional Vertical drilling
 Water based Drilling Fluid
 Shallow drilling depth with smaller
Rig
 Less casing policy
 Under balanced drilling - Foam, Air
 Air hammer drilling
 Horizontal drilling
Light weight Cementation
Drilling Methods
• Air Drilling
Less Damage?
Real time DST
Completion Problems?
• Mud Drilling
May Cause Damage to Coal
Cleats
Hole Stability Greater?
CONVENTIONAL VERTICAL WELL
Vertical wells – standard technique for CBM

 5 to 40 meters of coal exposure per well

( Cummulative thickness of coal seams)
 less complex
 Larger environmental impact
 Huge HF Cost
 Many pumps
 Logistics : Many rig moves, etc.
Horizontal, multilateral UBD wells
1 to 2 wells per section
Less LAQ problem

Low environmental impact

Fewer pumps but higher

capacity
Less eqipment cost, Less
Cementing & No hydraulic
fracturing
Very large drainage area

Higher productivity
Typical VCBM Well in Production
FRACTURING
 Pumps Blender Hydraulic
fracturing
Pad fluid • Creation of highly conductive
path in the reservoir
Sand slurry Well • Fracture connects far
reservoir with wellbore
Displacing fluid • Allows untapped hydrocarbon
to flow into the well
50-1000ft
Propped Frac
Shale
Reservoir
Shale

113
HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

 Job stages:

 Pad fluid (viscous fluid to initiate fracture)

 Sand Slurry (viscous fluid with sand / Proppant to prop

the created fracture)

 Flush (to clear the tubing from sand slurry) 114

PROPPANT HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

 Effect:

 Mostly utilized in Sandstone reservoir

 Fracture of large length and high conductivity can be

generated

 Can be used to increase the productivity/ injectivity of

low permeable or tight reservoir also

115
 PROPERTIES OF HF FLUIDS
 compatible with the formation and formation fluids.
 capable of suspending proppant and transporting them deep
into the fracture.
 capable, through its inherent viscosity, to develop the
necessary fracture width to accept proppant.
 an efficient fluid (i.e. have low fluid loss).

 easy to remove from the formation i.e. clean

 low friction pressure-easy to pump

 Preparation of the fluid should be simple and easy to perform

in the field.
 It should be stable so that it will retain its viscosity throughout
the treatment.
116
 The fracturing fluid should be cost-effective.
 TYPES OF HF FLUIDS
 Water Based Gel: Linear Gel Fluid,
Cross linked Gel Fluid

 Foam Based or energized fluid: N2,

CO2.

 Oil Based Fluid: Gelled Oil, Cross

Linked oil, Oil in Water emulsion

 Acid Based Gel: Gelled acid, Cross

Linked Acid, Foamed Acid 117
WHY UNCONVENTIONAL FLUIDS

 Tight Gas Reservoir

 – Unconventional Wells
 Shales
 Coal Beds

 Reservoirs with Adverse Capillary Effects

 – Sub-irreducible Water Saturation

 – Sub-irreducible Hydrocarbon Saturation

 Sensitivity to water

118
UNCONVENTIONAL FRAC-FLUIDS

26-04-2012
Polymer Systems
 Aqueous Methanol Based

Ojha-ISM,Dhanbad,India
WSEOR-Xian,China-Presented by Dr. K
 Non-Aqueous Methanol Based

Non Polymer Systems

 Surfactant Gels (VES)

 VES Foams

 Hydrocarbon Based

 Liquid CO2 Based

119
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF CBM
FRACTURING
• Before we even consider CBM issues such as embedment, coal fines
plugging, and multiphase flow, there is reason to suspect that our propped
fractures have inadequate conductivity.

Options to Increase Fracture Conductivity

 Increase fracture width

 Reduce gel damage

Often must
 Increase proppant permeability compromise
 Pack Porosity
Stim-Lab, 2 lb/sq ft, 20/40, 5e-6 psi core
45%
Sand

RCS
40%

Economy LWC
Porosity (percent)

35% Premium LWC

30%

25%
27% more porosity
(9 porosity units)
20%

15%
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

Closure Stress, psi

 OTHER FACTORS TO CONSIDER

 Multiphase flow
 Coal Fines Plugging / Flowback
 Coal compaction with high treating pressures
 Erosion of coal frac faces during treatment by
angular sand is likely more severe than with
round ceramic. Erosion may contribute to
width, but also “contaminates” pack with fines.
– SPE 48886
 Low reservoir energy to cleanup gel residue.
LWC clean up easier than sand.
 Embedment
 Additives
 CONCLUSIONS
 The conductivity needs of low pressure CBM wells are
often underestimated
 For rapid dewatering and ability to handle multiphase
flow, superior fracture conductivity is needed
 Many frac gels are extremely damaging to coals. It is
desirable to use low damage fluids but maintain
conductivity
 Light weight ceramic proppants provide superior
productivity
 Gas

Water
(production
fluid)

Coal Bed
 WATER DISPOSAL
Water production and disposal assume a greater degree of importance in
coalbed methane (CBM) projects than in conventional oil or gas operations. In
marginally economic coalbed projects, the water disposal costs and the
attendant environmental accounting are critical factors in the investment
decision;
water
disposal costs economically make or break a marginal project.
Normally, water must be removed from the coal to lower the pressure and to
initiate methane desorption; however, near mining operations there may be
only small amounts of water to produce. The operator can also anticipate large
amounts of water being produced early in the process but decreasing
thereafter to an eventual low level.
Therefore, water disposal problems decrease with time, and the greatest
economic burden is placed on the operator in the first few years.
•Water purity ranges from nearly fresh in the Powder River basin to
marginally saline in the Warrior basin to a brine in the deepest coals. Water
purity and the quantity produced determine the means of disposal and the
costs of disposal.
•Suspended solids, total dissolved solids, and oxygen demand of produced
waters have the most impact on water treatment.
•High initial water flow rates normally decline as the hydrocarbon production
rate increases, which is counter to the conventional oil and gas process.
Lack of understanding of the unusual pattern of water flow and its relation to
methane desorption probably delayed recognition that methane could be
produced profitably from the country’s vast coal reserve.
Exponential decline in water production rate
 Q. # 2
How is coalbed methane removed?

A. # 2
CBM is removed by removing water pressure which holds CBM in
place. Methane that was held in place by water pressure tends to
follow the water as it is pumped to the surface, where it is
captured and transported through pipelines. Fraccing fluids are
often first injected into the coal bed to break up the coal, making it
easier for the water and gas to flow to the surface.
UNAFFECTED HYDROLOGY
CBM EFFECTS ON HYDROLOGY
EFFECTS OF DISCHARGE TO SURFACE
WATER
WATER QUALITY

 Surface Water Quality

 Effects on Irrigation/Stockwater Usage

 Changing Riparian Ecosystems to more salt

tolerant system
WATER QUALITY OF CBM WATER
Horseshoe Canyon
Water Powder River Basin, Piceance Basin, San Juan Basin Black Warrior Basin,
Formation (Alberta,
Chemistry WY CO CO, NM, AZ, UT AL
Canada)

Max min max Min Max Min Max min max min
(mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

Na 861.0 112.0 800.0 110.00 2673. 1976. 5939. 3674. 3100. 570.0
Ca 128.00 2.70 69.00 5.90 1839.00 13.20 118.70 6.50 100.00 2.50
Mg 23.50 0.20 46.00 1.60 7.77 0.00 39.00 2.88 34.00 1.10

As 0.0022 <0.0002 0.0026 <0.0002 0.11 0.00

Fe 0.16 <0.01 4.90 0.20 1.50 0.05
K 8.90 2.00 18.00 3.80 6.00 2.00
HCO3- 1720.00 384.00 6612.00 5250.00 14701.00 6083.00 1120.00 670.00
Cl- 229.00 0.50 64.00 5.20 600.00 4.00 2499.00 668.00 4200.00 450.00
SO42- 1320.00 1.00 17.00 0.01 135.50 8.32 166.80 0.00

Meq Na 37.45 4.87 34.80 4.78 116.27 85.95 258.34 159.82 134.85 24.79
Meq Ca 6.39 0.13 3.44 0.29 91.77 0.66 5.92 0.32 4.99 0.12
Meq Mg 1.93 0.02 3.79 0.13 0.64 0.00 3.21 0.24 2.80 0.09

SAR 18.36 17.72 18.30 10.37 17.11 149.77 120.90 301.66 68.33 75.57
HYDROLOGY EFFECTS WITH
REINJECTION
Transport of gas in coal is a three stage process:

1. Desorption from coal surface due to lowering of pressure.

2. Diffusion from micro pores to macro pores.

3. Darcy’s flow through the cleats/fractures/fissures.

136
ADSORPTION ISOTHERM
Need of Dewatering

138
139
 CHALLENGES TO CBM DEVELOPMENT
•Technical Challenges
• Other Problems-
Most mines are not accessible to gas pipeline network - lack of
natural gas transportation infrastructure in the coal producing regions
 Limited drainage technologies/low drainage rates
 Lack of Technology development due to cost and lack of
investment capital
Technical Difficulties:
 Peculiar mechanical properties of coal
 Dewatering & produced water treatment cost
 Large number of parameter dependency
CHARACTERISTICS OF CBM RESERVOIR
• Coal is a source rock and a Reservoir Rock
• Gas Storage Mechanism of coal : adsorbed on surface- not free gas like
conventional gas reservoir
• Fracture system of coal reservoir : contains small naturally occurring fracture (several
in an inch) face cleat & butt cleat. Orientation, size, spacing of which controls gas flow
once desorbed & diffused to pore space
• Flow mechanism :
• Unique mechanical properties of coal compared to conventional reservoir rock
• Gas content = f(coal rank, reflectance, isotherm, reservoir pressure, CO2content etc.
• Dual Porosity
• Production behavior- similar to gas reservoir but rock is very much different
from sandstone or carbonate rock
• Variation of coal properties with production
• Gas composition variations during production
• dewatering
OTHER UNIQUE QUALITIES OF COAL

