Section 1
Pore Pressure and Reservoir
Compartmentalization
Section 2
Development of Overpressure
Section 3
Pore Pressure Prediction
Section 4
Geologic Factors Contributing to the
Macondo Well Blowout
2
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Definition of Pore Pressure
Monte Christo
5
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu Figure 1.4 d pg.13
Variations in Pore Pressure Within Compartments,
Each With ~Hydrostatic Gradients
c)
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Figure 11.15 b pg. 368 8
Oil and Gas Production and
Coastal Subsidence
Lapeyrouse
Field
9
(After M or ton et al., 2002)
Gas Fields in Southern Louisiana
15
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Overpressure at Depth Can Gradients > Sv/ z?
Monte Christo
17
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Outline
Section 1
Pore Pressure and Reservoir
Compartmentalization
Section 2
Development of Overpressure
Section 3
Pore Pressure Prediction
Section 4
Geologic Factors Contributing to the
Macondo Well Blowout
18
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Mechanisms of Overpressure Generation
19
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
N-S Cross Section
l2 ( f + r) l 2
= =
k
Equation 2.2 pg. 41
21
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Diffusion Times
22
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Pore Pressure in Wells in a Field in the
Northern North Sea
40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54
2600 2600
A
Pore Pressure in Wells in a Field
in the Northern North Sea B
C
D
2800 2800
E
F
G
H
I
3000 J 3000
K
L
3200 3200
Hydrostatic
Pore Pressure
3400 Gradient 3400
3600 3600
40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54
Pore Pressure (MPa)
23
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Variations of Pressure in South Eugene Island
Section 1
Pore Pressure and Reservoir
Compartmentalization
Section 2
Development of Overpressure
Section 3
Pore Pressure Prediction
Section 4
Geologic Factors Contributing to the
Macondo Well Blowout
26
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Shale Porosity as a Function of v
28
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Estimating Pore Pressure 1
x
1- v
P = Sv - ( Sv - P
p
sh
p )
hydr o
1- n
where,
x is an empirical coefficient
v = porosity from shale travel time
n = porosity from normal trend
M. Traugott (unpublished)
30
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Empirical Method for Determining Shale Pore Pressure
from Resistivity Data
hydr o 1.2
Sv Sv Pp Ro
Ppsh = z
z z z Rn
where,
Ro = observed shale resistivity
Rn = expected resistivity from
normal trend
M. Traugott (unpublished)
31
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Estimating Pore Pressure 2
Estimating Pore Pressure from Sonic-Derived Vint
B
vi = 5000 + A (after Bowers, 1994)
where vi is the interval velocity
and is effective stress
= 0.93 z - Pp
(0.93 psi/ft is the overburden gradient)
1
v - 5000 B
Pp = 0.93z -
A
where A =19.8 and B = 0.62
32
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
33
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
34
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
35
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Potential Problem with Using Compaction Trends
16.7
Vp = 5.77 6.94 1.73 C + 0.446( e )
38
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Outline
Section 1
Pore Pressure and Reservoir
Compartmentalization
Section 2
Development of Overpressure
Section 3
Pore Pressure Prediction
Section 4
Geologic Factors Contributing to the
Macondo Well Blowout
39
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Geologic Factors (Pore Pressure and Stress) Contributing to the
Macondo Well and Deepwater Horizon Accident
40
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
41
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Drilling in the
Presence of
Increasing Pore
Pressure Frac Gradient
Pore Pressure
Fig. 10.3a
42
42
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Essentially no Window for safe cementing
44
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Essentially no Window for safe cementing
45
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Essentially no Window for safe cementing
46
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu