Timber Creek Field:

A Case Study in
Successful Exploitation
of a Producing Minnelusa Oil Field

Brad Bauer
Jacob Hartgroves,
Merit Energy Company

A Simple Formula for Success

"Rise early. Work late. Strike oil.
J. Paul Getty
Dont give me your best geologist give me your luckiest.
Ace Gutowsky
Good fields get better.
Merit Energy Company
Acquire + Operate + Exploit
= 24 Years of Success

Powder River Basin - Minnelusa Play

Upper Minnelusa Formation

Minnekahta-Minnelusa Isopach

E. Permian
280 Ma
Blakey; http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rcb7/mollglobe.html

Tomasso, 2010

General Overview Timber Creek Field (Campbell Co., WY)

Timber Creek
TOTAL Minnelusa B & C
7 Producers / 6 Injectors
OOIP 55 mmbo [37% RF]
Current Rates
1,150 bopd
3,850 bwpd
3,850 bwipd

Outline of
Productive
Minnelusa B

A_BURTBR

Field History
5

1962: Field Discovery

IWR

(LeSueur # 1 598 bopd + 6 bwpd)

3
2

1963: Primary Development

1966: Water re-injection / disposal initiated

1
0
10,000

Barrels Per Day

(eastern flank)

1967: Western flank injection begins

1969: Southern flank injection begins
.
1997: Merit acquired
1998: Field unitized
1998: Waterflood begins

Water Injection
Water Production
Oil Production
Gas Production, mcf /d

1,000

(Injection > Withdrawal)

Well Count

100
1960
25
20
15
10
5
0

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2002: Toro # 3 drilled by Merit Energy

2008: Cook # 4 reactivated;
ESPs installed on Cook # 5 & Toro # 2;
Increased WINJ to ~ 2,500 bwipd

Water Out

Water Inj
Zero
Appreciable
Water
Movement

Evolving Geologic Interpretations

1960s
1990s
2000s
CURRENT

10,000

Barrels Per Day

Waterflood /
Reservoir
Management

1,000

Primary
(Depletion +
Water Drive)
100
1960

1965

Water Production
Water Injection
Oil Production

Re-injection / Produce
1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Water Out

Water Inj
Zero
Appreciable
Water
Movement

Primary Period

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

770 psi

576 psi

2,756 psi

1945 psi

2,390 psi

1963
End-of-Year
BHPs

791 psi

2,300 psi

770 psi

576 psi

2,756 psi

1945 psi

2,390 psi

1963
End-of-Year
BHPs

791 psi

2,300 psi

Timber Creek Field - Green Pod

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Average Monthly Rates

1,000

100

Gas - mcf pd
GINJ - mcf pd
Water - bwpd
WINJ - bwpd
Oil - bopd

10
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Oil Material Balance

Black Oil Material Balance
Equations

General Form

F = N (Eo + m E g + Ef ,w ) + (We Bw )

Black Oil Material Balance

Equations

General Form
Undergroun d Withdrawal

F = N (Eo + m E g + Ef ,w ) + (We Bw )

] [

F = N p Bo + (R p Rs ) Bg + (W p Wi ) Bw

Oil Expansion Eo = (Bo Boi ) + (Rsi Rs ) Bg

What are the effects of water influx?

Pressures

Water
(Aquifer)
Influx is the
Primary
Driver for
Production
in the
Green Pod

Pi =

3,655 psi

P=

1,860 psi

Production / Injection

Volumetrics

Assume
Volumetric
OOIP

N=

15,280,590 stb

G=

993,238 mcf

W=

4,083,474 stb

PVT Properties

Np =

1,136,736 stb

Bo =

1.081 rb/stb

Gp =

73,888 mcf

Boi =

1.070 rb/stb

Rp =

65 scf/stb

Rs =

65 scf/stb

Wp =

116,754 stb

Rsi =

65 scf/stb

Wi =

0 stb

Bg =

0.00144 rb/scf

Oil Recovery =

7.4%

Bgi =

0.00080 rb/scf

Gas Recovery =

7.4%

Bw =

1.001 rb/stb

Other Expansion Terms

Swi =
m=

Reservoir Indices

20.0%

Depletion Drive Index =

14%

Gas Cap Drive Index =

0%

Cw =

0.00E+00 psi-1

Water Drive Index =

86%

Cf =

0.00E+00 psi-1

Pore Volume Index =

0%

Expansion / Withdrawal / Influx

F ---

1346177.494

Eo ---

0.011435567

Eg ---

0.852992423

Ef,w --We ---

0
1,170,265 stb

Notes / Comments
Cumulatives as of Jan-64

Pressures

But Not in
the Other
Pods

Volumetrics

Pi =

3,655 psi

N=

15,757,830 stb

P=

511 psi

G=

1,024,259 mcf

W=

4,211,009 stb

Production / Injection

PVT Properties

Np =

1,147,774 stb

Bo =

1.089 rb/stb

Gp =

74,605 mcf

Boi =

1.070 rb/stb

Rp =

65 scf/stb

Rs =

52 scf/stb

Wp =

165,965 stb

Rsi =

65 scf/stb

Wi =

0 stb

Bg =

0.00604 rb/scf

Oil Recovery =

7.3%

Bgi =

0.00080 rb/scf

Gas Recovery =

7.3%

Bw =

1.001 rb/stb

Other Expansion Terms

Reservoir Indices

770 psi

Swi =
m=

576 psi

2,756 psi

1945 psi

20.0%

Depletion Drive Index =

112%

Gas Cap Drive Index =

0%

Cw =

0.00E+00 psi-1

Water Drive Index =

Cf =

0.00E+00 psi-1

Pore Volume Index =

2,390 psi

Expansion / Withdrawal / Influx

791 psi

2,300 psi

F ---

1503782.121

Eo ---

0.095430787

Eg ---

7.01479143

Ef,w --We ---

0
0 stb

Notes / Comments
Cumulatives as of Jan-64

-12%
0%

1967

1974

1981

1985

1991

1996

Re-injection Period

Water Out

Water Inj

Zero
Appreciable
Water
Movement

bpd

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production
Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Timber Creek Field

Injection / Withdrawal History
(All)

1,000

1,800

900

1,600

800

1,400

700

1,200

600

1,000

500

800

400

600

300

400

200

Total Liquids - rbpd

200

100

Total Injection - rbpd

Oil - bopd

0
1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

bopd

rbpd

2,000

900

Changing Fluid
Rates

Oil Rate, bpd

800
700
600

Wolff # 1
Toro # 2
LeSueur # 3-M

500

LeSueur # 2-M
LeSueur # 1-M

400

LeSueur # 1
Fed 311 Camp # 1

300

Cook # 5

Whats the next step in development?

Cook # 4
Cook # 3R

200

Cook # 2R
Cook # 1

100

2,000

Total Fluid Rate, bpd

1,800
1,600
1,400

Wolff # 1
Toro # 2

1,200

LeSueur # 3-M
LeSueur # 2-M

1,000

LeSueur # 1-M
LeSueur # 1

800

Fed 311 Camp # 1

Cook # 5

600

Cook # 4
Cook # 3R

400

Cook # 2R
Cook # 1

200

1/31/1995

1/31/1994

1/31/1993

1/31/1992

1/31/1991

1/31/1990

1/31/1989

1/31/1988

1/31/1987

1/31/1986

1/31/1985

1/31/1996

1/31/1995

1/31/1994

1/31/1993

1/31/1992

1/31/1991

1/31/1990

1/31/1989

1/31/1988

1/31/1987

1/31/1986

1/31/1985

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Waterflood Implementation
2000

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Some Response to Injection?

