4.3 Article

Geochemical characterization of the source rock intervals, Beni-Suef Basin, West Nile Valley, Egypt

期刊

OPEN GEOSCIENCES
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 1536-1551

出版社

DE GRUYTER POLAND SP Z O O
DOI: 10.1515/geo-2020-0306

关键词

source rocks; Abu-Roash F-G; L-Kharita; OM-rich interval; expulsion threshold depth; ASDL; heat flow; burial history

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Geochemical and lithological investigations in the WON C-3X well have identified five organic-matter-rich intervals of effective source rocks, including two in the Albian age L-Kharita member and three in the Late Cenomanian-Santonian age Abu-Roash G and F members. The high heat flow in the studied basin has contributed to shallow oil expulsion depths and active source rock depth limits, with potential oil generation from the Abu-Roash F and G source rock intervals.
Geochemical and lithological investigations in the WON C-3X well record five organic-matter-rich intervals (OMRIs) of effective source rocks. These OMRIs correspond to moderate and good potentials. Two of these intervals occurred within the L-Kharita member of the Albian age represent 60.97% of the entire Albian thickness. The rest of OMRIs belongs to the Abu-Roash G and F members of the Late Cenomanian-Santonian age comprising 17.52 and 78.66% of their total thickness, respectively. The calculated heat flow of the studied basin is high within the range of 90.1-95.55 mW/m(2) from shallower Abu-Roash F to deeper L-Kharita members. This high-heat flow is efficient for shallowing in the maximum threshold expulsion depth in the studied well to 2,000 m and active source rock depth limit to 2,750 m. Thermal maturity and burial history show that the source rock of L-Kharita entered the oil generation from 97 Ma till the late oil stage of 7.5 Ma, whereas the younger Abu-Roash G and F members have entered oil generation since 56 Ma and not reached peak oil yet. Hence, the source rock intervals from Abu-Roash F and G are promising for adequate oil generation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据