SPE/IADC 163526

Drilling Unconventional Shale Wells Remotely Cesar Gongora, SPE, Omar Awan, SPE, Jose Mota, SPE, Shell Upstream Americas, and Eric van Oort, SPE, The University of Texas at Austin (formerly with Shell Upstream Americas)

Copyright 2013, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 5–7 March 2013. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors 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 SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract

After a successful pilot application in the Haynesville Shale, Shell Upstream Americas is currently taking steps to conduct all of its directional drilling, MWD/LWD and geosteering operations in the Americas and beyond from remote drilling centers. The main drivers for the use of these centers are:

More wells can be directionally drilled with the involvement of the most knowledgeable / most experienced directional drilling / MWD/LWD / geosteering staff, while at the same time new staff can be trained and developed effectively from a central location.

Safety is improved by having less staff commuting back and forth to the rig site (i.e. reducing the number of driving-related accidents), and by reducing occupational exposure through the decrease in number of people “in harm’s way” present at the rig-site itself.

Remote geosteering at a central facility allows for efficient communication between geologists and interpreters, with a single geosteering expert and a single geologist being able to handle a large number of geosteering operations at the same time, while at the same time greatly improving the speed of decision-making.

Staying within the shale target zone and reduction of the number of geosteering corrections and doglegs while landing the horizontal section, resulting in noticeably improved wellbore quality, which yields immediate benefits in the ease of running production casing and will ultimately translate in higher hydrocarbon recovery.

The learnings and best practices associated with the ongoing implementation of the remote drilling centers for unconventional shale drilling operations in the Americas are compiled. This includes a review of the technologies involved, the new workflows that were implemented, how the “people issues” were addressed, and what results – including a 90% improvement in the speed of decision making, clear improvements in wellbore placement and quality, and the drilling of best-in-class directional wells in the Eagle Ford Shale – were obtained. In addition, the future of remote directional drilling and its extension into drilling automation is briefly discussed.

Business Case & Justification

The phenomenal opportunities associated with unconventional shale oil and natural gas development in the Americas and elsewhere have brought important drilling, completion and production challenges to the forefront, including:

1. The need for improved production rates and ultimate reserves recovery, to reduce unit cost ($/BOE). 2. The need for improved efficiency and associated reduction of “waste” in rig time and associated cost, again to reduce

unit cost ($/BOE). 3. The need for improved safety, reducing occupational hazards and taking rig staff “out-of-harm’s-way”. 4. The need for guaranteed competency among the rig staff and/or leveraging competent, experienced staff over a larger

number of operations. 5. The need for effective high-volume manufacturing approaches for prospects which may require 1,000’s to 10,000’s of

development wells where conventional staffing models for well construction break down.

2 SPE/IADC 163526

6. The need to address the “big crew change” in the oil and gas industry, i.e. the retirement of a whole generation of oilfield experts without proper backfill with younger resources.

All of these challenges / opportunities force us to consider new, more efficient ways of working, where a larger number of operations can be handled by a smaller group of people. This is now possible by leveraging IT and communications technology, software and hardware tools, automated systems, etc. These are the enablers behind the Drilling Automation and Remote Technology (DART) centers which are currently in operation in Shell’s unconventional shale business in the Americas. Here, directional drilling (DD), geosteering (GS) and measurement/logging while drilling (MWD/LWD) tasks are carried out remotely in dedicated facilities (See Figure 1). The aim is to gain efficiencies by leveraging a small number of drilling experts over a larger number of operations, while improving the quality, efficiency and safety of the well construction operation at the same time.

Historical Development & Timeline

In a recent review of the history of drilling operations centers, two generations of such centers separated in time and function were distinguished (Booth 2009, 2011). Shell kicked off the second, modern generation of real-time operations centers (RTOC) in 2002 with its facility in New Orleans that was focused on offshore deepwater drilling optimization and non-productive time (NPT) prevention (Kaminski 2002, Ursem 2003). The success of this pilot facility led to worldwide adoption of such centers throughout the Shell group around 2005, with primary focus on deepwater “big cat’ wells but later on also broadening to include critical land well operations (van Oort, 2005). In more recent years (2008 onwards), effective ways have been developed to exploit real-time capabilities for fit-for-purpose drilling optimization on unconventional shale wells in North America (Billa, 2011). A range of value-adding tools and methods (MSE-based drilling optimization, automatic rig activity detection, dedicated root-cause failure analysis, etc.) was used and placed in the hands of dedicated performance optimization engineers who were seconded to field-operations teams in order to implement drilling improvements, minimize invisible lost time (ILT), etc. This approach contributed to the acceleration of drilling learning curves (van Oort, 2011).

When Shell embarked on the adoption DART centers starting in 2010, the following prerequisites were in place:

Extensive experience with the deployment of RTOC’s, its communication and optimization tools and methods, etc. as well as how to work these to add significant value to a large number of different drilling and completion operations.

Ability to deploy reliable IT infrastructure that allowed for two-way communication between field-based drilling rigs and office-based staff.

Field-based operations staff being already familiar with remote RTOC involvement and its benefits, without the traditional pushback that usually accompanies the introduction of any outside involvement.

Strong management support to test and develop new, value-adding ways-of-working that addressed the challenges / opportunities mentioned in the Introduction above.

In early 2011, the first DART center commenced its operations by leveraging the infrastructure of an existing land-based RTOC facility in Houston. In its early days, this DART center was dedicated to remote operations in the Haynesville Shale. Its initial capability consisted of being able to monitor up to 3 concurrent MWD and DD jobs on 3 different rigs in Haynesville from single MWD and DD stations. Figure 2 shows the change from the historical field-based DD approach to the new, optimized DART approach, where DD, MWD/LWD, GS and geology resources were co-located allowing for more effective integration and communication, ultimately translating into improved speed and quality of decision-making. Wells were drilled remotely from DART center throughout the course of 2011, when 9 rigs were deployed in the Haynesville drilling HPHT shale gas wells. As a glut in natural gas prices reduced the drilling program from 9 rigs down to 1 rig in March 2012, the Haynesville remote directional drilling program was suspended since it proved to be uneconomical to continue remote operations for only a single rig. Operations were redirected and expanded towards shale oil and condensate wells drilled in the Eagle Ford Shale. Since June 2012, 7 Eagle Ford wells have been directionally drilled remotely, with the last two wells being considered best-in-class (BIC, see below).

The evident merits of the remote directional drilling approach have not gone unnoticed, and the Shell Group is currently planning an expansion of the DART activities across all North America unconventional shale drilling operations, as well as an extension across the globe, starting with shale plays in China and Australia. We fully expect the DART approach to gain further momentum to become the preferred way of directional drilling globally. Moreover, we see it as a clear step up towards the goal of further automating and de-manning our field operations to make them safer and more efficient at the same time.

DART Objectives and Approach

The following list concisely summarizes our DART objectives and approach:

SPE/IADC 163526 3

Drill multiple wells with single MWD/LWD, DD, and GS resources working 24/7 from a remote facility. Carry out concurrent MWD/DD operations for 3 wells at the same time, and concurrent GS operations for 4 wells at the same time. Continually improve the number of wells managed with fewer key positions.

Carry out wellsite geology activities relating to MWD/LWD interpretation and GS in the remote center with a resident geologist.

Improve journey management by having less staff commuting back and forth to the rig site thereby reducing exposure to traffic incidents, and by reducing occupational exposure through the decrease in number of people “in harm’s way” present at the rig-site.

Bring previously outsourced GS operations in-house, facilitate the interaction between MWD/LWD, GS, DD and geology resources, and strongly reduce cycle time for wellbore trajectory corrections.

Increase the consistency of build sections and horizontal laterals in shale zones by minimizing the number of required directional changes and reducing the dogleg severity associated with the changes that are required. This will not only benefit ease of casing running operations by creating smoother wellbores, but may ultimately also yield higher initial production and ultimate reserves recovery by creating wellbores that remain in zone and can be used to stimulate reservoir rock more effectively.

