SPE 10316
SPE
Geothermal Well Stimulation Experiments and Evaluation
by Don A. Campbell, Charles W. Morris, and Robert V. Verity, Republic Geothermal,
Inc.
Members SPEeAIME
Copyright 1981, Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME
This paper was presented at the 56th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, held in
San Antonio, Texas, October 5-7,1981. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of
not more than 300 words. Write: 6200 N. Central Expressway, Dallas, Texas 75206.
ABSTRACT
Republic Geothermal, Inc., and its subcon-
tractors have planned and executed six experi-
mental fracture stimulation treatments under the
Department of Energy-funded Geothermal Reservoir
\~ell Stimulation Program (GRWSP). The program,
begun in February 1979, is ultimately to include
eight full-scale field hydraulic and chemical
stimulation experiments in geothermal wells.
This paper describes the six treatments com-
pleted to date.
Two stimulation experiments were performed
at Raft River, Idaho, in late 1979. This is a
naturally fractured, hard rock reservoir with a
relatively low geothermal resource temperature
(290F). A pl anar hydraul ic fracture job was
perfomed in Well RRGP-5 and a dendri ti c, or
reverse flow, technique was utilized in Well
RRGP-4.
In mid-l980, blo stimUlation experiments
were performed at East Mesa, California. The
stimulation of Well 58-30 provided the first
geotherma 1 well fracturi ng experi ence ina mod-
erate temperature (350F) reservoir with matrix-
type rock properti eSt The two treatments con-
sisted of a hydraulic fracture of a deep, low-
perr:leabil ity zone and a dendritic fracture
treatment of a shallow, high-permeability mudl
cement-damaged zone in the same well.
In early 1981, an acid etching stimulation
treatment was performed in the Ottoboni State 22
\oJell located in The Geysers geothermal area of
California. The treatment involved the injec-
tion of 476 bbl of 10% HF-5% HCr acid behind a
476 bbl slug of high viscosity crosslinked gel
fluid. This technique was intended to take ad-
vantage of the fluid mobility differences to
etch discrete flow channels, or fingers, in the
fracture faces.
A 7,600 bbl hydraulic fracture treatment \'/as
also performed in early 1981 in the Baca 23 well
of the Redondo Creek area of New t~exico. The
References and illustrations at end of paper.
Society of Petroleun Engineers of AIME
stimulation interval was in the upper part of
the Bandelier Tuff, a 450F interval in which
the well had not encountered product; ve natural
fractures. This treatment utilized a large
cool i ng water prepad and temperature res; stant
proppants, i.e., sintered bauxite and resin-
coated sand.
The stimu1 at; on experiment resu1 ts to date
were eva1 uated us, ng short-tem producti on
tests, conventional pressure transient analysis,
interference pressure data, chemical and radi 0-
active tracers, borehole acoustic televiewer
surveys, fracture mappi ng wi th geophones, and
numerical models. This cor,lbination of evalua-
tion techniques yielded an interpretation of
fracture geoQetry and productivity enhancement.
A discussion of the pre-stimulation and
post-stimulation data and their evaluation are
provided for each experiment in this report.
Fi ve of the six stimul at; on experiments were at
1east techn; cally successful in stimul at; ng the
wells. The two fracture treatments in East Mesa
58-30 more than doubled the producing rate of
the previously marginal producer. The two frac-
ture treatments in Raft River and the one in
Baca were all successful in obtai ni ng s i gni fi-
cant production from previously unproductive
interval s. However, these three treatments
failed to establish commercial production due to
deficiencies in either fluid temperature or flolrl
rate or both. The acid etching treatment in the
well at The Gey'"sers di d not have any mater; al
effect on producing rate. Evaluations of the
field experiments to date have suggested improve-
ments in treatment design and treatment interval
sel ecti on which offer substanti al encouragement
for future stimulation work.
INTRODUCTION
The stimulation of geothermal wells presents
some new and challenging problems. Formation
temperatures in the 300-600F range must be
dealt with. The behavior of stimulation fluids,
frac proppants, and equ i pment at these tempera-
2 Geothermal Well Stimulation Experiments and Evaluation
cures in w-hat is frequently a hostile brine
environment must be carefully eval uated before
perfomance expectati ons can be deterf.li ned. In
order to avoid possible damage to the producing
forr.1ati on. hi gh-tef.lperature chemi cal compati bil-
i ty betHeen the i n-si tu rock/fl u; d and the stim-
ulation materials must be verified. Perhaps
nost significant of all, in geothermal \'1ells the
required techniques must bring about very large
fluid production rates. This necessity for high
flow rates represents a significant departure
fror:! convent; onal petrol eUr:1 well st imul ati on and
del1ands the creati on of very hi gh near-well bore
