Valuation of NGH Deposits

  • Michael D. MaxEmail author
  • Arthur H. Johnson


Valuation of a natural gas hydrate (NGH) deposit is concerned with determining the amount of natural gas that can be technically extracted from a deposit. NGH will rarely occupy all porosity, probably topping out at 80 % or slightly greater of available pore fill. NGH may also be patchy because of both variable porosity and permeability in the reservoir, and from inconsistent mineralization. There are different ways to value a NGH deposit, (1) reservoir analysis, which is an analog of valuing a conventional gas deposit, (2) 3D body analysis based on high resolution seismic data, and (3) cell analysis, which is an analog of conventional economic geology exploration. In addition to an estimate of gas-in-place, estimates for technical recovery must be made. It is likely that a number of the NGH deposits that will be discovered will occur in discontinuous volumes that are not completely hydraulically linked initially through their pore water because of discontinuous impermeable shale beds and lenses. It should be noted that NGH in place may not be technically recoverable gas in place. Where production wellbores cannot link some NGH volumes, the gas has to be discounted from the valuation figure.


Gas-in-place Petrogenesis Permeability Mineralization grade Cell valuation Seismic response Creaming curve 


  1. Bohorquez, M.O. 2014. Hydrocarbon discovery potential in Columbian basins: Creaming curve analysis. Adapted from oral presentation given at AAPG 2014 European regional conference and exhibition, Barcelona, Spain, May 13–15, 2014, AAPG Datapages Accessed 21 Sep 2015.
  2. Boswell, R., and T. Collett. 2011. Current perspectives on gas hydrate resources. Energy and Environmental Sciences 4: 1206–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boswell, R., T.S. Collett, M. Frye, W. Shedd, D.R. McConnell, and D. Shelander. 2012. Architecture of gas-hydrate-bearing sands from Walker Ridge 313, Green Canyon 955, and Alaminos Canyon 21: Northern deepwater Gulf of Mexico. Marine and Petroleum Geology 34: 134–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caulfield, C., and H. Corr. 2015. Industry reassessing potential of Irish Atlantic Margin. Offshore Magazine. August, 42–45.Google Scholar
  5. Dai, S., J.C. Santamarina, W.F. Waite, and T.J. Kneafsey. 2012. Hydrate morphology: Physical properties of sands with patchy hydrate saturation. Journal of Geophysical Research 117, B11205, 12 pp doi: 10.1029/2012JB009667.Google Scholar
  6. Frye, M. 2008. Preliminary evaluation of in-place gas hydrate resources: Gulf of Mexico outer continental shelf. US Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Resource Evaluation Division, OCS Report MMS 2008-0004, 136 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Frye, M., J. Schuenemeyer, W. Shedd, K. Piper, and B. Herman. 2013 Gas hydrate resource assessment on the United States Outer Continental Shelf: A mass balance model. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Gas Hydrates (ICGH 2011), 13 pp. Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, July 17–21.Google Scholar
  8. Fujii, T., K. Suzuki, T. Takayama, M. Tamaki, Y. Komatsu, Y. Konno, J. Yoneda, K. Yamamoto, and J. Nagao. 2015. Geological setting and characterization of a methane hydrate reservoir distributed at the first offshore production test site on the Daini-Atsumi Knoll in the eastern Nankai Trough, Japan. Marine and Petroleum Geology 66(1): 310–322. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.02.037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gaddipati, M., E.M. Myshakin, R. Boswell, and B.J. Anderson. 2011. Gas production modeling from a complex 3-D description of marine hydrate deposits. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Gas Hydrates (ICGH 2011), 11 pp. Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, July 17–21.Google Scholar
  10. Hamilton, E.L. 1979. Sound velocity gradients in marine sediments. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 65: 909–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamilton, E.L. 1980. Geoacoustic modeling of the sea floor. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 68: 1313–1340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Holbrook, W.S., H. Hoskins, W.T. Wood, R.A. Stephen, D. Lizarralde, and Leg 164 Science Party. 1996. Methane hydrate and free gas on the Blake Ridge from vertical seismic profiling. Science 273: 1840–1843.Google Scholar
  13. Hunter, R. and S. Digert. 2014. Resource Characterization and Quantification of Natural Gas Hydrate and Associated Free-Gas Accumulations in the Prudhoe Bay—Kuparuk River Area on the North Slope of Alaska. Final Technical Report September 30, 2001–March 31, 2014, 370 pp. United States Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory, Office of Fossil Energy, U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  14. Imrie, C.E., and F.J. Macrae. 2016. Application of experimental design to estimate hydrocarbons initially in place. Petroleum Geoscience 22: 11–19.Google Scholar
  15. Jaiswal, P. 2016. Hydrate quantification: Integrating full-waveform inversion, seismic attributes, and rock physics. In: Special section: Exploration and characterization of gas hydrates. Interpretation 4(1): SA55–SA71. Google Scholar