Improve efficiency and communication between field and office staff. DART centers can be used to hold effective meetings with rig staff while having all desired information readily available, and can be used to hold morning operations calls while facilitating the availability and visualization of performance data.

Provide a cost-effective solution for “Well Manufacturing Drilling” (also referred to as “Factory Drilling” (Gorgone 2008, Ayllon, 2011)), when large numbers of relatively low-cost wells need to be drilled efficiently and conventional ways of working and staffing become unsustainable (e.g. through the sheer lack of available resources)

Become a first step in delivering the end-game strategy of progressive automation and rig de-manning, with the ability to conduct drilling and completion activities through remote command and control operations.

Controlling the IT infrastructure was an important objective from the start. Different data-aggregation, communication and visualization systems have been used, but continuity of use has often suffered from picking up and laying down rigs. Developing a customized solution for each rig is unfortunately not sustainable. This is why the DART approach uses a standardized IT infrastructure solution named “Rig-In-A-Box” (RIAB, see below) that could be deployed irrespective of the rigs and rig systems used.

DART Solution Delivery

In the following, key elements of the DART solution delivery are summarized, including the RIAB IT infrastructure and the way DART operations are carried out. IT Infrastructure - RIAB

The DART centers allow for active communication with drilling rigs by conducting DD, MWD/LWD and GS operations remotely, with a single off-site operations team typically taking care of operations on multiple rigs at the same time. Through DART technology out on location, several sources of data are gathered and transmitted to the DART, thereby reducing the number of broadband pipes needed at the rig.

Proper execution of an Information Technology / Information Management (IT/IM) project plan coupled with a structured Maintenance and Support (M&S) strategy are key factors for a successful DART implementation. There are three primary environments requiring careful attention in the IT space: (1) the rigsite, (2) the office domain, and (3) the end user. For the purposes of this paper, we will focus primarily on the rigsite, specifically telecommunications and applications:

RIAB is at the heart of the operation at the rigsite. It is a compact, robust, fully integrated and remotely managed piece of IT equipment that provides the necessary hardware and software to make DART function properly. The basic building blocks of RIAB can be divided into four main components:

1. A virtualized fault tolerant host server that can be referred to as the “brains” of the operation. It collects, aggregates, stores, processes and publishes real-time data in several basic and rich formats such as: (1) numerical, (2) voice, and (3) video. It is capable of ingesting and publishing this data using a number of universal protocols.

4 SPE/IADC 163526

2. A telecommunications package that provides secure and seamless bi-directional communication between the rig and the office domains.

3. A Human Machine Interface (HMI) to visualize the data at strategic locations on the rig.

4. Centralized monitoring and management of the equipment which provides real-time “health“ of the system in the event of a physical and/or network breach and/or failure. This allows for proactive support of the equipment and applications to minimize downtime.

A key benefit to the way RIAB is designed is that it is compact, yet modular, both in terms of physical size and capability. It is designed to form-fit to the functionality and constraints of the rig and tailor its capabilities to the requirements of DART.

The telecommunications package RIAB employs universal and secure tunneling protocols over any standard IP network (VSAT, Microwave, Mesh, 3G, etc.) to allow data to pass transparently from the rigsite to the office and vice versa. In other words, it creates “virtual” corporate network on the rig that is accessible, given the appropriate rights and permissions, to any system or persons anchored in a corporate office setting, like a DART Center. The benefit of this standard approach allows for quick and secure commissioning and decommissioning making DART implementation easier where rig moves in and out of a field are frequent. Stable and resilient connections to the rigsite are imperative to conduct DART operations; any interruption in communication could paralyze the workflows. Therefore, in the event of a communications failure, redundant IP networks, for example, Microwave and Satellite, can be cascaded enabling a continuous flow of data without disruption.

