You are on page 1of 1

The problem that the author is presenting is that the fluids and gas in shale shows a

different density profile, where it raises questions related to gas-in-place calculations: Under
reservoir conditions, what fraction of the pore volume of the organic material can be considered
as free gas, and what fraction is taken up by the adsorbed phase? How accurately is the shale gas
storage capacity estimated using the conventional volumetric methods? And finally, do average
densities exist for the free and adsorbed phases?
The methods and approaches of the author is by using a volumetric approach for shale-
gas reserves estimation for different phases such as the sorbed-gas phase. He also followed some
suggestions to determine the density of the adsorbed phase on solid surfaces, such as
Dubinin(1960), Haydel and Kobayashi(1967), Menon(1968), Tsai t al.(1985), Ozawa et al.(1976,
and Ming et al. (2003). At the end, it is found that after comparing all the previous methods by
the different groups mentioned to a Langmuir-Freundlich adsorption model and found that there
exists a temperature dependence in the sorbed-phase density, but the value approaches those
proposed by Dubinin (1960). The study used a numerical molecular-modeling approach to
determine the adsorbed-phase density from the first principles of Newtonian mechanics. Two
sets of molecular-dynamics (MD) simulations are used to estimate and analyze the adsorbed
phase density under typical reservoir pressure and temperature conditions: Bulk phase methane-
density measurements using a fixed number of methane molecules at fixed pressure and
temperature and run involving measurements of density of methane at the same temperature but
confined to a pore with organic walls.
The main findings from this paper is that the density is sensitive to the changes in
temperature, pressure, and pore size. The sorbed phase follows Langmuir theory for most of the
pores and takes up one-molecule-thick portion of a pore, although there is a damped oscillation
density profile with an increased density in the second layer; 100nm pore shows insignificant
volume, whereas 1nm pore shows a large volume. It is found that the Equation 13, which was
modified from the standard calculations used to calculate free-gas storage capacity, was more
correct. Through MD simulation and Langmuir theory, it is showed that the density for adsorbed
methane equals 0.34g/cm3. The value is based on numerical work using simple falt organic pore-
wall surfaces. In small pores, the adsorbed-layer thickness will be affected by the roughness and
curvature of the solid surface, and the density will increase because of increased surface area of
the wall.
I have learned a lot about shale gas-in-place calculations and the various methods used to
obtained the data needed. I am enlighten by the processes to conduct such calculations with
numerical modeling, along with data for different parameters such as the pressure, temperature,
and pore size. In order for this experiment to advance, further analysis using more complex pore-
wall structures is necessary. Reevaluation of the concepts and approaches in this paper is needed
and a new study on transport properties of natural gases in nanoporous organic materials is