Natural Gas Hydrates

in the Alaskan Arctic. .

S.P. Godbole, SPE, U. of Alaska
V.A. Kamath, SPE, U. of Alaska
C. Ehlig-Economldes, * SPE, Flopetrol Johnston

Summary. The occu~rence of in-situ natural gas hydrates in the arctic North Slope of Alaska is governed by several thermo-
dynamic and geologic parameters, such as mean annual surface temperature, geothermal gradients above and below the base of the
permafrost,pore-fluid salinity, permafrost base depth and temperature, subsurface pressure, and composition. Accurate knowledge
of these parameters is necessary to determine the depths and thicknesses of zones of potential hydrate occurrences. The role of the
parameters is discussed in this paper. To determine the hydrate-stability zone, a nomogram has been developed and has been used
for several Alaskan wells. For further delineation of gas hydrates, the neutron-transit-time crossplots have served as a. valuable
tool. To quantify gas hydrate deposits in terms of thickness, porosity, and saturation; use of neutron- and sonic-porosity-correction
factors and Pickett crossplots is recommended.

Introduction Gas Hydrate Stability

Natural gas hydrates are ice-like mixtures of natural gas and water
in which gas molecules are trapped within the crystalline structures
of frozen water. They exist in arctic regions of Soviet Siberia, Cana-
da, and the North Slope of Alaska where low temperatures exist
far beneath the earth's surface. Gas hydrates are concentrated forms
of natural gas and contain about 160 to 180 times the natural gas
by volume at standard conditions. Because ofthe widespread exis-
tence of gas hydrates, they are considered as an alternative source
of natural gas in the future.
Natural gas hydrates have been studied in the past primarily to
determine how to avoid their formation in natural gas transmission
lines. I The discovery of huge oil and natural gas resources on the
North Slope of Alaska, however, first stimulated interest in gas
hydrates in these regions. In 1971, a study by Katz 2 indicated that
gas hydrates can be stable up to depths of 3,940 ft [1200 m] on
the North Slope of Alaska. The first confirmed evidence of the pres-
ence of gas hydrates in Alaska was obtained on March 15, 1972,
when Arco and Exxon recovered gas hydrate core samples in pres-
surized core barrels at several depths between 1,893 and 2,546 ft
[577 and 776 m] from the Northwest Eileen Well No.2 in the Prud-
hoe Bay field. 3 Since then, several studies have been done to iden-
tify and quantify the gas hydrate resources of Alaska. 4 -8 In 1983,
Collett 4 and Collett and Ehlig-Economides 5 examined 125 wells
in the North Slope of Alaska for potential hydrate occurrence. 'They
developed techniques for detecting gas hydrates from well log data.
In their studies, 102 definite hydrate occurrences in 32 different
wells were identified. Godbole and Ehlig-Economides 6 examined
34 wells in Alaska and indicated that there is a possibility of hy-
drate occurrence in 14 of the wells. Kamath et al. 7 examined 46
wells and showed th!!t gas hydrate deposits may be found in 10 of
them.
Collett et al. 8 have used the Pickett crossplotting technique along
with corrected neutron porosity and sonic porosity values to deter-
mine the depths, thicknesses, porosities, and saturations of in-situ
gas hydrates in the Kuparuk field region. They have estimated that
the amount of natural gas trapped in gas hydrates in the Kuparuk
field is about 53x 10 9 ft 3 /sq mile [579X 10 6 m 3 /km 2 ].