There are 3 main technologies that allow for efficient remote MWD and DD operations: (1) graphical desktop sharing, (2) Radio over IP (RoIP), and (3) Video Surveillance and Analytics. For the purpose of this section we will discuss graphical desktop sharing and RoIP. Graphical desktop sharing describes a software package that has the ability for a remote user using a local computer on a common IP network to visualize and interact with a remote computer. There are three key features that make for an effective graphical desktop sharing package for the rigsite environment:

1. Security. Because remote MWD provides the ability for a remote user to create and modify set points which can alter a drillstring’s trajectory, several layers of security are required to enter a remote system on the rig from the DART Center. Security levels include both the IP and Application layers. Accounts and permissions for access are managed using standard protocols over a secure encrypted link.

2. Compression. Because some rigs are limited to high latency and low bandwidth links, such as Ku Band Satellites, the ability to compress desktop images is of significant importance. By selecting fit for purpose compression algorithms and color saturations, DART operators can effectively manage depth control and telemetry from any part of the world without rigsite intervention.

3. Portability. To account for many different MWD Service Providing using a number of telemetry systems and operating systems it is imperative to a select the graphical desktop sharing package that is easily ported to different operating systems and corporate security policies.

RoIP is a technology that was deployed to DART-enabled rigs to allow DART operators (MWD/LWD and DD), to be in seamless contact with key personnel on the rig, namely, the driller and company representative. Unlike VoIP, RoIP is uni-directional and on-demand, making it an excellent solution for brief instructions to be sent over high latency links. In our case, the system utilizing existing radio systems already present on the rig make for quick integration. In addition, any user on the corporate network with a PC, Blackberry, Android, or iOS device can be added to the channel in very short order; this allows for a robust collaboration suite that can also act as an emergency response system.

As discussed earlier, system reliability and uptime are important factors to fulfill many of the DART workflows which are why the M&S aspects of DART should not be underestimated. From inception to agreement to operate, a specially trained team of IT professionals were involved and approved all major stage gates of the project. Having agreement from this group of individuals and a detailed list of responsibilities, accountabilities, and service level agreements reinforces our reliance on M&S to insure all the hardware and software components of DART are properly supported and maintained. Moreover, aligning our M&S organization with our corporate DART long-term strategy at the very beginning allows for a healthy balance of innovation coupled with practical support procedures thus minimizing surprises. Geosteering

DART integrates GS with the geological expertise of the asset team to provide interpretations of the payzone geometry, which is then used for real-time well placement guidance. DART GS focal points work directly with operations geologists to obtain regional geologic information such as formation thickness, expected dips, structural and stratigraphic targets, etc. Once this information is obtained a framework for GS is built, which includes choosing the appropriate type logs either from existing vertical pilot wells or by deriving them from nearby deviated wells. It is essential that the type log is as close as possible in proximity to the active well being drilled and on similar geologic structure to ensure fair and reasonable well geometry comparison.

SPE/IADC 163526 5

When steering, the active well data is received from the MWD/LWD crew in the DART or from remote onsite locations including data such as gamma ray, resistivity and density logs. This data is then correlated with the chosen type log to get a tie-in. The depth at which regionally identified stratigraphic markers are crossed is important for landing projections while the curve is being built. This information is shared with the geologist and drilling engineers to determine if adjustments by the directional driller will be necessary to keep the well landed on target depth (or within accepted vertical tolerance of it).

Once the well is landed it is important to keep the well within the tolerance of the target zone. This is done by taking updated MWD/LWD data and surveys and, using the GS correlation effort, proceed with an interpretation of the subsurface and its stratigraphic and structural changes. This gives information about the apparent dip value of the formation, its direction, and how these are changing within the lateral. The best interpretation is shared and discussed with the geologist who may wish to instigate well path inclination or azimuth adjustments when projections show certain target thresholds being breached. These thresholds or tolerances would have previously been discussed with the geologist, the drilling engineer and directional driller to avoid excessive corrections and unnecessary doglegs which may pose a problem when running production casing. This process continues throughout while drilling to total depth, with scheduled daily reports, status updates and phone calls as advised on an a pre-agreed call point list. A final report is also presented at the end of the well as a steering record, allowing for later research by the geologist and engineers for subsequent wells (e.g. on the same pad or at nearby well locations). Directional Drilling

Remote DD requires drillers at the rig site to carry out slide operations under the remote guidance of the directional drillers, with the latter still remaining 100% in charge of the operation. A staged approach was used to teach the drillers how to run the directional equipment and to understand the overall goals:

1. First, the directional drillers started by standing next to the driller and giving him/her verbal instruction. While doing this they explaining why certain decisions and changes (about setting toolface, adjusting for reactive torque etc.) were made. Most of the drillers quickly became familiar with the decision-making process.

2. During the second step, the drillers started making a few changes on their own when needed during a slide. At this point they started to understand what was actually happening with the directional assembly and its interaction with the rock formation downhole, and required progressively less direct supervision for simple directional scenarios.

3. The third step was taking the directional drillers out of the field altogether, and directing the drillers directly over radio using the above-mentioned RoIP technology from the DART. This transition was easy once the drillers understood what the directional drillers were trying to accomplish and how they should react to changes during a slide. Soon, there were drillers who are able to execute slides in the easier sections of the well with little help from the DART. Note that a team of roaming directional drillers was kept in the field to assist whenever necessary during more complicated sliding operations, e.g. while drilling the curve. These field-based directional drillers are junior staff and they are also directed from the DART. It is the expectation that the need for these roaming resources will decrease once the skills and proficiency of the drillers is increased. Note that this approach still reduced the number of people on location: 3 rigs typically deploy 6 directional drillers at any time (3 day / 3 night), whereas DART handles those same 3 rigs with 2 directional drillers (1 day / 1 night) in the remote center with 1-2 roaming directional drillers in the field – a 33% - 50% reduction in staff.

During normal drilling conditions, the directional driller is using all the available data to instruct the drillers on location on how to drill in sliding and rotary mode parameters. Survey data are continuously compared against the directional plan, and decisions are made on the need to execute a slide. The directional driller will then communicate the requirements for tool face orientation and length of the slide to the driller, specifying required weight-on-bit (WOB), motor differential pressure etc. The driller will then proceed with drilling ahead while the directional driller will continuously watch the surface and downhole sensor data remotely, altering ROP, WOB and differential settings as need to maximize drilling efficiency and accuracy. During the slides the directional driller keeps a constant eye on the data to look for any settings that might be making the slide harder or slower than it could be.

Key challenges which had to be overcome included:

Motivating the drillers to be a part of a remotely-run operation, and having them adjust to their new roles and responsibilities (e.g. operate the directional equipment).

Identifying a radio / RoIP system that worked reliably and could be used in the noisy environment of the rig floor.

Making the directional drillers comfortable with their remote, office-based location while still being in fully charge of the directional drilling operation. After an initial adjustment period of several weeks, they adjusted smoothly to their new role and work environment.

During the adjustment phase, the speed of slides executed by the drillers out on location was running at about 50% of the speed that the directional drillers out on location would achieve. The motor yields were also at a reduced level due to less

6 SPE/IADC 163526

steady toolfaces during the slides. This is to be expected as part of the learning curve and continues to improve as drillers get more and more time and experience sliding.

Keys to success included the following:

Leadership and communication skills of the directional driller. Even though the directional driller is located remotely, he/she should be fully in charge of the directional drilling operation, communicate effectively with all stakeholders, and command their respect and buy-in for decisions made. Not all directional drillers do well in a remote environment, but several individuals we have worked with so far have performed well beyond expectations.

Good communication between all stakeholders (directional drillers, company representatives, drillers etc.) is key to success. In particular, the company representatives have been able to motivate the drillers to learn the remote directional drilling process and improve their proficiency, which is crucial to making the operation work.

Important tools that keep the directional drillers informed about everything that is happening at the rig at all times and allow them to make appropriate corrections include: (1) RoIP: first and foremost, the most important tool, as it constitutes the “lifeline” between drillers and directional drillers, allowing the directional drillers to talk directly with the people on location as if they were standing there with them; (2) VNC Viewer: This allows the directional drillers to get a view of all the computers on location. For instance, they can watch toolface as they would see it on the rig floor. Moreover, they can see the MWD/LWD computers to diagnose problems, obtain new surveys, etc; (3) Real-time data communication: used to communicate and visualize real-time sensor data coming off surface and downhole sensors, including automatic driller settings.

Results Haynesville Shale

In the Haynesville Shale, a total of 46 wells were drilled using the DART from 2011 to mid-2012, until rig activity levels dropped to levels where maintaining a dedicated Haynesville DART unit could no longer be sustained and operations were switched over to Eagle Ford well construction. The DART pilot work and subsequent wider deployment in the Haynesville, however, showed clear benefits. Until DART was deployed, GS work was outsourced, which meant that geological interpretations could take as much as 7-9 hours before communications for directional course corrections came back to the rig. With GS in the DART, the geologic interpretation became real time and updates could be provided to the geologist, drilling engineer and directional driller within 30-45 minutes. Overall, a 90% efficiency gain was achieved in the speed of interpretation and decision-making, which a noticeable improvement in wellbore quality. Drilling the production laterals, high levels of confidence were achieved on bit position with respect to formation stratigraphy and dip angles. The pattern of bit walk tendencies with respect to formation stratigraphy could be successfully delineated and used to proactively steer the wells, while at the same time minimizing sliding time and maximizing rotating time. Drilling performance was optimized by providing operations, engineering, and geologic groups with more relevant real-time data for feedback and course corrections. Although ROP was some 18% slower on early wells drilled remotely compared to those drilled with the directional driller on location (primarily due to drillers adjusting to carrying out slides while taking guidance from remote directional drillers), tripping times improved by 21% and casing running times by 9%. One of the main benefits achieved with the DART was consistency in drilling performance, largely due to having the same competent individuals involved in consecutive wells. Figure 4 shows that high performance in ROP was more consistently achieved on the DART wells than on the wells drilled prior to the DART introduction.

However, more importantly, the well drilled remotely were able to stay 100% of the time in the target zone, something that proved impossible prior to DART use. None of the wells drilled at the Haynesville shale in the 13 months under DART control required geological sidetracks, whereas drilling conventionally required 2-3 sidetracks per quarter. The latter improvement provides a return on investment that justifies the upfront expense of putting the DART center(s) in place. Eagle Ford Shale

The progress in remotely drilling Eagle Ford wells is displayed in Figure 5. A steady improvement in drilling performance (characterized in days/1000ft) was observed, with a ~50% improvement in average drill rates observed over a period of 7 wells drilled by the DART. Well 7 recorded one of the fastest lateral and tangent section drilled by Shell in the Eagle Ford, at 0.44 days/1000ft (at the time this paper was compiled, this record appears to have been broken on well 10 with only 0.34 days/1000ft). On average, 6 out of 7 Eagle Ford wells drilled by the DART are top quartile when benchmarked against external competitors (see Figure 6). The only well not in the top quartile was the first well drilled in the Eagle Ford using the DART approach, i.e. the well at the very start of the learning curve for Eagle Ford. All build curves drilled using the DART were in the top 20 percentile of Eagle Ford well history. Using the DART, the two longest laterals (~7000 ft length) have

SPE/IADC 163526 7

been drilled to date, including the longest successful Ecoscope runs. Wellbore quality was also noticeably improved. Figure 7 shows tortuosity and the number of inflection points while drilling the horizontal laterals on wells drilled with the DART and wells drilled immediately before the DART started its remote operations in the Eagle Ford. The tortuosity index, a quantitative measure characterizing the tortuosity of the lateral dropped by 24% using the DART (from 0.125 down to 0.095), whereas the average number of inflection points in the well dropped by 52% (from 6.2 down to 3.0). Discussion

Key Success Factors

A key success factor contributing to the success of the DART approach includes addressing the people issues. DART introduction requires careful management of change to achieve buy-in from all stakeholders, even when there is strong senior management support backing the effort. As with all real-time technologies, outside “interference” by remote resources may receive some pushback from field staff. Directional drillers may need time adjusting to their new role in a centralized facility, whereas drillers in the field need to be carefully trained in their new role as slide drillers. Especially in the early days of implementation, when additional time and resources are required to start off the remote drilling effort and benefits are not yet evident, it is important to have a clear engagement and communication strategy with all stakeholders, to “stay the course” for a period long enough to be able to demonstrate benefits (typically on the order of 1 year), and to clearly and widely communicate successes once they become available.

The DART lends itself well to help drive drilling improvements, with the drilling engineer, geologist and directional driller initiating optimization efforts, while the company representative supervises these in the field and prioritizes based on operations safety. On a more basic level, the DART has facilitated performance improvement simply by providing relevant, up-to-date information for structured daily morning calls and making sure that key personnel remains informed about upcoming targets. DART operations have benefitted from setting achievable milestones (i.e. wells are broken down in smaller milestones, instead of overall performance targets, making them more achievable), and recognizing performance accordingly. With all the rig data readily available, the DART is also in a unique position to identify performance limiters and to help address them.

Having highly experienced staff available in a central DART location allows for effective onboarding and training of new staff. The high-tech environment of the DART is particularly appealing to a younger generation, and can be used effectively as a tool to attract them. Future Outlook From the early pilots in Haynesville and Eagle Ford, DART is currently being expanded to cover a wider range of activities and operations (see Figure 8). Current plans include facilities in Houston that will handle all Eagle Ford, Haynesville, and Arrowhead operations. A drilling automation pilot program is currently carried out with a dedicated rig in the Marcellus Shale. Since the automation team is located in Houston, its operations will be controlled out of Houston as well. A separate facility, currently under construction in Pittsburgh, will handle all other Marcellus activities. The Calgary RTOC will be remodeled to conduct DART operations for Canadian operations in Foothills, Deep Basin, Ground Birch (Montney Shale) Fox Creek, etc. In addition, there are plans to globalize the DART effort with centers in China and Australia. Figure 9 outlines the roadmap for DART as we currently perceive it, taking DART from its current scope all the way to full-scale implementation of SCADA systems and the deployment of automated rigs. Conclusions

We have implemented Drilling Automation and Remote Technology (DART) centers to address pressing challenges, particularly in unconventional shale well construction, associated with the needs for improved safety, more efficient operations leveraging a smaller number of people across a larger number of operations, and obtaining high-quality wellbores. The DART approach brings together key resources including directional drillers, geosteering focal points, MWD/LWD interpreters and company geologists, allowing them to conduct their work effectively from remote locations. The speed of geosteering decision-making has been improved by 90%, with noticeable improvements in wellbore placement (staying in the target zone 100% of the time) and wellbore quality (reduction in wellbore tortuosity and the number of inflection points in the well). These improvements have in turn improved casing running operations, and are expected to benefit the quality of the fracture stimulation and ultimately production rates and reserves recovery. DART has meanwhile also been proven to be an enabler for best-in-class well delivery in the Eagle Ford, and has been demonstrated to facilitate more consistency in drilling performance by having the same, highly group of competent people involved in consecutive wells. Given their solid return on investment, the reach of the DART centers is now expanded to cover all of Shell’s North American land-based well delivery operations and beyond. Moreover, the adoption of DART technology is seen as a step in the future implementation of SCADA systems and automated drilling rigs.

8 SPE/IADC 163526

Acknowledgements

Many people contributed to this paper. We would like to especially thank Don Sitton, RJ Mendoza, Christopher Klug, Edward N. Perry, Cory U. Osaze, Kyle J. Patterson, Sean Huggins-Chan, Matt R. Scheiner, Haroon Farooq, Mike Behrns, Justin Sappington, Randy Henderson and James Griffith for all their help, input and support. We also would like to thank Shell Upstream Americas for permission to publish this paper.

