scholarly journals Some Considerations Concerning the Genesis of Natural Gas Deposits of Dissolved-in-water Type in the Kazusa Group, with Special Reference to Diffusion of Methane from Gas Reservoirs

1963 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-15
Author(s):  
KOZO KAWAI
2021 ◽  
pp. 014459872098811
Author(s):  
Yuanyuan Zhang ◽  
Zhanli Ren ◽  
Youlu Jiang ◽  
Jingdong Liu

To clarify the characteristics and enrichment rules of Paleogene tight sandstone reservoirs inside the rifted-basin of Eastern China, the third member of Shahejie Formation (abbreviated as Es3) in Wendong area of Dongpu Depression is selected as the research object. It not only clarified the geochemical characteristics of oil and natural gas in the Es3 of Wendong area through testing and analysis of crude oil biomarkers, natural gas components and carbon isotopes, etc.; but also compared and explained the types and geneses of oil and gas reservoirs in slope zone and sub-sag zone by matching relationship between the porosity evolution of tight reservoirs and the charging process of hydrocarbons. Significant differences have been found between the properties and the enrichment rules of hydrocarbon reservoirs in different structural areas in Wendong area. The study shows that the Paleogene hydrocarbon resources are quasi-continuous distribution in Wendong area. The late kerogen pyrolysis gas, light crude oil, medium crude oil, oil-cracked gas and the early kerogen pyrolysis gas are distributed in a semicircle successively, from the center of sub-sag zone to the uplift belt, that is the result of two discontinuous hydrocarbon charging. Among them, the slope zone is dominated by early conventional filling of oil-gas mixture (at the late deposition period of Dongying Formation, about 31–27 Ma ago), while the reservoirs are gradually densified in the late stage without large-scale hydrocarbon charging (since the deposition stage of Minghuazhen Formation, about 6–0 Ma). In contrast, the sub-sag zone is lack of oil reservoirs, but a lot of late kerogen pyrolysis gas reservoirs are enriched, and the reservoir densification and hydrocarbon filling occur in both early and late stages.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-819 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuangfeng Zhao ◽  
Wen Chen ◽  
Zhenhong Wang ◽  
Ting Li ◽  
Hongxing Wei ◽  
...  

The condensate gas reservoirs of the Jurassic Ahe Formation in the Dibei area of the Tarim Basin, northwest China are typical tight sandstone gas reservoirs and contain abundant resources. However, the hydrocarbon sources and reservoir accumulation mechanism remain debated. Here the distribution and geochemistry of fluids in the Ahe gas reservoirs are used to investigate the formation of the hydrocarbon reservoirs, including the history of hydrocarbon generation, trap development, and reservoir evolution. Carbon isotopic analyses show that the oil and natural gas of the Ahe Formation originated from different sources. The natural gas was derived from Jurassic coal measure source rocks, whereas the oil has mixed sources of Lower Triassic lacustrine source rocks and minor amounts of coal-derived oil from Jurassic coal measure source rocks. The geochemistry of light hydrocarbon components and n-alkanes shows that the early accumulated oil was later altered by infilling gas due to gas washing. Consequently, n-alkanes in the oil are scarce, whereas naphthenic and aromatic hydrocarbons with the same carbon numbers are relatively abundant. The fluids in the Ahe Formation gas reservoirs have an unusual distribution, where oil is distributed above gas and water is locally produced from the middle of some gas reservoirs. The geochemical characteristics of the fluids show that this anomalous distribution was closely related to the dynamic accumulation of oil and gas. The period of reservoir densification occurred between the two stages of oil and gas accumulation, which led to the early accumulated oil and part of the residual formation water being trapped in the tight reservoir. After later gas filling into the reservoir, the fluids could not undergo gravity differentiation, which accounts for the anomalous distribution of fluids in the Ahe Formation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (08) ◽  
pp. 63-64
Author(s):  
Chris Carpenter

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper OTC 30732, “Economic Feasibility Study of Several Usage Alternatives for a Stranded Offshore Gas Reservoir,” by Khoi Viet Trinh, SPE, and Rouzbeh G. Moghanloo, SPE, University of Oklahoma, prepared for the 2020 Offshore Technology Conference, originally scheduled to be held in Houston, 4–7 May. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Copyright 2020 Offshore Technology Conference. Reproduced by permission. This paper compares economics of a floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) project with those of an onshore LNG plant and gas-to-wire (GTW) processes. Sensitivity analyses and tornado charts are used to evaluate the importance of various uncertain parameters associated with FLNG construction and operation. This study will be helpful for future considerations in using FLNG to convert offshore gas reservoirs previously considered stranded into economically viable resources. The results from this economic model can play a key role in the future of the natural gas industry and energy market in West Africa. Assumptions Before presenting different economic scenarios, the following assumptions must be established: * The pipeline will have the correct diameter, pressure rating, and metallurgy to transport produced gas. Only the pipe length will be considered a variable. * Operating expenses (OPEX) of both onshore LNG and FLNG will be the same. Realistically, however, OPEX of FLNG will be different from that of onshore LNG. * A subsidy from the Nigerian government has been obtained for the onshore LNG plant. * The electricity price is assumed to be $0.25/kWh. * An assumed upstream cost of $2/Mscf to cover onshore LNG gas pretreatment is assumed. * The onshore LNG plant and FLNG will have the same lifespan. However, in reality, availability of FLNG can be lower than that of onshore LNG. Pricing Models FNLG. Because of the relative recency of FNLG, few pricing models have been readily available. For the complete paper, Shell’s Prelude project is the basis for pricing of FLNG. Prelude costs averaged out to approximately $14 billion, which will be used as the cost of the facility for the FLNG scenario in the economic analysis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document