Arabian Journal of Geosciences (2022) 15:1028

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10257-5

ORIGINAL PAPER

3D Reservoir Modeling of the Farewell Formation and its Implications

on the Maui Gas Field Development, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand
Kamalia Norjannah Kamalrulzaman1 · Md Aminul Islam1 · Surya Tejasvi Thota1 · Mohamed Ragab Shalaby1

Received: 9 March 2022 / Accepted: 29 April 2022

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2022

Abstract
This study aims to characterize the Farewell Formation by producing reservoir models based on the 3D seismic data, avail-
able well logs, and completion reports. Seven wells were penetrating the studied formation, but a complete well log dataset
was only available for three wells: MB-R(1), MB-V(3), and MB-P(8). The volume-based structural modeling was done using
Structural Framework (SF) and Corner Point Gridding (CPG). Sequential Indicator Simulation (SIS) and Object-Based
Modeling (OBM) algorithms were used to model lithofacies and depositional facies, respectively, for a better definition of
fluvial channels. GR responses and core descriptions were used for constructing facies models. The whole formation was
divided proportionally into 100 layers (K property layer), with each layer having approximately 2-m thickness. The field has
got NE-SW trending paleo-shoreline, and the whole formation experienced an overall transgressive depositional system,
with local regressions, marked by upward increasing marine influence. Petrophysical modeling was done using Sequential
Gaussian Simulation (SGS) algorithm. Structural, facies, and petrophysical models show that the potential areas are located
towards the southern and central parts of the field and better defined respectively within K property layers 38–71 and lay-
ers 37–100 of the formation. The distribution of effective porosity, permeability, and net-to-gross values range as high as
15–21%, 10–1000 mD, and 80–100% respectively, while the water saturation and volume of shale are as low as 0–20% and
0–10%, respectively. The aforementioned characteristics are often associated with shoreface (especially middle shoreface)
and fluvial channel sand deposits. This study hopes to contribute significantly to the Maui Gas Field development and also
laid the foundation for a basin-scale study of the Farewell Formation.

Keywords Maui Gas Field · Taranaki Basin · Seismic interpretation · Structural modeling · Facies modeling · Petrophysical
modeling

Introduction of New Zealand’s electricity. However, hydrocarbon deple-

Maui Gas Field is one of the largest hydrocarbon-producing
fields in the Taranaki Basin with an area of 150 square km.
Therefore, a lot of studies and research have been done in
this field. The major reservoirs found are Mangahewa, Kaim-
iro, and the oldest Farewell Formation. In 2002, with a pro-
duction of 4.6 billion cubic meters per year (Ministry of Eco-
nomic Development Energy), Maui Gas Field provided 30%
Responsible Editor: François Roure
* Kamalia Norjannah Kamalrulzaman
aliajannah16597@gmail.com
1
Department of Geosciences, Faculty of Science, Universiti
Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong 1410,
Brunei Darussalam
tion in the field had led to a reduction in energy provided
and by 2005, with a production of 2.4 billion cubic meters
per year (Ministry of Economic Development Energy), and
depletion was recorded to be about 90%, providing only 16%
of New Zealand’s electricity (Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of
New Zealand, 2006). This then took a good turn when the
New Zealand government revised its estimated gas reserves
in 2014 and found that the reserves have been doubled. The
oldest gas producer, the Farewell Formation, was one of the
main contributors (Stuff New Zealand, 2014). Even though
the reserves have doubled, it is still below 30% of what they
used to produce. This forces the need for the development
of new wells.
The importance of seismic interpretation and reservoir
modeling in the development of the field includes the abil-
ity to locate further development and infill wells, undrained

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
1028 Page 2 of 29
areas, reservoir heterogeneity, and carrying out reservoir
characterization. Taranaki Basin has been studied inten-
sively by numerous researchers (Dong et al., 2018; Thota
et al., 2021a & 2021b; Radwan et al., 2021 & 2022; Haque
et al., 2022; Radwan and Nabawy, 2022). Some studies done
on the Maui Gas Field include the Integrated 3-D Geological
Modeling of the Mangahewa C1 Sands Reservoir by Bry-
ant et al. (1995), Structural Modeling of the Maui Gas Field
by Haque et al. (2016a), Lateral distribution of Petrophysi-
cal properties on Clastic Mangahewa Formation by Haque
et al. (2016b), 3D modeling of the Mangahewa Formation
by Haque et al. (2018), 3D Paleo-Environmental Facies and
Petrophysical Properties of Mangahewa Formation by Haque
(2018), and Integrated reservoir characterization and fluid
flow distribution of the Kaimiro Formation by Shalaby et al.
(2020b). Most of the aforementioned studies focus on Man-
gahewa and Kaimiro formations, and there have been no stud-
ies published on the Farewell Formation in Maui Gas Field
regarding reservoir characterization and the implications of
reservoir modeling on the field development. Some studies of
the Farewell Formation in other fields include the petrophysi-
cal and petrographical analyses of the Farewell Formation
on basin scale by Jumat et al. (2018), Three-Dimensional
Petrophysical Modeling and Volumetric analysis to model the
Reservoir Potential of the Kupe Field by Qadri et al. (2019a),
1D and 3D modeling to establish the Farewell Formation as
a self-sourced reservoir in Kupe South Field by Qadri et al.
(2020), and sedimentological and well log analysis in the
Kupe South Field by Qadri et al. (2021).
Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the reservoir
potential of the Farewell Formation in the Maui Gas Field
by applying several techniques and methods: (1) to utilize
powerful tools such as structural, facies, and petrophysical
modeling; (2) to manually interpret the lithofacies and depo-
sitional facies along the Farewell Formation interval based
on Gamma Ray (GR) responses and core descriptions; (3)
to obtain important petrophysical parameters from Interac-
tive Petrophysics (IP) and core analysis in the form of LAS
files to be imported into Petrel; and (4) to propose new well
locations in the Maui Gas Field. Hopefully, this study will
contribute significantly to the case of Maui Gas Field devel-
opment and also lay the foundation for basin-scale study of
the Farewell Formation.
Geological Setting
Taranaki Basin is located along the west coast of New Zea-
land’s North Island about 400 km west of the Pacific-Aus-
tralian plate boundary (Fig. 1). The basin is about 100,000
square km big with up to 9-km thick of sediment. Large
parts of this basin can be found offshore, and the onshore
region is known as the Taranaki Peninsula. Active faults
13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
run both onshore and offshore. The basin is divided into
two components—the Western Platform and Eastern Mobile
Belt. The Western Platform, separated by a large NE-SW
trending fault, the Cape Egmont Fault, could be found to the
west of the Eastern Mobile Belt. The Cape Egmont Fault is
accompanied by a zone of sub-parallel normal and reverse
faults. The Western Platform is also called the Western Sta-
ble Platform due to the lack or no tectonic activities happen-
ing since the Cretaceous and experienced an overall regres-
sion depositional system due to regional subsiding seafloor
(King and Thrasher, 1996). The Eastern Mobile Belt consists
of multiple grabens with compressional structures including
thrust and reverse faults, and inversion structures (reactiva-
tion from normal to reverse faults) (Knox, 1982). The East-
ern Mobile Belt extends from the Cape Egmont Fault zone
to the N-S trending Taranaki Fault zone that uplifted a large
basement block at the east forming Wanganui Basin in the
later stage. The Taranaki Fault is the largest, stretching more
than 250 km with slight sinuosity and offsetting the base-
ment by about 6 km (King and Thrasher, 1996).
The Maui Gas Field is located on the Eastern Mobile
Belt (Fig. 1). The field is enclosed by two faults, the Whitiki
Fault on the left and the Cape Egmont Fault on the right.
Structural inversions occurred on both faults that have led
to the formation of structures and topography of Maui. The
inversion structure of Maui was formed by fault-bend fold-
ing during the reactivation of the Whitiki Fault (King and
Thrasher, 1996). The major reservoirs of Maui Gas Field are
Mangahewa, Kaimiro, and Farewell Formation which is the
oldest known reservoir of the Kapuni Group. The reservoirs
are capped by the regional Turi Shale (Fig. 2).
The Farewell Formation of the Palaeocene age formed
the basement of the Kapuni Group that unconformably over-
lies the marginal marine strata of the top Pakawau Group
(Fig. 2). Up to 300 m of terrestrial to marine strata have been
penetrated by several wells including those in Maui Gas
Field. King and Thrasher (1996) described the strata found
within the Farewell Formation to be slightly finer-grained,
similar to the sediments found in the areas mainly controlled
by structures. Sand-rich coastal facies of the Farewell For-
mation in the Maui Gas Field thicken northwards and inter-
finger laterally into mudstones of the Turi Formation.
Data and Methods
A 3D seismic areal coverage over Maui Gas Field is 150
square km. The seismic cube provided by the Ministry of
Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), New Zea-
land, consists of 1340 inlines and 4000 crosslines. Seven
wells were penetrating the Farewell Formation: Maui-
1, Maui-2, Maui-3, MB-R(1), MB-W(2), MB-V(3), and
MB-P(8) wells (Fig. 1a). Checkshots and deviation surveys
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
a a
Fig. 1  Regional geological and structural setting of Taranaki Basin
modified after Crowhurst et al. (2002) and Haque et al. (2016a). a
The studied area, Maui Field with 2 major NE-SW trending faults,
were available for those wells. Completion reports and well
log data were also provided that include gamma ray (GR),
spontaneous potential (SP), neutron, density, resistivity
(deep and shallow), and sonic. However, the aforementioned
complete well log dataset was only available for three wells:
MB-R(1), MB-V(3), and MB-P(8). Core samples were avail-
able at intervals 3516–3570 m for MB-R(1), 4109–4135 m
Page 3 of 29 1028
Cape Egmont Fault and Whitiki Fault. b Seismic lines of Maui Gas
Field and wells of Farewell Formation
for MB-W(2), and 2963–3383 m for MB-P(8). Interactive
petrophysics (IP) developed by LR senergy was used for
evaluating petrophysical analysis. For this study, industry-
standard Petrel software version 2015 of Schlumberger was
extensively used for seismic interpretation and model gen-
eration. The coordinates given in the well completion reports
were incompatible with Petrel; therefore, coordinates’
13
1028 Page 4 of 29
Fig. 2  Generalized stratigraphy of the Taranaki Basin and the depositional sequence, modified after Shalaby et al. (2020b) and King and
Thrasher (1996)
conversion was done online through Land Information New
Zealand website https://w
​ ww.g​ eodes​ y.l​ inz.g​ ovt.n​ z/c​ oncor​ d/.
The workflow involved in this study is shown in Fig. 3.
Seismic Interpretation
Depth for Farewell Formation top and bottom was provided
in the well completion reports of available wells and was
used for horizon interpretation. Well data provided was in
the units of depth, and the seismic cube was in the two-way-
time format. In order to pick horizons and do interpreta-
tions properly, seismic-well tie is needed to be done first
(Islam et al., 2021). Faults were also interpreted based on
the seismic sections and coherence-variance time slice map
(Haque et al., 2016a; Islam et al., 2021). Horizon interpreta-
tion was then used to generate surface maps with different
attributes: time, depth, and thickness. Root-mean-square
13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
Regressive sequence
Foredeep and distal
sediment starved shelf
and slope sequence
Late-rift and post-rift
transgressive sequence
Syn-rift sequence
(RMS) amplitude map was generated to show the locations
of accumulated hydrocarbons. Seismic interpretation was
also done to create input for velocity and reservoir modeling.
A velocity model is necessary to convert inputs such as hori-
zon and fault interpretations from time to depth domain.
Time surface maps created from horizon interpretation and
well tops were converted to depth using the velocity model.
Petrophysical and Well Log Analyses
The main parameters for petrophysical analysis were poros-
ity and permeability obtained from cores. The petrophysical
analysis was log-based (Qadri et al., 2019a; Shalaby et al.,
2020a) and done on Farewell Formation to determine the
lithologies, fluid types, porous, and permeable beds (Jumat
et al., 2018). Well log data from MB-R(1), MB-V(3), and
MB-P(8) were imported into IP to assess the quantity and
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 5 of 29 1028

