AllAboutShale.com

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil

Cai-Neng Zou1 • Zhi Yang1 • Lian-Hua Hou1 • Ru-Kai  Zhu1 • Jing-Wei  Cui1 • Song-Tao Wu1 • Sen-Hu Lin1 • Qiu-Lin Guo1 • She-Jiao Wang1 • Deng-Hua Li1

 

 

1PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China

Abstract

 

 

Tight oil has become the focus in exploration and development of unconventional oil in the world, especially in North America and China. In North America, there has been intensive exploration for tight oil in marine. In China, commercial exploration for tight oil in continental sediments is now steadily underway. With the discovery of China’s first tight oil field—Xin’anbian Oilfield in the Ordos Basin, tight oil has been integrated officially into  the  category  for  reserves  evaluation.  Geologically, tight oil is characterized by distribution in depressions and slopes of basins, extensive, mature, and high-quality source rocks, large-scale reservoir space with micro- and nanopore throat systems, source rocks and reservoirs in close contact and with continuous distribution, and local ‘‘sweet area.’’ The evaluation of the distribution of tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ should  focus  on  relationships  between  ‘‘six  features.’’ These are source properties, lithology, physical properties, brittleness, hydrocarbon potential, and stress anisotropy. In North America, tight oil prospects are distributed in lamellar shale  or  marl,  where  natural  fractures are  frequently present, with TOC > 4 %, porosity > 7 %, brittle mineral  content > 50 %,  oil  saturation  of  50 %–80 %, API > 35 , and pressure coefficient > 1.30. In China, tight oil prospects are distributed in lamellar shale, tight sandstone, or tight carbonate rocks, with TOC > 2 %, porosity > 8 %, brittle mineral content > 40 %, oil saturation of 60 %–90 %,  low  crude oil  viscosity, or  high formation pressure. Continental tight oil is pervasive in China and its preliminary estimated technically recoverable resources are about (20–25)x108t.

 

 

1 Introduction

 

 

Tight oil refers to the oil preserved in tight sandstone or tight carbonate rocks with overburden pressure matrix permeability  less  than  or  equal  to  0.1x10-3 μm2 (air permeability  less  than  1x10-3 μm2).  Individual  wells generally have no natural productivity or their natural productivity is lower than the lower limit of industrial oil flow, but industrial oil production can be obtained under certain economic conditions and technical measures (Jia et al. 2012a, b; Zou et al. 2012; Hao et al. 2014). Such measures include  acid  fracturing,  multi-stage  fracturing, horizontal wells, and multi-lateral wells. Tight oil is a highlight in global unconventional oil, for which industrial breakthroughs have been achieved in North America. Tight oil reservoirs, as typical ‘‘man-made’’ oil reservoirs, are explored and developed by vertical well network fracturing and horizontal well  volume  fracturing in  order to  form ‘‘man-made permeability’’ and achieve substantial productivity. In this article, through case studies based on the tight oil practices in North America and China, major geological features of tight  oil are identified and major parameters for the evaluation for ‘‘sweet area’’ are proposed. These can provide important reference for continuously promoting  the   exploration   for   this   important unconventional oil. ‘‘Sweet area’’ refers to the target area rich in unconventional tight oil which should be developed in   priority   under   current   economic   and   technical conditions.

 

 

2 Global tight oil exploration and development

 

 

Tight oil has become a new focus, after shale gas, in exploration and development of unconventional oil and gas around the world. The U.S. Energy Information Administration  (EIA)  predicted  that  the  technically  recoverable tight oil (shale oil) resources of 42 countries had reached 473x108 t in 2013, revealing great resource potential. At present, the exploration and development of tight oil are concentrated in North America and China. North America has achieved intensive exploration and development, while China is in the early stage of industrial exploration.