 Coals are extremely friable; i.e., they crumble and break

easily . It creates problem in hydraulic fracturing of coal prior
to production
 Nearly impossible to recover a whole core, but Accurate
measurement of petrophysical properties required long core
analysis
 Compressibility of coal is very high ~10-3 /psi
 Proper well testing is need to model dual porosity system as
well as characterizing the reservoir which is rarely done as it
takes long time
PETROPHYSICAL PROPERTIES
 Very low porosity & permeability
 Dual porosity system

 Nearly impossible to collect whole core- difficult

to make useful correlations
EFFECT OF MOISTURE CONTENT
Ref: Coal Mine Methane Potential source of Energy in NE India, NN Gautam, North East India Energy Summit 2008
 COAL BED METHANE – RESERVE ASSESSMENT
Results in respect of six coal samples collected during exploratory drilling of boreholes and analyzed for
estimation of gas content, analyses for the chemical and petrographical properties and construction of
adsorption isotherm are presented below

Table: Proximate analysis of coal samples

Sl Location Depth Proximate Analysis
No. (m)
Moist., % % Ash % VM % FC

1. Sonhat 330-420 1.0-1.7 18.8-28.8 17.6-28.8 45.3-53.2

Coalfield

2. Raniganj 330-800 2.9-4.2 16.8-33.6 32.0-38.2 32.0-45.0

Coalfield
3. Jharia 96.2-800 0.6-1.0 8.5-14.5 19.0-26.0 50.0-65.0
Coalfield
4. East 300-600 06-1.0 16.1-55.8 10.7-18.8 32.0-65.0
Bokaro
5. Mehsana 1295-1450 13.7-18.0 3.5-5.0 28.5-42.5 23.7-42.0
Area
6. Neyveli Ref: Coal Mine400-440 18.3-27.5
Methane Potential source of 0.9-32.2
Energy in NE India, NN Gautam, 38.4-40.7
North East India Energy Summit 2008 31.6-36.0
STRATEGY FOR RECOVERY OF
CBM

•To drill into Virgin seam ahead of mining,, hydrofracturing

the well, to pre-drain the gas existing in coal seams;

• To recover from surface by vertical drilling into worked out

(GOB ) areas

• To recover gas (in-seam) in working mines by long hole

horizontal underground drilling, in advance of mining

EFFECT ON ENVIRONMENT

Methane is a very powerful green house gas, (GHG) Twenty one times more
potent than CO2 .
 Its adverse impacts are felt more intensely due to its shorter residence and
higher potency in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
 Methane is remarkable clean fuel when burnt and its combustion produces no
SO2 or particulates and only about half of the CO2 associated with coal
combustion.
 Emission of Methane is related to various human activities -Rice cultivation,
livestock management landfills and coal mining.
 Global methane concentration is increasing by about 1% per annum.
CONCLUSIONS

 Coal bed methane gas – a clean gas

 Large volume of reserve –only very small amount produces

 production is challenging- required tech-economic development

 Utilization of CBM can reduce accidents in coal mines as well as

carbon emission to atmosphere

 Deep coal beds can be used for CO2 sequestration

Thus, CBM gas – to supplement energy requirement to future India

WELL TESTING
THANK YOU
 CBM is a form of natural gas that is trapped inside the coal
seams.

 CBM is naturally occurring methane with small amount of other

hydrocarbon and non hydrocarbon gases that are content in coal
seam as result of coalification.

 Coal is the most abundant energy source in the world. It is a

well recognized source of hydrocarbons, particularly gas.

 CBM is often produced at shallow depths & is often produced

with large volumes of water.
156
 Depletion of Natural Hydrocarbon resources &
Faster Increase in world-wide energy demand,
magnifies production of hydrocarbons from
unconventional reservoirs.
 Coal bed methane is one of the most important &
viable unconventional resources.
 Production of CBM form coal bed serves multiple
purposes: -(a) Extra recovery of natural gas in
addition to coal (b) Recovery of gas from non-
mineable coal mines © prevents accident
 The natural gas from coal is "sweet" not "sour“.
 CBM is of marketable quality containing small
amounts of carbon dioxide and nitrogen. 157