1. Technically Recoverable Shale Oil and Shale Gas
Resources: An Assessment of 137 Shale Formations in
41Countries Outside the United States’
THE PAKISTAN POTENTIAL SHALE GAS RESERVOIR PROPERTIES
Abbas Bilgrami | June 30, 2013
PAGE 0

2. TERMINOLOGY
SHALE OIL/ GAS AND TIGHT OIL/ GAS
Although the terms shale oil and tight oil are often used interchangeably in public discourse, shale
formations are only a subset of all low permeability tight formations, which include sandstones and
carbonates, as well as shales, as sources of tight oil production. Within the United States, the oil
and natural gas industry typically refers to tight oil production rather than shale oil production,
because it is a more encompassing and accurate term with respect to the geologic formations
producing oil at any particular well. EIA has adopted this convention, and develops estimates of
tight oil production and resources in the United States that include, but are not limited to,
production from shale formations. The ARI assessment of shale formations presented in this
report, however, looks exclusively at shale resources and does not consider other types of tight
formations.
EIA = US Energy Information Administration
ARI = Advanced Resources International
PAGE 1

3. “If 55 Tcf of conventional gas reserves have been discovered, there has got to be
shales that have generated at least 10 times that much gas, 50% of which would
have been retained by these rocks. Based on conservative estimates,
unconventional reserves of Tight and Shale gas in the country stand at about 100
Tcf. This is clearly not the kind of statistic that we can afford to overlook any longer
if we are to ensure the country’s future energy security. To this end, it is imperative
for geoscientists, petroleum engineers, service providers and policy makers to
strategize together and chalk out the roadmap for a way forward”
Mr.Moin Raza Khan, Deputy Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer, Pakistan Petroleum Limited
ANALYSIS
This report was published in June 2013 and it highlights interesting aspects of Pakistan's shale oil
and gas potential.
A number of preliminary studies have been undertaken by Pakistan Petroleum, OMV and the Oil
and Gas Development Corporation. All which indicate that the universe for Shale and Tight gas is
considerable. This report which is in itself clear that these are very initial estimates, projects that
Pakistan has about 9 billion barrels of shale oil and 586 TCF of shale gas according to ARI.
ARI's study is based on existing material available on the various exploration basins within
Pakistan. These figures are considered by the Group to be somewhat optimistic and the studies
based on which these estimates have been taken, out of date by at least 25 years.
We identified this report and shared it with the Pakistan Business Council. They have in turn
requested the Energy Expert Group that we prepare a small extract and briefly analyse the contents.
The most preliminary but relevant comments on this effort came from our colleague Mr. Moin
Raza Khan who gave a reality check while our Chairman Mr. Farooq Rahmatullah wanted to
establish the source of the data based on which they have developed this opinion.
Our efforts in understanding the importance of this study is based on the fact that it identifies that
Pakistan has potential. However in 2011, the same group gave a highly optimistic analysis based
only on one sample for a very limited area, this new report covers much larger area, yet again very
optimistic estimates. On the other hand PPL's work presented to the Pakistan Business Council
and which is part of the Groups Position Paper on Energy, has adopted a comprehensive yet
conservative approach. As such the realistic number would be somewhere between PPL's and EIA
estimates. The main issue with the EIA study is that it covers a global analysis of these resources
irrespective of the quantum of the data and it’s reliability - a very risky approach for a region like
Pakistan where no or very sketchy work has been done so far. The report quotes OMV in their
report, while it is actually Eni, not OMV, which has done a lot of work jointly with PPL using the
data available with PPL, while there is a lot of data available with DGPC and HDIP to which very
few have access.
Bearing this somewhat optimistic assessment and the fact that no actual shale gas/oil work has
been conducted on the ground in the form of pilot wells and full blown coring of the target shale
sections and then carrying out integrated studies on the actual data. Even then it will still be
PAGE 2

4. sketchy as the work will be based on respective company’s data. Therefore, any estimates based on
available data will remain conjecture. This is why there is a need to carry out a focused, integrated
study based on the data from available with all E&P companies as well as DGPC/HDIP archives by a
third party specializing in Shale Gas/Oil prospectivity analysis – it is high time that such a project
be started sooner than later. Otherwise, the planners will continue to continue to rely on EIA
reports.
Shale Gas and Oil has been in the media a great deal in the past five years. No doubt Pakistan has a
great deal of unconventional gas potential. Independent studies support the findings of the EIA/
ARI in this report. However this is for the first time that a number has been put on the total
potential shale gas and oil reserves in Pakistan. Even if commercially recoverable reserves are one
third of the potential the shale oil reserves would 3 billion BBL (current recoverable reserves are 342
million bbl) and shale gas reserves would be around 175 TCF (current recoverable reserves are
estimated at 33 TCF) which is approximately 5 times the current recoverable reserves of
conventional gas.
Shale oil and gas extraction is expensive and difficult. The current technology of hydro fracturing or
"fracking" as it is called, requires large quantities of water to do the fracking. This makes the
application of this technology even more difficult in Pakistan which is a water stressed country. The
long term potential impact on the water aquifers where this fracking has taken place in the USA is
yet to be determined. There are alternative technologies that are in the process of being developed
but these are unlikely to have a major impact on the overall level of fracking in the next five years.
It is therefore our view that Shale Oil and Gas is of medium to long term importance for Pakistan.
Therefore any policy structure that is developed for Shale Oil and Gas in Pakistan must factor in
the expense, time and difficulty to develop this market. Once announced the policy structures must
not be changed every time a new Government takes over.
Unconventional and Shale Gas and Oil could in the next decade contribute a major part of
Pakistan's hydrocarbon needs. However there will still be a need for imports and a great deal of
focus on energy efficiency and conservation since this will be the cheapest form of energy for
Pakistan.
One of the other peculiarities of shale oil and gas production is that initially for the first two years
the level of production from these fields is high. But they tend to level off at much lower levels.
This leads to the need for a great deal more drilling and development work to maintain higher
levels of production. This capital intense nature of shale exploration is often overlooked by policy
makers and regulators.
Pakistan is fortunate that it has been recognised as a major Shale play internationally. This must be
used as a means of creating greater interest in Pakistan's potential by the Government undertaking
a proper study of the shale opportunity in the country. This study must then be available to share
with those companies from international markets that could be interested to invest in Pakistan.
This must then lead to a fair and more comprehensive policy structure that will encourage
investment and bring shale and unconventional gases into our energy mix sooner rather than later.
PAGE 3

5. 1.0 Executive Summary
This report provides an initial assessment of shale oil resources and updates a prior assessment of
shale gas resources issued in April 2011. It assesses 137 shale formations in 41 countries outside the
United States, expanding on the 69 shale formations within 32 countries considered in the prior
report. The earlier assessment, also prepared by Advanced Resources International (ARI), was
released as part of a U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) report titled World Shale Gas
Resource: An Initial Assessment of 14 Regions outside the United States.
There were two reasons for pursuing an updated assessment of shale resources so soon after the pri
or report. First, geologic research and well drilling results not available for use in the 2011 report all
ow for a more informed evaluation of the shale formations covered in that report as well as other sh
ale formations that it did not assess. Second, while the 2011 report focused exclusively on natural ga
s, recent developments in the United States highlight the role of shale formations and other tight pl
ays as sources of crude oil, lease condensates, and a variety of liquids processed from wet natural
gas.
Although the shale resource estimates presented in this report will likely change over time as
additional information becomes available, it is evident that shale resources that were until recently
not included in technically recoverable resources constitute a substantial share of overall global
technically recoverable oil and natural gas resources.
When considering the market implications of abundant shale resources, it is important to
distinguish between a technically recoverable resource, which is the focus of this report, and an
economically recoverable resource. Technically recoverable resources represent the volumes of oil
and natural gas that could be produced with current technology, regardless of oil and natural gas
prices and production costs. Economically recoverable resources are resources that can be
profitably produced under current market conditions. The economic recoverability of oil and gas
resources depends on three factors: the costs of drilling and completing wells, the amount of oil or
natural gas produced from an average well over its lifetime, and the prices received for oil and gas
PAGE 4