Timber Creek Field

Dimensionless Performance Plot

50%

Total Oil Recovery vs. HCPV Injected

Total Oil Recovery vs. Net Displaceable Pore Volumes Injected

45%

40%

25%

20%

15%

10%

1966
1965

5%

1964

0%
-20%

2002

2001

2000

1964 196519661967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999

2002
2001
1999 2000
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967

30%

1959
1960
1961
1962
1963

Oil Recovery Factor, % of OOIP

35%

1963
1962
1961
1960
1959

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Oil Cut

2001

2002

2000

1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999

1992

1993

1989
1990
1991

1987

1988

1986

1984

Actuals

1985

1982

1983

1981

Oil Cut vs. Cumulative Oil Production

1980

1979

1978

1977

100%

1976

Timber Creek Field

10%

1%
10,000

15,000

20,000
Cumulative Oil Production, mbo

25,000

Waterflood Analysis: General Observations

Water Cut & IWR vs. Cumulative Oil Production

100.0%

4.0

Possible aquifer influence

Unaffected by initial disposal

3.5
3.0

10.0%

2.0
```

1.5

Water Cut
Liquid IWR

1.0
0.5
1.0%
0

5,000

10,000

15,000
Np, mbo

20,000

0.0
25,000

IWR

stb/stb

2.5

Next Steps Reservoir Simulation

General Information
Name:

Timber Creek Simulation Project

Description:

Develop a simulation model of Timber Creek field (using available data)

to better understand its historic performance, aquifer behavior, & future
opportunities; develop a methodology for evaluating Minnelusa fields
given a limited data set & determine critical variables to help guide future
data-gathering efforts

Objectives:

(1) Create a reservoir simulation model of the Minnelusa B & C

formations, at Timber Creek field
(2) Using available data, develop history match scenarios in an attempt
to mimic the historic performance of the field
(3) Determine the relative likelihood of un-drained/un-exploited,
moveable oil being present in the northeast quadrant of Timber
Creek field
(4) Based on history match construction & associated sensitivity runs,
determine which reservoir/geologic variables are most important to
the development of a reservoir simulation model

Goals / Metrics:

Increased oil production rates

Improved ultimate oil recovery

Low production, F&D costs per incremental barrel of oil

WY EORI 2010 Reservoir Simulation

B Sand Red
B Sand Blue

B Region

B Sand Green
B Dolomite
Upper C Sand
Middle C Sand

Model
Boundary

Lower C Sand

B Dolomite Region
Upper C Region
Lower C Region

Simulation Process

GEOL Interpretation (GRG / MEC)

GEOL Model Construction, Initial Build (GRG / EORI)

Problems w/ data (No gas, missing water, very few BHPs)

Different Oils (B & C)
Strong aquifer influx from SE edge; weak influx from NW
Tilted OWCs (Consistent w/ aquifer direction & 3-pod configuration)
Initially, mobile water present in C; but, only immobile water in B
Not enough OOIP in northern tip to support production; higher uncertainty in C
volumetrics due to insufficient layering & water production

Model Calibration, History Matching

Using oil rate & FBHP constraints; focused on WORs & mass balance
Additional tuning was necessary
Increased PV in B by 10% except in North, which was raised 20%
Increased k by 2-5 X
Manual tuning of aquifer w/ controlled pseudo-injection

Minnelusa B Upper Hi Res (Red)

Minnelusa B Middle, Mid Res (Blue)

Minnelusa B Lower, Low Res (Green)

Minnelusa C - Upper

Minnelusa C - Middle

Minnelusa C - Lower

2010 Prediction Runs

Simulation Runs, Estimated Reserves
Scenario

1
2
3
4
5
6A
6B
7A
7B

Description

Next 5 Yrs

Next 10 Yrs

Next 40 Yrs

B+C

B Only

B+C

B Only

B+C

B Only

Base Case, No Changes

1.52

1.32

2.81

2.38

7.07

5.34

Vertical PROD Well (NE)

1.57

1.38

2.88

2.45

7.13

5.40

Horizontal PROD Well (NE)

1.50

1.30

2.94

2.53

6.95

5.30

Increased INJ (hist. max)

1.75

1.47

3.15

2.56

7.39

5.27

Reactivate Wolff 3

1.83

1.47

3.31

2.54

7.84

5.23

INJ Conv (Cook 1, 4, Wolff 1)

2.30

2.08

3.62

3.15

7.14

5.37

INJ Conv (Cook 1, 3R, 4, Wolff 1)

2.17

1.95

3.66

3.18

7.16

5.37

Vertical INJ Well (NE)

1.90

1.65

3.31

2.78

7.45

5.51

Vertical INJ Well (NE) + 6B

2.25

2.04

3.91

3.46

7.32

5.60

Important Observations / Conclusions

Simulation suggests substantial remaining reserves, even under current injection conditions
(7 mmbo)

A new producer (NE corner) will add reserves (+ 60 70 mbo)

A new injector will add even more reserves, & also accelerate recovery (+ 380 mbo overall; + 500 mbo would be
recovered over the base case within the next 10 yrs)

The highest EUR can be obtained with reactivating the Wolff # 3; conversions will accelerate recovery

Drilling an injector & performing conversions should result in the greatest present value
(+ 730 mbo within 5 yrs + 1.1 mmbo over next 10 yrs dropping to an ultimate increase of + 250 mbo)

Exploitation Recommendations
Using the simulation as
a guide to future development
Drill new well (NE corner)
Gene George # 1 (WIW)
Reactivate Wolff # 3 for
waterflood support
Convert additional wells

Wolff # 1
Cook # 1
Cook # 4 (When it waters out)

ESP / AL Changes
(LeSueur # 2M or other)
Shut off / divert
current injection
(address recycling from
Fed Campbell #1)

Drill New Well

Gene George # 1

Gene George #1 Logs

PMk
POp
PMl
B sst

B dol
C1 sst

C1 dol
C2 sst

Oil over shaker

Gene George #1 Fluid Analysis

Cored New Well (Gene George # 1)

Gene George #1 Core Analyses

20 plugs for immediate
phi/k measurement (17
horiz, 3 vert).
63 plugs for EORI
research analyses (59
horiz, 4 vert).
2 plugs for electrical
properties.
Kv ~ factor of 10 lower
than Kh.
Samples with lower
anhydrite cement have
better than average
reservoir properties.
(Helps
explain good
injectivity.)

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Timber Creek Field

Production / Injection History
(All)

10,000

Water Injection
Water Production

bpd

Oil Production

1,000

100
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

OUTLOOK13 - All Prvd Rsvs

2008

2001
2002

Culled Data Set

Outlook13 (Exp. Match)

Oil Cut

Expon. (Culled Data Set)

2013

2012

2011

2003

2010 Simulation Runs

2009
2010

2000

1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999

2004

2006

Actuals

1989
1990
1991
1992
1993

1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988

1980

2005

Oil Cut vs. Cumulative Oil Production

1981

1978

1979

1977

100%

1976

Timber Creek Field

10%

1%
10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Cumulative Oil Production, mbo

30,000

35,000

Timber Creek Field

Oil Rate vs. Cumulative Oil Production
Actuals

7,000

Primary Forecast - Fluid Expansion Drive

Secondary Forecast - Pressure Maintenance
WF Forecast
Secondary Forecast - After '98 WF Upgrade

6,000
1964

Outlook
2010 Simulation Runs

1965

4,000

1979

1977
1978

1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

1,000

1975
1976

1963

1972
1973
1974

1970

1971

1968

2,000

1969

1967

1966

3,000

#N/A

1959
1960
1961
1962

bopd

5,000

0
0

5,000

10,000

15,000
Cumulative Oil Production, mbo

20,000

25,000

30,000

Any Questions?