Interest in gas hydrates as a potential fuel source has resulted in a great deal of investment, study and testing.

While much of the research has focused on offshore reserves, the Arctic is also home to vast resources below the permafrost. Most recently, drilling has taken place in Canada's Mackenzie Delta.
Hart's E&P spoke with Tom Williams, vice president of business development at Maurer Technology and project manager for the US Department of Energy (DOE)-funded "Methane Hydrate Production from Alaska Permafrost" project, about continuing research into this potentially vast resource.

Hart's E&P: How did interest in methane research become a significant investment?
Williams: From 1982 to1992, the DOE invested more than US $8 million to build a foundation of basic knowledge about the distribution and physical and chemical nature of naturally occurring methane hydrates. This initial phase of work ended as priorities shifted to more near-term exploration and production research and development (R&D). However, more recent research results, both in the United States and overseas, indicated that the issues surrounding methane hydrates required immediate federal attention. Consequently, in 1997, the DOE initiated the planning for a multiagency national gas hydrate R&D program. Two workshops were conducted in 1998 and resulted in the publication of "A Strategy for Methane Hydrate Research and Development." This document was followed in 1999 by the "National Methane Hydrate Multi-year R&D Program Plan."
As natural gas demand was growing in the United States and internationally, the interest in ramping up research was initiated by Japan as that country began looking for unconventional natural gas reserves. Other countries followed suit. In May 2000 the US Congress passed the Methane Hydrate Research and Development Act that caused DOE to lead a research program that now includes five other federal agencies - the Naval Research Laboratory, Minerals Management Service, US Geological Survey (USGS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Science Foundation. The research is more focused on the application.

Hart's E&P: How did you get involved?
Williams: From 1989 to 1993, I worked at the DOE Office of Fossil Energy in Washington, D.C., having oversight of the oil and gas R&D programs, for the Bush administration. This was when the gas hydrate research program was terminated in 1991. I spent a lot of time reviewing the hydrate program while at DOE and have been working for companies involved in hydrate research since I left...I supported DOE's decision in 1991 that ended the program in 1992, but I have been a strong supporter of their new hydrate program initiative.
In my opinion, research on gas hydrates is such an interesting topic that the research has the propensity to lose its focus. Many scientists who call themselves the "hydrate research community" measure the results of their research by publishing papers rather than (developing) economic applications. An example of this type of research is in the volumes of published papers on the Blake Ridge of the East Coast of the United States and in all the published speculation and research on hydrate contributions to global warming. R&D can get out of hand, and this is one of the dangers I see in the current program if the hydrate research community is again well funded to conduct basic research science projects with little or no application other than to publish interesting papers and create ice they can occasionally burn in their laboratories. However, I have a lot of confidence in the DOE program management to prevent this from taking place. Gas hydrates are a real problem in deepwater exploration and production, and it is potentially a significant gas resource for our next generation. The people involved in this focused research on the DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory side and the industry and researcher side should be complimented for their contributions and the quality of the work conducted.

Hart's E&P: When did interest surface in the Arctic?
Williams: DOE-funded research covered Arctic and offshore regions, but the resource was considered highly speculative, and limited field data was generated. The DOE co-funded the USGS to assess the resource potential on the North Slope of Alaska during that time, and early estimates on the resource potential were developed. There were volumes of technical papers published by the hydrate research community from a number of federal agencies, national laboratories and universities, but Congress and DOE decided there was not sufficient application or progress on developing hydrates as a resource, and no additional R&D funds were provided.

Hart's E&P: Why is there such an extensive hydrate concentration there?
Williams: Gas hydrates in onshore Arctic environments are associated with the permafrost. Natural gas hydrates beneath the permafrost have been encountered as a nuisance by the oil and gas industry for years. Numerous drilling problems, including kicks and uncontrolled gas releases, have been documented in Arctic regions by engineers working in Russia, Canada and the United States.

