RockMechanicsforIndust• Amadei,Kranz,Scott& Smeallie(eds)¸ 1999Balkema,Rotterdam,ISBN90 5809 052 3

Compressibility
of coalanditsimpactongasproduction
fromcoalbed
reservoirs

S.Harpalani
Department
ofMiningandGeological
Engineering,
University
ofArizona,Tucson,
Ariz.,USA

ABSTRACT: With continuedgas productionfrom a coalbedmethanereservoir,the reservoirpressure

declinesresultingin geometric andvolumehiechanges in thesolidcoalandporespace.This,in turn,affects
theflow characteristics
of coaland,hence,theoverallproduction. Thispaperdescribes appropriate laboratory
techniquesto estimatedifferentcompressibilitiesof coal:bulk, matrix,porevolumeandmatrixshrinkage.
The impactof compressibility on gasproduction is alsoevaluated. The resultsshowthatbulk andmatrix
shrinkagecompressibilities are muchlarger comparedto matrix, or grain, compressibility. The simulation
resultsshowthatincluding porevolumecompressibility resultsin a declinein production
of about15%overa
five-yearperiod.Includingma•ix shrinkage compressibility, ontheotherhand,increases theproduction over
the sameperiodby almost50%. Furthermore, reductionin the overallbulk volumeof coal as a resultof
matrixshrinkage compressibility effectmay alsobe resultingin a significantdecreasein the effectivestress
andthusincreased permeability.

1BACKGROUND sticksasshownin Figure2b (Reiss,1980),hasbeen

usedrecently(Seidle,1992).
1.1 Structureof coal Butt Cleat

Coal is generallycharacterized as having a dual

porosity,microporeand macroporesystem. The
microporesin coal are estimatedto have diameters
ranging
from5 to 10]kandoccur
aspartofthecoal
mahix. Although this servesas the storehousefor
over 95% of the gasin adsorbed form(Gray, 1987),
it hasverylow permeability.The macropore system
consistsof a naturallyoccurringnetworkof closely
spacedfracturessurroundingblocksof matrix,called
the cleatsystem,and providesflow pathsfor gas. /
MatrixBlocksContaining
Micropores
The two constitutethe micro and macroporosity
system,asshownin Figure1. Figure1.Dualporositystructure of coal.
Apartfrom the cleatsystem,thereis anotherset
of fracturespresentin coal, the beddingplanes.
Thesearehorizontalpartingsbetweendifferentcoal
layers. Basedon thesethree setsof fractures,the
physicalstructure of coal is oftenrepresentedusing
the cubic model consistingof severalcubesput
together,as shown in Figure 2a. However, the
beddingplanes do not normally have a role in
conducting fluidsdueto the overburden weightand Fractures
areof little interestin flow of gasin coal.Sincethe (a) (b)
flow of gasis throughthe vertical•andnearvertical
cleat system,anothergeometryused to represent
naturallyfracturedreservoirs, a collectionof match- Figure2. Cubicandcollection
of matchstick
models.

301
1.2 Gastransportin coal threedifferentcompressibilities:
bulk, porevolume
andmatrixcompressibilities.
Most virgin coal seams in the U.S. are water Bulk compressibility
is definedasthe fractional
saturated. In order for methane to be released and changein bulk volumeper unit changein pressure,
flow to take place,wateris first pumpedfrom the andis givenas:
coalseam. The flow of waterdecreases the pressure
in the cleatsmakingcoal lesscapableof retaining
methanein adsorbed form,andgasis desorbed at the CS=i/V
b dVb
d• (4)
coal matrix-cleat interface. As a result, a gas
concentration gradientis establishedbetweenthe
cleats and coal matrix. Since the diameter of the wheredP is the changein appliedpressureat the
external surfaces, with internal pressure held
micropores is small comparedwith the mean free
constant. Porevolumecompressibilityis definedas
pathof gasmolecules, thismigrationis a diffusion
the fractionalchangein porevolumeperunit change
process andfollowsFick'sLaw,givenas:
in pressure,
andis givenas:
m= DVC (1)
where, m is the massflowrate,D is the diffusion
C,=l/Vp
'dP dVp (5)
coefficientand VC is the concentration gradient.
After the gas reachesa cleat, the flow becomes wheredP is the changein appliedpressureat the
viscous,controlled
by the permeability of coal and internal surfaces,with external pressure held
obeyingDarcy'sLaw, givenas: constant.Matrix compressibility
is definedas the
fractionalchange
in volumeof solidmaterialperunit
changein pressure,
andis givenas:
m=_Pkvp (2)
wherem is themassflowrateperunitarea,VP is the Cm =l/VmdVm dE (6)
pressure
gradient,I• is theviscosityof the gas,@ is
the gas density gas and k is the apparent
permeability
of coal. wheredP is the changein appliedpressureat both
the external and internal surfaces.

