Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

David W. Houseknecht

Publications and source records attributed to David W. Houseknecht.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2019

Evolution of the Arctic Alaska Sedimentary Basin

The Arctic Alaska basin occupies the eastern part of the Arctic Alaska – Chukotka microplate, which rifted from the Canadian Arctic margin during opening of the Canada Basin. Stratigraphy comprises four tectonostratigraphic sequences. (1) The Devonian and older Franklinian sequence consists of sedimentary and metasedimentary rocks deposited on the Arctic passive margin of Laurentia and in a Devonian foreland basin, and deformed during Caledonian, Romanzof, and Ellesmerian tectonism. (2) The Mississippian – Triassic Ellesmerian sequence was deposited on the Arctic rifted passive margin of Laurentia during and after opening of the Angayucham Ocean basin. Predominant sediment routing was southward in present coordinates. (3) The Jurassic – Lower Cretaceous Beaufortian sequence was deposited during rift-opening of the Canada Basin, and includes graben fill on the rift shoulder and a southward offlapping clastic wedge beneath the Alaska North Slope. (4) The Lower Cretaceous – Cenozoic Brookian sequence was deposited in the Colville foreland basin and on the Beaufort rifted margin during Brooks Range – Chukotkan tectonism. Predominant sediment routing was eastward (longitudinal) in the underfilled foreland basin, and progressively became northward in the overfilled foreland basin and on the rifted margin. The Arctic Alaska basin is a prolific petroleum province from which more than 17 billion barrels of oil have been produced since 1977. The basin hosts the Prudhoe Bay oil field, the largest in North America.

Alaska↗
USGS2019

Petroleum systems framework of significant new oil discoveries in a giant Cretaceous (Aptian–Cenomanian) clinothem in Arctic Alaska

Recent oil discoveries in an Aptian–Cenomanian clinothem in Arctic Alaska demonstrate the potential for hundred-million- to billion-barrel oil accumulations in Nanushuk Formation topsets and Torok Formation foresets–bottomsets. Oil-prone source rocks and the clinothem are draped across the Barrow arch, a structural hinge between the Colville foreland basin and Beaufort Sea rifted margin. Stratigraphic traps lie in a favorable thermal maturity domain along multiple migration pathways across more than 30,000 km 2 (10,000 mi 2 ). Sediment from the Chukotkan orogen (Russia) filled the western Colville basin and spilled over the Beaufort rift shoulder, forming east- and north-facing shelf margins. Progradational shelf-margin trajectories change abruptly to “sawtooth” trajectories at mid-clinothem, the result of reduction in sediment influx. Two stratigraphic trap types are inferred in Nanushuk basal topsets in the eastern part of the clinothem: (1) lowstand systems tracts, inferred to reflect forced regression, include a narrow, thick progradational stacking pattern perched on a sequence boundary on the upper slope; and (2) highstand-progradational systems tracts include a broad, thin wedge of shingled parasequences above a toplap surface. Both include stratigraphically isolated sandstone sealed by mudstone. Trap geometries in Torok foreset and bottomset facies in the same area include basin-floor fan, slope-apron, and slope-channel deposits that pinch out upslope and are sealed by mudstone. Significant potential exists for the discovery of additional oil accumulations in these stratigraphic trap types in the eastern part of the clinothem. Less potential may exist in the western part because reservoir-seal pairs may not be well developed.

American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulle↗
USGS2018

Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic exhumation of the western Brooks Range, Alaska, revealed from apatite and zircon fission track data

We report data for 112 apatite and 31 zircon fission track (AFT and ZFT) outcrop sandstone samples along a transect that spans the western Brooks Range. Sampling targeted structures that modify the Middle Jurassic‐Early Cretaceous early Brookian orogen. The AFT samples record latest Cretaceous to Eocene in situ exhumational cooling and resolve two kinematic phases. The first phase was focused at 65–60 Ma. To the north, cooling age patterns at this time are attributable to wide‐spaced fault‐related folding. Farther south, within the allochthon belt, exhumation was related to uplift of a broad region, likely in the hanging wall of deep‐seated faults that extend into basement rocks. The second kinematic phase occurred around ~45 Ma. It was characterized by north and east directed thrusting to the north, and coeval extension in the allochthon belt to the south. The ZFT cooling ages are all Early Cretaceous or older and put an upper limit on the magnitude of Cenozoic exhumation across the western Brooks Range. Synthesis of exhumation patterns and structural styles show that Paleocene rejuvenation of contraction was roughly contemporaneous along the entire ~1,000‐km orogen. Later, around ~45 Ma in the Eocene, contraction in the frontal parts of the orogen was contemporaneous with extension interior to the orogen. Following previous authors, we suggest that the Paleocene rejuvenation was a far‐field response to subduction of a mid‐ocean ridge in southern Alaska. However, by the Eocene, strain patterns in the western Brooks Range changed, possibly to accommodate rotations of fault blocks in southwestern Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2018

Geology and assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the East Siberian Sea Basin Province, 2008

The East Siberian Sea Basin, which lies beneath the continental shelf east of the New Siberian Islands, is one of the better-known basins in a series of postorogenic (successor) basins in the East Siberian-Chukchi Sea region because of a reconnaissance network of seismic-reflection profiles and outcrops on nearby islands. In spite of the seismic coverage, the basin’s petroleum potential is poorly known. It is considered a separate petroleum province for the purposes of the Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal. The probability that the East Siberian Sea Basin contains at least one undiscovered accumulation >50 million barrels of oil equivalent (MMBOE) is considered to be ~22 percent. A single assessment unit was defined and studied, resulting in mean estimates of technically recoverable conventional undiscovered resources of ~20 million barrels of oil (MMBO) and 580 billion cubic feet of gas (BCFG), nonassociated.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2018

Geology and assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the Long Strait Basin Province, 2008

The Long Strait Basin is both a stand alone petroleum province and an assessment unit (AU) that lies offshore in the East Siberian Sea north of Chukotka and south of Wrangel Island. This basin is known only on the basis of gravity data and a single proprietary seismic line. In the absence of more specific data, its position and regional setting suggest that it may have petroleum geologic characteristics similar to the nearby Hope Basin. Because the geology and petroleum potential of the Long Strait Basin are so poorly known, only a single AU was defined for this study area. An overall probability of ~0.08 (8 percent) of at least one petroleum accumulation larger than 50 million barrels of oil equivalent was determined on the basis of estimated probabilities of the occurrence of petroleum source, adequate reservoir, trap and seal, and favorable timing. Because this probability falls below the 10 percent probability cutoff used in the U.S. Geological Survey’s Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal, no quantitative assessment of sizes and numbers of petroleum accumulations was conducted for this AU.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2018

Geology and assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the Hope Basin Province, 2008

The Hope Basin, an independent petroleum province that lies mostly offshore in the southern Chukchi Sea north of the Chukotka and Seward Peninsulas and south of Wrangel Island, the Herald Arch, and the Lisburne Peninsula, is the largest in a series of postorogenic (successor) basins in the East Siberian-Chukchi Sea region and the only one with exploratory-well control and extensive seismic coverage. In spite of the seismic coverage and well data, the petroleum potential of the Hope Basin Province is poorly known. The adequacy of hydrocarbon charge, in combination with uncertainties in source-rock potential and maturation, was the greatest risk in this assessment. A single assessment unit was defined and assessed, resulting in mean estimates of undiscovered, technically recoverable resources that include ~3 million barrels of oil and 650 billion cubic feet of nonassociated gas.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2017

Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Cretaceous Nanushuk and Torok Formations, Alaska North Slope, and summary of resource potential of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, 2017

The U.S. Geological Survey estimated mean undiscovered, technically recoverable resources of 8.7 billion barrels of oil and 25 trillion cubic feet of natural gas (associated and nonassociated) in conventional accumulations in the Cretaceous Nanushuk and Torok Formations in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, adjacent State and Native lands, and State waters. The estimated undiscovered oil resources in the Nanushuk and Torok Formations are significantly higher than previous estimates, owing primarily to recent, larger than anticipated oil discoveries.

Alaska↗
USGS2017

Geology and assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the Chukchi Borderland Province, 2008

The Chukchi Borderland is both a stand-alone petroleum province and assessment unit (AU) that lies north of the Chukchi Sea. It is a bathymetrically high-standing block of continental crust that was probably rifted from the Canadian continental margin. The sum of our knowledge of this province is based upon geophysical data (seismic, gravity, and magnetic) and a limited number of seafloor core and dredge samples. As expected from the limited data set, the basin’s petroleum potential is poorly known. A single assessment unit, the Chukchi Borderland AU, was defined and assigned an overall probability of about a 5 percent chance of at least one petroleum accumulation >50 million barrels of oil equivalent (MMBOE). No quantitative assessment of sizes and numbers of petroleum accumulations was conducted for this AU.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2017

Significance of northeast-trending features in Canada Basin, Arctic Ocean

Synthesis of seismic velocity, potential field, and geological data from Canada Basin and its surrounding continental margins suggests that a northeast-trending structural fabric has influenced the origin, evolution, and current tectonics of the basin. This structural fabric has a crustal origin, based on the persistence of these trends in upward continuation of total magnetic intensity data and vertical derivative analysis of free-air gravity data. Three subparallel northeast-trending features are described. Northwind Escarpment, bounding the east side of the Chukchi Borderland, extends ∼600 km and separates continental crust of Northwind Ridge from high-velocity transitional crust in Canada Basin. A second, shorter northeast-trending zone extends ∼300 km in northern Canada Basin and separates inferred continental crust of Sever Spur from magmatically intruded crust of the High Arctic Large Igneous Province. A third northeast-trending feature, here called the Alaska-Prince Patrick magnetic lineament (APPL) is inferred from magnetic data and its larger regional geologic setting. Analysis of these three features suggests strike slip or transtensional deformation played a role in the opening of Canada Basin. These features can be explained by initial Jurassic-Early Cretaceous strike slip deformation (phase 1) followed in the Early Cretaceous (∼134 to ∼124 Ma) by rotation of Arctic Alaska with seafloor spreading orthogonal to the fossil spreading axis preserved in the central Canada Basin (phase 2). In this model, the Chukchi Borderland is part of Arctic Alaska.

Alaska, Northwest Territories, Yukon Territory↗
USGS2016

Pre-Mississippian tectonic affinity across the Canada Basin–Arctic margins of Alaska and Canada

New and reprocessed seismic reflection data on the Alaskan and Canadian Arctic margins of the Canada Basin, together with geologic constraints from exploration wells and outcrops, reveal structural and stratigraphic relationships in pre-Mississippian rocks that constrain models of Canada Basin opening. Lithostratigraphic age and acoustic character indicate that the Devonian and older passive-margin to foreland-basin succession in the Canadian M’Clure Strait is also found on the central Alaska margin. This succession also displays similar structural geometry and relief as well as deformational age on both margins. Moreover, Middle Devonian to Early Mississippian tectonic vergence—north directed on the central Alaska margin and east directed in the Canadian M’Clure Strait—indicates a common direction of tectonic transport if the two margins were conjugate. All of these observations demonstrate that pre-Mississippian rocks of the Alaskan and Canadian Arctic margins share a common tectonic history of uplift and exhumation and that the two margins were conjugates prior to opening of the Canada Basin.

Alaska↗
USGS2016

Upper Cretaceous and Lower Jurassic strata in shallow cores on the Chukchi Shelf, Arctic Alaska

Shallow cores collected in the 1980s on the Chukchi Shelf of western Arctic Alaska sampled pre-Cenozoic strata whose presence, age, and character are poorly known across the region. Five cores from the Herald Arch foreland contain Cenomanian to Coniacian strata, as documented by biostratigraphy, geochronology, and thermochronology. Shallow seismic reflection data collected during the 1970s and 1980s show that these Upper Cretaceous strata are truncated near the seafloor by subtle angular unconformities, including the Paleogene mid-Brookian unconformity in one core and the Pliocene-Pleistocene unconformity in four cores. Sedimentary structures and lithofacies suggest that Upper Cretaceous strata were deposited in a low accommodation setting that ranged from low-lying coastal plain (nonmarine) to muddy, shallow-marine environments near shore. These observations, together with sparse evidence from the adjacent western North Slope, suggest that Upper Cretaceous strata likely were deposited across all of Arctic Alaska. A sixth core from the Herald Arch contains lower Toarcian marine strata, indicated by biostratigraphy, truncated by a Neogene or younger unconformity. These Lower Jurassic strata evidently were deposited south of the arch, buried structurally to high levels of thermal maturity during the Early Cretaceous, and uplifted on the Herald thrust-fault system during the mid to Late Cretaceous. These interpretations are based on regional stratigraphy and apatite fission-track data reported in a complementary report and are corroborated by the presence of recycled palynomorphs of Early Jurassic age and high thermal maturity found in Upper Cretaceous strata in two of the foreland cores. This dataset provides evidence that uplift and exhumation of the Herald thrust belt provided sediment to the foreland during the Late Cretaceous.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2016

Modified method for estimating petroleum source-rock potential using wireline logs, with application to the Kingak Shale, Alaska North Slope

