泥岩与页岩地化特征对比——以鄂尔多斯盆地安塞地区延长组7段为例

doi:10.11743/ogg20200601

Abstract

Abstract:

High-quality shale and mudstone source rocks are developed in the 7^th member of Yanchang Formation (Chang 7 member) in Ansai area within the Ordos Basin.A study of geochemical differences of the two rocks was considered necessary for evaluating their quality and identifying their contributions to oil and gas reservoirs.A core description of the Chang 7 member was then carried out based on 25 key exploration wells and a geochemical comparison of the rocks was also performed based on 81 mudstone and shale samples gathered from the member in the wells.The results show that both shale and mudstone samples are good source rocks with their thermal maturation and organic matter abundance values within favorable ranges, except that the shale samples are dominated by Types Ⅰ and Ⅱ₁ organic matters whereas the mudstone samples are dominated by Types Ⅱ₁ and Ⅱ₂ organic matters.Compared with mudstone in terms of geochemical features, shale has significantly higher abundance of organic matter with more shale samples having TOC values greater than 4% and is more oil-prone as it contains higher content of sapropel.Shale also has higher contents of free and pyrolysis hydrocarbons and greater hydrocarbon-generating potential than mudstone.However, it should be noted that the occurrence of more pores and micro-fractures in shale may have a greater impact on the content measurements of free hydrocarbon.Compared with shale, in which pores and micro-fractures are easily developed and serve as pathways for hydrocarbon expulsion and migration, mudstone demonstrates stronger retention capacity for hydrocarbons.In addition, there is no significant difference between shale and mudstone in terms of biomarker parameters.

Key words: mudstone, shale, geochemical difference, Yanchang Formation, Ansai area, Ordos Basin

CLC Number:

TE122.1

Bojiang Fan, Qiliang Mei, Xiaojun Wang, Yue Meng, Qijiang Huang. Geochemical comparison of mudstone and shale—A case study of the 7^th member of Yanchang Formation in Ansai area, Ordos Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2020, 41(6): 1119-1128.

