energies

Article
3D-Basin Modelling of the Lishui Sag: Research of
Hydrocarbon Potential, Petroleum Generation
and Migration
Jinliang Zhang 1 , Jiaqi Guo 1, * , Jinshui Liu 2 , Wenlong Shen 2 , Na Li 1 and Guangchen Xu 1
1 Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China;
jinliang@bnu.edu.cn (J.Z.); 201621190016@mail.bnu.edu.cn (N.L.); 201721190021@mail.bnu.edu.cn (G.X.)
2 Shanghai Branch of CNOOC Ltd., Shanghai 200335, China; liujsh3@cnooc.com.cn (J.L.);
shenwl@cnooc.com.cn (W.S.)
* Correspondence: guojiaqi@mail.bnu.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-151-1694-7059




Received: 16 January 2019; Accepted: 15 February 2019; Published: 17 February 2019


Abstract: The Lishui Sag is located in the southeastern part of the Taibei Depression, in the East China
Sea basin, where the sag is the major hydrocarbon accumulation zone. A three dimensional modelling
approach was used to estimate the mass of petroleum generation and accumulated during the
evolution of the basin. Calibration of the model, based on measured maturity (vitrinite reflectance)
and borehole temperatures, took into consideration two main periods of erosion events: a late
Cretaceous to early Paleocene event, and an Oligocene erosion event. The maturation histories of
the main source rock formations were reconstructed and show that the peak maturities have been
reached in the west central part of the basin. Our study included source rock analysis, measurement
of fluid inclusion homogenization temperatures, and basin history modelling to define the source
rock properties, the thermal evolution and hydrocarbon generation history, and possible hydrocarbon
accumulation processes in the Lishui Sag. The study found that the main hydrocarbon source for the
Lishui Sag are argillaceous source rocks in the Yueguifeng Formation. The hydrocarbon generation
period lasted from 58 Ma to 32 Ma. The first period of hydrocarbon accumulation lasted from 51.8 Ma
to 32 Ma, and the second period lasted from 23 Ma to the present. The accumulation zones mainly
located in the structural high and lithologic-fault screened reservoir filling with the hydrocarbon
migrated from the deep sag in the south west direction.

Keywords: Lishui Sag; 3D basin modelling; model calibration; hydrocarbon generation and migration

1. Introduction
The Lishui Sag is one of the main exploration hotspots in the Taipei Depression, in the East China
Sea Shelf Basin. The exploration of the Lishui Sag started in the 1980s and six hydrocarbon-bearing
structures were discovered thus far [1,2]. Among these are WZ13, L35-B, and S1, which are oil-bearing
structures, whereas LF1, WZ26 are gas-bearing structures. The hydrocarbon bearing structures proved
the superior reservoir conditions and source rock core samples showed rich hydrocarbon generation
potential in the Lishui Sag. However, the LS36-A structure, discovered in 1997, is the only commercial
field, with potential geological reserves of around 5 billion m3 of gas. Previous studies show that the
LS36-A gas field is a complex trap controlled by the tectonic evolution and the low permeability Lower
Mingyuefeng Formation [3].
The Lishui Sag has low petroleum discovery due to the lithologic complexity of its potential
reservoirs. Numerous studies on the source rock and reservoir have been performed in the Lishui
Sag, mainly focused on the tectonic evolution and hydrocarbon-forming processes [3–9]. The main

Energies 2019, 12, 650; doi:10.3390/en12040650 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2019, 12, 650 2 of 20

hydrocarbon generation period occurred during the Late Paleocene [7,10]. Tectonic analysis
Energies 2019, 12, x
and
2 of 20
fluid inclusion homogeneous temperature tests are used to determine the petroleum filling periods.
The accurate
hydrocarbonpetroleum charge
generation periods
period are not
occurred clearthe
during because different[7,10].
Late Paleocene scholars haveanalysis
Tectonic reachedanddifferent
fluid
conclusions.
inclusion The burial temperature
homogeneous history
temperature testsofare
single
usedwells constructed
to determine using BasinMod
the petroleum 1D indicates
filling periods. The
three accurate
petroleum petroleum charge periods
charge events are not clear
which occurred because
at the end ofdifferent scholars end
the Paleocene, haveofreached different
the Eocene and
conclusions. The burial temperature history of single wells constructed using
during the Miocene [11]. Su et al. considered that three charge events occurred in the early Eocene BasinMod 1D indicates
(54–52three
Ma),petroleum
late Eocene charge events
to early which occurred
Oligocene (45–34 Ma) at the
andend of the
during thePaleocene,
Pliocene end of the Eocene
to present (5–0 Ma)and[7].
during the Miocene [11]. Su et al. considered that three charge events occurred
Basin modelling is used to analyze the petroleum generation and accumulation through geologic in the early Eocene
(54-52 Ma), late Eocene to early Oligocene (45-34 Ma) and during the Pliocene to present (5-0 Ma) [7].
time with multiple input data [12,13]. The 1D and 2D basin modelling approached generally
Basin modelling is used to analyze the petroleum generation and accumulation through geologic
neglect the critical factors that influence temperature and hydrocarbon migration that can only be
time with multiple input data [12,13]. The 1D and 2D basin modelling approached generally neglect
specifically addressed in three dimensions [14]. It is necessary to consider the petroleum evolution and
the critical factors that influence temperature and hydrocarbon migration that can only be specifically
accumulation as a whole by constructing a detailed 3D numerical petroleum system model [15–18].
addressed in three dimensions [14]. It is necessary to consider the petroleum evolution and
The lateral and
accumulation vertical
as a heterogeneity of lithology
whole by constructing is strong
a detailed 3D in the Lishui
numerical Sag andsystem
petroleum the sand-shale ratio is
model [15–18].
different
Thefor eachand
lateral formation. We tried to set
vertical heterogeneity of reliable
lithologycorrelations for Lishui
is strong in the porositySagvs. depth
and correlation
the sand-shale and
ratio
porosity vs. permeability of each formation. Also, the distribution of sand-shale patterns
is different for each formation. We tried to set reliable correlations for porosity vs. depth correlation was defined
to represent the horizontal
and porosity petrophysical
vs. permeability of eachdiversity.
formation. WeAlso,
stacked
the the sand-shale
distribution distributions
of sand-shale of different
patterns was
system tracts to represent
defined representthe thehorizontal
formationpetrophysical
facies model.diversity.
In this study, we constructed
We stacked a 3Ddistributions
the sand-shale facies model
of different
to simulate system tractsmigration
the hydrocarbon to represent inthe
cellsformation facies model.
with different physicalIn this study, we constructed a 3D
properties.
facies model to simulate the hydrocarbon migration in cells with different physical properties.
2. Geological Settings
2. Geological Settings
The Lishui Sag is located in the south-west corner of the East China Sea Shelf Basin, occupying
an area of The
13785Lishui
km2Sag is located
[19]. The saginisthe south-west
a typical cornerrift
Cenozoic of the East China
depression Sea Shelf Basin,
developed on theoccupying
Mesozoic
an area of 13785 km 2 [19]. The sag is a typical Cenozoic rift depression developed on the Mesozoic
residual basin basement and formed by a half graben structure with faults in the east and overlapping
residual
the uplift belt basin
in thebasement and formed
west [1,19,20]. by a half
The Lishui Sag graben
trendsstructure
NE-SWwithand faults
can beindivided
the east into
and overlapping
four tectonic
the uplift belt in the west [1,19,20]. The Lishui Sag trends NE-SW and can be divided into four tectonic
units: west sub-sag, east sub-sag, south sub-sag and the Lingfeng uplift zone. The west sub-sag and
units: west sub-sag, east sub-sag, south sub-sag and the Lingfeng uplift zone. The west sub-sag and
east sub-sag are separated by the Lingfeng Uplift zone, a buried basement hill and the maximum
east sub-sag are separated by the Lingfeng Uplift zone, a buried basement hill and the maximum
burial depth reaches nearly 8 km at the northern part of the west sub-sag (Figure 1).
burial depth reaches nearly 8 km at the northern part of the west sub-sag (Figure 1).

1. Location
FigureFigure and geographic
1. Location setting
and geographic of theofstudy
setting area area
the study (Modified afterafter
(Modified Liu [9]). (A) Structural
Liu [9]). and
(A) Structural
tectonic
andelements
tectonic of the East
elements ofChina Sea
the East ShelfSea
China Basin.
Shelf(B) Structure
Basin. division
(B) Structure of the of
division Lishui Sag and
the Lishui Sagstudy
and
area outlined in the
study area red box.
outlined in the red box.

The Cenozoic strata

The Cenozoic fromfrom
strata bottom to top
bottom include
to top includethethePaleocene
PaleoceneYueguifeng
Yueguifeng Formation (E1y),
Formation (E 1 y),
Lingfeng
Lingfeng Formation
Formation (E1 l)(E 1l) and
and Mingyuefeng
Mingyuefeng Formation
Formation (E(E 1m),
1 m), LowerEocene
Lower Eocene Oujiang
Oujiang Formation
Formation(E(E2o),
2 o),
Energies 2019, 12, 650 3 of 20

Energies 2019, 12, x 3 of 20

Wenzhou Formation (E2 w), Miocene, Pliocene and Quaternary [21] (Figure 2). The basement of the
Wenzhou Formation (E2w), Miocene, Pliocene and Quaternary [21] (Figure 2). The basement of the
Lishui Sag is Upper Cretaceous Shimentan Formation (K2 s) igneous rock. Evidence of oil and gas could
Lishui Sag is Upper Cretaceous Shimentan Formation (K2s) igneous rock. Evidence of oil and gas
be found mainly in the Paleocene series including the Yueguifeng Formation, Lingfeng Formation and
could be found mainly in the Paleocene series including the Yueguifeng Formation, Lingfeng
Mingyuefeng Formation, which is the target interval of this study.
Formation and Mingyuefeng Formation, which is the target interval of this study.

