**Author details**

Walter Glauser1 , John McLennan1 and Ian Walton2

1 Department of Chemical Engineering, U. of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA

2 Energy & Geoscience Institute, U. of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA

### **References**

[1] Pritchett, J. The role of reservoir stimulation in the future of the geothermal power industry. In: Reservoir stimulation current understanding and practice, and the path forward, GRC 2012 Annual Pre-Meeting Workshop, September 2012, Reno, Nevada; (2012). , 28-29.

[2] Gale, J. F. Natural fractures in Shales: Origins, characteristics and relevance for hy‐ draulic fracture treatments. Search and Discovery Article #40338, adapted from oral presentation at AAPG Annual Convention..San Antonio, TX, April (2008). posted Oc‐ tober 30, 2008)., 20-23.

[16] Lord, D. L, Shah, S. N, & Rein, R. G. Lawson III, J.T. Study of perforation friction

Do Perforated Completions Have Value for Engineered Geothermal Systems

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/56211

387

[17] Shah, S. N, et al. New correlations for perforation pressure loss. In: GRI Technical

[18] El-Rabba, A. M, Shah, S. N, & Lord, D. L. New perforation pressure-loss correlations for limited-entry fracturing treatments. SPE 54533 (1997), SPE Prod & Facilities, 14,

[19] Gulrajani, S. N, & Romero, J. Evaluation and modification of fracture treatments showing near-wellbore effects. SPE 36901, Eur. Petl. Conf., Milan, Italy, October

[20] Manrique, J. F, Bjornen, K, & Ehlig-economides, C. Systematic methodology for effec‐ tive perforation and fracturing strategies. SPE 38630, ATCE, San Antonio, TX, Octo‐

[21] Behrmann, L. A, & Nolte, K. G. Perforating requirements for fracture stimulations. SPE 39453, Intl. Symp. on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, February

[22] Massaras, L. E, Dragomir, A, & Chiriac, D. Enhanced fracture entry friction analysis of the rate step-down test. SPE 106058, Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference,

[23] Karakas, M, & Tariq, S. M. Semianalytical productivity models for perforated com‐

[24] Ershaghi, I, Abdassah, D, Bonadkdar, M. R, & Ahmad, S. Estimation of geothermal

[25] Kabir, A. H, & Salmachi, A. An improved method for total mechanical skin calcula‐ tion for perforated completions. SPE 121233, SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual Conf. Ex‐

[26] Saleh, A. M, & Stewart, G. New approach towards understanding of near well bore behaviour of perforated completions. SPE 36866, European Petl. Conf., Milan, Italy,

[27] Tariq, S. M, Ichara, M. J, & Ayestaran, L. Performance of perforated completions in the presence of anisotropy, laminations, or natural fractures. SPEPE, November

[28] Cinco-ley, H, & Samaniego-v, F. Effect of wellbore storage and damage on the transi‐ ent pressure behavior of vertically fractured wells. SPE Annual Fall Technical Con‐

pressure employing a large-scale fracture "simulator." SPE 28508, (1994).

Summary, GRI-96/0208, (1996).

(1), February (1999).

(1996). , 22-24.

ber (1997). , 5-8.

(1998). , 18-19.

October (1996). , 22-24.

(1989).

College Station, Texas, January (2007). , 29-31.

pletions. SPEPE, SPE 18247, February (1991).

brine viscosity. In: J. Pet. Tech. March (1983). , 621-628.

hib., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June (2009). , 8-11.

ference and Exhibition. Denver, Colorado (1977).


[16] Lord, D. L, Shah, S. N, & Rein, R. G. Lawson III, J.T. Study of perforation friction pressure employing a large-scale fracture "simulator." SPE 28508, (1994).

[2] Gale, J. F. Natural fractures in Shales: Origins, characteristics and relevance for hy‐ draulic fracture treatments. Search and Discovery Article #40338, adapted from oral presentation at AAPG Annual Convention..San Antonio, TX, April (2008). posted Oc‐

[3] Mukherjee, H, & Economides, M. J. A parametric comparison of horizontal and verti‐

[5] Waters, G, Ramakrishnan, H, Daniels, J, Bentley, D, Belhadi, J, & Sparkman, D. Uti‐ lization of real time microseismic monitoring and hydraulic fracture diversion tech‐ nology in the completion of Barnett Shale horizontal wells. OTC 20268, OTC,

[6] Stalker, R, Graham, G. M, & Oluyemi, G. Modelling staged diversion treatments and chemical placement in the presence of near-wellbore fractures. SPE 121683, Intl.

