1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Petroleum Geoscience
  4. Volume 27, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 27, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1354-0793
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

A number of geological and engineering parameters influence and control the performance and ultimate recovery from an oil reservoir. These are commonly interlinked and the relative importance of each can be difficult to unravel. These variables include geological parameters such as depositional environment, which has long been considered to be a key factor influencing the production characteristics of fields. However, quantifying the importance of any single factor, such as depositional environment, is complicated by the impact of the other variables (geological and engineering) and their numerous interdependencies.

The main aim of this study is to unravel the impact of the depositional environment and primary facies architecture on reservoir performance using an empirical study of oilfields from the Norwegian Continental Shelf. A database of 91 fields, with a total of 7.8 Bbbl (billion barrels) of oil in place, has been built. Within this a total of 93 clastic reservoirs were classified into three gross depositional environments: continental, paralic/shallow marine and deep marine. The reservoirs were further classified into eight depositional environments in order to provide further granularity and to capture their depositional complexities. A further 28 parameters which capture other aspects that also impact production behaviour, such as reservoir depth, fluid type and structural complexity, were recorded for each reservoir. Principal component analysis (PCA) was utilized to explore the importance of sedimentological-dependent variables in the dataset, and to determine the parameters that have the strongest influence on the overall variability of the dataset. PCA revealed that parameters associated with field size and depth of burial had the most influence on recovery factor. Gross depositional environment and other stratigraphic-dependent parameters were the most significant geological factors. Fluid properties, such as API gravity and average gas/oil ratio, were unexpectedly among the less important parameters.

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by The Geological Society of London for GSL and EAGE. All rights reserved
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2019-133
2020-12-17
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2019-133
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ajdukiewicz, J.M. and Lander, R.H.
    2010. Sandstone reservoir quality prediction: The state of the art. AAPG Bulletin, 94, 1083–1091, https://doi.org/10.1306/intro060110
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aliyuda, K. and Howell, J.
    2019. Machine-learning algorithm for estimating oil-recovery factor using a combination of engineering and stratigraphic dependent parameters. Interpretation, 7, SE151–SE159, https://doi.org/10.1190/INT-2018-0211.1
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Aliyuda, K., Howell, J. and Humphrey, E.
    2020. Impact of geological variables in controlling oil-reservoir performance: An insight from a machine-learning technique. SPE Reservoir Evaluation Engineering, https://doi.org/10.2118/201196-pa
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bjørkum, P.A. and Nadeau, P.H.
    1998. Temperature controlled porosity/permeability reduction, fluid migration, and petroleum exploration in sedimentary basins. APPEA Journal, 38, 453–464, https://doi.org/10.1071/AJ97022
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bjørkum, P.A., Oelkers, E.H., Nadeau, P.H., Walderhaug, O. and Murphy, W.M.
    1998. Porosity prediction in quartzose sandstones as a function of time temperature, depth, stylolite frequency, and hydrocarbon saturation. AAPG Bulletin, 82, 637–648.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bjørlykke, K. and Egeberg, P.K.
    1993. Quartz cementation in sedimentary basins. AAPG Bulletin, 77, 1538–1548.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bloch, S., Lander, R.H. and Bonnell, L.
    2002. Anomalously high porosity and permeability in deeply buried sandstone reservoirs: Origin and predictability. AAPG Bulletin, 82, 301–328, https://doi.org/10.1306/61EEDABC-173E-11D7-8645000102C1865D
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bredehoeft, J.D., Djevanshir, R.D. and Belitz, K.R.
    1988. Lateral fluid flow in compacting sand-shale sequence, South Caspian Sea. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 72, 416–424.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bouvier, J.D., Kaarssijpesteijn, C.H., Kluesner, D.F., Onyejekwe, C.C. and Vanderpal, R.C.
    1989. Three-dimensional seismic interpretation and fault sealing investigations, Nun River Field, Nigeria. AAPG Bulletin, 73, 1397–1414.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Corbett, P.W.M. and Jensen, J.L.
    1993. Application of probe permeametry to the prediction of two-phase flow performance in laminated sandstones (lower Brent Group, North Sea). Marine and Petroleum Geology, 10, 335–346, https://doi.org/10.1016/0264-8172(93)90078-7
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gauthier, B.D.M. and Lake, S.D.
    1993. Probabilistic modelling of faults below the limit of seismic resolution in Pelican Field, North Sea, offshore United Kingdom. AAPG Bulletin, 77, 761–777.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Harding, T.P. and Tuminas, A.C.
    1989. Structural interpretation of hydrocarbon traps sealed by basement normal blocks and at stable flank of foredeep basins and at rift basins. AAPG Bulletin, 73, 812–840.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hartkamp-Bakker, C.A. and Donselaar, M.E.
    1993. Permeability patterns in point bar deposits: Tertiary Loranca Basin, central Spain. International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publications , 15, 157–168.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Howell, A.J., Martinius, A.W. and Good, T.R.
    2014. The application of outcrop analogues in geological modelling: a review, present status and future outlook. In: Martinius, A.W., Howell, J.A. & Good, T.R. (eds) Sediment-Body Geometry and Heterogeneity: Analogue Studies for Modelling the Subsurface. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 387 , 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP387.12
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hunt, J.M.
    1979. Petroleum Geochemistry and Geology. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Hurst, A. and Rosvoll, K.
    1991. Permeability variations in sandstone and their relationship to sedimentary structures. In: Lake, L.W., Carroll, H.B. and Wesson, T.C. (eds) Reservoir Characterization II. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 166–196.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Jian, F.X., Larue, D.K., Castellini, A. and Toldi, J.
    2004. Reservoir modelling methods and characterization parameters for a shoreface reservoir: what is important for fluid flow performance. SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering, 7, 89–103, https://doi.org/10.2118/87893-PA
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Keogh, K.J., Martinius, A.W. and Osland, R.
    2007. The development of fluvial stochastic modelling in the Norwegian oil industry: A historical review, subsurface implementation and future directions. Sedimentary Geology, 202, 249–268, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.05.009
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Kjønsvik, D., Doyle, J., Jacobsen, T. and Jones, A.
    1994. The effects of sedimentary heterogeneities on production from a shallow marine reservoir – what really matters?Paper SPE 28445, presented at theSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 25–28 September 1994, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, https://doi.org/10.2118/28445-MS
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Knipe, R.J., Fisher, R.J. et al.
    1997. Fault seal analysis: successful methodologies, application and future directions. Norwegian Petroleum Society Special Publications, 7, 15–40, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-8937(97)80004-5
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Knipe, R.J., Jones, G. and Fisher, Q.J.
    1998. Faulting, fault sealing and fluid flow in hydrocarbon reservoirs: an introduction. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 147, vii–xxi, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1998.147.01.01
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Larue, D.K. and Yue, Y.
    2003. How stratigraphy influences oil recovery: a comparative reservoir database concentrating on deep water reservoirs. The Leading Edge, 332–339, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1572086
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Manzocchi, T., Carter, J.N. et al.
    2008. Sensitivity of the impact of geological uncertainty on production from faulted and unfaulted shallow-marine oil reservoirs: objectives and methods. Petroleum Geoscience, 14, 3–15, https://doi.org/10.1144/1354-079307-790
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Nordahl, K., Ringrose, P.S. and Wen, R.
    2005. Petrophysical characterization of a heterolithic tidal reservoir interval using a process-based modelling tool. Petroleum Geoscience, 11, 17–28, https://doi.org/10.1144/1354-079303-613
     [Google Scholar]
  25. O'Connor, S.A. and Swarbrick, R.E.
    2008. Pressure regression, fluid drainage and a hydrodynamically controlled fluid contact in the North sea, Lower Cretaceous, Britannia Sandstone formation. Petroleum Geoscience, 14, 115–126, https://doi.org/10.1144/1354-079308-737
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Pickup, G.E. and Hern, C.Y.
    2002. The development of appropriate upscaling procedures. Transport in Porous Media, 46, 119–138, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015055515059
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Richard, R.A. and Savazzi, E.
    1999. Methods for analysing a sample drawn from a single population. In: Aspects of Multivariate Statistical Analysis in Geology. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 103–153.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Riis, F. and Wolff, A.
    2020. Use of Pore pressure data from the Norwegian continental shelf to characterize fluid-flow processes in geological timescales. In: Chiarella, D. et al. (eds) Cross-Border Themes in Petroleum Geology II: Atlantic Margin and Barents Sea. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 495 , https://doi.org/10.1144/SP495-2018-176
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Roden, R., Smith, T. and Sacrey, D.
    2015. Geologic pattern recognition from seismic attributes: Principal component analysis and self-organizing maps. Interpretation, 3, SAE59–SAE83, https://doi.org/10.1190/INT-2015-0037.1
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Skorstad, A., Kolbjørnsen, O., Fjellvoll, B., Howell, J.A., Manzocchi, T. and Carter, J.N.
    2005. Sensitivity of oil production to petrophysical heterogeneities. In: Leuangthong, O. and Deutsch, C.V. (eds) Geostatistics Banff 2004. Quantitative Geology and Geostatistics, 14, 723–730.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Skorstad, A., Kolbjørnsen, O., Manzocchi, T., Carter, J.N. and Howell, J.A.
    2008. Combined effects of structural, stratigraphic and well controls on production variability in faulted shallow-marine reservoirs. Petroleum Geoscience, 14, 45–54, https://doi.org/10.1144/1354-079307-789
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Slatt, R.M.
    and Galloway, W.E. 1992. Geological heterogeneities: Part 6. Geological methods. AAPG Methods in Exploration Series , 10, 278–281.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 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) Abnormal Pressures in Hydrocarbon Environments. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir, 70, 13–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Tveranger, J., Howell, J., Aanonsen, S.I., Kolbjørnsen, O., Semshaug, S.L., Skorstad, A. and Ottesen, S.
    2008. Assessing structural controls on reservoir performance in different stratigraphic settings. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 309, 51–66, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP309.4
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Tyler, N. and Finley, R.J.
    1991. Architectural controls on the recovery of hydrocarbons from sandstone reservoirs. SEPM Concepts in Sedimentology and Palaeontology , 3, 1–5, https://doi.org/10.2110/csp.91.03.0001
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Walsh, J.J., Watterson, J., Heath, A., Gillespie, P.A. and Childs, C.
    1998. Assessment of the effects of sub-seismic faults on bulk permeabilities of reservoir sequences. Geological Society of London, Special Publications , 127, 99–114, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1998.127.01.08
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Weber, K.J.
    1982. Influence of common sedimentary structures on fluids flow in reservoir models. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 34, 665–672, https://doi.org/10.2118/9247-PA
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 1986. How heterogeneity affects oil recovery. In: Lake, L.W. and Carroll, Jr., H.B. (eds) Reservoir Characterization. Academic Press, Orlando, 487–544.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Weber, K.J. and van Geuns, L.C.
    1990. Framework for constructing clastic reservoir simulation models. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 42, 1248–1253, 1296–1297, https://doi.org/10.2118/19582-PA
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Wilkinson, M., Darby, D., Haszeldine, R.S. and Couples, G.D.
    1997. Secondary porosity generation during deep burial associated with overpressure leak-off: Fulmar Formation, United Kingdom Central Graben. AAPG Bulletin, 81, 803–813.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Williams, R.R. and Milne, A.D.
    1991. The Thistle Field, Blocks 211/118a and 211/19, UK North Sea. Geological Society, London, Memoirs , 14, 199–207, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.MEM.1991.014.01.25
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Wooldridge, L.J., Worden, R.H., Griffiths, J. and Utley, J.E.P.
    2017. Clay-coated sand grains in petroleum reservoirs: Understanding their distribution via a modern analogue. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 87, 338–352, https://doi.org/10.2110/jsr.2017.20
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2019-133
Loading
Stratigraphic controls on hydrocarbon recovery in clastic reservoirs of the Norwegian Continental Shelf
Petroleum Geoscience 27, petgeo2019-133 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2019-133
/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2019-133
/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2019-133
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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