Hart's E&P: What's taking place in Canada?
Williams: Recent activities to explore the potential of gas hydrates as a resource have been conducted in the Mackenzie Delta of Canada. A well was drilled on the Mallik field in 1998 led by the Canadian Geological Survey and the Japan National Oil Co. (JNOC). This project was supported by the USGS and DOE. Hydrate cores and logs were taken to investigate gas hydrate potential in this field. Comprehensive reports were later published from this field test, and lessons learned were well documented. This venture was a very important first step in determining information about in-situ gas hydrates.
This past winter drilling season, three wells were drilled on the Mallik leases. Partners in this project included the Geological Survey of Canada, JNOC, USGS, DOE, the Gas Authority of India, the Oil & Natural Gas Corp. of India, the German government's GFZ, International Continental Drilling Program and various oil and gas operators active in that region. The results of this project, which included coring and logging to an approximate 3,940-ft (1,200-m) depth and drilling two adjacent observation wells, will not be made available to the public for 2 years, although reports are that the project was successful, hydrate core was taken, well production testing was accomplished and shallow seismic testing was successfully conducted. The JNOC took a major role in this project for the application in a methane hydrate project off the Pacific Coast in the Nankai Trough. Results from this project will no doubt be applied to that offshore project.

Hart's E&P: What about the North Slope of Alaska?
Williams: Maurer Technology, Anadarko Petroleum and Noble Drilling, in partnership with the DOE and supported by a team of top-notch university, service company and government experts, are involved in the first year of a 3-year hydrate project. The Anadarko team, lead by Dr. Keith Millheim, is contributing a significant amount of co-funding and expertise to assure this project will be a success. The purpose of the project is to build on previous and ongoing R&D in the area of onshore hydrate deposition. Plans are to identify, quantify and predict production potential for hydrates located on the North Slope of Alaska. Plans to design and implement a program to safely and economically drill, core and produce gas from Arctic hydrates are under way. The current work scope is to drill and core two to three wells on Anadarko leases in the 2003 winter drilling season.
One unique feature of the project is to utilize an Anadarko onsite core analysis laboratory to determine some of the physical characteristics of the hydrates and surrounding rock. We plan to tie together geology, geophysics, logs and drilling and production data to allow reservoir models to be calibrated. Ultimately, the goal is to form an objective technical and economic evaluation of reservoir potential of Alaska hydrates. We plan to core, complete and test wells on different lease blocks in order to make an aerial determination of the hydrate resource. Although the focus of this project is in the permafrost Arctic region, results from the project may have an impact on the offshore. The exchange of information by all the other companies, organizations and laboratories conducting hydrate research increases all our respective chances of success.
Another longer-term arctic project funded by the DOE includes BP Exploration, supported by the University of Alaska in Fairbanks, the University of Arizona and the USGS. This project is looking at natural gas hydrate potential in the Prudhoe Bay, Kuparuk and Milne Point areas of Alaska.

Hart's E&P: How soon will production of gas hydrates be a reality?
Williams: Information has been generated in laboratory studies pertaining to the extent, volume, chemistry and phase behavior of gas hydrates. The scientists that have studied hydrate potential agree that the potential is great. On the North Slope of Alaska alone, it has been estimated at 590 Tcf. But the estimates of hydrates and, most importantly, recoverable methane vary significantly, and there are a lot of unknowns. This is because little information has been obtained on physical samples taken from actual rock containing hydrates and little work has been conducted on recovery. Theories about production have yet to be proven. If hydrates are to be economical, a method to introduce heat (and) energy, reduce the pressure to a level below where hydrates dissociate or a combination of both must be proven. And depending upon the geology, associated free gas and other factors, one method will most probably not apply to all applications.
The production of gas hydrates is significantly more complex than a conventional gas or oil reservoir, and there are no commercial hydrate reservoir models engineers can use to simulate hydrate recovery. Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory (LBL) has been developing a hydrate model called the EOSHYDR. Although it is not a commercial simulation tool, the model has been used to support the Mallik wells. LBL will be an important contributor to our project, providing modeling expertise in the planning and development phases. "Ground truth data" from hydrate wells will help calibrate this model, as it will continue to be improved.
While published information suggests that gas hydrates could be a significant resource potential, there are a number of technical challenges that must be addressed. The resource must be better defined, and the exploration methods to economically determine the extent of resource have not been proven. There are no proven, environmentally sound, safe and economic ways to complete and produce this resource. This is not an easy task. This resource has been compared to the coalbed methane resource 20 years ago. In many ways it is much more complex, but the potential as a resource could be much greater. We are all on a steep learning curve, but if the resource is there, addressing the technical challenge to develop the tools necessary in order to make this a commercial resource is possible. The good news is there is a lot of momentum thanks to DOE's leadership and funding, there is cooperation between the various organizations conducting this R&D, there is a baseline of information from past and ongoing research, and industry is involved. This is critical if we are to take the science from the laboratory to application.

Editor's Note: For more information, visit www.doe.gov/scng/hydrate.

Comments