quality of the hydrocarbon-bearing reservoirs (Jumat et al.,

2018). The results comprised of important parameters
Data
(Coordinate projection system; 3D seismic cube;
well tops; well logs; checkshots; deviation surveys) including effective porosity, water saturation, volume of
shale, and net-to-gross.
Horizon Interpretation Fault Interpretation The porosity was calculated from sonic, neutron, density,
and the combination of the neutron-density log. However,
neutron porosity might be affected by the presence of gas
Surface Map Generation
in the formation (decreasing values) and the effect of shale
Generate surface attribute
(increasing values) (Schlumberger – Oilfield Glossary).
(Time; depth; thickness; RMS) Therefore, neutron-density porosity is calculated to find the
most reasonable total porosity. The total porosity (ϕT) is the
total pore spaces in the rock that also includes the intercon-
nected effective porosity (ϕe) allowing fluid flow (Schlum-
Velocity Modeling

berger – Oilfield Glossary). Both porosities were calculated

Depth conversion Depth conversion of horizon
of seismic cube and fault interpretation from the neutron-density porosity model (Qadri et al.,
2019a). The study wells were subjected to a dual water satu-
ration model during the petrophysical analysis in IP. Hydro-
Structural Framework Modeling carbon saturation can be calculated based on the water satu-
ration values produced by IP. GR, neutron, and resistivity
Define
Fault framework Horizon logs were used as the single indicators while neutron-density
geometry
boundary
modeling modeling porosity log was used as the double indicator to calculate the
shale content. The arithmetic averages from both indicators
produced the approximate equal to the actual values (Hakimi
Corner Point Gridding et al., 2012; Qadri et al., 2019a). Net pay identifies the zones
with hydrocarbons and is very important in evaluating the
Fault from structural Fault Pillar quality of the reservoir (Worthington, 2010). Net pay is
framework modeling gridding obtained by applying the cut-offs, ϕe less than 10%, Vsh and
Sw more than 50% during petrophysical analysis in IP. Jumat
Horizon et al. (2018) and Qadri et al. (2020) applied the same cut-offs
Layering Zones creation
modeling to investigate the same formation (Farewell Formation), and
other formations in the same basin were also evaluated using
the same cut-offs (Dong et al., 2018; Shalaby et al., 2020b;
Well Log Data Thota et al., 2021a). Net-to-gross is the decimal fraction or
percentage of selected rock interval calculated by dividing
Lithofacies Depofacies the net thickness by gross thickness (Shepherd, 2009) and
can be classified into three forms: net/gross sand, net/gross
Interpretation Interpretation

reservoir, and net/gross pay (Worthington, 2003). These net/

Data Preparation gross forms were calculated for this study.

Upscalling Data Analysis Reservoir Modeling

Reservoir modeling was divided into structural, facies,

Facies Modeling and petrophysical. The velocity model was used to convert
interpreted horizons and faults of time domain into depth
Sequential Indicator Object-based domain and were used as inputs for the volume-based
Simulation modeling structural modeling. Volume-based modeling (VBM)
algorithm is one of the most efficient techniques for
Petrophysical Modeling
generating an implicit structural model (Haque et al.,
2018). Fault framework was first created with Structural
Sequential Gaussian Simulation
Framework (SF) and then inputted into Corner Point
Gridding (CPG) to produce the final structural model that
Fig. 3  Workflow for seismic interpretation and reservoir modeling. was then populated with facies and petrophysical properties.
Subprocesses sequence from left to right then right to left Manual interpretations of lithofacies and depositional

13
1028 Page 6 of 29
facies were carried out based on GR responses and core
descriptions for facies modeling. Sequential Indicator
Simulation (SIS) and Object-Based Modeling (OBM)
algorithms were used to build lithofacies and depositional
facies models. SIS was chosen due to its robust algorithm,
producing a reasonable model of facies inferred from
limited data (Pyrcz and Deutsch, 2014; Deutsch, 1998).
OBM was also used for the depositional facies model to
show geobodies stochastically (Shepherd, 2009; Haque
et al., 2018) such as fluvial channels. Quality checks were
done and the number of layers was decided based on the
thinnest lithologies. Effective porosity, water saturation,
volume of shale and net-to-gross obtained from IP, and also
permeability from the core analysis were converted into
LAS files and imported into Petrel to create petrophysical
models. The Sequential Gaussian Simulation (SGS)
algorithm was used for the petrophysical model due to its
algorithm producing a more realistic model as compared
to other algorithms (Qadri et al., 2019a). Top, middle, and
bottom skeletons with 50×50 grid cells were decided for
the models to allow better representation of the smallest
geobodies (Shepherd, 2009).
Results
Depth Surface, Thickness, and Root‑Mean‑Square
(RMS) Maps
Two horizons (top and bottom Farewell) and 13 interpreted
faults were used for this study. Figure 4a shows the depth
surface map of the top Farewell Formation that ranges
from 3160 to 3540 m TVDSS. The map shows that the
shallowest depth (orange to red color scale) is towards
the southern part of the Maui Gas Field. Figure 4b shows
the depth thickness map of the Farewell Formation which
ranges from 130 to 260 m. The map shows that the thickest
area (light blue to purple) is located in the southern part of
the field. Figure 4c shows the depth RMS amplitude map
of the Farewell Formation where the brightest areas (light
green to yellow color scale) are around the central and
southern parts of the field. The shallowest depth and the
thickest area are associated with the monocline structure.
The RMS amplitude map also suggests the presence of fluids
recognized by bright amplitude (greenish-yellow areas)
around the monocline structure.
Structure of Maui Gas Field
Taranaki Basin experienced three stages of deformation
(King and Thrasher, 1996; Reilly et al., 2015; Islam et al.,
2021) which could also be seen to happen in the Maui
Gas Field (Haque et al., 2016a). The three main episodes
13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
of faulting recorded during the Cenozoic were (1) Late to
Paleocene rifting episode, (2) Late Eocene to Miocene com-
pressional faulting episode, and (3) Plio-Pleistocene com-
pressional faulting (Southern Maui) and extensional faulting
(Northern Maui) episode.
Figure 5 shows the coherence-variance time slice map
used to identify the location of faults, and Fig. 6 shows
the final structural model by CPG of the Maui Gas Field.
The horizon-fault connection was done to ensure a sealed
model (Haque et al., 2018). The field can be divided into
two sections, Northern and Southern Maui, according to
the structural trends seen (Haque et al., 2016a). The field
has N-S with few NW-SE, and NNE-SSW trending faults
in the northern and southern section, respectively (Fig. 7a).
Thirteen interpreted faults including a known major fault,
the Whitiki Fault, were interpreted for this study. The sub-
parallel faults can be seen cutting through up to the Middle
Eocene Mangahewa Formation with few reaching the base-
ment of the Middle Miocene Moki Formation. The average
dip angle, dip direction (azimuth), and strike for each fault
were calculated (Fig. 8).
In the northern section, the faults are seen closely spaced
together and show normal movements with average dip
54–65° to the west, resulting in the formation of grabens
and mostly half-grabens (Fig. 9). Here, the beds are dipping
gently 10–15° both east and west. In the Southern section,
the largest fault identified, the Whitiki Fault, shows a reverse
movement with an average dip of 55° to the east as a result
of inversion, forming a fault-bend-fold (Fig. 10). Faults that
were reactivated during the inversion period have the same
orientation as earlier faults indicating that the extensional
and compressional forces were acting along the same fault
plane (King and Thrasher, 1996; Haque et al., 2016a). The
monocline structure has beds dipping 15–20° west in the
footwall sides which are higher compared to the northern
and central parts of Maui.
Thinning and stretching of the lithospheric plate of the
Maui Gas Field started due to the early rifting that occurred
during the Middle to Late Cretaceous. This stretching
resulted in the extensive normal faulting in the northern and
central parts of the field. Farewell Formation formed part of
a transgressive depositional system of the Kapuni Group that
sat on the older North Cape Formation leading to more thin-
ning and stretching (Haque et al. 2016a). The southern sec-
tion of the field was less affected by these normal faulting.
Fault Geometry and Mechanism
Whitiki Fault is shown to have the largest fault throw and
displacement of about 280 and 360 m, respectively, against
the distance along the fault plane (Fig. 11). Fault throw is the
vertical distance of the separation, and fault displacement is
the distance along the fault plane. The difference between
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 7 of 29 1028

a b

Fig. 4  Surface maps of Farewell Formation: a Depth surface map of Formation. Bright amplitude represented by greenish-yellow areas
top Farewell Formation, b depth thickness map of Farewell Forma- suggests the presence of fluids including hydrocarbons
tion, and c depth root-mean-square (RMS) amplitude map of Farewell

the throw and displacement values is not big, supporting the south of Maui Gas Field. All other faults show smaller throw
statement that the fault is dipping quite steeply (Blakeslee and displacement which are below 80 m. Histogram plots of
and Kattenhorn, 2013). The throw and displacement are the the faults also show that most of the faults have throw and
largest at the shorter distance along the fault which is to the displacement below 80 m with 64% and 57% having throw

13
1028 Page 8 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

Fig. 5  Variance-coherence time slice map of Farewell Formation showing the location of the faults which could be recognized with red line pat-
terns seen on the map

Northern Maui

Southern Maui

Fig. 6  Final structural model by Corner Point Gridding (CPG). Maui Gas Field is separated into two sections: Northern and Southern Maui

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 9 of 29 1028

a b

Whitiki Whitiki
Fault Fault

Fig. 7  Faults displayed on maps: a Faults having N-S with few on depth root-mean-square (RMS) amplitude map. Bright amplitude
NW-SE, and NNE-SSW trends in the northern and southern section represented by greenish-yellow areas suggests the presence of fluids
of Maui Gas Field, respectively. The largest reversed fault, the Whi- including hydrocarbons
tiki Fault, can be seen in the southern section, and b Faults displayed

Fig. 8  Table on the left shows Average dip Average dip Average
the calculated average dip angle,
dip direction (azimuth), and the angle ° direction ° strike °
strike for 13 faults used in this 65 275 185
study with Whitiki Fault in the 55 112 22
red highlighted row. Stereonet
65 288 198
on the right shows the orienta-
tion of the 13 faults with Whi- 60 275 185
tiki Fault as the red line. Most 55 288 198
Whitiki
faults are showing N-S and
55 280 190 Fault
NE-SW trends with very few
showing NW-SE trend. Most 60 313 223
faults are dipping to the west 54 251 161
55 100 10
58 313 223
60 100 10
65 313 223
60 75 345

and displacement, respectively, below 10 m (Fig. 12). Most
of the faults have a dip of 40–70° with 50.3% having the
highest dip of 50–60°.
The depth RMS amplitude map (Fig. 7b) of the Farewell
Formation shows good lateral distribution of fluids across the
whole field suggesting that the juxtaposition between reser-
voir rocks created with low throw and displacement provides
very less or no vertical sealing from the faults, especially in
the northern and central parts of the Maui Gas Field. This is
also supported by the structural study of the Maui Gas Field

13
1028 Page 10 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

W E
3178

Graben
Half-graben

FAREWELL FORMATION

Thinning

Fig. 9  Seismic section (crossline 3178) of two-way-time showing normal faulting in the Northern Maui where grabens and half-grabens formed

W E

Whitiki Fault

FAREWELL FORMATION

619

Fig. 10  Seismic section (crossline 619) of two-way-time showing fault-bend-fold formed in the Southern Maui as a result of reversed faulting by
the Whitiki Fault. The monocline structure has beds dipping 15–20° west

by Haque et al. (2016a, b). In the Southern Maui, due to the
reverse movement of the Whitiki Fault, with the highest throw
and displacement, possible juxtapositions between reservoir
and the non-reservoir rocks in addition to the destroyed poros-
ity along the fault zone, provide some sealing leading to more
accumulation of fluids towards this area.
Lithofacies Modeling
Figure 13 shows the correlation between the GR responses
and core photographs at depth 3552–3557.5 m for lithol-
ogy interpretation of MB-R(1). The correlation will
then be used to interpret lithofacies solely based on GR
responses from other wells that have limited or no core

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 11 of 29 1028

a
Whitiki Fault

Whitiki Fault

Fig. 11  Fault data plots: a Fault throw for all faults plotted against the the largest fault throw and displacement of about 280 and 360 m,
distance along respective faults and b Fault displacement for all faults respectively. All other faults show smaller throw and displacement
plotted against the distance along respective faults. Whitiki Fault has which are below 80 m

data. As a result, 7 lithofacies were identified for the Fare-
well Formation. Based on the thinnest interpreted lithofa-
cies layers, the whole formation was divided proportion-
ally into 100 equal layers, represented by the K property
layer, having an approximate thickness of 2 m each layer.
Figure 20b shows the lithofacies model created by SIS.
The I and J property layers with intervals of every 50
are also shown in Fig. 26 where the change in lithofacies
along the Farewell Formation can be observed.
Lithofacies Analysis
Figure 14a shows the vertical proportion curve (VPC) for
the lithofacies model. A VPC is a cumulative probability

13
1028 Page 12 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

a b c
Probability of occurrence

Probability of occurrence

Probability of occurrence
Fault throw (m) Fault displacement (m) Fault dip (°)

Fig. 12  Histogram plots for faults: a fault throw against the probability of occurrence, b fault displacement against the probability of occurrence,
and c fault dip against the probability of occurrence. Most of the faults have throw and displacement below 80 m with dip 40–70°

Depth: 3552 – 3557 m

•3552 – 3554.1 m: Shale, grading in part to and interlaminated with
siltstone and inter-bedded with sandstone.
•3554.1 – 3557.5 m : Sandstone with occasional inter-bedded shale.

NOTES

3528 – 3529 m:
Channel sand

3550.6 – 3550.9 m: Small

fault, throw 5 mm, dip 55º

3557 – 3557.4 m:
Sub-vertical fracture

3562.4 – 3562.8 m: Sub

-vertical fracture

Fig. 13  Correlation between the gamma ray (GR) responses and core photographs at depth 3552–3557.5 m for lithology interpretation of
MB-R(1)

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
a b
Probability of occurrence
Fig. 14  Data analysis of lithofacies model: a vertical proportion curve and b histogram of lithofacies thickness against the probability of occur-
rence
plot that shows the estimated facies proportions against
the K property layer of the Farewell Formation (Haque
et al., 2018). The layers also represent the depths, going
from the shallowest (layer 1) to the deepest (layer 100).
Shales are mostly found towards layers 0–30 and layers
89–100 of the Farewell Formation, with estimated facies
proportions reaching up to 50%. Sandstones can be found
throughout the whole formation, but the biggest estimated
facies proportions are along layer 38–89, reaching up to
80%. Siltstones can be found scattered throughout the
whole formation with estimated facies proportions reach-
ing up to 30%. Sandstones and siltstones interbedded are
found along layers 41–80, with estimated facies propor-
tions reaching up to 40%. Sandstones interbedded with
shale can be found along layers 60–82, but the biggest
estimated facies proportions are towards the top layers,
reaching up to 60%. Shales with sandstone and siltstone
are mostly found towards layers 0–19, with estimated
facies proportions reaching up to 22%. Fluvial sandstones
can be found along layers 29–100, with estimated facies
proportions reaching up to 24%. Overall, layers 0–29 con-
tain the highest amount of shale and the lowest would be
along layers 38–71.
Figure 14b shows the histogram of lithofacies thickness
against the probability of occurrence. The thickest shale
and sandstone are 20–30 and 80–90 m, respectively. Both
lithologies have about 1% probability of occurrence, and
both also have the highest probability of about 13% with
Page 13 of 29 1028
thickness below 10 m. The thickest siltstone is 20–30 m
with about 1% probability of occurrence, and the highest is
about 7% with thickness below 10 m. The thickest sandstone
and siltstone interbedded are 20–30 m with about 2% prob-
ability of occurrence which is also the highest probability.
Sandstone and siltstone interbedded with thickness 10–20
m also have the same probability of occurrence. The thick-
est sandstone interbedded with shale is 30–40 m with about
3% probability of occurrence, and the highest is about 4%
with thickness below 10 m. The thickest shale with sand-
stone and siltstone is 30–40 m with about 1% probability of
occurrence which is also the highest probability. Shale with
sandstone and siltstone with thickness below 10 and 10–20
m also have the same probability of occurrence. The thickest
fluvial sandstone is only 10 m and below with about 15%
probability of occurrence.
Depositional Facies Modeling
Five depositional facies were also identified based on the
GR responses and core descriptions available for the Palaeo-
cene-aged Farewell Formation from MB-R(1) and MB-W(2)
(Figs. 15, 16, 17 18, and 19). Interpretation of depositional
facies was done based on GR responses is done according to
Nazeer et al. (2016). The depositional facies interpretation is
also correlated with the lithofacies interpretation. Any addi-
tional information about depositional facies mentioned here is
from the well completion reports. Figure 20a shows the final
13
1028 Page 14 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

Fig. 15  Gamma ray (GR)

responses and core photographs
at measured depths 3556–3557
m from MB-R(1). Depositional
facies has been identified to be
inner shelf/estuarine where the
GR log has been characterized MD: 3556 m MD: 3557 m
to have an abrupt base with
fining upward trend according
to Nazeer et al. (2016). The
core photographs have shown
sandstones with some cross-
beddings

Cross-beddings

10 cm

Fig. 16  Gamma ray (GR)

responses and core photographs
at measured depths 4110–4111
m from MB-W(2). Depositional MD: 4110 m MD: 4111 m
facies has been identified to be
the transgressive inner shelf
where the GR log has been
characterized to have an ideally
rounded base and top accord- Bioturbation
ing to Nazeer et al. (2016). The
core photographs have shown
sandstones with some rare bio-
turbation and laminations as the
results of weak currents

Lamination

10 cm

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 15 of 29 1028

Fig. 17  Gamma ray (GR)

responses and core photographs
at measured depths 3533–3535
m from MB-R(1). Depositional
facies has been identified to
be tidally influenced estuarine
channel sands where GR log has
been characterized to have sharp
top and base with consistent MD: 3533 m MD: 3535 m
trend according to Nazeer et al.
(2016). Core photographs have
shown sandstones with some
herringbone cross-beddings
Herringbone 10 cm
cross-beddings

Fig. 18  Gamma ray (GR)

responses and core photographs MD: 4113 m MD: 4114 m
at measured depths 4113–4114
m and 4116 m from MB-W(2).
Depositional facies has been
identified to be lower to middle
shoreface where the GR log
has been characterized to have
an abrupt top and coarsen-
ing upward trend according to
Nazeer et al. (2016). Core pho-
tographs have shown sandstones
with some bioturbations and
siltstone with high GR response Bioturbation

10 cm
Bioturbation

13
1028 Page 16 of 29
Fig. 19  Gamma ray (GR)
responses and core photographs
at measured depths 3564–3565
m from MB-R(1). Depositional
facies has been identified to
be fluvial channel at the base
where GR log has been charac-
terized to have fining upward
trend according to Nazeer et al.
(2016). Core photographs have
shown sandstones with some
cross-beddings
depositional facies model created by SIS and OBM to display
the geobodies. The geobodies, which are the fluvial channels
in this study, were generated based on the geometrical inputs
studied by Reynolds (1999) and Gibling (2006).
Inner Shelf Sand Facies
The sands have an abrupt base with fining upward trend
(Fig. 15). Inner shelf facies are frequently seen to overlie
estuarine deposits with sharp, erosive contact. It is also
called the shallow marine greensand facies due to the high
content of glauconite (well completion report). Glauconite
is a fine, green mineral that has very low weathering resist-
ance (Odin, 1988). The basal parts of the facies sometimes
contain granule siltstone clasts and bivalve shell fragments.
Bioturbation is rare in the sandstones of this facies. This
facies also separates the overlying shoreface facies from the
underlying estuarine-fluvial-influenced facies. Figure 16
shows transgressive inner shelf depositional facies with an
ideally rounded base and top. Core photographs measured at
depths 4110–4111 m from MB-W(2) have shown sandstones
with some rare bioturbations and laminations as an indica-
tion of weak currents.
Estuarine Sand Facies
The sands also have an abrupt base with fining upward trend
(Fig. 15). Core photographs measured at depths 3556–3557
m from MB-R(1) have shown some cross-beddings. For
13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
MD: 3564 m MD: 3565 m
Cross-beddings
10 cm
depositional facies classification, inner shelf, and estuarine
deposits were grouped due to similar GR responses and the
absence of core descriptions from some wells to distinguish
these two sand facies. Inner shelf and estuarine deposits have
wide a range of petrophysical values, and the values are also
affected by transgression or tidal effect. Estuarine deposits
overlie fluvial deposits with transitional contacts. These facies
are distinguished from fluvial facies by the presence of Ophio-
morpha burrows (well completion report). Bioturbation inten-
sified in the upper parts of estuarine facies. These sediments
represent the onset of marine transgression. Figure 17 shows
tidally influenced estuarine channel sands depositional facies
with sharp top and base with a consistent trend. Core photo-
graphs measured at depths 3533–3535 m from MB-R(1) have
shown sandstones with some herringbone cross-beddings.
Shoreface Sand Facies
The sands have an abrupt top and coarsening upward
trend (Fig. 18). Core photographs measured at depths
4113–4114 m from MB-W(2) have shown sandstones with
some bioturbations. A core sample with siltstone lithol-
ogy at a depth of 4116 m is also correlated with a high
GR response. These are the reworked deposits from long-
shore currents, along and parallel to the shoreline (Mode
et al., 2017), resulting in facies having NE-SW orienta-
tion. Wave action effects are stronger here compared to the
other facies, making the shoreface facies the cleanest. The
upper part of the GR log is the middle shoreface while the
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 17 of 29 1028

Fig. 20  Facies and petrophysical models of the Farewell Formation: a depositional facies, b lithofacies, c porosity, d permeability, e water satu-
ration, f volume of shale, and g net-to-gross

lower part is the lower shoreface (well completion report). lower shoreface. Generally, the shoreface deposits are
The middle shoreface represents a better reservoir than wave-dominated with a good winnowing effect (Mode
the lower shoreface due to the higher porosity and coarser et al., 2017).
sands. Alternation of sand and shale also occurred in the

13
1028 Page 18 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

Fig. 21  K property layer 83: a Depositional facies model showing ▸

non-marine, fluvial dominated environment. Paleo-shoreline can a b
be identified having NE-SW trend, b lithofacies model, c porosity
model, d permeability model, e water saturation model, f volume of
shale model, and g net-to-gross model. Areas with high net-to-gross
often correlate with high porosity, high permeability, low water satu-
ration, and low volume of shale. Fluvial channel sand deposits show
mostly high porosity, high permeability, high water saturation, high
net-to-gross, and low volume of shale while the other facies have a
wide range of these petrophysical values

Fluvial Channel Sand Facies

The sands usually represent the lower part of subtle

fining upwards cycles (Fig. 19). Core photographs
measured at depths 3564–3565 m from MB-R(1) have
c d
shown sandstones with some cross-beddings. This
facies is dominated by subtle, low-angle cross-bed-
dings (well completion report). Fluvial also shows
aggradation and the cycles reflect waning energy flow.

Environment of Deposition

Maui Gas Field have been classified into having two main
environments of deposition: Marine dominated and non-
marine (fluvial dominated). Marine dominated environments
will have more deposits from the inner shelf, estuarine, and
shoreface. Marine associations are based on the presence
of mineralogical indicators such as glauconite or bioclasts. e f
Ophiomorpha burrows are often found in shallow marine
deposits (well completion report). Non-marine dominated
environment will have more deposits from fluvial channels
with a dominant NW-SE paleocurrent direction. These two
environments are separated by a NE-SW trending paleo-
shoreline with basinward and landward flows to the NW and
SE, respectively. Interfingering of marine and non-marine
sediments is often seen across the layers. The whole Farewell
Formation is predominantly non-marine and experienced an
overall transgressive depositional system, with local regres-
sions, marked by increasing marine influence up-sequence
(King and Thrasher, 1996). Figures 21, 22 and 23, 24 show
the transgressive sequence from K property layer 83 (bottom g
Farewell) to layer 47 (top Farewell) of the depositional facies
model, with the migration of paleo-shoreline landwards. The
changes in lithofacies and petrophysical properties can also
be observed for the selected layers. Fluvial channel sand
deposits show mostly high porosity, high permeability, low
water saturation, high net-to-gross, and low volume of shale
while the other facies have a wide range of these petrophysi-
cal values.

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 19 of 29 1028

Fig. 22  K property layer 60: a Depositional facies model. Paleo- ▸

shoreline can be identified having NE-SW trend, b lithofacies model,
a b
c porosity model, d permeability model, e water saturation model, f
volume of shale model, and g Net-to-gross model. Areas with high
net-to-gross often correlate with high porosity, high permeability,
low water saturation, and low volume of shale. Fluvial channel sand
deposits show mostly high porosity, high permeability, high water
saturation, high net-to-gross, and low volume of shale while the other
facies have a wide range of these petrophysical values

Reservoir Petrophysical Evaluation

The well log data from MB-R(1), MB-V(3), and MB-P(8)

were used to estimate the petrophysical parameters in IP.
The well log analysis was conducted for the Farewell For-
mation at measured depths 2095.5–3619.4 m for MB-R(1), c d
3571–3780.3 m for MB-V(3), and 3390–3621 m for
MB-P(8) to obtain the effective porosity, water saturation,
volume of shale, and net-to-gross (Fig. 25). GR, neutron
and density porosities, and a combination of these logs were
used to evaluate the petrophysical parameters. The petro-
physical models (Fig. 20c–f) represent the distribution of
petrophysical values obtained for the Farewell Formation.
Cut-offs were applied to produce the reservoir pay of the
formation which are 10% for effective porosity and 50% for
water saturation and volume of shale. As a result, porosity
values are less than 10%, and water saturation and volume of
shale greater than 50% were not considered as reservoir pay
zone. Petrophysical analysis of the three wells after cut-offs e f
has shown that the effective porosity is 17–19%, net-to-gross
is 12–16%, volume of shale is 11–12%, water saturation is
16–23%, and hydrocarbon saturation is 77–84% (Table 1).
MB-P(8) is the most prolific well. Permeability values were
obtained from core analysis of MB-R(1) at measured depths
3516.1–3521.6 m and MB-W(2) at 4109.1–4114.6 m for
the formation. The range of minimum, maximum, and aver-
age permeabilities are 0.02–0.03 mD, 1374–2304 mD, and
327.88–628.84 mD, respectively.

Effective Porosity Model

Figure 20c shows the effective porosity model created by g

SGS. Figures 27, 28, and 29 show three cross-sections
(west-east) from selected J property layers of the northern
(layer 850), central (layer 550), and southern (layer 200)
parts of the Maui Gas Field, respectively. The effective
porosity model ranges from 7 to 21%. Cross-sections of
the model (Figs. 27d, 28d, and 29d) have shown that the
effective porosity is the highest (green to red color scale)
towards the southern and central parts of the field, within
the middle and bottom layers of the formation, respectively.
The lowest effective porosity (blue color scale) can also be
found towards southern and central parts but both within the

13
1028 Page 20 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

Fig. 23  K property layer 53: a Depositional facies model showing ▸

marine-dominated environment. Paleo-shoreline can be identified a b
having NE-SW trend, b lithofacies model, c porosity model, d per-
meability model, e water saturation model, f volume of shale model,
and g net-to-gross model. Areas with high net-to-gross often corre-
late with high porosity, high permeability, low water saturation, and
low volume of shale. Fluvial channel sand deposits show mostly high
porosity, high permeability, high water saturation, high net-to-gross,
and low volume of shale while the other facies have a wide range of
these petrophysical values

top layers. These high effective porosity values are mostly

associated with shoreface (especially middle shoreface) and
fluvial channel sand deposits while low values are associated
with shoreface (lower), transgressive inner shelf, and tidally
influenced estuarine channel sand deposits (Fig. 27b, 28b, c d
and 29b). Towards the top layers, shoreface deposits will
mostly be of the lower shoreface due to the overall transgres-
sion experienced by the whole Farewell Formation result-
ing in higher shale content. Northern Maui shows frequent
changes in effective porosity range across the layers.

Permeability Model

Figure 20d shows the permeability model created by SGS.

The permeability model ranges from 0.1 to 1000 mD. Cross-
sections of the model (Fig. 27e, 28e, and 29e) have shown
that the highest permeability (yellow to red color scale)
is towards the southern and central parts of the Maui Gas e f
Field, within the middle and bottom layers of the Farewell
Formation, respectively. The lowest permeability (purple
color scale) can also be found towards southern and central
parts but both within the top layer of the formation. These
high permeability values are mostly associated with shore-
face (especially middle shoreface) and fluvial channel sand
deposits while low values are associated with shoreface
(lower), transgressive inner shelf, and tidally influenced
estuarine channel sand deposits (Fig. 27b, 28b, and 29b).
Northern Maui shows frequent changes in permeability
range across the layers.

Water Saturation Model g

Figure 20e shows the water saturation model created by

SGS. The water saturation model ranges from 0–100%.
Cross-sections of the model (Figs. 27f, 28f, and 29f) have
shown that the highest water saturation (blue color scale)
is towards the southern and central parts of the Maui Gas
Field, both within the bottom layers of the Farewell Forma-
tion. The lowest water saturation (red to yellow color scale)
can also be found towards southern and central parts but
both within the top to middle layers of the formation. These
high-water saturations are mostly associated with transgres-
sive inner shelf and tidally influenced estuarine channel sand

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 21 of 29 1028

Fig. 24  K property layer 47: a Depositional facies model show- ▸

ing marine dominated environment, b lithofacies model, c porosity a b
model, d permeability model, e water saturation model, f volume of
shale model, and g net-to-gross model. Areas with high net-to-gross
often correlate with high porosity, high permeability, low water satu-
ration, and low volume of shale. Fluvial channel sand deposits show
mostly high porosity, high permeability, high water saturation, high
net-to-gross, and low volume of shale while the other facies have a
wide range of these petrophysical values

deposits while low values are associated with shoreface and

fluvial channel sand deposits (Figs. 27b, 28b, and 29b).
Northern Maui shows frequent changes in water saturation
range across the layers.

c d
Volume of Shale Model

Figure 20f shows the volume of shale model created by

SGS. The volume of shale model ranges from 0–35%.
Cross-sections of the model (Figs. 27g, 28g, and 29g)
have shown that the highest volume of shale (green
color scale) is towards the southern and central parts
of the Maui Gas Field, both within the top layers of the
Farewell Formation. The lowest volume of shale (red
to yellow color scale) can also be found towards the
southern and central parts but within the middle and
bottom layers of the formation, respectively. These high
volumes of shale values are associated with shoreface e f
(lower), transgressive inner shelf, and tidally influenced
estuarine channel sand deposits while low values are
associated with shoreface (especially middle shoreface)
and fluvial channel sand deposits (Figs. 27b, 28b, and
29b). Northern Maui shows frequent changes in volume
of shale range across the layers.

Net‑to‑Gross Model

Figure 20g shows the net-to-gross model created by SGS.

The net-to-gross model ranges from 0 to 100%. Cross-
sections of the model (Figs. 27h, 28h, and 29h) have
shown that the highest net-to-gross (red color scale) is g
towards the southern and central parts of the Maui Gas
Field, within the middle and bottom layers of the Fare-
well Formation, respectively. Areas with high net-to-
gross often correlate with high porosity, high permeabil-
ity, low water saturation, and low volume of shale. The
lowest net-to-gross (blue color scale) can also be found
towards the southern and central parts but both within
the top layers of the formation. These high net-to-gross
values are associated with shoreface (especially mid-
dle shoreface) and fluvial channel sand deposits while
the low values are associated with shoreface (lower)
and tidally influenced estuarine channel sand deposits

13
1028 Page 22 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

Fig. 25  Well log analysis with well-log data including gamma ray
(GR), spontaneous potential (SP), neutron, density, resistivity (deep
and shallow), and sonic using IP were conducted for the Farewell
Formation at measured depths 2095.5–3619.4 m for MB-R(1), 3571–
3780.3 m for MB-V(3), and 3390–3621 m for MB-P(8) to obtain the
petrophysical parameters including the effective porosity, water satu-
ration, volume of shale, and net-to-gross. Permeability values were
obtained from core analysis of MB-R(1) at measured depths 3516.1–
3521.6 m and MB-W(2) at 4109.1–4114.6 m for the formation

Table 1  Estimated values of important parameters obtained from log- voir pay of the formation which are 10% for effective porosity and
based petrophysical analysis of the Farewell Formation for MB-R(1), 50% for water saturation and volume of shale
MB-V(3), and MB-P(8). Cut-offs were applied to produce the reser-

Well name Thickness N/G (%) Vsh (%) ∅e (%) Sw (%) Sh (%)
Top Bottom Gross Net reservoir Net pay

MB-R(1) 2095.5 3343.0 1523.9 478.7 242.3 15.9 11.0 17.5 22.1 77.9
MB-V(3) 3572.0 3780.3 208.3 71.5 25.6 12.3 8.2 17.0 22.2 77.8
MB-P(8) 3390.0 3621.0 231.0 94.1 31.2 13.5 11.6 18.3 16.6 83.4

(Figs. 27b, 28b, and 29b). Northern Maui shows frequent
changes in net-to-gross range across the layers.
3D Reservoir Modeling Implications on Field
Development
A 3D reservoir modeling is growing in popularity
within the oil and gas companies as a tool in making
critical decisions for field development. The methods
used in generating the models can quantify and reduce
uncertainties making the field development plan more
robust, for instance, designing well positions and paths
for maximum oil and gas recovery (Jian, 1999). The
flexibility of the 3D models also allows companies to
identify the upside and downside cases. 3D models
generated in this study can aid in the development of
the Maui Gas Field by identifying locations for infill
wells and undrained areas, providing visualization of
reservoir heterogeneity, and carrying out reservoir
characterization. Infill wells are wells that are positioned
in spaces between existing wells where hydrocarbons
were unreachable, increasing production. The 2 proposed
areas for new wells are introduced in Fig. 30 which
are in the southern and central parts of the Maui Gas

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
Fig. 26  I and J property layers of the Farewell Formation with an interval of every 50 for lithofacies
Field where there are lacking of existing production
wells. The structural model shows that the good vertical
seal created by the possible juxtaposition between the
reservoir and non-reservoir rocks in addition to the
destroyed porosity is towards the southern part of the
field, where the faulted monocline can be found. Here,
the depth for top Farewell is the shallowest, and this area
is the thickest. The RMS amplitude map also shows the
brightest anomaly. Petrophysical and well log analyses
can tell us whether the reservoir is of good quality or
not. Facies and petrophysical models show that the good
target areas are towards the southern and central parts of
the field, within the K property layers 38–71 and layers
37–100 of the Farewell Formation respectively, where the
effective porosity, permeability, and net-to-gross without
applying the cut-offs are high (15–21%, 10–1000 mD,
and 80–100%, respectively), while the water saturation
and volume of shale are low (0–20% and 0–10%,
respectively). These characteristics are often associated
with shoreface (especially middle shoreface) and fluvial
channel sand deposits.
Page 23 of 29 1028
Conclusions
The integrated 3D modeling scheme to characterize the res-
ervoir quality of the Farewell Formation has come to the
following conclusions:
(1) Farewell Formation has a thickness that ranges from
130 to 260 m with the thickest area towards the south-
ern part of Maui Gas Field where the monocline struc-
ture can be seen. RMS amplitude map also shows the
brightest amplitude anomaly around this area.
(2) The 13 interpreted faults in the Maui Gas Field have
N-S with few NW-SE, and NNE-SSW trends in the
northern and southern section, respectively. Faults
show normal movement with low throw and displace-
ment (both below 10 m) in the northern and central
parts of the field and reverse movement forming fault-
bend-fold, the Whitiki Fault, in the southern part, with
the highest throw and displacement (up to 280 m and
360 m, respectively).
(3) Seven lithofacies have been identified for the Farewell
Formation based on the GR responses and core descrip-
tions. K property layers 0–29 of the formation contains
13
1028 Page 24 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

a b

c d

e f

g h

Fig. 27  J property layer 850 (Northern Maui): a Maui Gas Field
showing cross-section line X’-X” (west-east), b cross-section of dep-
ositional facies model, c cross-section of lithofacies model, d cross-
section of porosity model, e cross-section of permeability model, f
cross-section of water saturation model, g cross-section of the volume
of shale model, and h cross-section of the net-to-gross model. Areas
with high net-to-gross often correlate with high porosity, high perme-
ability, low water saturation, and low volume of shale. Northern Maui
shows frequent changes in petrophysical values across the layers

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028 Page 25 of 29 1028

a b

Y’ Y”
Y”
Y’

c d

Y” Y”

Y’ Y’

e f

Y” Y”

Y’ Y’

g h

Y” Y”

Y’ Y’

