January/February 2018 Reservoir

Resources Available to the Working Geologist In This Issue...

The Evolution of Canstrat Resources Available to the Working Geoscientist Flowing Conventional Duvernay Oil Not Pursued by Industry. Why?

RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESSES TO: CSPG – 150, 540 – 5th Ave SW Calgary, AB, T2P 0M2

$7.00 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018 VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1 Canadian Publication Mail Contract – 40070050

THANK-YOU TO ALL OF OUR SPONSORS SAMARIUM SPONSORS

TITANIUM SPONSORS

DIAMOND SPONSOR

GOLD SPONSORS

SILVER SPONSORS

BRONZE SPONSORS

CORPORATE SUPPORTERS Geovariances XRF Solutions Ltd Birchcliff Energy Ltd. I H S Markitt Encana Foothills Resource Services RSEG Saguaro Resources Secure Energy Services Trican Laboratories Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. Sproule Associates Limited

*As of December 1st

Sensor Geophysical Ltd. Pulse Seismic Inc Siftgrid Cabra Consulting Ltd. CoreSearch CAPL NAL REsources Crescent Point Energy TAQA North Ltd. Earth Signal Processing Ltd. Baker Hughes Calgary Ember Resources McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd. Enlighten Geoscience Ltd. Midwest Surveys MEG Energy Corp.

RPS Energy Canada Ltd. Petrocraft Products Ltd. Canadian Global Exploration Forum Tangle Creek Energy Velvet Energy Ltd. PERM Inc.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2018 CSPG OFFICE #150, 540 - 5th Ave SW Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 0M2 Tel: 403-264-5610 Web: www.cspg.org Please visit our website for all tickets sales and event/course registrations Office hours: Monday to Friday, 8:30am to 4:00pm The CSPG Office is Closed the 1st and 3rd Friday of every month.

OFFICE CONTACTS

Membership Inquiries Tel: 403-264-5610 Email: membership@cspg.org Advertising Inquiries: Emma MacPherson Tel: 403-513-1230 Email: emma.macpherson@cspg.org Sponsorship Opportunities: Lis Bjeld Tel: 403-513-1235 Email: lis.bjeld@cspg.org Conference Inquiries: Candace Jones Tel: 403-513-1238 Email: , candace.jones@cspg.org Accounting Inquiries: Kasandra Amaro.

Tel: 403-513-1232 Email: kasandra.amaro@cspg.org Education Inquiries: Kristy Casebeer Tel: 403-513-1233 Email: kristy.casebeer@cspg.org Executive Director: Lis Bjeld Tel: 403-513-1235, Email: lis.bjeld@cspg.org

EDITORS/AUTHORS

Please submit RESERVOIR articles to the CSPG office.

Submission deadline is the 23rd day of the month, two months prior to issue date. (e.g. January 23 for the March/April issue) To publish an article, the CSPG requires digital copies of the document. Text should be in Microsoft Word format and illustrations should be in TIFF format at 300 dpi., at final size.

CSPG COORDINATING EDITOR

Emma MacPherson, Programs Coordinator, Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Tel: 403-513-1230, emma.macpherson@cspg.org

The RESERVOIR is published 6 times per year by the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists. The purpose of the RESERVOIR is to publicize the Society’s many activities and to promote the geosciences. We look for both technical and non-technical material to publish.

The contents of this publication may not be reproduced either in part or in full without the consent of the publisher. Additional copies of the RESERVOIR are available at the CSPG office.

No official endorsement or sponsorship by the CSPG is implied for any advertisement, insert, or article that appears in the Reservoir unless otherwise noted. All submitted materials are reviewed by the editor. We reserve the right to edit all submissions, including letters to the Editor. Submissions must include your name, address, and membership number (if applicable).The material contained in this publication is intended for informational use only.

While reasonable care has been taken, authors and the CSPG make no guarantees that any of the equations, schematics, or devices discussed will perform as expected or that they will give the desired results. Some information contained herein may be inaccurate or may vary from standard measurements. The CSPG expressly disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions, or conduct of any third-party user of information contained in this publication. Under no circumstances shall the CSPG and its officers, directors, employees, and agents be liable for any injury, loss, damage, or expense arising in any manner whatsoever from the acts, omissions, or conduct of any third-party user.

PRESIDENT Clint Tippett

PRESIDENT ELECT Marty Hewitt

president@cspg.org

presidentelect@cspg.org

PAST PRESIDENT Mark Cooper

FINANCE DIRECTOR Jim Barclay

Sherwood Geoconsulting Inc. pastpresident@cspg.org

directorfinance@cspg.org

FINANCE DIRECTOR ELECT Ray Geuder

DIRECTOR Laurie Brazzoni membershipdirector@cspg.org

directorfinanceelect@cspg.org

DIRECTOR Mark Caplan

DIRECTOR Alex MacNeil

Cenovus Energy Ltd. conferences@cspg.org

Osum Oil Sands Corp.

AMacNeil@osumcorp.com

DIRECTOR Kevin Parks

DIRECTOR Michael Webb

Alberta Energy Regulator kevin.parks@aer.ca

Suncor Energy mwebb@suncor.com

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Lis Bjeld CSPG lis.bjeld@cspg.org

Printed by CBN Commercial Services, Calgary, Alberta.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JAN/FEB 2018

3

2018 CSPG Squash Tournament

Registration Open!

When: February 1-3rd, 2018 Where: Bow Valley Club | 250-6 ave SW Calgary For more information and to register online go to www.CSPG.org

Registration deadline is Wednesday January 24th @ 4:00pm

GeoConvention 2018 is a must-attend event for access to latest innovations, discoveries and insights within the Geosciences, market and business analysis with international perspectives and research

Early Bird Registration NOW OPEN Exhibit and Sponsorship Opportunities Available

geoconvention.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018 – VOLUME 45, ISSUE 1

MONTHLY SPONSORS............................................................................................4 MESSAGE FROM THE BOARD.............................................................................6 MESSAGE FROM THE EDITORS.........................................................................8 TALKING WITH ARCHITECTS ...........................................................................9 TECHNICAL ARTICLES The Evolution of Canstrat...........................................................................................13 FRONT COVER Sand Dunes – Death Valley. This area of sand dunes, located at Mesquite Flat in Death Valley National Park, California, is one of the few in North America with large, well-developed dunes. Sediments derived from the Cottonwood Mountains to the north and west are transported into the valley in the huge alluvial fans visible in the middle distance. Grains of quartz and feldspar are reworked by strong winds in the valley bottom to form dunes up to 30 m in height.

The Funeral Mountains on the horizon consist of Precambrian metamorphic rocks, Cambrian to Mississippian sedimentary rocks and Miocene to Recent sedimentary and volcanic rocks.

Photo: Gary Prost

Resources Available to the Working Geoscientist.................................................16 Flowing Conventional Duvernay Oil not Pursued by Industry. Why?.................21

UPCOMING EVENTS Technical Luncheons..............................................................................................23 Division Talks...........................................................................................................26

SOCIETY NEWS 2018 CSPG Geological Calendar Wrap-up............................................................35 2017 Gussow Wrap-up.............................................................................................36 Financial Overview of the CSPG 2017 Fiscal Year.................................................37 Recognizing A World Class Resource The AER Core Research Centre...............................................................................38

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

5

MESSAGE FROM THE BOARD

SOME PERSPECTIVES ON THE UPCOMING YEAR

By Clinton Tippet, CSPG President 2018 Welcome to 2018! As I start my term as President, I’d like to share a few thoughts with you.

I joined the CSPG in 1982 and have participated in its activities continuously over the intervening decades. I have benefited in a technical sense – but equally important to me are the personal relationships that I have had a chance to make over the years and the sense of community that I have enjoyed. When I was asked to run for office, I was willing to take on the challenge in part as a way of paying back to the Society and its members for all of these benefits that I have received.

During 2017 I participated in the CSPG as President-Elect and had a chance to see how the Society operates. It is clear to me that we are involved in an organization that is every bit as complicated as a midsized business. Our products are largely educational – and we can only succeed if we have the quality that people want to buy and that offers us the chance to make money to support the other parts of our Society. We have a large number of people involved as either volunteers or as employees – all of whom require some degree of coordination, motivation and recognition. We are faced daily with organizational issues whether that be the need to establish new parts of the Society or dealing with existing partners such as the CSPG Foundation and Geoconvention. We have technology issues. Some folks harken back to the “good old days” but I would offer up the comment that technology hasn’t made our lives simpler at all – rather more complicated and expensive. Likewise for government regulations.

So where do we sit now as petroleum geologists?

Although we are seeing some level of strengthening of oil prices, the industry is still hampered by many obstacles – both external and generated by forces within our country. It would be

comforting to say that this is just another cycle and that we have turned the corner but I think that we all know that some fundamental problems are going to have to be overcome before we are back to a degree of normalcy.

Having set the stage, all is not lost.

As is said, “money never sleeps” and investments continue to be made in some of the more profitable fairways such as the Montney and Duvernay plays. Some hiring is taking place. A number of “fair weather” multinationals have turned tail and divested large chunks of their Canadian portfolios. It is my hope that through innovation and imaginative thinking, we will prove that these were erroneous decisions.

The Society faces challenging times.

Membership numbers and sponsorships continue to be weak – and we definitely thank those who continue to support us on both fronts. We have brought on board Laurie Brazzoni as our new Membership Director to coordinate our initiatives.

We look forward to retaining existing members, renewing our relationship with those whose memberships have lapsed and bringing a new crop of petroleum geologists into the fold. For this to be successful we need to strengthen our rationale for membership – and with that the “case to contribute” because we cannot survive with just members – a strong volunteer base is essential. And in this regard, I would like to thank those who have continued their volunteer involvement with the Society over many years.

We are starting off our 2017-2018 financial year on a solid footing. In September we hosted a technical luncheon that featured A.A.P.G. President Charles Sternbach who described for us the activities going on in the prolific Permian Basin of Texas.

This is a part of his Superbasins initiative – which notably recognizes the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin as one of its

members. The Gussow Conference that was held in Banff in October attracted a large audience and was a success, demonstrating that the little grey cells, as Poirot would say, are still grinding away on some of the fundamental technical issues facing the petroleum industry. Our Fall Education Week was likewise popular with those seeking enlightenment. In October I attended the full week corefocused clastics course taught by David James at the Core Research Centre. It was uplifting to see the transfer of knowledge to the younger generation – and not purely the geological variety but also the historical background behind many of the concepts in use today and the personal sides of their evolution.

November included both a successful Young Professionals evening at the Unicorn and a well-attended Geology of Wine Tasting session instructed, in part, by Jon Noad. As this is being written, we are looking forward to a fun and informative Honorary Address and Holiday Social in December.

I should also mention that our Technical Divisions and special interest groups continue to roll out numerous talks and other activities of interest to the membership.

Our sports -related committees provide our members with the opportunity to get involved in a physical way.

Peering into the future, we see that plans for both Geoconvention 2018 and our Spring Education slate are well underway. The gears are turning in the SIFT organization. Gussow 2018 is coming together. We have lots of great educational opportunities to which we look forward.

As a grandfather I have regained an appreciation for fairy tales. One that caught my attention is the classic story of Rumpelstiltskin and the spinning of straw into gold. I like to learn by analogy and it seems to me that this tale forms a strong

MESSAGE FROM THE BOARD

parallel with the role played by geologists in the petroleum industry. The straw that we use is the information that we have at our disposal, whether that be well data, cores and cuttings or seismic. Our spinning wheel is the technology that we use to analyze this information. The gold is, of course, the interpretations, maps and recommendations for investment activity as well as the ultimate financial riches that flow from our successes.

One of the corollaries of this tale is that in order to be successful we need to have a continuous supply of straw – so continued access to information resources is essential.

One of the mandates of the CSPG is therefore to collaborate with regulators such as the Alberta Energy Regulator to ensure that petroleum geologists can access well data.

Likewise working with organizations that

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

generate basic and advanced well data and, ultimately, industry-wide database vendors provide critical links.

In terms of the “spinning” technologies, strong relationships with companies that provide hardware and software used in data analysis and synthesis are key.

This provides a basis for the relationship between the CSPG and vendors such as geoLOGIC systems ltd. who provide the tools needed by our members.

our Society stronger. If you have any comments or suggestions, please don’t hesitate to get in contact with us and we will take the initiative.

In closing, I would like to thank all of you for your roles in our Society, whether that be as a member or a volunteer. I look forward to working with you over the coming year.

Finally, in terms of “the gold”, we need to be able to participate in an environment that is receptive to the need for capital investment – otherwise our good ideas and potential prospects will fall on deaf ears.

I am a believer in continuous improvement. Every change for the better – whether small or large – makes

7

MESSAGE FROM THE EDITORS

RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE WORKING GEOLOGIST

H Jason Frank Technical Editor for the CSPG Reservoir Sr. Geologist at Athabasca Oil Corporation Jason Frank is a Professional Geologist who holds a B.Sc. and M.Sc. from the University of Alberta.

He has over 16 years of experience in oil and gas including technical and leadership positions in exploration and development both on and offshore. Past experience includes Shell Canada Ltd., Burlington Resources Ltd., ConocoPhillips Canada Ltd., and Talisman Energy Inc. Jason has volunteered for the Society in the past, most recently chairing the Duvernay session at the Society’s annual convention (2014) and the Honourary Address Committee.

Travis Hobbs Technical Editor for the Reservoir Professional Geologist at Encana Travis Hobbs is an undergraduate from University of Calgary with a graduates degree from Simon Fraser University in Geology. Professionally has worked both domestically and internationally for 19 years in the Oil & Gas industry, and is currently celebrating 15 years with Encana.

Industry roles have included development, exploration, management and business development. Prior to the Reservoir, Travis has held previous roles on convention committees and six years as the Chair of Continuing Education. As free time permits Travis enjoys cycling, cross-country skiing and teaching his two daughters violin.

8

appy New Year Dear Reservoir Readers! Hope you all had some much-deserved rest over the holiday and had the opportunity to spend quality time with friends and family. The end of one year and the start of a new year is an appropriate time for some reflection – not just on a personal level, but also professionally. We hope that a read of the Reservoir helps deliver on some of those goals: increase knowledge and keep the creative juices flowing!

As we all know, working in the current days of the ‘Google’ search engine and spreadsheets overload, the working Geologist needs to have more at his or her fingertips to keep tabs on what’s happening in their basin of interest. From analysing industry trends, databases filled with valuable information, to joint industry research; in this first edition of the 2018 calendar year we explore some of the resources available to the working Geologist.

One of the trends continuing into 2018 is the ever-evolving database landscape. How do we get the best data in a useable format that can add meaningful insight? With over 70 years of data collection, Canstrat is evolving their expansive cuttings database into the twenty-first century. Employing machine learning and GIS mapping, they allow subscribers a chance to harness the power of their 35,000 well library.

The Tight Oil Consortium, led by Dr. Christopher Clarkson (Principal Investigator and Engineering lead) and Dr. Per Pedersen (Geological lead), highlights some innovative work that is currently being conducted at the University of Calgary. Remarkable strides are being made to understand the prolific unconventional resources that are being exploited today. Identifying ‘sweet spots’ from advanced core and cuttings analysis, Diagnostic Fracture Injection Tests (DFIT) modeling and design, Rate-Transient Analysis (RTA) and improved oil recovery,

the paper highlights scientific insights from the nano, micro and macro scales of reservoir properties to maximize value from these resources.

Exploitation of the Duvernay Formation has been well documented within the Kaybob region. Canadian Discovery presents a paper that sheds light onto a potentially underexploited corner of the Duvernay play at Ante Creek. With excellent descriptions of the play, and geological setting, this paper highlights the creative thinking and investigative skills that are offered to industry by Canadian Discovery to help explore this play and push its potential limits.

The interview this month with Brad Hayes in our ‘Talking with the Architects’ series is a great read. For someone who has given so much to the CSPG organization, he continues to offer valuable nuggets of his experience to those working in the industry. Brad has excellent perspective on navigating the waters between academia and industry. Also, this interview highlights some of the great technical support which consulting firms can offer industry projects.

We hope that 2018 is a year filled with new exploration, discovery and technical growth. We will continue to bring you articles that will tantalize your imagination and test your scientific mind; for as we know, “from a little spark may burst a mighty flame” - Dante.

As with every edition, we thankyou for your time and continued support for the Reservoir and the CSPG. Jason and Travis

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TALKING WITH ARCHITECTS

TALKING WITH ARCHITECTS Interview with Brad Hayes

By Travis Hobbs Brad Hayes is a long-time CSPG member and volunteer. Brad has served on many CSPG committees and initiatives, such roles include: Outreach, Conventions, Bulletin, Ambassador as well as several years on the executive board as Secretary, Vice President,President and PastPresident. Brad received a B.Sc. in geology from University of Toronto in 1978 and a Ph.D. from the University of Alberta in 1982; where Brad is currently an Adjunct Professor. He serves as a Councillor for APEGA and a Director for Canadian Society for Unconventional Resources (CSUR).

Brad is currently the President of Petrel Robertson Consulting, a leading Industry consulting firm for petroleum geoscience and exploration / development strategies.

Technical Background 1) Who were the influences on your work during your early education/training? Is there a seminal experience you feel every Geologist should have to call themselves a “Geologist?”

I was fortunate to attend a high school where a full-year geology course was offered in Grade 12. My teacher John Wilkins was a very enthusiastic man, and had us interpreting sedimentary environments by mapping out plastic casts of sedimentary structures he placed up and down the hallways. I knew I wanted to become a geologist even before entering university, so got right at it first year. At grad school, my advisor Gordon Williams and committee member Charlie Stelck were tremendously influential in training me to be a scientist.

Every geologist needs to experience time in the field – at least university field schools, and preferably a season or more in the bush.

While it was my only minerals experience, I’ll never forget my summer with Noranda in northern Ontario.

2) What is your best field memory (hike/ field work/looking at rocks)?

My first summer in Calgary the CSPG ran a field trip led by Eric Mountjoy. We started by fording the Ghost River then hiking through Devil’s Gap to Lake Minnewanka. We were supposed to meet the sightseeing boat to take us along the lake to the dam, but we hiked up the wrong side of the lake and had to be shuttled across to the dock by smaller boats. What a fabulous trip being introduced to the structure and stratigraphy of the Rocky Mountains by one of the legendary researchers – and what a great time.

3) How much have you worked in western Canada vs. other geographic areas? And how has this influenced you as a Scientist?

I’ve worked my entire career in western Canada, from my PhD thesis work through to the present – first exploring with Shell and Canadian Hunter, then consulting with Petrel Robertson. I’ve had the opportunity to work the subsurface in basins around the world at PRCL, but I always come back to western Canada. Being based in western Canada has been hugely influential in my career – we have so much data and so much research on a huge variety of clastic and carbonate reservoirs. No matter where I’ve worked in the world, I can find an analogue with great data control and a solid geological model in the WCSB. 4) What are the biggest challenges you personally noticed working in both academic and industry circles. How do you walk the line between what is academically interesting to what is required by industry?

Considering academic vs industry, the biggest challenge I see is the shift to unconventionals.

So much fascinating sedimentology and stratigraphy seems less relevant when pursuing regionallyextensive basin-centred plays – delineating sweet spots is not quite the same thrill as mapping out ancient valley systems and shoreline deposits. But there is great science

to be done in unconventional appraisal and development, particularly internationally – but you have to learn in some different academic areas.

5) Water is a very key topic with today’s unconventional plays.

You have worked with the regulators in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and NWT concerning water source and disposal wells – can you comment on the ‘state of affairs’ in each jurisdiction? What are the major issues concerning each one, and how are they dealing with them? How do they compare with regulators in the US? Water is critical – and Canadian regulators are world leaders in ensuring that water is accessed and disposed of in safe and sustainable fashions. I’ve worked most extensively with regulators and industry associations in BC and Alberta, completing integrated regional water resource assessments in partnership with hydrogeologists. While it’s still early days, great efforts are being made to use water most efficiently, both by recycling and by sourcing frac waters from deep saline (Continued on page 10...)

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

9

TALKING WITH ARCHITECTS (Continued from page 9...) aquifers.

In BC, intensive development of both the Montney and Horn River plays has supported sophisticated water resource planning, including creation of several water resource hubs, which maximize the efficiency of recycling and water use. In Alberta, much unconventional development is in western areas with relatively abundant surface water resources and relatively small populations, so water resource management is less mature. However, as systematic development decisions are reached, as Chevron did recently in the Duvernay, we’ll see more intensive water resource management under the play-based regulatory system.

PRCL has done water resource assessments in the NWT, as part of very proactive promotion of resource potential by the NWT Geoscience Office. Unfortunately, it’s looking like those resources may not get developed in the near future for economic

and political reasons. Finally, we’ve done relatively little in Saskatchewan, at least in part because the water requirements for fracturing are less there in thinner tight carbonate and clastic plays.

mix them together with problem-solving, risk analysis, and more than a little art.

I’ve known that I wanted to be a geologist since high school because of my training there. Unconventional hydrocarbons have become a priority for me since I worked the early Deep Basin plays with Canadian Hunter. And besides – if you want to work in Canada as a consultant, you pretty much have to work with unconventionals !

I believe Canadian regulation of water resources is much more advanced than in most areas of the U.S., although it varies from state to state. Strong regulation is more a part of our operating mindset in Canada, but is being imposed in the States, particularly where operators have not treated communities with the appropriate respect.

2) As industry moves from conventional to an unconventional exploration/ exploitation what are some key geology applications you have noticed of critical importance? What are some triumphs and pitfalls you have observed?

Career Development 1) What attracted you to the Earth Science discipline, and when did you realize you wanted to focus on the field of Geology?

Why has an unconventional focus become a priority for you?

It’s not so much geological applications, it’s becoming more widely knowledgeable about geophysics and engineering disciplines.

It used to be you could be a good industry geologist by being an imaginative interpreter and mapper of depositional environments and stratigraphy. Those skills are still useful,

Geoscience is so diverse – we draw on many different scientific disciplines, and

A Geoscience Outreach Exhibition  

March 18-20, 2018 Big Four Building Stampede Park, Calgary Sunday, March 18 11:30 am – 5:00 pm Monday, March 19 8:45 am – 2:45 pm 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm (tentative)

OPEN TO THE PUBLIC HANDS ON EXPERIENCE

 

FAMILY FRIENDLY FREE ADMISSION

Come Join Us!

Earth Science for Society (ESfS) is a fun, educational, and dynamic geoscience outreach event where visitors explore Earth Science fundamentals while enjoying many varied interactive activities, including gold panning and a fossil hunt.

On Sunday, ESfS presents the following Geo-Theatre topics and speakers: Everyday Astronaut

Tuesday, March 20 8:45 am – 2:45 pm

Dr. Ross Lockwood

For more information or to volunteer, visit esfscanada.com

How and Where to Find Fossils in Alberta

Dr. Jon Noad

Hosted by:

10

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TALKING WITH ARCHITECTS

at least in some plays, but you need to know so much more now to understand resource play reservoir distribution. We’ve become world leaders in unconventional plays using our diverse skills sets – but I’m still seeing lots of cases where geologists don’t develop a sufficient understanding of local and basinscale stratigraphy, and therefore fail to see important controls on reservoir distribution.

3) What were the biggest changes and/or challenges you encountered with your role as a Councillor for APEGA? What are your feeling on the benefits of APEGA for the practicing geoscientist?

The biggest challenge for me in working with APEGA is functioning in a big organizational setting with rigid rules and reporting lines.

I’m more used to freewheeling in a small organization, but I have come to appreciate the need for the organizational structure. It’s more important than ever for geoscientists to become APEGA members – in the days when you could count on playing out your career in one or two big organizations, you could get away without registering. Now, when geoscientists can expect to work in a number of different organizations or as independent consultants through their career, APEGA membership tells people that you have competence and ethical standards, and enables you to practice legally in independent or small organization settings.

4) Running a consulting practice can be challenging. If any of our readers have similar aspirations, do you have any advice? What qualities / abilities would you suggest honing / mastering? Or if you’d like to share some pearls of wisdom on how you have achieved success in the oil and gas industry (i.e. what skill-sets would you recommend having).

It is very challenging running a consulting practice – you need people skills and business skills in addition to advanced geological knowledge and a lot of experience. You have to be comfortable with balancing the needs of different clients and fellow consultants on large integrated projects. I was fortunate to earn my PhD in an environment where my advisors were not shy about telling me when I needed to learn more and do better – that experience has enabled me to recognize that it’s much more

interesting and rewarding to work in a team of highly competent individuals than to try to do everything on my own. My “pearl of wisdom” is to know yourself – your skills and preferences – to help figure out where you are most comfortable and can best employ your knowledge. Few people are well suited to consulting as a long-term career choice – many function much better in larger organizations with fewer and more defined projects. And some people, like one very good friend of mine, realize after a few years that they’re not temperamentally suited to the uncertainty of the oil and gas business; my friend went back to school and became a physiotherapist instead.

5) Working as a consultant, I can only imagine, that you must have been involved in a few ‘eureka’ moments (good or bad).

Wondering if you could give our readers some insight into one or two of these moments, and how your work impacted a play or a key development.

My “eurekas” have been the result of intensive geological mapping in WCSB Cretaceous strata, and coming to understand the control that erosional relationships have on play development and reservoir quality.

There’s a fascinating story in mapping the major pre-Cretaceous valley systems out to their terminus in NEBC, and differentiating Gething (valley fill) reservoirs from preGething (Nikanassin / Buick Creek) reservoirs. While results of this work, and of similar middle Cretaceous relationships in west-central Alberta have been captured in PRCL exploration reports, I haven’t managed to make the time to publish them, which I’d really like to do someday. Several operators have used this mapping to design new exploration strategies in NEBC and western Alberta. One of the best things about being a consultant is in having the opportunity to pursue so many different plays and ideas in so many different places.

class field – and although our client, Canada Hibernia Holding Corp is a relatively small partner, we’ve been completely involved in the development process throughout. The technologies employed by the major partner companies are quite amazing, and the team relationships – particularly our longterm partnership with reservoir engineers at RPS Energy (formerly Adams-Pearson Associates) – have been hugely supportive.

And it’s been quite rewarding working with the principals at CHHC over all these years.

7) What are some key messages you would like to share with the industry professional just starting their careers? (Starting to collect, analyze and apply geologic data)?

It’s very competitive as the industry goes through structural changes related to unconventionals and to society’s contradictory relationship with oil and gas.

More than ever new professionals need to acquire a broad array of skills – more and more involving a graduate degree or other training beyond an undergraduate degree.

Volunteering, networking, and a willingness to do entry-level jobs, even as an unpaid intern are critical. And you have to be genuinely ready and able to work in a team with professionals in other disciplines.

8) You have been such a large part of the CSPG and have held many roles and responsibilities. Which roles were the most impactful for your career/personal development? Which roles were the most “fun”?

6) Is there a particular study / working relationship that you are most proud of throughout your career? What was it about the project that made it ‘the one,’ (people, rocks, impacts, etc.).

Honestly, everything I’ve done with CSPG has been important in developing my career and in helping me grow as a person. Having to deal with people in a variety of situations has been tremendously instructive.

A colleague who has known me a long time recently told me that I have really developed diplomacy skills, even though he knows darn well I’m not really that diplomatic at all! I have to say the most fun is had in being on lecture tours and working with students – especially the really keen ones. That said, I sure did enjoy my very first CSPG work on the Field Trip Committee.

I’ve had the good fortune to be involved with the development of the Hibernia Field since before first oil in 1997. It’s a giant, world-

9) This edition is focusing on resources available to the working geoscientist.

Can you comment on the importance of (Continued on page 12...)

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

11

TALKING WITH ARCHITECTS (Continued from page 11...) some of these industry resources that are available to the working geoscientist who are currently working for small or larger companies? Benefits? Cost savings?

Learning?

mindsets are detracting from our economic and environmental successes.

The key industry resources are those that provide learning opportunities and networking / relationship building.

Participating in workshops and conventions, attending luncheons and field trips – all contribute to learning and to meeting new people that can influence your career.

CSPG of course is a primary resource. If you belong to an organization that’s a member of Canadian Society for Unconventional Resources, there are great technical / networking events available as well. But don’t just attend – pull out some good work that you’ve done and present it as a convention talk or core workshop. I’ve seen lots of senior undergraduate projects that would make great talks or core displays – you’ll learn more in presenting your own work and getting feedback from peers than you would just attending somebody else’s presentation.

I was born in Vancouver, and although Calgary’s my home, I still love the west coast.

Geology remains my intellectual passion after all these years, so I’m really enjoying re-connecting with my roots at University of Alberta, where I’ve become an Adjunct Professor and am engaged in consulting projects with faculty members. I love cycling – I can get outside and explore, and feel good being active now that higher-impact sports like hockey and squash are too hard on the body. That said – it was wonderful to be involved in minor sports when my boys were growing up, and it’s wonderful now to cheer for the Oilers.

10) Specifically, what was your involvement in the formation of the Petrel Robertson? How has working in this type of consulting firm shaped your perspective of the oil and gas industry?

Expanding my educational and outreach activities, with CSPG, CSUR, U of A, and perhaps some other ventures. I’ll still be working, but perhaps will dial it back if the economy allows so that we can do a little more non-business travelling.

I joined Petrel Robertson when it was a diversified company, running a core lab and shooting seismic programs, with geological consulting only one component of the business.

With partners Peter Putnam, Shawna Christensen, and Alula Damte we transitioned to a pure consulting firm focused on multi-client studies and exploration / development strategies.

Since I became President in 2007, we’ve evolved with the industry to focus on unconventionals and water resources, while retaining our expertise in more traditional skills. Working at PRCL has given me a very broad view of the industry, and has highlighted for me how very fortunate that we are to work in Canada – where data are available and abundant, and regulators topnotch. I’ve worked to share this knowledge through CSPG, CSUR and APEGA – because I see the oil and industry is not doing well in communicating our science and proenvironment attitudes in a country where polarized, unscientific (i.e., irrational)

12

The Personal Side of Brad Hayes: 1) What are your interests outside of work?

particularly happy that there will always be great demand for film-makers and doctors, and they won’t have to experience the huge business cycle swings that add stress to our careers in oil and gas.

And my family – wife Carol and sons Steven and Brian – remain at the centre of my life.

2) What are your plans/goals for the next 3 to 5 years outside of work?

3) Are your holidays spent visiting outcrops or famous geological sites?

Really just day trips, although I enjoy looking at and thinking about the geology everywhere I go. I always take a window seat on the plane when I can and I never get tired of mountains, river valleys, glacial landforms – and on and on. It’s a bonus when a family holiday takes me to a place like Hawaii, where you’re surrounded by new and fascinating geology.

4) Are you encouraging your children to look at the oil and gas industry as a viable career ?

I have two sons, aged 26 and 23. They are developing careers in other areas (film and medical research); I am very proud of them, and happy for them to be there. They are using their brains and the many skills they have learned through a lot of school. I’m

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL ARTICLE

THE EVOLUTION OF CANSTRAT

By Aleksandra Petrusic, Business Development Director, Canadian Stratigraphic Services Ltd. Overview Canadian Stratigraphic Services, commonly known as Canstrat, is proud to have served the North American Oil and Gas industry for the better part of 6 decades. The beginnings of Canstrat can be traced back to the 1950’s when the company was primarily involved with the storage and washing of rock cutting samples recovered from drilling operations. At the time, detailed analysis and description of cuttings was inconsistent and without standardized processes.

This resulted in varied and inconsistent output and made interpreting the results somewhat risky. Born out of that situation, Canstrat embarked on a journey to develop a standardized methodology for analyzing cuttings and cores. The initiative was very successful, and has allowed Canstrat to create the gold standard in the industry for lithologic description. We now maintain a dataset of 35,000 wells, containing a rich set of lithologic descriptions of unsurpassed detail. Today, Canstrat works hard to evolve and expand our data library while at the same time improving and modernizing access to the information it holds.

Figure 1: Fluorescence’s through microscope analysis

Figure 2: Hand sample analysis vs, crushed sample

The Canstrat Log A Canstrat log is a visual and written representation of numerous petrographic properties meticulously analyzed and interpreted by our trained geologists. The format was developed by Canstrat and has become the standard for recording and representing samples. It is taught to well site geologists in a classroom setting to prepare them for their work, and is the trusted source for conveying core and drill cuttings interpretations. For decades Canstrat striplogs have served to inform interpretations because they are confidently regarded as the next best thing to analyzing a rock sample. The data provides the ability to infer extremely detailed lithology descriptions, clay content as well as porosity and oil staining attributes thus providing our customers logs that they can confidently ground truth their interpretations in. Additionally, the striplog is excellent in helping to pick difficult formation tops in faulted areas that have been altered by orogenic processes and

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

Figure 3: Example of a standardized, digitally coloured Canstrat strip-log have resulted in overturned lithologies.

Subsequently, the logs are also used to help normalize dated wireline and in turn help deduce what physical properties are affecting doubtful and dated signatures. Due to the expansive nature of the data, Canstrat strip-logs are regulary incorporated in the construction of lithofacies maps that aid in facies mapping and regional studies.

Digital Data In addition to the detailed strip-logs, Canstrat has converted the information that they hold into digital formats to promote their integration into modern workflows.

Canstrat codes all recorded petrographic information into distinct lithological intervals. This enables geologists to do rapid (Continued on page 14...)

13

TECHNICAL ARTICLE (Continued from page 13...) single and multi-well analysis. Generating maps and visualization based on our digital proprietary data set has become the most effective way for our clients to identify zones of interest quickly and efficiently.

The notion of providing the oil and gas industry with access to the Canstrat data in multiple formats and to make access to the database easy has always been important.

In order to continue the evolution, and to take advantage of new technology, we recently recreated the tools with which customers accessed the database. After all, we figured, what’s the use of having a rich and trusted database if finding and accessing the data isn’t easy?

The LogSource Revolution The product of this initiative is called LogSource. LogSource integrates and displays depth registered digitally coloured raster images as well as the coded petrographic properties from our database of strip-logs. It is a web- portal that requires no software installation, and is built to easily integrate into GIS software’s, such as Sigma’s SigMAP, allowing for easy mapbased searches which allows users to find the data they need quickly. Subscribers to LogSource have unlimited access to the entire Canstrat database, including its analytical capabilities, and are able to download the data for use in their other interpretation software. It also allows users to use their own interpreted tops.

Figure 4: Lithofacies map based on Canstrat data

With the release of LogSource, Canstrat completed out initiative to make our entire database accessible to users and to promote the use of this important datatype in the context of modern tool and interpretation workflows.

The Machine Learning Revolution The resulting step was to take the 15,000 Canadian wells and 20,000 USA wells and embark on a project to create systematic and consistent lithology labels in every well that has wireline log data on the North American continent. The goals being to create regular and constant lithology labels or better known as ‘pseudo-logs’ that would prove to be just as affordable and universal as Canstrat’s original data.

Machine learning has become a rapidly growing science recently, potentially revolutionizing everything from financial systems to deep space exploration.

14

Figure 5: Average porosity of oil stained intervals over gross meters of oil show trend using Canstrat interval data

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL ARTICLE

We trust machine learning algorithms to recommend songs and movies that we might like and to park our cars. It helps us to dictate text messages and call our mothers. So far, however, the impact has not been felt as much in the oil and gas industry – although that is rapidly changing. One of the reasons that impact of machine learning and AI has been somewhat muted in our industry may be the data. In order to learn, computers need consistent and readily available examples to learn from. That is most often not the case when looking at exploration data. Canstrat, however, has made a business out of exactly what computers need – rigorous, consistent, and widely available lithological descriptions (labels in the vernacular of machine learning). So our latest initiative has been to investigate whether machine learning algorithms can be trained to predict lithology from ubiquitous wireline logs. Our latest offering – CAML (Canstrat Agile Machine Learning), in conjunction with the experts at Agile Scientific – has yielded very promising results. The idea of quality inspection of tools before the use of these tools in projects or exploration work is a workflow that needs to become consistent and second nature within the oil and gas industry. The idea of creating ‘pseudo-logs’ with standardized Canstrat labels quickly expanded into refining and taming imprecise and extremely variable petrophysical data running unchecked and rampant in the industry. From our ambition of using machine learning to generate accurate and reliable pseudo-logs Canstrat uncovered a need the industry had not directly addressed.

existence. Projects and applications continue to be improved and developed based solely on need and necessity as was the case in the very beginnings of Canstrat.

As a result of these revolutionary products coupled with the need to consistently evolve, Canstrat has pushed our extensive database, procedures and experience into the future. We are excited by the fact that the valuable information that we offer is now available to a new generation of geoscientists and that we are forging a machine learning based path to providing needed and innovative solutions to the industry for decades to come.

This would be considered one interval of shale

Change is lithology denotes the next interval, shale now contains 10% sand and 10% silt

Figure 6: Canstrat coded intervals

Conclusion With LogSource and CAML, Canstrat has taken innovative steps in an effort to move the oil and gas industry to the next phase.

Customer experience and data quality continue to be the core values Canstrat adheres to during this next chapter of

Figure 7: LogSource main search page

Figure 8: CAML – Canstrat Agile Machine Learning Template

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

15

TECHNICAL ARTICLE

RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE WORKING GEOSCIENTIST Tight Oil Consortium – Advanced Reservoir and Hydraulic Fracture Characterization in Support of Tight Rock Development Optimization

by Christopher R. Clarkson and Amin Ghanizadeh, Tight Oil Consortium, Department of Geoscience, University of Calgary Introduction Low permeability (‘tight’) oil and liquidsrich gas reservoirs are currently the hottest unconventional resource targets in North America. While technologies such as long horizontal wells combined with hydraulic fracturing in multiple stages (multi-fractured horizontal wells, MFHWs) have enabled commercial recovery of these unconventional resources, liquid hydrocarbon recovery remains very low (< 5-10%), and development efficiency is suboptimal. When producing from MFHWs completed in ultra-low permeability reservoirs, a complex series of processes occurring at multiple scales (Figure 1) are initiated that we don’t completely understand; understanding how to advance characterization methods at all scales is critical for sustainable development through primary and enhanced recovery processes. This is the remit of Tight Oil Consortium (‘TOC’), an industry- and government-sponsored consortium led

by Dr. Christopher Clarkson (PI and engineering lead), with the assistance of Dr. Per Pedersen (geological lead), at the University of Calgary.

The current phase of research (2017-2019)

by TOC is focused on the following research themes: 1.

Advancing Core and Cuttings Analysis for Improved Characterization of Petrophysical/Geomechanical Properties and Fluid-Rock Interaction in Unconventional Light Oil Reservoirs 2. Advancing Diagnostic Fracture Injection Test (‘DFIT’) Modeling and Design 3.

Advancing Rate-Transient Analysis for Improved Characterization and Forecasting in Unconventional Light Oil Reservoirs 4. Investigation of Improved Oil Recovery (IOR) in Unconventional Light Oil Reservoirs

16

Figure 1 — Illustration of the scales of flow that occur to a multi-fractured horizontal well completed in a tight oil/gas reservoir. In the top image, the green ellipse illustrates a drainage area around a single fracture stage on initial flowback of that stage. On the left hand side of the image, the red box is zoomed in progressively to illustrate the different scales at which flow occurs within tight oil and liquids-rich gas reservoirs (meter to nanometer scale). Modified from Clarkson et al. (2016a).

Each of these research themes are supported by detailed geological characterization support provided by Dr. Pedersen’s students and research staff. A brief summary of each research theme, and sample results, are provided below. The topics are ordered according to the scales of investigation illustrated in Figure 1.

Advanced core and cuttings analysis In the face of ongoing suppressed commodity prices, the energy industry is seeking advanced core and cuttings analysis techniques that 1) allow fast, inexpensive and efficient identification

of reservoir “sweet spots” and 2) provide critical data for assessing hydrocarbon liquids (oil and condensate) recovery in an environmental-friendly manner with limited capital investment. During recent years, TOC researchers have developed a variety of advanced core/cuttings analysis methods to assist industry to 1) identify and target hydrocarbon “sweet spots” more effectively and 2) improve the economics of hydrocarbon recovery of Canada’s unconventional reservoirs while minimizing the environmental footprint.

It

is

known

that

hydraulic

fracture

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL ARTICLE

ultrasonic velocities are also important for the estimation of elastic anisotropy and dynamic rock mechanical properties, which in turn can be used in the calibration of sonic logs, and to inform 3D/4D seismic and microseismic interpretations.

Nevertheless, l a b o r a t o r y measurements of Figure 2 — Schematic of the new experimental system that was designed s t re s s - d e p e n d e n t and built in the TOC Laboratory to measure gas/liquid/relative permeabilities unpropped and on intact and unpropped/propped fractured core plugs. Combined with a propped fracture set of complementary experimental components (e.g. back-pressure valves; permeability and gasometer – not shown), this experimental set-up is also used for laboratory- ultrasonic velocities scale cyclic solvent injection (huff-n-puff) studies. have not been publically reported stimulation results in regions around the for the Montney and MFHWS containing propped, primary Duvernay. Performing steady-state gas (N2) hydraulic fractures and unpropped induced flow tests, TOC researchers (Ghanizadeh (hydraulic) and reactivated natural fractures. et al. 2016; Riazi et al., 2017) have recently The stress-dependent permeabilities of each developed innovative workflows for of these regions are important controls measuring unpropped/propped fracture on both primary and enhanced recovery. permeability and dynamic rock mechanical Laboratory-based measurement of properties simultaneously under in-situ

Figure 3 — Application of micro-injection experiments, a novel micro-wettability technique, on a selected Montney sample. (a,d) For the analyzed sample, the mineralogy can be inferred from the X-ray maps. (b) Back-scatter image of sessile droplet on a selected location on the selected sample at t = 0 s. (c) Back-scatter image of sessile droplet on the same location at t = 10 s. (d) Note the silica injection tube in the top half of the image. The deionized water is highlight in green (Oxygen (O)). (e) Back-scatter image of sessile droplet on another location on the selected sample at t = 0 s. (f) Back-scatter image of sessile droplet on the same location at t = 10 s. Modified from Deglint et al. (2017b).

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

stress on Montney and Duvernay core plugs that have been artificially fractured in a process analogous to in-situ hydraulic fracturing. The innovative development of engineered standard materials (Ghanizadeh et al., 2017a) – that are not available commercially – further ensure the accuracy and reliability of the unpropped/propped fracture permeability measurements. The stress-dependent unpropped/propped fracture permeability and dynamic rock mechanical properties that are obtained from these measurements have been used as input to constrain rate-transient analysis and hydraulic fracture modeling.

The multi-phase flow characteristics, such as capillary pressure and relative permeability, are further among key controls on both primary and enhanced hydrocarbon recovery. Using a new experimental set-up (Figure 2) that has been recently designed and developed in the TOC Laboratory, TOC researchers are now capable of 1) measuring liquid/gas/relative permeabilities with a variety of reservoir fluids (oil, brine, lean/rich gas) under controlled effective stress conditions and 2) conducting cyclic solvent injection (“huff-n-puff”) tests, mimicking incremental oil recovery with CO2 (or lean/rich gas) in fractured tight oil reservoirs. Wettability (i.e. fluid-fluid/fluidrock interactions, interfacial tension and contact angle) is an importan phenomenon affecting both IOR processes and formation damage. These wettability parameters are typically quantified using conventional laboratory techniques (e.g. sessile drop and captive bubble) at macro-scale (cm/ mm-sized samples). However, conventional macro-scale measurements only provide an average wettability that cannot be used in modeling fluid flow through micro-scale pore-structures in contact with mineral grains with variable composition. To address this shortcoming, using an FEI Quanta FEG 250 environmental field emission scanning electron microscope (E-FESEM), state-ofthe-art methodologies have been developed

by TOC researchers (Deglint et al., 2017a) to characterize the wettability attributes of tight oil reservoirs at the micro-scale in live mode (Figure 3). These novel capabilities have provided the opportunity to directly observe fluid-rock interactions using native, synthetic and commercial hydraulicfracturing fluids at micro-scale. Combined (Continued on page 18...)

17

TECHNICAL ARTICLE (Continued from page 17...) with pore-scale modeling, these data can be used to more accurately evaluate key properties affecting multi-phase flow (e.g. capillary pressure and relative permeability), which in turn can be used in rigorous evaluation of primary/ enhanced recovery and formation damage phenomena in unconventional Figure 4 — (Left) Conceptual representation of pressure response during a DFIT illustrating key pressure points observed that reservoirs. are useful in hydraulic fracture modeling; idenitification of before- and after-closure periods. Modified from Potocki (2012).

For MFHWs, the only (Right) Interpretation of physical mechanisms leading to before-closure derivative signatures, as evaluated from coupled flowreservoir samples geomechanical simulation. Modified from Zanganeh et al. (2017). available are often small amounts hydrocarbon and organic matter 2) reservoir pressure and permeability, (<5-10 g) of drill cuttings. Conventional (OM) components (e.g. light/mobile amongst other uses. This test is often laboratory techniques are not suitable for hydrocarbons, solid bitumen, kerogen performed on the ‘toe’ of a horizontal well the routine determination of petrophysical etc.). Using an innovative workflow in advance of the main fracture stimulation (e.g. permeability/diffusivity, and properties pioneered by the TOC researchers in treatment. Seminal work by Potocki (2012) affecting hydrocarbons-in-place, such collaboration with Dr. Hamed Sanei of the has demonstrated that DFIT net fracture as adsorption) and geomechanical (e.g.

Geological Survey of Canada (GSC), the pressure (NFP, Figure 4, left) may be used unconfined compressive strength (UCS), evolution of reservoir quality (porosity, to infer hydraulic fracture stimulation Young’s modulus) properties. Innovative pore size distribution, permeability/ complexity, which in turn can be related methodologies have been developed by diffusivity) with thermal maturity can now to tectonic setting, amongst other factors.

TOC researchers to estimate 1) free and be quantified using small drill cuttings DFIT analysis may be broadly classified adsorbed hydrocarbons-in-place (Clarkson subjected to an “extended slow heating” into before-closure analysis (BCA), which and Haghshenas, 2016), 2) permeability/ (ESH) cycle. The ESH cycle, first used to is used to estimate closure pressure and diffusivity from the rate-of-adsorption data improve Rock-Eval pyrolysis of Montney in identifying leakoff characteristics, (Haghshenas et al., 2016) using cuttings samples by Sanei et al. (2015), is capable and after-closure analysis (ACA), which samples, and 3) drilling-derived UCS profiles of distinguishing different hydrocarbon/ is used to estimate reservoir pressure from rock compositional data (Ghanizadeh OM components more easily during the and permeability. As with conventional et al., 2017b). Another innovative method pyrolysis process. Quantification of the well-test analysis, pressure derivative involving the use of cuttings, developed evolution of reservoir quality with thermal analysis is used to identify flow-regimes

by TOC researchers, is the use of drill maturity has important implications for (characteristics patterns of flow within cuttings composition data to geochemically 1) identifying petrophysical “sweet spots” and to the fracture), which in turn are fingerprint vertical intervals in the reservoir within unconventional reservoirs, for the used to determine when fracture closure and bounding zones, and the use of these purpose of optimizing stimulation design occurs and for interpretation of reservoir data to estimate in-situ fluid composition and 2) targeting specific zones within the properties. However, identification of these variability (Clarkson et al., 2016b). As will be reservoir of interest with organic matter flow-regimes, and their physical governing discussed further below, this information, content/type amenable to maximizing gas principles, particularly before-closure, is combined with flowback fluid compositions, storage/transport during cyclic solvent hampered by a lack of understanding of can be used to assess connected fracture injection for IOR applications. fracture dynamics during the DFIT. In order height growth, which is of significant practical to provide fundamental understanding of importance for the development of “stack” the physical processes occurring beforeDFIT modeling and design plays, as in certain areas of the Montney. and after-closure, TOC researchers Stepping up in scale to the macro-scale (Zanganeh et al., 2017, 2018) have simulated (Figure 1), a relatively new form of well-test One of the primary obstacles to DFITs for tight Montney siltstone and referred to as a diagnostic fracture injection understanding IOR mechanisms in Duvernay shale reservoirs using coupled test (DFIT), or ‘mini-frac’, has become unconventional reservoirs is lack of flow-geomechanical simulation and very popular in recent years primarily for knowledge on the evolution of reservoir revealed previously mis-interpreted events estimating 1) fracture closure pressure, quality with thermal maturity in presence occurring during the before- and aftera reflection of minimum in-situ stress, of various types/contents of entrained closure periods. As an example, DFIT data and used in hydraulic fracture design and

18

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL ARTICLE

Figure 5 — (Left) Illustration of the typical sequence of operations undertaken during the lifetime of a multi-fractured horizontal well completed in a tight oil reservoir. Flowback operations are initiated after hydraulic fracturing and a brief shut-in. After a second shut-in, during which the well is tied-in to surface facilities, the well is flowed through the production facilities during the online production period. Pressure-transient analysis may be conducted on the buildup period following flowback operations. Rate-transient analysis is most commonly performed on the online production period; most recently, RTA has been performed on the flowback period. Modified from Clarkson et al. (2017a), after Alkouh et al. (2014). (Right) History-match of high-resolution flowback data from a multi-fractured tight oil well using the hybrid model of Jia et al. (2017c). collected in the Montney (Figure 4, right) has been reinterpreted, using the model as a guide, to suggest that fracture closure is a progressive event (‘progressive closure’), where closure occurs first at the fracture tip, and eventually near the wellbore — using the conventional DFIT analysis procedures of Barree et al. (2009), this behavior would have been interpreted to be caused by an excessive of storage in the fracture, and a single closure event identified. The implications of these new interpretations for quantifying minimum in-situ stress are therefore significant. Another finding is that a false radial flow period may occur beforeclosure and after-closure; these are caused by a “hinge-closure” process (Figure 4, right) and residual leakoff after mechanical closure. Failure to recognize these, and mis-interpretation as radial flow, would cause incorrect estimates of permeability and reservoir pressure. By reinterpreting the BCA/ACA flow-regimes using rigorous simulation, the TOC research group hopes to not only improve the reliability of DFIT interpretation, but also to improve their design (with a goal of reducing cost).

Advancing Rate-transient analysis Rate-transient analysis (RTA) refers to the quantitative analysis of well production data (along with flowing pressures, if available), using techniques analogous to well-test analysis (pressure-transient analysis, PTA), in order to extract reservoir information (ex. permeability), hydraulic fracture properties (ex. fracture half-length and conductivity),

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

and hydrocarbons-in-place (Clarkson, 2013). In terms of scale, RTA can be used to investigate a much larger volume of the reservoir than DFITs. However, RTA is based on models that make simplifying assumptions about the reservoir. These models, historically developed for single-phase flow through conventional reservoirs, may not be applicable to unconventional reservoirs, leading to significant errors in reservoir/hydraulic fracture characterization. TOC researchers have developed analytical/semi-analytical models to account for two-phase flow (oil + gas, oil or gas + water) (Behmanesh, 2015; Qanbari, 2017), and more recently multiphase flow (oil+gas+water) (e.g. Shahamat and Clarkson, 2017), stress-dependent permeability and porosity (Behmanesh et al., 2015), non-Darcy flow (e.g. slip flow and diffusion) (Clarkson et al., 2012), and interwell communication (evidenced by ‘frac hits’) (Jia et al. 2017a,b), amongst other complexities. These improvements in RTA modeling have increased the reliability of RTA models as applied to unconventional reservoirs. Importantly, the TOC research group has also endeavored to integrate laboratory-based information (stressdependent fracture permeability/ porosity, relative permeability etc.) into RTA to constrain model input. Another important goal of the TOC research program is to extract reservoir/hydraulic fracture information from all phases of well production, including the flowback period (Figure 5, left). Flowback analysis,

which can be used to quantify hydraulic fracture properties, is a relatively new field of RTA, and has been pioneered by TOC researchers (e.g. Williams-Kovacs, 2017).

Models have been developed to account for the complex physics of flowback, and to account for inter-well communication (Figure 5, right).

Investigation recovery

of

improved

oil

Constrained by critical laboratory and field data collected and interpreted by TOC researchers, stochastic compositional numerical simulation models are being used to perform 1) huff-n-puff (HNP) sensitivities using lean/rich and CO2 gas injection in the Montney (Clarkson et al., 2017b) and Duvernay reservoirs (in progress) and 2) full flooding (water injection and wateralternating-gas, WAG) sensitivities in the middle Bakken of Viewfield Saskatchewan (Ghaderi et al., 2017).

An example of 1) for the Montney was provided by Clarkson et al. (2017b). In that study, stochastic compositional numerical simulation was first used to history-match flowback data in order to estimate hydraulic fracture properties (matrix properties were constrained by TOC Laboratory data). A novel aspect of that study was that in-situ fluid heterogeneity was characterized through the use of drill cuttings gas samples captured from the headspace of isojars™, as discussed above, combined with separator (Continued on page 20...)

19

TECHNICAL ARTICLE (Continued from page 19...)

Figure 6 — (Left) Illustration of the simulation gridding and property (permeability) assignment used in the simulation of an HNP cycle. A quarter fracture model was used to reduce run times – the model was subsequently scaled-up to represent 9 successful fracturing stages for history-matching efforts. Modified from Clarkson et al. (2016b). (Right) Effect of adsorption/diffusion on oil production using primary recovery and HNP schemes. Modified from Haghshenas et al. (2017). data collected during flowback.

The combination of in-situ fluid compositions estimated using cuttings data, and flowback fluid compositions provided an important constraint on the estimation of fracture height growth (Figure 6, left), a goal of the Clarkson et al. (2017b) study. Using the calibrated (to flowback data), a sensitivity study was performed to determine the impact of fluid adsorption and diffusion, commonly not included in IOR studies of unconventional reservoirs, on primary and enhanced recovery using a single HNP cycle with CO2 (Figure 6, right). That study highlighted the potential importance of accounting for adsorption/diffusion in the modeling of HNP cycle in the Montney.

An example of 2) was provided by Ghaderi et al. (2017). In that study, a waterflood pilot performed in the middle Bakken of Viewfield Saskatchewan, in which MFHWs were used as both injectors and producers, was history-matched using a numerical model to ascertain the incremental recovery associated with water injection (Figure 7, top left). Five years of MFHW production/injection were history-matched. The calibrated model was then used to forecast waterflood performance as well as different IOR schemes such as WAG (Figure 7, top right). Basic conclusions derived from that study included: a) waterflooding in the tight middle Bakken in Viewfield is technically feasible, resulting in incremental oil recovery and b) careful characterization of vertical changes in reservoir quality using laboratory-based measurements (performed at TOC Laboratory prior to simulation work)

20

were critical for improving the quality of the history match and resulting forecast scenarios. For b), vertical permeability heterogeneity was quantified using profile permeability measurements corrected to in-situ stress conditions.

Finally, gravity segregation in gas flooding operations was found to have a negative effect on miscible and immiscible processes (Figure 7, bottom).

Figure 7 — (Top, left) 3D view of model used to simulate waterflood pilot (using MFHWs as injectors and producers). (Top, right) Results of miscible Summary WAG forecast (using CO2) of oil. (Bottom) spatial distribution of CO2 at Tight Oil Consortium the end of the WAG injection period – wells displayed are the injectors. is an industry- and Some leakage to the top aquifer was observed, having a negative effect government-sponsored on gas flood operations. Modified from Ghaderi et al. (2017). consortium whose remit is to perform Geoscience. The authors gratefully thank advanced reservoir and hydraulic Seven Generations Energy Ltd. and the fracture characterization research and sponsors of the Tight Oil Consortium, studies in order to assist industry with hosted at the University of Calgary, for their the optimization of oil and liquids-rich support. Partial support for some of the gas recovery from low-permeability, research studies was provided through the unconventional reservoirs in North NSERC CRD, Discovery Grant and WCIO America.

(Western Canadian Innovation Offices) programs.

Acknowledgments

Chris Clarkson would like to acknowledge Shell, Encana, and Alberta Innovates for support of his Chair position in Unconventional Gas and Light Oil at the University of Calgary, Department of

Full List of References available on the CSPG website.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL ARTICLE

FLOWING CONVENTIONAL DUVERNAY OIL NOT PURSUED BY INDUSTRY. WHY? Ante Creek, AB By: E.C. (Ed) Fogg, B.Sc., Founder, Senior Exploration Analyst, June 10, 2015 Conventional Duvernay completion yields nearly 4,000 barrels of oil, yet offsetting Crown lands are available.

Introduction In 1979 and 1980, Forest Oil aggressively pursued Devonian oil in west central Alberta, both geophysically and by drilling.

The Forest et al Ante Creek 5-2-67-26W5 test recovered almost 4,000 bbls of oil from the Duvernay Formation, but to date, no operator has used advanced drilling and completion technology to follow up on the play.

Historical Drilling Following Chevron’s discovery of Nisku pinnacle reef oil at West Pembina, Forest Oil adopted a strategy of exploring for similar potential in rank wildcat settings, eventually focused on the Latornell and Ante Creek areas. In 1980, Forest drilled a $4.5 million New Field Wildcat Cambrian test on a seismically defined feature at Ante Creek 5-2-67-26W5.

Forest likely encountered oil shows as it was drilling through the Duvernay and cut a core. The top of the core was at the base of the Duvernay and only the Beaverhill Lake section was recovered. No core analysis data is available. After the well reached total depth, a DST was run over the Duvernay interval and recovered oil-cut mud. There was enough encouragement while drilling for the operator to perforate a significant portion of the Duvernay. After perforations, the well produced 3,693 bbls of oil and then abandoned.

unit (Duvernay B), and the underlying shale unit (Duvernay A). CDL subdivides the Duvernay C unit into five members, with three of those members are present in the 5-2 test (figure 5). CDL studies indicate that the organic content of the upper Duvernay C unit is moderate, while that of the Duvernay A unit is high.

Geological Setting The Forest Ante 5-2 prospect lies just off the northwestern flank of the Ante Creek Swan Hills reef complex and southwest of the Sturgeon Lake Leduc buildup (figures 1 and 2). The thick Ireton shale overlies a lithologically complex Duvernay section (figures 3 and 4). The total thickness of the Duvernay varies from 15m to 50m, and comprises an upper Duvernay shale (the Duvernay C unit), the middle carbonate

Figure 3: Ante Creek Duvernay Regional CrossSection A-A'

Figure 2: Ante Creek Base Map Figure 1: Duvernay Regional Setting Map

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

(Continued on page 22...)

21

TECHNICAL ARTICLE (Continued from page 21...)

Figure 4: Stratigraphic Model

The location of the prospect is also interpreted to be within an anomalous cool geothermal gradient region. This interpretation would suggest a greater likelihood of oil production than other regions where gas/liquids production is the norm.

Crown Rights A review of the mineral rights available in the Ante Creek North area reveals a significant area of available Duvernay rights (figure 6). The Triassic Montney zone has been the dominant zone of rights acquisition in the recent past. Birchcliff Energy holds the Duvernay rights in sections 2 and 10, immediately surrounding the Forest Ante 5-2 test. With the exception of five separate, somewhat distant blocks held by brokers, the rest of the offsetting rights over two townships are available for posting.

At the recent May 27, 2015 Crown Sale, Scott Land purchased a four-section all-rights block located several miles to the southwest (sections 1, 2, 11 and 12-66-27W5) for $40.78/ha. An Alterren Land Services block located north of the Forest 5-2 well expires in December 2015, and a LandSolutions block to the northwest expires in November 2015.

22

Figure 5: 5-2-67-26W5 Forest Ante Creek Log

Conclusion The assumption herein is that operators regard the Duvernay in the Ante Creek North area as too thin to produce economically. In this prospect area, the Duvernay C Unit is 10m thick compared with over 30m thickness in the more aggressively drilled region. The depth to the zone is not deeper or shallower than some current areas of activity. However, given the long-term potential of the Duvernay, that free oil has been recovered in a vertical test (pre-Duvernay potential recognition), and that mineral rights are not only available, but currently available at potentially low cost, it may be time to reconsider this area as part of a Duvernay resource strategy.

Figure 6: Ante Creek Detail Land Map

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL LUNCHEON

Developing a Sedimentologic and Stratigraphic Framework for the Falher G and Falher H Sandstone Successions in the Greater Kakwa area, Alberta SPEAKER John-Paul Zonneveld, University of Alberta, Department of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences

January 23, 2018 11:30 am doors open Marriot Hotel, Kensington Ballroom 110 9 Ave SE, Calgary AB T2G 5A6 Please note: CSPG member ticket price: $42.50+gst Non-member ticket price: $55+gst Please note: The cut-off for ticket sales is 1:00pm, five business days before the event. January 16, 2018. Each CSPG Technical Luncheon is 1 APEGA PDH credit. Tickets may be purchased online at www.cspg.org

ABSTRACT John-Paul Zonneveld, Darren Tisdale, and Francois Legault The Lower Cretaceous (Albian) Spirit River Formation comprises a complex association of clastic lithologies and represents deposition in a wide variety of depositional environments. This unit, which consists of the Notikewin, Falher and Wilrich members, has been the focus of hydrocarbon exploration in the Deep Basin of western Alberta for over four decades (eg. Jackson, 1984; Smith, 1984; Smith et al., 1984). The lowermost beds of the Spirit River Formation record a major marine incursion from the north, southwards towards the southernmost limits of the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (Smith et al., 1984; Zonneveld and Moslow, 2004). The Spirit River Formation is approximately 350 metres in overall thickness and has been subdivided into a series of sandstone and conglomeratedominated shingle-sets deposited in shallow marine depositional settings, with laterally equivalent heterolithic coastal plain deposits to the south / southeast and fine-grained strata deposited in offshore settings to the north (eg. Smith et al., 1984; Casas and Walker, 1997; Zonneveld and Moslow, 2004; Caddell and Moslow, 2004).

Initial (1970s-early 2000s) exploration interest in the Spirit River Formation focused on high permeability (~10 to >1000 md) / moderate porosity (~6-12%), unimodal to bimodal, clast-supported conglomerate intervals (eg. Smith et al., 1984; Moslow and Zonneveld, 2004; Zonneveld and Moslow, 2004). These horizons, although lucrative exploration targets, comprise only a small proportion (<1%) of the Spirit River Formation. Very fine-grained, fine-grained and mediumgrained sandstone successions, although volumetrically much more significant, were avoided due to low porosity and very low permeabilities (Cant and Ethier, 1984), which rendered them non-commercial exploration targets using technology available at the time. Innovation over the last decade in drilling and completion technologies (including horizontal wells and multi-stage fracs) has turned these sandstone units into compelling exploration targets, particularly in areas with stacked, over-pressured, laterally extensive sandstone units. Thus, recent attention has focused on moderate porosity (5-7% average) / low permeability (0.01-0.10 md) sandstone plays in the lower Falher / upper Wilrich interval (eg.

Moslow and Ala, 2012; Bann and Ross, 2014a, 2014b; Fawcett, 20914; Newitt and Pedersen, 2015; 2016; Bann and Fawcett, 2016).

Conglomerate / sandstone units in the Spirit River Formation are informally referred to, from top to base, as the Notikewin Member, Falher A through F members, (Jackson, 1984).

Falher subunits were initially defined on the basis of the occurrence of clastic reservoir lithologies between regionally occurring coal layers. Thus, some of the lettered units consist of single shingles or parasequences whereas others include several shingles or parasequences (i.e. parasequence sets). Some workers (eg.

Smith et al., 1984; MacDonald et al., 1988; Zonneveld and Moslow, 2004) recognized lower Falher parasequence set (the Falher G and H) however industry practice over the past decade has been to refer to

reservoir sandstone units in the lower Spirit River Formation as the ‘Wilrich play’ particularly in the absence of a regional (basin-wide) stratigraphic framework for Falher subunits. Complicating matters, it has recently been recognized that shale and siltstone successions in the Wilrich Member (sensu stricto) also comprise local exploration targets, rendering usage of the term ‘Wilrich’ for sandstone units problematic. Thus we advocate extending Falher letter nomenclature to sandstone units in the lower Spirit River Formation, to differentiate these reservoir units from lithologically distinct units in adjacent shale and siltstone successions (e.g.

Zonneveld et al., 2017; Newitt, 2017).

This contribution focuses on the Falher G and H units in the greater Wapiti-Kakwa area of Alberta (T61-T68; R6-12W6). Both units consist of several discrete, regionally correlatable sandstone reservoir units however they contrast sharply in terms of lithological composition and, although both are excellent reservoir targets, the two units differ strongly in terms of ease of drilling (rate of penetration).

All available core and well logs were analyzed to develop a detailed sedimentologic / palaeographic model for the study interval. The lower Spirit River Formation was deposited within a shallow inland seaway in which major storms (Continued on page 24...)

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

23

TECHNICAL LUNCHEON

Thorium

0

150

Uranium

PPM

Potassium 0

FRAC

20

0.04

Wentworth grain size class gravel

silt clay

sedimentary structures physical biogenic

estuarine point bar / intertidal flats

3300

3425

none observed

F1

3325 F2

bay upper shoreface

middle shoreface (fluvially dominated wave modified delta)

Falher G

ravinement surface

3435

3375

cryptic

3440

lower shoreface

ravinement surface

none observed

offshore transition

3445

3425

none observed

undifferentiated Wilrich

3400

3450

Bluesky Fm.

Lower Spirit River Formation at Redrock showing the Falher E through H intervals and the undifferentiated Wilrich intervals. Note that the interval identified here as ‘undifferentiated Wilrich grades into additional ’Falher’ sandstone shingles south of the study area discussed herein.

touched the sea floor in much of the basin.

Depositional gradients were affected by both sediment delivery rates as well as structural influences related both to subsidence in the Peace River Arch area as well as movement in the thrust front and subsidence in the foredeep depocentre.

Shingles within the Falher H interval are dominated by quartzose, very fine-grained to fine-grained sandstone deposited in shoreface and wave-dominated deltaic settings. Horizontal wells within this interval have, overall, moderate to high rates of penetration. The contact between the Falher H and the overlying Falher G

24

washover fan

3350

Falher H

lower Spirit River Formation

3430

proximal prodelta

Falher F

sand

fossils

API

metres

Total Gamma

vc c m f vf c f

Falher E

0

interpreted depositional environment

MODERN REDROCK 12-22-64-10 W6M

3275

>16 mm 8-16 mm 4-8 mm 2-4 mm

Falher D

(Continued from page 23...)

interval is erosional in the study area and is interpreted as a coplanar regressive surface of erosion / transgressive surface of erosion.

Similar to the Falher H, the Falher G consists of a series of sandstone bodies deposited in shoreface and fluvial to wavedominated deltaic successions. Falher G sandstone beds differ strongly from Falher H sandstone beds in terms of their overall higher proportion of chert grains and granules and silica cements, resulting in a comparably abrasive lithology and significantly lower rates of penetration in horizontal wells. Higher lateral variability

in sandstone composition reflects higher fluvial dominance / influence in the Falher G interval. A subtle change in shingle orientation between the Falher G and H intervals and a higher proportion of chertdominated rock fragments and overall decrease in sediment sorting in the Falher G interval may reflect an interval of more active tectonism during deposition of the Falher G interval.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS John-Paul is grateful to Modern Resources for allowing him to present the results of this team project. Tom Moslow, Richard Harris, Dave Smith and Rob Sadownyk and the former Canadian Hunter Falher team are thanked for discussions on the depositional framework and resource potential of the Wilrich-Falher interval.

BIOGRAPHY John-Paul Zonneveld is a Professor in the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Alberta, curator of the University of Alberta drill core collection and SEPM Special Publications Editor. John-Paul has been with the University of Alberta for ten years.

Prior to this John-Paul was a Research Geologist with the Geological Survey of Canada.

John-Paul’s research is focused in the areas of sedimentology, stratigraphy, palaeoecology and palaeontology. JohnPaul’s research projects are typically multidisciplinary and commonly focus on problems involving the interface between geological and biological system. Current projects include: mixed siliciclasticcarbonate depositional systems and reservoir controls in the Triassic of western Canada (Montney, Doig, Halfway and Charlie Lake formations and their outcrop equivalents); reservoir controls in shoreface and deltaic successions in the Fernie, Spirit River, Cardium and Dunvegan formations of Alberta and British Columbia; the sedimentology, biostratigraphy and paleoecology of Early to Middle Eocene successions in southwestern Wyoming; and the Paleogene to Quaternary paleontology and sedimentology of Island Southeast Asia (focusing on Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sumba, Bali and Timor).

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

TECHNICAL LUNCHEON

Ice Age and the Giant Bakken Oil Accumulation SPEAKER Bruce Hart, AAPG Distinguished Lecturer, Statoil

February 20, 2018 11:30 am doors open Marriot Hotel, Kensington Ballroom 110 9 Ave SE, Calgary AB T2G 5A6 Please note: CSPG member ticket price: $42.50+gst Non-member ticket price: $55+gst Please note: The cut-off for ticket sales is 1:00pm, five business days before the event. February 13, 2018. Each CSPG Technical Luncheon is 1 APEGA PDH credit. Tickets may be purchased online at www.cspg.org

ABSTRACT The USGS estimated (2013) that the Late Devonian to Early Mississippian Bakken Formation holds in excess of 7 billion barrels (~1.1 billion m3) of recoverable oil, making it one of the top 50 largest oilfields in the world. Most of the production comes from shallow-marine sandstones of the Middle Bakken Member that are directly over- and underlain by extremely organicrich shale source rocks (Upper and Lower Bakken Shale members respectively).

Although not oil-productive everywhere, the Middle Bakken forms a relatively sheet-like unit that covers an area of over 200,000 square miles (~520,000 km2) of the intracratonic Williston Basin.

The vertical juxtaposition of shallowmarine reservoir and more distal source rocks over such a large area, without intervening transitional facies, is unusual from a stratigraphic perspective. One possible explanation would require global fluctuations of sea level to drive geologically rapid and extensive shoreline movements in this relatively stable basin. Forced regression associated with falling sea level could explain the lack of transitional facies (e.g., inner shelf ) between the distal Lower Bakken Shale and the overlying Middle Bakken (a sharp-based shoreface). Subsequent sea-level rise would have caused rapid and extensive transgression, leading to the observed stratigraphic relationships

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

between the Middle and Upper Bakken members. But what could have caused the changes in sea level?

A considerable body of evidence points to a Late Devonian-Early Mississippian ice age that covered portions of Gondwana (e.g., parts of present-day Brazil) that were situated close to the paleo South Pole. This ice age consisted of more than one glacial/interglacial cycle and was probably triggered by massive removal of CO2 from the atmosphere by land plants and organic-rich shales. Some evidence indicates that at least 100 m of sealevel drop took place during one of the Famennian glaciations, which would have effectively drained the Williston Basin and induced major shoreline progradation.

Melting of the ice sheets would have caused transgression and reflooding of the basin and deposition of the Upper Bakken Shale.

Other basins around the world record similar evidence for glacioeustacy near the Devonian-Mississippian transition. The glacial/interglacial cycles are expressed differently from basin to basin, reflecting the interplay between fluctuations of global sea level and each basin’s history of subsidence and sediment supply.

in trade journals and extended abstracts.

He authored a digital textbook on seismic interpretation for AAPG, and has given short courses on that topic in Houston, London, Cairo, Kuala Lumpus, Calgary and Vienna.

He previously toured as the AAPG-SEG Distinguished Lecturer in 2009-10, and as a Guest Lecturer for the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists in 2006.

BIOGRAPHY Bruce Hart is a research scientist with Statoil leading the study of shale and unconventional exploration and development. Prior to joining Statoil, Hart held positions with ConocoPhillips, McGill University, New Mexico Tech, Penn State and the Geological Survey of Canada.

He received a bachelor’s degree in geology from McMaster University, a master’s degree in oceanography from Universite du Quebec a Rimouski and a doctorate degree from the University of Western Ontario.

He has authored or co-authored more than 60 peer-reviewed publications (three of which won Best Paper awards) on shales, seismic attributes, clastic sedimentology, fractured reservoirs, pore-pressure prediction, sequence stratigraphy and other topics. He has written more than 50 papers as SPE and URTeC papers, papers

25

DIVISION TALKS

BASS TECHNICAL DIVISION TALK Rocks, Ridges and Rivers: Geological Wonders of Banff,Yoho, and Jasper National Parks SPEAKER Dale A. Leckie, University of Calgary, Department of Geoscience

Time: 12:00 pm Date: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 Location: geoLOGIC Room (2nd Floor), Aquitaine Tower, 540-5th Avenue S.W. ABSTRACT Banff, Yoho, and Jasper National Parks form part of the UNESCO Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks World Heritage Site.

They are described by UNESCO as being characterized by“rugged mountain peaks, ice fields and glaciers, alpine meadows, lakes, waterfalls, extensive karst cave systems, and deeply incised canyons”.

The mountain parks serve to “illustrate active glacial processes taking place along the Continental Divide, where erosion is happening in uplifted, folded, and faulted sedimentary rocks”.

The rocks that make up the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks World Heritage Site west of Calgary and north to Jasper are a complex

intermix of sedimentary types that were deposited as the North American craton wandered about the world for more than 600 million years. The sediments contain evidence of warm-shallow carbonates deposited close to and south of the equator, deep-water submarine canyons that carried sand and gravel away from ancestral North America long before there was any life on land, and 600- to 700-million-year-old glacial deposits from when Earth nearly froze solid during a period called the Cryogenian. There were also periods when hot, dry desert and sabkha conditions prevailed. About 500 million years ago, Earth saw a population explosion of numerous life forms that are now preserved in Yoho’s Burgess Shale; these organisms were predecessors to many species that exist today. And then, only 2.6 million years ago – really, in the recent past – glaciers covered the landscape again sculpting it into the landforms that you see today. This is only part of what you observe when you visit Canada’s Rocky National Parks.

BIOGRAPHY Dale Leckie has a Ph.D. Geology) from McMaster University, a M.Sc. (Geography)

from McMaster University and B.Sc. (Geography) from University of Alberta.

Dale worked as a scientist at the Geological Survey of Canada and as chief geologist at Nexen. He has edited numerous books and published widely. He is an adjunct professor in the Geoscience Department at University of Calgary. Dale has been president of the Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM) and Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists (CSPG). Dale is well recognized for his long-term contributions to geology and is an honorary member of SEPM and CSPG.

DIVISION INFORMATION BASS technical division talks are free.

Please bring your lunch. For further information about our division, to join our mailing list, receive a list of upcoming talks, or if you wish to present a talk or lead a field trip, please contact either Steve Donaldson (BASS) at 403-808-8641, or Mark Caplan (BASS) at 403-975-7701, or visit our web page on the CSPG website at http://www. cspg.org. We would like to thank geoLOGIC Systems for sponsoring the new classroom and AGAT Laboratories for sponsoring refreshments.

Registration Opening in March 2018!

26

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

DIVISION TALKS

BASS TECHNICAL DIVISION TALK The Montney Play of Western Canada: Deposition to Development SPEAKER Tristan Euzen (IFP Technologies (Canada) Inc.), Tom Moslow (Moslow Geoscience Consultants) and Mark Caplan (Cenovus Energy Inc.) (BCPG Special Volume Associate Editors)

Time: 12:00 pm Date: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 Location: geoLOGIC Room (2nd Floor), Aquitaine Tower, 540-5th Avenue S.W. ABSTRACT Our growing understanding of unconventional resource plays demonstrates the need for new or improved models to account for the distribution of rock and fluid properties in these highly heterogeneous and complex source-reservoir systems. This creates new and exciting challenges in geoscience disciplines including stratigraphy and sedimentology, organic geochemistry, geomechanics and geophysics as well as in reservoir engineering. Integrated multidisciplinary analysis of welldocumented unconventional plays is key to tackle these challenges and improve our efficiency in exploring and developing these resources. With nearly 60 years of conventional exploration and production, and over 10 years of unconventional development, the Lower Triassic Montney Formation of Western Canada offers a unique opportunity to build such an integrated reference case study.

In the past 10 years, a huge amount of new subsurface well data was released by the industry in the unconventional part of the basin, however comparatively very few papers have been published during this period, probably in part to preserve operators competitive advantage. Following in the steps of 1997 special volume on the “Triassic of the WCSB”, and thanks to the contribution of numerous well-respected experts in their field, an upcoming special volume of the

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geologist will fill this gap and integrate the state of the art of our understanding of the Montney unconventional play. This presentation aims at setting the stage for this special volume entitled “The Montney Play of Western Canada: Deposition to Development” and will summarize some of the key aspects of the Montney unconventional resource play from a geoscience perspective. Following the path of geological time and causality, from deposition to burial history and fluid migration, it will relate geological controls on regional and local heterogeneities to the production and development strategy of the Montney Play in Alberta and British Columbia.

BIOGRAPHY Tristan Euzen – Geoscience Manager – IFP Technologies (Canada) Inc. Tristan Euzen received a PhD in Earth Science from the University of Rennes (France) and is a Professional Geologist with over 20 years of experience. During 10 years as a Research Geoscientist at IFP Energies nouvelles, his interest has been on reservoir characterization from outcrop and subsurface data, and closely related domains such as sequence stratigraphy, sedimentology, static reservoir modelling and stratigraphic modeling. Since 2007, when he Joined IFP-Canada, Tristan has been active in the oil and gas industry through research and consulting projects in Western Canada and abroad and in recent years, is focus has been on unconventional resources. Tristan served in organization committees for the GeoConvention, the SPE Canada Unconventional Resources Conference and the International Meeting of Sedimentology. He is an Associate Editor for the Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology and a member of the Board of Directors of the GeoConvention Partnership.

Thomas F. Moslow, Ph.D., P.Geol. (Moslow Geoscience Consultants) Dr. Tom Moslow is President of Moslow Geoscience Consultants, an Adjunct

Professor in the Department of Geoscience at the University of Calgary and a former Professor (1985–1994) at the University of Alberta and Louisiana State University (1983-87).Tom was employed by Canadian Hunter, Ulster Petroleum and was a cofounder of Midnight Oil & Gas Ltd. which led to creation of Daylight Energy Trust. He held executive positions in subsequent affiliated companies. He has won awards and honours for work pertaining to the Triassic and Lower Cretaceous of the Deep Basin of Western Canada and resource play geology in general. Tom is a Co-Associate Editor for the Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology’s Special Montney Volume.

Mark Caplan (Cenovus Energy Inc.) Mark holds a Masters from University of Alberta and a PhD from UBC. Mark is currently a staff geoscientist at Cenovus Energy, and has worked for TOTAL S.A., Shell Canada, and Athabasca Oil Corporation. He is an oil sands geologist with over 20 years experience in the oil and gas industry. His interests lie in the domains of stratigraphy, sedimentology, reservoir characterisation and static geomodelling. Mark is currently co-chair of BASS, an associate editor of the Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geologists, a member of the CSPG thesis committee, a member of the Board of Directors of the CSPG and has presented and volunteered at many geotechnical conventions for the CSPG and AAPG.

DIVISION INFORMATION BASS technical division talks are free.

Please bring your lunch. For further information about our division, to join our mailing list, receive a list of upcoming talks, or if you wish to present a talk or lead a field trip, please contact either Steve Donaldson (BASS) at 403-808-8641, or Mark Caplan (BASS) at 403-975-7701, or visit our web page on the CSPG website at http://www. cspg.org. We would like to thank geoLOGIC Systems for sponsoring the new classroom and AGAT Laboratories for sponsoring refreshments.

27

DIVISION TALKS

HYDROGEOLOGY DIVISION TALK The Critical Importance of Hydrogeology to WCSB Development SPEAKER Jamie Wills, M.Sc., P.Geol., President, Waterline Resources Inc.

Time: 11:45 pm Date: Wednesday, January 18, 2018 Location: geoLOGIC Room (2nd Floor), Aquitaine Tower, 540-5th Avenue S.W. Register online at www.cspg.org ABSTRACT The presentation will highlight the fundamental importance of hydrogeology and water to current and future oil and gas development. It is applicable to a wide audience, including company directors, senior financial and technical managers, project-based geoscience and engineering staff, and operations staff, including riskbased decision makers and environmental specialists.

Water has always been critical to petroleum exploration and development. From understanding regional flow systems as drivers for the migration and trapping of oil and gas deposits, to produced water management, to waterflood schemes, etc., all had to be understood to drive recovery and manage cash flow. As conventional production gave way to heavy oil and oil sands projects, large water volumes were required to enable thermal recovery and bitumen processing. More recently, our focus on tight reservoir development, via horizontal wells and multi-zone fracs, requires large water volumes and secure disposal zones.

Other considerations, such as the risks posed by aging infrastructure to non-saline water resources, and other key receptors, place additional pressure on industry to manage the collective liability.

It is often stated “no water, no project”.

Thus, as an industry we must improve our understanding of water resources, and recognize that hydrogeology factors into all aspects of the life cycle of an O&G asset. Our discipline must incorporate the knowledge of petroleum geoscientists, physical and contaminant hydrogeologists, and surface water professionals. Those whom invest in increased water knowledge, and available smart tools, will maximize their individual and corporate success.

The presentation will review some of these aspects, efforts, tools, regulations and drivers, as well as upcoming CSPG Hydrogeology short courses. It will also illustrate how the CSPG Hydrogeology Division can play a lead role in hydrogeology knowledge training and transfer.

As venue seating is limited, please email jwills@waterlineresources.com on/before January 16 to register for the presentation.

BIOGRAPHY Mr. Wills is president and co-founder of Waterline Resources Inc., an AB and BCbased hydrogeology and environmental consulting firm providing services to

the energy, industrial, commercial and government sectors in western Canada.

Jamie has 30 years of experience on groundwater exploration, development and management, including water resource and contaminant hydrogeology projects in Western Canada and internationally.

He has extensive experience on regional assessments, including preparing baseline and EIAs for in-situ projects in Alberta’s oil sands regions. A key role for him is assisting clients with developing strategic water management plans for unconventional plays, as well as risk management associated with aging O&G infrastructure.

Jamie received a B.Sc. in geology, and a M.Sc. in hydrogeology, from the University of Waterloo. He has chaired and presented at numerous conferences over the last three decades, and currently Chairs the CSPG Hydrogeology Division.

DIVISION INFORMATION The goal is for the Division meetings to be held once a month over the lunch hour (monthly meeting to be scheduled from October to May). All lunch talks are free and open to the public, and please bring your lunch. The success of the Division depends on the participation and volunteer efforts of CSPG members and the public at large. If you are interested in giving a presentation, or in learning more about the Division, please contact Jamie Wills at jwills@ waterlineresources.com

At the same time, changing climate patterns, and population and industry growth has focused societal concerns on water sustainability and quality over the long term. It is thus increasingly complex for the petroleum industry to secure longterm water supplies, and to safely and economically manage produced water.

28

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

DIVISION TALKS

OPERATIONS GEOLOGY DIVISION TALK Logistical Challenges of a World-Record 207 m Coring Run SPEAKER Craig Forrest, Baker Hughes, a GE Company

Time: 12:00 pm Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 Location: Bankers Hall Auditorium, Lower Level A/P3, 315 – 8th Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta ABSTRACT Operators in Western Canada are currently active in the Montney formation despite these tougher economic times. As more wells are licenced and drilled in this formation, Operation Geologists are continually fine tuning their drill targets within the Montney to find optimal well placement to generate the best return on investment for their wells.

A coring program has a direct opportunity cost between the overall operational drilling costs of an AFE and the best total vertical depth (TVD) and quantity of cores brought to surface. Coring multiple smaller TVD sections greatly increases the overall rig time and drilling AFE, yet it may yield results and knowledge that optimize production and directly impact the long-term development of an asset. So, the question becomes, how much risk (costs) is worth the reward (finding the sweet spot) to the Operator?

In 2017, an Operator requested Baker Hughes, a GE company (BHGE) to perform coring operations on the Inga field. The initial operation interval was projected to be 280m in thickness as the plan was to core the entire Montney interval, as well as the lower Doig Phosphate to overlay it.

Upon discussions with the Operator’s drilling and operations geological teams, it was decided that the operation was planned to be completed in 2 runs with the use of BHGE’s High Torque (HT30™) coring system, Jambuster™ technology, and Talon™ corebits equipped with StaySharp™ cutter technology.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

The initial execution of the first run was agreed to be attempted using a 207 meter assembly; this would be the longest core run attempted to date industry wide. The previous longest assembly successfully run was a 189 meter assembly completed by BHGE in the Middle East region through a homogenous sandstone reservoir.

The major operational risk of such a core would be premature jamming specifically during the transition between the Doig Phosphate and Upper Montney in addition to the multiple unconformities throughout the Montney formation. To alleviate the risk and prevent a short core run, BHGE recommended deploying Jambuster™ technology to allow coring to continue if a jam was experienced through any of these transitions. An additional risk to the operation was the deterioration of the core bit life while cutting due to such an extended core. This risk was alleviated by deploying a TC407 (7 blade, 13 mm cutters) corehead. This core head is able to provide the cutter durability to ensure minimal wear in the harder and more abrasive Doig Phosphate. As well, it provides longer cutter life to ensure the Montney formation could be cut with adequate penetration rate.

Preplanning and modeling was conducted by the BHGE applications engineering team to ensure the expected well profile and well conditions would be within tolerance for all equipment deployed. This helped eliminate

both mechanical and operational issues with such a long assembly. The engineering department deemed that the 207m core would be achievable and the operation would fall well within the technical limits of the tools.

This additional step of risk mitigation gave the Operator piece of mind before deployment.

The objective to acquire 280 m (919 ft.) of 3.5in core in two runs to minimize the operational costs of the drilling program was successful.

BHGE planned and then executed the job with two dedicated coring runs. The first core that was cut was 207.0 m (679 ft.) and the second core was 73.0 m (240 ft.), with 100% recovery.

The deployment of the 207 meter Jambuster™ system necessitated solutions for handling the installation and removal of 24 core barrels, in a safe and efficient manner.

Additionally, it was a logistical solution when it came to the processing and transportation of approximately 4,615 kilograms of core.

BIOGRAPHY Craig has been in the oil and gas industry for 20 years and has built his expertise in coring operations over this time. Craig is based out of Calgary Alberta and has spent the last four years in coring in Western Canada. Prior to this, Craig coordinated coring operations throughout the US and was based out of Casper Wyoming. Craig has also spent a large part of his career in the field both on drilling rigs and as a service representative.

29

DIVISION TALKS

OPERATIONS GEOLOGY DIVISION TALK Geosteering: what works, what doesn’t SPEAKER Calin Dragoie, P.Geol. , Chinook Consulting Services

Time: 12:00 pm Date: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 Location: Aquitaine Tower, 540 – 5th Ave SW, Second Floor – geoLOGIC Classroom ABSTRACT Geosteering is one of several new technologies that are transforming (and sometime disrupting) the oil and gas industry. Geosteering and remote

the position of VP Geoscience. In this capacity he is coordinating geological operations, international projects, strategy implementation and integration of technological advances.

supervision can dramatically increase the efficiency of resource play development.

But does it always work? We find that only specific depositional systems lend themselves to efficient geosteering.

BIOGRAPHY Calin holds a M.Sc. in Geology from the University of Bucharest, Romania, and a P. Geol. Certification from APEGA and APEGS; he is a Petroleum Geologist with 20+ years of operations and wellsite geology experience, with work done in Western Canada and international projects in Cuba, Algeria and Libya. He is working with Chinook Consulting since 2008 and currently holds

SUBSURFACE DATA CLOUD SERVICES GEOSCIENCE DATA MANAGEMENT  

Well Data, Interpretation Archives & Seismic All on One Map

 

• One PPDM database • One web-based GIS map interface • One complete life cycle solution

    

katalystdm.com

  

































  





30



UNLEASH YOUR DATA’S POTENTIAL

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

DIVISION TALKS

ALBERTA PALAEONTOLOGICAL SOCIETY DIVISION TALK The Ankylo Question In addition to the main presentation by Dr. Eva Koppelhus, Clinton and Allan Turner will provide a brief presentation.

SPEAKER Clinton Turner, a 9 year old student, attends Hillhurst Elementary School, Calgary, Alberta Allan Turner, a geologist, developed an interest in palaeontology in elementary school

Time: 7:30 pm Date: January 19, 2018 Location: Mount Royal University, Room B108 ABSTRACT On July 16, 2017, Clinton and Allan Turner were on the Alberta Paleontological Field Trip to the Red Deer River Badlands. They were exploring the bottom of Horse Thief Canyon, with Catherine and Lyndsay Turner, and the rest of the Field Trip attendees. What they found was both rare and astounding. Hidden amongst the Quaternary Guardians of the Cretaceous fossils, also known as cacti, was a scute

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

from an ankylosaurid.

From the beginnings of the trek to the bottom of the canyon, to the hike through the oyster beds on the way back to the parking lot, Clinton and Allan will describe their journey of discovery, not just of fossils, but of the survival of humans in a decidedly hostile environment. They will discuss the terrain, the heat, whom to travel with (spoiler alert – it is the APS!), the other fossils they found, the geology associated with the area, and the pros and cons of fossil hunting in the Badlands.

BIOGRAPHIES Clinton Turner is nine years old and attends Hillhurst Elementary School. He has been interested in Paleontology for as long as he can remember. Clinton has had the great pleasure of meeting several renowned scientists, such as, Dr. Nazir Ibrahim, Dr. Eva Kopplehus, and Dr. Phil Currie, to name a few. A highlight of Clinton’s fossil hunting was this summer when he, along with his dad, Allan Turner, discovered a scute from an anklosaurid during the APS Field Trip into Horsethief Canyon. Clinton also enjoys swimming, fencing, climbing, travelling,

and camping and exploring Alberta with his family.

Allan Turner is a geologist by trade, but an explorer at heart. He first became interested in paleontology when he was in elementary school and discovered partial tibia from a hadrosaur near the Morrin Bridge area. His interest was rekindled when his children, Catherine and Clinton, became interested in fossil hunting and collecting. Allan enjoys coffee, outdoor activities and field trips, and spending time with his family.

DIVISION INFORMATION This event is presented jointly by the Alberta Palaeontological Society, the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Mount Royal University, and the Palaeontology Division of the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists. For details or to present a talk in the future, please contact CSPG Palaeontology Division Chair Jon Noad at jonnoad@hotmail.com or APS Coordinator Harold Whittaker at 403-2860349 or contact programs1@albertapaleo. org. Visit the APS website for confirmation of event times and upcoming speakers: http://www.albertapaleo.org/.

31

DIVISION TALKS

ALBERTA PALAEONTOLOGICAL SOCIETY DIVISION TALK Palaeontological Expeditions to western Greenland in 2014 and 2017 SPEAKER

BIOGRAPHY

Dr. Eva Koppelhus, Assistant Professor and Curator of Palaeonbotany and Palynology, University of Alberta

Eva B. Koppelhus is an Assistant Professor and Curator of Palaeobotany and Palynology of the Palaeobotanical Collections at the Department of Biological Sciences of the University of Alberta. From October 2005 and until June 30, 2015 she was a research assistant for Dr. Philip Currie in the Vertebrate Palaeontology research group. Before October 2005, she spent eight years as a research assistant for Dr. Currie at the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology. She had a postdoctoral position in the same museum in 1996 and 1997, following a two-year postdoctoral fellowship at the Greenland Geological Survey in Copenhagen, Denmark. As a palynologist educated at the University of Aarhus in Denmark, she worked for more than ten years at the Geological Surveys of Denmark and Greenland. Her research focused on floras of the Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous geological periods. During her postdoctoral position at the Tyrrell Museum, she worked with material from the Centrosaurus bonebeds in Dinosaur Provincial Park to determine more about the plants associated with this dinosaur.

Her research interest is now concentrating on floras of the Upper Cretaceous of northwestern North America. She primarily works with material from dinosaur bearing formations such as the Pachyrhinosaurus bonebed in Pipestone Creek, the Albertosaurus bonebed in Dry Island Park, and the Danek bonebed in Edmonton.

Her work has taken her to all corners of

Time: 7:30 pm Date: January 19, 2018 Location: Mount Royal University, Room B108 ABSTRACT In 2014 an expedition to western Greenland was made possible by a donation from a private donor in Cleveland Ohio. The crew included Michael Ryan, Matthew Lamanna, Philip J. Currie, Eva Koppelhus and Wendy Sloboda. The aim was to find dinosaur fossils in the Upper Cretaceous Atana Formation.

This formation consists of deltaic deposits, and there are good reasons to believe it should be possible to find dinosaur remains there. We spend two weeks prospecting in the region during the 2014 field season, and one week in 2017. On the last day of the first expedition, one of the expedition members found something that looked like a dinosaur footprint. However, there was no time to confirm the find as the helicopter was picking us up shortly after. It was therefore decided that we would go back in 2017 to either confirm or dismiss the find. Early during the second expedition, the possible footprint from 2014 was examined and identified as a nodule rather than a footprint. However, we found another more convincing possible footprint on the same day. Although it was incomplete and deemed to be of too poor quality for research, thin sections are being prepared for detailed sedimentological examination to determine whether it may be a footprint.

Upper Cretaceous dinosaur remains have been found in Arctic Canada sediments of similar age. Furthermore, dinosaur remains were found more than 20 years ago in the Triassic/Jurassic formations of Jameson Land in eastern Greenland. These finds suggest that dinosaurs will eventually be found in western Greenland.

32

the world, including Antarctica, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Europe, Indonesia, Japan, Madagascar, Mongolia, New Zealand, South Korea, South Africa and the USA. In June of 2011 she received the Stefansson Medal of the Explorers Club (Canadian branch) for outstanding contributions to paleontological field research in Canada and internationally. In March 2012 she received the Antarctica Service Medal of the United States of America in recognition of valuable contributions to exploration and scientific achievement under the U.S. Antarctic Program. Furthermore in 2012, a dinosaur was named after her -- Unescoceratops koppelhusea (Ryan, M.J., Evans, D.C., Currie, P.J., Brown, C.M. and D. Brinkman, 2012).

She has been a member of the Explorers Club since 2002 and a Fellow of the Royal Canadian Geographic Society since 2013.

DIVISION INFORMATION This event is presented jointly by the Alberta Palaeontological Society, the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Mount Royal University, and the Palaeontology Division of the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists. For details or to present a talk in the future, please contact CSPG Palaeontology Division Chair Jon Noad at jonnoad@hotmail.com or APS Coordinator Harold Whittaker at 403-2860349 or contact programs1@albertapaleo. org. Visit the APS website for confirmation of event times and upcoming speakers: http://www.albertapaleo.org/.

T.I.H. Consulting Ltd. Geologic Well-Site Supervision

1602 – 5th St N.E. Calgary, AB. T2E 7W3 Phone: 403-233-7729 www.tihconsulting.com e-mail: tih@shaw.ca

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

DIVISION TALKS

ALBERTA PALAEONTOLOGICAL SOCIETY DIVISION TALK Sea monsters on the prairies: A visit to the Canadian fossil Discovery Centre In addition to the main presentation by Dr. Jon Noad, Cory Gross will provide a brief presentation.

SPEAKER Cory Gross is an educator at the Glenbow Museum, part time interpreter at the Calgary Zoo, and President and Out Reach Coordinator of the Alberta Palaeontological Society.

Time: 7:30 pm Date: February 9, 2018 Location: Mount Royal University, Room B108 ABSTRACT In the small town of Morden, Manitoba, in the basement of the recreation centre,

lies the largest collection of marine vertebrates in Canada. The Canadian Fossil Discovery Centre displays 80 million year old finds from the Eastern side of the Western Interior Seaway, including Bruce the Mosasaur. At 13 metres long, this Tylosaurus pembinensis is the largest mosasaur on public display in the world.

BIOGRAPHY Cory Gross started his undergraduate studies in geology at Mount Royal University, switching to the Museum and Heritage Studies program at the University of Calgary, in which he received his BA. He went on to receive a Masters of Theological Studies from the Lutheran Theological Seminary - Saskatoon. Currently he works full time as an educator at the Glenbow Museum, part time as an interpreter at

the Calgary Zoo, and in between acts as president and public outreach coordinator of the Alberta Palaeontological Society.

DIVISION INFORMATION This event is presented jointly by the Alberta Palaeontological Society, the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Mount Royal University, and the Palaeontology Division of the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists. For details or to present a talk in the future, please contact CSPG Palaeontology Division Chair Jon Noad at jonnoad@hotmail.com or APS Coordinator Harold Whittaker at 403-2860349 or contact programs1@albertapaleo. org. Visit the APS website for confirmation of event times and upcoming speakers: http://www.albertapaleo.org/.

• • •

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

33

DIVISION TALKS

ALBERTA PALAEONTOLOGICAL SOCIETY DIVISION TALK After the extinction: Macrofossils of the Triassic Sulphur Mountain Formation in Kananaskis SPEAKER Dr. Jon Noad, Geologist

Time: 7:30 pm Date: February 9, 2018 Location: Mount Royal University, Room B108 ABSTRACT Outcrops in and around Kananaskis expose portions of the Sulphur Mountain Formation, dating back to the basal Triassic, just after the Permian extinction event that led to the eradication of 92% of life on Earth. The lowermost beds overlying the Permian extinction appear devoid of fossils, in contrast to the highly bioturbated limestone beds of the uppermost Permian Ranger Canyon Formation. However, the younger strata in the Sulphur Mountain Formation yield a diverse fauna that includes ammonites, bivalve beds and a variety of burrows and algal mats.

Most striking of the fossil assemblages is a bone bed, preserved in lower shoreface, marine sediments. It yields bone fragments, shark teeth and possible coprolites, preserved in a siltstone matrix. Some of the smaller bones are thought to belong to plesiosaurs. The fossil material is densely concentrated, forming a clast supported conglomerate. At least three species of shark teeth have been identified, and work is ongoing as to the best way to study the palaeontology of this unique discovery without destroying it. The Aust Bone Bed in the UK is slightly younger, but provides a suitable analogue, with a comparable fauna with similar preservation.

The bone bed occurs as pockets of fossiliferous sediment between concretionary ribs that are around 10 cm in diameter, oriented along three distinct axes.

These are interpreted as Thalassinoides burrows, created by glass shrimps, and later overgrown by concretionary

34

phosphatic material. The concretions occur within a laterally extensive bed that dips subvertically, and is overlain by a thick black mudstone interval. The depositional setting is interpreted as a storm deposit that was covered by sediment, allowing cementation to take place. A subsequent transgression removed the covering sediment, exposing the concretionary layer and depositing a transgressive lag or omission surface. A further transgression led to deposition of the thick mudstone interval.

The excellent exposures along creeks and road cuts in the Kananaskis region have allowed the bone bed horizon to be tied into the stratigraphy of the lower Sulphur Mountain Formation, and incorporated into a sequence stratigraphic framework that can be directly correlated to the Lower Montney Formation. The Montney Formation is a major shale gas and shale oil resource, one of the largest known gas resources in the world.

BIOGRAPHY Jon Noad is an experienced Geologist, currently Director of the DigitCore Institute for Learning, where he trains geologists through classroom and field based courses.

Jon graduated from Imperial College, London in 1985 with a Geology degree.

He worked in mining in South Africa for five years, and then as a marine geologist responsible for all subsea cable route planning for British Telecom. He completed a Masters in Sedimentology at evening classes, which led to a PhD. examining the sedimentary evolution of eastern Borneo. After graduating from the University of London in 1998, he joined Shell International in Holland, working mainly on Middle Eastern exploration.

He moved to Calgary in 2006 with Shell Canada, working as Team Lead, Frontier and on the Orphan and Deep Basins. He joined Murphy Oil in 2010 as Exploration Manager, then Husky Energy in 2012 as

Geological Specialist. Roles there included managing peer reviews, and the new graduate program. He left them in 2016 and set up his own consultancy, Sedimental Services, taking on a variety of Canadian and international projects, before joining DigitCore in 2017.

In addition to his technical experience, Jon has taught at several universities, and is currently Adjunct Professor at the University of Alberta. He is former President of British Sedimentology Research Group and the Nederlands Geology Circle. He has published numerous scientific papers as well as popular articles on the industry.

He loves running, wildlife photography and hot chilis.

DIVISION INFORMATION This event is presented jointly by the Alberta Palaeontological Society, the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Mount Royal University, and the Palaeontology Division of the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists. For details or to present a talk in the future, please contact CSPG Palaeontology Division Chair Jon Noad at jonnoad@hotmail.com or APS Coordinator Harold Whittaker at 403-2860349 or contact programs1@albertapaleo. org. Visit the APS website for confirmation of event times and upcoming speakers: http://www.albertapaleo.org/.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

SOCIETY NEWS

2018 CSPG GEOLOGICAL CALENDAR WRAP-UP By: Markus Ebner

T

he 2018 CSPG Geological Calendar is fresh off the press and included with the January/February issue of The Reservoir. This year’s calendar is sure to impress once again with 12 geological images from our society’s members. With 105 entries this year (down 40 from last year) selection of the 12 finalists was still challenging and competitive.

The 2018 Calendar displays geological wonders around the world and this year 5 finalist photos also happen to be Canadian.

The cover photo by Gord Hurlburt (voted Best Photo), shows us the close-up intricacies of ancient algal stromatolites from Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta.

This year’s subcategory of best modern carbonate photo was nabbed by Wayne Laturnas, for his underwater shot of elkhorn coral in the Bahamas. Two entries from Death Valley, California made it in this year, highlighting the stark contrasts of the desert

environment, from sand dunes to saltpans, submitted by long time contributors Gary Prost and Jerry Osborn, respectively. A wonderful aerial shot of modern tectonism in action was submitted by Brad Barrie of a spreading center at Thingvellir, Iceland.

These highlight only the tip of the iceberg for this year’s amazing calendar.

I would like to thank Dr. Clint Tippett for his time spent on the judging committee with the selection of this year’s winners. Applying his keen geological eye and his critical role with the editing of the geological descriptions are appreciated. Emma MacPherson, our Publications Coordinator, is thanked once again orchestrating this project and making it come together year after year.

The CSPG would like to thank all the members that took the time to submit their photos to this year’s contest. We would not be able to have such a great calendar

without the time and efforts our members submitting their photographic talents.

The 2018 CSPG Geological Calendar should keep you captivated throughout the year, and hopefully offer you inspiration to submit again next year. Enjoy and have a spectacular 2018.

Spring Education Program

Registration Open!

To view course offerings go to

www.cspg.org/Springforward RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

35

SOCIETY NEWS

2017 GUSSOW WRAP-UP

T

he 2017 Gussow Conference took place at the Banff Centre from October 10th to 12th. There were sixty- seven full conference attendees and fifteen people who attended for one of the days. The theme of the conference was ‘Subsurface Hydrocarbon Movement’, a very appropriate topic for a Gussow Meeting bearing in mind the huge impact that William Gussow had on this topic with his theory of differential entrapment (‘fill and spill’). Clint Tippett, incoming CSPG President, launched the meeting with a summary of Gussow’s career that included some personal anecdotes.

The meeting was divided into five sessions that covered the fundamentals of hydrocarbon movement, experimental studies, basin modelling, surface expressions of migration and case studies. Each session consisted of five to seven diverse talks followed by a session debate with a panel of the presenters.

The speakers, many preeminent in their field, represented industry, academia and government institutions from eight different countries, adding a real international flavor to the meeting. Discussions were spirited but conducted in a respectful way. There were also 14 posters, presented mostly by students.

The conference chairs would like to thank the CSPG for allowing us to organize this meeting and especially Candace Jones and Kristy Casebeer for doing much of the logistical organization, our sponsors (Statoil, Enlighten Geoscience and AGAT Laboratories), Steve Grasby for giving the Conference dinner talk and the Banff Centre for their excellent hospitality.

36

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

SOCIETY NEWS

FINANCIAL OVERVIEW OF THE CSPG 2017 FISCAL YEAR (SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 TO AUGUST 31, 2017)

By Shelley Legitt “Plan for the worst and hope for the best” summarizes this year’s approach to managing the financial deficit issues. After two years of significant losses and no end in sight for a recovery, the executive and CSPG staff made some tough decisions. The largest expense items were fixed costs, namely office space and staff. With some creative negotiating we were able to re-locate to a less costly office space that had the added advantage of having access to a large classroom that we could use for courses at no additional cost. We also endured some staff cuts and additional workload for staff because of maternity leave absences. The role of Financial Director in tough times required tough choices but I was fortunate enough to be surrounded by a team of staff and board members that came up with very creative solutions.

Key changes that were made to decrease our deficit and move towards a neutral break-even budget included the CSPG office move, staff reductions, decreasing the cost of the technical luncheons through a lighter lunch and smaller venue, and changing to bimonthly reservoir issues.

This year’s projected loss was -$215,578 as approved by the board of directors in July 2016 and with the changes to fixed costs and other efforts the deficit on the audited financials shows a loss of -$146,058. Savings during profitable years has positioned the CSPG with an Internally Restricted fund of $820K and an Unrestricted fund of $ 823K at year end.

Our portfolio continues to be conservatively invested with an asset mix of approximately 80% Fixed Income and 20% Equities.

Operationally, we brought in $928 K in Revenue (down from $1.2 MM last year) and had $1.2 MM in Expenses (also down from $1.7 MM in 2016). This year the Geoconvention exceeded the CSPG

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

anticipated budget profit share by 77%; while the Core Conference exceeded budget by 84%. Also showing positive results were the continuing education courses and field trips coupled with spring workshops. The budget deficit was a result of decreased advertising in the Reservoir therefore higher than expected print and mailout costs that were committed to until January 2017. The Reservoir is now being sent out bimonthly in an attempt to keep our costs in line while still providing the popular Reservoir publication. We also had some net investment losses on some of our marketable securities, which are not realized losses until the investments are sold.

Membership is a key component to the society and keeping our members either through in transition programs or attracting new members has been strengthened recently by adding a membership director to the board – Laurie Brazzoni. Membership numbers have stabilized and the board made the decision this year to increase dues from $100 to $120; the first increase in over a decade. The CSPG is also looking at opportunities to attract new young members and we’ll be evolving as a society both in the way we communicate and the types of member benefits and programs we offer as we include a newer generation. As in previous years, our fully audited Financial Statements will be available on the cspg.org website.

Since the CSPG is a Not-For-Profit society our success is not measured by our profits.

It always good to remind ourselves that we are a Technical Society and that the mission of the CSPG is to advance the professions of the energy geosciences – as it applies to geology, foster the scientific, technical learning and professional development of its members; and promote the awareness of the profession to industry and the public. We believe that we have done an

excellent job adhering to our mandate while managing some tough deficit years.

We have made some changes and tough choices but it appears that we are on track to break even in 2017-2018. It is the work of our volunteers and the success of all the events that defines who we are as a society.

Some highlights of our activities from 2017: • 8 Technical Luncheons, Fall and Spring Education Week • Gussow Conference on Subsurface Hydrocarbon Movement, • 11th annual conference and field trips on Fluvial Sedimentology (CSPG, SEPM, IAS and Imperial funded) • Geology of Wine Tasting event • The GeoConvention Partnership ran GeoConvention for the third year (partnered with the CSEG and CWLS) followed by the CSPG sponsored core conference • 4 sporting events oR oad Race & Fun Run, Squash Tournament, Mixed Golf and Classic Golf Tournaments As an organization we have had to make significant changes and adapt to a new environment while still keeping our members needs at the forefront. Change is upon us - from industry practice, to demographics, to communication and information sharing. Our challenge is to leverage from our strong knowledge base while keeping a fresh perspective: encouraging volunteerism, helping young geoscientists with networking, mentorship and training opportunities. Jim Barclay will be assuming the Finance Director role in 2018 and his history of experience with the CSPG will be a huge benefit to the society.

Lastly, I’d like to thanks Lis Bjeld and the staff in the CSPG office – this has been a tough year with an office move, reduced staff and the expectation of business as usual – they have put in tremendous effort.

37

SOCIETY NEWS

RECOGNIZING A WORLD CLASS RESOURCE THE AER CORE RESEARCH CENTRE By: Doug Hayden, David James, Dale Leckie and Brad Hayes The following letter is intended for a variety of readers, including politicians, senior management at the Alberta Energy Regulator, Alberta Department of Energy, industry leaders and energy sector geoscientists.

The AER Core Research Centre (CRC) located in University Research Park in Calgary has been serving the petroleum industry and geological community since the early 60’s. It houses the largest collection of subsurface core and drill cuttings in the world, some cores going back to 1925. The scale is vast, with almost 2 million metres of core from over 70,000 wells and 20 million cutting vials, one well dated back to 1911. Because of this, the CRC is recognized internationally as the best facility of its kind in the world.

With this huge and unequalled repository of geologic data, the CRC has provided more than 50 years of support for exploration and development of oil and gas resources in Alberta. From this user-pay and easily accessible subsurface database, numerous hydrocarbon discoveries have been made which in turn has translated into huge revenues from land sales and production royalties for government. How important is this asset? Not very long ago, Alberta’s energy sector provided the backbone of the entire Canadian economy.

In addition to its sheer size, the CRC has historically been the most well used facility of its kind in the world because of its proximity to Calgary-based head offices and CRC patrons, many of whom made their entire careers working out of the centre. Historically, the facility would see 40 to 80 users on any given day. During seminars and geological society (CSPG) events, the number of delegates expanded into the hundreds and in several events, thousands. Frequently, before large Crown land sales, the facility would be fully utilized as geologists and companies sought to better understand the geology as

38

they prepared their bids. Another unique advantage of the location of the CRC is its proximity to downtown. If a geologist was stumped and needed to test an exploration idea, a 15-minute drive to the CRC allowed them to find the answer in a core or set of drill cuttings.

In addition to industry geoscientists, the CRC has been a centre for academics and students from across Canada, the U.S. and internationally, conducting studies that have contributed significantly to our knowledge of the Canadian sedimentary basins hundreds, if not thousands of theses and peer-reviewed scientific papers have resulted only because of the data housed within the Core Research Centre. For decades, numerous industry training schools, core workshops and seminars have been taught to thousands of geologists, geophysicists and engineers.

Some of these schools have a history going back almost four decades and have resulted in significant discoveries of hydrocarbons.

One such school alone was attended by more than 1000 delegates over its three plus decade run. The facility has hosted thousands of CSPG core conferences that showcase world class work mostly

conducted by Canadian expertise.

Given the above discussion, the CRC provides what we in industry think of as a great example of the “Alberta Advantage” that other such jurisdictions cannot provide and only dream about. This advantage is twofold; having immediate access to a vast source of geological data, and secondly, having numerous local and world class experts interpreting that data. Without the access to the core or our talented geoscientists, Alberta’s advantage would be diminished if not lost.

Not long ago the building reached capacity and seldom-viewed cores are now being stored off-site, which is a significant expense to the AER. Strategies for culling core have been considered to deal with the problem, and a few years ago several dumpsters of mineable oil sands core were disposed of to extend the life of the storage capacity.

With the recent downturn in oil industry activity, usage of the CRC has now significantly declined to the point that on some days, only a handful of earth scientists are seen at the centre. The

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

SOCIETY NEWS

training, of course utilizing the CRC where appropriate?

A second reason for a decline in CRC users is the perception that engineered shale projects or heavy oil projects do not require significant geological input.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

When one examines the numerous current shale and billion-dollar heavy oil projects, it becomes very clear that they are not created equal. Some of these projects have not met economic hurdles as expected at the cost of millions if not billions of dollars to shareholders. Often the cited reason for these production shortfalls or lack of success is geological. That observation should teach industry leaders to ignore geology at their peril.

fixed costs to operate a building of this size and continue to serve the geological community is significant and during tight financial times, the Centre, like all other services, is under scrutiny to justify these expenses. No one is going to use the CRC just to show appreciation for the value it has provided in the past. Rather, we need to think of new ways we can use this world class resource to create new assets, transition to a more sustainable energy environment and expand our knowledge base of geology.

Significantly, the transition of CRC usage has been under way for almost a decade.

Initially focussed on conventional resources, CRC users have expanded their use of the facility to help evaluate unconventional shales, clastics, carbonates, and identify reservoirs for storage and disposal of CO2, contaminated water and tailings. It’s easy to imagine how the CRC could be used in the future for the emerging demand for enhanced hydrocarbon production, storage, disposal, and shallow hydrothermal energy development.

Despite the downturn, the management and staff at the CRC have done a superb job trying to keep the facility functional with fewer staff. At a recent CSPG sponsored week-long training school, the management and staff bent over backwards to accommodate the large number of cores

RESERVOIR ISSUE 1 • JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2018

that needed to be timed to the schedule of the class. This action demonstrates the dedication of CRC management and staff in maintaining its historic track record of supporting industry.

So why is there such a decline in use of the facility? There are numerous reasons of which we will discuss three of the most obvious.

The prolonged downturn in the economy has impacted every sector of the petroleum industry, resulting in huge layoffs, declining drilling and fewer land sales. Lowered energy prices are the main culprit, but the downturn is also related to the politics of energy and the economic uncertainty that creates. The latter is a difficult issue. However, we believe it can be helped by earth scientists as a group being more vocal and informing the public and various levels of government of the importance of our industry to the entire Canadian economy. Too long have we as a group been silent.

Despite the cyclical nature of our industry, explorationists by nature are optimistic. If history is any guide, there will be a time when we will climb out of this deep cycle and industry needs to be ready. While perhaps swimming against the tide, could this be an ideal time for company geologists to engage in longer term planning, geologic studies and

A third reason why many earth scientists are not using the CRC is the reality of downsizing and perception/human nature that accompanies such times. Many professionals choose to stay very close to their offices and will not engage in any activity that will be seen by management as increasing costs. This includes deferring trips to the CRC or requests for training.

But this is where managers and executives must act in their leadership roles and ensure that all the geological pre-drilling homework is done before committing millions if not billions of project dollars.

This homework should include prudent use of the CRC to ensure that exploration/ drilling models are reasonable, and the exploration risks are known and tolerable.

The potential downside of a failed project or mega-project far outweighs the cost and time of examining a few cores.

Our final thought is addressed to geoscientists as a group. They should be proud that their technical work, a significant portion of it derived from examining data at the CRC, has resulted in our sedimentary basins being the best understood in the world. Furthermore, they should be proud of their prolonged impact to the Canadian economy with the discovery and development of billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic metres of natural gas. We ought to be celebrating and vocalizing that success to the public, the press, and to politicians. It has, after all, profoundly impacted the lives of all Canadians.

39

STUDENTS! Did you know there is over $20,000 available in CSPG awards and scholarships?!

Scholarship/Award

Amount Available

Application Deadline

Regional Graduate Student Scholarships

($2,500 x 4)

January 19, 2018

Undergraduate Student Awards

($1,000 x 4)

January 19, 2018

Student Event Grants

($1,000 x 5)

March 16, 2018

Andrew Baillie Award

($1,000 x 2)

GeoConvention 2018

Please visit www.cspg.org/students for more information