Part 4 - Berg - Hughes Center

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Louisiana Salt Basin. Potential underdeveloped reservoirs include Lower Cretaceous sandstone facies (Hosston, Paluxy) and limestone facies (Sligo, James, Rodessa, Mooringsport, and Fredericksburg) and Upper Cretaceous sandstone facies of the Austin (Tokio), Taylor (Ozan), and Navarro (Nacatoch) Groups. Exploration Strategies Knowledge of the geohistory of the North Louisiana and Mississippi Interior Salt Basins and an understanding of the concepts of sequence stratigraphy (transgressive- regressive sequences) in association with information regarding lithofacies associations, diagenesis, and petroleum systems facilitates the design of new exploration strategies for these basins. For example, in the North Louisiana Salt Basin, secondary, non-associated thermogenic gas is expected to be preserved in Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous deeply buried transgressive and regressive reservoirs. These potential reservoirs include Cotton Valley and Hosston sandstone facies, Bossier shale facies, and Smackover and Sligo carbonate facies at depths greater than 20,000 ft (Mancini et al., 2006, 2008). Porosity is predicted at this depth and to consist of a combination of depositional and diagenetic (fracture) types in Cotton Valley and Hosston shallow nearshore and deep marine sandstone facies. Porosity is predicted to be mainly diagenetic (vuggy and fracture) in Smackover and Sligo carbonate nearshore, marine shelf, ramp, and reef facies. In addition, the knowledge of the geohistory of the North Louisiana Salt Basin and the use of transgressive-regressive sequences, as recognized in well log signatures and seismic reflection profiles, is of assistance in targeting combination structural and stratigraphic traps and specific reservoir facies in a transgressive-regressive sequence. 443
For example, Upper Cretaceous sandstone reservoirs are recognized as transgressive backstepping facies in transgressive-regressive sequences that onlap onto the Monroe Uplift that serves as a combination structural and stratigraphic trap. Also, an understanding of the Bossier petroleum system has resulted in the identification of the Bossier as a potential undiscovered shale gas reservoir in the North Louisiana Salt Basin. CONCLUSIONS The principal research efforts of the project have been the determination of the tectonic, depositional, burial and thermal maturation histories of the North Louisiana Salt Basin, basin modeling (geohistory, thermal maturation, hydrocarbon expulsion, hydrocarbon flow pathway), petroleum system study (identification, characterization, modeling), comparative basin evaluation, and assessment of the undiscovered and underdeveloped reservoirs in the North Louisiana Salt Basin. Existing information, including 2-D seismic sections, on the North Louisiana Salt Basin has been evaluated and an electronic database has been developed. Regional cross sections have been prepared. Structure, isopach, and formation lithology maps have been constructed on key surfaces and of key intervals, respectively. Seismic data, well logs, cross sections, subsurface maps and burial history, thermal maturation history and hydrocarbon expulsion profiles have been used in evaluating the tectonic history, depositional history, burial history and thermal maturation history of the basin. The origin of the North Louisiana Salt Basin is comparable to the origin of the Mississippi Interior Salt Basin. The geohistory of these basins is directly linked to the evolution of the Gulf of Mexico. The timing of tectonic events and the nature of the structural styles control the type and size of petroleum traps formed and the volume of 444
Page 1 and 2:
time frame spanning from approximat
Page 3 and 4:
the same well, Pennsylvanian plant
Page 5 and 6:
Louann Salt The Louann Salt conform
Page 7 and 8:
Norphlet deposition, in southern Ar
Page 9 and 10:
Haynesville-Buckner Formation Produ
Page 11 and 12:
Caddo, Bossier, Webster, Claiborne,
Page 13 and 14:
Smackover limestone. The Bossier gr
Page 15 and 16:
Lower Cretaceous Coahuila (Hosston,
Page 17 and 18:
system that includes a variety of d
Page 19 and 20:
greater than 90 md, most of the Tra
Page 21 and 22:
contains approximately 13 producing
Page 23 and 24:
Pine Island shale, averaging 250 ft
Page 25 and 26:
10%. Calcite-lined vugs and intergr
Page 27 and 28:
Lake Anhydrite was deposited above
Page 29 and 30:
Sabine, Franklin, Tensas Shallow wa
Page 31 and 32:
Across northern Louisiana in the pr
Page 33 and 34:
Taylor Group Producing Parishes Cad
Page 35 and 36:
2,000 to 2,500 ft with net pay of 1
Page 37 and 38:
productive in east-central Louisian
Page 39 and 40:
North Louisiana Salt Basin. The str
Page 41 and 42:
Louisiana Salt Basin. Lower Cretace
Page 43 and 44:
Table 2. Oil and gas production for
Page 45 and 46:
1987; Claypool and Mancini, 1989; M
Page 47 and 48: Figure 329. Cross section A-A’. G
Page 49 and 50: generation (Table 4). The following
Page 51 and 52: Table 5. Cotton Valley-Bossier Grou
Page 53 and 54: Table 6. Cotton Valley-Group sample
Page 55 and 56: Table 7. Wells used to construct th
Page 57 and 58: Figure 336. Electric logs for wells
Page 59 and 60: Figure 338. Thin section micrograph
Page 61 and 62: Figure 340. Amoco CZ 5-7 well elect
Page 63 and 64: Table 9. Total organic carbon, rock
Page 65 and 66: Figure 343. HI versus OI diagram. T
Page 67 and 68: Figure 345. Rock-Eval pyrolysis ana
Page 69 and 70: Figure 347. Visual kerogen analyses
Page 71 and 72: gas with some oil, not only within
Page 73 and 74: Figure 350. Burial history profile
Page 75 and 76: Figure 352. Hydrocarbon expulsion p
Page 77 and 78: Figure 354. (A) Thermal-maturity an
Page 79 and 80: Figure 356. Cross section A-A’ sh
Page 81 and 82: Figure 360. Cross section J-J’ sh
Page 83 and 84: Figure 364. Seismic cross section B
Page 85 and 86: of secondary, non-associated thermo
Page 87 and 88: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Geologic His
Page 89 and 90: peripheral fault trend and numerous
Page 91 and 92: oundary between thick transitional
Page 93 and 94: Cretaceous reservoirs have shown th
Page 95 and 96: from the southern part of the basin
Page 97: Reservoir Assessment Comparison of
Page 101 and 102: The Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretace
Page 103 and 104: Bishop, W.F., 1968, Petrology of up
Page 105 and 106: Dawson, W.C., and Callender, C.A.,
Page 107 and 108: Fisher, W.L., and McGowen, J.H., 19
Page 109 and 110: Hermann, L.A., J.A. Lott, and R.E.
Page 111 and 112: Mancini, E.A., M. Badali, T.M. Puck
Page 113 and 114: McCulloh, R.P., and Eversull, L.G.,
Page 115 and 116: Source Rock Potential of Carbonate
Page 117 and 118: Salvador, A., 1991b, Triassic-Juras
Page 119 and 120: Tolson, J.S., C.W. Copeland, and B.
Page 121: Zimmerman, R.K., 1999a, A potential
show all

Part 4 - Berg - Hughes Center

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?