油气藏评价与开发 ›› 2025, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (3): 339-348.doi: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2025.03.001
收稿日期:
2025-05-11
发布日期:
2025-05-28
出版日期:
2025-06-26
作者简介:
郭彤楼(1965—),男,博士,正高级工程师,主要从事油气勘探研究与管理。地址:四川省成都市高新区吉泰路688号,中国石化西南油气分公司,邮政编码:610041。E-mail:tlguo@163.com
基金资助:
Received:
2025-05-11
Online:
2025-05-28
Published:
2025-06-26
摘要:
中国页岩气勘探开发历经二十年发展,已成为继美国、加拿大之外第三个实现商业开发的国家,但此前勘探开发层位仅局限于志留系龙马溪组。随着页岩气勘探理论认识的提高,近年来,二叠系、寒武系页岩相继取得了勘探突破,进一步印证了四川盆地页岩气的巨大潜力。基于对志留系龙马溪组、寒武系筇竹寺组两大海相主力层系页岩气勘探历程的回顾,总结页岩气勘探历经了研究探索(2000—2011年)、发现上产(2011—2022年)和多层突破(2022年—至今)3个阶段。深入剖析四川盆地海相页岩气勘探研究2次理论创新、思路转变的过程:① 通过对比分析中美页岩气形成条件,摒弃简单复制北美经验的思维,基于中国多期构造演化特征,突出保存条件的关键作用,实现了第一次思路转变,取得了志留系龙马溪组勘探的重大突破;②加强低有机质和无机孔特征研究,对页岩气传统富集成藏理论进行了发展和完善,建立“输导+原地”成藏模式,实现了第二次思路转变,推动了寒武系筇竹寺组勘探突破。当前,页岩气在低有机质页岩、无机孔等方面的研究突破,拓展了勘探领域和勘探深度,形成了海相页岩气多层并举的局面,展现出广阔的勘探前景。基于对志留系到寒武系页岩气勘探历程、思路转变的回顾以及重大突破带来启示的剖析,揭示了中国特色页岩气勘探之路,对未来多层系、多领域页岩气的勘探开发具有重要参考意义。
中图分类号:
GUO Tonglou. Review and reflection on shale gas development in China: From Silurian to Cambrian[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2025, 15(3): 339-348.
表1
四川盆地海相页岩与美国典型页岩对比(据参考文献[4-5,22-26]修改)"
层系/地区 | 龙马溪组 (焦石坝地区) | 筇竹寺组 (井研地区) | 筇竹寺组 (资阳地区) | Marcellus (阿巴拉契亚盆地) | Haynesville (密西西比盐盆地) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
沉积背景 | 克拉通 | 凹槽西缘 | 拉张槽 | 前陆盆地 | 局限盆地 |
层序 | 1个旋回、1套页岩 | 3个旋回、3套页岩 | 4个旋回、4套页岩 | 4个旋回、4套页岩 | 4个旋回、3套页岩和 1套灰岩 |
相 | 深水陆棚 | 浅水缓坡 | 深水缓坡 | 深水陆棚 | 深水陆棚 |
镜质体反射率(Ro)/% | 2.5~3.0 | 3.3 | 3.5 | 0.8~3.6 | 2.2~2.3 |
干酪根类型 | Ⅰ-Ⅱ1型,底栖藻类 | Ⅰ型,藻类和疑源类 | Ⅰ型,藻类和疑源类 | Ⅱ型,藻类 | Ⅱ型 |
ω(TOC)/% | 3.54 | 0.45 | 2.92 | 8.55 | 3.45 |
ω(TOC)>2%的厚度/m | 24~35 | 2~3 | 22~60 | 15~45 | 60~90 |
矿物成分及 质量分数 | 钙质21.2%、硅质42.3%、长石2.6% | 钙质5.0%、硅质40.0%、长石30.0% | 钙质8.0%、硅质34.0%、长石33.0% | 钙质22.5%、硅质45.0%、长石6.0% | (钙质+硅质)55.0%、 长石10.0% |
黏土成分及 质量分数 | 伊利石41.7%,、伊/蒙混层53.5%、绿泥石3.3% | 伊利石24.0%、伊/蒙混层含量3.0%、绿泥石73.0% | 伊利石58.0%、伊/蒙混层含量9.0%、绿泥石33.0% | 伊利石25.0%、伊/蒙混层含量6.0%、绿泥石3.0% | 伊利石25.0%、伊/蒙混层含量50.0%、绿泥石20.0% |
孔隙度/% | 6~8 | 2~4 | 2~8 | 4~15 | 5~15 |
孔隙构成 | 有机质孔60.00% | 有机质孔4.59% | 有机质孔14.63% | 有机质孔为主 | 有机质孔46.00% |
脆性矿物孔8.0%、 黏土矿物孔47.0% | 脆性矿物孔30.0%、 黏土矿物孔60.0% | 脆性矿物孔34.0%、 黏土矿物孔45.0% | 脆性矿物孔19.60%、 黏土矿物孔75.50% | ||
孔体积/(ml/g) | 0.012 0 | 0.006 0 | 0.014 4 | ||
含气量/(m3/t) | 5.0~6.0 | 0.6~2.3 | 2.5~6.8 | 1.2~5.6 | 2.8~9.4 |
压力系数 | 1.89 | 1.30~1.50 | 2.08 | 0.90~1.30 | 1.60~2.10 |
1 | 郭旭升, 赵永强, 申宝剑, 等. 中国南方海相页岩气勘探理论: 回顾与展望[J]. 地质学报, 2022, 96(1): 172-182. |
GUO Xusheng, ZHAO Yongqiang, SHEN Baojian, et al. Marine shale gas exploration theory in Southern China: Review and prospects[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2022, 96(1): 172-182. | |
2 | 肖贤明, 宋之光, 朱炎铭, 等. 北美页岩气研究及对我国下古生界页岩气开发的启示[J]. 煤炭学报, 2013, 38 (5): 721-727. |
XIAO Xianming, SONG Zhiguang, ZHU Yanming, et al. Summary of shale gas research in North American and Revelations to shale gas exploration of Lower Paleozoic strata in China south area[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2013, 38(5): 721-727. | |
3 | HUGHES J D. Energy: A reality check on the shale revolution[J]. Nature, 2013, 494(7437): 307-308. |
4 | 郭彤楼, 刘若冰. 复杂构造区高演化程度海相页岩气勘探突破的启示: 以四川盆地东部盆缘JY1井为例[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2013, 24(4): 643-651. |
GUO Tonglou, LIU Ruobing. Implications from marine shale gas exploration breakthrough in complicated structural area at high thermal stage: Taking Longmaxi Formation in well JY1 as an example[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2013, 24(4): 643-651. | |
5 | 郭彤楼, 张汉荣. 四川盆地焦石坝页岩气田形成与富集高产模式[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2014, 41(1): 28-36. |
GUO Tonglou, ZHANG Hanrong. Formation and enrichment mode of Jiaoshiba shale gas field, Sichuan Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2014, 41(1): 28-36. | |
6 | 张义纲. 多种天然气资源的勘探[J]. 石油实验地质, 1982, 4(2): 93-96. |
ZHANG Yigang. Experiment of various natural gas resources[J]. Petroleum Geology & Expeximent, 1982, 4(2): 93-96. | |
7 | 张金川, 薛会, 张德明, 等. 页岩气及其成藏机理[J]. 现代地质, 2003, 17 (4): 466. |
ZHANG Jinchuan, XUE Hui, ZHANG Deming, et al. Shale gas and its reservoir formation mechanism[J]. Geoscience, 2003, 17 (4): 466. | |
8 | 陈建渝, 唐大卿, 杨楚鹏. 非常规含气系统的研究和勘探进展[J]. 地质科技情报, 2003, 22(4): 55-59. |
CHEN Jianyu, TANG Daqing, YANG Chupeng. Advances in the research and exploration of unconventional petroleum systems[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information, 2003, 22(4): 55-59. | |
9 | 《页岩气地质与勘探开发实践丛书》编委会. 中国页岩气地质研究进展[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2011. |
Editorial board of “Shale gas geology and exploration practice series”. Progress in shale gas geology research in China[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2011. | |
10 | 张金川, 李玉喜, 聂海宽, 等. 渝页1井地质背景及钻探效果[J]. 天然气工业, 2010, 30 (12): 114-118. |
ZHANG Jinchuan, LI Yuxi, NIE Haikuan, et al. Geologic setting and drilling effect of the shale cored well Yuye-1, Penshui County of Chongqing[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2010, 30(12): 114-118. | |
11 | 郭旭升, 胡东风, 黄仁春, 等. 四川盆地深层—超深层天然气勘探进展与展望[J]. 天然气工业, 2020, 40(5): 1-14. |
GUO Xusheng, HU Dongfeng, HUANG Renchun, et al. Deep and ultra-deep natural gas exploration in the Sichuan Basin: Progress and prospect[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2020, 40(5): 1-14. | |
12 | 张金川, 陶佳, 李振, 等. 中国深层页岩气资源前景和勘探潜力[J]. 天然气工业, 2021, 41(1): 15-28. |
ZHANG Jinchuan, TAO Jia, LI Zhen, et al. Prospect of deep shale gas resources in China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2021, 41(1): 15-28. | |
13 | 郭旭升, 李宇平, 腾格尔, 等. 四川盆地五峰组—龙马溪组深水陆棚相页岩生储机理探讨[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2020, 47(1): 193-201. |
GUO Xusheng, LI Yuping, BORJIGEN Tenger, et al. Hydrocarbon generation and storage mechanisms of deep-water shelf shales of Ordovician Wufeng Formation-Silurian Longmaxi Formation in Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(1): 193-201. | |
14 | 张岳桥, 李海龙, 李建华. 青藏高原东缘中更新世伸展作用及其新构造意义[J]. 地质论评, 2010, 56(6): 781-791. |
ZHANG Yueqiao, LI Hailong, LI Jianhua. Middle Pleistocene extension along the eastern margin of Xizang (Tibetan) plateau and its neotectonic significance[J]. Geological Review, 2010, 56(6): 781-791. | |
15 | 郭彤楼, 楼章华, 马永生. 南方海相油气保存条件评价和勘探决策中应注意的几个问题[J]. 石油实验地质, 2003, 25(1): 3-9. |