References

Ayllon, R., and Hansen, R.: “Factory Drilling Boosts ROP with Automation”, Drilling Contractor, Nov/Dec 2011

Billa, R., Mota, J., Schneider, B., and Weissman, M.: “Drilling Performance Improvement in the Haynesville Shale”, paper SPE 139842 presented at the 2011 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1-3 March 2011

Booth, J.E.: “Drilling Operations Centers: A History of Functionality and Organizational Purpose–The First Generation” , paper SPE 123225 presented at the SPE Digital Energy Conference and Exhibition, 7-8 April 2009, Houston, Texas, USA

Booth, J.E.: “Real-Time Drilling Operations Centers: A History of Functionality and Organizational Purpose--The Second Generation”, paper SPE 126017, SPE Drilling & Completions, Volume 26, Number 2, p. 295-302

Gorgone, I., Gomez, J., and Uddenberg, G.: “Remote Operations, The Future of Drilling: Directional Drilling Remote Control” paper SPE 112599 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, 4-6 March 2008, Orlando, Florida, USA

Kaminski, D.H., Pellerin, N.M., Williams, J.H.:”A New Data Integration and Work Process System for Providing Online Real-Time Drilling Collaboration”, paper SPE 78343 presented at the 13th European Petroleum Conference held in Aberdeen, UK, 29-31 Oct. 2002

Ursem, L-J., Williams, J.H., Pellerin, N.M., Kaminski, D.H.: ”Real Time Operations Centers: The People Aspects of Drilling Decision Making”, paper SPE/IADC 79893 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 19-21 Feb. 2003 van Oort, E., Rosso, R., Cabello-Montero, J.: “Evolution of Real Time Operations Monitoring: from Concept to Global Implementation”, paper SPE ATCE 97059 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9 – 12 October 2005

van Oort, E., Griffith, J, Schneider, B: “How to Accelerate Drilling Learning Curves”, paper SPE 140333 to be presented at the 2011 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1-3 March 2011

SPE/IADC 163526 9

Figures

Figure 1a – Photograph of a DART unit in action, with ongoing Geosteering (lower left), Directional Drilling (middle left) and MWD/LWD (lower right) operations.

Figure 1b – Schematic outline of a DART unit, with stations for Geosteering, Directional Drilling (DD) and MWD/LWD operations.

10 SPE/IADC 163526

Figure 2a – “Old” directional drilling workflow, with Directional Drilling and MWD/LWD resources located at the rig site, Geosteering work being conducted externally by a 3rd party, and a considerable delay before relevant information reached the drilling engineer and geologist in the office and well trajectory course corrections could be initiated.

Figure 2b – New DART-based directional drilling workflow, with Directional Drilling, MWD/LWD and Geosteering resources co-located in the office-based DART center with immediate access to the drilling engineer and geologist, thereby greatly accelerating the speed of decision-making around e.g. well trajectory course corrections.

SPE/IADC 163526 11

Figure 3 – Schematic view of how “Rig-In-A-Box” (RIAB) Technology allows for reliable rig-based data-aggregation and two-way communication between rigs and the office.

Figure 4 – Drilling ROP per stand for rotating (light brown) and sliding (orange) operations for wells drilled before and after DART introduction in the Eagle Ford Shale. Note the more consistent performance achieved in both rotating and sliding for wells drilled with the DART (red arrow)

12 SPE/IADC 163526

Figure 5 – Chronological overview of improvement in drilling performance (days/1000ft) for DART wells drilled in the Eagle Ford

Shale.

Figure 6 – External benchmarking on total drilling days vs. depth for the first 7 wells drilled by DART in the Eagle Ford Shale. Note that 6 out of the 7 wells show up as first quartile (Q1)

SPE/IADC 163526 13

Figure 7 – Wellbore quality expressed in terms of a tortuosity index and the number of inflection points for wells drilled in the Haynesville before and after DART introduction, with the evident improvement (lower tortuosity, lower number of inflection points) indicated.

Figure 8 – Overview of the planned expansion of DART capacity to cover all of Shell’s North American unconventional shale operations

Figure 9 – Schematic overview of the staircase in the progression of real-time technologies, with the DART as an intermediate step towards SCADA systems and automated rigs.