American Oil and Gas Reporter - November 2019 - 65

Williston Basin that is still being delineated in the Bakken and
Three Forks. For this reason, we could not embark on a fullscale development program that would have supported extending
the service from the local electric co-op. Our initial phase of
capital investment was broadly dispersed across our acreage
position with one- and two-well pads.
Gas-to-power for these initial projects represented a much
lower capital investment than extending grid power with none
of the logistical complications. We were able to maintain a
flexible drilling schedule and avoid the commitment of time
and capital to fixed infrastructure projects. We expect the next
phase of this project-development drilling-to support that higher
level of commitment.
Meanwhile, we have found gas-to-power technology to have
improved substantially over the years in its performance,
flexibility and reliability. In fact, it has been an enabling solution
in that there was no capital investment and the operating costs
are on par with utility service in other parts of our acreage. We
are able to scale the on-site generation to the number of wells,
water disposal operations, and even satellite well pads with a
pseudo-distribution system.
Wet gas is a low-value component of our production stream,
so the trade-off in reduced sales volumes is a minor consideration
at this stage. Our operations team does prefer the utility over
gas-to-power when available. Generators must be sized and
configured to be compatible with more complicated loads such
as multiple electric submersible pumps on a pad. This is the
only idiosyncrasy that we have encountered.

How "gassy" is your production stream? What
market options are available to NP Resources for
its produced gas? Given those options, why did you elect to
install on-site power units? How many units have you installed? Any fuel quality issues in burning field gas in your
operations? What is the average uptime for the units?
MILLER: The gas-to-liquids ratio of a Bakken producing
well in our area is about 1,000 scf/bbl, so gas represents a small

component of the revenue stream. Our acreage position is 98%
covered by gas gathering, while electric utilities only cover
45% of our acreage. For those reasons, coupled with our initial
phase of dispersed delineation, gas-to-power was the logical
solution.
The technology we have chosen for our operations is microturbines from Flex Leasing Power and Service. These
packages are capable of using sweet or sour lease gas straight
from the separator with no conditioning other than liquid
scrubbers. They are very low maintenance compared with reciprocating engines and thus far have had >90% uptime.
Downtime from these units is related to the complexity of the
load, such as multiple ESPs. Our key learning with these units
has been that it is important to properly design and configure
the power supply to the load.

Again from a management perspective, how
do you see on-site gas-to-power applications
evolving? Generally speaking, how will industry
trends such as longer laterals with higher initial production volumes influence electricity usage per pad?
How will the ongoing adoption of digital solutions
and "smart" production technology impact power
requirements?
MILLER: I expect that the increasing application of ESP
artificial lift technology will favor gas-to-power in the first
phases of field development. Grid power is still a superior
source of energy (as long as it is natural gas-fired), but the large
capital and time commitment for a grid make gas-to-power a
sensible transition component of facilities planning.
I also think that initial production volumes with high
decline rates also favor on-site gas-to-power. It doesn't make
sense to size permanent facilities to flush production volumes
and then have them 100% overcapacity in a year or two. The
technology of today's turbine generators make them a natural
fit with the technologies of advanced artificial lift, operations
surveillance and tracking emissions.
❒

Clayton L. Miller is president and chief operating officer of NP Resources, an independent
oil and gas company with operations in the Williston Basin of North Dakota. He has more
than 30 years of experience in the domestic and international oil and gas industry. Before
joining NP Resources, Miller was executive vice president and COO at Cornerstone Natural Resources, a private equity-backed operator in the North Dakota Bakken/Three Forks play. Prior
to working in the Bakken/Three Forks, Miller's career spanned domestic and international operations with Chevron and Saudi Aramco, independent operators in the D-J Basin of Colorado,
and natural gas storage in Australia. He holds bachelor's and master's degrees in petroleum
engineering from Texas A&M University.
President and Chief Operating Officer | NP Resources
Operational focus: Williston Basin
Headquarters: Denver

CLAYTON L. MILLER
NOVEMBER 2019 65

American Oil and Gas Reporter - November 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - November 2019