Exploration at the eastern edge of the Precaspian basin: Impact of data integration on Upper Permian and Triassic prospectivity

Barde, Jean-Pierre; Gralla, Peter; Harwijanto, Josef; Marsky, Juergen

doi:10.1306/61eedaee-173e-11d7-8645000102c1865d

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kungurian-Kazanian) the basin became isolated from the Tethys Ocean and a thick (up to 4.5 km in the basin; c. 2 km in the study-area) salt sequence was deposited (Barde et al, 2002b, Volozh et al, 2003Fernandez et al, 2017). During the Upper Permian, sedimentation was dominated by westward progradation of a non-marine clastic wedge comprising material shed off the rising Ural Mountains.…”

Section: Geological Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The basin initially formed in response to Devonian rifting and subsequent Carboniferous, post-rift thermal subsidence (Barde et al, 2002a,b;Volozh et al, 2003). The Ural Orogeny started in the middle Carboniferous in response to the collision of the eastern European and Kazakh plates, causing uplift of the Precaspian Basin's eastern side and the development of a rapidly-subsiding foreland basin in the remaining Precaspian Basin (Brunet et al, 1999;Barde et al, 2002b). During this time (i.e.…”

Section: Geological Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Four-dimensional Variability of Composite Halokinetic Sequences

Pichel¹,

Jackson²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The architecture of salt diapir-flank strata (i.e. halokinetic sequences) is controlled by the interplay between volumetric diapiric flux and sediment accumulation rate. Halokinetic sequences consist of unconformity-bounded packages of thinned and folded strata formed by drape-folding around passive diapirs. These sequences are described by two end-members: (i) hooks, which are characterized by narrow zones of folding (<200 m) and high-angle truncations (>70°); and (ii) wedges, which are typified by broad zones of folding (300-1000 m) and low-angle truncations (<30°). Hooks and wedges stack to form tabular and tapered composite halokinetic sequences (CHS), respectively. CHSs were first and most thoroughly described from outcrop-based studies that, although able to capture their high-resolution facies variations, are limited in describing their 4D variability. This study integrates 3D seismic data from the SE Precaspian Basin, onshore Kazakhstan and structural restorations to examine variations in CHS architecture through time and space along diapirs with variable plan-form and cross-sectional geometries. The diapirs consist of curvilinear walls that vary from upright to inclined in cross-section, may flare-upward and locally display well-developed salt shoulders and/or laterally transition into salt rollers. CHS architecture is highly variable in both time and space, even along a single diapir or minibasin. A single CHS can transition along a salt wall and/or minibasin from tabular to tapered geometries. They can also be downturned and exhibit rollover geometries with thickening towards the diapir above salt shoulders. These variations can be linked to changes in the diapir morphology. Inclined walls present a greater proportion of tapered CHSs implying an overall greater ratio between sediment accumulation and salt-rise relatively to vertical walls. In terms of vertical stacking, CHS can present a typical zonation with lower tapered, intermediate tabular and upper tapered CHSs, but also unique patterns where the lower sequences are tabular and transition upward to tapered CHS. The study demonstrates that CHSs are more variable than previously thought, indicating a complex interplay between volumetric salt rise, diapir-flank geometry, sediment accumulation and roof dimensions. Ultimately, this improves our understanding of diapir-flank deformation and potential minibasin reservoir distribution.

show abstract

Section: Geological Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Geological Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four-dimensional Variability of Composite Halokinetic Sequences

Pichel¹,

Jackson²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the west and north, the basin is adjacent to the Russian platform. It is bounded to the South Emba fold belt and the Karpinskiy fold zone to the south and southeast, respectively, and the eastern boundary is the south end of the Ural fold belt [37][38][39] (Figure 2). The tectonic evolution of the Precaspian Basin involved [40] rifting during the Devonian, [1] passive and transform continental margins of palaeocontinents during the Carboniferous, and [2] plate collisions (European, Kazakh, and Turan plates) at the end of the Permian [37,41,42] (Figure 3).…”

Section: Geological Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During basin evolution, very thick sediments were deposited in the Precaspian Basin starting in the Middle Devonian. The sedimentary strata of the basin can be divided into two major packages (presalt and postsalt), separated by the Kungurian salt [37] (Figure 3). At the end of the early Permian, the European plate collided with the Kazakh plate to the east (Ural Mountains orogeny), and then, the Precaspian Basin progressively became isolated from the open sea, leading to the deposition of a considerable amount of evaporites, i.e., the Kungurian salt (Figure 3).…”

Section: Geological Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphology and Depositional Processes of a Carbonate-Filled Canyon in the Carboniferous KT-II Formation of the Eastern Precaspian Basin, Kazakhstan: Insight from 3D Seismic Data

