VOLUME 97 NUMBER 4 APRIL 2013

R E G U L A R F E AT U R E S
Previews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii Staff Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv House of Delegates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Geoscience Meetings Calendar . . . . 638 Memorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 673 Book Releases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 Association Roundtable . . . . . . . . . . 675 Education Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . . . (vii) Affiliated Societies . . . . . . . . . . . . . (viii)

GEOHORIZON
Summary of the AAPGSPESEG Hedberg Research Conference on Fundamental Controls on Flow in Carbonates
Susan Agar, Sebastian Geiger, Philippe Lonide, Juliette Lamarche, Giovanni Bertotti, Olivier Gosselin, Gary Hampson, Matt Jackson, Gareth Jones, Jeroen Kenter, Stephan Matthi, Joyce Neilson, Laura Pyrak-Nolte, and Fiona Whitaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

...

533

ARTICLES
Deposits of the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River: Implications for the use of modern analogs in reconstructing channel dimensions in reservoir characterization .......... Diagenesis and quartz cement distribution of low-permeability Upper TriassicMiddle Jurassic reservoir sandstones, Longyearbyen CO2 lab well site in Svalbard, Norway Mai Britt E. Mrk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Measuring and modeling fault density for CO2 storage plume-fault encounter probability estimation
Preston D. Jordan, Curtis M. Oldenburg, and Jean-Philippe Nicot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ian A. Lunt, Gregory H. Sambrook Smith, James L. Best, Philip J. Ashworth, Stuart N. Lane, and Christopher J. Simpson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

553

577

597 619

ON COVER Aerial photograph of the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada with a digital elevation model (DEM) partly draped over the bottom and left areas of the image (blue represents deeper parts of the braidplain and red higher parts of the reach). The image was taken near Outlook, the studied reach described in the classic paper by Cant and Walker (1978). The photograph and DEM show superb resolution of lobate fronted unit bars and larger compound bars as well as a variety of dune bedforms. Flow in the image is bottom to top, although note the wide range of dune crest orientations. See related paper on by Lunt et al. on p. 553 of this issue of the Bulletin.

Insight into petrophysical properties of deformed sandstone reservoirs Anita Torabi, Haakon Fossen, and Alvar Braathen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evidence for overpressure generation by kerogen-to-gas maturation in the northern Malay Basin
Mark R. P. Tingay, Chris K. Morley, Andrew Laird, Orapan Limpornpipat, Kanjana Krisadasima, Suwit Pabchanda, and Hamish R. Macintyre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.......

639

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AAPG thanks ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company; University of Birmingham; Norwegian University of Science and Technology; and the AAPG Foundation for financial support of this issue of the Bulletin.
Printed in the U.S.A.

PREVIEWS
Carbonate reservoirs The Hedberg Research Conference on Fundamental Controls on Flow in Carbonates was held in Saint-Cyr sur Mer, France, July 2012, to review current research and explore future research directions related to improved production from carbonate reservoirs. A primary objective was to explore novel connections among different disciplines as a way to define new research opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .533 This study analyzed the morphology, geometry, and deposits of bedforms and channels in the South Saskatchewan, a sandy braided river. Results add to the relatively small pool of data from modern rivers and aid in constraining the limits of dimensions of different lithofacies used in reservoir models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .553 This study focuses on a CO2 storage pilot project in Upper TriassicMiddle Jurassic sandstones, Spitsbergen. Sandstone porosity occurs mainly in isolated molds and micropores while the most promising zones for CO2 injection may occur in beds with enhanced dissolution porosity. . . . . . . . . . . .577 Storage of CO2 in brine-filled reservoirs is a possible means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The potential for gas leakage through faults is a significant concern and is evaluated through a case study in the southern portion of the San Joaquin Basin, California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .597 Permeability and porosity measurements from in-situ, core-plug, and thin section can be used to estimate capillary pressures and sealing capacities of different fault-related rocks without requiring direct laboratory measurements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .619 Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin is the result of fluid expansion, most likely from gas generation through kerogen catagenesis or oil cracking. This study represents some of the best supporting evidence to date for significant basin-wide overpressures caused by gas generation. . . . . . . . . . . . .639

Estimating the scale of paleorivers

Potential for CO2 storage?

Leakage via faults

Estimating capillary pressures Basin-wide gas generation overpressuring

ii

A A P G B U L L E T I N S TA F F Editorial
Technical Editor/Andrea Sharrer Bulletin Production Coordinator/Anne B. Pinkey Technical Publications Coordinator/Paula Sillman Phone: (918) 560-2625 (800) 364-2274 (U.S. and Canada) Fax: (918) 560-2632 E-mail: bulletin@aapg.org

AAPG Editor STEPHEN E. LAUBACH Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of Geosciences 10100 Burnet Road Austin, Texas 78713 SENIOR ASSOCIATE EDITORS
Richard Groshong, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama Barry Katz, Chevron Corporation, Houston, TX Colin P. North, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland Terrilyn Olson, EOG Resources, Denver, CO Michael L. Sweet, ExxonMobil Upstream Research Co., Houston, TX

Production
Cover/Matt Randolph Production/SPI Publisher Services Richmond, Virginia Printing/R R Donnelley Book Group Menasha, Wisconsin

ASSOCIATE EDITORS
E&P Notes
Michael L. Sweet, ExxonMobil Upstream Research Co. Arthur E. Berman (2013), Sugar Land, Texas, Gulf Coast Section William R. Brown (2013), College Station, Texas, Gulf Coast Section Stuart D. Harker (2013), Aberdeen, Scotland, European Region Marcio R. Mello (2013), Rio de Janiero, Brazil, Latin America Region John Minch (2013), Santa Barbara, California, Pacific Section David G. Morse (2013), Champaign, IL, Eastern Section David R. Pyles (2013), Golden, CO, Rocky Mountain Section Tim L. Rynott (2013), Denver, Colorado, Rocky Mountain Section William C. Stephens Jr. (2013), Wichita Falls, Texas, Southwest Section

Subscriptions
Members Nonmembers Nancy lnce Accounting Dept. Phone: (918) 584-2555 (918) 584-2555 Fax: (918) 560-2694 (918) 560-2652 nancyi@aapg.org payables@aapg.org Toll Free: (800) 364-2274 (U.S. and Canada)
AAPG grants permission for a single photocopy of an item from the AAPG Bulletin for personal use. Authorization for additional photocopies of items from the AAPG Bulletin in any form (hardcopy, digital/electronic scanning, or other digital transformation into computer-readable and/or transmittable form) for personal or corporate use is granted provided the appropriate fee is paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923, http: //www.copyright.com. For circumstances occurring outside authorization of Copyright Clearance Center contact permissions@ aapg.org. The AAPG Bulletin (ISSN 0149-1423) is published monthly by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Offices are located at 1444 South Boulder Avenue, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119-3604. Periodicals postage paid at Tulsa, Oklahoma, and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: send change of address to AAPG Bulletin, P.O. Box 979, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101-0979. SUBSCRIPTIONS Institutional subscriptions are $425 U.S.; $470 non-U.S. By surface mail; $540 non-U.S. By Airmail. AAPG member subscriptions are included in the dues. Single copies: $16 member, $25 nonmember. Prices subject to change without notice. Claims for nonreceipt of any issue, if reported within three months of the date of publication, will be filled gratis. Back issues, if available, may be ordered from the Association. The AAPG Bulletin is also available on CD-ROM through Datapages, Inc., P.O. Box 979, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101. Phone (918) 560-9429, fax (918) 560-9418, e-mail: rhart@aapg.org Copyright 2013 by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Phone (918) 584-2555, fax (918) 560-2632, e-mail: bulletin@aapg.org CANADA SUBSCRIPTIONS Canada Post Agreement Number 40036158. Send change of address information and blocks of undeliverable copies to P.O. Box 1051, Fort Erie, ON, L2A 6C7, Canada. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) does not endorse or recommend any products or services that may be cited, used or discussed in AAPG publications or in presentations at events associated with AAPG.

Spatial

Bret J. Fossum, ConocoPhillips, Houston,TX

20122013

F. E. (Rick) Abegg, Chevron, Moon Township, PA Patricia F. Allwardt, ConocoPhillips, Houston, TX Roslinda A. Archer, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Peter Baillie, GeoData Ventures, Singapore Janok P. Bhattacharya, University of Houston, Houston, TX Timothy N. Diggs, Shell International E&P, Houston, TX Barrett T. (Bret) Dixon, Anadarko Petroleum Corp., The Woodlands, TX Fang Hao, China University of Petroleum, Beijing, China Nicholas B. Harris, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada Brian W. Horn, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Durham, NC Alain-Yves Huc, Institut Franais du Ptrole, Rueil-Malmaison, Cedex, France G. Wyn Hughes, Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Joseph J. Lambiase, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand Christopher K. Morley, PTTEP, Bangkok, Thailand Prasanta (Muki) Mukhopadhyay, Global Geoenergy Res. Ltd., Halifax, NS, Canada Terrilyn Olson, EOG Resources, Denver, CO Jory Pacht, Altair Enterprises LLC, Houston, TX Bradford E. Prather, Shell Upstream Americas, Houston, TX Sandro Serra, Serra GeoConsulting LLC, Houston, TX

2013 2014

Mohammed S. Ameen, Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Joachim E. Amthor, Petroleum Development Oman, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman Marc Aurell, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain David N. Awwiller, ExxonMobil, Houston, TX Linda M. Bonnell, Geocosm, LLC, Austin, TX Kent A. Bowker, Bowker Petroleum, LLC, The Woodlands, TX Stephen P. Cumella, Bill Barrett Corp., Denver, CO David E. Eby, EBY Petrography & Consulting, Inc., Denver, CO Peter Eichhubl, Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX Mark P. Fischer, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL Peter Hennings, ConocoPhillips, Houston, TX William A. Hill, BP, Houston, TX Christopher A. Jackson, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom Alexander A. Kitchka, Centre for Aerospace Research of the Earth at Institute of Geological Sciences (CASRE), Kiev, Ukraine Dale A. Leckie, Nexen Inc., Alberta, Canada Steven Losh, Minnesota State University, Mankato, MN Richard J. Moiola, Sandstone Enterprises, Dallas, TX Joyce E. Neilson, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland Jon E. Olson, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX Jack C. Pashin, Geological Survey of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL Kenneth E. Peters, Schlumberger and Stanford University, Mill Valley, CA Dave A. Pivnik, Apache Energy, Perth, Australia Matthew J. Pranter, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO Stephen Ruppel, Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX Mihaela S. Ryer, ConocoPhillips, Houston, TX Carl K. Steffensen, BP America Inc., Houston, TX Gabor Tari, OMV Exploration, Vienna, Austria Peter D. Warwick, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Howard J. White, Anadarko Petroleum, The Woodlands, TX

iii

The American Association of Petroleum Geologists

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 20122013
President: EDWARD A. BEAUMONT Sections Vice President: THOMAS E. EWING Regions Vice President: STUART D. HARKER President-Elect: LEE KRYSTINIK Secretary: DENISE M. COX Treasurer: DEBORAH K. SACREY Editor: STEPHEN E. LAUBACH Chair, House of Delegates: RANDY RAY DWIGHT CLINT MOORE, Investments PAT GORDON, Membership Career Services DAVID HAWK, Membership Coordination & Communication VALARY SCHULZ, Membership Recruitment TERRY O'HARE, Membership Survey (Ad Hoc) NICK LAGRILLIERE, Membership Young Professional BEVERLY DEJARNETT, Preservation of Geoscience Data JESSICA MOORE, Professional Women in Earth Sciences (Co-Chair) LEE AVARY, Professional Women in Earth Sciences (Co-Chair) COLIN NORTH, Publications JON BLICKWEDE, Publications Pipeline REBECCA DODGE Public Outreach KUNLE ADESIDA, Regions PETER HENNINGS, Research TBA, Reservoir Development RICHARD NEHRING, Resource Evaluation STEVEN SCHAMEL, Sections RICHARD BALL, Student Chapters CECILIA RAMIREZ, Student Expo JOHN SUTER, Technical Advisory (Co-Chair) GRETCHEN GILLIS, Technical Advisory (Co-Chair) PLAMEN GANEV, Visiting Geoscientists Program, (Co-Chair) ANDRAS NEMETH, Visiting Geoscientists Program, (Co-Chair) LYLE BAIE, Youth Educational Activities SUZANNE SUE CLUFF, Secretary-Treasurer CATHERINE CAT CAMPBELL, Secretary-Treasurer Elect BOB SUYDAM, Past President

Southwest Section
GREGG A. NORMAN, President DAVID B. CODDING, Vice President DAVID J. ENTZMINGER, President-Elect ROY L. YATES, Secretary ERIC W. NELSON, Treasurer FRANK P. PANISZCZYN, Past President

ADVISORY COUNCIL, 20122013

Ex-Officio
PAUL WEIMER, Chair DAVID G. RENSINK JOHN C. LORENZ ANDREA REYNOLDS CHARLES STERNBACH TOM J. TEMPLES JEFFREY W. LUND

AAPG REGION OFFICERS

Africa Region
ERELUMHE GILBERT ODIOR, President ADEGBENGA "FEMI" ESAN, Vice President DAVID BLANCHARD, President-Elect ANTONIO M. N. INGLES, Secretary AJIBOLA OYEBAMIJI, Treasurer NOSA OMORODION, Past President

Elected
DAVID C. HARRIS, Eastern Section MARY E. BROUSSARD, Gulf Coast Section MARTHA LOU BROUSSARD, Gulf Coast Section ROBERT D. COWDERY, Mid-Continent Section JON SCHWALBACH, JR., Pacific Section JOHN ROBINSON, Rocky Mountain Section DEBRA P. OSBORNE, Southwest Section TBA, Africa Region PETER W. BAILLIE, Asia/Pacific Region PAUL J. ENGLISH, Canada Region ANDREA MOSCARIELLO, European Region TBA, Latin America Region TBA, Middle East

Asia Pacific Region

PETER BAILLE, President AGU KANTSLER, Vice President TAUFIK MANAN, Secretary MICHAEL MICK MCWALTER, Treasurer JOE LAMBIASE, Past President

AAPG SECTION OFFICERS

Eastern Section
TIM CARR, President JAMES MCDONALD, Vice President JOAN CROCKETT, Secretary LANGHORNE TAURY SMITH, Treasurer DAVID HARMON, Past President

Canada Region
ROSS CLARK, President KEN HANSEN, Vice President/Treasurer RYAN T. LEMISKI, Secretary/Foreman DAVID DOLPH, Past President

AAPG BOARDS
ROBERT RYAN, Corporate Advisory Board JAMES B. BLANKENSHIP, Datapages Board DAN SMITH, GEO-DC Governance Board STEPHEN A. SONNENBERG, IP LLC Board GENE AMES, PTTC Board

Gulf Coast Section (GCAGS)

THOMAS C. KLEKAMP, President MARY BROUSSARD, Vice President JACK GROSS, Secretary MICHAEL FEIN, Treasurer SCOTT TINKER, Past President

European Region
VLASTIMILA DVORAKOVA, President KEITH GERDES, President-Elect HELEN CROMIE, Secretary KNUT HENRIK JAKOBSSON, Treasurer DAVID COOK, Past President

AAPG COMMITTEE CHAIRS

ED DOLLY, 100th Anniversary (Ad Hoc) JOHN HOLBROOK, Academic Liaison TERRY HOLLRAH, Association Group Insurance JAMES REILLY, Astrogeology (Co-Chair) BILL AMBROSE, Astrogeology (Co-Chair) DEBORAH SACREY, Audit DEBORAH SACREY, Budget Review & Finance OLE MARTINSEN, Distinguished Lecture (Co-Chair) KATE GILES, Distinguished Lecture (Co-Chair) LORI SUMMA, Education BOB COUNTRYMAN, Ethics STEVE GETZ, Geophysical Integration R. RANDY RAY, GEvO BRET FOSSUM, GIS Publication ANDY KLEIN, Grants-In-Aid HANS KRAUSE, History of Petroleum Geology DAVID COOK, Imperial Barrel (Co-Chair) CHUCK CAUGHEY, Imperial Barrel (Co-Chair)

Mid-Continent Section
ERNEST R. MORRISON, President DONALD G. BURDICK, Vice President H.W. DUB PEACE II, Secretary DOUGLAS W. DAVIS, Treasurer CARROLL KINNEY, Past President

Latin America Region

MIGUEL RAMIREZ, President PEDRO ALARCON, Vice President VICTOR RAMIREZ, President-Elect JORGE CALVACHE, Secretary-Treasurer ENRIQUE VELASQUEZ, Past President

Pacific Section
STEPHEN TONY REID, President JANA MCINTYRE, Vice President DAN SCHWARTZ, President-Elect JENNIFER A. ANDERSON, Treasurer 20102012 JACK GRIPPI, Treasurer-Elect REBECCA K. LANNERS, Secretary TIMOTHY D. ELAM, Editor-in-Chief JOHN MINCH, Past President

Middle East Region

ABDULRAHMAN S. AL-SHARHAN, President MOHAMMAD O. AL-ALMOUDI, Vice President SAID A. AL-HAJRI, President-Elect DAVID ALSOP, Secretary MATTER J. AL-SHAMMERY, Treasurer HUSSAIN AL-OTAIBI, Past President

Rocky Mountain Section

MICHAEL VANDEN BERG, President CHARLES ELMO BROWN, II, President-Elect

iv

The American Association of Petroleum Geologists

ENERGY MINERALS DIVISION
ANDREA REYNOLDS, President JEREMY BOAK, President-Elect ROBERT A. TREVAIL, Vice President BRUCE HANDLEY, Secretary DAVID E. TABET, Treasurer STEPHEN M. TESTA, Past President At-Large Members, GERALD BLOUNT, JEFFREY PAINE, STEVEN P. TISCHER, ANNE FIX

Chairmen, Standing Committees

E. CHARLOTTE SULLIVAN, CO2 Sequestration JEFF PAINE, Environmental Geophysics MICHAEL HAGAN, Honors and Awards GENE L. MURRAY, Hydrogeology DOUG WYATT, Membership DOUGLAS C. PETERS, Nominating KRISTEN M. CARTER, Publications TBA, Web Site KRISTIN M. CARTER, ACE 2013 (Pittsburgh) SERGIO SARMIENTO, ICE 2013 E. CHARLOTTE SULLIVAN, ACE 2014

Councillors
Eastern Section, TBA Gulf Coast Section, AMY SULLIVAN Mid-Continent Section, LISA L. HUNT Pacific Section, JAMES G. CLOUGH Rocky Mountain Section, PAUL MORGAN Southwest Section, TBA

RICHARD D. FRITZ, Membership MARTIN D. HEWITT, Nominating CHANDLER T. WILHELM, Publications JOHN T. COLEMAN, Reserves & Resources DAVID G. RENSINK, State Registration ROBERT A. TREVAIL, ACE 2013 (Pittsburgh) LINDA STERNBACH, Website FLAVIO J. FEIJO, ICE 2013 (Co-Chair) HECTOR SAN MARTIN, ICE 2013 (Co-Chair) CHANDLER T. WILHELM, ACE 2014 (Houston)

AAPG FOUNDATION
Board of Trustees
WILLlAM L. FISHER, Chairman JOHN J. AMORUSO, Vice Chairman JAMES A. GIBBS, Secretary WILLIAM E. GIPSON, Treasurer PAUL M. STRUNK, Trustee M. RAY THOMASSON, Trustee DAVID K. CURTISS, Executive Director DAVID LANGE, Deputy Executive Director NATALIE ADAMS, Manager

International Councillors
Africa, TBA Asia/Pacific, BARRY A. GOLDSTEIN Canada, JOHN JOCK McCRACKEN Europe, TBA Latin America, JOSE ABELARDO SANCHEZ ARAIZA

DIVISION OF PROFESSIONAL AFFAIRS

CHARLES A. STERNBACH, President VALARY L. SCHULZ, President-Elect PAUL H. PAUSE, Vice President MARK J. GALLAGHER, Secretary DEBRA P. OSBORNE, Treasurer MARTIN D. HEWITT, Past President

Chairmen, Committees
MARIA MASTALERZ, Certifications WILLIAM AMBROSE, Coal JACK PASHIN, Coalbed Methane TBA, CO2 Sequestration JEREMY B. PLATT, Energy Economics & Technology ART JOHNSON, Gas Hydrates NEIL FISHMAN, Shale Gas & Liquids FRAN HEIN, Gas (Tight) Sands RICHARD ERDLAC, Geothermal BRIAN CARDOTT, Honors & Awards STEPHEN TESTA, Nominations STEVE SCHAMEL, Oil Sands JEREMY JERRY BOAK, Oil Shale BOB TREVAIL, Publications DOUGLAS C. PETERS, Deputy Editor, NRR MICHAEL D. CAMPBELL, Uranium (Nuclear Minerals) BOB TREVAIL, Website DOUGLAS G. PATCHEN, ACE 2013 (Pittsburgh) NEIL S. FISHMAN, ICE 2013, (Co-Chair) PAUL M. BASINSKI, ICE 2013, (Co-Chair)

Council Members
Eastern Section, PATRICK M. IMBROGNO, (JAY G. HENTHORNE, HANNES E. LEETARU) Gulf Coast Section, RALPH W. BAIRD, STEWART CHUBER, JAMES M. GRUBB, GREGORY F. HEBERTSON, WILLIAM R. MEANEY (TIMOTHY J. BENNETT, RICK L. ERICKSEN, CHANDLER WILHELM) Mid-Continent Section, JOEL A. ALBERTS, DAVID G. TSCHOPP Pacific Section, JOHN T. WILLIAMS (KURT E. NEHER) Rocky Mountain Section DONNA S. ANDERSON, ROBERT F. GARVIN, (CLIFFORD C. CLARK, MARGARET PEGGY WILLIAMS, DAVID A. WAVREK, JEFFREY JEFF W. BRAME) Southwest Section, GREGG A. NORMAN, DEBRA OSBORNE, MARK RAINER (DAVID J. ENTZMINGER) Africa Region, ADEBAYO OLADELE AKINPELU, (MONDAY AIDELOJIE AGBUZA, OLUGBENGA TAIWO ODUSOTE) Asia-Pacific Region, ROBERT SHOUP, (ABULHASANAT SHAMS SHAMSUDDIN) Canada Region, WILLIAM J. HASKETT, (SANJEEV S. THAKUR) European Region, JOHN BROOKS, (IAIN P. WRIGHT) Latin America Region, FLAVIO JUAREZ FEIJO, (HECTOR SAN MARTIN) Middle East Region, MOUSTAPHA MOHAMED R. ELBAZ

HEADQUARTERS STAFF
Executive Director: DAVID K. CURTISS
Executive Administration Manager: REGINA GILL Division Manager: NORMA NEWBY Sections & Regions Manager: CAROL CAIN MCGOWEN

Deputy Executive Director: DAVID E. LANGE

Accounting Manager: BRYAN HAWS Information Systems Manager: JERRY THIBODEAU Office Services & Facilities Manager: JAMES E. BRIGGS Member Services Manager: VICKI BEIGHLE

Communications Director: TBD

Explorer Managing Editor: VERN STEFANIC Web Site Manager: JANET BRISTER

Education Director: SUSAN SMITH NASH

Education Manager: DEBBI BOONSTRA

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL GEOSCIENCES

TOM J. TEMPLES, President DOUGLAS E. WYATT, JR., President-Elect MICHAEL S. HAGAN, Vice President M. JANE ELLIS-MCNABOE, Secretary/Treasurer KRISTIN CARTER, Editor DOUGLAS C. PETERS, Past President

Global Development and Conventions Director: ALAN T. WEGENER

Operations Manager: RANDA REEDER-BRIGGS Convention Marketing Manager: JULIE SIMMONS

Geoscience Director: JAMES B. BLANKENSHIP

Datapages Manager: RONALD L. HART Managing Editor, Technical Publications: BEVERLY MOLYNEUX

Advisory Board Members

Chair, MICHAEL HAGAN Eastern Section, TIM MURIN Gulf Coast Section, KEVIN S. HOPSON Mid-Continent Section, CHARLES STEINCAMP Rocky Mountain Section, TBA Southwest Section, MICHAEL A. JACOBS Pacific Section, TBA Asia-Pacific Region Coordinator, JEFF ALDRICH Canada Region, JESSE SCHOENGUT European Regions Coordinator, TBA

Asia-Pacific Representative: ADRIENNE PEREIRA European Office Director: JEREMY RICHARDSON Middle East & India Office Director: ABEER ALZUBAIDI GEO-DC Director: EDIE ALLISON

Chairmen, Standing Committees

RICK L. ERICKSEN, Board of Certification VALARY L. SCHULZ, Bylaws Committee ROBERT C. SHOUP, Continuing Education VALARY L. SCHULZ, Conventions PAUL W. BRITT, Governmental Affairs MARTIN HEWITT, Awards Committee

A A P G H O U S E O F D E L E G AT E S
Deadline for this section is three months prior to publication. OFFICERS
CHAIR: R. Randy Ray (Lakewood, CO) CHAIR-ELECT: Larry Wickstrom (Columbus, OH) SECRETARY/EDITOR: Karen Glaser (Katy, TX)

D. A. Dolph P. J. English K. F. Hansen* A. C. Hargreaves M. D. Hewitt J. R. Hogg R. T. Lemiski D. A. D. Scott G. D. Strother-Stewart G. D. Wach COAST (CA) J. T. Williams CORPUS CHRISTI (TX) F. G. Cornish DALLAS (TX) P. M. Buehrle* J. R. Davis M. J. Gallagher T. G. OHare M. A. Rainer K. G. Sprague W. C. Stephens, Jr. R. E. Webster EAST TEXAS R. C. Hulse EL PASO J. M. Levy EUROPE J. R. V. Brooks P. Burri J. Craig J. de Jager S. Drachev V. Dvorakova M. Fleckenstein M. B. Hauck S. Johnsen I. A. Kjorlaug I. Le Nir N. V. Lopatin H. C. Matias N. Pimentel F. M. Roure M. Rye-Larsen S. Sorensen G. Tari EVERGLADES (FL) W. G. Frost FORT SMITH (AR) J. A. Woolsey FORT WORTH (TX) C. C. Blair, Jr. J. P. Dugan, Jr. J. H. Hope R. L. Yates FOUR CORNERS S. A. Hines GEORGIA R. B. Koepnick GRAHAM (TX) G. H. Felderhoff

GRAND JUNCTION (CO) R. B. Suydam HOUSTON (TX) R. J. Ardell P. E. Babcock L. B. Backsen S. M. Barber S. H. Brachman K. C. Bennett P. W. Britt C. A. Caughey M. M. Cassidy M. T. Cisar M. H. Deming C. Desforges C. M. Dingler J. Dombrowski S. A. Earle L. G. Eubanks B. A. Falkenstein S. L. Getz T. Y. Ghazi G. M. Gillis K. S. Glaser P. T. Gordon J. M. Grubb P. F. Hoffman W. F. Howell J. E. Jordan G. D. Klein N. C. Lian W. S. Light, Jr. C. P. Ludwig J. W. Lund P. J. McCarthy J. D. McCullough E. A. Medvin B. L. Milne-Andrews* D. M. Moore R. L. Nagy W. D. Neville J. V. Richards W. C. Riese D. K. Sacrey P. A. Santogrossi S. M. Sartain R. C. Scheidemann M. L. Shields S. G. Stanley C. A. Sternbach L. R. Sternbach D. M. Stone J. B. Tubb IDAHO D. H. Hawk ILLINOIS J. Crockett INDIANA J. D. Grigsby INDIANA-KENTUCKY J. T. Smith KANSAS R. D. Cowdery D. V. Davis, Jr.

KENTUCKY P. J. Gooding LAFAYETTE (LA) T. A. Helms LOS ANGELES (CA) D. D. Clarke W. T. Long MICHIGAN BASIN R. H. Gillespie, Jr. W. B. Harrison, III MISSISSIPPI M. N. Birdwell MONTANA R. P. Diedrich D. E. French NEVADA A. D. Hanson NEW MEXICO M. E. Dowse NEW ORLEANS A. H. Johnson B. E. Reilly S. A. Waters W. M. Whiting* NEW YORK S. A. Epstein L. B. Smith NORTH DAKOTA S. Nordeng NORTH TEXAS C. W. Reynolds NORTHERN CALIFORNIA J. R. Gilbert, Jr. D. W. Lewis R. G. Lindblom NORTHERN OHIO I. D. Sasowsky NORTHWEST (OR/WA) J. M. Armentrout N. J. Fix OHIO L. H. Wickstrom S. P. Zody OKLAHOMA CITY D. G. Campbell H. W. Hanke T. L. Hollrah L. W. Holman, II J. R. Howell H. W. Peace, II M. W. Smith PANHANDLE (TX) J. F. OConnell PITTSBURGH (PAPG) R. A. Trevail

PITTSBURGH (PGS) D. A. Billman A. A. Reynolds ROCKY MTN. (CO) C. E. Brown, II S. Cluff S. P. Cumella J. J. Cuzella E. D. Dolly S. M. Goolsby* J. E. Harris W. E. Johnson S. G. Kirkwood C. J. N. Knight S. M. Landon R. S. Martinsen J. C. Mullarkey R. R. Ray S. A. Sonnenberg A. S. Steinle J. E. Wellborn ROSWELL (NM) D. B. Codding SAN ANGELO (TX) B. R. Swartz SAN JOAQUIN (CA) A. C. Draucker L. C. Knauer S. Mazzoni SHREVEPORT (LA) O. R. Berg R. G. Richardson SOUTH TEXAS S. Chuber T. E. Ewing B. R. Weise SOUTHEASTERN G. H. Means TULSA (OK) D. G. Burdick N. J. Hyne M. D. Kuykendall K. L. Luchtel Ferguson J. S. McGhay UTAH T. H. Morris WASHINGTON (DC) J. F. Allan C. A. Doolan C. S. Swezey WEST TEXAS R. G. Cox D. W. Cromwell D. J. Entzminger J. D. Farmer M. A. Raines* WYOMING T. C. Anderson L. M. Kozimko

DELEGATES *Group Chair AFRICA R. M. Aburawi B. Bosworth M. Hafid B. Olaleye K. B. Trivedi ALASKA D. M. Hite ALABAMA N. Tew ALBUQUERQUE (NM) B. E. Gaither M. A. C. Rogers APPALACHIAN (WV) E. M. Rothman ARDMORE (OK) M. D. Allison ASIA-PACIFIC P. W. Baillie B. A. Goldstein K. Hoshi C. Jia J. G. Kaldi G. Lahiri J. J. Lambiase G. H. Lee K. Liaw M. McWalter Y. H. Setiawan A. M. Shamsuddin R. C. Shoup AUSTIN (TX) M. A. Edwards E. Radjef S. W. Tinker L. C. Zahm BATON ROUGE (LA) W. H. Schramm CANADA D. E. Brown R. A. Clark

vi

GEOHORIZON

AUTHORS Susan Agar  ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company, Houston, Texas; susan.m.agar@exxonmobil.com Susan Agar is an advisor for emerging and disruptive technologies at ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company. She directed the ExxonMobil-Academic (FC)2 Alliance for five years before this Hedberg Conference on the same research theme. She obtained her Ph.D. from Imperial College and has divided her research and development career equally between academic positions and industry. Her research interests include structural geology, geomechanics, and flow prediction in fractured reservoirs. She also pursues interests in academic-industrygovernment collaboration. Sebastian Geiger  Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; sebastian.geiger@pet.hw.ac.uk Sebastian Geiger is the foundation CMG chair for carbonate reservoir simulation at the Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, where he leads the carbonate research group. He is also the codirector of the International Centre for Carbonate Reservoirs in Edinburgh, a joint research alliance between Heriot-Watt University and University of Edinburgh. His current research interests include modeling, simulating, and upscaling multiphase flow processes in (fractured) carbonate reservoirs, enhanced oil recovery processes for carbonate reservoirs, and studying the fundamental transport processes in carbonates from a pore-scale perspective. Sebastian received a Ph.D. from ETH Zurich and an M.Sc. degree from Oregon State University. Philippe Lonide  Universit Aix-Marseille, Marseille, France; leonide@cerege.fr Philippe Lonide is an assistant professor in carbonate sedimentology at the Aix-Marseille University (Centre Europen de Recherche et dEnseignement des Gosciences de lEnvironnement [CEREGE], National Center for Scientific Research [CNRS], Institut de Recherche pour le Dveloppement [IRD], Centre Europen de Recherche et dEnseignement des Gosciences de lEnvironnement [CEREGE] UM34, France). He received his Ph.D. in sedimentology from University of Provence in 2007. He was a postdoctoral researcher on stratigraphical architecture in carbonates at Total/University of Provence from 2008 to 2009. He moved to the sedimentology and marine geology group of John Reijmer at the VU Amsterdam University in February 2009. His present-day research focuses on evolution of carbonates through time, which have importance for the characterization of petrophysical properties in the carbonate systems and reservoirs.

Summary of the AAPGSPESEG Hedberg Research Conference on Fundamental Controls on Flow in Carbonates
Susan Agar, Sebastian Geiger, Philippe Lonide, Juliette Lamarche, Giovanni Bertotti, Olivier Gosselin, Gary Hampson, Matt Jackson, Gareth Jones, Jeroen Kenter, Stephan Matthi, Joyce Neilson, Laura Pyrak-Nolte, and Fiona Whitaker

A joint AAPGSociety of Petroleum EngineersSociety of Exploration Geophysicists Hedberg Research Conference was held in Saint-Cyr sur Mer, France, on July 8 to 13, 2012, to review current research and explore future research directions related to improved production from carbonate reservoirs. Eighty-seven scientists from academia and industry (split roughly equally) attended for five days. A primary objective for the conference was to explore novel connections among different disciplines (primarily within geoscience and reservoir engineering) as a way to define new research opportunities. Research areas represented included carbonate sedimentology and stratigraphy, structural geology, geomechanics, hydrology, reactive transport modeling, seismic imaging (including four-dimensional seismic, tomography, and seismic forward modeling), geologic modeling and forward modeling of geologic processes, petrophysics, statistical methods, numerical methods for simulation, reservoir engineering, pore-scale processes, in-situ flow experiments (e.g., x-ray computed tomography), visualization, and methods for data interaction.

Copyright 2013. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Manuscript received September 6, 2012; revised manuscript received January 14, 2013; final acceptance December 17, 2012. DOI:10.1306/12171212229

AAPG Bulletin, v. 97, no. 4 (April 2013), pp. 533 552

533

Juliette Lamarche  Universit Aix-Marseille, Marseille, France; juliette.lamarche@univ-provence.fr Juliette Lamarche is an assistant professor in structural geology at the Aix-Marseille University (CEREGE, CNRS, IRD, CEREGE UM34, France). She received her Ph.D. in structural geology from Paris VI University in 1999. In 1999 to 2000, she taught structural geology at the Lille 1 University (France). She then did postdoctoral research on three-dimensional basin modeling at the GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (Germany) from 2000 to 2003. Her present-day research focuses on fractured reservoir analog in carbonates and three-dimensional structural basin modeling. Giovanni Bertotti  Delft University of Technology and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; G.Bertotti@tudelft.nl Giovanni Bertotti received his M.Sc. degree in field geology at the University of Pisa (Italy). He then obtained a Ph.D. from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology developing a project on the tectonics of the South Alpine passive continental margin. From 1991 to 2010, he has been working at VU Amsterdam on the tectonics of basins in Carpathians, Turkey, Morocco, and elsewhere. Since 2010, he also holds the position of a full professor in applied geology at the Delft University of Technology where he is working on the geology of fractured reservoirs. Olivier Gosselin  Total/Imperial College, London, United Kingdom; o.gosselin@imperial.ac.uk Olivier Gosselin has been a principal reservoir engineer, with Elf and Total for more than 30 years. He is now a full-time visiting professor of petroleum engineering at Imperial College London. His research interest and expertise concerns mathematical and numerical methods applied to characterization, modeling, and flow simulation of reservoirs, especially carbonates and fractured reservoirs, and also identification of problems and assisted history-matching using four-dimensional seismic data. Gary Hampson  Imperial College, London, United Kingdom; g.j.hampson@imperial.ac.uk Gary Hampson is a reader in sedimentary geology in the Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College, London. He holds a B.A. degree in natural sciences from the University of Cambridge and a Ph.D. in sedimentology and sequence stratigraphy from the University of Liverpool. His research interests lie in the understanding of depositional systems and their preserved stratigraphy, and in applying this knowledge to reservoir characterization.

MEETING FORMAT The conference was organized into four thematic sessions on the first two days (fundamentals, measurement and detection of flow on laboratory to field scales, uncertainty and prediction, and novel modeling and simulation techniques); a field trip on the third day was preceded by a dedicated poster session that introduced the geology of the area, whereas the ice breaker featured guest lectures on innovation and complex adaptive leadership, as well as a panel discussion. Given the challenge of cross-disciplinary communication, delegates were encouraged to adopt a beginners mind, challenging the status quo and exploring basic questions that the establishment might have overlooked. Stepping back and slowing down to promote effective conversations among different disciplines was emphasized upfront. Several delegates noted that technical jargon was a significant barrier to novel thinking in the way that it impeded effective communication among disciplines during the meeting. Cross-disciplinary interactions were encouraged by several further mechanisms, representing a shift from more common Hedberg Conference formats. Overall, the conference started with substantial guidance to promote engagement. As the week progressed, the conference format became less structured as delegates learned more about each other and pursued the development of research ideas. For a group of free-thinking research scientists, early deliberate orchestration of interactions was an unusual experience. The objective, however, was to ensure that delegates did not fall back on established connections, to promote new connections and to engage all delegates (particularly non-native English speakers). Some of the techniques used resemble methods used in Open Space Technology to promote self-organization in a framework of simple guidelines (Owen, 2012). Nick Obolensky (Vth Dimension) and Julian Birkinshaw (London Business School) helped to kick off the meeting with introductions related to innovation. Birkinshaw discussed Where Ideas Come From, while Obolensky led sessions related to Complex Adaptive Leadership and Self-Organization. Delegate feedback commented on the value of these nonscientific contributions, recommending that similar efforts might be worthwhile for future conferences. The techniques encouraged delegates not only to think about the science and technology but also to consider how situations and interactions were impacting their ability to connect and innovate. Several of the approaches had been tested previously through the ExxonMobil-Academic (FC)2 Alliance (Agar, 2009), but this Hedberg Conference provided an opportunity to evaluate these methods in a large group of academic and

534

Geohorizon

industry researchers, many of them meeting for the first time. A panel discussion, led by Professor Martin Blunt (Imperial College London), Donatella Astratti (Schlumberger), and Brodie Thompson (ExxonMobil) then emphasized why innovation is needed for carbonate reservoirs and what keeps the scientific community from achieving it. From the start of the week, delegates were asked to consider new research opportunities in the form of proposals for collaborative multidisciplinary research involving academic and industry representatives. A strong emphasis was placed on the development of bold new ideas regardless of budget and present-day technical feasibility. The motto for the week was Build your spaceship to Mars!, encouraging delegates to think beyond incremental developments on their current line of research and to explore new and unfamiliar areas. During the first three days of the conference, delegates could propose a potential venture group by posting an idea or research direction and inviting others to sign up. Essentially, the conference provided a market place to sell and buy into ideas with a view to consolidating a limited number of teams later in the week to discuss forefront research proposals (Figure 1). Although many high-quality and informative presentations and posters were presented, the emphasis was very much on the future. To support the development of venture groups, 13 keynote presentations were delivered over the first 2 days to introduce provocative thinking, novel research, and case studies related to each of the four half-day themes. The presentations were followed by poster sessions (1520 posters per session). Nearly all delegates who were not giving keynote presentations contributed a poster, creating a rich library of ongoing research primarily related to geoscience, flow prediction, and production in carbonate reservoirs. Abstracts for the talks are now available on AAPG Search and Discovery and were distributed electronically to the delegates. In addition, many delegates volunteered to make their talks and posters available in electronic format after the conference via a secure Web site at Heriot-Watt University. Posters (Figure 2) provided a starting point to identify connections and future research opportunities. Speed dates were used at the start of each poster session as a means to identify connections. These 8-min exchanges required the poster presenter to deliver key research messages, needs, future directions, and opportunities. Some delegates noted that posters commonly have more writing on them than can be easily absorbed and that the focus on a few key points helped to drill quickly into what really mattered. After 4 min, the audience (that had selforganized around the posters in each session) was asked to provide feedback on common interests and connections that they

Matt Jackson  Imperial College, London, United Kingdom; m.d.jackson@imperial.ac.uk Matthew Jackson is total chair of geological fluid mechanics in the Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College, London. He holds a B.S. degree in physics from Imperial College and a Ph.D. in geologic fluid mechanics from the University of Liverpool. His research interests include simulation of multiphase flow through porous media, new techniques for reservoir characterization and modeling, and monitoring and inflow control in advanced wells. Gareth Jones  ExxonMobil Exploration Company, Houston, Texas; gareth.d.jones@exxonmobil.com Gareth Jones is a geoscientist with ExxonMobil. His research interests include carbonate reservoir characterization and modeling with an emphasis on process-based predictions of diagenesis. He has a B.Sc. degree from the University of London (Royal Holloway), an M.Sc. degree in hydrogeology from the University of Birmingham, and a Ph.D. from the University of Bristol. Jeroen Kenter  Statoil, Bergen, Norway; jeken@statoil.com Jeroen Kenter is a member of the Carbonate Producibility Group at Statoil Company in Bergen, Norway. He received his Ph.D. from Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam. He worked as a postdoctoral researcher at Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) in Miami, returned as a junior researcher to Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, joined the Chevron Energy Technology Company in 2005, and moved to Statoil in 2011. His research includes carbonate reservoir characterization and, in particular, rock typing and upscaling workflows, and the development of new geomodeling techniques and fast-track reservoir modeling and simulation. Stephan Matthi  Montan Universitt Leoben, Leoben, Austria; stephan.matthai@unileoben.ac.at Stephan Matthi is chair of reservoir engineering at the Montan University of Leoben, Austria, and a consultant to the oil and gas industry. His previous academic appointment was as a senior lecturer of computational hydrodynamics at Imperial College London, United Kingdom. He holds an M.Sc. degree from Tbingen University, Germany, and a Ph.D. from the Research School of Earth Sciences at the Australian National University. Furthermore, he has conducted postdoctoral research at Cornell University and Stanford University in the United States, as well as the Swiss ETH Zrich. His publications range from the formation of hydrothermal gold deposits to the upscaling of multiphase flow in naturally fractured hydrocarbon reservoirs.

Agar et al.

535

Joyce Neilson  University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom; j.neilson@abdn.ac.uk Joyce Neilson is currently a lecturer in carbonates and petroleum geology at the University of Aberdeen. Since receiving her Ph.D. from Imperial College in 1988, she has also worked for BP and as a consultant. Her research interests include the effects of diagenesis and faulting and fracturing on reservoir quality in carbonates. Laura Pyrak-Nolte  Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana; ljpn@purdue.edu Laura Pyrak-Nolte is a professor in physics at Purdue University with courtesy appointments in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and the School of Civil Engineering. She received her B.S. degree in engineering science from State University of New York at Buffalo, M.S. degree in geophysics from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and Ph.D. in material sciences and mineral engineering from the University of California, Berkeley. Her research interests include applied geophysics, experimental and theoretical seismic wave propagation, rock mechanics, microfluidics, particle swarms, and fluid flow through earth materials. Fiona Whitaker  University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom; Fiona.Whitaker@bristol.ac.uk Fiona Whitaker is a senior lecturer in earth sciences at Bristol University. Her research focuses on waterrock interactions in carbonate, evaporite, and volcanic systems, integrating field studies of modern environments with reactive-transport modeling. She has a B.Sc. degree in physical geography from the University of Bristol and a Ph.D. on the hydrochemistry of modern Bahamian carbonate platforms.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The conveners thank AAPG, the Society of Petroleum Engineers, and the Society of Exploration Geophysicists for their support of this Hedberg Conference. The following companies generously sponsored the conference: BG Group, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Maersk Oil, Petrobras, Saudi Aramco, Shell, Statoil, and Total. We thank the Geosciences Research Program Office of Basic Energy Sciences U.S. Department of Energy Grant No. DE-FG0212ER16287 for a generous award to support travel for students, postdoctoral students, and early career faculty. We also thank Laura Wegener (ExxonMobil) for her substantial contributions to field safety, conference preparation, and networking data compilation. We thank Debbi Boonstra (AAPG) for all her efforts during the two years involved in conference preparation. Frederic Jan and the staff of the Dolce Fregate hotel provided excellent logistical support.

could identify and ways that they might help. For some, this felt a little different because their usual mode of interaction is to interrogate the science as opposed to identifying opportunities. The fundamental science was still important, but delegates were being asked to think on their feet about potential mutual gains. In the open format poster session that followed, delegates were asked to identify three to five posters that could offer opportunities for research collaboration on a common theme. A simple numbering system enabled the rapid acquisition of data and mapping of networks (Figure 1). Delegates agreed to share information on connections to posters, although it was recognized that large differentials in the apparent popularity reflected might exist. It was emphasized that network maps of connections did not represent any evaluation of the scientific or technical merit of a given poster. First, delegates might not even recognize the opportunities associated with cutting-edge research. Second, to a large extent, connections tend to reflect the interests of delegates instead of the opportunities for commercialization. Some biases also arose from the position of posters in the meeting room and timing of sessions. Recognizing that the process was far from perfect, the network maps still offered some early insights to potential hubs for venture groups. Several poster presenters also commented that the networking process helped to identify novel connections that they had not previously considered. Following a spectacular introductory boat trip along the coast between La Ciotat and Cassis on the first day of the conference, a mid-week field trip provided the transition from orchestrated presentations and poster sessions to more informal interactions. Led by the faculty and students at the Universit Aix-Marseille, the trip focused on Cretaceous carbonate outcrops near Orgon and Cassis. The diverse group of delegates was introduced to analogs for Middle East carbonate reservoirs, examples of fault zones in carbonates, facies in various ramp settings, outcrop fracture studies, and multi-kilometerscale overviews of carbonate sequences. The fourth morning of the conference provided additional time for delegates to review the venture group proposals and to consolidate into 12 or less groups. Starting with more than 20 proposals, self-organized mergers and acquisitions condensed fairly quickly down to just five venture groups (see below). Breakout discussions with interim report outs were used to shape research proposals by each venture group for the next day with final presentations delivered on the last morning (Figure 1). The following section summarizes key points from each of the sessions including all keynote oral presentations and posters. To avoid unnecessary repetition, some posters are discussed in a different session from the one in which they were presented.

536

Geohorizon

 Insights to first-order processes and their relation to original mineralogy and stratigraphy may offer ways to simplify porosity and permeability prediction. Knowledge creation related to the processes controlling stylolite formation and fracture aperture development is opening up paths to improved prediction and representation in flow models. Many alternatives available for flow and mechanical modeling tools that can offer improvements on the current state of industry technology exist. A state-of-the-art summary would benefit many researchers (see also Session 4 below). Methods to Predict and Control Wettability
Figure 1. Example network of individual delegates (black dots) and their connections to posters in all four poster sessions for the first two days. The posters common to a given poster session are represented by dots with a common color (i.e., red, green, blue, or orange). The size of the circles represents the in-degree, that is, the number of delegates who identified a connection to a given poster. These displays were used to provide early indications of research interests and potential links that could underpin venture groups. Data presentation by Laura Wegener.

EMERGING THEMES RELATED TO FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES Joyce Neilson (University of Aberdeen) and Olivier Gosselin (Total/Imperial College) led the first session on fundamentals. Key messages included the following: Future research needs to emphasize the fundamental physics and chemistry controlling fluid movements in carbonate rocks. Some of this research is currently limited by technical capabilities (e.g., imaging). Expansion of pore-scale simulation research is stimulating further discussion related to multi scale-modeling approaches, more rigorous approaches to upscaling, and improvements for reactive transport modeling (RTM). The creation and destruction of porosity involve fundamental processes affecting all carbonates. Significant advances are still needed to develop reliable simulations of porosity evolution.

Discussions emphasized the need for more research on the fundamental physics and chemistry controlling fluid movements in carbonate rocks. In particular, presentations highlighted the relationship of wettability to pore structures, how wettability varies with pore surface, and how we can use this knowledge and smart water to change the wettability of pore throats to increase permeability. One approach discussed in Martin Blunts (Imperial College) keynote presentation introduced pore-network modeling as a means to study the impact of wettability and connectivity on waterflood relative permeability. This approach involves computing flow through binarized images, solving the Stokes equation for slow viscous flow, tracing streamlines through the pore space, and moving particles combined with a random displacement. Agreement between simulation results and experimental neutron magnetic resonance (NMR) measurements reinforces confidence in the method. A further experimental study of wettability, that of Kristian Mogensen and Sren Frank (Maersk), looked at different scales to constrain the impact of heterogeneities. Their results highlighted the function of surface reactivity and roughness on wettability and the potential to modify pore-throat roughness (and wettability) through carefully designed acid jobs. Surface electrical charge was proposed as another influence on the wetting behavior of carbonates by Matt Jackson (Imperial College). He discussed the use of the streaming potential coupling coefficient as a way to probe the surface electrical charge properties of carbonate samples
Agar et al. 537

Figure 2. Speed dating at the posters.

saturated with brine and crude oil. The method also offers a way to explore whether changes in surface charge and wetting state are responsible for improved oil recovery during controlled salinity water floods. The importance of being able to visualize directly the distribution of residual phases in the rock pore space based on plug nanometer-scale studies was discussed by Mark Knackstedt (Australian National University). His multiscale imaging approach not only provides insights to recovery mechanisms but also can support the development of upscaling methods for flow properties from pore to plug to core scales. Masa Pradonovic (University of Texas at Austin) also revealed submicron porosity characteristics of carbonate rocks through her ion beam microscopy studies (see more below). An identified challenge for the wettability theme was the need for a set of recommendations or guidelines to represent relative permeabilities for (fractured) multiporosity carbonates with complex diagenetic evolution. Furthermore, current image resolution for tomography imposes limitations on pore-scale visualization and modeling. This said, the potential for pore-scale modeling approaches to advance RTM was highlighted as a promising future research area. Processes Controlling Porosity Development The creation and destruction of porosity involve fundamental processes affecting all carbonates and represent a cornerstone of carbonate geoscience research. Without appropriate constraints for mod538 Geohorizon

eling parameters, simulations of porosity evolution remain exploratory at best. Starting with the fundamental assumptions used in numerical models, Simon Emmanuel (Hebrew University) discussed the shortcomings of empirical rate laws of dissolution for dissolution in heterogeneous carbonates. Suggested improvements have been developed based on combined atomic force microscopy and numerical modeling studies of dissolution rates and mechanisms. Linking to comments on pore-scale modeling above, these results are now being used to propose techniques to integrate pore-scale heterogeneity with reactive transport models. The large number of complex interactions involved in diagenesis were noted as a key challenge for simulations. However, a contribution by Adrian Immenhause (Ruhr University Bochum) emphasized the first-order controls of original mineralogy on dissolution (the aragonite vs. calcite seas issue). The recognition of carbonate mineralogy as one of a limited number of factors that exerts an overriding influence on diagenesis may offer a way to simplify diagenetic models. In the absence of robust simulations of porosity evolution, a tendency to fall back on common assumptions (rules of thumb and anecdotes) for porosity and permeability development also exists. Whereas some may argue that sequence boundaries tend to localize significant porosity and permeability development, Robert Goldstein (University of Kansas) presented a different view: reductions in porosity and permeability at sequence boundaries are also predictable on the basis of depositional facies and thus can improve

subsurface models. Cementation as a process that can destroy overall permeability was further highlighted by the concept of diagenetic backstripping (Rachel Wood, University of Edinburgh) as a means to identify diagenetic tipping points during the evolution of carbonate reservoirs during burial that can be linked to fluid migration histories. Discussions extended to porosity and cementation in stylolites and fractures. Einat Aharonov (Hebrew University) identified categories of stylolites; the mechanisms controlling their evolution; and their impacts on large-scale strains, spatial distributions of porosity, and potential flow. A proposed upscaling approach also offers a new way to incorporate core-scale observations of stylolites into field-scale models. The processes controlling fracture aperture development were also addressed. As a key impact on fracture flow predictions, appropriate definitions of fracture aperture populations remain elusive. In response to this challenge, novel approaches to evaluate the impacts of stress and fluid reactivity on apertures were shared by Derek Elsworth (Pennsylvania State University). His experimental results suggest that both the fluid chemistry and characteristics of the fracture surfaces influence whether the fracture aperture is likely to increase or reduce with time. The direction of flow along fractures can also impact whether their apertures decrease or increase. Gareth Jones (ExxonMobil) showed the strong impacts of thermal gradients on dissolution and cementation rates in convective flow models (variable density fluid flow coupled with thermodynamic reactions) for nonmarine carbonates. Weak gradients along strata have little impact; however in fault zones, stronger thermal gradients promote faster dissolution when flow is directed up the fault but more cementation when flow is directed down the fault. These thermal gradient effects have the potential to drive locally an order-of-magnitude difference in permeability. Whereas each of the studies above focused on a particular aspect of carbonate porosity, Rudy Swennen (KU Leuven) promoted the need to integrate and coordinate studies of various carbonate pore networks to realize gains for both academia and industry. He highlighted the ad-hoc nature of reservoir studies undertaken to meet industry needs for the short term, the small size of ac-

ademic research groups, and the lack of a full spectrum of required expertise in any given group. In his view, the coordination of a consortium of multiple research groups to develop a structured database on this theme can offer significant advances in terms of standardization of data and broader access. Simulation of Flow and Fundamental Geologic Processes In addition to direct investigations of the fundamental physical and chemical processes that impact flow and rock properties in carbonate reservoirs, the first session introduced some of the challenges related to the development of appropriate proxies and their representation at different scales in models (pore scale to full-field scale). Issues surrounding the scaling rock and fluid flow behavior, as well as multiscale modeling techniques, were raised commonly. As an example of a way to capture the fundamental physics while reducing computational cost, Masa Pradonovic (University of Texas at Austin) demonstrated a novel two-scale network model to connect flow on pore and microporosity scales. Moving to a coarser scale, Jim Jennings (Shell) sought a way to simplify. He proposed a generalized approach for permeability averaging through the use of power averaging. This approach provides flexibility to range between harmonic and arithmetic means, using exponents estimated by the Ababou conjecture and applying these, stepwise, to random permeability fields containing different anisotropies. At an even coarser scale, Cedric Griffiths (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) addressed multiscale forward stratigraphic modeling as a way to gain insights to appropriate upscaling techniques for rock properties and to predict rock properties between wells. Highlighting the numerous improvements needed to advance flow simulation for carbonate reservoirs, Olivier Gosselins (Total/Imperial College) keynote presentation challenged delegates to pursue improvements or alternatives to dual porosity models for fracture-flow simulations. No resistance to this proposal was voiced at the conference, and several alternatives were highlighted in subsequent talks and posters (discrete fracture-matrix modeling, lattice
Agar et al. 539

Boltzmann, cellular automata (CA), network (ball and stick model), Langrangian, and continuous time random walk (CTRW) [see below]). Ensuing discussion of discrete fracture network (DFN) models raised questions concerning the current state of geomechanical modeling as a means to generate fracture populations, their connectivity, and the value of coupling fluid flow to geomechanics. Reinforcing the need for a review of geomechanical modeling tools, Gosselin also highlighted new approaches that are under development (e.g., incorporating fluid flow into geomechanical simulations and attempts to incorporate fracture propagation and realistic fracture aperture distributions in discrete fracture matrix [DFM] models). The problem, however, is that, while numerous geomechanical modeling efforts are being pursued, interested parties are challenged to find the time and resources to evaluate all of them, and little consensus on the most promising research avenues appears to exist. Although many people are familiar with the application of DFN simulation approaches for fractured carbonate reservoirs, the application of the CTRW method, which is well established in the groundwater community and has been used in physics since the early 1970s, was less familiar to many of the delegates. The CTRW approach has been applied in many different fields, but examples of its application to subsurface flow in hydrocarbon reservoirs are more limited. In his keynote presentation, Ruben Juanes (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) introduced the CTRW method as a novel way to look at anomalous flow and particle velocity, emphasizing flow in fractured porous media. In his example, the CTRW was being used to validate a spatial Markov model on a lattice network that explicitly captures the multidimensional effects associated with changes in direction along the particle trajectory. Potential applications of this approach include forecasting and risk assessment of the drained reservoir volume or time to breakthrough in fractured reservoirs directly from DFN models. This approach avoids the need for lengthy dynamic simulations on conventional corner point grids and the difficult task of upscaling the DFN. A wide-ranging conversation on various aspects of modeling permeated discussions throughout the conference. Comments reinforced the need to im540 Geohorizon

prove the integration of static and dynamic data and the types of dynamic data needed to calibrate models for a given scale with a given recovery process. In addition, the relative merits of more simulations and more sophisticated simulations versus a move to simpler approaches were debated. The fact that conclusions from simulations may arise from an input that is not being tracked carefully was duly noted. Discussions also drew attention to the fact that reservoir simulation models step forward linearly in time whereas much of the inherent flow physics operates on multiple time scales, that is, it happens much faster than a single simulation time step (and hence would be represented incorrectly) or is much slower (and hence the simulator calculates that nothing happened in part of the reservoir volume). This not only makes the use of computational hardware inefficient but also simplifies the flow physics, potentially leading to erroneous results and production forecasts.

EMERGING THEMES RELATED TO MEASUREMENT AND DETECTION OF FLOW AND ROCK PROPERTIES Laura Pyrak-Nolte (Purdue University) and Matt Jackson (Imperial College) chaired a session on various approaches to measure and detect flow and rock properties from plug to play scales. Key points from this session were as follows: Petrophysical experiments are revealing further complexities in terms of rock and fluid impacts on acoustic signaturesthere is much more to do. Petrophysical assumptions for clastic rocks do not necessarily apply in carbonates caused in part by the multiple scales of heterogeneities that exist in carbonates. Novel experiments are highlighting additional insights to controls on distinct paths for porosity and permeability development in carbonates and offer improvements for established petrophysical parameters. An opportunity exists to pursue more subsurface experiments to validate modeling (flow and seismic) and interpretation of seismic signatures, to learn more about what happens between wells, and to measure flow properties directly.

 Linking different measurements over different scales is a major challenge for monitoring and detection of flow. Opportunities exist to develop better tools for subsurface monitoring and better tools for seamless data integration. Various inversion methods and integration of all available data types (geophysical, geologic, and production and/or engineering data) can help to reduce uncertainties. No single approach can tell us what we need to know. We need to remember that operations also impact flowit is not just geology and fluids.

INSIGHTS FROM NOVEL PETROPHYSICAL EXPERIMENTS The overlap in length scales of discrete elements in carbonate rocks together with changes induced by factors such as stress, fluid content, and reactive fluid flow make it particularly challenging to interpret the geophysical signatures of flow behavior and to tie petroacoustic responses to rock properties. In her keynote presentation, Laura Pyrak-Nolte (Purdue University) used results from time-lapse imaging of Austin chalk samples to promote three key areas for future research on seismic wave behavior: (1) in layered media in the transition zone between ray theory and effective medium theory, (2) for layered systems with two competing anisotropic sources, and (3) in layered fractured systems that are geochemically altered over time. The experimental results highlighted several issues related to the influence of different rock and fluid characteristics on acoustic properties. Fracture-specific stiffness will change as a consequence of precipitation and reduction of a fracture aperture, whereas the locations of fractures in a layered medium will impact interpretations of specific stiffness. Changes in flow paths, fluid saturation (velocity dispersion), and fluid substitution (seismic anisotropy) will also influence the seismic response. Further laboratory studies of petrophysical properties introduced several novel approaches to improve the link between petroacoustic signatures and the rock properties while highlighting the distinct approaches required for carbonate rocks. Efforts to improve constraints on porosity and poten-

tial permeability were targeted by Elizabeth Bemer (Institut Franais du Ptrole) via a micromechanical model. By capturing microstructural characteristics, Bemer is able to compute theoretical velocities and compare these with experimental petroacoustic measurements. This, in turn, enables inversion for optimal parameters such as pore aspect ratio. The limitations of Archies law when applied to carbonate rocks were further highlighted by two studies from Geosciences Montpellier: using a synchrotron facility to image connected porosity and percolation clusters, Charlotte Garing (Geosciences Montpellier) illustrated a flow dependency on the critical pore size connecting the percolating network instead of the electrical formation factor or tortuosity. Discussion reinforced the need to integrate three-dimensional (3-D) imaging with core-scale geophysical properties as a consequence of the fine-scale heterogeneities (below that of the integration volume of the borehole geophysical methods) and the strong influence that these heterogeneities have on the hydrodynamic properties of the rock. In addition to pore sizes, geometry, and connectivity, reactive surface area was introduced as a new controlling parameter. Philippe Gouze (Geosciences Montpellier) presented controlled dissolution experiments to show how the pore structure changes in different ways with dissolution regimes (representing different rates of dissolution). One consequence of this is the development of distinct porosity-permeability relationships within different dissolution regimes. The importance of links between chemical and physical processes was further emphasized by Tiziana Vanorio (Stanford University) in a discussion of time-varying elastic parameters. Laboratory-based time-lapse experiments with high-resolution imaging illustrated the changes in P- and S-wave velocities resulting from injection-induced dissolution. By recognizing distinct styles of porosity-permeability modification for each carbonate facies during dissolution, an opportunity to reduce the number of parameters to model permeability and velocity trends exists. A case study from the Campos Basin, Brazil, also targeted ways to distinguish porosity and permeability associated with different facies. Abel Carrasquilla (Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense) discussed the integration of laboratory petrophysical
Agar et al. 541

measurements with conventional logs as a means to quantify permeability and classify electrofacies. Focusing on ways to reduce the costs associated with NMR logs, the study attempted to simulate the NMR profile through the use of other conventional logs and artificial intelligence (neural network approaches proved to work better than other methods). Results for porosity were shown to be reasonable, but permeability prediction was more challenging. Seeing More The issue of linking different measurements over different scales was raised again in the context of directly imaging faults and fractures or predicting their presence from bulk volume seismic attributes. Sampling, scaling, and resolution issues limit any ability to cross-validate seismically derived fracture attributes with geologic observations of fractures. A keynote presentation by Donatella Astratti (Schlumberger) introduced various seismic attributes and time-lapse seismic data as a means to capture information on the connectivity of fracture networks. Using a chalk reservoir example, she illustrated the need to differentiate distinct generations of structures caused by their significantly different impacts on flow and their different responses to stress. Integration of the production history with the comparisons of repeated surveys was used to link changes in fault images to qualitative interpretations of changes in fault-flow behavior. A related keynote by Andr Revil (Colorado School of Mines) discussed time-lapse joint inversion of geophysical data as a way to reduce the nonuniqueness of the inverse problem. Using a combination of two inversion methods (active timeconstrained and structural time-lapse inversion) to simulate the inversion of cross-hole data, Revil showed the potential advantages for monitoring changes in partial saturation during the production of oil from carbonate reservoirs. Recognized benefits were the reduction in spatial artifacts in the tomograms relative to other inversion methods as well as improvements for the use of time-lapse inversion of seismic and resistivity data performed independently. Enru Liu (ExxonMobil) also made a strong case for further measurements to examine the interwell space while ensuring a full
542 Geohorizon

understanding of the physics, limitations, and complementary nature of tools and techniques used to acquire information on different scales. In an effort to link laboratory data to field-scale seismic velocity variations and interpretations of fracture populations, Richard Gibson (Texas A&M) presented a model for effective seismic velocities in media with isotropic or aligned fracture sets. His method expresses the stress dependence of fracture compliances to the increasing contact area of roughsurfaced fractures. This provides a way to represent changes in seismic anisotropy caused by variations in stress fields while relating fracture distributions to changes in seismic amplitudes. Discussion noted, however, that whereas the presence of fractures may be determined from bulk attributes, the precise location of a given low-offset fault or large-opening mode fracture may be needed to understand specific impacts of discrete structures on flow. Ralf Oppermann (OPPtimal Exploration and Development) addressed this challenge through new workflows for automated fault extraction that integrate very highresolution 3-D seismic image processing results with detailed calibration. A key paradigm shift here is the move from subjective interpretation to objective measurements, which can highlight faults in seismic data and decrease a reliance on stochastic approaches. He showed examples where high-resolution fault extraction enabled the identification of multiple seismic fault penetrations in wells that were ground-truthed with image log data and directly linked with productivity and/or sweet spots or unfavorable fluid flow effects (drilling fluid losses, water channeling, well-to-well shortcuts, and compartmentalization). Four-dimensional ground-penetrating radar (GPR) as a technique to image fractures in near-surface settings were reported by Mark Grasmueck (University of Miami). One of his previous studies focused on the Solvay quarry (Cassis) that was visited during the conference field trip. In a further quarry study, time-lapse GPR was used to show the impacts of deformation bands on near-surface flow of water. The presence of baffles caused the water to spread, but some deformation bands provided connections between strata on meter to decimeter scales. The potential use of diffractions for imaging fractures and karst was also

considered by Grasmueck. It was suggested that a combination of 3-D GPR and ray-born synthetic modeling can be used to decipher the signatures of unmigrated diffractions. Seemingly incomplete and asymmetric diffraction circles visible on time slices actually contain dip information of crosscutting fracture systems. Diagenetic impacts on the elastic properties of carbonates were also included. Using seismic-scale examples of carbonate reservoir analogs from the Southeast Basin in France, Renaud Toullec and Francois Fournier (Universit Aix-Marseille) presented forward seismic models of depositional and diagenetic heterogeneities. Following a program of detailed sampling and petrophysical measurements, their study shows that sequence boundaries and unconformities will not necessarily correspond to changes in the seismic signal. Furthermore, a diagenetic overprint can generate nondepositional reflector terminations and abrupt lateral polarity changes. The Integration of Geophysical Monitoring with Production Data Several delegates sought ways to maximize the value of insights from seismic data through integration with other monitoring techniques and routine production data (e.g., more common use of cross-well tomography and wells that monitor above and below reservoirs). One approach proposed by Matt Jackson (Imperial College) discussed the use of spontaneous potential (SP) in hydrocarbon reservoirs during water flooding to detect and monitor water encroaching on a well through the use of SP and electrodes installed permanently downhole. The technique has the potential to detect increasing water saturation several meters to tens to hundreds of meters away but is still looking for developments of appropriate hardware and interpretation methods and a better understanding of the coupling coefficients involved (these relate gradients in water phase pressure, salinity, and temperature to gradients in electrical potential). In addition to novel monitoring techniques, considerable energy exists around the need to acknowledge the uncertainty in 3-D and fourdimensional seismic data and ways to reduce this uncertainty through joint inversion with other geophysical data. As a method to capture 3-D petro-

physical properties from inverted prestack seismic data, Andrew Curtis (University of Edinburgh) showed a neural network approach for fully probabilistic inversion techniques. A key advantage of this approach was an ability to represent the uncertainty associated with rock and fluid property maps derived from seismic (such as variations in effective pressure, bulk modulus, density of hydrocarbons, random noise in recorded data, and the petrophysical forward function) while realizing significant computational efficiencies. Frequent calls for better tools to integrate all the different types of data across multiple scales emphasized the need for smoother mechanisms to update models with monitoring and survey data. Moving on from geophysical insights, an interesting case study from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (Nicole Champenoy and Scott Meddaugh, Chevron) was used to broaden the picture by drawing attention to the less commonly recognized variables that impact fluid flow. These include well deliverability, historical operations, completions, facility constraints, and reactivity. Champenoy and Meddaugh emphasized that, without appropriate measurements and monitoring, it can be hard to determine which of these has the most impact. Moreover, these factors are not necessarily at the front of a geologists mind when considering controls on flow. A further case study shared by Rick Wachtman (ExxonMobil) showed how a comprehensive measurement and surveillance program combined with geologic modeling was used on the Means field residual oil zone to assess recovery efficiency and potential flow streams. In this case, repeated simulations identified key factors such as proxies for fractures, high-permeability leached zones, and ratios between vertical and horizontal permeabilities as requirements to obtain a match to production histories. Complementary models were used to estimate fieldwide flow streams of a wateralternating-gas flood, providing an estimated extension of field life by 20 yr. Several delegates wanted to learn more about the extent to which fracture and fault patterns are validated by modeling and/or monitoring data. The following presentations helped to fill in some knowledge gaps while highlighting limitations and opportunities to do more. In a more data-limited
Agar et al. 543

case study than the preceding examples, Stephen Smart (Hess) emphasized the importance of early conceptual models to develop ideas for the 3-D distribution of fracture intensity. Subsequent integration of robust data sets across various scales and several iterations with reservoir performance data were used to construct and refine a dualporosity simulation model for offshore East Java. In an assisted history matching example, Arnaud Lange (Institut Franais du Ptrole) demonstrated the use of connectivity information from production data to characterize seismic and subseismic fault networks. By examining possible correlations between water breakthrough time and connectivity, Lange was able to identify the most probable fault network realizations to match the production data. Given the sensitivity of flow simulation results to different fault network realizations, the method can help to focus on the most likely scenarios. Thomas Finkbeiner (Baker Hughes) provided insights to fracture-flow properties on production time scales through geomechanical modeling of a carbonate reservoir. Key developments in this study emphasized permeability changes associated with depletion and/or injection, fracture property variations (i.e., weak vs. strong fractures), as well as the impact that would be predicted had all fracture sets been assigned the same mechanical properties and stress sensitivity. It was noted that, in carbonates where fractures may be stiffer and less stress (pressure) sensitive, stress impacts on production and injection may be far less pronounced relative to reservoir rocks containing more stress-sensitive fractures. The impact of a single fracture on well-test responses was explored by Bander Al-Quaimi (Saudi Aramco). Numerical simulation (dual porosity), inspired by a real field example, was used to generate a spectrum of well-test responses for different scenarios related to a fracture located between two wells. The results showed the impact of permeability contrasts between the fracture and the matrix in different layers as well as the connection of the fracture to different layers. Monitoring Flow on Local to Regional Scales Whereas most of the discussion focused on production time scales, a novel contribution by Apollo
544 Geohorizon

Kok (Maersk) illustrated the concept of an oil-onthe-move system in which hydrocarbons are neither structurally nor dynamically trapped but still represent viable accumulations as they continue to migrate. This work has supported the development of a regional oil migration atlas based on oil expulsion, vertical migration, aquifer flow, and residual oil saturations. By performing numerical simulations of oil migration and comparing the results with known accumulations, several opportunities and potential leads were identified in the Danish North Sea Chalk.

EMERGING THEMES RELATED TO UNCERTAINTY AND PREDICTION Giovanni Bertotti (TU Delft), Gareth Jones (ExxonMobil), and Jeroen Kenter (Statoil) chaired the third session on uncertainty and prediction. Key points from this session included the following: First principle and robust geologic concepts are lacking in reservoir models for reasons such as (1) poorly defined integration of geologic attributes and static and dynamic properties (multiscale pore system) and resulting conversion to rock types, (2) inadequate nongeologic geostatistical simulation techniques and fear to deviate from hard data in data-poor scenarios and, (3) lack of techniques to fast track model building and dynamic simulation of a wider range of models in a shorter period of time. Workflows need to identify early the function of diagenetic modification on static and dynamic properties. Consequently, improved knowledge of diagenetic processes and related spatial trends as well as diagenetic modeling capabilities are needed to reduce uncertainty in matrix characteristics and property distributions. Organization of the few existing data sets and a concerted effort to acquire new multiscale diagenetic and/or pore system data sets will be required to validate model capabilities and realizations. Geologic databases capturing depositional rock-type assemblages from analogs, their spatial juxtaposition rules and morphometric trends, will support the detection of diagenetic modification and help to constrain pre-drill scenarios.

 Reservoir (or petrophysical) rock typing needs to go beyond basic rock classifications (e.g., texture and fabric) and incorporate many more geologic factors (e.g., diagenetic attributes, certain fracture types, juxtaposition rules, and spatial trends) while integrating static and dynamic data. One size does not fit alllocal (and when needed, refined) models may still be needed to explain flow behavior even with substantial geologic data and insights across a producing field. This is because heterogeneity varies spatially and generally increases with data quality and quantity. Variations in fracture densities are unlikely to be fully captured by well data or properly predicted from analogs. Fracture prediction needs to include an understanding of the evolution of mechanical properties as a function of primary depositional and diagenetic factors. Mechanical modeling of carbonate rocks is still limited by the identification of appropriate mechanical properties to assign to models at different scales. Representation of depth-dependent fracture mechanisms and the evolution of rock strengths during platform development provide examples of the types of model improvements needed. Current geostatistical techniques and practices tend to obscure the relationships between geologic concepts and permeability distributions in reservoir models. Significant opportunities to go beyond entrenched methods for geologic modeling and to invest in new and innovative techniques and workflows exist. In addition, a need for a wider range of models to be tested and/or other techniques to fast track simulation exists. A clear need to take the art out of reservoir quality predictions and to develop more rigorous and concept-driven workflows exists. Expert opinions are rarely objective, but subjectivity can be good if it is recognized and used appropriately. The key is to be aware of the factors influencing expert opinions. Uncertainty in the Matrix Several presentations and posters addressed a range of characteristics in different carbonate facies, to predict them and to capture key attributes in geologic models and flow simulations. As a way to

take the art out of reservoir quality predictions, Dave Cantrell (Saudi Aramco) issued the challenge to develop quantitative process-based tools that would allow the prediction of reservoir quality ahead of the bit. Based on a pilot in the Shaaiba, he outlined a multimodel approach to generate the initial reservoir quality (forward stratigraphic modeling) including environmental constraints (e.g., water depth, initial bathymetry, temperature, sediment accretion rates, and wind speeds) and the superimposed diagenetic modifications (calibrated kinetic cementation model). Although initial results for porosity were within two porosity units, the project has not evolved yet to the point where predicted dynamic properties and trends can be contrasted with subsurface data. Related discussion reemphasized that the origin of multiscale carbonate pore systems remains poorly understood and requires improvements through research on diagenetic modeling and the development of guidelines. Anita Csoma and Hesham El Sobky (ConocoPhillips) developed the diagenetic theme further to predict anhydrite cementation of the karst system in the San Andres Formation. When compared with deterministic petrophysical methods and other statistical approaches, a modular neural network method proved to be superior for the determination of anhydrite abundance. Given the potential impact of cemented karst features on recovery, predicted volumes and distribution of anhydrite were used in a geocellular model to delineate anhydrite-filled karst networks via multiple-point geostatistics with customized training images. Two case studies provided fundamental observations related to the distribution and origin of dolomitized reservoir intervals and their commercial significance. From Brazil, Mary Raigosa Diaz (Baker Hughes) focused on dolomites that form the best reservoir units in the Sergipe subbasin. Detailed paragenesis identified the top of high-energy carbonate banks that were subjected to complete dolomitization as the prime reservoir candidates. Reporting on the characteristics of a less commonly encountered environment in carbonate reservoirs, Ray Mitchell (ConocoPhillips) pointed out that production from the Bakken petroleum system comes mainly from interbedded, mostly dolomitic carbonate intervals interpreted to be of mostly continental
Agar et al. 545

origin. The mixed siliciclastic and carbonate sediments in the Three Forks Dolomite were deposited mainly by eolian processes with heterolithic bedding (dolomite silt and mudstone) formed during wet periods. Further characterization efforts used satellite images of modern isolated carbonate platforms (Philippe Ruelland, Total) to derive lateral variations in environments of deposition to generate training images for multiple-point geostatistics. Direct sampling was used to develop facies models synchronously with models of matrix porosity before diagenesis. Overall, this cluster of posters demonstrated the increasingly sophisticated use of data to characterize matrix properties, together with the effective use of modern and recent carbonates to inform our understanding of the distribution of carbonate heterogeneities over a range of scales. Mark Skalinski (Chevron) and Jeroen Kenter (Statoil) discussed several shortcomings in the classification and use of carbonate rock types, including the need to incorporate diagenetic attributes and modification; integrating multiscale and multimodal pore types, including fractures; integrating dynamic data; and the lack of appropriate geostatistical tools. Examples from Tengiz and First Eocene (Wafra) reservoirs were used to illustrate the application of a new workflow designed to optimize petrophysical rock typing and the generation of carbonate reservoir models. Petrophysical rock types are defined as (1) the category of rocks characterized by specific ranges of petrophysical properties, (2) exhibiting distinct relationships relevant for flow characterization, (3) identified by logging surveys, and (4) linked to geologic attributes like primary texture or diagenetic modifications. The objective of this approach is to determine the petrophysical rock types that control the dynamic behavior of the reservoir while optimally linking the geologic attributes (depositional and diagenetic attributes and their hybrid combinations) and their spatial interrelationships and trends. Michel Rebelle and Cecile Pabian Goyheneche (Total) also showcased an approach to integrate reservoir geology, seismic data, engineering, and petrophysics as a more sophisticated workflow for reservoir rock typing. Jim Markello and Rick Wachtman (ExxonMobil) showed a new sequence-stratigraphic based reservoir architecture for the Lisburne field
546 Geohorizon

that was developed in the context of Late Pennsylvanian regional and global controls on tectonics, climate, eustasy, ocean circulation, and geologic history. The improved framework helped to guide the content of geologic models and simulations to achieve reasonable performance matches. However, even with substantial geologic and production data, the single framework could not capture local differences that impacted specific flow directions, connectivity lengths, and rates on the sector scale. A key message was one size does not fit all. Complementary outcrop studies of the Urgonian carbonate platform in southern France by Philippe Lonide, Francois Fournier, and Jean Borgomano (Universit Aix-Marseille) suggest that early cementation influenced the preservation of tight and/or microporous units that compartmentalize the platform vertically and laterally. An association between the early diagenesis and major sequence boundaries has been recognized. By combining petrographic, diagenetic, and isotope geochemistry, they have been able to identify links among poretype distributions, micrite diagenetic patterns, and sequence stratigraphy in microporous-dominated carbonate reservoir analogs that may offer predictive capabilities. A further example of outcrop modeling was presented by Maria Mutti (University of Potsdam) based on a Jurassic carbonate ramp in Morocco. In this case, the focus was the development of a geostatistical database of geobodies and the choice of appropriate statistical modeling algorithms to represent the spatial organization of different hierarchical scales of heterogeneity. A truncated Gaussian simulation algorithm was used to represent depositional environments because of the gradational and linear trends observed between geobodies. However, the sequential indicator simulation was used for lithofacies distributions because of its flexibility in handling spatially independent lithofacies elements. Uncertainty in Fractures Delegates continued to wrestle with long-standing issues related to the prediction of fracture networks and ways to capture uncertainty in their characteristics and distributions in the subsurface. Bertrand Gauthiers (Total) keynote presentation focused on

the need to know more about fracture networks between wells and at the scale of a reservoir model cell. Outcrop studies can complement information on fractures at a well by providing insights to the factors controlling fracture populations, which can then underpin qualitative concepts or quantitative relationships. A detailed quarry study in the Southeast Basin, France, used to construct a digital fracture network, provided several useful lessons, including the following: (1) fracture data from wells may not really be hard data because they cannot capture the full spectrum of variability in fracture densities and (2) identified relationships among one-dimensional, two-dimensional (2-D), and 3-D representations of the same fracture network may simplify the extrapolation of well data to 3-D properties in the subsurface. A broader evaluation of fracture populations across the Southeast Basin of France was reviewed by Juliette Lamarche (University of Provence) and Bertrand Gauthier (Total). The study offered a departure from more traditional mechanical stratigraphy, indicating that geographic position was more important for the mechanical properties of the carbonates than depositional facies, with early diagenesis potentially locking in mechanical differentiation of the rocks. Regional fracture patterns were also considered to be mostly unrelated to large-scale structural events. In contrast, sedimentologic controls on fractures were the focus of Chris Zahms (Bureau of Economic Geology) presentation. Nine vertical mechanical facies associations were linked between core and outcrop studies of facies in transgressive- and highstand-systems tracts. Both rock fabric and porosity were found to be key influences on rock strength. The vertical mechanical facies associations constrained a mechanical framework for subsurface dual-porosity simulation models and ultimately supported a pressure match to well tests and fieldwide production. In another fractured carbonate reservoir case study, Alex Assaf and Richard Steele (BG Group) addressed uncertainty in a severely heterogeneous carbonate field in North Africa. They developed multiple models (fully compartmentalized, fully open faults, and partly compartmentalized) to explore a spectrum of scenarios. Further reductions in uncertainty were realized by

integrating pressure transient analysis and numerical modeling of near wellbore effects that provided critical feedback and led to a geologically appropriate history match. Michael Welch (Rock Deformation Research Ltd.) reported on his quest to predict fractures based on outcrop studies in chalk. Examples from southeastern and northeastern England provided insights to the larger structural influences on the locations of fracture corridors and emphasized the way that rock strength (reflecting different porosities in chalk) and pore fluid pressure will impact fracture failure modes (shear or tensile). Prediction of fracture populations in flattopped carbonate platforms was addressed by Giovanni Bertotti (TU Delft). In this case, fracture generation scenarios (stress and mechanisms) were represented by first-order 3-D finite-element modeling. Key uncertainties included (1) the stress conditions that control the formation of stylolites and transitions from mode 1 to mode 2 fractures, (2) the appropriate bulk mechanical properties for a platform-scale model, and (3) the difficulty of predicting the number and dimensions of fractures. Important factors represented by this work were the depth dependence of fracture formation and large sensitivities to assumed paleostress scenarios. A further geomechanical study related to a steep-rimmed carbonate platform was presented by Vincent Heesakkers (Chevron). Two-dimensional finite-element modeling was used to represent stepwise carbonate platform development with appropriate constitutive models to reflect the different strength of facies during synsedimentary fracture development. Based on studies of the Canning Basin and the Guadalupe Mountains, such models offer insights to early fractures in large carbonate resources such as Tengiz and Karachaganak. Dave Healy (University of Aberdeen) shared insights to the variability of fault-zone properties based on outcrop analogy from Malta. The overall objective of this ongoing research is to constrain the natural statistical distributions in all of the pore-system attributes, as well as their spatial variation with respect to depositional faces and tectonic damage. In a related study, Joyce Neilson and Dave Healy (University of Aberdeen) showed how effective medium theory is being applied to translate the frequency range from ultrasonic
Agar et al. 547

data from fractured rock to seismic scales. As such, this work supports a way to link the fracture porosity and fault properties in the Malta study to acoustic signatures and to determine how property variations are manifested in petrophysical attributes. Based on the preceding presentations, an interesting discussion developed surrounding the importance of production data as a way to provide a check on the validity of the initial geologic predictions and interpretations and, possibly, to identify their flaws. However, the time-lag between insights from production data and the development of a geologic model makes such validation less feasible. A possible solution lies in the definition of proxies to signal the quality of the model as early as possible. The sooner a shortcoming in the model is identified, the less damaging are the consequences: fail fast! Uncertainty, Statistics, and Modeling Brodie Thomson (ExxonMobil) provoked the audience by addressing the failure of carbonate reservoir characterization and modeling to define the distribution and continuity of permeability extremes and to represent our geologic concepts adequately. The current practice of geostatistical methods, he argued, tends to obscure the relationship between geologic concepts and the final (and noisy) permeability distribution in the model. The effects of averaging and stacking multiple geostatistical steps can obscure flow pathways, thin baffles, and many other subtle geologic features (e.g., thin-bedded and microporous intervals and stylolites). The presentation stirred considerable discussion, dividing the delegates into those who sought greater simplification and those who sought more (appropriate) geologic influence or concepts in the model. More unified support developed around the need for a wider range of models to be tested and other techniques to fast track simulations. In addition, it was recognized that this was an area of considerable entrenchment and that significant opportunities to think outside of the box exist. Comments on the need to improve communication and integration across groups of experts reinforced the overall thinking behind the conference. In a related poster presentation, Andrew Curtis
548 Geohorizon

(University of Edinburgh) drew attention to the information scale gap that exists as a result of the tools and approaches available for subsurface sampling. Given the large geologic uncertainties that result from this gap, the function of expert opinions was reviewed, using examples to highlight a lack of objectivity that emerges because of group dynamics. Examples of the ways that opinions evolve in response to group dynamics have been tracked by software during discussions and raise concerns for consensus-driven outcomes. Expert elicitation, hence, is potentially a low-cost method to reduce overall uncertainties by improving the quality of how previous information is obtained and parameterized.

EMERGING THEMES RELATED TO NOVEL MODELING AND SIMULATION TECHNIQUES The fourth session, chaired by Gary Hampson (Imperial College), Fiona Whitaker (University of Bristol), and Stephan Matthi (Montan Universitt Leoben) addressed novel modeling and simulation methods. Discussions returned to some of the initial comments related to the simulation of fundamental processes at the start of the meeting. Key messages from this session included the following: Models can serve to integrate different data sources across multiple scales, but techniques for upscaling across several orders of magnitude in a single model remain challenging. Multiscale models offer an alternative approach that allows significant fine-scale details to be captured while maintaining computational efficiency. Recognizing the caveats related to uncertainties in the previous session, it was still emphasized that a large amount of data are available to pursue modeling in a larger, more integrated, and strategic way, with strong opportunities to link field observations and hypothesis testing via numerical models and laboratory experiments. Many new (or less commonly used) modeling tools are available or on the horizon (discussed in this and other sessions). We need to develop the most effective ways to use them and to seek clever and more creative applications.

 An ability to compare different models through standardization approaches, to use common models as a basis for further analysis, and to conduct collaborative research on common reservoirs and outcrops can serve to increase the overall value of modeling. Outcrop studies are perceived to have waned in popularity, but these still have a function to play in geologic modeling and flow simulations. They provide low-cost opportunities to test out data handling and modeling techniques for different stratal and structural geometries. They can also provide reasonable geologic scenarios and assumptions for characteristics that are not easily constrained by subsurface data (e.g., fracture size distributions and effective fracture permeability). Fracture-flow simulations would benefit from guidelines to determine when fractures and similar small pervasive heterogeneities (e.g., stylolites and karst) should be explicitly represented versus being implicitly represented by effective properties. Fracture-flow simulations mostly ignore the impacts of fracture-associated diagenesis on sweep and fracture-matrix fluid exchange and struggle to assign appropriate aperture distributions. Further developments in RTM need to extend to fracture diagenesis as well as the matrix. The coupling of processes in models is recognized as important but has yet to be fully realized (e.g., integrated sedimentologic DFM-RTM geomechanical models). Developments in computational graphics and visualization offer ways to truly interact with data and models and provide opportunities to represent the associated uncertainty. The essentials of geologic heterogeneity and evolving flow patterns must be captured in a reservoir simulation for better production forecasting; however, this is normally not achieved with the current, industry-standard reservoir simulators. In light of the above, many geologic and simulation models constructed using standard tools and workflows are unnecessarily complex in some regard, simplistic in others, and their construction is too time intensive to allow assessment of multiple scenarios and uncertainty. New modeling and visualization tools can help to tackle these

issues, but their effective exploitation probably requires a shift in the mindset of the user. It is commonly more useful to generate a suite of simple models that encompass different scenarios and uncertainty (while representing key heterogeneities and flow processes realistically) than to generate a small number of detailed models anchored to a single scenario, which may fail to represent key aspects of the system of interest. Simulating Matrix Properties Over Different Scales Further reinforcing the need to integrate different data sources across multiple scales, Chris Nichols (Shell) focused on inputs for upscaling based on information from core-plug to whole-core scales. Three case studies were used by Nichols to show how different data (core plug, logs, and core) can lead to different impressions of porosity and permeability. A key message here was the need to examine rock types in both the petrophysical and geologic space. This integration can help to determine approaches to handle different types of heterogeneities for a given rock type while shaping guidelines to upscale from core to log to cell scales. Michael Sukop (Florida International University) very effectively demonstrated how dense datadriven variograms from borehole images of relatively young carbonates in Florida appear to capture high-frequency stratigraphic cycles and can be used to generate 3-D volumes for borehole-scale lattice Boltzmann flow simulations and thereby extend the scale of application of direct flow simulation. Limitations of readily available geostatistical software to accommodate the complex variogram structure led to simulations that overrepresented the horizontal continuity and underestimated vuggy porosity. By expanding applications of the lattice Boltzmann method to boreholescale simulations of flow for vuggy carbonates (much larger than the usual pore-scale applications), Sukop confirmed reasonable agreement with other experimentally derived estimates of permeability. Advances for Fracture-Flow Simulation Robin Hui (Chevron) introduced this theme with a keynote presentation on an in-depth sensitivity
Agar et al. 549

analysis using a DFM, where fractures and matrix are both represented in a dynamic model using an unstructured grid. The study highlighted the challenge of applying appropriate numerical approaches to the simulation of flow on a geologically driven grid structure. Whereas the DFM technology enables the inclusion of aperture and length-displacement scaling from outcrop-analog data, solid guidelines to determine when to draw the line between explicitly represented fractures and those represented by effective properties do not exist yet. Such decisions can be influenced by gridding and other software considerations and, also, by geologic rationale. Questions were raised concerning the value of running a DFM as opposed to conventional approaches and if different business decisions would have resulted from using more traditional dual porosity and/or dual-permeability simulation approaches. The need for a comparative study to determine these factors was also discussed. Wayne Narr (Chevron) generated much interest in his work characterizing syndepositional fracturing from the Devonian Canning Basin, features similar to those seen in the recent as well as reservoirs such as Tengiz but very different from fracturing that occurs after burial. Supporting the value of outcrop-based studies for the subsurface, the Canning Basin data compilations of fracture sizes and their relationships to stratigraphy have been shown to complement well data and provide useful guidelines to constrain flow simulations of the Tengiz field. A further case study presented by Jim Sylte (ConocoPhillips) demonstrated how dynamic data have been integrated for a period of 25 yr to monitor the influence of fractures and stylolites during waterflooding of the Ekofisk chalk reservoir. The duration of the study reinforces the value of continuing to reevaluate and integrate data with simulations as new technology brings further insights and as enhanced oil recovery projects pose new challenges. Iryna Malinouskaya (Universit Pierre et Marie Curie) demonstrated the use of 2-D outcrop data from a Jurassic carbonate ramp in Morocco to calculate the 3-D tensor for fracture permeability. The approach is being used to explore the impact of different fracture network characteristics on effective permeability. In some cases, differences in fracture populations will have a substantial impact
550 Geohorizon

on the effective permeability, but in others, the details may not make that much difference. Ole Petter Wennberg (Statoil) showed the implications for fluid flow of the development of a cemented zone around a fracture and patchy matrix cement alone. Preliminary results indicate that cement distribution exerts a primary influence on simulation outcomes and that the presence of cement at the matrix-fracture interface should be factored into history matching and upscaling efforts. The study elegantly created anticipation for the Notre Dame de Beauregard outcrop, which was seen during the field trip. Following previous sessions in which fracture impacts were discussed, this session reinforced that the simplifications we commonly make about the effect of fractures on flow are problematic. This occurs not only on the reservoir scale for reservoir characterization and flow simulation, but also where fractures are represented in 2-D, ignoring fluid circulation in the fracture plane and incorporating simplistic assumptions about fracture apertures. Reactive Transport Modeling A keynote presentation by Nicole Champenoy and Scott Meddaugh (Chevron) discussed advanced methods to characterize permeability heterogeneity and to handle steamflood RTM. Based on 2-D RTMs, steam injection was predicted to drive calcite and brucite precipitation, dissolution of dolomite, and conversion of gypsum to anhydrite. Discussions emphasized the need to anticipate potential changes in flow behavior, the need to understand the physics of displacement, the need for technical knowledge to guide the use of various software tools, and the impact of grid design. Opportunities to develop more sophisticated RTMs were illustrated using examples of replacement dolomitization by Fiona Whitaker (University of Bristol), who also explored some of the hurdles that need to be overcome to generate more meaningful simulations. Such challenges include the feedbacks between depositional and diagenetic sediment texture, permeability and reactivity, the relative importance of various forcing mechanisms, and the sensitivity of an environmental system to changes in any of these forcing processes. Scenarios for dolomitization were also discussed by Conxita Taberner (Shell) in the

context of density-driven flow. Two-dimensional RTM simulations were used to predict geometries (layered dolomite bodies vs. irregular fingerlike bodies) resulting from (1) hypersaline brine reflux and (2) thermally driven flow. Potentially beneficial links were evident within this cluster of posters, for example, RTM simulations offering a route to generate rules and to describe diagenetic geobodies that could usefully feed into geologic models. Enrique Gomez-Rivas (University of Tuebingen) proposed a crustal-scale mechanism for the emergence of a self-organized flow system that may explain the development of localized alteration such as hydrothermal mineralization along fault zones. Advances in Geologic Modeling, Data Visualization, and Interaction Methods Contributions related to static modeling of both matrix and fracture properties introduced significant developments. In this cluster of posters, Gregory Benson (ExxonMobil) exemplified the workflow for collecting and interpreting data from detailed field studies and LIDAR imaging to construct a geologic model of a Miocene outcrop in southeastern Spain. In ongoing efforts to ensure compatibility of various flow simulation studies, Benson introduced a standard property calculator as a means to standardize assignment of reservoir properties. Gary Hampson (Imperial College) demonstrated the principles and application of a pragmatic surface-based modeling approach. The approach is still limited by several factors, including selection of an appropriate level in the hierarchy, gradations in geologic characteristics, and the incorporation of fracture and diagenetic heterogeneities. Nevertheless, the technology offers improvements related to the next generation of unstructured mesh simulators. The surface-based modeling approach was applied by Peter Fitch (Imperial College) to a Jurassic ramp system to systematically investigate controls on patterns of multiphase fluid flow. In combination with experimental design techniques, the objective is to develop insights to the impact of heterogeneities on flow in carbonates as a means to support the prioritization of effort during geologic model construction. A completely different approach presented by Claude-

Alain Hassler (Shell) used the numerically efficient cellular automata (CA) method. The technique provides a way to incorporate simple diagenesis in reservoir models. Although the CA method is widely used, its application to reservoir modeling has been very limited. Perceived benefits include improvements on classic variogram-based methods through the application of stochastic rules, straightforward conditioning to existing data, and capabilities to represent complex geometries. Providing a link to the field trip, Jean Borgomano (Universit Aix-Marseille) introduced work in the carbonates group of the University Aix-Marseille and their research on generic learning from outcrops that can be translated to relevance in the subsurface (e.g., correlation length scales and rules). Using mainly Cretaceous carbonates in the Provence region, the group has developed an impressive suite of sedimentologic, petrophysical, LIDAR, and seismic data integrated across multiple scales. It was emphasized that the required level of detail is not always obvious at the outset of a study and, echoing points raised in the first session, opportunities to link multiple models at different scales exist. This presentation also served to introduce several poster contributions by students and postdoctoral students at the University of Provence for a special session that recognized their contributions to field-trip organization and local logistics for the conference. A strong contender for the most glamorous presentation, Mario Costa Sousa (University of Calgary) shared novel approaches to visualization and data interaction. Examples emphasized the need to interact with data as opposed to simply observing them, showing ways to tear apart or zoom into reservoir simulation model results and to construct 3-D objects from 2-D sketches. Discussions noted that such impressive visualization methods still have the potential to mask significant uncertainty and that geologists and engineers may be awed by the visualization, masking the underlying data; however, more flexible visualization would actually help to query simulation results more robustly. In addition, generalists (and others) examining data by these methods would benefit from simultaneous representations of uncertainty. The concept of a Google Earth style interface for zooming in and out of models was
Agar et al. 551

proposed during the discussion as a way to link data and models across different scales. Venture Groups Recharged from the field trip, delegates self-organized to form five venture groups from the 20 venture groups initially proposed. Each venture group comprised 10 or more delegates representing different disciplines (geology vs. engineering) and background (industry vs. academia). For the next day, each venture group came up with a well-defined research project with a clearly identified hypothesis, research goal, and research plan, including an idea for an endproduct that could be rolled out to the industry. The topics proposed were as follows: 1. Diagenetic and structural controls on flow models: The aim was to build a multidimensional matrix that will allow isolation of variables driving the resulting 3-D distribution reservoir quality properties useful both at exploration and production stages. 2. Geoprinting: The aim was to develop 3-D printing technology to create large-scale (tens of meters), integrated dynamic analog models for carbonate reservoirs to experiment with geology, fluid flow, geophysics, and geomechanics. 3. Disconnect between geology and reservoir characterization: The aim was to develop an app to fast track the creation and validation of 3-D reservoir models and test multiple flow and geologic scenarios. 4. Multiscale field experiment (from 106 to 102 m2): The aim was to study flow processes over more than eight orders of magnitude in length scale from laboratory to field, including the excavation of the field site for reconstructing the 3-D geologyto revolutionize flow simulation tools used for reservoir predictions. 5. Wettability engineering: The aim was to develop a flexible toolkit that accurately predicts reservoir wettability at the pore scale and suggests the best recovery mechanism, based on the fundamental physics and chemistry, to increase production from carbonate reservoirs.

Crossing the Academic-Industry Divide As noted above, this Hedberg Conference achieved many of its success measures, defining promising new research directions that are being shared with the global scientific community through this article and a special conference volume anticipated later in 2014. New connections were formed, and delegates developed interesting ideas for collaborations and research proposals. However, there is much that remains to be done to strengthen industry-academic collaboration. Discussion drew attention to the fact that industry-academic collaboration may be limited by the extent to which academics are aware of routine industry applications and the awareness of novel research advances in academia by industry representatives. These shortcomings limited the abilities of delegates to identify opportunities for research advances through collaboration. Several academics wanted to learn more about the basic modeling assumptions used in industry, the knowledge gaps, and the opportunities that might exist to contribute fundamental geologic data. Industry researchers needed opportunities to learn about the assumptions and methods implicit in novel modeling techniques and advances in fundamental science. In the experience of the conveners, this is a problem that extends far beyond the research needs for carbonate reservoirs. There was a call to be more organized and united in our data collection. Significant valuable data sets have been collected through the years both by industry and academia. Given this, it would be beneficial for the combined industry and academic community to adopt a coordinated approach in which the data would be more accessible and comparable, as per recommendations of Rudy Swennen (KU Leuven).

REFERENCES CITED
Agar, S. M., 2009, The (FC)2 Alliance: An innovation portal for research on the fundamental controls on flow in carbonates: International Petroleum Technology Conference Paper MS-13175, Doha, Qatar, December 79, 2009, 9 p. Owen, H., 2012, Open space technology: San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., 200 p.

552

Geohorizon

Deposits of the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River: Implications for the use of modern analogs in reconstructing channel dimensions in reservoir characterization
Ian A. Lunt, Gregory H. Sambrook Smith, James L. Best, Philip J. Ashworth, Stuart N. Lane, and Christopher J. Simpson

AUTHORS Ian A. Lunt $ Statoil ASA, Sandsliveien 90, P.O. Box 7190, N-5020 Bergen, Norway; present address: Statoil, 308-4th Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta T2P OH7, Canada; ianlunt@broadpark.no Ian Lunt is a fluvial sedimentologist and completed his Ph.D. at Binghamton University with John Bridge in 2002 before undertaking postdoctoral research at the University of California at Berkeley and the Universities of Leeds and Birmingham (United Kingdom). He worked as a research geologist with Statoil in Bergen, Norway, since 2007, before recently moving to Statoil Canada in Calgary. Gregory H. Sambrook Smith $ School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom; g.smith.4@bham.ac.uk Gregory Sambrook Smith is based at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom, and completed his Ph.D. in 1994 at the University of Sheffield, United Kingdom. His research uses a range of geophysical tools to quantify the alluvial architecture of sand and silt bed rivers. He also investigates flow in porous media using a range of novel experimental methods. James L. Best $ Departments of Geology, Geography, Mechanical Science and Engineering and Ven Te Chow Hydrosystems Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1301 W. Green St., Urbana, Illinois 61801; jimbest@uiuc.edu James Best was appointed to the Threet Chair in Sedimentary Geology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2006, after 18 years at the University of Leeds, United Kingdom. His research investigates the relationships between fluid flow and morphodynamics using laboratory experiments and studies of modern and ancient sedimentary environments. He was editor of Sedimentology, the flagship journal of the International Association of Sedimentologists from 1998 to 2002. Philip J. Ashworth $ Division of Geography, School of the Environment, University of Brighton, Sussex BN2 4GJ United Kingdom; p.ashworth@bton.ac.uk Philip Ashworth is a professor of physical geography at the University of Brighton, United

ABSTRACT Estimation of the dimensions of fluvial geobodies from core data is a notoriously difficult problem in reservoir modeling. To try and improve such estimates and, hence, reduce uncertainty in geomodels, data on dunes, unit bars, cross-bar channels, and compound bars and their associated deposits are presented herein from the sand-bed braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada. These data are used to test models that relate the scale of the formative bed forms to the dimensions of the preserved deposits and, therefore, provide an insight as to how such deposits may be preserved over geologic time. The preservation of bed-form geometry is quantified by comparing the alluvial architecture above and below the maximum erosion depth of the modern channel deposits. This comparison shows that there is no significant difference in the mean set thickness of dune crossstrata above and below the basal erosion surface of the contemporary channel, thus suggesting that dimensional relationships between dune deposits and the formative bed-form dimensions are likely to be valid from both recent and older deposits. The data show that estimates of mean bankfull flow depth derived from dune, unit bar, and cross-bar channel deposits are all very similar. Thus, the use of all these metrics together can provide a useful check that all components and scales of the

Copyright 2013. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Manuscript received October 11, 2011; provisional acceptance January 16, 2012; revised manuscript received August 2, 2012; final acceptance September 25, 2012. DOI:10.1306/09251211152

AAPG Bulletin, v. 97, no. 4 (April 2013), pp. 553 576

553

Kingdom. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Stirling and then lectured at the University of Leeds for 10 years. His research interests include big river dynamics, processform relations in braided rivers and alluvial stratigraphy. He has worked with the petroleum industry for more than 25 years. Stuart N. Lane $ Institut de Gographie, Facult des Gosciences et de lEnvironnement, Universit de Lausanne, Lausanne CH-1015 Switzerland; stuart.lane@unil.ch Stuart Lane, currently at Universit de Lausanne, Switzerland, is a world leader in the development of remote sensing techniques for quantifying river morphodynamics. This work has been developed during periods at the Universities of Cambridge, Leeds, and Durham (United Kingdom) over the past 20 years. He is currently the editor of the prestigious geomorphology journal Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. Christopher J. Simpson $ Fulcrum Graphic Communications Inc., TH2-168, Esplanade Avenue East, North Vancouver, British Columbia V7L 4X8 Canada; cjsimpso@chaw.ca Christopher Simpson is proficient in geomatics and currently works for Fulcrum Graphic Communications Inc. in Calgary. He has an M.Sc. from the University of Calgary in fluvial geomorphology and uses these skills to acquire and synthesize large geospatial data sets for later analysis. In his current job, he also produces graphics and designs project Web pages for a wide range of clients. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was supported by grants NER/A/ S/2003/00538 and NE/D005701/1 to G. H. Sambrook Smith, P. J. Ashworth, J. L. Best, and S. N. Lane from the United Kingdom Natural Environment Research Council. We are grateful to the many people who helped in the field and especially to John Bridge who provided much advice on this project in his capacity as a visiting researcher. Derald Smith, University of Calgary, kindly loaned a zodiac boat and outboard motors. Bill Vavra allowed us access to the river from his land, and Bob and Sandy Stephenson at the Irrigation Motel in Outlook are thanked for their fantastic hospitality and logistical help during our fieldwork. The AAPG Editor thanks the following reviewers for their work on this article: Christopher Fielding and Brian J. Willis. 554

alluvial architecture have been identified correctly when building reservoir models. The data also highlight several practical issues with identifying and applying data relating to crossstrata. For example, the deposits of unit bars were found to be severely truncated in length and width, with only approximately 10% of the mean bar-form length remaining, and thus making identification in section difficult. For similar reasons, the deposits of compound bars were found to be especially difficult to recognize, and hence, estimates of channel depth based on this method may be problematic. Where only core data are available (i.e., no outcrop data exist), formative flow depths are suggested to be best reconstructed using cross-strata formed by dunes. However, theoretical relationships between the distribution of set thicknesses and formative dune height are found to result in slight overestimates of the latter and, hence, mean bankfull flow depths derived from these measurements. This article illustrates that the preservation of fluvial crossstrata and, thus, the paleohydraulic inferences that can be drawn from them, are a function of the ratio of the size and migration rate of bed forms and the time scale of aggradation and channel migration. These factors must thus be considered when deciding on appropriate length:thickness ratios for the purposes of object-based modeling in reservoir characterization.

INTRODUCTION Depositional models for sandy braided rivers are used commonly to interpret ancient fluvial deposits in core and outcrop and to simulate the subsurface geometry of fluvial reservoirs using stochastic simulations. Such models of sandy braided fluvial deposits have been based on studies of both modern rivers (e.g., Coleman, 1969; Collinson, 1970; Smith, 1971; Miall, 1977; Cant and Walker, 1978; Blodgett and Stanley, 1980; Bridge et al., 1986, 1998; Bristow, 1987, 1993a; Jordan and Pryor, 1992; Fielding et al., 1999; Best et al., 2003; Skelly et al., 2003; Bridge and Lunt, 2006; Sambrook Smith et al., 2006, 2009; Horn et al., 2012) and outcrops (Smith, 1970; McCabe, 1977; Hazeldine, 1983; Bristow, 1993b; Willis, 1993; Miall and Jones, 2003). However, despite these numerous studies, limited data are available concerning the thickness and lateral extents of differing depositional facies from modern rivers, mostly because the extensive data sets that would be required are expensive and time consuming to generate (Tye, 2004). This paucity of information represents a particular weakness in the input to fluvial reservoir models because the dimensions of all scales of modern surface bar and bed forms

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Figure 1. (A) Location of Outlook, Saskatchewan, Canada; (B) location of study site on South Saskatchewan River, near Outlook.

should be related to their associated deposits and, hence, provide a powerful tool for reconstructing the scale of a paleoriver from the dimensions of a range of preserved strata sets. Given this relative paucity of quantitative data from modern rivers, the most advanced and widely used scaling relationships are thus mostly based on experimental work with a particular focus on alluvial dunes (e.g., Paola and Borgman, 1991; Leclair and Bridge, 2001), although such relationships remain to be tested fully in the field (however; see Leclair, 2011, for a notable exception). Additionally, while scaling relationships have been developed for dunes and their stratal sets, less progress has been made for bars (Bridge and Lunt, 2006; Hajek and Heller, 2012). This article addresses these issues and provides an analysis of the South Saskatchewan River, Canada, which is one of the type rivers that has been adopted for facies models of sandy braided rivers (Miall, 1977), and their associated depositional records. The aim of this article is to establish scaling relationships between subsurface deposits and their formative surface morphology. These results add to the relatively small pool of data from modern rivers to aid in constraining the limits of the dimensions of different lithofacies used in objectbased reservoir models. This development may be significant because, as demonstrated by Tye (2004), relatively small changes in the dimensions of sedi-

mentary units used in object-based reservoir models can have a significant impact on the resultant modeled sand-body distribution. Specific objectives of this article are to (1) use topographic data to quantify the dimensions of surface morphological features in a sandy braided river, such as dunes, bars, and channel fills; (2) quantify the dimensions and grain-size characteristics of the preserved deposits of dunes, bars, and channel fills using ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and cores; (3) assess how the geometry of the deposits changes with depth within the preserved sediments and specifically above and below the basal erosion surface of the modern channel; and (4) generate quantitative relationships between the formative bedform dimensions and resultant deposits observed in outcrop, core, or GPR profiles to ascertain their preservation potential.

STUDY AREA This study was undertaken along a 10-km (6-mi) reach of the South Saskatchewan River, near Outlook, Saskatchewan (Figure 1). Full details of the site have been described previously (see Cant and Walker, 1978; Sambrook Smith et al., 2005, 2006), and so, only a brief summary is provided here. The channel belt is approximately 0.6 km (0.37 mi)
Lunt et al. 555

Figure 2. Aerial photographs of the two primary study areas used in this study showing dunes, unit bars, and compound bars in the South Saskatchewan River. Also shown are the groundpenetrating radar (GPR) survey lines and core locations from which the analysis discussed in the text was derived. Locations of radar data shown in Figures 5 and 6 are also shown.

wide, has an average slope of 0.00023, and is incised into Quaternary glaciofluvial and Cretaceous siliciclastic deposits by up to 30 m (98 ft). Mean grain size, as measured from 365 sediment samples taken from the river bed, ranges from 0.01 to 0.7 mm (0.0004 to 0.028 in.), which encompasses sediments from silty clays to gravelly sands, with a mean of 0.34 mm (0.013 in.). The South Saskatchewan River was impounded by the Gardiner Dam in 1967, which is 25 km (15.5 mi) upstream of the study site. Bed elevation surveys at a series of cross sections have been surveyed since 1964 (Phillips, 2003) and indicate
556

that the river has not experienced any statistically significant change in mean bed elevation near Outlook since impoundment. However, peak discharge has fallen since 1967, with mean annual peak discharge pre- and postdam construction being 1536 and 595 m3 s1 (54,243 and 21,012 ft3 s1), respectively. The river now has low-suspended sediment concentrations, which allows observation of the river bed using aerial photographs during floods (Lane et al., 2010). Channels are dominated by dunes (Figure 2) as much as approximately 0.5 m (1.6 ft) high. Besides these dunes, the river is also characterized by

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Table 1. Acquisition Parameters and Processing Steps for GPR Profiles Acquisition Parameters Bartop GPR profiles Frequency Antenna separation Shot spacing Sampling interval Stacks In-channel GPR profiles Frequency Antenna separation Shot spacing Sampling interval Stacks 200 MHz 0.75 m 0.1 m 0.4 ns 16 High-pass filter Bandpass filter Set time-zero AGC gain function Static correction Processing Steps 20 MHz 21-40-150-300 Airwave peak 10 ns window From GPS data

225 MHz 0.5 m 0.1 m 0.4 ns 16

Trace interpolation High-pass filter Bandpass filter Set time-zero AGC gain function Static correction Split-step migration

20 MHz 21-40-150-300 Airwave peak 10 ns window From GPS data Using two-region velocity model

lobate unit bars (Figure 2) that have heights equivalent to the channel depth, with typical values as much as approximately 1.5 m (5 ft). Compound bars, which are defined as comprising two or more unit bars, may be as much as approximately 800 400 m (2625 1312 ft) in spatial extent. Cross-bar channels are observed eroding into compound bars, with widths as much as 10 m (3300 ft) and depths of approximately 0.5 m (1.6 ft). Eolian reworking of nonvegetated bar-top surfaces is common and can create both eolian ripples and small barchan dunes, although both of these have a low preservation potential.

METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION Cores, GPR profiles, topographic measurements, and grain-size samples were collected on compound bars from two different reaches of the study area (Figure 2). Subsurface Data

164 ft) apart, which allowed the larger scales of stratification associated with unit bars to be mapped in three dimensions. The vertical resolution of the GPR profiles is about 0.2 m (0.66 ft), and thus, it was only used to resolve deposits relating to crossbar channels and bars. Those measurements associated with dunes were derived from core (the method is described below). Ground-penetrating radar data were collected by moving the antennae continuously at a constant speed and at a fixed separation across the ground, instead of remaining stationary, whereas the shot was gathered, as this reduced the time of acquisition without loss of data quality. The GPR acquisition parameters and processing steps are shown in Table 1. The frequency spectrum of the data was used to determine the cutoffs for dewow and bandpass filters, and the GPR data were not migrated to preserve spatial relationships between the strata sets. The mean radar velocity determined from common midpoint (CMP) profiles was 0.05 0.003 m ns1 (0.16 0.009 ft ns1). Topographic Surveys

Approximately 30 km (19 mi) of GPR data were collected on a rectilinear grid on exposed bar surfaces (Figure 2) using a pulseEkko 100 GPR with unshielded 200 MHz antennas. Ground-penetrating radar profiles were spaced 25 and 50 m (82 and

Dune and unit bar heights were quantified using topographic data from (1) digital elevation models (DEM) derived from aerial photographs (May 2003, May 2004, September 2004, and August 2005; full
Lunt et al. 557

Figure 3. Examples of topographic data used in the study as derived from (A) digital elevation models (DEMs), (B) echosounder, and (C) boat-based GPR surveys. The photograph shows the locations of each of the survey lines. 558 Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Table 2. Summary of Primary Characteristics of Radar Facies Used in This Study

details of the DEM methodology are given in Lane et al. (2010); (2) a boat-based echosounder survey (September 2005); and (3) a boat-based GPR survey (September 2005). The DEMs enabled data to be collected from across the study reach, whereas the echosounder and GPR surveys provided additional data from the main channels for another period and discharge for which no aerial photographs were available. In September 2005, a bathymetric sonar was used for mapping the bed topography of the main thalweg where flow depths were greater than approximately 1 m (3.3 ft). At the same time, a boat-based GPR survey of the shallower sections of the channel was also undertaken using a Sensors & Software Noggin system with shielded 250 MHz antennae. Although there was no penetration into the subsurface using this GPR approach, the dielectric contrast between the water and channel bed provided detailed topographic data comparable to that of the echosounder (see Table 1 for summary). Depths acquired from the sonar and GPR were combined with positional information using differential global positioning system. Measurements for all three methods were precise to within 0.01 m (0.033 ft) horizontally and 0.02 m (0.066 ft) vertically, examples of which are illustrated in Figure 3.

Grain Size Three hundred and sixty five sediment samples were collected from both exposed and subaqueous bar surfaces using a dredge sampler (Phillips, 2003) in the deepest parts of the channels. Grain-size distributions of dry samples were determined using laser particle size analysis for sediment less than 2 mm (0.08 in.) diameter and by sieving for sediment coarser than 2 mm (0.08 in.). The weight percentage of the coarse fractions was converted to a volume percentage and combined with the volume percentage of laser-sampled fractions to determine the overall grain-size distribution. Cores Cores were collected using both vibracoring (Smith, 1984) and suction coring (Van de Meene et al., 1979; Mndez et al., 2003) methods. The cores were 0.076 m (0.35 ft) in diameter and as much as 4.2 m (13.78 ft) long and did not suffer any compaction. Liquefaction and rodding, in which sediment is pushed in front of the core pipe, affected some vibracores, but were minor in the suction cores. Epoxy peels were made of the cores by cutting the cores in half along their length, and pouring
Lunt et al. 559

Figure 4. Sequence of aerial photographs showing the location of the GPR profile and the change in bed topography of reach B between (A) 2002, (B) 2003, and (C) 2004. (D) Radar profile taken in 2004 as indicated by red line in (C). The green and blue lines represent the bar surface in 2003 and 2002, respectively, with locations of the radar line relative to the channel configuration at those times shown in (A) and (B). The basal erosion surface of the modern channel at this location is denoted by the yellow line (D). Representative examples of the radar facies are indicated by numbers (the box indicates the spatial extent of the channel cut and fill that relates to radar facies 4). The labels a and b refer to the most recent unit bars that have been deposited at this site; note how they thicken in a downstream direction (flow right to left in all panels) as indicated by the arrows.

epoxy resin onto the exposed surface. The differential permeability of the sediment resulted in excellent preservation of the sedimentary structures that were then photographed and logged.

the radar data. The methodology used to analyze the different data sets is described below.

RADAR AND SEDIMENTARY FACIES METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS The data reported herein extend the work of Sambrook Smith et al. (2006) by providing greater detail on the process-product relationship, which has been enabled by the greater spatial coverage of GPR surveys, more common acquisition of imagery and collection of cores. A more quantitative analysis, over and beyond identification of radar facies, is also possible using the combination of sequential aerial photographs and cores that provide detail on the deposits of smaller bed forms (e.g., ripples and dunes) that are below the resolution of
560

As reported in Sambrook Smith et al. (2006), four primary radar facies (see Table 2 for summary) can be identified within the GPR data from the South Saskatchewan River (Figure 4D): (1) highangle reflections (from 6 to angle of repose), interpreted as large-scale inclined cross-strata formed by the migration of bar margins; (2) discontinuous or undular trough-shaped reflections, interpreted as medium- and small-scale cross-stratification formed by sinuous crested dunes; (3) low-angle reflections, less than 6, interpreted as small-scale cross-strata formed by the migration of bed forms below the resolution of the radar; and (4) reflections of variable

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

dip angle that are enclosed by a concave reflection, interpreted as cross-bar channel fills or bartop hollows (Best et al., 2006). The origin of the radar facies has been determined by comparing the GPR profiles with the formative bed forms identified from the aerial photographs. This methodology allows the evolution of the channel to be tracked using the imagery, whereas the DEMs derived from these images provide data on channel topography through time. For example, during periods of lower flow (Figure 4B, C), change within the channel is relatively modest, with the migration of dunes and unit bars within channels and minor changes occurring in the planform of the compound bar. However, higher flows (Figure 4A, B) resulted in significant reworking of compound bars and more substantial channel migration. These higher flows resulted in major changes in bed morphology caused by the lateral and downstream migration of channels, which led to the erosion of compound bars and the formation of new compound bars by the amalgamation of dunes and unit bars (Figure 4A, B). The location of new compound bars was determined from either the pre-existing bed topography or the planform channel geometry. The DEM surfaces can then be merged with the GPR profiles and used to identify and highlight the deposits of individual bed forms. For example, the position of unit bar fronts evidently on aerial photographs from 2003 (Figure 4B) corresponds exactly to the extent of high-angle crossstrata seen in the GPR profiles (Figure 4D, indicated by arrows). Similar radar facies have been observed in other bars in the South Saskatchewan River (Sambrook Smith et al., 2006) and within other rivers (i.e., Best et al., 2003; Bridge and Lunt, 2006; Horn et al., 2012). Figure 4 also exemplifies the overall alluvial architecture of compound bars commonly found in sandy braided rivers. For instance, the compound bar at this location comprises two stacked unit bars (labeled a and b in Figure 4D). In both alongstream and across-stream orientations, the crosssets formed by unit bars are composed of subhorizontal reflections that steepen from less than 6 to about 22 as the cross-set thickness increases in a downdip direction (see arrows in Figure 4D).
Lunt et al.

Figure 5. Example to illustrate how the radar profiles are interpreted for later quantitative analysis; see Figure 2 for location. This profile, taken in an along-stream orientation with flow left to right, shows the main unit bar (green) and cross-bar channel fill (brown) deposits. UD = upstream-dipping surfaces. Colored lines are bar surfaces in 2004 (red), 2003 (green), 2002 (blue), and the basal erosion surface of the modern channel at this location (yellow). 561

Figure 6. Example to illustrate how the radar profiles are interpreted for later quantitative analysis; see Figure 2 for location. This profile, taken in a cross-stream orientation, shows the main unit bar (green) and cross-bar (brown) channel-fill deposits. Colored lines are the basal erosion surface of the bar in 2002 (light blue) and the margins of the 2002 compound bar (dark blue), which have prograded by deposition of unit-bar deposits. In 2003, the upper part of the compound bar was truncated (green) and also experienced aggradation (purple) by deposition of sediment transported as dunes and unit bars. The bar surface in 2004 is indicated by the red line; flow is into the page.

These cross-sets commonly terminate in concaveupward reflections that may represent channel fills or confluence scours at the downstream end of a compound bar (black outlined box in Figure 4). This methodology thus permits the identification of the explicit links between process and product and allows (1) confidence in the interpretation of the deposits of other unit bars and cross-bar channels in the radar surveys and (2) the radar surveys to be categorized comprehensively (see examples shown in Figures 5, 6). In contrast to the deposits above the basal erosion surface of the modern channel, those below this surface cannot be linked explicitly with their formative depositional processes. The modern channel base is defined herein by a persistent reflection seen within the radar profiles at an elevation equivalent to the channel depth within the study reach (Figures 46). Bed scour did not occur below this surface during a 1-in-40-year flood event in the summer of 2005 (Sambrook Smith et al., 2010). On this basis, it is inferred that this erosion surface is the level down to which the modern channel has scoured. If radar facies (from GPR) and grain-size variations (from core) are similar in the deposits above and below this erosion surface, then this provides the best basis for inferring that their origins are similar.
562

Our data clearly show that the radar facies observed above the basal erosion surface of the modern channel are also observed below this level (Figure 7), and that the sedimentary architecture of these facies is very similar to the deposits above the erosion surface (Figures 46). We can thus infer that the origin of the deposits below the basal erosion surface of the modern channel is broadly similar to that above it, thus allowing direct comparison between the two data sets to examine which

Figure 7. Percentage of radar facies with depth in the deposits. The proportions of facies 1 and 3 below the basal erosion surface are much smaller than those above. The basal erosion surface varies in elevation but is generally at about 3 m (10 ft) depth. Facies 1 is high-angle inclined reflections, facies 2 is discontinuous undular or trough-shaped reflections, facies 3 is low-angle reflections, and facies 4 is reflections of variable dip enclosed by a concave reflection (see Table 2).

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Figure 8. (A) Dune heights measured for May 2004 (flow 61 m3 s-1 [2154 ft3 s-1]) and August 2005 (flow 600 m3 s-1 [21,188 ft3 s-1]); (B) dune wavelengths as measured for the same periods as above. For 2004, n = 74, and for 2005, n = 85.

parts of the formative bed forms are likely to have been preserved. However, note that this need not always be the case; for example, Horn et al. (2012) document how discharge has decreased in the Holocene on the Platte River and produced a significant change in the associated alluvial architecture. Based on data from the entire study reach, including cores, detailed descriptions of the deposits are provided below.

ORIGIN AND SCALE OF DEPOSITS Dunes Mean dune height is approximately 0.15 m (0.49 ft) under low-flow conditions (<100 m3 s1; <3531 ft3 s1) and increases to approximately 0.49 m (1.61 ft)

under high discharges (>600 m3 s1; 21,188 ft3 s1) (Figure 8A). Dune wavelength displays a weak inverse relationship with discharge, with mean wavelengths of approximately 12 m (39 ft) under lowflow conditions and approximately 7.5 m (24.6 ft) at higher discharges (Figure 8B). These dune height and wavelength data suggest that dunes become steeper (i.e., their height:wavelength ratio increases) as discharge increases, as has been shown in past work (e.g., Allen, 1982). Some of the scatter in the relationships between dune size and discharge, especially with respect to dune wavelength, may be caused by the use of discharge instead of depth (although there is a strong relationship between discharge and depth on this river; Thomas, 2006). As discussed by Bridge (2003), it is possible to possess contrasting dune geometries even at a constant discharge, with large dunes forming in a channel
Lunt et al. 563

Figure 9. Thickness of medium-scale cross-sets associated with dune deposits as measured from sections of core above (n = 170) and below (n = 171) the channel basal erosion surface.

with low velocity but high depth, whereas smaller dunes may form in a channel with high velocity and lower depth. Additionally, the variability in dune morphology may be caused by a dune lag effect (see summaries in Allen, 1982; Bridge, 2003), as the dune form takes time to adjust to a new flow depth. Thus, it is not uncommon for dune dimensions to be less than equilibrium values during rising stage, but greater during falling stage. Data are not available at a sufficiently high temporal resolution to investigate these issues further herein. Many cross-strata formed by dunes are below the resolution of the radar data, and thus, the information relating to dunes is mostly restricted to that derived from cores (see Reesink and Bridge, 2007, for a detailed discussion of identifying dunes in core). Above the basal erosion surface, the mean dune set thickness is 0.07 m (0.23 ft), with a range from 0.01 to 0.43 m (0.032 to 1.41 ft) (Figure 9). Average set thickness below the basal erosion surface is the same as that above it, 0.07 m (0.23 ft), but the range of set thicknesses is less (0.010.31 m [0.0331.02 ft]; Figure 9). Mean thickness of the dune cross-strata is thus approximately 14 to 47% smaller than the mean bed-form height in the modern channels, as compared with dunes measured at high and low discharges, respectively.
564

Unit Bars The wavelength of unit bars shows a positive relation with discharge, with mean wavelengths of 210 and 606 m (689 and 1988 ft) in low and higher flow conditions, respectively (Figure 10). Similarly, the mean height of unit bars measured from echosounder and GPR profiles ranged from approximately 0.46 m (1.51 ft) under low-flow conditions to 1.25 m (4.10 ft) at high discharges. This trend of increasing unit bar size with higher discharge may be expected given that the flow width is likely a strong control on bar geometry (Yalin, 1992). The ratio of unit bar wavelength:channel width is constant at a value of approximately 2 (Figure 11; here, the channel width is defined as the width of individual anabranches and not the channel belt width), although the values reported herein are smaller than the ratios of 5 to 7 as suggested by Yalin (1992) and the values of between 3 and 12 reported from theoretical, field, and experimental data by Lewin (1976), Nelson (1990), Tubino et al. (1999), Lanzoni (2000a, b), and Lunt et al. (2004). Comparison of cores with GPR data (Figure 12) shows that the low-angle, undulating reflections that make up most of the unit bar deposits comprise medium-scale cross-sets formed by dunes.

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Figure 10. Unit bar length (n = 622) as measured from aerial photographs for a range of discharges.

Figure 13 shows the change in the dimensions of unit bar sets above and below the basal erosion surface, as derived from measurements made from the GPR profiles. Above the basal erosion surface, unit bar deposits range in length from 10 to 108 m (33 to 354 ft), with a mean of 46 m (151 ft), and in thickness from 0.29 to 1.44 m (0.95 to 4.72 ft), with a mean of 0.68 m (2.23 ft). However, unit bar deposits below the basal erosion surface are only 6 to 78 m (20 to 256 ft) long, with a mean of 23 m (75 ft), and 0.25 to 1.38 m (0.82 to 4.53 ft) thick, with a mean of 0.59 m (1.94 ft). This yields length:thickness ratios of simple large-scale sets ranging from approximately 20 to 143, with a mean of 69 above the basal erosion surface, whereas below the basal erosion surface, the range is only approximately 10 to 80, with a mean of 37. These values above the basal erosion surface are very similar to those reported by Lunt et al. (2004) from a gravel-bed braided river. Important observations to note here are that (1) the lengths of unit bars are significantly

more truncated than their thicknesses; (2) thicknesses below the basal erosion surface are only slightly smaller than those above; (3) the alluvial architecture of unit bar deposits appears the same above and below the erosion surface, comprising large-scale cross-strata that increase in thickness and dip angle in a downstream direction; and (4) most of the unit bar deposits are composed of medium-scale dune cross-sets. Comparison of the dimensions of unit bar deposits below and above the basal erosion surface show that they are approximately 50% shorter below than those above this surface and are approximately 10% of the length of the mean formative bed form. The mean thickness of unit bar deposits below the basal erosion surface is approximately 87% of unit bar deposits above this surface. Thus, unit bar deposits below the channel base are approximately 50% as thick as mean bed-form height in the modern channels at high flow and slightly larger than the mean bed-form height at low flow. This clearly indicates

Figure 11. Ratio of mean unit bar length: formative channel width (n = 622) shows that bar dimensions scale with flow discharge.

Lunt et al.

565

Figure 12. Example of integration of radar and core data, with yellow line indicating the basal erosion surface at this location. The core at this location shows a compound bar with an overall fining-upward trend. The compound bar itself comprises three unit bars that also display fining-upward trends (labeled FU). Also shown is the truncation of the bar immediately beneath the erosion surface that has no fine-grained surface, in contrast to that above.

Figure 13. (A) Length of large-scale cross-sets associated with unit bar deposits as measured from GPR data above (n = 110) and below (n = 355) the basal channel erosion surface. (B) Thickness of large-scale cross-sets associated with unit bar deposits as measured from GPR data above (n = 110) and below (n = 355) the basal channel erosion surface.

566

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Figure 14. Example of surface grain-size data collected at reach B. Note how coarser sediment is found in the channels (red and yellow) around the bar, with the finest sediment located between the bartail limbs (dark blue).

that the deposits of unit bars below the basal erosion surface have been more strongly reworked than the younger deposits above this surface, and that this truncation of sets most likely occurs by erosion of the bar margins (i.e., set lengths are only approximately 10% of formative bed forms) instead of surface erosion of the deposited bar form (i.e., set thicknesses are approximately 50% of high-flow formative bed forms). The vertical trends in grain size of unit bar deposits above and below the channel base are similar. Data from cores (Figure 8) show that unit bar deposits fine upward, from very coarse or coarse sand to medium sand near the base of the compound bar, and then from medium to fine sand toward the top of the compound bar. This trend agrees well with the surface grain-size data (Figure 14) that show that the coarsest sediment occurs in the deepest parts of the active channels, especially in confluences, and also on the outer bends of channels, and finer sediment is present in the upper parts of compound bars. Clay deposits are rarely observed in core and range in thickness from a few millimeters to 0.2 m (0.66 ft) and from the GPR profiles appear up to tens of meters in their lateral extent. Observations of the bed surface show that clay deposits are formed in sheltered low-velocity zones, such as bar tail areas or in the troughs of dunes or unit bars (Sambrook Smith et al., 2006).

Cross-Bar Channels Cross-bar channels have an erosional, concaveupward base when viewed in cross section, although this same erosion surface is generally flat when viewed parallel to flow (Figures 46). Cross-bar channels are up to 100 m (330 ft) long, 20 to 50 m (66 to 164 ft) wide, and 0.5 to 1.4 m (1.64 to 4.59 ft) thick. Reflections that appear as isolated concaveupward bounding surfaces, regardless of orientation, are also seen in the GPR profiles and are formed not by cross-bar channels but as bar-top hollows (Best et al., 2006). These concave-upward surfaces are conformable, with high-angle, inclined strata on either side of the hollow that are formed by the gradual filling of bar tail areas by accretion of inwardly migrating bar tails (Ashworth et al., 1999; Best et al., 2006). These bar tail areas are likely to be filled with sands, or with alternating sandy and muddy strata deposited under conditions of variable discharge (i.e., the U-shaped mixed fill units of Eberth and Miall, 1991), which are then overlain by high-angle cross-strata that dip toward the center of the hollow. The fills of channels and confluence scours below the basal erosion surface are as much as 1 m (3.3 ft) thick, with an average of 0.5 m (1.64 ft) (Figure 15). The thickness of channel fills above the erosion surface is slightly greater, ranging to as much as 1.3 m (4.26 ft) with an average of 0.6 m
Lunt et al. 567

Figure 15. Thickness of cross-sets associated with cross-bar channel deposits as measured from GPR data above (n = 28) and below (n = 54) the basal channel erosion surface.

(1.97 ft). The thickness of channel-fill deposits below the erosion surface is thus approximately 83% of the thickness of those channel fills above this surface. Note that this is a similar level of truncation as described above for the thicknesses of unit bar deposits. Additionally, subhorizontal cross-sets are also present in deposits below the basal erosion that are approximately 0.2 m (0.66 ft) thick and 10 m (33 ft) long, may contain dipping cross-strata, and do not terminate in concave-upward reflections, analogous to the facies 2 described by Sambrook Smith et al. (2006; their figure 3). These subhorizontal surfaces are interpreted as formed by dunes, or low unit bars, that are accreting on the upstream margins of compound bars. Concave-upward reflections with unit bar deposits dipping toward each other are also present below the modern channel basal erosion surface in the GPR profiles and are interpreted to represent bar-top hollows (Best et al., 2006). Compound Bars Given the large scale of compound bars, the present data sets are not extensive enough to provide sufficient data on their dimensions, although some qualitative observations are presented herein. Groundpenetrating radar profiles (Figures 46) show that the deposits of compound bars comprise an amalgamation of unit bar deposits, which are commonly dissected by cross-bar channels that were filled
568

with dunes and rippled sands. Thus, downstream sections through modern compound bars show large-scale, upstream-dipping strata (facies 3) at the upstream end (labeled UD in Figure 5) that are produced by either (1) sets of cross-strata formed by dunes that are too thin to be resolved on the GPR profiles or (2) thin, unit bar deposits that accrete onto the upstream parts of the compound bar. Most of the compound bar comprises unit bar deposits and subhorizontal planar reflections associated with dunes (facies 2), whereas downstream and lateral sections of the compound bar contain a high proportion of high-angle cross-strata (facies 1) associated with unit bar fronts and lateral accretion of the compound bar. Cores through recent compound bars show coarse-grained lags at the base of the bar, which is most likely the reflection picked out in the radar profiles, that are overlain by fining-upward crosssets associated with the unit bar deposits observed on GPR profiles (Figure 12). The compound bars show an overall fining-upward trend from very coarse or coarse sand to fine sand. Although it is difficult to identify definitive details of the compound bar deposits below the basal erosion surface, the vertical grain-size trends of compound bar deposits below the basal erosion surface do appear truncated (Figure 12). Thus, the fines observed in the compound bar deposits above the basal erosion surface are commonly eroded and missing from those from compound bar deposits below this surface. This implies that, in similar depositional environments that undergo truncation of sets, compound bars will be especially difficult to detect in cores where these grain-size trends are absent. This finding matches quantitative data on the proportion of facies at different depths, which also shows differences above and below the basal erosion surface (Figure 7). The proportions of facies 1 and 3 (high-angle reflections and planar reflections, respectively) decrease below the basal erosion surface. Similarly, the proportion of facies 2 (discontinuous reflections) increases below the basal erosion surface. This trend is most likely because of the preferential truncation of the upper (facies 3) and lateral (facies 1) deposits of compound bars. Additionally, because facies 3 represents

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Figure 16. Probability density function of dune height with a two-parameter gamma function fitted according to the method described by Paola and Borgman (1991).

finer grained sediments, the observation detailed above from cores concerning grain-size trends is corroborated.

based purely on laboratory experimental data. Leclair and Bridge (2001) provide a relationship for estimating the preserved cross-set thickness, sm, based on dune height, h sm 1:8b 1

DISCUSSION The data set generated in this study allows testing of theoretical relationships between the dimensions of the formative bed forms and their associated crossstrata. To date, such relationships have been developed mostly based on laboratory flume experiments, where flow is uniform and steady and the crossstrata are not subject to the degree of reworking that may be present in a natural river channel. Dunes The mean thickness of cross-strata formed by dunes was found to be the same above and below the basal erosion surface and would have been generated by a range of dune sizes. Thus, based on observations of dune height over a range of flow conditions in the modern South Saskatchewan River, the ratio of mean cross-set thickness to mean dune height ranges from 0.14 to 0.47. This range is very similar to that of 0.17 to 0.49 reported by Leclair (2002) that was

where estimates of b are made by fitting (Figure 16) a two-parameter gamma function (equation 2) to the probability density function of dune height, p (h) (Paola and Borgman, 1991): Table 2 ha1 e p ph a a b G
h

in which a is a parameter also estimated from the fit of the gamma function to the data and G a is the standard gamma function (e.g., Ash, 1993). Nonlinear, least-squares fitting of equation 2 to the probability density function of dune height results in values of a and b of 2.134 and 0.0597, respectively. This yields a slight overestimation of crossset thickness of 0.11 m (0.36 ft), compared with a measured value of 0.07 m (0.23 ft). From the perspective of interpreting the rock record, it is of more interest to establish the likely formative dune heights based on the preserved cross-set thicknesses and
Lunt et al. 569

use this to estimate the flow depth. Fitting the following to the probability density function of crossset thickness, p(s) ps aeas eas + as 1 1 eas 2 3

where 1/a is the mean value of the exponential tail of the probability density and provides an estimate of b = 0.0446. According to Leclair and Bridge (2001), the mean formative dune height, hm, can be estimated from hm 5:3b + 0:001b 2 4

which yields a predicted mean formative dune height of 0.24 m (0.79 ft), compared with a measured mean dune height of 0.13 m (0.43 ft). Again, the theory overestimates the mean dune height. However, if a value of b = 0.0276 is used (fitting equation 3 to the cross-set probability density function data, but excluding the first point that relates to the smallest dunes), the predicted formative dune height is reduced to 0.15 m (0.49 ft), which is in much better agreement with the observed dune heights. Using the approach outlined in Bridge and Tye (2000) and Leclair and Bridge (2001), the mean flow depth can be estimated from the formative dune height by assuming that the formative flow depth is between six and ten times the dune height. This results in an estimated mean formative flow depth of between 1.42 and 2.36 m (4.66 and 7.74 ft). However, bed topography data collected during a 600 m3 s1 (21,188 ft3 s1) event in 2005 indicates that the mean flow depth was 1.2 m (3.93 ft) (maximum flow depths were about 3.7 m [12.14 ft]), and thus, the theory overestimates the mean flow depth slightly. Two important points emerge from this analysis: (1) dune cross-set thickness relates most closely to the distribution of formative dune heights from average flow conditions, and large dunes have a low preservation potential; and (2) it thus follows that estimates of depth should also relate to average flow depths. Note that Leclair (2011), based on analysis of dunes in the Mississippi River, reaches similar conclusions.
570

The implication of this finding is that applying this theory for reconstructing original bed-form dimensions from the cross-strata, which has mostly been developed under experimental conditions, appears to result in modest overestimates of both set thickness and dune height. This overestimation may be attributed to several factors present in the field that have been simplified in the laboratory, including the influence of nonuniform flows and bedform hysteresis, the presence of bed-form superimposition, and the complex three-dimensionality of flow structure in the field. For example, Leclair (2011) suggests that bend curvature may affect the velocity structure within a channel, leading to dune geometries that may not match theoretical estimates based solely on estimates of flow depth. Unit Bars Large-scale cross-sets generated from unit bars can be analyzed in a similar way as those of dunes. Using data from below the basal erosion surface, where the mean cross-set thickness was 0.59 m (1.94 ft), and fitting the Paola-Borgman probability density function to this histogram, gives b = 0.3277. Using equation 4, the formative bed-form height is then predicted to be 1.74 m (5.71 ft), compared with a mean unit bar height during the 2005 event of 1.25 m (4.10 ft), and thus provides a 40% overestimate. Mean unit bar height should also be broadly equivalent to average flow depth, with mean flow depth being 1.2 m (3.93 ft) during the 2005 flood and mean unit bar height being 1.25 m (4.10 ft). Therefore, similar to the use of dune sets, existing theory for formative mean bar heights would result in a slight overestimation of mean depth at 1.74 m (5.71 ft). Cross-Bar Channels Although no equivalent theory is associated with cross-bar channel deposits, as compared with dunes, it has been suggested that although cross-bar channel fills can cover a wide range of sizes up to that of the main channel, typically, maximum channel fill depths will be a third or a quarter of the maximum bankfull main channel depth (Bridge, 2003).

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Applying this rule of thumb to the South Saskatchewan data gives the following estimates: Based on the maximum thickness of channel fills above (1.3 m [4.27 ft]) and below (1.0 m [3.28 ft]) the basal erosion surface yields estimates of maximum bankfull main channel depth of 3.9 to 5.2 and 3.0 to 4.0 m (12.79 to 17.06 and 9.84 to 13.12 ft), respectively. These figures compare favorably with maximum recorded channel depths of 3.7 m (12.14 ft), although given the slight truncation of sets below the basal erosion surface, the estimate from this location is closer to the upper limit, whereas the opposite is true for the estimate from above the basal erosion surface. Note that these estimates concern maximum bankfull depth, whereas the dune and unit bar depths cited above were for average bankfull depth. Bridge (2003) suggests that mean bankfull depth is approximately half that of the maximum, thus yielding values of 2.0 to 2.6 and 1.5 to 2.0 m (6.56 to 8.53 and 4.92 to 6.56 ft) for above and below the basal erosion surface, respectively. These estimates are of a similar range to those estimated using the dune and unit bar methods detailed above. These calculations therefore suggest that useful estimates of main channel depths can be established from the fills of cross-bar channels. Compound Bars Similar to cross-bar channels, no existing theory applies to the deposit dimensions compound bars, although it has been suggested that on average, a compound bar deposit will comprise three to seven unit bars (Bridge and Lunt, 2006). Thus, if these bars can be identified, this again provides an additional means of estimating paleodepth because compound bar thickness will be equivalent to the maximum bankfull channel depth. With sequential aerial imagery and associated GPR data, it is relatively straightforward to identify the components of a compound bar in a modern river. For instance, Figure 6 shows a compound bar that comprises two to three unit bar deposits, which corresponds with the lower end of Bridge and Lunts (2006) range, which is perhaps to be expected given that this section of the channel was not the deepest within the river. This modern compound bar also most likely

sits on top of a truncated compound bar that defines the basal erosion surface (Figure 6), which itself appears to comprise two to three unit bars. Although not definitive, at least for the South Saskatchewan, it would appear that the number of unit bars that make up a compound bar relates better to the lower range of that suggested by Bridge and Lunt (2006). At the sections studied herein, the channel deposits comprise two truncated compound bars with a maximum of six unit bars within them. Using a unit bar set thickness of 0.59 m (1.94 ft) (see above), then this would yield a maximum bankfull depth estimate of 3.5 m (11.48 ft), which is very close to the measured value of 3.7 m (12.14 ft). The foregoing analysis highlights several important points. (1) Following deposition, dune sets are of such a scale that they either remain intact or are completely eroded, and this results in a similar mean set thickness from modern and preserved dune deposits. (2) In contrast, the sets produced by larger unit bars become more truncated as they are eroded vertically by amalgamation with other unit bars and laterally by main channel erosion. Thus, unit bar sets that lie above the basal erosion surface may be thought of as analogous to rivers where there is a high rate of aggradation and/or low rate of channel migration. Conversely, the unit bar sets preserved below the basal erosion surface may be more typical of low aggradation rates and/or a high rate of channel migration. The importance of channel migration in determining the geometry of the deposits is shown by the irregular nature of many of the cross-set boundaries. (3) The rate of channel migration will also mostly determine the degree to which the deposits of unit bars are dissected. If channel migration within the channel belt is rapid relative to the local vertical aggradation rate, then the bar deposits would be expected to undergo greater degrees of both vertical and lateral erosion and, therefore, be more strongly truncated (Bridge and Lunt, 2006). At present, insufficient data exist from a sufficiently wide range of rivers with which to develop these ideas further and establish whether different relationships of unit bar cross-set and formative unit bar height may be appropriate for rivers with different rates of aggradation and/or channel migration. For example, in contrast to the bars quantified
Lunt et al. 571

herein, Hajek and Heller (2012) report bar deposits from the Castlegate Sandstone that are commonly fully preserved. However, scaling relationships appear more robust and widely applicable for dunes, with the caveat that they relate more to average flow conditions and mean dune height. The largest sets associated with dunes at high flow stage appear to have a low preservation potential, as also concluded by Leclair (2011). These findings highlight that the preservation of cross-strata and the paleohydraulic inferences that can be drawn from them are a function of the ratio of the spatiotemporal scale of the bed forms (i.e., how large they are and how rapidly they migrate) to the temporal scale of aggradation and channel migration. Where this ratio is high, as exemplified by unit bars, then the original bed form is more likely to become eroded and its original form modified when preserved in the subsurface. Conversely, when this ratio is smaller, then the bed forms become more completely preserved, as is the case for dunes, and thus, these may be of greater value in paleohydraulic reconstructions.

5.71, and 4.92 to 6.56 ft), respectively. The mean of these estimates yields a formative flow depth of 1.8 m (5.91 ft), which is slightly higher than our measured mean bankfull flow depth of 1.2 m (3.94 ft). However, using the three different data sets, the accuracy of this estimation has been increased in comparison with use of any single data set. Additionally, the present work, as well as that of Leclair (2011), suggests that preserved dunes will relate more to average conditions, such as the mean, instead of maximum bankfull flow depth. This point is important because estimates of channel belt width using empirical equations are commonly based on mean bankfull flow depth. For example, using the estimate of 1.8 m (5.91 ft) for mean bankfull flow depth (dm), and an empirical equation for channel belt width (cbw) from Bridge and Mackey (1993):
1:37 cbw 192dm

APPLICATION TO RESERVOIR MODELING The results of the present work can be used to improve scaling relationships in studies that seek to predict the heterogeneity of subsurface fluvial deposits. The dimensions (length, width, and height) of geobodies are defined statistically in stochastic models, and thus, the correct recognition of the formative channel depth allows the different scales of fluvial heterogeneity to be estimated with a reduced uncertainty. We illustrate below how our results can be applied to geobody estimation using data from the preserved deposits detailed herein. One prerequisite input for reservoir models is an estimate of channel belt width because this exerts a fundamental control on the connectedness of fluvial sandstone bodies. Typically, as the width of the channel belt increases, then sandstone body connectivity can also be expected to become greater. As demonstrated above, estimates of mean formative flow depths from the present measurements of preserved dunes, unit bars, and channel fills are 1.42 to 2.36, 1.74, and 1.5 to 2.0 m (4.66 to 7.74,
572

yields a cbw of 430 m (1410 ft), as compared with measured values of approximately 600 m (1968 ft). However, if the estimate of 1.8 m (5.91 ft) was assumed to relate to maximum bankfull flow depth, then dm would be assumed to be approximately 0.9 m (2.95 ft) (i.e., half the maximum value), resulting in an estimate of cbw of only 166 m (544 ft). As well as improving estimates of the width of channel belt sandstones, the data presented herein can also provide important insights for heterogeneity modeling within the channel. Using estimates of the preserved vs. original bed-form dimensions documented herein, the lateral dimensions of fluvial geobodies can be predicted. Although porosity and permeability variations on the scale of dune crosssets may be of more limited concern at the reservoir scale, high-permeability streaks associated with coarse lags at the base of unit bar deposits may have a large impact on reservoir drainage. Similarly, mud-rich drapes such as those commonly found at bartail locations will act to reduce vertical and lateral connectivity (e.g., the interbar muds of Lynds and Hajek, 2006). Prediction of the geometry of such unit bar scale is thus important. Lynds and Hajek (2006) list four channel-scale fine-grained lithofacies (channel-lining muds, interbar muds, inclined heterolithic muds, and

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

mud plugs) that can all occur in sandy braided rivers and demonstrate how estimates of the size of these lithofacies can be derived from estimates of flow depth to better constrain mudstone dimensions used in reservoir models. This study has also allowed the estimation of the degree of preservation of bars that, together with estimates of flow depth, can assist with improving estimates of geobody dimensions. For instance, because unit bar deposits scale with formative flow width (see above) and generally have lengths of between three and seven times the channel width, use of a typical flow depth:channel width ratio of 1:200 (Bridge, 2003) yields an estimate of formative channel width of approximately 300 m (984 ft). This yields estimates of unit bar lengths of 900 to 2100 m (2952 to 6890 ft) and widths of about 300 m (984 ft). Furthermore, using the preservation potential of approximately 10% quantified herein, yields preserved geobody dimensions of 30 to 210 m (98 to 689 ft) with a mean of about 90 m (295 ft). If we assume that high-permeability basal lags between two or three adjacent unit bars may interact (Ramanathan et al., 2010), this implied the potential for high-permeability thief zones to impact reservoir drainage between wells spaced 300 to 600 m (984 to 1968 ft) apart. Clearly, identifying the degree of truncation is important in such calculations, and the use of a 10% preservation figure herein may represent a lower limit more typical of lower aggradational settings. Conversely, at a larger scale, bars may be much more fully preserved, such as those reported by Hajek and Heller (2012). The aim of the example described above is to demonstrate how detailed analysis and use of such data from this study can reduce the uncertainty in estimates of formative mean flow depths through prediction from the thicknesses of preserved dune, unit bar, and channel-fill deposits. The estimation of formative mean flow depth is then combined with well-documented scaling relationships to predict the range of bed-form and channel widths. The new information from this study concerning the preservation potential of these bed-form widths and lengths is then used to predict the scale of heterogeneities in subsurface fluvial reservoirs with greater rigor than simple application of dimen-

sional databases. The value of developing scaling relationships is thus that they are independent of analog data and allow prediction in any subsurface reservoir with well-described core data.

CONCLUSIONS This study has analyzed the morphology, geometry, and deposits of bed forms and channels in a sandy braided river. This analysis reveals six points concerning the use of the preserved alluvial architecture to establish the likely scale of a formative alluvial channel: 1. The mean dune cross-set thickness is the same above and below the basal erosion surface analyzed herein. However, large dune cross-sets are not well represented in the subsurface sedimentology and result in relationships between set thickness, dune height, and depth that are more appropriate to mean bankfull flow depth. Past theory of formative dune height has been mostly tested with experimental data and appears to overestimate slightly the mean dune height and, hence, estimates of flow depth derived from this. 2. The mean thickness of unit bar deposits above and below the basal erosion surface is broadly similar. Mean unit bar thicknesses below the surface (0.59 m [1.94 ft]) are approximately 87% of that from those above the basal erosion surface (0.68 m [2.23 ft]). Thus, unit bar deposits below the channel base are approximately 50% as thick as the mean formative bed-form height, as compared with high-flow bar forms. However, unit bar lengths are substantially different, and appear to be more truncated than thickness. Unit bar deposits below the base of the modern channel are only approximately 50% as long as those above and approximately 10% as long as the formative mean bedform wavelength. Similar to the analysis conducted with dunes, unit bar sets provide a reasonable estimate of mean bankfull flow depth, although again with a slight overestimation. 3. The choice of the unit bar length:thickness ratio used in object-based models must consider the extent of unit bar reworking as affected by
Lunt et al. 573

aggradation rate, the rate of lateral channel migration, variability of bed-form dimensions, and intrinsic channel scour. However, the precise nature of these relationships remains unquantified. Thus, existing theory applied to dune cross-strata provides a more robust method for estimating mean flow depth than using the dimensions of unit bar sets. This is especially the case when using core data, where identifying and interpreting the deposits of unit bars is problematic. 4. Similar to unit bars, the maximum thickness of the fills of cross-bar channels is only slightly smaller below the basal erosion surface than above it (83%). Given this similarity, using either thickness yields a reasonable estimate of main channel flow depth based on the assumption that the main channel is three to four times deeper than the maximum thickness of the crossbar channel fills. However, this provides an estimate of the maximum bankfull depth. To compare this estimate with the methods concerning dunes and unit bars, which relate to mean bankfull depth, the assumption should then be made that this depth is approximately half the maximum bankfull depth. 5. When taken together, estimates of mean bankfull flow depth obtained from dunes cross-sets (1.89 m [6.20 ft]), unit bars (1.74 m [5.71 ft]), and cross-bar channels (1.75 m [5.74 ft]) are all very similar but slight overestimates of the measured value (1.2 m [3.94 ft]). However, given the inherent variability within natural rivers, these estimates are sufficiently reliable to gain a satisfactory estimate of the overall scale of the alluvial channel. The central point that arises here is that estimates from a range of different methods should be obtained if possible because this allows confidence in the use of such estimates. If the estimates from these different methods show a wide variation, this suggests that the different scales and features of dunes, unit bars, and crossbar channels have been identified incorrectly. 6. Individual compound bars can be difficult to identify unequivocally in outcrop and core and, thus, provide the least robust method for attempting to establish paleochannel dimensions. In this study, compound bars above the basal
574

erosion surface (and hence, channel depth) were more readily identified based on the presence of more complete fining-upward successions within the deposits. However, these compound bars only comprised up to three unit bars. In contrast, the deposits of compound bars below the basal erosion surface have truncated vertical trends in grain size with their upper fine-grained caps commonly absent, thus making them much more difficult to identify. Although estimates of paleochannel dimensions can be derived from both core and outcrop, the dimensions of bars and channel fills will vary depending on the degree of truncation, and these dimensions may be especially difficult to identify in core alone. Taking all this evidence into account, we recommend herein that if only core data are available, then dune cross-sets provide the most robust method for estimating paleochannel mean bankfull flow depth and hence, establishing the overall size of the river. It is, of course, preferable to have outcrop as well as core data so that a range of estimates can be better constrained. The data presented herein suggest that the correct identification of the different components of an alluvial channel should yield comparable estimates for mean bankfull flow depth. These data demonstrate that when using length and thickness estimates from modern channels to build an object-based reservoir model, consideration of the aggradational history is vital. Herein, we have used a simple split between those deposits above and below the modern channel basal erosion surface to illustrate this point. For example, rapid channel migration relative to aggradation rate will lead to greater truncation of deposits and, thus, may be more analogous to data from below the basal erosion surface. Clearly, development of these ideas requires the types of measurement provided herein but from a broader range of rivers with differing depositional histories.

REFERENCES CITED
Allen, J. R. L., 1982, Sedimentary structures: Their character and physical basis: Amsterdam, Elsevier, 594 p.

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Ash, C., 1993, The probability tutoring book: Chichester, United Kingdom, IEEE Press, 480 p. Ashworth, P. J., J. L. Best, J. Peakall, and J. A. Lorsong, 1999, The influence of aggradation rate on braided alluvial architecture: Field study and physical scale-modelling of the Ashburton River gravels, Canterbury Plains, New Zealand, in N. D. Smith and J. Rogers, eds., Fluvial sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication 28, p. 1150. Ashworth, P. J., G. H. Sambrook Smith, J. L. Best, J. S. Bridge, S. N. Lane, I. A. Lunt, A. J. H. Reesink, C. J. Simpson, and R. E. Thomas, 2011, Evolution and sedimentology of a channel fill in the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River and its comparison to the deposits of an adjacent compound bar: Sedimentology, v. 58, p. 18601883, doi:10.1111/j.1365-3091.2011.01242.x. Best, J. L., P. J. Ashworth, C. S. Bristow, and J. Roden, 2003, Three-dimensional sedimentary architecture of a large, mid-channel sand braid-bar, Jamuna River, Bangladesh: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 73, p. 516530, doi:10.1306/010603730516. Best, J. L., J. Woodward, P. J. Ashworth, G. H. Sambrook Smith, and C. J. Simpson, 2006, Bar-top hollows: A new element in the architecture of sandy braided rivers: Sedimentary Geology, v. 190, p. 241255, doi:10.1016 /j.sedgeo.2006.05.022. Blodgett, R. H., and K. O. Stanley, 1980, Stratification, bedforms and discharge relations of the Platte braided river system, Nebraska: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 50, p. 139148. Bridge, J. S., 2003, Rivers and floodplains: Forms, processes and sedimentary record: Malden, Massachusetts, Blackwell, 491 p. Bridge, J. S., and I. A. Lunt, 2006, Depositional models of braided rivers, in G. H. Sambrook Smith, J. L. Best, C. S. Bristow, and G. E. Petts, eds., Braided rivers: Process, deposits, ecology and management: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication 36, p. 1150. Bridge, J. S., and S. D. Mackey, 1993, A theoretical study of fluvial sandstone body dimensions, in S. S. Flint and I. D. Bryant, eds., Geological modeling of hydrocarbon reservoirs: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication 15, p. 213236. Bridge, J. S., and R. S. Tye, 2000, Interpreting the dimensions of ancient fluvial channel bars, channels, and channel belts from wireline-logs and cores: AAPG Bulletin, v. 84, p. 12051228. Bridge, J. S., N. D. Smith, F. Trent, S. L. Gabel, and P. Bernstein, 1986, Sedimentology and morphology of a low-sinuosity river: Calamus River, Nebraska Sand Hills: Sedimentology, v. 33, p. 851 870, doi:10.1111/j.1365-3091.1986 .tb00987.x. Bridge, J. S., R. E. L. Collier, and J. Alexander, 1998, Largescale structure of Calamus River deposits revealed using ground-penetrating radar: Sedimentology, v. 45, p. 977 985, doi:10.1046/j.1365-3091.1998.00174.x. Bristow, C. S., 1987, Brahmaputra River: Channel migration and deposition, in F. G. Ethridge, R. M. Flores, and M. D. Harvey, eds., Recent developments in fluvial sedimentology: SEPM Special Publication 39, p. 6374.

Bristow, C. S., 1993a, Sedimentary structures exposed in bar tops in the Brahmaputra River, Bangladesh, in J. L. Best and C. S. Bristow, eds., Braided rivers: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 75, p. 277 289. Bristow, C. S., 1993b, Sedimentology of the Rough Rock: A Carboniferous braided river sheet sandstone in northern England, in J. L. Best and C. S. Bristow, eds., Braided rivers: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 75, p. 291304. Cant, D. J., and R. G. Walker, 1978, Fluvial processes and facies sequences in the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada: Sedimentology, v. 25, p. 625648, doi:10 .1111/j.1365-3091.1978.tb00323.x. Coleman, J. M., 1969, Brahmaputra river: Channel processes and sedimentation: Sedimentary Geology, v. 3, p. 129 239, doi:10.1016/0037-0738(69)90010-4. Collinson, J. D., 1970, Bedforms of the Tana River, Norway: Geografiska Annaler, v. 52A, p. 3156. Eberth, D. A., and A. D. Miall, 1991, Stratigraphy, sedimentology and evolution of a vertebrate-bearing braided to anastomosed fluvial system, Cutler Formation (Permian Pennsylvanian), north-central New Mexico: Sedimentary Geology, v. 72, p. 225252, doi:10.1016/0037-0738 (91)90013-4. Fielding, C. R., J. Alexander, and R. McDonald, 1999, Sedimentary facies from GPR surveys of the modern, upper Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia: Consequences of extreme discharge fluctuations, in N. D. Smith and J. Rogers, eds., Fluvial sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication 28, p. 347362. Hajek, E. A., and P. L. Heller, 2012, Flow-depth scaling in alluvial architecture and nonmarine sequence stratigraphy: Example from the Castlegate Sandstone, central Utah, U.S.A.: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 82, p. 121130, doi:10.2110/jsr.2012.8. Hazeldine, R. S., 1983, Fluvial bars reconstructed from a deep, straight channel, Upper Carboniferous coalfield of northeast England: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 53, p. 12331247. Horn, J. D., C. R. Fielding, and R. M. Joeckel, 2012, Revision of Platte River alluvial facies model through observations of extant channels and barforms, and subsurface alluvial valley fills: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 82, p. 7291, doi:10.2110/jsr.2012.9. Jordan, D. W., and W. A. Pryor, 1992, Hierarchical levels of heterogeneity in a Mississippi River meander belt and application to reservoir systems: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 16011624. Lane, S. N., P. E. Widdison, R. E. Thomas, P. J. Ashworth, J. L. Best, I. A. Lunt, G. H. Sambrook Smith, and C. J. Simpson, 2010, Quantification of braided river channel change using archival digital image analysis: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 35, p. 971985, doi:10 .1002/esp.2015. Lanzoni, S., 2000a, Experiments on bar formation in a straight flume: 1. Uniform sediment: Water Resources Research, v. 36, p. 33373349, doi:10.1029/2000WR900160. Lanzoni, S., 2000b, Experiments on bar formation in a straight

Lunt et al.

575

flume: 2. Graded sediment: Water Resources Research, v. 36, p. 33513363, doi:10.1029/2000WR900161. Leclair, S. F., 2002, Preservation of cross-strata due to the migration of subaqueous dunes: An experimental investigation: Sedimentology, v. 49, p. 11571180, doi:10.1046 /j.1365-3091.2002.00482.x. Leclair, S. F., 2011, Interpreting fluvial hydromorphology from the rock record: Large-river peak flows leave no clear signature, in S. K. Davidson, S. Leleu, and C. P. North, eds., From river to rock record: The preservation of fluvial sediments and their subsequent interpretation: SEPM Special Publication 97, p. 113123. Leclair, S. F., and J. S. Bridge, 2001, Quantitative interpretation of sedimentary structures formed by river dunes: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 71, p. 713716, doi:10 .1306/2DC40962-0E47-11D7-8643000102C1865D. Lewin, J., 1976, Initiation of bed forms and meanders in coarse-grained sediment: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 87, p. 281 285, doi:10.1130/0016-7606 (1976)87<281:IOBFAM>2.0.CO;2. Lunt, I. A., J. S. Bridge, and R. S. Tye, 2004, A quantitative, three-dimensional depositional model of gravelly braided rivers: Sedimentology, v. 51, p. 377414, doi:10.1111/j .1365-3091.2004.00627.x. Lynds, R., and E. Hajek, 2006, Conceptual model for predicting mudstone dimensions in sandy braided-river reservoirs: AAPG Bulletin, v. 90, p. 12731288, doi:10 .1306/03080605051. McCabe, P. J., 1977, Deep distributary channels and giant bedforms in the Upper Carboniferous of the Central Pennines, northern England: Sedimentology, v. 24, p. 271290, doi:10.1111/j.1365-3091.1977.tb00257.x. Mndez, G., M. Prez-Arlucea, E. Stouthamer, and H. Berendsen, 2003, The TESS-1 suction corer: A new device to extract wet, uncompacted sediments: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 73, p. 1078 1081, doi:10 .1306/033103731078. Miall, A. D., 1977, A review of the braided river depositional environment: Earth Science Reviews, v. 13, p. 162, doi:10.1016/0012-8252(77)90055-1. Miall, A. D., and B. G. Jones, 2003, Fluvial architecture of the Hawkesbury Sandstone (Triassic), near Sydney, Australia: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 73, p. 531545, doi:10.1306/111502730531. Nelson, J. M., 1990, The initial instability and finite-amplitude stability of alternate bars in straight channels: Earth Science Reviews, v. 29, p. 97115. Paola, C., and L. Borgman, 1991, Reconstructing random topography from preserved stratification: Sedimentology, v. 38, p. 553565, doi:10.1111/j.1365-3091.1991.tb01008.x. Phillips, R. T. J., 2003, Downstream geomorphic impacts of reservoir construction on the sand-bed braided South Saskatchewan River, Saskatchewan. B.Sc. (Hons.) thesis, Simon Fraser University, British Columbia, Canada, 75 p. Ramanathan, R., A. Guin, R. W. Ritzi Jr., D. F. Dominic, V. L. Freedman, T. D. Scheibe, and I. A. Lunt, 2010, Simulating the heterogeneity in braided channel belt deposits: 1. A geometricbased methodology and code: Water Resources Research, v. 46, doi:10.1029/2009WR008111. Reesink, A. J. H., and J. S. Bridge, 2007, Influence of superim-

posed bedforms and flow unsteadiness on formation of cross strata in dunes and unit bars: Sedimentary Geology, v. 202, p. 281296, doi:10.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.02.005. Sambrook Smith, G. H., P. J. Ashworth, J. L. Best, J. Woodward, and C. J. Simpson, 2005, The morphology and facies of sandy braided rivers: Some considerations of scale invariance, in M. D. Blum, S. B. Marriott, and S. F. Leclair, eds., Fluvial sedimentology VII: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication 35, p. 145158. Sambrook Smith, G. H., P. J. Ashworth, J. L. Best, J. Woodward, and C. J. Simpson, 2006, The alluvial architecture and sedimentology of the sandy, braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada: Sedimentology, v. 53, p. 413434, doi:10 .1111/j.1365-3091.2005.00769.x. Sambrook Smith, G. H., P. J. Ashworth, J. L. Best, I. A. Lunt, O. Orfeo, and D. R. Parsons, 2009, The sedimentology and alluvial architecture of a large braid bar, Ro Paran, Argentina: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 79, p. 629 642, doi:10.2110/jsr.2009.066. Sambrook Smith, G. H., J. L. Best, P. J. Ashworth, S. N. Lane, N. O. Parker, I. A. Lunt, R. E. Thomas, and C. J. Simpson, 2010, Can we distinguish flood frequency and magnitude in the sedimentological record of rivers?: Geology, v. 38, p. 579582, doi:10.1130/G30861.1. Skelly, R. L., C. S. Bristow, and F. G. Ethridge, 2003, Architecture of channel-belt deposits in an aggrading shallow sandbed braided river: The lower Niobrara River, northeast Nebraska: Sedimentary Geology, v. 158, p. 249 270, doi:10.1016/S0037-0738(02)00313-5. Smith, D. G., 1984, Vibracoring fluvial and deltaic sediments Tips on improving penetration and recovery: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 54, p. 660663. Smith, N. D., 1970, The braided stream depositional environment: Comparison of the Platte River with some Silurian clastic rocks, north-central Appalachians: Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, v. 81, p. 29933014, doi:10 .1130/0016-7606(1970)81[2993:TBSDEC]2.0.CO;2. Smith, N. D., 1971, Transverse bars and braiding in the lower Platte River, Nebraska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 82, p. 34073420, doi:10.1130/0016-7606 (1971)82[3407:TBABIT]2.0.CO;2. Thomas, R. E., 2006, Flow processes and channel change in sand-bedded braided rivers: United Kingdom, University of Leeds, 295 p. Tubino, M., R. Repetto, and G. Zolezzi, 1999, Free bars in rivers: Journal of Hydraulic Research, v. 37, p. 759 775, doi:10.1080/00221689909498510. Tye, R. S., 2004, Geomorphology: An approach to determining subsurface reservoir dimensions: AAPG Bulletin, v. 88, p. 11231147, doi:10.1306/02090403100. Van de Meene, E. A., J. Van der Staay, and Teoh Lay Hock, 1979, The Van der Staay suctioncorer: A simple apparatus for drilling in sand below groundwater table: Haarlem, The Netherlands, Rijks Geologische Dienst, 24 p. Willis, B. J., 1993, Ancient river systems in the Himalayan foredeep, Chinji village area, northern Pakistan: Sedimentary Geology, v. 88, p. 176, doi:10.1016/0037 -0738(93)90151-T. Yalin, M. S., 1992, River mechanics: Oxford, United Kingdom, Pergamon Press, 219 p.

576

Using Modern Analogs to Reconstruct Channel Dimensions

Diagenesis and quartz cement distribution of low-permeability Upper TriassicMiddle Jurassic reservoir sandstones, Longyearbyen CO2 lab well site in Svalbard, Norway
Mai Britt E. Mrk

AUTHOR Mai Britt E. Mrk  Department of Geology and Mineral Resources Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway; mai.britt.mork@ntnu.no Mai Britt E. Mrk has a Ph.D. in geology and mineralogy from the University of Oslo and has been a researcher at SINTEF Petroleum Research in Trondheim since 1988 and a professor in geology at Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) since 2003. Her present research activities focus on sandstone reservoir geology and Mesozoic geology offshore northern Norway. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This article is a result of the ongoing studies by the Longyearbyen CO2 lab of the University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS). We thank Snorre Olaussen (UNIS) and Atle Mrk (SINTEF) for the sampling collaboration and discussion, and our partners ConocoPhillips, Statoil, Store Norske Spitsbergen Kulkompani, Statkraft, Lundin Norway, Leonhard Nilsen & Snner AS (LNS) Spitsbergen, and the Climit program at the Research Council of Norway for the access to samples and publishing. We also thank the referees and editor of the journal for the useful comments. The AAPG Editor thanks the following reviewers for their work on this paper: Brenda B. Bower and an anonymous reviewer.

ABSTRACT Reservoir properties of Upper TriassicMiddle Jurassic sandstones, Spitsbergen, are studied as part of a CO2 storage pilot project in Longyearbyen. The reservoir formations show large contrasts in sandstone compositions, with unexpected low permeability despite moderate porosity values. Petrographic analyses were performed to investigate the influence and distribution of diagenesis. It is concluded that, because of various compaction, cementation, and dissolution processes, the sandstone porosity is mainly isolated molds and micropores and associated with fibrous illite and chamosite, explaining the low permeability. Diagenesis and the distribution of quartz cement is influenced by lithofacies and detrital compositions. Mineralogically immature sandstones (De Geerdalen Formation) show a homogeneous distribution of quartz cement overgrowths on quartz grains, distributed interstitial to labile grains and other cements (e.g., late calcite). The main silica source was from the dissolution of adjacent feldspar and labile grains as part of the chemical compaction. In contrast, quartz-dominated sandstones (Knorringfjellet Formation) show a heterogeneous patchy distribution of quartz cement influenced by the sedimentary bioturbation pattern, with silica sourced also from dissolution at clay-rich microstylolites. Phosphatic beds at the base and top of the formation are strongly influenced by marine eogenesis and reworking processes and associated with

Copyright 2013. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Manuscript received December 16, 2011; provisional acceptance July 11, 2012; revised manuscript received September 8, 2012; final acceptance October 3, 2012. DOI:10.1306/10031211193

AAPG Bulletin, v. 97, no. 4 (April 2013), pp. 577 596

577

concentration of iron-rich authigenic minerals. The highest porosity appears in sand-supported conglomerate where moldic clay-mineral ooids contributed to reduce quartz cementation. The stratigraphic change from mineralogical immature (Triassic) to mature (uppermost TriassicJurassic) sandstone compositions is detected in wide areas of the Barents Shelf and has considerable implications for the distribution of sandstone reservoir properties.

INTRODUCTION The TriassicJurassic sedimentary succession in the vicinity of Longyearbyen, Svalbard, was studied as a potential reservoir for CO2 storage in the initial phase of the Longyearbyen CO2 lab pilot study, which was initiated in 2007 by the University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS). Several cores were drilled near Longyearbyen (Figure 1) as part of the test program penetrating a total section from Triassic to Cretaceous (Braathen et al., in press). The reservoir sandstones comprise the Upper Triassic De Geerdalen Formation and the overlying Knorringfjellet Formation. The latter formation is included in the Upper Triassic to Middle Jurassic Wilhelmya Subgroup (Mrk et al., 1999; Dallmann et al., 2001) (Figure 2). The Wilhelmya Subgroup has the greatest thickness in eastern Svalbard and is only 15 to 25 m (4982 ft) thick in the study area near Longyearbyen. The reservoir units are overlain by the Agardhfjellet Formation of Upper Jurassic dark shales, which provide cap rocks in the subsurface, and by Cretaceous and Cenozoic formations (Major et al., 2000; Braathen et al., in press). The Agardhfjellet Formation and the Middle Triassic Botneheia Formation (Figure 2) also provide important source rocks for hydrocarbons (Mrk and Bjory, 1984; Leith et al., 1992). The stratigraphic units are gently tilted by later tectonics, and the reservoir formations are outcropping updip 15 km (9 mi) to the north. A total overburden thickness on top of the TriassicJurassic strata in the studied area is estimated to have been approximately 2.7 km (1.7 mi) (e.g., Manum and Throndsen, 1978) with a maximum thickness in
578 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

the mid-Cenozoic, suggesting that more than 2 km (1 mi) of overburden have been removed by erosion in the area. As much as 3.5-km (2.2-mi) uplift in Oligocenelatest Neogene has been suggested (Ogata et al., in press). The De Geerdalen Formation consists of alternating marine sandstones and shales and lagoonal sediments in the upper part. This formation has been correlated to the Snadd Formation in the Barents Sea, which is interpreted as a northwestwardprograding wedge of shallow-marine and paralic sediments, sourced from elevated areas in the far southeast (Riis et al., 2008). The Knorringfjellet Formation is interpreted to have been deposited in a shallow shelf embayment with a high deltaic influx (Nagy and Berge, 2008; Nagy et al., 2011) and is composed of a condensed section of sediments ranging from the Late Triassic to the Middle Jurassic (Bjerke and Dypvik, 1977; Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985; Mrk et al., 1999; Reolid et al., 2010). The transition from the De Geerdalen Formation to the Wilhelmya Subgroup and in the Barents Sea from the Snadd Formation to the Fruholmen Formation (Figure 2) marks important changes in sediment compositions and provenance over huge areas in the Late Triassic from mineralogically immature Triassic sandstones to quartzdominated Jurassic sandstones (Mrk et al., 1982; Bergan and Knarud, 1993; Mrk, 1999; Riis et al., 2008). The Knorringfjellet Formation is strongly heterolithic with alternating marine sandstones and mudstones and is recognized by the appearance of relatively thin sandy phosphate conglomerates at the base and in the upper part, referred to as the Slottet and Brentskardhaugen beds, respectively (Worsley, 1973; Mrk et al., 1999). The Slottet Bed has a wide regional distribution on the Svalbard and the Barents shelf and is interpreted as a transgressive lag (Mrk et al., 1999; Nagy and Berge, 2008; Nagy et al., 2011). The Brentskardhaugen Bed has been studied in various outcrops on Spitsbergen (e.g., Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985; Maher, 1989; Mrk et al., 1999; Krajewski, 2000). It contains fossils ranging from the Late Triassic to the Middle Jurassic (Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985; Reolid et al., 2010) including Toarcian and Bajocian fossils

Figure 1. Svalbard archipelago in the Barents Sea and the location of the Longyearbyen study area on the island of Spitsbergen. Outcropping Triassic and Jurassic sedimentary rocks are shown in black. LYR = Longyearbyen.

identified within phosphate concretions (Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985). The Brentskardhaugen Bed has been referred to as a remanie (Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985), that is, a gravel lag formed in response to transgression following a considerable depositional hiatus. An alternative origin related to short-lived depositional events such as storms is proposed by Maher (1989) who suggested that megastorms on a shallow shelf could have acted on the underlying condensed bed. A combination of the proposed models may be realistic.

Previous diagenesis studies of the Wilhelmya Subgroup focused on the details of phosphate cementation from outcrop samples (Krajewski, 2000, 2001) and on carbonate cementation at the base of the overlying Adventdalen Group (Krajewski et al., 2001; Krajewski, 2002). Influences of quartz cementation on reservoir properties have been studied in the mineralogically mature St Formation (Figure 2) in local areas southwest in the Barents Sea (Olaussen et al., 1984; Walderhaug and Bjrkum, 2003). Knowledge of the distribution of
Mrk 579

values (as much as 18%; average, 13%) (table 1 in Farokhpoor et al., 2010) (Figure 3). The variation in lithofacies and mineralogical maturity exemplified within these formations in the drill cores provide a framework to compare textural and compositional influences on the diagenesis and reservoir quality. This study documents that the unusual porosity and permeability distribution is caused by a combination of multistage depositional and diagenetic processes. The studied formations are of interest also as potential petroleum reservoirs and are known to be more porous both in eastern Svalbard and offshore in the Barents Sea, depending on variations in local tectonics and in the burial and temperature histories.

Figure 2. Upper Triassic and Jurassic stratigraphic nomenclature for Svalbard and the Barents Sea (modified from Mrk et al., 1999). Fm = Formation; Gp = Group; Sg = Subgroup.

SAMPLING AND METHODOLOGY The De Geerdalen and Knorringfjellet Formations are cored onshore between 670 and 970 m (2198 and 3182 ft) below surface in drillhole Dh4 southeast of Longyearbyen and between 732 and 856 m (2402 and 2808 ft) in drillhole Dh2 7 km (4 mi) northwest. A litholog for core Dh4, which covers the most

quartz cementation is important in deep reservoirs and in partly exhumed reservoirs as exemplified in parts of the Barents Sea. This study focuses on the sandstone properties of the De Geerdalen and Knorringfjellet formations in the subsurface near Longyearbyen and was initiated to examine possible diagenetic controls on the distribution of reservoir properties as part of the CO2 storage project (Braathen et al., in press). In a previous study of sandstone porosity and permeability (core Dh4), Farokhpoor et al. (2010) concluded a low porosity and permeability in the De Geerdalen Formation and a moderate porosity and low permeability in the Knorringfjellet Formation. However, because a water injection test into the lower reservoir indicated a relatively high connectivity in the lower part of the De Geerdalen Formation, it has been suggested that fracture permeability forms effective conduits into the reservoir body (Braathen et al., in press; Ogata et al., in press). The nature of the reservoir matrix is still a question considering permeability values less than 0.05 md for the De Geerdalen Formation and in the range of 1.0 to 0.1 md for the Knorringfjellet Formation despite moderate to relatively high porosity
580 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Figure 3. Porosity-permeability (K) plot of sandstones from the De Geerdalen Formation (green diamonds) and Knorringfjellet Formation (blue circles), based on plug measurements by Farokhpoor et al. (2010).

Figure 4. Sedimentary core log of the De Geerdalen (units A and B) and Knorringfjellet (units CG) Formations in well Dh4. Basaltic layers are marked by hatched lines. SL marks the Slottet Bed at the base of the Knorringfjellet Formation (KFF), and BB marks the Brentskardhaugen phosphatic bed. The conglomerate of unit F is grouped with BB in Braathen et al. (in press). Fm = Formation.

complete section, is shown in Figure 4. The log is modified from Braathen et al. (in press) who also presents a lithostratigraphic correlation between cores Dh4 and Dh2. In the present descriptions, the sandstone and conglomerate units are divided into different categories, referred to as units A to G on the basis of stratigraphic appearance and petrographic properties (Figure 4).

The sandstone study is based on core-plug samples from wells Dh4 and Dh2, including optical microscopy of 55 polished thin sections stained blue to show porosity, and supplemented by scanning electron microscopy backscattered electron image and energy dispersive analysis for mineral identification and microstructural interpretation. A JEOL JXA-8500F Electron Probe Microanalyzer
Mrk 581

with x-ray spectrometers was used for mineral chemical analyses of carbonate and clay minerals. The presence of chamosite was interpreted based on microprobe analyses (including 30% FeOtot) and verified by x-ray diffraction bulk-rock analysis. The sandstone petrography is described first with respect to detrital framework mineralogy and provenance features and then for diagenetic processes and their impact on reservoir properties.

SANDSTONE COMPOSITIONS AND PROVENANCE De Geerdalen Formation The De Geerdalen Formation (units A and B) consists of marine and lagoonal bioturbated sandstones alternating with mudstones, with thicker sandstone beds interpreted as barriers and channels (Braathen et al., in press), and also includes an intraformational channel conglomerate in unit A identical with that described in the analogous Snadd Formation in the northern Barents Sea (figure 7 in Riis et al., 2008). Multicolored lagoonal sediments in the uppermost part of the formation (unit B) are assigned to the Isfjorden Member (Mrk et al., 1999; Dallmann et al., 2001), which is less studied here because of its mudstone dominance. The sandstones of the De Geerdalen Formation are generally fine grained (very fine to medium) and well sorted. The compositions are mineralogically immature arkosic and lithic arenite (Pettijohn et al., 1972) and dominated by plagioclase, quartz, and polygranular rock fragments (Figures 5, 6). The varied detrital mineralogy also includes mica, chlorite, and accessory zircon, tourmaline, Cr-spinel, and garnet. Chert is common as rock fragments, and fragments of volcanic or shallow intrusive rocks, metamorphic rocks (e.g., micaschist), and shale are also common. Very fine aggregate grains of chlorite, illite, and albite may represent altered mafic volcanic rocks. An igneous sediment source is supported also by the appearance of zoned plagioclase grains. Detrital K-feldspar associated with moldic porosity suggests diagenetic dissolution and is particularly abundant in the channel sandstone (unit A; Figure 6C).
582 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Figure 5. (A) Sandstone compositions from modal analyses in terms of detrital quartz (Qtz), feldspar (Fsp), and lithics (Lith) (Pettijohn et al., 1972). Data from the Snadd Formation in the northern Barents Shelf (Riis et al., 2008), which is equivalent to the De Geerdalen Formation, are shown for comparison. (B) Comparison of sandstone compositions in well Dh4. Note the difference between the immature lower (De Geerdalen) and upper more mature (Knorringfjellet) sandstones. Detrital grains (Qtz, Fsp, Rfr [rock fragments] = Lith), diagenetic minerals (quartz cement [Qcm], carbonate cement [Carb], opaque minerals [Opq], pyrite), total clay content (Cly), and porosity (Por) from modal analyses. The low modal porosity values are commented on in the text. Fm = Formation; LYR = Longyearbyen.

Knorringfjellet Formation This formation is represented by a thin phosphatic conglomerate unit at the base grading to coarse sandstone (unit C, Slottet Bed) overlain by a shaledominated unit with thin sandstone beds (unit D) and a fine-grained bioturbated sandstone (unit E). The upper part is composed of the Brentskardhaugen Bed, which, in Dh4, consists of two conglomerate units (F and G). Unit F is fining up from

Figure 6. Micrographs of sandstones from the De Geerdalen Formation. (A) Optical micrograph (parallel polars) of quartz (Qtz)cemented lowpermeability sandstone; 901 m (2956 ft). The distribution of quartz cement and dissolution porosity is indicated by arrows. White = detrital quartz with quartz cement; darker areas = rock fragments and feldspars; blue = dissolution porosity associated with clay minerals. The details of quartz cement textures as syntaxial overgrowths on quartz grains, and interstitial to adjacent labile grains, are shown in B (crossed polars). (C) Sandstone rich in dissolution porosity in feldspar pseudomorphs (shown by black arrows); 875.4 m (2872.0 ft). (D) Backscattered electron image showing Fe chlorite (Fe-Chl) and fibrous illite within partly dissolved detrital K-feldspar (Kf). Detail from 875.4 m (2872.0 ft; area marked in image E). Black = porosity. (E) Feldspar pseudomorphs with dissolution porosity. Scanning electron microscopy backscattered electron image (left) and x-ray element scans (right) verify authigenic albite (Ab) enclosed by partly dissolved K-feldspar.

sandstone-supported conglomerate (Figure 7B) to sandstone containing scattered gravel and very coarse sand. Unit G is matrix-supported and cemented by phosphate and siderite (Figure 7A). The coarsegrained sandstones and conglomerates are characterized by rounded or subrounded grains, but with only poor or moderate grain sorting (Figure 7).

The fine-grained sandstones (unit E) are well sorted but with a patchy distribution of dark clay matrix caused by bioturbation (Figures 7D, 8). The sandstones are classified as quartz-rich arkosic-lithic wacke (Figure 5A) (Pettijohn et al., 1972). Monogranular and polygranular quartz and rock fragments of chert are common in the coarse-grained
Mrk 583

Figure 7. Optical micrographs of conglomerates and sandstones from the Knorringfjellet Formation, well Dh4. Porosity is shown in blue. (A) The remanie deposit of the Brentskardhaugen Bed is characterized by rounded quartz grains in a brown phosphate- and sideritecemented matrix. Note also the grains of glauconite (Glc) and organic debris (black); 673.7 m (2210.3 ft), unit G. (B) Sandstone-supported conglomerate with rounded granules of chert (Cht) and quartz (Qtz) (polycrystalline Qtz [Qtp]). This unit has fairly good reservoir properties and only minor quartz cementation (arrow) in the sand fraction; 678.3 m (2225.4 ft), unit F. (C) Black arrows show the outline of a reworked phosphate-cemented sandstone fragment in the Slottet Bed (691.7 m [2269.4 ft], unit C) suggesting multiple stages of phosphate cementation. Mesogenesis is evidenced by the microstylolite (Styl) marked by a red arrow in the left part of the image. (D) Fine-grained bioturbated sandstone with microstylolites (1), moldic porosity (2), and patchy distribution of quartz-cemented domains (3); 678.9 m (2227.4 ft), unit E. (E) Detail of partly dissolved chert grain and glauconite. (F) A partly dissolved clay mineral ooid (shown with an arrow) in conglomerate from unit F; 678.3 m (2225.4 ft).

and conglomeratic beds (Figure 7B, E), as well as phosphate and, less commonly, K-feldspar, and glauconite and coated grains form part of the grain framework in units C and F (Figures 7A, F; 9A). Pebbles of micrite are identified in the uppermost part of unit G. Feldspar is more abundant in the
584 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

finer grain fraction, and mica, zircon, and tourmaline are present in trace amounts. The presence of monogranular quartz and K-feldspar up to pebble size suggests a provenance of coarse-grained igneous or metamorphic rocks (granitic gneisses or, alternatively, conglomerates with coarse-grained crystalline

Figure 8. (A) Optical micrograph mosaic of fine-grained, bioturbated sandstone, core Dh4 (Knorringfjellet Formation; 678.9 m [2227.4 ft]), showing quartz-cemented (light-color) zones (1) alternating with clay-rich (darker) zones (2), stylolites (brown, marked with arrows), and with scattered isolated dissolution pores (blue, 3). (B) Details of light-color areas cemented by quartz (Qtz) overgrowths (arrows) on detrital quartz and calcite (Cc) (crossed polars). (C) Stylolite detail showing clay matrix (dark areas, shown by arrows), pyrite (Pyr), and dissolution pores (Po). Note the dense packing of quartz grains (parallel polars). (D) Scanning electron microscopy backscattered electron image of stylolite area showing corroded quartz (arrow), fibrous illite, pyrite, Fe-rich chlorite (Fe-Chl), and stylolite porosity (SP).

boulders). The upper conglomerate (unit G) also shows various evidences of sediment reworking by the presence of (1) rounded quartz-cemented quartz grains, (2) rounded rock fragments of phosphatecemented silt or quartz sand, and (3) rock fragments of chert. The phosphate-cemented sandstone clasts in the lower conglomerate (unit C; e.g., Figure 7C) also suggest reworking, probably from intrabasinal hardgrounds. Implications for Provenance The high contents of plagioclase and lithic grains in the De Geerdalen Formation are similar to the analogous Snadd Formation offshore in the northern Barents Sea (Figure 5; Riis et al., 2008). Similar compositions are found also in older Triassic formations in the southern Barents Shelf, which include provenance components from the Uralides

(Mrk, 1999). The Snadd Formation in the northern Barents Sea was interpreted to have been derived from eastern and southeastern areas (Riis et al., 2008; Glrstad-Clark et al., 2010). However, the source of volcaniclastic components in the Spitsbergen sediments is still unresolved, and an additional source area in the north may exist. The change in composition from the De Geerdalen Formation to mineralogically more mature sandstones in the overlying Knorringfjellet Formation is noted in large areas of the Barents Shelf, indicating changes in climate, provenance, and depositional environments. The studied sediments of the Knorringfjellet Formation have, in addition, also been strongly modified through intrabasinal reworking and eogenesis. Reworking has been suggested previously based on the fossils within the Brentskardhaugen Bed (Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985; Reolid et al., 2010). In the present location,
Mrk 585

reworking was shown by the mixing of sand and gravel of phosphate-cemented ooids probably derived from intrabasinal hardgrounds with debris from more deeply eroded quartz-cemented sandstones and gravel of crystalline igneous or metamorphic rocks. Erosion events may have occurred repeatedly through time (e.g., Bjerke and Dypvik, 1977; Bckstrm and Nagy, 1985) followed by transgressions, sediment mixing, and condensation. Pchelina (1980) describes a major erosion inconformity within the TriassicJurassic transitional beds in Spitsbergen, correlated to a major regional sequence boundary (Egorov and Mrk, 1998).

ment may have been at shallow subsurface conditions. Less likely, some of the igneous bodies that parallel sedimentary layers may be extrusive flows.

DIAGENESIS Fine-Grained Sandstones of the De Geerdalen Formation The mineralogically immature sandstones of the De Geerdalen Formation are strongly influenced by compaction and cementation. Compaction is evidenced by dense grain packing and squeezing of ductile grains, which resulted in relatively low intergranular volumes (e.g., Paxton et al., 2002) in the range of 10 to 19% (average, 14%), of which 6% is visible porosity. Cementation was mainly by authigenic quartz, calcite, and pyrite, which appear in nearly equal amounts (Figures 5B; 6A, B), and also by clay minerals (illite and Fe-chlorite), albite, and minor anatase. Quartz cement forms syntaxial overgrowths on the detrital quartz grains, locally filling the pore spaces between quartz and adjacent grains. Minor quartz cement has also been detected in secondary pores after the dissolution of feldspar (Figure 6E). The quartz overgrowths show smooth contacts with plagioclase and chert grains but irregular contacts with dark clay-mineral aggregates and volcanic rock fragments. Pore-filling calcite cement is interpreted from textural relations to postdate the quartz cement. Detrital K-feldspar commonly includes dissolution porosity, sometimes resulting in skeletal pseudomorphic textures (Figure 6C, D, E). Albite of authigenic origin is shown by the subhedral albite in dissolution pores in feldspar grains (Figure 6E) and as overgrowths on feldspar. The occurrences of K-feldspar rims enclosing partly moldic pseudomorphs could have resulted from the selective dissolution of chemically zoned feldspar considering that the more central parts had more unstable hightemperature compositions, for example, as (K,Na)feldspar is less stable than pure K-feldspar at diagenetic conditions. Alternatively, the K-feldspar rims may be of authigenic origin (e.g., Kastner and Siever, 1979) but predating dissolution and albitization.

IGNEOUS DIKE INTRUSIONS The De Geerdalen Formation has been intruded by thin basalt dikes marked in the log in the lower part of core Dh4 (Figure 4), and a thicker dike underneath the cored section is interpreted from seismic data (Blum et al., in press). Thick outcropping diabase dikes are known from outcrops 19 km (12 mi) north of Longyearbyen in the Diabasodden area (Major et al., 2000). The dikes in the adjacent areas are dated as post-Jurassic (? latest JurassicCretaceous) based on a range of K-Ar isotopic dates (Burov et al., 1977; Nejbert et al., 2011) and supported by stratigraphic age relations (Major et al., 2000; Miloslavskij et al., 1993). Considering the thickness of the overlying Agardhfjellet Formation, which has not been intruded in the studied area, the level of intrusion may have been <1.0 km (0.6 mi) deep in this area, with emplacement long before the mid-Cenozoic maximum sediment burial. The mafic dikes and/or sills in the lower part of the cored De Geerdalen Formation in Dh4 are strongly altered and may easily be mistaken for mudstone except when phenocrysts are visible. However, thin-section microscopy shows evidence of abrupt cooled magma based on plagioclase appearance as microlites and dendritic phenocrysts in a dark matrix. Cooling was followed by an extensive alteration of plagioclase to albite and calcite and by a chloritization of mafic glomerocrysts and matrix, suggesting local influences from hydrothermal activity. Based on textural relations, the magma emplace586 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Figure 9. (A) Backscattered electron image of the phosphatic Slottet Bed; 694.1 m (2277.2 ft). Phosphate cement (Ph) appears in clay (Cly)mineral ooids (Oo) and mudstone (Mst) and chert clasts, predating siderite (Sid) cement. Note the zoning of the siderite rhombs with the highest Fe content (lightest color) in the outer rim. (B) Siderite cement with rhomb-shape moldic pores (indicated with arrows), now consisting of clay, near the top of the Brentskardhaugen Bed; 672.5 m (2206.4 ft). Qtz = quartz.

Illite and Fe-chlorite appear in pseudomorphs after feldspar and as secondary replacement minerals in fine-grained, altered rock fragments. Clay minerals also define irregular, thin, pore-lining structures and folded flakes of illitized grains (possibly altered mica, 897.1 m [2943.2 ft]). The presence of booklet aggregates of Fe-chlorite in the base of the thick channel sandstone (799.2 m [2622.0 ft]) suggests precursor minerals of kaolinite in this facies. The replacement of kaolinite by Fe-chlorite can be interpreted in terms of changes in porewater composition from low saline fresh water, possibly fluvial influenced on deposition to marine slightly alkaline during a later eogenetic stage, which could have occurred in response to a rise in sea level (e.g., Ketzer et al., 2003) or, alternatively, resulting from mesogenetic chlorite formation within kaolinite pseudomorphs. Fine-Grained Sandstones of the Knorringfjellet Formation The quartz-rich sandstones of the Knorringfjellet Formation unit E (and some beds within unit D) show a different compaction distribution caused by the presence of microstylolites and with average intergranular values of 22% including an average of 8% modal porosity in the fine-grained sandstones. The quartz cementation has a patchy distribution

reflecting the bioturbation pattern (Figure 8A). Light-color, matrix-poor areas are strongly quartz cemented, locally associated with minor calcite cement that postdates the quartz overgrowths (Figure 8B). The calcite cement is in places associated with corroded quartz surfaces at the grain boundaries, which indicate the dissolution of quartz. The clay-dominated darker areas seen in the image mosaic includes illite and Fe-chlorite and occasionally dispersed organic matter and pyrite (Figure 8C, D). Microstylolites are developed at the boundary between the quartz-dominated and clay mineraldominated areas (Figure 8D). Fibrous illite commonly appears within dissolution pores. Fe-chlorite (chamosite) appears in matrix and, possibly, as massive aggregates, which may represent diagenetic alteration products. The precursors of these aggregates are not known. Porosity is mainly dissolution porosity either as isolated moldic pores or as microporosity in matrix-richer domains (Figure 8C). In the absence of carbonate cementation, the clay zones are also the main locus for dissolution porosity. Coarse Sandstones and Conglomerate, Knorringfjellet Formation The coarse-grained and conglomeratic beds are characterized by marine eogenetic minerals such
Mrk 587

as glauconite, phosphate, and carbonate cements, and compaction is taken up in soft clay-mineral aggregates between rigid quartz grains. Compaction of the matrix-rich beds in units C and F is shown by the squeezing of clay-mineral pseudomorphs after glauconite and traces of bent mica are occasionally present. Microstylolites are rare but are recognized in dark organic-rich lamina in the phosphatic beds and are very rare as organic-rich seams transecting clusters of coarser quartz grains (Figure 7C). Glauconite is most common in the phosphatic beds (units C and G) and is altered and replaced variably by other clay minerals and, occasionally, by phosphate. The influence of burial compaction is suggested from the elongate shapes of the glauconite pseudomorphs. Clay minerals also form parts of ooids in the Slottet Bed and are lining detrital grains in the Brentskardhaugen Bed. The presence of thin strings or films of clay minerals enclosing secondary dissolution pores in conglomerates and sandstones (Figure 7F) may represent the remains of coated grains. The clay-mineral coatings are of particular importance in preserving porosity in the conglomerates of unit F. Pyrite is locally dispersed in matrix or occasionally forms coarser aggregates of euhedral pyrite and is postdating glauconite. Phosphate of eogenetic origin is identified in different microstructural relationships such as (1) in micrometer-size lamina alternating with clay-mineral lamina in oolitic-coated grains and oncolites, (2) within chert grains replacing carbonate microfossils, and (3) within pseudomorphs after glauconite. The appearance of phosphatecemented coated grains as rock fragments shows that much of the phosphate cement is reworked and that phosphatization may have occurred in several stages. The coated and phosphate-cemented grains in the Slottet Bed are postdated by siderite cement (Figure 9A). Rhomb-shape siderite cement crystals are abundant in the Brentskardhaugen and Slottet beds units C and G (Figure 9A, B), and they are more scattered in the other coarse-grained beds (units D and F). In beds rich in clay matrix and phosphate, the siderite crystals are only of a few micrometers in size, forming dense microcrystalline aggregates.
588 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Siderite rhombs in units with low matrix content form slightly coarser crystals. The inner zones of the siderite rhombs are commonly rich in impurities. In the upper part in unit G, the siderite crystals show atoll-like microstructures, suggesting that the central areas of the crystals have been dissolved and filled by matrix (Figure 9B). Coarser crystals of pore-filling calcite are present in some beds and are interpreted as the latest diagenetic phase. Scanning electron microscopy backscattered electron images and microprobe analyses of siderite show a consistent chemical zoning pattern throughout the formation, even in the smallest micrometer-size crystals. The analyses show relatively pure siderite in the outer part of the crystals and Mg-richer compositions in a central area or as a band between the crystal core and rim (Figure 9A). The range in mineral chemical variation in terms of end members is 74% to 88% Fe, 3% to 17% Mg, 3% to 9% Ca, and 7% to 0.5% Mn. Pure dolomite, zoned Fe-dolomite, and siderite have been identified in different microdomains in the Slottet Bed. Unstable Ca-carbonate debris may have been dispersed in the clay matrix originally and acted as nucleation sites of dolomite or siderite. Based on the microstructural observations and the chemical zoning patterns, dolomite was possibly later dissolved or replaced by siderite. Quartz cement forms syntaxial overgrowths on quartz grains but in lesser amounts than in the fine-grained samples. Quartz cement abundance ranges from trace amounts to a few percent. Greater amounts commonly occur around clusters of tighter packed detrital quartz grains. Quartz cement is rare or absent in microdomains where quartz grains are not in contact or where clay coatings are present (e.g., Heald and Larese, 1974; Ehrenberg, 1993; Storvoll et al., 2002). Quartz cement is also nearly absent in the phosphate-cemented sandstones (units C and G).

DISCUSSION The eogenetic minerals of the condensed beds of the Knorringfjellet Formation are indicators of marine depositional environments. Glauconite forms

in marine eogenetic environments by interaction of mineral substrates or volcanic debris with sea water at suboxic conditions and is favored by low sedimentation rates (e.g., Odin and Matter, 1981; Odin, 1985). In terms of sequence stratigraphy, glauconite formation is associated with the transgressive and the lower highstand system tracts (Amorosi, 1995) and has recently also been associated with shallow lagoonal environments (El Albani et al., 2005). Paraautochtonous redeposited glauconite is common in regressive shoreline sands and at sequence boundaries (e.g., Amorosi, 1995, 1997; Ketzer et al., 2003). In the studied cores, the glauconite appears in the condensed phosphatic beds (units C and G) where reworked sediments were documented, and a parautochtonous nature of the coarse glauconite grains is likely. The formation of pyrite and phosphate cement in glauconite pseudomorphs may have resulted from changes in redox conditions, for example, in initial sediment burial upon entering the sulfate reduction zone (e.g., Curtis, 1987). The presence of finely laminated chamosite-phosphate ooids in the Slottet Bed suggests fluctuations in redox conditions, for example, by supply or depletion of carbonate, which necessitate a long residence time below the sediment-water interface (Pufahl and Grimm, 2003). In the petrography section, it was described that phosphate cementation occurred in several stages, also after the formation of laminated phosphate ooids. Possibly, the ooids were reworked from intrabasinal hardgrounds. Several stages of phosphate cementation are documented also from outcrop studies of the Brentskarhaugen Bed in other areas (Krajewski, 2000, 2001). The abundance of iron-rich authigenic clay minerals and carbonate minerals is notable in the Knorringfjellet Formation where Fe-chlorite and siderite form a fine matrix in the condensed beds. Eogenetic Fe-chlorite (berthierine) may form in warm low-sulfide waters associated with bacterial iron reduction (Taylor and Macquaker, 2011) and chamosite by mesogenesis of berthierine at higher temperatures (Curtis, 1985; Iijima and Matsumotu, 1982). In the present case, it cannot be proven if the matrix of Fe-chlorite in the condensed beds is authigenic or transported. It may have formed early

as it predates authigenic siderite and could have formed from reworking and eogenesis of ironenriched weathering products. However, iron-rich chlorite of similar composition in the underlying De Geerdalen Formation is replacing rock fragments and is most likely of authigenic origin. Green clay-mineral aggregates in the Knorringfjellet Formation, sometimes forming nestlike structures (Figure 7F) in sandstones and conglomerates, may be alteration products from glauconite or claymineral ooids in which some lamina are partly dissolved. Illite associated with secondary porosity may have formed by mesogenetic reactions involving feldspar dissolution. The authigenic siderite in the Knorringfjellet Formation is characterized by chemical zoning to iron-richer compositions in the outer part of the crystals. The dense aggregates of rhomb-shape crystals and in the upper unit G, also with rhombshape moldic pores, question a possible dolomite precursor. Impurities in the central parts of the crystals indicate that they have grown in carbonatebearing mud, either via a first stage of dolomitization or directly as siderite. The fine crystal size may be explained by an abrupt growth from several nuclei, as would be the case in lime-bearing siliciclastic mud. Assuming marine conditions, the early dolomite or Mg-siderite could have formed in the sulfate reduction zone where Fe is incorporated into pyrite formation (Curtis, 1987), whereas the Fe:Mg increase in siderite could be caused by reactions that involve iron reduction and a breakdown of Fe-oxides and/or hydroxides and/or ironrich clay minerals (e.g., glauconite, chamosite). An alternative scenario for the initial stages may involve dolomitization during periods of exposures and oxidation (e.g., Moss and Tucker, 1996), followed by marine eogenetic or shallow-burial diagenetic siderite formation connected to iron reduction as mentioned above.

SOURCES OF IRON? The fine fraction of the conglomerates and sandstones in the Knorringfjellet Formation is, in
Mrk 589

particular, rich in Fe-chlorite and siderite. Iron enrichment has not been emphasized in previous studies of these formations but is an important aspect of the diagenetic history. Possible sources and mechanisms for the iron enrichment are considered below and include (1) sediment supply from a source area undergoing extreme weathering, (2) reworking and alteration of older mineralogically immature sediments in the depositional environment, (3) contribution of mafic components from contemporaneous volcanism, and (4) iron supply from hydrothermal activity. 1. Precipitation of iron-rich clays in recent sediments are found within shelf sediments supplied from large rivers in areas undergoing tropical weathering (e.g., Aller et al., 1986). Iron from surface weathering may be transported as small particles of oxides and/or hydroxides attached to clay minerals and as wind-blown dust of various iron-bearing minerals (Bensing et al., 2005; Engelbrecht and Derbyshire, 2010; Raiswell, 2011). Upon entering sea water, the iron-rich particles become trapped in marine sediments, and iron is reduced to form new iron minerals by microbial-influenced reduction processes depending on environmental conditions and organic content (Raiswell, 2011). The red color of lagoonal mudstones in the Upper TriassicLower Jurassic Isfjorden Member has been related to source area weathering in a warm climate (Nystuen et al., 2008). 2. Reoxidation of Fe(II) during sediment reworking and resuspension generates fine-particulate iron oxides (e.g., Raiswell, 2011) that can be transported and redistributed. The mineralogically immature sediments of the De Geerdalen Formation as well as the underlying Triassic sandstone formations are rich in mafic components. Reworking of such sediments and reoxidation in agitated waters could provide iron-rich components in the Knorringfjellet Formation by this mechanism. These beds could also have acted as iron sources through the diagenetic dissolution of unstable rock fragments in the subsurface and the circulation of pore waters into the overlying formation.
590 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Figure 10. Summary of main diagenetic minerals, quartz (Qtz) cement distribution, and mechanisms of quartz cementation. Ab = albite; Ana = anatase; Cc = calcite; Chm = chamosite; Dol = dolomite; Fsp = feldspar; Glc = glauconite; Ill = illite; Ph = phosphate; Pyr = pyrite; Sid = siderite.

3. Basaltic glass is one of the main sources of clay minerals in the oceans, and volcanism has been suggested as a source of iron-rich ooids elsewhere (e.g., Sturesson et al., 2000). Eogenetic clay minerals (e.g., smectite) may form through the alteration of palagonite (e.g., Drief and Schiffmann, 2004) and act as substrate for chlorite and illite in burial diagenesis. Extensive volcanism occurred at the PermianTriassic boundary (Siberian traps; e.g., Sharma et al., 1991) and, if eroded, could have been a source of volcaniclastic debris in eastern areas, but evidence of Late Triassic Middle Jurassic volcanism in the northern Arctic has not been proven. A possible indication of contemporaneous volcanism is the interpretation of altered felsic pyroclastics in the De Geerdalen Formation in Sassenfjorden (Chlebowski and Wierzbowski, 1983). Volcanism at the Triassic Jurassic boundary occurred in the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province (Cirilli et al., 2009). The possibility of synsedimentary ash supply cannot be completely ruled out. 4. Influences from hydrothermal activity could be related to the aforementioned Cretaceous igneous activity. This idea might be supported by the observed chloritization and calcitization of the shallow dykes in the De Geerdalen

Formation. The heating accompanying the intrusive event could also have induced pore-fluid convection in the sediments at a time when they were less compacted than at present. Chemical interaction with Mg-Fe increase in the pore fluid caused by basaltic dyke intrusions has been documented in other studies (Wolela, 2002). However, the analyzed chlorite breakdown products in the basaltic dyke in Dh4 are all Mg-rich and are thus different from the Fe-chlorite of the adjacent sediments, suggesting local compositional controls instead of precipitation from an iron-rich hydrothermal fluid. In summary, the concentration of iron-rich minerals in the Knorringfjellet Formation may have different explanations, and most probably, a combination of different processes has occurred. These include extensive weathering in the source area, which also explains the mineralogically mature grain compositions in the Knorringfjellet Formation; later iron enrichment in the depocenter by reworking processes in the condensed beds; and, possibly, reworking of locally exposed parts of the underlying mineralogically immature formation, for example, at the uplifted margins of the embayment. In the De Geerdalen Formation, diagenetic dissolution of mafic rock fragments (and ash?) provided a very local source of iron (see below).

MESOGENESIS AND DISTRIBUTION OF QUARTZ CEMENT Comparison of Lithofacies Units A to G Lithofacies units A to G are compared with respect to diagenetic signatures and with emphasis on the function of quartz cementation in Figure 10. Considering the maximum burial depths and a geothermal gradient greater than 30C/km, diagenetic peak temperatures greater than 90C are probable. However, very local heating adjacent to dike contacts may also have occurred before maximum burial. As already mentioned, the sandstones in the De Geerdalen Formation (units A and B) and the fine-grained bioturbated sandstones in the

Knorringfjellet Formation (unit E) are strongly modified by mesogenesis. Despite the differences in composition between these fine-grained sandstone units, several diagenetic features are common, but differences in the distribution of cements are noted. The fine-grained sandstone units (A, B, and E) are strongly influenced by chemical compaction, quartz cementation, and later calcite cementation resulting in low porosity and permeability in both cases. However, on the basis of microstructures, it is possible to recognize the different distributions and sources of the quartz cement between the formations (Figure 10). In the quartz-rich sandstones (Knorringfjellet Formation, unit E), the spatial distribution of claydominated and quartz-cemented domains result from a combination of preburial bioturbation succeeded by burial compaction. The localization and development of microstylolites follows the irregular distribution of clay lamina, which resulted from the bioturbation. It is well established that the diagenetic dissolution of quartz at stylolites provides a major silica source for quartz cementation (e.g., McBride, 1989; Oelkers et al., 1996; Baron and Parnell, 2007), and this mechanism has been emphasized also in Jurassic sandstones southwest in the Barents Sea (Olaussen et al., 1984; Walderhaug and Bjrkum, 2003). The function of clay minerals and mica in enhancing quartz grainboundary dissolution (pressure dissolution) in mesogenesis is also well documented (e.g., Bjrkum, 1996; Oelkers et al., 1996). The abundant quartz-clay contacts and microstylolites in unit E provide common dissolution sites for quartz, which reprecipitated as overgrowths on quartz grains in the adjacent clay-poor domains. Quartz grains also show corroded contacts with calcite, which may have replaced a precursor mineral. Another diagenetic process that produced silica in unit E is the dissolution of feldspar and reaction with clay minerals such as kaolinite or smectite to form illite (e.g., Bjrlykke, 1998; Worden and Barclay, 2000). The authigenic illite and Fe-chlorite appear in the stylolites and in the pseudomorphs after feldspar. The dissolved silica precipitated as quartz overgrowths cementing local clusters of quartz grains where clay minerals are absent in the pores. In total, the spatial
Mrk 591

distribution of the different cements was strongly influenced by the preexisting bioturbation pattern. In the mineralogically immature sandstones (De Geerdalen Formation), the mechanical compaction of ductile rock fragments played a greater function in porosity reduction. Chemical compaction involved the dissolution of labile grains to form secondary porosity and the precipitation of authigenic minerals (quartz, calcite, pyrite, clay minerals, and also, in small amounts, TiO2 and albite). Notably, authigenic Fe-chlorite has formed within mafic rock fragments, and illite is associated with partly dissolved feldspar. Despite the mineralogically immature sandstone compositions, quartz cement is one of the most abundant diagenetic minerals, precipitated as syntaxial overgrowths on the detrital quartz, which is randomly scattered in between other minerals. Silica for the quartz cementation may have been sourced from the dissolution of chert fragments and other labile rock fragments and K-feldspar. Replacement of eogenetic kaolinite, smectite, or glauconite by chamosite and illite also releases silica because of the mineral chemical differences and, depending on the total reactions, may provide excess silica for the precipitation of quartz cement. In summary, quartz cementation in the mineralogically immature sandstones is ascribed to the dissolution of labile grains and feldspar in combination with clay-mineral reactions, suggesting a local source in the millimeter scale in these fine-grained sandstones. Microstylolites are not observed, suggesting that the quartz cement formed in part by different reaction mechanisms compared to unit E, that is, without clayenhanced dissolution at stylolites.

Dissolution Porosity Dissolution porosity is a main porosity type in all the sandstones. The most extensive dissolution porosity in the De Geerdalen Formation is observed in the middle part of unit A (Figure 6C), with common evidence of the dissolution of K-feldspar and lithic grains. Extensive diagenetic feldspar dissolution is commonly ascribed to influences from meteoric water systems (e.g., Hawlader, 1990;
592 Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Bjrlykke and Aagaard, 1992; Bjrlykke, 2010). Interactions with meteoric waters could have occurred early during the lagoonal and paralic environments of Unit B or during Jurassic telogenetic events as exemplified by erosion and condensations of the Knorringfjellet Formation. However, textural observations suggest that some of the moldic porosity structures formed late instead because they have resisted compaction. A late diagenetic origin is also supported by the association of moldic porosity with authigenic albite and illite because these minerals form at elevated diagenetic temperatures (e.g., Aagaard et al., 1990; Morad et al., 1990). A two-stage or multistage model would therefore be realistic in which (1) K-feldspar was partly altered and dissolved in connection with eogenetic or telogenetic clay-mineral reactions and (2) moldic pores were enhanced and porosity was redistributed by the later reactions between eogenetic minerals and labile grains to form illite, albite, chamosite, and quartz overgrowths. An alternative mechanism to explain late diagenetic K-feldspar dissolution and quartz cementation involves introduction of organic acids or CO2 from hydrocarbon generation, which also provides a mechanism to release silica for quartz cementation (e.g., Worden and Barclay, 2000). The importance of this process in generating secondary porosity is still under debate and considered limited (e.g., Stoessell and Pittmann, 1990; Bjrlykke, 2010). In the present area, maximum burial was in the mid-Cenozoic (Dallmann et al., 2001; Bjory et al., 2010; Braathen et al., in press). Influences on sediment diagenesis from gas generation and fluid migration caused by the Cretaceous igneous activity (cf. Aarnes et al., 2010, and references therein) are also probable. Evidence of hydrothermal activity by the extensive chloritization and calcitization of the basaltic dikes (e.g., core Dh4), as well as the presence of quartz- and calcite-cemented fractures in the reservoir sandstone (Ogata et al., in press), suggest dissolution and mineral precipitation in connection with or after dike emplacement. Considering the regional geologic evolution, the sandstone porosity distribution may have been influenced by several stages of diagenetic dissolution and cementation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESERVOIR PROPERTIES The combination of mechanical compaction of ductile grains and cementation by quartz and calcite resulted in a relatively low porosity of the sandstones of the De Geerdalen Formation in the subsurface below Longyearbyen. In fact, most of the visible porosity is dissolution porosity after feldspar and rock fragments and thus is commonly poorly connected. The distribution of clay minerals, for example, fibrous illite within the dissolution pores, resulted in a further decrease in permeability, explaining the low values reported by Farokhpoor et al. (2010). A considerable contribution from microporosity is also suggested from the modal porosity values (Figure 5) that are, on average, lower than the laboratory plug measurements of Farokhpoor et al. (2010). Dissolution porosity is also the main porosity type in the quartzrich fine-grained sandstone (unit E) within the Knorringfjellet Formation, where low permeability results from a combination of clay minerals in the dissolution pores and a patchy distribution of claycemented and quartz-cemented zones. The most promising reservoir properties are in the coarsegrained and conglomeratic sandstones (unit F), although dissolution porosity is also dominant there. However, clay-mineral replacement products and coatings may have had a positive impact on preserving porosity by limiting quartz cement growth. A sealing nature of the phosphatic bed (G) reflects a combination of the siderite and phosphate cementation of the clay matrix and the compaction and squeezing of ductile clay-mineral pseudomorphs after glauconite. For CO2 storage, the chemical reactivity of the formation with the injected fluid is an important factor both for the cap rock and reservoir properties (Alemu et al., 2011; Pham et al., 2011). Notably, relatively reactive minerals such as iron-rich chlorite and Fe-Mg carbonates are present in all the described units, suggesting influences on porosity and permeability over time, and with lesser impacts in the Knorringfjellet Formation. In summary, the more promising reservoir parts for CO2 storage are units with enhanced secondary porosity and, in particular, unit F (Figure 4) with

sand-supported conglomerate. However, preliminary water injection results suggest that fractures are the main conduits (Braathen et al., in press). Based on a comprehensive study of fracture distributions in outcrops and drill holes (Ogata et al., in press), abundant fractures of different generations and origins are documented. More comprehensive multidisciplinary work including new drillings, flow tests, and reservoir modeling are in progress to gain a better understanding of reservoir complexities and potential for CO2 storage.

CONCLUSIONS 1. The Upper TriassicJurassic sandstones of the Longyearbyen CO2 test reservoir drilled onshore Spitsbergen show a large variation in composition and facies, from mineralogically immature arenitic sandstones in the lower part to quartzrich sandstones and phosphatic conglomerates in condensed beds in the upper part. 2. The low permeability of all sandstone units despite moderate to high porosity is caused by extensive diagenesis with compaction, cementation, and mineral dissolution. The resulting porosity is dominated by the isolated dissolution porosity associated with authigenic clay minerals (Fechlorite and fibrous illite). 3. Comparison of quartz cement distribution in relation to facies and detrital composition suggests that (1) quartz cement distribution is related to stylolites and enhanced by bioturbation in the quartz-rich Jurassic sandstones and that (2) quartz cement was sourced from reactions that involve the dissolution of various labile grains in the mineralogically immature Triassic sandstones. 4. The most promising zones for CO2 injection in the studied reservoir may be in beds with an enhanced dissolution porosity and in a sandsupported conglomerate with chlorite-coated grains. However, preliminary studies suggest that fractures form important conduits. 5. This study has relevance for predicting the hydrocarbon reservoir properties of the Triassic
Mrk 593

and Jurassic sandstone formations of the Barents Shelf in areas where these formations experienced deep burial diagenesis.

REFERENCES CITED
Aagaard, P., P. K. Egeberg, G. C. Saigal, S. Morad, and K. Bjrlykke, 1990, Diagenetic albitization of detrital K-feldspars in Jurassic, Lower Cretaceous and Tertiary clastic reservoir rocks from offshore Norway: II. Formation water chemistry and kinetic considerations: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 60, p. 575581. Aarnes, I., H. Svensen, J. A. D. Connoly, and Y. Y. Podladchikov, 2010, How contact metamorphism can trigger global climate changes: Modeling gas generation around igneous sills in sedimentary basins: Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 74, p. 71797195, doi:10.1016/j.gca.2010.09.011. Alemu, B. L., P. Aagaard, I. A. Munz, and E. Skurtveit, 2011, Cap rock interaction with CO2: A laboratory study of reactivity of shale with supercritical CO2 and brine: Applied Geochemistry, v. 26, p. 19751989, doi:10.1016 /j.apgeochem.2011.06.028. Aller, R. C., J. E. Mackin, and R. T. Cox, 1986, Diagenesis of Fe and S in Amazon inner-shelf muds: Apparent dominance of Fe reduction and implications for the genesis of ironstones: Continental Shelf Research, v. 6, p. 263 289, doi:10.1016/0278-4343(86)90064-6. Amorosi, A., 1995, Glaucony and sequence stratigraphy: A conceptual framework of distribution in siliciclastic sequences: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B65, p. 419425. Amorosi, A., 1997, Detecting compositional, spatial and temporal attributes of glaucony: A tool for provenance research: Sedimentary Geology, p. 135 153, doi:10 .1016/S0037-0738(96)00042-5. Bckstrm, S. A., and J. Nagy, 1985, Depositional history and fauna of a Jurassic phosphorite conglomerate (the Brentskardhaugen Bed) in Spitsbergen: Norsk Polarinstitutt Skrifter, v. 183, p. 161. Blum, K., T. A. Johansen, H. Johnsen, K. Red, B. O. Ruud, E. Mikkelsen, and A. Braathen, 2012, Subsurface geometries of the Longyearbyen CO2 lab in central Spitsbergen, as mapped by reflection seismic data: Norwegian Journal of Geology, v. 92. Baron, M., and J. Parnell, 2007, Relationships between stylolites and cementation in sandstone reservoirs: Examples from the North Sea, U.K. and East Greenland: Sedimentary Geology, v. 194, p. 1735, doi:10.1016/j.sedgeo .2006.04.007. Bensing, J. P., P. S. Mozley, and N. W. Dunbar, 2005, Importance of clay in iron transport and sediment reddening: Evidence from reduction features of the Abo Formation, New Mexico, U.S.A.: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 75, p. 562571, doi:10.2110/jsr.2005.046. Bergan, M., and R. Knarud, 1993, Apparent changes in clastic mineralogy of the TriassicJurassic succession, Norwegian Barents Sea: Possible implications for paleodrainage

and subsidence, in T. O. Vorren, E. Bergsager, .-A. Dahl-Stamnes, E. Holter, B. Johansen, E. Lie, and T. B. Lund, eds., Arctic geology and petroleum potential: Norwegian Petroleum Society Special Publication 2, p. 481 493. Bjerke, T., and H. Dypvik, 1977, Sedimentological and palynological studies of Upper TriassicLower Jurassic sediments in Sassenfjorden, Spitsbergen: Norsk Polarinstitutt rbok, v. 76, p. 131150. Bjrkum, P. A., 1996, How important is pressure in causing dissolution of quartz in sandstones? Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 66, p. 147154. Bjrlykke, K., 1998, Clay-mineral diagenesis in sedimentary basins: A key to prediction of rock properties Examples from the North Sea: Clay Minerals, v. 33, p. 1534, doi:10.1180/000985598545390. Bjrlykke, K., 2010, Petroleum geoscience: From sedimentary environments to rock physics: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 508 p. Bjrlykke, K., and P. Aagaard, 1992, Clay minerals in North Sea sandstones, in D. W. Houseknecht and E. D. Pittman, eds., Origin, diagenesis, and petrophysics of clay minerals in sandstones: SEPM Special Publication 47, p. 6580. Bjory, M., P. B. Hall, I. L. Ferriday, and A. Mrk, 2010, Triassic source rocks of the Barents Sea and Svalbard: AAPG Search and Discovery article 10219, http ://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/2009 /10219bjoroy/ndx_bjoroy.pdf (accessed October 23, 2012). Braathen, A., et al., 2012, Longyearbyen CO2 lab of Svalbard, Norway: First assessment of the sedimentary succession for CO2 storage: Norwegian Journal of Geology, v. 92. Burov, J. P., A. A. Krasilscikov, L. V. Firsov, and B. A. Klubov, 1977, The age of Spitsbergen dolerites, in Norsk Polarinstitutt, au., rbok 1975: Oslo, Norsk Polarinstitutt, p. 101108. Chlebowski, R., and A. Wierzbowski, 1983, Pyroclastic material from the Upper Triassic deposits of Sassenfjorden, Spitsbergen: Polar Research, v. 1, p. 75 81, doi:10 .1111/j.1751-8369.1983.tb00732.x. Cirilli, S., A. Marzoli, L. Tanner, H. Bertrand, N. Buratti, F. Jourdan, G. Bellieni, D. Kontak, and P. R. Renne, 2009, Latest Triassic onset of the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province (CAMP) volcanism in the Fundy Basin (Nova Scotia): New stratigraphic constraints: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 286, p. 514525, doi:10.1016/j .epsl.2009.07.021. Curtis, C. D., 1985, Clay-mineral precipitation and transformation during burial diagenesis: Geological Society (London) Philosophical Transactions, v. A315, p. 91 105, doi:10.1098/rsta.1985.0031. Curtis, C., 1987, Mineralogical consequences of organic matter degradation in sediments: Inorganic/organic diagenesis, in J. K. Leggett and G. G. Zuffa, eds., Marine clastic sedimentology: London, Graham and Trotman, p. 108 123. Dallmann, W. K., T. Kjrnet, and A. Nttvedt, 2001, Geological map of Svalbard: Norwegian Polar Institute C9G/ C9Q, scale 1:100,000, sheet C9G, p. 456.

594

Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Drief, A., and P. Schiffmann, 2004, Very low temperature alteration of sideromelane in hyaloclastics and hyalotuffs from Kilauea and Mauna Kea volcanoes: Implications for the mechanism of palagonite formation: Clays and Clay Minerals, v. 52, p. 623635. Egorov, A. Y., and A. Mrk, 1998, The East Siberian and Svalbard Triassic successions and their sequence-stratigraphic relationships: Zentralblatt fr Geologie und Palontologie Teil 1, v. 1112, p. 13471430. Ehrenberg, S. N., 1993, Preservation of anomalously high porosity in deeply buried sandstones by grain-coating chlorite: Examples from the Norwegian continental shelf: AAPG Bulletin, v. 77, p. 12601286. El Albani, A., A. Meunier, and F. Frsich, 2005, Unusual occurrence of glauconite in a shallow lagoonal environment (Lower Cretaceous, northern Aquitaine Basin, SW France): Terra Nova, v. 17, p. 537544, doi:10.1111 /j.1365-3121.2005.00646.x. Engelbrecht, J. P., and E. Derbyshire, 2010, Airborne mineral dust: Elements, v. 6, p. 241246, doi:10.2113/gselements .6.4.241. Farokhpoor, R., O. Torster, T. Baghbanbashi, A. Mrk, and E. Lindeberg, 2010, Experimental and numerical simulation of CO2 injection into Upper Triassic sandstones in Svalbard, Norway: Society of Petroleum Engineers International Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, November 1012, 2010, SPE Paper 139524, 11 p, doi:10.2118/139524-MS. Glrstad-Clark, E., J. I. Faleide, B. A. Lundschien, and J. P. Nystuen, 2010, Triassic seismic sequence stratigraphy and paleogeography of the western Barents Sea area: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 27, p. 14481475, doi:10 .1016/j.marpetgeo.2010.02.008. Hawlader, H. M., 1990, Diagenesis and reservoir potential of volcanogenic sandstones: Cretaceous of the Surat Basin, Australia: Sedimentary Geology, v. 66, p. 181 195, doi:10.1016/0037-0738(90)90059-3. Heald, M. T., and R. E. Larese, 1974, Influence of coatings on quartz cementation: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 44, p. 12691274. Iiljima, A., and R. Matsumotu, 1982, Berthierine and chamosite in coal measures of Japan: Clays and Clay Minerals, v. 30, p. 264274, doi:10.1346/CCMN.1982.0300403. Kastner, M., and R. Siever, 1979, Low-temperature feldspars in sedimentary rocks: American Journal of Science, v. 279, p. 435479, doi:10.2475/ajs.279.4.435. Ketzer, J. M., S. Morad, and A. Amorosi, 2003, Predictive diagenetic clay-mineral distribution in siliciclastic rocks within a sequence-stratigraphic framework, in R. H. Worden and S. Morad, eds., Clay mineral cements in sandstones: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication 34, p. 4361. Krajewski, K. P., 2000, Early diagenetic collapse and injection microstructures in phosphate nodules of the Brentskardhaugen Bed (Jurassic) in Spitsbergen: Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Earth Sciences, v. 48, p. 209229. Krajewski, K. P., 2001, Diagenetic recrystallization of apatite in phosphate nodules of the Brentskardhaugen Bed (Jurassic) in Spitsbergen: Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Earth Sciences, v. 49, p. 7187. Krajewski, K. P., 2002, Catagenic ankerite replacing biogenic

calcite in the Marhgda Bed (Jurassic), Sassenfjorden, Spitsbergen: Polish Polar Research, v. 23, p. 8599. Krajewski, K. P., B. Lacka, M. Kuzniarski, R. Orlowski, and A. Prejbisz, 2001, Diagenetic origin of carbonate in the Marhgda Bed (Jurassic) in Spitsbergen, Svalbard: Polish Polar Research, v. 22, p. 89128. Leith, T. L., et al., 1992, Mesozoic hydrocarbon source rocks of the Arctic region, in T. O. Vorren, E. Bergsager, . A. Dahl-Stamnes, E. Holter, B. Johansen, E. Lie, and T. B. Lund, eds., Arctic geology and petroleum potential: Norwegian Petroleum Society Special Publication 2, p. 125. Maher Jr., H. D., 1989, A storm-related origin for the Jurassic Brentskardhaugen Bed of Spitsbergen, Norway: Polar Research, v. 7, p. 6777, doi:10.1111/j.1751-8369.1989 .tb00605.x. Major, H., P. Haremo, W. K. Dallmann, and A. Andresen, 2000, Geological map of Svalbard: Norsk Polarinstitutt Temakart 31, scale 1:100,000, sheet C9G. Manum, S. B., and T. Throndsen, 1978, Rank of coal and dispersed organic matter and its geological bearing on the Spitsbergen Tertiary, in Norsk Polarinstitutt, au., rbok 1977: Oslo, Norsk Polarinstitutt, p. 159178. McBride, E. F., 1989, Quartz cement in sandstones: A review: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 26, p. 69112, doi:10 .1016/0012-8252(89)90019-6. Miloslavskij, M. Ju., A. S. Birjukov, S. N. Slnskij, S. Hansen, B. T. Larsen, W. K. Dallmann, and A. Andresen, 1993, Geological map of Svalbard: Norsk Polarinstitutt Temakart 21, scale 1:100,000, sheet D9G. Morad, S., M. Bergan, R. Knarud, and J. P. Nystuen, 1990, Albitization of detrital plagioclase in Triassic reservoir sandstones from the Snorre field, Norwegian North Sea: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 60, p. 411425. Mrk, A., and M. Bjory, 1984, Mesozoic source rocks on Svalbard, in A. M. Spencer et al., eds., Petroleum geology of the north European margin: London, Graham & Trotman, p. 371382. Mrk, A., R. Knarud, and D. Worsley, 1982, Depositional and diagenetic environments of the Triassic and Lower Jurassic succession of Svalbard, in A. F. Embry and H. R. Balkwill, eds., Arctic geology and geophysics: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 8, p. 371398. Mrk, A., W. K. Dallmann, H. Dypvik, P. Johannessen, G. B. Larssen, J. Nagy, A. Nttvedt, S. Olaussen, T. M. Pcelina, and D. Worsley, 1999, Mesozoic lithostratigraphy, in W. K. Dallmann, ed., Lithostratigraphic atlas of Svalbard: Troms, Norway, Norwegian Polar Institute, p. 127214. Mrk, M. B. E., 1999, Compositional variations and provenance of Triassic sandstones from the Barents Shelf: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 69, p. 690710, doi:10.2110/jsr.69.690. Moss, S. J., and M. E. Tucker, 1996, Dolomitization associated with transgressive surfaces: A mid-Cretaceous example: Sedimentary Geology, v. 107, p. 1120, doi:10 .1016/S0037-0738(96)00066-8. Nagy, J., and S. H. Berge, 2008, Micropaleontological evidence of brackish water conditions during deposition of the Knorringfjellet Formation, Late Triassic Early Jurassic, Spitsbergen: Polar Research, v. 27, p. 413 427, doi:10.1111/j.1751-8369.2007.00038.x.

Mrk

595

Nagy, J., S. Hess, H. Dypvik, and T. Bjrke, 2011, Marine shelf to paralic biofacies of Upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic deposits in Spitsbergen: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 300, p. 138151, doi:10 .1016/j.palaeo.2010.12.018. Nejbert, K., P. Krzysztof, K. P. Krajewski, E. Dubiska, and Z. Pcskay, 2011, Dolerites of Svalbard, northwest Barents Sea Shelf: Age, tectonic setting and significance for geotectonic interpretation of the High Arctic Large Igneous Province: Polar Research, v. 30, p. 7306, doi:10 .3402/polar.v30i0.7306. Nystuen, J. P., A. Mrk, R. Mller, and A. Nttvedt, 2008, From desert to alluvial plain: From land to seaTriassic: 251200 million years ago, in I. B. Ramberg, I. Bryhni, A. Nttvedt, and K. Rangnes, eds., The making of a land: Geology of Norway: Norsk Geologisk Forening, p. 330355. Odin, G. S., 1985, Significance of green particles (glaucony, berthierine, chlorite) in arenites, in G. G. Zuffa, ed., Provenance of arenites: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Riedel, p. 279307. Odin, G. S., and A. Matter, 1981, De glauconiarum origine: Sedimentology, v. 28, p. 611641, doi:10.1111/j.1365 -3091.1981.tb01925.x. Oelkers, E. H., P. A. Bjrkum, and W. M. Murphy, 1996, A petrographic and computational investigation of quartz cementation and porosity reduction in North Sea sandstones: American Journal of Science, v. 296, p. 420452, doi:10.2475/ajs.296.4.420. Ogata, K., K. Senger, A. Braathen, J. Tveranger, and S. Olaussen, in press, The importance of natural fractures in a tight reservoir for potential CO2 storage: Case study of the Upper Triassic to Middle Jurassic Kapp Toscana Group (Spitsbergen, Arctic Norway), in G. H. Spence, J. Redfern, R. Aguilera, T. G. Bevan, J. W. Cosgrove, G. D. Couples, and J.-M. Daniel, eds., Advances in the study of fractured reservoirs: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 374, 21 p. Olaussen, S., A. Dalland, T. G. Gloppen, and E. Johannessen, 1984, Depositional environment and diagenesis of Jurassic reservoir sandstones in the eastern part of Troms 1 area, in Petroleum geology of the north European margin: London, Graham & Trotman, p. 6179. Paxton, S. T., J. O. Szabo, J. M. Ajdukiewicz, and R. E. Klimentidis, 2002, Construction of an intergranular volume compaction curve for evaluating and predicting compaction and porosity loss in rigid-grain sandstone reservoirs: AAPG Bulletin, v. 86, p. 20472067. Pchelina, T. M., 1980, New data on the TriassicJurassic boundary beds in the Svalbard Archipelago, in D. V. Semerdkiy, ed., Geology of the sedimentary deposits in the archipelago of Svalbard: Collection of scientific papers: Leningrad, NIIG, p. 4460. Pettijohn, F. J., P. E. Potter, and R. Siever, 1972: Sand and sandstone: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 618 p. Pham, V. T. H., P. Lu, P. Aagaard, C. Zhu, and H. Hellevang, 2011, On the potential of CO2-water-rock interactions for CO2 storage using a modified kinetic model: Interna-

tional Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, v. 5, p. 1002 1015, doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.12.002. Pufahl, P. K., and K. A. Grimm, 2003, Coated phosphate grains: Proxy for physical, chemical and ecological changes in seawater: Geology, v. 31, p. 801 804, doi:10.1130/G19658.1. Raiswell, R., 2011, Iron transport from the continents to the open ocean: The aging-rejuvenation cycle: Elements, v. 7, p. 101106, doi:10.2113/gselements.7.2.101. Reolid, M., M. Philippe, J. Nagy, and I. Abad, 2010, Preservation of phosphatic wood remains in marine deposits of the Brentskardhaugen Bed (Middle Jurassic) from Svalbard (Boreal Realm): Facies, v. 56, p. 549566, doi:10 .1007/s10347-010-0219-z. Riis, F., B. A. Lundschien, T. Hy, A. Mrk, and M. B. E. Mrk, 2008, Evolution of the Triassic shelf in the northern Barents Sea region: Polar Research, v. 27, p. 318 338, doi:10.1111/j.1751-8369.2008.00086.x. Sharma, M., A. R. Basu, and G. V. Nesterenko, 1991, Nd-Sr isotopes, petrochemistry, and origin of the Siberian flood basalts, USSR: Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 55, p. 11831192, doi:10.1016/0016-7037(91)90177-7. Stoessell, R. K., and E. D. Pittmann, 1990, Secondary porosity revisited: The chemistry of feldspar dissolution by carboxylic acids and anions: AAPG Bulletin, v. 74, p. 1795 1805. Storvoll, V., K. Bjrlykke, D. Karlsen, and G. Saigal, 2002, Porosity preservation in reservoir sandstones due to graincoating illite: A study of the Jurassic Garn Formation from the Kristin and Lavrans fields, offshore mid-Norway: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 19, p. 767 781, doi:10.1016/S0264-8172(02)00035-1. Sturesson, U., J. M. Heikoop, and M. J. Risk, 2000, Modern and Paleozoic iron ooids: A similar volcanic origin: Sedimentary Geology, v. 136, p. 137 146, doi:10.1016 /S0037-0738(00)00091-9. Taylor, K. G., and H. S. Macquaker, 2011, Iron minerals in marine sediments record chemical environments: Elements, v. 7, p. 113118, doi:10.2113/gselements.7.2.113. Walderhaug, O., and P. A. Bjrkum, 2003, The effect of stylolite spacing on quartz cementation in the Lower Jurassic St Formation, southern Barents Sea: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 73, p. 146 156, doi:10.1306 /090502730146. Wolela, A., 2002, Effects of heat flow and hydrothermal fluids from volcanic intrusions on authigenic mineralization in sandstone formations: Bulletin Chemical Society of Ethiopia, v. 16, p. 3752. Worden, R. H., and S. A. Barclay, 2000, Internally sourced quartz cement due to externally derived CO2 in subarkosic sandstones, North Sea: Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v. 6970, p. 645649, doi:10.1016 /S0375-6742(00)00104-7. Worsley, D., 1973, The Wilhelmya Formation: A new lithostratigraphic unit from the Mesozoic of eastern Svalbard, in Norsk Polarinstitutt, au., rbok 1971: Oslo, Norsk Polarinstitutt, p. 716.

596

Longyearbyen Sandstone Reservoir Diagenesis, Norway

Measuring and modeling fault density for CO2 storage plume-fault encounter probability estimation
Preston D. Jordan, Curtis M. Oldenburg, and Jean-Philippe Nicot

AUTHORS Preston D. Jordan $ Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720; pdjordan@lbl.gov Preston Jordan is a professional geologist and a certified engineering geologist and hydrogeologist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory with an M.S. degree in geotechnical engineering from the University of California, Berkeley. His current research focus is on geologic carbon storage with an emphasis on risk assessment. He also advises the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory regarding the hydrogeology and engineering geology of the facility. Curtis M. Oldenburg $ Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720; cmoldenburg@lbl.gov Curtis Oldenburg is the head of the Geologic Carbon Sequestration Program at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. His area of expertise is on numerical model development and on applications for coupled subsurface flow and transport processes. Oldenburg is the author of more than 70 peer-reviewed articles and book chapters and editor-in-chief for Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology. Jean-Philippe Nicot $ Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713; jp.nicot@beg.utexas.edu Jean-Philippe Nicot is a geologic engineer and a research scientist at the Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin, from which he holds a doctorate in civil engineering. He has been working on environmental issues for more than two decades. His current research interests include groundwater contamination risks and water resources assessment.

ABSTRACT Emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil-fueled power generation stations contributes to global climate change. Capture of CO2 from such stationary sources and storage within the pores of geologic strata (geologic carbon storage) is one approach to mitigating anthropogenic climate change. The large storage volume needed for this approach to be effective requires injection into pore space saturated with saline water in reservoir strata overlain by cap rocks. One of the main concerns regarding storage in such rocks is leakage via faults. Such leakage requires, first, that the CO2 plume encounter a fault and, second, that the properties of the fault allow CO2 to flow upward. Considering only the first step of encounter, fault population statistics suggest an approach to calculate the probability of a plume encountering a fault, particularly in the early site-selection stage when sitespecific characterization data may be lacking. The resulting fault encounter probability approach is applied to a case study in the southern part of the San Joaquin Basin, California. The CO2 plume from a previously planned injection was calculated to have a 4.1% chance of encountering a fully seal offsetting fault and a 9% chance of encountering a fault with a throw half the seal thickness. Subsequently available information indicated the presence of a half-seal offsetting fault at a location 2.8 km (1.7 mi) northeast of the injection site. The encounter probability for a plume large enough to encounter a fault with this throw at this distance from the injection site is 25%, providing a single before and after test of the encounter probability estimation method.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Chris Doughty (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) for sharing the pilot test simulation results and Jeff Wagoner (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) for sharing his expertise regarding the geology of the southern San Joaquin Valley, particularly in the vicinity of the pilot test site. We also thank Tiemi Onishi for providing an internal review and for suggesting that the study could be reported in two papers to

Copyright 2013. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Manuscript received December 7, 2011; provisional acceptance March 27, 2012; revised manuscript received June 19, 2012; final acceptance October 1, 2012. DOI:10.1306/10011211181

AAPG Bulletin, v. 97, no. 4 (April 2013), pp. 597 618

597

provide the space necessary to properly convey it. We thank all of the peer reviewers that offered comments, particularly Nancye H. Dawers. After voluntarily identifying herself, she offered constructive reviews that were far beyond the norm. In addition, we thank AAPG consulting editor Frances Plant Whitehurst for her keen input on several technical and editorial issues, which led to considerable further improvement. Of course, none of the above should be construed as indicating that the authors take anything other than full responsibility for the data analysis and conclusions presented. This work was supported in part by the CO2 Capture Project of the Joint Industry Program and by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory under U.S. Department of Energy contract no. DE-AC02-05CH11231. The AAPG Editor thanks the following reviewers for their work on this paper: Nancye H. Dawers and an anonymous reviewer.
EDITORS NOTE Color versions of Figures 5 and 13 may be seen in the online version of this article.

INTRODUCTION Fossil fuelfired electrical power plants emitted 40% of the carbon dioxide (CO2) resulting from energy usage in the United States in 2008 (EIA, 2009). Storage of a part of this CO2 in the pore space of geologic strata (geologic carbon storage) is one possible mitigation for the part of climate change associated with emitting this pollutant to the atmosphere. Geologic carbon storage is envisioned in strata from which oil or gas has been produced as well as strata containing primarily saline waters, termed saline aquifers. Injection into unminable coal beds to allow adsorption is another option. Estimates indicate that as much as tens of metric Gt of CO2 per year can feasibly be captured in a few decades time (Gale, 2005). Global total oil and gas field storage capacity is estimated at many hundred to almost a thousand Gt of CO2 (Benson and Cook, 2005). This suggests that oil and gas fields could provide all the necessary storage. However, no general tendency exists for large point sources of CO2 emissions to be located near oil or gas fields. This lack of proximity between sources, for example, large coal-fired power plants, and sinks consisting of oil and gas reservoirs would necessitate extensive CO2 transportation pipeline networks. However, sedimentary basins with alternating reservoir and cap-rock sequences filled with saline water are amenable to geologic carbon storage and are present under large areas of North America thereby reducing transportation requirements. With large capacity and wide spatial distribution (Benson and Cook, 2005), the focus for large-scale geologic carbon storage that can make a material difference in reducing CO2 emissions is on saline systems in sedimentary basins. Even where source and oil and gas field volumes are colocated, storage awaits a field owner deciding that such an activity, even if combined with CO2-enhanced recovery, would provide the greatest economic return. In contrast, storage in saline aquifers does not have hydrocarbon market timing constraints. For this reason, as well as their greater and more widespread storage capacity, a substantial part of storage will likely need to occur in saline aquifers if carbon capture and storage is to significantly mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Leakage of CO2 out of designated subsurface storage volumes, whether oil and gas fields or saline aquifers, is one of the main concerns regarding geologic carbon storage. Fault zones are considered as one of the main potential leakage pathways (Benson and Cook, 2005). More is generally known about the location and character of faults in a known oil and gas reservoir than in a saline aquifer. Consequently, a more deterministic

DATASHARE 47 Appendix 1 is available in an electronic version on the AAPG Web site (www.aapg.org/datashare) as Datashare 47.

598

Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

assessment of leakage risk caused by faults is possible for storage in mature oil and gas reservoirs, and a more probabilistic assessment is necessary for saline aquifers in the early site-selection phase of a project. For leakage via a fault to occur, stored CO2 must first encounter the fault, and then that fault must be relatively more transmissive than the surrounding rock. This article focuses on a method for estimating the probability of the first of these steps, that is, CO2 encountering a fault. This article does not consider the second step regarding whether a fault is transmissive if such an encounter occurs. Two inputs are needed for assessing the fault encounter probability: the plume geometry and fault statistics (Jordan et al., 2011). The necessary fault statistics concern fault strike and density versus size. Numerical modeling can provide realizations of the plume geometry. This article develops a more readily usable fault statistical approach for use in calculating the encounter probability and applies that approach to develop fault statistics from publicly available data to calculate a plume-fault encounter probability for a hypothetical pilot test site in the southeastern San Joaquin Valley, California.

in a one-dimensional sample space, such as a scan line. When d (known as the displacement cutoff ) is substituted for S, equation 1 becomes Nd / d Cd 2

where the subscript d is for displacement cutoff. Field studies, numerical simulations, and physical modeling have also indicated that, at very low strains and high strains, fault density versus displacement cutoff is exponential instead of power law (Cowie et al., 1995; Ackermann et al., 2001). They also show that Cd declines with increasing strain during the initiation of faulting and becomes constant with further strain. At initiation of strain, many small faults develop, and so Cd is large. As strain continues, some of the faults grow and eventually link, whereas few new small faults develop, so Cd decreases. Values reported in the literature are likely to emphasize lower values for Cd because field studies are easier to conduct on more heavily faulted terrains. At very high strains, further development of a few faults or even one fault dominates, termed as characteristic fault(s). Such populations are marked by an exponential instead of a power-law distribution in the larger fault range (Hardacre and Cowie, 2003).

BACKGROUND FAULT DENSITY APPROACH Numerous investigators have found that fault length and displacement populations can commonly be represented by a power-law distribution. This finding is based on field research (e.g., Watterson et al., 1996), physical modeling (e.g., Ackermann et al., 2001), and numerical simulations (e.g., Cowie et al., 1995). Power-law distributions are of the form N / aSC 1 If N represents the number of faults longer than a certain length, it is commonly difficult to measure in practice because of the confounding effects of fault intersections. Furthermore, the orientation of the boundary of a fault map can introduce scatter in the fault density distribution measured from the map. The areal density of faults (length per area), F, with a certain value of d is easier to measure. It can be accurately calculated by measuring the length of faults with greater than a certain displacement occurring in a map area and dividing by that area. It avoids handling of fault intersections inherent in defining the number of faults based on length, and it does not suffer from bias introduced by the orientation of map margins. The use of F is workable because it is proportional to Nd, as shown next, and so can be substituted for Nd in equation 2.
Jordan et al. 599

where N is the number of faults of a size greater than S, and C is the power-law exponent (notations from Watterson et al., 1996). For instance, N can represent the number of faults greater than a certain length determined from a two-dimensional (2-D) sample space, such as a geologic map. Alternately, N can represent the number of faults with greater than a certain displacement, d, encountered

Nd can be multiplied by the average length of the fault (ld) represented by each fault intersection with one of multiple scan lines across a map assuming that the faults have no orientation bias or that the scan lines are randomly oriented. This value is proportional to the average sample-line spacing. Multiplying Nd by ld yields ld Nd L 3

where L is the total length of faults with d greater than a particular value. As the space between the scan lines approaches the limit of 0, equation 3 approaches equality. L can be directly measured from a fault map instead of through scan lines. Multiplying equation 2 by ld yields ld Nd / d Cd 4

Substituting equation 3 into equation 4 and dividing by the total area of the sample domain, A, gives L / d Cd A 5

The value of L divided by A is the fault density, F, so equation 5 can be rewritten as F / d Cd 6

An additional implication of equation 6 is that F follows the same pattern as Nd as strain accumulates. Taking the log of equation 6 gives log F / Cd log d 7

Equation 7 indicates that a log-log plot of F against d will be linear if the fault population follows a power-law distribution. A semilog plot of F against d will be linear if the distribution is exponential (very early or late-stage strain). Equation 7 implies that F approaches infinity as d approaches 0. In practice, most fault population researchers have found, or believe based on theoretical
600 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

considerations, that the relationship is accurate down to displacements equivalent to several grain diameters for clastic rocks (e.g., Ackermann et al., 2001). Even this implies that F becomes very large at the actual lower limit of d. This suggests a high probability that a given CO2 plume will encounter a fault of some size. Of course, most such faults will have such small displacements as to not be of serious concern in terms of leakage. Consequently, the concern for leakage should focus on faults of a certain size (large enough to have a high probability of leakage) instead of on all faults encountered, as is commonly the case currently. As defined above, F is a measure of fault density in a 2-D space and so is independent of fault dip. As such, F provides a biased estimate of the fault density in the three-dimensional (3-D) rock volume (Pickering et al., 1995). Because of the buoyancy of CO2, and typically because of the much greater length and width than thickness of most proposed storage reservoirs, CO2 plumes will typically be more 2-D than 3-D. As a result, F is the proper parameter for estimating the probability of a CO2 plume encountering a fault with a given displacement. However, 3-D fault density can enter back into consideration several steps after a plume encounters a fault. After such an encounter, the first issue is the flow and transport properties of the fault. If these properties are such that leakage via the fault can occur, then the next relevant issue is the vertical extent of the part of the fault with these properties. If the extent of this part of the fault is sufficient to allow leakage all the way from the CO2 plume to a volume of concern (i.e., a receptor such as an underground source of drinking water), then analysis should proceed to the consideration of impacts. If the extent of the leakage-capable part of the fault is insufficient to allow direct leakage to a receptor, but sufficient to allow leakage out of the storage formation, then consideration of leakage via more complex pathways must occur. This network is defined in part by the 3-D fault density, along with the distribution of permeable geologic units in relation to the fault density. Such considerations are outside of this study, but the probability of flow through conductive fault networks with power-law populations is developed by Zhang et al. (2010).

Figure 1. Map view of randomly located circular plumes centered in a prospective storage area or fault map area. Plumes within a radius of an unknown fault, indicated by the gray area, will encounter the fault.

FAULT ENCOUNTER PROBABILITY For a circular plume in plan to encounter a fault, it must be centered within a radius of either side of the fault. Discounting the ends of the fault, a plume centered within a plume-diameter wide stripe centered on the fault will encounter the fault, as shown in Figure 1. Dividing this area by the study area, such as the part of the basin under consideration for locating a storage project or the available fault map area, gives the probability of a randomly located plume encountering the fault. It also gives the probability of a plume at a known location encountering a randomly located fault of the same length in the study area, again discounting end effects. The fault stripe area is the plume diameter multiplied by the fault length as shown in Figure 1. The fault length is the fault density multiplied by the study area. So, the study area occurs in both the numerator and the denominator of the probability calculation, leaving just the plume diameter multiplied by the fault density. This result can be generalized to noncircular areas swept by CO2. This requires ascertaining the fault strike mode from available fault maps, as well as estimating the expected shape of the sweep area. This shape can be estimated from the numerical simulations of the proposed CO2 injection. Taking half the length of the sweep area perpendicular to the fault as l, Prg 2lF 8

where g is the encounter of a fault by a plume, and Pr(g) is the probability of such an encounter. The half length of the sweep area is used to emphasize that the area must be centered within this distance of a fault for CO2 to encounter it and that potential faults on either side of the area contribute to the probability. Using the fault-perpendicular dimension of the sweep area in the equation instead, such as the diameter for circular plumes, could lead to misunderstanding. The derivation of equation 8 is further detailed in Jordan et al. (2011). If more than one fault strike mode is observed, then multiple distributions of F will have to be defined based on measurements from the fault map. Each mode will also require a different l unless the sweep area is radially symmetric. Equation 8 can then be used to calculate a Pr(g) for each mode for each fault size of interest. Equation 8 inherently has several assumptions (Jordan et al., 2011). As mentioned above, it presumes that the region swept can be approximated as a 2-D space to allow the use of aerial instead of volumetric fault density. It also assumes that the plume encounters only one fault. So, the faultperpendicular dimension of the sweep area must be much less than the likely spacing between the faults of interest. Another way to view this is that, as the fault encounter probability resulting from equation 8 increases, overestimation of the probability increases because of assuming that a plume encounters only one fault.
Jordan et al. 601

Figure 2. Location of the previously proposed pilot test in the San Joaquin Basin in California (modified from Scheirer and Magoon, 2007). OR = Oregon; ID = Idaho; WY = Wyoming; CA = California; NV = Nevada; UT = Utah; AZ = Arizona.

This overestimation is negligible at small probabilities. For instance, assuming a random fault distribution and a single fault encounter probability of 5%, the likelihood of encountering two such faults (ignoring fault effects on plume evolution) is just 0.25%.

FAULT ENCOUNTER PROBABILITY ESTIMATION METHOD Given equation 8, estimating the probability of a CO2 plume encountering a fault can proceed as follows (Jordan et al., 2011): 1. Identify the fault map(s) relevant to a proposed site.

2. Measure fault lengths, orientations, and displacement profiles from the map(s). 3. Determine fault orientation modes. 4. Analyze spatial trends in the areal fault density (length divided by area), F, and select a data set applicable to the proposed site. 5. Calculate F for faults with displacements greater than a value of interest, d, and plot in log-log and semilog space. 6. Model the F-versus-d distribution. 7. Estimate the length of the plume perpendicular to the faults of interest or estimate the plume area, aspect ratio, and orientation. 8. Calculate the encounter probability at the d of interest from the F-versus-d distribution model, fault orientation modes, and fault-perpendicular plume length.

602

Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

Figure 3. The pilot test site is at the star with nearby oil and gas fields and major depositional environment and structural boundaries shown (depositional environment boundary from Gautier and Scheirer, 2007; dip direction and magnitude from Wagoner, 2009; and oil and gas fields from California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources [DOGGR], 1998).

CASE STUDY: SOUTHEASTERN SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY PILOT TEST A previously planned pilot test site was located in the southeastern part of the San Joaquin Basin in California approximately 27 km (17 mi) northwest of Bakersfield, as shown in Figure 2. This test was to inject 1 Mt (106 t = 109 kg; 1.1 106 T = 2.2 109 lb) of CO2 into a suitable stratum over 4 yr (National Energy Technology Laboratory [NETL], 2009). Planning for the test was terminated when construction of the pilot power plant that was to supply the CO2 was canceled.

Geologic Setting The San Joaquin Basin extends approximately 350 km (220 mi) from the Stockton arch in the north to the northern Transverse Ranges in the south and from the Sierra Nevada in the east to the California Coast

Ranges in the west. The San Joaquin Basin averages 80 to 110 km (5070 mi) wide (National Energy Technology Laboratory [NETL], 2009). During the Mesozoic, the area was a forearc basin during the subduction of the Farallon plate. By the middle Tertiary, the basin had become relatively isolated as a result of the transpressional margin that followed the passage of the Mendocino triple junction. The depositional environment generally progressed from deep marine in the Mesozoic to alluvial at present, with several intervening transgression-regression sequences (Graham and Williams, 1985). The Vedder Sand consists of interbedded sandstones and shales deposited on the marine slope, shelf, and delta comprising a ramp (Bloch, 1986). The test site is at the boundary of the shelf to upper slope and lower slope to basin depositional environments at the time of deposition of the Vedder as shown in Figure 3 (Gautier and Scheirer, 2007). As shown in Figure 3, the site is structurally either at or just a short distance north of the northern margin of the Bakersfield arch
Jordan et al. 603

Figure 4. Generalized section for the southeastern San Joaquin Basin (California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources [DOGGR], 1998). Oil fields are stippled on the map. Predominantly fine-grained (shale) units without significant coarse-grained reservoirs are shaded gray on the section according to Scheirer and Magoon (2007) with the position of the Freeman and Vedder facies changed based on wireline logs in California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) (1998) and Pulv unit lithology changes based on Callaway (1990).

(Bartow, 1991; Gautier and Scheirer, 2007). The more significant faults in the vicinity appear to extend from the basement to the MiocenePliocene unconformity, as shown in Figure 4. These faults appear to be primarily growth faults that are vertical upsection of the Vedder and likely subvertical at the Vedder (McPherson, 1978). At the site, the Vedder dips 7 to the west southwest, has a thickness of as much as 160 m (520 ft), and occurs at a depth of 2300 m (7500 ft) (Wagoner, 2009). The Freeman Silt provides a good overlying seal at the site and surrounding areas (Wagoner, 2009).
604 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

Fault Data Detailed information on faults at the pilot test site is not available. Twenty-seven oil and gas fields exist wholly or partially within 24 km (15 mi) of the pilot test site as shown in Figure 3. A structure map for each field, mostly showing faults, is publicly available, with the exception of the Rose field for which no data were available (California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources [DOGGR], 1998). These maps provide a basis for predicting the fault population in the vicinity of the pilot test site. An example structure map is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Structure map of the N electric log marker in the Bellevue oil field modified from California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) (1998). The N electric marker occurs near the base of the Reef Ridge Shale. The location of this field and the geologic unit are shown on Figure 4. The stippled areas represent the extent of oil accumulations.

