Page 1

www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.

Introduction
A shift in drilling economics has made it increasingly
attractive for operators to explore and produce
unconventional plays. By using new techniques
in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing,
operators now access resources that were never
before considered viable. Rising commodity prices
and worldwide demand reward these operators for
their efforts to free tight oil and shale gas.
Unlike conventional plays, shale plays have very low
permeability and are both the trap and seal. These
resources, until recently considered only the source
rock for hydrocarbon reservoirs, are now recognized
in their own right for their huge potential for both oil
and gas production.
As with conventional plays, the economic case for
developing and producing a feld is based on how
much hydrocarbon resource exists, whether it is
primarily a gas or oil opportunity, and how much can
be extracted at what cost. The answers in shale plays
lie in the volume and maturity of the total organic
carbon (TOC) and the ability to create an effective
fracture network that will conduct the hydrocarbons
to each borehole. This in turn requires an
understanding of mineralogy, lithology, relative rock
brittleness, natural fracturing and the directionality
of in situ rock stresses.
This paper provides a rock properties-based
workfow for shale plays and discusses the infuence
of local variation on the specifc analysis performed.
The goal of such an analysis is to gather enough
intelligence to defne drilling locations, well bore
placement and orientation, plus provide valuable
input for developing the completion and stimulation
program.
Rock Properties for Success in Shales
Ted Holden, John Pendrel, Fred Jenson, and Peter Mesdag
Page 2
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
Field-Related Data Included in Workfow
Gamma ray logs: indicate overall clay
and uranium content, which has a known
association with organic richness and is
useful in differentiating shales from other
lithologies.
Resistivity logs: record high readings
for hydrocarbon fuids and lower readings
for high clay or pyrite presence.
2
Highly
mature reservoirs can have a resistivity
signifcantly lower than the same
formation at lower thermal maturities.
Density logs: used to build proxies
for TOC when there are no large local
variations in other parameters that
would affect bulk density. These can be
very useful when combined with high
resolution resistivity logs to differentiate
subtle and closely spaced vertical
variation in TOC.
3

Compressional and shear sonic logs:
calibrated to TOC content due to low
p-wave velocity or organic matter when
there is no signifcant local variation
in parameters such as porosity and
mineralogy.
Borehole image logs: useful for
identifying closely spaced vertical
variation in resistivity and detecting both
open and healed fractures and fracture
orientation.
Core data: provides matrix
permeability, bulk mineral density,
kerogen, grain density, total porosity,
and gas-flled porosity (both free and
adsorbed gas). Cores provide ground
truthing for well log and seismic data.
4
3D Seismic data: adds valuable
perspective on the areas beyond well
control. Seismic data enables better
characterization of structural and
stratigraphic complexities, reveals
fracture orientation and shows
preferential stress direction based on
azimuthal anisotropy.
Shale Play Workfow
Shale play sweet spots are typically characterized by
mid to high kerogen content, lower clay volumes, higher
effective porosity, low water saturation, high Youngs
Modulus and low Poissons Ratio. Using these properties
as a guide, reservoir engineers can defne a drilling
program that focuses on the best targets in the feld and
optimizes the recovery from each well.
Petrophysical analysis is the starting point, combining
laboratory measurements, core data and well logs.
Rock physics then establishes the relationship between
petrophysical and elastic properties of the formation and
enables the creation of synthetics for missing and bad
log data from drilling and invasion effects. Seismic data
analysis moves the analysis beyond well control to the
whole feld.
High level workfow steps are:
1. Determine TOC and mineralogy including porosity
and water saturation, using petrophysical and rock
properties analysis. Determine bulk density for
each mineral, calculate TOC weight percentage, and
convert this measure to bulk volume kerogen.
1
2. Extend analysis beyond well control to visualize
the entire area of interest by combining well log
and seismic data. Characterize structural and
stratigraphic complexities to identify high value
intervals and potential hazards like water conduits.
3. Evaluate relative brittleness and ductility from well
logs and seismic inversion to identify areas prone to
fracturing.
4. Analyze rock stresses, natural fracture networks,
and fracture directionality by examining image
logs, directional borehole acoustics and azimuthal
seismic inversion data to determine optimal
horizontal well direction and fracturing strategy.
