en
×

分享给微信好友或者朋友圈

使用微信“扫一扫”功能。
作者简介:

蒋云箭(1966—),男,江苏泰兴人,高级工程师,硕士,从事测井解释管理与研究工作。E-mail:jiangyj750.slyt@sinopec.com。

中图分类号:TE132.8

文献标识码:A

文章编号:1009-9603(2020)05-0044-09

DOI:10.13673/j.cnki.cn37-1359/te.2020.05.005

参考文献 1
宋明水.济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与现状[J].油气地质与采收率,2019,26(1):1-12.SONG Mingshui.Practice and current status of shale oil explora⁃ tion in Jiyang Depression[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Ef⁃ ficiency,2019,26(1):1-12.
参考文献 2
王永诗,李政,巩建强,等.济阳坳陷页岩油气评价方法——以沾化凹陷罗家地区为例[J].石油学报,2013,34(1):83-91.WANG Yongshi,LI Zheng,GONG Jianqiang,et al.Discussion on an evaluation method of shale oil and gas in Jiyang depression:a case study on Luojia area in Zhanhua sag[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica,2013,34(1):83-91.
参考文献 3
张林晔,孔祥星,张春荣,等.济阳坳陷下第三系优质烃源岩的发育及其意义[J].地球化学,2003,32(1):35-42.ZHANG Linye,KONG Xiangxing,ZHANG Chunrong,et al.Highquality oil-prone source rocks in Jiyang Depression[J].Geochimi⁃ ca,2003,32(1):35-42.
参考文献 4
张春池,彭文泉,胡小辉,等.沾化凹陷沙河街组页岩气成藏条件研究[J].特种油气藏,2019,26(3):12-17.ZHANG Chunchi,PENG Wenquan,HU Xiaohui,et al.Shale gas accumulation conditions of Shahejie formation in Zhanhua depres⁃ sion[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2019,26(3):12-17.
参考文献 5
余涛,卢双舫,李俊乾,等.东营凹陷页岩油游离资源有利区预测[J].断块油气田,2018,25(1):16-21.YU Tao,LU Shuangfang,LI Junqian,et al.Prediction for favorable area of shale oil free resources in Dongying Sag[J].Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field,2018,25(1):16-21.
参考文献 6
包友书.济阳坳陷超压和应力场对页岩油富集的影响[J].断块油气田,2018,25(5):585-588.BAO Youshu.Influence of overpressure and stress on shale oil en⁃ richment in Jiyang Depression[J].Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field,2018,25(5):585-588.
参考文献 7
杨智,侯连华,林森虎,等.吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组致密油、页岩油地质特征与勘探潜力[J].中国石油勘探,2018,23(4):76-85.YANG Zhi,HOU Lianhua,LIN Senhu,et al.Geologic characteris⁃ tics and exploration potential of tight oil and shale oil in Lucaogou Formation in Jimsar sag[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2018,23(4):76-85.
参考文献 8
张鹏飞,卢双舫,李俊乾,等.湖相页岩油有利甜点区优选方法及应用——以渤海湾盆地东营凹陷沙河街组为例[J].石油与天然气地质,2019,40(6):1 339-1 350.ZHANG Pengfei,LU Shuangfang,LI Junqian,et al.Identification method of sweet spot zone in lacustrine shale oil reservoir and its application:A case study of the Shahejie Formation in Dongying Sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2019,40(6):1 339-1 350.
参考文献 9
冯国奇,李吉君,刘洁文,等.泌阳凹陷页岩油富集及可动性探讨[J].石油与天然气地质,2019,40(6):1 236-1 246.FENG Guoqi,LI Jijun,LIU Jiewen,et al.Discussion on the enrich⁃ ment and mobility of continental shale oil in Biyang Depression [J].Oil & Gas Geology,2019,40(6):1 236-1 246.
参考文献 10
李浩,陆建林,王保华,等.渤海湾盆地东濮凹陷陆相页岩油可动性影响因素与资源潜力[J].石油实验地质,2020,42(4):632-638.LI Hao,LU Jianlin,WANG Baohua,et al.Controlling factors of continental shale oil mobility and resource potential in Dongpu Sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2020,42(4):632-638.
参考文献 11
王然,常秋生,钱永新,等.准噶尔盆地吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组页岩油“甜点体”储集特征及成因机理[J].石油实验地质,2020,42(4):604-611.WANG Ran,CHANG Qiusheng,QIAN Yongxin,et al.Reservoir characteristics and genesis of shale oil“sweet spots”in Lucaogou Formation,Jimsar Sag,Junggar Basin[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2020,42(4):604-611.
参考文献 12
赵铭海,傅爱兵,关丽,等.罗家地区页岩油气测井评价方法 [J].油气地质与采收率,2012,19(6):20-24.ZHAO Minghai,FU Aibing,GUAN Li,et al.Logging evaluation method of shale oil and gas reservoir in Luojia area[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2012,19(6):20-24.
参考文献 13
张晋言.页岩油测井评价方法及其应用[J].地球物理学进展,2012,27(3):1 154-1 162.ZHANG Jinyan.Well logging evaluation method of shale oil reser⁃ voirs and its applications[J].Progress in Geophysics,2012,27(3):1 154-1 162.
参考文献 14
张晋言,孙建孟.利用测井资料评价泥页岩油气“五性”指标 [J].测井技术,2012,36(2):146-153.ZHANG Jinyan,SUN Jianmeng.Log evaluation on shale hydrocar⁃ bon reservoir[J].Well Logging Technology,2012,36(2):146-153.
参考文献 15
孙建孟.基于新“七性”关系的煤层气、页岩气测井评价[J].测井技术,2013,37(5):457-465.SUN Jianmeng.Coalbed methane and shale gas evaluation based on new seven related logging goals[J].Well Logging Technology,2013,37(5):457-465.
参考文献 16
夏宏泉,刘畅,王瀚玮,等.页岩含气量测井评价方法研究[J].特种油气藏,2019,26(3):1-6.XIA Hongquan,LIU Chang,WANG Hanwei,et al.Logging evalua⁃ tion of shale gas content[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2019,26(3):1-6.
参考文献 17
宋国奇,徐兴友,李政,等.济阳坳陷古近系陆相页岩油产量的影响因素[J].石油与天然气地质,2015,36(3):463-471.SONG Guoqi,XU Xingyou,LI Zheng,et al.Factors controlling oil production from Paleogene shale in Jiyang depression[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2015,36(3):463-471.
参考文献 18
孙焕泉.济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与认识[J].中国石油勘探,2017,22(4):1-14.SUN Huanquan.Exploration practice and cognitions of shale oil in Jiyang depression[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2017,22(4):1-14.
参考文献 19
宁方兴,王学军,郝雪峰,等.济阳坳陷页岩油甜点评价方法研究[J].科学技术与工程,2015,15(35):11-16.NING Fangxing,WANG Xuejun,HAO Xuefeng,et al.Evaluation method of shale oil sweetspots in Jiyang Depression[J].Science Technology and Engineering,2015,15(35):11-16.
参考文献 20
宁方兴.济阳坳陷页岩油富集机理[J].特种油气藏,2015,22(3):27-30.NING Fangxing.Mechanism of shale oil enrichment in Jiyang De⁃ pression[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2015,22(3):27-30.
参考文献 21
杨智,侯连华,陶士振,等.致密油与页岩油形成条件与“甜点区”评价[J].石油勘探与开发,2015,42(5):555-565.YANG Zhi,HOU Lianhua,TAO Shizhen,et al.Formation condi⁃ tions and“sweet spot”evaluation of tight oil and shale oil[J].Pe⁃ troleum Exploration and Development,2015,42(5):555-565.
参考文献 22
冯军,张博为,冯子辉,等.松辽盆地北部致密砂岩储集层原油可动性影响因素[J].石油勘探与开发,2019,46(2):312-321.FENG Jun,ZHANG Bowei,FENG Zihui,et al.Crude oil mobility and its controlling factors in tight sand reservoirs in northern Songliao Basin,China[J].Petroleum Exploration and Develop⁃ ment,2019,46(2):312-321.
参考文献 23
李霞,周灿灿,赵杰,等.泥页岩油藏测井评价新方法——以松辽盆地古龙凹陷青山口组为例[J].中国石油勘探,2014,19(3):57-65.LI Xia,ZHOU Cancan,ZHAO Jie,et al.New logging evaluation method for shale reservoirs:Taking Qingshankou formation in Gu⁃ long Sag of Songliao basin for instance[J].China Petroleum Explo⁃ ration,2014,19(3):57-65.
参考文献 24
中国石油勘探与生产分公司.低阻油气藏测井识别评价方法与技术[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2006:83-89.PetroChina Exploration and Production Company.Logging evalua⁃ tion method and technology of low-resistivity reservoirs[M].Bei⁃ jing:Petroleum Industry Press,2006:83-89.
参考文献 25
吴文圣,陈钢花,雍世和.利用双侧向测井方法判别裂缝的有效性[J].石油大学学报:自然科学版,2001,25(1):87-89.WU Wensheng,CHEN Ganghua,YONG Shihe.Determination of effectiveness of fractures using dual laterolog[J].Journal of the University of Petroleum,China:Edition of Natural Science,2001,25(1):87-89.
参考文献 26
肖承文,朱筱敏,李进福,等.高压低渗致密裂缝性砂岩测井评价技术[J].新疆石油地质,2007,28(6):761-763.XIAO Chengwen,ZHU Xiaomin,LI Jinfu,et al.Well-logging eval⁃ uation for fractured tight sand reservoirs with high pressure and low permeability[J].Xinjiang Petroleum Geology,2007,28(6):761-763.
参考文献 27
曾文冲.油气藏储集层测井评价技术[M].北京:石油工业出版社,1991:53-54,176-183.ZENG Wenchong.Logging evaluation technique of oil and gas res⁃ ervoir[M].Beijing:Petroleum Industry Press,1991:53-54,176-183.
参考文献 28
中国石油勘探与生产分公司.低孔低渗油气藏测井评价技术及应用[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2009:31-34.PetroChina Exploration & Production Company.Evaluation tech⁃ nology and application of well logging in low-porosity and lowpermeability oil and gas reservoirs[M].Beijing:Petroleum Indus⁃ try Press,2009:31-34.
参考文献 29
高松洋.测井资料在裂缝识别中的应用——以H地区砂岩储层为例[J].石油天然气学报,2009,31(2):272-274.GAO Songyang.Application of logging data to fracture identifica⁃ tion:A case study of sand reservoir in Area H[J].Journal of Oil and Gas Technology,2009,31(2):272-274.
参考文献 30
刘雅利,刘鹏.陆相富有机质泥页岩中夹层特征及其作用—— 以济阳坳陷为例[J].油气地质与采收率,2019,26(5):1-9.LIU Yali,LIU Peng.Interlayer characteristics and their effect on continental facies organic-rich shale:A case study of Jiyang De⁃ pression[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2019,26(5):1-9.
参考文献 31
滕建彬.东营凹陷利页1井泥页岩中白云石成因及层序界面意义[J].油气地质与采收率,2018,25(2):1-7,36.TENG Jianbin.Genesis of dolomite in shale drilled by Well Liye1 in Dongying Sag and its significance on sequence boundary indi⁃ cation[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2018,25(2):1-7,36.
目录contents

    摘要

    页岩油测井评价是目前测井解释的难点之一。从页岩油具有“自生自储”和“生烃高压”的成藏特征,以及地质“甜点”具有异常高压和油气显示活跃等宏观现象出发,深入分析了页岩油地质“甜点”的基本特征,指出油气可动性是页岩油地质“甜点”的最重要特征。统计胜利油区数百口页岩油井的钻井、录井、测井和试油等资料,发现地质“甜点”段物性较好、地层高压、油气充注度高,井壁附近更易形成明显而稳定的电阻率低侵特征剖面。由于双侧向测井比感应测井更能有效地表征低侵特征,首次从宏观上确立了页岩油油气可动性与测井曲线之间的响应关系。基于双侧向测井曲线幅度差异特征,提出了应用油气可动性定量评价系数评价页岩油地质“甜点”的方法。应用该方法对多口页岩油井进行了地质“甜点”分级评价,评价结果与岩相分析和试油结果吻合度较高,获得了良好的应用效果。

    Abstract

    Well logging evaluation for shale oil is one of the difficulties in logging interpretation at present. Based on the ac- cumulation characteristics of shale oil such as“self-generation and self-storage”and“high pressure for hydrocarbon gen- eration”,as well as the macro phenomena of geological“sweet spots”such as the abnormal high pressure and active oil and gas display,authors analyze the essential characteristics of shale oil“sweet spots”and consider that the hydrocarbon mov- ability is the most important characteristic of the geological“sweet spots”of shale oil in this study. The statistical results of the drilling,mud logging,well logging and oil testing data from hundreds of shale oil wells in Shengli Oilfield show that the geological“sweet spot”intervals have good physical properties,high formation pressure and high oil and gas charging, which make it easier to form obvious and stable low resistivity invasion profile near the borehole. Since the dual lateral log- ging is more effective to show the low invasion feature than the induction logging,the response relationship between the hy- drocarbon movability of shale oil and well logging curves is established for the first time. Based on the amplitude difference of dual lateral logging,the quantitative evaluation coefficient of hydrocarbon mobility is proposed to evaluate the geological “sweet spots”of shale oil. The grading evaluation of geological“sweet spots”for several shale oil wells is conducted by this method,and the results match well with the lithofacies analysis and oil test results,which indicate a good application perfor- mance.

  • 近年来,随着对页岩油地质认识的不断深化和工程技术的持续进步,特别是一些页岩油井压裂后获得了较高的工业油流,页岩油勘探开发日益成为关注的热点话题[1-11]

  • 测井评价作为重要的技术手段在页岩油理论研究与勘探开发中发挥了不可替代的作用。由于页岩油地层具有矿物组分复杂、微裂缝发育以及低孔超低渗透等特征,造成页岩油储集性与含油性评价难度较大。赵铭海等在密闭岩心分析的基础上,结合岩相和测井曲线组合关系,提出纹层状泥质灰岩含油品质最好、层状灰质泥岩含油品质较差[12]。张晋言应用成像、元素俘获和常规测井资料,总结了不同泥页岩岩相的测井响应组合模式,取得了良好的应用效果[13]。随着页岩油储集性和含油性微观研究的不断深化,页岩油测井评价由常规储层 “四性”关系研究,发展至岩相与矿物组分特性、物性与孔隙结构特性、地化参数指标、含油气量、可压裂性等“多性”关系的研究[14-16],为泥页岩油气测井评价提供了新思路和新方法。

  • 上述研究成果在实践过程中也暴露出一些不足。一是基于岩相分析与刻度的页岩油含油性评价过度依赖于钻井取心分析化验数据,在无取心井或非取心层段适应性较差。二是页岩油“多性”关系的研究一定程度上弱化了主要矛盾的分析与研究,无法建立统一的测井解释标准,具体到某一口井,不同的解释人员会给出不同的解释结论。三是相比不断深化的岩心微观研究,页岩油宏观特征研究明显不足,尤其是页岩油油气可动性这一地质 “甜点”的重要宏观指标,其测井响应特征研究依然处于空白区。这些原因客观上制约了页岩油测井评价的准确性,是目前测井解释的技术瓶颈。为此,笔者从页岩油油气可动性这一宏观特征着手,开展地质“甜点”油气可动性测井响应特征研究,其成果将有助于提高页岩油测井评价的针对性和准确性。

  • 1 页岩油地质“甜点”基本特征

  • 页岩层系液态烃地质“甜点”是指在源储共生的页岩层系规模发育区,目前经济技术条件下可优先勘探开发的非常规石油富集高产目标区。

  • 在成熟页岩油地质“甜点”发育段具有以下3个基本特征:①孔隙度较高,孔径大,储集性好。②游离烃富集,油气充注度高,含油饱和度为 50%~90%。③地层压力系数高(一般大于1.4),气测异常值高,微裂缝发育,气油比高,油气可动性强。这 3 个特征是页岩油地质“甜点”油气富集的基本要素,在油气成藏过程中相互关联、各有侧重。

  • 宋国奇等研究认为异常高压影响页岩油气的富集与产出,流动性是页岩油气局部性富集高产的控制因素[17]。孙焕泉统计了济阳坳陷页岩油自然产能与地层压力系数之间的关系,认为泥页岩孔隙中不断富集的游离油量越高,地层压力越高,越有利于油气产出[18]。宁方兴等依据地质和地化资料,明确了页岩油富集主控因素为泥页岩岩相、页岩油可动性、泥页岩裂缝和异常压力等要素,并依据主控因素综合确定了济阳坳陷页岩油地质“甜点”分布范围[19-20]。杨智等基于中外页岩层系液态烃研究成果分析,认为流体可动性是形成页岩层系油气地质“甜点”的先决条件,高产地质“甜点”集中分布区具有较好的油质、较高的气油比、较高的含油饱和度与地层压力,且天然裂缝较发育[21]。上述研究成果分别从不同角度指出,油气可动性是页岩油地质 “甜点”最重要的特征,该类页岩油地质“甜点”物性好,油气可动性强,也必然是可压性较好的工程“甜点”。页岩油“多性”测井评价的重点应归集为页岩油油气可动性评价,其为解决页岩油地质评价的关键。

  • 随着页岩油研究工作的不断深入,在泥页岩储集性和含油性评价过程中,已开始涉及页岩油油气可动性测井研究。一般基于岩心分析化验数据,建立不同岩相测井响应模式,利用测井响应回归方程,计算游离烃含量,并结合气测异常,综合评价页岩油地质“甜点”含油性。冯军等在核磁共振、压汞等资料分析的基础上,确定了可动油启动时的孔隙度下限值、渗透率下限值和平均孔喉半径下限值[22]。李霞等以“非常规思想”为指导,优选泥页岩有机碳含量、岩石脆性指数、地层压力系数定性反映页岩油富集的充足程度[23]。由于未能建立页岩油油气可动性与测井响应特征之间的直接关系,上述研究应用效果值得商榷。

  • 2 页岩油油气可动性测井响应特征

  • 在钻井过程中,页岩油地质“甜点”常表现为高压、气测显示异常活跃、槽面见油气显示等宏观现象,表明地层油气活跃,可动性强。

  • 笔者统计了胜利油区东营凹陷和渤南凹陷数百口页岩油井的钻井、测井、录井及试油资料发现,气测异常段与测试见工业油流段的双侧向测井曲线往往存在比较明显的幅度差。地层油气显示越活跃,测试产量越高,双侧向测井曲线幅度差值越大。反之,气测录井无显示、压裂试油后产油量极低的泥页岩段,其双侧向测井曲线通常无幅度差。同时,同一页岩油发育段不同时间的双侧向测井资料对比结果表明,在泥页岩油气富集段,双侧向测井曲线幅度差在很长一段时间内稳定存在。页岩油地质“甜点”的油气可动性在测井曲线上存在对应的响应特征。

  • 页岩油地质“甜点”具有物性较好、地层高压、油气充注度高等 3 个基本特征,该特征决定了其泥浆侵入剖面具有特殊性。一是“甜点”物性较好,液态烃可流动性强,泥浆滤液能够有效驱替地层油气,从而可以在井壁附近形成电阻率低侵特征剖面。二是地层压力高,流体可压缩性较差,泥浆滤液难以大量侵入地层,泥浆侵入深度较浅。三是 “甜点”气油比高,油气活跃,被泥浆驱替的油气会不断向井眼附近重新聚集,井壁附近电阻率低侵特征剖面随时间变化小,相对稳定。受上述因素的综合作用,在地质“甜点”井壁附近形成了比较明显而稳定的电阻率低侵特征剖面。

  • 电阻率低侵特征剖面的存在可以通过感应测井和(或)双侧向测井进行表征。由于感应类测井仪器采用并联测量原理,泥浆侵入剖面中相对低阻部分会大幅降低深、中感应测井值,导致“甜点”的深、中感应测井曲线重合、无低侵特征[24]。在胜利油区东营凹陷页岩油油气显示活跃段,不同类型的深、浅感应测井均表现为无差异响应特征,电阻率低侵特征在感应测井曲线上无法得到有效表征。

  • 双侧向测井仪器采用串联测量原理,对高电阻率响应敏感,电阻率低侵特征剖面会表现为深、浅侧向测井曲线幅度差。在胜利油区渤南凹陷页岩油显示活跃段,双侧向测井曲线均表现为较明显的幅度差,干层和非地质“甜点”段深、浅侧向测井曲线基本重合,测井曲线无幅度差。

  • 研究结果[25-26] 表明,在致密砂岩中(基质孔隙度小于 8%),裂缝愈发育,深、浅侧向测井曲线幅度差越大。双侧向测井曲线幅度差反映了储层裂缝的产状与发育程度。由于致密储层裂缝发育程度决定了地层的渗流能力,双侧向测井曲线幅度差实际上也是地层渗流能力的反映。对于均质的孔隙性地层,或缝洞发育呈网络状分布的储层,双侧向测井曲线的幅度差往往是地层含油性的反映[27]。因此,在页岩油地层中,双侧向测井曲线的正幅度差综合反映了地质“甜点”的渗流能力与(或)含油性。页岩油地质“甜点”物性越好,含油丰度越高,油气可动性越强,深、浅侧向测井曲线幅度差越大;反之,非地质“甜点”段双侧向测井曲线重合,无幅度差。

  • 3 页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性定量评价方法

  • 基于双侧向测井曲线幅度差,开展页岩油地质 “甜点”油气可动性定量评价方法研究,提出了页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性定量评价系数,其表达式为:

  • Cma=RD-RsRD
    (1)
  • 罗69井为渤南凹陷页岩油系统密闭取心井,丰富的岩心分析数据为油气可动性定量评价提供了条件。该井页岩油发育段主要岩性为暗色泥岩、油泥岩和油页岩,属于基质型页岩油。其地层压力系数为1.4~1.5,录井显示高气测异常值,部分井段全烃值达 100%,具有较好的油气可动性。在页岩油地质“甜点”发育段,双侧向测井曲线表现出不同的幅度差,计算的 C mo 值与自然电位、孔隙度、孔隙结构指数、流体移动指数之间具有较好的相关性。其中,C mo 与储层孔隙度和孔隙结构指数[28]呈正相关关系,储层物性越好、孔隙结构越好,C mo值越高(图1)。C mo与自然电位异常幅度、反映地层渗流能力的流体移动指数[29]呈正相关关系(图2)。罗 69 井 3 041.0~3 056.0 m 井段计算的 C mo 值较高,对应的自然电位异常幅度值也较高。

  • C mo值较好地反映了页岩油地层的储集性、孔隙结构和渗流能力。依据 C mo 计算结果,初步确定罗 69 井页岩油地质“甜点”分类标准为:C mo≥0.2,解释为Ⅰ类页岩油;0.1≤C mo<0.2,解释为Ⅱ类页岩油; C mo<0.1,解释为Ⅲ类页岩油。

  • 罗 69 井 1 号层埋深为 2 996.0~3 016.0 m 的岩心分析为层状泥质灰岩相,其 C mo 值较低,平均为 0.11,解释为Ⅱ类页岩油。2 号层埋深为 3 041.0~3 056.0 m 的岩心分析为纹层状泥质灰岩相,其 C mo 值较高,平均为 0.23,解释为Ⅰ类页岩油。3号层埋深为 3 060.0~3 075.0 m,岩心分析上段为纹层状泥质灰岩相,下段为层状纹层状泥质灰岩相,其 C mo 值表现为上段高下段低的特征,其中上段解释为Ⅰ 类页岩油,下段解释为Ⅱ类页岩油。页岩油地质 “甜点”油气可动性定量评价结果与泥页岩岩相分析的含油气品质分类结果[6] 基本一致,表明依据C mo值定量评价页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性是切实可行。

  • 图1 罗69井C mo与孔隙度和孔隙结构指数的关系

  • Fig.1 Correlation of C mo with porosity and porous structure index in Well Luo69

  • 图2 罗69井页岩油地质“甜点”综合评价结果

  • Fig.2 Stratigraphic integrated column of geological“sweet spot”of shale oil in Well Luo69

  • 4 应用实例

  • 为验证页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性定量评价方法的有效性和可靠性,结合近期页岩油勘探重点井,分别对渤南凹陷义176井、东营凹陷官斜26井和牛斜55井的页岩油地质“甜点”进行评价及分析。

  • 4.1 义176井

  • 义176井沙三段下亚段泥页岩由富有机质纹层状灰质泥岩、富有机质纹层状泥质灰岩和碳酸盐岩夹层组成,发育基质与夹层型页岩油(图3)。利用 (1)式计算 C mo值,结果表明:该井 2 号层埋深为 3 504.0~3 516.0 m 和 4 号层埋深为 3 534.0~3 540.0 m 的岩相类型为富有机质纹层状泥质灰岩相,其C mo值明显高于其他解释井段,采用罗69井页岩油地质“甜点”分类标准,解释为Ⅰ类页岩油。1 号层埋深为 3 482.0~3 494.0 m,为富有机质纹层状灰质泥岩相,含油品质差,计算的 C mo 值较小,平均值小于0.1,解释为Ⅲ类页岩油。

  • 义 176 井沙三段下亚段 13 砂组下段发育多个白云质夹层,不同夹层的双侧向测井曲线表现出不同的幅度差特征,计算的C mo值也存在较大的差别。其中,4 号层内部油斑灰质夹层(埋深为 3 534.6~3 536.4 m)的C mo值为 0.21,解释为Ⅰ类页岩油。2 号层内部白云岩夹层(埋深为 3 512.0~3 513.3 m) 的C mo值为0.3,明显高于4号层的灰质夹层,为含油性极好的薄夹层。该夹层与义页平1井A靶段相对应。A靶段(垂深为3 490.6~3 493.2 m)气测异常值高,综合解释为油层,验证了义176井夹层解释结论的可靠性。义 176 井 3 号层与 5 号层内部夹层录井无显示,其C mo值均小于0.1,解释为干层。同一层段中不同夹层的C mo值差异明显,表明利用C mo值评价夹层含油性直观有效。

  • 在页岩油发育层段,灰质或白云质薄夹层常具有较好的储集性和含油性,是地质“甜点”和工程 “甜点”的有效结合体,也是油气流入井筒的优势通道。因此,薄夹层的有效识别与含油性评价对于压裂改造选层和水平井靶点选择极其重要[30]

  • 4.2 官斜26井

  • 官斜 26 井沙四段上亚段纯上次亚段为灰质夹层型页岩油,其页岩油发育层段地层压力高,油气显示活跃(图4)。

  • 图3 义176井页岩油地质“甜点”综合评价结果

  • Fig.3 Stratigraphic integrated column of geological“sweet spots”of shale oil in Well Yi176

  • 对比该井沙四段上亚段纯上次亚段 2 砂组的 1 号层(埋深为3 358.4~3 372.0 m)与纯上次亚段3砂组的2号层(埋深为3 396.4~3 400.8 m)的C mo值,二者存在明显的差异。1号层页岩油地质“甜点”发育厚度大,C mo值高,解释为Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类页岩油;其中,埋深为 3 360.0~3 362.4 m 发育多个灰质夹层,C mo值为全井段最高值,气测异常值高,解释为Ⅰ类页岩油。2号层页岩油地质“甜点”厚度较薄,C mo值较低,解释为Ⅱ类页岩油。总体而言,沙四段上亚段纯上次亚段2砂组页岩油地质“甜点”发育程度好于 3砂组。

  • 该井采用组合缝网压裂工艺。其中3砂组埋深为 3 399.7~3 413.7 m 井段的破裂压力为 53.9 MPa,总进液量为 1 130.2 m3,加砂量为 19.4 m3;2 砂组埋深为 3 362.6~3 389.2 m 井段的破裂压力为 46.3 MPa,总进液量为 1 252.5 m3,加砂量为 43.0 m3。套管畅放,累积产液量为 1 796.35 m3,累积产油量为 738.64 m3。分析压裂施工参数,3砂组可压性差,破裂压力大,进液量和加砂量少,应为地层产油次要贡献层;2 砂组可压性好,破裂压力小,进液量和加砂量高,应为地层产油主要贡献层。页岩油地质 “甜点”评价结果与压裂试油结论基本一致。需要说明的是,由于该井泥浆矿化度过高,泥浆电阻率仅为 0.13 Ω·m/18℃,对双侧向测井曲线幅度差产生影响,导致C mo值计算结果偏低。

  • 4.3 牛斜55井

  • 牛斜 55 井沙四段上亚段纯上次亚段页岩油分段压裂后试油,最高日产油量达68.13 m3 /d。该井纯上次亚段页岩油地层灰质夹层和白云质夹层较发育,采用页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性定量评价方法分析其基质与夹层的含油性(图5)。该井 3 628.0~3 700.0 m 井段的 C mo值较高,普遍大于 0.1,页岩油地质“甜点”厚度大,含油性好。密度测井和自然伽马测井曲线显示该段白云质薄夹层发育,其C mo值一般大于0.2。其中,3 688.5~3 690.0 m 井段测井曲线指示白云质含量极高,计算的 C mo 值达 0.35,为全井段最好的含油夹层,明显好于义 176 井和官斜26井的灰质夹层。较厚的页岩油地质“甜点”和含油性较好的白云质夹层,为该井压裂后获得高产提供了地质基础[31]

  • 图4 官斜26井页岩油地质“甜点”综合评价结果

  • Fig.4 Stratigraphic integrated column of geological“sweet spots”of shale oil in Well GX26

  • 图5 牛斜55井页岩油地质“甜点”综合评价结果

  • Fig.5 Stratigraphic integrated column of geological“sweet spots”of shale oil in Well NX55

  • 5 结论

  • 胜利油区多口页岩油井的应用实例分析结果表明,页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性定量评价方法有效地解决了页岩油“甜点”测井评价技术的瓶颈。基于双侧向测井判别的页岩油“甜点”具有较好的含油性和较强的油气可动性,工程可压性好,是地质“甜点”和工程“甜点”的有效统一体。相比常规页岩油“甜点”测井多参数评价方法,页岩油地质 “甜点”油气可动性定量评价方法是一种全新的页岩油测井评价方法,具有快速、直观、有效的特点,对于页岩油认识与测井评价具有重要的意义。

  • 目前,针对页岩油的泥浆体系选型和测井系列优化工作尚未有效开展。由于泥浆滤液矿化度与地层水矿化度不匹配、测井系列选择不合适、钻开页岩油层后未及时测井等原因,页岩油地质“甜点” 本应具有的双侧向测井低侵特征未能很好的表现出来。今后工作中,应进一步强化页岩油泥浆体系选型和测井系列的优化工作,及时进行测井,有效发挥其在页岩油评价中的作用。

  • 符号解释

  • C mo——页岩油地质“甜点”油气可动性定量评价系数,小数;

  • R D——深侧向电阻率,Ω·m;

  • R S——浅侧向电阻率,Ω·m。

  • 参考文献

    • [1] 宋明水.济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与现状[J].油气地质与采收率,2019,26(1):1-12.SONG Mingshui.Practice and current status of shale oil explora⁃ tion in Jiyang Depression[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Ef⁃ ficiency,2019,26(1):1-12.

    • [2] 王永诗,李政,巩建强,等.济阳坳陷页岩油气评价方法——以沾化凹陷罗家地区为例[J].石油学报,2013,34(1):83-91.WANG Yongshi,LI Zheng,GONG Jianqiang,et al.Discussion on an evaluation method of shale oil and gas in Jiyang depression:a case study on Luojia area in Zhanhua sag[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica,2013,34(1):83-91.

    • [3] 张林晔,孔祥星,张春荣,等.济阳坳陷下第三系优质烃源岩的发育及其意义[J].地球化学,2003,32(1):35-42.ZHANG Linye,KONG Xiangxing,ZHANG Chunrong,et al.Highquality oil-prone source rocks in Jiyang Depression[J].Geochimi⁃ ca,2003,32(1):35-42.

    • [4] 张春池,彭文泉,胡小辉,等.沾化凹陷沙河街组页岩气成藏条件研究[J].特种油气藏,2019,26(3):12-17.ZHANG Chunchi,PENG Wenquan,HU Xiaohui,et al.Shale gas accumulation conditions of Shahejie formation in Zhanhua depres⁃ sion[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2019,26(3):12-17.

    • [5] 余涛,卢双舫,李俊乾,等.东营凹陷页岩油游离资源有利区预测[J].断块油气田,2018,25(1):16-21.YU Tao,LU Shuangfang,LI Junqian,et al.Prediction for favorable area of shale oil free resources in Dongying Sag[J].Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field,2018,25(1):16-21.