perl.leabil; ty and/or fractures w; th very hi gh
flml conductivities over long intervals. Fi-
nally, natural permeabil ities which are already
very hi gh in compari si on to most oi 1 and gas
situations normally dictate relatively large
volume, high rate treatments.
If stimulation can reduce or eliminate the
need for new wells or redrills, then the poten-
tial for improving geothermal development econo-
mics and extending the developable resource base
is substantial. Stimulation may be conducted in
format ions Hhi ch produce ei ther hot \'1ater or
stear.l from both matrix permeabil ity and natural
fracture systems. The following targets of
opportunity are of common interest in geothermal
fields today:
o Hells that did not intersect nearby major
fracture systems;
o s that can benefi t fror.l the estab-
~/ell
lishment of high conductivity linear flovl
channels to improve f10\,1 capacity from
surroundi ng local; zed regi ons of low
permeability formation;
o s that suffered man-made damage dur-
\~ell
ing drilling, completion, or \'lOrkover
operations, including T;1Ud or ceT.lent in-
vasion; and
o Hell s that require periodic remedial
treatment as a result of fluid production
related damage.
The first of the above situations is expect-
ed to be the most cor.1T:lOn because the major; ty of
geothermal wells produce from naturally fractured
reservoirs. Even in Nell-developed fields, hm/-
ever, nevI \'Jell s often fail to encounter suffi-
ciently productive fractures. Redrilling in an
attempt to encounter better fractures is al-
r.lOst standard industry procedure in such cases.
The greatest potential for stimulation lies in
its abil ity to rel iably and econor:1ically replace
redri 11 s as a means of connecti n9 \Ii th maj or
fractures in a naturally fractured reservoir.
Both acid fracturing and hydraulic fracturing
have promise of being successful methods.
In order to be economically attractive,
fracturing must be at least as reliable as re-
drilling in establishing comr:1Unication \'1ith
r.lajor natural fractures. One concern has been
that formation stresses will dictate a direction
for the created fracture parallel to the natural
fractures with the result that adequate communi-
cation will not be reliably established. Results
SPE103lfi
to date suggest thi sis probably not a general
problem because most geothermal reservoirs
appear to be naturally fractured in mUltiple
directions.
Currently a fracture treatment with accompa-
nyi ng \'1ell \'Iork is one-thi rd to one-hal f the
cost of a ne\'I well and comparabl e in cost to a
redrill. Even at costs of this magnitude, frac-
turing would be economically attractive if its
success ratio is better than that of redrilling.
Substantial potential for cost reduction exists
in treatment optimization and novel treatment
techniques. Costs can be reduced most of all by
new well completion practices. If stimulation
proves to be a generally viable option, opera-
tors will change fror.! long openhole or slotted
liner completions to accommodate stimulation
without extensive well work.
Recognition of the potential benefits of
devel opi ng a successful geothermal well stimul a-
tion capability led the Department of Energy/
Division of Geothermal Energy (DOE/DGE) to spon-
sor the Geothermal Reservoir Well Stimulation
Program (GRWSP) beginning in 1979. The scope of
work under the GRWSP emphasi zes hydraul i c frac-
turi ng ; n hot water reservo; rs and speci fi ca 11y
excludes explosive fracturing. The principal
purpose of the discussion below is to review the
si x fi el d experiments cOr.lpl eted to date. Tabl e
1 summarizes the six field experiments.
STIMULATION TREATt1ENTS AT RAFT RIVER
Raft River, Idaho, is a 10\t-temperature
(260-290F) hydrotherr.1al resource. Well s RRGE-l
and RRGE-2 are the best produc; ng well sin the
field and appear to intersect a natural fracture
zone in the quartz monzonite reservoir. These
fractures have high transmissibility, with a
permeabi 1 i ty-thickness (kh) of greater than
50,000 md-ft. Hell s RRGE-3, RRGP-4 and RRGP-5
are less productive and were all considered for
stimul ation. Well s RRGP-4 and RRGP-5 were
chosen as the best blO candi dates for stimul a-
tion because RRGE-3 is farther from the best
producing wells and its mechanical configuration
is very complex. Figure 1 is a map of the field
shovil n9 the well s and the surface traces of the
two major faults.
Before stimulation, RRGP-4 was essentially
nonproductive. RRGP-5, hm"lever, was capable of
f10\'ling at a stabilized rate of 66,000 lb/hr and
produced more than 283,000 1b/hr wi th a pump.
Thi sis adequate producti vi ty, but the produc-
tion came fror.l the upper portion of the comple-
tion interval, and the produced fluid tempera-
ture of 255F was unders; rably low. Based on
the perforr:1ance of the better well sin the fi el d
and the proximity of \Jell s RRGP-4 and RRGP-5 to
the Bridge and Narrows Faults, it was considered
1 i kely that hi ghly producti ve fractures exi sted
near the well s. Hydraul i c fracture treatments
in the deeper interval s were chosen as the best
means to connect the wells with major productive
fractures and to achi eve the desi red produced
fluid temperatures of 270F or greater. Al-
though on the upper temperature margins of
conventional oil field fracturing technology, no
special techniques or material s ~'1ere thought to
SPEl0316 D. A. Campbell, C. W. Morris, R. V. Verity
be necessary for Raft River.
To isolate the deep interval of ~4ell RRGP-4
for the fracture treatment, a 7-1 nch 1 i ner was
cemented through the upper porti on of the open-
hole interval (Figure 2). This isolated a 195-
foot openhole interval (4,705-4,900 feet) near
the bottom of the well for the hydraul i c frac-
ture treatment. The techni que employed was a
four-stage dendri t; c fracture treatment. It \'1as
chosen because, if dendri ti c fracturi ng was
achi eved, it offered the best chance of i nter-
secting major natural fractures. The main
concern was that a single, planar fracture might
only parallel and not intersect the principal
natural fractures. The dendritic, or reverse
flow, fracturing technique is designed to create
branch; ng or di versi on of the fracture \'1i ngs by
downhole stress modification. r~ultiple stages
or pumping periods are used with each stage
utilizing a low-viscosity fluid, sand slugs, and
blO brief flow-back periods. High pumping rates
are used in these treatments to offset f1 ui d
leakoff into natural fractures and to enhance
erosi on in the fracture faces by the proppant
and fine sand.
The 7,900 bb1 treatment was pumped at a high
rate (50 bpm) and utilized a light polymer gel
frac fluid (HP Guar) carrying relatively low
concentrati ons of proppant. The treatment i n-
cl uded 50,400 1 b of 100-mesh sand added for
leakoff control and 58,000 lb of 20/40-mesh sand
proppant. Use of both sand and HP Guar was con-
sidered acceptable here because of the relative-
ly low temperature.
Following the treatment, the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) ran thei r hi gh temperature acous-
tic borehole televiewer and observed that the
created fracture extended the full 1 95-foot
height of the open interval and was oriented
approximately east-west, parallel to the nearby
Narrm\/s Fault (Figure 1). In the post-
stimulation flOlrJ test, the well produced at a
stabilized rate of 28,300 lb/hr with a downhole
fl ui d temperature of 270F. Thi s rate repre-
sented at least a five-fold increase over the
pre-stimulation rate; but even with an estimated
pumped rate capability of more than 100,000
lb/hr, the \'/ell was still subcommercial. The
produced fluid temperature is significantly
hi gher than past measurements. Thi s fact
suggests that the new artificial fracture is
producing fluid from a deep zone not open in the
original hole. The chemical data further
support thi s i nterpretati on in tha t the extent
of polymer degradati on determi ned chern; cally is
consi stent wi th fl ui d exposed to hi gher temper-
atures.
Conventional fracture type curve analysis
(1 og-l og plot) yi el ds a fracture 1 ength of
approximately 335 feet and a permeabil ity-
thickness (kh) of 800 md-ft. The Horner plot of
the same pressure buildup data has two straight
1 ine segments after the fracture dorainated
period, one during early time (less than 15
hours) and one during later time (greater than
15 hours). These two segments give kh values of
1,070 md-ft and 85,000 md-ft, and suggest the
presence of more than one permeabi 1 i ty zone in
3
the Vicinity of the well bore. Also, a negative
skin factor {minus 6.0} indicates a stimulated
zone close to the wel1bore.
Well RRGP-5 originally had good productivity
from the upper portion of the completion inter-
val. The goal of the treatment for thi s well
was a similar or higher productivity, but from a
deeper, hotter interval. The ''Iell \'1as recom-
pleted similar to RRGP-4 in preparation for this
stimul aton treatment. The recompl eti on cons i s-
ted of cementing a 7-inch liner through the
upper portion of the openhole interval which
sealed off the existing producing interval and
left a 2l6-foot openhole interval near the bot-
tom of the we 11 A 1 a rge fracture treatment
designed to create a single planar propped frac-
ture was selected for RRGP-5. The treatment
consi sted of 7,600 bbl of a rel atively low vi s-
cosity polymer gel {HP Guar} with 84,000 lb of
100-mesh sand for leakoff control and 347,000 lb
of 20/40-mesh sand proppant. Near the end of
the treatment, the pumpi ng rate \"IIas gradually
reduced in an effort to sand the well out and
leave the fracture propped near the wellbore
with an open, high-conductivity channel near the
top. As the rate approached zero, the \'1ell head
pressure dropped to zero psi g i ndi cati ng that
communication with the major natural fracture
system had been achieved. Also, a significant
pressure response was noted in RRGE-l during the
frac job.
Follm'/ing the treatnent, the USGS borehole
tel evi e\'/er showed that the created fracture
spanned the upper 135 feet of the open interval.
The fracture vias oriented northeast-southv/est,
parallel to the nearby Bridge Fault {Figure 1}.
In the post-stimulation production test, the
well stabi 1 i zed very rapidly at a 94,300 1 b/hr
rate with a 30 psia wellhead pressure. The
produced fluid temperature was unchanged fron
the pre-stimulation flow. Follm'ling the natural
f10VI test, a pump was installed in the well and
it produced more than 307,000 lb/hr. Chemical
analysis of the produced fluid indicated a
rel at; vely low rate of polymer degradati on in
the reserVOir, confirming that the frac fluid
traveled upward into a cooler portion of the
reservoir.
Pressure bui 1 du p and temperature data also
suggest strongly that the fracture treatment
\'Ient up\,/ard to the original producing interval.
The Horner plot of the pressure buil dup data
shm'ls only a short trans i ti on phase bet\'Ieen the
fracture dominated period and the late time
constant pressure period. Estimates of the late
time format; on kh were 1 a rge--greater than
100,000 rnd-ft. The Horner analysis indicates a
very large positive skin factor. This skin
factor is probably not due to format; on damage
but rather to the 1 imited entry nature of the
comple~ion.
STIMULATION TREATMENTS AT EAST ~1ESA
The East Mesa field, in the Imperial Valley
of California, is a moderate-temperature reser-
voir producing from a sandstone and siltstone
matrix. Several features of East ~1esa made it
an excellent choice for the second set of field
4 Geothermal Well Stimulation Experiments and Evaluation
----------------------~----------------~~------------
experiments. The reservoir is knmln in more
detail than most other geothermal reservoirs and
thi sin-depth kno\'ll edge provi des a sound basi s
for designing and evaluating stimulation treat-
ments. The moderate temperature range (320-
350F) Has the next 109i ca 1 step from Raft Ri ver
conditions in the evaluation of fracture fluids,
proppants, and mechanical equipment. The selec-
tion of a r.latrix-type reservoir was also impor-
tant at thi s stage of the prograra. Fracture
geometry has been successfully predicted in
r.latrix-type reservoirs in the petroleur.1 indus-
try, and the existing interpretive techniques
shoul d transfer to geothermal reservoirs. Fur-
thermore, the reservoir fluids, with a total
dissolved solids content of less than 2,000
mg/1, were not expected to chemically interfere
\/ith the stimu1 at; on fl ui ds or tracers.
~/ell 58-30, sel ected for these experiments,
is ideally suited mechanically. Unlike r.1any
other geothenna 1 \'1ell s at East f1esa and el se-
\'/here, it is completed with a cemented, jet
perforated liner (Figure 3). This afforded an
opportuni ty to easily and cheaply i sol ate zones
of a s-j ze that can be effect; vely treated and
evaluated. The first treatment \'las a planar type
hydraul ; c fracture of a 250-foot, 10\,/-
permeability sand-stone interval (6,587 1 -6,834 1 )
near the bottom of the well. This zone has good
sand development, but the perraeabi 1; ty has been
severely reduced because of authi geni c cementa-
tion by carbonate minerals. Porosity is still
hi gh enough, however, to prov; de good storage
capacity. A fracture treatment of this zone \las
intended to create a hi gh conducti vity 1 i near
fl m-I channel in the 10\'1 perr.1eabil; ty area sur-
rounding the well, thereby enhancing the flow
capacity. The treatment consisted of 2,800 bbl
of a viscous crosslinked polymer frac fluid and
163,000 lb of sand. The fluid \'1as pUlilped at an
average rate of 40 bpm during the treatment.
The second treatment was a dendri ti c type
fracture treatment in a shallm-,er, cooler,
higher permeability, 300-foot interval (4,952 1
- pl ugged back to 5,600 feet to i sol ate the upper
5,2561
) of the same well. This. upper zone,
drilled with a predominantly bentonitic mud
system, has good sands (high porosity and perne-
ability) which sho\"1 permeability inpairr.lent near
the \'1ellbore. The staged treatment was designed
to create mul ti pl e short fractures through the
damaged zone around the \'1ellbore. The treatment
consisted of 10,300 bbl of lm~ viscosity frac
fluid (HP Guar) and 44,000 lb of 100-mesh sand
pur.lped in five stages at an average rate of 48
bpn. The 100-mesh sand was injected in slugs as
a fluid-loss control agent in the 50 md perme-
ability sandstone, as a diverter for succeeding
stages of the treatnent and to erode flow chan-
nels in the fracture faces.
From July 25 to August 2, 1980, the v/ell was
producti on tested to eval uate the fracture ex-
periment on the upper zone. The lower section
of the \'Iell, frora 6,547 feet to TO, was sanded
back to prevent flow fror.1 the lower frac zone.
The \'Iell flm/ed an average of 132,000 lb/hr.
Reservoir pressure buil dup data show the total
open interval permeabil; ty-thickness \'/as 9,427
r.1d-ft, or approximately a 108 percent increase
in kh for the upper frac zone. This analysis
SPEI0316
indicates the shall 0\'1 hydraulic stimulation
treatment of the high permeability, upper inter-
val \'Ias very successful. The upper zone treat-
ment to correct near wellbore damage is of
particular importance because such mud and
cement damage is bel i eved to be a common cause
of irapairment in Imperial Valley geothermal
well s.
Well .cl ean-out operati ons \'1ere i ni ti ated ; n
August to remove the sand coveri ng the lower
frac zone. The coil tubing being used to lift
sand out of the well parted and left approxi-
mately 5,170 feet of tubing in the hole.
Fall owi ng the fi shi ng and c1 ean-out operati ons,
the enti re \'1ell bore \'1as opened for a flow test
and the well achieved a total flow rate of about
198,000 lb/hr. The lower zone, stimulated \'1ith
a small hydrau1 i c fracture treatr.lent, showed a
19 percent increase in kh but an 84 percent in-
crease in fluid production. In addition, the
overall fluid production temperature increased
by 5F. Hi gher temperatures reduce the hydrau-
lic head in the wellbore (lower flash point) and
thereby increase the natural flow rate r:1ore than
would be expected from the kh increase alone.
In summary, Hell 58-30 \'Ias successfully
stimulated by the two fracture treatments. Al-
though SOQe of the improvement in the upper
interval was lost during workover operations,
the overall productivity of the well had been
increased 112% and the kh had been increased 38%.
STIIv1ULATION TREATt-1DJT AT THE GEYSERS
The fi fth experiment \'IaS performed at The
Geysers geothenna 1 area in Sonoma County,
California, and was cost-shared with the well
operator, Uni on Geothermal Company. The \Jell
chosen for thi s chemi ca 1 stimul ati on treatment
\'Ias Ottoboni State No. 22. This \tell is com-
pleted openhole fron 4,600 feet to 8,360 feet in
naturally fractured graywacke. The reservoir
temperature is about 460F. The well I/'Ias
1 ,000 feet of openhol e i nterva 1 for the treat-
ment.
The stimul ati on techni que employed was an
aci d etchi ng treatment (Hall i burton Servi ces
rW-T-ACIO). A 476 bbl low viSCOSity prepad
was pumped to prov; de cool i ng of the tubul ars
and formation. Follovlling the prepad were 476
bbl of high viSCOSity crosslinked gel fluid
(Versagel 1600) and 476 bbl of 10% HF -5% HCl
acid with corrosion inhibitors and friction
reducer. After the acid, an additional 445 bbl
of low viscosity fluid were injected as dis-
placement and overflush.
Fracture fluid pump rates of 20-40 bpm and a
surface pressure of 3,000 psi 9 were estimated
for this stimulation job. However, no signifi-
cant surface pressure was recorded and all fluids
eas i ly flo\"/ed into the interval. Subsequent
eval uation of well performance showed that no
noticeable stimUlation had been achieved eVen
though the fracture fluids were properly placed.
Temperature and radioactive tracer surveys indi-
cated that the fracture fluids entered natural
pre-existi n9 fracture channel sin the lower 650
SPEI0316 D. A. Campbell, C. w. Morris, R. V. Verity
feet of the 1,000-foot openho1e interval. In
addition, chemical tracers injected sequentially
with the frac fluids returned in a highly mixed
fashion. The small fluid volume er.1ployed and
widespread entry interval probably resulted in a
shallow penetration of the formation.
After the job the \'1e11 was cleaned out to
total depth and returned to its pre-stimu1 ati on
condition. The final steam flow rate was 41,200
lb/hr which is similar to the rate recorded
before the stimulation job. This confirmed the
fact that the aci d etchi ng treatment di d not
create any new, high conductivity flow paths to
the main reservoir system. There;s no evidence
to suggest, however, that the acid etching
technique will not work, and the technique needs
to be attempted agai n ina shorter treatment
interval or with larger fluid volumes.
STIMULATION TREATMENT AT THE BACA PROJECT AREA
The Baca reservoir lies within the Jemez
Crater, Valles Caldera, and is defined by more
than twenty \-/ell s compl eted to date in the
Redondo Creek area by Uni on Geothermal Company
of New Mexico. The main reservoir, lI-,OOO to
6,000 feet in thickness, is composed of volcanic
tuffs with low permeability and a primary flo\,1
system of open fracture channel s. In the
Redondo Creek area, wells have encountered a
high temperature (550F) liquid-dominated res-
ervoir, but several wells have not been of
commercial capacity, primarily because of the
absence of productive natural fractures at the
we11bore. After considering several candidate
wells, RGI and Union agreed that Baca Well 23, a
dry hole with a rig still in place was a good
well of opportunity for the experiment. Experi-
ment costs were shared by Uni on and the GRWSP.
Baca 23 was originally completed with a
11
9-5/8 1 i ner cemented at 3,057 feet and 8-3/411
openho1e to 5,700 feet. The well was flow
tested at that time and woul d not sustai n pro-
duction. A relatively shallow interval from
3,300 feet to 3,500+ feet in the \'1ell was
selected for fracture- stimulation. Productive
fractures had previously been encountered near
thi s depth approximately 200 feet away in Baca
10 during drilling (later damaged by cement). A
231-foot openhole interval (3,300-3,531 feet)
was i sol ated for the treatment by pl uggi ng the
\..,rell back to 3,531 feet and cement; ng a ]I' 1 i ner
in the interval 2,917-3,300 feet. The tempera-
ture in the zone selected was approximately
450F, which is low for the Baca reservoir.
The well was stimulated with a hydraulic
fracture treatment consisting of 7,641 bbl of
fluid and 180,000 lb of 20/40-mesh proppant. A
3,581 bbl col d water prepad \'/as pumped at an
average rate of 38 bpm. The frac fl ui d con-
sisted of 3,998 bbl of crosslinked (60 lb/1000
gal HP guar) polymer gel pumped at an average
rate of 66 bpm and an average pressure of 3,300
psig. The final displacement was with 62 bb1 of
water. The treatment was pumped through a
4-1/211 tubing frac string with a high tempera-
11
ture packer set near the top of the 7 liner.
Although the job was basically a convention-
5
a 1 hydraul i c fracture treatment, the hi gh fonna-
tion temperature (450F) dictated special design
and materials selection requirements. There-
fore, the large prepad was dedicated to wellbore
and fracture pre-COOling. While frac fluid pro-
perti es are known to degrade rapi dly at hi gh
temperature, these effects were minimized by
pre-cooling, by pumping at high rates (up to 75
bpm), and by limiting the frac interval to 231
feet. Proppants were selected for the; r i nsen-
sitivity to the high temperature (Sinclair et
al., 1980). Both resi n-coated sand and si ntered
bauxite were used. The two proppants were mixed
in near equal proportions by weight. Chemical
work i ncl uded compati bi 1i ty studi es of the frac
materi al s wi th the fonnation fl ui ds and the use
of chemical tracers to monitor fluid returns.
During the fracture treatment, Los Alamos
Sci enti fi c Laboratory perfonned a fracture
mappi ng experiment usi ng Saca 6 as an observa-
ti on well. A tri axi al geophone system was
placed in the well, and using techniques devel-
oped for the Hot Dry Roc k Proj ect, mi cro-sei smi c
activity caused by the fracture job was mapped.
The 14 di screte sei smi c events measured i ndi ca-
ted northeast trendi ng acti vi ty i n a zone
roughly 2,300 feet long, 650 feet wide, and
1,300 feet high (Figure 4). The rock failure,
therefore, occurred ina broad zone and suggests
the stimul ati on di d not resul tin the creati on
of a singular monolithic fracture. These micro-
sei sm; c events woul d be expected to proceed in
advance of any si gni fi cantly wi dened, a rti fi-
cially created fracture and would not neces-
sarily defi ne a fi nal propped flow path to the
wellbore at Baca 23. Calculations of the theo-
reti cal fracture 1ength were made assumi ng a
300-foot hi gh fracture. The resul ts suggest a
fracture wi n9 of 430 to 580 feet in 1 ength may
have been created, dependi ng on the assumpti ons
utilized for the frac fluid, fluid efficiency,
and fracture height.
As discussed above, the 231-foot interval
isolated for stimUlation was nonproductive prior
to the treatment. Thi s i ndi cated that no s1 g-
nificant natural fractures intersected the
well bore. Twelve hours after the frac job, a
stati c temperature survey was obtai ned by Denver
Research I nsti tute. Thi s survey showed a zone
cooled by the frac fluids of more than 300 feet
; n hei ght at the well bore.
On March 26, 1981, a 6-hour production test
through d ri 11 pi pe was perfonned ; n whi ch tran-
sient, downhole pressure and temperature mea-
surements were obtai ned. A un; que test; ng
method was utilized to overcome the problems
associated with flowing a geothennal well
through small di ameter pi pe from an underpre s-
sured reservoi r. The procedure was a combi na-
tion of conventional drill stem test (DST)
methods (to eliminate large wellbore storage
effects) and ga s lift to mai ntai n steady,
single-phase flow to the well bore. The gas lift
was provided by injecting nitrogen gas at depth
through coil tubing inside the drill pipe. As a
result of this procedure, the well flowed at a
low, steady rate (about 21,000 1 b/hr) and the
transi ent pressure data obtai ned downho1 e pro-
vided a clear indication of \'1ellbore storage
6 Geothermal Well Stimulation Experiments and Evaluation
effects, fracture flow effects, and reservoi r
transmi ssi vi ty.
A conventional Horner analysis of the pre~
sure buil dup data yi e 1ded an average reserVOl r
penneability-thickness of 2,500 md-ft. This
compares closely with results from other sub-
commercial wells in the area. An average reser-
voir value of 6,000 md-ft has been obtained by
Union from interference testing. The length of
the fracture was calculated from the pressure
data to be about 300 feet. The maximum recorded
flowi ng temperature was 342F and i ndi cated that
the near well bore area had not recovered from
the injection of cold fluids.
Following the modified DST, a 49-hour flow
test was perfonned to detenni ne the well 1 s
productive capacity. The results showed that
the well could produce approximately 120,000
1 b/hr total mass flow at a well head pressure of
45 psi g, although the rate was conti nui ng to
decline. The chemical tracer data showed that
the frac fluid stages were thoroughly mixed
together in the return fluids and the frac
polymer had thennally degraded by the end of
thi s test.
Union perfonned a long-tenn flow test on the
well in April-May 1981. A stat; c temperature
profile of the well prior to this test showed
that the bottom-hole temperature still remained
low (401F). Temperature and pressure surveys
obtai ned duri ng thi s test recorded a temperature
of 344F and a pressure of 120 psig at 3,500
feet. Therefore, two-phase flow was occurring
well back in the fonnati on, wi th the steam frac-
ti on estimated at more than 50 percent. Evi dence
of two-phase flow in the reservoi r has been ob-
served in other well sin the field.
Of greater concern ; s the low product; vi ty
observed duri ng thi s 1ast test. The mass flow
rate had dropped to 73,000 lb/hr with a wellhead
pressure of 37 psig in May 1981. Since the well
recovers producti vi ty foll owi ng each shut-i n
period and then exhibits the same decline again,
the cause of the rate decl i ne is not due to
scaling 1n the fonnation. Partial closing of
the fracture is possible, due to pressure draw-
down. The most probabl e expl anati on, however,
is that the producti vi ty loss is the resul t of
relative penneability reduction associated with
two-phase flow effects in the fonnation.
Al though the stimul ati on treatment di d not
resul tin a commerci a1 well at Baca 23, the
hydrauli c fracturi ng techni que shows promi se for
future stimulation operations and for being a
valid alternative to redrilling. The well was
capable of near-economic steam rates at low
well head pressures, but it woul d not produce at
the >100 psig design flowline pressure of the
planned Baca power plant. This sensitivity to
wellhead pressure appears related to the re-
source temperature and pressure and suggests
that future stimulation treatments should be
done in deeper, hotter interval s.
CONCLUSIONS
Both fracture stimulation treatments at Raft
SPEI0316
River were successful in establishing production
from previ ously nonproducti ve zones. However,
neither treatment resulted ina commercial pro-
ducing well. In the case of RRGP-4, the frac-
ture apparently communi cated wi th a hi ghly
productive zone but the fracture was of insuffi-
cient conductivity. The more conventional frac-
ture treatment in RRGP-5 establ i shed commerci a 1
p roduci ng rates from the deeper porti on of the
well. HO\'/ever, the low produced fluid tempera-
ture made it subcommerci al. Eval uati on of the
job i ndi cates that the fracture was di verted to
a shallow, cooler interval, probably through a
nearby abandoned well bore.
The two stimul ati on treatments in East Mesa
58-30 more than doubled production from the well
and consti tuted an economi c and techni cal
success. The lower zone treatment stimulated
production from a tight sandstone fonnation.
The upper zone treatment successfully penetrated
mud and cement damaged hi gh penneabi 1i ty sands
around the wellbore.
The aci d etch; ng treatment of the Ottoboni
State 22 well; n The Geysers failed to increase
production. It is believed likely that the
treatment fl ui ds were di ss; pated into mul ti pl e
natural mi crofractures and therefore fa; led
to penetrate deep enough into the fonnat; on to
enhance communi cat; on wi th major natural frac-
tures. Future treatments should employ larger
fluid volumes and/or shorter treatment intervals
to overcome this problem.
The fracture treatment in Baca 23 success-
fully established communication with the reser-
voi r from a zone whi ch was nonproducti ve before
the treatment. Economic flow rates were not ob-
tained however. Evaluation of the job has indi-
cated that the fracture conductivity achieved
was marginally acceptable, but the zone selected
for treatment was probably too shallow and
cool. A second fracture treatment at Baca i s
being planned for a deeper, hotter interval and
wi 11 be desi gned to create hi gher fracture con-
duct; vi ty.
With few exceptions, conventional fluids,
proppants, and equi pment have perfonned sati s-
f actori ly in the si x sti mul ati on experi ments.
In many cases special techniques were employed
to allo'w the use of available materials and
equipment. Results of the treatments have been
mi xed, but in all cases the eval uati ons sug-
gested possible improvements in the selection of
candidate wells, selection of the stimUlation
interval s, and ; n treatment des; gn for future
work.
A substanti al number of add; ti onal experi-
ments wi 11 be needed to bri ng geothennal well
stimulation technology to the point of regular
commercial application. Future field experi-
ments wi" be di rected toward: (l) confi nnati on
and improvement of techni ques al readY' appl i ed;
(2) testing of new techniques; and (3) extension
to new (lithology and fluids) and hotter reser-
voi r condi ti ons.
SPE10316 D. A. Campbell, C. W. Morris, R. V. Verity 7

REFERENCES
Sinclair, A. R., Pittard, F. J., and Hanold,
R. J., "Geothennal Well Stimulation," Geo-
thenmal Resources Council, Transactions,
Vol. 4, September 1980.
 TABLE 1

GRWSP SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTS

Frac
Res. Interva 1
LlI.P"l'- Lucation Reservoir S timula tion
iment & Well Formation Treatment Frac Fluid Proppant

Raft River, ID 290 Fractured metamorphic Dendri tic hydraulic 195 7900 bbl Sand 50.400 1 b 100-mes h
RRGP-4 & intrusive rocks fracture 10 1 b HP Guar /1000 gal 58,000 Ib 20/40-mesh
2 Ib xc Polymer/IOOO gal

Raft River, ID 290 Fractured 216 7600 bbl Sand 84,000 lb 100-mesh
RRGP-5 & intrusive 30 1 b HP Guar / 1000 gal 347,000 lb 20/40-mesh

East Mesa, CA 350 Deltaic sandstone Hydraulic fracture 247 2800 bbl Sand 44,500 lb 100-mesh
58-30 & shale sequence 60 lb HP Guar 59,200 lb 20/40-mesh
(Crosslinked Resin-coated Sand
gel)/lOOO gal 60,000 lb 20/40-mesh

East Nesa, CA 320 Deltaic sandstone Dendritic hydraulic 304 10,300 bbl Sand 44,000 Ib lOO-mesh
58-30 & shale sequence fracture 10 1 b HP Guar /1000 gal
2 Ib XC Polymer/lOOO gal

Baca, NM 450 Fractured Bandelier Large hydraulic 231 3600 bbl water pre-pad Sand 42,000 lb lOO-mesh
B-23 tuff fracture 4000 bbl Resin-coa ted Sand
60 lb HP Guar 81,500 Ib 20/40-mesh
(Crosslinked Bauxite 98,500 Ib 20/40-mesh
gel)/lOOO gal

CA 460 Frac tured Franciscan Acid etching 1000 476 bbl Prepad None
graywacke & 15 lb HP Guar/lOOO gal
greenstone 476 bbl Pad
60 Ib HP Guar
(Crosslinked
gel)/lOOO gal
476 bb1 10% HF-S% HCl
'.45 bbl Displacemen t
15 1 b HP Guar /1000 ga 1

24

RRGP 4

- + - - - - - - - ---'-'"-"---:-::=---:-:::---- -------....-,1-----
USGS-3- MW - 1 MW 2
MW4
(1460') (1209') (575') -(1000')
MW 5
_(500')

II -
ItRRGI-6
RRGE3 \I MW-6 _
26 II
I:MW 7 (1100')
11(500')-
II
1\

~
RRGI-7

FIGURE
MAP OF RAFT RIVER IDAHO
 20"CASING--~

13 3/8" CASING----..

rl41----1512'

~._--1820'

1830'---

---1887'

9 5/8"CASING-----

3307' - - - - - I......
"'.1-----2840'
KICK-OFF 3526'-----t1l{ ,;~ ..- - - - - - - - KICK-OFF 3555'

---------7" LINER

~~ ......-----4705t

------TD5110'

100 --.,.__- - - - - - - - - - T D 5420'

IlCI 465

FIGURE 2
SCHEMATIC OF RAFT RIVER RRGP-4 WITH 7" LINER IN PLACE
 ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO
K.B., 11.5' ABOVE GROUND.
SURFACE
24" CONDUCTOR

1732'------''-IlW...

1962' _ - - o.....'1'!

1+-_ _ 103/4", BUTTRESS CASING

_ 7 5/8" 33.7, LB. N80, BUTTRESS

CASING
SELECTED INTERVALS PERFORATED
W/4 JET SHOTS PER FOOT WITHIN
MAJOR INTERVALS SHOWN ABOVE

SELECTED INTSRVALS REPERFORATEO

(TOTAL 8 JET SHOTS PER FOOT)
WITHIN THE INTERVAL SHOWN.

7305'T.D. ~~=::J!ll:::::!;::;;~

FIGURE 3
COMPLETION DETAIL FOR EAST MESA 58-30

BACA6
LOCATION OF
GEOPHONE
PACKAGE

.

BACA23~

i;{

FIGURE 4
BACA 23 FRACTURE TREATMENT MICROSEISMIC EVENT
LOCATIONS SHOWN IN PLAN VIEW