Is stress-insensitive chemical compaction responsible for high overpressures in deeply buried North Sea chalks?

Abstract

Chalk compaction is often assumed to be controlled by a combination of mechanical and effective stress-related chemical processes, the latter commonly referred to as pressure solution. Such effective stress-driven compaction would result in elevated porosities in overpressured chalks compared with otherwise identical, but normally pressured chalks. The high porosities that are frequently observed in overpressured North Sea chalks have previously been reported to reflect such effective stress-dependent compaction. However, several wells with deeply buried chalk sequences also exhibit low porosities at high pore pressures. To investigate the possible origins of these overpressures, basin modeling was performed in a selected well (NOR 1/3-5) offshore Norway. This modeling was based on both effective stress-driven mechanical porosity reduction, which enables modeling of disequilibrium compaction, and on stress-insensitive chemical compaction where the porosity reduction is caused by thermally activated diagenesis. The modeling has demonstrated that the present day porosities and pore pressures of the chalks could be successfully replicated with mechanical porosity loss as the only process leading to chalk porosity reduction. However, the modeled porosity and fluid pressure history of the sediments deviated significantly from the porosity and pore pressure versus depth relationships observed in non-reservoir North Sea chalks today. To the contrary, modeling which was based on thermally activated porosity loss due to diagenesis (as a supplement to mechanical compaction), resulted in modeled chalk histories that are consistent with present day observations. It was therefore inferred that disequilibrium compaction could not account for all of the pore pressure development in overpressured chalks in the study area. The observation that modeling including temperature-controlled diagenetic porosity reduction gave plausible results, suggests that such porosity reduction may in fact be operating in chalks as well as in clastic rocks. If this is correct, then improved methods for pore pressure identification and fluid flow analysis in basins containing chalks should be developed.