    • [6] 包友书.济阳坳陷超压和应力场对页岩油富集的影响[J].断块油气田,2018,25(5):585-588.BAO Youshu.Influence of overpressure and stress on shale oil en⁃ richment in Jiyang Depression[J].Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field,2018,25(5):585-588.

    • [7] 杨智,侯连华,林森虎,等.吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组致密油、页岩油地质特征与勘探潜力[J].中国石油勘探,2018,23(4):76-85.YANG Zhi,HOU Lianhua,LIN Senhu,et al.Geologic characteris⁃ tics and exploration potential of tight oil and shale oil in Lucaogou Formation in Jimsar sag[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2018,23(4):76-85.

    • [8] 张鹏飞,卢双舫,李俊乾,等.湖相页岩油有利甜点区优选方法及应用——以渤海湾盆地东营凹陷沙河街组为例[J].石油与天然气地质,2019,40(6):1 339-1 350.ZHANG Pengfei,LU Shuangfang,LI Junqian,et al.Identification method of sweet spot zone in lacustrine shale oil reservoir and its application:A case study of the Shahejie Formation in Dongying Sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2019,40(6):1 339-1 350.

    • [9] 冯国奇,李吉君,刘洁文,等.泌阳凹陷页岩油富集及可动性探讨[J].石油与天然气地质,2019,40(6):1 236-1 246.FENG Guoqi,LI Jijun,LIU Jiewen,et al.Discussion on the enrich⁃ ment and mobility of continental shale oil in Biyang Depression [J].Oil & Gas Geology,2019,40(6):1 236-1 246.

    • [10] 李浩,陆建林,王保华,等.渤海湾盆地东濮凹陷陆相页岩油可动性影响因素与资源潜力[J].石油实验地质,2020,42(4):632-638.LI Hao,LU Jianlin,WANG Baohua,et al.Controlling factors of continental shale oil mobility and resource potential in Dongpu Sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2020,42(4):632-638.

    • [11] 王然,常秋生,钱永新,等.准噶尔盆地吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组页岩油“甜点体”储集特征及成因机理[J].石油实验地质,2020,42(4):604-611.WANG Ran,CHANG Qiusheng,QIAN Yongxin,et al.Reservoir characteristics and genesis of shale oil“sweet spots”in Lucaogou Formation,Jimsar Sag,Junggar Basin[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2020,42(4):604-611.

    • [12] 赵铭海,傅爱兵,关丽,等.罗家地区页岩油气测井评价方法 [J].油气地质与采收率,2012,19(6):20-24.ZHAO Minghai,FU Aibing,GUAN Li,et al.Logging evaluation method of shale oil and gas reservoir in Luojia area[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2012,19(6):20-24.

    • [13] 张晋言.页岩油测井评价方法及其应用[J].地球物理学进展,2012,27(3):1 154-1 162.ZHANG Jinyan.Well logging evaluation method of shale oil reser⁃ voirs and its applications[J].Progress in Geophysics,2012,27(3):1 154-1 162.

    • [14] 张晋言,孙建孟.利用测井资料评价泥页岩油气“五性”指标 [J].测井技术,2012,36(2):146-153.ZHANG Jinyan,SUN Jianmeng.Log evaluation on shale hydrocar⁃ bon reservoir[J].Well Logging Technology,2012,36(2):146-153.

    • [15] 孙建孟.基于新“七性”关系的煤层气、页岩气测井评价[J].测井技术,2013,37(5):457-465.SUN Jianmeng.Coalbed methane and shale gas evaluation based on new seven related logging goals[J].Well Logging Technology,2013,37(5):457-465.

    • [16] 夏宏泉,刘畅,王瀚玮,等.页岩含气量测井评价方法研究[J].特种油气藏,2019,26(3):1-6.XIA Hongquan,LIU Chang,WANG Hanwei,et al.Logging evalua⁃ tion of shale gas content[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2019,26(3):1-6.

    • [17] 宋国奇,徐兴友,李政,等.济阳坳陷古近系陆相页岩油产量的影响因素[J].石油与天然气地质,2015,36(3):463-471.SONG Guoqi,XU Xingyou,LI Zheng,et al.Factors controlling oil production from Paleogene shale in Jiyang depression[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2015,36(3):463-471.

    • [18] 孙焕泉.济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与认识[J].中国石油勘探,2017,22(4):1-14.SUN Huanquan.Exploration practice and cognitions of shale oil in Jiyang depression[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2017,22(4):1-14.

    • [19] 宁方兴,王学军,郝雪峰,等.济阳坳陷页岩油甜点评价方法研究[J].科学技术与工程,2015,15(35):11-16.NING Fangxing,WANG Xuejun,HAO Xuefeng,et al.Evaluation method of shale oil sweetspots in Jiyang Depression[J].Science Technology and Engineering,2015,15(35):11-16.

    • [20] 宁方兴.济阳坳陷页岩油富集机理[J].特种油气藏,2015,22(3):27-30.NING Fangxing.Mechanism of shale oil enrichment in Jiyang De⁃ pression[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2015,22(3):27-30.

    • [21] 杨智,侯连华,陶士振,等.致密油与页岩油形成条件与“甜点区”评价[J].石油勘探与开发,2015,42(5):555-565.YANG Zhi,HOU Lianhua,TAO Shizhen,et al.Formation condi⁃ tions and“sweet spot”evaluation of tight oil and shale oil[J].Pe⁃ troleum Exploration and Development,2015,42(5):555-565.

    • [22] 冯军,张博为,冯子辉,等.松辽盆地北部致密砂岩储集层原油可动性影响因素[J].石油勘探与开发,2019,46(2):312-321.FENG Jun,ZHANG Bowei,FENG Zihui,et al.Crude oil mobility and its controlling factors in tight sand reservoirs in northern Songliao Basin,China[J].Petroleum Exploration and Develop⁃ ment,2019,46(2):312-321.

    • [23] 李霞,周灿灿,赵杰,等.泥页岩油藏测井评价新方法——以松辽盆地古龙凹陷青山口组为例[J].中国石油勘探,2014,19(3):57-65.LI Xia,ZHOU Cancan,ZHAO Jie,et al.New logging evaluation method for shale reservoirs:Taking Qingshankou formation in Gu⁃ long Sag of Songliao basin for instance[J].China Petroleum Explo⁃ ration,2014,19(3):57-65.

    • [24] 中国石油勘探与生产分公司.低阻油气藏测井识别评价方法与技术[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2006:83-89.PetroChina Exploration and Production Company.Logging evalua⁃ tion method and technology of low-resistivity reservoirs[M].Bei⁃ jing:Petroleum Industry Press,2006:83-89.

