Copyright 2006, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2006 SPE Eastern Regional Meeting held in
Canton, Ohio, U.S.A., 1113 October 2006.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Introduction
Pumping water from a well is a straight forward effort that has
been done for centuries. Pumping fluid from relatively
shallow wells should be an easy task. Normally a pump is
installed in a well, started and then forgotten. This premise
does not hold true in CBM wells. In CBM wells, this
pumping process can be complicated by many issues unless
precautions are taken. This paper is designed to address the
basic precautions that can be taken to improve de-watering of
CBM wells. These precautionary steps can save the operator
money by reducing the month to month maintenance
associated with CBM wells. Although we cannot cover every
potential pitfall to de-watering operation, the basic steps
discussed will identify potential problems and offer ideas to
address them.

Well Planning for Artificial Lift

The successful de-watering of CBM wells, especially Coal
Bed Methane (CBM) wells takes some planning before the
first well is dilled. Many factors should be taken into
consideration so that the operation can be economical for the
entire life of the well. Unconventional gas has gone from an
experiment to a logical and viable energy source. Pre-
planning can and will reduce the overall cost of operation over
the life of a CBM well. Short cutting the pre-planning stage
can often take perceived savings in well drilling costs and
transfer these costs to much higher day to day maintenance
costs and lower gas production, thus decreasing the economics
of the play. The learning curve has been steep for operators
and suppliers as well as we all try to find solutions to the many
challenges that face the industry.
The first step is to identify the type of coals to be de-watered
by asking these questions. Are the cleats in the coals easily
fractured? How thick are the coals? Do the coals contain
sand, clay or other solids that could interfere with pump
operations? Are their multiple coal zones and what kind of
material separates the zones? Are their other CBM wells
producing from the same formations and what problems have
they encountered? Pre-planning will reap benefits in lower
operating costs and maintenance and higher profitability for
the operator.

Formation Evaluation

Coal formation can change from Basin to Basin and
sometimes from field to field. Coal seam thickness, density,
material composition and cleat structure are also variables that
make a difference determining economic feasibility.

Material composition will determine the kind of free solids
that one will have to contend with during the producing life of
the well. Sands, coal fines and other solids can adversely
affect the life of your artificial lift. Identifying these solids
and permanently controlling them will add greatly to the long
term economics of the CBM well. Making initial decisions on
whether to address these solids in the well itself or on the
surface, is a critical decision. The most costly variation is to
be forced to address these problems after the well is put on
production. Taking core samples above, through and below
the coal seam will identify these composites and allow the
operator to plan for their control prior to drilling the
production hole.

The enemy to all forms of artificial lift is solids and especially
those solids that are abrasive. Although coal itself poses
problems in the way of plugging artificial lift sources, it is the
sands and other abrasive materials that is the greatest threat to
long pump life. Proven methods of solids control can be
employed initially that will make solids control a non issue.

The first step to successful dewatering is to understand the
formation you are dealing with and take steps to control
potentially damaging materials from the very beginning. This
is true for vertical wells and more important for horizontal
wells. In both cases, it is necessary to control sloughing from
the very beginning. Once coals become unstable enough to
slough off into the well bore, it will continue doing so. This
source of failure will rob the well of its ability to produce gas
at its optimum rate. It also will keep all forms of artificial lift
from surviving. These problems can be eliminated by proven
well bore stabilization technolology that has been developed
specifically for unconventional gas operations. These are
engineered systems that have proven to be economically
sound investments for the life of the well.

SPE 104290
Guidelines to Successful Dewatering of CBM Wells
L. Bassett, Weatherford
2 SPE 104290
Plugging of pumps is usually a function of not generating
sufficient velocity up the tubing to the produced fluids to
move the suspended solids out of the tubing string. Coal fines
especially have a tendency to suspend in the fluid stream if
they are not carried all the way to surface. Every time the
pump shuts down due to low fluid or gas locking, those
suspended solids fall back into the pump and will eventually
plug the pump. This can be avoided by maintaining high
discharge velocity sufficient to expel the solids from the
tubing string.
Likewise, solids entering the well bore can be reduced by
assuring low inflow velocities as well. Keeping inflow
velocities below 1/10th of a foot per second will minimize the
amount of solids the fluid can carry into the well bore.
Standard practices of perforating the casing using oil field
methods can have a detrimental affect on solids production.

Well Consideration for Success

Drill a hole and produce gas. We all wish it were that simple.
Proper well design is critical to allowing artificial lift sources
to live for long periods of time.

After the formation is cored and examined and a decision is
made as to vertical or horizontal production, one then must
decide on what options may be needed today and five years
from now to assure continual dewatering and gas production.
The trend is to drill and case as small a hole as is possible for
economical reasons. This is false economics and can lead to
higher operating expenses and create conditions that make
wells uneconomical sooner than they should. Over the 15 year
life of a well, the initial cost of drilling and setting casing will
be the least expensive thing that was accomplished on a well.
This can be argued and is every day. Opening a well bore is
only one function of a gas producing well. The other function
is to open coal surface area. Usually, the larger the area
exposed of the coal the better gas production. Another
function is to house the artificial lift. Artificial lift systems are
designed in specific diameters. Completing a well designed
around being able to use only one lift system may rob the
operator of options that would better optimize production at a
later date. This does and has reduced the economics of a well.
Later problems that would require liners or alternate well
treatments or stimulations may make a well uneconomical
before its time. Again, the initial cost of drilling and casing a
well, over the life of the well, will be the least expensive thing
that was done.

One Example: (Based on actual costs in the Powder River
Basin)

Cost to drill and case 1200 foot 4 43 per foot 51600.00
Cost to drill and case 1200 foot 5 49 Per foot 58800.00
Difference Savings for 4 casing 7200.00
Potential cost of one solids cleanout 12000.00

Evaluating conditions at the very beginning of the dewatering
cycle, as an example, an operator might case a 4 inch
vertical hole and decide on a pumping unit for artificial lift.
The well was perforated through the casing and the well was
not cored initially, there could be an ugly surprise awaiting us.
The well has sand stringers within the coal seam and that sand
follows the high velocity inflow into the well bore through the
large perforated holes. The well bore fills up with solids,
plugging off the pump and or the sand cuts the pump
repeatedly causing higher than anticipated maintenance costs.
(Each pull costs $2500.00 and pump repair $800.00 and
repeats every six months) Once the sand or the fines start
entering the well, all remedies will further reduce the ID of the
well. This reduced ID further limits the kind of artificial lift
one could use and further reduces the inflow surface area of
the casing which can also reduce the amount of gas a well can
deliver. The result is reduced well economics. This scenario
happens every day.

Similarly, we find ourselves in the above example hole and
gas production is not as anticipated because of the tight coals.
We may find that future stimulations are harder and more
expensive. The point is drill and case for the future. Larger
casing gives an operator many more options when the CBM
related unexpected surprise does materialize. Solids, sloughing
coal, higher water production than anticipated or tight coals
are all issues that can crop up later that leave the operator with
fewer options in small casing.

Having cost effective options available to address producing
issues can be the difference between profitability or not.
Pumping units being used in CBM are often times the only
artificial lift considered during the initial phase of a well. As a
well dewaters the inflow characteristics of a well may change
daily up or down. In any dewatering situation, the
optimization of the wells dewatering is based upon the
artificial lifts capability to match the inflow of the well so that
a constant low pressure can be achieved. Matching your
pumping rate as closely as possible to the wells inflow will
give the best chance of optimizing a wells production.
Constant loading and unloading a well with solids producing
potential can and does surge the well and increases the
quantity of those solids. Loading and unloading a well also
makes for inconsistent gas production.
As another example, should an operator find that his well is
not behaving as expected with 4 casing, he will find that
most other forms of artificial lift are not able to operate or
survive in this size casing. This lack of flexibility leaves the
operator with poor performing wells and very limited options
to improve that performance. This is a critical decision in
vertical holes and even more critical in horizontal wells. The
cost of installing larger casing can be offset many times over
by the cost of day to day maintenance over the life of a CBM
well. Flexibility for well clean out, future stimulation, solids
control and options in artificial lift could easily pay for the
cost of the larger casing. In CBM we all know that we will
face unexpected conditions as that is just the nature of this
play.