1.3 Compressibility
- general A commonassumption in reservoirengineering
is thatCmis verysmallin relationto C•, andalso,
Compressibilityis the parameterquantifyingthe
relationship
betweenthepressure exertedon a body Cp= C• /• (7)
andthe resultingchangein its volume. For a non-
porousmaterial,a single compressibility, C, is where• is theporosity
of rock.
defined as: Compressibilitycanhavea significantinfluence
on coal permeability, and therefore, on gas
- 1 dV productionfrom coal. For instance,with large
c- (3) compressibility-suchas that measuredfor Rock
VdP
Creek site in Alabama- a pressuredrawdownof
only2.1 MPa (300 psi)canreducethe permeability
where V is the volume of the body and P is the by halfor more(Zuberet al. 1987).Reliablevalueof
hydrostatic pressureexertedoverits surface.For a compressibility is also of importancein resource
rock,sinceit canbe subjected to an externalpressure estimation,reservoir maintenanceand subsidence
as well as an internal'pore'pressurethat actsover evaluation (Zhenget al. 1992).
the surfacesof its pore walls,the compressibility Finally, for coal, there is an additionalfactor
termis morecomplicated.It becomesnecessary to influencingthe volume of the solid matrix and,
accountfor at leasttwo differentvolumes,the bulk therefore,the fracturevolume,accompanying flow
volumeand pore volume.The bulk volume,Vb, is of gas.This is the sorptioninducedmatrixshrinkage
defined as the volume that would be measured if the changingthe volumeof the matrixdueto desorption
presence of theporesis ignored.The porevolume, of gas. Thisis uniqueto coalandmethanebecame
Vp,is definedasthatpartof thebulkvolumewhich almostall of thegasis heldin coalin adsorbed form.
is not occupiedby the solid rock (Zimmerman, Changesin the volumeof coal matrix associated
1991). The volumeoccupied by solidgrainsis the with releaseandflow of gashavebeenmeasured by
matrixvolume,Vm.Thesethreevolumesgive riseto several researchers in the past and recently. A
summaryis givenbelow.

302
1.4Matrix shrinkagecompressibility 2 MEASUREMENT OF COMPRESSIBILITY

Associatedwith sorptionof gaseson solidsis a 2.1 Bulkandporevolumecompressibilities

changein thesolidvolumedueto changes in its free
surface energy, an expansion resulting from Measurement of CbandCw required a setupwith a
adsorption, andshrinkage from desorption (Gregg, jacket/sleeve aroundthe samplefor application of
1961). Swellingof coal in the presenceof an horizontal stress,a meansof applyingverticalload,
adsorptive gashas beeninvestigated in the past. gas inlet to control the internal pressure
Moffat & Weale (1955) reportedstudyingthe independently,while monitoringthe volumetric
swelling/shrinkage of coal with adsorption/ changes of thesample. Figure3 showstheschematic
desorption of methanein order to interpretthe of theexperimental setupused.A Hoektriaxialcell
sorptionisothermscorrectly. For pressures up to connectedto a hydraulicpump provided the
15.2 MPa (2200 psi), the volume of differentcoal confiningstressanda compression testingmachine
blockswasreported to increase
by 0.2 to 1.6%. For wasusedfor application of axial stress.Figure4
pressures abovethat,the volumeeitherdecreased or showsa Hoektriaxialcell,with slightmodifications.
remainedconstant, probablydueto changes in the Holesweredrilledat rightangles through theupper
volumeof solidcoal,or thematrixcompressibilityandlowerplatens to allowentryof gas.Entryof gas
effect.Reucroft(1986)andSethuraman et al. (1987) frombothendsensured thattheentirespecimen was
reportedan increasein the lengthof coal samples subjected to uniformgaspressure.To distribute the
between0.36%and1.31%whenexposed to carbon gasuniformly,two stainless steeldiskswith small
dioxideat a pressureof 0.14 MPa (20 psi). The diameterholeswereplacedbetweenthe specimen
changein the lengthwith exposure to nitrogenand endsandplatens.
heliumwasnegligible. To enablemeasurement of thevolumetricstrain,
It is quiteclearfrom Figures1 and2 that any the typicalpermeameter type of arrangement was
volumetricchangein the co• matrix would also modifiedslightly. The modification wasbasedon
affectthecleataperture,
andthusthepermeability
of the principlethat whena cylindricalspecimen
is
coal. With coalbedmethaneindustryin the U.S. stressedaxially, thereis a reductionin the axial
maturing,thereis adequateevidenceof permeability lengthof the specimen.Associated with this is a
increaseswith continuedproductionfrom a coalbed radialbarreling,causingan increasein the mean
reservoir,
anda negativedeclinetrendin production diameter
of thespecimen. If stressed
radially,the
rates (Zabner, 1997, Seidle, 1995). The overall diameter
of thespecimendecreases,andthelength
changesin cleat permeabilityin situ would, of increases.For determination
of thebulk andpore
course,depend on the coal properties(cleat volume compress•ilities,
it was necessaryto
compressibilityandcleatspacing)andthe increase monitorvolumetricchanges
in bothaxial andradial
in cleatporositydueto matrixshrinkage.Basedon directions.
Two LVDTs(linearvoltagedifferential
thislogicof permeability increase, furtherlaboratory transducers) onthesidesmeasuredthechange in the
studieshave been carried out to estimate the increase axiallengthof thespecimen.An average
of thetwo
in cleatporosityandpermeability, (Harpalani,1992, canceledout any effectsarisingfi'omnon-uniform
Levine, 1996, Seidle, 1995). Using the measured strainon thetwo sidesof the specimen.Sincethe
volumetricchanges, modelshavebeendeveloped to diameterof thespecimenwasknown,thechange in
estimatethe resultingchanges in permeability and volumein the axialdirection,
AVaxwascalculated.
impacton gas production(Levine, 1996, Palmer, To measurethe changein volumein the radial
1996, Harpalani, 1997). The benefits of the direction, theprocedure wasslightlycomplicated.A
phenomenon havebeensummarized asincreased
gas smalloil reservoirwasfittedbetween thehydraulic
deliverability,greater recovery and offset of pump and the cell body. This servedas an
completiondamage. accumulator and it was possibleto changethe
Sincedesorption of gasaffectsthevolumeof the volumeof oil in thisby a micrometer screw.After
matrix, an additionalterm, matrix shrinkage reaching a desiredlevelof confinirlg
stress,
thOvalve
compressibility,
is definedfor coalasfollows: connecting the hydraulicsystemand the cell was
closed. The volume of oil on the cell side of the
valve,therefore,became constant.By controlling
thevolume of oilin theaccumulator,
it waspossible
to maintainthe confiningstress
at anylevel. The
volume of oil taken from, or added to, the
whereP isthechange
in pressure
of a sorbing
gas. accumulator
gave the changein volumeof the
specimenin the radial direction,AVra. The net
changein the volumeof the specimen
was then
calculated as:

303
 UPPER PLATEN

Upplr PIiI©n
PRESSURE GAUGE

Plrforllld OllQ

8peclml.
L BODY
Rubber 81elvl

LVDTs
011

VALVE 011

LOWER PLATEN
Plrlorlted
OIL FROM
OIL CHAMBER PUMP
Lew•r Pieleo

Oee Oullet
sc

GRADUATED RING
Figure4. Hoek tfiaxial cell.
Figure3. Experimental
setupto measure
C• and
2.2Matrixandmatrixshrinkage
compressibility
,w = + ,w,. (9) Measurement
of C• required
thatpressure
all around
thesample andwithinbeequalat all timesensuring
Appropriate corrections for compressibilityof that the void volumeremainedunchanged with
platens(for axial length),and compressibility
of oil variationsin applied pressure. The measured
andrubbersleeve(for radialvolume)weremade. volumetric
changeswouldthenbedueto changes in
For measurement of thebulk compressibility,
the the volumeof the solidmatrix,or grains,alone.
specimenwas placedin the triaxial cell. Axial and Also, an inert gaswasusedsuchthat therewas no
confiningstresseswere graduallyincreasedto 2.1 chemicalor physicalaffinitybetweenthe gasand
MPa (300 psi). Gaspressure wasthensetto a value, coal.Theprocedure involvedsaturating thesample
P, and the specimenwas left for severalhoursto with heliumat highpressure until equilibrium
was
equilibrate. Zero readings for LVDTs and attained.Thepressurewasthenreduced in stepsand
accumulator volume were recorded. The stress was thestrainmeasurementsrecordedafterequilibrium
increasedin stepsuntil 6.9 MPa (1000 psi) was at eachstage.The procedure is described
in detail
reached.Stresswas thendecreased in similarsteps, later
since
CanandCan* weremeasured sequentially.
and a complete AV-stress relationship was For measurementof matrix shrinkage
established.Usingthe results,bulk compressibility, compressibility,
it was felt that the experimental
Cb was determined for the particular internal design mustconsider thefollowing factors:
pressure. 1. Both horizontal and axial strains must be
For measurement of the pore volume monitored.For large samples,at least two,
compressibility,
Ca,, the plan was to maintain preferably
three,setsof straingauges
shouldbe
constantexternalstressthroughoutthe experiment.
Gas pressurewithin the specimenwas to be 2. The experimentshould be carried out for
increasedin stepsof 0.69 MPa (100 psi) and AV decreasinggas pressureranging from the
determinedfor each pressurelevel giving a AV- pressure encounteredin situto lowpressure.
internal pressure relationship, and enabling 3. Sincemoisture content andtemperature affectthe
calculationof Ca,.However,thiswasnotsuccessful quantityof sorbedgas, thesetwo factorsalso
with thegivensetup.The gasleakagefrom the sides affectthevolumetric straininduced by sorption.
of the specimenwas significant. Hence, it was Moisture content and temperatureshould,
decided thatCa, will be calculated
by estimating
the therefore,be carefullymaintainedat constant
porosityof the sample.An experimentalsetupto levels.
measureCp of coal usedsuccessfully is given by 4. The effect of matrix compressibility shouldbe
Zhenget al.(1992). eliminated to ensure that the measured strain is
purely due to the sorptioninduced matrix
shrinkageeffect, and not a combinationof the
two.

304
 I ; ToPressure
Indicator wasattained,a sampleof gasfromthecontainer
was
J ,•. ß Pressure
Transducers
passedthrough a gas chromatograph and the
1 .U: concentrationof methane,C, wasmeasured.Using
J To •= • • Chromato;raph
therelationship:
__ Vac
[n•J•=--•
Fixed
Volume
g.:-'.'::•.•:•"'••,t:.':f::.L
'•'.-3: :::::.':::.
',,, ß Temperature
Sath c=?. 0o)
?,
:.•. .;:;