[7] Petty, S. Stimulation methods in geothermal and oil and gas, reservoir stimulation: In: Current Understanding and Practice, and the Path Forward, GRC Annual Pre-

[8] Eftaxiopoulos, D. A, & Atkinson, C. Hydraulic fracture propagation from a cased, ce‐ mented and inclined wellbore. In: Aurertin, Hassani and Mitri, (eds.) Rock Mechan‐

[9] Yew, C. H, & Li, Y. Fracturing of a deviated well. In: SPE Production Engineering

[10] Yew, C. H, Schmidt, J. H, & Yi, L. On fracture design of deviated wells. SPE 19722,

[11] Yew, C. H, Mear, M. E, Chang, C. C, & Zhang, X. C. On perforating and fracturing of deviated wellbores. In: SPE ATCE, SPE 26514, October (1993). Houston, Texas. [12] Weng, X. Fracture initiation and propagation from deviated wellbores. SPE 26597,

[13] Behrmann, L. A, & Elbel, J. L. Effect of perforations on fracture initiation. In: JPT,

[14] Romero, J, Mack, M. G, & Elbel, J. L. Theoretical model and numerical investigation of near-wellbore effects in hydraulic fracturing. SPE 30506, ATCE, Dallas, TX, Octo‐

[15] Crump, J, & Conway, M. Effects of perforation-entry friction on bottomhole treating

cal well performance. In: SPE Formation Evaluation. June (1991).

[4] Spencer, A. New diverting agents from applied research. SPE 2828, AIME.

Symp. on Oilfield Chemistry, The Woodlands, TX, April (2009). , 20-22.

tober 30, 2008)., 20-23.

386 Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing

Houston, TX May (2009). , 4-7.

SPE ATCE, October (1989). , 8-11.

SPE ATCE, Houston, October (1993). , 3-6.

(1987).

May (1991).

ber (1995). , 22-25.

analysis. In: JPT, August (1988).

Meeting Workshop, September (2012). , 28-29.

ics. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Balkema, (1996).


[29] Cinco-ley, H, & Samaniego-v, F. Transient pressure analysis: finite conductivity frac‐ ture case versus damaged fracture case. SPE ATCE, SPE October, 1981, San Antonio, Texas (1981). , 10179, 5-7.

[41] Jackson, G, & Rai, R. The impact of completion related pressure losses on productivi‐ ty in shale gas wells. SPE 162213, Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhib. & Conf.,

Do Perforated Completions Have Value for Engineered Geothermal Systems

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/56211

389

[42] Nobakht, M, & Mattar, L. Analyzing production data from unconventional gas reser‐ voirs with linear flow and apparent skin. In: JCPT and SPE 137454, Canadian Uncon‐ ventional Resources and International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, AB, October,

[43] Xie, X. MacGlashan, J.D., Holzhauser, S.P., Knott, G.M. Completion influence on Haynesville shale gas well performance. SPE 159823, SPE Hydrocarbon Economics

[44] Clarkson, C. R, Qanbari, F, Nobakht, M, & Heffner, L. Incorporating geomechanical and dynamic hydraulic fracture property changes into rate-transient analysis: exam‐ ple from the Haynesville shale. SPE 162526, SPE Canadian Unconventional Resour‐

[45] Bello, R. O, & Wattenbarger, R. A. Multi-stage hydraulically fractured shale gas rate transient analysis. SPE 126754, SPE North Africa Tech. Conf. Exhib., Cairo, Egypt,

[46] Al-ahmadi, H. A, Almarzooq, A. M, & Wattenbarger, R. A. Application of linear flow analysis to shale gas wells- field cases. SPE 130370, SPE Unconventional Gas Conf.,

[47] Bello, R. O. Rate transient analysis in shale gas reservoirs with transient linear behav‐ ior. PhD thesis. Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas; May (2009).

[48] Bello, R. O, & Wattenbarger, R. A. Modelling and analysis of shale gas production with a skin effect. In: Can. Intl. Petrl. Conf., Paper 2009-082, 16-18 June (2009). Calga‐

[49] Bello, R. O, & Wattenbarger, R. A. Modelling and analysis of shale gas production

[50] Anderson, D. M, Nobakht, M, Moghadam, S, & Mattar, L. Analysis of production da‐ ta from fractured shale gas wells. SPE 131787, SPE Unconventional Gas Conf., Pitts‐

[51] Bahrami, H, Rezaee, R, Ostojic, J, Nazhat, D, & Clennell, B. Evaluation of damage mechanisms and skin factor in tight gas reservoirs. SPE 142284, SPE European For‐

[52] Sun, D, Li, B, Gladkikh, M, Satti, R, & Evans, R. Comparison of skin factors for perfo‐ rated completions calculated with computational fluid dynamics software and a semi-analytical model. SPE 143663, SPE European Formation Damage Conf., Noord‐

mation Damage Conf., Noordwijk, The Netherlands, June (2011). , 7-10.

and Evaluation Symp., Calgary, AB, September (2012). , 24-25.

ces Conf., Calgary, AB, 30 October-1 November (2012).

with a skin effect. In: JCPT, 49(12), December (2010).

Abu Dhabi, UAE, November (2012). , 11-14.

(2010). , 19-21.

February (2010). , 14-17.

ry, Canada.

Pittsburgh, PA, February (2010). , 23-25.

burgh, PA, February (2010). , 23-25.

wijk, The Netherlands, June (2011). , 7-10.


[41] Jackson, G, & Rai, R. The impact of completion related pressure losses on productivi‐ ty in shale gas wells. SPE 162213, Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhib. & Conf., Abu Dhabi, UAE, November (2012). , 11-14.

