Geology topics
Publications and source records attributed to Marc L. Buursink.
Using a geology-based assessment methodology, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated mean undiscovered, technically recoverable conventional resources of 100 million barrels of oil and 16.5 trillion cubic feet of gas in the downdip Paleogene formations in onshore lands and State waters of the U.S. Gulf Coast region.
The U.S. Geological Survey has completed an assessment of the potential geologic carbon dioxide storage resources in the onshore areas of the United States. To provide geological context and input data sources for the resources numbers, framework documents are being prepared for all areas that were investigated as part of the national assessment. This report, chapter M, is the geologic framework document for the Uinta and Piceance, San Juan, Paradox, Raton, Eastern Great, and Black Mesa Basins, and subbasins therein of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah. In addition to a summary of the geology and petroleum resources of studied basins, the individual storage assessment units (SAUs) within the basins are described and explanations for their selection are presented. Although appendixes in the national assessment publications include the input values used to calculate the available storage resource, this framework document provides only the context and source of the input values selected by the assessment geologists. Spatial-data files of the boundaries for the SAUs, and the well-penetration density of known well bores that penetrate the SAU seal, are available for download with the release of this report.
Following the geologic basin-scale assessment of technically accessible carbon dioxide storage resources in onshore areas and State waters of the United States, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that an area of about 130 million acres (or about 200,000 square miles) of Federal lands overlies these storage resources. Consequently, about 18 percent of the assessed area associated with storage resources is allocated to Federal land management. Assessed areas are allocated to four other general land-ownership categories as follows: State lands about 4.5 percent, Tribal lands about 2.4 percent, private and other lands about 72 percent, and offshore areas about 2.6 percent.
The geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage resource size is a function of the density of CO 2 in the subsurface. The pressure and temperature of the storage reservoir at depth affect the CO 2 density. Therefore, knowing these subsurface conditions allows for improved resource estimates of potential geologic CO 2 storage capacity. In 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) completed an assessment of geologic CO 2 storage resources for large sedimentary basins in onshore and State waters areas of the U.S. Evaluating the subsurface conditions and CO 2 density in these basins was integral to the assessment. To better understand these conditions, investigations of pressure and temperature gradients, typically derived from borehole data and analog studies, were assembled at the basin scale. Based on the USGS assessment results and findings here, changes in subsurface pressure and temperature may yield density changes up to 40 percent, which may translate into significant changes in storage resource estimates.
The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (Public Law 110–140) directs the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct a national assessment of potential geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO2). The methodology used by the USGS for the national CO2 assessment follows up on previous USGS work. The methodology is non-economic and intended to be used at regional to subbasinal scales. This report identifies and contains geologic descriptions of 14 storage assessment units (SAUs) in Ordovician to Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks within the Greater Green River Basin (GGRB) of Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah, and eight SAUs in Ordovician to Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks within the Wyoming-Idaho-Utah Thrust Belt (WIUTB). The GGRB and WIUTB are contiguous with nearly identical geologic units; however, the GGRB is larger in size, whereas the WIUTB is more structurally complex. This report focuses on the characteristics, specified in the methodology, that influence the potential CO2 storage resource in the SAUs. Specific descriptions of the SAU boundaries, as well as their sealing and reservoir units, are included. Properties for each SAU, such as depth to top, gross thickness, porosity, permeability, groundwater quality, and structural reservoir traps, are typically provided to illustrate geologic factors critical to the assessment. This geologic information was employed, as specified in the USGS methodology, to calculate a probabilistic distribution of potential storage resources in each SAU. Figures in this report show SAU boundaries and cell maps of well penetrations through sealing units into the top of the storage formations. The cell maps show the number of penetrating wells within one square mile and are derived from interpretations of variably attributed well data and a digital compilation that is known not to include all drilling.
This report presents 27 storage assessment units (SAUs) within the United States (U.S.) Gulf Coast. The U.S. Gulf Coast contains a regionally extensive, thick succession of clastics, carbonates, salts, and other evaporites that were deposited in a highly cyclic depositional environment that was subjected to a fluctuating siliciclastic sediment supply and transgressive and regressive sea levels. At least nine major depositional packages contain porous strata that are potentially suitable for geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) sequestration within the region. For each SAU identified within these packages, the areal distribution of porous rock that is suitable for geologic CO 2 sequestration is discussed, along with a description of the geologic characteristics that influence the potential CO 2 storage volume and reservoir performance. These characteristics include reservoir depth, gross thickness, net-porous thickness, porosity, permeability, and groundwater salinity. Additionally, a characterization of the overlying regional seal for each SAU is presented. On a case-by-case basis, strategies for estimating the pore volume existing within structurally and (or) stratigraphically closed traps are also presented. Geologic information presented in this report has been employed to calculate potential storage capacities for CO 2 sequestration in the SAUs that are assessed herein, although complete assessment results are not contained in this report.
This report presents fourteen storage assessment units (SAUs) from the Alaska North Slope and two SAUs from the Kandik Basin of Alaska. The Alaska North Slope is a broad, north-dipping coastal plain that is underlain by a thick succession of sedimentary rocks that accumulated steadily throughout much of the Phanerozoic during three major tectonic sequences: the Mississippian through Triassic Ellesmerian sequence, the Jurassic through Lower Cretaceous Beaufortian sequence, and the Cretaceous and Tertiary Brookian sequence. Stratigraphic packages associated with all three of these tectonic sequences are suited to geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) sequestration. The lower part of the Ellesmerian sequence contains five potential SAUs, two of which have reservoirs within the Endicott Group and three of which have reservoirs within the Lisburne Group. Another potential SAU has sandstone-prone reservoir units interbedded with the upper part of the Ellesmerian Shublik Formation and the Beaufortian Kingak Shale. The Brookian sequence contains eight potential SAUs that have reservoirs that are defined by the various Cretaceous and Tertiary deltaic topset strata of the Colville foreland basin as well as associated slope aprons and submarine turbidite fan complexes. In east-central Alaska, Kandik Basin is an extension of cratonic North America and straddles the border between Alaska and Canada. The basin contains a section of Neoproterozoic to Mesozoic rocks, which have been multiply deformed during the Phanerozoic. Paleozoic strata within the basin appear to be suited to geologic CO 2 sequestration. We defined two SAUs within this interval, which are the Upper Devonian and Mississippian Nation River Formation SAU and the Lower Permian to Lower Cretaceous Step Conglomerate and Tahkandit Limestone SAU. For each SAU in both of the basins, we discuss the areal distribution of suitable CO 2 sequestration reservoir rock. We also characterize the overlying sealing unit and describe the geologic characteristics that influence the potential CO 2 storage volume and reservoir performance. These characteristics include reservoir depth, gross thickness, net thickness, porosity, permeability, and groundwater salinity. Case-by-case strategies for estimating the pore volume existing within structurally and (or) stratigraphically closed traps are presented. Although assessment results are not contained in this report, the geologic information included herein was employed to calculate the potential storage volume in the various SAUs. Lastly, in this report, we present the rationale for not conducting assessment work in fifteen sedimentary basins distributed across the Alaskan interior and within Alaskan State waters.
The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act directs the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct a national assessment of potential geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). The methodology used by the USGS for the national CO 2 assessment follows that of previous USGS work. This methodology is non-economic and is intended to be used at regional to sub-basinal scales. The Williston Basin of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana, along with the Central Montana Basins and Montana Thrust Belt study areas are adjacent and share similar geologic units. In general, the Williston Basin study area is a wide sedimentary basin, whereas the Central Montana Basins study area contains sedimentary rocks along topographic highs and flat plains, and the Montana Thrust Belt study area is more structurally complex. This report identifies and contains geologic descriptions of nine storage assessment units (SAUs) in Cambrian to Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks within the Williston Basin study area. The Central Montana Basins and Montana Thrust Belt study areas were also investigated for this report. Nevertheless, no SAUs in these study areas were assessed because they contained potential sources of underground drinking water; although sufficient geologic data were available, and suitable storage formations meeting our size, depth, reservoir quality, and regional seal guidelines were found. Ultimately, the report focuses on the characteristics, specified in the methodology, that influence the potential CO 2 storage resource in the SAUs. Specific descriptions of the SAU boundaries as well as their sealing and reservoir units are included. Properties for each SAU, such as depth to top, gross thickness, porosity, permeability, groundwater quality, and structural reservoir traps, are usually provided to illustrate geologic factors critical to the assessment. The geologic information herein was employed, as specified in the USGS methodology, to calculate a probabilistic distribution of potential storage resources in each SAU with these assessment outputs contained in a companion results report. Figures in this report show the study area boundaries along with the SAU extent and cell maps of well penetrations through sealing units into the top of the storage formations. The USGS does not necessarily know the location of all wells and cannot guarantee the full extent of drilling through specific formations in any given cell shown on the cell maps.
2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (Public Law 110–140) directs the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct a national assessment of potential geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). The methodology used by the USGS for the national CO 2 assessment follows that of previous USGS work. This methodology is non-economic and intended to be used at regional to subbasinal scales. This report identifies and contains geologic descriptions of three storage assessment units (SAUs) in Upper Cambrian to Mississippian sedimentary rocks within the Arkoma Basin study area, and two SAUs in Upper Cambrian to Mississippian sedimentary rocks within the Kansas Basins study area. The Arkoma Basin and Kansas Basins are adjacent with very similar geologic units; although the Kansas Basins area is larger, the Arkoma Basin is more structurally complex. The report focuses on the characteristics, specified in the methodology, that influence the potential CO 2 storage resource in the SAUs. Specific descriptions of the SAU boundaries as well as their sealing and reservoir units are included. Properties for each SAU, such as depth to top, gross thickness, porosity, permeability, groundwater quality, and structural reservoir traps, are usually provided to illustrate geologic factors critical to the assessment. Although assessment results are not contained in this report, the geologic information herein was employed, as specified in the USGS methodology, to calculate a probabilistic distribution of potential storage resources in each SAU. The Midcontinent Rift Basin study area was not assessed, because no suitable storage formations meeting our size, depth, reservoir quality, and regional seal guidelines were found. Figures in this report show study area boundaries along with the SAU boundaries and cell maps of well penetrations through sealing units into the top of the storage formations. The cell maps show the number of penetrating wells within one-square mile and are derived from interpretations of incompletely attributed well data and from a digital compilation that is known not to include all drilling. The USGS does not expect to know the location of all wells and cannot guarantee the amount of drilling through specific formations in any given cell shown on the cell maps.
In response to the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a national assessment of potential geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO2). Storage of CO2 in subsurface saline formations is one important method to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and curb global climate change. This report provides updates and implementation details of the assessment methodology of Brennan and others (2010, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1127/) and describes the probabilistic model used to calculate potential storage resources in subsurface saline formations.
No abstract available.
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) operates a network of about 7,000 streamflow-gaging stations that monitor open-channel water discharge at locations throughout the United States. The expense, technical difficulties, and concern for the safety of operational personnel under some field conditions have led to the search for alternate measurement methods. Ground- penetrating radar (GPR) has been used by the USGS in hydrologic, geologic, environmental, and bridge-scour studies by floating antennas on water or mounting antennas in boats. GPR methods were developed to measure and monitor remotely the cross-sectional area of rivers by suspending a 100-megahertz (MHz) radar antenna from a cableway car or bridge at four unstable streams that drained the slopes of Mount St. Helens in Washington. Based on the success of these initial efforts, an experiment was conducted in 1999 to see if a combination of complementary radar methods could be used to calculate the discharge of a river without having any of the measuring equipment in the water. The cross-sectional area of the 183- meter (m) wide Skagit River in Washington State was measured using a GPR system with a single 100-MHz antenna suspended 0.5 to 3 m above the water surface from a cableway car. A van- mounted, side-looking pulsed-Doppler (10 gigahertz) radar system was used to collect water-surface velocity data across the same section of the river. The combined radar data sets were used to calculate the river discharge and the results compared closely to the discharge measurement made by using the standard in-water measurement techniques. The depth to the river bottom, which was determined from the GPR data by using a radar velocity of 0.04 meters per nanosecond in water, was about 3 m, which was within 0.25 m of the manually measured values.