Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:13:29.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response model of fluid–rock ratio to reservoir space in primary formation of shale oil during hydrous pyrolysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2022

Lina SUN ,
Deliang FU Open the ORCID record for Deliang FU [Opens in a new window] ,
Qi ZHANG  and
Yuandong WU
Lina SUN
Affiliation:
Hubei Cooperative Innovation Center of Unconventional Oil and Gas (Yangtze University), Wuhan, Hubei 430100, China
Deliang FU*
Affiliation:
Key laboratory of Coal Resources Exploration and Comprehensive Utilization, Ministry of Land and Resources, Xi`an 710021, China
Qi ZHANG
Affiliation:
The Erlian Filiale of HuaBei Oilfield Company, Hebei 062550, China
Yuandong WU
Affiliation:
Peking University Shenzhen Institute, Shenzhen, 518057, China
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Due to the presence of geological fluid under actual geological conditions, water–rock interaction will occur between the fluid and reservoir. Thus, to analyse the influence of the water–rock interaction on storage space during the organic matter evolution stages, this study conducted a series of simulation experiments on shales by using a closed autoclave: four temperatures, 250°C, 300°C, 350°C, 400°C, and five fluid–rock ratios (FRRs), 0:20, 4:20, 10:20, 15:20, and 20:20. Low pressure N2 adsorption measurement was conducted on the solid residues. The experimental results show that the effect of temperature on the yield and pore structure of oil shale was the same as the result when the FRR was = 0:20, 4:20 and = 10:20, 15:20, 20:20, respectively. This result showed that temperature remained the main factor that affected the thermal evolution of hydrocarbon generation. Additionally, temperature was beneficial to the generation and storage of shale oil within a certain range, but only occupied the storage space of shale oils or connected a certain storage space beyond a certain range. The variation trend of shale oil yield with increasing FRR under the same simulated temperatures, 250°C and 400°C, was most affected by the FRR, but little change occurred at 300°C and 350°C. This further proved that the ratio of fluid to rock was an indirect acting factor, which affected the evolution of organic matters and then the development of pore structures. Before the oil window (350°C), the lower evolution degree, the higher water content and the more significant effect. In the higher evolution stage, the higher the water content, and the more complete the kerogen reaction, which was also more conducive to the development of pore structures. Therefore, this study promotes the establishment of linear equations on FRR to the gas adsorption capacity, which further provides a theoretical basis and guidance for the exploration and development of shale oil.

Keywords

fluid–rock ratiohydrous pyrolysisreservoir spaceresponse modelshale oil
Type
Articles
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 113 , Issue 2 , June 2022 , pp. 141 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Society of Edinburgh

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

7. References

Abouelresh, M. O. & Slatt, R. M. 2012. Lithofacies and sequence stratigraphy of the Barnett Shale in east-central Fort Worth Basin, Texas. AAPG Bulletin 96, 1–22.10.1306/04261110116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, C., Yu, B., Han, S. & Shen, Z. 2020. Characterization of lithofacies in shale oil reservoirs of a lacustrine basin in eastern China: implications for oil accumulation. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 195, 107907.10.1016/j.petrol.2020.107907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, C., Yu, B., Liu, H., Xie, Z., Han, S., Zhang, L., Ye, R. & Ge, J. 2018. The genesis and evolution of carbonate minerals in shale oil formations from Dongying Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, China. International Journal of Coal Geology 189, 8–26.10.1016/j.coal.2018.02.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, J., Wang, Q. & Jiao, G. 2012. Study on the pore structure of oil shale during low-temperature pyrolysis. Energy Procedia 17(Part B), 1689–96.10.1016/j.egypro.2012.02.299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behar, F., Vandenbroucke, M., Tang, Y., Marquis, F. & Espitalie, J. 1997. Thermal cracking of kerogen in open and closed systems: determination of kinetic parameters and stoichiometric coefficients for oil and gas generation. Organic Geochemistry 26(5–6), 321–39.10.1016/S0146-6380(97)00014-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, Y. D., Liu, D. M., Pan, Z. J., Yao, Y. B., Li, J. Q. & Qiu, Y. K. 2013. Pore structure and its impact on CH4 adsorption capacity and flow capability of bituminous and subbituminous coals from Northeast China. Fuel 103, 258–68.10.1016/j.fuel.2012.06.055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y., Cao, P., Chen, R. & Teng, Y. 2010. Effect of water–rock interaction on the morphology of a rock surface. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 47, 816–22.10.1016/j.ijrmms.2010.03.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, J. B. 2002. Fractured shale-gas systems. AAPG Bulletin 86, 1921–38.Google Scholar
Dieckmann, V., Schenk, H. J. & Horsfield, B. 2000. Assessing the overlap of primary and secondary reactions by closed- versus open-system pyrolysis of marine kerogens. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 56, 33–46.10.1016/S0165-2370(00)00083-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, C. & Gaupp, R. 2005. Change of black shale organic material surface area during oxidative weathering: implications for rock-water surface evolution. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69, 1213–24.10.1016/j.gca.2004.09.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gai, H., Tian, H. & Xiao, X. 2018. Late gas generation potential for different types of shale source rocks: implications from pyrolysis experiments. International Journal of Coal Geology 193, 16–29.10.1016/j.coal.2018.04.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, L., Schimmelmann, A., Tang, Y. & Mastalerz, M. 2014. Isotope rollover in shale gas observed in laboratory pyrolysis experiments: insight to the role of water in thermogenesis of mature gas. Organic Geochemistry 68, 95–106.10.1016/j.orggeochem.2014.01.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, K., Zhang, S. C., Mi, J. K. & Zhang, W. L. 2018. Pyrolysis involving n-hexadecane, water and minerals: insight into the mechanisms and isotope fractionation for water–hydrocarbon reaction. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 130, 198–208.10.1016/j.jaap.2018.01.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, R. J., Zhang, E., Katz, B. J. & Tang, Y. 2007. Modeling of gas generation from the Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, Texas. AAPG Bulletin 91, 501–21.10.1306/12060606063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horsfield, B. & Dueppenbecker, S. J. 1991. The decomposition of posidonia shale and green river shale kerogens using microscale sealed vessel (MSSV) pyrolysis. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysi 20, 107–23.10.1016/0165-2370(91)80066-HCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvie, D. M., Hill, R. J., Ruble, T. E. & Pollastro, R. M. 2007. Unconventional shale-gas systems: the Mississippian Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale-gas assessment. AAPG Bulletin 91, 475–99.10.1306/12190606068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, L., Mathur, R., Rother, G., Cole, D., Bazilevskaya, E., Williams, J., Carone, A. & Brantley, S. 2013. Evolution of porosity and geochemistry in Marcellus Formation black shale during weathering. Chemical Geology 356, 50–63.10.1016/j.chemgeo.2013.07.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, L., Yu, W., Li, D. & Du, X. 2021. Numerical and theoretical investigation on the size effect of concrete compressive strength considering the maximum aggregate size. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 192, 106130.10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.106130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P., Zheng, M., Bi, H., Wu, S. & Wang, X. 2017a. Pore throat structure and fractal characteristics of tight oil sandstone: a case study in the Ordos Basin, China. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 149, 665–74.10.1016/j.petrol.2016.11.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Q., Li, J. & Zhu, B. 2022. Experimental investigation of the influence of sequential water–rock reactions on the mineral alterations and porosity evolution of shale. Construction and Building Materials 317, 125859.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, X. Q., Krooss, B. M., Weniger, P. & Littke, R. 2017b. Molecular hydrogen (H2) and light hydrocarbon gases generation from marine and lacustrine source rocks during closed-system laboratory pyrolysis experiments. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 2017, 275–87.10.1016/j.jaap.2017.05.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liao, X., Chigira, M., Matsushi, Y. & Wu, X. 2014. Investigation of water–rock interactions in Cambrian black shale via a flow-through experiment. Applied Geochemistry 51, 65–78.10.1016/j.apgeochem.2014.09.