Shale Gas Content Calculation of the Triassic Yanchang Formation in the Southeastern Ordos Basin, China

Jiao Su, Yingchu Shen, Jin Hao and Bo Liu
Additional contact information
Jiao Su: School of Earth Sciences and Resources, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China
Yingchu Shen: School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Jin Hao: Key Laboratory of Shale Gas and Geoengineering, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China
Bo Liu: Oil and Gas Research Center, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China

Energies, 2017, vol. 10, issue 12, 1-18

Abstract: Shale gas content is the key parameter for shale gas potential evaluation and favorable area prediction. Therefore, it is very important to determine shale gas content accurately. Generally, we use the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) method for coal reservoirs to calculate the gas content of shale reservoirs. However, shale reservoirs are different from coal reservoirs in depth, pressure, core collection, etc. This method would inevitably cause problems. In order to make the USBM method more suitable for shale reservoirs, an improved USBM method is put forward on the basis of systematic analysis of core pressure history and temperature history during shale gas degassing. The improved USBM method modifies the calculation method of the gas loss time, and determines the temperature balance time of water heating. In addition, we give the calculation method of adsorption gas content and free gas content, especially the new method of calculating the oil dissolved gas content and water dissolved gas content that are easily neglected. We used the direct method (USBM and the improved USBM) and the indirect method (including the calculation of adsorption gas, free gas and the dissolved gas method) to calculate the shale gas content of 16 shale samples of the Triassic Yanchang Formation in the Southeastern Ordos Basin, China. The results of the improved USBM method show that the total shale gas content is high, with an average of 3.97 m 3 /t, and the lost shale gas content is the largest proportion with an average of 62%. The total shale gas content calculated by the improved USBM method is greater than that of the USBM method. The results of the indirect method show that the total shale gas content is large, with an average of 4.11 m 3 /t, and the adsorption shale gas content is the largest proportion with an average of 71%. The oil dissolved shale gas content which should be paid attention to accounts for about 7.8%. The discrepancy between the direct method and indirect method is reduced by using the improved USBM method, and the improved USBM method could be more practical and accurate than the USBM method.

Keywords: shale gas; lost shale gas content; oil dissolved shale gas content; improved USBM method; Ordos Basin (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/1949/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/1949/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:10:y:2017:i:12:p:1949-:d:120314

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().