SPE 104290 3
Ideally, it is in the best interest of the operator and the
artificial lift supplier to design producing wells that optimize
production and give the pump a home that is within its design
window. All forms of artificial lift are more comfortable
producing fluid than gas. All forms of artificial lift will have
reduced life expectancy should they be forced to run dry for
even short periods of time. All forms of artificial lift are
inefficient in producing multiphase fluids and multiphase
fluids reduce the amount of fluid that can be pumped, which
increases internal heat and produce more stress on all parts of
the pumping system. For best results, the well should be
designed to allow for adequate space for gas separation around
the artificial lift and a well design that optimizes gas
separation from the water before the water enters the pump.
This will allow the pump to be more efficient, create less heat
and live longer in a harsh environment. The end result is
lower operating costs and higher profits.

Artificial Lift Selection

The selection of your artificial lift system is more than will it
pump water. Other considerations need to be a part of the
operators decision making progress. Unlike pumping oil wells
where the goal is to never pump a well completely off,
unconventional gas requires that the bottom hole pressure is
reduced to as low as possible. One very key issue is often
overlooked when selecting artificial lift and that is the required
Net Positive Suction Head required (NPSH) required for
proper operation. Every form of lift has different
requirements, pros and cons for operating. Selecting the
correct system for a given operation can help optimize
operations and reduce things like gas lost up the tubing,
surging the well, excessive repairs or simply poor well
performance.
In addition to the NPSH issues, it is necessary to ask ourselves
the following questions.
Will it need to be low profile, quiet, or is public safety a
concern? Do I need production flexibility, will I need to be
able to produce variable amount of water from the same well
or will the inflow be consistent and predictable? Is my well
going to make some solids, lots of solids or no solids? Will
the well need to be vertical or horizontal and is it possible this
configuration would need to change during the life of the
well? Do I have electric power to the location and if so what
kind, single phase or three phase? Is the well going to be
close to a residence today? Might it be close in two years or
during the life of the well? For environmental reasons, does
the surface equipment need to be less obvious to the public or
operate cleaner or with no noise?

All of these issues should be answered and the appropriate lift
system be selected. One thing we all know about CBM. The
wells will be around for 15 to 20 years. The well economics
are going to peak and gradually decline as gas production
declines over time. The public can view CBM as intrusive
and in some areas an eyesore. In some areas, environmental
issues are the deciding factors. In all cases, preplanning can
eliminate long term concerns and be a positive influence on
those around us.

Artificial Lift Strengths and Weakness

Most CBM wells present challenges that must be addressed to
insure economical de-watering. We need to be aware of the
potential for coal fines, sand or other solids developing and in
every case we must deal with extremely low bottom hole
pressures. To optimize an oil wells production, it is easy to
just produce less to keep from pumping off. In
unconventional gas operations it is imperative that we not only
pump the well off as much as possible but maintain that
extremely low pressure environment. In a CBM well, we have
to address the above issues and NPSH, Net Positive Suction
Head, which becomes an even more critical issue for all lift
systems as the well de-waters. This issue becomes as critical
of a concern as the coal fines that must be addressed for
successful operations. All artificial lift systems have their
place and specific application. All artificial lift methods are
proven fluid producers and have been successful in their own
environment. What works in a typical oil well may not work
as well in an unconventional gas environment. Where
artificial lift is concerned, if there was ever a place where
stepping outside of the proverbial box was necessary,
unconventional gas operations might just be the place.
Listed below is a list of systems commonly used for de-
watering and some of the limitations of each system and some
strong features. It may appear from the list below that none of
these systems are suitable for unconventional gas operations.
Nothing could be further from the truth. All of these lift
systems have strong features and are capable of de-watering
wells and are. However, evaluating each system by looking at
its limitation can give a greater value when looking for
success by matching real well conditions and avoiding these
limitations. The great features and capabilities of these lift
systems are more widely known in the industry than their
limitations.


Artificial lift Types

Progressive Cavity Pump (PC)

In a CBM application we know we can expect alternating
slugging of different volumes of multiphase fluids in different
concentrations. A PC pump is excellent at producing viscous
fluids and solids with limited wear due to abrasives. Again, it
is critical that velocities are maintained sufficiently to push the
solids up the tubing.
Although this is an excellent lift system some characteristic
limitations do exist. A PC, driven by a rotating rod string is
susceptible to stator damage due to high heat caused by
running the pump dry. Although the PC pump is usually
protected by undercurrent protection, the stickage between
the rotor and stator can add artificial loading and current drop
may not be seen, therefore protection may be limited or non
existent. A second issue in a horizontal well is the potential
for rod wear on the tubing and tubing failure and high
maintenance costs. This type of rod wear is the same as we see
with rod pumping units. The NPSH requirement for a PC is
about 25 psig. Pump off controllers should be avoided in
CBM operations due to the pumps poor ability to cold start
4 SPE 104290
with solids above the pump. Although the pump is designed
to handle the abrasive nature of sand and fines, velocity
through the pump and up the tubing will be insufficient to
carry the fines through the pump and out of the well bore as
the inflow reduces. This can lead to plugging and stuck rotor
to stator or excessive heat causing a stator failure. In the case
of a stuck pump, rod wind up can be a hazard to the local
operator as the stored energy must go somewhere when it is
released. A PC pump is a good option for abrasive conditions
and viscous fluid and many are used in unconventional gas
operations. It becomes less of an economical option in
conditions of low NPSH and low velocity production with
coal fines and solids present. Few advances have been made
to this lift system to be an unconventional gas specific system.
The biggest thing to avoid is no fluid flow through the stator
for even small periods of time can and will cause failure of the
stator.

Rod Pump

The beauty of this artificial lift method is it is old comfortable
technology and most people recognize it and are comfortable
with it. In vertical CBM wells that can be designed for its
particular characteristics it can be effective. It still requires a
higher NPSH to keep the pump from gas locking and when the
fluid level is pulled down too far it is prone to lose produced
gas up the tubing. Typically a minimum NPSH of 32 psig is
required to keep from gas locking. A rod pump also is limited
in its ability to stabilize a well effectively without changing
sheaves to increase or decrease the volume of fluid. Pounding
fluid can cause premature rod failures and pump damage.
Coal fines are also a problem for the rod pump. The pump can
become plugged or badly worn due to the coal fines not being
ejected from the pump barrel. In a horizontal well, friction
from the rods on the tubing will cause early wear and tubing
failure. The rod action and couplings in the tubing can create
pressure drops that can keep the fines from exiting the tubing
which in turn can plug the pump and tubing. In populated
areas, these systems can be an eyesore or cause noise pollution
depending upon the design of the system. This is old oil field
technology that has a long history of producing fluid.
Although commonly used, other lift systems should also be
evaluated to optimize production The limitation of this system
is the rod wear, low NPSH issues, lost gas up the tubing and
coal fine production and it is not as flexible in conditions that
may change from time to time. The positives are recognition,
available expertise, availability and ease of operation.

Jet Pump

The jet pump appears to be simple in nature and has been used
in oil wells since the 1950s. In CBM wells, the theory is
good but the practicality is poor. Typically the jet pump
requires clean power fluid and clean produced fluid. The
clearances and ports are so small that solids of any kind easily
plug off the pump. In this application, where we know that
solids will be present, a jet pump will experience substantial
maintenance problems and early failures. The flow of fluid
over the control surfaces of the pump can create enough static
electricity to cause coal fines to clump together and plug off
the formation fluid ports. In addition to the down hole
mechanical issues, there are substantial surface issues as well.
Surface pressures of over 3000 PSI is common which can
create a safety issue for workers and an environmental issue
should a leak occur. A jet pump requires the highest of all
artificial lift methods of about 86 psig in a 1200 foot well.
This makes this type of pump only effective in the early life of
a CBM well. With the certainty of solids in the form or coal
fines and or sand, the high NPSH requirement and the surface
issues, this lift system would be the last of the artificial lift
methods we would recommend. There are applications where
this system will economically out perform other lift methods
but is not as suitable for unconventional gas applications
primarily due to its requirement for higher NPSH as is
typically available.