Figure
Figure 2. 2.
(A)(A) Lithostratigraphyofofthe
Lithostratigraphy theLishui
LishuiSag
Sag and
and (B)
(B) the
the tectonic
tectonicevolution
evolutionininthetheLishui
LishuiSag. The
Sag. The
petroleum
petroleum systemelements
system elements(PSE)
(PSE)including
including seal
seal rocks
rocks (Seal),
(Seal),source
sourcerocks
rocks(SR)
(SR)and
andreservoir rocks
reservoir rocks
(RR),
(RR), as as well
well as as
thethe general
general overview
overview of of
thethe geologic
geologic andand tectonic
tectonic events
events areare also
also shown.
shown. The
The wavy
wavy line
line indicates the angular unconformity and the dash line indicates the parallel unconformity.
indicates the angular unconformity and the dash line indicates the parallel unconformity. The location The
of location of section
section AA’ is shownAA’in
is Figure
shown 1B.
in Figure 1B.

TheThe Lishui
Lishui SagSag
has has underwent
underwent four four tectonic
tectonic phases phases from
from the endthe endMesozoic
of the of the Mesozoic to the
to the Quaternary
Quaternary period [8,10,22–25] (Figure 2A): (1) The syn-rift phase (Late Cretaceous
period [8,10,22–25] (Figure 2A): (1) The syn-rift phase (Late Cretaceous to Paleocene) formed the to Paleocene)
formed the NE-SW trending graben and half-graben depocenters on the base of the residual Mesozoic
NE-SW trending graben and half-graben depocenters on the base of the residual Mesozoic basin [9,19].
basin [9,19]. The NE-trending extensional faults indicate slab-pull forces which were correlated with
The NE-trending extensional faults indicate slab-pull forces which were correlated with the subduction of
the subduction of the Western Pacific Plate beneath the Eurasian Plate. The Lishui Sag experienced a
the Western Pacific Plate beneath the Eurasian Plate. The Lishui Sag experienced a rapid sedimentation
rapid sedimentation period with intense fault activities (T100-T85). The Oujiang movement at the
period with intense fault activities (T100-T85). The Oujiang movement at the end of the Paleocene
end of the Paleocene terminated the fault-depression stage in the Lishui sag. (2) During the post-rift
terminated the fault-depression stage in the Lishui sag. (2) During the post-rift phase (Early Eocene to
phase (Early Eocene to Late Eocene) the extensional movements and deposition rate slowed down
Late Eocene) the[24].
significantly extensional movements
Extensional faults no and deposition
longer controlledrate
theslowed downcenters.
subsidence significantly [24]. the
(3) During Extensional
uplift
faults
phase (Late Eocene to Late Miocene) a regional erosion event occurred. The Lingfeng Uplift to
no longer controlled the subsidence centers. (3) During the uplift phase (Late Eocene Late
was
Miocene)
buried and the sub-basins began to be connected between Late Eocene and Early Miocene (Figure to
a regional erosion event occurred. The Lingfeng Uplift was buried and the sub-basins began
be 2B).
connected betweenmovement
The Huagang Late Eocene and Earlyto
contributed Miocene (Figure
the regional 2B).and
uplift Theerosion.
Huagang Themovement contributed
upper Eocene and
to the
the entire
regional uplift and
Oligocene are erosion. The upper
not represented Eocene
in the and thesection
stratigraphic entire[22].
Oligocene
(4) Theare not represented
regional subsidence in
the stratigraphic section [22]. (4) The regional subsidence phase (Late Miocene to Quaternary) occurred
Energies 2019, 12, 650 4 of 20

while the rift center moved towards the Okinawa Trough [26]. The Lishui Sag finally entered a uniform
Energies 2019, 12, x 4 of 20
subsidence stage.
phase (Late Miocene to Quaternary) occurred while the rift center moved towards the Okinawa
3. Construction of the Model
Trough [26]. The Lishui Sag finally entered a uniform subsidence stage.
In order to have a deeper understanding of the hydrocarbon generation characteristics and
3. Construction
reservoir forming processof the Model
of the Lishui Sag, we carried out 3D petroleum system modelling of the sag
using theInPetroMod
order to have 2015 software
a deeper (Schlumberger,
understanding of Oslo,
the Norway).
hydrocarbon 3D basin modelling
generation can reveal
characteristics andthe
sedimentation history,process
reservoir forming define of thethe
source
Lishui rock
Sag,maturation
we carriedand out hydrocarbon
3D petroleumgeneration processes,
system modelling and
of the
identify the paths
sag using of hydrocarbon
the PetroMod migration
2015 software and areas ofOslo,
(Schlumberger, accumulation
Norway). [21]. The modelling
3D basin essential processes
can revealto
the sedimentation
constitute the model includehistory,deposition,
define the source rock maturation
compaction, denudation, and hydrocarbon
source generation
rock maturation, processes,
hydrocarbon
and identify
generation, the paths
expulsion, of hydrocarbon
migration migration The
and accumulation. andbasic
areasconcepts
of accumulation
and rules[21]. usedThe essential
in the model
processes to constitute the model include
building have been discussed by Hantschel and Kauerauf [27]. deposition, compaction, denudation, source rock
maturation, hydrocarbon generation, expulsion, migration and accumulation.
The study area in this paper is a 3D seismic survey with an area of 2468 km , which covered The 2 basic concepts andthe
rules
central used
part of in
thethe model
west building
sub-sag and have been
part of thediscussed by Hantschel
east sub-sag (the blackand boxKauerauf
in Figure [27].
1). There are three
sets of 3DThe studysurvey
seismic area in data,
this paper is a 3D
acquired seismic
in 2006, survey
2014 with an
and 2015, area of 2468
respectively. kmseismic
The
2, which covered the
data acquired
central part of the west sub-sag and part of the east sub-sag (the black box in Figure 1). There are
in different periods used the different techniques and we created a unified data set for the basin.
three sets of 3D seismic survey data, acquired in 2006, 2014 and 2015, respectively. The seismic data
Eight main horizons were interpreted, including T20, T50, T80, T83, T85, T88, T90 and T100 [9,19,22].
acquired in different periods used the different techniques and we created a unified data set for the
The seismic data were combined with biostratigraphic and lithologic data from conventional cores
basin. Eight main horizons were interpreted, including T20, T50, T80, T83, T85, T88, T90 and T100
(Figure 2). There are 13 exploration wells distributed in the study area and the LS36-A gas field is also
[9,19,22]. The seismic data were combined with biostratigraphic and lithologic data from
included (Figure 1B).
conventional cores (Figure 2). There are 13 exploration wells distributed in the study area and the
In order
LS36-A gastofield
predict
is alsothe petroleum
included migration
(Figure 1B). path, use of a suitable migration algorithm in the
model isInespecially
order to predict the petroleum migration variety
important [28–30]. There are a path, useofofalgorithms
a suitable for hydrocarbon
migration algorithmmigration.
in the
We chose the hybrid model that combined both Darcy and flowpath methods
model is especially important [28–30]. There are a variety of algorithms for hydrocarbon migration. as well as a simplified
percolation
We chosecalculation
the hybrid model [27]. Darcy flow is both
that combined usedDarcy
in lowand permeability
flowpath methodscells and flowpath
as well analysis
as a simplified
works in high permeability
percolation calculation [27]. cells. This
Darcy method
flow is used isin
faster than a pure Darcy
low permeability cells andflow modelanalysis
flowpath to estimate
works the
petroleum
in highmigration
permeability and cells.
accumulation.
This method It is obvious
is faster that
thana amodel
pure with
Darcyhighflow resolution
model towould be more
estimate the
specific and the
petroleum tiny traps
migration and also could be described
accumulation. well. that
It is obvious However,
a model with
withthehigh
increase of thewould
resolution grid cells
be
more specific
included in the modeland the thetiny traps alsotime
simulation could be grow
will described well.To
rapidly. However,
balance with the increase
the model of the
precision andgridthe
cells included
computing time, aingrid the cell
modelsizethe
of simulation
200 × 200 m time
waswill
thegrow rapidly. To
best solution balance
to fit the model precision
our case.
and the computing time, a grid cell size of 200 × 200 m was the best solution to fit our case.
3.1. Erosion Thickness
3.1. Erosion Thickness
Four erosion events are considered in this study; the detailed information and thickness maps are
shown inFour erosion
Figure 3 and events
Tableare 1. considered in this study; the detailed information and thickness maps
are shown in Figure 3 and Table 1.

Figure
Figure 3. The
3. The eroded
eroded thickness
thickness maps
maps of of
thethe study
study areaininthe
area theLishui
LishuiSag.
Sag. The
The erosion
erosion events
eventsare
arelisted
listed
in Table
in Table 1. 1.
Energies 2019, 12, 650 5 of 20

Table 1. Lithology settings and petrophysical definitions for basin modelling. Gp. = Group, Fm. = Formation, fms. = formations, z = depth, por = porosity. The
Mingyuefeng Fm., Lingfeng Fm. and Yueguifeng Fm. each has two lithology types, the distribution of the different lithology types are shown in Section 3.2.

Petroleum Porosity (%) Functionvs. Permeability [log(mD)]

Age (Ma) Top Surface Formation Symbol Lithology
System Elements Depth (km) Function vs. Porosity (%)
2.6–0 Sea bed Donghai Gp. Overburden rock Q Siltstone (organic lean) 54*EXP(−0.51*z) 1.7142*ln(por)−6.3191
5.3–2.6 T0 Santan Fm. Overburden rock N2 Siltstone (organic lean) 54*EXP(−0.51*z) 1.7142*ln(por)−6.3191
23–5.3 T10 Liulang−Longjing fms. Overburden rock N1 Siltstone (organic lean) 54*EXP(−0.51*z) 1.7142*ln(por)−6.3191
32–23 Erosion event Erosion d
47.8–32 T20 Wenzhou Fm. Overburden rock E2 w Sandstone (typical) 40*EXP(−0.31*z) 1.5934*ln(x)−1.8387
52–47.8 Erosion event Erosion c
56–52 T50 Oujiang Fm. Seal rock E2 o Shale (organic lean, typical) 69*EXP(−0.83*z) 1.7569*ln(por)−8.5464
57.5–56 T80 Upper Mingyuefeng Fm. Reservoir rock Sandstone (arkose, quartz poor) 40*EXP(−0.37*z) 0.2184*por−3.4052
Upper E1 m
Seal rock Siltstone (organic lean) 49*EXP(−0.97*z) 1.9754*ln(por)−4.0093
59.2–57.5 T83 Lower Mingyuefeng Fm. Reservoir rock Sandstone (arkose, quartz poor) 40*EXP(−0.51*z) 0.1757*por−2.4609
Lower E1 m
Source rock Siltstone (organic rich, 2–3% TOC) 49*EXP(−0.86*z) 1.9272*ln(por)−3.9322
59.3–59.2 Erosion event Erosion b
60–59.3 T85 Upper Lingfeng Fm. Source rock Siltstone (organic rich, 2–3% TOC) 49*EXP(−1.03*z) 1.7305*ln(por)−4.8916
Upper E1 l
Reservoir rock Sandstone (clay rich) 40*EXP(−0.52*z) 0.1641*por−2.9967
61.6–60 T88 Lower Lingfeng Fm. Source rock Siltstone (organic rich, 2–3% TOC) 49*EXP(−0.91*z) 2.1441*ln(por)−4.9172
Lower E1 l
Reservoir rock Sandstone (clay rich) 40*EXP(−0.55*z) 0.0813*por−1.7413
62–61.6 Erosion event Erosion a
66–62 T90 Yueguifeng Fm. Source rock Shale (organic rich, typical) 69*EXP(−0.83*z) 1.7569*ln(por)−8.5464
E1 y
Underburden rock Sandstone (clay rich) 40*EXP(−0.5*z) 1.6492*ln(x)−2.8575
76–66 T100 Shimengtan Fm. Underburden rock K2 s Granite - -
Energies 2019, 12, 650 6 of 20

Energieswe
Firstly, 2019,used
12, x FOR
the PEER REVIEW
normal working procedures such as acoustic time difference method 6and of 20

vitrinite reflectance method [31,32]. However, we found out that the dataset did not fit the normal rules
Firstly, we used the normal working procedures such as acoustic time difference method and
well. We tracked the trend of the original strata on the seismic sections and calculate the denudation
vitrinite reflectance method [31,32]. However, we found out that the dataset did not fit the normal
thickness [33]. The main erosion event effecting the whole Lishui Sag occurred at the end of the Eocene
rules well. We tracked the trend of the original strata on the seismic sections and calculate the
(erosion d). The average
denudation thickness denudation thickness
[33]. The main erosionisevent
340 m and shows
effecting difference
the whole Lishuibetween the sub-sags.
Sag occurred at the end
Regional erosion
of the Eoceneevents a, bd).
(erosion and c correspond
The to the horizons
average denudation T90,
thickness T80mand
is 340 andT50. The
shows erosion event
difference between c
showstheerosion mainly in the slope area of the west sub-sag. The erosion in event b is confined
sub-sags. Regional erosion events a, b and c correspond to the horizons T90, T80 and T50. The to the
SW part of theevent
erosion westcsub-sag near the
shows erosion Well in
mainly S1.the
The erosion
slope event
area of occurred
the west primarily
sub-sag. in theinsouthern
The erosion event b is
part ofconfined
the study toarea
the SWwith a mean
part of thevalue
west of 350 m.near the Well S1. The erosion event occurred primarily
sub-sag
in the southern part of the study area with a mean value of 350 m.
3.2. Lithology and Petroleum System Elements
3.2. geological
The Lithology andtimePetroleum
scale System
of theElements
formations in the Lishui Sag followed the International
Chronostratigraphic Charttime
The geological [34].scale
We defined the lithology
of the formations assignment
in the Lishui Sag of each
followed stratum unit based
the International
on the Chronostratigraphic
drilling cuttings andChart cores [34].
fromWe13 wells
definedin the study area (Table 1).
lithology assignment of each The K 2 stratum unit consists
s unit mainly based on
of tuff,the
reddrilling
mudstone andand
cuttings mudstone
cores fromwith13tide-flat
wells in lime mudstone
the study developed
area (Table 1). Theat K2the topmainly
s unit [1]. The E1 y
consists
unit wasof tuff, red mudstone
deposited in a warm andand mudstone with tide-flat
humid lacustrine lime mudstone
environment developed
and developed at the
thick topdeposition
shale [1]. The E1y
unit hydrocarbon
with good was deposited in a warm
potential anddelta
with lake humid lacustrine
deposits. The E environment and developed
1 l unit is dominated by a set ofthick shale
organic
deposition with good hydrocarbon potential with lake delta deposits.
rich marine siltstone. The E1 m unit is mainly composed of delta-shore swamp deposits with coal seamThe E 1 l unit is dominated by a
set ofsandstone
and thick organic rich[1].marine siltstone.
The source TheinEE
rock 1m unit is mainly composed of delta-shore swamp deposits
1 y, E1 l and E1 m units contribute to the hydrocarbon
generation in the Lishui Sag [7]. The reservoir rocksource
with coal seam and thick sandstone [1]. The in therock in E1Ey, m
E1 l and 1
E1lunits
and E is1m units contribute
sandstone. to the
The widely
hydrocarbon generation in the Lishui Sag [7]. The reservoir rock in the E 1l and E1m units is sandstone.
distributed thick shale in the E2 o unit performs as a highly effective regional seal for the Lishui Sag.
The widely distributed thick shale in the E2o unit performs as a highly effective regional seal for the
The siltstone in E1 m and E1 l can also be local seal rock. The widespread seal rock plays an important
Lishui Sag. The siltstone in E1m and E1l can also be local seal rock. The widespread seal rock plays an
role for the preservation of the gas storage.
important role for the preservation of the gas storage.
The structure model, shown in Figure 4, was derived from depth maps interpreted from
The structure model, shown in Figure 4, was derived from depth maps interpreted from seismic.
seismic. We calibrated the depth of each horizon by the stratigraphic classification in single wells.
We calibrated the depth of each horizon by the stratigraphic classification in single wells. The gridded
TM (Schlumberger, Oslo, Norway) from seismic data (Figure 5).
The gridded faults were created in Petrel
faults were created in PetrelTM (Schlumberger, Oslo, Norway) from seismic data (Figure 5). The
The properties
propertiesof of the faultswere
the faults werebasedbased
on on
the the interpreted
interpreted tectonic
tectonic history,history, which in
which results results in the
the properties
properties
of theofmain
the main
faults faults
changingchanging from
from open to open
closedtoafter
closed after themovement,
the Oujiang Oujiang movement,
as a result inasthe
a result
change
in the change in stress field at that time. This means that hydrocarbons could
in stress field at that time. This means that hydrocarbons could migrate through faults until aroundmigrate through faults
until around 56Ma,
56Ma, after afterthe
which which
faults the faultsblock
would would block hydrocarbon
hydrocarbon migration.migration.

4. The 4.
FigureFigure 3DThe
model dimensions
3D model and major
dimensions layers layers
and major of the of
study area (the
the study areablack box inbox
(the black thein
Figure 1B)
the Figure
in the Lishui SagLishui
1B) in the at present-day.
Sag at present-day.
Energies 2019, 12, 650 7 of 20

Energies 2019, 12, x 7 o

Figure 5. Model faults in the study area intersect with the stratigraphic surface. The surfaces with
Figure 5. Model faults in the study area intersect with the stratigraphic surface. The surfaces with
unique colors are faults and the stratigraphic horizon refer to the top surface of Lower E1 l.
unique colors are faults and the stratigraphic horizon refer to the top surface of Lower E1l.
Because of the lithologic variability of the mixed sandstone and mudstone reservoirs, uniform
Because of the lithologic variability of the mixed sandstone and mudstone reservoirs, unifo
compositions are inadequate for the accuracy required by the basin model. As shown in Table 2, the
compositions are inadequate for the accuracy required by the basin model. As shown in Table 2,
physical properties of rock vary widely in the E1 m and E1 l, and there was also a significant difference
physical properties of rock vary widely in the E1m and E1l, and there was also a significant differen
between the upper and lower layers. We used Athy’s Law [35,36] and core measured porosity data
between the upper and lower layers. We used Athy’s Law [35,36] and core measured porosity d
to calibrate the porosity versus depth curve of Upper and Lower E1 m and E1 l and other formations.
to calibrate the porosity versus depth curve of Upper and Lower E1m and E1l and other formatio
The algorithms and formula of the porosity are listed in Equation (1) and Table 2. The calibrated curves
The algorithms and formula of the porosity are listed in Equation (1) and Table 2. The calibra
are shown in Figure 6 and the difference between sandstone and siltstone is clear. The correlations
curves are shown in Figure 6 and the difference between sandstone and siltstone is clear. T
between permeability and porosity were also established using the measured data from the Lishui Sag
correlations between permeability and porosity were also established using the measured data fr
(Table 1).
the Lishui Sag (Table 1).  
P = p e−bx (1)
𝑃 = 𝑝 (𝑒 ) (
where P is the porosity, p is the mean porosity of surface sediments, b is a constant, and x is the
burial depth. where P is the porosity, p is the mean porosity of surface sediments, b is a constant, and x is the bur
depth.
Table 2. The reservoir physical property of the sandstone core samples from the study area.
Table 2. The reservoir physical property of the sandstone core samples from the study area.
Porosity (%) Permeability (mD) Sample
Formation Porosity (%) Permeability (mD)
Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Amount
Formation Sample Amoun
Upper E1 m 25.10 Maximum
1.30 Minimum
16.88 Average
236.91 Maximum
0.01 Minimum
34.35 Average
131
Lower E1 m 23.00
Upper E1m 2.14 25.10 13.74 1.30 155.8816.88 0.01236.91 7.56 0.01 33234.35 131
Upper E1 l 14.00 2.60 11.01 1.53 0.01 0.13 137
Lower E1 l Lower E1m 2.80 23.00 6.91 2.14 5.07 13.74
18.20 0.01155.88 0.22 0.01 2227.56 332
Upper E1l 14.00 2.60 11.01 1.53 0.01 0.13 137
Lower facies
The lateral and vertical E1l 18.20 2.80
heterogeneities 6.91
of each formation 5.07
are 0.01
considered 0.22
in this model. 222
In order to distinguish the sandstone and siltstone in the reservoir layers, we calculated the RMS
amplitude using the 3D seismic data. The RMS attribute is obtained by calculating the root-mean-square
amplitude value of each sampling point in seismic trace analysis. It is very sensitive to amplitude
variation and is very effective at distinguishing different rock types in seismic bodies [37–39]. The sand
Energies 2019, 12, 650 8 of 20

and shale distribution is similar within the same systems tract, so we used stratal slices of the RMS
attribute to 12,
Energies 2019, predict
x the sandstone distribution. 8 of 20

Figure 6.
Figure 6. The
The calibrated
calibrated porosity versus depth
porosity versus depth curve
curve using
using Athy’s Law for
Athy’s Law for the
the sandstone
sandstone and
and siltstone
siltstone
in E m and E l (the curves for upper and lower layers are separated).
in E1 m and E1 l (the curves for upper and lower layers are separated).
1 1

The division scheme of the systems tract of the study area followed the research of Zhang et al. [19]
and Liu [9]. The Upper E1m strata is divided into two systems tracts: highstand systems tract (HST)
and transgressive systems tract (TST). The Lower E1m is divided into four systems tracts: falling stage
systems tract (FSST), highstand systems tract (HST), transgressive systems tract (TST) and lowstand
systems tract (LST). The Upper and Lower E1l both consist of three systems tracts including HST, TST
and LST. Figure 7 shows the RMS attribute of the each systems tract. The warm color indicates the area
with higher sand content while the cool color represents the area with more mudstone. The distribution
maps of the sandstone and siltstone of each systems tract were worked out by sedimentary facies
maps. Then we adjusted the maps referring to the shale content in the drilling core samples (Figure 8).
We combined the layers with different distribution patterns of facies to construct the lithologic and
stratigraphic model (Figure 9). The migration path for hydrocarbons is dictated both by the spatial
variation of porosity and permeability and by the temporal variations of the fault properties.

3.3. Source Rock Properties and Kinetics Model

As introduced in the former section, the main source rock layers in the Lishui sag are E1 m, E1l
and E1 y. The vitrinite reflectance of Upper E1 m is below 0.5% due to the shallow burial depth [1,7].
In Figure 10A, the atomic ratio of hydrogen to carbon is shown to be between 0.5 and 1.0, with the
atomic ratio of oxygen to carbon varying from 0.05 to 0.3. The source rock samples have typical
characteristics of type III kerogen. The samples from Lower E1 m and Upper E1 l have higher maturity.
Few samples from Lower E1 l and E1 y have lower maturity than the upper layers because the over
mature samples are not included in this figure. In Figure 10B, the sample samples cluster around
a value of Ro = 0.5, with the majority below the curve for type III kerogen. The source rocks from E1 l
and E1y have low hydrogen indexes (less than 200 mg/g) and the pyrolysis peak temperature ranges
from 420 to 460 ◦ C. Part of the samples from E1 m belong to the type II2 kerogen but the major source
rock type is type III kerogen. In Figure 10C, the potential hydrocarbon generation amount (Pg) is the
summation of S1 and S2 measured in the pyrolysis and the values are between 0.5 and 6 mg/g. The
quality of the source rocks is fair to good, with a few of samples of very good source rock. In this study,
the source rock properties used in the model are the average value of the source rock layers listed in
Table 3. The thickness of source rock used in the model is calculated by the shale ratio in the layer.
The average source rock thickness of Upper and Lower E1 m is 350 and 300 m, the thickness of E1 y
is 250 m. The hydrocarbon generation was simulated using the Burnham kinetic model for type II
and III kerogen [40]. The oil and gas generation regularities in the Burnham’s model are similar to the
petroleum production data.

Figure 7. Distribution maps of root-mean-square (RMS) amplitude of each system tract in the
reservoir interval, with uniform value ranges for RMS amplitude. The undefined value areas are faults
and Lingfeng Uplift areas where gaps exist in the seismic data.
Energies 2019, 12,
Figure 650 calibrated porosity versus depth curve using Athy’s Law for the sandstone and siltstone9 of 20
6. The
in E1m and E1l (the curves for upper and lower layers are separated).

Figure 7.7.Distribution
Figure Distributionmaps
maps of root-mean-square
of root-mean-square (RMS)
(RMS) amplitude
amplitude of eachofsystem
each system tract
tract in the in the
reservoir
interval, with uniform value ranges for RMS amplitude. The undefined value areas are faultsfaults
reservoir interval, with uniform value ranges for RMS amplitude. The undefined value areas are and
and Lingfeng
Lingfeng Uplift
Uplift areasareas
wherewhere
gaps gaps
exist exist
in theinseismic
the seismic
data.data.

Table 3. The average value of source rock pyrolysis test data used in the model. TOC = Total organic
carbon, S1 = Free hydrocarbon components, S2 = Hydrocarbons generated by the pyrolysis, HI =
Hydrogen index, Tmax = Pyrolysis peak temperature.

Formation TOC (%) S1 + S2 (mg/g) HI (mg/g) Tmax (◦ C) Sample Size

Upper E1 m 1.31 2.41 148 397 51
Lower E1 m 1.16 2.28 162 402 123
Upper E1 l 1.15 2.34 152 414 109
Lower E1 l 1.25 1.71 119 421 86
E1 y 1.68 1.99 89 452 32
 order to distinguish the sandstone and siltstone in the reservoir layers, we calculated the RMS
amplitude using the 3D seismic data. The RMS attribute is obtained by calculating the root-mean-
square amplitude value of each sampling point in seismic trace analysis. It is very sensitive to
amplitude variation and is very effective at distinguishing different rock types in seismic bodies [37–
39]. 2019,
Energies The sand
12, 650and shale distribution is similar within the same systems tract, so we used stratal
10 ofslices
20
of the RMS attribute to predict the sandstone distribution.

Figure 8. Distribution
Figure mapsmaps
8. Distribution of theofsandstone and siltstone
the sandstone of each systems
and siltstone of each tract in thetract
systems reservoir
in theinterval.
reservoir
Theinterval.
purple areas represent
The purple therepresent
areas impermeable Lingfeng Uplift.
the impermeable Lingfeng Uplift.

3.4. Boundary Conditions

The boundary conditions of the model consist of paleo water depth, sediment water interface
temperature (SWIT) and heat flow. The paleo water depth trend was estimated based on the relative
sea level change and sedimentary thickness [43,44]. The water depth increased during the Paleocene
(66–56 Ma) and reach the maximum at end of the E1 m. During the uplift and erosion period of
Oligocene (41–23 Ma), the sea level fall and water depth tend to be zero with the formation uplifting
(Figure 11). The sediment water interface temperature (SWIT) is the top boundary condition of
heat transmit in a sedimentary basin [45]. In this study, the SWIT is automatically calculated by the
Energies 2019, 12, 650 11 of 20

PetroMod software module based on the method of Wygrala [46]. It shows the variations of mean
surface paleo temperatures through geological times classified by the paleo latitudes of the sedimentary
basin [45]. Then a standard temperature at sea level over geological time was extracted with the given
geographic location and paleo latitude at present day. The SWI-Temperature curve used in the model
was also corrected by the paleo water depth changing (Figure 11).
The heat flow represents the lower boundary condition of the heat transfer input into
a sedimentary basin [45]. The thermal evolution in the study area is important to the source rock
maturation and hydrocarbon expulsion. The present-day temperature gradient measured by bore
hole temperature test data is around 2.99 ◦ C/100 m. The heat flow measurements show that the
present-day heat flow in the East China Sea Shelf Basin (ECSSB) is around 58.6 mW/m2 , varying from
56 to 88.6 mW/m2 [47]. The heat flow evolution after the Mesozoic was mainly influenced by the
lithospheric stretching activities. The heat flow evolution research of the ECSSB suggests that the paleo
heat flow was around 80 mW/m2 (67–93 mW/m2 for individual wells) at the end of the Paleocene
(56 Ma), at which time the strata experienced the maximum formation temperature before cooling to
the present [48]. As shown in Figure 12A, the heat flow trend is considered to vary by 13 mW/m2
around the nominal heat flow trend 2. We used different heat flow scenarios to construct the single
well model to simulate the temperature and vitrinite reflectance [49–51]. For example, we used three
heat flow scenarios for the Well LS36-A model, and the formation temperature and vitrinite reflectance
fit the heat flow trend 1 better (Figure 12B,C).
Energies 2019, 12, x 10 of 20

Figure 9. (A)
Figure 9. The
(A) facies and lithology
The facies assignment
and lithology model
assignment of the
model ofstudy area area
the study in the
inLishui Sag. Sag.
the Lishui (B) The
(B) The
crosscross
section map of taking the profile in the south of the model. (C) The cross section map
section map of taking the profile in the south of the model. (C) The cross section map of taking
of taking
the profile in the
the profile inwest of the
the west ofmodel.
the model.

The division scheme of the systems tract of the study area followed the research of Zhang et al.
[19] and Liu [9]. The Upper E1m strata is divided into two systems tracts: highstand systems tract
(HST) and transgressive systems tract (TST). The Lower E1m is divided into four systems tracts:
falling stage systems tract (FSST), highstand systems tract (HST), transgressive systems tract (TST)
and lowstand systems tract (LST). The Upper and Lower E1l both consist of three systems tracts
including HST, TST and LST. Figure 7 shows the RMS attribute of the each systems tract. The warm
color indicates the area with higher sand content while the cool color represents the area with more
mudstone. The distribution maps of the sandstone and siltstone of each systems tract were worked
out by sedimentary facies maps. Then we adjusted the maps referring to the shale content in the
drilling core samples (Figure 8). We combined the layers with different distribution patterns of facies
 study, the source rock properties used in the model are the average value of the source rock layers
listed in Table 3. The thickness of source rock used in the model is calculated by the shale ratio in the
layer. The average source rock thickness of Upper and Lower E1m is 350 and 300 m, the thickness of
E1y is 250 m. The hydrocarbon generation was simulated using the Burnham kinetic model for type
II and2019,
Energies III kerogen
12, 650 [40]. The oil and gas generation regularities in the Burnham’s model are similar to
12 of 20
the petroleum production data.

Energies 2019, 12, x 12 of 20

3.4. Boundary Conditions

The boundary conditions of the model consist of paleo water depth, sediment water interface
temperature (SWIT) and heat flow. The paleo water depth trend was estimated based on the relative
sea level change and sedimentary thickness [43,44]. The water depth increased during the Paleocene
(66–56 Ma) and reach the maximum at end of the E1m. During the uplift and erosion period of
Oligocene (41–23 Ma), the sea level fall and water depth tend to be zero with the formation uplifting
(Figure 11). The sediment water interface temperature (SWIT) is the top boundary condition of heat
transmit in a sedimentary basin [45]. In this study, the SWIT is automatically calculated by the
PetroMod software module based on the method of Wygrala [46]. It shows the variations of mean
Figure10.
Figure 10. Source rock evaluation
evaluationplots
plotsofofthe
themain
mainsource
sourcerocks from
rocks fromthethe
study area
study in the
area Lishui
in the Sag.
Lishui
surface paleo temperatures through geological times classified by the paleo latitudes of the
(A) Kerogen
Sag. (A) Kerogen typetype
andand
maturation definition
maturation using
definition vanvan
using Krevelen
Krevelen diagram
diagram[41].
[41].(B)(B)
Distribution of
Distribution
sedimentary basin [45]. Then a standard temperature at sea level over geological time was extracted
ofhydrogen
hydrogenindex index(HI)
(HI)with
withpyrolysis
pyrolysispeak
peaktemperature
temperature (Tmax)
(Tmax) [42].
[42]. (C) Variation of of Rock–Eval
Rock–EvalPg Pg
with the given geographic location and paleo latitude at present day. The SWI-Temperature curve
(S(S11+S
+ S2)2 with
) withtotal organic
total carbon
organic (TOC)
carbon (TOC)content. In figure
content. A and
In figure B the
A and green
B the dashdash
green line line
represents Ro =
represents
used in the model was also corrected by the paleo water depth changing (Figure 11).
0.5,= the
Ro 0.5,yellow dashdash
the yellow line represents Ro =Ro
line represents 1.3,=and
1.3, the
andred
the dash line represents
red dash Ro =Ro
line represents 2.0.= 2.0.

Table 3. The average value of source rock pyrolysis test data used in the model. TOC = Total organic
carbon, S1 = Free hydrocarbon components, S2 = Hydrocarbons generated by the pyrolysis, HI =
Hydrogen index, Tmax = Pyrolysis peak temperature.

Formation TOC (%) S1+S2 (mg/g) HI (mg/g) Tmax (oC) Sample Size

Upper E1m 1.31 2.41 148 397 51

Lower E1m 1.16 2.28 162 402 123
Upper E1l 1.15 2.34 152 414 109
Lower E1l 1.25 1.71 119 421 86
E 1y 1.68 1.99 89 452 32

Figure TheThe
11. 11.
Figure paleo waterwater
paleo depthdepth
and sediment water interface
and sediment temperature
water interface (SWI-Temperature)
temperature curves
(SWI-Temperature)
through geologic time.
curves through geologic time.

The heat flow represents the lower boundary condition of the heat transfer input into a
sedimentary basin [45]. The thermal evolution in the study area is important to the source rock
maturation and hydrocarbon expulsion. The present-day temperature gradient measured by bore
hole temperature test data is around 2.99 °C/100 m. The heat flow measurements show that the
present-day heat flow in the East China Sea Shelf Basin (ECSSB) is around 58.6 mW/m2, varying from
56 to 88.6 mW/m2 [47]. The heat flow evolution after the Mesozoic was mainly influenced by the
lithospheric stretching activities. The heat flow evolution research of the ECSSB suggests that the
paleo heat flow was around 80 mW/m2 (67–93 mW/m2 for individual wells) at the end of the Paleocene
(56 Ma), at which time the strata experienced the maximum formation temperature before cooling to
Energies 2019, 12, 650 13 of 20

Energies 2019, 12, x 13 of 20

Figure
Figure 12. (A)
12. (A) TheThe
heatheat
flowflow trends
trends usedused to recover
to recover the paleo
the paleo heatheat
flowflow in Lishui
in the the Lishui
Sag.Sag. Heat
Heat flowflow
1 1
refers to the minimum trend and heat flow 3 refers to the maximum trend. The heat
refers to the minimum trend and heat flow 3 refers to the maximum trend. The heat flow uncertainty flow uncertainty
is estimated
is estimated to13
to be bemW/m
13 mW/m 2 above
2 above or below that of heat flow trend 2. (B) The vitrinite reflectance
or below that of heat flow trend 2. (B) The vitrinite reflectance
simulated
simulated using
using the three
the three heat heat
flow flow
trendstrends
(curves(curves with different
with different colors)colors) and measured
and measured data (C)
data (dots). (dots).
(C) The formation temperature calculated using different heat flow trends
The formation temperature calculated using different heat flow trends and measured data. and measured data.

In this way,
In this fivefive
way, wells with
wells formation
with temperature
formation temperatureandandvitrinite reflectance
vitrinite measured
reflectance measureddata (Well
data (Well
LS36-A, LS36-B,
LS36-A, LS35-A,
LS36-B, LS35-B
LS35-A, andand
LS35-B LF1) andand
LF1) fourfour
wells with
wells oneone
with kind of calibration
kind measured
of calibration measured datadata
(Well NP6,
(Well NP11,
NP6, LS23
NP11, andand
LS23 S1) S1)
are are
used to define
used the the
to define heatheat
flowflow
trend for each
trend wellwell
for each in the study
in the areaarea
study
(Figure 12B,C, Figure 13B–I). The individual heat flow evolutionary trends are calibrated
(Figure 12B,C, Figure 13B–I). The individual heat flow evolutionary trends are calibrated to plot to plot the the
heatheat
flow distribution
flow maps
distribution andand
maps the the
heatheat
flow at 0atMa
flow is shown
0 Ma is shownin Figure 13A.
in Figure Also,
13A. the the
Also, heatheat
flowflow
maps at different
maps ageage
at different are are
separately calibrated
separately andand
calibrated drawn.
drawn.
Energies 2019, 12, 650 14 of 20
Energies 2019, 12, x 14 of 20

Figure 13.(A)
Figure 13. (A)Present-day heat
Present-day flowflow
heat distribution map map
distribution basedbased
on the on
single
thewell heatwell
single flow heat
reconstruction
flow
(left). (B–I) The formation temperatures and vitrinite reflectance data for the 8 wells in the
reconstruction (left). (B–I) The formation temperatures and vitrinite reflectance data for the 8 wells study in area.
The
the study area. The modelled formation temperature and vitrinite reflectance versus depth curve fit the
modelled formation temperature and vitrinite reflectance versus depth curve fit well with
measured data.
well with the The heatdata.
measured flowThe
used in flow
heat the simulation
used in theare shown in
simulation the
are map in
shown Figure 13A.Figure
the map The paleo
13A. heat
flow evolution
The paleo followed
heat flow the trend
evolution in Figure
followed 12. in Figure 12.
the trend

4.4. Study Results

Study Results
The
The combination
combination of of source
sourcerock,
rock,reservoir
reservoirrock,
rock, seal
seal rock
rock andand boundary
boundary conditions
conditions formform
the the
model.
model. After the model simulation, we can get abundant results including the overall prospectivity of
After the model simulation, we can get abundant results including the overall prospectivity
the basin
of the and
basin the
and detailed
the detailedhydrocarbon distributionsinineach
hydrocarbon distributions eachreservoir
reservoir during
during thethe whole
whole geological
geological
time.
time. The maturity of the source rock layers are shown in Figure 14. In Figure 14A, the central part of part
The maturity of the source rock layers are shown in Figure 14. In Figure 14A, the central
of
thetheE1yE1reached
y reached
the the
gas gas generation
generation stagestage
with with Ro 1.0%.
Ro over over The
1.0%. Theslope
west westofslope of the
the west west and
sub-sag sub-sag
and southern part have lower maturity. The east sub-sag has lower maturity due to the less burial
 sags. The maximum burial depth at Well LS36-A was around 6500 m while the depth at Well NP6
reached 4700 m. The source rocks enter the hydrocarbon generation threshold at burial depth of 2300
m. The E1y entered the hydrocarbon threshold at 58 Ma, Lower E1l at 56 Ma, Upper E1l at 53 Ma
(Figure 15, Figure 16A). Hydrocarbon source rocks transformation ratio (TR) is generally defined as
the present hydrocarbon potential divided by the initial hydrocarbon generation potential. When the
Energies 2019,
Energies 2019, 12,
12, 650
TR reach x 100%, it means that hydrocarbon part in the source rocks completely supply the oil 15
15 of 20
and
of 20
gas
generation, and the hydrocarbon generation potential has been exhausted. The TR of the source rock
southern in part have lower
the Lishui maturity.
Sag rose quicklyThe
aftereastthesub-sag has lower
source rock enteredmaturity due to the
the oil window. Theless burial from
kerogen depthE1y
depth but still reach the oil-generating peak stage. The whole Lower E1 l source rock entered the oil
but stillandreach
Lowerthe Eoil-generating peak stage.into
1l continued transforming Thehydrocarbon
whole Lower E1l48source
until rock entered
Ma, before the oil of
the deposition
generation threshold (Figure 14B) and the deep regions acquired higher vitrinite reflectance over 1.3%.
Wenzhou
generation Formation.
threshold (FigureThe TR and
14B) rose the
slowly
deep from 53 Maacquired
regions to presenthigher
day and reached
vitrinite a high stage.
reflectance overThe
The high maturity areas are the sags at the west side of the Lingfeng Uplift. The maturity in Figure 14C
1.3%. TheTR of thematurity
high source rocks from
areas areE1the
y, Lower
sags at E1lthe
andwest
Upper E1lof
side slowly increasedUplift.
the Lingfeng to 77%,The
62%maturity
and 22%.in The
was more high evenly distributed
transformed E y at main
and Lower oilE1stage.
l formations are the main petroleum generating source rocks.
Figure 14C was more evenly distributed at main oil stage.
1

Figure 15 shows the maturity and burial history of two typical wells in the west and east sub-
sags. The maximum burial depth at Well LS36-A was around 6500 m while the depth at Well NP6
reached 4700 m. The source rocks enter the hydrocarbon generation threshold at burial depth of 2300
m. The E1y entered the hydrocarbon threshold at 58 Ma, Lower E1l at 56 Ma, Upper E1l at 53 Ma
(Figure 15, Figure 16A). Hydrocarbon source rocks transformation ratio (TR) is generally defined as
the present hydrocarbon potential divided by the initial hydrocarbon generation potential. When the
TR reach 100%, it means that hydrocarbon part in the source rocks completely supply the oil and gas
generation, and the hydrocarbon generation potential has been exhausted. The TR of the source rock
in the Lishui Sag rose quickly after the source rock entered the oil window. The kerogen from E1y
and Lower E1l continued transforming into hydrocarbon until 48 Ma, before the deposition of
Wenzhou Formation. The TR rose slowly from 53 Ma to present day and reached a high stage. The
TR of the source rocks from E1y, Lower E1l and Upper E1l slowly increased to 77%, 62% and 22%. The
high transformed E1y and Lower E1l formations are the main petroleum generating source rocks.

Figure 14. (A)14.

Figure Modelled maturity
(A) Modelled mapsmaps
maturity at present dayday
at present forfor
thetheE1Ey;1y;(B)
(B)Modelled
Modelled maturity mapsfor
maturity maps
for the Lower E1 l;E(C)
the Lower Modelled
1l; (C) Modelledmaturity
maturity maps forthe
maps for theUpper
UpperE1El.1The
l. The higher
higher maturities
maturities havehave been
been reached
reachedininthe
thecentral
central part of of
part thethe
west sub-sag.
west TheThe
sub-sag. missing area area
missing between the sub-sags
between represents
the sub-sags the Lingfeng
represents the
LingfengUplift.
Uplift.

Figure 15 shows the maturity and burial history of two typical wells in the west and east sub-sags.
The maximum burial depth at Well LS36-A was around 6500 m while the depth at Well NP6 reached
4700 m. The source rocks enter the hydrocarbon generation threshold at burial depth of 2300 m.
The E1y entered the hydrocarbon threshold at 58 Ma, Lower E1l at 56 Ma, Upper E1l at 53 Ma
(Figures 15 and 16A). Hydrocarbon source rocks transformation ratio (TR) is generally defined as the
present hydrocarbon potential divided by the initial hydrocarbon generation potential. When the TR
reach 100%, it means that hydrocarbon part in the source rocks completely supply the oil and gas
generation, and the hydrocarbon generation potential has been exhausted. The TR of the source rock
in the Lishui Sag rose quickly after the source rock entered the oil window. The kerogen from E1 y and
Lower E1 l continued transforming into hydrocarbon until 48 Ma, before the deposition of Wenzhou
Figure 14. (A) Modelled maturity maps at present day for the E1y; (B) Modelled maturity maps for
Formation. The TR rose slowly from 53 Ma to present day and reached a high stage. The TR of the
the Lower E1l; (C) Modelled maturity maps for the Upper E1l. The higher maturities have been reached
source rocks from
Figure
in the central E1(A)
15.
part y, the
of Lower
west E
Maturation 1 l and
andburial
sub-sag. Upper
The E1 l of
history
missing slowly increased
thebetween
area Well LS36-A into
the77%,
west
the sub-sags 62% and
sub-sag
represents 22%.
ofthe
the TheSag.
Lishui
Lingfeng high
transformed E1Maturation
Uplift. (B) y and Lower and E 1 l formations
burial areWell
history of the the NP6
maininpetroleum generating
the east sub-sag source
of the Lishui Sag.rocks.

(A) Maturation
Figure 15. (A) Maturation and
and burial
burial history
history of
of the
the Well
Well LS36-A
LS36-A in
in the
the west
west sub-sag
sub-sag of
of the
theLishui
LishuiSag.
Sag.
(B) Maturation and burial history of the Well
Well NP6
NP6 inin the
the east
east sub-sag
sub-sag ofof the
the Lishui
Lishui Sag.
Sag.
Energies 2019, 12, 650 16 of 20
Energies 2019, 12, x 16 of 20

Figure 16. (A) Maturity evolution for each source rock according to vitrinite reflectance (solid lines)
Figure 16. (A) Maturity evolution for each source rock according to vitrinite reflectance (solid lines)
and transformation ratio (dash lines). (B) The bulk generation mass evolution of three main source
and transformation ratio (dash lines). (B) The bulk generation mass evolution of three main source
rock: E1 y, Lower E1 l and Upper E1 l (solid lines), and the petroleum filling saturation history in the
rock: E1y, Lower E1l and Upper E1l (solid lines), and the petroleum filling saturation history in the
Upper E1 m for Well LS36-A (dash line).
Upper E1m for Well LS36-A (dash line).
5. Discussion
5. Discussion
5.1. Hydrocarbon Generation and Expulsion
5.1. Hydrocarbon Generation and Expulsion
The main hydrocarbon generation period can be figured out by the generation rate and mass of
The main
the source rocks. hydrocarbon
As we can see, generation period can
the generation mass behas
figured out byrelation
a positive the generation
with therate and mass of
transformation
the source
rate rocks.rock
and source As maturation
we can see, intheFigure
generation
16. InmassFigurehas 15awe positive
can see relation with the
the vitrinite transformation
reflectance didn’t
rate and source rock maturation in Figure 16. In Figure 15 we can see
increase after the regional erosion event began at 32 Ma. The generation mass of E1 y source rock the vitrinite reflectance didn’tis
increase afterlarger
significantly the regional
than theerosion
Upper event beganEat
and Lower 32 Ma. rock.
1 l source The generation
The generation massofofhydrocarbon
E1y source rockfromis
significantly
source larger
rocks last fromthan
58theMaUpper and The
to 32 Ma. Lower firstE1hydrocarbon
l source rock.filling
The generation of hydrocarbon
history began from 56 Mafromand
sourceuntil
lasted rocksthe last from 58
erosion Ma started
event to 32 Ma. TheMa
at 32 first hydrocarbon
(Figure 3, Table filling history16B).
1 and Figure beganThefrom 56 Ma
second and
filling
lasted until
period startedthefromerosion
23 Maevent
afterstarted at 32 Ma
the erosion and(Figure
continued 3, Table 1 and Figure 16B). The second filling
to nowadays.
periodThestarted
fluid from
inclusion23 Ma after the
analysis erosion and
technique continued
is used widelytoinnowadays.
the orientation of hydrocarbon pool
forming and the homogenization temperature indicates the temperature of reservoir forming and fluid
injection [52]. The fluid inclusions analysis of six core samples from Well LS36-A and LS36-B Lower
E1 m sandstone show the major distribution zone of homogenization temperature is between 85 ◦ C and
95 ◦ C. There were also a group of results gather around 125 ◦ C and 135 ◦ C (Figure 17A). However, on
the basis of geological temperature history simulation, the temperature of Lower E1 m never reached
this high degree (Figure 17B). The higher homogenization temperature of fluid inclusions related to
local volcanic activities in the southern part of the west sub-sag, and the composition of gas inclusions
is mainly CO2 . According to the formal researches, the volcanic activities mainly in the Late Miocene
which are unrelated to the petroleum generation [53,54].
When combined with the burial and temperature history map of Well LS36-A, the reservoir
forming period can be limited between 51.8 Ma and 32 Ma. The second filling process started from
18.2 Ma to now. The model simulation gave the filling process (petroleum saturation) through geologic
history, which is calculated by the 3D basin hydrocarbon generation, migration and accumulation.
The homogenization temperature and filling time recovery focused on the 1D single well burial and
temperature
Figure history.
17. DetermineThey arethe two different
petroleum perspectives
filling period using to solve the inclusion
the fluid problem.homogenization
The reservoir forming
time figured out byanalysis
temperature model simulation
method. (A)(Figure 16B) and inclusion
Homogenization temperature homogenization temperature
distribution diagram from method
sandstone samples from Well LS36-A and Well LS36-B. (B) 1D structure
(Figure 17) draw the similar conclusion which confirmed the accuracy of the result. The long term and temperature history
model offilling
hydrocarbon Well LS36-A
historyindicating the two
has positive effectperiods
to theofgashydrocarbon filling.
reservoir forming.
This study find out that the first phase of filling is from the early Eocene to the early Oligocene,
The fluid
the second phase inclusion
is from analysis
the earlytechnique
Miocene toisthe used widelyIninthe
present. the orientation
former of hydrocarbon
literature, pool
scholars support
the idea of three petroleum charge periods [7,10,11]. The diverse charging time intervals worked and
forming and the homogenization temperature indicates the temperature of reservoir forming out
fluid injection [52]. The fluid inclusions analysis of six core samples
by different scholars put the high homogenization temperature (>120 C) into consideration. In fact,from
◦ Well LS36-A and LS36-B
Lower
after theEheat
1m sandstone show the major distribution zone of homogenization temperature is between
flow calibration we discover that the maximum formation temperature the E1 m reached
85 °C and 95 °C. There were also a group of results gather around 125 °C and 135 °C (Figure 17A).
is 100 ◦ C.
However, on the basis of geological temperature history simulation, the temperature of Lower E1m
never reached this high degree (Figure 17B). The higher homogenization temperature of fluid
 the source rocks. As we can see, the generation mass has a positive relation with the transformation
rate and source rock maturation in Figure 16. In Figure 15 we can see the vitrinite reflectance didn’t
increase after the regional erosion event began at 32 Ma. The generation mass of E1y source rock is
significantly larger than the Upper and Lower E1l source rock. The generation of hydrocarbon from
source rocks last from 58 Ma to 32 Ma. The first hydrocarbon filling history began from 56 Ma and
Energies 2019,
lasted12,until
650 the erosion event started at 32 Ma (Figure 3, Table 1 and Figure 16B). The second filling 17 of 20
period started from 23 Ma after the erosion and continued to nowadays.

Energies 2019, 12, x 17 of 20

Figure 17. Determine the petroleum filling period using the fluid inclusion homogenization
Figure 17.
inclusions Determine
related the volcanic
to local petroleum filling period
activities in theusing the fluid
southern part inclusion homogenization
of the west sub-sag, and the
temperature analysisanalysis
temperature method. (A) Homogenization
method. temperature distribution diagram from sandstone
composition of gas inclusions is(A) Homogenization
mainly CO2. Accordingtemperature distribution
to the formal diagram
researches, thefrom
volcanic
samples from Well
sandstone LS36-A
samples and
from Well
Well LS36-B.
LS36-A and (B)
Well 1D structure
LS36-B. (B) 1D and temperature
structure and history
temperature
activities mainly in the Late Miocene which are unrelated to the petroleum generation [53,54]. model of Well
history
model of Well
LS36-A indicating theLS36-A indicating
twowith
periods of the two periods filling.
hydrocarbon of hydrocarbon filling.
When combined the burial and temperature history map of Well LS36-A, the reservoir
forming period can be limited between 51.8 Ma and 32 Ma. The second filling process started from
TheMa
fluid
5.2. Hydrocarbon
18.2 inclusion
Migration
to now. analysis
and
The techniquegave
Accumulation
model simulation is used widelyprocess
the filling in the (petroleum
orientationsaturation)
of hydrocarbon pool
through
forming andhistory,
geologic the homogenization temperature
which is calculated by the indicates
3D basin the temperature
hydrocarbon of reservoir
generation, forming
migration andand
The hydrocarbon
fluid injection [52].
accumulation. migration
The The path from
fluid inclusions
homogenization sourceand
analysis
temperature ofto
sixreservoir
coretime
filling in three
samples dimension
fromfocused
recovery Well LS36-A was
and
on the 1D simulated in
LS36-B
single
the 3D Lower
basin
wellmodel,
Eburial which
1m sandstone
and is unavailable
show
temperature thehistory.
major They using
distribution1D zone
are two and 2D modelling.toThe
of homogenization
different perspectives hydrocarbon
temperature
solve can be both
is between
the problem. The
85 °C
accumulated and
reservoir95forming
in the °C. There time
sandstone wereandalsosiltstone
figured a group
out by model of results gather
simulation
reservoir due toaround
(Figure 16B)
the 125 C andcap
and °inclusion
horizontal 135 °C (Figure 17A).
homogenization
of the E2 o Formation.
temperature
However,
From the plot ofmethod
on the basis
the (Figure
of
simulated 17) draw
geological the similarhistory
temperature
hydrocarbon conclusion
expulsion which confirmed
simulation,
direction the(Figure the accuracy
temperature of theE1m
18A)ofitLower
can be seen that
result. The long term hydrocarbon filling history has positive effect to the
never reached this high degree (Figure 17B). The higher homogenization temperature of fluid gas reservoir forming.
the E1y sourceThis rock
study find out that the first phase of filling is from the early Eocene to the early Oligocene,formation
generated oil (green arrow). As the burial depth increased rapidly,
temperature also rose
the second phase sharply, andearly
is from the theMiocene
original to oil crackedIninto
the present. gas, so
the former that subsequent
literature, hydrocarbon
scholars support
the idea of three petroleum charge periods [7,10,11]. The diverse
generation formed wet and dry gas (red arrow). The main hydrocarbon generating zones charging time intervals worked out located at
by different scholars put the high homogenization temperature (>120 °C) into consideration. In fact,
the east of the Lingfeng Uplift. The upward migration of oil and gas moved into Upper and Lower
after the heat flow calibration we discover that the maximum formation temperature the E1m reached
E1m Formation reservoir. As shown in Figure 18B, the migration path follows the fluid potential and
is 100 °C.
affected by faults and physical properties. The main migration direction is from the site of source rock
kitchen to5.2.
theHydrocarbon
slope zone. Migration and Accumulation
The gas zones occur in the anticline and faulted anticline structures. The
oil zones occur in the lower structures
The hydrocarbon migration pathand lithologic
from traps. The
source to reservoir LS36-A
in three structure
dimension is a good
was simulated in anticline
the 3D basin model, which is unavailable
structure for petroleum accumulation and preservation. using 1D and 2D modelling. The hydrocarbon can be both
accumulated in the sandstone and siltstone reservoir due to the horizontal cap of the E2o Formation.

(A) 3D
Figure 18. Figure 18.model view view
(A) 3D model of E1ofy Eat
1y 52 Ma (during
at 52Ma thedeposition
(during the deposition of showing
of E2o), E2 o), showing the hydrocarbon
the hydrocarbon
displacement vectors at the first petroleum charge period. (B) The oil and
displacement vectors at the first petroleum charge period. (B) The oil and gas migration gas migration path and path and
accumulation areas of Upper E1m in the study area (at present).
accumulation areas of Upper E1 m in the study area (at present).
From the plot of the simulated hydrocarbon expulsion direction (Figure 18A) it can be seen that
the E1y source rock generated oil (green arrow). As the burial depth increased rapidly, formation
temperature also rose sharply, and the original oil cracked into gas, so that subsequent hydrocarbon
generation formed wet and dry gas (red arrow). The main hydrocarbon generating zones located at
Energies 2019, 12, 650 18 of 20

6. Conclusions
We constructed a detailed 3D model of the basin with several wells and seismic data to get the
inner evolutionary process of the basin, which is the key for petroleum exploration. The simulation
could be made more accurate with additional analytical data and refined boundary conditions for the
model. In this research, reservoir physical properties and multiple lithology distribution modelling
were used to improve the accuracy of lithological hydrocarbon reservoir modelling. The heat flow
calibration and detailed boundary condition settings contributed to the refined petroleum system
modelling and verified the accuracy of the results.
3D petroleum system modelling of the Lishui Sag indicates that the major hydrocarbon source
rocks is argillaceous shale in the Yueguifeng Formation. The peak hydrocarbon generation period is
from 58 Ma to 50 Ma, the petroleum generation period lasted until 32 Ma when the regional erosion
event occurred. The main hydrocarbon generating zones located at the east of the Lingfeng Uplift. The
main migration direction is from the site of source rock kitchen to the slope zone with the effect of
faults and lithology. The primary reservoir forming and petroleum charging event took place between
early Eocene and the end of Eocene (51.8 Ma–32 Ma). The second period of hydrocarbon accumulation
is from early Neogene to present (23 Ma–0 Ma). Because of the source rock properties along with
the high temperature and high pressure deposition environment, the hydrocarbon types of Lishui
Sag are mainly gas and gas condensate. Regional uplift and erosion, the location of the source rock
kitchens and fault-lithologic distribution play the important role in the petroleum pool forming in
the Lishui Sag. In the further research, the model of the whole basin can be established to get a more
macroscopic vision.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization by J.Z., J.G. and J.L., model construction by J.G., source rock analysis
by W.S., erosion thickness calculation by N.L. and RMS amplitude research by G.X.; J.G. and J.Z. contributes to the
writing of the manuscript.
Funding: This study was supported by the Major National R&D Projects of China (No.2016ZX05027-001-006). We
are grateful to CNOOC for supplying the research data and permitting the publication of this research.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Chen, J.P.; Ge, H.P.; Chen, X.D.; Deng, C.P.; Liang, D.G. Classification and origin of natural gases from Lishui
Sag, the East China Sea Basin. Sci. China Ser. D-Earth Sci. 2008, 51, 122–130. [CrossRef]
2. Cheng, Z.Y.; Wu, P.K.; Wu, Z.X. Petroleum geology and exploration potential of Lishui Sag. China Offshore
Oil Gas (Geol.) 2000, 14, 384–391.
3. Li, D.Y.; Jiang, X.D.; Xu, F.; Liu, J.S.; Hou, G.W. Geochemistry of the Paleocene in Lishui Sag, East China
Sea Shelf Basin: Implications for Tectonic Background and Provenance. Acta Geol. Sin.-Engl. Ed. 2016, 90,
166–181.
4. Xu, F.; Li, X.; Zhang, J.L.; Zhang, G.X. Three-dimensinal Structure Modeling of Lishui Depression, East China
Sea Basin. Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 853, 663. [CrossRef]
5. Liu, J.S.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, J.L.; Wang, C.Y.; Zhang, P.H. Tectonic evolution and sequence filling of Paleocene
in Lishui Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 807–809, 2244. [CrossRef]
6. Liu, J.S.; Li, X.; Zhang, J.L.; Li, C.L. 3D Visualization for Detailed Sedimentary-Facies Modeling of Lishui
Depression, East China Sea Basin. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2014, 442, 489. [CrossRef]
7. Su, A.; Chen, H.H.; Cao, L.S.; Lei, M.Z.; Wang, C.W.; Liu, Y.H.; Li, P.J. Genesis, source and charging of oil and
gas in Lishui sag, East China Sea Basin. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2014, 41, 574–584. [CrossRef]
8. Jiang, Z.L.; Li, Y.J.; Du, H.L.; Zhang, Y.F. The Cenozoic structural evolution and its influences on gas
accumulation in the Lishui Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2015, 22, 107–118. [CrossRef]
9. Liu, J.S. Fine description of structure research of Lishui sag, East China Sea Basin. Arab. J. Geosci. 2015, 8,
4433–4441. [CrossRef]
10. Ge, H.P.; Chen, Z.Y.; Fang, L.F.; Shen, W.F. A discussion on hydrocarbon accumulation periods in Lishui Sag,
East China Sea Basin. China offshore Oil Gas (Geol.) 2003, 17, 44–49.
Energies 2019, 12, 650 19 of 20

11. Tian, Y. Study on hydrocarbon accumulation rule in the Lishui Sag, East China Sea Continental Shelf Basin.
Master dissertation, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China, 2013.
12. Welte, D.H.; Yukler, M.A. Petroleum Origin and Accumulation in Basin Evolution—A Quantitative Model.
AAPG Bull. 1981, 65, 1387–1396.
13. Welte, D.H.; Yalcin, M.N. Basin Modeling—A New Comprehensive Method in Petroleum Geology.
Org. Geochem. 1988, 13, 141–151. [CrossRef]
14. Bruns, B.; Primio, R.D.; Berner, U.; Littke, R.J.G. Petroleum system evolution in the inverted Lower Saxony
Basin, northwest Germany: A 3D basin modeling study. Geofluids 2013, 13, 246–271. [CrossRef]
15. Bruns, B.; Littke, R.; Gasparik, M.; van Wees, J.D.; Nelskamp, S. Thermal evolution and shale gas potential
estimation of the Wealden and Posidonia Shale in NW-Germany and the Netherlands: A 3D basin modelling
study. Basin Res. 2016, 28, 2–33. [CrossRef]
16. Brandes, C.; Astorga, A.; Littke, R.; Winsemann, J. Basin modelling of the Limon Back-arc Basin (Costa Rica):
Burial history and temperature evolution of an island arc-related basin-system. Basin Res. 2008, 20, 119–142.
[CrossRef]
17. Sachse, V.F.; Anka, Z.; Littke, R.; Rodriguez, J.F.; Horsfield, B.; di Primio, R. Burial Temperature and
Maturation History of the Austral and Western Malvinas Basins, Southern Argentina, Based on 3d Basin
Modelling. J. Pet. Geol. 2016, 39, 169–191. [CrossRef]
18. Schneider, F.; Wolf, S.; Faille, I.; Pot, D. A 3D basin model for hydrocarbon potential evaluation: Application
to Congo offshore. Oil Gas Sci. Technol.-Rev. D Ifp Energies Nouv. 2000, 55, 3–13. [CrossRef]
19. Zhang, M.; Zhang, J.L.; Xu, F.; Li, J.Z.; Liu, J.S.; Hou, G.W.; Zhang, P.H. Paleocene sequence stratigraphy
and depositional systems in the Lishui Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2015, 59, 390–405.
[CrossRef]
20. Su, A.; Chen, H.H.; Wang, C.W.; Li, P.J.; Zhang, H.; Xiong, W.L.; Lei, M.Z. Genesis and maturity identification
of oil and gas in the Xihu Sag, East China Sea Basin. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2013, 40, 558–565. [CrossRef]
21. Verweij, H. Basin Modeling Perspectives Preface. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2009, 26, 427–429. [CrossRef]
22. Zhang, G.H.; Li, S.Z.; Suo, Y.H.; Zhang, J.P. Cenozoic positive inversion tectonics and its migration in the
East China Sea Shelf Basin. Geol. J. 2016, 51, 176–187. [CrossRef]
23. Zhang, J.P.; Zhang, T.; Tang, X.J. Basin type and dynamic environment in the East China Sea Shelf Basin.
ACTA Geol. Sin. 2014, 88, 2033–2043.
24. Xia, B.; Zhang, M.Q.; Wan, Z.F.; Sun, X.Y.; Lv, B.F. Structural styles and hydrocarbon prospects in the
Lishui-Jiaojiang Sag, the East China Sea. S. China J. Selsmology 2007, 27, 1–8.
25. Zhang, S.L.; Xia, B. Characters of tectonic evolution of the Lishui-Jiaojiang Sag and oil accumulation. Nat. Gas
Geosci. 2005, 16, 324–328.
26. Cukur, D.; Horozal, S.; Kim, D.C.; Han, H.C. Seismic stratigraphy and structural analysis of the northern East
China Sea Shelf Basin interpreted from multi-channel seismic reflection data and cross-section restoration.
Mar. Pet. Geol. 2011, 28, 1003–1022. [CrossRef]
27. Hantschel, T.; Kauerauf, A.I. Fundamentals of Basin and Petroleum Systems Modeling; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2009.
28. Baniasad, A.; Rabbani, A.; Sachse, V.F.; Littke, R.; Moallemi, S.A.; Soleimany, B. 2D basin modeling study of
the Binak Trough, northwestern Persian Gulf, Iran. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2016, 77, 882–897. [CrossRef]
29. Mohsenian, E.; Fathi-Mobarakabad, A.; Sachsenhofer, R.F.; Asadi-Eskandar, A. 3D Basin Modelling in the
Central Persian Gulf, Offshore Iran. J. Pet. Geol. 2014, 37, 55–70. [CrossRef]
30. Rodrigues Duran, E.; di Primio, R.; Anka, Z.; Stoddart, D.; Horsfield, B. 3D-basin modelling of the
Hammerfest Basin (southwestern Barents Sea): A quantitative assessment of petroleum generation, migration
and leakage. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2013, 45, 281–303. [CrossRef]
31. Dow, W.G. Kerogen Studies and Geological Interpretations. J Geochem. Explor. 1977, 7, 79–99. [CrossRef]
32. Magara, K. Thickness of Removed Sedimentary-Rocks, Paleopore Pressure, and Paleotemperature,
Southwestern Part of Western Canada Basin. AAPG Bull. 1976, 60, 554–565.
33. Li, D.Y.; Guo, T.Y.; Jiang, X.D.; Zhao, H.Q.; Wang, H.P. Erosion thickness recovery and tectonic evolution
characterization of southern East China Sea Shelf Basin. Oil Gas Geol. 2015, 36, 913–923.
34. Cohen, K.M.; Finney, S.C.; Gibbard, P.L.; Fan, J.X. The ICS International Chronostratigraphic Chart. Available
online: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/289106 (accessed on 15 February 2019).
35. Athy, L.F. Density, porosity, and compaction of sedimentary rocks. Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. 1930, 14, 1–24.
Energies 2019, 12, 650 20 of 20

36. Fowler, A.C.; Yang, X.-S. Fast and Slow Compaction in Sedimentary Basins. SIAM J. App. Math. 1998, 59,
365–385. [CrossRef]
37. Liu, H.; Xia, Q.L.; Zhou, X.H. Geologic-seismic models, prediction of shallow-water lacustrine delta sandbody
and hydrocarbon potential in the Late Miocene, Huanghekou Sag, Bohai Bay Basin, northern China.
J. Palaeogeogr. 2018, 7, 66–87. [CrossRef]
38. Tayyab, M.N.; Asim, S. Application of spectral decomposition for the detection of fluvial sand reservoirs,
Indus Basin, SW Pakistan. Geosci. J. 2017, 21, 595–605. [CrossRef]
39. Penguang, A.S.A.; Lubis, L.A.; Hermana, M.; Ghosh, D.P. Study of Rock Physics and Seismic Attributes of
Hydrocarbon Reservoirs in Sabah Basin. Available online: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-
1315/88/1/012009/meta (accessed on 15 February 2019).
40. Burnham, A.K. A Simple Kinetic Model of Petroleum Formation and Cracking; Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory: Livermore, CA, USA, 1989.
41. Tissot, B.P.; Welte, D.H. Petroleum Formation and Occurrence; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1984.
42. Espitalie, J. Use of Tmax as a maturation index for different types of organic matter: Comparison with
vitrinite reflectance. Thermal Model. Sediment. Basins 1986, 44, 475–496.
43. Zhang, Y.G.; Ge, H.P.; Yang, Y.Q.; Liang, J. Division and controlling factors of Paleocene sequence strata in
Lishui Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin. Mar. Orig. Pet. Geol. 2012, 17, 33–39.
44. Wu, F.D.; Li, S.T.; Lu, Y.C.; Li, P.L.; Zhou, P.; Zhao, J.H. The tertiary sea-level changes in the East China Sea
Shelf Basin. Sci. Geol. Sin. 1998, 33, 214–221.
45. Yalçin, M.N.; Littke, R.; Sachsenhofer, R.F. Thermal History of Sedimentary Basins. In Petroleum and Basin
Evolution; Welte, D.H., Horsfield, B., Baker, D.R., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1997.
46. Wygrala, B.P. Integrated Study of an Oil Field in the Southern Po Basin, Northern Italy. Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany, 1989.
47. Li, G.B.; Liu, B.H.; Li, N.S. A probe heat flow value of the East China Sea shelf. Chin. J. Oceanol. Limnol. 2006,
24, 243–249.
48. Yang, S.C.; Hu, S.B.; Cai, D.S.; Feng, X.J.; Chen, L.L.; Le, G. Present-day heat flow, thermal history and
tectonic subsidence of the East China Sea Basin. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2004, 21, 1095–1105. [CrossRef]
49. Larter, S. Chemical-Models of Vitrinite Reflectance Evolution. Geol. Rundsch. 1989, 78, 349–359. [CrossRef]
50. Lerche, I.; Yarzab, R.F.; Kendall, C.G.S.C. Determination of Paleoheat Flux from Vitrinite Reflectance Data.
AAPG Bull. 1984, 68, 1704–1717.
51. Sweeney, J.J.; Burnham, A.K. Evaluation of a Simple-Model of Vitrinite Reflectance Based on Chemical-Kinetics.
AAPG Bull. 1990, 74, 1559–1570.
52. Zhang, J.L.; Chang, X.C.; Liu, B.J.; Mao, F.M. Fluid history analysis and formation mechanism of the Yancheng
petroleum reservoir. ACTA Geol. Sin. 2002, 76, 252–260.
53. Huang, Y.H.; Tarantola, A.; Wang, W.J.; Caumon, M.C.; Pironon, J.; Lu, W.J.; Yan, D.T.; Zhuang, X.G.
Charge history of CO2 in Lishui sag, East China Sea basin: Evidence from quantitative Raman analysis of
CO2-bearing fluid inclusions. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2018, 98, 50–65. [CrossRef]
54. Zhao, S.; Liu, L.; Liu, N. Petrographic and stable isotopic evidences of CO2-induced alterations in sandstones
in the Lishui sag, East China Sea Basin, China. Appl. Geochem. 2018, 90, 115–128. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).