The US has repeated the shale gas success in the exploration and development of tight oil. Nearly 20 tight oil basins have so far been discovered, including Williston, Gulf Coast, and Fort Worth, with multiple producing zones like Bakken, Eagle Ford, Barnett, Woodford, and Marcellus-Utica (Schmoker 2002; Jarvie et al. 2007, 2010; Cander 2012; Corbett 2010; Camp 2011; EIA 2012, 2013; Lu et al. 2015).  Since  2008,  these  discoveries have  reversed the previous oil production decline in the US. On the whole, the marine tight oil of North America is predominantly distributed in three sets of shale formations, i.e., Devonian, Carboniferous, and Cretaceous, and occasionally in Cambrian, Ordovician, Permian, Jurassic, and Miocene. The US tight oil production amounted to  2.09x108  t by 2014, accounting  for  36.2 %  of  total  US  oil  production. EIA predicted in 2013 that the technically recoverable tight oil resources of the US would be 79.3x108  t, revealing good prospects for tight oil exploration and development. In addition to the US, tight oil has also been discovered in Canada, Argentina, Ecuador, the UK, Russia, etc.

 

In China, tight oil is extensively distributed in the continental strata of major oil and gas basins, as widely distributed tight sandstone oil or tight carbonate oil associated or in contact with lacustrine source rocks (Sun et al. 2011; Li et al. 2011; Li and Zhang 2011; Jia et al. 2012a, b; Kang 2012; Ma et al. 2012; Zhang 2012; Zou et al. 2012, 2013a, b, c; Guo et al. 2013). In recent years, strategic break-throughs have been successively achieved in the Ordos and Songliao Basins (Yang et al. 2013; Yao et al. 2013; Huang et al. 2013; Zou et al. 2012, 2013a, b, c, 2015). By the end of 2013, total proven technically recoverable reserves of tight oil were 3.7x108 t in the Ordos, Songliao, Junggar, Bohai Bay, and Sichuan and Qaidam Basins (Liang et al. 2011; Kuang et al. 2012; Zhang et al. 2012; Liang et al. 2012; Song et al. 2013; Yang et al. 2013; Huang et al. 2013;  Yao  et  al.  2013;  Fu  et  al.  2013). Currently,  the Chang7 oil layer in the Ordos Basin and the Fuyang oil layer in the Songliao Basin have been developed on a large scale. PetroChina Changqing Oilfield Company has developed the first 100-million-ton tight oil field— Xin’anbian Oilfield, making  Changqing Oilfield form  a capacity of 1 million tons per annum. With this discovery, which is a milestone in China’s oil history, in 2014 tight oil was integrated officially into the category for reserves evaluation. At present, China is undertaking an in-depth study of technologies to evaluate tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ and building test regions. Once breakthroughs are made in key technologies and more efforts are made in this aspect, the development and utilization of tight oil will be further accelerated.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil

Fig. 1 Tight oil distribution of the Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin

3 Geological features  of tight oil

 

 

The tight oil fields of North America and China have two essential features. Firstly, oil is extensively distributed, without clear trap boundaries. Secondly, there is no natural industrial oil production with unobvious Darcy flow (Zeng et al. 2010; Nelson 2009, 2011; Zou et al. 2012, 2013a, b, c; Chen et al. 2013; Gaswirth and Marra 2015; Peters et al. 2015; Li et al. 2015; Pang et al. 2015; Sun et al. 2014; Yuan et al. 2015; Wu et al. 2015; Li et al. 2015). Taking the continental tight oil of China as example, it has four typical geological features (Zou et al. 2012, 2013a, b, c) (Table 1; Fig. 1).