Figures/Tables 15

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 1

Table 2

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

Fig.11

Fig.12

Fig.13

References 17

1	郝运轻, 谢忠怀, 周自立, 等. 非常规油气勘探领域泥页岩综合分类命名方案探讨[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2012, 19 (6): 16- 19.
	Hao Yunqing , Xie Zhonghuai , Zhou Zili , et al. Discussion on multi-factors identification of mudstone and shale[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2012, 19 (6): 16- 19.
2	王怡, 刘修善, 曾义金, 等. 泥页岩综合分类方法探索[J]. 钻井液与完井液, 2014, 31 (4): 82- 85.
	Wang Yi , Liu Xiushan , Zeng Yijin , et al. Research on integrated classification method of claystones and Shales[J]. Drilling Fluid & Completion Fluid, 2014, 31 (4): 82- 85.
3	王勇, 王学军, 宋国奇, 等. 渤海湾盆地济阳坳陷泥页岩岩相与页岩油富集关系[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2016, 43 (5): 696- 704.
	Wang Yong , Wang Xuejun , Song Guoqi , et al. Genetic connection between mud shale lithofacies and shale oil enrichment in Jiyang Depression, Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2016, 43 (5): 696- 704.
4	李玉喜, 聂海宽, 龙鹏宇. 我国富含有机质泥页岩发育特点与页岩气战略选区[J]. 天然气工业, 2009, 29 (12): 115- 118.
	Li Yuxi , Nei Haikuan , Long Pengyu . Development characteristics of organic-rich shale and strategic selection of shale gas exploration area in China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2009, 29 (12): 115- 118.
5	林森虎, 袁选俊, 杨智. 陆相页岩与泥岩特征对比及其意义——以鄂尔多斯盆地延长组7段为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2017, 38 (3): 517- 523.
	Lin Senhu , Yuan Xuanjun , Yang Zhi . Comparative study on lacustrine shale and mudstone and its significance:A case from the 7-(th) member of Yanchang Formation in the Ordos Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2017, 38 (3): 517- 523.
6	刘群, 袁选俊, 林森虎, 等. 湖相泥岩、页岩的沉积环境和特征对比——以鄂尔多斯盆地延长组7段为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39 (3): 531- 540.
	Liu Qun , Yuan Xuanjun , Lin Senhu , et al. Depositional environment and characteristic comparison between lacustrine mudstone and shale:A case study from the chang 7 Member of the Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2018, 39 (3): 531- 540.
7	邓继新, 史謌, 刘瑞珣, 等. 泥岩、页岩声速各向异性及其影响因素分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 2004, 47 (5): 862- 868.
	Deng Jixin , Shi Ge , Liu Ruixun , et al. Analysis of the velocity anisotropy and its affection factors in shale and mudstoneE[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2004, 47 (5): 862- 868.
8	庞正炼, 邹才能, 陶士振, 等. 中国致密油形成分布与资源潜力评价[J]. 中国工程科学, 2012, 14 (7): 60- 67.
	Pang Zhenglian , Zou Caineng , Tao Shizhen , et al. Formation, distribution and resource evaluation of tight oil in China[J]. Engineering Science, 2012, 14 (7): 60- 67.
9	范柏江, 王香增, 吴小斌. 页岩的气体解析特征及地球化学认识——以鄂尔多斯盆地中南部长7段页岩为例[J]. 中国矿业大学学报, 2017, 46 (3): 554- 562.
	Fan Bojiang , Wang Xiangzeng , Wu Xiaobin . Desorption analysis of shale and its geochemical characteristics:A case study of the Chang 7 member shale in the central south Ordos basin[J]. Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 2017, 46 (3): 554- 562.
10	师良, 王香增, 范柏江, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地延长组砂质纹层发育特征与油气成藏[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39 (3): 522- 530.
	Shi Liang , Wang Xiangzeng , Fan Bojiang , et al. Characteristics of sandy lamination and its hydrocarbon accumulation, Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2018, 39 (3): 522- 530.
11	高岗, 徐新德, 刘诗局, 等. 涠西南凹陷流沙港组二段优质烃源岩判别及其控油作用[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41 (2): 339- 347.
	Gao Gang , Xu Xinde , Liu Shiju , et al. Organic geochemistry identification of high-quality source rocks in the 2nd member of Liushagang Fm and its controls on petroleum occurrence in the Weixi'nan Sag, Beibuwan Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2020, 41 (2): 339- 347.
12	成海燕, 李安龙, 龚建明. 陆相烃源岩评价参数浅析[J]. 海洋地质前沿, 2008, 24 (2): 6- 10.
	Cheng Haiyan , Li Anlong , Gong Jianming . Appraisal parameters of terrestrial hydrocarbon source rocks[J]. Marine Geology Letters, 2008, 24 (2): 6- 10.
13	肖晖, 赵靖舟, 熊涛, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地古隆起西侧奥陶系烃源岩评价及成藏模式[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2017, 38 (6): 1087- 1097.
	Xiao Hui , Zhao Jingzhou , Xiong Tao , et al. Evaluation of Ordovician source rocks and natural gas accumulation patterns in west flank of a paleo-uplift, Ordos basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2017, 38 (6): 1087- 1097.
14	肖贤明, 金奎励. 显微组分的成烃作用模式[J]. 科学通报, 1991, 36 (3): 208- 211.
	Xiao Xianming , Jin Kuili . Hydrocarbon generation model of macerals in coal[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 1991, 36 (3): 208- 211.
15	柳波, 吕延防, 赵荣, 等. 三塘湖盆地马朗凹陷芦草沟组泥页岩系统地层超压与页岩油富集机理[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2012, 39 (6): 699- 705.
	Liu Bo , Lü Yanfang , Zhao Rong , et al. Formation overpressure and shale oil enrichment in the shale system of Lucaogou Formation, Malang Sag, Santanghu Basin, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2012, 39 (6): 699- 705.
16	Fan Bojiang , Shi Liang . Deep-lacustrine shale heterogeneity and its impact on hydrocarbon generation, expulsion, and retention:A case study from the Upper Triassic Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin, China[J]. Natural Resources Research, 2019, 28 (1): 241- 257. doi: 10.1007/s11053-018-9387-2
17	Jia W , Wang Q , Liu J . The effect of oil expulsion or retention on further thermal degradation of kerogen in the high maturity stage:A pyrolysis study of type Ⅱ kerogen from Pingliang shale, China[J]. Organic Geochemistry, 2014, 71 (1): 17- 29.

	参数	TOC/%	(S₁+S₂)/ (mg·g^-1)	氯仿沥青“A”含量/%	总烃含量/10^-6	R_o/%	有机质类型
泥岩	数值范围	0.88~9.86	2.2~21.72	0.05~1.04	129.52~7282.20	0.72~1.10	Ⅱ₁与Ⅱ₂型为主
	平均数值	2.81	7.60	0.53	3569.44	0.87
	样品数/个	19	30	30	30	14
	评价	好	好	好	好
页岩	数值范围	0.86~10.81	3.00~32.41	0.33~1.48	253.95~8916.37	0.73~1.12	Ⅰ型与Ⅱ₁型为主
	平均数值	3.57	11.21	0.51	3208.80	0.94
	样品数/个	40	40	40	40	35
	评价	好	好	好	好

生标参数	泥岩(样品数17个)		页岩(样品数33个)
生标参数	数值范围	平均值	数值范围	平均值
伽马蜡烷/C₃₀藿烷	0.07~0.39	0.20	0.06~0.42	0.24
CPI(碳优势指数)	1.05~1.11	1.08	1.05~1.11	1.05
OEP(奇偶优势指数)	0.99~1.07	1.02	0.98~1.07	0.99
Ts/(Ts+Tm)	0.39~0.89	0.72	0.08~0.90	0.60
C₃₀重排藿烷/C₂₉Ts	0.58~4.85	2.31	0.60~6.87	2.05
C₃₁升藿烷22S/ (22S+22R)	0.41~0.59	0.50	0.30~0.59	0.49
C₃₂升霍烷22S/ (22S+22R)	0.52~0.58	0.56	0.45~0.60	0.53
孕甾烷/升孕甾烷	0.00~5.72	2.54	0~20.32	3.46
(孕甾烷+升孕甾烷)/ ααα20RC₂₉甾烷	0.08~3.40	1.68	0.07~4.41	1.47
C₂₉甾烷ββ/(αα+ββ)	0.27~0.50	0.42	0.24~0.52	0.38
αααC₂₉甾烷S/(S+R)	0.39~0.62	0.53	0.30~0.73	0.48
8β(H)-补身烷/ 8β(H)-升补身烷	0.79~1.61	1.23	0.79~3.17	1.51
Pr/Ph	1.22~2.17	1.64	1.22~2.17	1.65
C₂₇/C₂₉规则甾烷	0.40~0.78	0.56	0.39~1.24	0.65
Pr/nC₁₇	0.16~0.62	0.3	0.16~0.62	0.27
Ph/nC₁₈	0.09~0.25	0.14	0.09~0.25	0.14
C₂₇/(C₂₇+C₂₈+C₂₉)规则甾烷	0.20~0.28	0.24	0.19~0.40	0.27
C₂₈/(C₂₇+C₂₈+C₂₉)规则甾烷	0.26~0.37	0.33	0.17~0.40	0.30
C₂₉/(C₂₇+C₂₈+C₂₉)规则甾烷	0.36~0.52	0.43	0.35~0.54	0.43

[1]	Zhiliang He, Haikuan Nie, Shuangjian Li, Guangxiang Liu, Jianghui Ding, Ruikang Bian, Zhiyuan Lu. Differential occurence of shale gas in the Permian Longtan Formation of Upper Yangtze region constrained by plate tectonics in the Tethyan domain [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 1-15.
[2]	Xunyu Cai, Peirong Zhao, Bo Gao, Tong Zhu, Lingyu Tian, Chuanxiang Sun. Sinopec's shale gas development achievements during the "Thirteenth Five-Year Plan" period and outlook for the future [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 16-27.
[3]	Jinchuan Zhang, Shugen Liu, Xiaoliang Wei, Xuan Tang, Yang Liu. Evaluation of gas content in shale [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 28-40.
[4]	Zhenxue Jiang, Xin Li, Xingmeng Wang, Guozhen Wang, Hengyuan Qiu, Deyu Zhu, Hongyang Jiang. Characteristic differences and controlling factors of pores in typical South China shale [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 41-53.
[5]	Ruyue Wang, Zongquan Hu, Li Dong, Bo Gao, Chuanxiang Sun, Tao Yang, Guanping Wang, Shuai Yin. Advancement and trends of shale gas reservoir characterization and evaluation [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 54-65.
[6]	Hongyan Wang, Zhensheng Shi, Shasha Sun, Leifu Zhang. Characterization and genesis of deep shale reservoirs in the first Member of the Silurian Longmaxi Formation in southern Sichuan Basin and its periphery [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 66-75.
[7]	Qian Chen, Xiangbin Yan, Chaoying Liu, Xiaoliang Wei, Zhe Cheng, Weijun Qin, Taiyuan Hong. Controlling effect of compaction upon organic matter pore development in shale: A case study on the Lower Paleozoic in southeastern Sichuan Basin and its periphery [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 76-85.
[8]	Zhiyuan Lu, Zhiliang He, Chuan Yu, Xin Ye, Donghui Li, Wei Du, Haikuan Nie. Characteristics of shale gas enrichment in tectonically complex regions-A case study of the Wufeng-Longmaxi Formations of Lower Paleozoic in southeastern Sichuan Basin [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 86-97.
[9]	Cheng Shen, Lan Ren, Jinzhou Zhao, Mingpei Chen. Division of shale lithofacies associations and their impact on fracture network formation in the Silurian Longmaxi Formation, Sichuan Basin [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 98-106, 123.
[10]	Quansheng Cai, Xiaohong Chen, Guotao Zhang, Baomin Zhang, Jing Han, Lin Chen, Peijun Li, Yangui Li. Characteristics and exploration potential of the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale gas reservoirs of Lower Paleozoic in Yichang area, western Hubei Province, China [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 107-123.
[11]	Shasha Sun, Dazhong Dong, Yucong Li, Hongyan Wang, Zhensheng Shi, Shiwei Huang, Yan Chang, Wenhua Bai. Geological characteristics and controlling factors of hydrocarbon accumulation in terrestrial shale in the Da'anzhai Member of the Jurassic Ziliujing Formation, Sichuan Basin [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 124-135.
[12]	Zhongbao Liu, Zongquan Hu, Guangxiang Liu, Zhujiang Liu, Haotian Liu, Jingyu Hao, Pengwei Wang, Peng Li. Pore characteristics and controlling factors of continental shale reservoirs in the Lower Jurassic Ziliujing Formation, northeastern Sichuan Basin [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 136-145.
[13]	Peixian Zhang, Xipeng He, Quanfang Gao, Yuqiao Gao, Bin Sun, Xiao Cai, Guisong He, Zhiping Zhang, Nana Liu. Geological characteristics and enrichment pattern of Permian Mao 1 Member shale gas reservoirs at the southeastern margin of Sichuan Basin [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 146-157.
[14]	Jianghui Ding, Jinchuan Zhang, Gang Shi, Baojian Shen, Xuan Tang, Zhenheng Yang, Xingqi Li, Chuxiong Li. Sedimentary environment and organic matter enrichment mechanisms of the Upper Permian Dalong Formation shale, southern Anhui Province, China [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 158-172.
[15]	Wei Dang, Jinchuan Zhang, Fengqin Wang, Pei Li, Chang'an Shan, Ruijing Wang. Thermodynamics and kinetics of water vapor adsorption onto shale: A case study of the Permian Shanxi Formation, Ordos Basin [J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 173-185.

Geochemical comparison of mudstone and shale—A case study of the 7^th member of Yanchang Formation in Ansai area, Ordos Basin

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 15

References 17

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Geochemical comparison of mudstone and shale—A case study of the 7th member of Yanchang Formation in Ansai area, Ordos Basin

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 15

References 17

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Geochemical comparison of mudstone and shale—A case study of the 7^th member of Yanchang Formation in Ansai area, Ordos Basin