SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale

wayne avatar
wayne
18 diapositives · 450 Views · Jul 20, 2014

Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale. Jake Harrington Dr . Julie Sheets, Dr. Dave Cole, Dr. Sue Welch, Mik e Murphy, Alex Swift. SEMCAL. Overview. Purpose Sample Selection Methodology Results Analysis The Future. 500 nm. D. Cole, SEMCAL, OSU. Why the Utica?.

#mineralogical and toc trends in the ohio utica shale #mineralogical and toc trends in the ohio utica shale ppt #powerpoint #presentation
Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale - slide 1
01 / 18Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale Jake Harrington Dr. Julie Sheets, Dr. Dave Cole, Dr. Sue Welch, Mike Murphy, Alex Swift SEMCAL

  2. Overview • Purpose • Sample Selection • Methodology • Results • Analysis • The Future 500 nm D. Cole, SEMCAL, OSU

  3. Why the Utica? • Significant energy potential • Not much data yet available • To determine geochemical and mineralogical trends in Utica/Point Pleasant across Ohio Why Mineralogy and Total Organic Carbon (TOC)? • Possible relationship between minerals and TOC concentration • Comparable to other unconventional reservoirs

  4. Ohio Stratigraphy Ohio Geological Survey

  5. Sample Selection • Core obtained from ODNR • Part of Utica/Point Pleasant Formation • Depth Range: 1220 – 9564 ft • Longitudinal Range: 84.7°W to 81.4°W • 24 samples from 7 wells

  6. Utica Thickness Ohio Geological Survey

  7. Methodology X-Ray Diffraction Elemental Analysis • PANalytical XRD • Randomly oriented powder samples • Qualitative analysis with intensity and 2θ to identify mineral phases • DD Eberl’s Excel program RockJockused for quantification • Costech EA • Samples treated with hydrochloric acid to dissolve all inorganic carbon

  8. Location Data

  9. Barth and Wood Co. Wells TOC increasing with increasing depth TOC increasing with decreasing depth

  10. Location Data

  11. Location Data

  12. Mineralogical Data

  13. Mineralogical Trends

  14. Mineralogical Trends

  15. Summary by the Numbers • Average TOC across all samples is 1.70% • Highest TOC values are found in the east and at greater depths • Average TOC, west/east: 1.78/1.66 • Average wt% of clays, west/east: 45/37 • Average wt% of carbonates, west/east: 19/44 • Anything but consistent

  16. What’s Next? • Samples, samples, samples • Associating porosity with clay content, TOC • Checking trends with another shale gas play

  17. References Acknowledgements • Shell Exploration and Production Company • Friends of Orton Hall • Dr. Dave Cole • Drs. Julie Sheets and Sue Welch • Mike Murphy, Alex Swift, Brandon McAdams • SEMCAL Eberl, D.D., 2003 User's guide to RockJock-A program for determining quantitative mineralogy from powder X-ray diffraction data. Revised 11/30/09. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 03-78, p. 48. Ross, D. J. K. and R. M. Bustin, 2009, The importance of shale composition and pore structure upon gas storage potential of shale gas reservoirs, Marine and Petroleum Geology, vol. 26, no. 6, p. 916-927. Ryder, R., R. Burruss, and J. Hatch, 1998, Black shale source rocks and oil generation in the Cambrian and Ordovician of the central Appalachian basin, USA, Aapg Bulletin-American Association of Petroleum Geologists, vol. 82, no. 3, p. 412-441. Wicksron, L.H., Gray, J.D., and Seieglitz, R.D., 1992, Stratigraphy, structure, and production history of the Trenton Limestone (Ordovician) and adjacent strata in northwestern Ohio, Ohio Division of Geological Survey, no. 143, p. 78. Zhu, Y., E. Liu, A. Martinez, M. A. Payne, C. E. Harris, C. M. Sayers editor, and A. Jackson editor, 2011, Understanding geophysical responses of shale-gas plays, Leading Edge (Tulsa, OK), vol. 30, no. 3, p. 332-338.

  18. Questions?