Plenary 001

Current Status of CBM in Western Canada Dave Russum, P.Geol.

AJM Petroleum Consultants Canadian Institute – Coalbed Methane Symposium June 2005

Canada’s Natural Gas Production (Bcf/d Adapted from CAPP Data) 20.0

?

18.0 16.0 14.0

E Canada Rest WCSB Alberta

Record Prices Record Activity

10.0 8.0

Production Growth controlled by pipeline capacity

Production flat to declining

6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0

19 47 19 50 19 53 19 56 19 59 19 62 19 65 19 68 19 71 19 74 19 77 19 80 19 83 19 86 19 89 19 92 19 95 19 98 20 0 20 1 04 E

Bcf/d

12.0

Not Sustainable

Resource Triangle Conventional Reservoirs

Obvious Traps

Small Resource High Quality Difficult to find Easy to develop Low cost High margin

Subtle Traps Heavy Sour Oil Gas

W.C.S.B. Tar Sands

Unconventional Reservoirs

Oil Shale

Tight CBM Gas Shale Gas Gas Hydrates

Basin Maturity Better Technology (Higher prices) Large Resource Low Quality Easy to find Difficult to develop High cost Low margin

Canada’s Resources and Reserves Natural Gas (Conventional data adapted from CGPC 2001)

?1000’sTcf Ultimate Resources

Total Conventional + Unconventional

592Tcf

?>1,000Tcf

Discovered

340Tcf Raw Gas Sales Gas

204Tcf Remaining Reserves

Unproduced

58 Tcf (>95% WCSB)

Rate of Conversion: Accessibility Technology Price Motivation

Understanding Remaining Gas Resources – Accessible and Economically Available

Accessible

Accessible with restrictions

Inaccessible

Available at current prices

Presently Available Resources

Future Available Resources

Unavailable Resources

Available at higher prices

Future Available Resources

Future Available Resources

Unavailable Resources

Can apply this approach to Conventional and Unconventional Resources Russum, CSEG Recorder, June 2003

Unconventional Gas Reservoirs • Any methane not trapped in a porous, permeable, buoyancy driven system • ‘More Challenging to extract’ • Characteristics – extremely variable • (Often) – – – – –

Methane not freely dispersed Source rock and reservoir closely related Large, low concentration resources Unusual pressure regimes Low or heterogeneous permeability

Unconventional Gas - Producibility • • • • •

Low productivity, often low decline rates Low recovery factors Require greater drilling density Environmental issues Technologically challenging to produce: – Area and resource specific solutions – Low risk once specific solutions identified

• Relatively high development and operating costs

Unconventional Gas - Types • Shallow Biogenic Gas • ‘Tight’ Gas – includes Deep Basin and Basin Centred Gas (BCG)

• Coalbed Methane (CBM) – Also called Natural Gas from Coal (NGC)

• • • •

Shale Gas Gas Hydrates – in molecular structure of ice Inorganic Methane Continuous generated Methane

Unconventional Gas – Status and Resources (*From various sources) Status USA

Resource in Canada*

Status Canada

Shallow Biogenic Gas

On-going Production

30Tcf

Production since 1905

Tight Gas

Growth Opportunity

600Tcf

Production since 1976

Coalbed Methane

On-going Production

400Tcf

Production since 2002

Shale Gas

On-going Production

100Tcf

Experimental activity

Gas Hydrates

Experimental Research

5,000Tcf

Experimental Research

Inorganic Methane

?Theoretical

?

?Theoretical

Continuously Generated Methane

Pilot Projects

400Mmcf/d

Pilot Projects

Contribution of Unconventional Gas Production, WCSB, December 2004

Shallow

CBM

Deep/Tight Conventional Shale

Unconventional : 33% Source: PetroCube 2005

WCSB Coalbed Methane Resource Potential

Status

Ardley Coal WC Alberta

Low/Moderate

Limited activity, Best potential is relatively remote

Horseshoe Canyon Coal

High

Focus of current activity, readily accessible, dry gas

Mannville Coal WC Alberta

Very High

Experimental activity, requires dewatering eg. Trident, Corbett Creek.

Mannville Coal NE BC

Moderate?

Experimental activity, - 7 permits granted, confidential results

Kootenay Coal SE BC

Moderate

Experimental , Encana, Devon. Coal continuity and environmental problems

Mannville CBM

Mannville CBM – Current Status • • • • •

Still experimental ‘Conventional’ CBM requiring dewatering Not yet producing at economic rates Need to find ‘sweet spots’ – better permeability Main area of interest T60-66, R1-11W5 – Starting to see experimentation over a wider area

• Main Operators – – – – –

Trident - Corbett Ck Apache Thunder Energy Centrica PennWest

Mannville CBM Production AJM Database wells producing Mar 2005 Mannville CBM Production (to March 2005)

12000

6000

10000

5000

8000

4000

6000

3000

4000

2000

2000

1000 0

20 01 -1 20 2 02 -0 20 3 02 -0 20 6 02 20 0 9 02 -1 20 2 03 -0 20 3 03 -0 20 6 03 -0 20 9 03 -1 20 2 04 20 0 3 04 -0 20 6 04 -0 20 9 04 -1 20 2 05 -0 3

0

Water Bbls/d

Gas Mcf/d

(Source AJM Database)

CBM producing well count: 56, Water 2000 bbls/Mmcf

Horseshoe Canyon CBM

Horseshoe Canyon Coals

•Apache

•MGV •Fairborne •Thunder

•Trident •EOG

•1st NGC Sales

•MGV •Encana

•MGV

•Median depth ranges from 300m to 600m • drill and complete 3 wells per day •10 to 20 seams of 1-2m thickness Stimulated by Nitrogen gas fracture treatment •3 to 4 week flow testing •No water production – dry gas •Range 20 to 500 Mcf/d •Well head pressure < 5psi •Compression facilities required •Four wells per section •1 to 4 BCF/section in place

AJM’s CBM Database • Focused currently on Horseshoe Canyon • Reviewed all wells in CBM Fairway • Excludes confidential wells as of 31st March 2005 (underestimates total wells but gives better confidence in data) • Assignments are independent of Board data • Producing wells split into: – Pure coalbed methane wells – Wells with commingled perforation and production from coal and adjacent sands – Wells where there is a contribution from CBM but information is incomplete – Confidential wells licensed as CBM

2005/02

2004/12

2004/10

2004/08

2004/06

2004/04

2004/02

2003/12

2003/10

2003/08

2003/06

2003/04

2003/02

2002/12

2002/10

2002/08

2002/06

2002/04

2002/02

2001/12

2001/08

CBM Well Count

Horseshoe Canyon

All CBM â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Producing Well Count To Mar 2005 excluding Confidential Wells All HSC CBM Producing Wells

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

AJM, 2005

Horseshoe Canyon CBM Producing well count (AJM Database, Mar 31 2005)

Horseshoe Canyon Producing Well Count Wells producing Pure CBM

951

Wells producing from Coal + Sand without differentiation of production

547

Wells producing from coal but insufficient data to define whether production also from adjacent sand

183

Confidential wells probably producing from coal

384

TOTAL

2065*

* Compares to 1470 wells identified by AEUB as CBM wells

Horseshoe Canyon Production Horseshoe Canyon Production to Mar 2005 (AJM Data) 200

160

Conf 'CBM' wells

140

CBM Undefined

120

CBM + Sand

100

CBM - Pure

80 60 40 20

2005-03

2004-12

2004-09

2004-06

2004-03

2003-12

2003-09

2003-06

2003-03

2002-12

2002-09

2002-06

2002-03

0

2001-12

Mmcf/d

180

Horseshoe Canyon CBM Production 160

1600

140

1400

120

1200

100

1000

80

800

60

600

40

400

20

200

2005-03

2004-12

2004-09

2004-06

2004-03

2003-12

2003-09

2003-06

2003-03

2002-12

2002-09

2002-06

2002-03

0

2001-12

0

Water Bbls/d

Gas Mmcf/d

Horseshoe Canyon Gross Production (AJM Data)

CBM producing well count: 1675, Water <1bbl/Mmcf

Horseshoe Canyon Production - Observations • Considerable variation in production profiles • Varies between wells, between areas and between operators • Relative productivity greatly influenced by line pressure – Need very low line pressure – Noise from compression is major environmental challenge

• Early phase of development limits accurate prediction of ultimate productivity • Developing tools to better understand and predict results

Horseshoe Canyon Current Productivity Avg Daily Production vs Production Days 600

Gas Production (mcf/d)

500

400

Trendline

300

200

100

0 0

100

200

300

400

500

Days on Production

600

700

800

Horseshoe Canyon Productivity Statistics (mcf/d) to March 2005 Pmean Daily Production

P10

P50

P90

CBM Pure

100

186

81

32

CBM + Sand

104

202

80

44

CBM Unconfirmed

100

172

81

35

HSC CBM wells data to March 2005 - 5 or more wells on production (Source: AJM Database) All CBM Producing Wells - with Data to March 2005 700 600

400

300 200 100

EO G M us ta ng Re so lu te En er m ar k Ba yt ex G la ci er Ce nt ric a De vo n

Fa ent irb or ne Th un de r CN RL

Tr id

ch e

G V

Ap a

M

ca na

0

En

CBM Well Count

500

+ 26 Operators with <5 wells on Production

na

A

M G pa V c Tr he Fa ide irb nt o Th rn un e de C r NR L EO M us G R tan es g E n ol u er t e m a B rk ay t G ex la C cie en r tr ic D a ev on

En ca

# of Producing Wells

700

600 Average Daily Production

400 150

300 100

100

0 0

Avg mcf/d per well

Average HSC Productivity for main CBM Producers 250

Producing Wells

200

500

200 50

AVG all wells all producers

Horseshoe Canyon CBM – How significant?

• Fairway with >4m net aggregate coal covers approximately 12,000 sq miles • 4 wells per sq mile = 48,000 well • If 24,000 wells on production at one time @ 100mcf/d = 2.4Bcf/d • 48,000 wells @ 300mcf = approx. 15Tcf of Marketable gas

In Conclusion: • Typical Horseshoe Canyon CBM well produces 100mcf per day • Considerable variations in the productivity by area and Company • AJM will continue to gather data on CBM as it evolves in Canada to identify trends, productivity and ultimately reserves per well

More Information?

Dave Russum, drussum@ajma.net CBM Studies at AJM: Larry Boyd, lboyd@ajma.net AJM Petroleum Consultants, Petrocube and Well Load: Hugh Mosher hmosher@ajma.net www.ajma.net or www.petrocube.com AJM Petroleum Consultants: (403) 232-6600

Closing Comments Question Period

Question One

Question Two

Question Three