1887

Abstract

Summary

The Middle-Upper Triassic Mercia Mudstone Group (MMG) of England and Wales, and equivalent units on the UK offshore continental shelf, is a successful top seal to hydrocarbon reservoirs and is now a potential host rock for radioactive waste disposal and top seal to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) reservoirs in the UK. A significant challenge for these projects is that the MMG is both vertically and laterally heterogeneous. The distribution and causes of heterogeneity are poorly understood. We will here show that this variability has arisen from spatial-temporal changes in depositional environments combined with complex differences in the temperature-time history of major UK Triassic basins. This research therefore takes an integrated approach by combining published compositional, sedimentological and burial diagenetic data to synthesise the depositional and diagenetic controls on the spatio-temporal variability of this heterogeneous rock. As well as improving general understanding of the variability of the MMG, the findings of this research provide crucial insights into the representativity of natural analogues for CCS and radioactive waste disposal projects in the UK.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202532024
2025-09-14
2026-02-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bjørlykke, K. (2014) 'Relationships between depositional environments, burial history and rock properties. Some principal aspects of diagenetic process in sedimentary basins', Sedimentary Geology, vol. 301, pp. 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Duncan, W.I., Green, P.F. & Duddy, I.R. (1998) 'Source Rock Burial History and Seal Effectiveness: Key Facets to Understanding Hydrocarbon Exploration Potential in the East and Central Irish Sea Basins', AAPG Bulletin, vol. 82, no. 7, pp. 1401–1415.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fisher, Q., Kaminskaite, I. & Sanchez, A.d.P. (2023) ‘Shale barrier performance in petroleum systems: implications for CO2 storage and nuclear waste disposal’, Geoenergy, vol. 1, no. 1,
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Hiatt, E.E. & Kyser, K. (2000) ‘Links between Depositional and Diagenetic Processes in Basin Analysis: Porosity and Permeability Evolution in Sedimentary Rocks’, in K.Kyser (ed.), Fluids and Basin Evolution, First edn, Mineralogical Association of Canada pp. 63–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Hobbs, P., Hallam, J., Forster, A., Entwisle, D., Jones, L., Cripps, A., Northmore, K., Self, S. & Meakin, J. (2002) ‘Engineering geology of British rocks and soils: Mudstones of the Mercia Mudstone Group’, British Geological Survey Research Report RR/01/02
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Milroy, P., Wright, V.P. & Simms, M.J. (2019) ‘Dryland continental mudstones: Deciphering environmental changes in problematic mudstones from the Upper Triassic (Carnian to Norian) Mercia Mudstone Group, south-west Britain’, Sedimentology, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 2557–2589.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Scorgie, J.C., Worden, R.H., Utley, J.E.P. & Roche, I.P. (2021) ‘Reservoir quality and diagenesis of Triassic sandstones and siltstones from arid fluvial and playa margin environments: A study of one of the UK’s earliest producing oilfields', Marine and Petroleum Geology, vol. 131,
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Seedhouse, J.K. & Racey, A. (1997) ‘Sealing capacity of the mercia mudstone group in the east irish sea basin: Implications for petroleum exploration’, Journal of Petroleum Geology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 261–286.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Worden, R.H. & Burley, S. (2003) ‘Sandstone diagenesis: the evolution of sand to stone’, in S.D.Burley & R.H.Worden (eds), Sandstone diagenesis: Recent and ancient, Wiley, pp. 1–44.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202532024
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202532024
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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