About This Item

Share This Item

The AAPG/Datapages Combined Publications Database

AAPG Special Volumes

Abstract


 
Chapter from: M 66:  Hydrocarbon Migration And Its Near-Surface Expression
Edited By 
Dietmar Schumacher and Michael A Abrams
 

Geochemistry, Generation, Migration

Published 1996 as part of Memoir 66
Copyright © 1996 The American Association of Petroleum Geologists.  All Rights Reserved

Foreword

Utilization of Hydrocarbon Seep Information

Geochemical prospecting for petroleum is the search for chemically identifiable surface or near-surface occurrences of hydrocarbons as clues to the location of oil or gas accumulations. It extends through a range from observation of clearly visible oil and gas seepages at one extreme to the identification of minute traces of hydrocarbons determinable only by highly sophisticated analytical methods at the other. There is no question in Previous HitprincipleNext Hit about the value of the method for petroleum exploration if properly applied. Historically, most of the world's major petroleum-bearing areas and many of its largest oil and gas fields were first called to attention because of visible oil and gas seepages. The mere presence of higher hydrocarbons in a region is encouraging in that it usually proves that conditions in that region have been suitable for at Previous HitleastNext Hit some petroleum generation. Often seepages are in close proximity to commercial oil and gas pools, but the absence of seepage does not at all negate prospects because it may only indicate that there has been little escape from such pools due to good sealing rocks.

Oil and gas are mobile fluids and rocks are generally permeable. Surface oil and gas seeps primarily reflect avenues of migration (or escape) from deeper and sometimes laterally distant locations. Moreover, because avenues of migration (or escape) from deeper accumulations vary considerably in the degree to which they are sealed, the quantitative size of a seep has little relationship to the size of the accumulation. Some small accumulations are marked by strong visible seepages, whereas some of the largest accumulations are so well sealed that they show no visible seepages and only microscopic seepages or none at all. The value of seepages, visible or microscopic, is thus largely a matter of the accuracy with which they can be interpreted geologically. In some case (e.g., Burgan field) a well drilled vertically at the site of seepage would have discovered the field. In other cases where escape of hydrocarbons has been along low dipping fault planes or low dipping carrier beds, surface seepages may be many miles laterally from vertical superposition over the oil or gas accumulation. Again, the value of the information on the seepage, visible or microscopic, is always there, but it is only the geologic interpretation that allows cashing in on its value.

On land, most visible seepages have already been recorded and the nature of the relationship to subsurface petroleum accumulations has been at Previous HitleastTop studied if not always successfully determined. The main task now for geochemical prospecting is the identification of the invisible or less clearly manifested "seepages" that can be determined only by detailed chemical analysis of fluids in surface and near-surface rocks. The problems are not whether there is any value to the data but rather are (1) the techniques for identification, (2) the geologic interpretation, and (3) the quality of the interpretation good enough to justify the cost.

Offshore, the situation is slightly different. Visual observation of offshore seepages has been impeded by the water cover, and reliance must be placed mainly on chemical analysis of the water column and the interstitial waters filling the pores of the blanket of young sediment covering the sea floor. Again, there seems to me no question of the innate value of the geochemical information, positive or negative. And again, the problems are with the techniques of identification and geologic interpretation, and whether the interpretation is good enough to justify costs. There is nothing wrong with the concept; it is only a question of our ability to collect the data adequately and to interpret the results correctly, at a reasonable cost.

A geochemical survey should be thought of not as a black magic means of spotting the location of oil and gas pools but only as a simple common sense method of gathering data on hydrocarbon occurrences too dilute to make visible seeps or impregnations--data which if collected reliably, interpreted wisely, and used intelligently along with all other lines of evidence will always be helpful in petroleum exploration of any area.
 
 

Hollis D. Hedberg

View the First Page

A text abstract of this article is not available. The first page of the PDF appears below.

You may download the first page as a PDF.

Pay-Per-View Purchase Options

The article is available through a document delivery service. Explain these Purchase Options.

Watermarked PDF Document: $14
Open PDF Document: $24