Matthews 9 recently described logging characteristics of gas hy-
drates in the Northwest Eileen Well No.2 and estimated that the
amount of natural gas trapped within gas hydrates was about
17.5x 10 9 to 37.7x 10 9 ft 3 /sq mile [192X 10 6 to 412x 10 6 m 31
km 2 ].
• Now at Schlumberger Perforating and Testing.
Copyright 1988 Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE Fonnation Evaluation, March 1988
The simplest and quickest method of identifying the zone of possible
gas hydrate occurrence is to examine the gas-hydrate-stability zone.
The essential condition for gas hydrate stability at a given depth
is that the actual earth temperature at the depth is lower than the
equilibrium temperature of hydrates corresponding to the pressure
and gas composition conditions. The thickness of a potential hy-
drate zone can be an important variable in drilling operations where
drilling through hydrates requires special precautions. It also can
be of significance in determining regions where hydrate occurrences
might be sufficiently thick to justify .gas recovery. The existence
of a gas-hydrate-stability condition, however,does not ensure that
hydrates exist in that region, but only that they can exist. But if
gas and water coexist within the hydrate-stability zone, then they
must exist in gas hydrate form.
The factors affecting the stability of gas hydrates in the arctic
regions include mean annual surface temperatures, geothermal gra-
dients above and below the base of permafrost, salinity, permafrost
depth, subsurface pressures, and gas composition. These parame-
ters vary significantly in the North Slope region and hence the ac-
curate values of these parameters need to be known in determining
the zone of hydrate stability. Table I gives the mean and standard
deviations for mean annual surface temperature, Ts , permafrost
base depth, Dp ' geothermal gradient within permafrost, Gfi., and
geothermal gradient below the base of the permafrost, Grh' in the
Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk-West Sak fields. The data for individu-
al wells in these fields are given in previous publications. 4 ,6.7,1O,ll
Fig. I shows a nomogram for determination of the zone of
methane hydrate stability for specific conditions of mean annual
Ts. salinity, Gjr' and Gth . The use ofthis nomogram is quite sim-
ple. First, for given salinity (in ppm) and me~n annual surface tem-
perature (in 0 F), TB - Ts is obtained by drawing a straight line.
Then for a giveri Gjr value, D p is obtained by drawing a straight
line through TB - Ts and Gfl" values. TB is the permafrost base'tem-
perature. For that value of D p ' the upper and lower boundaries of
the methane-hydrate-stability zone are determined for the corre-
sponding values of Gjr and Gth .
Osterkamp and Payne 12 and Zoeller 13 have suggested,that sub-
surface pressure for the shallow units on the North Slope can be
assumed to be in a hydrostatic equilibrium (0.435 psi/ft [9.84
kPa/mD. A shallow subsurface drillstem test and repeat formation
tests support the assumption of hydrostatic variation in pressure.
The nomogram developed in this study assumes hydrostatic varia-
tion in pressure. The sensitivity analysis shows that the hydrate-
stability zone increases by about 2.75% per percent increase in pres-
sure gradient above hydrostatic value.
Salts in the formation fluids not only depress the permafrost base
temperature, but also depress the equilibrium hydrate tempera-
263
 TABLE 1-GEOTHERMAL PROPERTIES FOA PRUDHOE BAY
AND KUPARUK·WEST SAK FIELDS

West Sak and

Prudhoe, Bay Kuparuk Field
Standard Standard
Parameter Mean Deviation Mean Deviation
Mean annual surface temperature, °C -10.9 0.5 -9.3 0,8
Geothermal gradient within permafrost, °C/100 m 1.66 0.11 1.75 0,26
Geothermal gradient below permafrost, °C/100 m 2.86 0.14 3.03 0.45
Permafrost depth, m 630 18 482 55

ture 14 and thus reduce the hydrate-stability zone. The salinity
values for the North Slope region vary between 5,000 and 14,000
ppm. The reduction in the hydrate-stability zone is about 2.3 % for
every 1,000 ppm increase in salinity, An increase in mean annual
surface temperature and geothermal gradients lowers the hydrate-
stability zone, whereas an increase in permafrost base temperature.
and depth increases the hydrate-stability zone.
Gas composition strongly influences hydrate stability conditions,
and hence accurate gascompositlons need to be known in any
hydrate-stability-zone calculations. The effect of gas composition
on hydrate sta1;lility is illustrated in Fig. 2. Additions of ethane,
propane, and isobutane increasingly affect methane-hydrate stability.
CO 2 will have an effect similar to that of ethane. Fig. 2 is con-
structed for mean values of the parameters for Kuparuk field, which
are listed in Table 1. Similar figures can be constructed for given
parameters to correct the hydrate-stability zone for gas composition.
Log Evaluation
Collett and Ehlig-Economides5 have reviewed the use of well logs
in the detection of hydrates. Collett et al. 8 have presented a tech-
nique for confirming the distinction between ice and hydrate as well
as for quantification of hydrate deposits. This. technique involves
the use of a neutron porosity transit time crossplot along with a
Pickett crossplot. They presented a correction factor based on hydro-
gen atom density in water with respect to hydrates. The ratio of
hydrogen present in.l cm 3 of water is compared to the hydrogen
present in 1 cm 3 of Structure I hydrate, which is 0.93 and could
be used as a correction factor to the neutron porosity within the
hydrate zone. It is necessary to use a compensated neutron log to
minimize the effect of increased borehole. In addition, the increased
wellbore resulting from thawing might contain drilling fluids and
free gas, and hence should be carefully considered. The porosity
measurements in cased holes should be considered only semiquan-
titative.
A transit time porosity correction factor similar to the neutron
porosity correction factor was outlined by Collett et al. 8 The com~
pressional and shear wave velocities of a formation are a function
of matrix and its constituents as well as the temperature of the for-
mation and the salinity of pore fluids. Collett et al. 8 have shown
that the ratio of compressional velocity in Boise core saturated with
Structure I hydrate (23°F [-5°C]) to compressional velocity in
Boise core saturated with ice at 23°F [-5°C] is 1.18-e.g., an ap-
parent porosity of 0.33 in hydrate-saturated zones would be cor-
rected as 0.39. These corrections should be considered only
approximate and might fail to give reasonable results.
Collett et al. 8 have evaluated a series of neutron porosities and
. sonic velocities for 18 units in a Kuparuk B-1 production well. Fig.
3 shows a crossplot of correcte9 neutron porosity and corrected

SALINITY
1l'P"'
o

I000O

lOGO
100
_ aoooo
ao

15
::- _ t--t--f--i--t-+--1-+--t
e"
z"
~
0 1000
I
zo:x'
t
t
,
:1000
I
I
I : - ,

.-
&. I-I--t--~I---+--+--+---+--t--t
10
Z I I ' :

.: -_. ~ ..-.. - :-- - .;. ---:. - -'

I I I I I

I I I I I

.... ..,.
'I I I
I. __ .1;. _ ._.'" '"'_._ .1-•. __ •
5
" I I:
~~ I I I
", I.... __.... 1 __ .-1-.-'
-~ :)
~.:: .. 0
o 4000 I
.. _--:---- .. .!
,
\,
-------- .... ..,. .
..... I ~
, I

I a 0
I
I z c
.... _ _ 0

J+--r----r-+-+--+--+-.....-1
o lIlOO 2000 _ -

PEIIMAflloliT "'SE - DEPT" eft)

Fig. 1-Nomogram for determination of methane-hydrate-stablllty zone.

264 SPE Formation Evaluation, March 1988

 2·0....-----------~---, 0·-----------...,
1·a LEGEND:
A ICE
eWATER
• HYDRATE
10~

15-
1·0 ,..,
CH.4
.,. M
A A

o·a+------J..-----'--...!.-------'\
o·a
..., 201- •
0·5 0'6 0'7 . >-
&AS &RAVITY -
~

..
en
0 251-
Fig. 2-Effect of gas gravity for binary hydrocarbon mixtures GIl
on the hydrate-stability zone. 0
At

