See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/299399390

Evaluation of source rocks using one dimensional maturity modeling in Lower

Indus Basin, Pakistan

Article  in  Arabian Journal of Geosciences · April 2016

DOI: 10.1007/s12517-015-2244-2

CITATIONS READS

6 758

5 authors, including:

Dr Muhammad Hanif Sohail Wahid

University of Peshawar National Centre of Excellence in Geology, University of Peshawar
94 PUBLICATIONS   318 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   17 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Fahad Ali
Bacha khan University charsada
27 PUBLICATIONS   95 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Carboniferous-Permian stratigraphic and environmental studies View project

Implication of the diagenetic evolution for the diagnosis of reservoir potential of the Amb Formation, western Salt Range, Pakistan View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fahad Ali on 11 November 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
DOI 10.1007/s12517-015-2244-2
ORIGINAL PAPER
Evaluation of source rocks using one dimensional maturity
modeling in Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan
Faisal Qayyum 1 & Muhammad Hanif 1 & Muhammad Mujtaba 2 &
Sohail Wahid 1 & Fahad Ali 3
Received: 26 December 2014 / Accepted: 18 November 2015
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2016
Abstract Out of the numerous potential petroleum
source rocks, present in the Lower Indus Basin, Sembar
Formation is the most promising rock unit. One-
dimensional maturity modeling of source rocks in Low-
er Indus Basin is conducted to find out the lateral and
vertical extents of maturity levels of Sembar Formation.
This study is also aimed to infer the extent of petroleum
generation in the region. The study is based on one-
dimensional basin modeling (maturity modeling) of 22
main exploration wells, drilled in the region. Strati-
graphic input to model includes thickness, formation
tops, ages of deposition and lithology, age and amounts
of erosion, and ages of non-depositional events. Isopach
map of Sembar Formation demonstrates the lateral and
vertical extents of the formation, whereas temperature
and vitrinite reflectance (Ro) contour maps indicate its
maturity levels in different parts of the study area. It is
inferred that the thickness of the overlying rock units
(overburden) control the maturity level of the Sembar
Formation. It may be noticed that the findings of this
study are fully in conformity with the ground realities
of the Lower Indus Basin. Discovery patterns and the
lateral distribution of various types of hydrocarbons
(such as oil, condensate, and dry gas) in the region
* Muhammad Hanif
hanif.nceg@gmail.com
1
National Centre of Excellence in Geology, University of Peshawar,
Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
2
Hydrocarbon Development Institute Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan
3
Department of Geology, Bacha Khan University, Charsadda, Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
coincide with the modeling results of the study, as can be seen
from the burial history diagrams of the 12 wells. The study shows
that Sembar Formation is mature enough to be considered
as conventional petroleum source rock or can be exploit as
unconventional shale gas/oil source.
Keywords Lower Indus Basin . Upper Goru . Lower Goru .
Hydrocarbon . Maturity . Sembar Formation
Introduction
The maturity modeling of source rocks was undertaken
in Lower Indus Basin (LIB). The study area (Fig. 1),
which is now a small portion of the Indo-Pakistan Plate,
was a part of Gondwanaland during Permian time
(Kadri 1995). LIB has been subjected to several tectonic
events that have significantly affected hydrocarbon hab-
itat either developing traps or providing uplifting and
erosion and/or deposition in the basin. It has positively
provided thermal blanket to the source rock. Different
structural styles of LIB are the result of different tec-
tonic events throughout its geological history (Fig. 2)
(Ahmed and Ali 1991). There are three significant
post-rifting tectonic events that can be distinguished in
LIB, a late Cretaceous uplift and inversion, a late Pa-
leocene right-lateral wrenching, and a late Tertiary to
Holocene uplift of the Khairpur High (Kazmi and Jan
1997; Hedley et al. 2005). The LIB has been divided
into Kirthar Fold Belt, Kirthar Depression, Karachi De-
pression, Thar Platform, and Indus Offshore area
(Fig. 1) (Quadri and Quadri 1996).
The Kirther and Karachi depressions contain several
large anticlines and domes and some of these contain
small gas fields (Kemal et al. 1992; Ahmad et al.
252 Page 2 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

Fig. 1 Map showing the study area (i.e., Lower Indus Basin) with well dotted line represents north west-south east cross section, and GH dotted
names and their location. AB dotted line represents south east-west cross line represents north east and south west cross section (modified after
section, CD dotted line represents north east-south cross section, EF Kazmi and Rana 1982; Quadri and Quadri 1996; Raza et al. 1990)
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
Fig. 2 Generalized cross section
of LIB (modified from Quadri
and Quadri 1996; Kadri 1995)
2007). The eastern part of the basin comprising the
Sindh Monocline (Indus Platform) is largely comprised
of faulted and tilted blocks of Mesozoic rocks which
form structural traps and contain small oil and gas fields
(Ahmad et al. 2007). The fault blocks are unconformably
Table 1 Generalized stratigraphic succession of Lower Indus basin (Raza et al. 1990)
Page 3 of 22 252
overlain by Deccan Trap Basalts and Tertiary sedimentary
rocks (Biswas and Deshpande 1983).
The present study is an attempt to model the maturity
of source rock (Sembar Formation) in order to under-
stand the hydrocarbon generation potential of the
252 Page 4 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

Fig. 3 Model of well Buzdar South Deep-01 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source
and reservoir events and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column

Sembar Formation in Lower Indus Basin Pakistan. The
study area occupies a central position in exploration of
oil and gas in Pakistan. There are many commercial oil
and gas discoveries in Cretaceous Goru sands and in
some shallow formations. Recent developments in tech-
nology enable to explore the unconventional reservoirs
to extract shale oil and gas. The shales in the Sembar
Formation are considered as the primary source rocks
for the discoveries in LIB (Iqbal and Shah 1980;
Kadri 1995). While oil and gas shows have been re-
corded in the Sembar Shale on the Thar Platform, as
of yet no productive oil or gas well have been drilled
into the Sembar Shale (Quadri and Quadri 1996). It has
fair to good hydrocarbon source potential (Wandrey

Fig. 4 Model of well Kandra-01 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir
events and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252 Page 5 of 22 252

Fig. 5 Model of well Khairpur-02 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir
events and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column

et al. 2004; Hasany et al. 2007; Nazir et al. 2012). The deposited under open marine environmental conditions
formation consists of black shale with interbedded silt- that deepen in west and north westward with sediment
stone and argillaceous limestone (Raza et al. 1990; derived from Indian Shield in east (Quadri and Quadri
Kadri 1993; Khan et al. 2002 and Shah 2009). It was 1996; Hedley et al. 2005). Its lower contact with

Fig. 6 Model of well Mirpur Bataro-01 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and
reservoir events and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column
252 Page 6 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

Fig. 7 Model of well X-01 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column

various Jurassic formations such as Mazar Drik Forma- disconformable while upper contact is generally grada-
tion, Chiltan Limestone, and Shirinab Formation is tional with the Goru Formation (Williams 1959). The

Fig. 8 Model of well X-04 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252 Page 7 of 22 252

Fig. 9 Model of well X-05 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column

age of the formation is mainly Neocomian (Fatmi the formation thickens to 262 m in the Mughal-Kot
1977). The thickness in the type section is 133 m but Section of the Sulaiman Range (Shah 2009). Gross

Fig. 10 Model of well X-06 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column
252 Page 8 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

Fig. 11 Model of well X-08 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column

thickness of the formation ranges from less than 50 m to foredeep areas (Ahmad et al. 2011). The maturity of
to more than 1000 m. Subsurface depth (top of the the Sembar Formation increases in the west and de-
formation) varies between 1000 and 5000 m in platform creases in the east due to change in lithology and

Fig. 12 Model of well X-10 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252 Page 9 of 22 252

Fig. 13 Model of well X-11 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column

depositional environment (Ahmad et al. 2011). Total or- wells range from 0.5 to 3.5 % and average about
ganic carbon (TOC) values of Sembar in Badin area 1.4 % (Wandrey et al. 2004). Overburden thickness,

Fig. 14 Model of well X-15 showing burial history, hydrocarbon generation history, maturity with depth along with seal, and source and reservoir events
and intervals adjacent to stratigraphic column
252 Page 10 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

Table 2 Summary of the burial histories of different wells

Well name Depth of Sembar Targeted Fm. Timing of HC Cum. HC ratio Sembar Fm. Maturity Top depth
Fm. (m) generation (Ma) (bbls/m3 rock) thickness (m) (Ro %) temp. (°C)

X-01 4,100 E Jurassic 101.05 (Albian) 0.23 600 Overcooked (4.8) 282
X-02 1,922 E Jurassic 96.73 (Cenoinanian) 0.1 827.492 Oil/gas (0.9) 137
X-03 1,991 E Jurassic 102.53 (Albian) 0.12 650.107 Oil/gas (1.00) 140
BSD-01 2,767 E Jurassic 105.87 (Albian) 0.15 611.09 Gas (2.00) 182
X-04 2,889 E Jurassic 113.84 (Aptian) 0.05 785.13 Overcooked (2.4) 200
Kandra-01 2,231 E Jurassic 105 (Albian) 0.06 11 Gas (1.6) 162
Khairpur-02 Nil E Jurassic Nill Nill Nill Nill
X-05 3,218 E Jurassic 100 (Albian 0.05 740.93 Overcooked (2.1) 182
Mirpur Bataro-01 2,958 L. Goru 101.84 (Albian) 0.06 1,500 Overcooked (2.8) 200
X-06 950 Triassic Nill Nill 239.68 NSR 80
X-07 3,330 E Jurassic 104.31 (Albian) 0.21 601.5 Overcooked (3.4) 230
X-08 2,152 Chiltan Fm 87.05 (Santonian) 0.12 558 Oil and gas (1.8) 145
X-09 2,202 E Jurassic 98.88 (Albian) 0.16 823.838 Gas (1.6) 165
X-10 4,407 E Jurassic 98.03 (Albian) 0.06 185 Overcooked (3.5) 238
X-11 2,346 E Jurassic 51.5 (Ypersian) 0.06 124 Gas (1.2) 150
X-12 2,540 E Jurassic 100 (Albian) 0.11 587.095 Gas (1.8) 170
X-13 2,100 E Jurassic 103.42 (Albian) 0.06 833.7 Gas (1.4) 150
X-14 2,355 E Jurassic 105.31 (Albian) 0.05 658.641 Gas (1.8) 170
X-15 3,187 Sembar 101.63 (Albian) 0.04 413 Overcooked (2.8) 215
X-16 3,797 Sembar . 106 (Albian) 0.06 197 Overcooked (3.8) 240
X-17 3,868 Sembar . 107.49 (Albian) 0.06 320 Overcooked (3.5) 230
X-18 3,857 Sembar . 106.89 (Albian) 0.06 173 Overcooked (3.8) 240

geothermal gradient, Tmax, and vitrinite reflectance data
place the formation in oil, wet, and dry gas windows at
the depths of 2500, 3200, and 3400 m, respectively
(Ahmad et al. 2011). The organic matter in the Sembar
is mainly type III kerogen, capable of generating gas;
however, additional proprietary data indicate the pres-
ence of type II kerogen as well as type III kerogen
(Nazir et al. 2012). Thermal generation of hydrocarbons
in the Sembar Formation began 65 to 40 million years
ago (mya) during Paleocene to Oligocene time. Migra-
tion is primarily vertical and updip into adjacent reser-
voirs and through extensional faults associated with
plate collision (Wandrey et al. 2004).
Stratigraphy
The Lower Indus Basin includes Precambrian base-
ment and Mesozoic to Recent sedimentary rocks
(Table 1). Triassic to Tertiary rocks have been drilled
in the region (Kadri 1995). The sedimentary fill is of
varying thickness ranging from 5000 to 10,000 m in
deeper parts of the basin (Bender and Raza 1995).
Stratigraphic succession of the Thar Platform changes
from east to west with regional unconformities at
Permian and Tertiary base levels. Tertiary sequence
has direct contact with the Jurassic sequence in the
eastern part of the Thar Platform (X-06 well). The
thickness of the sediments increases westward (X-01
well). The stratigraphy in Kirthar Fold belt ranges
from Triassic to Recent age (Hasany et al. 2007). Ero-
sion in some parts of the fold belt is so deep that it
has exposed the Jurassic rocks at or near the surface
(Riaz and Ali 1991). The main source rock is Sembar
Formation and reservoir rock is the Cretaceous Lower
Goru sandstone in the Thar platform (Kadri 1995).
Paleocene Ranikot Formation is producing in Karachi
Depression, in Kirthar Depression, and Sukkur Rift
zone Eocene Sui Main/Habib Rahi Limestone is pro-
ducing. The Lower Indus Basin is characterized by
high geothermal gradients (range 2–4 °C/l00 m) (Khan
and Raza 1986).
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
Fig. 15 Contour map shows
variation in subsurface thickness
of Sembar Formation in the
Lower Indus Basin
Methodology
In maturity modeling study, a conceptual model of the
region’s geological history is developed which works as
a framework for the reconstruction of the basin’s depo-
sitional history. Burial history reconstruction includes
important events occurring during the geological time
represented by deposition and non-deposition or erosion
(unconformities) while taking into account various
rock’s physical and thermal parameters. The stratigraphy
input data for maturity modeling include thickness, ages
of deposition, lithologies, and amount and ages of ero-
sion and non-deposition.
The one-dimensional modeling was carried out
using 22 exploratory wells (Fig. 1). During the
Page 11 of 22 252
selection of wells, only those wells were selected
which were penetrated deep enough to include
Sembar Formation and penetrating Chiltan Limestone
of Jurassic age underlying it. The one-dimensional
maturity modeling was done by using BasinMod-
2012 software. It is a commercially available soft-
ware by Platte River Associates, Inc., Boulder, CO,
USA. The wire line log data included mostly sponta-
neous potential and gamma ray; however, resistivity,
sonic, and density logs are also provided for some of
the wells. The list of wells and associated basic in-
formation is given in Appendix 1. The wire line log
data was issued by Land Mark Resources (LMKR)
Pakistan with prior permission of Directorate General
of Petroleum Concession (DGPC). Most of the wells
252 Page 12 of 22
Fig. 16 The contour map shows
variation in top depth of the
Sembar Formation in the Lower
Indus Basin
are concentrated in the middle portion of the Lower
Indus Basin with a few outliers for the purpose of
correlation. The wire line data was very poor in qual-
ity and unreliable as it did not include Sembar For-
mation, targeting only the overlying Lower Goru For-
mation interval, the reservoir rock in most of the
wells in LIB. Wire line log data is very important
in the evaluation of source rock as it provides infor-
mation on lithology, compaction, generation potential,
erosional amounts, borehole temperature (BHT), and
mud weight (Passey et al. 1990, 2010). Poor wire
line log data cause uncertainties in modeling. Thus,
in the light of insufficient and unreliable data, the
input data, paleo-geographical position of the basin
and geology was generalized and collected from
literature (Ahmed and Ashten 1982; Quadri and
Quadri 1996; Raza et al. 1990; Ahmed and Ali
1991; Kadri 1995; Ahmed and Chaudhry 2002;
Khan et al. 2002; Wandrey et al. 2004; Ahmad
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
et al. 2007; Shah 2009; Ahmad et al. 2011 and
Nazir et al. 2012).
Input data for modeling
The basic input data required include stratigraphy, for-
mation thickness, formation tops, age, lithology, and pe-
troleum system information (Appendix 1). The stratigra-
phy, the formation ages, and the general lithological
information for each formation were taken from Shah
(2009). At some instances, where lithological data was
not available or uncertain, environment of deposition of
various formations is given instead of lithology input.
The BasinMod-2012 software has an internal library of
different environments of deposition along with default
lithology percentages from where one can choose de-
sired depositional environment and lithology
combination. The input data for different wells used in
the modeling is given in the Appendix 2. The
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
Fig. 17 Isopach map shows
variation in calculated
temperature at the top of Sembar
Formation in LIB
geological time scale of Haq et al. (1987) was used to
get the ages in million years for each formation. The
petroleum system, rock type, and generalized kerogen
type was chosen primarily on the basis of lithology
adopted from Shah (2009) and later from Quadri and
Quadri (1996), Raza et al. (1990), Ahmed and Ali
(1991), Kadri (1995), Khan et al. (2002), and Ahmad
et al. (2011).
Burial history and petroleum system elements
To reduce the number of figures the burial history of only 12
exploratory wells is shown in Figs 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13 and 14. Stratigraphy (chronostratigraphic time scale, depth,
and thickness) and lithology encountered at individual well
locations are given in Appendix 2. Compaction was calcu-
lated automatically by the software using the equation
Page 13 of 22 252
of effective stress following the work of Burland (1990)
and Yang and Alpin (2004). The permeability was cal-
culated by using modified Kozeny-Carman equation by
the software following the work of Carman (1956). The
values of petrophysical parameters necessary for calcu-
lating physical properties and thermal properties were
default provided by the software on the basis of lithol-
ogy specified for each rock unit which is present today
or was deposited but subsequently eroded away. Since
the precise lithologies of eroded rock units are not
known. Lithologies of eroded sections have been esti-
mated from data on rocks present in a nearby well or
outcrops and also taking into consideration the different
facies and modes of deposition. The simulated results
based in the input data including burial history, timing
of hydrocarbon generation, type of hydrocarbons, top
temperature of Sembar Formation, tentative amount of
252 Page 14 of 22
Fig. 18 Isopach map shows
calculated maturity (Ro) at the top
of Sembar Formation
hydrocarbons, and petroleum system elements for all the
22 wells are given in Table 2.
Results and discussion
Sembar Formation is distributed throughout in the
Kirthar Range of Lower Indus Basin. The average sub-
surface thickness of Sembar Formation is 520 m en-
countered in various exploratory wells, and thickness
varies from 124 m in X-11 well to 827 m in X-02 well.
It is not present in Khairpur-02 well and Kandra-01
well; both are located near the Khairpur High area,
north of Lower Indus Basin (Fig. 15). It is inferred that
during the deposition of Sembar Formation (Early Cre-
taceous), either Khirpur High was already developed or
was under developing. The Sembar Formation is rela-
tively thin toward east, i.e., 239.68 m in X-06 well and
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
dominated with silliciclasts (Khan and Raza 1986;
Quadri and Quadri 1996; Raza et al. 1990; Shah
2009). This may indicate the deposition of the Sembar
Formation near the shoreline. The highest thickness was
encountered in Mirpur Bataro-01 well (1500 m) and
indicates the basinal setting away from the shoreline.
Figure 16 shows an isopach map highlighting variation
in subsurface top depth of Sembar Formation in LIB.
The average subsurface depth is 2690 m and varies
from 2100 m (X-13 well) to 4407 m (X-10 well). The
top depth gives information about the overburden and
formation undergoes with the time. Keeping in view the
paleogeographical location of the coastal area which
was located south east of the present location
(Wandrey et al. 2004), Sembar Formation attained max-
imum overburden in deeper parts of the basin (i.e., lo-
cation of Mirpur Bataro-01 well, X-10 well, X-14 well,
X-17 well, and X-18 well). Figure 17 shows an isopach
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
Fig. 19 South east-west cross section shows variation in thickness, top depth, and lithology of Sembar Formation
map highlighting the variation in calculated temperature
encountered at the top of Sembar Formation at different
wells in LIB. The average modeling top temperature is
186 °C and varies between 80 °C (X-06 well) and
280 °C (X-01 well). The minimum modeled top temper-
ature is where the formation has less overburden (i.e.,
X-06 well) and where the basin is relatively cool (South
East of LIB). Sembar Formation has attained maximum
temperature where formation has undergone maximum
overburden (i.e., Mirpur Bataro-01 well, X-10 well, X-14
well, X-17 well, and X-18 well).
Sembar Formation is not in oil window (60 to 120 °C)
in any well used in the modeling. The model shows that
the formation is in mixed oil-gas window where the
Page 15 of 22 252
modeling temperature range is 130 to 150 °C (X-02,
X-03, X-08, and X-11 wells). The formation is in wet
gas window where modeling temperature is ranging
between 150 and 180 °C (i.e., Buzdar South Deep-01,
Kandra-01, X-09, X-12, X-13, and X-14 wells). The for-
mation is overcooked (dry gas) where top temperature is
greater than 182 °C (i.e., X-04, X-01, X-05, X-07, X-10,
X-15, X-16, X-17, X-18 wells). The modeling tempera-
ture is 80 °C at the top of Sembar Formation in X-06 well.
Here, the formation is dominated with silliciclastics mak-
ing it non-source rock at well location (Quadri and Quadri
1996). Figure 18 shows an isopach map of calculated
maturity (Ro versus LLNL) levels at the top of Sembar
Formation in LIB. The model shows that the average
252 Page 16 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

Fig. 20 North east-south cross section shows variation in thickness, top depth, and lithology of Sembar Formation

Fig. 21 North east-south west cross section shows variation in thickness, top depth, and lithology of Sembar Formation
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
Fig. 22 North east-south west cross section shows variation in thickness, top depth, and lithology of Sembar Formation
maturity (Ro) is 2.2 % and varies between 0.45 and 4.8 %.
The formation has higher maturity values (i.e., >1.8 %)
where it is overcooked due to greater overburden and
higher modeling temperature. The lowest maturity values
are encountered in south east of LIB where it is dominat-
ed by sand (Shah 2009) and have less overburden and
modeling temperature.
Different cross sections were constructed to high-
light the lateral variation in lithology, thickness, top
depth, and top temperature calculated from maturity
modeling of Sembar Formation. These cross sections
were made along dotted lines on the map (Fig. 1), and
Sembar Formation bottom depth was taken as refer-
ence. Sembar Formation shows variation in lithology
from sand dominated to shale dominated from east to
west (Kadri 1995). Such variation in lithology can
also be observed in south east–west cross section rep-
resented by AB dotted line on the map. It also shows
increase in formation thickness, top temperature, ma-
turity, and overburden from east to west as well as
Page 17 of 22 252
change from non-source rock to source rock. This in-
dicate the transition from the near shore area in the
south east (i.e., X-06 well) to deep marine conditions
in the west (i.e., X-01 well). The CD dotted line on
the map represents north east-south cross section
(Fig. 19). Formation shows increase in overburden
and increase in formation top temperature from north
to south. There is no pronounced variation in litholo-
gy, except a little decrease in sand percentage in the
middle portion of the basin (i.e., X-15). The formation
thickness does not show any dramatic change except
at the middle portion where it decreases to a few hun-
dred meters (i.e., X-15). The overall maturity increases
from north to south. The EF dotted line (Fig. 20) rep-
resents north east-south west cross section (Fig. 21). It
shows an increasing trend in the thickness and matu-
rity of the formation. The middle portion of the basin
(i.e., X-15) shows greater overburden and high calcu-
lated temperature as compared to X-08 in north east
and Mirpur Bataro-01 well in south west. The sand
252 Page 18 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

content of the formation shows a little decrease from Mr. Shahid Waheed from NCEG, University of Peshawar, for providing
Information Technology (IT) assistance during the research.
NE (i.e., X-08) to SW (i.e., Mirpur Bataro-01). The
GH dotted line represents the north west-south east
cross section (Fig. 22). It shows increasing trend in
overburden, maturity, and formation top temperature Appendix 1
from SE (i.e., X-06 well) to NW (i.e., X-10 well). In
contrary, the thickness of Sembar Formation decreases Table 3 The list of wells and associated basic information
pronouncedly along with sand content from south east
to north west. The Sembar Formation shows change in Well Lat./Log. Operator TD KBE Targeted Status
Name (m) (m) Fm.
sand-dominated lithology in the south east (i.e., X-06
well) to shale-dominated lithology in the north west X-01 26.1392/ LASMO 3495 271 Chiltan Gas
(i.e., X-10 well). This indicates shoreline conditions 67.6508
in SE and basin conditions in NW of the LIB. X-02 24.3781/ UTP 3813.5 4.2 Chiltan Oil
24.3781
X-03 24.6055/ Stanvac 2744.88 11.28 Chiltan. Oil
68.99
Conclusion BSD-01 25.3249/ UTP 3428.8 3.3 Chiltan . Gas
68.7745
X-04 24.3914/ UTP 3698.5 9.1 Chiltan. Oil
In this study, the maturity modeling of the Sembar For- 68.5983
mation was done by using 1D basin modeling technique Kandra- 27.5643/ Premier 7460 65 Chiltan. Gas
in Lower Indus Basin. In order to accomplish this goal, 01 68.857 oil
X-01 26.1392/ LASMO 3495 271 Chiltan. Gas
geological and geophysical studies were combined
67.6508 oil
which include well log and literature knowledge to con- Khairpur- 27.5931/ PPL 3557 183 Chiltan. Gas
struct the geological history of the study area. Burial 02 68.7805
history, maturity, timing of hydrocarbon generation, X-05 27.8827/ MGCL 4116.1 70 Chiltan. Gas
69.7435
and amount of hydrocarbon generation are predicted
MB-01 24.6544/ Stanvac 3051 12.8 L. Goru Oil
from the modeling results. Existing literature and results 68.2013
of our models show that the Sembar Formation of early X-06 25.0000/ Stanvac 3054 30 Triassic Oil
Cretaceous (Aptian) age is a widely distributed source 69.7075
X-07 25.402580/ OGDCL 4160 29 Chiltan. Gas.
rock in the Lower Indus Basin. The formation is
068.5758
overcooked in most of the LIB. However, reserves of X-08 27.824972/ Tullow 3185 103 Chiltan. Gas
dry gas and gas condensates are inferred to be present 070.1015 oil
in south of the study area. It is of prime importance to X-09 24.5282/ UTP 3093 9.14 Chiltan. Oil
68.7702
mention here that the migration of hydrocarbon might
X-10 28.6329/ PPL 4713 235 Chiltan. Gas
have already been taken place before the Sembar For- 69.1589
mation entered in to gas window in south of basin. The X-11 27.698103/ PCPI 2548 56.7 Chiltan. Gas
timing of hydrocarbon generation inferred from the 068.2325
X-12 24.8633/ Stanvac 3287 14.6 Chiltan. Oil
model is from 113 to 88 Ma (Aptian to Santonian).
68.7733
The average amount of hydrocarbon generated is X-13 25.198025/ UTP 3081 20.7 Chiltan. Oil
0.09 bbl/m3 of rock. The average TOC from Buzdar 068.8961
South-01 well is 1.8 % and its average initial TOC is X-14 24.7248/ UTP 3108 12.1 Chiltan. Oil
68.6666
3.47 % inferring 1.67 % (49 % out of 100 %) loss of
X-15 26.1297/ OGDCL 3600 0 Sembar. Cond.
TOC over the time due to degradation of organic matter 68.8874
at well location. Discoveries of reserves of condensate X-16 27.148056/ LASMO 3994 69.46 Sembar. Gas
and dry gas in the Lower Indus Basin are very much 69.2267
X-17 27.497239/ OMV 4188 68.46 Sembar. Gas
consistent with the results of the present maturity
69.3589
modeling study. X-18 27.331273/ OMV 4030 56.07 Sembar. Gas
69.3065
X-19 28.3517/ PPL 1772.00 56.00 L.Goru Gas
Acknowledgment We greatly acknowledge the Plate River Inc., 68.3256
Bouldar, CO, USA, for providing their software BasinMod-2012 for this X-20 28.3300/ AMOCO 4664.00 60.99 L.Goru Gas
research work and National Centre of Excellence in Geology (NCEG) 68.2853
University of Peshawar for funding this project. We give special thanks to
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252 Page 19 of 22 252

Appendix 2

Buzdar South Deep-01

Kandra-01

Khairpur-02

Mirpur Bataro-01
252 Page 20 of 22 Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252

X-01

X-04

X-05
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252 Page 21 of 22 252

X-06

X-08

X-10

X-11
X-15
 252 Page 22 of 22
References
Ahmad N, Spadini G, Palekar A, Subhani MA (2007) Porosity prediction
using 3D seismic inversion Kadanwari Gas Field, Pakistan. Pak J
Hydrocarb Res 17:95–102
Ahmad N, Mateen J, Shehzad K, Mehmood N, Arif F (2011) Shale gas
potential of Lower Cretaceous Sembar Formation in Middle and
Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan. Assoc Pet Geol/Soc Pet Explor-Ann
Tech Confer 235–252
Ahmed R, Ali SM (1991) Tectonic and structural development of the
eastern part of Kirthar Fold Belt and its hydrocarbon prospects.
Pak J Hydrocarb Res 3(2):19–31
Ahmed S, Ashten DG (1982) The Kheskeli oil field. PIP Seminar on
Petroleum Exploration in Pakistan, Karachi
Ahmed N, Chaudhry S (2002) Kadanwari Gas Field, Pakistan: a disap-
pointment turns into an attractive development opportunity. Pet
Geosci 8:307–316
Bender FK, Raza HA (1995) Geology of Pakistan. Gebruder Borntraeger,
Berlin 1:87–93
Biswas SK, Deshpande SV (1983) Geology and hydrocarbon prospects
of Kutch, Saurashtra, and Narmada basins. Pet Asia J 6:111–126
Burland JB (1990) On the compressibility and shear strength of natural
clays. Geotech 40:329–378
Carman PC (1956) Flow of gases through porous media. Academic, New
York City
Fatmi AN (1977) Mesozoic. In: Shah SMI (ed) Stratigraphy of Pakistan,
vol 12. Geol Surv of Pak, Quetta, pp 29–56
Haq BU, Hardenbol J, Vail PR (1987) Chronology of fluctuating sea-
levels since the Triassic. Sci 237:1156–1166
Hasany ST, Ahmed N, Baig MO (2007) Identification of unconventional
source and reservoir rocks of early Jurassic age, integrated with basin
modeling and exploration constraints in the northern Kirthar Range.
Pakistan Assoc Pet Geol/Soc Pet Explor-Ann Tech Confer: 115–176
Hedley R, Warburton J, Smewing J (2005) Sequence stratigraphy and
tectonics in the Kirthar Fold Belt. Pakistan. Assoc Pet Geol/Soc
Pet Explor-Ann Tech Confer, Islamabad, pp 61–72
Iqbal MWA, Shah SMI (1980) A guide to the stratigraphy of Pakistan.
Geological Survey of Pakistan Record 53:34
Kadri IB (1993) Cretaceous source rocks in Pakistan. AAPG/SVG inter-
national conference and exhibition, Caracus, Venezuela
Kadri IB (1995) Petroleum geology of Pakistan. Pak Pet Ltd, Karachi 1:
35–108
View publication stats
Arab J Geosci (2016) 9:252
Kazmi AH, Jan MQ (1997) Geology and tectonics of Pakistan. Graphic
Publishers, Karachi
Kazmi AH, Rana A (1982) Tectonic map of Pakistan, at a scale of 1:
200000. Geological Survey of Pakistan, Quetta
Kemal A, Balkwill HR, Stoakes FA (1992) Indus Basin hydrocarbon plays.
In: Ahmed G, Kemal A, Zaman ASH, Humayon M (eds) New direc-
tions and strategies for accelerating petroleum exploration and pro-
duction in Pakistan. Proceedings of an international petroleum semi-
nar, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources, 76–105, Islamabad
Khan MA, Raza HA (1986) The role of geothermal gradients in hydro-
carbon exploration in Pakistan. J Pet Geol 9(3):245–258
Khan AS, Kelling G, Umar M, Kassi AM (2002) Depositional environ-
ments and reservoir assessment of late cretaceous sandstones in the
south central Kirthar Fold Belt, Pakistan. J Pet Geol 25:373–406
Nazir A, Fazeelat T, Asif M (2012) The geochemical characterization of
Sediments from Early Cretaceous Sembar Formation. Pet Sci and
Tech 30(23):2460–2470
Passey QR, Creaney S, Kulla JB, Moretti FJ, Stroud JD (1990) Practical
model for organic richness from porosity and resistivity logs. AAPG
Bulliten 74:1777–1794
Passey QR, Bohacs WL, Kiimentidis ER, Sinah S (2010) From oil prone
source rock to gas producing shale reservoir- Geologic and
petrophysical characterization of unconventional shale gas reservoir.
International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in China, 8-10
June, Beijing. Soc Pet Eng. doi:10.2118/131350-MS
Quadri VN, Quadri SMGJ (1996) Anatomy of success in oil and gas
exploration in Pakistan 1915-94. Oil & Gas J 94(20)
Raza HA, Ali SM, Ahmed R (1990) Petroleum geology of Kirthar Sub-
basin and part of the Kutch Basin, Pakistan. Pak J Hydrocarb R 2(1):
29–73
Riaz A, Ali SM (1991) Tectonic and structural development of the eastern
part of Kirthar Fold Belt and its hydrocarbon prospects. Pak J
Hydrocarb R 3(2):19–31
Shah SMI (2009) Stratigraphy of Pakistan. Geol Surv Pak Meml 22:186–191
Wandrey CJ, Law BE, Shah HA (2004) Sembar Goru/Ghazij composite
total petroleum system, Indus and Sulaiman-Kirthar geologic prov-
inces Pakistan and India. In: Wandrey CJ (ed). Petroleum systems
and related geologic studies in region 8, South Asia. U.S. Geological
Survey Bulletin, 2208-C, p 23
Williams MD (1959) Stratigraphy of the Lower Indus Basin, west
Pakistan. Progress of 5th World Petroleum Congress 19:377–391
Yang Y, Alpin AC (2004) Definition and practical application of mud-
stone porosity-effective stress relationships. Pet Geosci 10:153–162