Exploring basin-scale relations and unsupervised classification to quantify and automate the definition of assessment units in USGS continuous oil and gas resource assessments

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assesses potential for undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in priority geologic provinces and quantifies resource volume estimates within subdivisions called assessment units (AUs). AU boundaries are defined by USGS geologists using quantitative and qualitative geologic information. Variables contained in IHS Markit’s well and production databases can quantify and/or function as proxies for many of the qualitative, boundary-defining variables. This research explores a new approach to determine AU boundaries and the potential to automate their definition, using data analytics and machine learning algorithms on key, qualitative variables within the IHS Markit databases. Well and production data from the U.S. onshore Gulf Coast region for the Upper Cretaceous Eagle Ford Group and Austin Chalk are used in this analysis because each is relatively geologically uniform in Texas and both have recently been assessed by the USGS. The Eagle Ford is an example of an in situ continuous oil and gas accumulation, and the overlying Austin Chalk is an example of a combined conventional and continuous resource, sourced from the underlying Eagle Ford. Wellspecific values were extracted or calculated from data in IHS Markit’s well and production databases for depth to top and base of the formations, formation thickness, bottom-hole temperature, temperature gradient, temperature at base of formation, cumulative oil and gas production values, barrels of oil equivalent, oil and gas gravities, mud weights from initial well test, depth pressure ratio, and excess pressure. A raster for each variable was interpolated using the natural neighbor technique from the spatial analyst toolbox in ArcGIS. Rasters were then transformed using minimum-maximum scaling, which rescales the distribution to the range of 0–1. Clustering was completed using the iso cluster unsupervised classification tool on the normalized rasters. Raster cell groupings from two to ten were explored, with initial results demonstrating that four to six classes return the most differentiable groups, with depth to formation, oil gravity, pressure, and temperature variables containing the greatest between-group differences. Modeled clusters have spatial similarities to the geologically defined AUs, with indication that temperature and pressure are the most fundamental to AU definition. Input from geologists will remain crucial for further dividing clusters and defining final AUs, since AUs are defined by both qualitative and quantitative information; however, this research documents promising cluster modeling results for the automation of initial AU definitions.