Volume 27, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1354-0793
  • E-ISSN:


X-ray fluorescence (XRF) data from a series of high-pressure–high-temperature (HPHT) wells drilled in the Shearwater Field, UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) are presented. These data comprise a total of 789 samples across a series of eight study wells. Chemical stratigraphy was utilized in conjunction with other geological data (i.e. well logs, ditch cutting descriptions and biostratigraphic analyses) to aid real-time stratigraphic placement. Systematic changes in geochemical composition were identified and used to build a chemostratigraphic zonation to aid delineation of lithostratigraphic boundaries.

The application of chemical stratigraphy provided a valuable source of data, particularly through critical ‘drill-in-liner’ sections that are devoid of conventional logging while drilling (LWD) data. The identification of key geochemical zones and provision of a synthetic gamma-ray (Synth GR) profile were utilized in the placement of key casing points and identification of challenging top reservoir picks (Fulmar Formation). These data also served as a backup during LWD tool failure resulting from excessive temperatures. The successive addition of geochemical data accumulated with each well-site exercise permitted continued refinement of the zonation framework, with derived Synth GR profiles exhibiting an extremely close relationship with subsequent wireline logs. Chemical stratigraphic data are shown to be robust and repeatable within the Shearwater Field, enabling close stratigraphic control through critical sections, whilst also providing a low-cost backup in the event of conventional logging tool failures.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Blehaut, J.F., Van Beek, F. et al.
    1999. Shearwater prospect development: a high pressure/high temperature challenge. Geological Society, London, Petroleum Geology Conference Series, 5, 1021–1027, https://doi.org/10.1144/0051021
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Brand, N.W. & Brand, C.J.
    2014. Performance comparison of portable XRF instruments. Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis, 14, 125–138, https://doi.org/10.1144/geochem2012-172
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Brasier, M.D.
    1980. The Lower Cambrian transgression and glauconite–phosphate facies in western Europe. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 137, 695–703, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.137.6.0695
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Burnett, W.C.
    1980. Apatite–glauconite associations off Peru and Chile: palaeo-oceanographic implications. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 137, 757–764, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.137.6.0757
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Craigie, N.W.
    2018a. Sampling, sample preparation and analytical techniques. In: Principles of Elemental Chemostratigraphy: A Practical User Guide. Springer International, Cham, Switzerland, 9–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2018b. Geochemistry and mineralogy. In: Principles of Elemental Chemostratigraphy: A Practical User Guide. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 39–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Craigie, N.W., Breuer, P. & Khidir, A.
    2016. Chemostratigraphy and biostratigraphy of Devonian, Carboniferous and Permian sediments encountered in eastern Saudi Arabia: An integrated approach to reservoir correlation. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 72, 156–178, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.01.018
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Emsbo, P., McLaughlin, P.I., Breit, G.N., du Bray, E.A. & Koenig, A.E.
    2015. Rare earth elements in sedimentary phosphate deposits: Solution to the global REE crisis?Gondwana Research, 27, 776–785, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2014.10.008
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Filippelli, G.M.
    2011. Phosphate rock formation and marine phosphorus geochemistry: The deep time perspective. Chemosphere, 84, 759–766, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.02.019
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gałuszka, A., Migaszewski, Z.M. & Namieśnik, J.
    2015. Moving your laboratories to the field – Advantages and limitations of the use of field portable instruments in environmental sample analysis. Environmental Research, 140, 593–603, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2015.05.017
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gilham, R., Hercus, C., Evans, A. & De Haas, W.
    2005. Shearwater (UK Block 22/30b): managing changing uncertainties through field life. Geological Society, London, Petroleum Geology Conference Series, 6, 663–673, https://doi.org/10.1144/0060663
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gowland, S.
    1996. Facies characteristics and depositional models of highly bioturbated shallow marine siliciclastic strata: an example from the Fulmar Formation (Late Jurassic), UK Central Graben. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 114, 185–214, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1996.114.01.09
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Holmes, N., Atkin, D., Mahdi, S. & Ayress, M.
