Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems

Fred P. Wang and Julia F. W. Gale

Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences,
The University of Texas at Austin, University Station, Box X, Austin, Texas 78713

ABSTRACT

In North America alone, more than 70 shale-gas plays have been identified. With
this rapid increase in shale-gas production, shale-gas systems have presented many new
challenges to production technology and the basic understanding of shale-gas reservoirs.
Because gas shales are complicated and highly variable, the objective of this study was to
indentify key controls on shale-gas productivity and to develop criteria for screening
shale-gas systems.
Gas shales, including biogenic and thermogenic systems whose depths range from
several hundred feet to >18,000 ft, are a complex function of total organic content
(TOC), thermal maturation, gas content, thickness, and brittleness. Because fixed-value
criteria cannot adequately be applied to all shale-gas systems for screening, a set of
depth-dependent screening criteria for shale-gas systems was developed that can be ap-
plied to biogenic and thermogenic systems, as well as regional plays and local lease areas.
Gas content, adsorption, and shale thickness are the depth-dependent parameters for
this screening of shale-gas systems.
Brittleness, a measure of the ability of rock to fracture, is a complex function of
lithology, mineral composition, TOC, effective stress, reservoir temperature, diagenesis,
thermal maturity, porosity, and type of fluid. The enormously successful performance
of Barnett Shale in the Fort Worth Basin, Texas, stems from its favorable tectonic set-
ting and burial history, which resulted in a double enhancement of brittleness. Its early
deep burial made the Barnett thermally mature and brittle. Subsequent exhumation
and uplift made it cheap to drill and easy to frac through enhancement of brittleness by
reduction of effective stress.

INTRODUCTION

More than 16,000 Tcf of shale-gas resources exist worldwide (Jenkins and Boyer, 2008), >30 percent of
which are in North America, with more than 70 shale-gas plays identified (Fig. 1) showing major shale-gas
plays). These resources are in black shales, Cretaceous to Cambrian in age, although predominantly in Devonian
and Mississippian rocks. In the U.S., >40,000 shale-gas wells have been drilled (modified after Frantz and
Jochen, 2005), and >11 Tcf of shale gas has been produced, with >2.5, >3.0 (Salamy et al., 1987), and >5.1 Tcf
(modified after Railroad Commission of Texas, 2009) coming from the Antrim Shale in the Michigan Basin, De-
vonian Shale in the Appalachian Basin, and Barnett Shale in the Fort Worth Basin (FWB), Texas, respectively.
The Antrim Shale, discovered in 1936, has been developed extensively since 1987, with >9000 wells com-
pleted. The Barnett Shale, discovered by Mitchell Energy Inc. in 1981, has recently been the most active gas play
in the U.S., with >10,000 wells completed (Fig. 2). Drilling in the Barnett increased from 185 wells in 2000 to
>1800 wells in 2008; horizontal-well drilling increased from the single digits in 2001 to >1400 in 2008.

Wang, F. P., and J. F. W. Gale, 2009, Screening criteria for shale-gas systems: Gulf Coast Association of Geological
Societies Transactions, v. 59, p. 779-793.

779

Copyright © 2009, The Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies. All Rights Reserved.
 Wang and Gale

Figure 1. Gas-shale plays in USA and Canada (modified after Frantz and Jochen, 2005; Hussey, 2007;
Dawson, 2008).

One of the endeavors in shale gas study has been to find the key factors controlling shale-gas production
(Curtis, 2002; Montgomery et al., 2005; Russum, 2005; Boyer et al., 2006; Walser and Pursell, 2007; Wiley et
al., 2007; Bustin et al., 2008; Curtis et al., 2008; Wang, 2008). All organic-rich and silica-rich shales having total
organic contents (TOC) of >2.0%, gas contents of 40 scf/ton, and thicknesses of >30 ft (Russum, 2005) are poten-
tial candidates for shale-gas production. Wiley et al. (2007) found that good production reservoirs are generally
greater than 100 ft in thickness, Ro from 1.1 to 1.4, >3.0 wt% in TOC, <40% of clay content and high brittleness.
In North America alone, more than 70 shale-gas plays have been identified. With the rapid increase in shale-gas
production, shale-gas systems have presented many new challenges in production technology and in understand-
ing pore network and fluid flow in gas shales. Objectives of this paper are to examine key geological and engi-
neering controls on shale-gas production and to develop criteria for screening shale-gas plays.

KEY CONTROLS ON SHALE-GAS PRODUCTION

Success of Barnett Shale production can be attributed to internal and external factors. Internal factors related
to shale-gas quality include gas content, thickness and size, brittleness, pore network, and reservoir quality
whereas external factors include evolution of production technology and market conditions (Fig. 3).

Pore Network and Petrophysical Property

Four types of porous media are present in productive shale-gas systems: nonorganic matrix, organic matrix,
natural fractures, and hydraulic fractures. Organic-matter pores, ranging from 5 to 800 nm (Reed et al., 2008),
are especially important because they can adsorb gases, as well as store free gases. Gas content and adsorption

780
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems

(A) (B)

(C)

Figure 2. Status of the Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, Texas, December 2008. (A) Location map,
(B) drilling activity, and (C) annual production.

data from the Barnett Shale also suggest that a significant amount of free gas is stored in organic matter (Wang et
al., 2009). The estimated porosity in organic matter can be two to five times higher than that in the nonorganic
matrix. Organic matter is oil-wet, and associated pores work as nanofilters for hydrocarbon flow, suggesting that
fluid flow in organic matter is predominantly single phase (Wang et al., 2009)
When pore sizes are close to the mean free path of gas molecules at reservoir conditions, a nonviscous slip-
page effect (Klinkenberg, 1941) can increase gas permeability. Data from Soeder (1988) showed that the slip-
page effect can increase shale permeability by ~30% at producing pressures of >500 psi and by ~300% at pres-
sure <500 psi. Owing to high porosity, predominantly single-phase flow, the gas-slippage effect, and the cushion
of adsorbed gas, gas permeability in organic matter is significantly higher than that in the nonorganic matrix, thus
significantly enhancing gas permeability in gas shale (Wang, 2008). In addition, the pore network in organic
matter, estimated to be at least three times larger than that in the fracture network, could be the hidden pathway to
high gas production in gas shale when connected with natural and hydraulic fractures (Wang, 2008; Wang et al.,
2009).

Gas Content

In contrast to conventional gas, a significant amount of shale gas is adsorbed on organic matter. Gas content
has been commonly referred to as the sum of free gas and adsorbed gas. Gas content is a complex function of
TOC, vitrinite reflectance (Ro), porosity, pressure, and temperature. Gas has been produced from organic-rich
shales with a TOC of from 2 to 25% and Ro from 0.4 to 5%. TOC and porosity normally decrease with depth,
whereas Ro, temperature, and pressure increase.

781
 Wang and Gale

Figure 3. Key controls on shale-gas

production.

Brittleness

Brittleness of rock—a measurement of the ability of rock to crack or fracture (fracability)—is a complex
function of rock strength, lithology, texture, effective stress, temperature, fluid type (Handin and Hagar, 1957,
1958; Handin et al., 1963; Davis and Reynolds, 1996), diagenesis, and TOC (Wells, 2004). Natural fractures and
other planes of weakness can also affect mechanical behavior (Zhang et al. 2007; Gale et al., 2007). The effect of
depth on brittleness is compounded and can work in both decreasing and increasing brittleness because pressures,
temperature, diagenesis, and TOC are functions of depth. An increase in depth generally increases pressure and
temperature, and hence the degree of diagenesis and tends to reduce TOC. Wells (2004) pointed out that
diagenetic alteration toward silica enrichment due to the smectite to illite transition enhances brittleness, and
lower TOC typically increases brittleness of the shale. But for a rock sample of specific composition, increases
in pressure and temperature decrease brittleness.
The exceedingly successful performance of the Barnett Shale in the FWB stems from its favorable tectonic
setting and burial history (Fig. 4), which resulted in double enhancements in brittleness. Its early deep burial
made the Barnett Shale thermally mature and brittle, and subsequent uplift and exhumation made it cheap to drill
and easy to frac by enhancing in brittleness through reduction of effective stress.

Reservoir Quality

Reservoir quality is controlled by variability in geology, geomechanics, geophysics and petrophysics. This
variability can cause stress anisotropy and changes in brittleness, which in turn determines size, distribution, and
success of hydraulic fracturing operations.

Major Production Technology

Major technologies developed for shale-gas production have been the horizontal well, frac technology
(Grieser et al., 2003: East et al., 2004; Ketter et al., 2006; Grieser et al., 2006; Seale, 2006; Wiley et al., 2007),
microseismics (Fisher et al., 2002; Mayerhofer, 2006), and downspacing (EOG, 2008; XTO, 2008). Frac tech-

782
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems

Figure 4. Burial history of Tarrant County, Fort Worth Basin (from Ewing, 2007, reproduced with
permission of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists).

nology includes water frac, refrac, multistage frac, fiber frac (the diversion technique, (Powell et al., 2007), and
high temperature–high pressure proppant technology (Ghiselin, 2009). Among them, horizontal well and multi-
stage water frac are the most important technologies for shale-gas production. In 2008, horizontal drilling in-
creased from single digits, which it had been in 2001, to >2000, commonly with lengths of 3000 to 6000 ft and 4
to 15 stages of frac stimulation (Seale, 2006). A multistage water frac significantly increases total stimulated
reservoir volume because a smaller volume is being fractured at each stage, thus reducing the effect of reservoir
heterogeneity.
Water fracs have been applied widely to hard, low-permeability, naturally fractured rocks because they are
brittle. The water frac—also called low-sand frac (LSF), slick-water frac (SWF), low-proppant frac (LPF), and
treated water frac—is the fracturing technique that uses a high rate, a large volume, and low sand concentration
fracturing at a low viscosity (10 cP or less), using water-based fracturing fluids (Grieser et al., 2003: Ketter et al.,
2006; Grieser et al., 2006). Benefits of a water frac include gel-damage and proppant-banking avoidance, fast
cleanup, increase in fracture contact volume, and cost reduction.
Meanwhile, microseismic technology makes monitoring frac jobs truly three dimensional, thus optimizing
and expediting development of modern frac technology (Fisher et al., 2002; Mayerhofer et al., 2006). In gas pro-
duction, well spacing generally decreases with reservoir permeability, well spacing of 10 to 20 ac is commonly
being used in tight-sandstone gas fields. In extremely low permeability gas shales (10 to 100 times lower perme-
ability than that in tight-gas reservoirs), well spacing of gas shales has been reduced from 80 to 20 ac to increase
recovery efficiency. Minimum well spacing between adjacent horizontal wells can be <400 ft (EOG, 2008; XTO,
2008).

SCREENING CRITERIA FOR SHALE-GAS PLAYS

More than 70 shale-gas plays have been identified in the U.S. and Canada. They have been produced from
biogenic and thermogenic systems and from reservoirs 200 to 18,000 ft deep (Fig. 5), with wide ranges in TOC,

783
 Wang and Gale

Figure 5. Depth range of shale-gas plays (modified after Curtis et al., 2008).

Ro, and thickness (Table 1). Development of a set of criteria for screening and ranking shale-gas systems is criti-
cal, and a preliminary list of screening items should include:
• TOC,
• Ro,
• gas content (free and adsorption gases),
• tectonic setting and burial history,
• type of pressure system,
• temperature,
• porosity,
• permeability,
• shale thickness,
• depth,
• mineral composition (quartz content …),
• brittleness, and
• frac barriers and hazards.

Tectonic Setting and Burial History

Tectonic setting and burial history must be known so that Ro and diagenesis of shale-gas systems can be
better understood. Many deep shale-gas systems occur along major thrust belts in deep basins that form ahead of
an advancing orogenic front. But others, such as the Williston Basin, are intracratonic. Details of basin setting
will control basin contents and subsequent burial history. Tectonism after shale deposition can lead to enhance-
ment of Ro, for example, through thrust-related burial, although the deeper, more complicated structure can be
more difficult to exploit.

784
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems

Table 1. Data range of shale-gas plays.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Datum Range
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Type Biogenic and thermogenic
Depth (ft) 400-18,000
Pressure (psi) 80-12,000
Pressure gradient (psi / 100 ft) 0.2-0.95
Temperature (°F) 85-380
Thickness (ft) 20-2000
Porosity (%) 2-15
TOC (%) 2-25
Ro (%) 0.4-4
Gas content (scf/ton) 15-400
Quartz content (%) TBD*-80
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
*TBD, to be determined.

Type of Pressure System

Shale systems can be geo-, normal-, and underpressured, and gas has been produced from under-, normal-,
and overpressured shale systems (Table 2). Barnett and Baxter Shales are normal to slightly geopressured
(Bowker, 2007), whereas the Haynesville Shale in Louisiana and the Pearsall Shale in Maverick County, Texas,
have pressure gradients as high as 0.9 psi/ft (Chesapeake Energy, Inc., 2008). The Lewis Shale in the San Juan
Basin, New Mexico, and the Ohio Shale in the Appalachian Basin are underpressured (Curtis, 2002). The Mar-
cellus Shale in Pennsylvania and West Virginia varies from underpressured to overpressured (0.7 psi/ft)
(Chesapeake Energy, Inc., 2008). The benefit of geopressured shales is that more gas can be stored, and they are
easy to frac because of reduction in effective stress.

Brittleness Index

Brittleness index, one the important parameters for screening shale-gas systems, is a function of mineral
composition and diagenesis. For example, the Barnett Shale in the FWB has 45% quartz (Bowker, 2007), and the
Muskwa Shale, Horn River, British Columbia, Canada, has 13.1 to 85.8% quartz (Ross and Bustin, 2008).
Jarvie et al. (2007) defined brittleness as
Q
BI = (1)
(Q + C + Cl )
where
BI: brittleness index,
Q: quartz,
C: carbonate, and
Cl: clay.
Presence of dolomite tends to increase brittleness of shale (dolostone is more brittle than limestone), and
organic matter tends to increase ductility (Wells, 2004). Equation 1 can be modified to
Q + Dol
BI = (2)
(Q + Dol + Lm + Cl + TOC )
where
Dol: dolomite,

785
 Wang and Gale

Table 2. Pressure systems in gas shales.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Play Pressure gradient (psi/ft)
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Geopressured
Barnett Shale, FWB, Texas 0.43-0.52
Haynesville Shale, Louisiana/Texas <=0.9
Pearsall Shale, Maverick Basin, Texas 0.60-0.95
Baxter Shale, Wyoming >0.5

Underpressured
Lewis Shale, San Juan Basin 0.20-0.25
Ohio Shale, Appalachian Basin 0.15-0.40

Both
Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin 0.30-0.70
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Lm: limestone, and

TOC: total organic content.
In addition to mineral composition, brittleness is a function of diagenesis caused by changes in temperature
and fluid composition related to tectonic setting and burial history, Ro, etc. For shale-gas systems, Ro, reflecting
maximum paleotemperature, is one of the commonly available data related to diagenesis.
Grieser et al. (2007) pointed out that good shale gas producing reservoirs have good brittle property with
high Young’s modulus and low Poisson’s ratio. Richman et al. (2008) used the average of a normalized Young’s
modulus and Poisson’s ratio to esti- mate the brittleness index (Fig. 6):
YM_n = 100 * ((YMS_C - 1)/7)
(3.1)
PR_n = - 100 * ((PR_C - 0.4)/0.25)
(3.2)
BI = (YM_n + PR_n)/2
(3.3)

where
YM_n: normalized Young’s modulus,
YMS_C: Young’s modulus,
PR_n: normalized Poisson’s ratio, and
PR_c: Poisson’s ratio.
Effective stress and temperature are two simple parameters for quick evaluation of the fracability of gas
shales. Table 3 compares pressure, effective stress, and temperature of three shale-gas plays: the Barnett Shale
in the FWB, the Haynesville in Louisiana, and the Barnett/Woodford Shale in the Delaware Basin. Because the
depth range of the Barnett/Woodford Shale in the Delaware Basin varies from 8000 to 18,000 ft, 11,000 ft was
used for convenience of comparison with the Haynesville Shale, and associated data were estimated at depth of
11,000 ft.
Because geothermal gradients in West Texas and North Texas are 1.2 to 1.8°F/100 ft in the Delaware Basin
(Kinley et al., 2008) and 1.7 to 2.0°F/100 ft in the FWB, temperature in the Barnett/Woodford Shale at 11,000 ft
in the Delaware Basin is similar to that in the Barnett Shale at 7500 ft in the FWB. The higher effective stress
(>6200 psi) in the Barnett/Woodford Shale in the Delaware Basin increases both its ductility and fracture
strength, which make hydraulic fracture less effective than in the Barnett in FWB and Haynesville shales in Lou-
isiana, with effective stresses <4000 psi (Table 3). Overpressure and high temperature in the Haynesville Shale
further enhance its fracability.

786
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems

Figure 6. Young’s modulus vs. Poisson’s ratio and brittleness index (modified after Richman et al.,
2008).

Frac Barriers and Hazards

In addition to brittleness, fracture height needs to be constrained by barriers at the tops and bases of fractures
to prevent excessive water production. In the Barnett Shale of the FWB, Marble Falls, Forestburg, and Viola
limestones are frac barriers (Montgomery et al., 2005). Large, transmissive faults or open mode-I fractures,
which can be extended to adjacent aquifers by hydraulic fractures, can be detrimental to gas production
(McDonnell et al., 2007).

Depth-Dependent Screening Parameters

Potential for gas shale is a function of TOC, thermal maturation, thickness, gas content, adsorption, and brit-
tleness. Because gas content is a function of TOC and Ro, it is an indicator directly related to TOC and Ro.
Therefore, minimum thickness, gas content, and brittleness are probably the most critical parameters for screen-
ing shale-gas systems.
Organic-rich shales with TOC >1%, Ro >0.4, gas content >40 scf/ton, and thickness >30 ft are potential can-
didates for shale-gas production (Russum, 2005). Whereas a minimum thickness of 30 ft and minimum gas con-
tent of 40 scf/ton are good for shallow Antrim and New Albany shales, these would, however, be too low for
deeper shales, such as the Barnett, Fayetteville, and Woodford.
For the Barnett Shale in FWB, a minimum thickness of 100 ft (Bowker, 2007), not 30 ft, is preferred. In
fact, minimum shale thickness, gas content, free gas content, and adsorption requirements can be viewed as func-
tions of depth. Screening criteria of minimum shale thickness, gas content and free gas content increase with
depth, along with maximum thresholds in depth, effective stress, and Ro decrease. Three sets of screening crite-
ria for shale-gas plays—fixed minimum, preferred minimum, and favorable minimum—are proposed in Table 4.
Depth-dependent, preferred minimum gas content and shale thickness (red lines in Figure 7A and 7B) are
plotted with data from 10 shale-gas plays—Antrim (Martini et al., 2008), New Albany (Martini et al., 2008),
Ohio, Lewis, Barnett in the FWB (Curtis, 2002; Jarvie et al., 2007), Fayetteville (Chesapeake Energy, Inc., 2008),
Barnett/Woodford in Delaware Basin (Kinley et al., 2008), Marcellus (Chesapeake Energy, Inc., 2008), Haynes-
ville (Petrohawk, 2009), Muskwa (EOG, 2008; Ross and Bustin, 2008), and Pearsall in the Maverick Basin

787
 Wang and Gale

Table 3. Comparison of Barnett, Haynesville, and Barnett/Woodford shale-gas plays.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Datum Barnett Shale Haynesville Shale Barnett-Woodford
Fort Worth Basin Louisiana Delaware Basin
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Depth (ft)
Lithostatic pressure (psi) 7500 11,222 >11,000
Pore pressure (psi) 7500 11,222 >11,000
Effective stress (psi) 3800 >7225 >4800
Temperature (°F) 200 >300 >210
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Table 4. Screening criteria for shale-gas systems.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Minimum
Datum Fixed Preferred Favorable
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
TOC (%) 2.0 2.0 3.0
Ro (%) 0.4 1.0 1.1
Shale thickness (ft) 30 20+z*/150 30+z*/120
Gas content (scf/ton) 25 25+0.005z 40+0.006z
Porosity (%) 2.0 3.0 4.0
Quartz content (fraction) TBD** TBD TBD
Brittleness (fraction) TBD TBD TBD
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Maximum
Fixed Preferred Favorable
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Depth (ft) TBD TBD TBD
Effective stress (psi) TBD TBD TBD
Ro (%) TBD TBD TBD
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
*Depth, in ft.
**TBD, to be determined.

(Petzet, 2007). The Lewis Shale in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, is a thick, high-silica-content, low-TOC,
high-maturity gas shale. The TOC of part of the Lewis Shale and Barnett-Woodford in the Delaware Basin can
be too low to produce economically (Fig. 7A). In fact, most gas in the Lewis Shale has been produced commin-
gled with deeper gas (Curtis, 2002). Nevertheless, the best horizontal wells in the Lewis Shale have produced >2
Bcf.
Figure 7B compares preferred-minimum (blue line) and favorable-minimum (red line) shale thicknesses with
those in nine shale-gas plays. Note that favored minimum thickness for the Barnett Shale is ~90 ft, which was
close to 100 ft suggested by Bowker (2007), and parts of New Albany and Marcellus shales can be slightly too
thin to be economical. Because ranges in both gas content and thickness at play level are wide, these unfavorable
locations will need to be determined from structure and isopach maps. These criteria should be applied better at
local level such as county within a play where data are better constrained. In addition, reservoir pressure, gas
content, effective stress, brittleness, and reservoir quality are important factors to consider. For highly geopres-
sured plays such as Haynesville and Marcellus, these criteria need to be adjusted according to gas content.

788
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems

(A) (B)

Figure 7. Screening shale-gas systems. (A) Gas content and (B) shale thickness.

SUMMARY

Production potential of a shale-gas system is a function of gas content, original gas in place, brittleness,
unique pore network, reservoir quality, production technology, and market conditions.
Pores in organic-matter fragments, ranging from 20 to 800 nm, can adsorb and store free methane at the
same time. Although porosity in organic matter varies, it can be as high as 30%. Gas flow through organic mat-
ter, although not well understood, can be high because of high porosity in organic matter, single-phase flow, and
cushions of adsorbed gas. Although organic-matter fragments are isolated or poorly connected, high-
permeability networks working as speed rails could form when nanopores in organic matter are accessed by hy-
draulic fractures, with possible enhancement through reactivated natural fracture connections.
Gas content, thickness, and brittleness are critical parameters for evaluating shale-gas potential, and depth-
dependent preferred and favorable criteria for screening shale-gas plays have been underdeveloped. Within these
criteria, minimum gas content and thickness requirements increase with depth.
Brittleness—a measurement of the ability of rock to fracturing—is a complex function of rock strength
(lithology, mineral composition, TOC, porosity, reservoir temperature, diagenesis, and Ro), effective stress, and
type of fluid. Fracability may also be affected by natural fractures or other planes of weakness.
Favorable gas content, thickness, and depth, along with high fracability (brittleness), have made the Barnett
Shale in the FWB one of the best shale-gas plays in North America. Its high fracability stems from its favorable
tectonic setting and burial history, which have resulted in a double enhancement in brittleness.

789
 Wang and Gale

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Publication authorized by the Director, Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, Uni-
versity of Texas at Austin. The manuscript was edited by Lana Dieterich, and special thanks are extended to Eric
Potter for his valuable discussions and suggestions.

REFERENCES CITED

Bowker, K. A., 2007, Barnett shale gas production, Fort Worth Basin: Issues and discussion: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 91, no. 4, p. 523-533.

Boyer, C. M., J. Keischnick, R. E. Lewis, and G. Waters, 2006, Producing gas from its source: Oilfield Review, v. 18,
no. 3, p. 36-49.

Bustin, R. M., A. M. M. Bustin, X. Cui, D. J. K. Ross, and V. S. M. Pathi, 2008, Impact of shale properties on pore
structure and storage characteristics: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 119892, Richardson, Texas, 28 p.

Bustin, R. M., A. M. M. Bustin, D. J. K. Ross, G. Chalmers, V. S. M. Pathi and X. Cui, 2008, Shale Gas Opportunities
and Challenges: Presented at 2008 American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention, San Anto-
nio, April 20-23.

Chesapeake Energy, Inc., 2008, Presentation in Investor and Analyst Meeting.

Curtis, J. B., 2002, Fractured shale-gas systems: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 86, no. 11,
p. 1921-1938.

Curtis, J. B., D. G. Hill, and P. G. Lillis, 2008, Realities of shale gas resources, <http://energy.ihs.com/NR/
rdonlyres/345C2AAA-AAE3-435F-B1B0-6E8A883A105A/0/curtisnape08.pdf> Last Accessed August 20, 2009,
22 p.

Davis, D., and S. J. Reynold, 1996, Structural geology of rocks and regions, 2nd ed.: Wiley, New York, 776 p.

Dawson, F. M., 2008, Unconventional gas: opportunities and challenges, <http://www.csug.ca/dl/Junior%

20Producers%20Breakfast%20Meeting.pdf> Last Accessed August 20, 2009, 25 p.

East, L. E., W. Grieser, B. W. McDaniel, B. Johnson, R. Jackson, and K. Fisher, 2004, Successful application of hydra-
jet fracturing horizontal wells in a thick shale reservoir: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 91435, Richardson,
Texas, 18 p.

Engelder, T., 2008, Appalachian gas reserves: Platts Appalachian Gas Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Oct. 29-
30, 19 p.

EOG, 2008, <http://www.eogresources.com/investors/investor_pres.html> Last Accessed August 20, 2009, 18 p.

Ewing, T., 2007, Natural fractures in the Barnett Shale and their importance for hydraulic fracture treatments: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 91, no. 4, p. 603-622.

Frantz, J. H., Jr., and V. Jochen, 2005, Shale gas: Schlumberger, 11 p.

Fisher, M. K., C. A. Wright, B. M. Davidson, A. K. Goodwin, E. O. Fielder, W. S. Buckler, and N. P. Steinsberger,

2002, Integrating fracture mapping technologies to optimize stimulation in the Barnett Shale: Society of Petro-
leum Engineers Paper 77441, Richardson, Texas, 7 p.

Gale, J. F. W., R. M. Reed, and J. Holder, 2007, Natural fractures in the Barnett Shale and their importance for hydrau-
lic fracture treatments: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 91, p. 603-622.

790
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems
Ghiselin, D., 2009, The Haynesville heats up: Hart, March issue, 12 p.

Grieser, B., J. Hobbs, J. Hunter, and J. Ables, 2003, The rocket science behind water frac design: Society of Petroleum
Engineers Paper 80933, Richardson, Texas, 14 p.

Grieser, B., B. Shelley, B. J. Johnson, E. O. Fielder, J. R. Heinze, and J. R. Werline, 2006, Data analysis of Barnett
Shale Completions: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 100674, Richardson, Texas, 12 p.

Grieser, B., and J. Bray, 2007, Identification of production potential in unconventional reservoirs: Society of Petroleum
Engineers Paper 106623, Richardson, Texas, 6 p.

Handin, J., and R. V. Hager, 1957, Experimental deformation of sedimentary rocks under confining pressure: Tests at
room temperature on dry samples: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 41, no. 1, 50 p.

Handin, J., and R. V. Hager, 1958, Experimental deformation of sedimentary rocks under confining pressure: Tests at
high temperature: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 42, no. 12, 43 p.

Handin, J., R. V. Hager, M. Friedman, and J. N. Feather, 1963, Experimental deformation of sedimentary rocks under
confining pressure: Pore pressure tests: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 47, no. 5,
39 p.

Hussey, W., 2007, North American gas supply, <http://www.necanews.org/dev/documents/070927hussey_will_3.pdf>

Last Accessed August 20, 2009, 20 p.

Jarvie, D., 2009, Characteristics of economically-successful shale resource plays in U.S.A.: Presented at Annual Re-
view Meeting of Permian Basin Geologic Synthesis Program, Austin, Texas, 45 p.

Jarvie, D., R. J. Hill, T. E. Ruble, and R. M. Pollastro, 2007, Unconventional shale-gas systems: The Mississippian
Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale-gas assessment: American Association
of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 91, no. 4, p. 475-499.

Jenkins, C. D., and C. M. Boyer, II, 2008, Coalbed- and shale-gas reservoirs: Journal of Petroleum Technology, Febru-
ary issue, p. 92-99.

Ketter, A. A., J. L. Daniels, J. R. Heinze, and G. Waters, 2006, A field study optimizing completion strategies for frac-
ture initiation in Barnett Shale horizontal wells: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 103232, Richardson,
Texas, 6 p.

Kinley, T. J., W. C. Cook, J. A. Breyer, D. M. Jarvie, and A. B. Busbey, 2008, Hydrocarbon potential of the Barnett
Shale (Mississippian), Delaware Basin, west Texas and southeastern New Mexico: American Association of Pe-
troleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 92, no. 8, p. 967-991.

Klinkenberg, L. J., 1941, The permeability of porous media to liquids and gases, in Drilling and productions practices:
American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., p. 200-213.

Martini, A. M., L. M. Walter, and J. C. McIntosh, 2008, Identification of microbial and thermogenic gas components
from Upper Devonian black shale cores, Illinois and Michigan basins: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists Bulletin, v. 92, no. 3, p. 327-339.

Mayerhofer, M. J., E. P. Lolon, J. E. Youngblood, and J. R. Heinze, 2006, Integration of microseismic fracture mapping
results with numerical fracture network production modeling in Barnett Shale: Society of Petroleum Engineers
Paper 102103, Richardson, Texas, 8 p.

McDonnell, A., R. G. Loucks, and T. Dooley, 2007, Quantifying the origin and geometry of circular sag structures in
northern Fort Worth Basin, Texas: Paleocave collapse, pull-apart fault systems, or hydrothermal alteration?:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 91, no. 9, p. 1295-1318.

791
 Wang and Gale
Montgomery, S. L., D. M. Jarvie, A. Kent, K. A. Bowker, and R. M. Pollastro, 2005, Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort
Worth Basin, north-central Texas: Gas-shale play with multi-trillion cubic foot potential: American Association
of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 89, no. 2, p. 155-175.

Petrohawk, 2009, Investor presentation: Credit Suisse Energy Summit, 15 p.

Petzet, A., 2007, More operators eyes Maverick shale gas and tar sand potentials: Oil & Gas Journal, August issue, 2 p.

Powell, A., O. Bustos, W. Kordziel, T. D. Olson, D. Sobernheim, and T. Vizurraga, 2007, Fiber-laden fracturing fluid
improves production in the Bakken Shale multilateral play: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 107979,
Richardson, Texas, 12 p.

Railroad Commission of Texas, 2009, Oil and gas production query system, Austin, Texas, <http://
webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/PDQ/
generalReportAction.do;jsessionid=KcBXZzCjLDnJ6w2qXnyQ2rXg3g1D2rp2hCgcrGsvLJBzZbGv2Qqm!-
2112244217> Last Accessed August 20, 2009.

Reed, R. M., R. G. Loucks, D. M. Jarvie, and S. C. Ruppel, 2008, Nanopores in the Mississippian Barnett Shale: Dis-
tribution, morphology, and possible genesis: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 6,
p. 358.

Richman, R., M. Mullen, M. Petre, B. Grieser, and D. Kundert, 2008, A practical use of shale petrophysics for stimula-
tion design optimization: All shale plays are not clones of the Barnett Shale: Society of Petroleum Engineers
Paper 115258, Richardson, Texas, 11 p.

Ross, D. J. K., and R. M. Bustin, 2008, Characterizing the shale gas resource potential of Devonian-Mississippian
strata in the Western Canada sedimentary basin: Application of an integrated formation evaluation: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 92, no. 1, p. 87-125.

Russum, D., 2005, Status of unconventional gas in North America, <http://www.geohelp.net/csugnov2005.pdf> Last
Accessed August 20, 2009, 40 p.

Salamy, S. P., B. S. Saradji, C. O. Okoye, J. C. Mercer, and A. B. Yost, II, 1987, Recovery efficiency aspects of hori-
zontal well drilling in Devonian Shale: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 16411, Richardson, Texas, 9 p.

Seale, R., 2006, Multistage fracturing system: improving operational efficiency and production: Society of Petroleum
Engineers Paper 104557, Richardson, Texas, 8 p.

Soeder, D. J., 1988, Porosity and permeability of eastern Devonian gas shale: Society of Petroleum Engineers Forma-
tion Evaluation, March issue, p. 116-124.

Walser, D. W., and D. A. Pursell, 2007, Make mature shale gas plays commercial: Process vs. natural parameters, So-
ciety of Petroleum Engineers Paper No. 110127, Richardson, Texas, 8 p.

Wang, F. P., 2008, Production fairway: Speed rails in gas shales: 7th Annual Gas Shales Summit, May 6-7, Dallas,
Texas, 22 p.

Wang, F. P., R. M. Reed, and R. Loucks, 2009, Pore networks and fluid flow in gas shales: Society of Petroleum Engi-
neers Paper 124253-PP, Richardson, Texas, in progress.

Wells, F., 2004, A new method to help identify unconventional targets for exploration and development through inte-
grative analysis of clastic rock properties: Houston Geological Society Bulletin, October issue, Texas, p. 34-49.

Wiley, G., R. Hyden, V. Parkey, B. Grieser, and R. Middaugh, 2007, Custom technology makes shale resources profit-
able: Oil & Gas Journal, December issue, 7 p.

792
 Screening Criteria for Shale-Gas Systems
XTO, 2008, Investor presentation, <http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/97/97780/CreditSuisse_020608.pdf>
Last Accessed August 20, 2009, 25 p.

Zhang, X., R. G. Jeffrey, and M. Thiercelin, 2007, Effects of frictional geological discontinuities on hydraulic fracture
propagation: Society of Petroleum Engineers Paper 106111, Richardson, Texas, 11 p.

793