LNG and LIN can be Alternative Fracturing Methods for Shale Gas

What do you think? Would this be an economic alternative to fracking with water and environmentally objectionable chemicals if congress should decide to give EPA oversight?

http://www.glgroup.com/News/LNG-and-LIN-can-be-Alternative-Fracturi...

...the oil & gas industry has more advanced techniques in their pocket and can outplay the EPA with clean cryogenic fracturing. LIN (liquid nitrogen) has ben used successfully in Texas EOR projects by Big Three, now part of L'Air Liquide. Nitrogen comes from the atmosphere and would return to the atmosphere without any environmental issues as the gas processing and industrial gas companies are experts in separating N2 from NG.

A more interesting and probably commercially attractive solution would be fracturing with LNG derived from the field shale gas. Cryogenic fracturing would tend to decrease the flow rates of the LNG injections when compared with water fracking due to the significant cryogenic fracking component. With LNG fracking there would be no environmental issues since nearly all the gas would end up in the pipeline. Considering overall investment costs, it may also be feasible - depending on the world LNG market- to truck imported LNG on the Gulf Coast and or the East Coast to the shale plays and inject the LNG for cryogenic fracturing whereby the LNG will in the end be vaporized and put in the pipeline as NG...

Views: 635

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by sesport on December 20, 2009 at 6:23
This is where it started getting sidetracked ...

Reply by jffree1 13 hours ago
I don't think it's the water that is at issue, Mac. It's the additives, that help the water carry the proppant, that are causing all the hissy fits.

After which several more comments followed regarding the additives. Then someone asked for info to better understand, to which an answer and a source were provided.

Not inciting, just trying to help someone that seems interested and/or concerned understand.

BACK TO THE TOPIC. 80)
Permalink Reply by sesport on December 20, 2009 at 6:47
Jay - Your sarcastic remarks are most unbecoming, and unprofessional, IMO.

I SAID I WASN'T LOOKING TO INCITE. I thought jffree posted an interesting discussion, thought it might be something new in the R&D department that, as she suggested, might prove to be economical. Although, I wondered about using LNG because of the refrigeration temp required to keep it liquid and, as you have stated numerous times, it's more than a little hot down there. It was my thought that the LNG would have to remain cooled until it was pumped down the the HS depths, where it could be heated to expand and frac the formations (and I DO know how deep they are, thank you).

But I see nothing wrong with providing someone answers to questions they ask as it might help them understand.

80)
Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 20, 2009 at 6:39
sesport, I did say it as clarification only. I just don't want this to go off into another discussion about the what the environmental issues are because they've already been discussed on this site at great length.
I was more interested in whether, as discussed by the author of the article, industry has an alternative route to achieve the same results in a well using LNG/LIN instead of water and the additives commonly used.
Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 20, 2009 at 6:46
Sorry, Jay... I decided "Loophole" might open yet another can of worms, LOL. I took out that whole EPA reference to head that off.
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 20, 2009 at 14:59
Jffree, this is beyond my expertise but information indicates LIN and liquid CO2 based well frac'ing is only viable for shallow, low-energy formations. I assume the same would be true for LNG based well frac'ing operations. From this I would same none of those alternative frac fluids would be applicable for Cotton Valley Sand or Haynesville/Bossier Shale wells and probably not workable for James Lime wells either.
Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 20, 2009 at 16:01
Thank you, Les B. So, the author of the article was sharing his opinion which may not be supported by either science or engineering? That was my biggest question... just because the process works in a softer or more porous type of rock at lower pressures wouldn't guarantee that it would work in shale?
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 20, 2009 at 16:15
Jffree, the author appears to have experience with various cryogenic gases but he may have over-stepped when implying the "oil & gas industry has more advanced techniques in their pocket" that can be applied to all shale formations.
Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 20, 2009 at 16:48
LOL, ok. You are SO tactful, Les. Thanks.

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Top Content 

1 Looking Back At The Haynesville Shale - A Retrospective

Looking Back At The Haynesville Shale - A Retrospective
2 Pending Public Oil and Gas Hearings

Pending Public Oil and Gas Hearings
3 Arkansas Smackover Lithium Play

Arkansas Smackover Lithium Play
4 Aethon looks for Buyers of its Haynesville Assets

Aethon looks for Buyers of its Haynesville Assets
5 Notice Emails Are Back! Please review how they work.

Notice Emails Are Back! Please review how they work.
6 Comstock October Presentation

Comstock October Presentation
7 Haynesville Has 12.5 Years of Sub-$3 NatGas Inventory - Enverus

Haynesville Has 12.5 Years of Sub-$3 NatGas Inventory - Enverus

Blog Posts

The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling

Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…

Continue

Posted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service