DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Geochemical Evaluation and Characterization of the Shale Gas Resources

셰일 가스 자원의 지화학적 평가 및 특성화

  • Lee, Young-Joo (Petreolum and Marine Research Division, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral resources)
  • 이영주 (한국지질자원연구원 석유해저연구부본)
  • Received : 2013.06.22
  • Accepted : 2013.08.02
  • Published : 2013.08.28

Abstract

Shale is considered as a source rock for conventional oil and gas exploration and development because shale is fine-grained detrital sedimentary rock which can preserve the organic matter better. Shale has a good sealing capacity for the petroleum trap due to its low permeability. Commercial recoveries of gas from shale in the North America based on the development of technologies of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing reveal that shale also function as a effective reservoir rock. Geochemical techniques to evaluate generation potential of the hydrocarbons from organic matter in the source rocks can be applied for the exploration of the shale gas resources. To evaluate shale gas resources, it is important to understand various geochemical processes and shale characteristics controlling generation, storage and estimation of shale gas reserves. In this paper, the generation mechanism of the oil and gas from organic matter is reviewed, and geochemical techniques which can be applied for the evaluation and characterization of shale gas are introduced.

Keywords

shale gas;geochemical technique;shale characterization;organic matter;shale resource system

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국지질자원연구원

References

  1. Baek, M. (2011) Unconventional Gas Resources & KOGAS's Projects Journal of Korean Society For Geosystem Engineering, v.48, n.4, p.524-538.
  2. Bend S. L. (2008) Petroleum Geology eTextbook. ver. 1.1, AAPG/Datapages
  3. Blatt, H. (1982) Sedimentary Petrology. Freeman, W. H. and Company, 564p.
  4. Cooles, G. P., Mackenzie, A. S. and Quigley, T. M. (1986) Calculation of petroleum masses generated and expelled from source rocks. Organic Geochemistry, v.10, p.235-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6380(86)90026-4
  5. Curtis, J. B. (2006) Fractured Shale-Gas Systems, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v.86, n.11, p.1921-1938.
  6. Curtis, M. E., Carl H., Sondergeld, R., Ambrose, J. and Rai, C. S. (2012) Microstructural investigation of gas shales in two and three dimensions using nanometerscale resolution imaging; AAPG Bulletin, v.96, p.665-677. https://doi.org/10.1306/08151110188
  7. Durand B. (1980) Kerogen, EDITIONS TECHNIP, 519p.
  8. Espitalie, J., Madec, M. and Tissot, B. (1984) Geochemical logging, in K. J. Voorhees, ed., Analytical pyrolysis: Techniques and applications: London, Butterworths, p.276-304.
  9. Gihm, Y.-S., Hwang, I.-G., Kim, H.-T., Lee, H.-S. and Lee D.-S. (2011) Geological Characteristics and Development Strategy of the Marcellus Shale, Journal of Korean Society For Geosystem Engineering, v.48, n.3, p.371-382.
  10. Huang, J., Zou, C., Li, J., Dong, D., Wang, S., Cheng, K. (2012) Shale gas generation and potentail of the Lower Cambrian Qiongzhusi Formation in the South Sichuan Basin, China, Petroleum Exploration and Development, v.39, p.75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(12)60017-2
  11. Hunt, J. M. (1996) Petroleum geochemistry and geology, second edition, Freeman, W. H. and Company, 741p.
  12. Hwang, S. and Jin, G. (2012) Unconventional Reservoirs: Review on Geophysical Well Logging for Shale Plays, Journal of Korean Society For Geosystem Engineering, v.49, p.248-260.
  13. Jarvie, D. M. (2004) Evaluation of hydrocarbon generation and storage in the Barnette shale, Ft. Worth Basin, Texas, Special BEG/PTTC presentation
  14. Jarvie, D. M. (2012a) Shale resource systems for oil and gas: Part 1. Shale-gas resource systems, in J. A. Breyer, ed., Shale reservoirs. Giant resources for the 21st century: AAPG Memoir 97, p.69-87.
  15. Jarvie, D. M. (2012b) Shale resource systems for oil and gas: Part 2.Shale-oil resource systems, in J. A. Breyer, ed., Shale reservoirs. Giant resources for the 21st century: AAPG Memoir 97, p.89-119.
  16. Jarvie, D. M. and Lundell, L. L. (2001) Amount, type, and kinetics of thermal transformation of organic matter in the Miocene Monterey Formation, in Isaacs, C. M. and Rullkotter, J. eds., The Monterey Formation: From rocks to molecules: New York, Columbia University Press, p.268-295.
  17. Jarvie, D. M., Hill, R. J., Ruble, T. E. and Pollastro, R. M. (2007) Unconventional Shale-Gas Systems: The Mississippian Barnett Shale of North-Central Texas as One Model for Thermogenic Shale-Gas Assessment, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v.91, p.475-499. https://doi.org/10.1306/12190606068
  18. Ko, J. (2007) Barnett Shale Gas System in the Fort Worth Basin, Texas, U. S. A., Journal of Korean Society For Geosystem Engineering, v.44, n.5, p.455-473.
  19. Loucks, R. G., Reed, R. M., Ruppel, S. C. and Jarvie, D.M. (2009) Morphology, genesis, and distribution of nanometer scale pores in siliceous mudstones of the Mississippian Barnett Shale: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v.79, p.848-861. https://doi.org/10.2110/jsr.2009.092
  20. Mahlstedt, N. and Horsfield, B. (2012) Metagenetic methane generation in gas shales I. Screening protocols using immature samples, Marine and Petroleum Geology, v.31, p.27-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2011.06.011
  21. Milliken, K. L., Rudnicki, M., Awwiller, D. N. and Zhang, T. (2013) Organic matter-hosted pore system, Marcellus Formation(Devonian), Pennsylvania; American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v.97, p.177-200. https://doi.org/10.1306/07231212048
  22. Modica, C. J. and Lapierre, S. G. (2012) Estimation of kerogen porosity in source rocks as a function of thermal transformation; Example from the Mowry shale in the Powder River of Wyoming. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v.96, n.1, p.87-108. https://doi.org/10.1306/04111110201
  23. Peters, K. E., and Casa, M. R. (1994) Applied source rock geochemistry, in L. B. Magoon and W. G. Dow, eds., The petroleum system: From source to trap: AAPG Memoir v.60, p.93-117.
  24. Rodriguez, N. D. and Philp, R. P. (2010) Geochemical characterization of gases from the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, Texas Norelis, AAPG Bulletin, v.94, p.1641-1656.
  25. Romero A. M. and Philp, R. P. (2012) Organic geochemistry of the Woodford Shale, southeastern Oklahoma: How variable can shales be. AAPG Bulletin, v.96, p.493-517. https://doi.org/10.1306/08101110194
  26. Selley, R. C. (1998) Elements of petroleum geology, second edition, Academic Press, 470p.
  27. Shin, C., Lee, S., Kwon, S., Park, D., and Lee, Y. (2012) A Classification and a Survey on the Core Technology for Shale Gas Development, Journal of Korean Society For Geosystem Engineering, v.49, n.3, p.395-410.
  28. Shurr, G. W. and Ridgley, J. L. (2002) Unconventional shallow biogenic gas systems, AAPG Bulletin, v.86, p.1939-1969.
  29. Slatt, R. M. and O'Brien, N. R. (2011) Pore types in the Barnett and Woodford gas shales: Contribution to understanding gas storage and migration pathways in fine-grained rocks: AAPG Bulletin, v.95, p.2017-2030. https://doi.org/10.1306/03301110145
  30. Slatt, R. M., Philp, R. P., Abousleiman, Y., Singh, P., Perez, R., Portas, R., Marfurt, K. J., Madrid-Arroyo, S., O'Brien, N., Eslinger, E. V. and Baruch, E. T. (2012) Pore-to-regional-scale integrated characterization work flow for unconventional gas shales, in Breyer, J. A. ed., Shale reservoirs. Giant resources for the 21st century: AAPG Memoir, v.97, p.127-150.
  31. Tissot, B. P. and Welte, D. H. (1984) Petroleum Formation and Occurrence, Springer-Verlag, 699p.
  32. Waples, D. W. (2000) The kinetics of in-reservoir oil destruction and gas formation : Constraints from experimental and empirical data, and from thermodynamics, Organic Geochemistry, v.31, p.553-575. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6380(00)00023-1
  33. Zou, C., Dong, D., Wang, S., Li, J., Li, X., Wang, Y., Li, D., Cheng, K. (2010) Geological characteristics and resource potential of shale gas in China, Petroleum exploration and Development, v.37, p.641-653. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(11)60001-3

Cited by

  1. Theoretical Considerations and Case Study on Application of Cyclic Gas Injection in U.S. Eagle Ford Shale Reservoir vol.55, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.32390/ksmer.2018.55.3.238