Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:30:43.858Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Geoperspective Oil and Gas in the Netherlands – Is there a future?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2014

R. Herber  and
J. de Jager
R. Herber*
Affiliation:
Energy & Sustainability Research Centre Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, 9747AG Groningen, the Netherlands
J. de Jager
Affiliation:
Shell International Ltd, Kessler Park 1, 2288 GS Rijswijk, the Netherlands. Present address: Nassaukade 42, 2281 XD Rijswijk, the Netherlands
*
Email: [email protected].
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The impact of oil and, in particular, gas fields discovered in the Dutch subsurface has been very significant. However, 50 years after the discovery of the giant Groningen gas field the Netherlands has become very mature for exploration of oil and gas, and the gas volume left to be discovered in conventional traps is insignificant compared to what has been found already. The total portfolio of conventional prospects held by the industry contains several 100s of billions of cubic metres (bcm), as reported by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, but many of these prospects are unattractive to drill because of their small size or other geologically unfavourable aspects. Hence, for planning purposes of future national gas production the risk should be taken into account that the size of the conventional portfolio is overestimated. The major E&P companies have reduced their exploration efforts and the number of wells drilled as well as the size and total volume of discovered gas reserves has seen a steady decline over the last 10 years. Some surprises may still be in store and can occasionally add a welcome addition of gas. But the follow-up potential of new play and trapping concepts has been disappointing for many years now, and it is concluded that this is unlikely to be different in the future. Remaining conventional discoveries will mainly be in small near-field targets that as a result of technological advances made in the last few decades can be drilled with high confidence, despite their small volumes.

This leaves the so-called unconventional gas (UG) resources for a real and significant increase in the exploration potential of the Netherlands. UG resources occur outside conventional structural or stratigraphic traps in tight (low permeability) rocks and are of regional or sub-regional extent, without well-defined hydrocarbon-water contacts. The potential for Basin Centred Gas, Shale Gas and Coal Bed Methane is reviewed. As, according to present-day technology, development of UG requires very dense drilling at low costs with well spacing of a few 100s of metres, only the onshore potential can be commercial, even in the longer term.

Recent geological uplift is a characteristic for all North American commercial UG developments. Uplift helps bringing the resources close to the surface and facilitates development of fractures, which are essential for achieving commercial flow rates. This significantly reduces the area where commercial UG resources may occur in the Netherlands. In addition, sweet spots, where commercial flow rates and ultimate recovery per well can be achieved, represent only a fraction of the total ‘play area’. The UG plays in the Dutch subsurface remain to be proven, and there is still a significant technical risk associated with these plays, on top of the commercial risk. Therefore, despite potentially enormous in-place gas volumes in these unconventional plays, recoverable volumes are much less. If UG resources can be proven and are commercially developable, their cumulative volume potential is estimated by us in the order of a few tens to one or two hundreds bcm of recoverable gas at best. Finally, as UG resources produce at very low rates and require large numbers of wells to develop, the environmental impact in a densely populated country like the Netherlands is enormous, and needs to be seriously considered, already in the exploration phase.

In a mature area like the Netherlands, industry focus should be on technology development to reduce risk, increase recovery, reduce cost and minimize surface impact. Cooperation between Operators to build multi-well campaigns is therefore strongly recommended to reduce mobilisation cost. In addition, government incentives should be targeted at the development phase, in order to increase economic attractiveness for difficult reservoirs, both conventional and unconventional. In this way State and industry will both be able to maximize their returns on the remaining potential for gas and oil in the next two to three decades.

Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 89 , Issue 2 , September 2010 , pp. 91 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2013

References

Ayers, W.B. Jr, 2002. Coalbed gas systems, resources and production and a review of contrasting cases from San Juan and Powder basins. AAPG Bulletin 86: 1853–1890.Google Scholar
Berman, A., 2009. Lessons learnt from the Barnett Shale. World oil Magazine, 08 2009.Google Scholar
Biteau, J.J., 2009. 45 years of Total. Symposium Fifty years of petroleum exploration in the Netherlands after the Groningen discovery – 15 and 16 January 2009. Available from: www.nlog.nl/nl/pubs/reports/presentations.html Google Scholar
Bokhoven, J.D., 2009, Best access to Dutch gas, EBN presentation at the Deloitte seminar, Amsterdam 14th May 2009. Accessible through: www.ebn.nl/presentaties.php?29.Google Scholar
Bruehl, M., Spaargaren, B., Van Spaendonck, R. & Van Lingen, W., 2008. Highgrading the prospect portfolio with latest technology – Impact on southern Permian Basin. Paper presented at the 2008 EAGE Annual Conference, Rome.Google Scholar
Chakhmakhchev, A., 2007. Worldwide coalbed methane overview. SPE 106850. Paper presented at the 2007 SPE hydrocarbon economics and evaluation symposium, 1-3 04, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
Curtis, J.B., 2002. Fractured shale-gas systems. AAPG Bulletin 86: 1921–1938 Google Scholar
Curtis, J.B., 2009. The Contribution of Shale Gas to Future U.S. Production: A View of the Resource Base. Search and Discovery Article #110082.Google Scholar
De Jager, J., Doyle, M.A., Grantham, P.J., & Mabillard, J.E., 1996. Hydrocarbon habitat of the West Netherlands Basin. In: Rondeel, H.E., Batjes, D.A.J & Nieuwenhuijs, W.H. (eds): Geology of gas and oil under the Netherlands. Kluwer (Dordrecht): 191–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Jager, J., 2003. Inverted basins in the Netherlands, similarities and differences. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 82: 339–349 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Jager, J & Geluk, M.C., 2007. Petroleum Geology. In: Wong, Th.E., Batjes, D.A.J. & De Jager, J. (eds): Geology of the Netherlands. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences: 241–264.Google Scholar
De Wijn, B., 2009. Wintershall exploration and production history. Symposium Fifty years of petroleum exploration in the Netherlands after the Groningen discovery, 15 and 16 January 2009. Available from: www.nlog.nl/nl/pubs/reports/presentations.html Google Scholar
Energie Beheer Nederland (EBN), 2009. Focus on Dutch Gas, EBN Jaarverslag 2009.Google Scholar
Hood, K.C. & Yurewicz, D.A., 2008. Assessing the Mesaverde basin-centered gas play, Piceance Basin, Colorado. In: Cumella, S. P., Shanley, K. W. and Camp, W. K. (eds): Understanding, exploring, and developing tight-gas sands, 2005, Vail Hedberg Conference: AAPG Hedberg Series 3: 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huffman, A.C. Jr, 2003. San Juan Basin Province. Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources Open-file report 464, 33 p., 1 appendix. Available from: certmapper.cr.usgs.gov/data/noga95/prov22/text/prov22/pdf Google Scholar
Jarvie, D.M. Hill, R.J., Ruble, T.E. & Pollastro, R.M., 2007. Unconventional shale-gas systems: the Mississippian Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale-gas assessment. AAPG Bulletin 91: 475–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kombrink, H., 2008. The Carboniferous of the Netherlands and surrounding areas; a basin analysis, Geologica Ultraiectina 294, 184 pp.Google Scholar
Law, B.E., 2002. Basin-centered gas systems: AAPG Bulletin 86: 1891–1919.Google Scholar
Law, B.E., 1984. Relationships of source-rock, thermal maturity, and overpressuring to gas generation and occurrence in low-permeability Upper Cretaceous and lower Tertiary rocks, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah. In: Woodward, J., Meissner, F. F. & Clayton, J. L. (eds): Hydrocarbon source rocks of the greater Rocky Mountain region: 1984 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists Guidebook: 469–490.Google Scholar
Masters, J.A., 1984. Lower Cretaceous oil and gas in Western Canada. In: Masters, J.A. (ed.): Elmworth: Case Study of a Deep Basin Gas Field. AAPG Memoir 38: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, J A., 1979. Deep basin gas trap, Western Canada. AAPG Bull 63: 152–181.Google Scholar
Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2009. Delfstoffen en aardwarmte in Nederland – Jaarverslag 2008, 145 pp. (available from: www.nlog.nl/nl/pubs/publications.html).Google Scholar
Muntendam-Bos, A.G., Wassing, B.B.T, Ter Heege, J.H., Van Bergen, F., Schavemaker, Y.A., Van Gessel, S.F., De Jong, M.L., Nelskamp Dipl.- Geow, S., Van Thienen-Visser, K., Guasti, E., Van den Belt, F.J.G & Marges, V.C., 2009. Inventory non-conventional gas, TNO report: TNO-034-UT-2009-00774/B (Utrecht), 188 pp. Available from: www.ebn.nl/files/ebn_report_final_090909.pdf Google Scholar
Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij (NAM), 2006. Milieu Effect Rapport Herontwikkeling olieveld Schoonebeek.Google Scholar
Pollastro, R.M., Hill, R.J., Jarvie, D.M. & Henry, M.E., 2003. Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch-Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas. Southwest Section of AAPG Transactions, 18 pp. CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
Shanley, K.W., Cluff, R.M. & Robinson, J.W., 2004. Factors controlling prolific gas production from low-permeability sandstone reservoirs: implications for resource assessment, prospect development and risk analysis. AAPG Bulletin 88: 1083–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Geological Survey, 2002. Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources of the San Juan Basin Province of New Mexico and Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 147–02.Google Scholar
Van Balen, R.T., Van Bergen, F., De Leeuw, C.S., Pagnier, H.J.M, Simmelink, H.J., Van Wees, J.D.A.M. & Verweij, J.M., 2000. Modelling the hydrocarbon generation and migration in the West Netherlands Basin, the Netherlands. Geologie en Mijnbouw / Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 79: 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Bergen, F., Pagnier, H.J.M, David, P. & Krooss, B.M., 2000. Inventory of potential volumes of methane extraction and carbon-dioxide storage in coallayers in the Dutch subsurface. TNO contribution to the ‘Feasibility study of combined Coalbed Methane production and Carbon Dioxide storage in the Netherlands’. TNO report NITG-00-272-B (Utrecht), 87 pp.Google Scholar
Van Bergen, F., Pagnier, H.J.M & Van Tongeren, P.C.H, 2007. Peat, coal and coalbed methane. In: Wong, Th.E., Batjes, D.A.J & De Jager, J. (eds): Geology of the Netherlands. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences: 265–282.Google Scholar
Van Buggenum, J.M. & Den Hartog Jager, J. & Silesian, D.G., 2007. In: Wong, Th.E., Batjes, D.A.J & De Jager, J. (eds): Geology of the Netherlands. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (Amsterdam): 43–62.Google Scholar
Van der Kolk, C.M., Guest, W.S. & Potters, J.H.H.M., 2001. The 3D shear experiment over the Natih field in Oman: the effect of fracture-filling fluids on shear propagation. Geophysical Prospecting, 49: 179–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Molen, A.S., 2004. Sedimentary development, seismic stratigraphy and burial compaction of the Chalk Group in the Netherlands North Sea area. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht. In: Geologica Ultrajectina, Mededelingen van de Faculteit Geowetenschappen Universiteit Utrecht 248, 175 pp.Google Scholar
Wolf, K.-H.A.A., Westerink, H.H.E, Van Delft, P.T.P & Bruining, J., 1997. Coalbed Methane Production in the Netherlands: An Inventory. Delft University of Technology, TUD-code: TA/PF/97.004, 73 pp.Google Scholar
Wong, Th.E., 2007. Jurassic. In: Wong, Th.E., Batjes, D.A.J & De Jager, J. (eds): Geology of the Netherlands. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (Amsterdam): 107–125.Google Scholar
Yurewicz, D.A., Bohacs, K.M., Kendall, J., Klimentidis, R.E., Kronmueller, K., Meurer, M.E., Ryan, T.C. & Yeakel, J.D., 2008. Controls on gas and water distribution, Mesaverde basin-centered gas play, Piceance Basin, Colorado. In: Cumella, S.P., Shanley, K.W. & Camp, W.K. (eds): Understanding, exploring, and developing tight-gas sands, 2005. Vail Hedberg Conference: AAPG Hedberg Series 3: 105–136.Google Scholar