基于改进的层次分析法的页岩气开发选区评价方法

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2021.02.009

Abstract

Abstract:

The evaluation of shale gas development area selection is an important part of shale gas development, and the effectiveness of evaluation methods is conducive to the efficient development of shale gas. Based on 9 candidate blocks of exploration and development mature and immature blocks in Fuling Shale Gas Field, the influence of different geological and engineering parameters on the evaluation of selected areas has been systematically analyzed, and the evaluation index of the blocks have been selected. Among these index, gas content, compressibility and economy are three important aspects of shale gas development area selection evaluation. Thereafter, the analytic hierarchy process and the mean square error method are used to determine the combined weight of the index, which improve the accuracy of the weight coefficients and establish an evaluation method for shale gas development area selection. The research result shows that in the process of selecting shale gas development areas, the main evaluation index are total hydrocarbon value measured by gas logging, fault development degree, formation pressure coefficient, topographic features, fracture development degree of target layer and porosity. According to the development practice in the Fuling Shale Gas Field, the evaluation results are in good agreement with the actual situation, indicating that the evaluation method for shale gas development area selection based on the improved analytic hierarchy process is feasible.

Key words: shale gas, development area selection, analytic hierarchy process, mean square deviation method, shale gas development area selection coefficient

CLC Number:

TE121

LU Yaqiu,WANG Jin,CAO Mengxi. Evaluation method of shale gas development area selection based on improved analytic hierarchy process[J].Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2021, 11(2): 204-211.

Figures/Tables 10

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Fig. 1

Table 7

Fig. 2

Table 8

References 19

[1]	张鉴, 王兰生, 杨跃明, 等. 四川盆地海相页岩气选区评价方法建立及应用[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2016,27(3):433-441. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2016.03.0433
	ZHANG Jian, WANG Lansheng, YANG Yueming, et al. The development and application of the evaluation method of marine shale gas in Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2016,27(3):433-441. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2016.03.0433
[2]	梁冰, 代媛媛, 陈天宇, 等. 复杂地质条件页岩气勘探开发区块灰关联度优选[J]. 煤炭学报, 2014,39(3):524-530.
	LIANG Bing, DAI Yuanyuan, CHEN Tianyu, et al. Grey correlation optimization for shale gas exploration and development areas of complicated geological parameter features[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2014,39(3):524-530.
[3]	李武广, 杨胜来, 王珍珍, 等. 基于模糊优化分析法的页岩气开发选区模型[J]. 煤炭学报, 2013,38(2):264-270.
	LI Wuguang, YANG Shenglai, WANG Zhenzhen, et al. Shale gas development evaluation model based on the fuzzy optimization analysis[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2013,38(2):264-270.
[4]	BOWKER K A. Barnett Shale gas production, Fort Worth Basin: Issues and discussion[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2007,91(4):523-533. doi: 10.1306/06190606018
[5]	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 evaluation[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2008,92(1):87-125. doi: 10.1306/09040707048
[6]	QUAN T M, ADIGWE E N, RIEDINGER N, et al. Evaluating nitrogen isotopes as proxies for depositional environmental conditions in shales: Comparing Caney and Woodford Shales in the Arkoma Basin, Oklahoma[J]. Chemical Geology, 2013, 360-361:231-240. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2013.10.017
[7]	聂海宽, 包书景, 高波, 等. 四川盆地及其周缘下古生界页岩气保存条件研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2012,19(3):280-294.
	NIE Haikuan, BAO Shujing, GAO Bo, et al. A study of shale gas preservation conditions for the Lower Paleozoic in Sichuan Basin and its periphery[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2012,19(3):280-294.
[8]	王玉满, 董大忠, 李建忠, 等. 川南下志留统龙马溪组页岩气储层特征[J]. 石油学报, 2012,33(4):551-561.
	WANG Yuman, DONG Dazhong, LI Jianzhong, et al. Reservoir characteristics of shale gas in Longmaxi Formation of the Lower Silurian, southern Sichuan[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2012,33(4):551-561.
[9]	王进, 包汉勇, 陆亚秋, 等. 涪陵焦石坝地区页岩气赋存特征定量表征及其主控因素[J]. 地球科学, 2019,44(3):1001-1011.
	WANG Jin, BAO Hanyong, LU Yaqiu, et al. Quantitative characterization and main controlling factors of shale gas occurrence in Jiaoshiba area, Fuling[J]. Earth Science, 2019,44(3):1001-1011.
[10]	刘树根, 马文辛, JANSA L, 等. 四川盆地东部地区下志留统龙马溪组页岩储层特征[J]. 岩石学报, 2011,27(8):2239-2252.
	LIU Shugen, MA Wenxin, JANSA L, et al. Characteristics of the shale gas reservoir rocks in the Lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation, East Sichuan basin, China[J]. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 2011,27(8):2239-2252.
[11]	余川, 程礼军, 曾春林, 等. 渝东北地区下古生界页岩含气性主控因素分析[J]. 断块油气田, 2014,21(3):296-300.
	YU Chuan, CHENG Lijun, ZENG Chunlin, et al. Main controlling factor analysis on gas-bearing property of Lower Paleozoic shale in northeastern Chongqing Region[J]. Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field, 2014,21(3):296-300.
[12]	王建波, 冯明刚, 严伟, 等. 焦石坝地区页岩储层可压裂性影响因素及计算方法[J]. 断块油气田, 2016,23(2):216-220.
	WANG Jianbo, FENG Minggang, YAN Wei, et al. Influence factors and evaluation methods for shale reservoir fracability in Jiaoshiba Area[J]. Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field, 2016,23(2):216-220.
[13]	周亚楠, 邓媛, 霍威, 等. 油气储层裂缝描述综述[J]. 辽宁化工, 2012,41(10):1008-1011.
	ZHOU Yanan, DENG Yuan, HUO Wei, et al. An overview of fracture description for oil and gas reservoirs[J]. Liaoning Chemical Industry, 2012,41(10):1008-1011.
[14]	唐颖, 邢云, 李乐忠, 等. 页岩储层可压裂性影响因素及评价方法[J]. 地学前缘, 2012,19(5):356-363.
	TANG Ying, XING Yun, LI Lezhong, et al. Influence factors and evaluation methods of the gas shale fracability[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2012,19(5):356-363.
[15]	丁文龙, 李超, 李春燕, 等. 页岩裂缝发育主控因素及其对含气性的影响[J]. 地学前缘, 2012,19(2):212-220.
	DING Wenlong, LI Chao, LI Chunyan, et al. Dominant factor of fracture development in shale and its relationship to gas accumulation[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2012,19(2):212-220.
[16]	王玉满, 黄金亮, 李新景, 等. 四川盆地下志留统龙马溪组页岩裂缝孔隙定量表征[J]. 天然气工业, 2015,35(9):8-15.
	WANG Yuman, HUANG Jinliang, LI Xinjing, et al. Quantitative characterization of fractures and pores in shale beds of the Lower Silurian, Longmaxi Formation, Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2015,35(9):8-15.
[17]	方栋梁, 孟志勇. 页岩气富集高产主控因素分析——以四川盆地涪陵地区五峰组—龙马溪组一段页岩为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2020,42(1):37-41.
	FANG Dongliang, MENG Zhiyong. Main controlling factors of shale gas enrichment and high yield: a case study of Wufeng-Longmaxi formations in Fuling area, Sichuan Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2020,42(1):37-41.
[18]	胡德高, 刘超. 四川盆地涪陵页岩气田单井可压性地质因素研究[J]. 石油实验地质, 2018,40(1):20-24.
	HU Degao, LIU Chao. Geological factors of well fracability in Fuling shale gas field, Sichuan Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2018,40(1):20-24.
[19]	郭秀英, 陈义才, 张鉴, 等. 页岩气选区评价指标筛选及其权重确定方法——以四川盆地海相页岩为例[J]. 天然气工业, 2015,35(10):57-64.
	GUO Xiuying, CHEN Yicai, ZHANG Jian, et al. Assessment index selection and weight determination of shale gas plays: A case study of marine shale in the Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2015,35(10):57-64.

