Abstract

Proppant selection, and the resulting dimensionless fracture conductivity, impacts well performance. Proppant quality standards were developed to quantify proppant performance using dimensionless fracture conductivity, correlating the flow potential of the propped fracture relative to the formation. Since 2018, there has been a near complete switch to in-basin sand (IBS) for completing oil and gas wells in the Permian Basin. The switch to IBS has primarily been based on the idea that overall well and field economics are improved because: 1) capital costs are lowered by sourcing sand locally reducing costs and logistics, and 2) well results using IBS were “good enough” in terms of well performance justifying the use of inferior proppants. Little regard is given to the long-term production impacts, field development value and cumulative free cash flow over a five-to-ten-year horizon.
Rystad Energy (2022) evaluated 850 wells from seven operators in both the Midland and Delaware basins and provided clear evidence that the perceived benefits of using IBS to complete Wolfcamp A (WCA) wells in the Permian is not accurate. The Rystad Energy studies will be reviewed in detail. This manuscript presents extensive hydraulic fracture modeling and production simulations of the WCA formation for both the Delaware and Midland basins using 100- and 40/70-mesh to identify the conductivity difference between IBS and NWS to provide an engineering basis for the Rystad Energy results. Conductivity differences for each mesh and sand type ultimately allowed a comparison of well production and net cash flow for P50 wells. The WCA production forecast cases were calibrated to the published Rystad Energy data, where possible, and EUR values. The payout, cumulative production differences and net cash flow are presented comparing IBS and NWS materials.