wherePt is thetotalpressure
andPpis thepartial
pressure
of methane,
thepartialpressure
of methane
was calculated. The strain measurements for each
pressure were thus obtained for reducing
concentrations (partialpressure)
of methane.Hence,
Helium/Methane
Cylinder wasusedtocalculateC-,m*.It shouldbepointedout at the end of this cycle,a completestrain-pressure
relationshipwas established. The measuredstrain
Figure5. Experimental
setupto estimatematrix here that the presenceof helium has no effect on
volumetric strain.
adsorption/desorption of methaneon coal (Purl,
1990). At the end of this cycle,the samplewas
The experimental setupis shownin Figure5. Six saturatedwith helium at the experimentalpressure.
straingageswereinstalledon the specimen surface- Theheliumpressure wasthendecreased in stepsand
three each for axial nnd horizontalstrains,placed thestrainwasmeasured for eachstep. Sincehelium
approximately
120ø apartfromonennother.
The is non-adsorptive,thisgavethe straincauseddueto
straingageswereafi%edto the coreusingnn epoxy changesin the volumeof solid coal, or the coal
recommendedby the mnnufacturer. As per grains,as a resultof changein pressure.This strain
manufacturer,the performanceof the epoxy was was usedto calculateCm.
appropriate andwasnot affectedby gases(methane,
carbondioxide,nitrogen)at highpressures. A micro-
crystallinewax, recommended by the strain gage 3 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
manufacturer, wasusedto coatthestraingagesfor
properoperation in humidconditions.The corewas The measuredvolumetricstrain with changesin
thenplacedin the samplecontainerenclosed on all stressconditionsis shownin Figure6. Using these
sides. The straingaugewireswerepassedthrough results,thebulkcompressibility
wascalculatedto be
theO-ringsealandconnected to thestrainindicator. 3.2x l0'5psi't. However,
thisisslightly
higher
than
The container wasclosedandtestedfor leakage. the valuesreportedin thepastby otherresearchers
The samplecontainerwas kept in a constant (Somertonet al. 1975, Zheng et al. 1992). Hence,
temperature water bath throughoutthe experiment. this value was not usedin calculationof the pore
Maintainingn constanttemperatureis important volumecompressibility.
becausethe processof adsorption/desorption is very Using the measuredstrain in the axial and
sensitiveto temperature. Furthermore,this also horizontaldirection,thematrixvolumetricstrainwas
enabled performingthe experimentsat in situ calculated for eachpressure level. Figure7 shows
temperature conditions. A smallcylindercontaining the resultsfor decreasing pressurefor one of the
distilledwaterwasusedas n gashumidifier. Moist experiments. The experiment was carriedout at a
gaswasusedbecause it is morerepresentativeof the total pressureof 10.3 MPa (1500 psi). The plot
gasrecovered fromcoalbeds.Anotheradvantage of showsthe resultsfor decreasing part of the cycle
usingmoistgasis thatit doesnot alterthe moisture onlydueto itsrelevance to thefieldconditions.The
contentof thesample by pickingupmoisture fromit. volumeat maximumpressurewas considered as the
Thespecimen wasfirstsaturated withmethane at reference point,whichis analogous to theconditions
high pressure. The strain was monitoreduntil in a virgin reservoir.For methane,there was no
equilibriumwas attained.A plot of swainvs time strainuntilthepressure wasdecreased to below6.9
indicated thatit tookapproximately fourmonthsto MPa (1000 psi). Belowthispressure, therewas a
reachequilibrium.After that,everytime methane fairlylineardecreasein thevolume.Thisis probably
wasbledoutto reducethemethanepressure, helium becausethe desorptionof gas is significantonly
was injected to ensurethat the total pressure below 6.9 MPa (1000 psi). From the figure, the
remainedconstantthroughout the experiment.For pressureat which shrinkageactuallybeginswas
decreasingpressure,the time requiredto reach obtained. This value was used in estimatingthe
equilibriumfor eachof the subsequent stepswas matrixshrinkage
compressibility.Thevalueof Cm*
approximatelyone month. Once new equilibrium wasestimatedto be 6.2 x l0:• psi't. Thehelium

305
 o i i i
Thecompressibilitics
calculated,
andtakenfrom
literaturefor the sakeof consistency
andusefulness
for the simulationexercise,are shown in Table 1.
These are the values used in the simulation discussed
in the next section.

Table1. Coalcompressibilities.

Bulkvolume 5x 10'S/psi
Porevolume 4.5x 10'S/psi
Matrix(Grain) 9 x 10'?/psi
Matrix
shrinkage6.2x lifS/psi
The results show that the matrix, or grain,
compressibility is almostseventimes smallerthan
the matrix shrinkagecompressibility.Althoughthe
positiveimpactof matrix shrinkagewill become
somewhatreduceddueto the matrixcompressibility
0 ß Stressing
Phase effect,its effect on the overallimpactwill not be
significant.The matrix shrinkagecompressiblity is

•1.6
oDesiressing
Phase
seven times smaller than the pore volume
1.8 compressibility.However, the exact interrelation
between the two is not well known due to
insufficientdataon matrix shrinkage.The effectof
2.0
matrix shrinkage compressibility on coal
permeabilityandgasproduction mightbe morethan
i i I i i i i i
just a reductionin the negativeimpact of pore
a'ao $oo 600 900 volumecompressibility.
HYDROSTATIC STRESS,o'h (psi) To evaluate the effect of the two
compressibilities,
Ca, andCm*,ongasproduction
Figure6. Variationin specimen
volumewith stress. from a coalbedmethanereservoir,the valuesgiven
abovewereusedasinputin a setof simulation runs
usinga commercialsimulator.The resultsfor three
0.001 casesare shownin Figures8 and9. Case 1 is the
basisof comparison
with Ca, = 0 and no matrix
shrinkage,
thatis,Cm*
= Ca,= 0. Case
2 shows
the
effectof porevolumecompressibility. A reduction
Hehum of 15%in gasproduction overa five-yearperiod,or
thenegativeimpactof porevolumecompressibility
effect, can be clearly seenin the results. Case 3
E -0.0Ol
showsthat if matrix shrinkagecompressibility is
.2=
included,it can more than compensatefor the
negativeeffect of pore volume compressibility. In
fact,thereis a significantincrease,almost50% over
-0.002
i
the samefive-yearperiod,in production.In reality,
0 so0 1000 1500 psi the impactcanbe evenmore significantthanshown
0 3.45 6.90 10.35 MPa
in thesimulation results.It hasbeenpointedoutthat
Gas/partial pressure, Ap it is extremelylikely that the matrix shrinkageand
stresseffectsare coupled.A decreasein the coal
Figure 7. Variation in coal matrix volume with bulk volumeas a resultof matrix shrinkagemay be
decreasing
gaspressure. resultingin a significantdecrease in the horizontal
stress(Mavor, 1997). Hence,theremight be a net
reduction in the stress across the cleat surfaces of
results show that the change in volume with
coal,increasingthe permeabilitysignifieanfiy.It is
decreasingpressureis very linear.The slopeof the
linewascalculated
tobe9 x 10'?psi'l well knownthatthepermeability of all rocksis very
sensitiveto stressconditions,changesin stresses

306
100
GASPRODUCTION
RATE(MSCFD) with continuedproductionand drawdown.In fact,
the overallimpactcanbe muchmorethanshownin
here, becausethis parametercan have several
80 lye ef additional effects like water saturation and overall
stressconditionsthe magnitudes
of which are not
known at this time.
The matrixcompressibility of coalis small and
50 probably does not impact the productionwith
/' J •- NegatlvHffect of pressuredrawdownsignificanfiy. When coupled
40 / • • porevolume
with the pore volume and matrix shrinkage
compressibilities,
it canbe ignored.
20 Measurementof pore volume compress•ility
10 • • • requiresmoresophisticated experimentalsetupthan
0 I 2 3 4 5
the one describedin this paper. However,
TIME (years) measurementtechniques for estimation
of matrixand
matrix shrinkagecompressibfiities, as described
F[•e 8. E•e• of •m•ess[bili•es o• S• here, are accurateand simple, but fairly time
produc•o••te. consuming.
120
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

se2
The authorwishesto thankthefollowingindividuals
for their assistance
and/orguidancein carryingout
the work describedin this paper: Malcolm J.
McPherson,Walter K. Sawyer and Richard A.
Schraufilagel.

