Integrated Petroleum Geosciences Certificate

ASSIGNMENT #2 : SEISMIC INTERPRETATION

LUIS MARIO PEREZ MOLINA

I. Prepare a short review on the formation of biogenic versus thermogenic gas,
focus in particular on their gas windows (including formation temperatures). Use at
most 2-3 slides in your powerpoint.

Thermogenic gas
Biogenic gas
Origin: produced from
Origin: derived by organic precursors. Formed
bacterial activity. in fine-grained sedimentary
Temperature: low rocks (mudstones,
Pressure: few meters of claystones, shales and
sediments. certain limestones, e.g algal
Depth: lower than limestones)
1000m Temperatures: high
temperatures
Pressure: high pressure
Depth: greater than 1000m.
I.3 Normally we would pick the faults but it is a simple graben structure. From vertical cross-sections can you determine
the correlation between the bright spots in the graben structure and the faults?

Yes, those brightspots are due to change of impedance, which could indicate the presence of hydrocarbon storaged due to
the traps caused by the graben structure and opposing normal faults and their lithological changes that leads to seals (that
traps the hydrocarbon or fluid)
 I.4 Is there evidence that the faults are sealing or leaking? Can you provide arguments in favor and/or against for each
case based on the seismic data and your answer to the question I.3?

There is evidence that they behaved like leaking when we assume that those are gas (or another fluid)
accumulations due to normal faults that acted as migration paths, but in some way they also functioned as a seal
when creating blocks bounded by opposing normal faults.
I.5 If we consider the gas to be biogenic we need to establish their source rocks and the temperature gradients
• a. Assuming a thermal gradient of 30° C/km and a velocity of 2.4 km/s what would be a representative temperature profile as a function of
two-way traveltime?

Horizons Depth (m) ∇T (°C)

Up Pleistocene 500 15
IUP 670 20
T580 810 25
T680 1060 32
UP Pleistocene MMU 1392 42

IUP

T580

T 680

Temperature Gradient in Depth (meters)

2500

MMU 2000

1500

1000

500

0
5°C 10°C 15°C 20°C 25°C 30°C 35°C 40°C 45°C 50°C 55°C 60°C 65°C 70°C
 • b. What are therefore potential source rocks for generation of biogas in your area? Assume that the gas is generated in situ at the current depths. Hint:
There are many system tracts in this dataset.

Transgresive system track

IUP 670m = 20°C

Lowstand system track Highstand system track

According to system tracks depositational model, the source rock could be fined-granned sedimentary rocks that were
deposited at time when was ocurring a transgression by the rise of the level of the sea; and based on the low depth and
temperature we could asume that the accumulation situated in the “IUP” is a biogenic gas hydrocarbon.
I. 6. If the gas is thermo-genic what are potential migration paths? And when would the gas have moved geologically? Can you give bounds on the timing? Answer this question
for the bright spots above both salt domes. The gas might have flowed in the past, so consider also the formation history of the current structures. You can show the potential
migration pathways on an East-West vertical cross-section.

Pleistocene Transgresive system track

Lowstand system track

Pliocene Highstand system track

Mid Miocene

In the case of the East part, the faults could have acted like migration paths for the gas generated in Lower units, that migrated through the faults and got
storaged by the lithological changes asociated to the opposite normal faults of the graben structure.
In my opinion the gas could have started to move at the Pliocene when the sediment influx got higher, this influx was high because of the strong erosion and a
delta system that bringed a lot of sediments that created a subsidence to then affect the salt layers below, that resulted in deformations and faults that
functioned as migration paths for the thermogenic gas.
 7. Weigh up The pros and cons on the origin of the shallow gas pockets above both domes. What speaks in favor or
against one scenario or the other?
Pros:
• By the characteristics of the depositation, we could be sure that the accumulation on
the West side is of biogenic origin, and that the rocks acts like source and storage for
the gas produced.
• For the East part we could say that the faults affected almost shallow layers, and this
faults make posible to communicate the bottom with upper layers that have
characteristics for storage of hydrocarbons (gas).
Cons:
• For the East part it could be more difficult to drill because of the inestability that the
faults offers.
• Another con (for me) is that the trapped fluid on the East by it’s origin it could be
“contaminated” with another gases like CO2 and S2 making it less valuable unlike the
other accumulation on the west that by its origin should be methane.
 8. If you would rank the various possible drilling targets what would be your top 2? Why? Can you
provide estimates on volumetrics?
TOP 1

590 ms

624 ms

By it’s origin, apparent size of structure and depth this would my Top 1 drilling target, and added the volume
calculation
• The volumetrics calculation shows the following values for TOP1
• The volumetrics calculation shows the following values for TOP2
 II. Salt and its evolution
We would like to find out when the salt moved and if this occurred in a
single or in multiple episodes.

• (1) computing isochrons (time intervals between formations)

• (2) flattening horizons
• (3) using cross-cutting relations including faults.
II.1.a Are the layer thicknesses mostly variable or constant? Which ones change in thickness?

They vary in thickness, i think that the unit that contains the source rock (by its origin) is a little bit more thinner because it is formed
by finned granned sedimentary rocks that allows to be more compact than the layers below.
 COMPUTING ISOCHRONES: FLATTENING HORIZONS

MMU

T680

T580

IUP

UPER
PLEISTOCENE
II.1.b Flatten your horizons consecutively. Do this both from top down and bottoms up. Chose again

Bottoms up: MMU

an East-West vertical section to display your results.
T680
T580
IUP
UPER PLEISTOCENE
UP TO DOWN
 II.1.C Interpretation of flattened horizons is based on Steno’s principle that all layers are originally deposited horizontally. Is this
assumption appropriate if system tracts are involved? Are there flattened horizons you may wish to exclude from your
analysis?
T580

The T580 horizon seems not to be too horizontal, this could be because this part correspond to a transgresive
system track so i would not exclude any flatten horizon because this give me a hint of the depositation way.
 II.1.D Based on layer thicknesses and cross-cutting relationships, when did the faulting occur? What evidence is
there for this?
IUP

UPER
PLEISTOCENE

• Based on the layer thickness, i could say that there’s evidence to

believe that the faulting occured after de MMU, to be more
precisely during the Pliocene when the load of sediments was too
high that it sank the basin and affecting the salt below the MMU,
making it to try to flow upward breaking and faulting the zone
above.
II.1.E Based on the remaining flattened sections: what is the correlation between the salt and the system tracts, and in particular the shoreline
orientation and evolution? Is there a cause and effect?

I think that the salt and its deformation lead to give shape of the basin, that through the time starts to sink to
then support to generate hydrocarbon, added to the effects of the rise of sea that created system tracks, to
storage hydrocarbons.
 2. Integration all these elements: What is your final interpretation on the salt movement in terms of evolution and timing? And how
did it influence the deposition of the overlying strata? Make sketches of the different steps in your reconstruction as a function of
geologic time (you can do this on paper and then include it as pictures, or directly on the flattened images). Hint: When did the two
salt bodies move? And did this happen in single or multiple episodes?

My interpretation is that in the Miocene started and uplifting that added with sediments influx started a deformation of the Basin, then the
amount of sediments during the Pliocene was too high tan the salt tried to move upwards breaking the layers above the salt and generating
faults and giving a shape for the Basin, then by changes in sea level allowed to créate system tracks that gathered the conditions to storage
hydrocarbons, meanwhile the faults continue to extent conecting lower layers with layers that could storage fluids too.
Conclusions::::::

• The hydrocarbons tends to migrate upward due to density, until they

meet resistance. In this case the resistance is a structural trap created
by the graben structure and the faults, that combined make an
effective seal to trap de hydrocarbons.
• Both accumulations are shallower, so the drill operation would be in
certain way more “easy”, but i preffer the biogenic gas accumulation.