松辽盆地梨树断陷页岩气资源潜力评价

吉林大学学报(地球科学版)

松辽盆地梨树断陷页岩气资源潜力评价

刘福春^1,2，程日辉¹，解启来³，胡望水⁴，汤济广⁴，李忠博²，杨秀辉²，徐浩⁵，周隶华⁶

1.吉林大学地球科学学院，长春130061;
2.中国石化东北油气分公司勘探开发研究院，长春130062;
3.华南农业大学资源环境学院，广州510642;
4.长江大学地球科学学院，武汉430100;
5.中国科学院广州地球化学研究所，广州510640;
6.新疆油田采油一厂，新疆克拉玛依834000

收稿日期:2013-11-18 出版日期:2014-05-26 发布日期:2014-05-26
通讯作者: 解启来（1964-），男，教授，博士, 主要从事油气地球化学及环境地球化学研究 E-mail:xieql@scau.edu.cn
作者简介:刘福春(1969-)，男，博士研究生，高级工程师，主要从事石油地质及油气勘探规划研究，E-mail:liufc.dbsj@sinopec.com
基金资助:
国土资源部油气资源战略研究中心页岩气资源调查项目（2009QYXQ15-07-09）；中国地质调查局油气调查项目（1212011220752）

The Potential Evaluation of Shale Gas Resources of Lishu Fault Depression in Songliao Basin

Liu Fuchun^{1, 2}, Cheng Rihui¹, Xie Qilai³, Hu Wangshui⁴, Tang Jiguang⁴, Li Zhongbo², Yang Xiuhui², Xu Hao⁵, Zhou Lihua⁶

1.College of Earth Sciences, Jilin University, Changchun130061, China;
2.Exploration and Development Institutes, Northeast Petroleum Company of SINOPEC, Changchun130062, China;
3.College of Natural Resources and Environment, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou510642, China;
4.The College of Earth Sciences, Yangtze University, Wuhan430100, China;
5.Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou510640, China;
6.The First Oil Factory, Xinjiang Oil Field, Karamay834000, Xinjiang，China

Received:2013-11-18 Online:2014-05-26 Published:2014-05-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

松辽盆地梨树断陷纵向上发育白垩系沙河子组和营城组两套主力泥页岩烃源岩层系，其沉积环境有利、厚度大、分布广。沙河子组以Ⅱ段页岩气地质条件最好，其w(TOC)分布范围为0.11%~8.20%(平均值1.45%)；营城组发育两段优质泥页岩，Ⅰ段w(TOC)为0.26%~12.01%(平均值1.96%)，Ⅱ段w(TOC)为0.06%~5.03%(平均值1.06%)。有机质类型以Ⅱ₁-Ⅲ型为主，含少量I型。沙河子组R_o普遍较高，断陷西部基本进入过成熟阶段，缓坡带处于成熟-高成熟阶段。营城组R_o变化范围较大，小城子、孤家子和十屋地区R_o达到2.00%以上。两套泥页岩脆性矿物体积分数为32.10%~62.90%，具有较好的储集性能。断陷内有多口探井在沙河子组和营城组的厚层泥页岩段钻遇高气测显示。营城组I段泥页岩含气量为0.62~3.09 m³/t。采用概率法初步预测出沙河子组和营城组页岩气资源量为6 645.34× 10⁸ m³。秦家屯地区和苏家屯次洼为页岩气勘探的有利目标区，桑树台深洼带为较有利目标区。

关键词: 页岩气, 资源潜力评价, 白垩系泥页岩, 梨树断陷, 松辽盆地

Abstract:

Two sets of main hydrocarbon source rocks, Shahezi Formation and Yingcheng Formation, developed in the Lishu fault depression of Songliao basin, which had a favorable sedimentary environment, large thickness and wide distribution. The member Ⅱ of Shahezi Formation possessed the best conditions of forming shale gas, its TOC distribution range was 0.11%-8.20% (average value was 1.45%); Yingcheng Formation developed two members of high quality mud shale: TOC distribution range of the member Ⅰ was 0.26%-12.01% (average value was 1.96%)，and that of the member Ⅱ was 0.06%-5.03% (average value was 1.06%). The main organic matter types were Ⅱ₁-Ⅲ, with few was type Ⅰ. The vitrinite reflectance (R_o) in Shahezi Formation was generally higher, whereas, in western fault depression it basically entered into over-mature phase, and it came into mature to high mature phase in gentle slope belt. In Yingcheng Formation, the range of variation of vitrinite reflectance (R_o) was large, and it reached over 2.00% in Xiaochengzi, Gujiazi and Shiwu. Mass fractions of brittle minerals of two sets of mud shale were 32.10%-62.90% which represents good reservoir properties. In the fault depression, there were several exploratory wells drilled with high gas logging show in the thick layers of mud shale in Shahezi Formation and Yingcheng Formation. The gas content was 0.62-3.09 m3/t in the member Ⅰ of Yingcheng Formation. With assessment by using the probability method, we preliminaryly forecast that Yingcheng Formation and Shahezi Formation possess shale gas resources amounting to 6 645.34 ×10⁸ m³. It is believed that Qinjiatun region and Sujiatun subsag are favorable target areas of shale gas exploration, and Sangshutai deep subsag belt is a relatively fine target area.

Key words: shale gas, resources potential evaluation, Cretaceous mud shale, Lishu fault depression, Songliao basin

中图分类号:

P618.13

刘福春，程日辉，解启来，胡望水，汤济广，李忠博，杨秀辉，徐浩，周隶华. 松辽盆地梨树断陷页岩气资源潜力评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2014, 44(3): 762-773.

Liu Fuchun, Cheng Rihui, Xie Qilai, Hu Wangshui, Tang Jiguang, Li Zhongbo, Yang Xiuhui, Xu Hao, Zhou Lihua. The Potential Evaluation of Shale Gas Resources of Lishu Fault Depression in Songliao Basin[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Earth Science Edition), 2014, 44(3): 762-773.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	冯小龙, 敖卫华, 唐玄. 陆相页岩气储层孔隙发育特征及其主控因素分析:以鄂尔多斯盆地长7段为例[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2018, 48(3): 678-692.
[2]	马国庆, 孟庆发, 黄大年. 基于重力异常的松辽盆地构造特征识别[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2018, 48(2): 507-516.
[3]	蔡来星, 卢双舫, 肖国林, 王蛟, 吴志强, 郭兴伟, 侯方辉. 论优质源储耦合关系的控藏作用:对比松南致密油与松北致密气成藏条件[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2018, 48(1): 15-28.
[4]	徐宏杰, 胡宝林, 郑建斌, 刘会虎, 张文永, 郑凯歌. 淮南煤田煤系页岩气储集空间特征及其岩相控制作用[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2017, 47(2): 418-430.
[5]	鲍新华, 张宇, 李野, 吴永东, 马丹, 周广慧. 松辽盆地增强型地热系统开发选区评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2017, 47(2): 564-572.
[6]	高翔, 刘志宏, 聂志阳, 姚勇, 贾卧, 王超, 宋健. 松辽盆地大庆长垣形成时间的厘定及其地质意义[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2017, 47(1): 74-83.
[7]	林承焰, 曹铮, 任丽华, 张昌盛, 范瑞峰, 王叶, 邢新亚, 马晓兰. 松辽盆地南部大情字井向斜区葡萄花油层石油富集规律及成藏模式[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(6): 1598-1610.
[8]	刘财, 杨宝俊, 冯晅, 单玄龙, 田有, 刘洋, 鹿琪, 刘才华, 杨冬, 王世煜. 论油气资源的多元勘探[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(4): 1208-1220.
[9]	温志良, 姜福平, 钟长林, 姜雪飞, 王果谦, 齐岩. 松辽盆地东南隆起超大型油页岩矿床特征及成因[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(3): 681-691.
[10]	邹友琴, 刘莉, 李宏卿, 颜春, 曾马荪, 兰盈盈. 水文地质条件对页岩气开采控制[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(3): 824-830.
[11]	康健, 韦庆海, 周琳, 高研, 张永刚, 高峰. 利用地震台阵观测资料研究大庆地区深部构造[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(3): 900-910.
[12]	杜治利, 田亚, 刘洪军, 王凤琴, 杜小弟, 袁远, 仝立华. 鄂尔多斯盆地南部延长组长9段页岩气资源潜力评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(2): 358-367.
[13]	修立君, 邵明礼, 唐华风, 董常春, 高有峰. 松辽盆地白垩系营城组火山岩孔缝单元类型和特征[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2016, 46(1): 11-22.
[14]	那金, 许天福, 魏铭聪, 冯波, 鲍新华, 姜雪. 增强地热系统热储层-盐水-CO₂相互作用[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2015, 45(5): 1493-1501.
[15]	陈彬滔, 潘树新, 梁苏娟, 张庆石, 刘彩燕, 王革. 陆相湖盆深水块体搬运体优质储层的主控因素以松辽盆地英台地区青山口组为例[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2015, 45(4): 1002-1010.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed