页岩油原地量和可动油量评价方法与应用

doi:10.11743/ogg20210619

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

页岩总油含量（TOY）和可动油含量（MOY）的计算是页岩油资源潜力评价的核心技术。根据对两次热解样品总有机碳含量（TOC）非均质性的认识，提出了一种基于两次热解数据来评价样品TOC含量非均质性的方法及一种校正吸附油含量的计算方法，并运用该方法对江汉盆地29个潜江组页岩样品和渤海湾盆地32个沙河街组页岩样品进行评价，结果显示：①TOC含量偏差平均值分别达到0.16%和0.34%，说明两组样品都存在一定的非均质性；②校正前、后吸附油含量的差值分别为0.85 mg/g和0.84 mg/g，说明进行等价TOC校正可以使吸附油含量、总油含量和可动油含量的计算结果更准确。同时，提出了一种基于页岩油密度及地层体积系数计算蒸发烃损失量的方法。采用以上新方法对鄂尔多斯盆地延长组7油层组（长7油层组）页岩油进行评价，结果显示：①吸附油含量占总油含量的63%，可动油含量占总油含量的37%，总油含量是游离烃量（S₁）的3.5倍，蒸发烃损失量约占总烃含量的9%，占S₁含量的29%；②长7油层组页岩油原地量为111.2×10⁸ t，可动油量为40.1×10⁸ t，说明长7油层组页岩油勘探潜力大。

关键词: 资源潜力, 总油含量, 可动油含量, 页岩油, 延长组, 鄂尔多斯盆地

Abstract:

The calculation of total oil yield (TOY) and movable oil yield (MOY) of shale is a core technology in assessing shale oil resource potential. A method of evaluating the heterogeneity of TOC content in shale samples and a calculation method to correct the content of adsorbed oil are proposed based on data of two separate pyrolysis experiments. The calculation method is subsequently applied to evaluate 29 shale samples from the Qianjiang Formation in the Jianghan Basin and 32 shale samples from the Shahejie Formation in the Bohai Bay Basin, and the results show that: (1) The mean deviations of TOC are 0.16% and 0.34%, respectively, indicating heterogeneity of the two sample groups; (2) The adsorbed oil content deviations of pre-and post-correction are 0.85 mg/g and 0.84 mg/g respectively, showing that the equivalent TOC correction can lead to more accurate results in calculating adsorbed oil, TOY and MOY. Besides, a method to calculate evaporative hydrocarbon loss is proposed based on shale oil density and formation oil volume factor. These newly proposed methods are used to evaluate the 7^th shale oil layer group of Yanchang Formation (Chang 7 shale oil layer group) in the Ordos Basin. The results are as follows: (1) Adsorbed oil accounts for 63% of the TOY, the MOY accounts for 37% of the TOY, the TOY is 3.5 times of S₁, and the evaporative hydrocarbon loss accounts for 9% of the TOY and 29% of S₁; (2) The shale oil in-place is 111.2×10⁸t and the movable oil in-place is 40.1×10⁸t in the study area, indicating that the Chang 7 shale oil layer group is of great exploration potential.

Key words: resource potential, total oil yield (TOY), movable oil yield (MOY), shale oil, Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin

中图分类号:

TE122.1

郭秋麟,王建,陈晓明,等. 页岩油原地量和可动油量评价方法与应用[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(6): 1451-1463. doi: 10.11743/ogg20210619 Qiulin Guo,Jian Wang,Xiaoming Chen,et al. Discussion on evaluation method of total oil and movable oil in-place[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(6): 1451-1463. doi: 10.11743/ogg20210619

图/表 11

图1

表1

江汉盆地潜江组页岩热解数据、吸附油含量及校正系数（热解数据来自文献[26]）"