REFERENCES

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

Gray, I. 1987.Reservoirengineering
in coal seams:
T•e, days(X1000)
PartI - The physical
process
of gasstorageand
movement in coal seams, SPE Reservoir
Figure9. Effectof compressibilities
on cumulative
gasproduction. Engineering: 28-34.
Gregg, S.J. 1961. The surfacechemistryof solids,
ReinholdPublishing Corp.,New York: 830-839.
beingcapableof altering by several Harpalani, S. & G. Chen 1997. Influence of gas
thepermeability
ordersof magnitude
(Harpalani
& McPherson,
1985, production inducedstrainon permeability of coal,
Somertonet al. 1975). Furthermore,the increased Int. J. of Geotech.And Geol.Engr., 15: 303-325.
fracture
porevolumeprobablyresultsin a reduction Harpalani,S. & G. Chen 1992. Effect of gas
in watersaturation,
thusresulting
in higherrelative productionon porosityand permeabilityof coal,
Proc. Coalbed Methane R and D in Australia: 67-
permeability
to gasandlowerrelativepermeability
78.
to water(Mayor,1997),againwitha positiveimpact
onpermeability
andgasproduction. Harpalani,
S. & M.J.McPherson
1985.Effectof
stresson permeabilityof coal,QuarterlyReviewof
Methanefrom Coal SeamsTechnology,
3(2): 23-
4CONCLUSIONS 28.
Levine,J.R. 1996. Model studyof the influenceof
Basedon the work described
in this paper,the matrix shrinkageon absolutepermeabilityof
followinggeneralconclusions canbe made: coalbed reservoirs, Coalbed Methane and Coal
In caseof coal,thereis definitelyan additional Geology,Geol.Soc.Spl.Publ.109: 197-212.
compressibilityaffectingthe matrixvolume,matrix Mavor, M.J. & J.E. Vaughn 1997. Increasing
shrinkage whichmustbe considered absolutepermeabilityin the San Juan basin
compressibility,
andmeasured.
It canhavea verysignificant
impact Fruitland formation,Proc. Intl. CoalbedMethane
on the flow behavior of a coalbedmethanereservoirSymposium: 33-45.
and productionfrom it. The effect can more than Moffat, D.H. & K.E. Weale 1955. Sorptionby coal
offset the negative impact of pore volume of methaneat highpressures, Fuel, 34: 449-462.
compressibility
andthe resulting cleatcompaction Palmer, I. & J. Mansoori 1996. How permeability

307
 depends on stressandporepressure
in coalbeds:
A
newmodel,AnnualMeetingof the $oc. of PetroL
Engrs.,SPE 36737.
Purl, R. & D. Yee 1990. Enhancedcoalbedmethane
recovery,AnnualMeeting of the $oc. of Petrol.
Engrs.,SPE20732.
Reucroi•, P.J. et al. 1986. Surface area and
swellabilityof coal,Fuel, 62(5): 279-284.
Reiss,L.H. 1980.Thereservoirengineering aspects
of•acturedformations,EditionsTechnip,France.
Seidle,J.P. et al. 1992.Applicationof matchstick
geometry to stress dependent
permeabilityin coals,
Proc, SPE RockyMountainRegionalMeeting,
SPE 24361.
Seidle,J. et al. 1995.Experimentalmeasurement of
coalmatrix shrinkage due to gasdesorptionand
implications for cleatpermeability
increases,
Proc.
Intl. Meetingof PetroleumEngrs.,SPE30010.
Sethuraman,A.R. et al. 1987. Gas and vapor
induced coal swelling, American Chemical
Society,32(1): 259-264.
Somerton,W. H. et al. 1975. Effect of stresson
permeabilityof coal,Int. J.. of RockMech. Min.
Sci. and Geo. Abstr.: 129 -145.
Stefanska,C.G. 1990. Influenceof carbondioxide
and methane on changesof sorptiort,and
dilatometricpropertiesof bituminous coals,
ArchiwumGornictwa,35(1): 105-113.
Zahner,B. 1997.Applicationof materialbalanceto
determine ultimate recovery of a San Juan
Fruitlandcoalwell, AnnualMeetingof the $oc. of
Petrol.Engrs.,SPE38858.
Zheng,Z. et al. 1992. Porevolumecompressibility
measurementon Blue Creek coal samples,semi-
annualreportsubmittedto GRI, subcontractno.
RC-TTI-1.
Zimmerman, R.W. 1991. Compressibilityof
sandstone,ElsevierPublishers,New York.
Zuber, M.D. et aL 1987. The use of simulationand
history matchingto determinecritical coalbed
methane reservoir properties, presented at
SPE/DOE Low Permeability Reservoirs
Symposium,SPE 16420.

308