1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 69, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 69, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Pore pressure prediction in shales undergoing compaction, including both mechanical and chemical processes, is customarily related to the mechanism referred to disequilibrium compaction. However, even when this mechanism is established and the normal compaction trend in sonic velocity, as a proxy for shale porosity, is well constrained, the pore pressure prediction may be in error because of the lithological variation in shale composition. The presence of solid organic matter in excess amounts in shale formations that have never been exposed to the pressure–temperature conditions in the oil window is an example of these lithological effects, causing marked overprediction of pore pressure even in thermally immature mudrocks. This necessitates implementation of bulk density and sonic velocity log corrections in organic‐rich shales prior to performing standard pore pressure prediction workflows. In this paper, it is shown how these corrections can be made and the outcomes of the pore pressure prediction can be dramatically improved by using combination of rock physics models relating bulk density to total organic carbon and P‐wave velocity to bulk density in organic‐rich and conventional shales, respectively. To illustrate the workflow, a case study from a well drilled through the Kimmeridge Clay Formation in the North Sea, a well‐recognized source rock with total organic carbon content in the 2%–12% range and significant variation in clay content from 25% to 60%, both of which strongly affect the most commonly utilized log responses recorded in this formation. Using this old but data‐rich well, the importance of accounting for both total organic carbon and clay content variations in pore pressure prediction is demonstrated. It is also recognized that this workflow does not immediately apply to unconventional shale plays, where the pore pressure generation mechanisms are more complex and cannot be solely ascribed to compaction disequilibrium.

© 2021 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12968
2021-02-12
2024-04-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12968
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aplin, A.C. and Macquaker, J.H.S. (2011) Mudstone diversity: origin and implications for source, seal, and reservoir properties in petroleum systems. AAPG Bulletin, 95(12), 2031–2059.
  2. Beers, R.F. (1945) Radioactivity and organic content of some Paleozoic shales. AAPG Bulletin, 29(1), 22.
  3. Bowers, G.L. (1994) Pore pressure estimation from velocity data accounting for overpressure mechanisms besides undercompaction. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, IADC/SPE (27488), pp. 515–530.
  4. Couzens‐Schultz, B.A., Axon, A., Azbel, K., Hansen, K.S., Haugland, M., Sarker, R.et al. (2013) Pore pressure prediction in unconventional resources, International Petroleum Technology Conference, IPTC (16849).
  5. Creaney, S. and Passey, Q.R. (1993) Recurring patterns of total organic carbon and source rock quality within a sequence stratigraphic framework. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 77(3), 386–401.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Eaton, B.A. (1975) The equation for geopressure prediction from well logs. Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, p. 11.
  7. Foster, J.B. and Whalen, H.E. (1966) Estimation of formation pressures from electrical surveys‐offshore Louisiana. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 18(2), 165–171.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Green, S., Loeffler, J., Clarke, S. and Thurston, D. (2018a) Using traditional methods to predict pore pressure in Devonian black shale basins of North East British Columbia, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, URTeC (2904084).
  9. Green, S., Rauch‐Davies, M., Meyer, J., Smith, S., Smicker, B. and Conference, E. (2018b) Seismic‐based de‐risking of unconventional plays by integrating rock physics, inversion, geopressure, and geomechanics. In 80th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2018, pp. 9–12.
  10. Hood, A., Gutjahr, C.C.M. and Heacock, R.L. (1975) Organic metamorphism and the generation of petroleum. AAPG Bulletin, 59(6), 986–995.
  11. Ikon Science, IHS and PGS (2010) Central North Sea Pressure Study: Phase 2 (Non‐Proprietary).
  12. Mendelson, J.D. and Toksoz, M.N. (1985) Source rock characterization using multivariate analysis of log data. In SPWLA 26th Annual Logging Symposium.
  13. Meyer, B.L. and Nederlof, M.H. (1984) Identification of source rocks on wireline logs by density / resistivity and sonic transit time / resistivity crossplots. AAPG Bulletin, 68(2), 121–129.
  14. Nixon, R.P. (1973) Oil source beds in Cretaceous Mowry Shale of northwestern interior United States. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 57(1), 136–161.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Passey, Q.R., Creaney, S., Kulla, J.B., Moretti, F.J. and Stroud, J.D. (1990) A practical model for organic richness from porosity and resistivity logs. AAPG Bulletin, 74(12), 1777–1794.
  16. Powers, S. and Clapp, F.G. (1932) Nature and origin of occurrences of oil, gas, and bitumen in igneous and metamorphic rocks. AAPG Bulletin, 16(8), 719–726.
  17. Rauch‐Davies, M., Schmicker, B., Smith, S.W., Green, S. and Meyer, J. (2018) Predicting pore‐pressure from on‐shore seismic data in the Delaware Basin, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, URTeC (2888832).
  18. Schmoker, J.W. (1979) Determination of organic content of Appajacliian Devonian shales from formation‐density logs. AAPG Bulletin, 63(9), 1504–1537.
  19. Schmoker, J.W. and Hester, T.C. (1983) Organic carbon in Bakken formation, United States portion of Williston basin. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 67(12), 2165–2174.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Swanson, V.E. (1960) Oil yield and uranium content of black shales. Geological Survey Professional Paper 356‐A.
  21. Swarbrick, R.E. and Osborne, M.J. (1998) Mechanisms that generate abnormal pressures: an overview. In: Law, B. E., Ulmishek, G. F., and Slavin, V. I. (eds) AAPG Memoir 70: Abnormal Pressures in Hydrocarbon Environments. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, pp. 13–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Terzaghi, K. (1943) Theoretical Soil Mechanics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Vernik, L. (2011) Unified Model for Continuous Pore Pressure Prediction in Shale (ARMA 11–444), In 45th US Rock Mechanics / Geomechanics Symposium. San Francisco, CA: American Rock Mechanics Association.
  24. Vernik, L. (2016) Seismic petrophysics in quantitative interpretation. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
  25. Vernik, L., Castagna, J. and Omovie, S.J. (2018) S‐wave velocity prediction in unconventional shale reservoirs. Geophysics, 83(1), MR35–MR45.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Vernik, L. and Milovac, J. (2011) Rock physics of organic shales. The Leading Edge, 30 (March), pp. 318–323.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Yang, Y., Aplin, A.C. and Larter, S.R. (2004) Quantitative assessment of mudstone lithology using geophysical wireline logs and artificial neural networks. Petroleum Geoscience, 10(1), 141–151.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Zhang, J. and Wieseneck, J. (2011) Challenges and surprises of abnormal pore pressures in shale gas formations. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, (SPE 145964).
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12968
Loading
Correcting density/sonic logs for total organic carbon to reduce uncertainty in pore pressure prediction
Geophysical Prospecting 69, 586 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12968
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12968
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12968
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Log analysis; Pore pressure; Rock physics

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error