5. Plan the well bore trajectory.
At the conclusion of the workfow there should be
suffcient information about the reservoir character to
select optimal drilling locations, as well as orientation
and placement of horizontal wells for the most effective
production program.
Page 3
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
TOC and Mineralogy
Determining total organic volume and mineral
composition within the zone of interest is a critical
frst step in unconventional formation evaluation
(Figure 1). The relative quantity and distribution
of minerals and TOC are key to understanding the
formation and optimizing production from it.
5
For
example, certain minerals such as quartz are more
prone to fracture, while clay tends to fll and close
fractures when they occur (Figure 2). Pyrite is
commonly present and decreases measured resistivity
if volume is suffcient. Kerogen type and maturity
determine the oil/gas ratio, and volume establishes
whether there is suffcient economic potential to
continue the analysis.
The highly laminated nature of most shales presents
a challenge for traditional analysis. These fne grain
sand formations harbor consolidated and compacted
parasequences of shallow marine sediment, clay,
quartz, feldspar, and heavy minerals.
6
They exhibit
ultra-to-low inter-particle permeability, low-to-
moderate porosity, and complex pore connectivity.
7

A stochastic or statistical model is used to estimate
relative volume and distribution of TOC and
minerals. First, the presence and volume of some
constituents are determined directly from core
and well log measurements, such as shale volume
from gamma ray or natural gamma ray logs and
dry clay bulk density from crossplots of porosity
and resistivity. Then these constituents are used
as input to the model to estimate relative volume
and distribution of TOC and minerals. If mineral
composition is well understood, a deterministic
approach can be taken instead.
Core data is the optimum control mechanism to
validate the model. Uranium can also be a quality
check, as its presence is a strong indicator of TOC.
Passey and Modifed Passey methods can also be
used as a quality control check on the volume of
total organic carbon. The methods work best in
shale sections where there is high clay content and
no permeability. If the reservoir is self-sourcing
and self-sealing, TOC is directly proportional to the
kerogen volume, which can be determined in an area
by calibrating log responses to core data for at least
one well in that area.
8

Figure 1: Petrophysical analysis using PowerLog yields
initial estimates of clay volume, kerogen volume and
porosity. These values can be used as input to stochastic
modeling in Statmin to estimate TOC and mineral volume
and distribution.
Figure 2: Log plot displaying a quartz-rich zone bounded by
two clay-rich zones identifed in FaciesID. The quartz-
rich sweet spot in this log plot is characterized by relatively
higher porosity and higher brittleness.
Lithologies
Page 4
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
Density plays an important role in the analysis,
given the disparity between various constituents
(e.g., pyrite is high density and has a smaller volume
percent; kerogen has a larger volume percent than
indicated by weight percent).
9
Core-XRD mineralogy
provides bulk-rock mineral weight percent, but
excludes porosity and kerogen, whereas volume
percent includes all minerals plus kerogen.
After the model is built and validated against well
and core data, it can be applied to other wells in the
feld within the same general lithology. Geoscientists
can then compare water saturation, porosity, and
mineralogy with confdence.
10
Field Level Lithology
Once well and core data are interpreted they
are combined with seismic data to extend the
understanding of rock properties to the space
between wells (Figure 3). This allows a better
understanding of lithological detail across the feld
and leads to identifcation of the most attractive
facies.
Shales present several challenges to seismic
interpretation:
Laminations cause polar anisotropy that distorts
seismic data and therefore must be corrected
during seismic processing or inversion.
Laminations are below seismic data resolution,
so special averaging must be performed to
accurately refect the composition of the
formation.
A tie must be interpolated between well and
seismic data, such that data at any wellbore can
be recreated by the seismic. This well tie is what
enables characterization and modeling of the
feld away from well control (Figure 4).
Simultaneous AVO inversion produces a
deterministic set of rock properties that can be
QCd against core and well log data (Figure 5). The
inversion process accounts for AVO anomalies and
reduces tuning and interference effects that can be
problematic in simple seismic data analysis. Because
laminations are below the seismic data resolution,
Backus averaging is employed to transform
laminations to the seismic scale. Detail is added
through a low frequency model generated as part of
the inversion workfow.
Geostatistical inversion provides additional layer
detail necessary to simulate fow. It simultaneously
inverts impedance and lithology, producing more
objective and geologically plausible models than
obtained with other methods. The models are
accurate both near and away from wells and have
realistic detail, often beyond the seismic band. They
also include uncertainty estimates (Figure 6).
Integrating 3D seismic into
geostatistical modeling can
be challenging. The physical
relationship between petrophysical
properties and seismic
measurement must be specifed
directly or by analyzing well log
data in conjunction with rock
physics modeling. This software-
based analysis establishes a
proper multivariate statistical
relationship between elastic and
petrophysical properties of interest
(e.g., impedance and porosity) that
accounts for uncertainty.
Petrophysical properties of interest
are simulated by constraining them
to the relationship (specifed or
Figure 3: Cross plot of Youngs Modulus vs Poissons Ratio, colored by Sw.
Cross plots such as this are used to defne key identifable reservoir facies. The
data points within the polygon are highlighted (white) in the log plots.
Page 5
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
statistical) and inverted together with the elastic
properties. This method simultaneously produces
detailed volumes of petrophysical properties,
elastic properties and lithology. Alternatively,
combined with the volumes of elastic parameters
and lithology from geostatistical inversion,
cosimulation yields highly detailed models of
lithology-dependent petrophysical properties.
Following seismic inversion and analysis, there
should be suffcient detail about the distribution
of TOC and minerals across the feld to make
a preliminary assessment of the distribution of
the reservoir facies for production. Potential
well bore trajectories can be defned and refned
with brittleness, rock stress and directionality
information.
Brittleness and Ductility
Once TOC, mineralogy and lithology are
understood, the formation can be evaluated for
relative fracability. Brittleness is a key factor,
indicating the likeliness to fracture under stress.
Ductile shale naturally heals, while brittle silty
shale with a quartz fraction is more likely to
fracture and remain open.
11
Geomechanical
properties aid in determining relative brittleness
or ductility of rock, providing valuable input into
completion and fracture stimulation design.
A combination of static and dynamic testing
triaxial compression for the former and ultrasonic
velocity for the latterestablish a relative
brittleness measure that is generally accepted in
the industry.
12
Zones with high Youngs Modulus
(ability to maintain a fracture) and low Poissons
Ratio (propensity to resist failure under stress)
13

will be more brittle and have higher reservoir
quality (TOC and porosity are both higher)
(Figure 7). High Poissons Ratio and low Youngs
Modulus rock is ductile.
Calculating Poissons Ratio from seismic data
is straightforward given that it depends strictly
on P-impedance and S-impedance. Youngs
Modulus requires a measure of density, which
is usually unavailable due to the limited range
of angles in the seismic data. In this case, it is
necessary to evaluate several different potential
proxies for density to determine the best one
Figure 4: Well log and seismic data are tied by identifying a
matching wavelet using Well Tie. Once the well tie is made,
simultaneous seismic data inversion is performed using
RockTrace to obtain an initial feld wide estimate of lithology.
Figure 5: Poissons Ratio was computed from P Impedance and
S Impedance using RockTrace deterministic simultaneous AVO
inversion. The plot is overlain with Poissons Ratio from logs.
The white arrow indicates the reservoir level in the lower Barnett.
Low Poissons Ratio rocks are more brittle.
Figure 6: The volume of quartz obtained from the mean of ten
realizations using cosimulation using RockMod geostatistical
inversion. Smoothed Vquartz logs are overlaid. The interval
shown is from the Top Barnett to the Top Viola.
Page 6
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
for the particular geology. The starting point is
P-impedance, although this is rarely suffcient. Other
potential proxies involve S-impedance plus Poissons
Ratio, or Poissons Ratio plus S-impedance and a
regression of P-impedance. The method chosen for
inferring density depends on the specifc lithology.
Core analysis can then be used as a real world
confrmation at each well location.
Note that brittleness is a relative not an absolute
measure. It is estimated based on a combination of
core and sonic data (well log and/or seismic) and
assumes that fractures open and remain open better
in brittle rock. Shale formations are quite distinct
from each other and vary in quality internally.
14
Facies can be identifed from deterministic inversions
following a Bayesian scheme (Figure 8). The inputs
to the process are the inversion outcomes and PDFs
representing the facies to be determined. These can
be estimated from log data or analogues. The outputs
of the process are probability volumes for each facies
and a most-probable facies volume. An example of
the most probable facies is shown in Figure 9.
Fracture Directionality
Following brittleness analysis, the areas most prone
to fracturing should be well understood. The next
step is to determine the best well bore direction for
optimized conductivity and production.
Productivity is a function of fracture direction,
induced fracture extent, network intensity, propensity
to sustain fractures
15
, effective conductivity and
matrix permeability.
16
These properties are governed
by mineralogydiscussed earlierand rock
stresses, which can be evaluated from seismic.
Determining these properties improves sweet spot
identifcation, reserve estimation, well placement,
completion design, stimulation effectiveness, and
production enhancement.
17
Fractures occur when the rock is stressed naturally or
with stimulation. Induced fractures run perpendicular
to the direction of minimum rock stress, and open
fractures created perpendicular to the well bore
provide the best opportunity to drain the area
around the well bore. These fractures are typically
vertical. If the formation is incorrectly fraced, the
fractures may close again, extend into water areas,
or be ineffective in conducting hydrocarbons to the
wellbore.
The three principal components of rock stress allow
estimation of how rocks are likely to fracture under
stress during fracture stimulation.
18
The vertical
stress component is the overburden pressure of the
rock on top of the reservoir. Differential horizontal
stress components (minimum and maximum) are
consequences of tectonics.
The effects of rock stress can be seen on borehole
images (Figure 10), where natural fractures are quite
apparent. Differential effective stress squeezes the
borehole causing breakouts in the direction of the
Figure 7: Log crossplots of Youngs Modulus vs. Poissons
Ratio colored by Brittleness from Logs (upper) and
Brittleness from Inversion (lower). The arrow shows the
direction of increase in Brittleness and also Vquartz.
Youngs Modulus vs. Poissons Ratio
Colored by Brittleness from Logs
Colored by Brittleness from Inversion
Page 7
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
Figure 8: Pdfs (Probability Density Functions) of predicted volume of quartz vs. predicted brittleness displayed in Facies
and Fluids Probabilities. The fve numbered zones each enclose similarly colored clusters of data points that indicate
the different lithotypes.
Figure 9: Cross section of the most likely lithology correlated across all of the wells from the Top Barnett to the
Top Viola computed using Facies and Fluids Probabilities.
Page 8
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
minimum stress effect. The structural
model from seismic also shows how the
rock is stressed, and seismic structural
attributes can be used in some situations to
indicate fractures below accepted seismic
resolution. The coherence attribute, used
to detect faults or discontinuous features,
can pick up swarms of parallel fractures.
Directional stress is determined using azimuthal
anisotropy analysis.
19
The distinct layers of organic
material in laminated shales exhibit electrical
anisotropyelectrical conductivity in one direction
that is different from another. Sand-bearing
hydrocarbon assets have high resistivity (low
conductivity) whereas shales have lower resistivity.
Anisotropy has a frst-order infuence on shear and
mode-converted PS-waves, which split into fast
and slow modes with orthogonal polarizations.
20

Because fractures and faults are mostly in the
vertical direction and aligned along the direction of
maximum horizontal stress, the result is azimuthal
anisotropy (HTI).
An azimuthal map can show the direction of the fast
component, its magnitude and
a measure of the difference
between the maximum and
minimum velocity (Figure
11). Together, these data help
determine the drilling direction,
well positioning and fracturing
strategy.
The differential horizontal
stress ratio can be calculated
from seismic parameters
without any knowledge of the
stress state of the reservoir.
21

Wide angle, wide azimuth 3D
seismic is best suited for this.
Greater differential stress and/
or higher fracture density
results in greater anisotropy. By
mapping the anisotropy at the
reservoir level geoscientists can
see the direction, magnitude and
difference between the maximum
and minimum. A combination of
Youngs Modulus and differential
horizontal stress indicates high
potential areas for creating fracture networks,
optimal drilling locations and best well bore
orientation.
22
Azimuthal anisotropy is typically caused by
near-vertical systems of aligned fractures and
microcracks
23
, pinpointing higher potential producing
areas.