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, P., Zhang, T., Xu, Q., Wang, X., Liu, C., Guo, R., Lin, H., Yan, M., Qin, L. & Li, L. 2022. Organic matter inputs and depositional palaeoenvironment recorded by biomarkers of marine–terrestrial transitional shale in the Southern North China Basin. Geological Journal 57, 1617–27.10.1002/gj.4363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loucks, R. G., Reed, R. M., Ruppel, S. C. & Hammes, U. 2012. Spectrum of pore types and networks in mudrocks and a descriptive classification for matrix-related mudrock pores. AAPG Bulletin 96, 1071–98.10.1306/08171111061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loucks, R. G. & Ruppel, S. C. 2007. Mississippian Barnett Shale: lithofacies and depositional setting of a deep-water shale-gas succession in the Fort Worth Basin, Texas. AAPG Bulletin 91, 579–601.10.1306/11020606059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Z., Tan, J., Zheng, L., Shen, B., Wang, Z., Shahzad, A., Jan, I. U. & Schulz, H. M. 2021. Evaluating gas generation and preservation of the Wufeng–Longmaxi Formation shale in southeastern Sichuan Basin, China: implications from semiclosed hydrous pyrolysis. Marine and Petroleum Geology 129, 105102.10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2021.105102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, D., Patil, D. J., Dayal, A. M., Kavitha, S., Hafiz, M., Hakhoo, N. & Bhat, G. M. 2014. Gas potential of Proterozoic and Phanerozoic shales from the NW Himalaya, India: inferences from pyrolysis. International Journal of Coal Geology 128–129, 81–95.10.1016/j.coal.2014.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mi, J. K., Wang, H. T., He, K., Bai, J. F. & Liu, C. Y. 2018. Demethylation as a mechanism for isotopic reversals of shale gas generated at over maturity. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 135, 361–8.10.1016/j.jaap.2018.08.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scislewski, A. & Zuddas, P. 2010. Estimation of reactive mineral surface area during water–rock interaction using fluid chemical data. Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta 74, 6996–7007.10.1016/j.gca.2010.09.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, D., Tuo, J., Zhang, M., Wu, C., Su, L., Li, J., Zhang, Y. & Zhang, D. 2018. Hydrocarbon generation potential and evolution of pore characteristics of Mesoproterozoic shales in north China: results from semi-closed pyrolysis experiments. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 62, 171–83.10.1016/j.jngse.2018.12.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, D., Wang, X., Tuo, J., Wu, C. & Wei, H. 2021. A comprehensive study on the impacts of rock fabric on hydrocarbon generation and pore structure evolution of shale under semi-confined condition. Marine and Petroleum Geology 124, 104830.10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, K., Lu, J., Zhang, H., Chen, S., Li, Y., Xiao, Z., Qiu, W. & Han, M. 2020. Quantitative study on hydrocarbon expulsion mechanism based on micro-fracture. Geoscience Frontiers 11, 6–18.10.1016/j.gsf.2020.05.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, L., Tuo, J., Zhang, M., Wu, C. & Chai, S. 2019a. Impact of water pressure on the organic matter evolution from hydrous pyrolysis. Energy & Fuels 33, 6283–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, L., Tuo, J., Zhang, M., Wu, C. & Chai, S. 2019b. Pore structures and fractal characteristics of nano-pores in shale of Lucaogou Formation from Junggar Basin during water pressure-controlled artificial pyrolysis. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 140, 404–12.10.1016/j.jaap.2019.04.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, L., Tuo, J., Zhang, M., Wu, C., Wang, Z. & Zheng, Y. 2015. Formation and development of the pore structure in Chang 7 member oil-shale from Ordos Basin during organic matter evolution induced by hydrous pyrolysis. Fuel 158, 549–57.10.1016/j.fuel.2015.05.061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, Y., Perry, J. K., Jenden, P. D. & Schoell, M. 2000. Mathematical modeling of stable carbon isotope ratios in natural gases. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 64, 2673–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tian, H., Xiao, X., Wilkins, R. & Tang, Y. 2012. An experimental comparison of gas generation from three oil fractions: implications for the chemical and stable carbon isotopic signatures of oil cracking gas. Organic Geochemistry 46, 96–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiwari, P., Deo, M., Lin, C. L. & Miller, J. D. 2013. Characterization of oil shale pore structure before and after pyrolysis by using X-ray micro CT. Fuel 107, 547–54.10.1016/j.fuel.2013.01.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, M., Xue, H. T., Tian, S. S., Wilkins, R. W. T. & Wang, Z. W. 2015. Fractal characteristics of Upper Cretaceous lacustrine shale from the Songliao Basin, NE China. Marine and Petroleum Geology 67, 144–53.10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.05.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z. X., Wang, Y. L., Wu, B. X., Wang, G., Sun, Z. P., Xu, L., Zhu, S. Z., Sun, L. N. & Wei, Z. F. 2017. Hydrocarbon gas generation from pyrolysis of extracts and residues of low maturity solid bitumens from the Sichuan Basin, China. Organic Geochemistry 103, 51–62.10.1016/j.orggeochem.2016.10.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Y., Zhang, Z., Sun, L., Li, Y., Zhang, M. & Ji, L. 2019. Stable isotope reversal and evolution of gas during the hydrous pyrolysis of continental kerogen in source rocks under supercritical conditions. International Journal of Coal Geology 205, 105–14.10.1016/j.coal.2019.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Y., Zhang, Z., Sun, L., Li, Y., Zhang, D. & Long, S. 2018. The effect of pressure and hydrocarbon expulsion on hydrocarbon generation during pyrolysis of continental type-iii kerogen source rocks. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 170, 958–66.10.1016/j.petrol.2018.06.067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C., Zhang, J., Tang, X., Ding, J., Zhao, Q., Dang, W., Chen, H., Su, Y., Li, B. & Lu, D. 2017. Comparative study on micro-pore structure of marine, terrestrial, and transitional shales in key areas, China. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 171, 76–92.Google Scholar
Yang, F., Ning, Z. F. & Liu, H. Q. 2014. Fractal characteristics of shales from a shale gas reservoir in the Sichuan Basin, China. Fuel 115, 378–84.10.1016/j.fuel.2013.07.040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, Y. B., Liu, D. M., Tang, D. Z., Tang, S. H. & Huang, W. H. 2008. Fractal characterization of adsorption-pores of coals from north China: an investigation on CH4 adsorption capacity of coals. International Journal of Coal Geology 73, 27–42.10.1016/j.coal.2007.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Z. F., Pang, X. Q., Jiang, F. J., Wang, K., Li, L. L., Zhang, K. & Zheng, X. W. 2018. Hydrocarbon generation from confined pyrolysis of lower Permian Shanxi Formation coal and coal measure mudstone in the Shenfu area, northeastern Ordos Basin, China. Marine and Petroleum Geology 97, 355–69.10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2018.07.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar