修武盆地下寒武统荷塘组海相页岩孔隙特征

doi:10.7657/XJPG20200506

新疆石油地质 ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 550-556.doi: 10.7657/XJPG20200506

修武盆地下寒武统荷塘组海相页岩孔隙特征

郭春礼¹(), 杨爽¹(), 王安东¹, 章双龙², 祁星²

1.东华理工大学 a.核资源与环境国家重点实验室;b.地球科学学院,南昌 330013
2.江西省煤田地质勘察研究院,南昌 330001

收稿日期:2020-06-01 修回日期:2020-06-22 出版日期:2020-10-01 发布日期:2020-10-10
通讯作者: 杨爽 E-mail:1418253657@qq.com;yangshuang18@ecut.edu.cn
作者简介:郭春礼（1993-）,男,河南商丘人,硕士研究生,地质工程,（Tel）18236259983（E-mail）1418253657@qq.com
基金资助:
江西省教育厅科技项目(GJJ180393);核资源与环境国家重点实验室自主基金(Z1912);东华理工大学博士启动基金项目(DHBK2018030)

Pore Characteristics of Marine Shale in Lower Cambrian Hetang Formation in Xiuwu Basin

GUO Chunli¹(), YANG Shuang¹(), WANG Andong¹, ZHANG Shuanglong², QI Xing²

1. East China University of Technology, a.State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Resources and Environment; b.College of Earth Science, Nanchang, Jiangxi 330013, China
2. Geological Prospecting Institute of Jiangxi Coalfield Geology Bureau, Nanchang, Jiangxi 330001, China

Received:2020-06-01 Revised:2020-06-22 Online:2020-10-01 Published:2020-10-10
Contact: YANG Shuang E-mail:1418253657@qq.com;yangshuang18@ecut.edu.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

通过孔隙度实验、低温N₂吸附法和CO₂吸附法,对修武盆地RDZ01井下寒武统荷塘组页岩孔隙发育特征进行定量表征,结合总有机碳含量、矿物组成及有机质的热演化程度,讨论孔隙发育特征主控因素。结果表明：孔隙形态以楔形孔为主,并发育墨水瓶形孔及狭缝形孔。页岩孔隙度为1.24%~2.91%,具低孔隙度特征;微孔、中孔和大孔3类孔隙分别占总孔体积的35.45%、44.54%和20.01%。页岩总孔体积为5.33×10^-3 ~20.10×10^-3 cm³/g,其中低温N₂吸附法和CO₂吸附法平均孔体积分别为7.40×10^-3 cm³/g和2.24×10^-3 cm³/g;总比表面积为7.62~17.84 m²/g,其中低温N₂吸附法和CO₂吸附法平均比表面积分别为5.23 m²/g和7.41 m²/g。孔径分布的主峰值小于10.00 nm,微孔的结构复杂,0.30~0.70 nm的孔隙较为发育,大的比表面积为页岩气提供更多的吸附位。总有机碳含量是微孔发育的主控因素,同时促进中孔发育,对大孔的影响较弱;黏土矿物增多会降低页岩的孔隙度;高石英含量为总孔体积和总比表面积增大的有利因素。修武盆地下寒武统荷塘组海相页岩和鄂西地区下侏罗统自流井组页岩储集层特征相似,呈现良好的储集能力。

关键词: 修武盆地, 下寒武统, 荷塘组, 孔隙, CO₂吸附法, 低温N₂吸附法, 孔径, 海相页岩

Abstract:

Based on porosity and low temperature N₂ and CO₂ adsorption experiments, the pore characteristics of the shale in the Lower Cambrian Hetang formation were quantitatively characterized. And combined with TOC, whole rock X-ray diffraction and previous research on the thermal evolution of organic matter, the controlling factors on the pore characteristics were discussed and analyzed. The results show that most pores are wedge-shaped, and less are like bottle-neck and slits. The porosity of the shale ranges from 1.24% to 2.91%, of which mesopores, micropore and macropore account for 44.53%, 35.45% and 20.01%, respectively. The total pore volume of the shale ranges from 5.33× 10^-3 cm³/g to 20.10×10^-3 cm³/g, of which the average pore volumes of BJH and DFT are 7.40×10^-3 cm³/g and 2.24×10^-3 cm³/g, respectively. The total specific surface area is 7.62 to 17.84 m²/g, of which the average specific surface areas of low-temperature N₂ adsorption and CO₂ adsorption are 5.23 m²/g and 7.41 m²/g, respectively. The peak pore size is less than 10.00 nm, and the micropore structures are complex. The pores of 0.30-0.70 nm are relatively developed, but the larger specific surface area provides more room adsorbing shale gas. TOC is the controlling factor on micropore development, and it is helpful to the development of mesopores, but influences less on macropores. Clay minerals reduce the shale porosity, while quartz is a favorable factor on the total pore volume and total specific surface area. With the similar characteristics to the Lower Jurassic Ziliujing formation shale in the western Hubei province, the marine shale of the Lower Cambrian Hetang formation in Xiuwu basin has a good reservoir capability.

Key words: Xiuwu basin, Lower Cambrian, Hetang formation, pore, CO₂ adsorption, low-temperature N₂ adsorption, pore size, marine shale

中图分类号:

TE122.2

郭春礼, 杨爽, 王安东, 章双龙, 祁星. 修武盆地下寒武统荷塘组海相页岩孔隙特征[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2020, 41(5): 550-556.

GUO Chunli, YANG Shuang, WANG Andong, ZHANG Shuanglong, QI Xing. Pore Characteristics of Marine Shale in Lower Cambrian Hetang Formation in Xiuwu Basin[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2020, 41(5): 550-556.

图/表 8

表1

图1

图2

表2

图3

图4

图5

表3

参考文献 24

[1]	Energy Information Administration, U.S., 2017. International energy outlook[EB/OL]. (2017-01-01)[2020-06-01]. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/pdf/0484.
[2]	孙焕泉, 周德华, 蔡勋育, 等. 中国石化页岩气发展现状与趋势[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2020,25(2):14-26.
	SUN Huanquan, ZHOU Dehua, CAI Xunyu, et al. Progress and prospect of shale gas development of Sinopec[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2020,25(2):14-26.
[3]	庞飞, 包书景, 任收麦, 等. 修武盆地下寒武统页岩气富集条件及有利区预测[J]. 东北石油大学学报, 2014,38(5):23-30.
	PANG Fei, BAO Shujing, REN Shoumai, et al. Shale gas accumulation conditions and favorable areas of the Lower Cambrian in Xiuwu basin[J]. Journal of Northeast Petroleum University, 2014,38(5):23-30.
[4]	刘天琳, 姜振学, 刘伟伟, 等. 江西修武盆地早寒武世热液活动对有机质富集的影响[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2018,25(3):68-76.
	LIU Tianlin, JIANG Zhenxue, LIU Weiwei, et al. Effect of hydrothermal activity on the enrichment of sedimentary organic matter at Early Cambrian in the Xiuwu basin[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2018,25(3):68-76.
[5]	郭旭升, 胡东风, 刘若冰, 等. 四川盆地二叠系海陆过渡相页岩气地质条件及勘探潜力[J]. 天然气工业, 2018,38(10):11-18.
	GUO Xusheng, HU Dongfeng, LIU Ruobing, et al. Geological conditions and exploration potential of Permian marine-continent transitional facies shale gas in the Sichuan basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018,38(10):11-18.
[6]	吴泓辰, 何金先, 张晓丽, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地临兴地区太原组页岩孔隙结构及分形特征[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2018,39(5):549-554.
	WU Hongchen, HE Jinxian, ZHANG Xiaoli, et al. Pore structure and its fractal features of the shale in Taiyuan formation of Linxing area,Ordos basin[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2018,39(5):549-554.
[7]	田兴旺, 胡国艺, 苏桂萍, 等. 川南威远地区W201井古生界海相页岩矿物特征[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2018,39(4):409-415.
	TIAN Xingwang, HU Guoyi, SU Guiping, et al. Mineralogical characteristics of Paleozoic marine shales in Well W201 of Weiyuan area,southern Sichuan basin[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2018,39(4):409-415.
[8]	熊亮. 四川盆地及周缘下寒武统富有机质页岩孔隙发育特征[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2019,30(9):1 319-1 331.
	XIONG Liang. The characteristics of pore development of the Lower Cambrian organic-rich shale in Sichuan basin and its periphery[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2019,30(9):1 319-1 331.
[9]	ROUQUEROL J, AVNIR D, FAIRBRIDGE C W, et al. Recommendations for the characterization of porous solids[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 1994,66(8):1 739-1 758. doi: 10.1351/pac199466081739
[10]	SING K S W. Reporting physisorption data for gas/solid systems with special reference to the determination of surface area and porosity[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 1985,57(4):603-619. doi: 10.1351/pac198557040603
[11]	SAIDIAN M, GODINEZ L J, PRASAD M. Effect of clay and organic matter on nitrogen adsorption specific surface area and cation exchange capacity in shales(mudrocks)[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2016,33:1 095-1 106. doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2016.05.064
[12]	张林彦, 包友书, 习成威. 东营凹陷古近系泥页岩孔隙结构特征及连通性[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2018,39(2):134-139.
	ZHANG Linyan, BAO Youshu, XI Chengwei. Pore structure characteristics and pore connectivity of Paleogene shales in Dongying depression[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2018,39(2):134-139.
[13]	梁兴, 张廷山, 杨洋, 等. 滇黔北地区筇竹寺组高演化页岩气储层微观孔隙特征及其控制因素[J]. 天然气工业, 2014,34(2):18-26.
	LIANG Xing, ZHANG Tingshan, YANG Yang, et al. Microscopic pore structure and its controlling factors of overmature shale in the Lower Cambrian Qiongzhusi Fm,northern Yunnan and Guizhou provinces of China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2014,34(2):18-26.
[14]	吴建国, 刘大锰, 姚艳斌. 鄂尔多斯盆地渭北地区页岩纳米孔隙发育特征及其控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2014,35(4):542-550. doi: 10.11743/ogg20140414
	WU Jianguo, LIU Dameng, YAO Yanbin. Characteristics and controlling factors of nanopores in shales in Weibei,Ordos basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2014,35(4):542-550.
[15]	陈跃, 马东民, 吴圣, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地东缘煤系伴生泥页岩孔隙特征及主控因素[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2018,29(2):189-198.
	CHEN Yue, MA Dongmin, WU Sheng, et al. Pore characteristics and main controlling factors of mud shale in coal-bearing strata of eastern Ordos basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2018,29(2):189-198.
[16]	LOUCKS R G, REED R M, RUPPEL S C, et al. Morphology,genesis,and distribution of nano meter scale pores in siliceous mudstones of the Mississippian Barnett shale[J]. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 2009,79(12):848-861. doi: 10.2110/jsr.2009.092
[17]	郭旭升, 胡东风, 李宇平, 等. 涪陵页岩气田富集高产主控地质因素[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2017,44(4):481-491.
	GUO Xusheng, HU Dongfeng, LI Yuping, et al. Geological factors controlling shale gas enrichment and high production in Fuling shale gas field[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2017,44(4):481-491.
[18]	JARVIE D M, HILL R J, RUBLE T E, et al. Unconventional shale gas systems:the Mississippian Barnett shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale gas assessment[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2007,91(4):475-499. doi: 10.1306/12190606068
[19]	曾维特, 丁文龙, 张金川, 等. 渝东南—黔北地区牛蹄塘组页岩微纳米级孔隙发育特征及主控因素分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2019,26(3):220-235.
	ZENG Weite, DING Wenlong, ZHANG Jinchuan, et al. Analyses of the characteristics and main controlling factors for the micro/nanopores in Niutitang shale from China’s southeastern Chongqing and northern Guizhou regions[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2019,26(3):220-235.
[20]	ROSS D J K, BUSTIN R M. Characterizing the shale gas resource potential of Devonian Mississippian strata in the western Canada sedimentary basin:application of an integrated formation evolution[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2008,92(1):87-125. doi: 10.1306/09040707048
[21]	邓继新, 王欢, 周浩, 等. 龙马溪组页岩微观结构、地震岩石物理特征与建模[J]. 地球物理学报, 2015,58(6):2 123-2 136.
	DENG Jixin, WANG Huan, ZHOU Hao, et al. Microtexture,seismic rock physical properties and modeling of Longmaxi formation shale[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2015,58(6):2 123-2 136.
[22]	蔡全升, 陈孝红, 张国涛, 等. 鄂西宜昌地区五峰组—龙马溪组页岩气储层发育特征与勘探潜力[J/OL]. 石油与天然气地质：1-20, [2019-12-20]. https://kns-cnki-net.webvpn1.ecit.cn/kcms/detail/11.4820.te.20191219.1625.002.html.
	CAI Quansheng, CHEN Xiaohong, ZHANG Guotao, et al. Reservoir characteristics and exploration potential of the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale gas in Yichang area,western Hubei province,China[J/OL]. Oil & Gas Geology：1-20, [2019-12-20]. https://kns-cnki-net.webvpn1.ecit.cn/kcms/detail/11.4820.te.20191219.1625.002.html.
[23]	王登, 余江浩, 陈威, 等. 鄂西建南地区自流井组东岳庙段页岩储层特征及含气性[J]. 资源环境与工程, 2020,34(1):41-45.
	WANG Deng, YU Jianghao, CHEN Wei, et al. Geological conditions of shale gas reservoir in the Dongyuemiao member of Ziliujing formation in Jiannan area,western Hubei province[J]. Resource Environment and Engineering, 2020,34(1):41-45.
[24]	郭旭升, 胡东风, 魏志红, 等. 涪陵页岩气田的发现与勘探认识[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2016,21(3):24-37.
	GUO Xusheng, HU Dongfeng, WEI Zhihong, et al. Discovery and exploration of Fuling shale gas field[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2016,21(3):24-37.

修武盆地下寒武统荷塘组海相页岩孔隙特征

Pore Characteristics of Marine Shale in Lower Cambrian Hetang Formation in Xiuwu Basin

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 24

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	张德梅, 段朝伟, 李高仁, 李永胜, 陆敬武, 林伟川. 华池—南梁油田长8油藏高阻水层解释方法[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2023, 44(1): 105-111.
[2]	郭海平, 吴承美, 张金风, 徐田录, 肖佃师, 郭雪燚. 吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组混积型页岩油可动性实验[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2023, 44(1): 76-83.
[3]	于淑艳, 汪洋, 冯宏业, 朱洪建. 川东北城口地区筇竹寺组页岩流变对孔隙结构的影响[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(5): 513-518.
[4]	魏军, 严宝年, 杜文博, 周晓峰, 周在华, 李铁锋, 谢菁钰. 酒泉盆地长沙岭构造带下沟组一段油藏圈闭特征及形成机理[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(4): 379-386.
[5]	段文刚, 吝文, 田继军, 马静辉, 杜猛, 罗锦昌. 川南罗布向斜五峰组—龙马溪组页岩孔隙分形特征与主控因素[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(2): 153-159.
[6]	杨帆, 孟鑫, 王先虎, 余佩蓉, 邵广辉, 陈火红. 玛页1井风城组页岩微观孔隙特征及其影响因素[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1): 1-10.
[7]	曹尚, 李树同, 党海龙, 邢海雪, 张丽霞, 张天龙, 白璞. 鄂尔多斯盆地东南部长7段页岩孔隙特征及其控制因素[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1): 11-17.
[8]	王迎港, 申峰, 吴金桥, 孙晓, 穆景福, 汤积仁. 海相与陆相页岩微观特征差异及其对可压性的影响[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1): 26-33.
[9]	易勇刚, 黄科翔, 李杰, 牟善波, 于会永, 牟建业, 张士诚. 前置蓄能压裂中的CO₂在玛湖凹陷砾岩油藏中的作用[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1): 42-47.
[10]	谢芳, 蔡德洋, 刘瑞林, 张承森, 冯程. 连通导电模型参数确定及其在白云岩储集层评价中的应用[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1): 92-101.
[11]	王晔磊, 邱隆伟, 杨勇强, 吴宛秋, 杨保良, 乔雨鹏. 济阳坳陷义和庄—大王庄地区二叠系储集层成岩作用及孔隙演化[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2021, 42(6): 676-682.
[12]	卢婷, 王鸣川, 马文礼, 彭泽阳, 田玲钰, 李王鹏. 考虑多重应力敏感效应的页岩气藏压裂水平井试井模型[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2021, 42(6): 741-748.
[13]	冯国良, 孙万高, 王一帆, 白建峰, 史艳丽, 杨文辉. 井-震结合泥岩盖层分级评价在乍得D盆地的应用[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2021, 42(6): 756-762.
[14]	李晶晶, 孙国翔, 刘琦, 刘淼. 吉木萨尔凹陷芦一段页岩储集层孔隙结构及敏感性[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2021, 42(5): 541-547.
[15]	闫高原, 张军建, 路冠文, 全方凯. 沁水盆地太原组—山西组页岩孔隙分形特征[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2021, 42(5): 548-553.