scholarly journals A white paper describing produced water from production of crude oil, natural gas, and coal bed methane.

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
J A Veil ◽  
M G Puder ◽  
D Elcock ◽  
Redweik, R. J., Jr.
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Crude Oil ◽  
Produced Water ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Coal Bed ◽  
Coal Bed Methane

A Comparative Analysis between Coal-Bed Methane and Shale Gas in China Based on Cases

2015 ◽  
Vol 737 ◽  
pp. 794-799
Author(s):  
Liang Yu Xia ◽  
Jing Yi Wen
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Shale Gas ◽  
Net Present Value ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Coal Bed ◽  
Coal Bed Methane ◽  
Single Well

Owing to the growing gap of natural gas between supply and demand in China, the unconventional natural gas, including coal-bed methane (CBM) and shale gas, has been considered as strategic energy sources. An assessment by China’s Ministry of Land and Resources (MLR) announced that China has potentially resources of 36.7 trillion cubic meters of CBM and 25 trillion cubic meters of shale gas, larger than those of the U.S. Controversial views about their commercial prospects and priorities in order are available. This research aims at exploring which is more economically viable and worth the priority. A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) based on average single well data is employed to carry out a comparative analysis between two typical fields, the coal-bed methane (CBM) fields in the Qinshui basin and the shale gas fields in Sichuan basin. The net present value (NPV), the internal rate of return (IRR) and the payback period are used as indicators in this analysis. The results indicate that CBM is superior to shale gas in viability under the current technological and economic conditions, and the future of the CBM industry is clearer than that of the shale gas industry, but the latter is still promising if the drilling costs can be reduced significantly with technical progress. We suggest that the CBM industry should be given the priority to, and the policy for shale gas should focus on promoting technical innovations.

GROUNDWATER MONITORING AT COAL BED NATURAL GAS PRODUCED WATER IMPOUNDMENTS: THE WYOMING DEQ DATABASE

2007 ◽  
Vol 2007 (1) ◽  
pp. 581-588
Author(s):  
T. Osborne ◽  
U. Williams ◽  
M. Smith ◽  
D. Fischer ◽  
K. Frederick
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Groundwater Monitoring ◽  
Produced Water ◽  
Coal Bed

STABLE BROMINE ISOTOPIC COMPOSITION OF COAL BED METHANE (CBM) PRODUCED WATER

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randy L. Stotler ◽  
◽  
Matthew F. Kirk ◽  
Shaun K. Frape ◽  
Rhys Gwynne
Keyword(s):  
Isotopic Composition ◽  
Produced Water ◽  
Coal Bed ◽  
Coal Bed Methane

The Research and Application of Coal-Bed Methane Surface Gathering Process

2014 ◽  
Vol 962-965 ◽  
pp. 899-902
Author(s):  
Mei Ting Jiang ◽  
Yi Shan Lou ◽  
Hao Yuan Wei
Keyword(s):  
Capital Investment ◽  
Produced Water ◽  
Plant Size ◽  
Coal Bed ◽  
Coal Bed Methane ◽  
Processing Plant ◽  
Gas Field ◽  
Central Processing ◽  
Single Well ◽  
Large Water

China is rich in coal-bed methane (CMB) resources, and has a vast exploitable volume, but the surface gathering system is not perfect. In order to solve the problems of high degree of difficulty in surface gathering system design and lower economic efficiency caused by the characteristics of CBM gas field geographically remote, more wells, large water production in single well and gas containing pulverized coal etc, we studied the select method of the piping material of CBM, process and the treatment technologies of produced water in F block of the southern Qinshui Basin. Finally, the first phase production can reach 6 × 108m3/a and the central processing plant size is 10 × 108m3/a in the F block. The application of this study not only reduced the capital investment but also met the requirement of good environmental protection. This gathering process design can be applied to other development and construction of CBM gas fields.

scholarly journals Stable Bromine Isotopic Composition of Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Produced Water, the Occurrence of Enriched 81Br, and Implications for Fluid Flow in the Midcontinent, USA

Minerals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 358
Author(s):  
Randy L. Stotler ◽  
Matthew F. Kirk ◽  
K. David Newell ◽  
Robert H. Goldstein ◽  
Shaun K. Frape ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Produced Water ◽  
Coal Bed ◽  
Coal Bed Methane ◽  
Rock Interaction ◽  
Higher Temperature ◽  
Cherokee Group ◽  
Gas Interactions ◽  
Two Fluid ◽  
Midcontinent Usa ◽  
Water Rock Interaction

This study characterizes the δ37Cl, δ81Br, and 87Sr/86Sr of coal bed methane produced fluids from Pennsylvanian Cherokee Group coals of the Cherokee Basin in southeast Kansas, USA. The δ37Cl, δ81Br, and 87Sr/86Sr values range between −0.81 and +0.68‰ (SMOC), −0.63 and +3.17‰ (SMOB), and 0.70880 and 0.71109, respectively. A large percentage of samples have δ81Br above +2.00‰. Two fluid groups were identified on the basis of K/Br, Br/Cl, and Ca/Mg ratios, temperature, He content, δ2H, δ18O, δ81Br, and 87Sr/86Sr. Both fluid groups have geochemical similarities to fluids in Cambrian, Ordovician, and Mississippian units. Lower salinity and higher temperature fluids from deeper units are leaking up into the Cherokee Group and mixing with a higher salinity fluid with higher δ81Br and more radiogenic 87Sr/86Sr. Variation in δ37Cl indicates an unknown process other than mixing is affecting the salinity. This process does not appear to be related to evaporation, evaporite dissolution, or diffusion. Insufficient data are available to evaluate halide–gas or water–rock interaction, but halide–gas interactions are not likely a significant contributor to high δ81Br. Rather, interactions with organically bound bromine and soluble chloride within the coal could have the strongest effect on δ37Cl and δ81Br values.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document