    • [25] 吴文圣,陈钢花,雍世和.利用双侧向测井方法判别裂缝的有效性[J].石油大学学报:自然科学版,2001,25(1):87-89.WU Wensheng,CHEN Ganghua,YONG Shihe.Determination of effectiveness of fractures using dual laterolog[J].Journal of the University of Petroleum,China:Edition of Natural Science,2001,25(1):87-89.

    • [26] 肖承文,朱筱敏,李进福,等.高压低渗致密裂缝性砂岩测井评价技术[J].新疆石油地质,2007,28(6):761-763.XIAO Chengwen,ZHU Xiaomin,LI Jinfu,et al.Well-logging eval⁃ uation for fractured tight sand reservoirs with high pressure and low permeability[J].Xinjiang Petroleum Geology,2007,28(6):761-763.

    • [27] 曾文冲.油气藏储集层测井评价技术[M].北京:石油工业出版社,1991:53-54,176-183.ZENG Wenchong.Logging evaluation technique of oil and gas res⁃ ervoir[M].Beijing:Petroleum Industry Press,1991:53-54,176-183.

    • [28] 中国石油勘探与生产分公司.低孔低渗油气藏测井评价技术及应用[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2009:31-34.PetroChina Exploration & Production Company.Evaluation tech⁃ nology and application of well logging in low-porosity and lowpermeability oil and gas reservoirs[M].Beijing:Petroleum Indus⁃ try Press,2009:31-34.

    • [29] 高松洋.测井资料在裂缝识别中的应用——以H地区砂岩储层为例[J].石油天然气学报,2009,31(2):272-274.GAO Songyang.Application of logging data to fracture identifica⁃ tion:A case study of sand reservoir in Area H[J].Journal of Oil and Gas Technology,2009,31(2):272-274.

    • [30] 刘雅利,刘鹏.陆相富有机质泥页岩中夹层特征及其作用—— 以济阳坳陷为例[J].油气地质与采收率,2019,26(5):1-9.LIU Yali,LIU Peng.Interlayer characteristics and their effect on continental facies organic-rich shale:A case study of Jiyang De⁃ pression[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2019,26(5):1-9.

    • [31] 滕建彬.东营凹陷利页1井泥页岩中白云石成因及层序界面意义[J].油气地质与采收率,2018,25(2):1-7,36.TENG Jianbin.Genesis of dolomite in shale drilled by Well Liye1 in Dongying Sag and its significance on sequence boundary indi⁃ cation[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2018,25(2):1-7,36.

  • 参考文献

    • [1] 宋明水.济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与现状[J].油气地质与采收率,2019,26(1):1-12.SONG Mingshui.Practice and current status of shale oil explora⁃ tion in Jiyang Depression[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Ef⁃ ficiency,2019,26(1):1-12.

    • [2] 王永诗,李政,巩建强,等.济阳坳陷页岩油气评价方法——以沾化凹陷罗家地区为例[J].石油学报,2013,34(1):83-91.WANG Yongshi,LI Zheng,GONG Jianqiang,et al.Discussion on an evaluation method of shale oil and gas in Jiyang depression:a case study on Luojia area in Zhanhua sag[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica,2013,34(1):83-91.

    • [3] 张林晔,孔祥星,张春荣,等.济阳坳陷下第三系优质烃源岩的发育及其意义[J].地球化学,2003,32(1):35-42.ZHANG Linye,KONG Xiangxing,ZHANG Chunrong,et al.Highquality oil-prone source rocks in Jiyang Depression[J].Geochimi⁃ ca,2003,32(1):35-42.

    • [4] 张春池,彭文泉,胡小辉,等.沾化凹陷沙河街组页岩气成藏条件研究[J].特种油气藏,2019,26(3):12-17.ZHANG Chunchi,PENG Wenquan,HU Xiaohui,et al.Shale gas accumulation conditions of Shahejie formation in Zhanhua depres⁃ sion[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2019,26(3):12-17.

    • [5] 余涛,卢双舫,李俊乾,等.东营凹陷页岩油游离资源有利区预测[J].断块油气田,2018,25(1):16-21.YU Tao,LU Shuangfang,LI Junqian,et al.Prediction for favorable area of shale oil free resources in Dongying Sag[J].Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field,2018,25(1):16-21.

    • [6] 包友书.济阳坳陷超压和应力场对页岩油富集的影响[J].断块油气田,2018,25(5):585-588.BAO Youshu.Influence of overpressure and stress on shale oil en⁃ richment in Jiyang Depression[J].Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field,2018,25(5):585-588.

    • [7] 杨智,侯连华,林森虎,等.吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组致密油、页岩油地质特征与勘探潜力[J].中国石油勘探,2018,23(4):76-85.YANG Zhi,HOU Lianhua,LIN Senhu,et al.Geologic characteris⁃ tics and exploration potential of tight oil and shale oil in Lucaogou Formation in Jimsar sag[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2018,23(4):76-85.

    • [8] 张鹏飞,卢双舫,李俊乾,等.湖相页岩油有利甜点区优选方法及应用——以渤海湾盆地东营凹陷沙河街组为例[J].石油与天然气地质,2019,40(6):1 339-1 350.ZHANG Pengfei,LU Shuangfang,LI Junqian,et al.Identification method of sweet spot zone in lacustrine shale oil reservoir and its application:A case study of the Shahejie Formation in Dongying Sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2019,40(6):1 339-1 350.

    • [9] 冯国奇,李吉君,刘洁文,等.泌阳凹陷页岩油富集及可动性探讨[J].石油与天然气地质,2019,40(6):1 236-1 246.FENG Guoqi,LI Jijun,LIU Jiewen,et al.Discussion on the enrich⁃ ment and mobility of continental shale oil in Biyang Depression [J].Oil & Gas Geology,2019,40(6):1 236-1 246.

    • [10] 李浩,陆建林,王保华,等.渤海湾盆地东濮凹陷陆相页岩油可动性影响因素与资源潜力[J].石油实验地质,2020,42(4):632-638.LI Hao,LU Jianlin,WANG Baohua,et al.Controlling factors of continental shale oil mobility and resource potential in Dongpu Sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2020,42(4):632-638.

    • [11] 王然,常秋生,钱永新,等.准噶尔盆地吉木萨尔凹陷芦草沟组页岩油“甜点体”储集特征及成因机理[J].石油实验地质,2020,42(4):604-611.WANG Ran,CHANG Qiusheng,QIAN Yongxin,et al.Reservoir characteristics and genesis of shale oil“sweet spots”in Lucaogou Formation,Jimsar Sag,Junggar Basin[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2020,42(4):604-611.

    • [12] 赵铭海,傅爱兵,关丽,等.罗家地区页岩油气测井评价方法 [J].油气地质与采收率,2012,19(6):20-24.ZHAO Minghai,FU Aibing,GUAN Li,et al.Logging evaluation method of shale oil and gas reservoir in Luojia area[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2012,19(6):20-24.

    • [13] 张晋言.页岩油测井评价方法及其应用[J].地球物理学进展,2012,27(3):1 154-1 162.ZHANG Jinyan.Well logging evaluation method of shale oil reser⁃ voirs and its applications[J].Progress in Geophysics,2012,27(3):1 154-1 162.

    • [14] 张晋言,孙建孟.利用测井资料评价泥页岩油气“五性”指标 [J].测井技术,2012,36(2):146-153.ZHANG Jinyan,SUN Jianmeng.Log evaluation on shale hydrocar⁃ bon reservoir[J].Well Logging Technology,2012,36(2):146-153.

    • [15] 孙建孟.基于新“七性”关系的煤层气、页岩气测井评价[J].测井技术,2013,37(5):457-465.SUN Jianmeng.Coalbed methane and shale gas evaluation based on new seven related logging goals[J].Well Logging Technology,2013,37(5):457-465.

    • [16] 夏宏泉,刘畅,王瀚玮,等.页岩含气量测井评价方法研究[J].特种油气藏,2019,26(3):1-6.XIA Hongquan,LIU Chang,WANG Hanwei,et al.Logging evalua⁃ tion of shale gas content[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2019,26(3):1-6.

    • [17] 宋国奇,徐兴友,李政,等.济阳坳陷古近系陆相页岩油产量的影响因素[J].石油与天然气地质,2015,36(3):463-471.SONG Guoqi,XU Xingyou,LI Zheng,et al.Factors controlling oil production from Paleogene shale in Jiyang depression[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2015,36(3):463-471.

    • [18] 孙焕泉.济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与认识[J].中国石油勘探,2017,22(4):1-14.SUN Huanquan.Exploration practice and cognitions of shale oil in Jiyang depression[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2017,22(4):1-14.

    • [19] 宁方兴,王学军,郝雪峰,等.济阳坳陷页岩油甜点评价方法研究[J].科学技术与工程,2015,15(35):11-16.NING Fangxing,WANG Xuejun,HAO Xuefeng,et al.Evaluation method of shale oil sweetspots in Jiyang Depression[J].Science Technology and Engineering,2015,15(35):11-16.

    • [20] 宁方兴.济阳坳陷页岩油富集机理[J].特种油气藏,2015,22(3):27-30.NING Fangxing.Mechanism of shale oil enrichment in Jiyang De⁃ pression[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2015,22(3):27-30.

    • [21] 杨智,侯连华,陶士振,等.致密油与页岩油形成条件与“甜点区”评价[J].石油勘探与开发,2015,42(5):555-565.YANG Zhi,HOU Lianhua,TAO Shizhen,et al.Formation condi⁃ tions and“sweet spot”evaluation of tight oil and shale oil[J].Pe⁃ troleum Exploration and Development,2015,42(5):555-565.

    • [22] 冯军,张博为,冯子辉,等.松辽盆地北部致密砂岩储集层原油可动性影响因素[J].石油勘探与开发,2019,46(2):312-321.FENG Jun,ZHANG Bowei,FENG Zihui,et al.Crude oil mobility and its controlling factors in tight sand reservoirs in northern Songliao Basin,China[J].Petroleum Exploration and Develop⁃ ment,2019,46(2):312-321.

    • [23] 李霞,周灿灿,赵杰,等.泥页岩油藏测井评价新方法——以松辽盆地古龙凹陷青山口组为例[J].中国石油勘探,2014,19(3):57-65.LI Xia,ZHOU Cancan,ZHAO Jie,et al.New logging evaluation method for shale reservoirs:Taking Qingshankou formation in Gu⁃ long Sag of Songliao basin for instance[J].China Petroleum Explo⁃ ration,2014,19(3):57-65.

    • [24] 中国石油勘探与生产分公司.低阻油气藏测井识别评价方法与技术[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2006:83-89.PetroChina Exploration and Production Company.Logging evalua⁃ tion method and technology of low-resistivity reservoirs[M].Bei⁃ jing:Petroleum Industry Press,2006:83-89.

    • [25] 吴文圣,陈钢花,雍世和.利用双侧向测井方法判别裂缝的有效性[J].石油大学学报:自然科学版,2001,25(1):87-89.WU Wensheng,CHEN Ganghua,YONG Shihe.Determination of effectiveness of fractures using dual laterolog[J].Journal of the University of Petroleum,China:Edition of Natural Science,2001,25(1):87-89.

    • [26] 肖承文,朱筱敏,李进福,等.高压低渗致密裂缝性砂岩测井评价技术[J].新疆石油地质,2007,28(6):761-763.XIAO Chengwen,ZHU Xiaomin,LI Jinfu,et al.Well-logging eval⁃ uation for fractured tight sand reservoirs with high pressure and low permeability[J].Xinjiang Petroleum Geology,2007,28(6):761-763.

    • [27] 曾文冲.油气藏储集层测井评价技术[M].北京:石油工业出版社,1991:53-54,176-183.ZENG Wenchong.Logging evaluation technique of oil and gas res⁃ ervoir[M].Beijing:Petroleum Industry Press,1991:53-54,176-183.

    • [28] 中国石油勘探与生产分公司.低孔低渗油气藏测井评价技术及应用[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2009:31-34.PetroChina Exploration & Production Company.Evaluation tech⁃ nology and application of well logging in low-porosity and lowpermeability oil and gas reservoirs[M].Beijing:Petroleum Indus⁃ try Press,2009:31-34.

    • [29] 高松洋.测井资料在裂缝识别中的应用——以H地区砂岩储层为例[J].石油天然气学报,2009,31(2):272-274.GAO Songyang.Application of logging data to fracture identifica⁃ tion:A case study of sand reservoir in Area H[J].Journal of Oil and Gas Technology,2009,31(2):272-274.

    • [30] 刘雅利,刘鹏.陆相富有机质泥页岩中夹层特征及其作用—— 以济阳坳陷为例[J].油气地质与采收率,2019,26(5):1-9.LIU Yali,LIU Peng.Interlayer characteristics and their effect on continental facies organic-rich shale:A case study of Jiyang De⁃ pression[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2019,26(5):1-9.

    • [31] 滕建彬.东营凹陷利页1井泥页岩中白云石成因及层序界面意义[J].油气地质与采收率,2018,25(2):1-7,36.TENG Jianbin.Genesis of dolomite in shale drilled by Well Liye1 in Dongying Sag and its significance on sequence boundary indi⁃ cation[J].Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency,2018,25(2):1-7,36.