Ann: Rafael Flow Test Update, page-175

@beachboy2 … I have a couple of further revision suggestions on the Victor Rudenno calculation…

- is 10% porosity more appropriate to tight gas? This suggests we can use 30% for conventional:

In conventional reservoirs, pore space can vary from fairly large, visible openings to microscopic pores, and generally comprises less than 30 percent of rock volume. In tight reservoirs, porosity is commonly less than 10 percent.

If we are multiplying by 0.3 instead of 0.1, we are tripling the result… is that the right way to factor in the porosity?

- on the other hand, I looked up gas expansion factors, found a table for natural gas that suggested this decreases with higher temperatures and given it’s about 100C hotter 4km down than surface, I think using 320 is too high… might be under 300 according to this, although it only goes up to 80C, if if 6200psi is about 43 MPa, (see Table 1)…

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1451/table1.html

Like to know your thoughts if you agree with either of the above before I try another calculation, but if both are correct, we might be back up from 1.75TCF and closer to 5TCF than 4TCF now…