油气藏评价与开发 >
2025 , Vol. 15 >Issue 5: 760 - 772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2025.05.006
东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷三潭深凹储层差异成岩演化与评价
收稿日期: 2024-11-14
网络出版日期: 2025-09-19
基金资助
中国石化先导项目“海域重点增储与突破目标勘探潜力及评价”(YTBXD-CGKT-2024-002-011-SH)
Differential diagenetic evolution and evaluation of reservoirs in Santan Deep Depression, Xihu Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin
Received date: 2024-11-14
Online published: 2025-09-19
东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷三潭深凹油气成藏条件较好,已发现Y、Q、G等多个构造,油气资源丰富。该区成藏富集的关键因素是储层,但研究区经历早期深埋,整体物性偏差,“甜点”储层发育区不明,制约了中深层油气勘探进程。为了寻找优质储层规模区,基于岩石薄片、X衍射、物性等资料,通过对三潭深凹南、中、北部储层沉积、微观孔隙结构、成岩演化差异性对比得出2点认识:①储层特征与成岩方面,研究区多为低孔低渗—特低孔特低渗-致密储层,储层演化处于中成岩B期;次生溶孔是主要储集空间类型,绿泥石膜和溶蚀作用是建设性成岩作用。②储层物性差异方面,受物源、成岩作用和地温梯度差异的影响,导致三潭深凹南、北储层致密顶界埋深不同,南部致密储层顶界埋深4 000 m,对应温度140 ℃;中北部致密储层顶界埋深4 700 m,对应温度160 ℃。平湖组比花港组储层经历了较强的碳酸盐胶结、较弱压实和较强溶蚀作用,常规储层段发育更多优质储层,致密储层段受源内超压成岩抑制效应控制,发育有效储层。基于以上认识提出“粗粒相、主河道砂体、源内超压”主控的优质储层发育模式,对西湖凹陷三潭深凹中深层寻找规模油气藏具有重要指导意义。
张沛 , 李昆 , 庄建建 , 谭毅滢 . 东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷三潭深凹储层差异成岩演化与评价[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2025 , 15(5) : 760 -772 . DOI: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2025.05.006
The Santan Deep Depression in the Xihu Sag of East China Sea Basin has favorable conditions for oil and gas accumulation, and multiple gasfields such as Y, Q, and G have been discovered, indicating abundant oil and gas resources. The key factor for accumulation and enrichment in this area is the reservoir. However, the study area experienced early deep burial, resulting in overall poor reservoir physical properties and unclear distribution of sweet spot reservoirs, which constrains the exploration process of oil and gas in the middle and deep formations. To identify large-scale high-quality reservoir zones, based on data such as thin section observation, X-ray diffraction, and physical properties, two conclusions were drawn through comparison of sedimentation, microscopic pore structures, and differences in diagenetic evolution of reservoirs in the southern, central, and northern parts of the Santan Deep Depression: (1) In terms of reservoir characteristics and diagenesis, the study area mainly consisted of low-porosity and low-permeability, ultra-low-porosity and ultra-low-permeability, and tight reservoirs, with reservoir evolution at the middle diagenetic stage B. Secondary dissolution pores were the main type of reservoir space, and chlorite film and dissolution were constructive diagenesis processes. (2) In terms of differences in reservoir physical properties, influenced by provenance, diagenesis, and geothermal gradient variations, the burial depths of the top boundaries of tight reservoirs between the southern and northern parts of the Santan Deep Depression differed. The top boundary of tight reservoirs in the southern part was buried at 4 000 m, corresponding to a temperature of 140 ℃. In the central and northern parts, the top boundary was at 4 700 m, with a corresponding temperature of 160 ℃. Compared with the Huagang Formation, Pinghu Formation reservoirs experienced stronger carbonate cementation, weaker compaction, and stronger dissolution. More high-quality reservoirs were developed in conventional reservoir units, and more effective reservoirs were developed in tight reservoirs controlled by the overpressure-induced diagenetic inhibition effects within the source. Based on the above understanding, a high-quality reservoir development model controlled by “coarse-grained facies, main channel sand bodies, and internal source overpressure” was proposed, providing important guidance for exploring large-scale oil and gas reservoirs in the middle and deep formations of the Santan Deep Depression in the Xihu Sag.
| [1] | 苏奥, 陈红汉, 王存武, 等. 低渗致密砂岩储层的致密化机理与成岩流体演化: 以东海西湖凹陷中央背斜带北部花港组为例[J]. 中国矿业大学学报, 2016, 45(5): 972-981. |
| SU Ao, CHEN Honghan, WANG Cunwu, et al. Densification mechanism and diagenesis fluid evolution of low-porosity and low-permeability tight sandstone reservoir: An example from Huagang formation in the northern of the central anticlinal zone in Xihu depression, East China Sea[J]. Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 2016, 45(5): 972-981. | |
| [2] | 周瑞琦, 傅恒, 徐国盛, 等. 东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷平湖组—花港组沉积层序[J]. 沉积学报, 2018, 36(1): 132-141. |
| ZHOU Ruiqi, FU Heng, XU Guosheng, et al. Eocene Pinghu formation-Oligocene Huagang formation sequence stratigraphy and depositional model of Xihu Sag in East China Sea basin[J]. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 2018, 36(1): 132-141. | |
| [3] | 于兴河, 李顺利, 曹冰, 等. 西湖凹陷渐新世层序地层格架与沉积充填响应[J]. 沉积学报, 2017, 35(2): 299-314. |
| YU Xinghe, LI Shunli, CAO Bing, et al. Oligocene sequence framework and depositional response in the Xihu depression, East China Sea shelf basin[J]. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 2017, 35(2): 299-314. | |
| [4] | 赵洪, 秦兰芝, 王辉, 等. 砂岩在西湖凹陷花港组交互式盖层中的作用初探[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 40(3): 43-51. |
| ZHAO Hong, QIN Lanzhi, WANG Hui, et al. Preliminary investigation on the role of sandstones in interacting caprocks of the Huagang formation in the Xihu depression[J]. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University (Science & Technology Edition), 2018, 40(3): 43-51. | |
| [5] | SU A, CHEN H H, CHEN X, et al. The characteristics of low permeability reservoirs, gas origin, generation and charge in the central and western Xihu depression, East China Sea Basin[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2018, 53: 94-109. |
| [6] | ZHANG J, LI Y, LIU J, et al. Modeling hydrocarbon generation of deeply buried type Ⅲ kerogen: A study on gas and oil potential of Lishui Sag, East China Sea shelf basin[J]. Frontiers in Earth Science, 2021, 8: 609834. |
| [7] | 苏奥, 陈红汉, 王存武, 等. 东海盆地西湖凹陷油气成因及成熟度判别[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2013, 40(5): 521-527. |
| SU Ao, CHEN Honghan, WANG Cunwu, et al. Genesis and maturity identification of oil and gas in the Xihu Sag, East China Sea Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(5): 521-527. | |
| [8] | 苏奥, 陈红汉, 胡飞, 等. 西湖凹陷中央构造带中南部油气成藏条件、特征及富集规律[J]. 地质科技情报, 2015, 34(2): 123-129. |
| SU Ao, CHEN Honghan, HU Fei, et al. Conditions, characteristics and enrichment regulation of oil and gas accumulation of the south central of central anticlinal zone in the Xihu Sag, East China Sea basin[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information, 2015, 34(2): 123-129. | |
| [9] | 张武, 蒋一鸣, 肖晓光, 等. 东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷中北部花港组储层致密化过程分析[J]. 石油实验地质, 2021, 43(1): 86-95. |
| ZHANG Wu, JIANG Yiming, XIAO Xiaoguang, et al. Densification process of Huagang formation in northern and central Xihu Sag of East China Sea shelf basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2021, 43(1): 86-95. | |
| [10] | 蔡全升, 胡明毅. 西湖凹陷黄岩构造带花港组砂岩储层成岩作用研究[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2013, 13(30): 9012-9017. |
| CAI Quansheng, HU Mingyi. Diagenesis of sandstone of Huagang formation in Huangyan tectonic belt, Xihu Sag[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2013, 13(30): 9012-9017. | |
| [11] | 梁建设, 王琪, 郝乐伟, 等. 西湖凹陷渐新统花港组储层砂岩成岩环境演化探讨[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2012, 23(4): 673-680. |
| LIANG Jianshe, WANG Qi, HAO Lewei, et al. Evolution of diagenetic environments for Oligocene Huagang formation sandstone in Xihu Sag[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2012, 23(4): 673-680. | |
| [12] | ZENG F, DONG C, LIN C, et al. Analyzing the effects of multi-scale pore systems on reservoir Properties: A case study on Xihu Depression, East China Sea Shelf Basin, China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2021, 203: 108609. |
