1887
Volume 37, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2117

Abstract

[ABSTRACT

The outcrops of the Panoche and Tumey Giant Injection Complexes in California have been instrumental in refining the interpretation of the sandstone intrusion reservoirs in the Volund Field, Norway. Insights from the outcrops enhanced the subsurface team's confidence and understanding of reservoir presence and connectivity during field production. This led to more accurate estimates of hydrocarbon reserves. Learnings from the Volund Field show that historical reservoir models underestimate net reservoir volume and reservoir connectivity. Outcrop data reveal step‐like geometry in some intrusions, which potentially explains the lack of seismic resolution of sandstone intrusions in some areas of the field. Failure to recognise this leads to misinterpretation of parts of the field as non‐reservoir. In some intervals, well logs interpreted as non‐reservoir mudstone‐rich units are actually mudstone‐clast breccia, which, because of good connectivity within the sandstone matrix, can comprise significant reservoir volumes. The rationale for including sandstone intrusions as reservoirs, although unresolved by seismic or borehole log data in static models, is validated by reference to outcrop data and from recent drilling in the adjacent Kobra Field. Observations of outcrop analogues enhance the interpretation of subsurface data, and the knowledge acquired from outcrops helped justify the drilling of more production wells in areas where reservoir presence and quality were difficult to predict, but almost nearly doubled the hydrocarbon reserves.

,

]
Basin Research © 2025 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers and International Association of Sedimentologists © 2025 International Association of Sedimentologists and European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/bre.70025
2025-03-25
2026-02-06

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/bre.70025
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Boehm, A., and C. J.Moore. 2002. “Fluidized Sandstone Intrusions as an Indicator of Paleostress Orientation, Santa Cruz, California.” Geofluids2: 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468‐8123.2002.00026.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Brettle, M., and J.Hauer. this volume. “Rules of Thumb for Optimising Sand Injectite Reservoir Development.”
  3. Briedis, N. A., D.Bergslien, A.Hjellbakk, R. E.Hill, and G. J.Moir. 2007. “Recognition Criteria, Significance to Field Performance, and Reservoir Modelling of Sand Injections in the Balder Field, North Sea.” In Sand Injectites: Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production, edited by A.Hurst and J.Cartwright, vol. 87, 91–102. AAPG. https://doi.org/10.1306/1209853M873259.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Carstens, H.2017. “En Liten Overraskelse, Geo365, No.8.”http://www.geo365.no/olje‐og‐gass/en‐liten‐overraskelse.
  5. De Boer, W., P. B.Rawlinson, and A.Hurst. 2007. “Successful Exploration of a Sand Injectite Complex: Hamsun Prospect, Norway Block 24/9.” In Sand Injectites: Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production, edited by A.Hurst and J.Cartwright, vol. 87, 65–68. AAPG. https://doi.org/10.1306/1209850M873256.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Dixon, R. J., K.Schofield, R.Anderton, et al. 1995. “Sandstone Diapirism and Clastic Intrusion in the Tertiary Submarine Fans of the Bruce‐Beryl Embayment, Quadrant 9, UKCS.” In Characterisation of Deep‐Marine Clastic Systems: Geol. Soc, edited by A. J.Hartley and D. J.Prosser, vol. 94, 77–94. Special Publication. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1995.094.01.0.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Duranti, D., and A.Hurst. 2004. “Fluidization and Injection in the Deep‐Water Sandstones of the Eocene Alba Formation (UK North sea).” Sedimentology51: 503–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐3091.2004.00634.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Duranti, D., A.Hurst, C.Bell, S.Groves, and R.Hanson. 2002. “Injected and Remobilized Eocene Sandstones From the Alba Field, UKCS: Core and Wireline Log Characteristics.” Petroleum Geoscience8, no. 2: 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo.8.2.99.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gibson, M., D.Riley, S.Kenyon‐Roberts, et al. 2020. “The Catcher, Varadero and Burgman Fields, Block 28/9a, UK North Sea.” In United Kingdom Oil and Gas Fields: 50th Anniversary Commemorative Volume, edited by G.Goffey and J. G.Gluyas, vol. 52, 399–412. Geological Society. https://doi.org/10.1144/M52‐2019‐24.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Grippa, A., A.Hurst, G.Palladino, D.Iacopini, I.Lecomte, and M.Huuse. 2019. “Seismic Imaging of Complex Geometry: Forward Modelling of Sandstone Intrusions.” Earth and Planetary Science Letters513: 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2019.02.011.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Holden, D., A.Bertrand, I.Lecomte, V.Patacz, and A.Hurst. 2024. “Assisting 3D/4D Seismic Interpretation in Remobilised Sands in the Balder Area Using 3D PSF Seismic Modelling.” EAGE Annual 85th Conference and Exhibition, Oslo.
  12. Hurst, A., J. A.Cartwright, and D.Duranti. 2003. “Fluidization Structures Produced by Upward Injection of Sand Through a Sealing Lithology.” In Subsurface Sediment Mobilization: Geological Society, edited by P.Van Rensbergen, R. R.Hillis, A. J.Maltman, and C. K.Morley, vol. 216, 123–137. Special Publication. https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.sp.2003.216.01.09.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hurst, A., M.Huuse, D.Duranti, M.Vigorito, A. M.Schwab, and E. W.Jameson. 2016. “Application of Outcrop Analogues in Successful Exploration of a Sand Injection Complex, Volund Field, Norwegian North Sea.” In The Value of Outcrop Studies in Reducing Subsurface Uncertainty and Risk in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production, edited by M.Bowman, H. R.Smyth, T. R.Good, S. R.Passey, J. P. P.Hirst, and C. J.Jordan, vol. 436, 75–92. Geological Society of London – Special Publications. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP436.3.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hurst, A., A.Scott, and M.Vigorito. 2011. “Physical Characteristics of Sand Injectites.” Earth‐Science Reviews106: 215–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2011.02.004.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hurst, A., and M.Vigorito. 2017. “Saucer‐Shaped Sandstone Intrusions: An Underplayed Reservoir Target.” AAPG Bulletin101, no. 4: 625–633. https://doi.org/10.1306/011817DIG17070.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Huuse, M., J.Cartwright, A.Hurst, and N.Steinsland. 2007. “Seismic Characterization of Large‐Scale Sandstone Intrusions.” In Sand Injectites: Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production, edited by A.Hurst and J.Cartwright, vol. 87, 21–35. AAPG. https://doi.org/10.1306/1209847M873253.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Huuse, M., D.Duranti, C.Guargena, et al. 2003. “Sandstone Intrusions: Detection and Significance for Exploration and Production.” First Break21, no. 9: 33–42. https://doi.org/10.3997/1365‐2397.2003014.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Huuse, M., D.Duranti, N.Steinsland, et al. 2004. “Seismic Characteristics of Large‐Scale Sandstone Intrusions in the Paleogene of the South Viking Graben, UK and Norwegian North Sea.” In 3D Seismic Technology: Application to the Exploration of Sedimentary Basins, edited by R. J.Davies, J. A.Cartwright, S. A.Stewart, M.Lappin, and J. R.Underhill, vol. 29, 263–277. Geological Society of London. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.MEM.2004.029.01.25.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Lawrence, D. A., B.Sancar, and S.Molyneux. 1999. “Large‐Scale Clastic Intrusion in the Tertiary of Block 24/9, Norwegian North Sea: Origin, Timing and Implications for Reservoir Continuity.” AAPG International Conference and Exhibition: Abstracts.