Wu,

Cheng,

Sheng

et al. 2023

Geofluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canyons in carbonate depositional settings, as important elements of the source-to-sink system, remain poorly studied compared to those in siliciclastic depositional environments. The latest high-resolution three-dimensional seismic data, well logs, and core data at the eastern edge of the Precaspian Basin are used to investigate the geomorphology, infillings, and depositional process of a unique carbonate-filled canyon in the Carboniferous KT-II formation parallel to the carbonate platform, which is distinct from other slope-perpendicular canyons. The canyon has a total length of more than 52.3 km with a nearly N-S orientation and an S-shaped geometry, and the whole canyon can be divided into three segments by two knickpoints. The slope-parallel orientation of the canyon is mainly controlled by the palaeogeomorphology and reverse faults. Due to the collision of the Kazakh and European plates in the early-middle Visean (early Carboniferous), the canyon was formed in a northern tilted, elongated, and restricted palaeotopographic feature between uplifts. The development of reverse faults related to tectonic movement controlled the variations in the width of the canyon and the positions of the knickpoints. Tectonics controlled the orientation and formation of the canyon, while sedimentary processes contributed to its infilling. The well-seismic tie analysis indicated two distinct periods of the canyon fillings, Ss1 and Ss2, which were separated by a second-order sequence boundary. The lower part contained sediments supplied by both sides of the canyon through channels or gullies, and the upper part was dominated by a carbonate platform that prograded from the eastern side of the canyon. The evolution of the canyon can be subdivided into three stages. The increasing stage was mainly characterized by significant upslope erosion through headward retrogressive mass failures in the slope-parallel confined negative relief to form the canyon during the lowstand system tract of Ss1. Subsequently, in the early filling stage, the carbonate factory was productive during the highstand, and massive excess carbonate sediments were transported into the adjacent canyon by channels or gullies on both sides and deposited. The canyon was basically filled, and the morphology became much gentler. During the subsequent late filling stage, the carbonate platform was flooded again during the highstand, and the production rates of the carbonate factory greatly increased. The lateral progradation of carbonate platforms accelerated on the canyon of the early filling stage and further into the inner sag.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, 3D seismic data provide high areal resolution, but with poor vertical resolution (Ajisafe and Ako 2013). Accuracy of subsurface structural mapping and analysis would be significantly enhanced by integrating well logs and seismic data (Adejobi and Olayinka 1997; Barde et al 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reservoir characterization and volumetric estimation of reservoir fluids using simulation and analytical methods: a case study of the coastal swamp depobelt, Niger Delta Basin, Nigeria

Kurah

Shariatipour

Itiowe³

2021

J Petrol Explor Prod Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suites of wireline well logs and three-dimensional (3D) seismic data were integrated to characterise the reservoir and estimate the hydrocarbon in Otigwe field, coastal swamp depositional belt, Niger Delta. The 3D seismic data were used to generate seismic sections through which fourteen faults and two horizons of interest were mapped across four wells. Depth structural map generated from the mapped faults and horizons of interest shows that the trapping mechanism within the field is fault-supported anticlinal structural trap. The four available wells were correlated using lithostratigraphic correlation to establish two reservoir continuities (Reservoir A and B). The estimated reservoir fluid volume at surface condition using reservoir simulation and modelling software is 59 MMstb for reservoir A and 25.70 MMstb for reservoir B. On the other hand, the estimated reservoir fluid volume at surface condition using analytical method is 52.58 MMstb for reservoir A and 18.85 MMstb for reservoir B. Using reservoir simulation and modelling software, the average net-to-gross ratio and shale volume for reservoir A range from 0.86 to 0.89 and 0.11 to 0.14, respectively, while for reservoir B the range is between 0.69 to 0.82 and 0.18 to 0.31, respectively. On the flipside using the analytical method, the average net-to-gross ratio and shale volume for reservoir A is 0.78 and 0.22, respectively. The results from the volumetric estimation of reservoir fluids showed close values using both methods and reservoir A is more prolific compare to B.

show abstract

Exploration at the eastern edge of the Precaspian basin: Impact of data integration on Upper Permian and Triassic prospectivity

Cited by 14 publications

References 4 publications

Four-dimensional Variability of Composite Halokinetic Sequences

Four-dimensional Variability of Composite Halokinetic Sequences

Morphology and Depositional Processes of a Carbonate-Filled Canyon in the Carboniferous KT-II Formation of the Eastern Precaspian Basin, Kazakhstan: Insight from 3D Seismic Data

Reservoir characterization and volumetric estimation of reservoir fluids using simulation and analytical methods: a case study of the coastal swamp depobelt, Niger Delta Basin, Nigeria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About