    2015. Integrated biostratigraphy and chemical stratigraphy in the development of a reservoir-scale stratigraphic framework for the Sea Lion Field area, North Falkland Basin. Petroleum Geoscience, 21, 171–182, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2014-045
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Jones, D.W., Taylor, B.J. et al.
    2017. The Shearwater Field – understanding the overburden above a geologically complex and pressure-depleted high-pressure and high-temperature field. Geological Society, London, Petroleum Geology Conference Series, 8, 429–443, https://doi.org/10.1144/pgc8.36
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Mange, M.A. & Morton, A.C.
    2007. Geochemistry of heavy minerals. Developments in Sedimentology, 58, 345–391, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0070-4571(07)58013-1
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Mark, H. & Bradley, M.
    2016. Review of new spectroscopic instrumentation 2016. Spectroscopy, 31, 40–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Martin, M.A. & Pollard, J.E.
    1996. The role of trace fossil (ichnofabric) analysis in the development of depositional models for the Upper Jurassic Fulmar Formation of the Kittiwake Field (Quadrant 21 UKCS). Geological Society, London, Special Publications,114, 163–183, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1996.114.01.08
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Morton, A.C.
    1991. Geochemical studies of detrital heavy minerals and their application to provenance research. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 57, 31–45, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1991.057.01.04
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Morton, A.C. & Hallsworth, C.R.
    1999. Processes controlling the composition of heavy mineral assemblages in sandstones. Sedimentary Geology, 124, 3–29, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0037-0738(98)00118-3
    [Google Scholar]
  20. O'Brien, G.W., Milnes, A.R. et al.
    1990. Sedimentation dynamics and redox iron-cycling: controlling factors for the apatite–glauconite association on the East Australian continental margin. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 52, 61–86, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1990.052.01.06
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ramkumar, M.
    2015. Toward standardization of terminologies and recognition of chemostratigraphy as a formal stratigraphic method. In: Ramkumar, M. (ed.) Chemostratigraphy: Concepts, Techniques and Applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ratcliffe, K.T., Martin, J., Pearce, T.J., Hughes, A.D., Lawton, D.E., Wray, D.S. & Bessa, F.
    2006. A regional chemostratigraphically-defined correlation framework for the late Triassic TAG-I Formation in Blocks 402 and 405a, Algeria. Petroleum Geoscience, 12, 3–12, https://doi.org/10.1144/1354-079305-669
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ratcliffe, K.T., Wilson, A., Payenberg, T., Rittersbacher, A., Hildred, G.V. & Flint, S.S.
    2015. Ground truthing chemostratigraphic correlations in fluvial systems. AAPG Bulletin, 99, 155–180, https://doi.org/10.1306/06051413120
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Rider, M.H. & Kennedy, M.C.
    2011. The gamma ray and spectral gamma ray log. In: Rider, M.H. & Kennedy, M.C. (eds) The Geological Interpretation of Well Logs. Rider–French Consulting Ltd, Aberdeen, UK, 117–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Taylor, T.R., Kittridge, M.G., Winefield, P., Bryndzia, L.T. & Bonnell, L.M.
    2015. Reservoir quality and rock properties modeling – Triassic and Jurassic sandstones, greater Shearwater area, UK Central North Sea. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 65, 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.03.020
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Van Bergen, P., De Gennaro, S. et al.
    2013. Shearwater – securing the chalk – effects of depletion of a HPHT reservoir on chalk overburden. In: Proceedings of the SPE Offshore Europe Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition (OE 2013), Aberdeen, United Kingdom, 3–6 September 2013. Curran, Red Hook, NY, 307–314, https://doi.org/10.2118/166574-ms
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Weibel, R., Johannessen, P.N., Dybkjær, K., Rosenberg, P. & Knudsen, C.
    2010. Chemostratigraphy of upper Jurassic reservoir sandstones, Danish Central Graben, North Sea. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 27, 1572–1594, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2010.06.001
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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