 

  1. It  is  generally  well  preserved  and  distributed  in depressions and slopes, where the structure is stable. In China, tight oil is predominantly distributed in depression and slope belts. For example, in the Ordos Basin, tight oil is distributed in the sandy debris flow and delta front sandbodies in the basin center; in the Junggar Basin, tight oil is distributed in the carbonate and hybrid sedimentary reservoirs in the depression center; in the Songliao Basin, tight oil is distributed in the delta front sandbodies in basin slope–depression locations.
  2. Large-scale  mature high-quality  source  rocks  are extensively developed. In China, continental source rocks are frequently present in Mesozoic and Cenozoic strata of rift, depression, and foreland basins. Their TOC is in a wide range, generally 2 %–15 %, and the thermal evolution degree Ro  is low, generally 0.6 %– 1.0 %. Organic-rich shale is extensive in depression centers and slopes.
  3. Tight  oil  reservoir space  consists  of  micro- and nanopore throat systems, with poor physical properties. In China, continental tight oil reservoirs are characterized by strong heterogeneity, rapid lateral variation, low porosity (5 %–12 %), and low matrix permeability, predominantly with micro- and nanopore throats.
  4. Source rocks and reservoirs are in close contact. Tight oil with extensive distribution is accumulated near source rocks in a non-buoyant manner, with ‘‘sweet spots’’ present locally. In all major oil basins of China, tight oil is distributed close to source rocks in a large area and with large resource potential. For example, in the Ordos Basin, the contact area between the producing layer of the middle-upper Chang7 Member and the shale  of  the  lower  Chang7  Member  is  more than 5x104 km2; in the Junggar Basin, the contact area between the tight oil of the Lucaogou and Fengcheng Formations and high-quality source rocks is large in depression center; in the Songliao Basin, the contact area between the Fuyang tight oil layer and underlying source rocks of the Qingshankou Formation is more than 3x104 km2.
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation for tight oil

Table 1  Parameters of typical marine and continental tight oil reservoirs

Compared with marine tight oil of the United States, continental  tight  oil  of  China  is  complex  and  special (Fig. 2) with six prominent features. First, its source rocks have a low degree of thermal evolution Ro (0.6 %–1.0 %). Second, reservoir porosity changes slightly (5 %–12 %). Third, oil saturation changes significantly (50 %–90 %). Fourth, reservoir fluid pressure changes significantly (both overpressure and negative pressure). Fifth, it is heavy oil with low gas/oil ratio. Sixth, the cumulative production of individual wells is low, generally 2x10–5x104 t. Its development and testing time are limited since it is still under  pilot  test  phase at present.  The  individual  well stable production of general horizontal segment after fracturing  is  10–30 t/d.  Industrial-scale  development  of continental tight oil in China faces great theoretical and technological challenges.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil

Fig. 2 Tight oil distribution in major oil/gas-bearing basins in North America and China

4 Tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation

 

 

4.1 Parameters and criteria

 

 

A tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ refers to an area rich in unconventional  oil  and gas, where test  production and initial production of individual wells will both be high, thus its exploration and development can be conducted as a priority under current economic and technical conditions. Tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ generally occur in  the  area  where source rocks and reservoirs are associated and natural fractures and localized structures are present. ‘‘Sweet area’’ are characterized by wide distribution, large thickness, high-quality source rocks, relatively good reservoir physical properties, high oil and gas saturation, light oil, high formation energy (high gas/oil ratio, high formation pressure), and high brittleness index (Fig. 3). It should be noted that under current economic and technological conditions both domestic and overseas, a definite structural setting (which is favorable for long-term oil and gas accumulation and favorable for the  development  of  natural  fractures) and good fluidity are the prerequisite for the formation of tight oil ‘‘sweet area.’’ For example, the Cretaceous Eagle Ford tight oil formation in Southwest Texas, US, has high-yield ‘‘sweet area’’ with good oil quality, high gas/oil ratio, and high  formation  pressure. These  are  concentrated  in  the inherited paleohigh crest and southwestern flanks, where natural fractures are frequently present.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil

Fig. 3  Mineral composition of oil-bearing tight  reservoirs of the Eagle Ford and the Lucaogou Formation in the Junggar Basin

Evaluating and selecting ‘‘sweet area’’ is the focus for unconventional tight oil research, which is being conducted throughout the entire exploration and development process. Unconventional tight oil sweet spots include geological, engineering, and economic sweet spots (Zou et al. 2012,

2013a, b, c). The evaluation should focus on relationships between ‘‘six features,’’ namely source properties, lithology, physical properties, brittleness, hydrocarbon potential, and stress anisotropy, to evaluate source rock quality, reservoir quality, and engineering quality and determine the distribution scope of tight oil ‘‘sweet area.’’ Eight evaluation indexes for tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ are proposed, among which high TOC value, high porosity, and the development of micro-fractures are major controlling factors.  Comprehensive evaluation  should  focus  on  source rock, reservoir, overpressure, and fracture for geological ‘‘sweet area,’’ on buried depth, rock compressibility, and stress  anisotropy for  engineering  ‘‘sweet  area,’’  and  on resources scale, buried depth and surface conditions for economic  ‘‘sweet  area.’’  At  present,  priority  should  be given to favorable source rock, reservoir, overpressure, fracture, and local structure of geological ‘‘sweet area,’’ and pressure coefficient, brittleness, crustal stress, and buried depth of engineering ‘‘sweet area’’ (Table 2).

Table 2 Evaluation criteria for tight oil ‘‘sweet spots’’

According to the evaluation criteria of tight oil source rocks and reservoirs (Table 3), tight oil ‘‘sweet area.’’ in China were evaluated. Areas with grade I and II source rocks and reservoirs are tight oil ‘‘sweet area.’’ Finally, 20 favorable  ‘‘sweet  area’’  with  an  area  of  5100 km2   and resources of 45x108 t were identified in the Songliao, Ordos, and Junggar Basins. Based on the evaluation results, the  tight  oil ‘‘sweet area’’ of the  Fuyu oil layer in the Songliao  Basin  have  an  area  of  1.5x104 km2    and resources of 25x108 t (Fig. 4); the tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ of the Chang71 Member in the Ordos Basin have an area of 3.5x104  km2  and resources of 14x108 t (Fig. 4); the tight oil ‘‘upper sweet section’’ of the Lucaogou Formation in the Jimsar Sag of the Junggar Basin have an area of 260 km2 and resources of 2.5x108 t.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil

Fig. 4 Tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ in China’s major oil and gas basins. a Tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ distribution of the Fuyu oil layer, Songliao Basin; b tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ distribution of Chang71  Member in the Ordos Basin

In China, tight  oil  is  pervasive and  diversified. It is  predominantly tight sandstone oil and tight carbonate oil in contact with or associated with lacustrine source rocks. As estimated, major onshore tight oil basins in China have an area  of  50x104 km2,  geological  resources  of  about 200x108 t,  and  technically recoverable  resources  of (20–25)x108 t. The preliminarily proven  technically recoverable reserves of tight oil are nearly 3.7x108 t in the tight sandstone of Cretaceous Qingshankou–Quantou Formation of the Songliao Basin, the tight sandstone of Triassic Chang7 Member of the Ordos Basin, the argillaceous dolomite  of Permian  Lucaogou Formation of  the Junggar Basin, the Middle-Lower Jurassic tight limestone of the Sichuan Basin, the marl and tight sandstone of the Shahejie Formation of Bohai Bay Basin, the Cenozoic marl and tight sandstone of the Qaidam Basin, and the Cretaceous marl of the Jiuquan Basin.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil

Table 3 Comprehensive evaluation of continental tight oil in China by source rocks and reservoirs

4.2 Case study

 

 

The Bakken tight oil region is located in the  Williston Basin, crossing the  United States and Canadian border, with an oil-bearing area of 7x104 km2 (Fig. 5) (Sarg, 2012). The Upper Devonian–Lower Carboniferous strata can be divided into nine lithological units, with individual layer thicknesses of 5–15 m, cumulative thickness of 55 m, and buried depth of 2590–3200 m. They were deposited under offshore shelf–lower shoreface environments and are composed of dolomitic siltstone, bioclastic sandstone, and

