Professional Documents
Culture Documents
For years, gas hydrates have been a resource that produced enormous inplace volume estimates. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated as
much as 16.7Tm (590Tcf; 106Bboe) in-place on the North Slope of Alaska
in 1995 that covers an area of about 145,000 km (equivalent to
approximately 25 North Sea quadrants). World wide estimates also
focused on in-place gas volumes because, at that time, there was not any
methodology to assess what actually could be produced from these
deposits.
Since these first published reports, a number of tests, experiments, and
much research has been conducted on gas hydrates, allowing
assessments to focus on the technically recoverable resources for the first
time.
"Test results from the Mallik well and other research have pointed the way
to treating gas hydrate in a much more conventional manner," say Dr.
Timothy Collett, a leading gas hydrate researcher for the USGS. "Our
recently releasedAssessment of Gas Hydrates on the North Slope,
Alaska, 2008, is based on the same geologic elements to define a Total
Petroleum System (TPS) we use to assess conventional plays. We were
able, for the first time, to obtain the undiscovered, technically recoverable
volume of gas from hydrates for an area, in this case, northern Alaska. To
this end, these resources can be discovered, developed, and produced by
using current oil and gas technology."
more than 50 regions of the world's oceans and even in some large lakes
(Baykal in Russia is one). Hydrates are stable in marine sediments below
about 500 meters in water depth and stable in association with permafrost
in Polar Regions in both onshore and offshore sediments.
Gas is greatly concentrated in hydrates where a unit volume of methane
hydrate can produce about 160 unit volumes of gas at one atmosphere.
Worldwide, the methane contained (in-place volumes) in gas hydrates is
about twice the amount of carbon held in all the earth's fossil fuels.
USGS
Sampled and
inferred gas hydrates occur world wide in oceanic sediment of continental margins and in
permafrost regions. Inferred gas hydrates are from bottom simulating reflectors (BSRs) on seismic
profiles. The Mt. Elbert and Mallik test sites are located at the top of the map. USGS Once
the
presence of gas hydrates was confirmed and it had been shown that the
volume of gas is huge, the next question was if this resource be produced
and how. Significant technical issues stood in the way before gas hydrates
could be considered a viable energy source. Hoping to find the answers,
Canada, Japan, India, and the United State launched ambitious research
projects.
"Past research has focused on three fundamental issues," according to Dr.
Collett. "Where do gas hydrates occur, how do they occur, and why do
they occur in a particular setting? However, there is a fourth issue. Until
recently, little had been done in evaluating the potential for viable
production of gas hydrates."
In 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy and BP Exploration (Alaska), Inc.
(BPXA), in cooperation with the USGS, initiated a research program on
Alaska North Slope (ANS) gas hydrates. The ultimate goal was a production
test to determine if the gas hydrates could be a viable energy resource.
Three ambitious research programs have also been undertaken in the last
decade next door in the Mackenzie Delta at the Mallik research site. Led by
Canada and Japan, the 1150m deep Mallik 2L-38 well was completed in
1998. For the first time, cores were brought to the surface from an Arctic
gas hydrate occurrence delineating approximately 120m of hydrate
bearing section within coarse grained clastic sands.
A second phase of this research program was undertaken in 2002 with a
broader five country partnership (Canada, Japan, Germany, USA, India)
that completed three additional wells and the first production test. This
would be the first time gas would be flared from hydrate.
While the 1998 and 2002 Mallik gas hydrate research projects enabled
many new ground breaking studies, the flow rates were modest. Japan
(JOGMEC) and Canada (NRCan) therefore decided to return to the Mallik
site in the winters of 2007 and 2008 to initiate a new testing program
focusing this time on a full scale production draw down test.
resources," says Dr. Collett. "Gas hydrate research is now looking at more
conventional prospects that can be produced by current technologies. The
February 2007 22-day field program at Mt. Elbert has taught us a lot about
how hydrates occur in porous media, why they occur where they do, and
the location and design of long-term testing."
The field program at the Mt. Elbert site was designed to collect as much
data as possible from the gas hydrate zones. Researchers were able to
obtain a full suite of open-hole well logs, over 152m of continuous core,
and open-hole formation pressure response tests. They used chilled oilbased drilling fluids to maintain excellent hole conditions and thus obtain
the best quality data.
"We found approximately 30m of gas hydrate saturated, fine-grained sand
reservoir," says Dr. Collett. "Gas saturations ranged from 60% to 75%
mostly due to differences in reservoir quality."
The culmination of the program was the open-hole tests. They were able to
obtain reservoir pressure response data in addition to gas and water
samples.
"This well clearly demonstrated that open-hole data can be safely and
efficiently obtained from shallow, sub-permafrost sediments," says Dr.
Collett.
Taking an even bigger step toward the production of methane from gas
hydrates was the Japanese and Canadian sponsored 2006-2008 Mallik 5L38 research well. Just completed in April 2008, the goal was to undertake a
longer production test than the 2002 Mallik project to advance new
research and development studies utilizing simple depressurization of the
reservoir. "The first tests were conducted during the winter of 2007," says
Dr. Scott Dallimore of the Canadian Geological Survey and lead researcher
for the Mallik Program. "Sand production prevented continuous pumping.
However, during a 12.5 hour interval, at least 830m of gas was produced.
It was the world's first gas production using large scale depressurization of
a gas hydrate."
"What the Mt. Elbert and the Mallik research is telling us is that we should
be able to develop gas hydrate prospects," says Dr. Collett. "When we
started the Mt. Elbert project, we first mapped 14 gas hydrate prospects in
the Eileen trend (Milne Point area northwest of the Prudhoe Bay field).
From 3-D seismic data and rock physics relationships conditioned by well
data, we were able to predict gas hydrate pay thickness and saturation.
The entire Eileen gas hydrate trend, including the 14 prospects in the
Milne Point area, has approximately 0.93Tm (33Tcf; 5.9Bboe) gas in place
with initial reservoir modeling suggesting as much as 0.34 Tm (12Tcf;
2.2Bboe ) recoverable."
The Mt. Ebert prospect turned out to be the highest-ranked prospect in the
Milne Point area and was selected for the field data acquisition program.
This prospect had a strong and well organized seismic response. Amplitude
anomalies observed in two horizons were restricted within a well defined
three-way fault closure suggesting the accumulation was originally a freegas accumulation later converted to gas hydrate through depressed
thermal gradients associated with the development of permafrost.
Open-hole logs from the Mt. Elbert test clearly showing high resistivities in the gas saturated zones. The Unit D
sand had 68% gas hydrate saturation and Unit C 89%. The low resistivity sands below the Unit C, but still in the
hydrate stability zone, are water saturated. Tim Collett, USGSrnttttMap of the fault bounded amplitude feature
(yellow to magenta, yellow being the thickest and highest concentration of gas hydrate) defining the Mt. Elbert
prospect. Tim Collett, USGS
1.
2.
More exploration
The successful research approach demonstrated at the Mt. Elbert well and
prospect has opened the door to more exploration and testing of gas
hydrate prospects.
A 2-year program is underway to map, drill and log gas hydrate-bearing
sands in the deep water in the northern Gulf of Mexico. The project is the
latest phase in an ongoing Joint Industry project led by Chevron in
collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy. They hope to further test
geological models and geophysical interpretations supporting the
existence of high gas hydrate saturations in reservoir-quality sandstone.
Another recently completed study off the Indian continental margin has
confirmed the presence of gas hydrates in four offshore basins. Not only
did they find gas hydrates, they found one of the richest gas hydrate
accumulations yet documented (Krishna-Godavari Basin, Bay of Bengal)
and found the thickest and deepest gas hydrate stability zone near the
Andaman Islands also in the Bay of Bengal.
Amplitude anomalies
associated with the gas hydrate drilling targets at the C Horizon. The anomalies are restricted
within a well defined three-way fault closure. Tim Collett, USGS "For
Migration: Like any accumulation, there must be a way to get the hydrocarbons to the
reservoir. Migration pathways for both gas and water are a must for significant hydrate
volumes to accumulate. Many areas show gas hydrates to be closely associated with
structural features where gas and water can migrate through a fracture or fault system.
This can also be confirmed on a macroscopic to microscopic scale as most hydrates
recovered are either pore-filling in coarser grained sediments or fractured-filling in more
fine grained sediments.