transit-time velocity. Ice-, water-, and hydrate-saturated zones are Z 30 I-

clearly separated from each other. If a free-gas zone is encoun-
tered, the plotted values should be in the upper left corner of the
graph. . ~
For a mixture of hydrate/water coexistence, the Pickett cross-
plots could be used to calculate the average water saturation and
hence the average hydrate saturation. An incorrect identification
of potential hydrate zone or wrong selection of pore water resistivity
can greatly alter the saturation.
In general, the most effective method for identifying and quan-
tifying gas hydrate deposits is first to determine the hydrate-stability
zone and then use well logs to delineate hydrates within stability
zones.
Economics of Gas Production From Gas Hydrates
To produce natural gas from hydrate zones, it is necessary to decom-
pose the hydrates into gas and water by various methods, such as
depressurization, 15 steam 16 or hot-water injection, 17 or injection
of such chemicals as methanol, glycols, and brines, 18 which are
inhibitors of hydrates. It is not possible to recommend any particular
production technique a priori. It will depend on the form of hy-
drate deposits (laminated, nodular, dispersed, or massive), types
of hydrates (all hydrate, excess gas, excess water, exceSs ice), per-
meabilities and porosities of hydrated and unhydrated zones,. and
heat losses. Detailed reviews of various production methods and
conceptual models are given by Kuuskraa et al. 19
It is difficult to anaiyze the economics of gas production from
these in-situ natural-gas-hydrate deposits because no data are avail-
able on the recovery factors achievable with various prOduction tech-
niques. Holder et al. 20 computed costs of gas production from
hydrates for depressurization and thermal recovery methods using
the basic cost data from Refs. 21 through 23 in their analysis. Cost
comparisons for single and triple zones of hydrates (25 ft [7.6 m]
thick) were presented in their study. These costs were updated for
arctic conditions and inflation. Using similar analysis in this study,
we did cost analyses for five hydrate zones (25 ft [7.6 m] thick
each); the detailed costs are given in Ref. 6. The approximate price
of natural gas necessary for consideration of gas production from
hydrates is $7.63/Mscf [$269/10 3 m 3 ]. The absence of more
realistic recovery models and field data makes detailed economic
analysis a futile exercise.
Conclusions
This paper describes the effect of geothermal properties and gas
compOsition on the thickness of a hydrate-stability zone in such arctic
0 e
GIl
~
III
z 35 l-
•
40 ...
• •
•
•••
•
45 l-
•
50
~---:-10~0=--~12~0=--~14~O~-1~6-0-1-J80
I I I
TRANSIT TIME VELOCITY
( mlcro.eel foot)
Fig. 3-Crosspiot of neutron porosity vs. transit time velocity
for differentiation of gas hydrates from ice and water.
regions as the North Slope of Alaska. A nomogram is developed
to determine the zone of methane hydrate stability for specific geo-
logic conditions. An illustrated example is presented to demonstrate
that gas composition has a very strong influence on the zone of hy·
drate stability and corrections for gas compositions are very im-
portant. In any geologic investigation for assessment of gas hydrate
resources, the effect of gas composition should be included.
The second step in hydrate resource assessment is to investigate
well logs to confirm gas hydrate occurrence and to quantify the
gas trapped in the hydrates within the zone of stability. For differen-
tiating hydrates from ice, the crossplots of corrected neutron porosity
and transit-time velocity are most useful. For accurate determina-
tion of porosity and saturation of hydrate intervals, sonic and neu-
tron porosity correction factors along with Pickett crossplots are
suggested.
The extent and type of hydrate deposits need to be analyzed in
detail along with the development of recovery models before this

SPE Formation Evaluation, March 1988 265

resource is considered for in-depth economic analysis. It is unlikely
that any commercial production of gas from hydrates will occur
before the free gas in Alaska comes to market. In cases where hy~
drates may occur in conjunction with oil or gas, the effect of the
presence of gas hydrates on recovery of oils should be addressed.
Acknowledgment
We would like to thank the Petroleum Engineering Dept.,Petrole-
urn Development Laboratory at the U. of Alaska, Fairbanks, for
their support. We would also like to thank T.S. Collett for his con-
tribution in our related work.
~eference8
I. Hammerschmidt, E.G.: "Formation of Gas Hydrates in Natural Gas
Transmission Lines," Ind. & Eng. Chern. (1934) 2(j, 851.
2. Katz, D.L.: "Depths to Which Frozen Gas Fields (Gas Hydrates) May
Be Expected," JPT (April 1971) 419-23.
3. Kvenvolden, K.A. and McMenamin, M.A.: "Hydrates of Natural Gas:
A Review of Their Geologic Occurrence," U.S. Geological Survey Cir-
cular 825 (1980).
4. Collett, T.S.: "Detection and Evaluation of Natural Gas Hydrates from
Well Logs, Prudhoe Bay, Alaska," Ms thesis, U. of Alaska, Fairbanks
(1983).
5. Collett, T.S. and Ehlig-Economides, C.: "Detection and Evaluation
of the In-Situ Natural Gas Hydrates in the North Slope Region, Alaska,"
paper SPE 11673 presented at the 1983 SPE California Regional Meet-
ing, Ventura, March 23-25. ',
6. Godbole, S.P.. and Ehlig-EconOlpides, C.: "Natural Gas Hydrates in
, Alaska: QUantificatio!1 and Economic Evaluation," paper SPE '13593
presented at the 1985 SPE California Regional Meeiing, 'Bakersfield,
March 27-29. ' 23. Tiratsoo, E.N.: Natural Gas, Gllif Texas, Houston (1979).
7. Kamath, V.A. et al.: "Evaluation of the Stability of Gas Hydrates in
Northern Alaska," Cold Regions ,Science and Technology (1987) 14,
107-19. '
8. Collett, T.S., Godbole, S.P., and Ehlig-Economides, C.: "Quantifi-
cation of Gas Hydrates on North Slope of Alaska," Proc., 1984 CIM
Annual Meeting, Calgary, June 10-12.
9. Mathews, M.: "Logging Characteristics of Methane Hydrates," The
Log Analyst (May-June 1986) 26-33. '
10. Lachenbruch, A.H. et al.: "Permafrost, Heat Flow and Geothermal
Regime at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska," 1. GeophYs. Res. (1982) 87, No.
Bll, 9301-16.
266
II. Lachenbruch, A.H. et al.: "Temperature and Depth of Permafrost on
the North Slope of Alaska, " paper presented at the 1985 AAPG Annu-
al Meeting Pacific Section Convention, May 22-24.
12. Osterkamp, T.E. and Payne, M.W.: "Estimates of Permafrost Thick-
ness from Well Logs in No'rthern Alaska," Cold Regions Science and
Techno(ogy (1981) 5, 13-27.
13. Zoeller, W.A.: "Determine Pore Pressure from MWD Gamma Ray
Logs," World Oil (March 1984) 97.
14. Evrenos, A.I., Heathman, J., and Ralston, J.: "Impermeation of Porous
Media!>y Forming Hydrates In Situ," JPT(Sept. 1971) 23, 1059-75.
15. Holder, G.D. and Angert, P.F.: "Simulation ofGas Production from
a Reservoir Containing Both Gas Hydrates and Free Natural Gas," paper
SPE-11105presented at the 1982 SPE Annual T,echnical Conference
and Exhibition,New Orleans, Sept. 26-29. '
16. Bayles, G.A. et al.: "A Steam Cycling Model for Gas Production from
a Hydrate Reservoir, " paper 26E presented·at the 1984 AIChE Winter
Natl. Meeting, Atlanta, March 11-14.
17. McGuire, P.L.: "Methalle Gas Production by Thermal Stimulation,"
Proc., Fourth Cdn. Permafrost Conference, Calgary, March 2-6, 1981.
18. Kamath, V.A. ana Godbole, S.P.: "Evaluation of Hot-Brine Stimula-
tion Technique for Gas' Production from Natural Gas Hydrates," JPT
(Nov. 1987) 1379-88.
19. Kuuskraa, V., Hammershaimb, E., and Sawyer, W.: "Phase 1-
Technical Directiye 6: Conceptual Models for Gas Hydrates," final
report, Contract No. DOE/MC/19239-1422, U.S. DOE (1983).
20. Holder, G.D., Kamath, V.A., and Godbole, S.P.: "The Potential of
Natural Gas Hydrates as an Energy Resource," Annual Review ofEnergy
(1984) 427-45.
21. "Economics of Enhanced Oil Recovery, " Lewin and Assocs. Inc., final
report, U.S. DOE, Washington, DC (1981).
22. Cleland, N.A., Edgington, A.N., and Brusett, M.J.: "The Econom-
ics ofDev~IQping Canadian Arctic Gas," JPT(Nov. 1974) 1199-1205.
SI Metric Conversion Factofs
fix 3.048* E~Ol =m
OF (OF-32)/1.8 °C
'Converalon faotor la exact. SPEFE
Original spe manuaorlpt received for review Maroh 27. 1985.Paper aooepted for publloa.
tlon Aug. 29, 1985. ReVised manusorlpt reoeived Dee. 15, 1986. Paper (SPE 13593) flrat
.presented at the 1985 SPE California Regional Meeting held In Bakersfield, Maroh27-29.
SPE Formation Evaluation, March 1988