  16. Kolle, J.J. 1999. A comparison of water jet, abrasive jet and rotary diamond drilling in hard rock. Tempress technologies report, 8 pp. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
  17. Kurihara, M., A. Sato, H. Ouchi, T. Ebinuma, K. Suzuki, Y. Masuda, T. Saeki, K. Yamamoto, and T. Fujii. 2010. Prediction of production test performances in Eastern Nankai Trough methane hydrate reservoirs using 3D reservoir model. OTC 20737. Offshore Technology Conference, 22 pp. Houston, Texas, USA, 3–6 May 2010.Google Scholar
  18. Laherrere, J. 2009. Creaming curves and cumulative discovery at end 2007 by continents. Accessed 11 Feb 2016.
  19. Lindgren, W. 1932. Mineral deposits, 930 pp. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. New York and London.Google Scholar
  20. Max, M.D., and A.H. Johnson. 2011. Methane hydrate/clathrate conversion. In Clean hydrocarbon fuel conversion technology, Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy, ed. Khan, M.R., No. 19: 413–434. Woodhead Publishing Ltd. Cambridge, U.K. ISBN 1 84569 727 8, ISBN-13: 978 1 84569 727 3.Google Scholar
  21. Max, M.D., and A.H. Johnson. 2014. Hydrate petroleum system approach to hydrate natural gas exploration. Petroleum Geoscience 20(2): 187–199. Geological Society of London (Published in online first 21 March 2014). doi: 10.1144/petgeo2012-049.Google Scholar
  22. Max, M.D., A.H. Johnson, and W.P. Dillon. 2006. Economic geology of natural gas hydrate, 341 pp. Springer, Berlin, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  23. Max, M.D., A.H. Johnson, and W.P. Dillon. 2013. Natural gas hydrate arctic ocean deepwater resource potential. SpringerBriefs in Energy, 113 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Meisner, J., and F. Demirmen. 1981. The creaming method: A Bayesian procedure to forecast future oil and gas discoveries in mature exploration provinces. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 144(1): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Myshakin, E.M., M. Gaddipati, K. Rose, and B.J. Anderson. 2012. Numerical simulations of depressurization-induced gas production from gas hydrate reservoirs at the Walker Ridge 313 site, Northern Gulf of Mexico. Marine and Petroleum Geology 34: 169–185.Google Scholar
  26. Paull, C.K., and W. Ussler. 2001. History and significance of gas sampling during DSDP and ODP drilling associated with gas hydrates. In Natural gas hydrates occurrence, distributions, and detection, ed. Paull, C.A., and W.P. Dillon. 124, 53–65. American Geophysical Union, Geophysical Monograph.Google Scholar
  27. Premier Oil. 2012. Where are the big fields hiding in SE Asia? A premier perspective. Presentation at Geological Society Meeting, Burlington House, London, GB, February 21, 2012. Accessed 11 Feb 2016.
  28. Reagan, M.T., G.J. Moridis, J.N. Johnson, L. Pan, C.M. Freeman, K.L. Boyle, N.D. Keen, and J. Husebo. 2015. Field-scale simulation of production from oceanic gas hydrate deposits. Transport in Porous Media 108: 151–169. Doi: 10.1007/s11242-014-0330-7.Google Scholar
  29. Schmidt, V. 2013. Rigless drilling enters the pilot stage. OE Digital, April 2013, 47–48.Google Scholar
  30. Shelander, D., J. Dai, G. E. Bunge, S. Singh, M. Eissa, and K. Fisher. 2012. Estimating saturation of gas hydrates using conventional 3D seismic data, Gulf of Mexico joint industry project Leg II. Marine and Petroleum Geology 34: 96–110.Google Scholar
  31. Snedden, J.W., J.F. Sarg, and X. Ying. 2003. Exploration play analysis from a sequence stratigraphic perspective. Accessed 11 Feb 2016.
  32. SPE. 2016. Estimating prospective resources and reserves. Oilfield development. Accessed 21 Sep 2015.
  33. Sylta, Ø. 2008. Analysing exploration uncertainties by tight integration of seismic and hydrocarbon migration modelling. Petroleum Geoscience 14: 281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tamaki, M., K. Suzuki, T. Fujii, and A. Sato. 2016. Prediction and validation of gas hydrate saturation distribution in the eastern Nankai Trough, Japan: Geostatistical approach integrating well-log and 3D seismic data. In: Special section: Exploration and characterization of gas hydrates. Interpretation 4(1): SA83–SA94.Google Scholar
  35. Thakur, N.K., and S. Rajput. 2011. Exploration of gas hydrates. Geophysical techniques, 281 pp. London, New York, Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht ISBN 978-3-642-14233-8.Google Scholar
  36. WHUT. 2008. Creaming curves and dispersive discovery. Accessed 11 Feb 2016.
  37. Wang, X., J. Qian, T.S. Collett, H. Shi, S. Yang, C. Yan, Y. Li., Z. Wang, and D. Chen. 2016. Characterization of gas hydrate distribution using conventional Ed seismic data in the Pearl River Mouth Basin, South China Sea. In: Special section: Exploration and characterization of gas hydrates. Interpretation 4(1): SA25–SA37.Google Scholar
  38. Wood, W., K. Martin, G. Barth, andD. Scholl. 2016. New constraints on gas and gas hydrate estimates in the bering sea using an automated sediment physics modeling approach (abs). American Geological Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco 14–18 December 2015. Accessed 18 Jan 2016.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hydrate Energy International LLCKennerUSA
  2. 2.Hydrate Energy International LLCKennerUSA

Personalised recommendations