No abstract

No abstract

Thin report w«i grrpmni ** an account or work ipoBtorrd by ihc United Sf stei* Government-Neither ibe United Slttr* nor the United .State* Energy Research a«d Devctopmeat Ad* ministration, nor anv -, completeneia. or uwftila«M of any information, •pparatm. prodort, or process 4Iw)»faa\ mr rcprrwatB that it* iwr would not Infringe privately owned ihm KOTICf-____ L-I n> pstpuet it an ..rcr.i "(an br IU I'auj Sum (nwa s,,:h-~-^ Sutr* no. tba I'Mtod Suui (JMTJ J~"cf. •« Dmlorocn ««IWKJJIIMI. no, «, , tot*lt aUli roi Ik ta«n o(.« «Ioniyuo«. imit ptaawr dMdoKd. 01 rfpfcscad Ihil m Mr *oa|6 c

Geochemical analyses of oil bearing formations, based on nuclear techniques, are often limited by the current level of uncertainties on neutron cross section data. The problems created for nuclear geochemistry are most acute in the areas of high energy neutron scattering, inelastic neutron scattering gamma-ray production, and production of prompt gamma rays and delayed activations generated by (n,p) and (n,ar) reactions for neutron energies up to 14 MeV. We will present examples illustrating the ways in which spectroscopic measurements are used for geochemical applications and how the uncertainties in the nuclear cross section data affect the usefulness of the results. Particular elements that cause significant problems in the analysis are emphasized. INTRODUCTIONThe discovery of hydrocarbon bearing geological formations and the probability of successful fluid recovery is dependent on the identification of fluids and a knowledge of the mineralogy of the surrounding rock.' An important technique for providing information on these questions is provided by continuous subsurface measurements in a borehole of the elemental concentrations of the' surrounding rock and fluid? With the

No abstract