| [13] | 徐昉昊, 徐国盛, 刘勇, 等. 东海西湖凹陷中央反转构造带古近系花港组致密砂岩储集层控制因素[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2020, 47(1): 98-109. |
| XU Fanghao, XU Guosheng, LIU Yong, et al. Factors controlling the development of tight sandstone reservoirs in the Huagang Formation of the central inverted structural belt in Xihu sag, East China Sea Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(1): 98-109. | |
| [14] | 刘毅, 林承焰, 林建力, 等. 东海盆地西湖凹陷深层低渗—致密砂岩孔隙结构特征及成因分析[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2024, 35(3): 405-422 |
| LIU Yi, LIN Chengyan, LIN Jianli, et al. Pore structure characteristics and genesis analysis of deep tight sandstone in Xihu Depression, East China Sea Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2024, 35(3): 405-422. | |
| [15] | 黄苏卫, 刘峰, 戚家振. 西湖凹陷Y构造花港组致密砂岩成藏特征[J]. 海洋地质前沿, 2023, 39(3): 71-80. |
| HUANG Suwei, LIU Feng, QI Jiazhen. Tight sandstone accumulation characteristics of Huagang formation in Y structure of Xihu Sag[J]. Marine Geology Frontiers, 2023, 39(3): 71-80. | |
| [16] | 黄鑫, 林承焰, 黄导武, 等. 西湖凹陷中央反转带中北部花港组砂岩储层成岩差异演化特征[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2022, 29(2): 1-12. |
| HUANG Xin, LIN Chengyan, HUANG Daowu, et al. Diagenetic differential evolution of Huagang Formation sandstone reservoir in north-central part of central reversal structural belt in Xihu Sag[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2022, 29(2): 1-12. | |
| [17] | 李宁, 徐振中, 钟荣全, 等. 西湖凹陷深层致密砂岩裂缝控制因素及发育模式: 以中部洼陷带中南部W构造为例[J]. 海洋地质前沿, 2024, 40(10): 19-28. |
| LI Ning, XU Zhenzhong, ZHONG Rongquan, et al. Controlling factors and development patterns of fractures in deep tight sandstone in Xihu Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin: A case study from W Structure in south central region of Central Depression Belt[J]. Marine Geology Frontiers, 2024, 40(10): 19-28. | |
| [18] | LI C F, ZHOU Z, GE H, et al. Rifting process of the Xihu depression, East China Sea basin[J]. Tectonophysics, 2009, 472(1): 135-147. |
| [19] | 林建力, 张宪国, 林承焰, 等. 岩相约束下的深层致密砂岩气藏储层演化特征[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019, 40(4): 886-899. |
| LIN Jianli, ZHANG Xianguo, LIN Chengyan, et al. Diagenetic evolution characteristics constrained by lithofacies in deep tight sand gas reservoir[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2019, 40(4): 886-899. | |
| [20] | 徐国盛, 徐芳艮, 袁海锋, 等. 西湖凹陷中央反转构造带花港组致密砂岩储层成岩环境演变与孔隙演化[J]. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 43(4): 385-395. |
| XU Guosheng, XU Fanggen, YUAN Haifeng, et al. Evolution of pore and diagenetic environment for the tight sandstone reservoir of Paleogene Huagang Formation in the central reversal structural belt in Xihu sag, East China Sea[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology (Science & Technology Edition), 2016, 43(4): 385-395. | |
| [21] | 韩国猛, 刘炎鑫, 吴雪松, 等. 中深层致密砂岩储集层成岩特征与孔隙演化定量研究: 以沧东凹陷南皮斜坡孔店组二段为例[J]. 古地理学报, 2023, 25(4): 945-956. |
| HAN Guomeng, LIU Yanxin, WU Xuesong, et al. Quantitative study on diagenetic characteristics and pore evolution of middle-deep tight sandstone reservoirs: A case study of the Second Member of Kongdian Formation in Nanpi slope, Cangdong sag[J]. Journal of Paleogeography, 2023, 25(4): 945-956. | |
| [22] | 张关龙, 王继远, 王斌, 等. 准噶尔盆地腹部深层—超深层碎屑岩储层发育特征与孔隙演化定量表征[J]. 石油实验地质, 2023, 45(4): 620-631. |
| ZHANG Guanlong, WANG Jiyuan, WANG Bin, et al. Development characteristics and quantitative characterization of pore evolution of deep and ultra-deep clastic reservoirs in the hinterland of the Junggar Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2023, 45(4): 620-631. | |
| [23] | 尚婷, 王斌, 杨庆坤, 等. 孔隙演化定量分析及在盆地模拟中的应用: 以鄂尔多斯盆地合水地区长8油层为例[J]. 西北大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 53(5): 843-856. |
| SHANG Ting, WANG Bin, YANG Qingkun, et al. Quantitative analysis of pore evolution and its application to basin simulation: A case from Chang 8 reservoir in Heshui Area, Ordos Basin, NW China[J]. Journal of Northwest University(Natural Science Edition), 2023, 53(5): 843-856. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |