Barnett Shale Petrophysics

Petrophysical Characterization of
the Barnett Shale: Progress Report
Jeff Kane
Bureau of Economic Geology
PBGSP Annual Meeting
February 27-28, 2006
Overview
• Database construction
• Geophysical log analysis model
• Texas United Blakely #1
• Summary
Jeffrey A. Kane, Bureau of Economic Geology , PBGSP Annual Meeting, 2/27-28/2006, Austin, TX
Database construction
• Wireline database:
• 7 wells with geochemical data
• 2 with log data
• 1 with mineralogy data
• 1 with limited P & P data
• 1 with capillary pressure data
• 2 with core descriptions
Database construction
• Many of these core data were recently provided by Dan

Jarvie of Humble Geochemical Services.
Geophysical log modeling
• A quick historical perspective

• Mineralogical model
• Kerogen issues
Geophysical log modeling – some history
• Much of the methodology used today to come from work

performed on the T.P. Sims #2 core (ResTech, 1991)
• This methodology derives from work done earlier on the
Devonian Shale (GRI, 1989)
• Few data have been published subsequently.
Geophysical log modeling - Mineralogy
Mineralogy distribution
W. C. Young #2
90
80
70
60
Volume (%)
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total Clay Quartz K-Feldspar Plagioclase Calcite Dolomite Pyrite Apatite
Q1 Min Median Max Q3
Geophysical log modeling - Kerogen
Kerogen is a wildcard
• It appears as porosity on logs
• It has a nominal density of about 1.0 to 1.2 g/cc
(but it is probably more variable)
• It has a hydrogen index of about 0.65 to 0.70
(water = 1.0)
TOC  ( S1  C S1 )
Wk 
Ck
(from Guidry and Olszewski, 1990) where:
Wk is the weight of kerogen
TOC is the weight fraction of total organic carbon
S1 is the weight fraction of free oil
CS1 is the weight fraction of carbon in the free oil
Ck is the weight fraction of carbon in the kerogen
Guidry and Olszewski (1990) suggest 0.87 and 0.75 for CS1 and Ck
respectively. Jarvie (1999) recommends a value of 0.83 for CS1.
Wk  r B
Vk 
rk
where:
Vk is the volume fraction of kerogen
Wk is the weight of kerogen
rB is the bulk density
rk is the kerogen density
• The preceding is from derived from core data, not log

data
• Initially, correlations have to be developed to estimate
kerogen volume from logs
• This work is currently in progress
• We have a mineralogical model of clay, quartz, calcite,

dolomite, pyrite, apatite, kerogen, and fluids (water and
gas)
• We have a set of logs that have known or estimated
responses to each of these model points
• We can construct a set of equations to describe these
relationships
• This leads to a set of simultaneous equations that allow

us to solve for the volumes of the geologic constituents
present
• This is fundamentally the same approach used by
programs such as ELAN™ and OPTIMA™
• We use the Geolog™ package MultiMin™
Overview of what the logs show
Texas Blakely #1 wireline log analysis
Texas United Blakely #1
Corrected gamma ray Uranium Deep induction
0 GAPI 300 -10 PPM 30 0.2 OHMM 2000
Total gamma ray DEPTH Thorium Bulk density Medium induction

0 GAPI 300 FEET 0 PPM 40 2 G/C3 3 0.2 OHMM 2000
Caliper Potassium Neutron porosity Shallow focussed log

6 IN 16 -5 % 5 0.3 V/V -0.1 0.2 MMHO 2000
7100
7200
7300
7400
2.40 0.15 2.40 0.15
2.45 2.45
0.1 0.1
2.50 2.50
Bulk density (g/c3)
Bulk density (g/c3)

2.55 2.55
0.05 0.05
2.60 2.60
2.65 2.65
2.70 2.70
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
Neutron porosity (v/v) Neutron porosity (v/v)

7090 7250 0 300
Depth (feet) Total gamma ray (gapi)
2.40 0.15 2.40 0.15
2.45 2.45
0.1 0.1
2.50 2.50
Bulk density (g/c3)

Bulk density (g/c3)
2.55 2.55
0.05 0.05
2.60 2.60
2.65 2.65
2.70 2.70
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
Neutron porosity (v/v) Neutron porosity (v/v)
0 300 0 7
Total gamma ray (gapi) Total organic carbon (wt. %)
0 GAPI 300 -10 PPM 30 0.2 OHMM 2000


6 IN 16 -5 % 5 0.3 V/V -0.1 0.2 MMHO 2000
7100
7200
7300
7400
8 8
7 7
6 6
Total organic carbon (wt. %)
Total organic carbon (wt. %)

5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
12
2.40
2.50
2.60
15
0
2.30
2.70
Bulk density (g/c3) Uranium (ppm)

7090 7250 7090 7250
Depth (feet) Depth (feet)
0 GAPI 300 -10 PPM 30 0.2 OHMM 2000


6 IN 16 -5 % 5 0.3 V/V -0.1 0.2 MMHO 2000
7100
7200
7300
7400
Total gamma Ray Depth Thorium - Potassium Ratio (smoothed)
feet
0 GAPI 300 0.5 50
7100
7200
7300
7400
inerals
10
ys
cla
nite
er
m bearing m
lay
Kaoli
8
d
xe
Mi
Heavy Thoriu
Thorium (ppm)
6
te
Illi
ite
au con
d in g gl
clu
2
Mic as in
0 Feldspars and potassium evaporites

0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
0.0
2.5
Potassium (wt. %)
Depth
7050 7450
Summary
• We have just begun to build an extensive Barnett

database
• We already have a basic model to analyze the Barnett
from wireline logs
• Work to date suggest that logs will be of great value in
providing detailed data on Barnett mineralogy and facies.
More core-based work is necessary to verify this and
and refine our initial model

Barnett Shale Petrophysics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Barnett Shale Petrophysics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Petrophysical Characterization of

the Barnett Shale: Progress Report

• Many of these core data were recently provided by Dan

• A quick historical perspective

• Much of the methodology used today to come from work

Q1 Min Median Max Q3

• The preceding is from derived from core data, not log

• We have a mineralogical model of clay, quartz, calcite,

• This leads to a set of simultaneous equations that allow

Texas Blakely #1 wireline log analysis

Total gamma ray DEPTH Thorium Bulk density Medium induction

Caliper Potassium Neutron porosity Shallow focussed log

2.40 0.15 2.40 0.15

Bulk density (g/c3)

Neutron porosity (v/v) Neutron porosity (v/v)

2.40 0.15 2.40 0.15

Bulk density (g/c3)

Total gamma ray DEPTH Thorium Bulk density Medium induction

Caliper Potassium Neutron porosity Shallow focussed log

Total organic carbon (wt. %)

Bulk density (g/c3) Uranium (ppm)

Total gamma ray DEPTH Thorium Bulk density Medium induction

Caliper Potassium Neutron porosity Shallow focussed log

0 Feldspars and potassium evaporites

• We have just begun to build an extensive Barnett

You might also like