CBM Electric Submersible Pump

The standard electric submersible pump exhibits some of the
same characteristic deficiencies as the above listed lift
systems. Over the past few years advances in Unconventional
Gas specific Electric Submersible Pumps (ESPs) has
addressed many of the problems Unconventional Gas
applications present. It is not a perfect system however it
offers the best flexibility of all lift systems for changing
applications. The weakness of a submersible pump is its
solids handling ability and the requirement for the motor to
have fluid going by it for cooling. In most CBM wells all of
these conditions can exist.

A standard ESP NPSH required is about 64 psig. With the
CBM specific Electric Submersible pump available today, this
NPSH required is now about 16, depending upon the pump
selected. Additionally, an ESP can operate in a horizontal
CBM well and automatically regulate its speed through a
variable speed drive to optimize a wells production and speed
up to clear gas interference. Technology has been developed
that addresses solids handling, low flow conditions and
automatic operations. Of all the current lift systems, the
specially designed CBM ESP may be the least understood and
most flexible system available for unconventional gas
operations.
SPE 104290 5



Solids handling technology

Technology has overcome the issue of low NPSH with
features specific for de-watering gas wells. With the pumping
conditions we face in a horizontal CBM well and all the
conditions that poses, this system offers flexibility with the
use of variable speed drives and accurate relatively
inexpensive down hole pressure transducers. The initial cost
of this system my not be the least expensive but by its design,
it offers the newest successful technology developed in recent
years. Although relatively an unknown player in this market,
thousands of them are used daily around the world to
successfully de-water CBM wells.
When we evaluate lift systems, we have to take into
consideration all of the conditions known and those we do not
yet know. For the long term economical life of a project
selecting the right artificial lift system is one of the key
decisions that can be made that will have long term affect.

Summary

Although this subject is far too large to cover all aspects in a
single paper we have attempted to cover a basic premise for
successfully de-watering CBM wells. Starting with
understanding what the conditions the wells are going to
present and addressing those issues before even drilling those
wells will add to the economics life of each project. Looking
at the entire life of a well and the potential options that may be
required in selecting casing sizes, solids control, well
optimization, stimulation processes and artificial lift selection
can determine on the first day what the economics of a well is
15 years down the road. Far too many wells become
uneconomical years earlier than predicted due to operational
problems developing and the lack of options to keep the well
on line. The initial cost of drilling and casing a well is less of
a cost factor than the day to day maintenance costs should a
well develop solids later or lift systems no longer can fit inside
a given diameter hole. Every basin has its own unique
challenges to overcome. Being willing to step outside the box
has proven in a number of basins to being the key to success.
All artificial lift systems have their place in the de-watering
world. All artificial lift systems in the market today are
successful systems in their own right. Some lift systems are
selected for reasons other than finding the best fit for the
conditions. Long term de-watering success is dependent upon
selecting artificial lift systems that are designed for these
operations. Studying the limitation of lift systems as they
apply to CBM wells, not oil field production and not strictly
water well, can yield a system that is better suited for the long
term operation of a well. De-watering a well is straight
forward, simple and been done for years, except for when we
come to CBM wells and we have had to relearn what we
thought we already knew. If steps are taken to look at the
entire picture before a single stone is uncovered, there will be
far fewer costly surprises and a whole lot more successful and
economically viable gas plays for years to come.

(Reference to SPE presented at the Oklahoma City Operations
Symposium)
David A. Simpson, J ames F. Lea, Coal bed methane
production
Weatherford ALS Progressive Pump manual