Reservoir: High saturations of gas hydrates are consistently associated with high
porosity and permeability reservoirs, either good quality sand-rich sediments or fractured
mudstones.
Timing: Finally, as with any accumulation, the geologic history has to be such as to trap
and preserve the migrated hydrocarbons.
Gas hydrates concentrate along porous and permeable zones such as fractures (core from India on top) to the good quality
conglomeratic sandstones found in the Mallik well. Photos: Tim Collette, USGS and 2006-2008 Canada-Japan Mallik Project
Doubted by Experts
The wild mountain landscape of Siberian taiga along the Lena River in Lenskie Stolby
National Nature Park, Yakutia, Russia. Source: Tatiana Grozetskaya / Dreamstime.com
Yakutia is where we find the Cold Pole, the coldest place in the northern
hemisphere, where in 1924 the lowest ever temperature for our
hemisphere, -71.2C, was recorded. Here, beyond the Polar Circle, the
night lasts all winter, and the day all summer.
It is 1963, and Yuri Makogon, then at the Moscow Oil-Gas Gubkin Institute
with a fresh MSc degree in petroleum engineering (now recently retired
begins at the middle of the Monterey Bay, and extends 153 km into the
A massive hydrate layer obtained from fine-grained sediment recovered in a marine setting in the Gulf of Mexico.
Bill Winters, USGS
Compared to hydrate recovered in a coarse-grained gravel layer from an Arctic setting, the Mallik 2L-38 well,
drilled in the Northwest Territories of northern Canada. Bill Winters, USGS
1.
2.
Gas Hydrates
draws in the water molecules to form a cage within which the methane
molecule flutters in a strange molecular dance, feeling the attraction and
pull of the hard ice walls of its prison, but without ever touching. Most
natural gas hydrate appears to be in this structure, with methane as the
trapped guest molecule, although alternative structures have also been
identified, with guest molecules such as isobutane and propane, as well as
lighter hydrocarbons. Gas hydrates provide an extremely effective way of
storing natural gas or methane (CH4). At standard atmospheric
temperature (20C) and pressure (1 atm) conditions, 1 m of solid methane
hydrate is equivalent to 160 m of free gas. Although global estimates
range widely by more than two orders of magnitude, the most cited value
is that of Kvenvolden in 1988, at 2x1016 m of gas, or 10,000 gigatons of
carbon. In comparison, estimates for the known combined reserves of
conventional hydrocarbons (natural gas, oil, coal) are about half of that
value.
An Unusual Catch
Methane is a fuel, and despite being trapped in an ice, it will readily burn.
For this reason, methane hydrates are known as burning ice.
That day in November introduced the scientific community to a new,
massive seafloor outcrop of gas hydrate on a 500m wide, 1 km long
plateau perched 150m above the canyon floor. In 2004, Canadian
scientists explored and verified the site, and the ROV revealed pinnacles
cutting up through the seafloor. Massive outcrops are exposed in 12m
high mounds covered by a thin veneer of sediment. A light yellow
condensate fluid is present in the surrounding sediment and associated
with the hydrate, causing yellow staining. With buoyant hydrate slabs on
the seafloor reaching 7m in length and 3m in height and with only a thin
sediment cover, the hydrate mass must continue deeper and be anchored
below the surface.
Although methane hydrate is known to be stable at the sea floor for water
depths greater than 500600m at temperate latitudes, observed outcrops
of hydrate at the sea floor are rare and somewhat poorly understood.
Permafrost - Methane gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ) forpermafrost and marine settings. The pressuretemperature phase boundary (idealised) is shown as a green curve, and the local thermal (assumed) gradients are
in red. In permafrost, the GHSZ can begin at 100300m depth and extend for hundreds of meters beneath the base
of the permafrost (typically occurring at 150600m depth). Source: Courtesy SEG
Marine - In marine sediments, the GHSZ typically begins below 300600m and extends for hundreds of meters. The
thickness of the marine GHSZ depends on sea floor water temperature (typically 34C), salinity, geothermal
gradient and depth. Source: Courtesy SEG
1.
2.
A major and obvious difference between ice and hydrate is that the
hydrate is highly flammable (burning ice).
It is of course the methane content in hydrate that makes it of commercial
interest. In fact the difference between ice and methane hydrate is not
huge: one could consider hydrate as one dash of methane gas and six
dashes of pure ice. Ice has a hexagonal crystalline structure, with a density
of roughly 0.92 g/cm at 0C and increases to 0.93 for a temperature of
3
there is only 1 mole of methane per 5.75 moles of ice. Another way to
formulate this is to say that whereas ice has the formula H O, the empirical
2
So, if the density difference between ice and hydrate is negligible, what
about other crucial seismic parameters, such as velocities?
The ratio between P-wave velocity of pure hydrate versus ice is 0.98. For
the S-wave velocity the corresponding ratio is close to 1.0. This means
that, acoustically, pure ice and pure methane hydrate are very similar. This
is maybe as expected since the dominant crystalline structures of the two
are similar.
Compressional and shear velocity versus time. The figure shows the response to a warming of the sample from 5
to 20C followed by a cooling back to 5C again. Confining pressure: 9,000 psi. Source: Helgerud (2001)
Compressional and shear wave velocities versus confining pressure for methane hydrate. The horizontal scale is
from 4,000 to 9,000 psi. Source: Helgerud (2001)
Compressional and shear velocity versus time. The figure shows the response to a warming of the sample from 5
to 20C followed by a cooling back to 5C again. Confining pressure: 9,000 psi. Source: Helgerud (2001)
Compressional and shear wave velocities versus confining pressure for methane hydrate. The horizontal scale is
from 4,000 to 9,000 psi. Source: Helgerud (2001)
1.
2.
Rock Physics
Rock physics provides the connections between geophysical (elastic and
electromagnetic) properties of the rock measured at the surface of the
earth, within the borehole or in the laboratory, with the intrinsic properties
of rocks, such as mineralogy, porosity, pore shapes, pore fluids, pore
pressures, permeability, electrical resistivity, viscosity, stresses and overall
architecture such as laminations and fractures. These parameters affect
how seismic and electromagnetic waves/fields physically travel through the
rocks. Establishing relationships between geophysical expression and
physical rock properties therefore requires knowledge about the
elastic/electromagnetic properties of the pore fluid and rock frame, and
of cement and grains. In the case of gas hydrate, the hydrate can form in
various ways. The effective seismic velocities vary quite strongly
depending on which formation scenario is used.
To model gas hydrate systems via rock physics one needs to define the
elastic/electromagnetic properties of the system in terms of (i)
elastic/electromagnetic properties of the (unconsolidated) sediments that
host the hydrates, (ii) elastic/electromagnetic properties of the embedded
gas hydrates, (iii) the concentration of hydrates in the sediments, and (iv)
geometrical details of the distribution of hydrates within their host
sediments. The inverse modeling problem is to infer hydrate concentration
from geophysical measurements.
Acoustic well-logs with full waveform show a pronounced decrease of wave
amplitude in hydrate-bearing zones.
Compressional and shear velocity versus porosity for ice. Source: Helgerud (2001) P-wave velocity versus
porosity assuming that the methane hydrate is a part of the rock frame (black line), of the pore fluid (green line).
The red line shows a rock which is 100% water saturated (no hydrate), the blue solid line represents 1% patch
gas saturation, and the dark blue line represents 1% homogenous gas saturation. Source: Helgerud (2001)
Compressional and shear velocity versus porosity for ice. Source: Helgerud (2001) P-wave velocity versus
porosity assuming that the methane hydrate is a part of the rock frame (black line), of the pore fluid (green line).
The red line shows a rock which is 100% water saturated (no hydrate), the blue solid line represents 1% patch
gas saturation, and the dark blue line represents 1% homogenous gas saturation. Source: Helgerud (2001)
1.
2.
relations more complex. What happens when methane hydrate enters into
a sedimentary rock? Hydrate is found both in clay rich sediments and in
sands. Several models have been proposed for this, varying from
regarding the hydrate as a part of pore fluid fill, via being a part of the rock
frame or acting as cement between sand grains. Helgerud found that the
P-wave velocity is slightly higher when assuming that the hydrate is a part
of the rock frame.
There are two ways of addressing this problem: either to perform
measurements in wells drilled into hydrate-bearing rocks, or to inject
hydrate in a controlled way into a rock in the laboratory. We will discuss
both methods in the next issue of GEO ExPro.
1.
2.
In this box we show two examples of some of the most frequently used rock
physics relations. The most famous model in rock physics is the Gassmann
(1951) equation, which is used to describe the effect of gradually changing
the pore fluid in, for instance, a sandstone. It needs calibration prior to use,
for which we often use well logs. The figure on the right shows how the
relative P-wave velocity varies as a function of water saturation, assuming
that the pores are filled with either oil or water. Another key reservoir
parameter is the pore pressure. For wave velocities it turns out that it is the
effective pressure (which is approximately equal to the overburden
pressure minus the pore pressure) that controls the velocity. The simplest
version for a theoretical model that includes changes in effective pressure
is the Hertz-Mindlin model. This is a contact model, where it is assumed
that the rock grains are identical spheres with a given contact area that
increases with the effective pressure. As this contact area increases, the
velocity increases, as shown below. The black line corresponds to a Mindlincoefficient of 1/6 and the red line to 1/10, demonstrating that also in this
case we need a calibration procedure prior to practical application of this
simple model. In most cases we assume that the density does not change
as the pore pressure changes. However, in some cases the rock might
compact or undergo stretching, and in such cases the porosity will change
and hence also the density. Typical examples are chalk reservoirs that may
compact by several meters, due to production. Rock physics plays a crucial
part both in exploration and production geophysics: advanced and
quantitative use of, for example, pre-stack seismic data require rock
physics input to link the seismic parameters to key reservoir parameters
such as saturation, pressure and porosity.
Seismic Attenuation
Like the presence of free gas, the presence of gas hydrate affects seismic
attenuation. Attenuation has the potential to map hydrate concentrations
through the effect of local blanking of sediment stratigraphic reflectivity.
However, there are few studies related to seismic attenuation in hydratebearing sediments and it remains an open topic for future studies. The
attenuation of seismic energy by gas hydrates is likely to depend on the
concentration of hydrate, the thickness of hydrate, the mechanism of
hydrate formation, and the dominant frequency of the seismic
measurements, in addition to the lithology changes.
VSP data in the Mackenzie Delta indicate that quite thick hydrate-bearing
zones have significant attenuation at seismic frequencies of 10200 Hz (Qvalues, which describe inverse attenuation, of around 10).
Methane hydrate
concentration in the sediments at ODP site 995 from P-wave sonic and resistivity logs. Column 1:
Comparison of P-wave velocity (red line) with model results assuming methane hydrate (solid black
lines) or homogeneously distributed methane gas (dashed lines) are part of the pore fluid. Column
2: Comparison with model results assuming methane hydrate is a sediment frame component (solid
black lines) or methane gas is patchily distributed in the pore space (dashed lines). Column 3:
Comparison of methane hydrate concentration estimates derived from the resistivity log to
estimates derived from the compressional wave sonic log using the gas hydrate as sediment frame
component model. Source: Helgerud, 2001In
Blake Ridge (ODP site 995) offshore South Carolina, USA, Helgerud found
that the rock physics model that assumes hydrate is part of the rock frame
gave a reasonable fit between hydrate concentrations estimated from Pwave well log measurements and those obtained from the resistivity log.
The deviation between the two models is not huge, but based on the well
log observation it is clear that the model which assumes hydrate is part of
the rock itself and acts as a kind of cement explains the well log data best.
A relative good fit between observed saturations of hydrate and those
estimated using the Archie equation (discussed in more detail below) is
achieved.
Qingdao Experiment
Microstructural Models
Existing
microstructural models of gas hydrate-bearing sediments (adapted from Dai et al., 2004).
Observations from various fields show that gas hydrate mainly forms as a supporting matrix-grain
(scenario 3). Source: Lasse AmundsenHigher gas hydrate concentrations yield an increase in
the elastic properties. There are a number of rock physics models in the literature that
attempt to quantify this effect (Dai et al., 2004). The cementation models treat the grains
as randomly packed spheres where the gas hydrates occur at the contact point (model 1)
or grow around the grains (model 2). However, these models predict large increases in the
elastic properties with only a small amount of gas hydrate but stay relatively flat as the
concentration of gas hydrate increases further.