 

calcareous siltstone, with porosities of 2 %–9 % and an average permeability of 0.05 mD. Two sets of shale are present in the Bakken Formation, predominantly distributed in the northern-central basin, with thicknesses of 5–12 m, TOC of 10 %–14 %, and Ro of 0.6 %–0.9 %, and their  recoverable  resources are  68x108 t  predicted  by HIS. As of 2010, a total of 2362 tight oil wells were in production in the Bakken region of the US, with an average daily oil production of 12 t, with a maximum of 680 t. The crude oil density is 0.78–0.85 g/cm3, which is light, the pressure coefficient is 1.15–1.84, gas/oil ratio is 53–160, and the annual oil production is greater than 5000x104 t. The tight reservoirs of the Bakken Member are bounded above and below by the source rocks of the Bakken, forming a good source–reservoir assemblage. The ‘‘sweet spots’’ are mainly controlled by the regional and local fracture systems arising from the tectonic background, and the  superimposed areas  of  both organic-rich shales and thick dolomitic pore-type reservoirs.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil

Fig. 5  Lithology and oil layer distribution of Bakken tight oil in the Williston Basin

The  Eagle  Ford  tight  oil  region trending SW–NE is located  in  the  Gulf  Coast  Basin,  southern  Texas. It is 440 km long and 80 km wide, with an area of 3 x104 km2. The  tectonic setting of  Eagle Ford  is  an NW–SE dipping slope, including three types of hydrocar bon maturity windows, i.e., crude oil, condensate oil–wet gas, and dry gas. Its formation thickness ranges from a few meters to more than one hundred meters (Li et al. 2011; Kevin 2010). Eagle Ford can be divided into upper and lower intervals, among which the lower interval, located between upper Austin limestone and lower Buda limestone, is the major target zone for oil and gas at present. So far, the  exploration  of  Eagle  Ford  is  focused on  the  liquid hydrocarbon-rich  zone  with  high  economic  value.  The maturity of source rocks ranges between 0.9 % and 1.5 %. The target zone is in the lower shale interval which is rich in organic matter. As of 2014, the daily tight oil production has exceeded 1x106 bbl/d. The distribution of the ‘‘sweet area’’ in the lower Eagle Ford major producing interval is predominantly under the control of maturity, formation thickness, API, gas/oil ratio, pressure coefficient, natural fracture, TOC, porosity, oil saturation, and other parameters. The developed area of ‘‘sweet area’’ generally has a high formation thickness  (greater  than  20 m)  and  TOC (greater  than 4 %)  value,  high  brittle  mineral  content (greater than 90 %), light oil (API of greater than 35 ), high fluid pressure (pressure coefficient between 1.3 and 1.8), and gas/oil ratio (greater than 5000 scf/bbl), where natural fractures are extensive.

 

The ‘‘six features’’ evaluation parameters of the tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ of the Lucaogou Formation in the Jimsar Sag are shown in Fig. 6. Source rocks are of high quality, with an average TOC of 5%–6%, Ro of 0.8%–1.1%, and type II kerogen. The reservoirs, composed of dolomitic sandstone, are  also of  high quality  and have  good physical properties, with a porosity of 6%–20 % and a permeability of generally lower than 1x10-3 μm2, where matrix pores are frequently present, with well-connected micro-fine pores dominating. Oil potential is good, with oil saturation of generally greater than 70 % and crude density of 0.88–0.92 g/cm3 without water cut. Reservoirs have a high brittle mineral content, with a brittleness index >60%, elastic modulus >1.0 x104 MPa, and Poisson’s ratio <0.35. The horizontal stress difference is small, generally less than 6 MPa, which is beneficial for volume fracturing. The oil-bearing properties of the tight reservoirs which are in the upper and lower members of the Lucaogou Formation in the Jimsar Sag are more closely related to the maturity of adjacent source rocks than reservoir porosity. The maturity of the shale in the lower member is higher than that of the shale in the upper member, and thus the tight oil/shale oil potential of the lower member of the Lucaogou Formation is significantly better than that of the upper member, since the tight oil/shale oil saturation of the lower member reaches over 90 %, basically without water cut. The major constraints of tight oil are low maturity, heavy oil quality, low gas content, low formation pressure, and poor fluid mobility as well as difficulty in exploiting and producing.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil

Fig. 7 Typical individual well-integrated histogram of the Triassic Chang7 Member, Ordos Basin

The Mesozoic Chang7 tight oil in the Ordos Basin is distributed in 11 enrichment regions, with an area of 3 X104 km2 and reserves of greater than 20x108 t. The Chang7 marl has a high abundance of organic matter, TOC value of 5 %–8 %, type I–II1 kerogen, Ro of 0.7%–1.2%, and pyrolysis Tmax of 435–455 C (Fig. 7). Its tight reservoirs are predominantly composed of lithic feldspathic sandstone with primary and secondary pores. Reservoir physical properties are good, with a porosity of 7%–13%. The oil-bearing properties are good, with oil saturation of 60%–80%; brittle minerals are common, with a brittleness index of 35 %–45 %, and the horizontal stress difference is 5–7 MPa. The Chang7 tight oil is advantaged by light oil quality, high gas/oil ratio, good reservoir compressibility, extensive micro-fractures, and low water cut; however, its major constraint is low formation pressure.

 

 

 

5 Conclusions

 

 

Tight oil is an important type of unconventional oil resource. It is extensive in global oil and gas basins, especially in North America and China. In North America, marine tight oil is intensively explored. In China, commercial tests are being steadily conducted for continental tight oil. Geologically, tight oil is characterized by distribution in depressions and slopes of basins, extensive, mature, and high-quality source rocks, large-scale reservoir space with micro- and nanopore throat systems, closely contacted source rocks and reservoirs with continuous distribution, and local ‘‘sweet area.’’ The evaluation of the distribution of tight oil ‘‘sweet area’’ should focus on relationships between ‘‘six features,’’ including source properties, lithology, physical properties, brittleness, hydrocarbon potential, and stress anisotropy. Continental tight oil is extensive in China, with preliminarily estimated technically  recoverable oil resources of   about (20–25)x108 t.

 

 

Acknowledgments

 

 

This work was supported by the National Key Basic Research and Development Program (973 Program), China (Grant 2014CB239000), and China National Science and Technology Major Project (Grant 2011ZX05001). This work could not have been achieved without the cooperation and support from PetroChina Research Institute of Exploration and Development. The authors appreciate both journal editors and anonymous reviewers for their precious time and useful suggestions.

 

 

 

DOI 10.1007/s12182-015-0058-1

Received: 11 May 2015 / Published online: 14 October 2015

Cai-Neng Zou: zcn@petrochina.com.cn

Zhi Yang: yangzhi2009@petrochina.com.cn

 

PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and  Development, Beijing 100083, China

 

 

 

References

 

 

Camp WK. Pore-throat sizes in sandstones, tight sandstones, and shales: discussion. AAPG Bull. 2011;95(8):1443–7.

 

Cander H. Sweet spots in shale gas and liquids plays: prediction of fluid composition and reservoir pressure. AAPG Search Discov. 2012; #40936.

 

Chen ZH, Osadetz KG. An assessment of tight oil resource potential in Upper Cretaceous Cardium Formation, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. Pet Explor Dev. 2013;40(3):344–53.

 

Corbett K. Eagleford shale exploration models: depositional controls on reservoir properties. AAPG Search Discov. 2010; #10242.

 

EIA. Annual Energy Outlook 2012 with Projections to 2035. 2012. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo.

 

EIA. Status and outlook for shale gas and tight oil development in the U.S. 2013.

 

Fu ST, Zhang DW, Xue JQ, et al. Exploration potential and geological conditions of tight oil in the Qaidam Basin. Acta Sedimentol Sin. 2013;31(4):672–82 (in Chinese).

 

Gaswirth SB, Marra KR. U.S. Geological Survey 2013 assessment of undiscovered resources in the Bakken and Three Forks Formations of the U.S. Williston Basin Province. AAPG Bull. 2015;99(4):639–60.

 

Guo QL, Chen NS, Wu XZ, et al. Method for assessment of tight oil resources. China Pet Explor. 2013;18(2):67–76 (in Chinese).

 

Hao ZG, Fei HC, Hao QQ, et al. Major breakthroughs in geological theory, key techniques and exploration of tight oil in China. Acta Geol Sin. 2014;88(1):362–3.

 

Huang W, Liang JP, Zhao B, et al. Main controlling factors of tight oil accumulations in the Fuyu Layer of Cretaceous Quantou Formation  in  northern  Songliao  Basin.  J  Palaeogeogr. 2013;15(5):635–44 (in Chinese).

 

Jarvie DM. Unconventional oil petroleum systems: shales and shale hybrids. AAPG Conference and Exhibition. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, September 12–15, 2010.

 

Jarvie DM, Hill RJ, Ruble TE, et al. Unconventional shale-gas systems: the Mississippian Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale-gas assessment. AAPG Bull. 2007;91(4):475–99.

 

Jia CZ, Zheng M, Zhang YF, et al. Unconventional hydrocarbon resources in China and the prospect of exploration and development. Pet Explor Dev. 2012a;39(2):139–46.

 

Jia CZ, Zou CN, Li JZ, et al. Assessment criteria, main types, basic features and resource prospects of the tight oil in China. Acta Pet Sin. 2012b;33(2):343–50 (in Chinese).

 

Kang YZ. Characteristics and prospects of unconventional shale oil & gas reservoirs in China. Nat Gas Ind. 2012;32(4):1–5 (in Chinese).

 

Kuang LC, Tang Y, Lei DW, et al. Formation conditions and exploration potential of tight oil in the Permian saline lacustrine dolomitic rock, Junggar Basin, NW China. Pet Explor Dev. 2012;39(6):657–67.

 

Li F, Martin R B, Thompson J W, et al. An integrated approach for understanding oil and gas reservoir potential in Eagle Ford shale Formation. Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, 15–17 November, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 2011; SPE 148751: 1–15.

 

Li HB, Guo HK, Yang ZM, et al. Tight oil occurrence space of Triassic Chang 7 Member in Northern Shaanxi Area, Ordos Basin, NW China. Pet Explor Dev. 2015;42(3):434–8.

 

Li YX, Zhang JC. Types of unconventional oil and gas resources in China  and  their  development  potential.  Int  Pet  Econ. 2011;19(3):61–7 (in Chinese).

 

Liang DG, Ran LH, Dai DS, et al. A re-recognition of the prospecting potential of Jurassic large-area and non-conventional oils in the central-northern Sichuan Basin. Acta Pet Sin. 2011;32(1):8–17 (in Chinese).

 

Liang SJ, Huang ZL, Liu B, et al. Formation mechanism and enrichment conditions of Lucaogou Formation shale oil from Malang Sag, Santanghu Basin. Acta Pet Sin. 2012;33(4):588–94 (in Chinese).

 

Lu JM, Ruppel SC, Rowe HD. Organic matter pores and oil generation  in  the  Tuscaloosa  marine  shale.  AAPG  Bull. 2015;99(2):333–57.

 

Nelson PH. Pore-throat sizes in sandstones, tight sandstones, and shales: reply. AAPG Bull. 2011;95(8):1448–53.

 

Ma YS, Feng JH, Mou ZH, et al. Unconventional petroleum resource potential and exploration progress of SINOPEC. Eng Sci. 2012;14(6):22–30 (in Chinese).

 

Nelson PH. Pore-throat sizes in sandstones, tight sandstones, and shales. AAPG Bull. 2009;93(3):329–40.

Pang XQ, Jia CZ, Wang WY. Petroleum geology features and research developments of hydrocarbon accumulation in deep petroliferous basins. Pet Sci. 2015;12(1):1–53.

 

Peters KE, Burnham AK, Walters CC. Petroleum generation kinetics: Single versus multiple heating-ramp open-system pyrolysis. AAPG Bull. 2015;99(4):591–616.

 

Sarg JF. The Bakken—an unconventional petroleum and reservoir system. Final Scientific/Technical Report. Office of Fossil Energy, Colorado School of Mines; 2012. p. 1–65.

 

Schmoker JW. Resource-assessment perspectives for unconventional gas systems. AAPG Bull. 2002;86(11):1993–9.

 

Song Y, Zhao MJ, Fang SH. Differential hydrocarbon accumulation controlled by structural styles along the southern and northern Tianshan Thrust Belt. Acta Geol Sin. 2013; 87(4):1109–19.

 

Sun ZD, Jia CZ, Li XF, et al. Unconventional petroleum exploration and development. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press; 2011 (in Chinese).

 

Sun L, Zou CN, Liu XL, et al. A static resistance model and the discontinuous pattern of hydrocarbon accumulation in tight oil reservoirs. Pet Sci. 2014;11(4):469–80.

 

Wu ST, Zhu RK, Cui JG, et al. Characteristics of lacustrine shale porosity evolution, Triassic Chang 7 Member, Ordos Basin, NW China. Pet Explor Dev. 2015;42(2):185–95.

 

Yang H, Li SX, Liu XY, et al. Characteristics and resource prospects of tight oil and shale oil in Ordos Basin. Acta Pet Sin. 2013;34(1):1–11 (in Chinese).

 

Yao JL, Deng XQ, Zhao YD, et al. Characteristics of tight oil in Triassic Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin. Pet Explor Dev. 2013;40(2):161–9 (in Chinese).

 

Yuan XJ, Lin SH, Liu Q, et al. Lacustrine fine-grained sedimentary features and organic-rich shale distribution pattern: a case study of Chang 7 Member of Triassic Yanchang Formation in Ordos Basin. NW China. Pet Explor Dev. 2015;42(1):37–47.

 

Zeng JH, Cheng SW, Kong X, et al. Non-Darcy flow in oil accumulation (oil displacing water) and relative permeability and oil saturation characteristics of low-permeability sandstones. Pet Sci. 2010;7(1):20–30.

 

Zhang K. From tight oil & gas to shale oil & gas—approach for the development of unconventional oil & gas in China. Chin Geol Educ. 2012;21(2):9–15 (in Chinese).

 

Zhang SW, Wang YS, Zhang LY, et al. Formation conditions of shale oil and gas in Bonan sub-sag, Jiyang Depression. Eng Sci. 2012;14(6):49–55 (in Chinese).

 

Zou CN, Yang Z, Tao SZ, et al. Nano-hydrocarbon and the accumulation in coexisting source and reservoir. Pet Explor Dev. 2012;39(1):15–32.

 

Zou CN, Yang Z, Cui JW, et al. Formation mechanism, geological characteristics, and development strategy of nonmarine shale oil in China. Pet Explor Dev. 2013a;40(1):15–27.

 

Zou CN, Yang Z, Tao SZ, et al. Continuous hydrocarbon accumulation over a large area as a distinguishing characteristic of unconventional petroleum: The Ordos Basin, North-Central China. Earth Sci Rev. 2013b;126:358–69.

 

Zou CN, Zhang GS, Yang Z, et al. Geological concepts, character- istics, resource potential and key techniques of unconventional hydrocarbon: on unconventional petroleum geology. Pet Explor Dev. 2013c;40(4):413–28 (in Chinese).

 

Zou CN, Yang Z, Dai JX, et al. The characteristics and significance of conventional and unconventional Sinian-Silurian gas systems in the Sichuan  Basin,  central  China.  Mar  Pet  Geol. 2015;64:386–402.

 

 

 

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://crea tivecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’  evaluation  for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil
Geological characteristics and ‘‘sweet area’’ evaluation for tight oil

AllAboutShale.com