Richardson (1966) also presents a structure map of the top of the Vedder sands based on oil field and exploratory well data. As such, the data density, and so also the map accuracy, vary considerably from within fields to between fields. For instance, the map only shows two wells in the township where the injection site is located and no wells in the next closest township to the injection site, which is to the west. In addition, the comparison of the Richardson (1966) structure map with the few oil field structure maps on the same surface indicates some significant differences. For instance, Richardson (1966) indicates a maximum of more than 120 m (400 ft) of displacement on the Greeley fault in the Greeley field, whereas the structure map for that field in California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources

(DOGGR) (1998) shows approximately 40 m (130 ft) of displacement in the same location. Based on the data above, the individual field structure maps are judged to provide the more accurate information at a higher resolution than the Richardson (1966) map. Although the latter offers the appearance of complete coverage, its use could lead to significantly different and incorrect conclusions regarding the likelihood of a plume encountering a fault with a particular throw. Accordingly, the strike and length of fault segments were measured from the structure map of each field. Segmentation of faults in this context was not purely topological as might be the case in other fault studies, which commonly place segment boundaries only at fault intersections or ends. Instead, segment
Jordan et al. 605

boundaries in this study were selected to capture the throw profile by recording this value at the ends of each segment. Segment boundaries were taken at the ends of faults (whether internal to the map or at its boundaries), at fault intersections, at most intersections of the fault with a structure contour, and at additional locations as needed. The latter were selected to provide segments along which the rate of change in throw along the fault is relatively constant. Figure 5 shows the fault segment boundaries selected on the structure map for one field. The sufficiency of the segment boundaries selected with regard to the purpose of this study is discussed in a following section. The structural elevation at fault block corners was typically linearly projected, but in some cases, geologic judgment was used to adjust the resulting value to account for near-fault folding. Throws across faults at the block corners were calculated from these interpreted elevations. The structural elevation on the side of the fault opposite where a structure contour intersection was chosen as a segment boundary was generally linearly interpolated, and the throw was calculated. Figure 5 shows examples of fault block corner elevations and segment boundary throw estimates and shows that the throw along each segment typically varies. Fault dip information was not given on the maps, so only the throw could be measured. As mentioned, most of the faults are understood to be vertical above the Vedder storage target and subvertical at the target, so measuring throw instead of dip displacement probably does not introduce significant errors. In addition, the faults have been identified as growth faults, so measuring throw should not generally introduce significant errors regarding the true displacement. In addition, offset perpendicular to bedding is more related to shale-gouge ratio than is the actual displacement. The shale-gouge ratio is the proportion of shale displaced past a particular point on a fault. Fault permeability decreases with increasing shale-gouge ratio, at least at lower values (Yielding et al., 1996). Because the bedding dips in the vicinity of the pilot test site are generally small (7 for the Vedder Sand), the offset perpendicular to the bedding is almost the same as the throw, further justifying the use of throw in this study instead of true displacement.
606 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

The length and strike of 956 fault segments were measured. The total fault length measured was 465 km (289 mi). Throws were measured at 1046 points. The data are presented in Appendix 1 (AAPG Datashare 47, www.aapg.org/datashare). Fault Strike The distribution of fault strikes in fields centered off versus on the Bakersfield arch is shown on Figure 6. Off the arch, the primary and almost only strike mode is to the northwest. On the arch, the fault population exhibits this strike mode in addition to a north-striking mode and a lesser northeast-striking mode. The distribution of fault strikes in fields centered on the shelf to upper slope versus the lower slope to deep basin is shown in Figure 7. Both populations show mostly the same modes in the same relative proportions, but the spread in the northwest and northeast modes is a bit greater in the lower shelf to basin population than the shelf to upper slope population. A comparison of Figures 5 and 6 suggests that the main variation in fault strike pattern is off versus on the Bakersfield arch. The on-arch population appears to include the mode present in the off-arch population in addition to two other modes. This mode is parallel to the bedding strike as well as the basin margin and basin slope, which suggests that the mode may be caused by growth faulting. The second most common mode on the Bakersfield arch appears to be conjugate with the primary northern mode. This suggests that the secondary and tertiary modes at this location may be caused by the tectonic stresses that uplifted the Bakersfield arch. As the pilot test site resides at the boundary of the Bakersfield arch, it is unclear from the above data which fault population strike modes to use in the analysis. In the course of investigating fault strike statistics, the strike distribution in oil and gas fields centered within 16 km (10 mi) of the pilot test site versus those farther away was plotted, as shown in Figure 8. Interestingly, the sole primary fault strike mode nearer the site is north to north-northwest. The reason for this is not clear, but given that the extent of the CO2 sweep area from the pilot test

Figure 6. Percentage of fault length occurring in 10 strike intervals in oil and gas fields centered off versus on the Bakersfield arch in the vicinity of the pilot test site.

injection was anticipated to be much smaller than 16 km (10 mi), the one primary mode from the nearby fault population was selected for input to the plume-fault encounter probability calculation. Throw Interpolation and Calculated Fault Density Robustness The throw at one end of a fault segment will typically be different from that at the other end. Some methods for estimating the part of the segment with a particular d must be chosen. This method could be a linear interpolation between the displacements at the ends of the segment or some higher-order interpolation of displacement along the fault using multiple values. Alternatively, the segment length could simply be bifurcated with each half assigned to the throw from the nearer end. The simplicity of the latter strategy comes at the cost of error in F for a particular d given a specific fault, but this error

should shrink to a generally small value for a larger fault set. In the case of the current set under consideration, F at different values of d was calculated using both the segment bifurcation and linear interpolation methods, as shown on Table 1. The difference in F at each d from these two methods was less than 5%, suggesting that the simpler bifurcation method can be used for larger fault sets. The selection of fault segment boundaries could also affect the measured values of F. To test this, a decimated fault data set was created by deleting every other throw value along each fault and combining the segment length to either side into one segment. This resulted in a data set with 61% as many segments as the full data set. The values of F from the decimated set using the linear interpolation method were less than 5% different than those from the full data set using linear interpolation, except for that at the highest value
Jordan et al. 607

Figure 7. Percentage of fault length occurring in 10 strike intervals in oil and gas fields centered on the upper slope to shelf versus the lower slope to basin in the vicinity of the pilot test site.

of d. At this d of 208 m (681 ft), F from the decimated set was still just 8% different than that from the full set. The match of F from the decimated and full data sets indicates that the fault segments measured were more than sufficiently small to accurately capture the fault population statistics for the purposes of this study. Vertical and Horizontal Fault Density Variation The stratigraphic horizon on which the structure map for each field in California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) (1998) is constructed varies from field to field. Figure 4 shows that the faults in the vicinity of the pilot test tend to persist through the sub-Pliocene Tertiary section, which includes the Vedder Sand (California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources [DOGGR], 1998). The fault density for each field is defined as
608 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

the total length of fault shown on the structure map for the field divided by the area of the map. The vertical distances from the mapped horizon in each field to the Vedder Sand were measured from the geologic sections or stratigraphic columns available for each field (California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources [DOGGR], 1998). Figure 9 shows the fault density from each structure map relative to the vertical distance from that horizon to the top of the Vedder. The distribution of fault densities does not change appreciably within 1500-m (6900-ft) depth of the Vedder. Data beyond this are sparse but suggest that the density may be lower. Still, the figure supports aggregating the data from all the structure maps as reasonable with regard to varying horizons. The other major consideration is whether data from the maps can be aggregated with regard to horizontal variation in the fault population. Although the major stratigraphic units are relatively continuous

Figure 8. Percentage of fault length occurring in 10 strike intervals in oil and gas fields centered less versus more than 16 km (10 mi) from the pilot test site.

across the area of data collection, as indicated in Figure 4, the site is located at the intersection of a depositional environment and a structural boundary as shown in Figure 3. The fault population could vary from one quadrant to another. For instance, there could be more growth faulting where the stratigraphic section is thicker, and/or more faulting over the Bakersfield arch. Figure 10 shows the approximate direction and distance from the pilot test site to each field and the size of and the fault density in each. The figure shows almost no fields from the northwest to the northeast of the pilot test site. The fault density appears to be higher on the Bakersfield arch, whereas density does not seem to correlate to shelf versus basin. Unlike fault strike, no obvious trend in fault density with distance is observed. These data suggest that the pilot test site is in a transitional area between higher and lower fault densities because of its location at the margin of the Bakersfield arch.

To explore this further, fault density was computed for each quadrant bounded by the depositional and structural boundaries relative to the site shown in Figure 3. This density was calculated by dividing the sum of the fault segments by the sum of the structure map areas located in each quadrant. The data from Dyer Creek were assigned to the nonBakersfield arch category based on the more recent work of Gautier and Scheirer (2007). Table 2 shows the results. The three quadrants of off arch on shelf, on arch on shelf, and on arch in basin all have fault densities within approximately 35% of the average fault density. The largest quadrant density is approximately 80% higher than the smallest quadrant density. In contrast, the density in the off-arch basin quadrant is only approximately 10% of the average and 8% of the largest quadrant density. However, the different quadrants have different average structure contour intervals. This, in turn,
Jordan et al. 609

Table 1. Fault Densities from the Full Data Set Via Different Methods and from the Decimated Set Full Data Set Throw Truncation (m) 0.30 0.46 0.67 0.98 1.4 2.1 3.0 4.5 6.6 9.6 14 21 30 45 66 96 141 208 (ft) 1.0 1.5 2.2 3.2 4.6 6.8 10 15 22 32 46 68 100 147 215 316 464 681 Bifurcation (km/km2) 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.51 0.46 0.40 0.32 0.22 0.120 0.076 0.035 0.0089 0.0025 (mi/mi2) 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 0.98 0.94 0.93 0.81 0.73 0.64 0.52 0.35 0.193 0.122 0.057 0.0144 0.0040 Linear Interpolation (km/km2) 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.62 0.61 0.58 0.56 0.50 0.45 0.39 0.31 0.21 0.116 0.073 0.035 0.0093 0.0025 (mi/mi2) 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.02 1.00 0.98 0.94 0.90 0.80 0.72 0.62 0.50 0.35 0.187 0.117 0.057 0.0150 0.0040 Difference (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 3.1 0.0 0.0 3.4 2.0 2.2 2.5 3.1 4.5 3.3 3.9 0.0 4.5 0.0 Decimated Data Set Linear Interpolation (km/km2) 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.61 0.58 0.56 0.50 0.45 0.39 0.31 0.21 0.113 0.070 0.034 0.0089 0.0023 (mi/mi2) 1.03 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.00 0.98 0.94 0.90 0.81 0.72 0.62 0.50 0.34 0.182 0.112 0.055 0.0142 0.0036 Difference from Full Set Linear Interpolation Result (%) 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 4.1 2.9 4.3 8.0

likely indicates different fault map resolution limits, with maps having smaller intervals likely to show faults with smaller throws than maps with larger intervals. All the areas have average contour intervals of approximately 30 m (100 ft) or less though, so the density of fault segments with throws greater than 30 m (100 ft) was also calculated and examined to reduce this confounding effect. The density of these larger faults in the aforementioned group of three quadrants was again a reasonable match to the average fault density, although the variation from average increased to approximately 50% of the average, and the maximum variation between the quadrants grew to a factor of 2.

Fault Density Modeling As indicated by Figures 2 and 9 as well as Table 2, the pilot test site is in a transitional location with regard to fault density. Experience at the Sleipner storage
610 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

project in the North Sea between Norway and the United Kingdom and the In Salah storage project in central Algeria indicates that it is difficult to simulate CO2 migration direction and velocity even in hindsight, let alone predict it accurately (Chadwick et al., 2009; Durucan et al., 2011, respectively). The uncertainty in predicting CO2 plume propagation direction demonstrated by the Sleipner and In Salah projects suggests that selecting the fault data from one or more of the geologic quadrants relative to the injection site could introduce larger errors in the analysis results than simply using the entire fault data set to develop average fault population statistics. The relative fault densities presented in Table 2 can be used to adjust the resulting probability up or down during injection depending on which direction the monitoring data indicate the plume is migrating. Fault density from the entire data set is plotted against throw truncation (dv) in Figure 11. Throw truncation is equivalent to the displacement cutoff for just the vertical component of offset. A throw

Figure 9. Fault density for individual oil and gas fields plotted against the vertical distance from the structural map horizon to the Vedder Sand. Positive values indicate that the Vedder is deeper than the map horizon. The symbol area is proportional to the field structure map area. Select data are labeled with field name initials. F = Fruitvale; G = Greeley; JW = West Jasmin; KR = Kern River; MP = Mount Poso; PC = Poso Creek; RR = Rosedale Ranch; St = Semitropic; Sr = Shafter; NS = North Shafter; SSE = Southeast Shafter; Sd = Strand. The location of each field is shown on Figure 3.

truncation value refers to the parts of all faults with throws greater or equal to this value, whereas a displacement cutoff value refers to the parts of all faults with displacement, whether dip, strike, or oblique, greater than a certain value. Although it is tempting to see the distribution in Figure 11 as exponential given the good fit to the data, low-displacement faults are underreported because of the fault mapping resolution limit (Pickering et al., 1995). The resolution limit is that throw below which the mapping method used and the data being used are unable to discriminate substantially all of the faults present within a map area. As a result, the actual fault population is larger than the measured population below the resolution limit. For instance, structure maps based on unit tops in well logs do not resolve all the faults seen in core samples. The latter allows the detection of faults with smaller offsets than the former. So, the exponential fit, as good as it is, actually underpredicts the fault density at low throw truncations. Alternatively, the throw truncation intervals and range of values fitted were varied to find the largest range that could be well fit linearly. This resulted in a line that lies above the data at a low throw truncation, in accordance with the mapping resolution effect.

Figure 10. Approximate direction and distance to each field, with locations of depositional and structural boundaries indicated. Relative field structure map area and fault density are indicated by open and shaded circle sizes, respectively. Entirely unshaded circles are fields without faults. Select data are labeled with field name initials. F = Fruitvale; G = Greeley; JW = West Jasmin; KR = Kern River; MP = Mount Poso; PC = Poso Creek; RR = Rosedale Ranch; St = Semitropic; Sr = Shafter; NS = North Shafter; SSE = Southeast Shafter; Sd = Strand. The location of each field is shown on Figure 3. Jordan et al. 611

Table 2. Fault Density in the Vicinity of the Pilot Test Site Fault Density Depositional and Structural Area* All Shelf Basin On arch Off arch On arch (on shelf) Off arch (on shelf) On arch (in basin) Off arch (in basin) Total Field Area (km2) 550 310 240 400 148 300 7.5 100 141 (mi2) 210 120 92 155 57 117 2.9 38 54 (%) 100 56 44 73 27 55 1 18 26 Area-weighted Average Contour Interval (ft) 94.6 108.5 76.5 100.4 78.7 110 50 71.2 80.3 All (km/km2) 0.84 1.14 0.46 1.11 0.112 1.15 0.68 0.99 0.087 (mi/mi2) 1.36 1.84 0.74 1.79 0.180 1.86 1.10 1.59 0.140 100-ft Throw (km/km2) 0.24 0.36 0.08 0.32 0.0186 0.36 0.18 0.19 0.00 (mi/mi2) 0.38 0.58 0.13 0.51 0.030 0.58 0.29 0.31 0.00

*Figure 3 shows the depositional and structural areas.

The point of departure of the linear fit from the fault density data is at a throw truncation of approximately 20 m (65 ft). The contour interval of most of the structure maps is 15 or 30 m (50 or 100 ft). The minimum interval is 6 m (20 ft), and the maximum is 61 m (200 ft). The contour interval average, standard deviation, kurtosis, and skewness are 23 m (76 ft), 14 m (48 ft), 1.85, and 1.21, respectively. This indicates that the distribution of contour intervals is relatively peaked at the average and symmetric at about the average. So, the point of departure between the fault density data and a linear fit matches the average structure contour interval. Consequently, the linear fit more accurately represents the actual fault population in the vicinity of the pilot test site, indicating that the fault population follows a power-law distribution. The power-law fit also yields higher fault density estimates at low throw truncations, which makes it more conservative than the exponential fit for estimating leakage risk. The linear fit also overpredicts the fault density at high throw truncations relative to the data according to Figure 11. This occurs because of the probability of undersampling of large faults in a given finite mapping area. This typically results in a greater downscaling in the throw truncation range than in the fault density range. This causes the data to shift
612 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

down at the highest throw truncations, the so-called finite-range effect of Pickering et al. (1995). Pickering et al. (1995) presents a correction for this effect. The suggested correction was implemented by including the fault density at the two highest throw truncations in the data set for fitting, adding a constant to each fault density in the data set, and calculating a new linear fit. The constant was varied until the square of the correlation coefficient was maximized. A constant of 0.025 km/km2 (0.04 mi/mi2) provided the best fit. The corrected data and fit are shown in Figure 12. The Cd resulting from this correction is 1.16. A comparison of Cd values from Figures 10 and 11 provides additional support for taking the latter as more accurately representing the fault population than the former. The Cd of 1.43 shown in Figure 11 is larger than the values typically reported from field studies using scan lines, which range from 0.5 to 1.0 (Yielding et al., 1996). However, Marrett and Allmendinger (1991) discuss the shift in the value of the coefficient resulting from bias introduced by sampling in a dimensional space other than the space of interest. The parameter Cd in this article regards the fault population measured in a 2-D sam0 pling space. Consequently, it is equivalent to C1 in Marrett and Allmendinger (1991). From a review of a previous work, Marrett and Allmendinger (1991) 0 suggest the range of C1 is 1.0 to 1.7.

Figure 11. Fault density (F) versus throw truncation (dv) aggregated from the structure maps for the oil and gas fields is shown in Figure 3. F is the areal density of the parts of all faults with a throw greater than dv. Data are shown as closed boxes. The heavy line is a linear fit to selected data (see text). The lighter line is an exponential fit to all data. Dashed lines are extrapolated from the fit lines.

The 1.43 value of Cd shown in Figure 11 is within the range of 1.0 to 1.7. However, Cowie et al. (1995) found that the value of Cd declines as strain accumulates. This occurs because, as strain increases, an increasing proportion is taken up by greater displacement on existing faults as they link than by nucleation of new faults. This increases the proportion of larger faults relative to smaller faults in the population. The 1.43 value of Cd shown in Figure 11 is above the midpoint of the 1.0 to 1.7 range, suggesting that the fault network is still relatively undeveloped. However, most of the faults on the fault maps, such as those in Figure 5, intersect other faults, suggesting that the fault network is significantly developed. This would tend to support the contention that the Cd on Figure 11 is too large. The corrected Cd of 1.16 shown in Figure 12 is more commensurate with the observed degree of fault network development.

Fault Encounter Probability An estimate of the reservoir area swept by CO2 because of the proposed injection can be measured from numerical simulation results. The anticipated CO2 plume at the pilot test site was numerically simulated using the ECO2N equation of the state package of TOUGH2 (Doughty, 2010). The model simulated the injection of 250,000 t/yr of CO2 for 4 yr then simulated migration and trapping of the plume over the next 46 yr. Figure 13 shows CO2 saturation (Sg) and saturation above residual saturation Sg SD gr at several time steps in the numerical modeling. Saturation above residual is referred to as the mobile fraction. In Figure 13, a value of 0 indicates no saturation above residual, and a value of 1 indicates 100% saturation. The area within the outer contour on the last frame of Figure 13 is taken as the region swept by
Jordan et al. 613

Figure 12. Areal fault density (F) versus throw truncation (dv) aggregated from the structure maps for the oil and gas fields shown on Figure 3. Data are shown as open boxes. The lighter line is a linear fit to selected data (see text). Data corrected for the finite range effect using the approach of Pickering et al. (1995) are shown as closed boxes. The heavy line is a linear fit to selected corrected data. Dashed lines are extrapolated from the fit lines.

CO2 since the start of injection. Little mobile CO2 remaining at the plume front 20 yr after the start of injection is observed, so the area swept by CO2 at this time is taken as the total sweep area for the purposes of analyzing the probability of mobile CO2 encountering a fault. Considering the predominant 170 fault strike mode in the vicinity of the pilot test site shown in Figure 8, the fault-perpendicular plume dimension, 2l, is 1.40 km (0.87 mi) from Figure 13. Faults with throws that fully offset the cap rock overlying a prospective storage reservoir are one particular focus of concern (not that leakage along faults with smaller throws is not possible). The sealing formations over the Vedder have a vertical thickness of approximately 180 m (600 ft) (Wagoner, 2009). The corrected fault density equation on Figure 12 indicates that the average density of faults with this throw
614 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

truncation is 0.029 km/km2 (0.047 mi/mi2). So, the probability of the plume resulting from the proposed pilot test injection encountering such a fault is 4.1% according to equation 8. The numerical plume simulation did not account for any potential permeability anisotropy along bedding caused by faulting, although fault zones tend to have either higher or lower permeability than the host reservoir rock. Either case results in a higher permeability parallel to faults in the reservoir. As a first exploration of the effect of horizontal anisotropy, Doughty (2010) also simulated cases with an along-bedding anisotropy of 3 to 1 and 10 to 1 to the north. The dimensions of these sweep areas perpendicular to the predominant fault mode is 1.03 km (0.63 mi) and 0.76 km (0.47 mi), respectively. From equation 8, these result in probabilities of 3.0% and 2.2% for the plume encountering a fully seal offsetting fault. This

D Figure 13. Map view of numerically simulated total carbon dioxide saturation (Sg) and saturation in excess of residual Sg Sgr resulting from the previously proposed pilot test (Sgr is the residual gas saturation). The D refers to the use of a hysteretic residual gas saturation function in the modeling. Total saturation is shown by contours. Saturation in excess of residual is shown by tints. Note that the tints for saturation in excess of residual are defined on a log scale. The axes are in meters. North is up. Courtesy of Christine Doughty, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Jordan et al.

615

suggests that anisotropy caused by faults with small throws can reduce the probability of plumes encountering faults with large throws. The density of faults with throws equal to half the seal thickness is 0.065 km/km2 (0.10 mi/mi2), so the probability of the plume encountering such a fault is 9%. This is offered not because a fault with this throw is particularly significant in terms of leakage consideration, but instead because shortly after the completion of this study, data became available, indicating that the Pond fault had a throw approximately half the seal thickness through the Vedder 2.8 km (1.7 mi) northeast of the prospective injection site (Wagoner, 2009). The length of the simulated area swept by the plume toward the Pond fault is 1 km (0.62 mi). So, if the plume were approximately 2.8 times larger, it would encounter the Pond fault. This translates to a 25% encounter probability by equation 8. Note that the northwestern strike of the Pond fault falls in the small secondary strike mode containing 10% of the fault length in oil and gas fields centered within 16 km (10 mi) of the site, as shown in Figure 8. The 25% encounter probability estimation is obviously considerably less than the actual unitary probability of encounter. However, it is sufficiently high to motivate consideration of such a fault encounter during the selection and design of a prospective carbon storage project, which, in turn, would hopefully motivate focused characterization efforts. Consequently, it appears that the method would have succeeded in this instance. Nonetheless, this single before and after outcome regarding the probability of a plumePond fault encounter provides only the beginning of testing the validity and use of the methodology presented in this article.

CONCLUSIONS Storage of CO2 in subsurface reservoirs is one possible means for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, the volume of depleted oil and gas fields is insufficient and is likely to be further limited by concerns regarding injecting CO2 into the remaining resource in place. Consequently, if this technological
616 Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

solution is to move forward, storage in brine-filled reservoirs will need to occur. Less is known about these reservoirs than those containing oil and gas because little economic incentive has existed to characterize them. The possibility of leakage is one of the main concerns regarding CO2 storage, with leakage along faults as a particular focus of concern. For leakage to occur along a fault, the CO2 plume must encounter a fault, followed by CO2 flow along the fault. The probability of the first step, fault encounter, can be calculated from statistics regarding fault orientation and areal fault density and from the numerical simulation of the CO2 sweep area. This is particularly useful when conducting leakage risk assessment in the site-screening stage, or in the siteevaluation stage, at sites with limited site-specific characterization of faults. Once the probability of a plume encountering a fault of a particular size is known, some perspective on the probability of leakage along that fault can be gained from its throw and the lithology of the displaced section by calculating the shalegouge ratio along the fault (Yielding et al., 1996). The probability of a fault-plume encounter multiplied by the probability of fault leakage once an encounter has occurred comprises the total fault leakage probability. However, this presumes that fault encounter and leakage along a fault are independent events. Consequently, this approach would not hold in some cases, such as fields with a significant probability of fault reactivation on the faults of interest. One outcome of the application of the fault population approach to fault encounter probability assessment is the realization that CO2 plumes will encounter faults of some size in most geologic sequestration environments because small-offset faults occur at high densities. This does not mean a priori that significant leakage will necessarily occur via these smaller faults, as evidenced by the persistence of buoyant hydrocarbon deposits commonly, if not typically, occurring in association with faulted terrain. This understanding should shift the consideration of leakage via faults from a more simple concern for plumes encountering faults to a more detailed assessment of which faults are likely

to be of concern and what happens if the plume encounters those faults. For instance, although leakage may not occur, deflection of the plume relative to a homogeneous reservoir permeability assumption is likely caused by permeability alteration by faults.

REFERENCES CITED
Ackermann, R. V., R. W. Schlische, and M. O. Withjack, 2001, The geometric and statistical evolution of normal fault systems: An experimental study of the effects of mechanical layer thickness on scaling laws: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 23, p. 18031819, doi:10.1016 /S0191-8141(01)00028-1. Bartow, J. A., 1991, The Cenozoic evolution of the San Joaquin Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1501, 40 p. Benson, S. M., and P. Cook, (coordinating authors), 2005, Underground geological storage, in P. Freund (coordinating author), Intergovernmental panel on climate change special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage: Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, p. 195276. Bloch, R. B., 1986, Ramp-style deposition of Oligocene marine Vedder Formation, San Joaquin Valley, California (abs.): AAPG Bulletin, v. 70, p. 463. California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), 1998, California oil and gas fields, volume I: Central California: Sacramento, California, California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, 507 p. Callaway, D. C., 1990, Organization of stratigraphic nomenclature for the San Joaquin Basin, California, in J. G. Kuespert and S. A. Reid, eds., Structure, stratigraphy, and hydrocarbon occurrences of the San Joaquin Basin, California: Bakersfield, California: Pacific Sections of SEPM and AAPG, p. 521. Chadwick, R. A., D. Noy, R. Arts, and O. Eiken, 2009, Latest time-lapse seismic data from Sleipner yield new insights into CO 2 plume development, in J. Gale, H. Herzog, and J. Braitsch, eds., Greenhouse gas control technologies 9: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Washington, DC, November 1620, 2008: Energy Procedia, v. 1, p. 21032110, doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2009.01 .274. Cowie, P. A., D. Sornette, and C. Vanneste, 1995, Multifractal scaling properties of a growing fault population: Geophysical Journal International, v. 122, p. 457 469, doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1995.tb07007.x. Doughty, C., 2010, Investigation of CO2 plume behavior for a large-scale pilot test of geologic carbon storage in a saline formation: Transport in Porous Media, v. 82, p. 4976, doi:10.1007/s11242-009-9396-z. Durucan, S., J.-Q. Shi, C. Sinayuc, and A. Korre, 2011, In Salah CO2 storage JIP: Carbon dioxide plume extension

around KB-502 wellNew insights into reservoir behavior at the In Salah storage site, in J. Gale, C. Hendriks, and W. Turkenberg, eds., Greenhouse gas control technologies 10: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, November 1620, 2008, Energy Procedia, v. 4, p. 33793385, doi:10.1016/j .egypro.2011.02.260. Energy Information Agency (EIA), 2009, Emissions of greenhouse gases report: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605 /ggrpt/carbon.html (accessed October 24, 2012). Gale, J. (coordinating author), 2005, Sources of CO2, in P. Freund (coordinating author), Intergovernmental panel on climate change special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage: Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, p. 75103. Gautier, D. L., and A. H. Scheirer, 2007, Miocene total petroleum system: Southeast stable shelf assessment unit of the San Joaquin Basin province, in A. H. Scheirer, ed., Petroleum systems and geologic assessment of oil and gas in the San Joaquin Basin province, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1713, 19 p. Graham, S. A., and L. A. Williams, 1985, Tectonic, depositional, and diagenetic history of Monterey Formation (Miocene), central San Joaquin Basin, California: AAPG Bulletin, v. 69, p. 385411. Hardacre, K. M., and P. A. Cowie, 2003, Controls on strain localization in a two-dimensional elastoplastic layer: Insights into size-frequency scaling of extensional fault populations: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 108, no. B11, p. 2529, doi:10.1029/2001JB001712. Jordan, P. D., C. M. Oldenburg, and J. P. Nicot, 2011, Calculating the probability of injected carbon dioxide plumes encountering faults: Greenhouse gases: Science and Technology, v. 1, p. 160174. Marrett, R., and R. Allmendinger, 1991, Estimates of strain due to brittle faulting: Sampling of fault populations: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 13, p. 735738. McPherson, B. A., 1978, Sedimentation and trapping mechanisms in upper Miocene Stevens and older turbidite fans of the southeastern San Joaquin Valley, California: AAPG Bulletin, v. 62, p. 22432274. National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), 2009, West Coast Regional Sequestration Partnership: Development phase: http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications /factsheets/project/Proj596.pdf (accessed June 9, 2009). Pickering, G., J. M. Bull, and D. J. Anderson, 1995, Sampling power-law distributions: Tectonophysics. v. 248, p. 120, doi:10.1016/0040-1951(95)00030-Q. Richardson, E. E., 1966, Structure contours on top of the Vedder Sand, southeastern San Joaquin Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report OF-66110, 15 p. Scheirer, A. H., and L. B. Magoon, 2007, Age, distribution and stratigraphic relationship of rock units in the San Joaquin Basin Province, California, in A. H. Scheirer, ed., Petroleum systems and geologic assessment of oil and gas in the San Joaquin Basin province, California: U. S. Geologic Survey Professional Paper 1713, 107 p.

Jordan et al.

617

Wagoner, J., 2009, 3D Geologic modeling of the southern San Joaquin Basin for the Westcarb Kimberlina Demonstration ProjectA status report: Livermore, Californina, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 25 p. Watterson, J., J. J. Walsh, P. A. Gillespie, and S. Eaton, 1996, Scaling systematics of fault sizes on a large-scale range fault map: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 18, p. 199214.

Yielding, G., B. Freeman, and D. T. Needham, 1996, Quantitative fault seal prediction: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 897 917. Zhang, Y., C. M. Oldenburg, and S. Finsterle, 2010, Percolationtheory and fuzzy rulebased probability estimation of fault leakage at geologic carbon sequestration sites: Environmental Earth Sciences, v. 59, no. 7, p. 144159, doi:10.1007 /s12665-009-0131-4.

618

Fault Density and Plume-Fault Encounter Probability

Insight into petrophysical properties of deformed sandstone reservoirs

Anita Torabi, Haakon Fossen, and Alvar Braathen

AUTHORS Anita Torabi $ Centre for Integrated Petroleum Research (Uni CIPR), Uni Research, Allegt. 41, N-5007 Bergen, Norway; anita.torabi@uni.no Anita Torabi is a senior researcher and a project leader at the Centre for Integrated Petroleum Research (Uni CIPR), Uni Research. She holds a Ph.D. in petroleum structural geology from the University of Bergen, Norway (2007). Her main research activities include the mechanism and mechanics of faulting, fault-related folding, and fluid flow in deformed reservoirs; CO2 storage underground; and diagenesis in fault zone. Haakon Fossen $ Department of Earth Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; haakon.fossen@geo.uib.no Haakon Fossen joined the University of Bergen after several years as a structural geologist within exploration and production departments in Statoil. His current research interests include deformation of sandstones, rifting, and continental collisions. He holds a C.Sc. degree from the University of Bergen (1986) and a Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota (1992). Alvar Braathen $ University Centre in Svalbard, Longyearbyen, Norway; alvar.braathen@unis.no Alvar Braathen works as a structural geologist for the University Centre in Svalbard, following years at the Centre for Integrated Petroleum Research, University of Bergen, and the Geological Survey of Norway. His current research covers sedimentary basin development, with a focus on fault and fracture characteristics. He holds C.Sc. (1991) and D.Sc. (1994) degrees from the University of Troms, Norway.

ABSTRACT We use samples from undeformed and deformed sandstones (single deformation band, deformation band cluster, slip-surface cataclasite, and fault core slip zone) to characterize their petrophysical properties (porosity, permeability, and capillary pressure). Relationships between permeability and porosity are described by power-law regressions where the power-law exponent (D) decreases with the increasing degree of deformation (strain) experienced by the sample from host rock (D, 9) to fault core (D, 5). The approaches introduced in this work will allow geologists to use permeability and/or porosity measurements to estimate the capillary pressures and sealing capacity of different fault-related rocks without requiring direct laboratory measurements of capillary pressure. Results show that fault core slip zones have the highest theoretical sealing capacity (>140-m [459-ft] oil column in extreme cases), although our calculations suggest that deformation bands can locally act as efficiently as fault core slip zones in sealing nonwetting fluids (in this study, oil and CO2). Higher interfacial tension between brine and CO2 (because of the sensitivity of CO2 to temperature and pressure) results in higher capillary pressure and sealing capacity in a brine and CO2 system than a brine and oil system for the same samples.

INTRODUCTION The petrophysical properties of highly porous sandstone reservoirs undergo significant changes as a result of deformation. Knowledge of the petrophysical properties of deformed sandstone and its undeformed host rock is essential for predicting

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study has been partly funded through Consortium R&D Project 429 207806/E20 (IMPACT Project) and partly through the Fault Facies Project. We thank the sponsors of these projects, the Research Council of Norway (CLIMIT and Petromaks programs), Statoil, and ConocoPhilips. We also thank AAPG Editor Stephen E. Laubach and the four reviewers John G. Solum, Andrew R. Thomas, Mark Andersen, and an anonymous reviewer for the constructive

Copyright 2013. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Manuscript received March 6, 2012; provisional acceptance May 10, 2012; revised manuscript received August 30, 2012; final acceptance October 3, 2012. DOI:10.1306/10031212040

AAPG Bulletin, v. 97, no. 4 (April 2013), pp. 619 637

619

comments. We thank Stephen Eaton for reviewing and copyediting the final version of the manuscript. The AAPG Editor thanks the following reviewers for their work on this paper: Mark Andersen, John G. Solum, and an anonymous reviewer. EDITORS NOTE Color versions of Figures 1 and 11 may be seen in the online version of this article.

fluid flow through such reservoirs. Faults are heterogeneous structures whose geologic and petrophysical properties may show abrupt lateral variations that can make faults act as barriers, baffles, or conduits to fluid flow (Smith, 1966; Gibson, 1994; Fisher and Knipe, 2001; Torabi and Fossen, 2009). Faults can control fluid flow by juxtaposing reservoir rocks against nonreservoir rocks or by making barriers to fluid flow through seals or fault rocks (Fisher and Knipe, 2001). This may reduce production rates in a petroleum reservoir and, in case of CO2 storage, may affect the injection rate and the total capacity of the reservoir. Consequently, faults may have considerable effects on hydrocarbon field production and CO2 storage management alike. One of the objectives of this article is to explore the petrophysical characteristics (e.g., porosity, permeability, and capillary pressure) of fault-related rocks found in porous sandstones, using different methods for estimation of these properties, such as in-situ, laboratory, and image-processed based (Torabi et al., 2008) methods. These results are used in analyzing statistical and empirical relationships between the petrophysical properties. A common approach to fault seal analysis is to use simple algorithms for seal capacity by clay smear, as reviewed by Yielding et al. (1997). An alternate approach, which will be used in this study, considers faults (and stratigraphic seals) as tabular zones whose sealing capacity is controlled by faultintrinsic properties such as porosity and permeability. This approach offers a possible assessment of capillary seal where the sealing capacity of the zone or layer relies on the size of pore throats and capillary forces between wetting and nonwetting phases. The capillary seal model allows for partially sealing faults, where the sealing capacity is governed by a critical pressure difference across the fault induced by the capillary forces, that is, an equilibrium situation acquired over geologic time in petroleum reservoirs that may be altered during production or injection (Fisher et al., 2001; Jolley et al., 2007). When the critical pressure is overcome for the liquid or vapor in question, flow is controlled by the relative permeability of fluids (e.g., Manzocchi et al., 2010). The fluid-flow behavior of faults in a petroleum reservoir is a function of their capillary entry pressure, porosity, permeability, and spatial continuity (e.g., Gibson, 1994; Knipe, 1997). The permeability of a fault zone is a function of its architecture (e.g., fault zone components and their geometry) and the flow properties of fault-related rocks and fractures (Caine et al., 1996; Fisher and Knipe, 1998; Gibson, 1998; Wibberley et al., 2008; Braathen et al., 2009). Major faults are generally surrounded by an enveloping volume of structures

620

Petrophysical Properties

of different scales exhibiting smaller faults, deformation bands, and fractures, defined by most authors as the damage zone (Figure 1A; e.g., Chester and Logan, 1986; Peacock et al., 2000; Schultz and Fossen, 2008; Braathen et al., 2009; Torabi and Berg, 2011). Damage zones in highly porous sandstones tend to be dominated by deformation bands (Fossen et al., 2007). Deformation bands can be classified into different types based on deformation mechanisms (Fossen et al., 2007), and cataclastic bands, that is, bands involving significant grain crushing, generally have a higher impact on the petrophysical properties (e.g., porosity, permeability, and capillary pressure) of the damage zone than noncataclastic bands. Damage zones are believed to form during fault-tip propagation and grow during continued slip accumulation on the main fault surface of the fault core (Shipton and Cowie, 2003). Most of the displacement is accommodated within the fault core, which, in nearly all cases, is found to be substantially thinner than the damage zone. Previous workers have provided some data on the petrophysical properties of faults (e.g., Antonellini and Aydin, 1994; Fisher and Knipe, 1998, 2001; Gibson, 1998; Sternlof et al., 2004), their sealing capacity (e.g., Gibson, 1994; Yielding et al., 1997; Fisher and Knipe, 2001; Frseth, 2006), and the distribution of fault rock types (e.g., Knipe, 1997; Childs et al., 2007). As outlined in Braathen et al. (2009), fault cores in sandstone are made up of several elements such as membranes (fault-parallel layers) of fault rocks (fault gouge), host and fault-rock lenses, slip surface(s) bounding significantly crushed sandstone (slip-surface cataclasites), fractures, and deformation bands (Figure 1). The slip surface with its deformed walls have been termed slip zones (Foxford et al., 1996), whereas the crushed slip-surface wall rocks in porous sandstone have been labeled slipsurface cataclasites (Tueckmantel et al., 2010). Their appearance is similar to cataclastic deformation bands, but the porosity and, especially, the permeability tend to be lower for slip-surface cataclasites (Tueckmantel et al., 2010). The internal distribution of fault core elements remains poorly understood, limiting predictions around fault core architecture. Therefore, knowl-

Figure 1. (A) Schematic illustration of fault core and damage zone in sandstone (not to scale); fault core can include the main slip surface, intensively broken and deformed rocks, and lenses of undeformed rocks (host rock). Note the presence of deformation bands in the fault damage zone. (B) Single deformation band (Entrada Sandstone, Utah). (C) Cluster of deformation bands (Entrada Sandstone, Utah). (D) Fault core slip zone (Nubian Sandstone, Sinai). (E) Slip-surface cataclasite (Entrada Sandstone, Utah); see knife for the scale. Torabi et al. 621

Illite/Smectite Illite+Mica Kaolinite Chlorite Quartz k-Feldspar Plagioclase Calcite Dolomite Siderite Pyrite Hematite Total Sandstone Type

Table 1. X-Ray Diffraction Analyses (X-Ray Diffraction Measured on Powder of Rock Samples in Percent) of the Sandstones Used in This Study*

DESCRIPTION OF DATA SET Our samples come from the Entrada Sandstone (Slick Rock and Moab Members) of Utah (United States) and the Nubian sandstones (Malha Formation) of Sinai (Egypt)two extensive sandstone units that together form a representative range of continental reservoir sandstones. The data sets contain measurements from fault cores (slip zones and slip-surface cataclasite) and damage zone (mainly cataclastic deformation bands). The Slick Rock Member of the Entrada Sandstone (Middle Jurassic) is a subarkose (Table 1) and is composed of thin and laterally discontinuous eolian dune sandstones interbedded with muddy to sandy sabkha and interdune siltstones and sandstones (Foxford et al., 1996). The sandstone is predominantly fine to medium grained and moderately to well sorted. The Moab Member of the Entrada Sandstone (Middle to Upper Jurassic) is a quartz arenite (Table 1) dominated by eolian dunes and is generally better sorted than the Slick Rock Member as it contains fewer
622 Petrophysical Properties

*Note the interpretations of sandstone types from the x-ray diffraction analyses based on the sandstone classification by Folk (1974). **TR = trace.

edge of the sealing properties of faults, especially in massive sandstones, remains uncertain and necessitates further analyses. In this study, we use samples from undeformed and deformed sandstones to characterize their petrophysical properties. The results allow for new statistical ways of calculating capillary pressure in a sandstone reservoir with two-phase fluids (e.g., brine [wetting phase] and oil-CO2 [nonwetting phase]), which are used to calculate the maximum nonwetting-fluid column height that can be sealed as a function of the effective pore-throat radius in the reservoir. Through this study, we validate and expand the empirical relations of Pittman (1992) by applying them on our large fault-related rock data set to very different rock types and by introducing new relations from laboratory measurements. The approaches introduced in this work will allow geologists to use permeability and/or porosity measurements to estimate the capillary pressures and sealing capacity of different fault-related rocks without requiring direct laboratory measurements of capillary pressure.

Sample

Malha Formation Malha Formation Moab Member Slick Rock Member

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9

0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7

97.2 98.4 98.5 79.7

0.0 0.0 1.5 10.3

TR** 0.0 0.0 TR

2.3 TR 0.0 5.4

0.0 0.0 0.0 TR

0.0 TR 0.0 TR

0.0 0.0 0.0 TR

0.5 0.0 0.0 TR

100 100 100 100

Quartz arenite Quartz arenite Quartz arenite Subarkose

fine grains (Foxford et al., 1996). The maximum burial depth of the Entrada Formation is estimated to be 2.2 km (1.4 mi) by reconstructing the burial and thermal histories of the Paradox Basin (Nuccio and Condon, 1996; Ellingsen, 2011). The latest activity of the Moab fault was reported to be of the early Paleocene based on the age of clay minerals in the damage zone of this fault (Solum et al., 2005). The sandstone of the Malha Formation is a quartz arenite (Table 1) and makes up the uppermost unit of the Nubian Sandstone sequence (Lower Cretaceous, a prerift sequence). This formation consists of fluvial sandstones with gravel lenses and mudstone and kaolinite beds (Moustafa, 2003; Tueckmantel et al., 2010). The Malha Sandstone is moderately sorted and medium to coarse grained. The maximum burial depth of Nubian sandstones at the time of faulting was approximately 1.5 km (0.9 mi) (Du Bernard et al., 2002; Torabi and Fossen, 2009). In this contribution, we distinguish between deformation bands, dense deformation band clusters (decimeter-wide zones or swarms packed with deformation bands), fault core slip zones, and slipsurface cataclasites, as shown in Figure 1B, C, D, and E. Our distinction of the latter two is based on the slip-surface cataclasites (in walls of well-striated and polished principal slip surfaces) that can be found in the studied units of both Utah and Sinai. In contrast, fault core slip zones have not been described before. Fault core slip zones are encountered in faults with 1- to 10-m offset in some of the Nubian Sandstone units and consist of multiple slip surfaces hosted in variably crushed sandstone. On microscale, the crushed sandstone appears as a poorly sorted mixture of crushed grains enveloping nearly undeformed but slightly rounded host sandstone grains (survivor grains) and mildly deformed sandstone lenses.

not so commonly found in the geologic literature, mostly because of cost and practicalities. Capillary pressure is the pressure difference between two immiscible fluids that are in contact in a porous media and can be measured by two types of processes: drainage (a nonwetting phase displaces a wetting phase) and imbibition (a wetting phase displaces a nonwetting phase) (Dandekar, 2006). Pittman (1992) presented an inverse approach to empirically calculate capillary pressure for sandstone reservoirs from laboratory-measured porosity and permeability. This method has the potential of providing abundant amounts of inferred capillary pressure data, for example, from cored intervals in a reservoir. In this study, we have implemented the inverse method of Pittman (1992) and, furthermore, used additional approaches to calculate the sealing capacity of our faulted sandstone reservoirs (for details, see approaches A, B, and C in the next section). We use data derived from different methods, including laboratory-measured porosity, absolute permeability, and mercury capillary pressure; in-situ measurements of permeability by minipermeameter (TinyPerm II); and estimated porosity and absolute permeability through image processing of backscatter images of thin sections (Torabi et al., 2008; Torabi and Fossen, 2009). Capillary Pressure and its Relation to Porosity and Permeability Data Capillary properties control the magnitude of the differential hydrocarbon buoyancy pressure exerted by a hydrocarbon column, which can be maintained across a lithologic or structural boundary within a reservoir. Thus, capillary pressure and pore-throat size control the ability of a fault to act as a barrier or conduit to hydrocarbon flow on a long-term (geologic) time frame, whereas the permeability of rocks will influence the short (production or injection)-time fluid-flow pattern within a reservoir (Schowalter, 1979; Gibson, 1998). In the inverse method implemented in this study, absolute permeability is used to calculate the capillary pressures of the samples. Among different types of laboratory capillary pressure analyses, the mercury
Torabi et al. 623

SCIENTIFIC APPROACH Porosity and permeability are two widely used petrophysical properties that can be measured through different approaches and at different sample sizes. In contrast, capillary pressure data are

cury saturation normalized by mercury saturation pressure (y axis) against mercury saturation (x axis), as shown in Figure 3B. In this study, Pittmans (1992) method has been used to find apex points on the capillary pressure data from 12 samples of deformed and undeformed sandstones (Table 2). Capillary pressure data were obtained through mercury injection into samples performed by Reslab (now Weatherford; for a detailed description of the method, see the Appendix). The analyses were performed on eight samples from fault core slip
Figure 2. Semilog plot of mercury injectioncapillary pressure data for a fault core slip zone sample from the Nubian Sandstone. The threshold pressure corresponds to the inflection point at which the curve becomes convex upward. This is the pressure at which mercury forms a connected pathway through the pores across the sample. 1 psi = 6.9 103 mPa.

injection method is particularly interesting because it can provide insight into the pore-structure and pore-size distributions in a porous medium. Many physical properties of porous rocks are related to their pore characteristics, and hence, their flow characteristics can be evaluated through mercury capillary pressure analysis. In a mercury drainage or injection plot, the pressure at which mercury forms a connected pathway through the pores across the sample is called threshold pressure, which corresponds to the inflection point (where the curve becomes convex upward) on the plot (Figure 2; Katz and Thompson, 1987; Pittman, 1992). However, the threshold pressure is sometimes difficult to measure (Pittman, 1992). Some researchers have argued that, in log-log plots of drainage or injection curves, the apex point of the hyperbola (the intersection points of the two asymptotes on the hyperbola) presents an important capillary pressure value, in which the mercury makes a connected pathway (Figure 3A; Thomeer, 1960; Swanson, 1981). Nevertheless, Pittman (1992) commented that not all drainage curves show such an apex point and suggested another way of plotting data for determining the apex point graphically, which he claims to be more accurate than the previously mentioned approaches. He plotted mer624 Petrophysical Properties

Figure 3. Two different ways to illustrate the apex point for the capillary pressure data of a fault core (slip zone) sample from the Nubian Sandstone. The apex point presents an important capillary pressure, in which the mercury (Hg) makes a connected pathway through the sample. (A) Illustration of the apex point in a log-log plot of drainage or injection curve; the apex point in the resulted hyperbola is the intersection point of the two asymptotes on the hyperbola. (B) Apex point in a plot of normalized mercury saturation versus mercury saturation. The latter illustration has been used to obtain the apex points for all of the samples in this study. 1 psi = 6.9 103 mPa.

Table 2. Laboratory Measurements of Porosity, Permeability, Capillary Pressure, and Pore-Throat Radii and Calculated Values of Capillary Pressure and Pore-Throat Radi* Porosity (%) 14 18 16 12 11 16 12 15 17 14 29 Permeability (md) 23.6 147 114 2.43 0.5 125 31.8 393 390 4.52 2465 Laboratory Capillary Pressure (psi) 32.50 15.16 4.88 58.94 70.23 9.64 9.64 6.14 6.86 70.41 5.99 Calculated Capillary Pressure (psi) 34.16 14.71 16.40 98.84 207.34 15.70 29.21 9.06 9.21 74.77 4.05 Laboratory Pore-Throat Radius (mm) 2.77 5.96 18.50 1.53 1.28 9.38 9.38 14.73 13.17 1.28 15.08 Calculated Pore-Throat Radius (mm) 2.64 6.14 5.50 0.91 0.43 5.75 3.08 9.97 9.81 1.20 22.35 Calculated h (cm) 307.23 132.33 147.55 888.96 1864.87 141.25 262.69 81.54 82.86 672.55 36.44

Sample A F I J K L M N O R U

h (cm) 292.31 340.87 109.73 1325.28 1579.14 216.76 216.76 138.06 154.25 1583.18 134.68

*The sealing capacity (presented by h in the table) of the samples has been calculated through approach A and has been compared to the calculated h values through approach B (presented in the last column of this table).

zones of normal faults in the Nubian Sandstone (Malha Formation, Sinai, Egypt; samples I, J, K, L, M, N, R, and T [not listed] in Table 2), two samples from single deformation bands in the Slick Rock Member (samples A and F in Table 2) and one single deformation band sample in the Moab Member (sample O in Table 2) in the damage zone of the Moab fault, and one host rock sample from the Moab fault footwall (Moab Member, Utah, United States; sample U in Table 2). During subsequent quality control of the data, one of the fault core samples (sample T) was excluded because of the poor quality of the laboratory data. Preparation of the samples includes cutting the samples into small pieces (as much as 1.0 cm [0.4 in.]) to keep only the deformed parts of the sample (fault core slip zone or deformation band) and then injecting mercury into the samples. The measured mercury capillary pressure data and the calculated apex points for the different samples were used in the study of empirical relationships between different parameters (see approaches A, B, and C).

meability (Table 2), the following approach has been used: 1. The capillary pressure data are plotted as mercury saturation/capillary pressure versus mercury saturation, and the plot is used to determine the apex of Pittmans (1992) hyperbola (Figure 3B). 2. Then, mercury pressure data are plotted against mercury saturation data, and the capillary pressure at the apex point is identified from the plot. Before using the mercury capillary pressure further, the pressure data have been converted to a reservoir condition for crude oil (<30 API, nonwetting phase) and brine (wetting phase), using the following empirical relationships (Vavra et al., 1992), where s is the two-phase fluid interfacial tension in millinewtons per meter: Pc s oil=brine PHg=air s Hg=air 31 PHg=air 485 1

Pc Approach A For the samples with laboratory measurements of mercury capillary pressure and porosity and per-

3. Based on the Young-Laplace equation for a cylindrical tube model, capillary pressure can be
Torabi et al. 625

calculated from the following relationship (Purcell, 1949; Schowalter, 1979): Pc 2s cos q r 3

where Pc is the capillary pressure at the apex point (dyn/cm2), r is the effective pore-throat radius, q is the contact angle between two-phase fluids and solid, and s is the two-phase fluid interfacial tension (Purcell, 1949; Schowalter, 1979). The capillary pressure equation can be rewritten in the following form (Schowalter, 1979; Vavra et al., 1992): 2s cos q h rg Dr 4

Figure 4. Correlation between capillary pressures at apex points and their related pore throats for mercury-injected samples.

porosity and permeability and capillary mercury injection) on more than 200 undeformed sandstone samples from 14 different formations (Pittman, 1992): lograpex 0:117 + 0:475 log k 0:099logf R2 0:91

where h (cm) is the maximum hydrocarbon fluid column height that can be sealed as a function of the effective pore-throat radius (r), Dr (g/cm3) is the difference between the density of the two-phase fluids in contact within rock pore throats (in this study, brine and oil), and g is the acceleration of gravity (980 cm/s2 [386 in./s2]). From combining equations 3 and 4, we get h Pc g Dr 5

where h (the fluid column height) can be easily calculated by having capillary pressure at the apex point as the main variable. Approach B For other samples (core-plug samples and other measurements obtained through image processing of backscatter images of thin sections) from which only porosity and permeability data were available, the following approach has been used: 1. The empirical relationship between porosity (f ), permeability (k), and pore-throat radius at apex point (rapex, effective pore throat) found by Pittman (1992) was used (equation 6; R2 is the coefficient of determination). This empirical relationship is based on measurements (core-plug
626 Petrophysical Properties

2. From the previous capillary pressure data (Table 2), rapex data were plotted against capillary pressure data at apex points, and the statistical relationship between the two (equation 7) is used for calculation of capillary pressure at apex points for pore-throat radii obtained by equation 6 (Figure 4). The calculated capillary pressure data are then converted to a reservoir condition (brine and oil) using equation 2. Pc 90:018r 0:99 R2 1 7

3. The maximum nonwetting-fluid column height (h, the height of sealed hydrocarbon) that can be stored in the samples can be calculated from equation 5, assuming a two-phase fluid in a reservoir condition (e.g., brine and oil). Approach C For samples from outcrops that only offered permeability measurements from minipermeameter data, the following approach was used: 1. The porosity term has been found to be without significance in equation 6 (Pittman, 1992).

Figure 5. Pore throat radius at apex points (rapx) have been calculated by including porosity (x axis) and removing porosity (y axis) for core-plug data. The plot shows that porosity is not significant in the calculation.

To further test this finding, we have examined the significance of porosity in our calculations and found that the differences are small and of little significance (Figure 5). Therefore, a regression (equation 8) that does not include porosity as a variable has been used to calculate porethroat radius at apex points. This regression was made by correlating our laboratory-measured permeability and pore-throat radii at apex points. However, Pittman (1992) has suggested a different relationship between these two parameters (equation 9), which, when applied to our data, results in a slightly higher pore throat than what we get from equation 8. lograpx 0:123 + 0:37logk R2 0:80 8 lograpx 0:226 + 0:466logk R2 0:90 9 2. Equation 7 has been used to calculate the capillary pressures at the apex points. The calculated capillary pressures are then converted to a reservoir condition (brine and oil) using equation 2.

3. The maximum nonwetting-fluid column height (h) that can be stored in the samples can be calculated from equation 5 assuming a two-phase fluid in a reservoir condition (brine and oil).

RESULTS Permeability-Porosity Relationships In addition to the porosity and permeability data of the samples used in mercury injection experiments (Table 2), we make use of an extensive porositypermeability database based on other types of measurements (core plug and image processing of thin sections), as shown in Figure 6. The rocks used for these measurements include the sandstones from the same or similar units as those presented in Table 1. The relationship between porosity and permeability data from core-plug measurements of a host rock, a single deformation band, a cluster of deformation bands, and fault core slip zones have been studied (Figure 6A). The results show that, for all of the samples, this relationship fits a robust power law but that the power-law exponent (D) depends on the degree of deformation experienced
Torabi et al. 627

Figure 6. Permeability-porosity relationship for all of the samples. Permeabilityporosity relationship for core-plug samples (host rock, single deformation band (DB), cluster of DBs, and fault core slip zone) (A) and for host rock and single DBs from image processing of thin sections (B). The fitted curves to the data are power laws. The power-law exponent decreases as the degree of deformation increases in the samples.

by the samples. More specifically, D ranges from approximately 9 for the host rock samples to approximately 5 for the fault core samples (Figure 6A).
628 Petrophysical Properties

Furthermore, for a given porosity, host rock samples have higher permeability than deformed rocks, and the permeability at a given porosity decreases

Figure 7. Comparison of the semilog drainage (injection) plots for mercury-injected samples reveals that the drainage curve for fault core slip zone samples is different from those of deformation band and host rock samples. (A) The drainage curve for fault core slip zone samples for most of the samples has more than one inflection point. (B) The deformation band and host rock samples follow almost a standard drainage curve after the inflection points, with some slight changes in high capillary pressures. Samples are presented in Table 2. 1 psi = 6.9 103 mPa.

with the amount of deformation (Figure 6A). A similar relationship can be obtained from permeabilityporosity data estimated through image processing of the thin sections (Figure 6B), although the exponents are slightly different from those obtained for core-plug samples and are also less well defined. This is because the measured sample size was smaller than that of the core plugs. This is particularly true for deformation bands, where we measured only the properties of the bands with no part of the host rock included (Torabi et al., 2008). Therefore, the deformation band porosity and permeability values estimated from image processing are slightly lower than the values that are obtained from core plugs (Figure 6B).

Capillary Pressure Measurements Detailed information on the properties of the samples used in mercury injection experiments are provided in Table 2. The laboratory mercury capillary pressure and pore-throat radii of the samples (approach A) are compared to the calculated capillary pressure and pore-throat radii (approach B) of the same samples in Table 2. A comparison of the semilog drainage (injection) plots (Figure 7A, B) for our mercury capillary pressure measurements reveals that the drainage curves for fault core slip zone samples are different from those of deformation band and host rock samples. The deformation band and host rock samples closely
Torabi et al. 629

630

Petrophysical Properties

Figure 9. Correlation between calculated fluid column height (h) values through approach B and calculated h values directly for mercury injection data (x axis, approach A) for the same samples (in Table 2). The resulting equation has been used to calibrate the data calculated through approaches B and C.

follow a standard drainage curve after the inflection points, with some slight changes in high capillary pressures (Figure 7B). In contrast, the drainage curve for fault core slip zone samples has more than one inflection point (Figure 7A) for most of the samples. This is also evident from Figure 8, where the pore-size distributions for fault core slip zone samples show a bimodal pattern (Figure 8A). This pattern reflects poorly sorted grain size, with crushed grains enveloping undeformed host rock grains and mildly deformed lenses (Figure 8C, D). The maximum nonwetting fluid (oil in our studied samples) column height (h) that can be stored in the samples because of their induced capillary pressure has been calculated for all the samples using equation 5, assuming minimum densities for oil and brine in the reservoir based on the typical range of oil-field fluids (i.e., roil = 0.51 g/cm3 and rbrine = 1 g/cm3; Vavra et al., 1992). For the same samples (samples in Table 2), the h values that have been calculated through approach B in the methodology section have been correlated with the h values calculated directly from the laboratory data (approach A in the approach section) in Figure 9. The resulting equation (Figure 9) was further used to calibrate all the h values calculated through approaches B and C. The plotted calibrated h values

in Figure 10A suggest that even a single deformation band can, from a theoretical point of view, withhold more than 60 m (197 ft) of oil column in the extreme case. The sealing capacity of deformation bands increases (they can theoretically withhold more than 80 m [262 ft] of oil column) when they form clusters of bands (Slick Rock Member data in Figure 10A) because their influence on fluid flow is related to the accumulated properties of the bands. Although the average estimated seal capacity of fault core slip zone samples (Nubian Malha Formation) is higher than any other sample on the graph (>140 m [459 ft] in the extreme case; Figure 10A), the data suggest that a cluster of deformation bands can locally affect fluid flow to the same extent as a fault core slip zone. The host rock and single deformation band data from image processing of thin sections are in the range of the data obtained from fault core plugs, although they exhibit slightly lower values of h (Figure 10A). The single deformation bands (image processing) can obviously seal higher amounts of fluid than their corresponding host rocks (Figure 10A). The comparison of h values obtained from minipermeameter data (Figure 10B; approach C in the methodology) with the other data in Figure 10 is not straightforward because the range of permeability values measured in situ

Figure 8. Distribution of pore-throat size in the mercury-injected samples (Table 2): for fault core slip zone samples at which most of them show bimodal distribution (A) and for deformation bands and host rock (B). (C and D) Examples of microstructure of fault core slip zone samples (samples I and L, respectively, in backscatter images), which reflect the heterogeneous (bimodal) grain-size distribution (a mixture of crushed grains and nearly undeformed host rock grains [survivor grains] and mildly deformed lenses trapped between the mostly crushed grains) within these samples. Torabi et al. 631

Figure 10. Sealing capacity of different fault-related rocks presented by fluid column height (h) values (the column height of hydrocarbon that could be stored because of the capillary pressure induced by these rocks) using calibrated capillary pressure values for host rock, single deformation band (DB), cluster of DBs, fault core slip zone samples (processed through approaches A and B). Clusters of DBs and fault core slip zones data show high sealing capacity, although fault core slip zones present the highest h values. The data presented by the open gray squares were calculated from the mercury capillary pressure values for the Nubian Sandstone (Malha Formation) in Sinai (the original capillary pressure data are from Tueckmantel et al., 2010) (A); and h values were calculated through approach C for data from in-situ measurements of permeability from minipermeameter data. The data are in the lower range in comparison to the other data in the upper plot. Fault core slip zones show the highest values of h in comparison to the other samples in this plot, although the values are almost one-tenth of the h values in A (B). (C and D) Averaged h values for the sample showing a range of h values in plots A and B of this figure, respectively.

632

Petrophysical Properties

Figure 11. Comparison of the permeability-porosity relationship between the fault rock data from this study and the published data of sandstones with different grain sizes (very coarse to coarse-grained, coarse- to medium-grained, fine-grained, silty, and clayey sandstones; the original data are from Chilingarian, 1963); both types of data show similar trends, although the permeability values are higher in the published data (undeformed sandstone). Note the increasing D values (powerlaw exponent) from faultrelated rocks to host rock implying increasing permeability toward the host rock. DB = deformation band.

in the field almost doubles laboratory measurements of the same rocks (Fossen et al., 2011). This deviation is especially seen as the minipermeameter approaches its lower threshold in range (minimum of 10 md for instrument). In general, the h values calculated from minipermeameter data (Figure 10B) are substantially less than the h values obtained for the same type of fault rocks in core-plug samples (almost one-tenth of the h values in Figure 10A). In Figure 10B, fault core slip zones and single deformation bands from the Nubian Sandstone (Malha Formation) show a higher sealing capacity than their corresponding host rocks. For Moab Member samples, the sealing capacity of a cluster of deformation bands and the single data from slipsurface cataclasite is higher than that of single deformation band and host rock samples (Figure 10B). The comparison of h values for Slick Rock Member samples shows a very clear increase from host

rock to single band and to the slip-surface cataclasite data, although we have only one data point for the slip surface (Figure 10B). Hence, the two data sources give quantitatively similar results overall. In Figure 10C and D, the averaged h values for the samples that show a range of h values for each specific fault-related rock in Figure 10A and B are presented, respectively. The comparison of these plots confirms that the fault core slip zone presents the highest sealing capacity among the different fault rocks presented in Figure 10.

DISCUSSION Establishing a global quantitative relationship between the porosity and permeability data of sandstones is challenging because the grain size and grain-size distribution of sandstones affect this
Torabi et al. 633

relationship (Chilingarian, 1963). Previous studies of sandstones with different grain sizes (Chilingarian, 1963; Tiab and Donaldson, 2004; Figure 11) show that very coarse to coarse-grained, coarse- to medium-grained, fine-grained, silty, and clayey sandstones show parallel trends in the permeabilityporosity relationship, although no regression has been made on the data. However, the modified version of the Kozeny-Carman relationship (Walsh and Brace, 1984) that is used for porous media (undeformed rocks) is based on the dependence of permeability (k) on porosity (f), the specific surface area of the pore-grain interface (s, as an indicator of grain size), and the formation factor (F), which again is related to porosity and to c, which is a constant related to pore geometry that is equal to 2 for materials possessing pores of circular cross section. k f2 =cFs2 The new regressions that we have applied to our data involve only permeability and porosity as variables and therefore allow for a straightforward prediction of either of these two parameters from the other, depending on the type of fault-related rocks. The comparison of our results (the powerlaw regressions drawn on the data) with previously published data (Tiab and Donaldson, 2004) shows some agreement in the permeability-porosity relationships, although the permeability values are, in general, higher in the previously published data from undeformed sandstones (Figure 11). An increase in permeability from fine- to coarse-grained sandstone is observed. Similarly, our data show an increase in permeability from fault-related rocks (fault core slip zone and deformation bands) to the host rock, which is shown by an increase in the D value from approximately 5 to approximately 9, respectively. In general, the trend of published data is similar to the regressions made on our data (Figure 11). For a given porosity, permeability is higher in host rock samples and decreases with deformation (Figure 6). This is so because the microstructure of the host rock and cataclastic bands is controlled by different processes. Within cataclastic bands, grain crushing results in more angular grains and a different grain634 Petrophysical Properties

size distribution compared to the compacted host sandstone. As a result, the specific surface area at pore-grain contacts increases, which in turn causes more reduction in permeability than in porosity (Torabi and Fossen, 2009). Our results show that fault core slip zones are the most efficient barriers to flow in comparison to the other fault rocks studied in this work, with a calculated sealing capacity exceeding 140 m (459 ft) of oil in the extreme case (Figure 10). However, deformation bands can locally offer capillary pressures comparable to fault core slip zones and slip surfaces (Figure 10). Note that both single deformation band and clusters of bands are heterogeneous in the sense that their thickness and microtexture and hence their petrophysical properties can substantially change over a short distance (Torabi and Fossen, 2009). Because the current estimates are based on measurements at the millimeter-to-centimeter scale, the effective sealing effects of such structures in a reservoir setting may be considerably lower. Note that the latter depends strongly on the arrangement and connectivity of deformation bands and cluster zones. Hence, deformation bands or clusters that do not form completely continuous structures or zones across fault blocks in a hydrocarbon reservoir will, of course, not have sealing properties close to the theoretical values presented here. Regarding the fault core slip zones in general, the presented method is not directly dependent on fault rock thickness, although it is expected that the thicker the core, the better the chance for continuity of the seal. When it comes to the microstructural details of the fault core, different fault features could have different effects on the properties of faults. For example, sandstone fault lenses in otherwise highly cataclastic sandstone commonly have less impact on the petrophysical properties of faults in comparison to the surrounding fault rocks, because they contain remnants of undeformed or mildly deformed rocks. In contrast, fluid flow perpendicular to slip surfaces can be substantially hindered because of considerable permeability reduction (Figure 10A, B). In this study, we have converted mercury capillary pressures to a reservoir condition (brine and oil). If we consider brine and CO2 as two phases in an aquifer, the interfacial tension between CO2 and

brine (in the range of 2040 mNm1) will control the resulting capillary pressure because the interfacial tension has shown a pronounced dependence on pressure and temperatures in the experiments run on brine and CO2 (e.g., Kvamme et al., 2007; Angeli et al., 2009). Depending on the selected interfacial tension (s) for brine and CO2 (s min 20 mNm1 and s max 40 mNm1 ; Angeli et al., 2009), the corresponding capillary pressure changes. A higher interfacial tension results in higher capillary pressure values in the brine and CO2 system for the same samples. This in turn will affect the maximum height of the CO2 column that can be stored through capillary forces. Among the different trapping mechanisms involved in the sequestration process of CO2, the capillary trapping mechanism could be the most effective (Wildenschild et al., 2011). In contrast to the mercury capillary experiments discussed in this study, capillary trapping of CO2 commonly occurs during the imbibition of brine, when CO2 is migrating upward and brine imbibes back into the formation because of density difference (buoyancy forces), after the injection of CO2 has stopped. At the imbibition process, the capillary pressure (residual or minimum capillary pressure) locks CO2 at the pore scale and hence inhibits large-scale movement of CO2 within the aquifer (Wildenschild et al., 2011).

samples. For a given porosity, permeability is higher in host rock samples than in deformed samples and will decrease with the degree of deformation in the samples. 2. The approaches introduced in this work will allow geologists to use in-situ (field), core-plug, and thin section (image processing) measurements of permeability and/or porosity to estimate the capillary pressures and sealing capacity of different fault-related rocks without requiring direct laboratory measurements of capillary pressure. 3. The sealing capacity of fault core slip zone was found to be higher than that of single deformation bands and clusters of bands. Our calculations suggest that a fault core slip zone offers more than 140-m (459-ft) height of hydrocarbon in extreme cases. A cluster of deformation bands can locally act as efficiently as a fault core slip zone or slip-surface cataclasite in increasing capillary pressure and sealing the nonwetting fluid. 4. A higher interfacial tension between brine and CO2 in a brine and CO2 system will result in a higher capillary pressure and sealing capacity for the same samples when compared to a brine and oil system.

APPENDIX: MERCURY INJECTION METHOD CONCLUSIONS This study focuses mainly on the properties of fault-related rocks in clean sandstones, that is, without significant clay minerals. We have studied samples of host rock, deformation bands, fault core slip zones, and slip-surface cataclasite from the Entrada Sandstone (Slick Rock and Moab Members) and Nubian sandstones (Malha Formation). Our results show the following: 1. Power-law regressions can be fitted to the porositypermeability data obtained through laboratory measurements. The D has a reduction from host rock (D, 9) to fault core (D, 5) in accordance with the increasing strain experienced by the
The main components of the mercury injection apparatus are a mercury pump for injection, a chamber to house the sample, pressure gauges, and devices for volume measurements. A sample with a known porosity and permeability is placed into the selected penetrometers in the mercury chamber and is completely evacuated before the mercury is injected into it. The injected mercury represents the nonwetting phase, the volume of which increases with increasing pressure until the sample is saturated by mercury (Dandekar, 2006). In the instrument used for the mercury injection at Reslab (Autopore IV 9520), initially, several pressure steps are defined in a pressure table over a range from vacuum to 60,000 psi (414 mPa). The Autopore software automatically takes readings between points on the pressure table until the maximum level of intrusion is detected. This maximum intrusion is also predetermined based on the petrophysical parameters of the sample and is presented in milliliters of mercury per gram of the sample. The pressures and saturations measured during the experiments make the drainage capillary pressuresaturation curve. The volume of mercury

Torabi et al.

635

in the penetrometer stem is measured by determining the penetrometers electrical capacitance. The data are further analyzed using the Young-Laplace equation.

REFERENCES CITED
Angeli, M., M. Soldal, E. Skurtveit, and E. Aker, 2009, Experimental percolation of supercritical CO2 through a caprock: Energy Procedia, v. 1, p. 33513358, doi:10.1016 /j.egypro.2009.02.123. Antonellini, M., and A. Aydin, 1994, Effect of faulting on fluid flow in porous sandstones: Petrophysical properties: AAPG Bulletin, v. 78, p. 355377. Braathen, A., J. Tveranger, H. Fossen, T. Skar, N. Cardozo, S. E. Semshaug, E. Bastesen, and E. Sverdrup, 2009, Fault facies and its application to sandstone reservoirs: AAPG Bulletin, v. 93, p. 891917, doi:10.1306/03230908116. Caine, J. S., J. P. Evans, and C. B. Forster, 1996, Fault zone architecture and permeability structure: Geology, v. 24, p. 1025 1028, doi: 10.1 130/0091-7 613(1 996) 024<1025:FZAAPS>2.3.CO;2. Chester, F. M., and J. M. Logan, 1986, Implications for mechanical properties of brittle faults from observations of the Punchbowl fault zone, California: Pure and Applied Geophysics, v. 124, p. 79 106, doi:10.1007 /BF00875720. Childs, C., J. J. Walsh, T. Manzocchi, J. Strand, A. Nicol, M. Tomasso, M. P. J. Schpfer, and A. Aplin, 2007, Definition of a fault permeability predictor from outcrop studies of a faulted turbidite sequence, Taranaki, New Zealand, in S. J. Jolley, D. Barr, J. J. Walsh, and R. J. Knipe, eds., Structurally complex reservoirs: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 292, p. 235258. Chilingarian, G. V., 1963, Relationships between porosity, permeability and grain size distribution of sands and sandstones, in J. U. van Straaten, ed., Deltaic and shallow marine deposits: New York, Amsterdam, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, p. 7175. Dandekar, A. Y., 2006, Petroleum reservoir rocks and fluid properties: Boca Raton, Florida, Taylor & Francis Group, 460 p. Du Bernard, X. D., P. Eichhubl, and A. Aydin, 2002, Dilation bands: A new form of localized failure in granular media: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 29, p. 2176 2179, doi:10.1029/2002GL015966. Ellingsen, E., 2011, Interaction of diagenesis and deformation of faulted sandstone reservoirs: Masters thesis, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway, 152 p. Frseth, R., 2006, Shale smear along large faults: Continuity of smear and the fault seal capacity: Journal of the Geological Society (London), v. 163, p. 741751, doi:10.1144 /0016-76492005-162. Fisher, Q. J., and R. J. Knipe, 1998, Fault sealing processes in siliciclastic sediments, in G. Jones, Q. J. Fisher, and R. J. Knipe, eds., Faulting and fault sealing in hydrocarbon reservoirs: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 147, p. 117134. Fisher, Q. J., and R. J. Knipe, 2001, The permeability of faults

within siliciclastic petroleum reservoirs of the North Sea and Norwegian continental shelf: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 18, p. 10631081, doi:10.1016/S0264-8172 (01)00042-3. Fisher, Q. J., S. D. Harris, E. McAllister, R. J. Knipe, and A. J. Bolton, 2001, Hydrocarbon flow across sealing faults: Theoretical constraints: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 18, p. 251257, doi:10.1016/S0264-8172(00)00064-7. Folk, R. L., 1974, Petrology of sedimentary rocks: Austin, Texas, Hemphills, 182 p. Fossen, H., R. A. Schultz, K. Mair, and Z. Shipton, 2007, Deformation bands in sandstones: A review: Journal of Geological Society (London), v. 164, p. 755769, doi:10 .1144/0016-76492006-036. Fossen, H., R. A. Schultz, and A. Torabi, 2011, Conditions and implications for compaction band formation in the Navajo Sandstone, Utah: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 33, p. 14771490, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2011.08.001. Foxford, K. A., I. R. Garden, S. C. Guscott, S. D. Burley, J. J. M. Lewis, J. J. Walsh, and J. Watterson, 1996, The field geology of the Moab fault, in A. C. Huffman Jr., W. R. Lund, and L. H. Godwin, eds., Geology and resources of the Paradox Basin: Utah Geological Association Guidebook 25, p. 265283. Gibson, R. G., 1994, Fault-zone seals in siliciclastic strata of the Columbus Basin, offshore Trinidad: AAPG Bulletin, v. 78, p. 13721385. Gibson, R. G., 1998, Physical character and fluid flow properties of sandstone-derived fault zones, in M. P. Coward, T. S. Daltaban, and H. Johnson, eds., Structural geology in reservoir characterization: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 127, p. 8398. Jolley, S. J., D. Barr, J. J. Walsh, and R. J. Knipe, 2007, Structurally complex reservoirs: An introduction, in S. J. Jolley, D. Barr, J. J. Walsh, and R. J. Knipe, eds., in Structurally complex reservoirs: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 292, p. 124. Katz, A. J., and A. H., Thompson, 1987, Quantitative prediction of permeability in porous rock: Physical Review B, v. 34, p. 81798181, doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.34.8179. Knipe, R. J., 1997, Juxtaposition and seal diagrams to help analyze fault seals in hydrocarbon reservoirs: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 187195. Kvamme, B., T. Kuznetsova, A. Hebach, A. Oberhof, and E. Lunde, 2007, Measurements and modeling of interfacial tension for water + carbon dioxide systems at elevated pressures: Computational Materials Science, v. 38, p. 506513, doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2006.01.020. Manzocchi, T., C. Childs, and J. J. Walsh, 2010, Faults and fault properties in hydrocarbon flow models: Geofluids, v. 10, p. 94113. Moustafa, A. R., 2003, Explanatory notes for the geologic maps of the eastern side of the Suez Rift (western Sinai Peninsula): Cairo, Egypt, AAPG/Datapages GIS Series, 34 p. Nuccio, V. F., and S. M. Condon, 1996, Burial and thermal history of the Paradox Basin, Utah and Colorado, and petroleum potential of the Middle Pennsylvanian Paradox Formation: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2000-O, 47 p.

636

Petrophysical Properties

Peacock, D. C. P., R. J. Knipe, and D. J. Sanderson, 2000, Glossary of normal faults: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 22, p. 291305, doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(00)80102-9. Pittman, E. D., 1992, Relationship of porosity and permeability to various parameters derived from mercury injection: Capillary pressure curves for sandstone: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 191198. Purcell, W. R., 1949, Capillary pressures: Their measurement using mercury and the calculation of permeability therefrom: American Institute of Mechanical Engineers Petroleum Transactions, v. 1, no. 2, p. 3948. Schowalter, T. T., 1979, Mechanism of secondary hydrocarbon migration and entrapment: AAPG Bulletin, v. 63, p. 723760. Schultz, R. A., and H. Fossen, 2008, Terminology for structural discontinuities: AAPG Bulletin, v. 92, p. 853867, doi:10.1306/02200807065. Shipton, Z. K., and P. A. Cowie, 2003, A conceptual model for the origin of fault damage zone structures in highporosity sandstone: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 25, p. 333345, doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(02)00037-8. Solum, J. G., B. A. van der Pluijm, and D. R. Peacor, 2005, Neocrystalization, fabrics and age of clay minerals from an exposure of the Moab fault, Utah: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 27, p. 15631576, doi:10.1016/j.jsg .2005.05.002. Smith, D. A., 1966, Theoretical consideration of sealing and nonsealing faults: AAPG Bulletin, v. 50, p. 363374. Sternlof, K. R., J. R. Chapin, D. D. Pollard, and L. J. Durlofsky, 2004, Permeability effects of deformation band arrays in sandstone: AAPG Bulletin, v. 88, p. 13151329. Swanson, B. F., 1981, A simple correlation between permeabilities and mercury capillary pressures: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 33, p. 24982504. Tiab, D., and E. C. Donaldson, 2004, Petrophysics, 2d ed.: New York, Elsevier, 881 p. Thomeer, J. H. M., 1960, Introduction of a pore geometrical factor defined by the capillary pressure curve: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 12, no. 3, p. 7377.

Torabi, A., and S. S. Berg, 2011, Scaling of fault attributes: A review: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 28, p. 1444 1460, doi:10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2011.04.003. Torabi, A., and H. Fossen, 2009, Spatial variation of microstructure and petrophysical properties along deformation bands in reservoir sandstones: AAPG Bulletin, v. 93, p. 919938, doi:10.1306/03270908161. Torabi, A., H. Fossen, and B. Alaei, 2008, Application of spatial correlation functions in permeability estimation of deformation bands in porous rocks: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 113, p. 1 10, doi:10.1029 /2007JB005455. Tueckmantel, C., Q. J. Fisher, R. J. Knipe, H. Lickorish, and S. M. Khalil, 2010, Fault seal prediction of seismic-scale normal faults in porous sandstone: A case study from the eastern Gulf of Suez rift, Egypt: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 27, p. 334350, doi:10.1016/j.marpetgeo .2009.10.008. Vavra, C. L., J. G. Kaldi, and R. M. Sneider, 1992, Geological applications of capillary pressure: A review: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 840850. Walsh, J. B., and W. F. Brace, 1984, The effect of pressure on porosity and the transport properties of rock: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 89, p. 94259431. Wibberley, C. A. J., G. Yielding, and D.-T. Giulio, 2008, Recent advances in the understanding of fault zone internal structure: A review, in C. A. J. Wibberley, W. Kurz, J. Imber, R. E. Holdsworth, and C. Collettini, eds., The internal structure of fault zones: Implications for mechanical and fluid flow properties: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 299, p. 533. Wildenschild, D., R. T. Armstrong, A. L. Herring, I. M. Young, and J. W. Carey, 2011, Exploring capillary trapping efficiency as a function of interfacial tension, viscosity, and flow rate: Energy Procedia, v. 4, p. 4945 4952, doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.464. Yielding, G., B. Freemen, and D. T. Needham, 1997, Quantitative fault seal prediction: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 897 917.

Torabi et al.

637

G E O S C I E N C E M E E T I N G S C A L E N DA R
*Denotes new entries or revisions. April 69, Southwest Section AAPG Annual Convention. Fredericksburg, Texas. Theme: GeoFest 2013. Gen. Co-Chairs: Bruce Swartz & Amy Noack Website: http://www.southwestsection.org/ 2013_convention/ April 810, AAPG Europe Regional Conference & Exhibition, Barcelona, Spain. Theme: Exploring the Mediterranean: New Concepts in an Ancient Seaway April 1925, Pacific Section AAPG Annual Convention. Monterey, California. Theme: Energy & the Environment Working Together for the Future. Gen. Chair: Paul Henshaw. Website: www.psaapg.org May 610, GeoConvention 2013: Integration Calgary, Alberta, Canada Website: http://www.geoconvention.com/ May 1922, AAPG Annual Convention & Exhibition. Theme: Go Deep: Making the play with geotechnology. David L. Lawrence Convention Center, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. Contact: AAPG Convention Dept., P.O. Box 979, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74101-0979; Tel: (918) 560-2617; Fax (918) 560-2684; E-mail: convene@aapg.org Website: www.aapg.org/pittsburgh2013/ August 1214, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado. Sponsored by AAPG, SPE, and SEG. Website: www.urtec.org September 811, AAPG International Conference and Exhibition, Cartagena, Colombia. Contact: AAPG Convention Dept., P.O. Box 979, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74101-0979; Tel: (918) 560-2617; Fax (918) 560-2684; E-mail: convene@aapg.org Website: www.aapg.org/ice/

For information about meetings managed by the AAPG Convention Department (marked with ), contact them at P.O. Box 979, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101-0979 USA; tel. 1 (918) 560-2617, fax 1 (918) 560-2684, e-mail: convene@aapg.org; homepage: http://www.aapg.org. For conferences and symposia managed by the AAPG Education Department (marked with ) at the address above; tel. 1 (918) 560-2621; fax 1 (918) 560-2678; e-mail: educate@aapg.org The deadline for this section is three months prior to publication.

September 2224, AAPG Rocky Mountain Section Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah Theme: Energy Elevated. Gen. Chair: Craig Morgan

2013
March 48, APPEX Regional London. London, England http://www.appexlondon.com/2013/index.cfm

October 68, GCAGS Annual Convention, New Orleans, Louisiana. Theme: Second Lining to Future Energy Resources. Website: http://gcags2013.com/

March 57, APPEX Prospect and Property Expo, London International Conference and Exhibition, London, England, Great Britain. Hosted by AAPG Europe. Website: http://www. appexlondon.com/2013/index.cfm March 2628, International Petroleum Technology Conference (IPTC). Beijing International ConventionCentre, Beijing, China. Website: http://www.iptcnet.org/2013/

October 1215, Mid-Continent Convention, Hilton Hotel Wichita Airport, Wichita, Kansas. Theme: New Technologies for the Mid-Continent. Gen. Chair: Doug Davis

October 1518, 3P Arctic: The Polar Petroleum Potential Conference & Exhibition, Stavanger, Norway. Website: http://www.3parctic.com/ Houston, Texas. Website: http://www.otcnet.org/

638

Evidence for overpressure generation by kerogen-to-gas maturation in the northern Malay Basin
Mark R. P. Tingay, Chris K. Morley, Andrew Laird, Orapan Limpornpipat, Kanjana Krisadasima, Suwit Pabchanda, and Hamish R. Macintyre

AUTHORS Mark R. P. Tingay $ Tectonics, Resources and Exploration, Australian School of Petroleum, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005 Australia; mark.tingay@adelaide.edu.au Mark Tingay is a senior lecturer at the Australian School of Petroleum, where he works on petroleum geomechanics, overpressures, tectonics, and porepressure prediction. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Adelaide in 2003 and has worked with the World Stress Map Project in Germany and Curtin University in Australia. He has conducted geomechanics and pore-pressure studies throughout Southeast Asia. Mark is a member of AAPG, Society of Economic Geologists, Geological Society of London, European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists, and Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia. Chris K. Morley $ PTT Exploration and Production Public Company Limited, 555 VibhavadiRangsit Road, Bangkok 10900 Thailand; ChristopherK@pttep.com Chris received his Ph.D. in 1983 before working for Amoco and Elf Aquitaine and as a professor at the University of Brunei Darussalam. He is currently working for PTT Exploration and Production as a senior geophysicist. He has worked as an exploration geologist and as a structural geologist in east Africa, Morocco, the Norwegian Caledonides, the Carpathians, northwest Borneo, and Thailand. Andrew Laird $ CEC International Ltd (Thailand Branch), Units 39013904, 39th Floor, Exchange Tower, 388 Sukhumvit Road, Klongtoey, Bangkok 10110 Thailand; andyplaird@yahoo.com Andrew graduated from Southampton University, United Kingdom, in 1986 and has an M.Sc. from the University of Brunei Darussalam. His career started as a seismologist on land seismic crews in Africa. He later worked in seismic processing at CGG, including multicomponent and four-dimensional analysis. He then joined PTT Exploration and Production where work included seismic interpretation and running the Geophysical Methods group. He is currently chief geophysicist at Coastal Energy, Thailand.

ABSTRACT Gas generation is a commonly hypothesized mechanism for the development of high-magnitude overpressure. However, overpressures developed by gas generation have been rarely measured in situ, with the main evidence for such overpressures coming from source rock microfractures, the physical necessity of overpressures for primary migration, laboratory experiments, and numerical modeling. Indeed, previous in-situ observations suggest that gas generation only creates highly localized overpressures within rich source rocks. Pore-fluid pressure data and sonic velocityvertical effective stress plots from 30 wells reveal that overpressures in the northern Malay Basin are primarily generated by fluid expansion and are located basinwide within the Miocene 2A, 2B, and 2C source rock formations. The overpressures are predominantly associated with gas sampled in more than 83% of overpressure measurements and have a sonic-density response consistent with gas generation. The association of fluid expansion overpressures with gas, combined with the sonicdensity response to overpressure and a regional geology that precludes other overpressuring mechanisms, provides convincing in-situ evidence for basinwide gas generation overpressuring. Overpressure magnitude analysis suggests that gas generation accounts for approximately one-half to two-thirds of the measured excess pore pressure in the region, with the remainder being generated by coincident disequilibrium compaction. Thus, the data herein suggest that gas generation, if acting in isolation, is producing a maximum pressure gradient of 15.3 MPa/km

Copyright 2013. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. Manuscript received February 14, 2012; provisional acceptance April 5, 2012; revised manuscript received August 8, 2012; final acceptance September 4, 2012. DOI:10.1306/09041212032

AAPG Bulletin, v. 97, no. 4 (April 2013), pp. 639 672

639

Orapan Limpornpipat $ PTT Exploration and Production Public Company Limited, 555 VibhavadiRangsit Road, Bangkok 10900 Thailand; Orapanli@pttep.com Orapan is a geophysicist in the corporate geophysical team in PTT Exploration and Production. Her duties primarily consist of providing services in seismic acquisition, seismic data processing, and quantitative interpretation. She graduated from Chiang Mai University, Thailand, in 2006 with a bachelors degree of science in physics and has also undertaken a study program in geology. Kanjana Krisadasima $ PTT Exploration and Production Public Company Limited, 555 VibhavadiRangsit Road, Bangkok 10900 Thailand; KANJANAK@pttep.com Kanjana is currently vice president for Myanmar Petroleum Development in the International Asset Group of PTT Exploration and Production International Limited. She graduated from Chang Mai University in Thailand and has worked extensively on petroleum exploration and production throughout Thailand and Myanmar. Suwit Pabchanda $ PTT Exploration and Production Oman Company Limited, P.O. Box 1067, P.C. 133, Al Khuwair, Muscat, Oman; suwitp@pttep.com Suwit Pabchanda has more than 20 years of experience in the petroleum industry. He obtained a bachelors degree in 1991 before joining PTT Exploration and Production. He has worked as an exploration and development geophysicist in the Gulf of Thailand, Malaysia, the deep offshore Angola, Myanmar, and Oman. He is currently subsurface manager for PTTEP Oman Company Limited in Muscat, Oman. Hamish R. Macintyre $ BG-Group Global Technology Centre BG Brazil, Av. Repblica do Chile, 330-25th floor Torre Oeste Centro, 20031170, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; present address: BGGroup Global Technology Centre BG Brasil, Av. Repblica do Chile, 330-25th Floor Torre Desk Centro, 2003 1-170, Rio de Janerio, Brazil; hamish.macintyre@bg-group.com Hamish is geophysics technology manager in the BG Group Global Technology Centre. Hamish received a B.Sc. (honors) in physics and geology from the University of Glasgow. Since 2004, he has worked for the BG Group on geophysical research and development and as an exploration and development subsurface manager. Before joining 640

(0.676 psi/ft) and not lithostatic magnitudes as commonly hypothesized. The gas generation overpressures in this article are not associated with a significant porosity anomaly and represent a major drilling hazard, with traditional pore-pressure prediction techniques underestimating pressure gradients by 2.3 1.5 MPa/km (0.1 0.07 psi/ft).

INTRODUCTION Abnormally high pore-fluid pressures (overpressures) represent a significant drilling hazard, and accurate pore-fluid pressure (typically termed pore pressure) prediction is critical for well planning, casing point selection, drilling procedures, and completions (Law and Spencer, 1998; Sayers et al., 2002). However, reliable pore-pressure prediction in many regions first requires an understanding of the origins and distribution of overpressures and how different overpressure generation mechanisms affect the petrophysical properties of sediments (Hermanrud et al., 1998; van Ruth et al., 2004). Overpressures are generally considered to be generated by two distinct mechanisms, disequilibrium compaction or fluid expansion and transfer processes, with each having different petrophysical signatures and, thus, requiring different porepressure prediction strategies (van Ruth et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2009a). Most overpressures observed in sedimentary basins are generated by disequilibrium compaction, in which overpressure is the result of loading (through burial or high horizontal stresses) of effectively sealed sediments (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Disequilibrium compaction overpressures are typically associated with abnormally high porosities (undercompaction) and commonly exhibit clearly observable seismic velocity anomalies (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Bowers, 1994; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Fluid expansion overpressuring comprises a suite of mechanisms in which the relative volume of pore fluid increases within a confined volume of sedimentary rock (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Bowers, 1994; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Overpressures generated by fluid expansion mechanisms are not associated with a porosity anomaly and are more difficult to detect and for pore pressures to be quantified (Miller et al., 2002; Gutierrez et al., 2006). Hypothesized fluid expansion overpressure generation mechanisms include aquathermal expansion, smectite, kaolinite or gypsum digenesis, load transfer, vertical transfer, and gas generation (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Neuzil, 1995; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997; Swarbrick and Osborne, 1998; Tingay et al., 2007; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). However, of all proposed fluid expansion or transfer

Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

mechanisms, only the generation of gas, load transfer, and vertical transfer are considered to be able to produce highmagnitude overpressures (Swarbrick et al., 2002; Tingay et al., 2007; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). The generation of natural gas (methane) has long been hypothesized as a major overpressure generation mechanism in sedimentary basins (Hedberg, 1974, 1980; Momper, 1980). Meissner (1978) suggested that the catagenesis of solid kerogen into liquid hydrocarbons, gas, residue, and other by-products is accompanied by up to 25% volume expansion. Ungerer et al. (1983) examined hydrocarbon generation for type-2 Toarcian black shales in the Paris Basin in France and observed that, whereas generation of oil is associated with a 3 to 6% decrease in fluid volume, maturation of kerogen into gas can result in a large fluid volume increase of potentially as much as 50%. Indeed, one volume of standard crude oil can be shown to crack to 534.3 volumes of gas under standard pressure and temperature conditions, and thus, the cracking of only 1% of a volume of oil within a sealed rock could theoretically generate lithostatic overpressures (Barker, 1990). Hence, the generation of gas within an effectively sealed sedimentary sequence is an entirely plausible overpressure generation mechanism and is routinely cited as a contributor to overpressures (Swarbrick and Osborne, 1998; Swarbrick et al., 2002). However, despite being a very commonly hypothesized or assumed overpressure generation mechanism, surprisingly little direct or in-situ evidence has been presented to date to demonstrate whether gas generation can be a significant factor in the development of overpressures (Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). The principal evidence for gas generation overpressures comes from the primary migration of hydrocarbons from source rocks (Hedberg, 1980; England et al., 1987; Lash and Engelder, 2005). Buoyancy pressure alone is insufficient for the release of hydrocarbons through micropores and microfractures, thus implying that high fluid pressures must be generated within source rocks for primary migration to occur (England et al., 1987; Fall et al., in press). Indeed, Fall et al. (in press) demonstrate that maximum paleopore pressures (derived from fluid inclusion analysis) were coincident with peak gas generation and fracturing periods in four basin-center gas fields in the Piceance Basin, Colorado. Furthermore, the onset of overpressure (or major overpressure increases) is coincident with the occurrence of hydrocarbons in some basins and fields, such as in the Williston Basin, some parts of the northern and central North Sea, and some basins in the Rocky Mountains (Spencer, 1987; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997; Burrus, 1998). However, the development of overpressure by gas generation on a regional (basinwide) scale requires a thick,

BG, he worked as a quantitative interpretation geophysicist with Amerada Hess and as a research geophysicist with TotalFinaElf. Hamish is a member of the Society of Economic Geologists, European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts, Royal Astronomical Society, and the Society of Petroleum Engineers.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank PTT Exploration and Production, BG Thailand, and Total for permission to publish these findings. In particular, we also thank Roger Kimber for informative and valuable discussions on overpressures in the Gulf of Thailand and Richard Swarbrick for discussions on overpressure generation mechanisms. We also thank Richard Lahann, Andras Fall, and an anonymous reviewer, whose informative and constructive comments greatly added to the article. Mark Tingays contribution forms Tectonics, Resources and Exploration Record 233. The AAPG editor thanks the following reviewers for their work on this article: Andras Fall, Richard W. Lahann, and an anonymous reviewer.

Tingay et al.

641

areally extensive, mature source rock with high total organic carbon content; otherwise, gas generation overpressures will only be locally constrained within source rocks (Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997; Swarbrick and Osborne, 1998). Indeed, kerogento-gas generation is commonly considered to generate only highly localized overpressures within rich source rocks, such as the Alum shales of the southern Norwegian Caledonides (Morley, 1992), the Bakken Formation of the Williston Basin (Burrus et al., 1996), and the Dunkirk shales of western New York state (Lash and Engelder, 2005). In this article, we examine the distribution and origin of overpressures in the northern Malay Basin in the Gulf of Thailand and present, to the best of our knowledge, the first direct in-situ evidence for significant basinwide overpressuring by gas generation and the approximate magnitude of these overpressures. We first examine the regional distribution of overpressure in the basin and reveal that overpressures are generated within one distinct package of the stratigraphic sequence and that pore-pressure magnitudes vary systematically across the region, increasing toward the basin center. We then use sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis and sonicdensity crossplot analysis to investigate the origin of overpressures in the northern Malay Basin and to reveal that fluid expansion processes generate a significant component of these overpressures (though disequilibrium compaction also contributes to overpressure generation in the region). The overpressures in the northern Malay Basin are almost entirely associated with gas, are located proximal to the primary source rock sequences, and have a sonicdensity signature consistent with gas generation that, coupled with a lack of other viable fluid expansion mechanisms in the region, suggests that a large component of the overpressures in the basin results from gas generation. Finally, we use this high-quality and unique data set to undertake an in-situ examination of these hypothesized gas generation overpressures, such as their magnitude, distribution, and coassociation with disequilibrium compaction, and to explore the implications of gas generation overpressuring on pore-pressure prediction, fluid flow and petroleum migration, and exploration strategies in both the northern Malay Basin and other basins
642 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

(such as shale gas regions) that may contain overpressures generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation.

GEOLOGICAL OVERVIEW OF THE NORTHERN MALAY BASIN The Malay Basin is a rapidly formed northwestsoutheasttrending elongate rift basin located offshore peninsular Malaysia in the Gulf of Thailand and within the Mesozoic continental core of Southeast Asia (Sunda; Figure 1). The Malay Basin has an area of approximately 83,000 km2(32,000 mi2), most of which is located in the waters of Malaysia, but with the northern section administered by Thailand, and a smaller part administered by Vietnam (in the northeast). This article focuses primarily on an area approximately 600 km2 (231 mi2) in the Thai section in the northwestern end of the Malay Basin (referred to here as the northern Malay Basin). The Malay Basin is a superdeep basin, containing up to 14 km (8.7 mi) of OligoceneHolocene sediments of predominantly terrestrial and shallow-marine origin, and is characterized by rapid subsidence rates (maximum rates of approximately 1000 m/m.y. [3280 ft/m.y.] sustained for many millions of years) and high present-day geothermal gradients (5075C/km [197269F/mi]; Madon et al., 1999; Morley and Westaway, 2006). Furthermore, in contrast to many other rift basins, the Malay Basin contains thick (612-km; 47.5-mi) postrift sequences despite exhibiting relatively limited uppercrustal extension (stretching factors [b] = 1.5; Morley and Westaway, 2006). The thick postrift sequences and low stretching factors indicate that the Malay Basin is not a typical rift basin under the standard Mckenzie (1978) model and has resulted in several theories for the development of the basin. Some authors suggest that the Malay Basin formed as the result of oblique rifting or transtension resulting from escape tectonics caused by the India Eurasia collision (Polachan et al., 1991; Ngah et al., 1996; Madon, 1997). However, more recent analysis of internal structural styles and the basins tectonic evolution indicates that the Malay Basin, and the adjacent and similar Pattani Basin, was not significantly influenced by transtensional or strike-slip

Figure 1. Tectonic framework of Southeast Asia (Sunda), including location of the Malay Basin and study area, outlines of Cainozoic sedimentary basins (dashed lines), plate boundaries (thick gray lines), major faults (narrow black lines), topography, and bathymetry (plate boundary, basin, and major fault data from Hall and Morley, 2004, and Tingay et al., 2010a).

deformation during its formation (Morley et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2010b; Morley and Racey, 2011). Hence, the anomalously thick postrift sedimentary sequences in the Malay Basin are suggested to result from the combination of hot crust, young continental lithosphere, rapid surface processes (particularly tropical weathering and erosion of adjacent regions), and particularly vigorous lower-crustal flow (in lieu of greater crustal extension; Hall and Morley, 2004; Morley and Westaway, 2006). This article focuses on approximately 3000 m (10,000 ft) of prospective and producing lower MioceneHolocene sequences located in an approximately 100 65-km (62 40-mi) northwestsoutheast elongate region of the northern (Thailand) section of the Malay Basin. The sequences investigated herein consist of three main lithostratigraphic intervals (formations 1, 2, and 3), with the most prospective formation 2 interval subdivided into five key units (Figure 2) (Jardine, 1997; Leo,

1997). Each of these formations is described briefly below and summarized in Figure 2. The formation descriptions herein are summarized from Jardine (1997), Leo (1997) Madon et al. (1999), and Morley and Racey (2011). Lower Miocene formation 1 is the oldest of the units discussed herein and consists of meandering river deposits with thick (about 15 m [49 ft]), coarsegrained sandy channels interbedded with red oxidized delta-plain clay (Jardine, 1997). The uppermost 200 to 500 m (6601640 ft) of formation 1 typically contains amalgamated and isolated sandy reservoirs (Figure 2). Five units within formation 2 cover a suite of depositional environments ranging from delta front to upper delta plain and alluvial plain. Formation 2A is the lowest unit in formation 2 and consists of fine- to medium-grained crevasse splay and channel sands deposited within a delta-plain to deltafront environment. Reservoir intervals primarily
Tingay et al. 643

Figure 2. Stratigraphic summary and schematic variation in reservoir type, amount, and hydraulic conductivity across the northern Malay Basin. Reservoir amount and connectivity decreases toward the basin center (southeast). Formations 2A, 2B, and 2C represent regions of source rock as well as low-permeability units (with formation 2B having slightly greater and more variable hydraulic conductivity) and are the primary host of overpressure in the study area. Formations 2D, 2E, and 1 are the primary reservoir units, particularly in the extensively produced basin flanks. Formation 3 acts as a regional seal across the basin.

consist of bars, but minor distributary channels are also present and are interbedded with delta-plain clay. Formation 2A contains abundant and sometimes widespread coal beds. Formation 2B is the most prolific hydrocarbonproducing interval in the northern Malay Basin and primarily consists of numerous vertically stacked, thick coarse-grained channels interbedded with deltaplain clays deposited in an upper delta-plain environment. However, formation 2B varies laterally across the basin, with the sand-to-shale ratio decreasing significantly toward the basin center (to the southeast), with an associated basinward decrease in the degree of channel interconnection. Formation 2B also contains several organic-rich shale beds. Formation 2C is predominantly shaly, with a coarser grained middle section, and is interpreted to have been deposited within an offshore to delta-front setting. Sands within formation 2C primarily consist of point bars, although some channelized sands are observed particularly within the sandier middle section of the formation. Formation 2C also contains numerous coal beds that can be laterally extensive.
644 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

Formations 2D and 2E are mostly regressive with respect to formation 2C. Formation 2D is composed of amalgamated and coalescent channelized sands interbedded with organic-rich deltaplain shales and coals. Formation 2E is sand dominated and consists of amalgamated fluvial and deltaic channels. Formation 3 is the uppermost lithostratigraphic unit in the study area and comprises upper MioceneHolocene shales and sporadic fine sands deposited in open-marine conditions. Formation 3 forms a regional seal in the northern Malay Basin. Gas and minor oil have been discovered throughout formations 1 and 2, although the primary hydrocarbon-bearing sequences are formations 1, 2A, 2B, and 2C (Leo, 1997). The overall play concept for this section of the Malay Basin is for hydrocarbons to be trapped by faults within numerous separate or connected sandy channels and isolated point bars, with source rocks consisting of the proximal coal beds and organic-rich shales, primarily located in formations 2A, 2B, and 2C. Hydrocarbon exploration in the region to date has

Figure 3. Location of normally pressured wells (black outlined circles) and wells with overpressures (black circles) in this study (see inset map for study area). Contours are of maximum observed pore-pressure gradient (in MPa/km, with psi/ft also provided) estimated from wireline formation tests or drillstem tests (1.0 MPa/ km contour interval; gridding conducted using Kriging method). Note that overpressures are not observed in the northwest of the study region and that overpressure magnitude increases toward the southeast and, particularly, into the center of the basin.

been focused on the highly faulted flanks of the basin. However, exploration focus is now moving toward the basin center, in which net-to-gross is generally lower (Figure 2) and sands tend to be less interconnected and less compartmentalized by faulting.

DISTRIBUTION OF OVERPRESSURE IN THE NORTHERN MALAY BASIN Compilation of a Pore-Pressure Database Overpressures are commonly encountered in the Malay Basin, particularly in the Malaysian section of the basin, and thus, a large amount of porepressure information was available for this study. The distribution of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin has been examined herein via the compilation of a pore-pressure database consisting

of 30 wells that includes pore-pressure data derived from all available wireline formation tests (WFTs) and drillstem tests (DSTs) in addition to drilling mud weights, WFT fluid sample information, WFTderived formation mobility, log-derived fluid-type estimates and formation tops (Figure 3; well and field names are confidential). The data for each well were quality checked for errors (e.g., inaccurate WFTs caused by supercharging or tight formation) and placed in a consistent format. Overpressure is technically defined as any porefluid pressure that is in excess of the hydrostatic pressure (the normal fluid pressure in the subsurface), which is typically 9.85 MPa/km (0.435 psi/ft) in the study region (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989). However, pressures can commonly become slightly elevated above the hydrostatic pressure because of the presence of hydrocarbon columns. Hence, overpressures have been defined herein as pore-pressure gradients derived from direct pressure tests (WFTs
Tingay et al. 645

646

Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

and DSTs) exceeding 11.5 MPa/km (0.508 psi/ft). Overpressure magnitudes have been further classified herein as being either mild (11.514.0 MPa/km; 0.5080.619 psi/ft), moderate (14.017.0 MPa/km; 0.6190.751 psi/ft), or high (>17.0 MPa/km; >0.751 psi/ft).

Overpressure Distribution Pore pressures in the northern Malay Basin have been directly measured from 990 WFTs and 20 DSTs. Overpressures (pore-pressure gradients >11.5 MPa/km [>0.508 psi/ft]) are observed in 285 WFTs and DSTs in 21 of the 30 wells examined in this study (Figure 3). Nine wells that did not contain overpressures (having only WFT measurements that exhibited hydrostatic pressures) are all located in the northwest part of the study region, indicating that overpressures primarily occur in the southeastern part of the northern Malay Basin (Figure 3). Furthermore, the maximum porepressure gradient measured from each well reveals that overpressure magnitude increases toward the southeast and toward the center of the basin (Figure 3). Overpressures are stratigraphically constrained in the northern Malay Basin, being primarily observed in the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations, with minor mild overpressures observed in the lowermost 2D, uppermost FM1, and lower FM1 formations. Indeed, 262 of the 285 overpressured WFT and DST measurements in the northern Malay Basin, including all of the moderate- and high-

magnitude overpressures (>14.0 MPa/km; >0.619 psi/ft), are observed in the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations. The overpressures observed in formations 2D and FM1 are all located near the top of formation 2C or the base of formation 2A respectively, and are relatively low in magnitude (<13.1 MPa/ km; <0.579 psi/ft) (Figure 4). Indications of potentially high-magnitude overpressures also exist in the lower FM1 formation. The lower FM1 formation is penetrated by just two wells in the data set, with mild overpressures observed from WFTs in the upper parts of the lower FM1 formation in one well, whereas mud weights of more than 18 MPa/km (0.795 psi/ft) were run in both wells in the deeper parts of the lower FM1 formation. Mud weight is commonly used as a proxy for pore pressure because mud weight is commonly kept slightly in excess of pore pressure to prevent an influx of formation fluids into the wellbore while maximizing the rate of penetration (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989). Hence, the high mud weights run in the lower FM1 formation may indicate high-magnitude overpressures. However, mud weight can be raised for reasons other than overpressure, such as to increase the stability of the wellbore wall, and mud weights significantly in excess of WFT-derived pore pressures were commonly observed in this study. Hence, the presence of moderate- or high-magnitude overpressures in the lower FM1 formation can only be speculated upon. Furthermore, the pore-pressure data set for the lower FM1 formation is insufficient for additional analysis and is not discussed further herein.

Figure 4. Examples of typical pore-pressure depth profiles in overpressured wells in the northern Malay Basin. Wireline formation tests (WFTs) in wells A (A) and B (B) display the most common pore-pressure profile, in which the onset of overpressure is at the top of formation 2C, with WFT pore pressures reducing back to hydrostatic at the base of formation 2A. Well C (C) exhibits a slight variation on the common trend, in which minor overpressures are also observed in the basal section of formation 2D and uppermost section of formation 1. (D) Schematic pore-pressure depth profiles for typical overpressured wells in the northern Malay Basin. Most overpressured wells (gray solid line) have overpressures that start near the top of the 2C formation. Overpressure magnitude increases to a maximum near the middle of formation 2C and remains high until near the top or middle of formation 2A (sometimes reducing slightly in formation 2B). Pore pressures reduce within formation 2A and return to hydrostatic near the base of formation 2A. Some wells (gray dashed line) have overpressures starting within the basal section of formation 2D, have maximum overpressures in formations 2C, 2B, and 2A, and then display pore pressures that return to hydrostatic in the uppermost parts of FM1. Maximum pressure gradient varies from well to well (see Figure 3), but almost all wells show the same general trend of pressure gradient increasing in formation 2C, reaching a maximum value and then reducing to hydrostatic in formation 2A (see Figure 3). We suggest that overpressures are generated within formation 2A, 2B, and 2C (gray solid line). However, overpressures have been vertically transferred into proximal sections of formations 1 and 2D in some wells (dashed gray line). TVD (mss) = true vertical depth (meters subsea); 1 MPa = 145.04 psi. Tingay et al. 647

Discussion of Overpressure Distribution The analysis of pore pressures measured from WFTs and DSTs reveals that overpressure primarily occurs within the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations; overpressures are not observed in the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations in the northwest part of the study area; pore-pressure magnitude within the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations increases from normally pressured in the northwest to moderately and highly overpressured in the southeast of the northern Malay Basin; the onset of overpressure is generally near the top of the 2C formation or in the lowermost parts of formation 2D; and pore pressures return to approximately hydrostatic near the base of formation 2A or in the upper part of FM1. Hence, a typical pressure-depth profile for overpressured wells in the northern Malay Basin has overpressures commencing near the top of formation 2C and rapidly increasing to a maximum gradient near the middle of formation 2C (Figure 4). Pore-pressure gradient remains approximately constant until near the middle of formation 2A (although sometimes with a slight pressure gradient reduction in formation 2B) before reducing back to hydrostatic pressures near the base of formation 2A or in the uppermost parts of formation FM1 (Figure 4). The predominance of overpressures (especially higher magnitude overpressures) in the low net-togross formations 2A, 2B, and 2C, coupled with the overall lack of overpressures in shallower and deeper formations, indicates that overpressures have most likely been generated within these formations and, thus, are located approximately in situ. Furthermore, the occurrence of relatively mild overpressures in the lowermost parts of formation 2D and uppermost parts of formation FM1, immediately adjacent to formations 2A and 2C, suggests that the overpressures observed in formations 2D and FM1 have been vertically transferred via fluid mi648 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

gration into neighboring reservoir sequences from formations 2A to 2C (Tingay et al., 2007). This model will be discussed in more detail in subsequent sections.

REVIEW OF MECHANISMS FOR OVERPRESSURE GENERATION Numerous mechanisms have been hypothesized for overpressure generation in sedimentary basins; however, overpressures are typically classified as resulting from one of two separate and distinct mechanisms: disequilibrium compaction and fluid expansion or transfer processes (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997; Swarbrick et al., 2002). Disequilibrium compaction overpressures occur when pore-fluid expulsion is impeded during burial (Neuzil, 1995; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). If the rate of pore-fluid expulsion is slower than the rate of loading, the effectively sealed pore fluids support some of the additional load and become overpressured as a result (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989). Disequilibrium compaction overpressures are considered to be the cause of most widespread and high-magnitude overpressures, particularly in Cenozoic basins where the favorable conditions of rapid deposition of fine-grained sediment are commonly met (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Fluid expansion overpressures relate to a collection of mechanisms in which overpressure is caused by an effective or overall increase in fluid volume within a sealed pore space. Fluid expansion mechanisms include the maturation of kerogen to gas, the release of intercrystalline water during clay diagenesis (e.g., smectite to illite), and the thermal expansion of water at depth (Perry and Hower, 1972; Barker, 1990). However, the increase in overall fluid volume in these processes is commonly mostly offset by pore-space creation, and there is only a net fluid increase in some diagenetic pathways (Swarbrick et al., 2002). Hence, of all the postulated fluid expansion mechanisms, only kerogen-to-gas maturation is suggested to be theoretically able to generate moderate- to high-magnitude overpressures (Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997).

Clay diagenesis is, however, also considered to be able to generate overpressure through a mechanism termed load transfer (Lahann, 2002; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). Load transfer refers to the combined influence of the conversion of bound water to mobile water, the dissolution of load-bearing grains, and the increased preferential grain orientation change that occurs during clay diagenesis and burial-related compaction (Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). This combination of processes is suggested to result in both the generation of an effective seal and the transfer of some of the load from the matrix to the pore fluids. Hence, in a simplistic way, this process can be considered as being able to generate overpressure through disequilibrium compaction, but triggered by clay diagenesis. To date, load transfer has been best demonstrated in the Gulf of Mexico, with suggestions that overpressure of as much as 2000 psi (13.8 MPa) can be generated through this process (Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). However, note that the Gulf of Mexico is an anomalously smectite-rich system and, thus, is somewhat dissimilar to the Malay Basin. There have also been suggestions that kaolinite to illite diagenesis may possibly be able to generate load-transfer overpressures, and kaolinite has been reported as being significant in the Malay Basin (Lahann and Swarbrick, 2010). Furthermore, load transfer and fluid expansion generate similar petrophysical signatures, which can be difficult to distinguish. Hence, the potential influence of load transfer will also be examined herein. The generation and preservation of overpressure by disequilibrium compaction, fluid expansion, or load transfer require the fluids to be effectively sealed because overpressures are inherently unstable and always attempt to return to hydrostatic equilibrium (Neuzil, 1995; Traugott, 1997). Hence, high-magnitude overpressures are generally assumed to occur within or proximal to the sediments in which they were generated (Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997; Lee and Deming, 2002). However, an additional aspect of overpressure, although sensu stricto not an overpressure generation mechanism, is the potential for overpressures to be transferred within one or more hydraulically linked pressure

compartments. Yardley and Swarbrick (2000) demonstrated that overpressures become redistributed within inclined, isolated reservoirs to maintain a hydrostat parallel gradient, resulting in the lateral transfer of overpressures to structural crests. It has also been demonstrated that overpressures can be vertically transferred if an overpressured compartment comes into hydraulic communication (via either cap-rock fracturing or active faulting) with another less-pressured and isolated compartment (Grauls and Baleix, 1994; Tingay et al., 2007).

ORIGIN OF OVERPRESSURE IN THE NORTHERN MALAY BASIN Sonic VelocityVertical Effective Stress Relationships The petrophysical properties of sequences containing overpressures differ depending on whether overpressures are generated by disequilibrium compaction, fluid expansion, or transfer mechanisms (Hermanrud et al., 1998; van Ruth et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2009a; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). Herein, porosityvertical effective stress plots (also known as Bowers plots) are used to distinguish between overpressures generated by disequilibrium compaction and overpressures generated by fluid expansion or vertical transfer (Bowers, 1994). Sediments primarily compact (lose porosity) with burial because of increasing effective stress acting on the rock matrix. Sediments that compact normally during burial follow a loading curve in which porosity decreases as vertical effective stress (vertical stress [sv] minus pore pressure [Pp]) increases (Figure 5). However, compaction is impeded when overpressures are generated by disequilibrium compaction, resulting in sediments with abnormally high porosities (undercompaction). Furthermore, disequilibrium compaction overpressures are commonly associated with a pore-pressure increase parallel to the mean or vertical stress and, consequently, an effective stress (stress minus pore pressure) that remains constant with burial
Tingay et al. 649

Figure 5. (A) Schematic porosity-depth and (B) pressure-depth paths for overpressure generated by disequilibrium compaction (DC) and fluid expansion (FE) or vertical transfer. (C) Porosityeffective stress schematic of overpressured sediments where overpressure is generated by DC, where sediments plot on the loading curve, and FE or vertical transfer during which sediments follow an unloading curve (modified from Bowers, 1994; Tingay et al., 2007).

(A)
Fluid isolation depth

Porosity

(B)
Lithostat

Pressure

(C)
Porosity -1 or sonic velocity at depth of maximum burial Unloading curve Loading curve

Lithostat-parallel disequilibrium compaction overpressure

Porosity -1 or Sonic Velocity

Normal compaction

FE

Porosity path for disequilibrium compaction overpressure

DC

Depth

Depth
Porosity path for fluid expansion overpressure Hydrostat Fluid expansion overpressure Vertical Effective Stress

(Figure 5). Hence, on a porosityvertical effective stress plot, sediments that have undergone disequilibrium compaction remain on the loading curve once they reach the fluid isolation depth (Bowers, 1994) (point DC in Figure 5C). Sediments that first compact under normal pore-pressure conditions and subsequently become overpressured (either by fluid expansion, load transfer, or vertical transfer) follow an unloading curve that is different to the loading curve (Figure 5C) (Bowers, 1994). The increasing pore pressure causes vertical effective stress to decrease (Figure 5B). However, compaction is a mostly irreversible process, and overpressuring generated by fluid expansion or vertical transfer is only associated with a small porosity change because of the slight elastic contraction of sediment grains and secondary porosity generation (Figure 5A). Therefore, overpressures generated by kerogen-to-gas or overpressure transfer follow a porosityvertical effective stress path away from the loading curve (Bowers, 1994) (point FE in Figure 5C). Load transfer overpressures are associated with a sharp decrease in effective stress and also compaction, resulting in a porosityvertical effective stress path that is also away from the loading curve, but with a slight decrease in porosity. Hence, the origin of overpressuring can be identified as disequilibrium compaction if the overpressured sediments lie on the loading curve or as fluid expansion, load transfer, or vertical transfer if the overpressured points lie
650 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

off the loading curve (Bowers, 1994; van Ruth et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2007).

Determination of Vertical Effective Stress and Sonic Velocity The vertical effective stress has been calculated using vertical stress determined from density logs and pore pressures measured from WFTs and DSTs. As previously discussed, WFT and DST data were carefully checked wherever possible during database compilation to avoid spurious pore-pressure data, such as tests affected by supercharging or tight formation. The vertical stress (the pressure exerted by the weight of overlying rocks and seawater column at any given depth) was calculated herein for ten wells spread across the study area. Vertical stress magnitude was calculated by integrating the density log (referenced to true vertical depth below sea level) from the surface (see Tingay et al., 2003, for the detailed methodology on the calculation of vertical stress magnitude). The average density from the sea bed to the top of the density log was estimated from empirically calibrated NafeDrake relationships combined with average velocities derived from checkshot data (Ludwig et al., 1970; Tingay et al., 2003). Vertical stress magnitudes were consistent across all wells examined, with a maximum variation range of 1.25 MPa/km (0.055 psi/ft).

Figure 6. Sonic velocityvertical effective stress plot for 990 wireline formation test (WFT) measurements in the northern Malay Basin. A total of 711 normally pressured WFT measurements define the loading curve (light-gray dots). The 279 overpressured WFT measurements have been divided into mildly overpressured (gray triangles; 11.514.0 MPa/km [0.51 0.62 psi/ft]), moderately overpressured (dark-gray diamonds; 14.017.0 MPa/km [0.620.75 psi/ft]), and highly overpressured (black squares; >17.0 MPa/km [>0.75 psi/ft]). Most of the overpressured points and almost all of the moderately and highly overpressured points lie off the loading curve, suggesting that a significant component of overpressure has been generated by fluid expansion, load transfer, or vertical transfer.

The vertical stress data from the northern Malay Basin was then used to develop an average lithostat equation: Sv 0:0064Z 1:1599 1

where Sv is the vertical stress magnitude (in MPa) and Z is the true vertical depth in meters below sea level (TVD mSS). This equation has an R2 = 0.99 and is accurate to 1.35 MPa (196 psi) over all calculated vertical stress magnitudes in the studied depth range of 100 to 3500 m (330 11,480 ft). This vertical stress equation was used to estimate the corresponding vertical stress magnitude for each WFT- and DST-derived pore pressure and, thus, to calculate the vertical effective

stress magnitude for all 1010 direct pore-pressure measurements. Sonic velocity wireline log data are used as a proxy for porosity in the porosityvertical effective stress plots (acoustic travel time is inversely related to porosity). The sonic velocity corresponding to each WFT and DST pore-pressure measurement was calculated as the average sonic velocity of all sonic log data in shales within 10 m (33 ft) above and below the WFT depth. In addition to sonic velocity, the average log-derived density, resistivity, and neutron porosity were also determined for each WFT depth. Density, resistivity, and neutron porosity logs are also commonly used to estimate porosity and, hence, can also be used in porosityvertical effective stress analysis. The
Tingay et al. 651

Figure 7. Average sonic velocityvertical effective stress values for pore-pressure gradient ranges in the northern Malay Basin. Average velocity-effective stress values (gray to black squares) plot further away from the loading curve (light-gray dots) with increasing overpressure magnitude. The unloading curve defined by increasingly overpressured averaged points suggests that a significant component of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin is generated by fluid expansion, lateral transfer, or vertical transfer mechanisms. 1 MPa = 145.04 psi.

porosityeffective stress analysis was also conducted herein using density, resistivity, and neutron porosity log data and showed essentially the same results as the sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis. However, sonic log data are preferentially used herein because these are less affected by borehole conditions and are more directly relevant to issues related to seismic-based pore-pressure prediction (Tingay et al., 2009a).

Results of Sonic VelocityVertical Effective Stress Analysis in the Northern Malay Basin Sonic velocity and vertical effective stress values were obtained for 990 WFT and 20 DST measurements from 30 wells in the northern Malay Basin. Of the 1010 WFTs and DSTs in the study
652 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

area, 725 WFTs and DSTs are normally pressured (<11.5 MPa/km; <0.508 psi/ft) and are used to define the loading curve (Figure 6). The scatter in the loading curve is most likely related to lithology variations and minor differences between pore pressure and sonic velocity measured in sands and adjacent shales or coals. Each of the 21 overpressured wells in the northern Malay Basin was classified as having overpressures that are either on or off the loading curve according to whether the overpressured velocity vertical effective stress values from the well lie predominantly within or outside of the scatter of normally pressured points defining the loading curve (Tingay et al., 2009a). Sixteen of the 21 overpressured wells have overpressured points plotting predominantly off the loading curve, indicating the presence of overpressures generated by fluid

Figure 8. Sonic velocityvertical effective stress plots for the overpressured (A) 2C, (B) 2B, and (C) 2A formations. Overpressured WFT measurements (black squares; >11.5 MPa/km [>0.51 psi/ft]) plot predominantly off the loading curve (small light-gray dots) and away from hydrostatic WFTs from the same formation (large dark-gray dots), indicating that a component of overpressure is generated by fluid expansion in all three formations. WFT = wireline formation test; 1 MPa = 145.04 psi.

expansion. Only five of the 21 overpressured wells contained overpressures that lie predominantly on the loading curve. However, note that these five wells only contain mild overpressures (11.5 13.2 MPa/km; 0.508 0.583 psi/ft) and, thus, will have only small effective stress anomalies that are unlikely to plot outside of the scatter of normally pressured points, regardless of the overpressuring mechanism. A key result of this study is that all wells containing moderate- to high-magnitude overpressures (>14.0 MPa/km; >0.619 psi/ft) have overpressured points that plot predominantly off the loading curve (Figure 6). Only 19 of the 168 moderately to highly overpressured points plot within the loading curve. Furthermore, the averaged velocityeffective stress data for increasing pore-pressure gradient bins from all overpressured wells show a trend in which higher magnitude pore-pressure gradients plot increasing away from the loading curve (Figure 7). Sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis has also been conducted individually on each of the overpressured 2A, 2B, and 2C formations using all data within the northern Malay Basin. Overpressured points in these formations lie primarily off the loading curve and generally plot distinctly

separate from normally pressured points in the same formation, particularly in the 2A and 2C formations, with mostly only mildly overpressured points (11.514.0 MPa/km; 0.5080.619 psi/ft) plotting on the loading curve (Figure 8). The results of the velocityeffective stress analysis indicate that overpressures in the northern Malay Basin lie predominantly off the loading curve, and that overpressures are entirely or partially generated by fluid expansion or transfer mechanisms. However, it is important to conclusively demonstrate this critical and unusual result and to avoid any possibility of spurious analysis. Wireline formation tests are more accurate in highly permeable formations and may yield erroneous pressure measurements in lower permeability formations, particularly if the measurement is taken when the mud weight is significantly greater than the porefluid pressure. Furthermore, supercharging and other errors are sometimes not labeled on WFT data sheets, and thus, there always remains the possibility that some spurious WFT data may have been unintentionally included in the database compiled herein. Hence, the velocityeffective stress analysis was also repeated herein using only the most reliable overpressured samples (those with
Tingay et al. 653

Figure 9. Sonic velocityvertical effective stress plot for 49 moderately to highly overpressured (>14.0 MPa/km; >0.62 psi/ ft) WFT measurements with excellent mobilities (>10 mD/cp) in the study area. Although all data used herein are considered reliable, WFTs taken in low-mobility overpressured units have greater potential to result in inaccurate measurements. Velocityeffective stress analysis of only these 49 most reliable overpressured WFTs also indicates that a significant component of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin is generated by fluid expansion or transfer mechanisms. WFT = wireline formation test; 1 MPa = 145.04 psi.

mobilities greater than 10 md/cp) to avoid any WFT pressures that may possibly be spurious. Wireline formation test measurements taken in moderately and highly overpressured formations with good mobilities also plot clearly off the loading curve, confirming that overpressures have been fully or partially generated by fluid expansion or transfer mechanisms in the northern Malay Basin (Figure 9). Note that the object of this stage of the sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis is to include only the most reliable and top-quality WFT data, but that the WFT data with lower mobilities removed for this specific analysis are still likely to be accurate and are considered as reliable herein.
654 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

FLUID EXPANSION OVERPRESSURING MECHANISMS IN THE NORTHERN MALAY BASIN Madon (2007) suggested that disequilibrium compaction is the dominant overpressure generation mechanism in the central (Malaysian) regions of the Malay Basin, based purely on the distribution of overpressure and subsidence modeling. However, one of the most significant results of this study is the well-defined velocityeffective stress distribution of overpressured points plotting predominantly off the loading curve, indicating that fluid expansion mechanisms and/or load transfer or vertical transfer is a significant factor in the generation of overpressures

crossplots to further distinguish between different generation mechanisms and also discuss the likely fluid expansion overpressuring mechanisms acting in the study area based on further analysis into the overpressured measurements and the regional geology of the northern Malay Basin.

Sonic VelocityDensity Crossplot Analysis of Overpressures Crossplots of sonic and density log data in overpressured shales have been suggested as a method for distinguishing between different overpressure mechanisms and, particularly, between different fluid expansion or transfer mechanisms (Hoesni, 2004; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011; OConner et al., 2011). Normally pressured sequences, in which rocks are compacting normally with increasing depth, plot as a loading curve on sonic-density crossplots, with both density and sonic velocity increasing with depth. Different overpressure mechanisms are hypothesized to have characteristic signatures on sonic and density logs (Hoesni, 2004) (Figure 10). Shales overpressured by disequilibrium compaction have essentially the same porosity and, thus, density and sonic velocity as normally pressured sequences and, hence, will plot on the loading curve. Overpressures generated by kerogento-gas maturation are suggested to show decreasing sonic velocity with increasing overpressure (because of the effect of gas and reduction in effective stress), but to have essentially little or no density change (Hoesni, 2004) (Figure 10). Shales that are overpressured by clay diagenesis or load transfer are hypothesized to undergo an increase in density with increasing overpressure, but are associated with either minor or no reduction in sonic velocity (Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011; OConner et al., 2011) (Figure 10). Sequences containing hybrid overpressures generated by a combination of gas generation and clay digenesis are predicted to display increasing and decreasing sonic velocity with increasing overpressure. Hence, the sonic-density crossplot response to increasing overpressure may help distinguish between different overpressure generation mechanisms.
Tingay et al. 655

Figure 10. Predicted sonic and density signatures associated with pore-pressure gradient increases caused by different overpressure generation mechanisms (adapted from Hoesni, 2004; OConner et al., 2011). Overpressures generated by disequilibrium compaction are expected to plot on top of the normally pressured sonic-density loading curve. Overpressures associated with clay diagenesis or load transfer are predicted to undergo an increase in density and little change in sonic velocity with increasing overpressure. Sequences that are overpressured through gas generation are predicted to undergo a sharp reduction in velocity, with little or no change in density. Lahann and Swarbrick (2010, 2011) further hypothesize that, if pore-pressure gradients reduce with depth (as occurs in the 2A formation in this study), sonic and density values will return to the original loading curve if overpressures were caused by gas generation, whereas sequences affected by clay diagenesis or load transfer will plot along a new loading curve, possibly subparallel to the original loading curve.

in the northern Malay Basin. Overpressures generated by fluid expansion, load transfer, or vertical transfer mechanisms are thought to be relatively uncommon, or to only provide a minor pore-pressure contribution, in sedimentary basins (Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997; Swarbrick et al., 2002) and are difficult to quantify using conventional porepressure prediction strategies (discussed in further detail in the section on implications; Hermanrud et al., 1998; Tingay et al., 2009a). Unfortunately, velocityeffective stress analysis cannot distinguish between the numerous fluid expansion and vertical transfer mechanisms (Tingay et al., 2007). However, in this section, we use sonic-density

Figure 11. Sonic and density crossplots for four wells in the northern Malay Basin. Average sonic and density values for shales have been calculated for each 50-m (164-ft)-depth section along the well. White squares represent normally pressured sequences and define the loading curve (approximate linear trend highlighted by gray dashed arrow). Gray squares represent overpressured sequences within overpressure transition zones, where the pore-pressure gradient is either increasing near the top of formation 2C or decreasing near the base of formation 2A. Black squares are average sonic and density values within the center of the overpressured sequences (from the lower half of formation 2C to the upper parts of formation 2A), in which overpressure gradient remains relatively constant (see Figure 4). Gray solid arrows indicate the approximate path of the average sonic and density values with increasing depth. (A) and (B): examples of moderately and mildly overpressured wells (wells B and D, respectively) that exhibit sonic-density responses consistent with gas generation overpressures (see Figure 10). Sonic velocity decreases sharply, with little change in density, in zones of increasing pore-pressure gradient (upper formation 2C). Sonic and density values both increase along a path that is subparallel to the loading curve within the central overpressured section (black squares), as the sequences have no change in overpressure magnitude in this zone, but are still compacting with depth. Sonic velocities then increase in the negative pressure transition zone at the base of formation 2A, with sonic and density values returning to the original loading curve in the normally pressured formation 1. (C) and (D): examples of highly overpressured wells toward the basin center, which exhibit sonic-density responses consistent with combined disequilibrium compaction and gas generation overpressures. These wells do not reach or contain the negative overpressure transition zone that is observed near the base of formation 2A in all other wells in the study. However, they exhibit decreasing sonic velocities and either decreasing values or no change in density, with increasing pore-pressure gradient (gray squares, located in upper parts of formation 2C). Sonic and density values then return to the original loading curve with increasing depth, despite still being within highly overpressured sequences. The reduction in sonic velocity with increasing overpressure, combined with the overall lack of density change and return to original loading curve with depth, suggests that the high-magnitude overpressures toward the basin center are the result of both gas generation and disequilibrium compaction. 1 MPa = 145.04 psi. 656 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

Sonic-density crossplots can further help to distinguish between different overpressure mechanisms in instances, such as in herein, where there is a negative pore-pressure transition zone. In a negative-pressure transition zone, shales that contain overpressures generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation will have a sonic-density response that returns to the loading curve as overpressure magnitude decreases. However, clay diagenesis is primarily a function of temperature, and thus, with increasing depth and temperature, the diagenetic reactions will not reverse. Hence, shales that have been overpressured by clay diagenesis or load transfer are predicted to have a sonic-density crossplot response that will follow subparallel to the original loading curve with decreasing overpressure and increasing depth (Figure 10). In summary, overpressures generated by disequilibrium compaction are expected to plot on the loading curve. Overpressures generated by gas generation are hypothesized to undergo a reduction in sonic velocity, with little change in density, as overpressure increases, and then return to the loading curve as overpressure decreases. Finally, overpressures generated by clay diagenesis or load transfer are expected to be associated with increasing density (and either no change or a slight drop in sonic velocity) and increasing overpressure and then follow a path subparallel to the loading curve with decreasing overpressure.

Results of Sonic VelocityDensity Crossplot Analysis in the Northern Malay Basin Sonic velocitydensity crossplot analysis has been conducted on shales in overpressured wells in the northern Malay Basin. Shale sonic velocity and density data for each 50 m (164 ft) of wellbore section have been calculated and crossplotted to filter out natural high-frequency variations in velocity and density that obscure the general trend. Wells containing mildly and moderately overpressured sequences (pore-pressure gradients <17.0 MPa/ km [<0.751 psi/ft]) have a sonic-density response that displays a typical loading curve in normally pressured sequences, with an approximately linear

trend both above and below the overpressured 2A to 2C sequences (wells B and D in Figure 11). The sonic-density response within mildly and moderately overpressured sequences displays a sharply decreasing sonic velocity, with little change in density, in the pore-pressure transition zone near the top of formation 2C (Figure 11). The sonic-density crossplot then shows increasing sonic and density values within the relatively constant overpressures at the center of the overpressured zone (from approximately the middle of formation 2C to the middle of formation 2A). Finally, a sharp increase in sonic velocity (again with little change in density) and a return to the loading curve coincide with the reduction in pore-pressure gradient near the base of formation 2A (Figure 11). The highly overpressured wells (>17.0 MPa/ km; >0.751 psi/ft) toward the basin center show a slightly different response on the sonic-density crossplots (wells E and F in Figure 11C, D). These wells do not exhibit the negative-pressure transition zone (reduction in pore-pressure gradient) observed near the base of formation 2A in other wells in the study region. On sonic-density crossplots, these wells display a sharp drop in sonic velocity, with either no change or a slight reduction in density, which coincides with the pressure transition zone at the top of formation 2C. Sonic velocity then sharply increases, and density stays constant or slightly increases, returning toward the loading curve, within the highly overpressured formation 2B and 2A sequences (Figure 11). The key finding of the sonic-density crossplot analysis highlights that sonic velocity exhibits a significant change with both increasing and decreasing overpressure magnitude, although there is little or no response in density values (Figure 11). Hence, the sonic-density response to overpressure suggests that gas generation is a key influence on overpressure generation in the northern Malay Basin. Furthermore, the observation that sonic and density values return to the loading curve as pore pressures return to hydrostatic provides very strong evidence against clay diagenesis or load transfer having any significant function in overpressure generation in the northern Malay Basin. Finally, highly overpressured (>17.0 MPa/km; >0.751 psi/ft)
Tingay et al. 657

sequences sometimes exhibit a reduction in both sonic velocity and density with increasing overpressure and also return back to the loading curve with depth (when still highly overpressured). Both of these responses suggest that disequilibrium compaction, in combination with gas generation, is contributing to overpressure generation in the highly overpressured sequences near the basin center.

Discussion of Fluid Expansion and Transfer Mechanisms with Respect to Regional Geology The sonic-density crossplot analysis indicates that gas generation is a key factor in overpressure generation in the northern Malay Basin. However, there are theoretically four mechanisms that could conceivably generate the fluid expansion or transfer overpressures identified by sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis: clay diagenesis, aquathermal expansion, vertical transfer, and kerogen-togas maturation. In this section, we examine each of these mechanisms in detail and assess the likely function of each with respect to the regional geology and the results of the sonic-density crossplot analysis. Aquathermal expansion (the normal expansion of water as it is heated) must be considered in the northern Malay Basin because of the observed high geothermal gradients of the area, which range from 50 to 75C/km (197269F/mi) (Barker, 1972). However, aquathermal expansion is theoretically only able to generate very mild overpressures (on the order of <100 psi [<0.7 MPa]), even under high geothermal gradients, and not the moderate- to high-magnitude overpressure commonly observed herein (Luo and Vasseur, 1992; Deming, 1994; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). The diagenesis of smectite or kaolinite into illite has been hypothesized to potentially generate overpressures either by the expulsion of intercrystalline bound water or through a load transfer mechanism (Perry and Hower, 1972; Bruce, 1984; Colton-Bradley, 1987; Lahann, 2002; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2010, 2011). No detailed clay mineralogy data were available for the region to investigate the potential for this overpressuring mechanism in detail,
658 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

but only relatively minor smectite quantities have been reported in the northern Malay Basin, although some wells are reported to contain significant proportions of kaolinite. However, it has been demonstrated that clay diagenesis can only generate very mild overpressures through a pure fluid expansion process, and that diagenesis is impeded with increasing pore-fluid pressure and is thus unlikely to be significant in the northern Malay Basin (Freed and Peacor, 1989; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Load transfer processes associated with clay diagenesis do have the potential to generate significant overpressure magnitudes, particularly in temperatures greater than 90C (193F), and the overpressured sequences of the northern Malay Basin are entirely at such temperatures (Lahann, 2002; Swarbrick et al., 2002; Lahann and Swarbrick, 2011). However, the absence of substantial smectite volumes, coupled with the sonicdensity crossplot analysis (which shows no influence of clay diagenesis on overpressures), suggests that load transfer effects are not a significant influence on overpressure generation in the northern Malay Basin. Overpressures generated by vertical transfer (the flow of overpressured fluids via faults, fractures, or a leaky top seal into a separate, lower pressured, and sealed reservoir) can reach moderate and high magnitudes (Tingay et al., 2007; 2009a). Vertical transfer has been observed as a basinwide overpressuring mechanism in Brunei (Tingay et al., 2007) and as a localized (field-scale) mechanism in Brunei, the Gulf of Mexico, and the lower Kutei Basin (Grauls and Baleix, 1994; Tingay et al., 2007, Ramdhan and Goulty, 2010). Indeed, vertical transferring has been suggested as a possible overpressuring mechanism in the northern flank of the central (Malaysian) section of the Malay Basin (Madon, 2007). However, we argue herein that vertical transfer is unlikely to be significant in the development of moderate- to high-magnitude overpressures in the northern Malay Basin. High-magnitude overpressuring through vertical transfer would be predicted to occur in the more highly faulted sections of the basin (the basin flanks and northwestern region) in the 2E and upper FM1 formations, which have relatively higher

Figure 12. Sonic velocityvertical effective stress plot for moderately to highly overpressured (>14.0 MPa/km; >0.62 psi/ ft) WFT measurements and their corresponding sampled fluid type. Gas (black squares) is sampled in 84% of all moderately and highly overpressured WFTs, and many of the 24 overpressured water samples (gray diamonds) are taken immediately below a gas column. In comparison, gas is sampled in only 60% of WFTs taken in normally pressured sequences in the study area. Although not definitive evidence, the association of gas with overpressures supports the hypothesis that a component of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin has been generated by gas maturation. WFT = wireline formation test; 1 MPa = 145.04 psi.

net-to-gross (and, thus, permeability to allow fluid flow into reservoirs) and are located immediately below major sealing lithologies (Figure 2). However, the overpressures in the northern Malay Basin are primarily located in the low net-to-gross 2A, 2B, and 2C formations, and significant volumes of overpressured fluids are unlikely to have been vertically transferred, via faults or fractures, into such lowpermeability sequences. Furthermore, the highest magnitude overpressures are observed in the relatively less-faulted basin center, in which there are fewer pathways for overpressured fluid migration into the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations. Indeed, the predominance of overpressures within such lowpermeability sequences, and the consistency in pore-pressuredepth profiles across the basin, sug-

gests that these overpressures are predominantly in situ and have been effectively sealed within, or adjacent to, the sediments in which they have been generated. However, the occurrence of mild overpressures in isolated reservoirs within the upper FM1 and lowermost 2D formations in the moderately overpressured northeastern and southwestern flanks of the northern Malay Basin suggests that some overpressures generated within the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations may have been vertically transferred into sequences immediately below the 2A and above the 2C formations (Figure 4). The occurrence of mild vertically transferred overpressures near the basin flanks correlates with similar overpressuring postulated by Madon (2007) in the central (Malaysian) section of the Malay Basin.
Tingay et al. 659

The sonic-density crossplot analysis suggests that the mechanism most likely to have created overpressures in the northern Malay Basin is the generation of natural gas (methane). The catagenesis of kerogen or oil into gas within a sealed source rock is associated with a large increase in fluid volume that can, theoretically, generate lithostatic magnitude overpressures (Meissner, 1978; Ungerer et al., 1983; Barker, 1990; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). The 2A, 2B, and 2C formations are typically at temperatures of 110190C and contain many coal and organic-rich units that are the primary source of hydrocarbons in the region. Furthermore, the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations typically have low net-to-gross and low permeability and, thus, act as an effective and stratigraphically localized pressure seal. Hence, the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations are suitable environments for overpressure development by gas generation. In addition, most of the overpressured WFT and DST measurements in the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations sampled gas. Gas is recorded as being sampled in 83% of all overpressured WFTs and DSTs (>11.5 MPa/km; >0.508 psi/ft), and 84% of WFTs sampled gas in moderately to highly overpressured sequences (>14.0 MPa/km; >0.619 psi/ft; Figure 12). The association of gas with overpressures is significantly greater than in normally pressured sequences. Gas is observed in 60% of WFT and DST samples in normally pressured sequences basinwide and in 66% of normally pressured sequences of the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations. Furthermore, almost all of the WFTs and DSTs that sampled water or oil in overpressured sequences were taken in the water and oil leg immediately below a gas column and, thus, are in direct pressure communication with gas. The observation that almost all of the overpressures in the northern Malay Basin are directly associated with the presence of gas is critical because the absence of such an association would be conclusive evidence against overpressures being formed by gas generation. However, the statistically high association of gas with overpressure in the region does not, by itself, provide evidence for the generation of overpressures by kerogen-to-gas maturation. The proper investigation of the like660 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

lihood of overpressuring caused by gas generation requires a detailed knowledge of the type, volume, and maturation of source rock material in the 2A, 2B, and 2C sequences that was not possible with the data available for this study. However, in our opinion, a significant component of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin is formed by gas generation given the evidence that fluid expansion overpressuring is occurring in the northern Malay Basin; sonic-density crossplots reveal a response in overpressured zones consistent with gas generation; a stratigraphically controlled distribution of overpressures exists within the regional source sequences; the overpressures show a strong association of gas; and the regional geology and geothermal gradient is favorable for gas generation overpressures and mostly unsuitable for other fluid expansion or transfer mechanisms. As such, the pore-pressure data presented herein constitute the most comprehensive in-situ data set of overpressures formed through gas generation known to us and possibly provides the best direct in-situ evidence to date that significant and basinwide overpressures can be generated by the catagenesis of kerogen and oil into gas.

ROLE OF DISEQUILIBRIUM OVERPRESSURE IN THE NORTHERN MALAY BASIN The sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis highlights the presence of overpressures generated by a fluid expansion mechanism in the northern Malay Basin, most likely the generation of gas within the effectively sealed 2A, 2B, and 2C formations. However, most of the moderate- and highmagnitude overpressures observed in sedimentary basins are generated by disequilibrium compaction, whereas fluid expansion mechanisms are typically considered to occur rarely, be highly localized, and have a mostly unproven potential for generating

Figure 13. (A) Pore-pressuredepth plot for well E located toward the center of the basin. Note that overpressures commence near the base of formation 2D, reach approximately 18.0 MPa/km (0.8 psi/ft) near the middle of formation 2C, and maintain this gradient until the base of formation 2A (no negative pressure transition zone is observed in formation 2A). (B) Observed (light-gray dots) versus predicted normal (hydrostatic; black line) sonic transit time values for well E. The highly overpressured 2A to 2C formations are associated with a moderate sonic transit time anomaly, further indicating that a component of overpressure in these formations is generated by disequilibrium compaction (in addition to the kerogen-to-gas overpressuring identified by the velocity-effective stress analysis and the sonicdensity crossplot analysis; see Figure 11C). TVD (mss) = true vertical depth (meters subsea).

significant or basinwide overpressures (Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Furthermore, the primary conditions necessary for overpressure generation by fluid expansion, most notably the required existence of an extremely effective seal, are also ideal for the generation of overpressures by disequilibrium compaction (Neuzil, 1995; Osborne and Swarbrick, 1997). Indeed, once a seal of sufficient quality has been developed to allow the formation of overpressures by fluid expansion, any increase in stress applied to the sealed sequences (e.g., burial or tectonic loading) will also generate overpressure by disequilibrium compaction. Thus, Neuzil (1995) and Osborne and Swarbrick (1997) predicted that overpressures generated by fluid expansion are unlikely to occur in isolation and will also include some component of overpressure gen-

erated through disequilibrium compaction. Indeed, Osborne and Swarbrick (1997) suggest that overpressures commonly associated with gas generation may, in fact, be generated by disequilibrium compaction because the increase in porosity and destruction of kerogen in the framework (associated with kerogen turning into gas) means that the matrix becomes unable to fully support the overlying load. Finally, the generation of highmagnitude (>17.0 MPa/km; >0.751 psi/ft) overpressures solely by kerogen-to-gas maturation, although theoretically possible, is extremely implausible as higher pore pressures inhibit gas generation, and such high magnitudes would require both extremely large quantities of source material and the unlikely maintenance of a nearly perfect pressure seal during and after gas generation. Hence,
Tingay et al. 661

Figure 14. Schematic diagram of the method used herein to estimate the approximate contribution of overpressure generated by kerogen-to-gas generation. The approximate percentage of overpressure caused by kerogen-to-gas maturation is estimated by the ratio of the distance a pore-pressure point plots from the loading curve (LC) (in terms of vertical effective stress) and the actual magnitude of overpressure (pore pressure minus hydrostatic pressure). This method provides only an approximate general estimate and will likely be a slight underestimate of the contribution of kerogen-to-gas maturation overpressuring because it does not consider the potential reduction in sonic velocity resulting from fluid expansion overpressuring (e.g., Figure 7). This analysis was conducted for all overpressured data and suggests that the overall magnitude of overpressure caused by kerogen-to-gas generation increases toward the basin center, but that the relative percentage contribution of gas generation overpressuring decreases toward the basin center (see overpressure generation model in Figure 15).

this section investigates the potential for disequilibrium compaction to have generated a component of the overpressures in the northern Malay Basin. Indeed, disequilibrium compaction has previously been suggested as the primary mechanism for overpressure generation in the central (Malaysian) section of the Malay Basin (Madon, 2007). Strong evidence exists that disequilibrium compaction is also a significant factor in generating overpressure in the northern Malay Basin, in addition to the previously discussed theoretical constraints and the hypothesis suggesting that kerogen-to-gas overpressures are unlikely to occur in isolation. Overpressured sequences in many moderately to highly overpressured wells in the study area are associated with abnormally high sonic transit times (Figure 13). Sonic transit times of as much as 40% less than expected are observed in the most highly
662 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

overpressured 2A, 2B, and 2C formations in wells located near the basin center (e.g., well E in Figure 13), whereas smaller sonic transit time anomalies are observed in wells containing moderately overpressured sequences. The higher transit times (lower sonic velocities) observed in overpressured sequences suggest that these formations are undercompacted (have abnormally high porosities for a given depth), and this is a classic indicator of overpressures generated by disequilibrium compaction (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989). The sonic velocitydensity crossplot analysis also suggested that overpressures are, in part, generated by disequilibrium compaction, particularly in the highly overpressured sequences located toward the basin center (wells E and F in Figure 11). These highly overpressured wells displayed reduced densities with increasing overpressure and/or highly overpressured sequences that plot on or close to the loading curve, both of which are evidence for overpressures being generated by disequilibrium compaction. The sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis provides further evidence that disequilibrium compaction contributes some component of the overpressure observed in the northern Malay Basin. Although most of the moderately to highly overpressured WFTs (>14.0 MPa/km; 0.619psi/ ft) have sonic velocities and vertical effective stress values that plot off the loading curve, some overpressured measurements (mostly near the basin center) have velocities and effectives stress values that plot on the loading curve, indicating overpressures generated by disequilibrium compaction. Furthermore, the distance (in terms of effective stress) that overpressured measurements lie off (to the left) the loading curve provides an approximate indication of the relative amount of fluid expansion overpressure in the region (described in detail in the following section). Overpressures in the northern Malay Basin lie, on average, 6.4 MPa (928 psi) off the loading curve, yet these same measurements are, on average, overpressured by 11.66 MPa (1691 psi). Hence, the sonic velocity vertical effective stress analysis confirms that fluid expansion alone cannot provide all of the overpressure observed in the northern Malay Basin.

AMOUNT OF OVERPRESSURE GENERATED BY GAS GENERATION AND DISEQUILIBRIUM COMPACTION The pore-pressure database compiled herein offers an opportunity to estimate the approximate magnitude of overpressure generated by gas generation from real in-situ data (as opposed to numerical or laboratory models). We suggest herein that the ratio between the measured amount of overpressure (pore-fluid pressure minus hydrostatic pressure) and the distance (in terms of effective stress) that overpressured measurements lie off (to the left) the loading curve provides an approximate estimate of the relative component of overpressure developed by the gas generation mechanism (Figure 14). Using the basinwide averages from the previous section, gas generation appears to account for approximately 60% of overpressure magnitude (i.e., 60% of the pressure in excess of the hydrostatic gradient) in the northern Malay Basin, but the relative proportion of overpressure caused by gas generation is different for each overpressured well and ranges from 35 to 85% across the study area. The component of overpressure generated by kerogen-to-gas catagenesis reduces from 60 to 85% in mildly overpressured sequences (11.514.0 MPa/ km; 0.5080.619 psi/ft) to 50 to 65% in moderate overpressures (14.017.0 MPa/km; 0.6190.751 psi/ ft) and only 35 to 55% in high-magnitude overpressure (>17.0 MPa/km; >0.751 psi/ft). However, this analysis also indicates that overpressures generated by fluid expansion in the northern Malay Basin appear to provide an average of approximately 3.6 1.8 MPa/km (0.159 0.079 psi/ft) of overpressure (in excess of the hydrostatic gradient) in moderate-magnitude overpressures (>14.0 MPa/ km; >0.619 psi/ft) and approximately 4.0 1.4 MPa/ km (0.177 0.062 psi/ft) in highly overpressured sequences (>17.0 MPa/km; >0.751 psi/ft). Hence, a key observation of this analysis is that the relative proportion of gas generation overpressures reduces toward the basin center, but that the absolute magnitude of kerogen-to-gas generation overpressures slightly increases toward the basin center. This basic analysis suggests that gas generation overpressures are likely to only contribute between

1.8 and 5.4 MPa/km (0.79 and 0.239 psi/ft) of the observed overpressures in the northern Malay Basin, with the remainder of overpressure generated by disequilibrium compaction (potentially underestimated by as much as 0.52.0 MPa/km [0.02 0.09 psi/ft]). Thus, if the northern Malay Basin is assumed as being a representative example of the potential for basinwide overpressure generation by gas generation, the analysis herein suggests that gas generation, if acting in isolation, is only able to generate pore-pressure gradients of up to 15.3 MPa/ km (0.676 psi/ft) and not the lithostatic magnitude pore pressures hypothesized by laboratory analysis and numerical modeling. A key issue with this approach is that it assumes that overpressure generated by fluid expansion has negligible influence on rock sonic velocity and, thus, that the horizontal distance that a point plots away from the loading curve equals the amount of overpressure generated by fluid expansion (Figure 14). However, gas is well known to cause a reduction in sonic velocity (gas effect), and this is exhibited in the sonic-density crossplot analysis (Figure 11). Furthermore, from the analysis of overpressured sequences in Brunei and Norway, a slight but detectable reduction in the sonic velocity during fluid expansion or transfer overpressure has been suggested because of the reduction of effective stress and grain-grain contacts and the slight elastic component of compaction (compliant pore space or the opening of microcracks; Hermanrud et al., 1998; Tingay et al., 2009a). Indeed, the average sonic velocityeffective stress analysis conducted herein also indicates that sonic velocity decreases with increasing overpressure (Figure 7). We could not determine in this study how much of the reduction in sonic velocity observed in overpressured zones is the result purely of gas effect on the sonic log and how much may be the result of reduction in effective stress at grain contacts or microfracture opening. Hence, note that the magnitude of fluid expansion overpressure estimated herein (suggested by the distance of points that lie off the loading curve) will likely be a lower bound to the actual amount of overpressure created by fluid expansion. The degree that
Tingay et al. 663

Figure 15. Schematic model for overpressure (OP) generation and transfer across the northern Malay Basin. Pore pressures are hydrostatic in the northwest end of the basin. Overpressures are primarily observed in the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations, with maximum porepressure gradients increasing toward the basin center (southeast). The amount of overpressure generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation increases toward the basin center with increasing source rock content, decreased net-to-gross and source material being subjected to deeper and hotter conditions. However, the reduction in net-to-gross and increasing burial rates toward the basin center also promote the generation of overpressure by disequilibrium compaction. Hence, the relative proportion of overpressure generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation decreases toward the basin center, although the absolute magnitude of these overpressures increases. Minor overpressures are also locally observed in the lowermost section of formation 2D and uppermost sequences of formation 1, particularly in the southwest and northeast flanks of the northern Malay Basin. These minor overpressures in formations 2D and 1 are suggested to be the result of vertical transfer of pore pressures from formations 2C and 2A, respectively.

the magnitude and proportion of overpressure generated by fluid expansion is underestimated is dependent on the influence of fluid expansion overpressure (acting in isolation) on the sonic velocity. A worst case sensitivity analysis, assuming no gas effect on the sonic log (an unlikely scenario in gas-generated overpressures) and an exaggerated influence of fluid expansion overpressure on sonic velocities, indicates that this method may underestimate the magnitude of overpressure generated by fluid expansion by between 0.5 and 2.0 MPa/ km (0.02 and 0.09 psi/ft) and the percentage component of fluid expansion overpressure by as
664 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

much as 16 to 25% (potential error increasing in greater magnitude overpressures). However, even such an exaggerated overestimate of the influence of fluid expansion overpressure on the sonic velocity fails to account for the discrepancy between observed overpressure magnitude and the distance the points plot off the loading curve. Hence, the sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis provides further evidence that fluid expansion alone cannot provide all of the overpressure observed in the northern Malay Basin, and the results of this analysis are used in the next section to develop a model for overpressure generation in the northern Malay Basin.

MODEL FOR OVERPRESSURE GENERATION IN THE NORTHERN MALAY BASIN The analysis of overpressure distribution and sonic velocityvertical effective stress data undertaken herein, coupled with the regional geology, suggests that overpressures in the northern Malay Basin are the result of varying amounts of both gas generation and disequilibrium compaction. This allows the development of a schematic model for overpressure generation in the northern Malay Basin that can be used as a foundation for future porepressure prediction in the region, in addition to other exploration and production implications that are discussed in subsequent sections. The velocityeffective stress analysis described previously suggests that kerogen-to-gas overpressures contribute 1.8 to 5.4 MPa/km (0.0790.239 psi/ft) of overpressure (increasing in highly overpressured sequences) or an average of 60% of the observed overpressure magnitude (decreasing in highly overpressured sequences toward the basin center). This analysis can then be combined with the regional distribution of overpressuresthat highly overpressured sequences (>17.0 MPa/km; >0.751 psi/ft) occur primarily toward the basin center, moderate overpressures (14.017.0 MPa/km; 0.6190.751 psi/ft) occur along the basin flanks, and mild overpressures (11.514.0 MPa/km; 0.508 0.619 psi/ft) occur toward the northwestern end of the basin (Figure 15). Gas generation can explain all or most of the observed mild to moderate overpressures near the basin flanks (though minor sonic velocity anomalies observed in moderately overpressured sequences indicate a component of disequilibrium compaction overpressure). In contrast, overpressuring appears to be possibly dominated by disequilibrium compaction in the highly overpressured sequences toward the basin a significant amount [potentially half] of overpressure created by gas generation). This schematic model of mild to moderate overpressures at the basin flanks generated primarily by kerogen-to-gas maturation, but with the proportion of disequilibrium compaction overpressure increasing (and eventually becoming dominant) toward the highly overpressured basin cen-

ter, is consistent with the schematic geology of the region (Figure 15). The 2A, 2B, and 2C formations near the basin flanks are relatively thinner and have not been as deeply and as rapidly buried as the same sequences in the basin center. These conditions promote a relatively greater proportion of gas generation overpressuring at the basin flanks, with only a minor component of disequilibrium compaction. However, the conditions toward the basin center become increasingly favorable for overpressure generation by disequilibrium compaction (faster deposition rates; deeper burial; and finer, more distal, sediments), although the magnitude of overpressure created by gas generation increases only slightly toward the basin center (deeper formation 2A, 2B, and 2C sequences and, thus, higher temperatures, but possibly slightly lower amounts of hydrocarbon source material). Hence, the overpressures observed in the basin center, and into the Malaysian section of the basin, are likely to be predominantly generated by disequilibrium compaction, but still with a significant component of overpressure created by gas generation (e.g., approximately 4565% of overpressure generated by disequilibrium compaction, with 3555% generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation; Figure 15).

EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION IMPLICATIONS OF OVERPRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AND ORIGIN The overpressure distribution and generation model developed in this study has numerous implications for exploration and production in the northern Malay Basin, and that can also be applied to other regions in which gas generation overpressuring is suspected to occur. This section discusses the key implications of the distribution and origin of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin for porepressure prediction, fluid flow, hydrocarbon migration, and seal retention capacity. Implications for Pore-Pressure Prediction Pore-pressure prediction techniques use the petrophysical response of overpressured sequences
Tingay et al. 665

to quantify pore-pressure magnitude, with the primary aim being to estimate pore pressure before drilling from variations in seismic processing velocities, or in real time from measurement-whiledrilling (MWD) data (typically sonic velocity or resistivity; Sayers et al., 2002). Developing a reliable pore-pressure prediction strategy is a detailed and involved process that is outside the scope of this study. However, the overpressure generation model developed herein provides the essential foundations for developing a pore-pressure prediction strategy, the key aspects of which are described herein. Different overpressure generation mechanisms have different effects on rock petrophysical properties (Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; Hermanrud et al., 1998; Tingay et al., 2009a). However, almost all currently used pore-pressure prediction techniques are focused on predicting the magnitude of overpressures generated by disequilibrium compaction (Sayers et al., 2002). This is primarily because disequilibrium compaction accounts for most of the overpressures observed in sedimentary basins, but also because disequilibrium compaction overpressures are normally associated with an easily detectable porosity anomaly. Indeed, most pore-pressure prediction techniques, such as the commonly used Eaton (1972) method, estimate pore pressure from the porosity anomaly associated with disequilibrium compaction overpressures and not from any direct petrophysical response of the overpressure itself (termed porosity-based prediction methods; Tingay et al., 2009a). However, fluid expansion or transfer overpressures, such as those generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation in the northern Malay Basin, are not associated with a significant porosity anomaly and will not be correctly estimated from porosity-based prediction methods (Bowers, 1994; Tingay et al., 2009a). Hence, the variable combination of overpressures generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation and disequilibrium compaction observed in the study region requires pore-pressure prediction strategies that do not rely solely on relative estimates of sediment porosity. The lack of a porosity anomaly associated with gas generation overpressures suggests that pore
666 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

pressures will be underestimated by typical porositybased prediction methods. This has been tested herein by conducting basic analysis of the pore pressures likely to be predicted for all overpressured WFT measurements using the standard Eaton (1972) method and sonic log velocities. The Eaton (1972) method, while generally not the most reliable pore-pressure prediction method, is used herein simply because it is well known and also easily calibrated with empirical data for application in specific regions or for variable overpressure generation mechanisms (van Ruth et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2009a). Furthermore, the purpose of this section is not to conduct pore-pressure prediction, but instead to highlight the implications and potential difficulties for pore-pressure prediction in regions containing gas generation overpressures (such as shale gas regions). The Eaton (1972) method estimates pore pressure from the ratio of acoustic travel time expected in normally pressured (and normally compacted) sediments versus the observed acoustic travel time. Pore pressure (Pp) is estimated using the equation: P p s v s v P h Dt norm =Dt x 2

where x is an exponent (typically equal to 3.0), Ph is hydrostatic pore pressure, Dtnorm is the acoustic travel time from the normal compaction trend at the depth of investigation, sv is vertical stress, and Dt is the observed acoustic travel time from the sonic log (Eaton, 1972). The sonic log velocity data from normally pressured WFTs determined herein were used to roughly estimate the following equation for acoustic travel time for normally pressured sequences (Dtnorm): Dt norm 4159:5Z 0:5086 ; R2 0:89 3

where D tnorm is in microseconds per foot and Z is the true vertical depth in meters below sea level. The pore pressure, vertical stress, and sonic velocity data collected for the sonic velocityvertical effective stress analysis, combined the predicted pore pressure from equations 2 and 3, can then be used to calculate the error in predicted pore pressure for

each overpressured WFT measurement using the conventional Eaton (1972) method. These same data can also be used to determine the perfect Eaton exponent required to accurately predict each individual WFT measurement (Tingay et al., 2009a). An Eaton exponent (x) of 3.0 is typically used, and has been shown to work well, in regions where overpressures are generated by disequilibrium compaction and, thus, where there is a large porosity anomaly associated with overpressures (Eaton, 1972; Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989; van Ruth et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2009a). However, pore-pressure gradients predicted using an Eaton exponent of 3.0 in overpressured sequences (>11.5 MPa/km; 0.508 psi/ft) of the northern Malay Basin are, on average, 2.3 1.5 MPa/km (0.102 0.066 psi/ft) lower than the actual observed pore-pressure gradients. This underestimation is greater in sequences containing higher overpressures, with pore-pressure gradients in moderately and highly overpressured sequences (>14.0 MPa/ km; >0.619 psi/ft) underestimated by an average of 2.8 1.4 MPa/km (0.124 0.062 psi/ft) when a typical Eaton exponent of 3.0 is used. Furthermore, an extremely large variation in the calculated perfect Eaton exponents exists that would exactly predict the pore pressure for each individual WFT measurement. Calculated perfect Eaton exponent values range from 5 to 50, with an average exponent (x) value of 7.8 4.8. The wide variation in calculated perfect Eaton exponents and the large standard deviation in perfect Eaton exponent values are a consequence of the multiple overpressure generation mechanisms in the northern Malay Basin and highlight the immense challenges in reliable pore-pressure prediction in the region. The significant component of overpressure generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation does not cause a noticeable porosity anomaly and, thus, is only associated with a minor and highly variable petrophysical response. Furthermore, the absence of a significant porosity anomaly requires a high Eaton exponent to amplify the typically smaller sonic velocity response associated with the gas generation overpressures. However, fluid expansion or vertical expansion overpressures may

cause a minor but detectable sonic velocity and resistivity anomaly because of the reduction of effective stress at grain-to-grain contacts in overpressured sequences (Hermanrud et al., 1998; Bowers and Katsube, 2002; van Ruth et al., 2004; Tingay et al., 2009a). Hence, the potential exists for developing a pore-pressure prediction strategy for the northern Malay Basin based on the overpressure model developed herein. Although a preliminary analysis of pore-pressure prediction from seismic velocities based on these results has been successful, a significant amount of further and more detailed analysis is still required (Limpornpipat et al., 2012).

Implications for Fluid Flow and Hydrocarbon Migration Overpressure is a transitory hydrodynamic phenomenon that can only exist in a sealed volume and, because no natural seal is perfect, will dissipate over time (Neuzil, 1995; Lee and Deming, 2002). The generation of overpressure by kerogen-to-gas maturation is also linked to primary migration of hydrocarbons away from the source rock (England et al., 1987; Mantaring et al., 1994). Hence, the occurrence and distribution of present-day overpressure provides a snapshot of how overpressures, and thus fluids, migrate through the petroleum system (Tingay et al., 2009a). Therefore, the overpressure generation model and overpressure distribution described herein yields insights into hydrocarbon migration and fluid flow in the northern Malay Basin. This is particularly important for extending the life of this relatively mature province through exploration away from the basin flanks and into the basin center. The observation that overpressure in the northern Malay Basin is mostly confined to the low netto-gross 2A, 2B, and 2C formations suggests that these overpressures are generated within these formations, and that overpressured fluids have remained mostly in situ. Furthermore, it has been hypothesized herein that a large component of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin has been generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation, and the
Tingay et al. 667

overwhelming majority of overpressured samples contain gas. The combination of these observations suggests that the moderately and highly overpressured 2A, 2B, and 2C formations toward the basin center may thus host significant volumes of gas within the low-permeability sequences and intraformational channels and bars. Hence, the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations may make good exploration targets, providing that significant volumes of isolated reservoir exist within these sequences, or that they can be effectively fracture stimulated. Furthermore, the significant component of overpressure generated by disequilibrium compaction in the highly overpressured regions of the northern Malay Basin is associated with anomalously high porosities that may potentially slightly enhance reservoir quality within these sequences. It therefore follows that the occurrence of moderate- and high-magnitude overpressures in the basin center suggests that significant volumes of hydrocarbons may not have migrated out of the 2A, 2B, and 2C source sequences, and thus, that shallower formations (e.g., 2D and 2E) may not have been significantly charged. In contrast, the lack of significant overpressures in the northwest of the study area may indicate that large quantities of gas have escaped from the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations and migrated into neighboring sequences. The observation that mild (and predominantly gas-charged) overpressures are observed in sequences immediately below the 2A and above the 2C formations, particularly near the basin center, offers some validation of the hypothesis herein that significant quantities of gas may not have migrated away from moderately to highly overpressured zones in the southeast of the study region. If correct, the model proposed herein for the generation and distribution of overpressure in the northern Malay Basin would suggest targeting structurally defined plays above or below the 2A, 2B, or 2C sequences in the normally pressured northwestern part of the study area, while targeting more stratigraphically controlled plays within the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations in the deeper parts of the basin (and a mixture of structural and stratigraphic plays in the moderately overpressured basin flanks).
668 Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

Implications of Gas Generation Overpressures for Retention Capacity and Seal Breach Seal breach can result from initiating tensile or shear fracturing of the cap rock or via the reactivation of pre-existing faults (Finkbeiner et al., 1997; Jones and Hillis, 2003; Tingay et al., 2009b). Fault and fracture reactivation is controlled by the effective stress (stress minus pore pressure), and thus, overpressures, which reduce the effective stress, drive the system toward shear or tensile failure and are associated with a greater risk of seal breach (Sibson, 1996; Hillis, 2001; Tingay et al., 2009b). Hence, overpressured sequences are commonly considered as poor targets for hydrocarbon exploration because of the increased risk of top or fault seal breach (Gaarenstroom et al., 1993). Furthermore, because overpressured sequences are closer to brittle failure and seal breach, overpressures are also thought to reduce the maximum hydrocarbon column height that can be trapped by a seal (Gaarenstroom et al., 1993). The risks of targeting overpressured reservoirs have been demonstrated in the central North Sea, where most of the dry wells or uncommercial accumulations are found in overpressured reservoirs that have low retention capacities (minimum horizontal stress minus pore pressure; Gaarenstroom et al., 1993). However, the common perception that overpressured reservoirs make for poor exploration targets is founded on overpressures being generated by disequilibrium compaction and, thus, may not be applicable in the northern Malay Basin, or in other basins in which gas generation overpressures are significant. The observation in the central North Sea that overpressured sequences only trap small hydrocarbon columns assumes that overpressuring of water-saturated formations occurs primarily because of disequilibrium compaction before hydrocarbon generation. Hence, the theory that reservoirs with low retention capacities are high-risk exploration targets assumes that these reservoirs are already close to fracturing and seal breach before hydrocarbons migrate into the system. However, it is hypothesized herein that a significant proportion of the overpressure in the northern

Malay Basin is generated by kerogen-to-gas maturation, and that overpressures (and associated overpressured gas-charged fluids) remain primarily sealed within the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations. The existence of such stratigraphically bound overpressures indicates that fluids (primarily gas) are effectively sealed within the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations in which the gases were generated. Under this model, the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations in the basin center have the highest overpressures and, thus, lowest retention capacities, but are also, potentially, the most gas-charged formations and most prospective exploration targets in the basin center. Hence, we suggest that the concept of low retention capacities making riskier exploration targets needs to be refined, and that formations with lower retention capacities may actually be the most prospective exploration targets in regions in which a significant component of overpressuring has occurred through gas generation. This concept may be particularly applicable to shale gas basins, in which gas generation overpressures may aid in production rates both through pressure drive and potential fracturing induced by high pressures.

SUMMARY The results of this study provide critical insights into the nature and origin of overpressures in the northern Malay Basin. The combination of an extensive and high-quality pore-pressure database combined with sonic velocityvertical effective stress and velocity-density crossplot analysis indicates that a significant component of overpressuring in the 2A, 2B, and 2C formations of the northern Malay Basin are the result of fluid expansion, most likely gas generation through kerogen catagenesis or oil cracking. This represents some of the best supporting evidence to date for the old and commonly assumed theory that gas generation can cause significant basinwide overpressures. However, the highly effective seal required for gas generation overpressuring (or any fluid expansion or transfer mechanism) results in conditions also being favorable for overpressure generation by disequilibrium compaction, and we

observe that the gas generation overpressures in the study area do not exist in isolation and occur coincidently with overpressure generated by disequilibrium compaction. We estimate that gas generation contributes 1.8 to 5.4 MPa/km (0.0790.239 psi/ft) of pore pressure in excess of the hydrostatic pressure (increasing in highly overpressured sequences toward the basin center), or an average of approximately 60% of the observed overpressure in the northern Malay Basin (decreasing in highly overpressured sequences). Thus, we propose that gas generation, acting in isolation, will likely generate moderate, instead of extremely high-magnitude, basinwide overpressures. However, this does not preclude gas generation from causing lithostatic overpressures in highly localized source rock sequences. Furthermore, the combination of gas generation and disequilibrium overpressures is able to generate high-magnitude overpressures that represent a significant hazard to drilling operations. The component of overpressure resulting from gas generation is not associated with a significant porosity anomaly detectable from seismic velocities, and thus, pore pressure will be significantly underestimated in the northern Malay Basin by most conventional prediction methods. This example of basinwide gas generation overpressuring indicates that a revaluation of the function of overpressures in developing exploration strategies and prospect risking is required. The main play type considered in the northern Malay Basin is to target fault-bound reservoirs in the higher net-to-gross sequences (formations 2E, 2D, and FM1) that are located immediately below major sealing lithologies (formations 2A and FM3) near the basin flanks. The analysis conducted herein suggests that hydrocarbons, and the bulk of any associated gas generation overpressures, appear to have mostly migrated out of the 2A, 2B, and 2C source formations in the basin flanks, and thus, this has been a highly successful exploration strategy to date. However, exploration focus is moving toward the basin center, in which the overpressures suggest that a different and less conventional play concept may be required. The 2A, 2B, and 2C source formations appear to be much more effective
Tingay et al. 669

seals toward the center of the basin, which, coupled with a comparatively lower density of faulting, suggests that much of the generated hydrocarbons (and associated overpressures) remain trapped within these lower net-to-gross formations. Thus, an exploration strategy for the center of the northern Malay Basin, or any region containing significant gas generation overpressures, may need to target stratigraphic traps (e.g., sealed channel complexes or bars) or permeability sweet spots within the highly overpressured source rock sequences. Furthermore, the common suggestion that highly overpressured reservoirs (low retention capacities) make poor exploration targets, caused by their higher likelihood of seal breach and the inability to maintain significant hydrocarbon columns, is not applicable if overpressures primarily result from gas generation. Indeed, prospects having lower retention capacities may actually be more favorable exploration targets in regions containing significant amounts of gas generation overpressure.

REFERENCES CITED
Barker, C., 1972, Aquathermal pressuring. Role of temperature in development of abnormal pressure zones: AAPG Bulletin, v. 56, p. 20682071. Barker, C., 1990, Calculated volume and pressure changes during thermal cracking of oil to gas in reservoirs: AAPG Bulletin, v. 74, p. 12541261. Bowers, G. L., 1994, Pore pressure estimation from velocity data: Accounting for overpressure mechanisms besides undercompaction: 1994 International Association of Drilling Contractors/Society of Petroleum Engineers Drilling Conference, p. 515530. Bowers, G. L., and T. J. Katsube, 2002, The role of shale pore structure on the sensitivity of wire-line logs to overpressure, in A. R. Huffman and G. L. Bowers, eds., Pressure regimes in sedimentary basins and their prediction: AAPG Memoir 76, p. 112. Bruce, C. H., 1984, Smectite dehydrationIts relation to structural development and hydrocarbon accumulation in northern Gulf of Mexico Basin: AAPG Bulletin, v. 68, p. 673683. Burrus, J., 1998, Overpressure models for clastic rocks, their relation to hydrocarbon expulsion: A critical review, in B. E. Law, G. F. Ulmishek, and V. I. Slavin, eds., Abnormal pressures in hydrocarbon environments: AAPG Memoir 70, p. 3563. Burrus, J., K. Osadetz, S. Wolf, B. Doligez, K. Visser, and D. Dearborn, 1996, A two-dimensional regional basin mod-

el of Williston Basin hydrocarbon systems: AAPG Bulletin, v. 80, p. 265291. Colton-Bradley, V. A. C., 1987, Role of pressure in smectite dehydrationEffects on geopressure and smectite-toillite transition: AAPG Bulletin, v. 71, p. 14141427. Deming, D., 1994, Factors necessary to define a pressure seal: AAPG Bulletin, v. 78, p. 10051009. Eaton, B. A., 1972, Graphical method predicts geopressures worldwide: World Oil, v. 182, p. 5156. England, W. A., A. S. Mackenzie, D. M. Mann, and T. M. Quigley, 1987, The movement and entrapment of petroleum fluids in the subsurface: Journal of the Geological Society (London), v. 144, p. 327 347, doi:10.1144 /gsjgs.144.2.0327. Fall, A., P. Eichhubl, S. P. Cumella, R. J. Bodnar, S. E. Laubach, and S. P. Becker, 2012, Testing the basin-centered gas accumulation model using fluid-inclusion observations: Southern Piceance Basin, Colorado: AAPG Bulletin, v. 96, p. 22972318. Finkbeiner, T., C. A. Barton, and M. D. Zoback, 1997, Relationships among in-situ stress, fractures and faults, and fluid flow: Monterey Formation, Santa Maria Basin, California: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 19751999. Freed, R. L., and D. R. Peacor, 1989, Geopressured shale and sealing effect of smectite-to-illite transition: AAPG Bulletin, v. 73, p. 12231232. Gaarenstroom, L., R. A. J. Tromp, M. C. de Jong, and A. M. Brandenburg, 1993, Overpressures in the central North Sea: Implications for trap integrity and drilling safety, in J. R. Parker, ed., Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference: Geological Society of London, Petroleum Geology Conference Series 4, p. 13051313, doi:10.1144/0041305. Grauls, D. J., and J. M. Baleix, 1994, Role of overpressures and in situ stresses in fault-controlled hydrocarbon migration: A case study: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 11, p. 734742, doi:10.1016/0264-8172(94)90026-4. Gutierrez, M. A., N. R. Braunsdorf, and B. A. Couzens, 2006, Calibration and ranking of pore-pressure prediction models: The Leading Edge, v. 25, p. 15161523, doi:10.1190 /1.2405337. Hall, R., and C. K. Morley, 2004, Sundaland basins, in P. Clift, P. Wang, W. Kuhnt, and D. E. Hayes, eds., Continentocean interactions within the east Asian marginal seas: American Geophysical Union Geophysical Monograph 149, p. 5585. Hedberg, H. D., 1974, Relation of methane generation to undercompacted shales, shale diapirs, and mud volcanoes: AAPG Bulletin, v. 58, p. 661673. Hedberg, H. D., 1980, Methane generation and petroleum migration, in W. H. Roberts III and R. J. Cordell, eds., Problems of petroleum migration: AAPG Studies in Geology 10, p. 179206. Hermanrud, C., L. Wensaas, G. M. G. Teige, E. Vik, H. M. N. Bolas, and S. Hansen, 1998, Shale porosities from well logs on Haltenbanken (offshore mid-Norway) show no influence of overpressuring, in B. E. Law, G. F. Ulmishek, and V. I. Slavin, eds., Abnormal pressures in hydrocarbon environments: AAPG Memoir 70, p. 6585. Hillis, R. R., 2001, Coupled changes in pore pressure and

670

Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

stress in oil fields and sedimentary basins: Petroleum Geoscience, v. 7, p. 419425. Hoesni, J., 2004, Origins of overpressure in the Malay Basin and its influence on petroleum systems: PhD thesis, University of Durham, Durham, United Kingdom, 268 p. Jardine, E., 1997, Dual petroleum systems governing the prolific Pattani Basin , offshore Thailand: Proceedings of the International Conference on Stratigraphy and Tectonic Evolution of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand, August 1924, 1997, p. 525534. Jones, R. M., and R. R. Hillis, 2003, An integrated, quantitative approach to assessing fault-seal risk: AAPG Bulletin, v. 87, p. 189215. Lahann, R. W., 2002, Impact of smectite diagenesis on compaction modeling and compaction equilibrium, in A. R. Huffman and G. L. Bowers, eds., Pressure regimes in sedimentary basins and their prediction: AAPG Memoir 76, p. 6172. Lahann, R. W., and R. E. Swarbrick, 2010, Kaolinite diagenesis: A previously unrecognized cause of fluid overpressure?: Proceedings of the AAPG Geoscience Technology Workshop on Pore Pressure and Related IssuesSpecial Focus: Singapore, October 2829, 2010, p. 6. Lahann, R. W., and R. E. Swarbrick, 2011, Overpressure generation by load transfer following shale framework weakening due to smectite diagenesis: Geofluids, v. 11, p. 362 375, doi:10.1111/j.1468-8123.2011.00350.x. Lash, G. G., and T. Engelder, 2005, An analysis of horizontal microcracking during catagenesis: Example from the Catskill delta complex: AAPG Bulletin, v. 89, p. 1433 1449, doi:10.1306/05250504141. Law, B. E., and C. W. Spencer, 1998, Abnormal pressure in hydrocarbon environments, in B. E. Law, G. F. Ulmishek, and V. I. Slavin, eds., Abnormal pressures in hydrocarbon environments: AAPG Memoir 70, p. 111. Lee, Y., and D. Deming, 2002, Overpressures in the Anadarko Basin, southwestern Oklahoma: Static or dynamic?: AAPG Bulletin, v. 86, p. 145160. Leo, C. T. A., 1997, Exploration in the Gulf of Thailand in deltaic reservoirs, related to the Bongkot field, in A. J. Fraser, S. J. Matthews, and R. W. Murphy, eds., Petroleum geology of Southeast Asia: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 126, p. 7787. Limpornpipat, O., A. Laird, M. R. P. Tingay, C. K. Morley, C. Kaewla, and H. Macintyre, 2012, Overpressures in the northern Malay Basin: Part 2. Implications for pore-pressure prediction: Proceedings of the Society of Petroleum EngineersInternational Petroleum Technology Conference 2012, v. 4, p. 32783289. Ludwig, W. E., J. E. Nafe, and C. L. Drake, 1970, Seismic refraction, in A. E. Maxwell, ed., The sea: New York, Wiley-Interscience, p. 5384. Luo, X., and G. Vasseur, 1992, Contributions of compaction and aquathermal pressuring to geopressure and the influence of environmental conditions: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 15501559. Madon, M., 1997, Analysis of tectonic subsidence and heat flow in the Malay Basin (offshore peninsular Malaysia): Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia, v. 41, p. 95108.

Madon, M., 2007, Overpressure development in rift basins: An example from the Malay Basin, offshore peninsular Malaysia: Petroleum Geoscience, v. 13, p. 169180, doi:10.1144/1354-079307-744. Madon, M., P. Abolins, M. Jamaal Hoesni, and M. Bin Ahmad, 1999, Malay Basin, in Petronas, ed., The petroleum geology and hydrocarbon resources of Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Petronas, p. 173217. Mantaring, A., F. Matsuda, and M. Okamoto, 1994, Analysis of overpressured zones at the southern margin of the Baram Delta province and their implications to hydrocarbon expulsion, migration and entrapment: 1994 AAPG International Conference and Exhibition, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, August 2124, 1994, www.searchanddiscovery .com/abstracts/html/1994/intl/abstracts/1154.htm?q= %2BtextStrip%3Amantaring. McKenzie, D., 1978, Some remarks on the development of sedimentary basins: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 40, p. 2532, doi:10.1016/0012-821X(78)90071-7. Meissner, F. F., 1978, Petroleum geology of the Bakken Formation, Williston Basin, North Dakota and Montana: Williston Basin Symposium, Montana Geological Society 24th Annual Conference, p. 207227. Miller, T. W., C. H. Luk, and D. L. Olgaard, 2002, The interrelationships between overpressure mechanisms and in situ stress, in A. R. Huffman and G. L. Bowers, eds., Pressure regimes in sedimentary basins and their prediction: AAPG Memoir 76, p. 1320. Momper, J. A., 1980, Generation of abnormal pressure through organic matter transformations (abs.): AAPG Bulletin, v. 64, p. 753. Morley, C. K., 1992, Hydrocarbon generationA possible cause of elevated pore pressures in the Osen-Ra thrust sheet, Norway: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 14, p. 743747, doi:10.1016/0191-8141(92)90131-F. Morley, C. K., and A. Racey, 2011, Tertiary stratigraphy, in M. F. Ridd, A. J. Barber, and M. J. Crow, eds., The geology of Thailand: The Geological Society (London), p. 223272. Morley, C. K., and R. Westaway, 2006, Subsidence in the super-deep Pattani and Malay basins of Southeast Asia: A coupled model incorporating lower-crustal flow in response to post-rift sediment loading: Basin Research, v. 18, p. 5184, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2117.2006.00285.x. Morley, C. K., N. Wonganan, A. Kornsawan, W. Phoosongsee, C. Haranya, and S. Pongwapee, 2004, Activation of rift oblique and rift parallel pre-existing fabrics during extension and their effect on deformation style: Examples from the rifts of Thailand: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 26, p. 18031829, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2004.02.014. Mouchet, J. P., and A. Mitchell, 1989, Abnormal pressures while drilling: Boussens, France, Elf Aquitaine, 255 p. Neuzil, C. E., 1995, Abnormal pressures as a hydrodynamic phenomena: American Journal of Science, v. 295, p. 742 786, doi:10.2475/ajs.295.6.742. Ngah, K., M. Madon, and H. D. Tjia, 1996, Role of pre-Tertiary basement faults in the formation of the Malay and Penyu Basins, offshore peninsular Malaysia, in R. Hall and D. J. Blundell, eds., Tectonic evolution of Southeast Asia: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 62, p. 281289. OConner, S., R. E. Swarbrick, and R. W. Lahann, 2011,

Tingay et al.

671

Geologically driven pore fluid pressure models and their implications for petroleum exploration. Introduction to thematic set: Geofluids, v. 11, p. 343348, doi:10.1111 /j.1468-8123.2011.00354.x. Osborne, M. J., and R. E. Swarbrick, 1997, Mechanisms for generating overpressure in sedimentary basins: A reevaluation: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 10231041. Perry, E. A., and J. Hower, 1972, Late stage dehydration in deeply buried pelitic sediments: AAPG Bulletin, v. 56, p. 2013 2021. Polachan, S., S. Pradidtan, C. Tongtaow, S. Janmaha, K. Intarawijitr, and C. Sangsuwan, 1991, Development of Cenozoic basins in Thailand: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 8, p. 8497, doi:10.1016/0264-8172(91) 90047-5. Ramdhan, A. M., and N. R. Goulty, 2010, Overpressuregenerating mechanisms in the Peciko field, lower Kutai Basin, Indonesia: Petroleum Geoscience, v. 16, p. 367 376, doi:10.1144/1354-079309-027. Sayers, C. M., G. M. Johnson, and G. Denyer, 2002, Predrill pore-pressure prediction using seismic data: Geophysics, v. 67, p. 12861292. Sibson, R. H., 1996, Structural permeability of fluid-driven fault-fracture meshes: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 18, p. 10311042. Spencer, C. W., 1987, Hydrocarbon generation as a mechanism for overpressuring in Rocky Mountain region: AAPG Bulletin, v. 71, p. 368388. Swarbrick, R. E., and M. J. Osborne, 1998, Mechanisms that generate abnormal pressures: An overview, in B. E. Law, G. F. Ulmishek, and V. I. Slavin, eds., Abnormal pressures in hydrocarbon environments: AAPG Memoir 70, p. 1334. Swarbrick, R. E., M. J. Osborne, and G. S. Yardley, 2002, Comparison of overpressure magnitude resulting from the main generating mechanisms, in A. R. Huffman and G. L. Bowers, eds., Pressure regimes in sedimentary basins and their prediction: AAPG Memoir 76, p. 112. Tingay, M., R. Hillis, C. Morley, R. Swarbrick, and E. Okpere, 2003, Variation in vertical stress in the Baram Basin, Brunei: Tectonic and geomechanical implications: Marine

and Petroleum Geology, v. 20, p. 12011212, doi:10 .1016/j.marpetgeo.2003.10.003. Tingay, M., R. Hillis, R. Swarbrick, C. Morley, and A. Damit, 2007, Vertically transferred overpressures in Brunei: Evidence for a new mechanism for the formation of high magnitude overpressures: Geology, v. 35, p. 10231026, doi:10.1130/G23906A.1. Tingay, M. R. P., R. R. Hillis, R. E. Swarbrick, C. K. Morley, and A. R. Damit, 2009a, Origin of overpressure and pore pressure prediction in the Baram Delta Province, Brunei: AAPG Bulletin, v. 93, p. 51 74, doi:10.1306/ 08080808016. Tingay, M. R. P., R. Hillis, C. K. Morley, R. King, R. E. Swarbrick, and A. R. Damit, 2009b, Present-day stress and neotectonics of Brunei: Implications for petroleum exploration and production: AAPG Bulletin, v. 93, p. 75 100, doi:10.1306/08080808031. Tingay, M. R. P., C. K. Morley, R. C. King, R. R. Hillis, D. Coblentz, and R. Hall, 2010a, Present-day stress field of Southeast Asia: Tectonophysics, v. 482, p. 92 104, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2009.06.019. Tingay, M. R. P., C. K. Morley, R. R. Hillis, and J. J. Meyer, 2010b, Present-day stress orientation in Thailands basins: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 32, p. 235248, doi:10 .1016/j.jsg.2009.11.008. Traugott, M., 1997, Pore/fracture pressure determinations in deep water: Deepwater Technology, p. 6870. Ungerer, P., E. Behar, and D. Discamps, 1983, Tentative calculation of the overall volume expansion of organic matter during hydrocarbon genesis from geochemistry data: Implications for primary migration, in M. Bjory, ed., Advances in organic geochemistry 1981: Chichester, John Wiley, p. 129135. van Ruth, P., R. R. Hillis, R. E. Swarbrick, and P. Tingate, 2004, The origin of overpressure in the Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia: Implications for pore pressure prediction: Petroleum Geoscience, v. 10, p. 247257, doi:10 .1144/1354-079302-562. Yardley, G. S., and R. E. Swarbrick, 2000, Lateral transfer: A source of additional overpressure?: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 17, p. 523538, doi:10.1016/S0264-8172 (00)00007-6.

672

Origin of Overpressure in the Northern Malay Basin

MEMORIAL
joined the Army Air Corps within two months of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. After extensive meteorological training, he qualified as a B-17 flight engineer. After being discharged from the Army Air Corps as a corporal on February 9, 1946, Don enrolled at the University of Wyoming to study geology. His interest in geology was sparked by the fascinating geological formations he had observed as a boy while riding horses and working on various ranches near Medicine Bow. By the spring of 1949, he had earned bachelors and masters degrees in geology at the University of Wyoming. Don married Marjorie Bailey of Hanna, Wyoming in 1950. They had grown up as childhood friends. Following his graduation from UW, Don worked for the Ohio Oil Company as a petroleum geologist in a number of locations including Wyoming, Utah, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Don was an exceptional field geologist and spent months in the field mapping geological structures and formations in search of petroleum reserves. Don and Marjorie moved to Casper in 1953 where Don took a position as the district geologist for the Forest Oil Corporation. He was appointed as the district manager for Forest Oil in 1960 and he held that position until 1971, when Forest Oil closed their Casper office. From that point forward Don remained in Casper and worked as an independent petroleum geologist until 2010. Throughout his career Don was active in the affairs of the Wyoming Geological Association and was a member of the WGA for over 60 years. At different times Don served as the president, vice president, and treasurer of the WGA. He was also active in AAPG, joining the association in 1950. Don was also certified by the state of Wyoming as a Professional Geologist. An ardent hunter and angler, Don would serve as a volunteer for the Wildlife Heritage Foundation and was a member of their Hunting and Fishing Expo advisory board for many years. He received several awards recognizing his service. Dons favorite pastime was fishing Pathfinder Reservoir from his boat with his best friend Dennis Lower, and next-door neighbor Charlie Weckwerth. Don is survived by his two daughters, Leslie Lawson (Dan Himelspach) of Denver, Colorado and daughter Dawn Lawson of Casper; and two sons, Jay of Cheyenne, and Bruce of Casper. He is also survived by three grandchildren: Jennifer Lawson of Casper, and Mariah and Jonathan Himelspach of Denver, Colorado; and one great grand daughter, Kylar Heath of Casper. He was preceded in death by his wife, Marjorie, and his brother, Bob. A celebration of Dons life was held December 28th at 5:30 P.M., at the Casper Petroleum Club. In lieu of flowers, memorials can be made to the Casper Humane Society.

DONALD EDWARD LAWSON 19242012

By Bruce Lawson, Casper, Wyoming James Lawson, Cheyenne, Wyoming

Donald E. Lawson died unexpectedly from heart failure on December 4, 2012. He had been admitted to the intensive care unit at the Wyoming Medical Center on December 3rd after falling at his home. Don was born in Potter, Nebraska, on August 20, 1924, where his father was employed as a telegrapher and depot agent for the Union Pacific Railroad. When Don was two years old, his father became the UPRR depot agent in Medicine Bow, Wyoming, where Don would grow up. As a child and teenager, Don worked for many of the local ranches in the vicinity of Medicine Bow, Hanna, and Elk Mountain. Following graduation from high school in Medicine Bow, Don

AAPG BULLETIN, V. 97, NO. 4 (APRIL 2013), PP. 673

673

BOOK RELEASES
NEW RELEASES
Buoyancy-Driven Flows, edited by Eric P. Chassignet, Claudia Cenedese, and Jacques Verron (2012). 436 pages. Published by Cambridge University Press, 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013, USA. $120.00. (Hardback) Structural Geology Algorithms: Vectors and Tensors, by Richard W. Allmendinger, Nestor Cardozo, and Donald M. Fisher (2012). 289 pages. Published by Cambridge University Press, 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013, USA. $50.00 (Paperback) Theory of Reflectance and Emittance Spectroscopy, 2nd Edition, by Bruce Hapke (2012). 513 pages. Published by Cambridge University Press, 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013, USA. $90.00 (Hardback) A History of Earth in 100 Groundbreaking Discoveries, by Douglas Palmer (2011). 415 pages. Published by Firefly Books (U.S.) Inc., P.O. Box 1338, Ellicott Station, Buffalo, New York, 14205. $29.95 (Paperback)

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOSCIENCES JOURNAL

Articles are available through AAPG Pay-Per-View at http://payperview.datapages.com, and to DEG members, and Environmental Geosciences subscribers. To subscribe or become a DEG member, contact Norma Newby at nnewby@aapg.org. CONTENTS Vol. 19, No. 4, December 2012 Predicting rock strength variability across stratigraphic interfaces in caprock lithologies at depth: Correlation between outcrop and subsurface By Elizabeth S. Petrie, Tamara N. Jeppson, and James P. Evans Groundwater development in hardrock terrain using morphometric analysis By Imran Ahmad Dar, K. Sankar, and Mithas Ahmad Dar

Geoinformatics: Cyberinfrastructure for the Solid Earth Science, edited by G. Randy Keller, and Chaitanya Baru (2011). 374 pages. Published by Cambridge University Press, 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013, USA. $130.00 (Hardback)

Produced Water Treatment Field Manual, by Maurice Stewart and Ken Arnold (2011). 229 pages. Published by Gulf Professional Publishing, an imprint of Elsevier, 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451, USA. $79.95 (Paperback)

AAPG BULLETIN, V. 97, NO. 4 (APRIL 2013), PP. 674

674

A S S O C I AT I O N R O U N D TA B L E
AAPG 2013 Annual Convention Technical Program*
May 1922, 2013 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
8:05 8:25 An Overview of Pre-Devonian Petroleum Systems Unique Characteristics and Elevated Risks: B. J. Katz Role of Petroleum Systems Modeling in Appraising the Point Pleasant Play, Eastern Ohio: S. G. Crews, J. M. Guthrie, K. Ahmed, J. A. Vines Shallow Onlap Model for Ordovician and Devonian Organic-Rich Shales, New York State: L. B. Smith Vigorous Anaerobic Methane Oxidation in the Upper Devonian Succession, Western New York; Possible Evidence for Devonian Gas Hydrates: G. Lash, R. Blood Break Biogenic Silica in the Devonian Shale Succession of the Appalachian Basin, USA: R. Blood, G. Lash, L. C. Bridges Assessment of CO2 Enhanced Recovery in Shale Gas Reservoirs: Preliminary Results from a Pilot Test in the Devonian Ohio Shale, Johnson County, Kentucky: B. C. Nuttall, D. E. Riestenberg, M. L. Godec, R. J. Butsch Gas Storage and Production in the Devonian Age Lower Huron Shale Formation in the Big Sandy Field, Kentucky: K. Pankowski-Heckman, S. McCallum Prediction and Distribution Analysis of Marcellus Shale Productive Facies in the Appalachian Basin, USA: G. Wang, T. R. Carr An Initial Assessment of the Point Pleasant and Utica Reservoirs in Eastern Ohio: K. A. Bowker

8:45 9:05

Theme Legend
Theme 1: Theme 2: Theme 3: Theme 4: Theme 5: Theme 6: Theme 7: Theme 8: Theme 9: Theme 10: Theme 11: Global Unconventional Resources The Appalachian Basin A Re-emerging Giant Emerging Conventional Frontiers Active Conventional Oil and Gas Fields Siliciclastics Carbonates and Evaporites Energy and the Environment Analysis of Petroleum Systems Structural Geology and Tectonics Geophysics and Seismology E&P Technology and Research The Past and The Future

9:25 10:10 10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

THEME 9 Extensional Tectonics: Implications for Tectonostratigraphic Evolution and Play Element Prediction (AAPG) Room 317/318 Chair: I. Norton 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Tectono-Stratigraphic Evolution of the West Orkney Basin, NE Atlantic Margin: Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration: P. C. Bird, J. A. Cartwright New Insight into Supradetachment Basin Formation and Fill from Basin-margin Growth Strata, Hornelen Basin, Norway: J. L. Aschoff Structure and Early Evolution of the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico: New Constraints from Marine Seismic Refraction Data: H. J. Van Avendonk, D. R. Eddy, G. Christeson, I. Norton, G. Karner, C. Johnson, E. Kneller, J. W. Snedden Unthinkable Physical Analogs for the Modern Concepts on Continental Stretching and Rupturing: P. V. Zaln

Sunday Afternoon Oral Sessions

History of Petroleum Geology Forum (AAPG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: S. Testa and L. Woodfork 1:00 1:05 1:30 1:55 Introductory Remarks Why the History of Petroleum Matters: R. Sorkhabi Geology Impacts History: Influence of the Edwards Plateau on Frontier History of the Texas Hill Country: P. R. Rose Past, Present and Future Advancements in Methods for Detecting Hydrocarbon Seepage after 75 Years: D. Seneshen, J. V. Fontana* From the Battle of Fredricksburg to Promised Land A Historical Perspective of Hydraulic Fracturing: S. Testa 8:25

8:45

9:05

2:20

Monday Morning Oral Sessions

THEME 1 Lower Paleozoic Unconventional Plays of the Northeast U.S. (EMD/AAPG) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Co-Chairs: H. Cander and R. Blood 8:00 Introductory Remarks

THEME 8 Exploring the Role of Ichnology in Modifying Porosity and Permeability I (SEPM) Room 317/318 Co-Chairs: K. J. Cunningham and H. Curran 10:05 10:10 Introductory Remarks Alteration of Original Porosity and Permeability in Continental Deposits by Soil Biota: Concepts and Examples: S. T. Hasiotis, A. F. Halfen, H. N. Wasserman, D. Hirmas, J. Counts Ichnology and Paleopedology: Keys to Understanding Reservoir Quality in Continental-Estuarine Deposits of the Donovan Sand (Lower Cretaceous), Citronelle Field, Alabama: J. Pashin, D. C. Kopaska-Merkel, A. C. Arnold

10:30

*Denotes presenter other than first author.

AAPG BULLETIN, V. 97, NO. 4 (APRIL 2013), PP. 675704

675

10:50 11:10

11:30

Bioturbation and Reservoir Quality: Towards a Genetic Approach: D. Knaust Ichnogenic Megaporosity and Permeability in Carbonate Aquifers and Reservoirs: Definitions and Examples: H. Curran, K. J. Cunningham Stratiform Flow in Aquifers: Implications of ThalassinideanGenerated Ichnofabrics in Lower Cretaceous to Pleistocene Carbonates: K. J. Cunningham

9:25 10:10

10:30

THEME 3 Recent Discoveries and Leading Edge Technologies (AAPG) Room 319/320/321 Co-Chairs: J. Bruce and J. Gordon 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Using Continuous Real-Time Compositional Gas Data for Horizontal Drilling and Detection of Natural Gas Liquids (NGL): W. Nagel Production Testing from Cuttings: J. M. Evensen Lightning Data, A New Geophysical Data Type: H. R. Nelson, D. Siebert, L. R. Denham Ocean Bottom Node Seismic Imaging New Technology Deployed in Deepwater Nigeria: J. McCloy, S. Iyiola, M. Bee, G. Smith, C. Page, E. Berg Break Global Palaeogeography and Palaeo-Earth Systems in the Modeling of Source Rock Depositional Space and the Predictive Mapping of Source Quality: Regional Examples from East Africa and Atlantic Ocean Margin Basins: J. Harris, E. Anderson, A. Adriasola Munoz, R. Crossley, C. Glover, J. Hoyle, N. Stronach, C. Watkins, J. Watson, M. Goodrich, P. Valdes, R. Proctor Exploration Success in the Eastern Mediterranean: Levant Basin Gas Discoveries: D. Needham, J. French, M. Barrett, B. Bruce, V. OBrien, G. Romero, M. Bogaards, J. Van Horn, G. Franco, S. Fenton Breakthrough Concept Turning Hazards Into Resources, The Forgotten Play: M. Isa, R. Kahar*, S. Shahar, S. Yu Wilcox Rebirth: South Louisiana: T. Rynott Independent Explorers Create High Value Opening Up New Countries: J. Wilson

10:50

11:10

8:25 8:45 9:05

11:30

Break Tectonic Controls on Very Thick and Laterally Confined Microbialites in the Pre-Salt Petroleum System of the South Atlantic: P. V. Zaln Lithology, Stratigraphic Architecture and Salt-related Structural Styles within the Enigmatic Evaporites of the Aptian Ariri Formation, Santos Basin, Offshore Brazil: C. Rodriguez, C. A. Jackson, R. Bell, A. Rotevatn, M. Francis Implications of Reservoir Quality Development and Distribution from Initial Petrographic Investigations of Lacustrine Microbial Carbonates of the Yacoraite Formation, Northwestern Argentina: J. W. Eleson, S. E. Kaczmarek Controls on Reservoir Development in the Toca Formation of Block 0, Offshore Cabinda, Angola: M. S. Wasson, A. Saller, D. Self Stevensite, Oolite, and Microbialites in the Eocene Green River Formation, Sanpete Valley, Uinta Basin, Utah: P. Buchheim, S. M. Awramik

9:25 10:10

THEME 5 Alluvial-Fluvial Deltaic-Eolian Siliciclastics (SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: J. L. Aschoff and B. J. Willis 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Influence of Water and Sediment Supply on the Completeness of the Stratigraphic Record and the Construction of Stratigraphic Surfaces in Alluvial Fans and Deltas: K. M. Straub, C. Esposito Geomorphic Elements in Modern Continental Sedimentary Basins: G. Weissmann, A. J. Hartley, G. Nichols, L. Scuderi Trace Fossil and Lithofacies Associations, Lower Triassic Fremouw Formation, Beardmore Glacier, Central Transantarctic Mountains, Antarctica: S. T. Hasiotis, P. P. Flaig Analysis and Correlation of Growth Strata of the Lower Dawson Formation: Insight into the Tectono-stratigraphic Evolution of the Colorado Front Range: K. Harvey, J. Aschoff Break Facies Characterization and Stratigraphic Prediction of Proximal Fluvial Systems in Endorheic Basins The View from the Margins: D. Ventra Funny Things Meanders Do: A Summary of the Diversity of Meander Processes and Morphology and Implications for Reservoir Geometry and Quality within Channel Belts: J. Holbrook Deltas or Marine-Influenced Distributive Fluvial Systems? Predicting Facies Distributions in Fluvio-Deltaic Systems: A. Hartley, G. Weissmann, L. Scuderi, K. McNamara Lower Permian Antarctic Marine Deltas of the Mackellar Formation: Turnabout Ridge, Beardmore Glacier Region, Central Transantarctic Mountains, Antarctica: P. P. Flaig, S. Hasiotis, A. Jackson, J. Isbell Anatomy of a Cretaceous Tide-Influenced Subaqueous Delta: The OBrien Spring Member, Haystack Mountains Formation, S. Wyoming: C. A. Uroza, R. Steel

8:25 8:45

10:30

10:50 11:10 11:30

9:05

9:25 10:10

THEME 6 Interplay of Evaporites and Carbonates Including Microbialites (SEPM) Room 403/404/405 Co-Chairs: C. Kerans, E. Franseen and C. Iannello Bachtel 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Characterization and Origin of Anhydrite-Rich Lateral Caprock Adjacent to Halite-Cored Salt Diapirs; Implications for Prospectivity in Salt Basins: C. A. Jackson, M. M. Lewis, A. Mannie The Central High Atlas in Morocco: A Snapshot of a Jurassic Diapiric Rifted Basin: J. Vergs, E. Saura, G. Messager, J. Martn-Martn, M. Moragas, P. Razin, C. Grelaud, R. Joussiaume, M. Malaval, D. Hunt Diapiric Controls on Early Jurassic Carbonate Platform Margins of the Central High-Atlas, Morocco: P. Razin, C. Grlaud, R. Joussiaume, M. Malaval, E. Saura, J. Martn-Martn, J. Vergs, G. Messager, M. Moragas, D. Hunt Characterization of Lacustrine Carbonate Microbialite Facies Associations of the Lower Cretaceous Cod Formation (Northeast Brazil): A. Bahniuk, J. A. McKenzie, S. Anjos, A. Barros, C. Vasconcelos

10:30

10:50

11:10

8:25

11:30

8:45

THEME 11 Geochemical Assessment of Petroleum Resources (DEG) Room 407 Co-Chairs: K. M. Carter, R. C. Capo and P. Ziemkiewicz 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Hydrocarbon Resource Characterization and Modeling: Past, Present and Future: Y. Z. Ma, E. Gomez, B. Luneau, W. Clark, M. Du

9:05

676

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

8:25

8:45

9:05 9:25 10:10

10:30

10:50

11:10 11:30

The Significance of Isotope Variations in Brine from the Poplar Oil Field, Montana: Z. E. Peterman, K. Kyser, J. N. Thamke Characteristics and Significance of Gas Accumulation during the Uplift Process of Xujiahe Formation Tight Gas System, Central Sichuan Basin: C. Bian, H. Wang, Z. Wang, A. Xu, Z. Xu, Y. Li Could Heavy Carbon Dioxide Be of Organic Origin?: Y. Shuai, S. Zhang, P. Peng, Y. Zou Break Study on Oil-Source Correlation Methods of Severely Biodegraded Oils in Bozhong Subbasin, Bohai Bay Basin, China: W. Jun, X. Zhou, G. Yonghua, Y. Bo, W. Feilong, Z. You Niobrara Source Rock Maturity in the Denver Basin: A Study of Differential Heating and Tectonics on Petroleum Prospectivity Using Programmed Pyrolysis: D. J. Thul, S. Sonnenberg Examination of Nitrogen Isotopes as a Proxy for Water Column Redox States During Deposition of Marine Shales: A Comparison of the Woodford and Springer Shales, Anadarko Basin, Western Oklahoma: K. Rivera, T. M. Quan Finding and Protecting Energy Resources with 21st Century Geochemical Tools: D. Seneshen, J. V. Fontana The Occurrence of Methane in Shallow Groundwater from Extensive Pre-Drill Sampling: J. Boulanger, B. Smith

8:05

8:25

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10

10:30

THEME 8 Basin Analysis, Sedimentation and Tectonics I (SEPM) Room 408/409/410 Co-Chairs: D. Kamola and C. Jackson 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Sedimentological and Architectural Characteristics of a Rift Initiation Package; Middle-Upper Jurassic, North Sea: J. Andsbjerg Structure and Evolution of a Fault Degradation Complex, Coastal Fault Belt, Suez Rift, Egypt: M. Muravchik, R. Gawthorpe, I. Sharp Fluvial-Estuarine Source Rock Model for Exploration in Continental Rift Systems: Western Desert, Egypt: W. Bosworth, M. Thompson, M. Drummond Outlier Basins on Passive Margins Cretaceous Outcrop Analogues and Play Concepts for the Central and North Atlantic: G. Wach, N. Pimentel, R. Pena dos Reis Break Petroleum System Modeling and Prospectivity of the Red Sea Basin, Sudan: Y. T. Hadad, W. H. Abdullah Tectonic Control of Channel Morphology and Orientation in the Gulf of Thailand: J. Lambiase, N. Ahmad, P. Wainuson, D. Paramita, P. Thongsang, B. Priyanto Evolution of the Lake Kivu Rift, East Africa: A Magmatically Active Extensional Mixed Siliciclastic/ Carbonate System: C. Scholz, D. Wood, X. Zhang, D. Mburu Stratal Patterns Within Fluvial Strata of the Upper Cretaceous Hunter Canyon/Williams Fork Formation and their Implication for Foreland Basin Evolution: D. Kamola, R. C. Ost Channel Avulsion and Sediment Aggradation Rate Controls on Fluvial Sandstone Body Stacking Patterns, Miocene, North Spain: G. Nichols

10:50

11:10 11:30

8:25

Interaction of Production Strategy with Stratigraphic and Sedimentologic Heterogeneity in Carbonate Reservoirs: P. Fitch, M. D. Jackson, G. J. Hampson, C. M. John Correlating Porosity with Acoustic Impedance in Sandstone Gas Reservoirs: Examples from the Atokan Sandstones of the Arkoma Basin, Southeastern Oklahoma: I. Cemen, J. Fuchs, R. Gertson, C. Hager Identification of Thin Gas-Bearing Beds in an Ultra-Deep Carbonate Reservoir through High-Resolution Seismic Inversion: T. Zhang, Y. Sun, H. Zhang, T. Guo, X. Cai Increase Productive Life and Add to Inplace Oil in Mature Reservoirs with Integrated Studies: Zubair Reservoir in Kuwait: S. A. Azim, S. Al-Anezi, B. Kostic, M. Hoppe, M. Al-Blayees, S. Al-Qattan, B. Al-Saad Break Impact of Heterogeneity on Flow in Shallow-Marine Reservoirs: Application to a Thin Oil Column Produced via Horizontal Wells: F. A. Dilib, M. D. Jackson, G. H. Graham, G. J. Hampson Predicting Connectivity and Rock Typing of the Upper Carboniferous Reservoirs in the Southern North Sea (NW Europe): Tackling Mature Reservoirs and Evergreen Challenges with a Back to the Rocks Approach: A. Moscariello, T. van Hoof, G. Kunakbayeva, J. ten Veen, F. Van der Belt, P. Davis, H. Williams The Value of Detailed Reservoir Characterization and Stratigraphic Interpretation: Radically Changing Development Plans within a Siliciclastic Reservoir of the San Joaquin Basin, California, USA: J. Allen, D. Larue, M. Henning, E. Hernandez, M. Mercer TBD A Review of Selected Michigan Niagaran Reef Waterfloods to Estimate the Fractional Flow Behavior During Flooding and Hysteresis Effects After Flooding: T. J. Brock

Monday Morning Poster Sessions

Presenters in booths: 9:00 a.m.10:30 a.m. AAPG Student Research Poster Session Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: S. A. Waters and W. Hottman Crustal Provinces of the Nicaraguan Rise as a Control on Source Rock Distribution and Maturity: B. Ott, P. Mann, M. Saunders Basin Margin Clinoform Analysis in the Dacian Basin of the Paratethys Domain, Romania: R. Fongngern, R. Steel, C. Olariu High-Resolution Reservoir Characterization of Incised Valley Fills of the Lower Cretaceous Grand Rapids Formation, Upper Mannville Group, East Central Alberta, Canada: A. B. Coderre, H. Pouderoux, P. Pedersen, A. Leier Interaction between Depositional and Post-Depositional Processes in the Cenozoic Northern North Sea and Implications for Understanding Basin-Scale Fluid Flow: O. Olobayo, M. Huuse, C. A. Jackson Subsurface Characterization of the Mississippian (Osagean to Meramecian) Carbonate Reservoirs of the Anadarko Shelf, North-Central Oklahoma and South-Central Kansas: B. Wittman, T. Cahill, X. Xie Defining Geobody Geometries and Architectural Elements within Fluvio-Deltaic Depositional Systems: A Quantitative Analysis of the Mixed Continental/Marine Mungaroo Fm, NW Australia: G. Heldreich, J. Redfern, D. Hodgetts New Observations of Facies A of the Eagle Ford (Boquillas) Formation in West Texas: Does It Represent a Shallow or Deep Water Depositional Environment?: M. Wehner, R. Gardner, M. C. Pope

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10 10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

THEME 4 Conventional Oil and Gas Fields I (AAPG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: R. W. Lynch and E. Rothman 8:00 Introductory Remarks

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

677

 Structural Constraints on Syn-Rift Depocenter Distribution and Clastic Entry Points at Rifted Margins; A Case Study of the Vesterdjupet Fault Zone, Lofoten Margin, North Norway: G. A. Henstra, A. Rotevatn, R. Gawthorpe, W. Helland-Hansen, E. Bastesen, R. Ravnas Buried Cretaceous Delta of the Barreirinhas Basin, Offshore Brazil: Potential Source of Structural and Stratigraphic Traps in Deepwater Sandstone?: K. Reuber, P. Mann, M. Saunders Lateral Continuity of Eagle Ford Group Strata in Lozier Canyon and Antonio Creek Terrell County, Texas: R. Gardner, M. Wehner, M. C. Pope Provenance of the Upper Jurassic Norphlet and Surrounding Formations from U-Pb Detrital Zircon Geochronology: A. Lisi, A. Weislogel Depositional and Mineralogical Controls on Organic and Inorganic Pore Distribution in the Lower Cretaceous Pearsall Mudrock System, South Texas: L. Ko, R. G. Loucks, S. C. Ruppel, H. Rowe, K. L. Milliken Petroleum Prospectivity of the Southwestern Nicaraguan Rise (Colombian Caribbean) Based on Regional Integration of Seismic and Well Data: L. Carvajal Arenas, P. Mann, M. Saunders Upper Ordovician Blue Mountain Formation in Southwestern Ontario, Canada: Progress Toward High Frequency Allostratigraphic Correlation to the Utica Shale in Ohio and Pennsylvania: S. Sweney, B. Cheadle Natural Fracture Analysis Related to Facies and Strain Variability in the Middle and Upper Williams Fork Formations, Piceance Basin, Colorado: E. C. Lee, B. D. Trudgill

Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: G. Gustason and B. Bracken Application of Sequence Stratigraphy to Nonmarine Successions Revisited: An Example from the Middle and Upper Williams Fork Formation, Piceance Basin CO: M. Wiechman, J. L. Aschoff A New Twist on Sequence-Stratigraphic Correlations in Fluvial Strata: Applying the Buffer Concept to Identification and Correlation of Stable Low-Accommodation Intervals: N. Alexandrowicz, J. Holbrook Depositional Architecture-Based Correlation Techniques for Fluvial and Deltaic Reservoirs in Lacustrine Basins: X. Yu, S. Li, L. Shunli, B. Chen THEME 6 Carbonate Diagenesis (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: G. P. Eberli, J. Kenter and M. Skalinski The Effect of Salinity on the Rate of Dolomitization: S. L. Martin, S. E. Kaczmarek* Origin of Fault-Fracture-Related Dolomitization, Mississippian Limestones, Isle of Man, UK: J. Hendry, J. M. Gregg*, K. L. Shelton, I. Somerville, S. Crowley Subsurface Seven Rivers (Guadalupian) Anhydrite-Dolomite Transition, Eddy Co, New Mexico, USA: Modification of a Depositional Facies Change by Permian Meteoric Dissolution: A. A. Brown, R. G. Loucks Fracture-controlled Burial Dolomitization: Outcrop Studies in Northern Oman: V. Vandeginste, C. John, J. Cosgrove Dolomitization of Madison Limestone in the Green River Basin, Wyoming; Geochemical Evidence for Low Temperature Diagenesis and the Relation to Regional Porosity Trends: J. F. McLaughlin, S. A. Quillinan, R. Surdam, R. Bentley, Y. Ganshin The Distribution and Formation Mechanism of Dolomite in Triassic Feixianguan Formation in JianNan Area: G. Wang, P. Li, G. Chen, X. Yu Fault/fracture-Related Dolomitization in the Thebes Formation, Hammam Faraun Fault Block, Suez Rift, Egypt: An Outcrop Study of Massive and Stratabound Dolomite Bodies in Remobilized Carbonates: H. J. Corlett, C. Hollis, R. Gawthorpe, J. Hirani, D. Hodgetts, A. Rotevatn, E. Bastesen Meteoric Diagenesis and Fluid-Rock Interaction in the Middle Permian Capitan Backreef: Yates Formation, Slaughter Canyon, New Mexico: J. W. Bishop, D. A. Osleger, I. P. Montaez, D. Y. Sumner Meteoric Calcite Cementation: Diagenetic Response to Relative Sea-Level Fall and Effect on Porosity and Permeability, Upper Miocene, Southeast Spain: Z. Li, R. H. Goldstein, E. Franseen Lower Permian Cumulative Paleosols from the Hugoton Gas Field: Characteristics, Paleoenvironmental Implications, and Sequence Stratigraphic Significance: J. Counts, S. Hasiotis THEME 6 New Tools and Techniques to Characterize Carbonate Reservoirs Advances in Seismic Imaging, Well-log Analysis, Reservoir Modeling (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: S. Bachtel, B. Coffey and K. Verwer Dolomitization in the Ghawar Field: An Update Based on the Clumped Isotope Technique: P. Swart, D. L. Cantrell, M. Arienzo, S. Murray Full-Core Porosity and Permeability Comparison to Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Results in Mississippi Lime: C. H. Smith, L. Ziane

THEME 1 Insights from Paleogeography, Tectonic Setting and Burial History (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Chair: J. Gale Preliminary Investigation of the Aptian Section as a Potential Unconventional Shale Gas Reservoir in the Downdip Mississippi Interior Salt Basin, Mississippi, USA: P. Hackley, C. Enomoto, C. D. Lohr, K. R. Scott, B. J. Valentine, F. T. Dulong, H. Alimi, A. M. Bove The Permian Phosphoria Formation: Stratigraphy, PaleoEnvironments, and Petroleum Potential: M. S. Hendrix, M. Hofmann Carbonaceous Shales in the Araripe Basin, NE Brazil: A Potential Shale Gas Reservoir: J. S. Neto, H. P. Mort, R. Pereira, J. A. Barbosa, V. H. Neumann, W. Vortisch, O. Filho, P. Brando, J. Pacheco Shale Reservoirs: Deposition in Active-Versus Passive-Margin Settings: J. D. Eoff Horizontal Detachments, Planes of Weaknesses and Layer Parallel Shortening in Shale Potential Impact on Unconventional Shale Development: J. Chatellier Possible Role of Organic Matter within Albo-Vraconnian and Cenomanian-Turonian Black Shales of Slata-Guern Halfaya in the Genesis of Pb-Zn Ore Deposits in the NW Tunisian Diapiric Zone: L. Rddad Integration of Detailed Geologic Study with Log-Based Rock Classification Helps Define the Regional Geologic Setting of the Haynesville and Bossier Shale Plays: S. Marino, S. Herring, K. Stevens, D. Handwerger, R. Suarez-Rivera THEME 5 Advances in Correlation Methods and Architectural Analysis of Clastic Reservoirs (SEPM)

678

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

 In Situ Validation of PSDM Seismic Volumetric Curvature as a Tool for Paleokarst Heterogeneity Studies: Results from an Extended-Reach Lateral: J. Rush, W. L. Watney, D. E. Hedke, J. Doveton, M. Fazelalavi Use of Clumped Isotopes to Reduce Uncertainties in Reconstructing the Thermal History of Carbonate Reservoirs: C. M. John, A. Jourdan, T. Kluge, S. Davis, V. Vandeginste QuantumRD for Characterizing Permeability Barriers and Compartmentalization in Tight Carbonates and Clastic Reservoirs: A. Gulati, R. Bogdan Challenge: Preserving Sector Model Integrity in Downscaling from the Full Field Earth Model for Steam Flood Forecasts in a Carbonate Reservoir: 1st Eocene Reservoir, Wafra Field, Partitioned Zone, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia: D. W. Dull, T. Osterloh, M. Shook, E. Rubin CO3DB The Digital Carbonate Database: F. Hasiuk Recognition Technology and Applications of Multi-Genesis Superimposed Karst Reservoir in Tarim Basin A Case Study on Weathering Curst in Ordovician Yingshan Formation of Tazhong Area: H. Wang, H. Zhang

THEME 9 Geomechanical Modeling of Natural and Stimulated Reservoirs (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: A. P. Morris and R. K. Davies A Geomechanical Study and Hydraulic Fracture Geometry Analysis of the Longmaxi Shale in South China: Q. Li, M. Chen, Y. Jin, F. Wang Time-Dependent Subsidence Associated with Compaction in Reservoir-Bounding Shale: C. Chang, E. Mallman, M. Zoback Using Seismic Forward Modeling to Assess Fault Stability During Fluid Injection: A. Wood, D. A. Paton, R. Collier How to Add Value to Tight Rock Fracturing Stages Using Geologically Constrained 3-D Fracture Models and Microseismicity: J. Daniel, M. Delorme, C. Kada-kloucha, N. Khvoenkova, S. Schueller, C. Souque Testing the Linear Scanline Method for Fracture Distribution Assessment in Multi-Deformed Evaporite Beds of Northeast Brazil, to Improve Geomechanical Models: T. Miranda, J. A. Barbosa, V. H. Neumann, I. Gomes, G. Matos, R. Santos Evaluating the Efficacy of Restoration Based Fracture Prediction Methods in Structurally Deformed Reservoirs: R. Shackleton, M. Cooke, G. Johnson, R. Muir Geomechanical Modeling of Hydraulic Fracturing: Why Mechanical Stratigraphy and Stress State Matter: K. J. Smart, G. I. Ofoegbu, A. P. Morris, D. A. Ferrill, R. N. McGinnis

Seismic Attribute Database for Selective Use of Seismic Attributes for a Given Application: J. Amtmann, C. G. Eichkitz, M. G. Schreilechner Seismic Attribute Mapping in Carbonate Depositional Environment Some Lessons from Case Studies: F. Hong, E. Shipilova Spectral-Velocity Prediction of Geological Section Types and Reservoir Properties: M. Afanasyev Prestack Time Migration and Impedance Inversion of a Mississippi Lime Reservoir, Osage County, Oklahoma, USA: B. L. Dowdell, K. Marfurt Fault Extraction Using Point Cloud Approach to a Seismic Enhanced Discontinuity Cube: A. Bounaim, T. Boe, W. Athmer, P. DHamonville, L. Snneland Seismic Geomorphology of a Shelf-Slope System in the South of Colombian Caribbean Offshore Based on Seismic Attributes Analysis: E. Alfaro, V. Ramrez C., F. Malagn, I. Olaya Enhanced Fault Segmentation Using an Adaptive 3-D Sobel Filter: A. A. Aqrawi, D. S. Barka Identification and Characterization of Paleo-Karsts within DeepBuried Carbonates in Central Tarim Basin, China: Constraints from Integrated 3-D Seismic Records: J. Yu, Z. Li The Application of Semi-Supervised Geobody Detection Technique using Multiple Seismic Attributes in Petroleum Exploration: L. Li, X. Ran, C. Tao, Z. Wan, S. Zhan Impact of Petroleum and Gas Model of Origin on the Exploration of their Commercial Accumulations: R. Seyful-Mulyukov Color Blending On Spectral Decomposition Method For Delineating Geological Features: G. Erlangga, Y. F. Swastiraras, K. Afafa Delineation of Reservoir Compartments in Fluvial Sand Systems by Using Spectral Decomposition and Seismic Attributes: Case Study from the Gulf of Thailand: M. N. Ahmad, S. Sriburee, P. Rowell Using Seismic Inversion Techniques to Delineate Rift-Related Miocene Sand Reservoirs in the Gulf of Thailand: M. N. Ahmad, B. Priyanto, P. Rowell Using Geological Expression Techniques to Reveal Complex Regional Structural Information Without Conventional Interpretation: T. Wooltorton

THEME 10 Potential Fields and Other Geophysical Methods and Analysis Techniques Relevant to Exploration Geophysics (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: A. N. Christensen and A. Adam Study on Fine Time-Depth Calibration in Petroleum Exploration: J. B. Hou The Application of Full Azimuth 3-D Seismic Fracture Detection Technology in the Prediction of Favorable Reservoirs within the Shengbei Five Well Area Tight Sandstone Region: G. Xiang, R. Jianbin, Y. Xiaowei, Z. Jinxue, H. Zhengtao, Z. Yuan, L. Fulei Trace of Hydrocarbon Migration Interpreted on Seismic Data: A Case Study from the Offshore Bohai Sea, China: Y. Wang, L. Huang Understanding the Deformation of the Naga Thrust Triangle Zone, NE India, Using Structural Modeling of 2-D Seismic Data: B. B. Michael, K. Shukla, C. M. Burberry, P. Jaiswal Data Evaluation in AVO Analysis: Y. Zhili, F. Guozhang, L. Fuliang, W. Bin, Y. Taotao Airborne Gravity Gradiometry for Rapid Mapping of Hydrocarbon Exploration Plays: A. N. Christensen, M. Dransfield

THEME 10 3-D Seismic Attribute Method-Based Interpretations Relevant to Stratigraphic and Fault Geometry of Hydrocarbon Accumulations (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Amtmann and J. Daniels Methods of Reservoir Identification for Iso-Velocity Sand-Mud Strata: R. Pu Detailed Seismic Characterization of a Heavily Karsted Zone: A. Fernandez, K. Marfurt Post-Stack Processing and Seismic Inversion of 2-D Line Bell Creek Field, Powder River Basin, Montana: M. Ostadhassan, J. R. Braunberger, J. Hamling, C. Gorecki New Seismic Attribute for Determination of Lithology and Brittleness: R. Sharma, S. Chopra*

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

679

 Local Sedimentary Structure and Regional Linear Trends Indicated by an Airborne Micromagnetic Survey of the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast: J. P. Land Delineation of Groundwater Aquifers Using an Electrical Resistivity Survey in the Dordab Region, Red Sea State, Eastern Sudan: A. Adam, S. Kaka Comparing Seismic Resolution and Signal and Noise Quality between Dense Point-Receiver and Conventional Data Over the Bakken Formation in North Dakota: N. C. Banik, A. Salama, M. Egan, A. Koesoemadinata, K. G. El-Kaseeh Coherence Technique and Its Application in Xisha Offshore: Y. Taotao A Reservoir Characterization Case Study Based on the Structural and Depositional Isochronous Framework: Y. Ling, X. Guo, Q. Song, Z. Xia*

THEME 10 VSP, Microseismic and Rock Physics Methods Relevant to Exploration Geophysics I (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Chair: T. Jordan Overview of Microseismic Play as Monitoring Geothermal Reservoir Sustainable in Indonesia: B. Guspudin Hydraulic Fracture Monitoring: Integrating Multi-Scale Borehole-Based Geophysical Measurement to Improve Formation Understanding: J. Le Calvez, M. Puckett Petrophysical Relationship to Predict Synthetic Porosity Log: T. Guntoro, I. A. Putri Rational Rock Physics For Improved Velocity Prediction And Reservoir Properties Estimation For Granite Wash (Tight Sands) in Anadarko Basin, Texas: M. A. Durrani, K. Wilson, J. Chen, B. Tapp, A. Jubran Physical Changes Associated with Maturation in Organic Rich Rocks: S. Zargari, M. Prasad Hydraulic Fracturing Optimization for Woodford Shale through Integration of Geological Characterization and Coupled Anisotropic Thermo-Hydro-Geomechanics: Y. N. Abousleiman, S. Hoang*, C. Liu Relating P-Wave Velocity to Rock Strength in High-Porosity, Shallowly Buried Sediments: Implications for in Situ Stress Estimates: K. A. Olcott, D. Saffer Predicting Seismically Thin Sandstone Reservoirs by Integrating Tectno-Paleogeomorphology and Seismic Sedimentology: A Case Study: L. Xu, H. Zeng*, P. Xiugang, G. Wang, W. Liu Quantitative Estimation of Oil-Water Contact in a Jurassic Clastic Reservoir Using Elastic Wave Propagation: Z. Zhang, Y. Sun Crosswell Imaging with LCB Beamlet: Y. Yueming, R. Wu, X. Zhuang

Messinian Seismic Stratigraphy of the Nile Delta: Identification of the RST (Regressive System Tract): M. I. Abdel-Fattah, J. D. Pigott Absolute Time Constraints on the Silurian-Devonian Boundary D13C Excursion: J. M. Husson, B. Schoene, A. C. Maloof, S. Bluher An Emerging Concept of Ever-Ready 3-D Numerical Reservoir Models: A Case Study from the Dukhan Field, State of Qatar: H. A. Alansi Alyafei, R. Stanley, F. Al Tamimi, L. Weber A Cenomanian-Age Deep Continental Shelf Record of Cyclical Anoxia, Gulf of Mexico, South Texas: H. Rowe, S. C. Ruppel, L. Moran Chemostratigraphy of Mudrocks: Bone Spring Formation, Delaware Basin, West Texas: S. Nance, H. Rowe Rediscussion on Sequence Stratigraphy Standardization: Some Modification Attempt on Base Level Cycle Definition: L. Song Recognition and Definition of Oscillating Base Level Subcycle: An Example from S Reservoir in Bozhong Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, East China: T. Fan, G. Hu, L. Song, L. Yu Sequence Stratigraphic Framework and Sedimentary System Evolution of Lishu Rift in Songliao Basin: X. Chen, Y. Ji, T. Fan A Special Sedimentary Type: Flood-overlake and Incised Valley Filling Deposition in Faulted Lake DepressionAn Example from Huimin Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, Eastern China: C. Zhang, Z. Jiang, J. Wang Applicant of Seismic Sedimentology Methods to Analyze Sedimentary Facies Evolution in A Fault Depression, Biyang, East China: X. Geng, X. Zhu, Y. Dong, C. Lin Geological Data Scale Integration Through Interactive Visualization for Geological Model Building: O. Paesi da Silva, C. Freitas, A. Lorenzatti, M. Abel*, L. F. De Ros, K. Goldberg Intelistrata: A System for Stratigraphic Interpretation of Well Logs: S. R. Fiorini, M. Abel*, C. M. Scherer

THEME 11 Application of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy to Reservoir Assessment II (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Chair: P. MacKenzie Forward Stratigraphic Modeling of Deltaic Deposits Using Delft 3-D: C. Esposito, R. Boyd, K. M. Straub Portable Technology Brings the Laboratory to the Well Site: K. Pfau, G. Oliver, L. J. Plant* Correlation of Red Beds and Evaporite Units Between Surface and Subsurface: Addressing Challenges for Petroleum Geology: K. C. Benison, J. Zambito A New Era in Seismic Sequence Stratigraphy: Computational Seismic Stratigraphy in the Undergraduate Classroom: J. Wolak, J. Ochoa, M. Pelissier, N. Hemstra Using X-Ray Fluorescence to Quantify Clay Content in Mudrock and Sandstone Outcrops: A. A. Brown, R. K. Davies Compound Specific Hydrogen Isotope Composition of Type II and III Kerogen Extracted by Pyrolysis-GC-MS-IRMS: R. A. Socki, D. Pernia, M. Evans, Q. Fu, A. Bissada, J. Curiale, P. Niles Genetic Types and Accumulation of the Deep Cracked Gas Pools of Minfeng Area in Dongying Depression: H. Liu

THEME 11 Application of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy to Reservoir Assessment I (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Chair: T. Mroz A Computer Application for Automatic Interpretation of Depositional Process from Visual Descriptions of Sedimentary Facies: J. L. Carbonera, D. E. Rosa, M. Abel, C. M. Scherer Do Pennsylvanian Cyclothems Record Glacioeustacy?: B. C. Dyer, A. C. Maloof Intercalation Pattern and Its Impact on Development of Braided River in SAGD Test Area of Fengcheng Oilfield in Junggar Basin, Northwest China: L. Haiyan, G. Yang

Monday Afternoon Oral Sessions

Discovery Thinking (AAPG/DPA) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Co-Chairs: C. Sternbach and E. Dolly

680

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

1:15 1:20 2:00 2:40 3:00 3:40

4:20

Introductory Remarks Marcellus Shale Geologic Considerations for an Evolving North American Liquids-Rich Play: W. Zagorski Wasatch-Green River Resource Play, Utah: J. Roesink, J. Anderson Break Horn River Devonian Shale Gas Discoveries in NE British Columbia: R. Spitzer Integrated Reservoir Evaluation as a Means for Unlocking Maximum Resource Value in an Unconventional Reservoir: Niobrara Formation, DJ Basin, Colorado: M. Deacon The Mississippi Lime: Outcrop to Subsurface and the Evolution of a Play: S. Matson

1:15 1:20

1:40

2:00

2:20

Michel T. Halbouty Lecture (AAPG) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Chair: M. Canich Speaker: Jeff Ventura, President and CEO, Range Resources 5:10 p.m. 6:00 p.m. THEME 8 Exploring the Role of Ichnology in Modifying Porosity and Permeability II (SEPM) Room 317/318 Co-Chairs: K. J. Cunningham and H. Curran 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Bridging the Gap from Hand-Specimen to Basin: Understanding the Scalar Impacts of Bioturbation on Reservoir Quality: R. Callow, D. McIlroy, L. Herringshaw Biogenic Permeability in the Bakken Formation: M. Gingras, S. Angulo, L. Buatois Ichnological Controls on Hydrocarbon Shale Properties in the Light of Three-Dimensional Volumetric Reconstructions of Shale Ichnofabric: M. Bednarz, D. McIlroy Permeability Distributions in Non-Surface Constrained Biogenic Textural Heterogeneities: A Case Study from the Upper Cretaceous Lysing Formation, Offshore MidNorway: C. A. Polo, G. Baniak, M. K. Gingras, S. Pemberton Break Characterization of Permeability Distribution in Bioturbated Geological Media using X-Ray Microtomography and Spot-permeametry: G. Baniak, A. D. La Croix, C. A. Polo, T. L. Playter, S. Pemberton, M. K. Gingras Ichnologic Suites and Their Controls on Permeability Distributions in the Lower Cretaceous Viking Formation, South-Central Alberta, Canada: A. D. La Croix, J. A. MacEachern, A. Hsieh, D. M. Allen, S. E. Dashtgard Three Dimensional Permeability Associated with Diplocraterion Burrows: M. Leaman, D. McIlroy Quantitative Assessments of Petrophysical Properties in Biogenic Dual-Permeability Systems: Facing the Challenge of Highly Bioturbated Heterogeneous Reservoirs: C. A. Polo, G. Baniak, M. K. Gingras, S. Pemberton Do Animal Sediment Interactions Preserve Organic Carbon during Shale Diagenesis? The Role of Grain and Mineral Selective Deposit Feeding: D. Harazim, D. McIlroy, R. Wogelius, N. Edwards, U. Bergmann

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05

4:25 4:45

1:40 2:00

Introductory Remarks Devonian Resource Plays of British Columbian and the North West Territories: From a Global Sequence Stratigraphic and Geodynamic Context to 3-D Analysis: K. C. Evans, A. Messer, O. E. Sutcliffe, R. M. Martin, N. Harvey Establishing a Sequence Stratigraphic Model for the Horn River Shale Succession, Horn River Basin, British Columbia: M. Kennedy, T. Dong, N. Harris Characterization of Organic Matter in the Canadian Lower Triassic Montney Shale Gas Reservoir: H. Sanei, M. Freeman, C. Clarkson, T. Gentzis Geologic Framework & Reservoir Characterization of the Cardium Formation, Northern Pembina, Alberta, Canada: A. Wiseman, F. F. Krause, C. Debuhr Break Pitfalls in Assessing Lacustrine Shale Versus Marine Shale Prospects: Lessons from the Frederick Brook Shale of New Brunswick: T. Martel Ordovician-Aged Liquid-Rich Shales and Hydrothermal Dolomites Plays: An Updated Review of the Eastern Canada Anticosti Basin Hydrocarbon Potential: J. Marcil, J. Lavoie, N. Mechti, P. K. Dorrins, B. Marcotte, J. Lavoie Reservoir Characterization and Exploration Assessment of Tight Gas Sands Related to Unconventional Concepts. Queen City Formation, Burgos Basin, Mexico: S. DAlessio, M. A. Porras, T. Arikuma Gas-Oil Shale, The New Frontier Exploration in Brazil: F. S. de Miranda Technological Developments for Enhancing Extra Heavy Oil Productivity in Fields of the Faja Petrolifera del Orinoco (FPO), PDVSA, Venezuela: T. Villarroel, R. D. Hernandez

2:20

THEME 7 Evaluating Environmental Impacts from Shale Gas Development (DEG) Room 403/404/405 Co-Chairs: F. Baldassare and M. Engle 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Emission Measurements from Natural Gas Development and Regional Background Characterization of Ambient Air Quality in the Marcellus Shale Region: P. DeCarlo, J. Goetz, E. Fortner, J. Wormhoudt, P. Massoli, C. Floerchinger, W. Brooks, B. Knighton, S. Herndon, C. Kolb, E. Knipping, S. Shaw Measurement of Air Quality Impacts During Hydraulic Fracturing on a Marcellus Shale Well Pad in Greene County, Pennsylvania: N. Pekney, G. Veloski, M. Reeder, J. Tamilia, R. Diehl, R. W. Hammack Dynamics of Marcellus Shale Environmental Health and Safety Incident Reporting in Pennsylvania: D. Glosser, D. Bain Reductive Weathering of Black Shale During Hydraulic Fracturing and Release of Barium: M. Sharma, D. J. Renock, J. D. Landis Break Real-Time Monitoring System for Evaluating Long-Term Variability in Methane in Domestic Water Wells in Northeast Pennsylvania: C. Whisman, D. McElreath, B. Smith, C. Olmsted, R. Wardrop, D. Good Lines-of-Evidence for the Investigation of Regional Groundwater Quality in Areas of Active Marcellus Shale Gas Extraction, Pennsylvania, USA: L. J. Molofsky, J. A. Connor, A. S. Wylie, T. Wagner, S. K. Farhat

2:40 3:25

3:45

1:40

4:05 4:25

2:00

2:20

4:45

2:40 3:25

THEME 1 Shale Plays of the Americas (Non-U.S.) (AAPG/EMD) Room 319/320/321 Co-Chairs: F. Walles and S. Egenhoff

3:45

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

681

4:05

4:25

4:45

Experiments to Better Understand Pennsylvanias Gas Migration Problem: A. Iannacchione, J. Vandenbossche, D. Janssen Use of Remote Sensing Technologies to Detect Surface and Near-Surface Stray Gas Occurrence and Potential Migration Pathways in Tioga County, Pennsylvania: B. J. McKee, C. Beasley Natural Variations of Dissolved Methane in an Area of Accelerating Marcellus Shale Gas Development in North Central West Virginia: S. Sharma, M. L. Mulder, T. R. Carr

3:25 3:45

4:05 4:25

4:45

TBD Enrichment Patterns of Various Coexisting Energy Resources and their Correlation in Ordos Basin, NW China: Y. Wang Integrated Geosciences for Optimal Hydraulic Fracturing of Shale Reservoirs: M. H. Tran, Y. N. Abousleiman Settling the Eighth Continent Three Steps to Mankinds Colonization of the Moon: B. L. Cutright, W. A. Ambrose Welcome to Barsoom: Bad Martian Astrogeology and Wrong Pubic Perceptions (18701970): D. T. King Jr

THEME 6 Porosity Creation in Carbonate Reservoirs through Burial Corrosion and Other Burial and Hydrothermal Processes How Important Is It? (AAPG/SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: P. Wright, P. Harris and J. W. Bishop 1:15 1:20 1:40 2:00 Introductory Remarks Carbonate Dissolution and Porosity Development in the Burial (Mesogenetic) Environment: V. P. Wright, P. Harris Subsurface Corrosion of Calcite and Dolomite by FaultSourced Hydrothermal Fluids: L. B. Smith How Important is the Impact of Burial Corrosion on Carbonate Reservoirs? Learnings from Case Studies: C. Taberner Styles of Burial Diagenetic Porosity Modification on the Arabian Plate: C. Hollis, A. Al Hajri Break Porosity-Conservative, Burial-Related Diagenesis and Reservoir Quality: Upper Jurassic Hadriya Reservoir, Berri Field, Saudi Arabia: R. B. Koepnick Burial Cementation and Dissolution in Carboniferous Platform-Top, Slope and Basinal Facies, Tengiz Field, Kazakhstan: J. F. Collins, D. A. Katz, P. Harris, W. Narr Late Burial Dissolution in the Kerendan Carbonate Platform, Oligocene, Central Borneo: A. Saller Evaluating the Role of Meteoric Karst vs. Burial Corrosion in an Offshore Indian Carbonate Field: M. Oates, V. Chandra What Laboratory-Induced Dissolution Trends Tell us About Diagenetic Trends and Reservoir Properties of Carbonate Rocks: T. Vanorio, Y. Ebert, D. Grombacher

THEME 8 Basin Analysis, Sedimentation and Tectonics II (SEPM) Room 408/409/410 Co-Chairs: D. Kamola and C. Jackson 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Defining Sequence Stratigraphy, Facies, and Stratal Patterns in Mudrock Systems: Understanding the Controls, Methodologies, and Realities: S. C. Ruppel, H. Rowe Influence of Rift Tectonics on Halokinesis and Deposition of Net-Transgressive Shallow Marine Sandstone Reservoirs: Upper Jurassic, Cod Terrace, Norwegian North Sea: A. Mannie, C. A. Jackson, G. J. Hampson The Miocene Tipping Point: Triggers for Rivers, Deltas, Deepwater Fans, and an Exceptional Global Hydrocarbon Endowment: J. W. Snedden Deltaic and Shallow Marine Sediment Accumulation under Spatially and Temporally Variable Accommodation Associated with Structural Growth: Data from the Cretaceous Frontier Formation of the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA: C. Fielding, A. J. Hutsky, T. J. Hurd Break Salt Tectonics and Turbidite Interactions: Miocene Deepwater Depositional Systems, Offshore Angola: A. Oluboyo, R. Gawthorpe, K. Bakke, F. Hadler-Jacobsen Evolution of the Mesozoic Qamdo (Changdu) Basin, Eastern Tibet: Linkages between Sedimentation, Climate, and Regional Tectonics: F. Shang, A. Weislogel, G. Sun Structural Controls on the Development of Eocene Lake Gosiute and Lake Uinta, Southwest Wyoming, Northwest Colorado, and Eastern Utah: R. C. Johnson Sedimentologic and Stratigraphic Effects of Episodic Structural Activity During the Phanerozoic in the Hugoton Embayment, Kansas USA: W. L. Watney, J. Youle, D. E. Hedke, P. Gerlach, R. P. Sorenson, M. K. Dubois, L. Nicholson, T. Hansen, D. Koger, R. Baker Stratigraphy and Petroleum Potential of the Bakken Three Forks Petroleum System: Northeastern Montana: A. L. Franklin, S. Sonnenberg

1:40

2:20 2:40 3:25

2:00

2:20

3:45

4:05 4:25

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:45

4:05

4:25 THEME 11 Insights on Petroleum Production/Astrogeology (AAPG) Room 407 Co-Chairs: D. Carulli and B. Schuller 1:15 1:20 1:40 Introductory Remarks World Oil Supply In Transition: W. L. Kelley, R. S. Bishop* The Hydrocarbon Migration and Accumulation Model of Shallow Layers in Sub-Sag, Slope and Salient of Continental Rift Basin: A Case Study of Huanghekou Sag in Bohai Bay Basin: L. Chen, L. Tian, X. Zhou, C. Niu, X. Zeng Reconciling Reported Well Locations in Historic Records of the Trenton Oil and Gas Field of Indiana: C. W. Zuppann, D. Jacob, I. Willett-Jacob, L. Montgrain, C. Dintaman, R. Powell, S. J. Keller Application of Fingerprinting Bacteria DNA in Crude Oil For Evaluating the Reservoir: N. Chegenizadeh, A. Hayatdavoudi*, A. Chistoserdov Break 4:45

2:00

THEME 4 Conventional Oil and Gas Fields II (AAPG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: R. W. Lynch and E. Rothman 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Expert Systems for Gas Production Prediction from Hydraulically Fractured Horizontal Wells Completed in Shale Gas Reservoirs and Establishing Equivalencies Between Different Hydraulic Fracture Representations: N. Siripatrachai, K. Bodipat, T. Ertekin

2:20

2:40

682

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

1:40

2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05

4:25 4:45

Practical Implementation of Stratigraphic Compartmentalization in Turbidite Lobe Reservoirs: A. Bertoncello, R. Mann, B. Kilsdonk Fault Damage Zones-Observations, Dynamic Modeling and Implications on Fluid Flow: M. Johri, M. Zoback, E. M. Dunham, P. Hennings 3-D Near-Wellbore Structural Modeling Based On High Resolution, Logging While Drilling Borehole Image Analysis: An Example From Sichuan Basin, China: Y. Yang, C. Miller, P. Marza, J. Zhao, A. Zhou, Y. Yang Break Core Driven Hierarchical Facies Modeling of Shoreface Environments: A Case Study from Offshore Sabah: S. K. Sharma, M. Chin, T. Basu, R. Bhargava, R. Henson, L. Jiang, M. B. Shuhaimi, L. Vizzini Reducing the Risk of EOR in Early Cretaceous Eolian Sandstone Reservoirs: The Impact of Geological Heterogeneity (Huitrin Formation, Chihuido de la Sierra Negra Field, Neuquen Basin, Argentina): E. Morettini, A. R. Thompson, D. Ancheta, S. Dufour, A. Lopez Gibson, B. Ruyu, M. Valenzuela, M. Delsahd Horizontal Well Technology Applications for Improved Reservoir Depletion, Kern River Oil Field: N. J. Shotts, G. J. McNaboe* Assigning Volumes for Realistic Assessment of Value in Multiple-Lease Prospects or Discoveries: C. D. Norman When Diagenesis Severely Modified Reservoir Characters: A Unique Carbonate Reservoir from Alur Siwah Field, Indonesia: M. Ricardo, I. Y. Syarifuddin, E. Adhitiawan, N. Nurul, M. Miftahurochman, F. F. Baskaraputra, L. Luqman, Y. Yanto, J. C. Lumban Tobing

Order Cycle, Bogda Mountains, NW China: J. Obrist, W. Yang, Q. Feng Parent Source Material of Calcium Bentonite in Smith County, Mississippi: K. Calhoun, D. W. Schmitz, B. L. Kirkland, J. May Upper Callovian to Oxfordian Muddy Supersequence of Southern Adriatic Platform, Croatia: B. Govoni, A. Husinec, J. Read Sedimentology and Depositional Environments of the Wadesboro Sub-Basin, Eastern Piedmont, North Carolina: Implications for Hydrocarbon Resource Potential: S. Brazell, J. Diemer Dune or Dune-Like Cross-Stratification in Deep-Marine Sandstones of the Neoproterozoic Windermere Supergroup, Cariboo Mountains, British Columbia, Canada: O. Al-Mufti, B. Arnott A Log-based Subsurface Correlation of the D and J Sandstone to Surface Equivalents in Southeastern Colorado: Y. Al-refaei, J. Holbrook

THEME 1 Resource Plays I (AAPG/EMD) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: H. Cander and R. Blood How Common Are Naturally Occurring Microfractures in Organic-Rich Mudrocks? Observations from Samples Prepared with Ar-Ion Cross-Section Polishing: R. M. Reed Review of Traditional and New Maturity Indicators Differences and Complementarities: J. Chatellier, R. Perez Bottom Current Deposition and Sediment Reworking in the Boquillas/Eagle Ford Fm: Val Verde County, West Texas, USA: G. Frebourg, S. C. Ruppel, R. G. Loucks A Sequence Stratigraphic Framework for the Mancos Shale, Uinta Basin, UT: Identifying Prospective Intervals within an Emerging Natural Gas Resource: A. McCauley, L. Birgenheier, R. Ressetar Integration of Depositional Facies and Sequence Stratigraphy in Characterizing Unconventional Reservoirs: Eagle Ford Shale, South Texas: S. Workman, M. Grammer Sweet Spot Mapping of the Barnett Shale Play, Fort Worth Basin, Texas: Q. Fu, S. Horvath, E. Potter, F. Roberts, S. Tinker, W. Fisher Modes of Oil Production from Monterey Formation, California: Unconventional or Just Harder to Produce?: M. E. Tennyson A New Log Evaluation Method to Predict Rich Blocks for Tight Sand Oil: X. Li, C. Zhou, Y. Shi, C. Li Diagenesis and Reservoir Quality in the Montney Formation in British Columbia A Major Siltstone Reservoir in Western Canada: N. Vaisblat, N. Harris, J. Zonneveld Stratigraphy and Petroleum Potential of the Niobrara Formation and underlying Late Cretaceous Mancos Group, Piceance Basin, Northwest Colorado, USA: M. C. Krueger, S. Sonnenberg Compositional Features of Molecular Compounds of the UltraDeep Condensate Oil, Bohai Bay Basin, China: G. Y. Zhu, G. Zhu, S. Zhang, H. Wang, N. Weng Hydrocarbon Preservation in Cambrian and Neoproterozoic Petroleum Systems: Potential Risks for the Reward in Conventional and Unconventional Plays: M. A. Everett Source Rock Reservoirs Present a Unique Petroleum System: K. E. Williams THEME 1 Resource Plays II (AAPG/EMD) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: H. Cander and R. Blood

Monday Afternoon Poster Sessions

Presenters in booths: 2:30 p.m.4:00 p.m. SEPM Student Research Poster Session Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: R. Sarg, A. Husinec and H. E. Harper The Cretaceous-Paleogene Boundary Unit, Deep-Water Gulf of Mexico: Character, Distribution, and Relation to the Chicxulub Impact: J. C. Sanford, J. W. Snedden Application of CT-Scan Data to the Study of Bioturbation Features in Cores of the New Albany Shale in Indiana: D. Riese, J. Schieber Floodplain Facies in a Paleo-Coastal Wetland: Cretaceous Ferron-Notom Delta, Utah: O. A. Famubode, J. Bhattacharya Ichnology and Sedimentology of the Lower Permian Mackellar Formation at Turnabout Ridge and Buckley Island, Beardmore Glacier, Central Transantarctic Mountains (CTAM), Antarctica: A Shallow Deltaic Marine Environment: A. Jackson, S. Hasiotis, P. Flaig, J. Isbell Evolution of the Calcareous Nannofossil Genus Biscutum in the Cretaceous: B. Brace, D. Watkins Linked Evolution of the Holocene Mitchell River Megafan and Delta, Gulf of Carpentaria, Australia: T. I. Lane, R. A. Nanson, B. Ainsworth, B. Vakarelov, K. Amos Bioerosion of Mesophotic Reefs in the U.S. Virgin Islands: D. K. Weinstein, J. S. Klaus, T. B. Smith, R. P. Reid, W. E. Kiene A Fluvially Dominated Deltaic System from the Turonian Frontier Formation of the Vernal Delta Complex, Dinosaur National Monument, Utah and Colorado: A. Hutsky, C. Fielding Facies Architecture of Meandering Fluvial Riffle Elements, Ferron Sandstone of Utah: S. T. Anderson, D. R. Kerr Mixed Fluvial and Loess Deposits in an Intracontinental Rift Basin, Mid-Permian (Wordian-Capitanian) Quanzijie Low-

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

683

 New Reserves is An Old Field, The Niobrara Resource Play in the Wattenberg Field, Denver Basin, Colorado: S. Sonnenberg Surficial Fracture Mapping for Unconventional Reservoirs Rio Puerco Structure, New Mexico: S. M. Reynolds Upper Devonian Lower Mississippian Stratigraphy of Northwestern Montana: A Petroleum System Approach: P. Schietinger, S. Sonnenberg Quasi-Continuous Accumulation: A New Model for Large Tight Oil Field Formation: J. Zhao, Y. Bai, Q. Cao Genesis and Characteristics of the Lower Triassic Tight Reservoirs, West Slope of Mahu Area, Junggar Basin: L. Yin, G. Wang, Y. Chen, B. Wang, D. Xu, X. Bai, Y. Huang, X. Chen Emerging Oil Shale Plays in China: Q. Li, M. Chen, F. Wang Lower Silurian Shale Gas Potential in Chongqing Southwest China: Geological Settings and Characteristics of Longmaxi Formation: Y. Zhu, L. Tan, D. Li Shale Gas Prospects of Cambay Basin, India: S. Mishra, A. M. Dayal*, D. M. Tiwari, D. J. Patil Distribution and Controlling Factors of Tight Oil in Deep Continental Fault Lacustrine Basin in East ChinaA Case Study on Nanpu Depression in Bohaiwan Basin: H. Jiang, S. Hu, Z. Wang, R. Wang, T. Wang, H. Zheng Albertas Unconventional Shale Resource Potential: A. Beaton, D. Rokosh, F. J. Hein* Geochemical Analysis on Prospective Gas Shale Reservoirs at Perth Basin, Western Australia: H. Jafary Dargahi, R. Rezaee

THEME 5 Alluvial-Fluvial Deltaic-Eolian Siliciclastics II (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. L. Aschoff and B. J. Willis Spatial Variability in Eolian Dune and Interdune Morphology in the RubAl-Khali Dune Field, Saudi Arabia: Implications for Reservoir Prediction: M. A. Almasrahy, N. Mountney Effects of Early Eocene Hyperthermal Events and Laramide Tectonics on the Composition of Fluvial Sandstones in the Uinta Basin, UT: E. Jones, P. Plink-Bjorklund New High-Definition Microelectrical Images Shed Light on Complex Paleozoic Nubian Sandstone Reservoir: E. Haddad, N. El-Defrawy, M. Hussein, A. Hassan, R. J. Laronga, E. Hassan, M. Nassar The Forebulge Migration and Its Influence on Sequence Stratigraphic Architecture of Back-Bulge in Triassic, Tarim Basin: W. Tang, Y. Wang, L. Zhang Identification and Prediction of the High Heterogeneous Channel Sand in Southern Turgay Basin: H. Yueying, W. Hongmei*, T. Wenyuan, M. Aling Shallow-Water, Nonclinoformal Deltaic Systems in Lacustrine Qijia Depression, Songliao Basin, China: H. Zeng, X. Zhu, R. Zhu, Q. Zhang High-resolution Sequence Stratigraphy and Seismic Sedimentologic Characteristics of a Fluvial Depositional System, Guantao Formation of Lower Neogene, Wuqiang Oilfield, Jizhong Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, China: L. Jiang, Y. Ji, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhou The Characterization of the Transgressive Depositional Packages to Aid Reservoir Geometry and Connectivity Prediction: North Kutai Lama Field, East Kalimantan, Indonesia: C. M. Eka Putra, E. Septama* Identification of Fans and their Petroleum Significance in the Northern Subbasin, Melut Basin: Z. Shi, L. Fang Quantitative Empirical Relationships for the Prediction of Subsurface Fluvial Sedimentary Architecture: L. Colombera, N. Mountney, W. D. McCaffrey A Petrophysical Model to Quantify Pyrite Volumes and to Adjust Resistivity Responses to Account for Pyrite Conductivity: M. Holmes, A. Holmes, D. Holmes

THEME 5 Alluvial-Fluvial Deltaic-Eolian Siliciclastics I (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. L. Aschoff and B. J. Willis Modeling Facies Distributions and Heterogeneity in Eolian Reservoir Successions: H. G. Romain, N. Mountney Controls on Fluvial Sedimentary Architecture in Salt-Walled Mini-basins: S. G. Banham, J. H. Venus, N. Mountney Development of Metrics to Test Correlation of Patterns in Channel Belt Successions with Shoreline Trajectories: L. Stright, C. L. Johnson, W. Benhallam, A. Turner Evaluating Process Interpretations of Multistory Fluvial Sand Bodies: E. P. Chamberlin, E. Hajek Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis of the Drip Tank Member of the Straight Cliffs Formation: A New Look at the Leading Nonmarine Models: W. Schellenbach, T. Lawton Avulsion-Generated Spatio-Temporal Arrangement of Fluvial Sandbodies, Blackhawk Formation, Wasatch Plateau, Utah: H. Sahoo, M. Gani, N. D. Gani, G. J. Hampson, A. Rittersbacher, A. Ranson, J. A. Howell, S. J. Buckley Distributary Channel Geometry and Sediment Distribution in a Modern, Monsoonal, Mixed-Process Delta, Gulf of Carpentaria, NE Australia: R. A. Nanson, B. Ainsworth, S. E. Dashtgard, T. I. Lane, B. Vakarelov Extruded or Depositional? Sub-Aqueous Sand Extrusion Dynamics: Discrete to Sheets: J. Ross, J. Peakall, G. M. Keevil Reconstruction of Channel and Barform Architecture in a Pennsylvanian Fluvio-Deltaic Succession: Brimham Grit, Northern England: R. Soltan, N. Mountney, W. D. McCaffrey, D. A. Paton Chemostratigraphic Recognition of a Disconformity in Mississippian Strata of the Northeast Appalachians, New Brunswick, Canada: N. Islam, D. Keighley A Study on Hydrocarbon Accumulation Characteristics of Beach-bar Sandstone: Southern Slope of Dongying Sag, Jiyang Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, China: S. Guo, L. Tan, C. Lin, H. Li, X. Lv

THEME 6 Carbonate Reservoirs and New Plays (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: S. Guidry, C. Steffensen and S. Lepley Sedimentology, Stratigraphy and Structural Signatures of Eocene-Miocene Carbonates, North Coast, Jamaica: Regional Tectonic Implications and Hydrocarbon Exploration: K. R. Tankoo, S. F. Mitchell, L. Brown New Constraints for Petroleum Accumulation Models in the Marine Carbonate Strata and Implications for Frontier Petroleum Exploration in China: Z. Jin Evaluating Ooid Grainstone Geobodies of the Grayburg in the Guadalupe Mountains, NM: A. Parker Seismic Characterization and Exploration of Karst Cave in Tarim Basin: C. Luo, F. Xue* Carbonate Hosted Sulfide Mineralization in the Southwest Davis Zinc Field, Southern Oklahoma: N. E. Gentry, J. M. Gregg Reef Development Distribution and its Controlling Factor in Xisha Offshore: Y. Taotao, L. Fuliang, W. Bin Tertiary Lacustrine Algal Limestone Mixed Carbonate Reservoir, Qaidam Basin, China: Z. Fan The Impact of the Messinian Salinity Crisis on Exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean; New Insights from Comprehensive

684

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

Seismic Facies Analysis of the Messinian Evaporite Complex: H. Allen, A. Fraser, C. Jackson Characterization of an Oligocene Reservoir in Southeast Kurdistan, Iraq: J. Hsieh, N. Begin, R. Deutscher The Siluro-Devonian Succession Along the Southern Flank of the Sangamon Arch, Central Illinois: Recent Discoveries and Controls on Reservoir Development: Y. Lasemi The Other Lower Cretaceous Carbonate Shelf-MarginTrends in the Gulf of Mexico: Winn and Calvin Limestones: R. G. Loucks, P. Sullivan, L. Zahm, C. Kerans THEME 6 Unconventional Carbonate Reservoirs (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: M. Grammer and H. G. Machel Paleotectonic Controls on Structure in Southern Sand Wash Basin and the Potential Influence on Fracture Orientation and Distribution within the Niobrara Formation: An Integrated Seismic and Geologic Approach: V. Lin, R. Sarg, S. Sonnenberg Sediment Gravity Flow Deposits in the Avalon Shale Play of the Delaware Basin, West Texas and Southeast New Mexico: D. Stolz, K. Mouton, R. H. Goldstein, E. Franseen, J. Doveton Stratigraphic Controls on Reservoir Properties, Cretaceous Niobrara Formation, DJ Basin, Colorado: M. Deacon, K. McDonough, L. Brinton, S. Friedman, J. Dunn, R. Lieber The Uteland Butte Member of the Eocene Green River Formation: An Emerging Unconventional Carbonate Tight Oil Play in the Uinta Basin, Utah: M. D. Vanden Berg, C. D. Morgan, T. C. Chidsey, P. Nielsen A Novel Workflow for Fracture Characterization and Well Placement using BHI Data in WBM and OBM in Deep Unconventional Reservoirs of North Kuwait: M. Acharya, S. Chakravorty*, S. A. Al-Ajmi, G. K. Joshi, A. Aviantara, Q. Dashti, E. H. Al-Anzi Compaction Properties of Fine-Grained Carbonate Sediments and Implications for the Bone Spring and Cutoff Formations: G. S. Hurd, C. Kerans, P. Flemings, J. Schneider Reece, X. Janson Ichnotaphonomy in Dolomitization and Characterization of Mississippian Mudstone Reservoirs: Hydrocarbon Potential and Flow Dynamics in Upper Midale Beds, Weyburn Oilfield, Saskatchewan: A. D. Keswani, S. Pemberton Depositional Environments of Organic-Rich Calcareous Shale in the Western Anticosti Basin: the Upper Ordovician Macasty Formation, Quebec, Canada: A. R. Kulkarni, K. Hattori, A. Desrochers THEME 9 Exploration in Salt and Deep Water Structural Systems (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Chair: E. Ukar Modeling the Structural Evolution of East Texas Based Upon Interpretation of Regional 2-D Seismic Lines: O. N. Pearson, J. J. Miller Secondary Basins and Sediment Pathways in Green Canyon, Deepwater Gulf of Mexico: V. Moore, D. Hinton Evolution of the Jeanne dArc Basin, Offshore Newfoundland, Canada: 3-D Seismic Evidence for >100 Million Years of Rifting: B. E. Serrano-Suarez, M. O. Withjack, R. W. Schlische Salt Tectonics in the Sivas Basin (Turkey): Outstanding Seismic Analogues: J. Ringenbach, J. Salel, C. Kergaravat, C. Ribes, C. Bonnel, J. Callot Salt Tectonics in the Sivas Basin (Turkey): 3-D Visualization of Minibasins and Salt Diapirs: J. Callot, C. Bonnel, C. Ribes, C. Kergaravat, H. Temiz, J. Ringenbach, J. Salel