Models 3 and 4 are variations of the cementation models, but consider the gas hydrate as
either a component of the load-bearing matrix or filling the pores. These use the HertzMindlin contact theory to calculate dry rock moduli at critical porosity (3540%). A
modified lower Hashin-Shtrikman (HS) bound is used for porosity smaller than critical
porosity, and a modified upper HS bound is used for porosities larger than critical porosity.
The Gassmann equation is then used to derive the composite rock velocities.
Model 5 is an inclusion-type model that treats gas hydrate and grains as the matrix and
inclusions respectively, solving for elastic moduli of the system by iteratively solving either
the inclusion-type or self-consistent type equations.
P- and S-wave
velocities versus hydrate concentration for a consolidated sand sample. Source: Hu and Ye, 2012
P- and S-wave
velocities versus hydrate concentration for an unconsolidated sand sample. Source: Hu and Ye,
2012
For an unconsolidated sand sample, they found that the P-wave velocity
increased from approximately 1,600 m/s for zero hydrate concentration to
approximately 3,600 m/s for 70% hydrate concentration. The
corresponding values for the S-wave velocity were 600 and 1,600 m/s,
respectively. This means that the Vp/Vs-ratio decreases from 2.7 for no
hydrate to 2.25 at 70% hydrate concentration. For comparison, it is
interesting to note that Helgerud (2001) measured a Vp/Vs-ratio of
approximately 1.9 for pure hydrate. A linear extrapolation of the measured
Vp/Vs-ratio from Hu and Yes experiment yields a Vp/Vs-ratio of
approximately 2.0.
For the consolidated sample, the Qingdao experiment showed, as
expected, higher acoustic velocities: a P-wave velocity increase from 4,250
m/s to 4,700 m/s as the hydrate concentration is increased from 0 to 70%.
The corresponding numbers for the S-wave velocity are 2,500 m/s and
2,750 m/s. These numbers correspond to a constant Vp/Vs-ratio of
approximately 1.7, practically independent on hydrate concentration.
Hu and Ye also noticed a hysteresis effect for the P-wave velocities. For the
Resistivity Variations
Archies Equation
In the field of petrophysics, Archies equation relates the in-situ electrical conductivity of a
sedimentary rock to its porosity and brine saturation. Named after Gus Archie (1907
1978), his empirical relationship laid the foundation for modern well log interpretation as it
relates borehole electrical conductivity measurements to hydrocarbon saturations.
where is the true or measured bulk formation resistivity, is the pore fluid resistivity, is the
sediment porosity, 0.5 < a < 2.5 is a constant, and 1.5 < m < 3 is the cementation factor
that increases as the grains becomes less spherical with depth. Sh is the hydrate
concentration. The value of n depends on the grain-hydrate-fluid structure. If n is relatively
large, gas hydrate forms in a way that strongly impedes current flow and increases bulk
sediment resistivity (e.g., gas hydrate located in the pore throats), whereas if n is relatively
small, gas hydrate forms in a way that has a lesser effect on sediment resistivity (e.g., gas
hydrate occurrence in the pore space, making minimal contact with sediment grains).
Pearson et al., (1983) calculated an estimate for n of 1.94; however, modelling by
Spangenberg (2001) has shown that n depends somewhat on grain size distribution and
the gas hydrate saturation itself.
In practice, for marine sediments, the pore fluid resistivity usually can be adequately
estimated from the equation of state of seawater, if in-situ pressure, temperature and
salinity are known. The gas hydrate saturation now can be estimated directly from the
equation above, given that the empirical Archie parameters a, m and n are known.
is that four magic ingredients must be present for gas hydrates to exist.
They form when there is a sufficient supply of water and gas,
predominantly methane (99%), at relatively low temperatures and high
pressures, with temperature and pressure in the so-called Gas Hydrate
Stability Zone (GHSZ), (see box, p34). Favourable hydrate formation
conditions exist off the coasts on the continental margins and below the
permafrost.
In marine settings, temperature is controlled by the ocean bottom water
temperature and the geothermal gradient at any given location, while
pressure is controlled by sea level. In aquatic sediment where water
depths exceed about 300m and bottom water temperatures approach 0C,
gas hydrate is found at the seafloor to sediment depths of about 1,100m.
The general temperature range is from 2 to 20C.
In a permafrost setting, however, temperature gradients are considerably
lower than in the ocean. The ambient temperature and the thickness of
the permafrost layer therefore are of significant importance for the
stability of gas hydrate. In polar continental regions, methane hydrate can
occur at depths ranging from 150 to 2,000m, with a general temperature
range from -10 to 20C.
Distribution of known
methane hydrate accumulations. The yellow dots show where actual samples of gas hydrate have
been recovered whereas the red dots show where gas hydrate occurrences have been inferred
based on BSRs and well logs. It is evident that gas hydrates are found along most continental shelf
and slope regions and in many permafrost areas. Hydrates have also been found in inland seas
(e.g., Black Sea and Caspian Sea) and in fresh water lakes (Lake Baikal). (Courtesy of Council of
Canadian Academies (2008), based on data from Kvenvolden and Rogers, 2005.)
Seismic example of
Bottom Simulating Reflector (BSR), from Indonesia. The water depth is 1,8002,000m. Observe that
the BSR has opposite polarity to that of the seabed. The average thermal gradient, about 35C,
permits the gas hydrate to exist down to around 300m sediment depth below that temperature is
too high and methane can exist only as free gas. Source: Statoil Indonesia The
geothermal
Predicted thickness of
the global GHSZ. The thickest zones (600800m) are mainly situated in high-latitude regions (Arctic
and Antarctic) due to low bottom water temperatures which maintain conditions required for
hydrate formation. Extended GHSZs are also observed along continental margins (>500m) where
thick sedimentary sequences are deposited. In these settings the extent of the GHSZ is not limited
by sediment thickness so that free gas can accumulate in sediments below it. Note that this
definition of the global GHSZ gives an upper limit to possible gas hydrate occurrences. Source:
modified from Burwicz et al 2011To
Methane
Hydrate in Permafrost Soils
Methane
Hydrate in Seafloor SedimentsThe most common type of gas hydrate is methane hydrate and
the conditions required for its stability can occur in marine sediments and in permafrost
soil. The phase diagrams redrawn from Kvenvolden and Lorenson (2001) show the physical
conditions (temperature and pressure) required for the stability of methane hydrate in the
marine environment (top) and the permafrost environment (bottom).
First, we discuss the marine setting. Salty oceanic water can be no colder than about ?
1.8C before freezing. Assume that you are in a polar region, where the sea bottom
temperature is 0C. Furthermore, assume that the average temperature increase is 3C
per 100m sediment depth. The figure then shows that methane hydrate cannot be stable
at a water depth of 100m. But it may occur in a seafloor that is 400m below sea level.
When drilling at a water depth of 400m, you can expect or hope to find a 370m thick
hydrate layer. Beneath this depth the temperatures get too high for a formation of gas
hydrate, so that free gas and water is found. For a case of 1,000m water depth, the
hydrate layer will be 600m thick. Obviously, the thickness of the hydrate zone will depend
on the temperature gradient. In sediments that display a stronger increase in temperature,
which can be the case, for example, at active continental margins (46C per 100m
depth), the hydrate zone will generally be thinner.
Next, we look at the permafrost setting, where temperature gradients are considerably
lower than in the ocean. Typically, the temperature can be expected to change by 1.3C
per 100m within the permafrost zone, and with 2C per 100m in layers below the
permafrost zone. The ambient temperature and the thickness of the frozen layer are
therefore of significant importance for the stability of gas hydrate.
Consider the case where the base of the permafrost is at a depth of 100m or less. The
figure shows that the physical conditions will not be adequate for the formation of gas
hydrate. If the permafrost base is, say, at 750m, the thickness of the gas hydrate zone is
900m.
Since the stability of gas hydrates is related to relatively low temperatures and high
pressure, any change in these two parameters can increase or decrease the stability of the
gas hydrate. For example, if either the temperature is increased or the pressure is
reduced, the gas hydrate will change phase from a solid to a gas and liquid.
Gas hydrates are not chemical compounds since the sequestered molecules are never
bonded to the lattice. The formation and decomposition of hydrates are first-order phase
transitions. However, the detailed formation and decomposition mechanisms are still not
well understood on a molecular level.
depths of about 1,100m. The typical depth range for hydrate stability lies
100500m beneath the seafloor. In polar continental regions, gas
hydrate can occur in sediments at depths ranging from 150 to 2,000m.
Occurrences of hydrates within the gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ) are
affected by numerous additional factors, including availability of gas,
water, and geological controls. About 98% of the gas hydrates are believed
to be concentrated in oceanic sediments, while the other 2% are in polar
landmasses.
Gas hydrate resource pyramid: Gas hydrates exist in a variety of forms that pose different
opportunities and challenges for energy resource exploration and production. The left axis displays
lithology of the host sediment. The right axis shows associated estimates of natural gas resources.
Gas hydrate-bearing sands are the most feasible initial targets for energy recovery. Other
occurrences, such as gas hydrate-filled fractures in clay-dominated reservoirs, may become
potential energy production targets in the long-term future (Courtesy: Ray Boswell). Gas
volumes are often cited in units of trillion cubic feet (Tcf), and there
are approximately 35.3 cubic feet in a cubic metre. It is estimated that
resources of methane in natural hydrate reservoirs range anywhere from
10 to 2.8 x 10 Tcf, or around 2.8 x 10 to 8 x 10 m , indicating that more
5
15
15
Below marine sands in the gas hydrate resource pyramid is the category
for muds and fine silt. Fractured muds are less permeable, usually smallergrained sediments that may host gas hydrates in fracture-related
permeability. Drilling on the Indian and Korean margins and in the Gulf of
Mexico has found gas hydrate filling pervasive fractures within low
permeability sediments (e.g., silts and clays). Such sediments may not
have a high average saturation of gas hydrate, maybe around 20%,
but targeted production from gas hydrates within the fractures could
theoretically yield significant gas.
At the base of the resource pyramid lie gas hydrates in low
permeability, undeformed fine-grained muds. Such sediments host most of
the global gas in place in methane hydrates and are unlikely to become a
target for commercial production of gas from methane hydrates. The
saturation typically is only 5%.
Sea-floor mound deposits are small size and ephemeral. They
are environmentally sensitive due to associated unique biological
communities and thus unattractive as a resource target.
Potential Worldwide
Hydrate Energy International (HEI) recently released estimates of the gas hydrate resource
potential, utilising a petroleum systems approach (Source: Johnson, 2011). In
conventional
A, B
F
HOTSPOT IMAGE: A schematic depiction of the components of various
methane hydrate systems.
Typical methane hydrate reservoir morphologies include (A) networks of hydratefilled veins; (B) massive hydrate lenses; (C) grain-filling methane hydrate in
marine sands; (D) massive sea-floor mounds; (E) grain-filling methane hydrate in
marine clays; (F) grain-filling methane hydrate in onshore
arctic sands/conglomerates (Click on map for photographic examples).
The general location of the most resource-relevant (blue circles) and
most climate-relevant (green circles) methane hydrate occurrences are
also shown. Other parts of the methane hydrate system as depicted include
the relationship between microbial and thermogenic gas sources and
gas migration controls.
SOURCE: R. Boswell, 2011.
Structural Accumulations
Stratigraphic Accumulations
Seismic attribute co-blend map (RMS amplitude/coherence) showing sand channels in excess of 150m thick. The
bright yellow and orange colours highlight zones with high seismic amplitudes characteristic of sand channels.
The displayed interval shows several generations of sand deposits within the gas hydrate stability zone. If
charged with gas they could form prospective targets for gas hydrate exploration. (Reichel and Gallagher, 2014)
Seismic example of marine gas hydrates above a double flat spot. The contrast between the high-velocity hydrate-bearing strata and the
In this example, the gas hydrates act as seals for underlying hydrocarbon reservoirs (Courtesy: Statoil, Sonangol E.P. and Schlumberger
Seismic feature enhancement of BSR and two underlying flat spots (Courtesy: Statoil, Sonangol E.P. and Schlumberger Multiclient).