指标	含气性	可压性	经济性	权重系数
含气性	1.000 0	2.0	3	0.538 9
可压性	0.500 0	1.0	2	0.297 3
经济性	0.333 3	0.5	1	0.163 8
一致性检验	CR=0.007 9,λ_max=3.009 2

指标	有机碳含量	孔隙度	气测全烃值	地层压力系数	权重系数
有机碳含量	1	1	0.333 3	0.333 3	0.130 2
孔隙度	1	1	0.333 3	1.000 0	0.161 4
气测全烃值	3	3	1.000 0	3.000 0	0.484 4
地层压力系数	3	1	0.333 3	1.000 0	0.224 0
一致性检验	CR=0.005 8,λ_max=4.156 6

指标		权重系数
含气性	有机碳含量	0.070
	孔隙度	0.087
	气测全烃值	0.261
	地层压力系数	0.121
可压性	断裂发育程度	0.148
	埋深3 500 m以浅面积比例	0.027
	构造形态	0.045
	目的层裂缝发育程度	0.077
经济性	水文条件	0.063
	天然气管网条件	0.028
	地形特征	0.073

区块	有机碳含量（%）	孔隙度（%）	气测全烃值（%）	地层压力系数	断裂发育程度	埋深3 500 m 以浅面积比例（%）	构造形态	目的层裂缝发育程度	水文条件	天然气管网条件	地形特征
区块一	3.80	4.50	15	1.3	0.4	85.0	0.6	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.4
区块二	4.00	5.00	20	1.6	0.8	95.0	0.8	0.6	0.5	0.5	0.4
区块三	3.30	4.00	10	1.2	0.2	80.0	0.4	0.3	0.4	0.4	0.4
区块四	3.20	3.00	6	1.2	0.2	70.0	0.4	0.3	0.5	0.4	0.3
区块五	3.32	4.57	15	1.6	0.8	50.2	0.8	0.6	0.5	0.5	0.4
区块六	3.55	3.21	12	1.5	0.8	64.0	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.4	0.4
区块七	3.23	3.32	6	1.2	0.4	79.0	0.4	0.5	0.5	0.3	0.3
区块八	3.66	2.96	4	1.1	0.2	59.3	0.4	0.3	0.3	0.3	0.3
区块九	2.88	2.85	2	1.0	0.4	30.0	0.6	0.3	0.4	0.3	0.3

指标	权重系数（均方差法）
有机碳含量	0.072
孔隙度	0.088
气测全烃值	0.077
地层压力系数	0.084
断裂发育程度	0.102
埋深3 500 m以浅面积比例	0.071
构造形态	0.097
目的层裂缝发育程度	0.102
水文条件	0.084
天然气管网条件	0.100
地形特征	0.122

Evaluation method of shale gas development area selection based on improved analytic hierarchy process

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 19

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

指标	权重系数（综合确定）
有机碳含量	0.057
孔隙度	0.086
气测全烃值	0.225
地层压力系数	0.114
断裂发育程度	0.170
埋深3 500 m以浅面积比例	0.021
构造形态	0.049
目的层裂缝发育程度	0.089
水文条件	0.060
天然气管网条件	0.031
地形特征	0.099

区块	有机碳含量	孔隙度	气测全烃值	地层压力系数	断裂发育程度	埋深3 500 m 以浅面积比例	构造形态	目的层裂缝发育程度	水文条件	天然气管网条件	地形特征	页岩气开发选区系数
区块一	0.82	0.77	0.72	0.50	0.33	0.85	0.50	0.67	1.0	1.0	1	0.680
区块二	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.0	1.0	1	1.000
区块三	0.38	0.53	0.44	0.33	0	0.77	0	0	0.5	0.5	1	0.366
区块四	0.29	0.07	0.22	0.33	0	0.62	0	0	1.0	0.5	0	0.199

区块	有机碳含量	孔隙度	气测全烃值	地层压力系数	断裂发育程度	埋深3 500 m 以浅面积比例	构造形态	目的层裂缝发育程度	水文条件	天然气管网条件	地形特征	页岩气开发选区系数
区块五	0.39	0.80	0.72	1.00	1.00	0.31	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	0.871
区块六	0.60	0.17	0.56	0.83	1.00	0.52	0.50	0.67	0.50	0.50	1.00	0.677
区块七	0.31	0.22	0.22	0.33	0.33	0.75	0	0.67	1.00	0	0	0.316
区块八	0.70	0.05	0.11	0.17	0	0.45	0	0	0	0	0	0.097
区块九	0	0	0	0	0.33	0	0.50	0	0.50	0	0	0.111

[1]	HE Dongbo, REN Lu, HAO Jie, LIU Xiaoping, CAO Qian. Quantitative evaluation system of geothermal resources based on analytic hierarchy process: A case study of middle-deep hydrothermal sandstone reservoir in Caofeidian of Hebei Province [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(6): 713-725.
[2]	YAO Hongsheng, WANG Wei, HE Xipeng, ZHENG Yongwang, NI Zhenyu. Development practices of geology-engineering integration in complex structural area of Nanchuan normal pressure shale gas field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 537-547.
[3]	LI Jingchang, LU Ting, NIE Haikuan, FENG Dongjun, DU Wei, SUN Chuanxiang, LI Wangpeng. Confidence evaluation of fractures seismic detection in shale gas formations on WY23 Pad in Weirong [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 614-626.
[4]	XIA Haibang, HAN Kening, SONG Wenhui, WANG Wei, YAO Jun. Pore scale fracturing fluid occurrence mechanisms in multi-scale matrix-fracture system of shale gas reservoir [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 627-635.
[5]	HAN Kening, WANG Wei, FAN Dongyan, YAO Jun, LUO Fei, YANG Can. Production forecasting for normal pressure shale gas wells based on coupling of production decline method and LSTM model [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 647-656.
[6]	XUE Gang, XIONG Wei, ZHANG Peixian. Genesis analysis and effective development of normal pressure shale gas reservoir: A case of Wufeng-Longmaxi shale gas reservoir in southeast margin of Sichuan Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 668-675.
[7]	LOU Zhanghua, ZHANG Xinke, WU Yuchen, GAO Yuqiao, ZHANG Peixian, JIN Aimin, ZHU Rong. Fluid response characteristics of shale gas preservation differences in Nanchuan and its adjacent blocks in Sichuan Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 451-458.
[8]	HU Zhijian, LI Shuxin, WANG Jianjun, ZHOU Hong, ZHAO Yulong, ZHANG Liehui. Productivity evaluation of multi-stage fracturing horizontal wells in shale gas reservoir with complex artificial fracture occurrence [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 459-466.
[9]	LIN Hun, SUN Xinyi, SONG Xixiang, MENG Chun, XIONG Wenxin, HUANG Junhe, LIU Hongbo, LIU Cheng. A model for shale gas well production prediction based on improved artificial neural network [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 467-473.
[10]	LIU Honglin,ZHOU Shangwen,LI Xiaobo. Application of PCA plus OPLS method in rapid reserve production rate prediction of shale gas wells [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 474-483.
[11]	LU Bi,HU Chunfeng,MA Jun. Influencing factors and countermeasures of inter-well interference of fracturing horizontal wells in Nanchuan shale gas field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 330-339.
[12]	QIU Xiaoxue,ZHONG Guanghai,LI Xiansheng,CHEN Meng,LING Weitong. CFD simulation of flow characteristics of shale gas horizontal wells with different inclination [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 340-347.
[13]	NIE Yunli, GAO Guozhong. Classification of shale gas “sweet spot” based on Random Forest machine learning [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 358-367.
[14]	YU Qiannan,ZHANG Han,LI Ning,TANG Huimin,LI Chenglong,WU Zhuolin,PENG Wei. Development quality evaluation of natural gas hydrate reservoir [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 385-392.
[15]	QU Lili, LI Minglin, WU Zhimin, ZHANG Lin, FENG Linping, DENG Liping. Application of unascertained measure model in reservoir potential evaluation of Nanpu H Fault Block [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(2): 190-199.