Abstract

The study of lithofacies identification and its distribution characterizations of shales is essential for the geological evaluation of shale oil exploration and development. In this study, core description, optical microscope, total organic carbon (TOC) content, whole-rock X-ray diffraction (XRD), Rock-Eval pyrolysis, X-ray fluorescence (XRF), scanning electron microscope (SEM), and well logging data were used in the qualitative analyses of the geochemical and mineralogical characteristics of shales. Since the work of detailed lithofacies identification is still lacking in the previous studies, based on TOC, sedimentary structure, and ternary diagram of siliceous minerals, carbonate minerals, and clay minerals, eight predominant lithofacies were identified in the shale of the second member of the Kongdian Formation (Ek2): ① low to moderate organic matter content (referred to as “low to moderate TOC”) massive calcareous mudstone (C-1); ② low to moderate TOC laminated calcareous mudstone (C-2); ③ low to moderate TOC layered mixed calcareous mudstone (C-3); ④ moderate to high organic matter content (referred to as “moderate to high TOC”) laminated calcareous siliceous mudstone (S-1); ⑤ moderate to high TOC massive mixed siliceous mudstone (S-2); ⑥ moderate to high TOC laminated clayey siliceous mudstone (S-3); ⑦ low to moderate TOC massive mixed mudstone (M-1); ⑧ moderate to high TOC layered calcareous/siliceous mixed mudstone (M-2). The favorability of lithofacies was investigated based on TOC, pyrolysis parameters, pore structures, and specific mineral contents. S-1 was currently considered as the most favorable lithofacies with excellent hydrocarbon potential, high amount of free hydrocarbon, and abundant organic pores; S-2, S-3, and M-2 were considered as favorable lithofacies, while C-1 and M-1 were ranked as the least-promising lithofacies in the research area. The lateral distribution of the shale is quite different, and Ek23 contains the most favorable lithofacies for shale oil exploration.

Highlights

  • Since the successful exploration and development of shale gas in North America, the world petroleum industry has gradually entered an era of unconventional oil and gas

  • The division of shale lithofacies adopted in this paper mainly considers the sedimentary structure, mineral composition, and abundance of organic matter developed by the shale

  • Based on the combination of total organic carbon (TOC), mineral components, and sedimentary structure, eight lithofacies were identified in the Ek2 shales: 1 low to moderate organic matter content massive calcareous mudstone (C-1); 2 low to moderate TOC laminated calcareous mudstone (C-2); 3 low to moderate TOC layered mixed calcareous mudstone (C-3); 4 moderate to high organic matter content laminated calcareous siliceous mudstone (S-1); 5 moderate to high TOC massive mixed siliceous mudstone (S-2); 6 moderate to high TOC laminated clayey siliceous mudstone (S-3); 7 low to moderate TOC massive mixed mudstone (M-1); 8 moderate to high TOC layered calcareous/siliceous mixed mudstone (M-2)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Since the successful exploration and development of shale gas in North America, the world petroleum industry has gradually entered an era of unconventional oil and gas. The lithofacies of shale contain information including mineral components, rock types, sedimentary structures, and organic matter abundance (Loucks and Ruppel, 2007; Ross and Bustin, 2009; Xu et al, 2018; Xu et al, 2019; Xu et al, 2020), which makes the division and distribution of lithofacies become a fundamental geology issue (Newport et al, 2016; Tang et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2018). Wu et al (2016) improved the three-terminal element diagram and divided shale into eight lithofacies types; Wang et al (2018) divided shale into four categories based on mineral composition and combined geological factors such as sedimentary environment which are further subdivided into 31 lithofacies. Six lithofacies were identified with the combination of the three-end-member method and TOC, and shale lithofacies evaluation criteria were established (Wang et al, 2020)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.