样品编号	井名	深度/ m	全岩热解数据			抽提后的全岩热解数据			未校正的		等价TOC校正后的
样品编号	井名	深度/ m	S₁/（mg·g^-1）	S₂/（mg·g^-1）	TOC_A/%	S_1EX/（mg·g^-1）	S_2EX/（mg·g^-1）	TOC_EX/%	（S₁- S_1EX）/ （mg·g^-1）	（S₂- S_2EX）/ （mg·g^-1）	ΔS_2eq/（mg·g^-1）	k_eq	TOC_B/%	\|TOC_A-TOC_B\|/%	\|ΔS_2eq-ΔS₂\|/ （mg·g^-1）
1	Wangyun-11	1 746.1	2.99	14.48	2.59	0.04	11.30	2.03	2.95	3.18	2.67	1.05	2.48	0.11	0.51
2	Wangyun-11	1 747.0	4.60	25.60	4.48	0.06	22.62	3.80	4.54	2.98	2.35	1.03	4.43	0.05	0.63
3	Wangyun-11	1 749.3	20.86	17.14	4.48	0.06	3.59	1.44	20.80	13.55	12.99	1.16	4.30	0.18	0.56
4	Wangyun-11	1 714.3	3.05	2.10	0.94	0.01	0.69	0.65	3.04	1.41	1.50	0.86	1.02	0.08	0.09
5	Wangyun-11	1 710.6	9.09	9.78	3.68	0.03	4.77	2.33	9.06	5.01	4.57	1.09	3.50	0.18	0.44
6	Wangyun-11	1 707.3	10.97	7.61	2.98	0.01	1.95	1.25	10.96	5.66	5.04	1.32	2.64	0.35	0.62
7	Wangyun-11	1 705.9	9.92	8.17	3.40	0.03	2.80	2.01	9.89	5.37	5.18	1.07	3.28	0.12	0.19
8	Wangyun-11	1 704.7	2.02	1.47	0.62	0.01	0.44	0.26	2.01	1.03	0.82	1.48	0.51	0.11	0.21
9	Wangyun-11	1 649.2	4.50	55.96	8.54	0.15	50.82	7.52	4.35	5.14	1.58	1.07	8.31	0.23	3.56
10	Wangyun-11	1 646.5	17.09	16.70	4.63	0.04	3.99	1.93	17.05	12.71	12.16	1.14	4.41	0.22	0.55
11	Wangyun-11	1 645.1	8.81	12.61	3.02	0.03	5.72	1.48	8.78	6.89	5.55	1.23	2.79	0.23	1.34
12	Wangyun-11	1 633.0	4.65	31.39	5.33	0.10	26.13	4.48	4.55	5.26	4.89	1.01	5.30	0.03	0.37
13	Wangyun-11	1 632.3	8.82	57.62	9.71	0.26	49.11	8.14	8.56	8.51	6.71	1.04	9.56	0.15	1.80
14	Wangyun-11	1 309.3	5.57	46.03	6.03	0.28	36.94	4.92	5.29	9.09	10.88	0.95	6.12	0.09	1.79
15	Qianyeping-2	1 451.6	0.73	3.80	0.98	0.04	2.98	0.90	0.69	0.82	1.03	0.93	1.03	0.05	0.21
16	Qianyeping-2	1 463.5	3.67	33.15	5.58	0.21	27.54	4.75	3.46	5.61	4.77	1.03	5.51	0.07	0.84
17	Qianyeping-2	1 467.8	3.49	17.57	4.35	0.11	13.30	3.57	3.38	4.27	3.50	1.06	4.21	0.14	0.77
18	Qianyeping-2	1 471.1	1.53	10.98	2.72	0.10	8.17	2.19	1.43	2.81	1.85	1.12	2.54	0.18	0.96
19	Qianyeping-2	1 476.5	3.01	31.11	5.00	0.15	24.76	4.21	2.86	6.35	6.09	1.01	4.98	0.02	0.26
20	Qianyeping-2	1 481.9	0.80	6.50	1.47	0.07	4.61	1.20	0.73	1.89	1.60	1.06	1.42	0.05	0.29
21	Qianyeping-2	1 485.7	1.68	7.58	2.11	0.12	4.86	1.72	1.56	2.72	2.60	1.03	2.08	0.03	0.12
22	Qianyeping-2	1 492.2	3.76	24.63	3.89	0.17	21.87	3.29	3.59	2.76	1.69	1.05	3.82	0.07	1.07
23	Qianyeping-2	1 500.3	1.82	23.90	4.34	0.15	21.73	3.99	1.67	2.17	1.87	1.01	4.31	0.03	0.30
24	Qianyeping-2	1 507.1	0.35	2.37	0.90	0.03	1.65	0.88	0.32	0.72	0.87	0.91	0.97	0.07	0.15
25	Qianyeping-2	1 513.2	3.25	12.56	3.45	0.07	4.08	1.94	3.18	8.48	7.10	1.34	2.91	0.54	1.38
26	Qianyeping-2	1 518.8	1.91	6.89	2.60	0.05	3.49	2.05	1.86	3.40	3.18	1.06	2.49	0.11	0.22
27	Qianyeping-2	1 528.7	4.67	10.20	2.86	0.08	4.33	1.70	4.59	5.87	4.93	1.22	2.57	0.29	0.94
28	Qianyeping-2	1 535.2	10.95	34.75	6.85	0.20	23.45	4.85	10.75	11.30	9.98	1.06	6.69	0.16	1.32
29	Qianyeping-2	1 537.2	8.07	17.72	3.51	0.12	9.10	2.85	7.95	8.62	11.77	0.65	4.23	0.72	3.15
	平均值	—	—	—	3.83	—	—	—	—	5.30	4.82	1.07	3.74	0.16	0.85

表1

表2

渤海湾盆地沙河街组页岩热解数据、吸附油含量及校正系数（热解数据来自文献[16]）"

			全岩热解数据			抽提后的全岩热解数据			未校正的		等价TOC含量校正后的
样品编号	井名	深度/m	S₁/（mg·g^-1）	S₂/（mg·g^-1）	TOC_A/%	S_1EX/（mg·g^-1）	S_2EX/（mg·g^-1）	TOC_EX/%	（S₁- S_1EX）/ （mg·g^-1）	（S₂- S_2EX）/ （mg·g^-1）	ΔS_2eq/（mg·g^-1）	k_eq	TOC_B/%	\|TOC_A-TOC_B\|/%	\|ΔS_2eq-ΔS₂\|/ （mg·g^-1）
1	LY1–18	3 580.17	5.34	11.86	3.58	1.31	8.90	2.83	4.03	2.96	2.21	1.08	3.30	0.28	0.75
2	LY1–17	3 587.18	4.47	7.54	2.43	1.49	6.15	1.87	2.98	1.39	0.41	1.16	2.10	0.33	0.98
3	LY1–16	3 600.10	11.90	18.44	4.97	0.50	8.64	3.13	11.40	9.8	9.53	1.03	4.82	0.15	0.27
4	LY1–15	3 613.38	9.23	12.88	3.63	1.84	7.78	2.53	7.39	5.10	4.83	1.03	3.51	0.12	0.27
5	LY1–14	3 624.31	5.46	8.52	2.70	1.10	5.29	1.91	4.36	3.23	2.63	1.11	2.42	0.28	0.60
6	LY1–13	3 635.56	6.05	12.60	3.93	0.29	6.52	2.54	5.76	6.08	4.75	1.20	3.26	0.67	1.33
7	LY1–12	3 644.95	9.35	18.13	5.15	0.62	10.90	4.01	8.73	7.23	7.91	0.94	5.49	0.34	0.68
8	LY1–11-a	3 659.12	13.76	24.96	6.93	1.60	15.09	4.96	12.16	9.87	9.30	1.04	6.68	0.25	0.57
9	LY1–10	3 671.64	10.01	18.93	5.97	0.66	13.01	4.90	9.35	5.92	6.62	0.95	6.31	0.34	0.70
10	LY1–9	3 690.20	2.64	4.85	1.73	1.15	3.47	1.43	1.49	1.38	1.18	1.06	1.63	0.10	0.20
11	LY1–8	3 748.10	3.42	5.48	2.22	0.50	2.93	1.47	2.92	2.55	1.82	1.25	1.78	0.44	0.73
12	LY1–7	3 757.16	3.02	4.80	1.94	0.38	2.14	1.44	2.64	2.66	2.56	1.05	1.85	0.09	0.10
13	LY1–5	3 786.35	8.43	8.87	3.26	0.41	3.33	1.93	8.02	5.54	5.13	1.12	2.90	0.36	0.41
14	LY1–4	3 797.74	7.29	7.99	3.25	3.41	6.58	2.90	3.88	1.41	1.70	0.96	3.40	0.15	0.29
15	LY1–3	3 812.73	6.35	7.72	2.97	3.85	6.23	2.54	2.50	1.49	1.13	1.06	2.81	0.16	0.36
16	LY1–2	3 817.87	11.52	14.87	5.58	0.71	5.89	3.77	10.81	8.98	8.69	1.05	5.31	0.27	0.29
17	LY1–1	3 822.75	5.27	6.81	2.43	0.23	2.23	1.43	5.04	4.58	4.22	1.16	2.09	0.34	0.36
18	NY1–22	3 307.06	1.98	13.87	2.60	0.69	13.31	2.57	1.29	0.56	1.74	0.91	2.85	0.25	1.18
19	NY1–21	3 314.10	4.95	26.87	4.45	0.67	21.72	3.55	4.28	5.15	3.68	1.07	4.17	0.28	1.47
20	NY1–20	3 351.47	2.58	9.69	2.14	0.29	8.11	1.90	2.29	1.58	2.14	0.93	2.30	0.16	0.56
21	NY1–19	3 360.55	2.35	9.96	2.11	0.23	9.62	1.94	2.12	0.34	0.64	0.97	2.18	0.07	0.30
22	NY1–18	3 374.19	6.04	26.98	4.64	0.48	23.73	4.37	5.56	3.25	7.93	0.80	5.78	1.14	4.68
23	NY1–17	3 380.60	2.25	8.37	1.75	0.25	5.1	1.09	2.00	3.27	1.52	1.34	1.30	0.45	1.75
24	NY1–16	3 398.85	7.48	31.52	4.94	0.39	21.52	3.57	7.09	10.00	10.67	0.97	5.10	0.16	0.67
25	NY1–15	3 401.63	3.50	9.71	1.89	0.26	9.29	1.82	3.24	0.42	2.55	0.77	2.45	0.56	2.13
26	NY1–14	3 404.99	3.47	9.24	1.85	0.75	6.04	1.33	2.72	3.20	2.99	1.03	1.79	0.06	0.21
27	NY1–11	3 434.83	6.31	16.54	5.37	0.53	13.94	5.04	5.78	2.6	3.94	0.90	5.94	0.57	1.34
28	NY1–10	3 439.13	8.31	11.06	2.38	0.37	4.4	0.92	7.94	6.66	4.61	1.47	1.62	0.76	2.05
29	NY1–9	3 468.65	4.49	12.55	3.73	0.35	6.37	2.59	4.14	6.18	5.30	1.14	3.28	0.45	0.88
30	NY1–8	3 471.24	0.20	0.27	0.25	0.01	0.05	0.15	0.19	0.22	0.20	1.45	0.17	0.08	0.02
31	NY1–6	3 478.13	1.58	0.91	1.10	0.03	0.16	0.59	1.55	0.75	0.66	1.55	0.71	0.39	0.09
32	NY1–5	3 483.03	4.19	3.94	2.10	0.22	0.97	1.02	3.97	2.97	2.44	1.54	1.36	0.74	0.53
	平均值	—	—	—	3.25	—	—	—	—	3.98	3.93	1.1	3.15	0.34	0.84

表2

图2

图3

表3

表4

图4

表5

图5

图6

参考文献 29

1	Romero-Sarmiento M . A quick analytical approach to estimate both free versus sorbed hydrocarbon contents in liquid-rich source rocks[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2019, 103 (9): 2031- 2043. doi: 10.1306/02151918152
2	Li J B, Wang M, Chen Z H, et al. Evaluating the total oil yield using a single routine Rock-Eval experiment on as-received shales[J/OL]. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, 2019, 144, 104707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2019.104707.
3	郭秋麟, 米敬奎, 王建, 等. 改进的生烃潜力模型及关键参数模板[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2019, 24 (5): 661- 669. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.012
	Guo Qiulin , Mi Jingkui , Wang Jian , et al. An improved hydrocarbon generation model of source rocks and key parameter templates[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2019, 24 (5): 661- 669. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.012
4	Li M W, Chen Z H, Qian M H, et al. What are in pyrolysis S₁ peak and what are missed? Petroleum compositional characteristics revealed from programed pyrolysis and implications for shale oil mobility and resource potential[J/OL]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2020, 217103321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2019.103321.
5	EIA, Drilling Productivity Report for key tight oil and shale regions[C]. U.S., Energy Information Administration, 2017.
6	Han Y , Horsfield B , Mahlstedt N , et al. Factors controlling source and reservoir characteristics in the Niobrara shale-oil system, Denver Basin[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2019, 103 (9): 2045- 2072. doi: 10.1306/0121191619717287
7	Kuske S , Horsfield B , Jweda J , et al. Geochemical factors controlling the phase behavior of Eagle Ford Shale petroleum fluids[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2019, 103 (4): 835- 870. doi: 10.1306/09051817227
8	杨雷, 金之钧. 全球页岩油发展及展望[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2019, 24 (5): 553- 559. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.002
	Yang Lei , Jin Zhijun . Global shale oil development and prospects[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2019, 24 (5): 553- 559. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.002
9	付金华, 牛小兵, 淡卫东, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地中生界延长组长7段页岩油地质特征及勘探开发进展[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2019, 24 (5): 601- 614. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.007
	Fu Jinhua , Niu Xiaobing , Dan Weidong , et al. The geological characteristics and the progress on exploration and development of shale oil in Chang 7 Member of Mesozoic Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2019, 24 (5): 601- 614. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.007
10	支东明, 唐勇, 郑梦林, 等. 准噶尔盆地玛湖凹陷凤城组页岩油藏地质特征与成藏控制因素[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2019, 24 (5): 615- 623. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.008
	Zhi Dongming , Tang Yong , Zheng Menglin , et al. Geological characteristics and accumulation controlling factors of shale reservoirs in Fengcheng Formation, Mahu sag, Junggar Basin[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2019, 24 (5): 615- 623. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.008
11	孙换泉, 蔡勋育, 周德华, 等. 中国石化页岩油勘探实践与展望[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2019, 24 (5): 569- 575. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.004
	Sun Huanquan , Cai Xunyu , Zhou Dehua , et al. Practice and prospect of Sinopec shale oil exploration[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2019, 24 (5): 569- 575. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.004
12	杜金虎, 胡素云, 庞正炼, 等. 中国陆相页岩油类型、潜力及前景[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2019, 24 (5): 560- 568. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.003
	Du Jinhu , Hu Suyun , Pang Zhenglian , et al. The types, potentials and prospects of shale oil in China[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2019, 24 (5): 560- 568. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2019.05.003
13	Clarkson C R, Pedersen P K. Production analysis of Western Canadian unconventional light oil plays[R]. SPE, 149005, 2011.
14	Guo Q L , Wang S J , Chen X M . Assessment on tight oil resources in major basins in China[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2019, 178 (7): 52- 63.
15	Li M W , Chen Z H , Ma X X , et al. A numerical method for calculating total oil yield using a single routine Rock-Eval program: a case study of the Eocene Shahejie formation in Dongying depression, Bohai Bay Basin, China[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2018, 191, 49- 65. doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2018.03.004
16	Li M W , Chen Z H , Ma X X , et al. Shale oil resource potential and oil mobility characteristics of the Eocene-Oligocene Shahejie Formation, Jiyang Super-Depression, Bohai Bay Basin of China[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2019, 204, 130- 143. doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2019.01.013
17	谌卓恒, 黎茂稳, 姜春庆, 等. 页岩油的资源潜力及流动性评价方法[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019, 40 (3): 459- 468.
	Chen Zhuoheng , Li Maowen , Jiang Chunqing , et al. Shale oil resource potential and its mobility assessment: A case study of Upper Devonian Duvernay shale in Western Canada Sedimentary Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2019, 40 (3): 459- 468.
18	蒋启贵, 黎茂稳, 钱门辉, 等. 不同赋存状态页岩油定量表征技术与应用研究[J]. 石油实验地质, 2016, 38 (6): 842- 849.
	Jiang Qigui , Li Maowen , Qian Menhui , et al. Quantitative characterization of shale oil in different occurrence state and its application[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2016, 38 (6): 842- 849.
19	Delveaux D , Martin H , Leplat P , et al. Comparitive Rock-Eval pyrolysis as an improved tool for sedimentary organic matter analysis[J]. Organic Geochemistry, 1990, 16 (4): 1221- 1229.
20	Jarvie D M. Shale Rresource Systems for Oil and Gas: Part 2-Shale-Oil Resource Systems. In: Breyer, J.A. (Ed. ), Shale reservoirs-giant resources for the 21st century[C]. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir, 2012, 97: 89-119.
21	Jarvie D M. Petroleum systems in the Permian basin: Targeting optimum oil production[C]. TCU Energy Institute Presentation, 2018.
22	Michael G E, Packwood J, Holba A. Determination of in-situ hydrocarbon volumes in liquid rich shale plays[C]//Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2013.
23	薛海涛, 田善思, 王伟明, 等. 页岩油资源评价关键参数——含油率的校正[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2016, 37 (1): 15- 22.
	Xue Haitao , Tian Shansi , Wang Weiming , et al. Correction of oil content-one key parameter in shale oil resource assessment[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2016, 37 (1): 15- 22.
24	余涛, 卢双舫, 李俊乾, 等. 东营凹陷页岩油游离资源有利区预测[J]. 断块油气田, 2018, 25 (1): 16- 21.
	Yu Tao , Lu Shuangfang , Li Junqian , et al. Prediction for favorable area of shale oil free resources in Dongying Sag[J]. Fault-Block Oil & Gas Field, 2018, 25 (1): 16- 21.
25	朱日房, 张林晔, 李政, 等. 陆相断陷盆地页岩油资源潜力评价[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2019, 26 (1): 129- 137.
	Zhu Rifang , Zhang Linye , Li Zheng , et al. Evaluation of shale oil resource potential in continental rift basin: A case study of Lower Es3 Member in Dongying Sag[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2019, 26 (1): 129- 137.
26	Chen Z H , Li M W , Ma X X , et al. Generation kinetics based method for correcting effects of migrated oil on Rock-Eval data-An example from the Eocene Qianjiang Formation, Jianghan Basin, China[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2018, 195 (5): 84- 101.
27	Jiang C Q , Chen Z H , Mort A , et al. Hydrocarbon evaporative loss from shale core samples as revealed by Rock-Eval and thermal desorption-gas chromatography analysis: Its geochemical and geological implications[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2016, 70, 294- 303. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.11.021
28	Abrams M A , Gong C , Garnier C , et al. A new thermal extraction protocol to evaluate liquid rich unconventional oil in place and in-situ fluid chemistry[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2017, 88, 659- 675. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2017.09.014
29	郭秋麟, 武娜, 陈宁生, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地延长组7段致密油资源评价[J]. 石油学报, 2017, 38 (6): 658- 665.
	Guo Qiulin , Wu Na , Chen Ningsheng , et al. Assessement of tight oil resource in seventh Member of YanchangFormation, Ordors Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2017, 38 (6): 658- 665.

地层原油				地面原油
密度/（g·cm^-3）	粘度/（mPa·s）	气油比/（m³·t^-1）	体积系数	密度/（g·cm^-3）	粘度（50 ℃）/（mPa·s）	初镏点/ ℃	凝固点/ ℃
0.748	1.48	68.83	1.222	0.839	6.64	74.99	23.17

[1]	刘惠民, 包友书, 黎茂稳, 李政, 吴连波, 朱日房, 王大洋, 王鑫. 页岩油富集可动性地球化学评价参数探讨[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(3): 622-636.
[2]	蒲秀刚, 董姜畅, 柴公权, 宋舜尧, 时战楠, 韩文中, 张伟, 解德录. 渤海湾盆地沧东凹陷古近系孔店组二段页岩高丰度有机质富集模式[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(3): 696-709.
[3]	吴伟涛, 冯炎松, 费世祥, 王一妃, 吴和源, 杨旭东. 鄂尔多斯盆地神木气田二叠系石千峰组5段致密气富集因素及有利区预测[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(3): 739-751.
[4]	方锐, 蒋裕强, 杨长城, 邓海波, 蒋婵, 洪海涛, 唐松, 谷一凡, 朱讯, 孙莎莎, 蔡光银. 四川盆地侏罗系凉高山组不同岩性组合页岩油赋存状态及可动性[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(3): 752-769.
[5]	李军, 邹友龙, 路菁. 陆相页岩油储层可动油含量测井评价方法[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(3): 816-826.
[6]	杜晓宇, 金之钧, 曾联波, 刘国平, 杨森, 梁新平, 陆国青. 基于成像测井的深层陆相页岩油储层天然裂缝有效性评价[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(3): 852-865.
[7]	赵喆, 白斌, 刘畅, 王岚, 周海燕, 刘羽汐. 中国石油陆上中-高成熟度页岩油勘探现状、进展与未来思考[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2): 327-340.
[8]	刘成林, 丁振刚, 范立勇, 康锐, 洪思婕, 朱玉新, 陈践发, 王海东, 许诺. 鄂尔多斯盆地含氦天然气地球化学特征与富集影响因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2): 384-392.
[9]	万俊雨, 朱建辉, 姚素平, 张毅, 李春堂, 张威, 姜海健, 王杰. 鄂尔多斯盆地中、东部奥陶系马家沟组成烃生物及烃源岩地球生物学评价[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2): 393-405.
[10]	高和群, 高玉巧, 何希鹏, 聂军. 苏北盆地古近系阜宁组二段页岩油储层岩石力学特征及其控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2): 502-515.
[11]	杨丽华, 刘池洋, 黄雷, 周义军, 刘永涛, 秦阳. 鄂尔多斯盆地古峰庄地区疑似侵入岩体的发现及其地质意义[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(1): 142-156.
[12]	师良, 范柏江, 李忠厚, 余紫巍, 蔺子瑾, 戴欣洋. 鄂尔多斯盆地中部三叠系延长组7段烃组分的运移分异作用[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(1): 157-168.
[13]	曹江骏, 王继平, 张道锋, 王龙, 李笑天, 李娅, 张园园, 夏辉, 于占海. 深层致密砂岩储层成岩演化对含气性的影响[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(1): 169-184.
[14]	郭旭升, 马晓潇, 黎茂稳, 钱门辉, 胡宗全. 陆相页岩油富集机理探讨[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2023, 44(6): 1333-1349.
[15]	孙龙德, 王小军, 冯子辉, 邵红梅, 曾花森, 高波, 江航. 松辽盆地古龙页岩纳米孔缝形成机制与页岩油富集特征[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2023, 44(6): 1350-1365.