The Source - Winter 2008 - (Page 20)

 Figure 1 Soil 1400 GAS HYDRATES, from page 19 Peat Other 500 67 Land Biota Dissolved 830 Organic Matter in Water 980 Recoverable and Nonrecoverable Fossil Fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) 5,000 Gas Hydrates (onshore and offshore) 10,000 Units = 10 g carbon 15 Thermal stimulation (applying heat to a reservoir) certainly will result in dissociation of gas hydrate, but would requireadditional technology that is still at an early stage, along with the added cost of heat generation. Most current scenarios for hydrate production primarily use depressurization, with limited amounts of thermal stimulation. Gas hydrate programs outside of the United States are primarily government efforts so that gas production would be largely sheltered from the global natural gas market. In contrast, the U.S. program is intended to assess the size of the domestic hydrate resource and demonstrate commercial potential. Once that is accomplished, hydrate efforts would be in corporate hands and in competition with other energy sources. As a result, the U.S. program will have to address the following critical economic issues to gain industry investment: Flow rates. Computer models based on limited testing in the Arctic suggest commercially viable flow rates are achievable, but all testing to date has been constrained by the design of the tests. A 2007 test in the Canadian Arctic had a maximum flow rate of 280 MCF per day, and models indicate that much higher rates would be possible, but no hydrate test has actually been tested at commercial rates. Industry will need confirmation that commercial rates are achievable • • before making the significant capital investments required for resource development. Operating expense. The use of depressurization and/or thermal stimulation will entail costs that will erode project economics. In addition, hydrate wells likely will require extra facilities that are not needed for conventional gas wells. The remote location of most hydrate deposits also increases operating expense. Water production during the early phases of production results in both disposal expenses and a lag in the generation of revenues. Models developed from the brief Canadian tests indicate that these Figure 2 Arctic sandstone under existing infrastructure (10s of tcf in place) Arctic sandstones away from infrastructure (100s of tcf in place) Deepwater sandstones (1,000s of tcf in place) Deepwater permeable, non-sandstones (unknown) Massive surficial and nodular (unknown) Marine reservoirs with limited permeability (100,000s of tcf in place) Proven (200 tcf) Growth & Undisc. (1500 tcf) Unrecoverable (unknown) Gas Hydrate Other Gas Resources 20 THE SOURCE | THE VOICE AND CHOICE OF PUBLIC GAS http://www.footagetools.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of The Source - Winter 2008

The Source - Winter 2008 Contents First Person The Bridge to Renewable Energy Future Natural Gas: The Comfortable, Responsible Energy Solution Gas Hydrates: Poised for the Next Phase The Role of Natural Gas in a Carbon-Constrained World Natural Gas Prepays Taking the Leap to Natural Gas Vehicles The Pipeline Legislative Outlook Advertiser's Index Advertiser.com At Last

The Source - Winter 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.