[First Hit]

Datapages, Inc.Print this page

Click to article in PDF format.

      

 

Colorado Basin, Argentina: A Case Study Combining Forward Sedimentary and Petroleum Previous HitSystemNext Hit Models for Consistent Evaluation of Basin Evolution, Play Development, and Petroleum Migration and Trapping*

By

Andre Vayssaire1, Patrick Wojciak1, Dan Carruthers2, Daniel Figueroa3, Oscar Mancilla3, Claudio Haring3, Alicia Salinas3, Daniel Soubies3, Jean-Michel Gaulier4,

Guillaume Smagghe5, John Bunney5, and Romain Debarre6

 

Search and Discovery Article #40155 (2005)

Posted June 6, 2005

 

*Adapted from extended abstract, prepared by the authors for presentation, entitled “Combining Forward Sedimentary and Petroleum Previous HitSystemNext Hit Models to Consistently Evaluate Basin Evolution, Play Development, and Petroleum Migration and Trapping. A Case Study from the Colorado Basin, Argentina,” at AAPG International Conference & Exhibition, Cancun, Mexico, October 24-27, 2004.

 

1Beicip-Inc, Houston, TX; 

2The Permedia Research Group Inc, Ottawa;

3Repsol- YPF, Argentina;

4Total, Paris, France;

5BP Exploration, Houston, TX

6Beicip-Franlab, Rueil-Malmaison, France  

 

General Statement 

We present a multi-disciplinary approach to understand the basin-scale evolution of a continental margin petroleum Previous HitsystemNext Hit, using a Previous HitreservoirNext Hit modeling workflow as an analogue. Generation of a consistent description of geophysical, geological, and petrophysical dataset and understanding of their related uncertainty ranges is key in order to address the various scales of physical processes operating as the basin evolves. In our approach, we appropriately solve at different length-scales within the same geologic volume the numerical solutions of temperature, pressure, and petroleum migration back through time.  

A deep offshore case study from the Colorado Basin (Argentine Continental Margin) (Figure 1), covering an area of 160,000 km2 is presented. We created a workflow combining integrated seismic stratigraphic interpretation, stratigraphic facies Previous HitpredictionNext Hit, 3D basin modeling,and multiphase petroleum migration. Results from the study have enhanced our understanding of the geological evolution of the Colorado Basin with specific emphasis on the key risks on Previous HitreservoirNext Hit presence and petroleum Previous HitsystemNext Hit elements. It helped us to identify the variety of play-types and associated key risks within the basin.

 

 

uGeneral statement

uFigure captions

uWorkflow

uConclusions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uGeneral statement

uFigure captions

uWorkflow

uConclusions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uGeneral statement

uFigure captions

uWorkflow

uConclusions

Figure Captions

Return to top.

Workflow 

Using the key interpreted seismic stratigraphic horizons, we generated the framework model by subdividing the stratigraphic section (Figure 2) according to zonations determined in wells and stratigraphic styles, and then evaluating both crustal and bathymetric evolution.  

A numerical stratigraphic approach (Dionisos®) was used to predict the stratigraphic architecture and facies distribution (Figure 3) in the undrilled areas using macro-scale physical laws over geological times, taking into account the existing wells and seismic information as constraints.  

The outputs of the stratigraphic simulation were used to populate a 3D basin model (Temis3D®). The dynamic evolution of the basin, including the compaction, pressure, temperature, and hydrocarbon generation, was calculated through time, and properties were calibrated against observed well data and offset analogues.  

The evolving basin properties were then passed onto a high-resolution petroleum migration simulator (MPath®), which evaluates the migration and trapping of the expelled petroleum through time (Figures 4, 5, and 6). Stochastic uncertainty was introduced at this stage, allowing realizations of multiple scenarios in order to evaluate the distribution of pool sizes and petroleum phase types to be risked.  

Conclusions: 

The workflow illustrated here combines the accuracy, refinement, and efficiency of three different numerical models and takes full advantage of the available data. Consistency of the geological and petrophysical descriptions and uncertainty are seen as keys to addressing the various scales of physical processes. Multiple scenarios constrained by available data were run to test geological hypothesis, such as 1) stratigraphy and facies distribution (source rock presence and type, Previous HitreservoirNext Hit presence and Previous HitqualityTop, seal capacity), 2) thermal regime, 3) charge access, and 4) migration pathways and efficiency.

 Return to top.