Supra-Salt Extensional Fault Evolution in the Santos Basin (Brazil): A. B. Tvedt, C. A. Jackson, A. Rotevatn, R. Gawthorpe, H. Fossen THEME 9 Fault Analysis and Fault Controlled Traps (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Goode and D. Wolf Large Scale Echelon Faults on the Shaleitian Uplift in Bohai Oilfield, Offshore Eastern China: T. Lixin, R. Zhang, F. Jianhua, X. Zhou, C. Xu Strike-slip Duplex Structures: A Case Study from the Bohai Oilfield Offshore Eastern China: C. Xu, R. Zhang, X. Zhou, X. Zhou The Relationships between S Shape Deformation Characteristics of Tan-Lu Fault Zone and the Differences of Hydrocarbon Accumulation in Liaodong Bay: X. Huang, C. Xu, X. Zhou, G. Wei, Z. Zhang, Y. Chai Characteristics, Mechanism of Faults and Impact on the Trap in Bachu Area of Tarim Basin, NW China: Y. Wang, Z. Zhang The Control Function of Synsedimentary Faulting on the Tertiary Stratum in Liaozhong Depression, East China: S. Xia Segment-wise Strike-Slip Fault on Tazhong Northern Slope and Preferential Hydrocarbon Migration Taking Zhonggu-8 Strikeslip Fault as an Example: J. Zhou, X. Lu, H. Yu, X. Lan Insights into Evolution of Inverted Normal Fault Systems of the Northwestern Gippsland Basin, Australia from Seismic and Geomechanical Analyses: E. Swierczek, S. Holford, R. King, G. Backe, A. Mitchell Crossing Conjugate Normal Faults and Hydrocarbon Accumulation in the Offshore Bohai Bay Basin, Eastern China: Y. Yu, X. Zhou, C. Xu Structural Analysis of the Kingri Fault Utilizing Remote Sensing Techniques; Pakistan: R. Gohar, K. Irfan, A. Sajjad, Q. Abdul Structural Characteristic of Oblique Convergent Strike-Slip Faulting: A Case Study of The Seram Trough, Indonesia: B. Sapiie, M. Hadiana, A. Kurniawan Influence of Pre-Existing Strike-Slip Faults on Fault Development During Subsequent Phases of Deformation: C. Putra, R. W. Schlische*, M. O. Withjack Characteristics and Evolution of a Strike-Slip Fault Zone and its Function on the Control of Petroleum Accumulation: A Case Study from the Tanlu Fault Zone Within the Bohai Bay Basin, China: C. Teng, H. Zou, F. Hao The Relationships Between Hydrocarbon Accumulation of Neogene Shallow Water Delta and Tanlu Fault Zone in the Huanghekou Sag, Offshore Bohai Bay Basin, Eastern China: X. Zhang, X. Zhou The Formation Period of Liaodong Uplift in Liaodong Bay, Bohai, Offshore China: J. Peng, X. Zhou, C. Xu Transpressional Structures Along the Eastern Flank of the Pamir Salient: Z. Wang, X. Wang THEME 10 VSP, Microseismic, and Rock Physics Methods Relevant to Exploration Geophysics II (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Chair: T. Jordan Seismic Facies Analysis on the Condition of Sequence and Palaeogeomorphology: P. Liu, X. Zhou, X. Wang, D. Guan, C. Li, H. Zhang, H. Zhang Identification of Fractured Basement Reservoir Using Integrated Well Data and Seismic Attributes (Case Study at Ruby Field, North West Java Basin, Indonesia): M. Suardana

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

685

 The Application of Rock Physics and Pre-Stack AVO Analysis for Gas Identification in Deepwater Sediments, Rakhine Bain, Offshore Myanmar: G. Zuo The Use of Shallow Subsurface Wells and Collected Multi-offset VSP for Characterizing the Black Warrior Basin: W. C. Harris, A. M. Goodliffe, J. Pashin River Channel Sand Body Characterization by Integrating Well Logs and Seismic Attributes Analysis in Dense Well Pattern Case Study of Eastern Beierxi Block in SaBei Development Area, Daqing Oilfield, China: S. Xia Research and Application of Formation Image Analysis Technology in Paleogene Reservoir Prediction, Bohai Bay, China: D. Jifeng Conduits Characterization for Fractured Reservoirs Using SubSeismic Faults Convergence Intensities Mapping: A. El Fouly Study for Fissure Eruption of Volcanic Seismic Reservoirology An Example from Northwest Margin of Junggar Basin: P. Wei, J. Pan, K. Tan, D. Xu Gene Expression Programming A Tool to Estimate Sonic Log Distributions and Overpressured Zones: C. Cranganu, E. Bautu Karst Reservoir Subdivision and Identification on Hydrocarbon Ordovician Formation of Tarim Basin, China: W. Ke, G. Zhang, L. Zhang, H. Jiang

THEME 3 Emerging Oil and Gas Plays Worldwide (AAPG) Room 317/318 Co-Chairs: C. G. Willan and C. Eckert 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks The Gulf of Mexico Basin: A Natural Laboratory of Sedimentary Processes, New and Evolving Exploration Plays, and New Insights on the Mesozoic Framework: J. W. Snedden, W. E. Galloway, C. Fulthorpe, P. E. Ganey-Curry, J. Xu, J. C. Sanford, I. Norton, T. L. Whiteaker, H. C. Olson, R. Cunningham Sandstone Trends, Sequence Framework, and Depositional Settings of the Upper Cretaceous Woodbine Group: Eaglebine Play, Southern East Texas Basin: T. F. Hentz, W. A. Ambrose Evaluation of the Tyler Formation, Williston Basin, Western North Dakota: I. M. Stevanovic The Western Utah Fold-Thrust Belt: A Frontier Petroleum Province: D. M. Herring, D. C. Greene Break The Final North America Conventional Oil Frontier: The Intracratonic Hudson Bay Basin in the Canadian Arctic: D. Lavoie, N. Pinet, J. Dietrich, B. P. Kohn, S. Zhang, K. Hu, D. Armstrong, M. Nicolas, E. Asselin, R. Bertrand, M. J. Duchesne, V. Decker, J. Galloway, J. Reyes, V. Brake Angolas Deep and Ultra Deep Water Potential: C. Abu, N. Herbst, M. Francis, G. Milne, G. Brown, M. Inkollu The Identification and Implication of Injectites in the Shwe Gas Field, Offshore Northwestern Myanmar: S. Cossey, D. Kim*, S. Yang, H. Jung Emerging Play Types and Structural Styles in the Equatorial Atlantic Transform Margin of Africa; Case Studies from Deep-Water Ghana and Ivory Coast Basins: O. S. Matthew, O. Ajayi, H. Adigwe Continental Margins of the Equatorial South Atlantic: R. Fainstein, W. Ueipass Mohriak

8:25

8:45 9:05 9:25 10:10

10:30

Tuesday Morning Oral Sessions

10:50

THEME 1 The Bakken Petroleum System (AAPG/EMD) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Co-Chairs: M. D. Sonnenfeld and S. G. Crews 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks The Sequence Stratigraphy and Production Potential of the Pronghorn Member of the Bakken Formation: S. Sonnenberg, R. Johnson* Characterization for Source Rock Potential of the Bakken Shales in the Williston Basin, North Dakota and Montana: H. Jin, S. Sonnenberg Parshall Field: Inferences From New Data Regarding Bakken Hydrocarbon Generation and Migration: J. Newman, J. Edman*, J. LeFever, J. Howe Reassessment of Undiscovered Resources in the Bakken Formation, Williston Basin, North Dakota and Montana: S. Gaswirth, K. Marra, T. Cook Break Influencing Productivity in the Bakken Play, Williston Basin: C. Theloy, S. Sonnenberg Integrated Hydrocarbon Geochemical Characterization and Pore Size Distribution Analysis for Bakken Shales, Williston Basin, USA: T. Zhang, J. Wiggins-Camacho, S. C. Ruppel, X. Sun Predicting Natural Fractures in Unconventional Reservoirs: Examples of Data Validation Techniques From the Bakken System, Mountrail County, North Dakota: S. J. Buckner, R. Nelson, S. Bayer, F. A. Lozano, J. Chen, F. Rasdi Sedimentology and Petroleum Potential of the Devonian/ Mississippian Three Forks and Bakken Formations and Equivalent Strata in Central and Western Montana: M. H. Hofmann, M. S. Hendrix, T. Nagase Assessing Undiscovered Resources in the Devonian Three Forks Formation, Williston Basin, USA: K. Marra, S. Gaswirth, T. Cook

11:10

11:30

8:25

8:45

THEME 5 SEPM Research Symposium-Depositional Systems and Sedimentology of Shale and Tight-Sand Reservoirs I Room 319/320/321 Co-Chairs: B. Zempolich, A. Carroll and S. Egenhoff 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Geochemical Characterization of Stratigraphic Sequences in the Horn River Shale, Middle and Upper Devonian, Northeastern British Columbia, Canada: T. Dong, M. Kennedy, N. Harris A Geochemical Analysis of Five Late Middle Pennsylvanian Cores (Carbondale Group) From the Illinois Basin, Southern Indiana: C. M. Broach, W. P. Gilhooly, W. S. Elliott, C. Smith A Geochemical and Mineralogical Investigation of Parasequences in the Camp Run Member of the Upper Devonian New Albany Shale: S. Spencer, J. Schieber Three Scales of Sequence Stratigraphy in the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale and Associated Strata: D. Kohl, R. Slingerland, M. Arthur, T. Engelder Break The Eagle Ford Outcrops of West Texas: A Laboratory for Understanding Heterogeneities, As Well As Sequence Stratigraphic Controls, on Unconventional Mudstone Reservoirs: A. D. Donovan, T. Staerker, A. Pramudito, M. J. Corbett, C. M. Lowery, A. M. Romero, R. Gardner Regional Outcrop to Subsurface Correlation of the Montney Formation: An Evolving Understanding of Lower

9:05

9:25 10:10 10:30

8:25

8:45

10:50

9:05

11:10

9:25 10:10

11:30

10:30

686

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

10:50

11:10 11:30

Mesozoic Tectono-stratigraphic Evolution in western Canada: J. Zonneveld, T. F. Moslow High Frequency Sequence Stratigraphic Surfaces and Associated Reservoir Facies in Lower Cretaceous Ratawi Shale Formation in Kuwait: S. K. Tanoli Characterization of the Union Springs Formation, Finger Lakes Region, NY: C. Karaca, T. E. Jordan The Relative Roles of Channel Types and Facies for Reservoir Characterization in Fluvial Tight-Gas Sands, Upper Williams Fork Formation, Piceance Basin, Colorado: B. McDowell, P. Plink-Bjorklund

8:45

9:05 9:25 10:10

10:30

THEME 10 3-D Seismic Attribute Method-based Interpretations Relevant to Stratigraphic and Fault Geometry of Hydrocarbon Accumulations (AAPG) Room 403/404/405 Co-Chairs: J. R. Morris and B. Lipinski 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Using Geological Expression to Extract Geohazards: An Example from the Barnett Shale, Ft. Worth Basin, Texas: R. Martin, M. Halpin, T. Wooltorton* 3-D Surface Seismic Attribute and Prestack Impedance Inversion Characterization of the Red Fork Formation, Oklahoma, USA: Y. Del Moro, A. Fernandez, S. Verma, K. Marfurt Griffon Vultures, Golden Eagles and Buzzards: Integration of Reconnaissance AVO, EEI Attributes & PreSDM to De-Risk a Flight of Prospects, Greater Buzzard Area, UKCS: D. M. Dutton, L. Lu Seismic Attribute Expression of Differential Compaction: S. Chopra, K. Marfurt Break Petroelastic Seismic Inversion for Reservoir Modeling in the Vienna Basin: M. Koenig, E. Angerer, E. Rieser, R. Korinek Pre-Stack Data Prediction for Fluvial Reservoirs: Y. Yuelong, C. Hongtao, L. Yuhai, L. Tinghui, L. Bingling, B. Yuhua, S. Huimin Shale Gas Reservoir Characterization Workflows: S. Chopra, R. Sharma, J. Keay, K. Marfurt Reservoirs Characterizing Based on Spectral Difference Anomaly at Lower-Frequency on Multi-Angle Stacking Gathers: Case Studies from China: X. Chen, W. Zhong, Z. He Increasing Confidence of Seismic Derived Reservoir Parameters From a Large 3-D Merge: C. Skidmore, P. Porter, A. Porter, R. Early

10:50

11:10

11:30

8:25

The Great American Bank in Eastern Canada A Synthesis: D. Lavoie, A. Desrochers, G. Dix, I. Knight, O. Salad Hersi The Great American Carbonate Bank in the GreenlandScotland Sector: Death, Life and Birth: P. Smith, R. Raine* Break Digital Outcrop Model of Stratigraphy and Breccias of the Southern Franklin Mountains, El Paso, Texas: J. A. Bellian, C. Kerans, J. Repetski Petroleum Resources of the Great American Carbonate Bank (GACB) Lessons from Heterogeneous Ellenburger, Arbuckle, Knox, Prairie du Chien and Beekmantown Reservoirs, Diverse Traps, Unconformity Thinking: C. Sternbach The Geology of the Arbuckle Group in the Mid-Continent: Sequence Stratigraphy, Reservoir Development and the Potential for Hydrocarbon Exploration: R. D. Fritz, P. Medlock, M. Kuykendal, J. L. Wilson Effects, Influences and Controls of Sedimentology, Stratigraphy, Tectonics, Paleogeography and Diagenesis on Hydrocarbon and Mineral Accumulations in the CambrianOrdovician Knox Group in Kentucky: P. J. Gooding Mississippi Valley-Type Ore Deposits in the CambrianOrdovician Great American Carbonate Bank: J. M. Gregg, K. L. Shelton

8:45

THEME 6 Modern Carbonates (SEPM) Room 407 Co-Chairs: C. Kerans, E. Franseen and C. Iannello Bachtel 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Complex Patterns of Carbonate Sediment Deposition and Accretion Controlled by Suborbital Sea-Level Oscillations: K. L. Jackson, G. Eberli, S. B. Reid, P. Harris, K. L. Maier, D. F. McNeill Multi-Scale Geocellular Models of a Holocene Bahaman Oolitic Tidal Bar Belt: How Geologic Resolution Impacts Simulation Studies: J. Rush, E. C. Rankey, Y. Holubnyak A Comparative Study of the Origin of Carbonate Mud in Reefs and Carbonate Platforms Using Modern Samples From the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans: E. Gischler, S. Dietrich Back-Barrier Sediment Dynamics: A Major Control on Modeling Sediment Properties, Cyclicity and Depositional Profiles: Examples from the Arid Coastline of Qatar: J. Jameson, C. J. Strohmenger Break Carbonate Ramp Shoreface Coquina and Lagoonal Systems: Holocene of Northwestern Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico: E. C. Rankey, R. Garza-Perez, M. Naranjo-Garca Variability of Slope Morphology and Processes Along Southwestern Great Bahama Bank: A. Jo, G. P. Eberli, M. Grasmueck Insights into Quaternary Depositional and Diagenetic Processes on a Caribbean Atoll: N. J. Van Ee, G. P. Eberli, F. Anselmetti, P. Swart, E. Gischler The Contemporary Red Sea as an Analog for Ancient Carbonates in Rift Settings: S. J. Purkis, P. Harris, J. Ellis Ichnologically Influenced Porosity on a Holocene Isolated Platform: M. Mary, E. C. Rankey, T. Uriam

9:05 9:25 10:10

8:25

10:30

8:45

10:50 11:10

9:05

11:30

9:25 10:10

10:30 THEME 6 The Great American Carbonate Bank Geology and Economic Resources of the Cambro-Ordovician Sauk Megasequence (SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: W. A. Morgan, C. Sternbach, R. Fritz, J. Derby and S. Longacre 8:00 8:05 8:25 Introductory Remarks Sequence Stratigraphy of the Great American Carbonate Bank: W. A. Morgan Before the Great North American Carbonate Bank: A Complex Cambrian-Lower Ordovician Transgressive History Recorded in Siliciclastic Strata of the Potsdam Group, Southeast Laurentia: D. G. Lowe, B. Arnott

10:50

11:10 11:30

THEME 5 Sedimentology, Geomorphology & Stratigraphy of Coastal, Estuarine, and Nearshore Systems (SEPM) Room 408/409/410 Co-Chairs: D. Kamola, M. Fenster and M. Gani

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

687

8:00 8:05

8:25

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10

10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

Introductory Remarks Challenge the Norms: Fluvial Channel in Shallow Marine Environment. Is it Possible? A Case Study of A-1 Well in Central Luconia, Offshore Sarawak, Malaysia An Integrated Approach Combining Seismo-Stratigraphy and Seismic Attributes Analysis: S. S. Wafa, M. S. Mustafa, K. A. Kamarudzaman, D. H. Sapri, O. A. Mahmud Distribution and Dimensions of Reservoir Elements and Baffles in Shallow-Marine Reservoirs: C. H. Eide, J. A. Howell, S. J. Buckley Denver Basin Isolated Sandbodies: Signature of Dynamic Subsidence, Laramide Uplifts and Shoreline Transitions: P. Plink-Bjorklund, L. Kiteley Regional Tectonics, Sedimentary Processes and Global Oceanography in the Formation of a World-Class Reservoir: Insights From the Johan Sverdrup Giant Oilfield, Norway: M. Vigorito, O. J. Martinsen, A. Ndtvedt, Skjveland, A. Gregersson, R. Martin, J. Windelstad, S. Jrgenvg, M. Fjelland, T. Ferstad Break Geomorphology, Facies Character and Stratigraphic Architecture of an Ancient Sand-Prone Subaqueous Delta: Upper Jurassic Sognefjord Formation, Troll Field, Offshore Norway: S. Patruno, G. J. Hampson, C. Jackson Sequence-Stratigraphic and Depositional Framework of Wave-Influenced Deltaic Systems in the Lower and Middle Frio Formation, Redfish Bay, Corpus Christi, Texas: J. Zhang, W. A. Ambrose, M. I. Olariu Ancient Backwaters and Baylines: Slope Magnitude and its Control on Deltaic Facies Partitioning in Ancient Deltaic Systems: J. Bhattacharya Mud-Bed Thicknesses, Distributions and Cyclicity Along Channel Margins Across the Tidal-Fluvial Transition, Lower Fraser River, BC, Canada: A. D. La Croix, S. E. Dashtgard, J. A. MacEachern Paleosols of the Upper Devonian Foreknobs Formation of Western Virginia and Eastern West Virginia: D. O. Terry, W. McClung, K. A. Eriksson

10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

Geochemical Evolution of Flowback and Produced Water From Marcellus Shale Wells in Southwest Pennsylvania: E. L. Rowan, M. Engle, T. F. Kraemer 7Li of Saline Water: Northern Appalachian Basin and Gulf Coast Sedimentary Basin, USA: G. L. Macpherson, R. C. Capo, B. W. Stewart, T. Phan, K. Schroder, R. W. Hammack Organic Substances in Produced and Formation Water From Natural Gas Production in Coal and Shale: W. H. Orem, C. A. Tatu, M. Varonka, J. Pashin, M. Engle Effect of Impoundment Management Strategies on Microbial Communities and the Fate of Radionuclides: K. Gregory, A. Murali Mohan, R. A. Vidic

Tuesday Morning Poster Sessions

Presenters in booths: 9:00 a.m.10:30 a.m. Additional AAPG Student Research Poster Session Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: S. A. Waters and W. Hottman Late Cretaceous to Cenozoic Deformation at North AmericanCaribbean Plate Boundary in Northern Central America and its Effects on the Origin and Migration of Hydrocarbons: C. J. Sanchez, P. Mann, P. A. Emmet Fluvial Geomorphology Changes Linked to Tectonic Effects during the Late Eocene-Oligocene in the Northern Llanos Foreland Basin of Colombia: L. Torrado, P. Mann, J. Bhattacharya Crustal Structure of the Central Atlantic Rifted-Passive Margin from South Carolina to the Southeastern Bahamas: A First Step to Understand its Petroleum Potential: A. Dale, P. Mann, D. Bird Modeling Falling Stage Topset Aggradation and Shoreline Trajectories: Implications for Distinguishing Forced and Unforced Regressions in the Ancient Record: G. Prince, P. Burgess Origin and Composition of Fluids Responsible for Fault Controlled Dolomitization on the Hammam Faraun Fault Block, Gulf of Suez, Egypt: J. Hirani, H. Corlett, A. Eker, R. Gawthorpe, D. Hodgetts, C. Hollis, A. Rotevatn Investigation of the Regional Extent and Controlling Factors of Residual Oil Zones in the Permian Basin: L. M. West Integrated Sedimentary Geochemistry of a Cretaceous Potential Shallow Shale Gas Reservoir, Western Manitoba, Canada: S. Hosseininejad, P. Pedersen, R. Spencer, M. Nicolas Facies Architecture, Depositional Environments, and Sequence Stratigraphy of the Marble Falls Formation (Morrowan-Atokan), Central Texas: S. G. Wood, S. C. Ruppel, R. G. Loucks Variations in Depocenter Style Under Mid-Late Jurassic SaltInfluenced Rifting: Norwegian Central Graben, North Sea: Z. Ge, R. Gawthorpe, A. Rotevatn, J. Wonham Depositional Analysis of the Jurassic Norphlet Formation in Mississippi: Impact on Petroleum Potential Offshore: M. L. Jessee, A. Weislogel The Lateral Variability of Sequence Boundaries: A Regional 3-D Seismic Case Study from the Late Cenozoic Southern North Sea: R. Harding, M. Huuse, R. Gawthorpe Characterization of Thickness Anomalies Within the Three Forks and Bakken Formations, North Central North Dakota, USA: D. G. Cobb, S. Sonnenberg Integrated Stratigraphic and Structural Evolution of a FluvialDominated, Tide-Influenced Marginal Marine System, the North Malay Basin, Gulf of Thailand: K. Kumnerdsiri, B. Ainsworth, A. Mitchell, G. Backe Return to the Source: Mapping the Microstructure of Organic Matter and Pores in the Utica Shale: M. Murphy, D. R. Cole, J. Daniels, J. Sheets, S. Welch, A. M. Swift, D. Huber, J. Sosa

THEME 7 Water Risks and Mitigation Strategies in Unconventional Development (DEG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: S. Sharma and B. W. Stewart 8:00 8:05 8:25 Introductory Remarks Evolving Water Management Practices in Shale Gas Development: D. J. Soeder, R. S. Rodriguez* Using Strontium Isotopes to Test Stratigraphic Isolation of Injected and Formation Waters During Hydraulic Fracturing: C. A. Kolesar, R. C. Capo, A. J. Wall, B. W. Stewart, K. Schroder, R. W. Hammack Using Stable Isotopes to Detect Potential Inter-Formation Mixing of Fluids and Gases Following the Hydraulic Fracturing of Marcellus Shale Wells at NETLs Greene County Test Site in Southwestern Pennsylvania: S. Sharma, A. Sack, L. Bowman, K. Schroder, R. W. Hammack Microseismic Monitoring to Determine Fracture Height Growth During Hydraulic Fracturing at NETLs Marcellus Shale Test Site in Greene County, Pennsylvania: R. W. Hammack, W. Harbert*, J. Sams, H. Siriwardane Break Use of Perfluorocarbon Tracers to Detect Possible Upward Migration of Gas and Fluids From Hydraulically Fractured Marcellus Shale Wells at NETLs Greene County Test Site in Southwestern Pennsylvania: A. W. Wells, R. Diehl, R. W. Hammack

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10

688

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

 Fracture Identification and Analysis Using Seismic Attributes in Carbonate Reservoirs: Cimarrona Formation, Middle Magdalena Valley Basin, Colombia: J. M. Blanco, C. E. Padrn, H. I. Contreras Depositional Controls on the Distribution of Permian Phylloid Algal Bioherms in the Orogrande Basin, South Central New Mexico: J. E. Stautberg, K. Giles, G. Mack Applying GigaPan Robotoc Photo-Panorama Technology to Enhance Facies and Architectural Analyses of the Upper Cretaceous Schrader Bluff and Prince Creek Fms at Shivugak Bluffs, North Slope of Alaska, USA: D. A. van der Kolk, P. P. Flaig, S. Hasiotis, L. J. Wood Structural Geology and Depositional Environments of the Mardin Group Carbonates in the Cemberlitas Oil Field in Southeastern Anatolia, Turkey: O. Mulayim, I. Cemen Structural Evolution and Petroleum Potential of Putumayo Foreland Basin, Colombia, From Subsurface Mapping and 3-D Flexural Modeling: L. F. Pachon, P. Mann, N. Cardozo Petroleum Potential of Onland Basins in Hispaniola (Dominican Republic and Haiti) Based on Integration of Vintage Well and Seismic Reflection Data with Geochemical Data: J. Osmond, P. Mann, S. Pierce Regional Source-to-Sink Systems within Intra-Continental Rifts: The Importance of Fluvial Connectivity and Drainage Integration: J. Smith, R. Gawthorpe, S. H. Brocklehurst, E. Finch Exploration Significance of the Tectono-Stratigraphic Evolution of the Eastern Benin Basin, Offshore Nigeria: I. A. Etobro, M. P. Watkinson, M. W. Anderson A Fault Re-Activation Study in Deepwater Gulf of Mexico: A Coupled Modeling Approach: J. Brown, B. Hornby, M. Zoback Structural Geology of the Arkoma Basin-Frontal Ouachita Transition Zone, Waldron and Boles Quadrangles, Scott County, Western Arkansas: D. Yezerski, I. Cemen Thrust Faults and Pressure of Overpressure Formations in the South Junggar Thrust-and-Fold Belt, China: L. Wang, G. Yang, W. Li, X. Wang, B. Li Geostatistical Integration of Core and Well Log Data for HighResolution Reservoir Modeling: K. Burch, J. Lee Evolution of the Northern End of Salt Valley Salt Wall, Northern Paradox Basin, SE Utah: M. Naqi, B. D. Trudgill, C. F. Kluth Using Seismic Expression of Contourite Drifts to Understand Mud-Dominated Depositional Systems: Insights from the Newfoundland Ridge, Offshore Canada: P. R. Boyle, B. W. Romans, I. Scientists Facies and Facies Architecture of Allomembers D and E, Upper Cretaceous Horseshoe Canyon Formation, Drumheller, Alberta, Canada: A. Montgomery, S. E. Dashtgard, J. A. MacEachern, B. Ainsworth, L. Ricci Additional SEPM Student Research Poster Session Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: R. Sarg, A. Husinec and H. E. Harper Variability of Fan-Shaped Depositional Systems of the 4th Member of Eocene Shahejie Formation in Minfeng Half Graben, Bohai Bay Basin, Eastern China: Z. Li, W. Yang, L. Zhang, X. Luo, S. Liu, H. Luo Late Pleistocene Sediment Dynamics in the Southern Galician Margin Gully System: A. Petrovic, T. Hanebuth, H. Lantzsch, V. Bender GPR Imaging of Riffle Elements in Meandering Channel-fill of the Ferron Sandstone (Upper Cretaceous), Emery County, Utah: O. Abatan, D. R. Kerr, K. Ramachandran Bio-magneto-chronology of Middle Eocene Planktonic Foraminifera: S. Hilding-Kronforst, B. Wade Assessment of Reservoir Quality and Potential Impact of Sequestered Carbon Dioxide in Reservoir Units of Diverse

Lithologies in South-Central, Mississippi, USA: A. D. Degny, B. L. Kirkland, D. W. Schmitz A Lithostratigraphic Examination of the K-T Boundary in Northwestern South Dakota: J. Testin Integrated Seismology, Correlation of Seismic and Seismological Data of Baska Block Pakistan: M. S. Ali

THEME 1 Unconventionals I (EMD/AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Tellers and P. Sullivan Pressure Coring A New Tool for Unconventional Oil & Gas Characterization: M. R. Wood, J. Sinclair, M. Bjorum Unconventional Applications of Archie: Does Geology Matter?: D. Hartigan, M. Lovell, S. Davies Accurate Quantitative Mineralogy in Gas Shales Based on Integrating Multiple Chemical and Physical Measurements with XRD Analyses: Improvement From Use of SEM -XRF Chemical Analysis: C. Fialips, J. Laurent, B. Labeyrie, V. Burg, P. Simeone, T. Kinderstuth, J. Girard, J. Kluska, F. Umbhauer Isotope Rollover in Shale Gas Observed in Laboratory Pyrolysis Experiments: Insight to the Role of Water in Thermogenesis of Mature Gas: L. Gao, A. Schimmelmann, Y. Tang, B. J. Katz, M. Mastalerz Accurate, Direct Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Log from a New Advanced Geochemical Spectroscopy Tool: Comparison with Conventional Approaches for TOC Estimation: A. Charsky, S. Herron Evaluation of the Unconventional Basement Reservoir of Kharir, Yemen: Insight from Fluid Inclusion Stratigraphy (FIS): J. Girard, J. Kluska, J. Champanhet Core-Based Geochemical Study of Mudrocks in Basinal Lithofacies in the Wolfberry Play, Midland Basin, Texas: R. W. Baumgardner, H. Hamlin Fecal Pellets and their Significance in Unconventional Resource Shales: Part II: Generation of Hydrocarbons: E. J. Torres, R. Philp, T. Wang, R. M. Slatt, N. OBrien Enhancing SEM Grayscale Images Through Pseudocolor Conversion: Examples from Eagle Ford, Haynesville and Marcellus Shales: W. Camp Geomechanical Interpretation of a Simul-Frac in Bakken Shale: Q. Li, M. Chen, F. Wang, Y. Jin Experimental Study of Fracture Interaction between Natural Fractures and Hydraulic Fractures in Shale Gas Reservoir: Q. Li, M. Chen, Y. Jin Review and Improvement of Brittleness Evaluation Methods in Shale Gas Reservoir: Q. Li, M. Chen, Y. Jin, F. Wang Soft Inorganic Geochemistry: A New Concept for Unconventional Resources Modeling: C. N. Larriestra Characterization of Fractured Basement Reservoir, Melut Basin, Southeast Sudan: M. A. Yassin, M. M. Hariri, O. M. Abdullatif, M. H. Makkawi

THEME 1 Unconventionals II (EMD/AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Tellers and P. Sullivan An Overview About Coal Water Mixture (CWM) as New Unconventional Energy Potency, and Indonesia Coal Fields for Case Studies: R. R. Putra, J. S. Alibazah, D. F. Umar Potential for Petroleum Production in Mississippian-Pennsylvanian Paleovalleys in the Main Consolidated Field (Crawford County,

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

689

Illinois) and Application throughout the Illinois Basin: J. London, A. Reeder, M. T. May Geochemical Controls on Gas Adsorption and Preservation in Organic-Rich Shale Systems: T. Zhang, K. L. Milliken, S. C. Ruppel, X. Sun Global Heavy Oil and Oil Sand Resources: H. Wang Fractured & Weathered Basement Reservoirs Best Practices for Exploration and Production: Examples from USA, Venezuela and Brazil: T. Koning Application of Combined Cuttings Gas/Oil Analysis, Rapid XRF and High Resolution Photography to Evaluation of Unconventional Reservoirs: D. L. Hall, M. Sterner A Way of Finding Proxy for TOC and Brittleness in Tight Gas Shales: S. Verma, K. Marfurt An Integrated Approach Using Geotechnology to Unlock the Secrets of Low Permeability Reservoirs: S. Sadykhov, A. Collamore, M. Guidry*, W. Palmer, C. Harrison Adapting Petroleum Systems Analysis to Evaluate Play Fairways and Sweet Spots in Unconventional Resources: J. E. Leonard, E. C. Heydweiller, C. O. Leonard, G. Lash Probabilistic Seismic Facies Estimation of a Mississippian Tripolitic Chert Reservoir through Generative Topographic Mapping: A. Roy, T. J. Kwiatkowski, K. Marfurt Big Clifty Sandstone Reservoir Characterization in Warren County Kentucky: L. Baizel, K. Butler, A. Reeder, J. London, M. T. May Production-Active Pore Systems The Pores That Matter: J. M. Evensen Influence of Rock Texture and Composition on Anisotropic Geomechanical Properties in the Eagle Ford Formation: T. Kosanke, R. Rosen, M. Sharf-Aldin, S. Narasimhan, M. Paiangle Burial History Modeling and Paleogeomechanics of the Barnett and Haynesville: K. E. Williams The Evolution of Petrophysics in Evaluating Unconventional Reservoirs in the Cooper Basin: Preliminary Results for the First Commercial Shale Gas Well in Australia: M. Vallee

THEME 3 Applied Technologies for Regional Play Analysis (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: T. B. Warner and D. Deemer Importance of Assessing Risk and Volume Relationships in Multiple-Target Exploration Prospects: C. D. Norman Offshore East Africa Fan Chronostratigraphy from WheelerTransformed Seismic Data, ION GeoVentures East AfricaSPAN: K. McDonough, E. Bouanga, C. Pierard, B. Horn, J. Gross, A. Danforth, N. Sterne, J. Granath, P. Emmet Evidence for Expulsion of Hydrocarbons From Early Mesozoic Source Rocks: Deepwater, Tanzania: D. L. Connolly, N. Hemstra Confirmation of Hydrocarbon Shows in the Mobil #3 Offshore Hyde County Well, North Carolina: J. L. Coleman, J. C. Reid, D. L. Hall Risk Reduction through Neural Networks Chimney Analysis: Frontier Exploration in East African Rift Basin: V. Baranova, A. Mustaqeem, F. Karaja, D. Mburu Worldwide Trends in the Discoveries of Giant Fields from 200612 with Predictions on the Locations and Numbers of Future Giants: P. Mann, N. Dowla Petroleum Accumulation in Passive Margin Basins: G. Zhang, Y. Liang*

Reservoir Modeling Using Multi-Point Statistics (MPS), Berkine Basin, Algeria: J. F. Delgado, F. Djettou, B. Noureddine, H. Hachelaf, Z. Kerboub The Role of Matrix and Fractures on Appalachian Basin Upper Devonian Gas Production: A. Douds, S. McCallum Quantitative Seismic Reservoir Architecture Analysis of Tertiary Fluvial System In The Onshore Bohai Bay Basin China: R. Zhai, S. Wu, Z. Fan, H. Zhang Cretaceous Volcanism and Development of Hydrocarbon Pools in and Around Peninsular India: K. S. Misra, A. Misra The Columbia River Basalt Group: A Volcanic Reservoir Analog: J. Jackson Comprehensive Prediction of Favorable Gas Reservoir in the Large-scale Tight Sandstone of Upper Triassic Xujiahe Formation in Anyue-Hechuan Area of Sichuan Basin, China: A. Xu, Z. Wang, C. Bian, Z. Xu, Y. Li, X. Zhai SHRIMP U-Pb Ages of Detrital Zircons: Discussions on Provenance Control and the Red River Capture: Q. Xu, W. Zhu, Y. Wang, D. Li, Y. Wang, H. Zhuo Production-Induced Capillary Breakdown of Reservoir Barriers: A. A. Brown Late Stage Hydrocarbon Accumulation and Enrichment Pattern in Liaozhong Sag, Northern Offshore Bohai Bay Basin, East China: K. Qiang, X. L, X. Zhou, C. Xu The Reserve Growth Model of Oil Fields in the Bohai Bay Basin, China: C. Liu, Z. Wang Sealing Mechanism for Cap Beds of Shallow Biogenic Gas Pools in Late Quaternary Deposits of The Qiantang River Incised Valley, Eastern China: L. C. Ming, Z. Xia, Q. C. Wei, W. S. Jun Characteristics of Neogene Tan-Lu Faults and Its Role in Controlling Young Traps: An Extreme Case of the Eastern Offshore Bohai Bay Basin, Eastern China: Q. Kun-sheng, X. Lu, X. Zhou Faults in Carbonate and Their Controls on the Distribution of Karst Reservoir A Case Study of Halahatang Field in Tarim Basin, China: L. Zhang, G. Zhang New Insight into the Strike-Slip Tectonic Control on the Penglai 19-3 Field in the Tan-Lu Fault Zone, East China: L. Huang, X. Zhou, Y. Wang, A. Wei, T. Liu The Origin Characteristic of Natural Gas in Permian Changxing and Triassic Feixianguan Formations in Sichuan Basin, SW China: T. Wang, X. Li, Q. Li, Q. Jiang, Y. Li Quantitative Prediction Methods of the Thin Interbedded Beach-Bar Sandstone in Lacustrine Basin: X. Wei, Z. Jiang, L. Yifan The Thermal Evolution Indicated by Integrated Methods: Implication for Source Rocks Maturation and Petroleum Prospective in the Meso-Cenozoic Basins of the Tibetan Plateau: H. Chen, Y. Wu Research on Architecture Pattern of Deepwater Turbidity Channel in X Oilfield of Neogene, West Africa: Y. Lin, S. Wu, Y. Lu, Q. Wan, J. Zhang

THEME 5 Deep Water Siliciclastics I (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Covault and B. Romans Along-Strike Variability of Morphology and Sedimentation of the Northern Continental Margin of the South China Sea: H. Zhuo, Y. Wang, Q. Xu, D. Li, Y. Wang, Y. Wang Examples of Turbidity Current Channelization in the Modern Seafloor: Environments, Causes and Products: F. Gamberi, G. Dalla Valle, M. Rovere

THEME 4 Conventional Oil and Gas Fields (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: H. Ramsey and N. Vander Griend

690

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

 The Relationships Between Shelf-Edge Trajectories and SlopeFacies Associations: Useful Predictors of Sand Delivery to Deepwater Areas: C. Gong, Y. Wang, W. Zhu, Q. Xu, D. Li, W. Li Stratigraphic Architectures of Punctuated Deepwater Channel Migration, Upper Cretaceous Tres Pasos Formation, Magallanes Basin, Chile: N. C. Auchter, B. W. Romans, S. M. Hubbard, L. Stright 3-D Mapping of Vertical and Lateral Facies Heterogeneity of a Compound, Tributive Incised Valley, Turonian Ferron Sandstone, Notom Delta, South-Central Utah: B. D. Hilton, J. Bhattacharya, S. Khan, C. Griffen, K. Biber Study of Calcite Cement in Submarine Fan Complex in the Lower Cherry Canyon, Delaware Basin, TX: S. Chakraborty Influence of Large-Scale Remobilizations on Deepwater Reservoir Architecture: An Example from the Britannia Field, North Sea: R. Teloni, W. D. McCaffrey, P. Haughton, M. Patacci, J. T. Eggenhuisen, R. Butler Solving a Puzzle An Integrated Approach to Revitalize a Neogene Turbidite Play in SW Pannonian Basin, Hungary: A. Nemeth, M. Vincze Three Depositional Models of Deep-water Gravity Flow System of Late Ordovician in Tarim Basin, Western China: J. Liu, C. Lin The Paleo-Morphology of Passive Margins and Its Controls on Deep-Water Systems: A Case Study From the Pearl River Month Basin, Northern South China Sea: Y. Wang, W. Zhu, Q. Xu, Y. Wang, C. Gong, H. Zhuo, W. Li Stratigraphic Architectures and Evolution of the Central Canyon System in the Qiongdongnan Basin, Northern South China Sea: Z. Wang, X. Xie, D. Zhang, X. Li, Z. Sun, Y. He

Tuesday Afternoon Oral Sessions

THEME 1 The Eagle Ford Petroleum System (EMD/AAPG) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Co-Chairs: H. Rowe and S. C. Ruppel 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks An Integrated Stratigraphy of the Cenomanian-Turonian Eagle Ford Shale, Texas, USA: J. S. Eldrett, S. Bergman, D. Minisini, C. Macaulay Stratigraphy and Sedimentary Facies of the Eagle Ford Shale (Cretaceous) Between the Maverick Basin and the San Marcos Arch, Texas, USA: J. A. Breyer, R. Denne, J. Funk, T. Kosanke, J. Spaw Influence of Primary Rock Texture, Diagenesis, and Thermal Maturity on Eagle Ford Pore Systems: A. Ozkan, K. L. Milliken, C. Macaulay, M. Johnston, D. Minisini, J. S. Eldrett, S. Bergman, A. Kelley Defining the Sequence Stratigraphic Framework, Organic Richness, and Hydrocarbon Storage of the Cenomanian/ Turonian Eagle Ford Formation, South Texas: J. M. Guthrie, T. C. Huang, R. Handford, R. Mitchell, S. Crews, R. Beaubouef, J. Halgas Break Cyclic Drivers for Limestone/Marl Sequences, Eagle Ford Shale (Cenomanian-Turonian,) South Texas: T. Kosanke, R. Denne, K. Campion, S. Egenhoff, J. Spaw, J. Breyer Relationship of Austin Chalk and Eagle Ford Shale Oil and Gas Resources: Evaluating a Stacked Source Rock Reservoir Scenario: K. Pearson Investigating the Geologic Factors That Control Reservoir and Completion Quality within the Eagle Ford Shale: C. Miller, E. Rylander, R. Lewis, S. Sinclair, T. Jiang, B. Dean, H. Gamero Seismic Inversion for Shale Gas/Oil Within the Austin Chalk and Eagle Ford Shale, Maverick Basin, South Texas: O. Ogiesoba, R. Eastwood, W. A. Ambrose, U. Hammes Allocating the Contribution of Oil From the Eagle Ford Formation, the Buda Formation, and the Austin Chalk to Commingled Production From Horizontal Wells in South Texas Using Geochemical Fingerprinting Technology: D. K. Baskin, M. McCaffrey, A. Kornacki

1:40

2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05 THEME 5 Deep Water Siliciclastics II (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Covault and B. Romans The Sedimentary Characteristics of the Central Canyon in the Deepwater Area, Qiongdongnan Basin: D. Zhang, Y. Wang, Q. Zuo, Z. Wang, W. He A Most Complete and Continuous Early Pennsylvania Sequence Stratigraphy Framework Near Kirby, Arkansas, USA and Its Implication on Global Remnant Basin Tectonics and Deepwater Hydrocarbon E&P Activities: F. Zou, R. M. Slatt Sedimentary Facies in the Upper Ordovician Maquoketa Group of Indiana: A Preliminary Analysis: D. Mizsei, J. Schieber Basin Accommodation Analysis: Integrative Sand Prediction, Deep Water Gulf of Mexico: J. Blackerby, J. W. Cross, C. Mornet, X. Wu Matrix-Rich Sandstones in Base-of-Slope and Basin-Floor Strata of the Neoproterozoic Windermere Supergroup: Hydraulic Jump Deposits and the Initiation of Local Sedimentation: V. Terlaky, B. Arnott Transitional and Composite Flow Deposits: Character and Distribution in the Maastrichtian Springar Fm., Vring Basin, Norwegian Sea: S. J. Southern, I. A. Kane, M. Warchol, K. W. Porten, W. D. McCaffrey, N. Mountney The Stratigraphic Architecture Preserved at the Channel-Lobe Transition Zone: Tres Pasos Formation Outcrop Belt, Southern Chile: E. Pemberton, S. M. Hubbard, S. Fletcher, B. W. Romans Submarine Lobes Confined behind Depositional Relief at the Toe-Wall of a Seismic-Scale Mass Transport Complex, Neuqun Basin, Argentina: D. Hodgson, R. A. Duller, C. A. Jackson, Y. Spychala Association Between Slope Channel Architecture and Shelf Sediment Supplies: A Quantitative Study of the Tectonically Active Columbus Basin, Trinidad: K. A. Ramlal, L. J. Wood

4:25

4:45

THEME 6 Identification and Modeling of Complex Pore Systems in Carbonate Reservoirs (SEPM) Room 317/318 Co-Chairs: G. P. Eberli, J. Kenter and M. Skalinski 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Non-traditional Techniques for Microporosity Evaluation in a Low-Permeability Carbonate Reservoir From a Giant Oil Field Offshore Abu Dhabi, UAE: T. D. Jobe, R. Sarg, T. Steuber, H. Shebl Sub-Micron Digital Image Analysis (BIBSEM-DIA), Pore Geometries and Electrical Resistivity in Carbonate Rocks: J. H. Norbisrath, G. Eberli, R. J. Weger, K. Verwer, J. Urai, G. Desbois, B. Laurich Relationship between Acoustic and Petrophysical Properties of Permian Grainstones, Lawyer Canyon, Algerita Escarpment, West Texas: X. Janson, F. Lucia Pore Typing Workflow for Complex Carbonate Systems: M. Skalinski, J. Kenter Break

1:40

2:00

2:20 2:40

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

691

3:25 3:45

4:05

4:25

4:45

Spectrum of Micropore Types and Their Origin in Limestones: R. G. Loucks, F. Lucia Dual Mineral Matrix and Organic Pore Textures in Thermally Mature Niobrara Formation, Rocky Mountains Region, USA Implications for Tight-Oil Carbonate Reservoir Modeling: C. D. Laughrey, T. E. Ruble, P. Purrazzella, K. Hooghan, J. Beuthin, K. Washburn, W. Dorsey Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Solves Challenges of Identifying Hydrocarbons in Low-Resistivity Pay Zones: C. H. Smith, L. Hamilton, J. R. Kinney, J. Christensen, G. A. Payne Characterization of Fluid Dynamics in Carbonate Reservoirs Using 4-D GPR: Assessment of Stratigraphic and Structural Controls on Flow and Comparison With Dynamic Modeling: P. Marchesini, M. Grasmueck, G. Eberli, R. J. Weger The Study and Application of the Connectivity of the Carbonate Reservoirs in Tarim Basin: J. Wang, H. Zhang, F. Chen, J. Zhou

1:40 2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05

THEME 5 SEPM Research Symposium Depositional Systems and Sedimentology of Shale and Tight-Sand Reservoirs II Room 319/320/321 Co-Chairs: A. Carroll, B. Zempolich and S. Egenhoff 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Classification and Description Guidelines for the Spectrum of Fine-Grained Sedimentary Rocks: Simplicity and Order Out of Chaos: R. O. Lazar, K. Bohacs, J. Macquaker, J. Schieber, T. Demko Mudstone Aggregates and Their Implications for Sedimentology and Reservoir Characteristics: D. P. Laycock, P. Pedersen, R. Spencer Bedload Transport of Mud A Mechanism for the Infilling of Epicontinental Basins and Lateral Displacement of Source Rocks: J. Schieber, R. Bennett, K. Curry, A. Schimmelmann The Importance of Near-Bed Sediment Concentration on Shelf Bed-Load Sedimentary Structures: B. Arnott Break Microbial Mats as an Indicator for Pauses during Shale Deposition Kimmeridge Clay Formation (Upper Jurassic), Offshore UK: S. Egenhoff, N. Fishman, R. Hill Organic Sedimentation in Lake Malawi, East Africa: Implications for Unconventional Petroleum in Lacustrine Shales: G. S. Ellis, B. J. Katz, C. Scholz, P. Swart A Genetic Stratigraphic Framework of the Green River Formation, Uinta Basin, Utah:The Impact of Climatic Controls on Lake Evolution: L. P. Birgenheier, P. Plink-Bjorklund, M. D. Vanden Berg, M. Rosenberg, L. Toms, J. A. Golab Shallow vs. Deep Water Origin for U.S. Cretaceous Shale Reservoir Successions: C. Fielding Lithologic Heterogeneity in the Upper Devonian Woodford Shale (Anadarko Basin, Oklahoma USA): J. M. Spaw

4:25

4:45

California: Implications for Reservoir Quality in Distal Turbidite Systems: B. Romans, A. Fildani, J. Clark, B. Power, M. Sullivan TBD Process-Based Sand Prediction: Eastern Gulf of Mexico: S. Hudson, D. Armitage, D. Granjeon, X. Wu, J. Blackerby, C. Mornet An Integrated Approach of Reservoir Prediction in a Structurally and Stratigraphically Complex Area A Miocene Example from Eastern Deepwater Gulf of Mexico: X. Wu, C. Mornet, M. McGilvery, J. Blackerby Break Variability in Slope Sandstone Bodies: Linkage to Slope Morphology and Evolution: B. Romans, S. M. Hubbard, L. Stright, N. C. Auchter Sand-Attached to Sand-Detached Deepwater Systems: Is There Predictability in Their Stratigraphic Distribution?: D. Hodgson, W. C. Van Der Merwe, R. L. Brunt, S. S. Flint A Tool to Interpret High-Density Turbidity Current Processes From High-Density Turbidite Lithofacies: M. Cartigny, J. T. Eggenhuisen, G. Postma The Campanian Quartz Claystone Conundrum of the African Transform Margin A Re-Evaluation of the Possible Origins of This Quartz Rich, Silty Claystone: A. Brown, S. Birkhead, D. McLean, P. Towle, H. White, Y. Wu Grainsize Control on Depositional Style in Deepwater Depositional Systems: J. T. Eggenhuisen, M. Hofstra, M. Cartigny

1:40

Energy Policy Forum: Demand Side of the Natural Gas Price Equation (AAPG/DPA/GEO-DC) Room 406 Moderator: E. Allison 1:15 1:20 1:40 2:00 2:20 2:40 3:25 Introductory Remarks Projections of Future Natural Gas Demand From the U.S. Energy Information Administration: H. Gruenspecht Expectations for Future Natural Gas and LNG Exports: C. Smith Potential Growth of Natural Gas Demand for Vehicles: L. Sanford Potential Growth in Natural Gas Demand for Chemicals: J. Cooper Break Q&A

2:00

2:20 2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05

4:25 4:45

THEME 10 Geology/Geophysics Integration Case Studies (AAPG) Room 407 Co-Chairs: D. Gao and D. Zhao 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks A Review of Hydrocarbon Prospects in the Lower Benue Trough Nigeria: Another Insight From Potential Field Study: L. N. Onuba, G. A. Onwuemesi, B. Egboka, G. K. Anudu, A. Omali Directing a Marcellus Shale Drilling Program Using High Resolution Aeromagnetic Data: J. P. Fagan Application of Seismic Sedimentology on the Prediction of Beach and Bar Sandbodies in Lacustrine: A Case Study of the Cretaceous in Chepaizi Area, Junggar Basin, NW China: D. Zhao, X. Zhu, Y. Dong Integrated 3-Dimensional Modeling of Igloo R3 Reservoir, Onshore Niger Delta, Nigeria: E. K. Anakwuba,

THEME 5 Domestic and International Turbidites (AAPG/SEPM) Room 403/404/405 Co-Chairs: J. Covault and B. Carson 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Grain-Size Characteristics of Unconfined Deep-Water Deposits in the Quaternary Santa Monica Basin,

1:40 2:00

2:20

692

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

2:40 3:25 3:45

4:05 4:25 4:45

G. A. Onwuemesi, C. U. Onyekwelu, I. A. Chinwuko, N. Akachikelu, I. I. Obiadi Break Earth Tide, Microseepage and Microbial Geochemical Exploration (MGCE): H. Mei, D. Hitzman, D. Guo, B. Mei Distribution and Origin Model of the Cenozoic Conglomerate Deposits by Electrical Survey in Kuqa Depression of Tarim Basin: H. Sun, H. Zhu, D. Zhong The Rawa Besar Lake Area (Depok, Indonesia) Study by Using Ground Penetrating Radar: A. C. Finahsan, S. Suparno Identification Method and Effect of Dongjiagangs Alluvial Fan: L. Cao, Y. Xu, L. Sun*, L. Pei, L. Yu, L. Xie, H. Zhu Support Vector Regression to Estimate Sonic Log Distributions and Overpressured Zones: C. Cranganu, M. Breaban

2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05 SPECIAL SESSION: Hurricane Sandy and Our Vulnerable Developed Coastlines (Eastern Section SEPM) Room 408/409/410 Moderator: R. Viso Time: 1:15 p.m.2:40 p.m. Invited Speakers: Dr. Cheryl J Hapke, United States Geological Survey Dr. Jesse McNinch, Director, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Field Research Facility Dr. Art Trembanis, Coastal Sediments Hydrodynamics and Engineering Laboratory THEME 9 Exploration in Salt and Deepwater Structural Systems (AAPG) Room 408/409/410 Co-Chairs: V. Hebert and M. Fisher 3:20 3:25 3:45 Introductory Remarks Fluid Systems Around Salt Diapirs: M. P. Fischer, P. Kenroy, A. Smith Evolution of Structures above a Salt Diapir Case Study from the Arabian Gulf Region: M. M. Al-Fahmi, A. Plesch, J. Shaw, J. Cole Structural Growth Rate and Impact on Deepwater Depositional Systems in Deepwater Fold Belts: Gulf of Mexico, Angola and Niger Delta: L. Lonergan, B. A. Jolly, G. L. Jones, M. Mayall, A. C. Whittaker, S. Dee Influence of Fold and Salt-wall Growth Rates on Deepwater Sedimentary Systems in an Active Salt Minibasin, Offshore Angola: G. L. Jones, L. Lonergan, M. Mayall, S. Dee Geomorphic Responses of Slope Channel Systems to Growing Thrusts and Folds, Deepwater Niger Delta: B. A. Jolly, L. Lonergan, A. C. Whittaker

4:25

4:45

Asperity and Joint Failures, Overall Surface Ruptures, Identification of and Role in the Interpretation of Discrete Fracture Networks: T. Urbancic, A. Baig*, S. Karimi, G. Viegas Fernandes Natural Fracture Networks Enhancing Unconventional Reservoirs Producibility: Mapping & Predicting: H. Abul Khair, D. Cooke, M. Hand Break Tight Reservoir Rock Integrity Experimentally Measured Pre-Failure Permeability Response to Stress Changes: P. Armitage, D. Faulkner, R. H. Worden, O. Blake, J. Omma Prediction of Sub-Seismic, Fault-related Fracture and Their Inclusion in Geocellular Models: D. Wolf, L. Bazalgette, P. Richard Pitfalls of Using Entrenched Fracture Relationships: Fracture System within Bedded Carbonates of the Hidden Valley Fault Zone, Canyon Lake Gorge, Comal County, Texas: R. N. McGinnis, D. A. Ferrill, K. J. Smart, A. P. Morris Outcrop to Core Comparison of Natural Fractures in a Tight Gas Sandstone Reservoir, Alberta Foothills, Canada: E. Ukar, P. Eichhubl, A. Fall, J. Hooker A 48 m.y. History of Natural Fracture Propagation: A. Fall, P. Eichhubl, K. Black, S. E. Laubach

Tuesday Afternoon Poster Sessions

Presenters in booths: 2:30 p.m. 4:00 p.m. THEME 2 World Class Resources Emerge From a Historic Basin (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: S. McCallum and D. M. Reif Advanced 3-D Structural Modeling of LWD Borehole Images for Optimized Well Placement: O. Azike, A. Wray* Concepts and Methods for the Recognition of Cyclicity in the Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale: O. O. Emmanuel, S. Sonnenberg Washington-Taylorstown Field as a Microcosm of the Oil and Gas Industry in Pennsylvania: K. M. Carter Nano-to-Micrometer Size Pores in Marcellus Shale Matrix: A Neutron Scattering Study: X. Gu, S. Brantley Lithologic Characterization of Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin and Its Implication for Organic-Rich Mudstone Deposition, Diagenesis and Shale Gas Exploration: J. Zhou, P. Rush, A. Sridhar, R. Miller Evaluating Reservoir Characteristics of the Utica Shale at Varying Levels of Thermal Maturity: M. L. Cooney, K. M. Carter X-Ray Computed Tomography of the Utica Shale: D. A. Kackley, A. Cook, D. R. Cole, M. Murphy, S. Welch, J. Sheets TOC and Mineralogical Trends in the Utica Shale of Ohio: J. Harrington, D. R. Cole, J. Sheets, A. M. Swift, M. Murphy, S. Welch Assessment of Thermal Maturation in Outcrop Samples of the Utica Shale, Northern Appalachian Basin, New York: T. E. Ruble, W. R. Knowles, B. W. Selleck, A. S. Wylie Revised Chronostratigraphy of the Cambrian System in Subsurface Ohio: L. E. Babcock, M. T. Baranoski Assessing Suitability of Depleted Fields for Enhanced Oil Recovery in West Virginia: J. P. Moore, P. Dinterman, J. Lewis, J. Luczko, S. Pool Petrography of the Marcellus Shale in Well WV6, Monongalia County, West Virginia: H. Eastman Investigation of Marcellus Shale Reservoir Variability Within Different Deposition Systems: G. C. Bank, J. S. Reed

4:05

4:25

4:45

THEME 9 Impact of Faulting, Fracturing, and Stress in Shale and Tight Reservoirs (AAPG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: W. Sassi and P. Armitage 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Multi-Scale Characterization of Faults and Fractures in the Marcellus and their Influence upon Well Performance: B. Stephenson, C. Dick, C. MacDonald, J. Dionne, N. McGraw, C. Bohn, M. Williams Viscoplastic Deformation of Shale Gas Reservoir Rocks and Its Relation to the In-Situ Stress Variations Observed in a Well From Barnett Shale: H. Sone, M. Zoback

1:40

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

693

THEME 3 International Oil and Gas Plays (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m. 5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: P. Billman and B. Hayward Main Petroleum Provinces and Recent Discoveries of Latin America: L. Zhang, G. Zhang Cretaceous-Tertiary Sedimentary Filling Characteristics and Hydrocarbon Exploration Potential of Rakhine Basin in Myanmar: W. Hongping, L. Fuliang, G. Fan, M. Chaolin, W. Yiping, H. Sun Spatial Changes in Tectonic and Stratigraphic Style across a Transform Fault, Offshore Sierra Leone Basin (West Africa): Implications for Potential Reservoir and Trap Architecture: C. A. Elenwa, M. P. Watkinson*, M. W. Anderson The West Mediterranean Salt Basin A Future Petroleum Producing Province?: G. Roberts, T. Christoffersen Morondava Basin, Offshore Madagascar New Long Offset Seismic Data Highlights the Petroleum Prospectivity of this Emerging Frontier Basin: G. Roberts, T. Christoffersen, H. Weining East Indonesia: Plays and Prospectivity of the West Aru, Kai Besar and Tanimbar AreaIdentified From New Long Offset Seismic Data An Update Based on Further Data Acquisition and Interpretation: G. Roberts, T. Christoffersen, C. Ramsden Play Analysis and Exploration Potential of the Cte dIvoire Basin, West African: Z. Xu, L. Fuliang, G. Fan, M. Chaolin Corozal Basin Stratigraphy of Northern and Central Belize: M. Wade, D. T. King Jr*, L. W. Petruny Cenomanian-Turonian Source-Rocks in the Southern North Atlantic Ocean: Origin, Distribution, and Exploration Impact: T. Leyenberger Petroleum System Evaluation of the Korotaikha Fold-Belt and Foreland Basin, Timan-Pechora Basin, Russia: B. J. Fossum, N. T. Grant, B. Byurchieva Proven Deepwater Play and Exploration Potential in Qiongdongnan Basin, North South China Sea: Z. Sun, M. Guo, Z. Yao Hydrocarbon Depletion and Enrichment in Strike-SlipTranspressional Structure zone, the Southern Liaodong Bay Depression of the Bohai Bay Basin, China: Y. Liu, X. Zhou, C. Xu

Quantifying the Importance of Sediment Supply, Global Eustasy and Fault-Induced Accommodation in Controlling Delta Architecture, Shelf-Margin Growth and Deep-water Sediment Transfer: Insights from Stratigraphic-Forward Modeling in Northern Australia: J. Bourget, T. Salles-Taing, B. Ainsworth, G. Duclaux Investigating Down-Slope Changes in Deep-Water Channel Stacking With a 3-D Digital Outcrop Model, Cretaceous Tres Pasos Formation, Southern Chile: S. Fletcher, S. M. Hubbard, R. V. Macauley, E. Pemberton, B. Romans, L. Stright Sedpak-A Qualitative Computer Simulation for Understanding Sequence Stratigraphy Modeling Concepts and Parameters: C. G. Kendall, E. Viparelli Controls on Fluid Flow and Hydrocarbon Recovery in a Clinoform-Bearing, Fluvial-Dominated Deltaic Reservoir Analog: Ferron Sandstone, Utah: G. H. Graham, M. D. Jackson, G. J. Hampson

THEME 5 Sedimentology, Geomorphology and Stratigraphy of Coastal, Estuarine, and Nearshore Systems (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m. 5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: D. Kamola, M. Fenster and M. Gani Anatomy of a Wave-Dominated, Tide-Influenced, Fluvial-Affected (Wtf) Mouthbar Element Complex Evidence from Outcrop, Core and Wireline Data: Horseshoe Canyon Formation, Alberta, Canada: B. Ainsworth, B. Vakarelov, C. Lee, J. A. MacEachern Anatomy of a Mixed-Process Shelf-Margin Delta, NW Australia: An Example of Process-Based Classification and Uncertainty Management From a Seismic Dataset: J. Bourget, S. L. Thompson, B. Ainsworth Influence of Sediment Cohesion on Basin-Filling Sedimentation Patterns: Q. Li, K. M. Straub Offshore Wind-Dominated Shoreline Progradation in an Arid Environment: Examples From the Leeward Shoreline of Qatar (Khor Al-Adaid Area): C. J. Strohmenger, J. Jameson Growth-Faulted Compartments of the Oligocene Frio Formation in Proximity of the Shelf Edge in Corpus Christi Bay, Texas: M. Olariu, U. Hammes, W. A. Ambrose, O. C. Ogiesoba Sedimentological and Ichnological Analysis of the McMurray IHS (Kearl Area): S. Alina, R. A. Myers, J. J. Scott, M. K. Gingras, S. Pemberton Implication of Depositional Architecture and Its Control on Vertical and Lateral Variation of Reservoir Facies A Case Study from North Kuwait Field: P. K. Mishra, J. M. Al-Kanderi Siliciclastics Sequence Models in Wide and Low-gradient Continental Margin of Northern South China Sea: S. Zhang, C. Zhang, Y. Yin, H. Shi, R. Wang, J. Du Lithofacies Interpretation From Core Studies of a Middle Jurassic Reservoir, North Usturt Basin, Kazakhstan: New Insights on the Reservoir Quality of the Caspian Sea Coast: J. D. Sanchez Mendoza, A. Novikov Imbricate Structure of Fluvial Facies and Its Petroleum Geological Significance: J. Zhong, Z. Shao, Y. Li, C. Mao, S. Liu, L. Ni Application of Field Analogs in New Mexico to the ReInterpretation of Some Niger Delta Shallow-Marine Hydrocarbon Reservoirs: R. Onyirioha, G. Okeke, R. Combellas, O. Ajao, C. Okafor, F. Pichard

THEME 5 Outcrop, Subsurface and Simulation: Perspectives on Quantitative Modeling of Sedimentary Systems (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: E. Hajek and M. Gani Quantifying Slope Intra-Channel Facies Architecture From Outcrop: B. G. Daniels, R. V. Macauley, S. Fletcher, A. A. Jackson, L. Stright, B. Romans, S. M. Hubbard Physical Modeling of Turbidity Current Flow Equilibration to a Fixed Multibend Sinuous Channel Form: K. M. Hunter, W. D. McCaffrey, G. M. Keevil, I. A. Kane Subsurface Core and Analogous Outcrop Characterization of the Muddy/Newcastle Formation for the Bell Creek Oil Field, Powder River County, Montana: J. R. Braunberger, W. Peck, T. Bailey, J. Bremer, B. Huffman, C. Gorecki External Controls on the Evolution of a Prograding Shelf Margin: the Craven Basin, UK: J. F. Bijkerk, P. Wignall, C. Waters, J. T. Eggenhuisen, I. A. Kane, W. D. McCaffrey Mapping Tools Applied to Reservoir Efficiency Index (REI) Evaluation at Prospect/Basin Scale: A. Consonni, A. Ortenzi Relationship Between River-Mouth Depositional Processes and Delta Architectures, Huangqihai Lake, Inner Mongolia, North China: L. Shunli, Y. Xinghe, S. Li, R. J. Steel, C. Olariu Prediction of Reservoir-Scale Carbonate Cements in Sandstones: G. Thyne

THEME 6 Carbonates and Evaporites I (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: C. Kerans, E. Franseen and C. Iannello Bachtel

694

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

 Sedimentology and Sequence Stratigraphy of the Middle to Late Miocene, Al-Jabal Al-Khdar Uplift and Soluq Trough, Cyrenaican NE Libya: K. S. Amrouni, M. C. Pope, A. S. El-Hawat Precambrian Analogs for Pre-Salt Lacustrine Carbonates: J. W. Bishop, M. S. Wasson, M. A. Murphy-Bishop, D. Y. Sumner Factors Controlling Differential Growth, Margin Geometry and Drowning of an Isolated Permian-Triassic Platform in the Nanpanjiang Basin, South China: D. Watford, J. Shultz, D. Lehrmann*, X. Li, J. Payne, M. Minzoni Basin Wide Controls on Carbonate Platform Evolution: The Triassic Nanpanjiang Basin of South China: D. Lehrmann, M. Minzoni, J. Payne, P. Enos, M. Yu, J. Wei, B. Kelley, E. Schaal, K. Meyer, X. Li, P. Montgomery Recurrent Cooling Events in Aptian Greenhouse: Stable-Isotope Trends and Sequence-Stratigraphic Evidence From Southern Tethyan Adriatic Platform Carbonates: A. Husinec, J. Read Heterogeneity and Depositional Variability of Reef Sand Aprons: Integrated Field and Modeling Analysis of Dynamics of Holocene Aranuka Atoll, Republic of Kiribati, Equatorial Pacific: H. N. Wasserman, E. C. Rankey, T. Uriam Geologic Patterns of Internal Architecture in Reef-Shoal Complexes Along Kaijiang-Liangping Trough in Sichuan Basin During Late Permian Changxingian: A. Xu, Z. Wang, X. Zhai, J. Yin, Z. Gu, Q. Li, D. Bao Based on the Filling Evaluation of Carbonate Paleokarst Reservoir Poroperm Characteristics in Tahe Oilfield, Tarim Basin: X. Kang, Q. Jin, T. Fei, Y. Li, H. Zhang Sequence Stratigraphy and Resulting Reservoir and Non-reservoir Facies Distribution, Upper Devonian Winterburn Nikanassin Range Outcrops, Alberta Canada: J. A. Weissenberger, P. K. Wong, M. G. Gilhooly Microbialite Shrubs of the Eocene Green River Formation: Analogs for the Cretaceous Pre-Salt Lacustrine Systems of the South Atlantic Conjugate Basins: S. M. Awramik, P. Buchheim Lacustrine Sedimentation and Paleolimnology in an Early Cretaceous Backbulge-Basin Lake: M. Trees Reservoir Character of Carbonate/Evaporite Oil Fields of the Middle East: A Response to Depositional Setting and Accommodation Space: C. G. Kendall, A. S. Alsharhan Controls on the Architecture of Paleokarst Systems and Associated Reservoir Quality: R. G. Loucks, C. Zahm THEME 6 Carbonates and Evaporites II (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: C. Kerans, E. Franseen and C. Iannello Bachtel Evaporite-Carbonate-Siliciclastic Interactions in Extensional Settings, El Qaa Fault Block, Suez Rift, Egypt: M. Muravchik, R. Gawthorpe, I. Sharp Miocene Carbonate Microfacies Distribution of Tendehantu Formation, Mangkalihat Peninsula: Approach of Reservoir Potential Using Outcrop Analogue: A. I. Koeshidayatullah Analysis of a Pennsylvanian to Early Permian Shelf Margin and Its Adjacent Slopes, Sverdrup Basin, North West Ellesmere Island, Arctic Canada: C. Shultz, B. Beauchamp Late Jurassic Jubaila Formation Storm-Dominated Cycles of Central Arabia: Outcrop Expression of a Reservoir in the Arab Formation: R. F. Lindsay, D. L. Cantrell, N. F. Hurley, A. G. Al-Dhubeeb, A. A. Al-Ibrahim The Cambro-Ordovician Prairie du Chien and Knox Groups in the Subsurface of Central Illinois: Facies, Reservoir Potential, and Correlation: Z. Askari, Y. Lasemi, H. E. Leetaru Comparative Analysis of the Western and Eastern Architecture of the Northern Margin of the Great Bank of Guizhou, Guizhou Province, South China: B. Kelley, D. Lehrmann, M. Yu, K. V. Lau,

D. Watford, J. Shultz, J. Payne, M. Minzoni Reefs Evaporites Relations in Late Permian of Western Poland: T. M. Peryt, K. Dyjaczynski Stratigraphic Framework for Late Cambrian-Early Ordovician Carbonate Slope/Toe-Of-Slope Sediments, Tybo Canyon, Hot Creek Range, Nevada: S. Marek, M. Lira, M. C. Pope Sedimentary Facies and Palaeoenvironmental Records of an Intracratonic Basin Lake: Aptian Lacustrine Crato Formation, Jatob Basin, NE Brazil: V. H. Neumann, D. Rocha, W. Vortisch, R. Gratzer, M. Lima, J. A. Barbosa, G. Fambrini A Revised Stratigraphic Framework for the Middle and Upper Devonian of the Northern Michigan Basin: J. Zambito High Resolution Sequence and Chemostratigraphic Correlations of the Grayburg Formation-Shattuck Valley Escarpment and Plowman Ridge-Testing Models of Shelf-to-Basin Frameworks: S. Hiebert, C. Kerans, S. C. Ruppel, H. Rowe Facies Belts, Microfacies, and Karst Features of the Ellenburger Group, Kerr Basin, Texas: Observations Based on Cores: R. C. Geesaman, J. L. Wilson

THEME 7 Advances in Carbon Capture and Storage (DEG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m. 5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: D. J. Soeder and M. Sharma Geologically Sequestered Carbon Dioxide as a Geothermal Heat Mining Fluid Applications to Enhanced Oil Recovery Operations: J. B. Randolph Spatial Stochastic Modeling of Sedimentary Formations to Assess CO2 Storage Potential. A Case Study for the Pennsylvania Part of the Appalachian Basin: O. H. Popova, M. J. Small, A. C. Thomas, S. McCoy, B. Karimi, S. Rose Preliminary Results From the TriCarb Deep Stratigraphic Well Drilled into the Newark Rift Basin, Rockland County, NY: B. E. Slater, T. Smith, D. Collins, M. Tymchak Evaluating Carbon Storage in Morrowan and Mississippian Oil Fields and Underlying Lower Ordovician Arbuckle Saline Aquifer in Southern Kansas: W. L. Watney, J. Rush, M. K. Dubois, R. L. Barker, T. Birdie, K. Cooper, S. Datta, J. Doveton, M. Fazelalavi, D. Fowle, P. Gerlach, T. Hansen, D. E. Hedke, Y. Holubnyak, B. Huff, K. Newell, L. Nicholson, J. Roberts, A. Scheffer, A. Sirazhiev, R. P. Sorenson, G. Tsoflias, E. Williams, D. Wreath, J. Youle Geologic Characterization for the U.S. SECARB Anthropogenic Test; Combining Modern and Vintage Well Data to Predict Reservoir Properties: S. R. Cyphers, G. J. Koperna CO2 Injection Monitoring Using an Experimental Modular Borehole Monitoring (MBM) System: G. J. Koperna, R. Trautz, T. M. Daley, B. M. Freifeld, K. Dodds Use of 3-Dimensional Dynamic Modeling of CO2 Injection for Comparison to Regional Static Capacity Assessments of Miocene Sandstone Reservoirs in the Texas State Waters, Gulf of Mexico: K. Wallace, T. Meckel, E. Miller, D. Carr, R. Trevino The Effects of Thermal Shock Due to Injection of Fluids on the Petrophysical Properties of Caprock and Reservoir Rocks; An Experimental Approach: O. Blake, D. Faulkner, R. H. Worden, P. Armitage Effect of Shallow Subsurface Heterogeneities in CO2 Storage Monitoring for EOR: Case Studies From the Gulf Coast: K. Zahid, B. D. Wolaver, W. A. Ambrose, R. C. Smyth Experimental Analysis and Modeling of PFT and SF6 Transport in Organic Rich Vadose Zones: Implications for Monitoring CO2 Leakage at CCS Sites: M. R. Gawey, T. Larson, K. Romanak, S. Hovorka, T. J. Phelps

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

695

 Evolution of Voids and Fractures in Wellbore Cement Under Dynamic Flow Conditions Relevant to Geological Carbon Sequestration: P. Cao, Z. Karpyn, L. Li Evaluation of Sequestration Options for Deep Saline Formations and Oil and Gas Fields in Eastern Ohio: R. A. Riley, M. P. Solis, M. S. Erenpreiss Dynamic Simulation of Pilot Scale CO2 Injection in the Arbuckle Saline Aquifer at Wellington Field in Southern Kansas: Y. Holubnyak, W. L. Watney, J. Rush, T. Birdie, J. Doveton, M. Fazelalavi Analysis of the Efficacy of CO2 Sequestration Into Depleted Shale Gas Reservoirs: I. B. Kulga, T. Ertekin Geochemical Experimentation and Modeling of CO2 WaterRock Reactions Due to Deep CO2 Injection into Midcontinent Rift Clastics: A. M. Abousif, D. J. Wronkiewicz Anatomy of Pore Networks in Caprock Relevant to Geologic CO2 Sequestration: D. R. Cole, J. Sheets, A. Swift, M. Murphy, S. Welch, L. Anovitz, G. Rother, L. Vlcek THEME 7 Mitigating Environmental Impacts in the Oil and Gas Industry (DEG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: D. J. Soeder and S. Sharma New Data and Techniques for Evaluating Subsidence from Abandoned Underground Mines in Ohio: J. McDonald Modeling the Potential Impact of Oil Spills on Commercial Fisheries in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: J. Graham, K. Rose, J. Nelson, L. Sim, C. Ringo Offshore Oil Spill Contingency Planning A Waste Management Approach: S. Metcalf Deepwater and Ultra-Deepwater Blowout and Offshore Spill Model: L. Sim, J. Graham, K. Rose Growing Microalgae on Hydraulic Fracturing Return Water for the Combined Benefit of Bioremediation and Biodiesel Production: B. Van Aken, S. Ranjbar Kolachaie Injection Pattern Design to Maximize the Efficiency of Carbon Dioxide Injection for Sequestration Purposes in Brine Formations: Q. Sun, T. Ertekin THEME 9 Contractional Tectonics and Fold-Thrust Belts: Implications for Exploration and Production of Hydrocarbons, Including Reservoir Productivity (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 1:15 p.m.5:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: M. P. McKay and D. Harris Basement-involved Structural Styles Along the Eastern Sulaiman Ranges Front, Pakistan: A. Sajjad, K. Irfan Mohammad, R. Gohar, Q. Abdul Thrust Fault Evolution and Hydrocarbon Sealing Behavior, Qaidam Basin, China: Y. Pei, R. J. Knipe, D. A. Paton, H. Lickorish, A. Li A New Thick-Skinned Structure Model for the Kedo Thrust Belt in the West KunLun Mount, Tarim Basin, Northwestern China: W. Guizhong, Z. Jianwei*, M. Peiling, H. Changwei, L. Dongming, X. Bo, Z. Xiangzhou Evolution of Fault-Related Folds and Their Hydrocarbon Trapping Potential: Kurdistan Region of Iraq: M. Zebari, C. M. Burberry 2-D Seismic Interpretation of the Tumaco Basin, SW Colombia: Implications for Tectono-Stratigraphic Evolution and Hydrocarbon Exploration: L. F. Campino, A. Escalona Uncovering Thick Sediment for Panama Exploration: A GPSBased Kinematic Model for the Western Caribbean: D. Kobayashi, P. LaFemina, H. Geirsson

Andean Exhumation and Growth of the Subandean-Chaco Foreland Basin, Southern Bolivia: Spatial-Temporal Variations and Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration: A. Z. Calle, B. K. Horton Mesozoic-Cenozoic Basin and Orogeny Evolution of Northern Tianshan and Its Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration in Southern Junggar Basin: S. Fang, Z. Guo, M. Zhao, Z. Zhang, S. Liu Main Thrust Fault Controlling on Hydrocarbon Accumulation in Wuxia Thrust Belt, NW Junggar Basin: Evidences From Paleofluid Data: S. Fang, M. Zhao, H. Cao, S. Liu A Preliminary Study on the Late Cenozoic Structural Characteristics of Arakan Fold Belt, Bay of Bengal: P. Tang, L. Fuliang, F. Guozhang, X. Wang, H. Sun, L. Li What About the Slip? Examining the Influence of Frictional Layer-Parallel Slip on Fault-Related Fold Geometry: A. M. Hodge, K. Johnson, B. Douglas Structural Style of Appalachian Plateau Folds, North-Central Pennsylvania: V. S. Mount, R. E. Harris, H. A. Casillas

Wednesday Morning Oral Sessions

THEME 1 Shale and Tight Oil Plays From Around the Globe (EMD) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Chair: K. L. Avary 8:00 8:05 8:25 Introductory Remarks Unconventional Resources Around the World: Company Strategies for Dynamic Global Markets: R. Clarke Organic Rich Shale in Permian Fjords A Potential Resource Play in the Arckaringa Basin, South Australia: S. A. Menpes Lower Wolfcamp Carbonate Breccias: Implications for Sequence Stacking Patterns in the Lower Slopeto-Proximal Basin Environment of Deposition: J. A. Bellian, T. Playton, K. Willis, C. Horn, G. Hinterlong Effective Application and Utilization of Inorganic Geochemical Data in Shale Resource Plays: A Case Study From the Appalachian Basin: N. Martinez-Kulikowski, M. Wright, A. Reynolds Break Petrophysical Analogue Trends From Core Property Data for Emerging Play Evaluation: G. Baechle, B. Tepper Geochemical Characteristics and Estimation of Gas Content of the Low-Middle Mature Continental Shales: A Case Study From the Ordos Basin: X. Tang, Z. Jinchuan, X. Wang, Y. Yang, Y. Yu, L. Wang, J. Xiong Geological Controls on Reservoir Properties and Production Potential of Lower Paleozoic Shale Gas Plays in Sichuan Basin: X. Li, Z. Qiu Geological and Geochemical Attributes of Paleozoic Source Rocks and their Remaining Potential for Unconventional Resources in Erg Oriental Algerian Sahara: A. N. Chaouche Outcrop Characterization and Sequence Stratigraphic Framework of the Brown Shale, Central Sumatra Basin, Indonesia: Implications as an Unconventional Resource Shale: R. J. Brito, R. M. Slatt, D. P. Kusuma, B. Singh

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10 10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

THEME 9 Contractional Tectonics and Fold-Thrust Belts: Implications for Exploration and Production of Hydrocarbons (AAPG) Room 317/318 Co-Chairs: B. Trevail and S. Naruk

696

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

8:00 8:05

8:25

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10

10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

Introductory Remarks Mizoram Fold-thrust Belt, NE India: Initial Hydrocarbon Exploration Strategy Based on Balanced Structural Cross Sections: A. N. Borthakur, D. Changmai, D. K. Mukhopadhyay 3-D Seismic and Geosteering Analysis Reveals the Structural Style of the Appalachian Plateau: P. Gillespie, S. A. Wessels, D. Lynch, J. van Hagen Geological Prediction of Subseismic Deformation From Seismic-Reflection Profiles of Contractional Structures: R. H. Groshong, M. O. Withjack, R. W. Schlische De-Risking Fold and Thrust Belt Hydrocarbon Plays with Structural Modeling: J. Brandenburg, M. Mora-Glukstad, S. Naruk Break High Fluid Pressures and High Fluid Flow Rates From a Zone of Natural Hydrofractures Associated with a Major Out-Of-Sequence Thrust Zone, Convergent Margin, SW Japan: J. C. Moore, M. Barrett, M. Thu The Impact of High Precision Age Controls in Basin Modeling for Tectonic Studies: Karoo Basin, South Africa: M. P. McKay, J. Dean, A. Weislogel Serial Cross-Section Trishear Modeling: Reconstructing 3-D Kinematic Evolution of the Perdido Fold Belt: D. He, J. Brandenburg Identifying and Quantifying the Amount of Layer Parallel Shortening in Compressive Regions Using Thin-Sections and Analog Models: C. M. Burberry Advancements in Interpretation of the Tectonic Structure of the East European Cratonic Edge in Poland Revealed by Recent Regional Seismic Data Two Orogenies and Beyond: P. Krzywiec, P. Lis, V. Buffenmyer, M. Malinowski, M. Lewandowski

11:30

Porosity and Pore Systems in Gas Shales: Posidonia and Wealden: E. Mathia, T. Rexer, A. Aplin, L. Bowen

THEME 2 World Class Resources Emerge From a Historic Basin I (AAPG) Room 403/404/405 Co-Chairs: J. A. Pancake and D. Patchen 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Acadian Sliding: Anatomy of Styles for Gravitational Fault Development and Hydrocarbon Migration in the Western Appalachian Foreland Basin of Pennsylvania and West Virginia: R. Jacobi, J. Starr, D. Jackson, T. Warner, C. Eckert Marcellus Shale Deformation and Related Devonian and Silurian Age Structural Styles and Fabrics, Appalachian Foreland, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, USA: A. S. Wylie, R. L. Parker The Importance of Vertical Heterogeneities in Unconventional Shale Plays: L. Wensaas, M. Gading, H. Lseth, T. Boassen Correlation of the Marcellus/Millboro Formations From the Northern to the South-Central Appalachian Basin: J. E. Repetski, D. J. Over, C. B. Enomoto Break Rock Fabric Is a Better Predictor of Well Performance Than TOC in the Marcellus Shale: J. Madren, K. Walker Hydrocarbon Production and Microseismic Monitoring Treatment Optimization in the Marcellus Shale: C. W. Neuhaus Marcellus Shale Stimulation Barrier and Geohazard Assessment: P. Morath, J. Starr, L. Schanken Marcellus Shale Asset Optimization through Increased Geological Understanding: C. Yang, W. A. Zagorski, J. R. Morris, D. A. Bowman A Preliminary Geology-Based Natural Gas Resource Assessment of the Marcellus Shale for West Virginia: S. Pool, R. Boswell, J. Lewis, J. P. Mathews

8:25

8:45

9:05

9:25 10:10 10:30

10:50 11:10

THEME 1 Evaluation of European Shales (EMD) Room 319/320/321 Chair: T. Carr 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Comparison of North American and European Shale Gas and Oil Resource Systems: J. E. Zumberge, J. B. Curtis*, S. W. Brown The Sequence Stratigraphic and Palinspastic Framework of Paleozoic Resource Play Potential in Europe: M. D. Booker, S. Laird, M. Wiltshire, A. Messer Assessment of Potential Shale Gas Resources in UK Pennine Basin Carboniferous Shales: S. Stoker, T. Harvey, I. Andrews, K. Smith, N. Smith, C. Vincent Shale Gas and Muddy Shelves: Comparing the NeogeneQuaternary Eridanos System (NW Europe) with the Devonian Catskill Delta (USA): A. Moscariello, D. Ventra, M. Zijp, J. ten Veen Break Sedimentological Characteristics and Shale Gas Potential of Carboniferous Mudstones in Ireland: The Clare and Northwest Carboniferous Basins: K. Taylor, S. Khattab, K. Nolan, J. Redfern, B. Williams, S. Warshauer, J. Hill, J. Armstrong Geological Characterization of Early Palaeozoic Mudrocks, Lublin Basin, South-East Poland: S. A. McLay Organic Porosity Study: Porosity Development within Organic Matter of the Lower Silurian and Ordovician Source Rocks of the Poland Shale Gas Trend: V. Kuchinskiy Gas Capacities and Micropore Characterization of Posidonia Shale and Isolated Kerogen: T. Rexer, E. Mathia, M. Thomas, A. Aplin

11:30

8:25

8:45

THEME 5 Advances in Correlation Methods and Architectural Analysis of Clastic Reservoirs (SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: B. Bracken and G. Gustason 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Integrating a Hierarchical Process and Architectural Marginal Marine Classification with a Computer Database and Expert Systems Toward Improved Subsurface Predictions: B. Vakarelov, B. Ainsworth Quantitative Stratigraphic Architecture, Depositional History and Progradation Rates of an Ancient Sand-Prone Subaqueous Delta (Sognefjord Formation, Troll Field, Norwegian North Sea): S. Patruno, G. J. Hampson, C. Jackson Compensatory Stacking Patterns Within Turbidite Channel Lobe Systems and the Impact to Resource Distribution, Reservoir Architecture and Connectivity: Example From the Polecat Discovery, UKCS: D. M. Dutton, K. Oudit, A. Theophilos, S. Sweetman Stratigraphic Development of a Submarine Slope to Shelf Edge, Karoo Basin, South Africa: Lessons for Reservoir Prediction: S. Flint, D. Hodgson, R. L. Brunt, W. C. Van Der Merwe, G. Jones, E. Morris

9:05

9:25 10:10

8:25

8:45

10:30 10:50

9:05

11:10

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

697

THEME 5 Outcrop, Subsurface and Simulation: Perspectives on Quantitative Modeling of Sedimentary Systems (SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: E. Hajek and M. Pyrcz 10:05 10:10 Introductory Remarks The Role of Climate Variation in Sequence Stratigraphy: Lessons From Analogue Modeling: J. F. Bijkerk, J. ten Veen, G. Postma, D. Mikes TBD Effective Permeability in Tidal Heterolithic Cross-Bedded Sandstones: B. Y. Massart, M. D. Jackson, G. J. Hampson, B. Legler, H. D. Johnson, C. A. Jackson, R. Ravnas, M. Sarginson Characterization of Discordant Surfaces Within Tidally Influenced Point Bars: Implications for Fluvial System Evolution and Reservoir Development: P. R. Durkin, S. M. Hubbard, D. Leckie, R. Boyd, J. R. Suter Grain Size Controls on Planform Morphology and Stratigraphy of River-Dominated Deltas: A. P. Burpee, R. L. Slingerland, D. A. Edmonds, D. R. Parsons, J. Best, R. Caldwell, A. Nijhuis, J. Royce, J. Cederberg, A. McGuffin, S. Prozeller

Fluid-Rock Interactions and Preliminary Modeling Results: R. J. Donahoe, T. Donovan, A. Weislogel THEME 6 Stratigraphy, Sedimentology, and Diagenesis of Carbonate and Interbedded Carbonate and Organic-Rich Mudrock Unconventional Reservoirs (AAPG/SEPM) Room 408/409/410 Co-Chairs: T. Smith, R. W. Mitchell and C. Laughrey 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Carbonate Depositional Motifs and Cycle Stacking Patterns in the Eagle Ford Formation, Texas: R. Forkner, D. Minisini Sedimentary Response to OAE2 Across a Spectrum of Carbonate Depositional Settings: A Case Study from Examples in Central Italy: R. Forkner, G. Frijia, M. Mutti, D. Minisini Sequence Architecture, Heterogeneities and Seismic Expressions of a Vaca Muerta Outcrop Analog in the Neuqun Basin, Argentina Implications for Unconventional Exploration: M. Zeller, S. B. Reid, G. Eberli The Vaca Muerta-Quintuco Mixed System: A Regional Outcrop to Subsurface Overview: J. L. Massaferro, M. Zeller, D. L. Giunta, G. Sagasti, G. Eberli Break Diagenesis, Fluid, and Thermal History of Carbonate Mudrocks; An Example from the Lower Lodgepole Formation, Williston Basin: R. H. Goldstein, R. W. Mitchell* Chemostratigraphic Subdivision and Diagenesis in the Upper Green River Formation, Southern Uinta Basin, Utah: D. Keighley, M. D. Vanden Berg, G. Yan Sequence Stratigraphy in Mixed Lake Systems, Organic Richness and Climate Green River Formation, Lake Uinta, Part I, Sequence Stratigraphy: K. Tanavsuu-Milkeviciene, R. Sarg, Y. Bartov Sequence Stratigraphy in Mixed Lake Systems, Organic Richness, and Climate Green River Formation, Lake Uinta, Part II, Organic Richness: R. Sarg, K. Tanavsuu-Milkeviciene, F. Jufang Sequence Stratigraphy in Mixed Lake Systems, Organic Richness and Climate Green River Formation, Lake Uinta, Part III, Mineralogy and Geochemistry: J. Boak, S. Poole, R. Sarg, K. Tanavsuu-Milkeviciene

10:30 10:50

8:25

11:10

8:45

11:30

9:05

THEME 7 Advances in Carbon Capture Storage (DEG) Room 407 Co-Chairs: G. Bromhal and M. Sharma 8:00 8:05 Introductory Remarks Detailed CO2 Storage Reservoir Site Characterization: The Key to Optimizing Performance and Maximizing Storage Capacity: R. Surdam, Z. Jiao, Y. Ganshin, R. Bentley, M. Garcia-Gonzalez, S. Quillinan, J. F. McLauglin, P. Stauffer, H. Deng Experimentally Produced Increase in the Permeability of Caprock by Flow of Carbon Dioxide Saturated Water: P. Armitage, D. Faulkner, R. H. Worden, O. Blake Concentration-Dependent Effects of CO2 on Deep Subsurface Microbial Ecology Under Carbon Sequestration Conditions: D. Gulliver, K. Gregory, G. Lowry Determining Seal Effectiveness and Potential Buoyant Fluid Migration Pathways Using Shallow High-Resolution 3-D Seismic Imaging: Application for CO2 Storage Assessment on the Inner Texas Shelf: T. Meckel, N. Bangs, R. Trevino Break The Miocene Petroleum System, Northern Gulf of Mexico Basin: Implications for CO2 Sequestration in Offshore Texas State Waters: J. Taylor, D. Carr, T. Meckel, R. Trevino Loss of CO2 Gas into Formation Water at the Natural CO2 Deposit of Bravo Dome, New Mexico, USA: M. M. Cassidy, C. Ballentine, M. Hesse Mineralogy and Geochemistry of the Arbuckle Aquifer: Insights into Characterization for CO2 Sequestration: R. L. Barker, W. L. Watney, J. Rush, B. Strazisar, A. Scheffer, S. Datta Modeling Reservoir Rock and Formation Fluid Geochemical Interactions: Implications for CO2 Sequestration From Citronelle Oil Field, Alabama: A. Weislogel, R. J. Donahoe, G. Gase, K. Coffindaffer, T. Donovan Injection of Supercritical CO2 at Citronelle Field, Mobile County, Alabama, for Carbon Utilization and Storage:

9:25 10:10

10:30

10:50

8:25

11:10

8:45

11:30

9:05

9:25 10:10

THEME 8 Petroleum Systems: Dynamics of Porosity, Permeability, and Basin Evolution (AAPG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: D. Barnes and M. Sandstrom 8:00 8:05 8:25 Introductory Remarks TBD Development of Organic and Inorganic Porosity in the Cretaceous Eagle Ford Formation, South Texas: N. Fishman, J. M. Guthrie, M. Honarpour Printing Rocks to Experiment with Pore Space: F. Hasiuk Numerical Investigation of Hydrocarbon Transport by Solitary Waves in the Eugene Island Field, Gulf of Mexico Basin: A. Joshi, M. S. Appold, J. Nunn Break Recent Advances in Petroleum System Modeling of Geochemical Processes: TSR, SARA, and Biodegradation: K. E. Peters, T. Hantschel, A. I. Kauerauf, Y. Tang, B. Wygrala

10:30

10:50

8:45 9:05

11:10

9:25 10:10

11:30

698

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

10:30

10:50

11:10

11:30

Accounting for the Effects of Lateral Stress in Basin and Reservoir Quality Modeling in Compressive Tectonic Environments: D. Rajmon, L. Hathon Mapping the Extent and Distribution of Oil Formation in the Upper Bakken Formation, Williston Basin: M. D. Lewan, K. Marra, P. G. Lillis, D. K. Higley, S. Gaswirth 3-D Thermokinematic Modeling of the Colombian Eastern Cordillera: Refining the Timing of Oil Generation and Expulsion Using Multiple Thermocronometers: A. R. Mora, I. Quintero, R. Styron, M. Raghib, M. Parra, R. A. Ketcham Reservoir Wettability Alteration as a Key Enabling Factor for the Hydrocarbon Accumulations in the Deeply Buried Tight Reservoirs in Tarim Basin, China: M. Zhao, K. Liu, Y. Li, S. Liu, S. Fang, X. Guo, Q. Zhuo, X. Lu, J. Fan

Wednesday Morning Poster Sessions

Presenters in booths: 9:00 a.m.10:30 a.m. THEME 1 EMD Coal, Hydrates and Geothermal Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: B. Cardott and K. Newell Impact of Subsidence and Thermal History on Microbial Gas Generation in Ninilchik Field, Cook Inlet, Alaska: E. Hart, J. Nunn* Forecasting Coalbed Gas Resources Amount by Artificial Neural Network: Y. Yang Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Update: A. K. Markowski Abnormally High Geothermal Gradients in the Cherokee Basin, Southeastern Kansas, USA: K. D. Newell, D. F. Merriam Geophysical and Geological Evidences of a Petroleum System of Gas Hydrates in the Colombian Caribbean Sea: A. E. Calle Short Migration of Methane into a Gas Hydrate-Bearing Sand Layer at Walker Ridge, Gulf of Mexico: A. Cook, A. Malinverno Reservoir Modeling of Production of CH4 From Natural Gas Hydrates by Injection of a CO2+N2 Gas Mixture: N. Garapati, P. McGuire, B. J. Anderson Gas Hydrate System Modeling in the Eastern Nankai Trough, Japan: T. Fujii, T. Ukita, Y. Komatsu, N. Oikawa, B. P. Wygrala, T. Fuchs, W. Rotke, T. Aung Abiogenic Gas: Should the Carbon Isotope Order be Reversed?: Z. Wei, Z. Cao, F. Zhao Gas Hydrates Up-Streaming: S. Mishra AVO Attribute Analysis for Gas Hydrate in Shenhu Area: Y. Rui, W. Nengyou, S. Zhibin, L. Jinqiang Geochemical and Physical Evidence of Methane Hydrate in Marine Sediments: E. R. Buchwalter, A. Cook, S. Welch, J. Sheets, K. Rose, C. Disenhof Relative Controls of Sea-Level and Climate on Coal Seam Composition and Thickness in the Westphalian C (Pennsylvanian/Upper Carboniferous) Four Corners Formation (Breathitt Group), Central Appalachian Basin, USA: R. Jerrett, D. Hodgson, S. S. Flint, R. Davies Optimal Locations for Lunar Settlements and Industrial Facilities: W. A. Ambrose, B. L. Cutright, D. Beike THEME 1 Unconventional Resources in China (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Chair: G. Wang Evaluation of Terrestrial Gas Shales: Case Study From the Ordos Basin, North China: J. Zhao, Y. Bai, Q. Cao, C. Er, W. Shen

Geochemistry of Palaeozoic Black Shales in Northeast Sichuan Basin, China: Y. Liang, S. Zhang, G. Zhu Geochemical Characterization of the Lower Cambrian Black Shales in the Southern Guizhou Depression, SW China: X. He, G. Yao, Z. Chen, J. Shou, A. Shen, J. Wu The Effect of Organic Matter on the Methane Adsorption Capacity of Paleozoic Shales From the Sichuan Basin, China: S. Wang, Z. Song, T. Cao, X. Song Current Status and Prospect of Unconventional Oil and Gas Development in China: X. Zhang, B. Cui, H. Deng, L. Cai, B. Gong, C. Ge Shale Gas Geological Conditions in the Southeast of the Ordos Basin, Central China: C. Liu, Z. Xu, S. Zheng, J. Liu The Characteristics of Fractures and Its Controlling on the Deep Basin Gas in the Yinan to Reservoirs of Kuqa Depression, China: W. P. Wang, X. Chen, Q. X. Pang, C. Y. Guo, G. Guo Geologic Factors of Formation of Tight Oil and Its Resource Potential in China: F. Huang, T. Yang, B. Guo, X. Li, W. Yan, H. Ma Shale Composition and Pore Structure Controls on Gas Storage Potential of Silurian Marine Shale and Jurassic Lacustrine Shale, Central China: Y. Hou, S. He, N. Harris, Y. Wang, J. Zhang, C. Cheng Late Mesozoic Volcanic Activities of the Songliao Basin, NE China: Implications for Volcanic Hydrocarbon Reservoirs: F. Meng, J. Liu*, Y. Cui Characteristics of Pore Structures and Controlling Factors of the Lower Paleozoic Marine Shales in the Western Region of Middle Yangtze, Central China: S. He, Y. Wang, B. Zhang, Y. Hou, C. Cheng Shale Fracture Characteristics and Its Main Controlling Factors in the Southeast of Chongqing: W. Zeng Absorbed Gas Content and its Controlling Factors of the Lower Paleozoic Marine Shale in the Sichuan Basin, Southwest China: Y. Wang, L. Liu A Probability of Jurassic Continental Shale Gas in the Tarim Basin, NW China: Petrologic, Geochemical and Reservoir Beds Conditions: Y. Wang, X. Gao, L. Liu Geological Features, Main Types and Resource Potential of Tight Sandstone Gas in China: L. Jianzhong, G. Bincheng*, L. Xin What Control Biogenic Gas Formation in Qaidam Basin, China: Y. Shuai, S. Zhang, S. Grasby, Z. Chen THEME 5 Diagenetic Effects on Clastic Reservoirs - Climate and Weathering Controls (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: C. Macaulay, K. Benison and R. Scheerhorn The Diagenesis Study of Tight Sandstone Reservoir of Lower Cretaceous in The Steep Slope Aera of Baiyinchagan Depression, Erlian Basin, China: Y. Ji, Y. Zhou Porosity Evolution Model Analysis of Sandstones in Sedimentary Basins: A Case Study from Ordos Basin: H. Shi Evolution of Diagenetic Fluids in Red Beds Reservoirs of Eocene Dongying Depression: Evidence from Fluid Inclusions: J. Wang, Y. Cao, M. Feely, G. Song Leached Secondary Porosity by Meteoric Water in the Upper Triassic Yanchang Formation of the Ordos Basin, China: Y. Lan, S. Huang, K. Huang Petrology and Porosity Development of the Oligocene and Eocene Sandstones of the Wasco Oil Field, Central San Joaquin, California, USA: O. E. Olabisi, R. A. Horton*, A. B. Kaess, S. E. Caffee Simulation Experiments on Sandstone Mechanical Compaction Diagenetic and Its Physical Properties Evolution: K. Xi, Y. Cao, J. Wang, G. Yuan, T. Yang

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

699

THEME 5 SEPM Research Symposium-Depositional Systems and Sedimentology of Shale and Tight-Sand Reservoirs Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: S. Egenhoff, A. Carroll and B. Zempolich Depositional Environment and Sedimentary Facies of the Proximal Middle Devonian (Givetian) Geneseo Formation of New York, USA: R. D. Wilson, J. Schieber Study on the Fine-grained Sediments and Tight Light Oil of Chang 7 Formation in Upper Triassic, Ordos Basin, China: S. Lin, C. Zou, X. Yuan Anatomy and Sequence Architecture of the Early Post-Rift in Central Neuqun Basin (Argentina): Implications for Unconventional Reservoirs: E. Schwarz, G. Veiga, L. A. Spalletti, J. L. Massaferro Insights into the Appalachian Basin Middle Devonian Depositional System From U-Pb Zircon Geochronology of Volcanic Ashes in the Marcellus Shale and Onondaga Limestone: C. Parrish, J. Toro, A. Weislogel, J. Hayward, J. Wooden Recognition Criteria for Distinguishing Between Hemipelagic and Pelagic Mudrocks in the Characterization of Deepwater Reservoir Heterogeneity: J. Ochoa, J. Wolak, M. Gardner Application of a Depositional and Sequence-Stratigraphic Model for Geocellular Modeling of the Woodford Formation, Oklahoma: K. Hlava, D. Alfred, B. Ramirez, J. Rodriguez On Climate, Weathering, and Siliciclastic Sedimentation in Tropical Lacustrine Rift Basins: M. McGlue, S. Ivory, G. Ellis, A. Boehlke, M. Blome, A. Cohen, R. Lyons, C. Scholz Fine-Grain Sediment Dispersal Pathways During the Late Pleistocene in Canterbury Basin, South Island of New Zealand: T. Villasenor, J. M. Jaeger Clay Mineralogy and Cation Exchange in the Marcellus Shale: P. Staub, P. Benelli, T. Bank, R. Giese Experimental Measurement of and Diagenetic and Depositional Controls on the Permeability of Caprock and Tight Reservoir Lithologies at the Krechba Field, Algeria: P. Armitage, R. H. Worden, D. Faulkner, A. Butcher, A. Aplin, N. Clark Comparing Geologic Proxies of Prolific U. S. Shale Gas and Oil Shale Basins with Emerging European Shale Gas and Oil Shale Plays The Development of a Comprehensive On-line Database: T. Ochmanski, M. Hofmann*, A. T. Halamski, M. Hendrix, P. Luczynski, W. Kozlowski, J. Trzcinski, K. Wjcik Distribution and Origin of Carbonate Cements in Paleogene Nearshore Subaqueous Lacustrine Fans of Dongying Depression of Bohai Bay Basin in China: L. Zhang, W. Yang, X. Luo, Y. Gao, S. Liu, H. Luo The Reservoir Geology of Mudrocks: C. D. Hall Fecal Pellets and their Significance in Unconventional Resource Shales: Part I: Physical and Petrophysical Properties: R. M. Slatt, N. OBrien, E. J. Torres, R. Philp Subsurface Stratigraphic Distribution and Evolution of the Upper Cretaceous Coals, Williams Fork and Related Formations, Piceance Basin, Northwestern Colorado: Implications for Source Rocks in the Basin-centered Gas Accumulation: P. Weimer, S. Cumella, J. NIcolette, K. Schwendeman, M. Leibovitz, R. Bouroullec, E. Gustason, D. Nummedal Sequence Stratigraphic Evolution of the Late Cretaceous Shorelines from Subsurface Studies, Piceance Basin, Northwestern Colorado: Implications for Reservoirs in the Basin-centered Gas Accumulation: P. Weimer, S. Cumella, K. Schwendeman, J. Nicolette, M. Leibovitz, R. Bouroullec, E. Gustason, D. Nummedal Atlas of Cretaceous Gas Fields, Piceance Basin, Northwest Colorado: Tight Gas Sandstones and the Evolving Niobrara Play: N. Rogers, S. Cumella, P. Weimer*, M. Leibovitz

Subsurface Stratigraphic Distribution and Evolution of the Upper Cretaceous Fluvial Sandstones and Related Deposits, Williams Fork Formation, Piceance Basin, Northwestern Colorado: Implications for Reservoirs and Regional Seals in the Basin-centered Gas Accumulation: P. Weimer, S. Cumella, R. Wild, M. Leibovitz, J. Nicolette, K. Schwendeman, J. Cantwell, R. Bouroullec, E. Gustason, D. Nummedal Subsurface Stratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous Lower Mancos Shale and Related Units, Piceance Basin, Northwestern Colorado: N. Rogers, P. Weimer, S. Cumella, E. Gustason, D. Nummedal THEME 5 Source-to-Sink Sedimentary Systems (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: A. Weislogel and R. Abegg Sediment Budgets and Depositional Processes Influencing Submarine Canyon Systems, Equatorial Guinea, West Africa: Z. R. Jobe Provenance of the Athabasca Oil Sands, Alberta, Canada: Reconstructing an Ancient Source-to-Sink System: C. S. Benyon, A. Leier, D. Leckie, A. Webb, S. M. Hubbard, G. Gehrels Effects of Climate Scenarios in a Small-Scale Shelf-Slope-Basin Model: Implications to Source-to-Sink Dynamics: D. B. da Silva, R. Manica, E. Puhl, A. Viana Impact of Facies and Tectonics on Provenance Signal in the Eastern North Sea Basin: Miocene Fluvio-Deltaic Sand Assessed by Zircon Ages and Heavy Minerals: M. Olivarius, E. S. Rasmussen, V. Siersma, C. Knudsen, T. F. Kokfelt, N. Keulen Sedimentary Characteristics of Shallow Delta Deposits in the Lower Part of Minghuazhen Formation of the BZ 19-4 Oil Fields: Y. Nanxin Unconfined Flow Deposits in Front Sandbodies of Shallow Water Deltaic Distributary Systems: Examples From the Yellow River Mouth Sag, Offshore Bohai Sea, China: X. Zhang, L. Tian, X. Zhou, C. Niu Seismic Geomorphology and Stratigraphy of Coalescing Slope Apron in Taibei Depression, East China Sea: R. Guo, C. Liu, J. Liang, Z. Zhao, C. Wang Shallow Water Delta and Beach Bar Mixed Deposition Model During Lake Level Fluctuation in E1f1 of Gaoyou Sag, East China: H. Lu, Y. Ji, Y. Liu, C. Shang, Q. Li, Y. Wang, M. Li

THEME 6 Porosity Creation in Carbonate Reservoirs (SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: P. Harris, P. Wright and J. W. Bishop Grayburg Formation (Permian, Lower Guadalupian) UpliftRelated Porosity-Permeability Enhancement, Permian Basin, USA: R. F. Lindsay A Kras Redefinition or: What to Call Subsurface Dissolution: H. G. Machel Diagenesis of the Central Luconia Carbonates: The Roles of Late and High Temperature Corrosive Fluids in Enhancing Reservoir Quality: M. Y. Ali The Origin of Micro Pores in the Upper Ordovician Lianglitage Group Carbonate Reservoir Within Tazhong No. I Slope Break Zone, Tarim Basin, China: Z. Bo Evolution of Greenhouse-to-Icehouse Meteoric Diagenesis in an Isolated Carbonate Platform and Its Effects on Porosity and Permeability Networks in Subsurface Reservoirs, Tengiz Reservoir, Kazakhstan: D. A. Katz, K. Hillbun, T. Playton, P. M. Harris, J. Humphrey, J. Hsieh

700

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

 Controls on Hydrothermal Fluid Flow and Porosity Evolution in the Arbuckle Group and Overlying Units: B. D. King, R. H. Goldstein Effect and Spatial Distribution of Reservoir Character in the Fault-Related Dolomite Bodies, Upper Cretaceous Ramales Formation (Basque-Cantabrian Basin, NW Spain): M. Shah, I. U. Haq THEME 7 Water Risks and Mitigation Strategies in Unconventional Development (DEG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: K. Rose and J. H. Williams Modeling Flowback Chemistry at Marcellus Shale Hydraulic Fracturing: V. N. Balashov, S. L. Brantley, T. Engelder Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Drilling Operations: P. Ziemkiewicz, J. Hause Development of a Methodology to Evaluate Potential Fluid Migration Pathways From Deep Shale Units to Surficial Aquifers in a Context of Shale Gas Production: C. Rivard, R. Lefebvre, D. Lavoie, S. Sejourne, M. J. Duchesne, J. Ahad, N. Benoit, B. Wang, A. Pugin, C. Lamontagne Single Stranded DNA as a Source-Specific Hydrogeology Tracer: J. Chow, J. Rudulph, P. Weiner Stable Isotopic and Geochemical Spatial Analysis of Surface Waters in an Area of Rapidly Expanding Marcellus Shale Development in the Monongahela River Basin of West Virginia: A. J. Pelak, S. Sharma Character and Origin of Flowback Brine from Marcellus Gas Wells in Pennsylvania: A. W. Rose, L. Haluszczak, L. Kump The Strontium Isotopic and Geochemical Evolution of Produced Waters From the Marcellus Formation: R. C. Capo, B. W. Stewart, E. L. Rowan, A. J. Wall, E. C. Chapman, K. Schroder, R. W. Hammack Facilitating Shale Play Development in Pennsylvania Meeting the Need for Nearby Brine Disposal Wells: D. E. Skoff, D. A. Billman Adaptive Water/Energy Management Solutions From Regional to Global Scale: G. M. Hanson Shallow Groundwater and Soil Chemistry Response to Three Years of Subsurface Drip Irrigation Using Coalbed Methane Produced Water: M. Engle, C. R. Bern, A. Boehlke, N. J. Geboy, K. Schroder, J. W. Zupancic The Cincinnati Group as a Caprock: Implications for Utica Production and CO2 Sequestration: M. Hawrylak, J. Daniels, A. Cook, E. Bair, S. Welch, J. Sheets, A. Swift Probing the Influence of Reactions Between Fracture Fluids and Marcellus Shale on the Composition of Major Ion and Trace Element Fluid Chemistry in Flowback Waters: A. Hakala, C. Joseph, V. Marcon, T. Bank, S. Hedges, T. R. Malizia, P. Mouser, S. Liu The Evolution of Coalbed Reservoir Fluids From Outcrop into the Basin: Applying Isotopic and Geochemical Techniques to Define Fluid Pathways and Methanogenic Processes, with Implications for Coalbed Natural Gas Production: S. A. Quillinan, C. D. Frost, J. F. McLauglin Well Infrastructure and Geologic Setting at NETLs Marcellus Shale Test Site in Greene County, Pennsylvania: R. W. Hammack

Tectono-Sequence Stratigraphy of Lower Cretaceous in Tamtsag Basin, Mongolia: Sequence Architecture, Depositional Systems, and Controls on Sediment Infill: Y. Zhou, Y. Ji Paleocene Deepwater Frontal Spalys, Cretaceous Pre-Basaltic Tilted Half Grabens and Their Significance in Hydrocarbon Prospectivity, Kerala-Konkan Basin, Western Offshore, India: D. K. Panda, S. K. Sahu, D. K. Jha, R. Sundriyal, G. Ram Structural Controls on the Stratigraphic Architecture of NetTransgressive Shallow-Marine Reservoirs in a Salt-influenced Rift Basin: Middle-to-Upper Jurassic Egersund Basin, Norwegian North Sea: A. Mannie, C. A. Jackson, G. J. Hampson Quantifying the Uplift Magnitude Caused by the Messinian Salinity Crisis and Its Impact on the Eastern Mediterranean Petroleum Systems: A. N. Al-Balushi, A. Fraser, P. A. Allen, C. A. Jackson Implications for Tectonic Control on Paleogeography and Sediment Dispersal Pathway: Integrated U-Pb Detrital Zircon Age-analysis of the Paleogene Missouri River Headwater System, SW Montana: D. E. Barber, R. K. Schwartz, A. Weislogel, L. Schricker, R. C. Thomas Influence of Silica Diagenesis on Seal Development: Insights from 3-D Seismic Reflection and Well Data From the Norwegian Margin: T. Wrona, C. A. Jackson, M. Huuse, K. G. Taylor Porosity, Permeability, Overpressure and Effective Stress Evolution in the Auger Basin, Gulf of Mexico: B. Gao, P. Flemings Physical Properties Cutoff and Controlling Factors of Effective Reservoir of Middle-Lower Third Member of Shahejie Formation of the Yonganzhen Area in Dongying Depression, Bohaiwan Basin, China: J. Liu, Y. Cao, T. Fan, J. Wang Depositional and Burial Domain Influences on Microporosity Modalities in Carbonaceous Mudstones of the Upper Cretaceous Colorado Group, Western Canada Foreland Basin: P. Jiang, B. Cheadle* Authigenic Minerals and Diagenetic Evolution in Altered Volcanics and Their Impacts on Hydrocarbon Reservoirs: Evidence from Lower Permian in Northwestern Margin of Junggar Basin, China: Z. Shifa, Z. Shifa Thermal Evolution of the Paleozoic Hydrocarbon Source Rocks in the Sichuan Basin: A Joint Inversion Result of Ro Data and Thermochronological Modeling: C. Zhu, S. Hu, S. Rao Thermal History and Hydrocarbon Kitchen Evolution in the Jianghan Basin: Z. Li, Y. Zhao, C. Liu, P. Zhao A Quantitative Assessment of Lateral Variability in a Cyclic Alluvial Succession Using Terrestrial LIDAR Data: Paleocene Nacimiento Formation, San Juan Basin, New Mexico: J. Carritt, J. Frechette, C. Bodman, G. Weissmann Combining High-Resolution Digital Imagery and Terrestrial LIDAR to Quantify Bounding Surface Hierarchy for Use in Subsurface Fluid Flow Models: A. Pickel, J. Frechette, G. Weissmann

THEME 9 Extensional Tectonics: Implications for Tectonostratigraphic Evolution and Play Element Prediction (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: J. Callot and O. N. Pearson Seismic Refraction Profiles Indicate a History of Syn-Rift Volcanism and Seafloor-Spreading in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: D. Eddy, G. Christeson, H. van Avendonk, I. Norton, G. Karner, C. Johnson, E. Kneller, J. Snedden Tectonic Evolution of Tarim Basin in Cambrian-Ordovician and the Implication for Reservoir Development: B. Yu, J. Li Meso-Cenozoic Tectonic Evolvement and Oil Gas Accumulation in Qaidam Foreland Basin, China: F. Zhao

THEME 8 Analysis of Sedimentary Basins and Petroleum Systems (AAPG/SEPM) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: K. Dick and J. Pashin

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

701

 Oblique Rift System in Caswell Sub-Basin, Browse Basin (NW Shelf, Australia): Insights From 3-D Seismic Interpretation and Structural Modeling: L. Wu, C. F. Kluth, B. D. Trudgill Models of Fault Transfer Zones in Rift Settings: Insights From Laser Scanned Clay Models: D. Paul, S. Mitra Discussion on Mesozoic Basin Patterns and Evolution in The Eastern North China Block: Z. Wu, W. Li, S. Yan Distinctive Two Stage Syn-Rift Activities of the Backarc Ulleung Basin, Korea, and Implications for New Plays: K. A. Lee, B. Woo, B. Park, S. Huh, E. Roh, B. Choi* Extensional Faulting and Related Fold Evolution Along the Oseberg st Fault System, Norwegian North Sea: J. P. de Boer, R. Gawthorpe, C. A. Jackson, I. Sharp, P. Whipp Has the Western Greenland Continental Margin Experienced Depth-Dependent Stretching?: S. Alsulami, D. A. Paton, D. Cornwell, G. Stuart Mobile Salt Thickness as a Control on the Structural Style and Evolution Of Rift Basins: Danish Central Graben, North Sea: O. B. Duffy, R. Gawthorpe, S. H. Brocklehurst, M. Docherty The Influence of Synrift Salt on Deformation During and After Rifting: Examples From the Orpheus Rift Basin, Offshore Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, Canada: B. R. Hanafi, M. O. Withjack*, R. W. Schlische, Z. Syamsir, M. A. Durcanin Shifting Pattern of Divergent and Convergent Plate Boundaries in Oceanic Regions: K. S. Misra, A. Misra

1:20

1:40 2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

3:45

4:05

4:25

THEME 9 Impact of Faulting, Fracturing, and Stress in Shale and Tight Reservoirs (AAPG) Exhibition Hall 8:30 a.m.12:00 p.m. Co-Chairs: E. Ukar and T. B. Warner Characteristics and Origin of Microfracture in Lower Cretaceous Tight Sandstone from Kuqa Foreland Basin, NW China: L. Chun Horizontal Permeability Anisotropy in Intact Tight Reservoir and Caprock Samples Caused by In-Situ Stress Anisotropy: P. Armitage, R. H. Worden, D. Faulkner, O. Blake Fault Displacement Gradients and Associated Deformation on Normal Faults: A. P. Morris, R. N. McGinnis, D. A. Ferrill Marcellus Fullbore-Resistivity Image Logs: The Bearing of Regional Structures and Stratigraphy on Steeply-Dipping Fractures: T. B. Warner, R. Jacobi Physical Modeling of Fluid Overpressure and Hydraulic Fracturing in Source Rocks in Various Tectonic Contexts: A. Zanella, P. R. Cobbold Fracturing in Basin Models, Application to the Barnett Formation in the Fort Worth Basin, Texas: W. Sassi, L. Milelli, M. Gasparrini Dynamic Branched Fractures in Pulverized Rocks From a Deep Borehole: D. Korngreen, A. Sagy Peeking into Continent-Building Processes Through the Bogda Window, Turpan-Junggar Basin, NW China: W. Yang, J. L. Crowley, J. Obrist, Q. Feng, Y. Liu, N. Tabor, X. Luo

4:45

Shale Gas Potential of Lower Goru Formation Over Lakhra High in the Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan: A. Hussain, F. Iqbal Siddiqui, M. Khan, A. Adhami Status of Unconventional Shale Gas Exploration in India: A. S. Boruah Geothermal Gradient Estimate in Pilot Study Areas of Gas Hydrates in the Colombia Caribbean Sea: A. E. Calle, A. Vesga The Distribution Pattern of SRV Fractures in Horizontal Shale Gas Well, Lacustrine Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin, China: X. Wang, R. Gao, L. Zhang, F. Shen, J. Wu, J. Zhang, Q. Guo, Q. Liang Break Seismic Characterization for Tight Gas Sand With 3D3C Data: Y. Zhou, C. Peng, D. Wang, S. Xu, M. Xia, X. Zhang, D. Daoyong, R. Yan, Y. Zhang Challenges to Explore Shallow Sandstone Reservoir for Optimized Unconventional Development Strategy in Kuwait: H. Ferdous, P. Chaudhary, F. Ahmad, F. Abbas, K. Ahmed, J. Llerena, I. Sammak Origin and Evolution of Waters in the Hancheng Coal Seams, the Ordos Basin, as Revealed From Water Chemistry and Isotope (H, O, 129I) Analyses: M. Xingzhi, S. Yan, S. Liu, J. Lin, H. Feng Characteristics and Models for Deposition and Accumulation of Gas Hydrate in Northern Continental Slope, South China Sea: J. Wang, X. Yu, S. Li, X. Zeng, W. Li Fractured Reservoir Prediction A Case Study in the Sichuan Basin: Y. Ling, X. Guo, Q. Song

THEME 6 High Resolution Chronostratigraphy of Carbonate Systems and Reservoirs (AAPG/SEPM) Room 317/318 Co-Chairs: T. Playton, T. Rasbury and J. Humphrey 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Uncertainties of Extracting Amplitude and Frequency of Orbitally Driven Sea-Level Fluctuations from ShallowWater Carbonate Cycles: G. P. Eberli Suborbital Sea-Level Oscillations During the Last Interglacial Highstand (MIS 5e): Evidence from New Providence Platform, Bahamas: K. L. Jackson, G. Eberli, S. B. Reid, P. Harris, D. F. McNeill Stable Carbon Isotopes for Constraining Sequence Stratigraphic and Paleogeographic Interpretations of Carbonate Successions: Fact or Fantasy?: S. C. Ruppel, H. Rowe Direct In Situ Dating of Carbonates by LA-ICP-(MC)MS and Its Applications to Chronostratigraphy: R. R. Parrish, T. Rasbury Break Development of Regional Stratigraphic Frameworks and Geological Implications in Upper Devonian Carbonates Using Integrated Chronostratigraphy, Canning Basin, Western Australia: T. Playton, D. Katz, K. Hillbun, E. Tohver, R. Hocking, P. Haines, K. Trinajstic, P. Montgomery, J. Hansma, S. Pisarevsky, J. Kirschvink, M. Yan, K. Ratcliffe Application of Carbon Isotope Chemostratigraphy as a Chronostratigraphic Tool in Upper Devonian Carbonate Slopes: Lennard Shelf, Canning Basin, Western Australia: K. Hillbun, D. Katz, T. Playton, E. Lewarch, K. Trinajstic, E. Tohver, P. Haines, J. Hansma, R. Hocking, J. Kirschvink, M. Yan, K. Ratcliffe, S. Pisarevsky, P. Montgomery, P. Harris, P. Ward

1:40

2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

Wednesday Afternoon Oral Sessions

THEME 1 Worldwide Unconventional Reservoirs (AAPG/EMD) Room 301/302/303/304/305 Chair: S. Egenhoff 1:15 Introductory Remarks

3:45

702

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

4:05

4:25

4:45

Use of Carbon Isotopes as a Chrononstratigraphic Tool From Outcrops and Subsurface Core of the Mississippian Madison Limestone, Wyoming and Montana: D. A. Katz, M. R. Buoniconti, I. P. Montaez, P. Swart, G. Eberli, T. Smith Using Chemo and Magnetostratigraphy to Define a Chronostratigraphic Framework in an Isolated Carbonate Platform: the Tengiz Field, Republic of Kazakhstan: K. T. Ratcliffe, M. Urbat, E. Davies, T. Playton, D. A. Katz High-Resolution Carbon Isotope Chemostratigraphy of the Niobrara Formation, Denver Basin, Colorado: J. D. Humphrey, L. Stout, L. Canter, K. Nakamura

1:40 2:00

2:20

2:40 3:25

THEME 9 Geomechanical Modeling of Natural and Stimulated Reservoirs (AAPG) Room 319/320/321 Co-Chairs: R. Shackleton and L. Chiaramonte 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Constraining Geomechanical Models of Hydraulic Fractures Using Seismic Moment Tensors: T. Urbancic, A. Baig, S. Goldstein A Unique Mechanical Method to Predict the Density and Distribution of Natural Fractures From Well Logs: M. Welch, R. K. Davies, R. J. Knipe An Integrated Geomechanical and Microseismic Study of Multi-Well Hydraulic Fracture Stimulation in The Bakken Formation: Y. Yang, M. Zoback, M. Simon, T. Dohmen Geomechanical Response of the Tuben Fm: A Compartmentalized CO2 Storage Reservoir, Snhvit Norway: L. Chiaramonte, J. A. White, P. Ringrose

3:45

4:05

4:25

1:40

4:45

Mapping With LIDAR-Based DEMs A Geologists New Tool: T. G. Whitfield Continued Evaluation of the Hydrocarbon Potential of the Utica/Point Pleasant in Eastern Ohio and Western Pennsylvania: J. Reed, S. W. Brown, J. E. Zumberge Hydrocarbon Resources in the Upper Ordovician Black Shales in Quebec (Eastern Canada): From Gas/ Condensate in the Utica to Oil in the Macasty: D. Lavoie, R. Thriault, S. Sejourne, R. Lefebvre, X. Mallet Break Geologic Overview and Activity Update for the UticaPoint Pleasant Shale Play in Ohio: C. J. Perry, R. A. Riley, M. S. Erenpreiss The Time-Transgressive Deposition of the Utica Shale in New York Revealed Using Carbon Isotope Stratigraphy: J. G. Metzger, D. Fike, T. Smith Identification of Future Oil Potential From Upper Devonian Venango Sandstones in Central Appalachians: E. G. Ober, C. Eckert Sequence Stratigraphic Framework Approach for the Identification and Mapping of Upper Devonian Siltstones in Northern West Virginia, Appalachian Basin: C. Eckert, E. G. Ober, S. McCallum Appalachian Basin Structural Styles A Bottoms Up Approach to Understanding Play Types and Depositional Controls: B. J. Carney

2:00

2:20

THEME 5 Diagenetic Effects on Clastic Reservoirs Climate and Weathering Controls (SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: C. Macaulay, K. Benison and R. Scheerhorn 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Stacked Sandstones Litharenite Seal and Quartzarenite Reservoir: Synsedimentary Pedogenic and Groundwater Diagenesis in Jurassic Paleovalley Sandstones, Medicine River Jurassic D Pool, Medicine River Area, Alberta, Canada: F. F. Krause, A. F. Mellor, A. Wiseman, C. Debuhr Influence of Climate on the Early Diagenesis of Triassic and Jurassic Sediments: R. Weibel, M. Olivarius, H. Friis, L. Nielsen, A. Mathiesen Marine Fine-Grained Sediment Tortuosity Derived From the Analysis of Three-Dimensional Reconstructions of Organo-Clay Fabric at the Nanometer Scale: J. R. Douglas, K. Curry, R. Bennett, A. Head Regional Variation in Detrital Composition, Diagenesis, and Reservoir Quality of Deep Tuscaloosa and Woodbine Sandstones, Gulf of Mexico, USA: S. P. Dutton, W. A. Ambrose, R. G. Loucks

THEME 9 Fault Analysis and Fault Controlled Traps (AAPG) Room 319/320/321 Co-Chairs: C. A. Jackson and P. N. Gusev 3:20 3:25 Introductory Remarks Defining a Trap: Implications of (Not) Understanding Fault Dimensions From Seismic Data in Exploration and Production: A. Rotevatn, H. Fossen Hierarchical Fault and Fracture Prediction: W. Athmer, A. Bounaim, L. Snneland The Role of Polygonal Fault Mapping in De-Risking Deep Water Reservoir Presence: A 3-D Seismic Reflection Case Study from Offshore Norway: C. A. Jackson, S. Mahlo, O. Briggs Petrophysical Properties of Deformation Band Fault Zones in the Entrada Sandstone, Utah: K. Fredericks Fault Sealing Processes at Ceiba Field, Offshore West Africa: J. Goode, C. Clechenko, W. F. Dula, B. Kilsdonk, S. Mondziel 1:40

2:00

3:45 4:05

2:20

4:25 4:45

THEME 2 World Class Resources Emerge from a Historic Basin II (AAPG) Room 403/404/405 Co-Chairs: L. J. Morris and S. McCleery 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Taking the Utica to Its Depositional Limits: Through Facies Changes and Across the Entire Appalachian, Illinois and Michigan Basins: R. A. Williams, D. L. Leighton

THEME 5 Source-to-Sink Sedimentary Systems (SEPM) Room 406 Co-Chairs: R. Abegg and A. Weislogel 3:20 3:25 3:45 4:05 Introductory Remarks Non-Equilibrium Source-to-Sink Systems: Controls and Examples: O. J. Martinsen, T. Smme Climatic Versus Eustatic Controls on Sediment Flux to the Indus Submarine Fan, Indian Ocean: P. Clift Multiple Provenances on Predicting Reservoir Quality: Source to Sink Sedimentation in a Dryland FluvialAeolian System, Western Lake Eyre Basin, Central

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

703

4:25

4:45

Australia: S. Menacherry, T. Payenberg, S. Lang, W. Heins The Importance of Fractured Olistoliths and Shelf-Gravel Sorting for the Construction of a Tectonically-Controlled Carpathian Margin, Albian Bucegi Conglomerates, Eastern Carpathians, Romania: C. Olariu, D. C. Jipa, R. J. Steel, C. Ungureanu Reservoir Development in Volcanic Provinces: A. Hartley, A. Ebinghaus, D. Jolley, M. Hole, A. Barker, R. Taylor, J. Millett

2:00 2:20

2:40 3:25

3:45 THEME 10 Microseismic Methods Relevant to Fracturing and Exploration Geophysics (AAPG) Room 407 Co-Chairs: W. Harbert and T. Jordan 1:15 1:20 1:40 Introductory Remarks Estimating Event Growth From Pumped Fluid Volumes: J. P. McKenna, Q. Bui, D. Abbott, D. Domalakes Imaging Fracture Networks With Ambient Seismicity: A. Lacazette, S. Fereja, C. Sicking, J. Vermilye, P. Geiser, L. Thompson Assessing the Impact of Recording Geometry on Microseismic Data: An Example From the Marcellus: J. Hnat, A. Reynolds, W. Langin, J. Le Calvez, J. Tan Characterization of Hydraulic Fracturing in the Marcellus Shale Using Microseismic Data: Y. Tan, R. Zhou, T. Engelder, S. Maxwell, M. Mueller, M. P. Thornton Break Using Microseismicity to Identify Changes in Fracture Behavior During Hydraulic Fracture Stimulations: T. Urbancic, A. Baig, K. Kocon, K. Tremblay Using Microseismicity to Understand Subsurface Fracture Systems and Increase the Effectiveness of Completions: Eagle Ford Shale, TX: J. Detring, S. Williams-Stroud Source Mechanism Analysis to Determine Optimal Wellbore Orientation in the Eagle Ford Play: C. Telker The Magnitude vs. Distance Plot: A Tool for Fault Reactivation Identification: C. Cabarcas A More Complete Catalog of the 2011 Youngstown, Ohio Earthquake Sequence From Template Matching Reveals a Strong Correlation to Pumping at a Wastewater Injection Well: S. Holtkamp, B. Currie, M. R. Brudzinski

4:05

4:25

2:00

4:45

2:20

Characteristics and Resource Potential of Lacustrine Shale Oil and Gas in China: Z. Jin Shale Characteristics and Gas Bearing Controlling Factors in Wufeng Formation and Longmaxi Formation in Southeast Chongqing, China: J. Tieya, Z. Jinchuan, T. Xuan Break Preliminary Research on the Potential of Terrestrial Shale Oil in China: A Case Study of Upper Triassic Shale in the Ordos Basin: C. Zou, S. Wu*, Z. Yang, R. Zhu, S. Tao, B. Bai, X. Zhai Petrology of Siltstone Laminae in Zhangjiatan Shale of the 7th Member of Yanchang Formation and Their Significance for Shale Gas, Ordos Basin, China: Y. Lei, X. Wang, X. Luo, L. Zhang, L. Zhang, C. Jiang, M. Cheng, Y. Yu Study on the Experienced Highest Paleotemperature and Thermal Maturity Evolution of the Lower Paleozoic Marine Shales in the West of Middle Yangtze Region, Central China: J. Zhang, S. He, J. Yi, Y. Hou Organic Matter Characteristics in Silurian Marine Mudstone and Factors to Shale Gas Accumulation in Sichuan Basin, China: X. Zhang, Y. Li, H. Lv, J. Yan, T. Zhang Lacustrine Shale Gas Exploration in Yanchang Exploratory Block: X. Wang, L. Zhang, C. Jiang, B. Sun, C. Gao, B. Fang, B. Fan

2:40 3:25

THEME 1 Unconventional Reservoirs: The State of the Art (AAPG) Room 413/414/415 Co-Chairs: J. Gale and H. Cander 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Tight Shale Heterogeneity and Pore Structure at the Nanometer to Centimeter Scale: J. Schieber, R. Newhart, S. Green, R. Suarez-Rivera, P. Gathogo, J.Petriello, W. Huster Shale Gas Reservoir Families Translating Sequence Stratigraphy into Robust Predictions of Reservoir Distribution and Potential: K. Bohacs, R. Lazar, J. Ottmann, K. Potma, T. Demko Quantifying Natural Fracture Spatial Organization: Application in Shales: J. Gale Cores Behind the Outcrop, Vertical and Horizontal Facies Variability: D. Minisini, J. S. Eldrett, R. Forkner, O. Aysen, S. Bergman, C. Macaulay Break Shale Gas Geochemistry Mythbusting: H. Dembicki Thermal and Pore Pressure History of the Haynesville Shale in North Louisiana: A Two-Dimensional Numerical Study: W. Torsch, J. Nunn* Trace Elements and Basin Processes: Woodford Shale, Permian Basin, West Texas: N. B. Harris Laboratory Measurements of Matrix Permeability and Slippage Enhanced Permeability in Gas Shales: R. Heller, J. Vermylen, M. Zoback Experience and Impact of Measuring Permeability on Intact Samples at Reservoir Conditions for Unconventional Shales: R. Rosen, T. Kosanke*, M. Sharf-Aldin, W. Mickelson, R. Patterson, F. Mir, M. Paiangle, B. Kurtoglu, B. Ramirez, T. Baker

3:45

4:05 4:25 4:45

1:40

2:00 2:20

THEME 1 Shale Plays of China (AAPG) Room 408/409/410 Co-Chairs: Y. Ju and S. Jiang 1:15 1:20 Introductory Remarks Reservoir Quality, Hydrocarbon Mobility and Implications for Lacustrine Shale Oil Productivity in the Paleogene Sequence, Bohai Bay Basin: M. Li, Z. Li, Q. Jiang Comparison Between Marine Shales and Lacustrine Shales in China: S. Jiang, N. Dahdah, P. Pahnke, J. Zhang

2:40 3:25 3:45

4:05 4:25

4:45

1:40

704

ASSOCIATION ROUNDTABLE

E D U C AT I O N C A L E N D A R
*Denotes new entries or revisions. **New AAPG course or field seminar. For complete details contact:
AAPG Education Department P.O. Box 979 Tulsa, OK 74101-0979 USA Phone: 918-560-2650 Fax: 918-560-2678 E-Mail: educate@aapg.org

Application of Maturation/Organic Facies, Geochemistry, and Petroleum System Modeling for the Shale Gas/Shale Oil Resource Evaluation May 23, Pittsburgh (with AAPG Annual Convention) Summer Education Conference June 1014, Fort Worth, TX Applied Structural Geology August 1923, Jackson Hole, WY Fractured Reservoirs September 913, Casper, WY Fall Education Conference October 1418, Houst on

Clastic Reservoir Facies April 2026, Utah

Geology of Grand Canyon, Bryce Canyon and Zion National Park June 17, Nevada

Play Concepts and Controls on Porosity June 27, Almeria, Spain

AAPG Home Page http://www.aapg.org

Browse our Continuing Education section. Click the Education box on our home page.

Folding, Thrusting & Syntectonic Sedimentation June 37, Barcelona, Spain

2013
Schools and Short Courses
Basic Well Log Analysis April 1519, Austin, TX July 2226, Golden, CO Carbonates School April 1618, Austin, TX Basic Tools for Shale Exploration May 18, Pittsburgh (with AAPG Annual Convention) Integrating Data from Source-Rock and Reservoir Fluid Samples to Evaluate Oil/GasShale Resources Across the E&P Lifecycle May 1819, Pittsburgh (with AAPG Annual Convention) Faults in the Northern Appalachian Basin and Their Effects on The Black Shale May 19, Pittsburgh (with AAPG Annual Convention)

Lacustrine Basin Exploration June 916, Utah

Practical Salt Tectonics November 47, Houston, TX Seismic Interpretation in Fold-and-Thrust Belts July 2127, Alberta, Canada

Geosciences Technology Workshops

Geomechanics July 1517, Baltimore, MD

Fractures, Folds and Faults in Thrusted Terrains July 2227, Montana

Structure, Tectonics & Sedimentary Basin Analysis August 1725, Montana

Field Seminars
Modern Terrigenous Clastic Depositional Systems April 512; October 1421, South Carolina Deep-Water Siliciclastic Reservoirs April 1419, California Sedimentology and Sequence Stratigraphic Response of Paralic Deposits September 1926, Colorado/Utah

Complex Carbonate Reservoirs September 28Oct. 4, Italy

vii

DIRECTORY OF ASSOCIATED & AFFILIATED SOCIETIES

AAPG ASSOCIATED INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
AASPTHE PALYNOLOGICAL SOCIETY
c/o Paul K. Strother Weston Observatory of Boston College Palaeobotanical Laboratory, Dept. of Geology and Geophysics 381 Concord Road, Weston, Massachusetts 02493 E-mail: paul.strother@bc.edu or jbri@bgs.ac.uk Web site: www.palynology.org

THE SOCIETY FOR ORGANIC PETROLOGY

c/o AGI, 4220 King St., Alexandria, Virginia 22302 E-mail: isruiz@incar.csic.es Web site: http://www.tsop.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Isabel Suarez-Ruiz

BULGARIA
BULGARIAN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
1113, Sofia, Geological Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Acad. Georgi Bonchev Str., bl. 24, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria E-mail: radnac@geology.bas.bg. Web site: http://www.bgd.bg President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Radoslav Nakov

AAPG AFFILIATED SOCIETIES

ALBANIA
ALBANIA ASSOCIATION OF GEOSCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS
National Scientific Center of Hydrocarbons Lagja 1 Maj, Fier, Albania E-mail: qkshdirection@red.com.al Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ilia Fili Meets in November in Fier.

CANADA
ATLANTIC GEOSCIENCE SOCIETY
Ann Miller-AGS, P.O. Box 2253 Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada B4P 2N5 E-mail: eckosters@hotmail.com Web site: ags.earthsciences.dal.ca/ags.php President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Elisabeth Kosters

ASSOCIATION FOR WOMEN GEOSCIENTISTS

1400 W. 122nd Ave., Suite 250, Westminster, Colorado 80234 E-mail: office@awg.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Heidi Hoffower

CIRCUM-PACIFIC COUNCIL FOR ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES, INC.

California State University, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories 8272 Moss Landing Road, Landing, California 95039 E-mail: greene@mlml.calstate.edu Web site: http://www.circum_pacificcouncil.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .H. Gary Greene

CANADIAN SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS

110, 333 5th Ave Sw Calgary Alberta T2P3B6 Canada E-mail: reception@cspg.org E-mail: paul.mackay@shalepetroleum.com Web site: http://www.cspg.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Paul A. Mackay Meets bi-monthly in Calgary for technical luncheons.

ARGENTINA
ASOCIACIN ARGENTINA DE GELOGOS Y GEOFSICOS PETROLEROS
Maipu 645 1 Piso, Casa del Gelogo. Oficina del CSPGC 1006 ACG Buenos Aires, Argentina E-mail: info@aaggp.org.ar Web site: www.aaggp.org.ar President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Luis Osvaldo Rebori Annual meeting June 9; monthly meetings by announcement

THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

c/o Edmund Nickless, Executive Secretary Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, W1J OBJ, England E-mail: edmund.nickless@geolsoc.org.uk Web site: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .David Shilston

Saskatchewan SASKATCHEWAN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 234 Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada S4P 2Z6 Society E-mail: info@sgshome.ca Pres. E-mail: gavin.jensen@gov.sk.ca President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gavin Jensen Meets monthly.

GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

3300 Penrose Place, P.O. Box 9140 Boulder, Colorado 80301 E-mail: president@geosociety.org Web site: www.geosociety.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .George Herbert Davis

ASOCIACIN GEOLGICA ARGENTINA

Maipu 645 1 Piso, Casa del Gelogo. Oficina del CSPG C 1006 ACG Buenos Aires, Argentina E-mail: postmaster@aga.inv.org.ar President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Roberto F. Page Meets monthly at society headquarters.

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MATHEMATICAL GEOSCIENCES

4 Cataraqui Street, Suite 310, Kingston, ON K7K 127 E-mail: office@iamg.org Home Page: http://www.iamg.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vera Pawlowsky-Glahn

AUSTRALIA
PETROLEUM EXPLORATION SOCIETY OF AUSTRALIA LTD.
122 Erica Street, Cannon Hill, Queensland 4170 Australia E-mail: gordon@wakelinassociates.com.au Web site: http://www.pesa.com.au/ President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gordon Wakelin-King Meets monthly in state capitals.

COLOMBIA
ASOCIACIN COLOMBIANA DE GELOGOS Y GEOFSICOS DEL PETRLEO
Gems S.A. Cra. 12 #98-35 Of. 304 Bogot, Colombia (S.A.) E-mail: presidente@acggp.org, cmora@gemssa.com Web site: www.acggp.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cesar A. Mora Monthly meetings are by announcement. A catalog of publications and guidebooks is available from the editor.

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BLACK GEOLOGISTS AND GEOPHYSICISTS

723 Main Street, Suite 1006, Houston Texas 77002 (Physical Address) 4212 San Felipe, Suite 420, Houston Texas 77027 (Mailing Address) E-mail: mbgg_us@hotmail.com Home Page: http://www.nabgg.com/ President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Michael Carroll

AUSTRIA
AUSTRIAN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
c/o Geological Survey of Austria Rasumofskygasse 23 P.O. Box 333, A-1015, Vienna, Austria E-mail: christoph.spoetl@uibk.ac.at Web site: http://www.geol-ges.at/startenglish.htm President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Christoph Spoetl Lectures, field trips, and divisional and regional meetings by announcement.

COSTA RICA
COLEGIO DE GELOGOS DE COSTA RICA
San Jos, Costa Rica E-mail: egamboa@geologos.or.cr President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Enid Gamboa Robles Meetings held first and third Wednesday of each month.

SOCIETY OF INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONAL EARTH SCIENTISTS

4925 Greenville Avenue, Suite 1106 Dallas, Texas 75206 E-mail: sipes@sipes.org Web site: http://www.sipes.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dennis Michael Gleason

AZERBAIJAN
AZERBAIJAN SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS
Kaspmorneftegaz, P.O. Box 370004 Neftyanikov Ave. 73 Baku, Azerbaijan E-mail: akifnar@socar.baku.az President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Akif Narimanov

REPUBLIC OF CROATIA
SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL FOR PETROLEUM
Faculty of Mining, Geology & Petroleum Engineering Pierottijeva 6, Zagreb, Rep. of Croatia HR-10000 E-mail: zhernitz@jagor.srce.hr President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Zvonimir Hernitz

SOCIETY OF PETROPHYSICISTS AND WELL LOG ANALYSTS

8866 Gulf Freeway, Suite 320, Houston, Texas, 77017 E-mail: vicki@spwla.org (society) E-mail: sharon@spwla.org Web site: http://www.spwla.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Roland Edward Chemali

BRAZIL
ASSOIAO BRASILEIRA DE GELOGOS DE PETRLEO
Av. Almirante Barroso N 52/21 Andar Centro - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil E-mail: sanjos@petrobras.com.br Web site: http://www.abgp.com.br/index.htm President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sylvia Anjos

CZECH REPUBLIC
CZECH GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
c/o B. Cizkova, Secretary Klarov 3, Praha l, 11821, Czech Republic E-mail: krystof@geology.cz Web site: http://prfdec.natur.cuni.cz/~cgs/ President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Krystof Verner Meetings held first and third Wednesday of each month.

SEPMSOCIETY FOR SEDIMENTARY GEOLOGY

4111 S. Darlington, Suite 100 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74135-6373 E-mail: hharper@sepm.org (society) E-mail: budd@colorado.edu (president) Web site: http://www.sepm.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .David A. Budd

viii

ECUADOR
ECUADORIAN GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL SOCIETY
Casilla 371A, Quito, Ecuador President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peter Hall

LIBYA
EARTH SCIENCE SOCIETY OF LIBYA
P.O. Box 3161, Tripoli, Libya S.P.L.A.J. E-mail: president@geolibya.org E-mail: inf@geolibya.org Web site: www.geolibya.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Faraj M. Said Luncheon meetings second Tuesday of the month, venue announced. Evening meetings, training courses, seminars, lectures, and field trips announced by monthly newsletter.

PAKISTAN
PAKISTAN ASSOCIATION OF GEOSCIENTISTS
Pakistan Petroleum Ltd. 3rd Floor PIDC House, Dr. Ziauddin A. Road Karachi 75530 Pakistan E-mail: k_moin@ppl.com.pk Web site: www.papg.org.pk Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Moin Raza Khan

EGYPT
EGYPT PETROLEUM EXPLORATION SOCIETY
GANOPE 19, Mostafa Refaat St., Sheraton Res., Behind Abu Bakr El Sedik Heliopolis, Egypt E-mail: hnassar@ganope.com Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hani Nassar Meetings held monthly at the Sofitel Hotel, El Maadi, Cairo.

MALAYSIA
GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MALAYSIA
c/o Dept. of Geology University of Malaya Kuala Lumpur 50603 Malaysia E-mail: geologicalsociety@gmail.com Web site: http://www.gsm.org.my President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Joy Pereira Meets second Tuesday each month, except during fasting month.

PERU
SOCIEDAD GEOLGICA DEL PERU
Petit Thouars 4380 Miraflores, 18 Lima, Peru Society E-mail: secretaria@sgp.org.pe Pres. E-mail: josearce@geofisicos.com.pe President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jose Arce Alleva

FRANCE
ASSOCIATION DES TECHNICIENS ET PROFESSIONNELS DU PETROLE
45 Rue Louis Blanc-92400 Courbevoie 92038 Paris la Defense, Cedex France E-mail: lenir@slb.com Web site: www.aftp.net President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Isabell Le Nir

POLAND
POLISH GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Jagiellonian University Inst. of Geological Sciences Oleandry 2a, 30063 Krakow, Poland E-mail: adam.gasinski@uj.edu.pl President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M. Adam Gasinski Lectures, field trips, and divisional and regional meetings by announcement.

MEXICO
ASOCIACIN MEXICANA DE GELOGOS PETROLEROS, A.C.
Pemex Exloracin Y Produccin Claustros Macuilis #10 Fracc. Club Campestre 86037 Villahermosa, Tab., Mexico E-mail: jaime.patino@pemex.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jaime Patino Meets monthly at eight locations in the country.

GERMANY
BERUFSVERBAND DEUTSCHER GEOWISSENSCHAFTLER E.V.
Lessenicher Strae 1, D-53123 Bonn, Germany E-mail: BDGBonn@t-online.de President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ulrike Mattig

QATAR
QATAR GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Box 7325, Doha, Qatar E-mail: Saeed_Al-Kuwari@oxy.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Saeed Al-Kuwari

INDIA
ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS
Oil & Nat. Gas Corp. Ltd. Executive Director, KDMIPE, ONGC Kaulagarh Road DEHRADUN 248195 India President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Prodyut Kumar Bhowmick

MOROCCO
MOROCCAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS
PB 93, Rabat, Morocco E-mail: onarepdg@acdim.net.ma President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mohamed Elmostaine Meets eight times throughout year at various locations in the country.

ROMANIA
GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF ROMANIA
Str. Caransebes nr. 1, Sector 1 012271 Bucharest, Romania E-mail: antoneta@ageod.org

GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA

Executive Director, KOMPE, ONGC Kaulagaht Road Dehradun 248195 INDIA. President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .H.K. Gupta Annual general meeting.

NETHERLANDS
ROYAL GEOLOGICAL AND MINING SOCIETY OF THE NETHERLANDS (KNGMG)
Shell Exploration and Production Kesslerpark 1, P.O. Box 60, 2280 AB Rijswijk Netherlands E-mail: m.deruig@shell.com Web site: http://www.kngmg.nl/index.htm Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Menno J. De Ruig Meetings of Petroleum Geological Circle held at KIVI Building, Prinsessegracht 23, The Hague, third Wednesday monthly, SeptemberJune. Social hour at 5:00 p.m.; lecture at 6:00 p.m.

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Antoneta Seghedi

SAUDI ARABIA
DHAHRAN GEOSCIENCE SOCIETY
P.O. Box 10376 Dhahran 31311 Saudi Arabia E-mail: mahmoud.hedefa@aramco.com Web site: http://www.dgsonline.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mahmoud E. Hedefa Meetings last Tuesday of each month, Dhahran.

INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOSCIENTISTS

#F-905, Brigade Metropolis, Whitefield Main Road Garudacharpalya Bangalore 560048 India E-mail: sudhakar.vijapurapu@shell.com

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sudhakar Vijapurapu

IRAQ
ARAB GEOLOGISTS ASSOCIATION
P.O. Box 28342, Al-Karkh Post Office Al-Dawoodi, Baghdad 12631, Iraq E-mail (Secretary General): wisam@uruklink.net Date and place of meetings vary. Executive Bureau meets every three years.

NEW ZEALAND
NEW ZEALAND ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS
New Zealand Oil & Gas LTD Level 20, 125 The Terrace P.O. Box 10725 Wellington 6001, New Zealand E-mail: Jonathan.Salo@nzog.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jonathan Salo

SINGAPORE
SOUTHEAST ASIA PETROLEUM EXPLORATION SOCIETY
Tanglin PO Box 423 Singapore 912415, Republic of Singapore Society E-mail: seapex@seapex.org E-mail: stephendoyle@enovationresources.com Web site: http://www.seapex.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Stephen Doyle Meets second Friday of all even months.

ISRAEL
ISRAEL GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
University of Haifa, Dept. of Maritime Civilizations Haifa, Israel E-mail: dsivan@research.haifa.ac.il President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dorit Sivan

NIGERIA
NIGERIAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM EXPLORATIONISTS
Danvic Concepts International Nigeria 46 Adetoro Adelaja St off Emmanuel Kechi, Magodo GRA Ketu Lagos, Nigeria E-mail: afemi@danvicconcepts.com Web site: www.nape.org.ng President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mayowa Lawrence Afe Monthly technical meetings held third Wednesday of month.

JAPAN
JAPANESE ASSOCIATION FOR PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
Keidanren-Kaikan Bldg, 3-2 Otemachi 1-chome Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 100-0004 Japan E-mail: wasada-hironori@jogmec.go.jp Web site: http://www.japt.org/html/english/english.html President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hironori Wasada

SOUTH AFRICA
GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SOUTH AFRICA
c/o Craig Smith, Executive Manager GSSA P.O. Box 61809, Marshalltown 2107 Johannesburg, South Africa E-mail: craig.smith@gssa.org.za Web site: www.gssa.org.za President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pamela Naidoo

KAZAKHSTAN
ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS OF KAZAKHSTAN
43 Aiteke bi st, Atyrau, 060011, Kazakhstan E-mail: bmku@meridian-petroleum.kz Web site: www.ongk.kz President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Baltabek M. Kuandykov

NORWAY
NORWEGIAN ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS
c/o University of Stavanger Gosenkroken 23, 4041 Hafrsfjord, Norway E-mail: fr-po@online.no, francisco.porturas@uis.no President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Francisco Porturas Meets every third Tuesday at the University of Stavanger, 7:00 p.m.

SPAIN
ASOCIACIN DE GELOGOS Y GEOFSICOS ESPAOLES DEL PETRLEO
Paseo de Castellana, 280 28046 Madrid, Spain E-mail: storrescusav@repsol.com Web site: www.aggep.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Susana Torrescusa Villaverde Meetings vary.

ix

SWITZERLAND
SWISS ASSOCIATION OF ENERGY GEOSCIENTISTS (SASEG)
Holbeinstrasse 7 CH 4051 Basel, Switzerland E-mail: peterburri.geol@bluewin.ch Web site: vsp-asp.ch President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peter Burri Meets yearly during 3 days in the second half of June for the annual convention and excursion (Alps). Additional meetings for lecture October - April, announced separately.

Alaska ALASKA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

P.O. Box 101288, Anchorage, Alaska, 99510 E-mail: president@alaskageology.org Web site: www.alaskageology.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Arthur C. Banet, Jr. Monthly luncheon meetings held third Thursday from September to May or as announced. Free list of publications by request or via website.

ROCKY MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION OF GEOLOGISTS

910 16th Street, Suite 1125 Denver, Colorado 80202 E-mail: higley@usgs.gov Web site: http://www.rmag.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Debra K. Higley Meets 11:30 a.m. first and third Friday each month, Denver Marmott City Center, 1701 California St., Denver, Colorado.

Arkansas FORT SMITH GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

THAILAND
GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF THAILAND
Department of Mineral Fuels 25th Floor Shinnawatra, Tower 3, Vibhavadi-Rungsit Rd. Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900 Thailand E-mail: songpope@dmf.go.th Web site: www.thaigeology.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Songpope Polachan

P. O. Box 2935 Fort Smith, Arkansas 72903 E-mail: gisto23@aol.com Web site: www.aogc.state.ar.us/FSGSinfo.htm President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .James Jeffrey Gist

District of Columbia GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON, D.C.

3635 Concorde Pkwy Suite 500 Chantilly, VA 201511125 E-mail: burruss@usgs.gov Web site: www.gswweb.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Robert C. Burruss Refreshments start at 7:30pm. The formal program starts at 8:00pm. Meetings are held at the John Wesley Powell Auditorium 2170 Florida Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. Check website for details.

California COAST GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 3055 Ventura, California 93006 E-mail: president@coastgeologicalsociety.org Web site: http://www.coastgeologicalsociety.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Edward F. Magdaleno Dinner meetings are held monthly September through June, usually on the third Tuesday of the month, at the Poinsettia Pavilion, 3451 Foothill Road in Ventura. Social hour starts at 6:00 p.m., dinner is served at 7:00 p.m., and the talk starts at 8:00 p.m. The cost of dinner with reservations is $20 (members), $25 (non-members), or $10 (students and K-12 teachers); the talk is free. For reservations, please email Jerry Nichols (secretary@coastgeologicalsociety.org) Reservations should be made by 4:00 p.m. on Friday before the meeting.

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
P.O. Box 3524 La Romaine, Trinidad & Tobago Web site: www.gstt.org E-mail: hinniss@kronusgsl.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Helena Inniss

Florida EVERGLADES GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

XMWH Americas 2503 Del Prdo Blvd, South, Ste 430 Cape Coral, Florida 33904 E-mail: edward.rectenwald@mwhglobal President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ed Rectenwald

TURKEY
TURKISH ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS
Izmir Caddesi II, 47/14, 06440 Kizilay, Ankara, Turkey Web site: www.tpjd.org.tr President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mehmet Ozkanli Meets every two years, TPAO Research Center conference room.

FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGISTS

Aquatech GeoSciences Inc. 7438 Pinetree Lane Lake Clarke Shores, Florida 33406 E-mail (Soc.): Robert@helpmembers.org E-mail (Pres): hickmanhydro@att.net Web site: http://www.fapg.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Helen Hickman

LOS ANGELES BASIN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

BreitBurn Energy LP 515 South Flower Street, Suite 4800 Los Angeles, California 90071 E-mail: jkuespert@breitburn.com Web site: www.labgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jon Kuespert Meets monthly at The Grand at Willow Street Centre.

MIAMI GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

University of Miami, RSMAS/MGG 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway Miami, Florida 33149-1098 E-mail: dmcneill@rsmas.miami.edu Web site: www.miamigeologicalsociety.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Donald F. McNeill

UKRAINE
ASSOCIATION OF UKRAINIAN GEOLOGISTS
7a, Naberezhno-Khreschatyska Kiev, Ukraine 4070 E-mail: marketing@nadra.kiev.ua Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pavlo O. Zagorodnyuk

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

734 14th Street #2, San Francisco, California 94114-1166 E-mail: tom.barry@shawgrp.com Web site: www.ncgeolsoc.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tom Barry Meets monthly September through May on the last Wednesday of the month at the Masonic Center, 9 Altarinda Road, Orinda, California, 6:30 p.m.

SOUTHEASTERN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1636 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Pres. E-mail: jrherbert1863@yahoo.com Society E-mail: info@segs.org Web site: http://www.segs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John Herbert Meets several times a year, various locations in Florida.

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

EMIRATES SOCIETY OF GEOSCIENCE (ESG)
ADMA, P.O. Box 303, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. E-mail: aalshemsi@adma.ae Web site: http://www.esg-uae.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Adbullah Al Shemsi Meets second Tuesday each month, Adnoc Club, Abu Dhabi.

SACRAMENTO PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION

Rio Delta Resources Inc. 3620 American River Dr., Ste. 105 Sacramento, California 95864 E-mail: jwr5532@aol.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jerry Reedy Meets third Wednesday of each month, Jan.-Nov., Club Pheasant Restaurant, West Sacramento.

UNITED KINGDOM
ENERGY INSTITUTE
61 New Cavendish Street, London W1G 7AR, U.K. Web site: http://www.petroleum.co.uk E-mail: hsullivan@energyinst.org.uk Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Joan MacNaughton

Georgia GEORGIA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

University of Georgia Department of Geology 210 Field Street Athens, GA 30602-2501 E-mail: schroe@uga.edu Web site: http://www.westga.edu/~ggsweb President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Paul A. Schroeder Meets annually during field trip; usually October or November, locations vary.

SAN JOAQUIN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1056, Bakersfield, California 93302 E-mail: vaughn_thompson@oxy.com Web site: www.sjgs.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vaughn Grant Thompson Meets 6 p.m. second Tuesday each month, American Legion Hall, 2020 H Street, Bakersfield.

PETROLEUM EXPLORATION SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN

5th Floor, 9 Berkeley Street, London W1J 8 DW, UK E-mail: pesgb@pesgb.org.uk (soc) Web site: www.pesgb.org.uk President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John Austin Meets second Tuesday each month, excluding August, and holds various conferences.

Colorado FOUR CORNERS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1501, Duranago, Colorado, 81302 Web site: fourcornersgeologicalsociety.org E-mail: david.johnson@conocophillips.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .David William Johnson Meets Fridays, Durango, Colorado or Farmington, New Mexico, date and time vary.

Idaho IDAHO ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGISTS

1846 Springmeadow, Boise, Idaho 83706 E-mail: richreed@cableone.net President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rich Reed Annual business meeting; monthly area meetings.

UNITED STATES
Alabama ALABAMA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Auburn University Department of Geology & Geography Petrie Hall, Room 207 Auburn, Alabama 36849 E-mail: uddinas@auburn.edu Web site: http://homepage.mac.com/jpashin/AGS.htm President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ashraf Uddin

GRAND JUNCTION GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 4045 Grand Junction, Colorado 81502-4045 E-mail: jiluebke@hughes.net President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Laurence O. Luebke Meets third Wednesday each month, SeptemberMay, Mesa State College.

Illinois ILLINOIS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

1271 Crestview Drive, Breese, Illinois 62230 E-mail: ncaserotti@baygeo.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nate Caserotti Meets second Thursday evening each month, SeptemberMay, in various locations.

Indiana PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGISTS OF INDIANA

P.O. Box 30165 Indianapolis, Indiana 46230-1065 E-mail: rgeorge@active-environmental.com Web site: www.professionalgeologistsofindiana.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rob George

Mississippi MISSISSIPPI GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 422, Jackson, Mississippi 39205-0422 E-mail: jfgd@comcast.net Web site: http://www.missgeo.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Edgar James Files, Jr. Meets 11:30 a.m. second Tuesday each month, SeptemberMay, River Hills Country Club.

North Dakota NORTH DAKOTA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 82 Bismarck, ND 58502 E-mail: jjperson@nd.gov Web site: http://ndgeosociety.tripod.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jeff Person Meetings generally held on the third Tuesday of each month at the N.D. Heritage Center.

Indiana-Kentucky INDIANA-KENTUCKY GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

Reynolds Resources, Inc. 4530 Doe Run, Owensboro, Kentucky 42303 E-mail: dougjr1956@yahoo.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Douglas W. Reynolds, Jr. Meets monthly with the exception of June, July, August, and December, various places in Kentucky and Illinois.

Missouri ASSOCIATION OF MISSOURI GEOLOGISTS

1590 Woodlake Drive Chesterfield, Missouri 63017 Web site: www.missourigeologists.org E-mail: jerry.prewett@dnr.mo.gov President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jerry Prewett Meets in September or early October at various locations in Missouri.

Ohio NORTHERN OHIO GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

SAIC 8866 Commons Blvd. Twinsburg, Ohio 44087 E-mail: amanda.m.sprinzl@saic.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Amanda Sprinzl Meets first Wednesday, SeptemberMay, excepting January, place varies.

Iowa GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF IOWA

Cornell College, Dept. of Geology Mount Vernon, Iowa 52314 E-mail: RDenniston@cornellcollege.edu Web site: www.iowageology.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rhawn Denniston

Montana MONTANA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 844, Billings, Montana 59103 E-mail: montanageologicalsociety@gmail.com Web site: www.montanags.com E-mail: aurie@stmaryland.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Andrew Urie Speaker dates and times are posted in the societys newsletter

OHIO GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

1477 Wildwood Drive Wooster, Ohio 44691 E-mail: sirius.black@embarqmail.com Web site: www.ohgeosoc.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John L. Wicks Meetings monthly SeptemberMay as announced by newsletter and e-mails. Location, date, and time vary.

Kansas KANSAS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

212 N. Market, Ste. 100 Wichita, Kansas 67202 E-mail: dave@mccoypetroleum.com Web site: http://www.kgslibrary.com

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .David W. Clothier Meets in Wichita every Tuesday except the second Tuesday of the month in the fall and spring.

Nebraska NEBRASKA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Layne Christensen Co. P.O. Box 81864, Lincoln, Nebraska 68502 E-mail: ragjere@terracon.com Web site: maps.unomaha.edu/ngs President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bob Gjere Meets bimonthly during academic year.

Oklahoma ARDMORE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

North Texas Sample Log Service P.O. Box 1376, Gainesville, Texas 76241 E-mail: ntsls@sbcglobal.net President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Michael D. Allison Meets second Thursday, SeptemberMay, Chickasaw Lake Club. Meeting begins at 6 p.m. with social hour and supper followed by a a guest speaker.

Kentucky KENTUCKY SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGISTS

University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky 40506 E-mail: watson@uky.edu President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Anna Watson Meets bi-monthly and holds annual banquet and field trip, seminars. Conducts several training workshops.

OKLAHOMA CITY GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

120 North Robinson, Suite 900 Center Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 E-mail: GFlournoy@slb.com Web site: http://www.ocgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gregory Blake Flournoy Luncheon meeting monthly from September through May at the Oklahoma History Museum; date varies.

Nevada NEVADA PETROLEUM SOCIETY, INC.

P. O. Box 11526 Reno, Nevada 89510-1526 E-mail: jsnow@standardsteamtrust.com Web site: www.nbmg.unr.edu/nps/ President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John H. Snow Meets first Thursday each month September to May at Austins Restaurant, 7671 S. Virginia St., Reno, Nevada, at 6:30 p.m.

Louisiana BATON ROUGE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

Louisiana Geological Survey 5020 Waterford Drive Zachary, Louisiana 70791 E-mail: Thomas.VanBiersel@la.gov

TULSA GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

P.O. Box 700926, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74170-0926 E-mail: rfritz@sm-energy.com Web site: http://tulsageology.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Richard Dale Fritz Luncheon meetings second and fourth Tuesday each month at 11:30 a.m., Tulsa Petroleum Club. dinner meetings on first Tuesday at 5:30 p.m., Tulsa Petroleum Club, September-May.

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Thomas P. Van Biersel Meets second Friday of each month (Sept.May), Mike Anderson Seafood Restaurant, 1031 West Lee Drive, meal at 11:30, Talk at 12:00.

New Mexico ALBUQUERQUE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

WaterBank, 610 Gold Ave. SW, Ste. III Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 E-mail: wturner@waterbank.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .William Turner Meetings at 11:30 a.m. first Wednesday each month at Furrs and Cafeteria, 6100 Central Ave. SE, Albuquerque. Visiting geologists and guests are welcome. Contact Bill Turner, (505) 843-7643 for program information.

LAFAYETTE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 51896, Lafayette, Louisiana 70505 E-mail: odyssey_intl@msn.com Web site: http://lafayettegeologicalsociety.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .James John Willis Meets third Wednesday each month, Lafayette Petroleum Club.

Oregon/Washington NORTHWEST ENERGY ASSOCIATION

P.O. Box 6679 Portland, Oregon 97228-6679 E-mail: info@nwenergyassociation.org Pres. E-mail: garthlaw@yahoo.com Web site: http://nwenergyassociation.org

NEW ORLEANS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

810 Union Street, Suite 300, New Orleans, Louisianan 70112 E-mail: info@nogs.org Web site: http://www.nogs.org E-mail: William.R.Jorgensen@shell.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .William Revis Jorgensen Meets first Monday each month unless a holiday, then meets second Monday.

NEW MEXICO GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

c/o New Mexico Bureau of Geology 801 Leroy Place, Socorro, New Mexico 87801 E-mail: gmack@nmsu.edu Web site: http://nmgs.nmt.edu President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Greg Mack Meets during April spring meeting in Socorro; Fall Field Conference (September or October); place varies.

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Garth Tallman Breakfast meetings held monthly SeptemberMay, usually on the second Friday of the month at the Multnomah Athletic Club, 1849 SW Salmon Street, Portland, 7:309:00 a.m. For information or reservations contact Steve Walti, steven.walti@nwnatural.com

SHREVEPORT GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P. O. Box 750 Shreveport, LA 71162 Web site: www.sgs1.org E-mail: larry@tmrex.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Larry Glen Frizzell Meets third Tuesday SeptemberMay, noon, Petroleum Club.

ROSWELL GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

P.O. Box 1171, Roswell, New Mexico 88202 E-mail: dcodding@santopetroleum.com Website: www.roswellgeologicalsociety.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .David Bruce Codding Meets second Tuesday of each month, SeptemberMay.

Pennsylvania PITTSBURGH ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS

P.O. Box 2036, Cranberry Twp., PA 16066 E-mail: mjarvis@mkeystone.com President E-mail: mjarvis@talismanusa.com Website: www.papgrocks.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Michael Aaron Jarvis Meets second Thursdays, SeptemberMay, Radisson Hotel in Greentree, Pennsylvania from 5-8 p.m. Meeting dates can vary as per speaker availability.

Michigan MICHIGAN BASIN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Office of Geological Survey P.O. Box 30256 Lansing, MI 48909-7756 E-mail: arlene.anderson-vincent@waters.nestle.com Web site: http://www.mbgs.org

New York NEW YORK STATE GEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

Dept. of Geosciences SUNY, Fredonia Fredonia, New York 14063 E-mail: gordon.baird@fredonia.edu Web site: www.nysga.net President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gordon C. Baird Meets annually, various places in New York.

PITTSBURGH GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.

P.O. Box 58172, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15209 Web site: pittsburghgeologicalsociety.org E-mail: kollara@carnegiemnh.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Albert Kollar Meets third Wednesday of every month at Fosters Restaurant, 10 Foster Plaza, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Restaurant.

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Arlene Anderson-Vincent Meets second Wednesday each month., SeptemberMay; location varies.

xi

Texas ABILENE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 974, Abilene, TX 79604-0974 E-mail: jhammett@plantationpetro.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jared Haynes Hammett Meets third Thursday, September through May (excluding December)

FORT WORTH GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 17075, Fort Worth, Texas, 76102 E-mail: Roy.Yates@woodbineacq.com Web site: http://fwgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Roy Yates Meets 11:30 a.m. second Monday each month, September to April, Petroleum Club of Ft. Worth.

SOUTH TEXAS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

900 N. E. Loop 410, Suite D-100, San Antonio, Texas, 78209 E-mail: retgeol@yahoo.com Web site: http://www.stgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John W. Stewart Meetings second Wednesday each month, SeptemberMay at the Petroleum Club of San Antonio.

AUSTIN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1302, Austin, Texas, 78767-1302 E-mail: President@austingeosoc.org Web site: http://www.austingeosoc.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peter R. Rose Meets first Monday of each month August through May.

GRAHAM GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Box 515 Olney, Texas 76374-0515 E-mail: glennfelderhoff@sbcglobal.net President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Glenn Henry Felderhoff Meets first Monday of each month except September.

WEST TEXAS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1595, Midland, Texas 79702 E-mail: wtgs@wtgs.org Presidents e-mail: dcrass@crownquest.com Web site: www.wtgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .David B. Crass Meets second Tuesday each month, Midland Center.

CORPUS CHRISTI GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1068 Corpus Christi, Texas 78403 E-mail: dtaylormetateminerals@msn.com Web site: http://www.ccgeo.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dennis Allan Taylor Meets third Wednesday each month, Sept.-May, Corpus Christi Town Club.

HOUSTON GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

14811 St Marys Lane, Suite 250, Houston, Texas 77079 E-mail: jo1955mar@aol.com Web site: www.hgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Martin Macdermott Cassidy General dinner second Monday, lunch last Wednesday every month, September through June.

Utah UTAH GEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

P.O. Box 520100, Salt Lake City, Utah 84152 E-mail: craigmorgan@utah.gov Web site: http://www.utahgeology.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Craig Dennis Morgan Meets second Monday each month, Department of Natural Resources, 1594 W. North Temple, Salt Lake City.

DALLAS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

4925 Greenville Avenue, Suite 200 Dallas, Texas 75206 E-mail: cklenk@flash.net Web site: http://www.dgs.org President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Charlotte Dillon Klenk Meets second Tuesday each month, SeptemberMay, Ellison Miles Geotechnology Institute, Building H, Room H114, 3939 Valley View Lane, Farmers Branch, Dallas, Texas 75244-4997.

NORTH TEXAS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 1671, Wichita Falls, Texas 76307 E-mail: lblack@wf.net Web site: www.southwestsection.org/north-texas President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lisa Leeann Black Meets third Thursday each month, SeptemberMay.

West Virginia APPALACHIAN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

P.O. Box 2605, Charleston, West Virginia 25329 E-mail: William.O.Carpenter@dom.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .William O. Carpenter, II Meets second Tuesday, SeptemberMay, at the Summit Conference Centre in Charleston.

EAST TEXAS GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

102 North College, #612 Tyler, Texas, 75702 E-mail: admsapl@prodigy.net Web site: www.easttexasgeo.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Richard Leroy Adams Meets SeptemberMay, date and place vary.

PANHANDLE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Pablo Energy II, LLC 801 S. Fillmore, Ste. 130 Amarillo, Texas 79101 E-mail: nathan.randolph@pabloenergy.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nathan Alan Randolph Meets third Wednesday of the month.

EL PASO GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

El Paso Community College 919 Hunter El Paso, Texas 79915 E-mail: rsmith74@epcc.edu Web site: http://elvis.geo.utep.edu/%7Eepgs President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Russell C. Smith Meets third Thursday each month, 12:00 noon, location varies.

Wyoming WYOMING GEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

P.O. Box 545 Casper, Wyoming 82602-0545 E-mail: info@wyogeo.org Presidents e-mail: mike.hawk@lincenergy.com.au Web site: http://www.wyogeo.org/ President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mike Hawks Meets each Friday, 11:30 a.m., Casper Petroleum Club.

SAN ANGELO GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Suite 201, 4112 College Hills Blvd. San Angelo, Texas 76904-6591 E-mail: swartzoil@suddenlinkmail.com President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bruce Swartz Meetings to be announced

xii