[29] Cinco-ley, H, & Samaniego-v, F. Transient pressure analysis: finite conductivity frac‐ ture case versus damaged fracture case. SPE ATCE, SPE October, 1981, San Antonio,

[30] Mukherjee, H. Fractured well performance: key to fracture treatment success. SPE

[31] Lian, Z, Meng, Y, & Tong, M. A new method of numerical simulation for perforation completion of fracture formation. SPE 64512, Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conf. and Ex‐

[32] Yildiz, T. Assessment of total skin factor in perforated wells. SPE 82249, SPEREE,

[33] Furui, K, Zhu, D, & Hill, A. D. A new skin-factor model for perforated horizontal

[34] Ehlig-economides, C. A, Tosic, S, & Economides, M. J. Foolproof completions for high-rate production wells. SPE 111455, Intl. Symp. on Formation Damage Control,

[35] Zhang, Y, Marongiu-porcu, M, Ehlig-economides, C. A, Tosic, S, & Economides, M. J. Comprehensive model for flow behavior of high performance fracture completions.

[36] Welling, R. W. F. Conventional high rate well completions: limitations of frac&pack, high rate water pack and open hole gravel pack completions. SPE 39475, SPE Intl. Symp. And Exhib. on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, February (1998). ,

[37] Cherny, S. G, Lapin, V. N, Alekseenko, O. P, & Medvedev, O. O. D modeling of hy‐ draulic fracture initiating at a wellbore with or without microannulus. SPE 119352, SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Tech. Conf., The Woodlands, TX January (2009). , 19-21. [38] Fallahzadeh, S. H, & Rasouli, V. The impact of cement sheath mechanical properties on near wellbore hydraulic fracture initiation. Rock Engineering and Technology for Sustainable Underground Construction, EUROCK ISRM Intl. Symp., Stockholm,

[39] Ceccarelli, R. L, Pace, G, Casero, A, Ciuca, A, & Tambini, M. Perforating for fractur‐ ing:theory vs. field experiences. SPE 128270, SPE Intl. Symp. And Exhib. on Forma‐

[40] Fallahzadeh, S. H, Shadizadeh, S. R, & Pourafshary, P. Dealing with the challenges of hydraulic fracture initiation in deviated-cased perforated boreholes. SPE 132797, Tri‐ nidad and Tobago Energy Resources Conf., Port of Spain, Trinidad, June (2010). ,

tion Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, February (2010). , 10-12.

wells. In: SPE Drilling & Completion, 23, (3): September (2008). , 205-215.

SPE 124431, SPE ATCE, New Orleans, LA, October (2009). , 4-7.

Texas (1981). , 10179, 5-7.

388 Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing

February (2006).

18-19.

27-30.

50976 and JPT, March (1999).

hib., Brisbane, Australia, October (2000). , 16-18.

Lafayette, LA, February (2008). , 13-15.

Sweden, 28-30 May (2012). , 2012.


[53] Byrne, M, Jimenez, M. A, & Salimi, S. Modelling the near wellbore and formation damage- a comprehensive review of current and future options. SPE 144096, SPE Eu‐ ropean Formation Damage Conf., Noordwijk, The Netherlands, June (2011). , 7-10.

**Chapter 18**

**Differentiating Applications of Hydraulic Fracturing**

Hydraulic fracturing has received abundant media attention in recent years due to a rapid increase in the use of the technique in combination with horizontal drilling technology to produce oil and gas resources from tight reservoirs. Hydraulic fracturing techniques are also used in a variety of other applications that are unrelated to oil and gas production, includ‐ ing tunnel and dam construction, enhanced geothermal energy, carbon sequestration, groundwater remediation, block cave mining, rock burst mitigation, and water well devel‐

Environmental concerns associated with large-scale hydraulic fracturing in oil and gas reser‐ voirs have resulted in political efforts to ban the technique with legislation now in place in certain states in the US and countries around the world. Concerns include soil and ground‐ water contamination and induced seismicity. A clear understanding of how hydraulic frac‐ turing techniques are used in various applications is important to avoid unintended consequences of any regulations aimed at hydraulic fracturing in the oil and gas industry. The methodology for each application varies widely in terms of scale, pressures applied, ad‐ ditives, and fracture propagation. Mining rock stress measurements, for instance, focus pri‐ marily on the breaking strength of rock, and can be conducted with a small-volume highpressure pump that produces only a few liters/minute. The total volume of water injected may be on the order of tens or hundreds of liters. A typical oil and gas well hydraulic frac‐ ture treatment, on the other hand, requires millions of litres of injected proprietary fluid and proppant in order to propagate and maintain the fracture effectively into the reservoir. Though both applications are termed "hydraulic fracturing", they differ greatly in terms of

This paper characterizes a range of hydraulic fracturing applications in terms of the objec‐ tives, techniques, and potential for environmental concerns associated with the standard

and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2013 Adams and Rowe; licensee InTech. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2013 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,

Joel Adams and Clem Rowe

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/56114

potential impacts to the environment.

**Abstract**

opment.

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