Anisotropic analysis identifes both higher
differential stress and natural fracturing, but the
difference between them is dependent on the play and
cannot be separated mathematically.
Through these analyses, geoscientists can fnd
natural fractures and areas with low anisotropy that
are prone to fracturing. Where there are many faults,
many fracs may be required. Where anisotropy is
high, fracture networks may already exist and fewer
Figure 11: Map of Interval Velocity Anisotropy from the Fayetteville shale.
Color indicates magnitude of anisotropy; arrow length indicates magnitude of
fast velocity. Arrow directions represent azimuths. Initial production from
Well Y was three times that from Well X (Courtesy Southwestern Energy).
Figure 10: Borehole image log showing faults and fractures.
Page 9
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
fracs are needed. Effective fracturing determines
the production rate and drainage area recovery.
24

Complex fractures appear to be preferable to long,
planar fractures
25
, and drainage is very effcient
when a high-relative-conductivity primary fracture
is present compared to a uniform-conductivity
network.
26
Planning the Well Trajectory
By this fnal step in the workfow, there should be
suffcient information to determine the details of well
placement and fracture stimulation. Planning each
well trajectory is an important element of success,
given the heterogeneity common in shales.
Target facies are identifed through petrophysical
and lithological analyses and refned with brittleness
analysis. These targets should consist of mid to
high kerogen content, low clay and brittle rock (e.g.,
quartz, carbonate). Because of the laminated nature
of shale, these targets may vary in height of pay
interval and proximity to each other (laterally and/
or vertically), requiring adjustments to the well bore
trajectory to optimize contact.
Results from rock stress analysis identify the optimal
well bore direction for fractures that will remain
open and provide effective conductivity to the well
bore, with the assistance of proppants close to the
bore hole and perhaps beyond. Placement of the
vertical segment of each well can then be guided by
the optimal horizontals in combination with surface
considerations.
Each well can be placed to remain in the optimum
stratigraphy throughout its entire length and
simultaneously avoid water and ductile zones.
Known fracture conductivity barriers can be used to
separate the well bore from water zones. Stimulation
can be managed to keep fractures small and avoid
communications with adjacent water bearing zones.
High clay zones can be mapped so that frac jobs are
not wasted, with oil and gas trapped in permeability
jail
27
because the fractures do not remain open.
Fractures must remain open to be conductive,
which may require propping or partial propping.
To maximize fracture complexity, operators may
utilize closer spacing of perforation clusters with
more fracture treatments, small proppants at higher
injection rates, closer spacing between laterals,
and simultaneously alternate fracture treatments in
offsetting wells to focus stimulation energy. Success
of these strategies depends on a strong understanding
of the rock properties and rock stresses unique to
each feld and well.
Conclusion
Shale plays require special analysis to consistently
obtain optimum results from each well drilled. By
combining all the well and feld dataincluding
cores, well logs and pre-stack 3D seismic data
geoscientists can understand key characteristics that
enable them to estimate reserves, place well bores in
the most appropriate trajectory and defne the overall
drilling completion and fracture stimulation program.
Combining well log and core analysis, seismic
attribute analysis, and seismic inversion is the best
practice for success in shales. Petrophysical analysis,
rock physics and stochastic modeling determine
the distribution of TOC and minerals. Seismic data
extends this understanding from individual well
bores to the feld level, creating a 3D lithological
model. Analysis of the formation propensity to
fracture and ability to remain open requires an
understanding of formation density. Given that
density generally cannot be extracted directly from
seismic, a method of inferring density must be
carefully evaluated and employed specifcally for
each felds geology.
With a proxy for density, brittleness and ductility can
be evaluated and combined with previous TOC and
mineral distribution data to determine the sweet spots
for both hydrocarbon content and fracability. Finally,
individual bore hole trajectories can be plotted based
on azimuthal data.
All of this analysis is enhanced and accelerated by
specialized reservoir characterization software for
methodical analysis of total organic carbon, minerals,
natural fractures, rock stresses, fracture orientation,
brittleness and other aspects of the play. Using these
tools and methods, geoscientists can make better
decisions about where to drill and how to frac, and
can better predict economic outcomes.
Page 10
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
About Jason
Jason (jason.cgg.com) delivers innovative software
products and services to help clients identify and
produce hydrocarbon deposits by integrating
information from the various geoscience disciplines.
Jason software applications make it possible to
integrate geological, geophysical, geostatistical,
petrophysical and rock physics information into a
single consistent model of the earth.
Applying Jasons technology through its software
and consulting services substantially improves E&P
investment return by adding invaluable reservoir
model information to reduce the risks, costs and
cycle-times associated with exploration, appraisal
and feld development and production. Jason is a
CGG company.
References
A. Babarsky, D. Gao. Fracture Detection in Unconventional
Gas Plays Using 3D Seismic Data. SEG 2012.
K.Bandyopadhyay, R. Sain, E. Liu, C. Harris, A. Martinez,
M. Payne, and Y. Zhu. Rock Property Inversion in Organic-
Rich Shale: Uncertainties, Ambiguities, and Pitfalls. SEG
2012 Abstract.
M.P. Brown, J.H. Higginbotham, C.M. Macesanu, O.E.
Ramirez, and C. Lang. PSDM for Unconventional
Reservoirs? A Niobrara Shale Case Study. SEG 2012
Abstract.
S. Chopra, R.K. Sharma, J. Keay and K.J. Marfurt. Shale
Gas Reservoir Characterization Workfows. SEG 2012
Abstract.
C.L. Cipolla. Modeling Production and Evaluating Fracture
Performance in Unconventional Gas Reservoirs. Journal of
Petroleum Technology, September 2009.
D. Denney. Highlights from Integrating Core Data and
Wireline Geochemical Data for Shale-Gas-Reservoir
Formation Evaluation and Characterization. Journal of
Petroleum Technology, August 2011.
D. Denney. Highlights from Whole Core vs. Plugs:
Integrating Log and Core Data to Decrease Uncertainty in
Petrophysical Interpretation and Oil-In-Place Calculations.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, August 2011.
D. Gray, P. Anderson, J. Logel, F. Delbecq and D. Schmidt.
Estimating In-Situ, Anisotropic, Principle Stresses from 3D
Seismic. EAGE 2010.
M. Haege, S. Maxwell,L. Sonneland, and M. Norton.
Integration of Passive Seismic and 3D Refection Seismic
in an Unconventional Shale Gas Play: Relationship Between
Rock Fabric and Seismic Moment of Microseismic Events.
SEG 2012 Abstract.
F. Jenson, H. Rael. Stochastic Modeling & Petrophysical
Analysis of Unconventional Shales: Spraberry-Wolfcamp
Example. 2012.
A. Kalantari-Dahaghi, S.D. Mohaghegh. Top-Down
Intelligent Reservoir Modeling of New Albany Shale. SEP
125859. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2009.
R. Kennedy. Shale Gas Challenges/Technologies Over the
Asset Lifecycle. US-China Oil and Gas Forum Presentation.
September 2010.
R. Lewis, D. Ingraham, M. Pearcy, J. Williamson, W. Sawyer,
and J. Frantz. New Evaluation Techniques for Gas Shale
Reservoirs. Reservoir Symposium, 2004.
Q.R. Passey, K.M. Bohacs, W.L. Esch, R. Klimentidis, and S.
Sinha. From Oil-Prone Source Rock to Gas-Producing Shale
ReservoirGeologic and Petrophysical Characterization of
Unconventional Shale-Gas Reservoirs. SPE 131350. Society
of Petroleum Engineers, 2010.
D. Themig. New Technologies Enhance Effciency of
Horizontal, Multistage Fracturing. Journal of Petroleum
Technology, April 2011.
A.N. Tutuncu. Incorporating Stress Anisotropy in
Determining Time-Dependent Rock Properties During
Production Optimization and Environmental Monitoring in
Shale Reservoirs. SEG 2012 Abstract.
I. Tsvankin, J. Gaiser, V. Grechka, M. van der Baan, and L.
Thomsen. Seismic Anisotropy in Exploration and Reservoir
Characterization: An Overview. Geophysics, Vol 75, No 5,
September-October 2010.
R. Varga, R. Lotti, A. Pachos, T. Holden, I. Marini, E.
Spadaford, and J. Pendrel. Seismic Inversion in the Barnett
Shale Successfully Pinpoints Sweet Spots to Optimize Well-
bore Placement and Reduce Drilling Risks. SEG 2012.