In 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey completed an assessment of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in three source rocks of the Alaska North Slope, including the lower part of the Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous Kingak Shale. In order to identify organic shale potential in the absence of a robust geochemical dataset from the lower Kingak Shale, we introduce two quantitative parameters, $\Delta DT_\bar{x}$ and $\Delta DT_z$, estimated from wireline logs from exploration wells and based in part on the commonly used delta-log resistivity ($\Delta \text{ }log\text{ }R$) technique. Calculation of $\Delta DT_\bar{x}$ and $\Delta DT_z$ is intended to produce objective parameters that may be proportional to the quality and volume, respectively, of potential source rocks penetrated by a well and can be used as mapping parameters to convey the spatial distribution of source-rock potential. Both the $\Delta DT_\bar{x}$ and $\Delta DT_z$ mapping parameters show increased source-rock potential from north to south across the North Slope, with the largest values at the toe of clinoforms in the lower Kingak Shale. Because thermal maturity is not considered in the calculation of $\Delta DT_\bar{x}$ or $\Delta DT_z$, total organic carbon values for individual wells cannot be calculated on the basis of $\Delta DT_\bar{x}$ or $\Delta DT_z$ alone. Therefore, the $\Delta DT_\bar{x}$ and $\Delta DT_z$ mapping parameters should be viewed as first-step reconnaissance tools for identifying source-rock potential.

Alaska↗
USGS2016

Cretaceous–Cenozoic burial and exhumation history of the Chukchi shelf, offshore Arctic Alaska

Apatite fission track (AFT) and vitrinite reflectance data from five exploration wells and three seafloor cores illuminate the thermal history of the underexplored United States Chukchi shelf. On the northeastern shelf, Triassic strata in the Chevron 1 Diamond well record apatite annealing followed by cooling, possibly during the Triassic to Middle Jurassic, which is a thermal history likely related to Canada Basin rifting. Jurassic strata exhumed in the hanging wall of the frontal Herald Arch thrust fault record a history of probable Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous structural burial in the Chukotka fold and thrust belt, followed by rapid exhumation to near-surface temperatures at 104 ± 30 Ma. This history of contractional tectonism is in good agreement with inherited fission track ages in low-thermal-maturity, Cretaceous–Cenozoic strata in the Chukchi foreland, providing complementary evidence for the timing of exhumation and suggesting a source-to-sink relationship. In the central Chukchi foreland, inverse modeling of reset AFT samples from the Shell 1 Klondike and Shell 1 Crackerjack wells reveals several tens of degrees of cooling from maximum paleo-temperatures, with maximum heating permissible at any time from about 100 to 50 Ma, and cooling persisting to as recent as 30 Ma. Similar histories are compatible with partially reset AFT samples from other Chukchi wells (Shell 1 Popcorn, Shell 1 Burger, and Chevron 1 Diamond) and are probable in light of regional geologic evidence. Given geologic context provided by regional seismic reflection data, we interpret these inverse models to reveal a Late Cretaceous episode of cyclical burial and erosion across the central Chukchi shelf, possibly partially overprinted by Cenozoic cooling related to decreasing surface temperatures. Regionally, we interpret this kinematic history to be reflective of moderate, transpressional deformation of the Chukchi shelf during the final phases of contractional tectonism in the Chukotkan orogen (lasting until ∼70 Ma), followed by renewed subsidence of the Chukchi shelf in the latest Cretaceous and Cenozoic. This history maintained modest thermal maturities at the base of the Brookian sequence across the Chukchi shelf, because large sediment volumes bypassed to adjacent depocenters. Therefore, the Chukchi shelf appears to be an area with the potential for widespread preservation of petroleum systems in the oil window.

AAPG Bulletin↗
USGS2015

Shale-gas assessment: Comparison of gas-in-place versus performance-based approaches

The recent interest in exploration for shale gas increases the demand for a reliable, compatible resource assessment. Many different assessment methods are used, commonly depending on types and quantity of data available, which may lead to significantly divergent results for the same shale-gas play. This study compares results obtained using performance-based and gas-in-place methodologies to assess a well-developed and active shale-gas play (Woodford Shale, Arkoma Basin, USA) and two untested, hypothetical shale-gas plays (Shublik and Brookian, Alaska North Slope, USA). Results show that the two assessment methods produce comparable results when assessment units are identically defined and similar geological constraints are used as input parameters. Inherent uncertainties are associated with both assessment methods, and these are related to aspects of shale-gas production that are not well understood. The performance-based method relies on decline trend analysis to generate distributions of estimated ultimate recovery (EUR), and uncertainty increases in cases of short production history. The gas-in-place method requires the application of a recovery factor to estimate technically recoverable resources, and both absolute values of recovery factors and their spatial variability are poorly documented, and therefore a source of uncertainty.

Natural Resources Research↗
USGS2015

Late Jurassic – early Cretaceous inversion of rift structures, and linkage of petroleum system elements across post-rift unconformity, U.S. Chukchi Shelf, arctic Alaska

Basin evolution of the U.S. Chukchi shelf involved multiple phases, including Late Devonian–Permian rifting, Permian–Early Jurassic sagging, Late Jurassic–Neocomian inversion, and Cretaceous–Cenozoic foreland-basin development. The focus of ongoing exploration is a petroleum system that includes sag-phase source rocks; inversion-phase reservoir rocks; structure spanning the rift, sag, and inversion phases; and hydrocarbon generation during the foreland-basin phase. Interpretation of 2-D seismic and sparse well data documents the presence, in the south-central part of the shelf, of a series of en-echelon, north-south trending monoclonal fold limbs that display up to 1+ km (3,300 ft) of structural relief. These folds, which are located above the tips of rift-phase normal faults, are interpreted as inversion structures formed by maximum compressive stress oriented obliquely to the strike of rift-phase normal faults. Erosional relief on a Jurassic unconformity, growth strata in the overlying Upper Jurassic to Neocomian strata, and east-dipping clinoforms in a high accommodation depocenter east of the inversion structures indicate profound structural influence on sedimentation. Oil-prone source rocks, reservoir-quality sandstone, migration pathways, and structural closure are linked intimately across the Jurassic unconformity, which reflects inversion. Thus, all these key petroleum systems elements were in place when Triassic source rocks entered the oil generation window during Cretaceous–Cenozoic stratigraphic burial.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2014

Upper Devonian–Mississippian stratigraphic framework of the Arkoma Basin and distribution of potential source-rock facies in the Woodford–Chattanooga and Fayetteville–Caney shale-gas systems

Wireline logs were used to document the stratigraphic framework of Upper Devonian–Mississippian strata in the Arkoma Basin, and maps of high-gamma ray (HGR) log response were used to analyze the spatial distribution of potential source rocks in the Woodford–Chattanooga and Fayetteville–Caney shale-gas systems. The Woodford–Chattanooga shale is a transgressive deposit that accumulated on an arid continental margin influenced by marine upwelling and minimal sediment influx. A broad HGR depocenter along the southwestern margin of the basin includes two areas of higher accommodation containing the thickest HGR concentrations. Basin-wide patterns of HGR likely reflect broad tectonic influence on accommodation. The proportion of chert in the formation increases eastward and southward, likely reflecting latitudinal and bathymetric influence on the accumulation of siliceous ooze. The Lower Mississippian Burlington sequence, which lies between the two shale-gas systems, comprises carbonate ramp and distal shale deposits. Proximal ramp facies form an apron around the southern flank of the Ozark uplift and grade radially basinward into distal facies. An Upper Mississippian succession in the east includes lowstand deposits of the Batesville delta, which onlap the relict Burlington ramp. Basinwide, the succession includes the transgressive Fayetteville–Caney shale overlain by regressive deposits of the proximal Pitkin Limestone and distal upper Fayetteville (Arkansas) and “false” Caney (Oklahoma) shale. The HGR shale is concentrated in an area of intermediate accommodation on the western margin of the Mississippi Embayment and just basinward of the Pitkin Limestone pinchout in Arkansas, and in an area of relatively high accommodation in Oklahoma.

Arkansas, Oklahoma↗
USGS2014

National Assessment of Oil and Gas Project: geologic assessment of undiscovered gas hydrate resources on the North Slope, Alaska

Scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey have completed the first assessment of the undiscovered, technically recoverable gas hydrate resources beneath the North Slope of Alaska. This assessment indicates the existence of technically recoverable gas hydrate resources—that is, resources that can be discovered, developed, and produced using current technology. The approach used in this assessment followed standard geology-based USGS methodologies developed to assess conventional oil and gas resources. In order to use the USGS conventional assessment approach on gas hydrate resources, three-dimensional industry-acquired seismic data were analyzed. The analyses indicated that the gas hydrates on the North Slope occupy limited, discrete volumes of rock bounded by faults and downdip water contacts. This assessment approach also assumes that the resource can be produced by existing conventional technology, on the basis of limited field testing and numerical production models of gas hydrate-bearing reservoirs. The area assessed in northern Alaska extends from the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska on the west through the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on the east and from the Brooks Range northward to the State-Federal offshore boundary (located 3 miles north of the coastline). This area consists mostly of Federal, State, and Native lands covering 55,894 square miles. Using the standard geology-based assessment methodology, the USGS estimated that the total undiscovered technically recoverable natural-gas resources in gas hydrates in northern Alaska range between 25.2 and 157.8 trillion cubic feet, representing 95 percent and 5 percent probabilities of greater than these amounts, respectively, with a mean estimate of 85.4 trillion cubic feet.

Alaska↗