  20. Luzinski, W., A.Morton, A.Hurst, I.Tøllefsen, and J.Cater. 2022. “Provenance Variability in Coeval Slope Channel Systems: Hermod S2 Member Sandstone (Eocene), South Viking Graben (North Sea).” Geosciences2022, no. 12: 450. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences12120450.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Macleod, M. K., R. A.Hanson, C. R.Bell, and S.McHugo. 1999. “The Alba Field Ocean Bottom Cable Seismic Survey: Impact on Development.” Leading Edge18: 1306–1312. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1438206.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Pelletier, F., and C.Gunn. 2020. “The Gryphon, Maclure, Tullich and Ballindalloch Fields, Blocks 9/18b, 9/18c, 9/19a, 9/23d and 9/24e, UK North sea.” Geological Society, London, Memoirs52: 837–849. https://doi.org/10.1144/M52‐2018‐91.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Regjeringen . 2011. “2024: An Industry for the Future – Norway's Petroleum Activities, Meld. St. 28 (2010–2011) Report to the Storting (White Paper).” Accessed June 7, 2024. https://www.regjeringen.no/.
  24. Satur, N., A.Bang, I.Skjærpe, and S. A.Muehlboeck. 2021. “Characteristics of an Injection Wing on the Volund Field.” In Subsurface Sand Remobilization and Injection, edited by S.Silcock, M.Huuse, M.Bowman, A.Hurst, and S.Cobain, vol. 493, 151–166. Geological Society of London – Special Publications. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP493‐2017‐309.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Schwab, A. M., E. W.Jameson, and A.Townsley. 2014. Volund Field: Development of an Eocene Sandstone Injection Complex, Offshore Norway. Vol. 403, 247–260. Geological Society of London, Special Publication. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP403.4.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Scott, A., A.Hurst, and M.Vigorito. 2014. “Outcrop‐Based Reservoir Characterization of a Kilometer Scale Sand Injectite Complex.” AAPG Bulletin97: 309–343. https://doi.org/10.1306/05141211184.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Skjærpe, I., I.Tøllefsen, and T.Endresen. 2018. “Developing Viper‐Kobra: Maximizing Recovery by Exploiting the Unique Characteristics of the Sand Injectite Environment.” 80th EAGE Conference and Exhibition2018: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.201801426.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. SODIR . 2024. “Norwegian Offshore Directorate Fact Pages.” Accessed June 7, 2024. https://factpages.sodir.no/.
  29. Szarawarska, E., M.Huuse, A.Hurst, et al. 2010. “Three‐Dimensional Seismic Characterisation of Large‐Scale Sandstone Intrusions in the Lower Palaeogene of the North Sea: Completely Injected vs. In Situ Remobilised Sandbodies.” Basin Studies22: 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2117.2010.00469.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Thompson, B. J., R. E.Garrison, and C. J.Moore. 1999. “A Late Cenozoic Sandstone Intrusion West of S. cruz, California. Fluidized Flow of Water and Hydrocarbon‐Saturated Sediments.” In Late Cenozoic Fluid Seeps and Tectonics Along the San Gregorio Fault Zone in the Monterey Bay Region, California GB‐76. Annual Meeting of the Pacific Section, edited by R. E.Garrison, I. W.Aiello, and J. C.Moore, 53–74. American Association of Petroleum Geologists. https://doi.org/10.32375/1999‐GB76.5.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Townsley, A., A. M.Schwab, and E. W.Jameson. 2012. “The Volund Field: Developing a Unique Sand Injection Complex in Offshore Norway.” Paper SPE 154912, Presented at the Europec Conference, Copenhagen, June. https://doi.org/10.2118/154912‐MS.
  32. van Oorschot, R., A.Fletcher, H.Basford, and A.Stuart. 2020. “The Chestnut Field, Block 22/2a, UK North Sea.” In United Kingdom Oil and Gas Fields: 50th Anniversary Commemorative Volume, edited by G.Goffey and J. G.Gluyas, vol. 52, 413–423. Geological Society of London. https://doi.org/10.1144/M52‐2018‐81.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Vigorito, M., and A.Hurst. 2010. “Regional Sand Injectite Architecture as a Record of Pore Pressure Evolution and Sand Redistribution in the Shallow Crust: Insights From the Panoche Giant Injection Complex, California.” Journal of the Geological Society167: 889–904. https://doi.org/10.1144/0016‐76492010‐004.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Vigorito, M., A.Hurst, J.Cartwright, and A.Scott. 2008. “Regional‐Scale Subsurface Sand Remobilization: Geometry and Architecture.” Journal of the Geological Society165: 609–612. https://doi.org/10.1144/0016‐76492007‐096.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Vigorito, M., A.Hurst, A.Scott, and O.Stanzione. 2022. “A Giant Sand Injection Complex: Processes and Implications for Basin Evolution and Subsurface Fluid Flow.” American Journal of Science322, no. 6: 729–794. https://doi.org/10.1144/0016‐76492010‐004.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Waltham, R., G.Zvirtes, B.Burnham, M.Brettle, and A.Hurst. this volume. “Wing‐Like Sandstone Intrusions: Geometric and Spatial Analysis of Outcrop Examples.”
  37. Zvirtes, G., A.Hurst, R.Philipp, G.Palladino, and A.Grippa. 2021. “The Tumey Giant Injection Complex, Tumey Hill, California (USA).” In Subsurface Sand Remobilization and Injection, edited by S.Silcock, M.Huuse, M.Bowman, A.Hurst, and S.Cobain, vol. 493, 181–214. Geological Society of London – Special Publications. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP493‐2019‐3.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/bre.70025
Loading
The Value of Outcrops in Understanding the Complexities of Sand Intrusion Reservoirs: Learnings From the Volund Field
Basin Research 37, e70025 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/bre.70025
/content/journals/10.1111/bre.70025
/content/journals/10.1111/bre.70025
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): outcrop; Panoche Hills; sand injection; Tumey Hills; Volund field

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