Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Cretaceous Research”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

220 records · Page 13Linked to original sources
USGS2006

Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia

Although reserve (or field) growth has proven to be an important factor contributing to new reserves in mature petroleum basins, it is still a poorly understood phenomenon. Limited studies show that the magnitude of reserve growth is controlled by several major factors, including (1) the reserve booking and reporting requirements in each country, (2) improvements in reservoir characterization and simulation, (3) application of enhanced oil recovery techniques, and (4) the discovery of new and extensions of known pools in discovered fields. Various combinations of these factors can affect the estimates of proven reserves in particular fields and may dictate repeated estimations of reserves during a field's life. This study explores the reserve growth in the 42 largest oil fields in the West Siberian Basin, which contain about 55 percent of the basin's total oil reserves. The West Siberian Basin occupies a vast swampy plain between the Ural Mountains and the Yenisey River, and extends offshore into the Kara Sea; it is the richest petroleum province in Russia. About 600 oil and gas fields with original reserves of 144 billion barrels of oil (BBO) and more than 1,200 trillion cubic feet of gas (TCFG) have been discovered. The principal oil reserves and most of the oil fields are in the southern half of the basin, whereas the northern half contains mainly gas reserves. Sedimentary strata in the basin consist of Upper Triassic through Tertiary clastic rocks. Most oil is produced from Neocomian (Lower Cretaceous) marine to deltaic sandstone reservoirs, although substantial oil reserves are also in the marine Upper Jurassic and continental to paralic Lower to Middle Jurassic sequences. The majority of oil fields are in structural traps, which are gentle, platform-type anticlines with closures ranging from several tens of meters to as much as 150 meters (490 feet). Fields producing from stratigraphic traps are generally smaller except for the giant Talin field which contains oil in Jurassic river-valley sandstones. Principal source rocks are organic-rich marine shales of the Volgian (uppermost Jurassic) Bazhenov Formation, which is 30-50 m (98- 164 feet) thick. Bazhenov-derived oils are mostly of medium gravity, and contain 0.8-1.3 percent sulfur and 2-5 percent paraffin. Oils in the Lower to Middle Jurassic clastics were sourced from lacustrine and estuarine shales of the Toarcian Togur Bed. These oils are medium to low gravity, with low sulfur (less than 0.25 percent) and high paraffin (commonly to 10 percent) contents. Among the 42 fields analyzed for reserve growth, 30 fields are located in the Middle Ob region, which includes the Samotlor field with reserves of more than 25 BBO and the Fedorov field with reserves of about 5 BBO. Data used in the study include year of discovery, year of first production, annual and cumulative production, and remaining reserves reported by Russian reserve categories (A+B+C1 and C2) in January of each year. Correlation of these Russian resource categories to U.S. categories of the Society of Petroleum Engineers classification is complex and somewhat uncertain. Reserve growth in oil fields of West Siberia was calculated using a newly developed Group Growth method, which requires that the total reserve (proven reserve plus cumulative production) of individual fields with an equal length of reserve record be added together starting with discovery year or the first production year. Then the annual growth factor (AGF), which is the ratio of total reserves of two consecutive years, is calculated for all years. Once AGFs have been calculated, the cumulative growth factor (CGF) is calculated by multiplying the AGFs of all the previous years. The CGF data are used to develop reserve growth models. The West Siberian oil fields show a 13-fold reserve growth 20 years after the discovery year and only about a 2-fold growth after the first production year. This difference is attributed to extensive exploration and field delineation activities between the discovery and the first production years. Because of uncertainty in the length of evaluation time and in reported reserves during this initial period, reserve growth based on the first production year is more reliable for model development. However, reserve growth models based both on discovery year and first production year show rapid growth in the first few years and slower growth in the following years. In contrast, the reserve growth patterns for the conterminous United States and offshore Gulf of Mexico show a steady reserve increase throughout the productive lives of the fields. The different reserve booking requirements and the lack of capital investment for improved reservoir management and production technologies in West Siberian fields relative to U.S. fields are the probable causes for the difference in growth patterns. Reserve growth models based on the first production year predict that the reserve growth potential in the 42 largest oil fields of West Siberia over a five-year period (1998-2003) ranges from 270-330 million barrels or 0.34-0.42 percent per year. For a similar five-year period (1996-2001), models for the conterminous United States predict a growth of 0.54-0.75 percent per year. This abstract presents the contents of a poster prepared for the AAPG Hedberg Research Conference on Understanding World Oil Resources, November 12-17, 2006 - Colorado Springs, Colorado. A paper 'Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia' was published in Natural Resources Research, v. 12, no. 2, June, 2003.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1991

Fluid inclusions and preliminary studies of hydrothermal alteration in core hole PLTG-1, Platanares geothermal area, Honduras

The Platanares geothermal area in western Honduras consists of more than 100 hot springs that issue from numerous hot-spring groups along the banks or within the streambed of the Quebrada de Agua Caliente (brook of hot water). Evaluation of this geothermal area included drilling a 650-m deep PLTG-1 drill hole which penetrated a surface mantling of stream terrace deposits, about 550 m of Tertiary andesitic lava flows, and Cretaceous to lower Tertiary sedimentary rocks in the lower 90 m of the drill core. Fractures and cavities in the drill core are partly to completely filled by hydrothermal minerals that include quartz, kaolinite, mixed-layer illite-smectite, barite, fluorite, chlorite, calcite, laumontite, biotite, hematite, marcasite, pyrite, arsenopyrite, stibnite, and sphalerite; the most common open-space fillings are calcite and quartz. Biotite from 138.9-m depth, dated at 37.41 Ma by replicate 40Ar/39 Ar analyses using a continuous laser system, is the earliest hydrothermal mineral deposited in the PLTG-1 drill core. This mid-Tertiary age indicates that at least some of the hydrothermal alteration encountered in the PLTG-1 drill core occurred in the distant past and is unrelated to the present geothermal system. Furthermore, homogenization temperatures (Th) and melting-point temperatures (Tm) for fluid inclusions in two of the later-formed hydrothermal minerals, calcite and barite, suggest that the temperatures and concentration of dissolved solids of the fluids present at the time these fluid inclusions formed were very different from the present temperatures and fluid chemistry measured in the drill hole. Liquid-rich secondary fluid inclusions in barite and caicite from drill hole PLTG-1 have Th values that range from about 20??C less than the present measured temperature curve at 590.1-m depth to as much as 90??C higher than the temperature curve at 46.75-m depth. Many of the barite Th measurements (ranging between 114?? and 265??C) plot above the reference surface boiling-point curve for pure water assuming hydrostatic conditions; however, the absence of evidence for boiling in the fluid inclusions indicates that at the time the minerals formed, the ground surface must have been at least 80 m higher than at present and underwent stream erosion to the current elevation. Near-surface mixed-layer illite-smectite is closely associated with barite and appears to have formed at about the same temperature range (about 120?? to 200??C) as the fluid-inclusion Th values for barite. Fluid-inclusion Th values for calcite range between about 136?? and 213??C. Several of the calcite Th values are significantly lower than the present measured temperature curve. The melting-point temperatures (Tm) of fluid-inclusion ice yield calculated salinities, ranging from near zero to as much as 5.4 wt. % NaCl equivalent, which suggest that much of the barite and calcite precipitated from fluids of significantly greater salinity than the present low salinity Platanares hot-spring water or water produced from the drill hole.

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research↗
USGS2012

The timing of uplift, volcanism, and rifting peripheral to the Red Sea: A case for passive rifting?

Prior to the formation of the Red Sea the northeastern Afro/Arabian continent had low relief and was largely below sea level from the Late Cretaceous to the early Oligocene. The events leading to the formation of the Red Sea followed the sequence (1) alkaline volcanism and rifting beginning about 30–32 Ma affecting a narrow linear zone in the continent, (2) rotational block faulting and detachment faulting, well underway by 25 Ma, (3) gabbro and diorite magmatism, andesite to rhyolite volcanism, and fine-grained nonmarine sedimentation in the rift between 20 and 25 Ma, (4) fine-grained marine sedimentation in the rift as the early shelves started to subside in the middle Miocene, and (5) uplift of the adjacent continents (about 3 km) and subsidence of the shelves (about 4 km) between 13.8 and 5 Ma. The youth of the uplift is suggested by 44 fission track dates on apatites from rocks of the Proterozoic Arabian Shield that range in age from 13.8 to 568 Ma. The youngest of these ages, coupled with the present high relief along the Arabian escarpment and published heat flow measurements, indicate that 2.5–4 km uplift has occurred in the last 13.8 m.y. The sequence volcanism/rifting followed by uplift leads to our adoption of a passive mantle model for rift origin. Models that require uplift to create the rift are rejected, because of the late uplift. We advocate a model of lithospheric extension caused by two-dimensional plate stress over those requiring tractional drag at the base of the lithosphere caused by vigorous flow in the asthenosphere. It is acknowledged that traction models could explain the observed data, but they imply a rigid, static lithosphere and seem to require a link between the direction of flow in the asthenosphere and plate motions. Neither requirement is necessary in the extension model. The rift starts with mechanical extension in a narrow zone of lithosphere between 25–32 Ma in our model. The thinned lithosphere is replaced by upwelling asthenosphere and by rocks from the adjacent deep continental lithosphere which flow into the rift. Ductile flow of the deep continental lithosphere is accelerated by partial melting as rocks flow upward toward the rift axis. Once partially melted, rocks formerly part of the continental lithosphere join the upwelling asthenosphere, resulting in a rapid erosion of the lithospheric mantle beneath the continent near the rift edge. The resulting density decrease explains the uplift. We think that the Red Sea began as a consequence of changing plate geometries resulting from the collision of India and Eurasia. After the collision, the segment of the Owens fracture zone north of the Carlsberg Ridge became locked, forcing the northeast corner of Afro/Arabia to rotate with the Indian plate away from the rest of Africa.

Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth↗
USGS2023

Stratigraphic architecture and fluvial interpretations of the Upper Cretaceous (Turonian?) Middendorf Formation, Chesterfield County, South Carolina, U.S.A.

The Upper Cretaceous (Turonian?) Middendorf Formation is a sand-rich stratigraphic unit of fluvial origin that forms a large aquifer in the U.S. Atlantic Coastal Plain. In Chesterfield County (South Carolina), which is the site of the type locality, the formation ranges in thickness from 66.5 to > 119.7 meters. The base of the formation is an unconformity above Paleozoic metasiltstone, and the upper contact is an unconformity above which lies sand of the Quaternary Pinehurst Formation. Outcrops display the following five facies assemblages: 1) sandstone to conglomeratic sandstone (fluvial bar and channel deposits), 2) beds of alternating laminae of sandstone and mudstone (fluvial overbank or floodplain deposits), 3) ≥ 1 m-thick beds of clay (swamp deposits, floodplain deposits, and/or sediment that accumulated in abandoned fluvial channels), 4) 0.2–0.5 m-thick planar to slightly undulatory beds of framework-supported sandstone with a mud matrix (traction-dominated current deposits at the top of fluvial bars, upper-flow-regime bedform deposits in subsidiary fluvial channels, or coarse-grained overbank deposits), and 5) sandstone to conglomeratic sandstone cemented by iron (interpreted as fluvial bar and channel deposits, with the iron cement being a diagenetic “groundwater ferricrete” that formed via the circulation of shallow groundwater and the oxidation of iron-bearing minerals). Kaolinite in various forms is pervasive throughout the formation and is interpreted as an early diagenetic phenomenon that formed by prolonged postdepositional weathering and flushing by meteoric water under a warm and humid paleoclimate. The fluvial system that formed the Middendorf Formation prograded into the area from the west or northwest from uplifted margins of Mesozoic rift basins and/or the Appalachian Mountains. This progradation was a response to a base-level fall and the sediment accumulated during base-level lowstand and subsequent early transgression. In Chesterfield County, the Middendorf Formation can be subdivided into three fining-upward sequences. Each sequence consists predominantly of medium to coarse sand with a greater abundance of gravel in the lower part of the sequence and a greater abundance of clay and silt beds in the upper part. Each sequence is interpreted as either a response to autogenic processes or a response to allogenic sea-level changes, specifically a higher-order (higher-frequency) progression from relative lowstand conditions to early transgression whereby coarse sand and gravel (e.g., fluvial bar and channel deposits) were preserved during initial lowstand conditions and a greater proportion of mud and finer-grained sand (floodplain deposits) were preserved during subsequent early transgression. The Middendorf Formation is correlative with several other kaolinite-rich fluvial sandstones in North America including the Raritan Formation in New Jersey, the Tuscaloosa Formation of the eastern Gulf of Mexico (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana), the Woodbine Formation of the central Gulf of Mexico (Texas), and the Frontier Formation of Wyoming. The accumulation and preservation of these formations occurred in response to a Turonian eustatic sea-level fall and subsequent transgression, and the early diagenetic kaolinite in these formations is attributed to similar warm and humid paleoclimate conditions.

South Carolina↗