mineralogical and toc trends in the ohio utica shale
DESCRIPTION
Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale. Jake Harrington Dr . Julie Sheets, Dr. Dave Cole, Dr. Sue Welch, Mik e Murphy, Alex Swift. SEMCAL. Overview. Purpose Sample Selection Methodology Results Analysis The Future. 500 nm. D. Cole, SEMCAL, OSU. Why the Utica?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica
ShaleJake Harrington
Dr. Julie Sheets, Dr. Dave Cole, Dr. Sue Welch, Mike Murphy, Alex Swift
SEMCAL
![Page 2: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Overview
• Purpose• Sample Selection• Methodology• Results• Analysis• The Future
D. Cole, SEMCAL, OSU
500 nm
![Page 3: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Why the Utica?• Significant energy potential• Not much data yet available• To determine geochemical and mineralogical trends in
Utica/Point Pleasant across Ohio
Why Mineralogy and Total Organic Carbon (TOC)?
• Possible relationship between minerals and TOC concentration
• Comparable to other unconventional reservoirs
![Page 4: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Ohio Stratigraphy
Ohio Geological Survey
![Page 5: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Sample Selection• Core obtained from
ODNR• Part of Utica/Point
Pleasant Formation• Depth Range: 1220 –
9564 ft• Longitudinal Range:
84.7°W to 81.4°W• 24 samples from 7 wells
![Page 6: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Utica Thickness
Ohio Geological Survey
![Page 7: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Methodology
• PANalytical XRD• Randomly oriented
powder samples• Qualitative analysis
with intensity and 2θ to identify mineral phases
• DD Eberl’s Excel program RockJock used for quantification
X-Ray Diffraction Elemental Analysis• Costech EA• Samples treated with
hydrochloric acid to dissolve all inorganic carbon
![Page 8: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Location Data
![Page 9: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Barth and Wood Co. Wells TOC increasing with increasing depth
TOC increasing with decreasing depth
![Page 10: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Location Data
![Page 11: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Location Data
![Page 12: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Mineralogical Data
![Page 13: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Mineralogical Trends
![Page 14: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Mineralogical Trends
![Page 15: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Summary by the Numbers
• Average TOC across all samples is 1.70%• Highest TOC values are found in the east and
at greater depths • Average TOC, west/east: 1.78/1.66• Average wt% of clays, west/east: 45/37• Average wt% of carbonates, west/east: 19/44• Anything but consistent
![Page 16: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
What’s Next?
• Samples, samples, samples• Associating porosity with clay content, TOC• Checking trends with another shale gas play
![Page 17: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
References
• Shell Exploration and Production Company• Friends of Orton Hall• Dr. Dave Cole• Drs. Julie Sheets and Sue Welch• Mike Murphy, Alex Swift, Brandon McAdams• SEMCAL
Acknowledgements
Eberl, D.D., 2003 User's guide to RockJock-A program for determining quantitative mineralogy from powder X-ray diffraction data. Revised 11/30/09. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 03-78, p. 48.Ross, D. J. K. and R. M. Bustin, 2009, The importance of shale composition and pore structure upon gas storage potential of shale gas reservoirs, Marine and Petroleum Geology, vol. 26, no. 6, p. 916-927.Ryder, R., R. Burruss, and J. Hatch, 1998, Black shale source rocks and oil generation in the Cambrian and Ordovician of the central Appalachian basin, USA, Aapg Bulletin-American Association of Petroleum Geologists, vol. 82, no. 3, p. 412-441.Wicksron, L.H., Gray, J.D., and Seieglitz, R.D., 1992, Stratigraphy, structure, and production history of the Trenton Limestone (Ordovician) and adjacent strata in northwestern Ohio, Ohio Division of Geological Survey, no. 143, p. 78.Zhu, Y., E. Liu, A. Martinez, M. A. Payne, C. E. Harris, C. M. Sayers editor, and A. Jackson editor, 2011, Understanding geophysical responses of shale-gas plays, Leading Edge (Tulsa, OK), vol. 30, no. 3, p. 332-338.
![Page 18: Mineralogical and TOC Trends in the Ohio Utica Shale](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062410/56816631550346895dd99a30/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Questions?