Hydro-Fracturing Versus Hydro-Shearing: A Critical Assessment of two Distinct Reservoir Stimulation Mechanisms

Hydraulic stimulation of deep reservoirs is an essential procedure for developing engineered/enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), but also in other Geo-energy contexts. The goal is enhancing permeability to such a degree that fluid flow rates within the reservoir are sufficiently high for an economically productive reservoir. Two fracture stimulation mechanisms are distinguished that may occur concurrently during the hydraulic treatment: 1) During hydro-fracturing (HF) new tensile fractures are propagated from the borehole by means of a fluid pressure overcoming the minimal principle stress d3 plus the tensile strength T0 of intact rock. In case of a pre-existing fracture oriented normal to d 3 , the fracture can be opened by exceeding d 3 only. Fluid injection is performed via small packed intervals for creating a stack of hydraulic fractures. 2) During hydro-shearing (HS), over-pressure induces slip along pre-existing fractures that are favourably oriented in the stress field for reactivation in shear. Such stimulation is usually performed in a large packed interval or in an open borehole. Which mechanism occurs predominantly during stimulation depends on the rock mass structure and in-situ stress field, but also on the orientation of discontinuities intersecting the open-hole section and thus being pressurized. Both mechanisms also differ in how they affect fracture permeability. While permeability gained by HS is mostly irreversible due to rearrangement of asperity contacts accompanied with shear dilation, permeability enhanced during HF reduces nearly reversible after pressurization unless proppant is used to ensure permanent apertures. In this contribution, we critically discuss the pros and cons of both mechanisms regarding efficiency of enhancing permeability and the associated hazard of induced earthquakes based on literature review and numerical modelling. We review literature that reports on how much permeability required for productive EGS reservoirs and how much permanent permeability can be gained by stimulation. We also compile information regarding the degree of seismicity induced during HFor HS-dominated stimulation procedures, together with conceptual studies that reveal characteristics of seismicity associated with the two mechanisms. Many observations and models indicate that HF may have a higher tendency of being aseismic, while felt seismic events are usually associated with HS. Further, we present a hydro-mechanically coupled fracture flow model that investigates, if and to what degree the stimulation strategy can be designed such that one of the two mechanisms is evoked and dominates over the other. It shows that HS may dominate in presence of larger persistent fractures nearly optimallyoriented in the stress field, even if HF is attempted in short packed intervals. The model further demonstrates that stress transfer during HS promotes the development of permeability across an anisotropic layer of the stimulated rock instead of a large volume. Hence, the study sheds light onto the feasibility of creating productive EGS reservoirs in crystalline rock at several kilometres depths.