6. production. Recent experience with shale gas in the United States and other countries suggests that
economic recoverability can be significantly influenced by above-the-ground factors as well as by
geology. Key positive above-the-ground advantages in the United States and Canada that may not
apply in other locations include private ownership of subsurface rights that provide a strong
incentive for development; availability of many independent operators and supporting contractors
with critical expertise and suitable drilling rigs and, preexisting gathering and pipeline
infrastructure; and the availability of water resources for use in hydraulic fracturing.
Top 10 countries with technically recoverable shale oil resources
Rank
Country
Shale oil (billion barrels)
1
Russia
75
2
U.S.*
58
3
China
32
4
Argentina
27
5
Libya
26
6
Australia
18
7
Venezuela
13
8
Mexico
13
9
Pakistan
9
10
Canada
9
World Total
345
(48)
(335)
* EIA estimates used for ranking order. ARI estimates in parentheses.
Because they have proven to be quickly producible in large volumes at a relatively low cost, tight oil
and shale gas resources have revolutionized U.S. oil and natural gas production, providing 29
percent of total U.S. crude oil production and 40 percent of total U.S. natural gas production in
2012. However, given the variation across the world's shale formations in both geology and abovethe-ground conditions, the extent to which global technically recoverable shale resources will prove
to be economically recoverable is not yet clear. The market effect of shale resources outside the
United States will depend on their own production costs, volumes, and wellhead prices. For
example, a potential shale well that costs twice as much and produces half the output of a typical
U.S. well would be unlikely to back out current supply sources of oil or natural gas. In many cases,
even significantly smaller differences in costs, well productivity, or both can make the difference
between a resource that is a market game changer and one that is economically irrelevant at
current market prices.
it is important to distinguish between short-term and long-term effects. The increase in U.S. crude
oil production in 2012 of 847,000 barrels per day over 2011 was largely attributable to increased
production from shales and other tight resources. That increase is likely to have had an effect on
prices in 2012. Even with that increase, global spare production capacity was low in 2012 relative to
PAGE 5

7. recent historical standards – without it, global spare capacity would have been considerably lower,
raising the specter of significantly higher oil prices.
However, the situation is somewhat different in a longer-run setting, in which both global supply
and demand forces are likely to substantially reduce the sensitivity of world oil market prices to a
rise in production from any particular country or resource outside of the Organization of the
Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Undoubtedly, significant volumes of oil production from
shale resources that are economically recoverable at prices below those desired by OPEC decisionmakers would add to the challenge facing OPEC as it seeks to manage oil prices. However, the
magnitude of this challenge is probably smaller than the challenges associated with the possible
success of some of its own member countries in overcoming barriers stemming from internal
discord or external constraints that have kept their recent production well below levels that would
be preferred by national governments and would be readily supported by their ample resources.
Ultimately, the possibility of significant price impacts in response to either of these potential
challenges will depend on the ability and willingness of other OPEC member countries to offset the
impact of higher production on prices by reducing their output or their investment in additional
production capacity. Efforts to limit the price effect of higher production could also be supported
by the demand side of the market over the long term since any persistent period of lower prices
would encourage a demand response that would tend to soften any long-term price-lowering
effects of increased production.
While the current report considers more shale formations than were assessed in the previous
version, it still does not assess many prospective shale formations, such as those underlying the
large oil fields located in the Middle East and the Caspian region. Further improvement in both the
quality of the assessments and an increase the number of formations assessed should be possible
over time.
PAGE 6

8. CHAPTER XXIV.
INDIA/ PAKISTAN
2.0 SUMMARY
India and Pakistan contain numerous basins with organic-rich shales. For India, the study assessed
four priority basins: Cambay, Krishna-Godavari, Cauvery and Damodar Valley. The study also
screened other basins in India, such as the Upper Assam, Vindhyan, Pranhita-Godavari, Rajasthan
and South Rewa. However, in these basins the shales were thermally too immature or the data for
conducting a rigorous resource assessment were not available. For Pakistan, the study addressed
the areally extensive Indus Basin, Figure XXIV-1.
Overall, ARI estimates a total of 1,170 Tcf of risked shale gas in-place for India/Pakistan, 584 Tcf in
India and 586 Tcf in Pakistan. The risked, technically recoverable shale gas resource is estimated at
201 Tcf, with 96 Tcf in India and 105 Tcf in Pakistan, Tables XXIV-1A and XXIV-1B. In addition, we
estimate risked shale oil in-place for India/Pakistan of 314 billion barrels, with 87 billion barrels in
India and 227 billion barrels in Pakistan. The risked, technically recoverable shale oil resource is
estimated at 12.9 billion barrels for these two countries, with 3.8 billion barrels for India and 9.1
billion barrels for Pakistan, Table XXIV-2A and XXIV-2B.
PAGE 7

9. PAGE 8

10. 3.0 INTRODUCTION
Evaluating the shale gas and oil resources of India and Pakistan posed a series of challenges. Only
limited publically available data exist on the geologic setting and reservoir properties of the
numerous shale formations in India and Pakistan. In addition, the shale basins in these two
countries are geologically highly complex.
Many of the basins in India, such as the Cambay and the Cauvery, comprised a series of extensively
faulted horst and graben structures. As such, the prospective areas for shale gas and oil in these
basins are often restricted to a series of isolated basin depressions (sub-basins). While the shales in
these basins are thick, considerable uncertainty exists on the areal extents of the prospective areas
in these basins. To account for this uncertainty, we have applied prospective area risk factors to
each basin. Figures XXIV-2 shows the stratigraphic column for the key basins of India.
Recently, ONGC drilled and completed India’s first shale gas well, RNSG-1, northwest of Calcutta in
West Bengal. The well was drilled to a depth of 2,000 meters and reportedly had gas shows at the
base of the Permian-age Barren Measure Shale. Two vertical wells (Well D-A and D-B) were
previously tested in the Cambay Basin and had modest shale gas and oil production from the
Cambay Black Shale.1
In Pakistan, the shale gas and oil assessment is restricted to the areally extensive Central and
Southern Indus basins, together called the Lower Indus Basin. The shales in this basin have sourced
the significant volumes of conventional oil and gas discovered and produced in Pakistan. However,
to date, no shale specific exploration has been publically reported for Pakistan. Figure XXIV-3
provides the stratigraphic column for the key basins of Pakistan.
Fortunately, the technical literature on conventional oil and gas exploration in India and Pakistan
often contains information on the nature of the source rocks that have charged the conventional
gas and oil reservoirs, providing a valuable starting point for this resource assessment. As
additional shale-directed geological and reservoir information is collected and distributed, a more
rigorous assessment of India’s and Pakistan’s shale oil and gas resources will emerge.
PAGE 9

11. 4. LOWER (SOUTHERN AND CENTRAL) INDUS BASINS, PAKISTAN
4.1 Introduction and Geologic Setting
The Southern and Central Indus basins (Lower Indus Basin) are located in Pakistan, along westerns
border with India and Afghanistan. The basins are bounded by the Indian Shield on the east and
highly folded and thrust mountains on the west, Figure XXIV-27.26
The Lower Indus Basin has commercial oil and gas discoveries in the Cretaceous-age Goru Fm
sands plus additional gas discoveries in shallower formations. The shales in the Sembar Formation
are considered as the primary source rocks for these discoveries. While oil and gas shows have been
recorded in the Sembar Shale on the Thar Platform, as of yet no productive oil or gas wells have
been drilled into the Sembar Shale.27
Figure XXIV-27. Outline for Southern and Central Indus Basin, Pakistan
PAGE 10

12. Sembar Shale. The Lower Cretaceous Sembar Formation is the main source rock in the Lower Indus
Basin. The Sembar contains shale, silty shale and marl in the western and northwestern portion of
the basin and becomes sandy in the eastern part of the basin. The kerogen within the Sembar
Formation is mostly Type II with some Type III.
The Lower Indus Basin covers a massive 91,000-mi2 area of western Pakistan. Within this large
basin area, for the Sembar Shale, we have identified a 31, 320-mi2 prospective area for dry gas (Ro
>1.3%), a 25,560-mi2 prospective area for wet gas and condensate (Ro between 1.0% and 1.3%), and a
26,700-mi2 prospective area for oil (Ro between 0.7% and 1.0%). To account for the limited data on
the Sembar Shale in this large basin area, we have highly risked the prospective areas and the
likelihood of development success.
The eastern boundary of the prospective area of the Sembar Shale in the Lower Indus Basin is the
minimum thermal maturity criterion of Ro 0.7%. The northern and western boundaries of the
prospective area are set by the limits of Sembar Formation deposition and depth. The southern
boundary of the prospective area is the offshore.
Ranikot Formation. The shales in the Paleocene Ranikot Formation are primarily in the upper
carbonate unit which consists of fossiliferous limestone interbedded with dolomitic shale,
calcareous sandstone and “abundant” bituminous material. The upper unit was deposited in a
restricted marine environment. West of the Karachi Trough axis, the Ranikot Formation becomes
dominantly shale (Korara Shale) with deep marine deposition.
Within the southern portion of the Lower Indus Basin, we have identified 26,780-mi2 for the
Ranikot Shale that appears to be prospective for oil (Ro of 0.7% to 1.0%). The eastern, northern and
western boundaries of the Ranikot Shale prospective area are set by the 300 m isopach contour; the
southern boundary of the prospective area is the offshore.
Figure XXIV-28. Isopach of Sembar Shale, Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan26
PAGE 11

13. 4.2 Reservoir Properties (Prospective Area)
Sembar Shale. The Sembar Formation was deposited under open-marine conditions.27 In the
prospective area of the Lower Indus Basin, the thickness of the Sembar Shale ranges from 1,000 to
over 2,000 ft, Figure XXIV-28. We identified an organic-rich interval 1,000 ft thick with a net shale
thickness of 250 ft. We estimate TOC of approximately 2% and an Ro of 1.0% to 1.6%. The Sembar
Shale, in the shallower portions of the Lower Indus Basin, is in the oil and wet gas windows, with
the lower limit of the oil window at about 4,000 ft and the wet gas/condensate window at 6,000 to
10,000 ft.27 In the deeper portions of the basin below 10,000 ft, the Sembar Shale enters the dry gas
window.
Figure XXIV-28. Isopach of Sembar Shale, Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan 26
The thermal gradients in the basin increase from east to west, from 1.31oF/100 ft on the Thar Slope
in the east to 2.39oF/100 ft in the Karachi offshore in the west. The average thermal gradient in the
basin is 2.1oF/100 ft. The Sembar Shale appears to have low clay content.
Ranikot Formation. The prospective area of the Ranikot Formation has a thickness of 1,000 to 3,000
ft, with a net shale thickness of 200 ft, Figure XXIV-29. We assume 2% TOC and a thermal maturity
of 0.7% to 1.0% Ro, placing the Ranikot Shale in the oil window.
PAGE 12

14. Figure XXIV-29. Isopach of Ranikot Formation, Southern Indus Basin, Pakistan 26
4.3 Resource Assessment
Within the 31,320-mi2 dry gas prospective area, the Sembar Shale in the Lower Indus Basin has a
resource concentration of 83 Bcf/mi2. Within the 25,560-mi2 wet gas and condensate prospective
area, the Sembar Shale has resource concentrations of 57 Bcf/mi2 of wet gas and 9 million
barrels/mi2 of condensate. Within the 26,700-mi2 oil prospective area, the Sembar Shale has a
resource concentration of 37 million barrels/mi2.
Within the overall prospective area of the Lower Indus Basin, the Sembar Shale has risked shale gas
in-place of 531 Tcf, with 101 Tcf as the risked, technically recoverable shale gas resource. In addition,
the Sembar Shale has 145 billion barrels of shale oil in-place, with 5.8 billion barrels as the risked,
technically recoverable shale oil resource.
Within its 26,780-mi2 wet gas and condensate prospective area, the Ranikot Shale has resource
concentrations of 17 Bcf/mi2 of wet gas and 25 million barrels/mi2 of shale oil/condensate. Within
this prospective area of the Lower Indus Basin, the Ranikot Shale has 55 Tcf of risked shale gas inplace and 82 billion barrels of risked shale oil in-place. The risked, technically recoverable shale
resources of the Ranikot Shale are 4 Tcf of wet shale gas and 3.3 billion barrels of shale
oil/condensate.
4.4 Recent Activity
No publically available data has been reported on shale gas exploration or development for the
Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan.
PAGE 13

15. PAGE 14

16. The Energy Expert Group was founded in 2009 by Mr. Farooq Rahmatullah, Mr. Mumtaz Hasan
Khan and Mr. Abbas Bilgrami. All three Principals bring with them many decades of energy
industry experience.
In 2009 at the request of Mr. Shaukat Tarin who was Finance Minister, Government of Pakistan
under the auspices of the Economic Advisory Council, the Group invited a number of recognised
industry professionals from the private and public sector to participate in a consultative process
which ultimately lead to the writing of the first ever Integrated Energy Plan for the country. The
Plan has subsequently been adopted by the Planning Commission as well.
At the request of the Pakistan Business Council the Group has refreshed the Integrated Energy Plan
which has been published and launched at the first Pakistan Economic Forum
The Group produced a Position Paper on Energy in 2011 and then once again in 2013 and which was
presented to the 2nd Pakistan Economic Forum in April 2013. The document was well received by
the participants of the Forum who comprised of the media, major business houses, policy makers,
energy industry professionals and eminent academics.
The Group provides ongoing advisory work to the Pakistan Business Council and a number of other
national institutions providing policy and industry advice.
The principals have spoken at various forums including the Pakistan USA Energy Dialogue, Lahore
University of Management Sciences, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce and Industry and a
large number of conferences.
The Groups principals maintain an ongoing dialogue with international energy agencies,
government policy makers, regulators, industry professionals and industry organizations. The
Principals are regularly invited by the media to provide analysis and comment on the energy sector.
The aim of the Group is to provide unbiased, professional and well researched advice on the energy
industry in Pakistan.
PAGE 15

17. www.energyexpertgroup.pk
DISCLAIMER
This summary report has been prepared by the Energy Export Group at the request of the Pakistan
Business Council. This summary has been extracted specifically with a focus on Pakistan’s potential or
shale oil and gas using an Energy Information Administration study conducted by ARI entitled,
‘Technically Recoverable Shale Oil and Shale Gas Resources: An Assessment of 137 Shale Formations in
41Countries Outside the United States’. The Analysis is entirely the Groups view and is provided without
any liability. The Energy Expert Group is committed to the highest standard and quality of information and
every attempt has been made to present up-to-date, accurate information.
However the Group gives no warranty as to the accuracy of the information and accepts no liability for any
loss damage or inconvenience caused as a result of reliance on such information.
Although the Group takes all reasonable measures to ensure that the information provided to it from third
parties is accurate it cannot control the content or take responsibility for studies undertaken by external
providers.
PAGE 16