GUO Tonglou, LOU Zhanghua, MA Yongsheng. Several problems on oil and gas preservation and their commercial prospecting in marine sequences of South China[J]. Experimental Petroleum Geology, 2003, 25(1): 3-9. | |
16 | 马永生, 楼章华, 郭彤楼, 等. 中国南方海相地层油气保存条件综合评价技术体系探讨[J]. 地质学报, 2006, 80(3): 406-417. |
MA Yongsheng, LOU Zhanghua, GUO Tonglou, et al. An exploration on a technological system of petroleum preservation evaluation for marine strata in South China[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2006, 80(3): 406-417. | |
17 | 楼章华, 马永生, 郭彤楼, 等. 中国南方海相地层油气保存条件评价[J]. 天然气工业, 2006, 26(8): 8-11. |
LOU Zhanghua, MA Yongsheng, GUO Tonglou, et al. Evaluation of oil and gas preservation conditions in marine formation in South China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2006, 26(8): 8-11. | |
18 | GUO T L. The Fuling shale gas field: A highly productive Silurian gas shale with high thermal maturity and complex evolution history, southeastern Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Interpretation, 2015, 3(2): SJ25-SJ34. |
19 | ZAGORSKI W A, WRIGHTSTONE G R, BOWMAN D C. The Appalachian Basin Marcellus gas play: Its history of development, geologic controls on production, and future potential as a world-class reservoir[J]. AAPG Memoir, 2012, 97, 172-200. |
20 | 熊亮, 葛忠伟, 王同, 等. 川南寒武系筇竹寺组勘探潜力研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(1): 14-21. |
XIONG Liang, GE Zhongwei, WANG Tong, et al. Exploration potential of Cambrian qiongzhusi formation in southern Sichuan Basin[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2021, 11(1): 14-21. | |
21 | 郭彤楼, 熊亮, 叶素娟, 等. 输导层(体)非常规天然气勘探理论与实践: 四川盆地新类型页岩气与致密砂岩气突破的启示[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2023, 50(1): 24-37. |
GUO Tonglou, XIONG Liang, YE Sujuan, et al. Theory and practice of unconventional gas exploration in carrier beds: Insight from the breakthrough of new type of shale gas and tight gas in Sichuan Basin, SW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2023, 50(1): 24-37. | |
22 | 郭彤楼, 邓虎成, 赵爽, 等. 四川盆地寒武系筇竹寺组新类型页岩气形成机理与勘探突破[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2025, 52(1): 57-69. |
GUO Tonglou, DENG Hucheng, ZHAO Shuang, et al. Formation mechanisms and exploration breakthroughs of new type of shale gas in Cambrian Qiongzhusi Formation, Sichuan Basin, SW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2025, 52(1): 57-69. | |
23 | 熊亮, 邓虎成, 吴冬, 等. 四川盆地及其周缘下寒武统筇竹寺组细粒沉积特征与影响因素[J]. 石油实验地质, 2023, 45(5): 857-871. |
XIONG Liang, DENG Hucheng, WU Dong, et al. Fine-grained sedimentary characteristics and influencing factors of the Lower Cambrian Qiongzhusi Formation in Sichuan Basin and on its periphery[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2023, 45(5): 857-871. | |
24 | LOUCKS R G, REED R M, RUPPEL S C, et al. Morphology, genesis, and distribution of nanometer-scale pores in siliceous mudstones of the Mississippian Barnett shale[J]. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 2009, 79(12): 848-861. |
25 | CURTIS M E, CARDOTT B J, SONDERGELD C H, et al. Development of organic porosity in the Woodford Shale with increasing thermal maturity[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2012, 103: 26-31. |
26 | MILLIKEN K L, RUDNICKI M, AWWILLER D N, et al. Organic matter-hosted pore system, Marcellus formation (Devonian), Pennsylvania[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2013, 97(2): 177-200. |
27 | 王玉满, 黄金亮, 王淑芳, 等. 四川盆地长宁、焦石坝志留系龙马溪组页岩气刻度区精细解剖[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2016, 27(3): 423-432. |
WANG Yuman, HUANG Jinliang, WANG Shufang, et al. Dissection of two calibrated areas of the Silurian Longmaxi Formation, Changning and jiaoshiba, Sichuan basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2016, 27(3): 423-432. | |
28 | 邹才能, 董大忠, 熊伟, 等. 中国页岩气新区带、新层系和新类型勘探进展、挑战及对策[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2): 309-326. |
ZOU Caineng, DONG Dazhong, XIONG Wei, et al. Advances, challenges, and countermeasures in shale gas exploration of underexplored plays, sequences and new types in China[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2024, 45(2): 309-326. | |
29 | 包汉勇, 赵帅, 梁榜, 等. 川东红星地区二叠系吴家坪组页岩气富集高产主控因素与勘探启示[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2023, 28(1): 71-82. |
BAO Hanyong, ZHAO Shuai, LIANG Bang, et al. Enrichment and high yield of shale gas in the Permian Wujiaping Formation in Hongxing area of eastern Sichuan and its exploration implications[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2023, 28(1): 71-82. | |
30 | 何骁, 梁峰, 李海, 等. 四川盆地下寒武统筇竹寺组海相页岩气高产井突破与富集模式[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2024, 29(1): 142-155. |
HE Xiao, LIANG Feng, LI Hai, et al. Breakthrough and enrichment mode of marine shale gas in the Lower Cambrian Qiongzhusi Formation in high-yield wells in Sichuan Basin[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2024, 29(1): 142-155. | |
31 | 腾格尔, 卢龙飞, 俞凌杰, 等. 页岩有机质孔隙形成、保持及其连通性的控制作用[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2021, 48(4): 687-699. |
BORJIGIN Tenger, LU Longfei, YU Lingjie, et al. Formation, preservation and connectivity control of organic pores in shale[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2021, 48(4): 687-699. | |
32 | 王濡岳, 胡宗全, 龙胜祥, 等. 四川盆地上奥陶统五峰组-下志留统龙马溪组页岩储层特征与演化机制[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2022, 43(2): 353-364. |
WANG Ruyue, HU Zongquan, LONG Shengxiang, et al. Reservoir characteristics and evolution mechanisms of the Upper Ordovician Wufeng-Lower Silurian Longmaxi shale, Sichuan Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2022, 43(2): 353-364. | |
33 | 王濡岳, 冷济高, 丁文龙, 等. 上扬子地区下寒武统牛蹄塘组优质页岩储层测井识别: 以贵州岑巩页岩气区块为例[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2015, 26(12): 2395-2407. |
WANG Ruyue, LENG Jigao, DING Wenlong, et al. Logging identification of the lower Cambrian niutitang shale gas reservoir in Upper Yangtze Region: A case study of the Cengong Block, Guizhou Province[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2015, 26(12): 2395-2407. | |
34 | 杨雨, 汪华, 谢继容, 等. 页岩气勘探新领域: 四川盆地开江—梁平海槽二叠系海相页岩气勘探突破及展望[J]. 天然气工业, 2023, 43(11): 19-27. |
YANG Yu, WANG Hua, XIE Jirong, et al. Exploration breakthrough and prospect of Permian marine shale gas in the Kaijiang-Liangping Trough, Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2023, 43(11): 19-27. | |
35 | 董大忠, 王玉满, 李新景, 等. 中国页岩气勘探开发新突破及发展前景思考[J]. 天然气工业, 2016, 36(1): 19-32. |
DONG Dazhong, WANG Yuman, LI Xinjing, et al. Breakthrough and prospect of shale gas exploration and development in China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2016, 36(1): 19-32. | |
36 | 姜鹏飞, 吴建发, 朱逸青, 等. 四川盆地海相页岩气富集条件及勘探开发有利区[J]. 石油学报, 2023, 44(1): 91-109. |
JIANG Pengfei, WU Jianfa, ZHU Yiqing, et al. Enrichment conditions and favorable areas for exploration and development of marine shale gas in Sichuan Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2023, 44(1): 91-109. | |
37 | 邹才能, 赵群, 王红岩, 等. 中国海相页岩气主要特征及勘探开发主体理论与技术[J]. 天然气工业, 2022, 42(8): 1-13. |
ZOU Caineng, ZHAO Qun, WANG Hongyan, et al. The main characteristics of marine shale gas and the theory & technology of exploration and development in China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2022, 42(8): 1-13. | |
38 | 沈安江, 付小东, 张建勇, 等. 羌塘盆地上三叠统—下侏罗统海相页岩油特征及发现意义[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2023, 50(5): 962-974. |
SHEN Anjiang, FU Xiaodong, ZHANG Jianyong, et al. Characteristics and discovery significance of the Upper Triassic-Lower Jurassic marine shale oil in Qiangtang Basin, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2023, 50(5): 962-974. |
[1] | 杨宪彰, 黄亚浩, 王斌, 文志刚, 周露, 张科, 何涛华, 罗涛, 陈笑, 曾强浩. 深层寒武系成岩流体演化与油气成藏——以塔里木盆地库车坳陷托探1井为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2025, 15(3): 382-393. |
[2] | 杨雪, 田冲, 杨雨然, 张景缘, 王青, 吴伟, 罗超. 四川盆地长宁地区深层煤层气成藏特征与勘探潜力 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2025, 15(2): 194-204. |
[3] | 朱苏阳, 刘伟, 王运峰, 贾春生, 陈朝刚, 彭小龙. 四川盆地煤层气勘探开发现状与前景 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2025, 15(2): 185-193. |
[4] | 罗少辉,王蓉英,岳勇,李斌,魏华动,金仙梅,姜忠正,曹杨. 塔里木盆地西南部寒武系充填层序及沉积样式演化 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(2): 284-296. |
[5] | 薛冈, 熊炜, 张培先. 常压页岩气藏成因分析与有效开发——以四川盆地东南缘地区五峰组—龙马溪组页岩气藏为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 668-675. |
[6] | 李东晖,田玲钰,聂海宽,彭泽阳. 基于模糊层次分析法的页岩气井产能影响因素分析及综合评价模型——以四川盆地焦石坝页岩气田为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(3): 417-428. |
[7] | 王红岩,董大忠,施振生,邱振,卢斌,邵男,孙莎莎,张素荣. 川南海相页岩岩石相类型及“甜点”分布——以长宁双河剖面五峰组—龙马溪组为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 68-81. |
[8] | 刘若冰,魏祥峰,刘珠江,燕继红,袁桃,魏富彬. JY1井五峰组—龙马溪组钻井地质剖面分析 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 47-57. |
[9] | 朱彤,张哲,冯动军,郑荣才,王烽,彭勇民. 梁平福禄镇剖面大安寨段泥页岩地质特征 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 139-149. |
[10] | 何文渊,冯子辉,张金友,白云风,付秀丽,赵莹,程心阳,高波,刘畅. 松辽盆地北部古龙凹陷古页8HC井地质剖面特征 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 1-9. |
[11] | 李昌,沈安江,常少英,梁正中,李振林,孟贺. 机器学习法在碳酸盐岩岩相测井识别中应用及对比——以四川盆地MX地区龙王庙组地层为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(4): 586-596. |
[12] | 何治亮,聂海宽,蒋廷学. 四川盆地深层页岩气规模有效开发面临的挑战与对策 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(2): 135-145. |
[13] | 郭彤楼. 深层页岩气勘探开发进展与攻关方向 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(1): 1-6. |
[14] | 王思航,田小林,王楚柯,冯永光,吴得强,白家全,李辉,孔德才. 模糊相似法对页岩气选区评价的应用——以四川盆地海相页岩气为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2018, 8(1): 71-75. |
|