P. F. Worthington. The Petrophysics of Problematic
Reservoirs. Journal of Petroleum Technology, December
2011, p. 88-96.
End Notes
1
S. Chopra, R.K. Sharma, J. Keay and K.J. Marfurt. Shale
Gas Reservoir Characterization Workfows. SEG 2012
Abrstract.
Page 11
www.jason.cgg.com Jason. All Rights Reserved.
2
Q.R. Passey, K.M. Bohacs, W.L. Esch, R. Klimentidis,
and S. Sinha. From Oil-Prone Source Rock to Gas-
Producing Shale ReservoirGeologic and Petrophysical
Characterization of Unconventional Shale-Gas Reservoirs.
SPE 131350. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2010.
3
Passey, ibid.
4
Themig. New Technologies Enhance Effciency of
Horizontal, Multistage Fracturing. Journal of Petroleum
Technology, April 2011.
5
Haege, S. Maxwell,L. Sonneland, and M. Norton.
Integration of Passive Seismic and 3D Refection Seismic
in an Unconventional Shale Gas Play: Relationship
Between Rock Fabric and Seismic Moment of Microseismic
Events. SEG 2012 Abstract.
6
Haege, ibid.
7
Themig. op. cit.
8
F. Jenson, H. Rael. Stochastic Modeling & Petrophysical
Analysis of Unconventional Shales: Spraberry-Wolfcamp
Example. 2012.
9
Haege, op. cit.
10
A.N. Tutuncu. Incorporating Stress Anisotropy in
Determining Time-Dependent Rock Properties During
Production Optimization and Environmental Monitoring in
Shale Reservoirs. SEG 2012 Abstract.
11
K. Bandyopadhyay, R. Sain, E. Liu, C. Harris, A. Martinez,
M. Payne, and Y. Zhu. Rock Property Inversion in
Organic-Rich Shale: Uncertainties, Ambiguities, and
Pitfalls. SEG 2012 Abstract.
12
L.K. Britt and J. Schoeffer. The Geomechanics of a Shale
Play: What Makes a Shale Prospective! SPE Paper 125525,
2009.
13
R. Varga, R. Lotti, A. Pachos, T. Holden, I. Marini, E.
Spadaford, and J. Pendrel. Seismic inversion in the Barnett
Shale successfully pinpoints sweet spots to optimize well-
bore placement and reduce drilling risks. SEG 2012.
14
L.K. Britt, op. cit.
15
K.Bandyopadhyay, op. cit.
16
D. Denney. Highlights from Whole Core vs. Plugs:
Integrating Log and Core Data to Decrease Uncertainty in
Petrophysical Interpretation and Oil-In-Place Calculations.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, August 2011.
17
Passey, op. cit.

18
R. Varga, R. Lotti, A. Pachos, T. Holden, I. Marini, E.
Spadaford, and J. Pendrel. Seismic Inversion in the Barnett
Shale Successfully Pinpoints Sweet Spots to Optimize
Well-bore Placement and Reduce Drilling Risks. SEG
2012.
19
C.L. Cipolla. Modeling Production and Evaluating
Fracture Performance in Unconventional Gas Reservoirs.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, September 2009.
20
I. Tsvankin, J. Gaiser, V. Grechka, M. van der Baan, and
L. Thomsen. Seismic Anisotropy in Exploration and
Reservoir Characterization: An Overview. Geophysics,
Vol 75, No 5, September-October 2010.
21
Varga, op. cit.
22
Cipolla, op. cit.
23
I. Tsvankin, J. Gaiser, V. Grechka, M. van der Baan, and
L. Thomsen. Seismic Anisotropy in Exploration and
Reservoir Characterization: An Overview. Geophysics,
Vol 75, No 5, September-October 2010.
24
R. Kennedy. Shale Gas Challenges/Technologies Over
the Asset Lifecycle. US-China Oil and Gas Forum
Presentation. Septemer 2010.
25
A. Kalantari-Dahaghi, S.D. Mohaghegh. Top-Down
Intelligent Reservoir Modeling of New Albany Shale. SEP
125859. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2009.
26
Themig, op. cit.
27
Britt, op. cit.