Fig. 28  J property layer 550 (Central Maui): a Maui Gas Field show-
ing cross-section line Y’-Y” (west-east), b cross-section of depo-
sitional facies model, c cross-section of lithofacies model, d cross-
section of porosity model, e cross-section of permeability model, f
cross-section of water saturation model, g cross-section of the volume
of shale model, and h cross-section of the net-to-gross model. Areas
with high net-to-gross often correlate with high porosity, high perme-
ability, low water saturation, and low volume of shale. Good areas
are within the K property layers 37–100 of the Farewell Formation
where the porosity, permeability, and net-to-gross without applying
the cut-offs are high (15–21%, 10–1000 mD, and 80–100%, respec-
tively), while the water saturation and volume of shale are low (0–20
and 0–10%, respectively). These characteristics are often associated
with shoreface (especially middle shoreface) and fluvial channel sand
deposits

13
1028 Page 26 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

a b Z”

Z’
Z’
Z”

c Z” Z”
d

Z’ Z’

e Z” Z”
f

Z’ Z’

Z” h Z”
g

Z’ Z’

Fig. 29  J property layer 200 (Southern Maui): a Maui Gas Field
showing cross-section line Z’-Z” (west-east), b cross-section of dep-
ositional facies model, c cross-section of lithofacies model, d cross-
section of porosity model, e cross-section of permeability model, f
cross-section of water saturation model, g cross-section of the volume
of shale model, and h cross-section of the net-to-gross model. Areas
with high net-to-gross often correlate with high porosity, high perme-
ability, low water saturation, and low volume of shale. Good areas are
within the K property layers 38–71 of the Farewell Formation where
the porosity, permeability, and net-to-gross without applying the cut-
offs are high (15–21%, 10–1000 mD, and 80–100%, respectively),
while the water saturation and volume of shale are low (0–20% and
0–10%, respectively). These characteristics are often associated with
shoreface (especially middle shoreface) and fluvial channel sand
deposits

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
a b
Whitiki
Fault
Fig. 30  Surface maps of Farewell Formation with faults displayed: a
depth surface map of top Farewell Formation with proposed areas and
b depth root-mean-square (RMS) amplitude map of Farewell Forma-
tion with proposed areas. The proposed areas are to the southern and
central parts of the Maui Gas Field where the effective porosity, per-
the highest amount of shale and the lowest is along
layers 38–71.
(4) Five depositional facies have been identified for the
Farewell Formation based on the GR responses and
core descriptions that are also correlated with lithofa-
cies interpretation. The Maui Gas Field has a NE-SW
trending paleo-shoreline, and the whole formation
experienced an overall transgression depositional
system, with local regressions, marked by increasing
marine influence up-sequence.
(5) Structural, facies, and petrophysical models show that
the effective porosity, permeability, and net-to-gross
are high (15–21%, 10–1000 mD, and 80–100%, respec-
tively), while the water saturation and volume of shale
are low (0–20% and 0–10%, respectively). With applied
cut-offs (10% for effective porosity, 50% for water sat-
uration, and volume of shale), petrophysical analysis
from MB-R(1), MB-V(3), and MB-P(8) have shown
that the effective porosity is 17–19%, net-to-gross is
12–16%, volume of shale is 11–12%, water saturation
Page 27 of 29 1028
Whitiki
Fault
meability, net-to-gross are high, and water saturation and volume of
shale are low according to the petrophysical models. Bright amplitude
represented by greenish-yellow areas suggests the presence of fluids
including hydrocarbons
is 16–23%, and hydrocarbon saturation is 77–84%. The
minimum, maximum, and average permeabilities from
the core analysis are 0.02–0.03 mD, 1374–2304 mD,
and 327.88–628.84 mD, respectively.
Acknowledgements The first author is grateful to the Universiti Bru-
nei Darussalam (UBD) for funding this study in the form of Brunei
Government Scholarship as part of the graduate research project under-
taken at the Department of Geosciences. The authors would like to
thank the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE),
New Zealand, for providing dataset containing 3D seismic, well logs,
and associated reports required for this study. Schlumberger and LR
Senergy are greatly acknowledged for the support with Petrel G&G
software version 2015 and Interactive Petrophysics, respectively. The
authors also would like to thank UBD Department of Geosciences for
providing the workstation amenities and logistic support for this study.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
13
1028 Page 28 of 29 Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028

References and seismic attribute analysis for the reservoir evaluation: a

case study of the Mount Messenger Formation in Kaimiro Field,
Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. J Natural Gas Sci Eng 99:104452
Allaby, A., & Allaby, M. (1999). Oxford Dictionary of Earth
“Industry pumps up gas reserves” (2014). Stuff New Zealand. http://​
Sciences (2 ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 320. ISBN
www.​stuff.​co.​nz/​taran​aki-​daily-​news/​news/​10347​574/​Indus​try-​
0-19-280079-5.
pumps-​up-​gas-​reser​ves (accessed 21st July 2021).
Asquith G, Krygowski D (2004) Basic well log analysis, 2nd Ed.
Islam MA, Yunsi M, Qadri SMT, Shalaby MR, Haque AKME (2021)
AAPG Methods in Exploration 16:13–35
Three dimensional structural and petrophysical modeling for res-
Audinno R, Pratama I, Halim A, Kusuma D (2016) Integrated analysis
ervoir characterization of the Mangahewa formation, Pohokura
of the-low resistivity hydrocarbon reservoir in the “S” field. For-
Gas-Condensate Field, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. Natural
tieth Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2016. Proceedings,
Resour Res (2021). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11053-​020-​09744-x
Indonesian Petroleum Association. 10.29118/IPA.0.16.436.SE
Jian FX (1999) 3D stochastic reservoir modelling and field develop-
Babasafari AA (2019) Velocity model building using Petrel soft-
ment planning. APPEA J 39:537–547. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1071/​
ware. Universiti Teknologi Petronas Centre Of Excellence In
AJ980​34
Subsurface Seismic Imaging & Hydrocarbon Prediction (CSI)
Jiang S (2012) Clay minerals from the perspective of oil and gas
Bates RJ, Jackson JA (1984) Dictionary of geological terms (3 ed.).
exploration. In: Valašcova M, Martynkova GS (eds) Clay miner-
American Geological Institute. p. 299. ISBN 0-385-18101-9
als in nature-their characterization, modification and applica-
Blakeslee M, Kattenhorn S (2013) Revised earthquake hazard of the
tion, pp 21–38. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5772/​47790
Hat Creek fault, northern California: a case example of a normal
Jumat N, Shalaby MR, Islam MA (2018) Integrated reservoir charac-
fault dissecting variable-age basaltic lavas. Geosphere. 9:1–13.
terization of the Paleocene Farewell Formation, Taranaki Basin,
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1130/​GES00​910.1
New Zealand, using petrophysical and petrographical analyses. J
Bryant ID, Greenstreet CW, Voggenreiter WR (1995) Integrated 3-D
Petrol Explor Prod Technol 8:685–701. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
Geological Modeling of the C1 Sands Reservoir, Maui Field, Off-
s13202-​017-​0420-5
shore New Zealand 1. AAPG Bulletin 79(3):351–374. https://​doi.​
King PR, Thrasher GP (1992) Post-Eocene development of the
org/​10.​1306/​8D2B1​52A-​171E-​11D7-​86450​00102​C1865D
Taranaki Basin, New Zealand, convergent overprint of a pas-
Cade CA, Evans IJ, Bryant SL (1994) Analysis of permeability con-
sive margin. AAPG Memoir 53:93–118
trols a new approach. Clay Miner 29:491–501
King PR, Thrasher GP (1996) Cretaceous-Cenozoic geology and
Crowhurst P, Green P, Kamp P (2002) Appraisal of (UTh) / He apa-
petroleum systems of the Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. Insti-
tite thermochronology as a thermal history tool for hydrocarbon
tute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences monograph 13. 243 p, 6
exploration: an example from the Taranaki Basin, New Zealand.
enclosures. Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences Limited,
AAPG Bulletin, v. 86, no. 10 (October 2002), pp. 1801–1819
Lower Hutt, New Zealand
Deutsch CV (1998) Cleaning categorical variable (lithofacies) reali-
Knox GJ (1982) Taranaki Basin, structural style and tectonic setting.
zations with maximum a posteriori selection. Comput Geosci
New Zealand J Geol Geophys 25:125–140
24(6):551–562
“Lithology”. Earthquake Glossary. US Geological Survey. https://e​ arth​
Dong SP, Shalaby MR, Islam MA (2018) Integrated reservoir char-
quake.​usgs.​gov/​learn/​gloss​ary/?​term=​litho​logy (accessed 28th
acterization study of the McKee formation, Onshore Taranaki
September 2021).
Basin, New Zealand. Geosciences 8(4):105. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
Ministry of Economic Development Energy Data File 2011 Spread
3390/​geosc​ience​s8040​105
Sheet E Gas. https://​www.​mbie.​govt.​nz (accessed 13th April
“Effective porosity”. Oilfield Glossary. Schlumberger. https://​gloss​
2022).
ary.​o ilfi​e ld.​s lb.​c om/​e n/​t erms/e/​e ffec​t ive_​p oros​i ty (accessed
Mode AW, Anyiam OA, John SI (2017) Depositional environment and
28th September 2021).
reservoir quality assessment of the “Bruks Field,” Niger Delta. J
Gibling, M. (2006). Width and thickness of fluvial channel bodies
Petrol Explor Prod Technol 7:991–1002. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
and valley fills in the geological record: a literature compilation
s13202-​017-​0346-y
and classification. J Sediment Res, n.d.v. 76, 731–770. DOI:
Nazeer A, Abbasi SA, Solangi SH (2016) Sedimentary facies interpre-
https://​doi.​org/​10.​2110/​jsr.​2006.​060.
tation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and
Hakimi MH, Shalaby MR, Abdullah WH (2012) Diagenetic charac-
Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan. Geodesy Geodynam 7:432e443.
teristics and reservoir quality of the Lower Cretaceous Biyadh
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​geog.​2016.​06.​006
sandstones at Kharir oilfield in the western central Masila Basin,
“Neutron porosity”. Oilfield Glossary. Schlumberger. https://​gloss​ary.​
Yemen. J Asian Earth Sci 51:109–120
oilfi​eld.​slb.​com/​en/​terms/n/​neutr​on_​poros​ity (accessed 28th Sep-
Haque AKME, Islam MA, Shalaby MR (2016a) Structural modeling
tember 2021).
of the Maui gas field, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. J Petrol
New Zealand Coordinate Conversions. Land Information New Zea-
Explor Dev 43(6):965–975
land. https://​www.​geode​sy.​linz.​govt.​nz/​conco​rd/ (accessed 29th
Haque, A. K. M. E., Islam, M. A., & Shalaby, M. R. (2016b). Lateral
August 2021).
distribution of Petrophysical properties on Clastic Mangahewa
Odin GS (1988) Green marine clays. Development in sedimentology,
formation, Maui field, New Zealand. SEG Global Meeting
45. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Abstracts: 256-256. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1190/​ice20​16-​65207​45.1.
Osli LN, Yakub NY, Shalaby MR, Islam MA (2018) Log-based petro-
Haque AKME, Islam MA, Shalaby MR, Sadeque J (2018) Integrated
physical analysis of Khatatba Formation in Shoushan Basin, North
3D facies modeling of the Mangahewa Formation, Maui Gas
Western Desert, Egypt. J Geosci 22:1015–1026. https://​doi.​org/​
Field, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. J Petrol Explor Prod Tech-
10.​1007/​s12303-​018-​0007-2
nol 8:1017–1049
Pyrcz MJ, Deutsch CV (2014) Geostatistical reservoir modeling.
Haque AKME (2018) 3D Paleo-environmental facies and petro-
Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 127–131
physical properties of Mangahewa formation, Maui Gas Field,
Qadri SMT, Islam MA, Shalaby MR (2019a) Three dimensional petro-
New Zealand. EAGE Conference on Reservoir Geoscience
physical modeling and volumetric analysis to model the reservoir
2018(1):1–5
potential of the Kupe Field, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. Natural
Haque AE, Qadri SMT, Bhuiyan MAH, Navid M, Nabawy BS,
Resour Res 28:369–392
Hakimi MH, Abd-El-Aal AK (2022) Integrated wireline log

13
Arab J Geosci (2022) 15:1028
Qadri SMT, Shalaby MR, Islam MA (2019b) Application of well log
analysis to estimate the petrophysical parameters and evaluate
the reservoir quality of the Lower Goru Formation, Lower Indus
Basin, Pakistan. Geomechanics and Geophysics for Geo-Energy
and Geo-Resources. 10.1007/s4094 8-019-00112-5
Qadri SMT, Islam MA, Shalaby MR, Ali SH (2020) Integration of 1D
and 3D modeling schemes to establish the Farewell Formation
as a self-sourced reservoir in Kupe Field, Taranaki Basin, New
Zealand. Frontiers of Earth Science. 1-18. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/​
s11707-​020-​0839-8
Qadri SMT, Islam MA, Shalaby MR, Abd El Aal AK (2021) Res-
ervoir quality evaluation of the Farewell sandstone by integrat-
ing sedimentological and well log analysis in the Kupe South
Field, Taranaki Basin-New Zealand. Journal of Petroleum
Exploration and Production Technology. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s13202-​020-​01035-8
Radwan AA, Nabawy BS, Abdelmaksoud A, Lashin A (2021) Inte-
grated sedimentological and petrophysical characterization for
clastic reservoirs: a case study from New Zealand. J Natural Gas
Sci Eng 88:103797
Radwan AA, Nabawy BS (2022) Hydrocarbon prospectivity of the
miocene-pliocene clastic reservoirs, Northern Taranaki basin,
New Zealand: integration of petrographic and geophysical stud-
ies. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s13202-​021-​01451-4
Radwan AA, Nabawy BS, Shihata M, Leila M (2022) Seismic interpre-
tation, reservoir characterization, gas origin and entrapment of the
Miocene-Pliocene Mangaa C sandstone, Karewa Gas Field, North
Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. Marine Petrol Geol 135:105420
Reilly C, Nicol A, Walsh JJ, Seebeck H (2015) Evolution of faulting
and plate boundary deformation in the southern Taranaki Basin,
New Zealand. Tectonophysics 651:1–18
Reynolds AD (1999) Dimensions of paralic sandstone bodies. Am
Assoc Petrol Geol Bull 83:211–229
Rider M (1996) The geological interpretation of well log (2nd ed.).
London: Whittles Publishing. ISBN 97809541 90606
Shalaby MR, Jumat N, Islam MA, Kalaitzidis S (2020a) Character-
istics of source and reservoir rocks of the Eocene Mangahewa
Page 29 of 29 1028
Formation in Taranaki Basin, New Zealand: their implications for
petroleum systems. Scientia Bruneiana, Vol. 19, No. 1
Shalaby MR, Sapri SH, Islam MA (2020b) Integrated reservoir char-
acterization and fluid flow distribution of the Kaimiro Forma-
tion, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand. J Petrol Explor Prod Technol
10:3263–3279. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s13202-​020-​01005-0
Shepherd M (2009) Where hydrocarbons can be left behind, in M.
Shepherd, Oil field production geology: AAPG Memoir, 91
Taylor TR, Stancliffe R, Macaulay CI, Hathon LA (2004) High temper-
ature quartz cementation and the timing of hydrocarbon accumu-
lation in the Jurassic Norphlet sandstone, offshore Gulf of Mexico,
U.S.A. In: Cubit JM, England WA, Larter S (eds) Understanding
petroleum reservoirs: towards an integrated reservoir engineer-
ing and geochemical approach. Geol Soc (London) Special Pub
237:257–278
“The Maui Gas Field” (2006). Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New
Zealand. https://​teara.​govt.​nz/​en/​oil-​and-​gas/​page-5 (accessed
21st July 2021).
Thota ST, Islam MA, Shalaby MR (2021a) A 3D geological model of
a structurally complex relationships of sedimentary Facies and
Petrophysical Parameters for the late Miocene Mount Messenger
Formation in the Kaimiro-Ngatoro field, Taranaki Basin, New
Zealand. J Petrol Explor Prod Technol 12:1147–1182. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1007/​s13202-​021-​01366-0
Thota ST, Shalaby MR, Islam MA (2021b) Petrophysical characteris-
tics and reservoir quality evaluation of deep water turbidite sand-
stones of the Mount Messenger Formation, New Zealand. Arab
J Geosci. 14:2738. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12517-​021-​09153-1
Worthington PF (2003) Effect of clay content upon some physical prop-
erties of sandstone reservoirs. The Intl Assoc Sedimentol Special
Publ 34:191–211
Worthington PF (2010) Net pay-what is it? what does it do? how do
we quantify? How do we use it? SPE Reservoir Evaluation &
Engineering 13(5):812–822
Wyllie MRJ (1963) The fundamentals of well log interpretations. Aca-
demic Press, New York
13