Next Article in Journal
Antibacterial Properties of Dandelion Extract-Based PVA/CTS/DAN/CuNP Composite Gel
Next Article in Special Issue
Pore-Fracture System Distribution Heterogeneity by Using the T2 Spectral Curve under a Centrifugal State
Previous Article in Journal
Development of the Design of Plate with Variable Diameters of Holes and Its Impact on Meat-Grinding Quality and Efficiency
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mineralogical and Geochemical Composition of Late Permian Coals from Dengfeng Coalfield, North China: Conversion of Clay Minerals in Coal during Coalification
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 12
Issue 9
10.3390/pr12091810
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Analysis of Factors Influencing Tight Sandstone Gas Production and Identification of Favorable Gas Layers in the Shan 23 Sub-Member of the Daning-Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin

by
Junyi Sun
1,
Ming Chen
1,
Bo Wang
2,*,
Gang Wang
3,
Haonian Tian
1,
Jie Hou
1 and
Boning Zhu
1
1
PetroChina Coalbed Methane Company Limited Linfen Branch, Linfen 042202, China
2
Information Institute of the Ministry of Emergency Management of PRC, Beijing 100029, China
3
College of Architecture & Civil Engineering, Shangqiu Normal University, Shangqiu 476000, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2024, 12(9), 1810; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091810
Submission received: 18 July 2024 / Revised: 14 August 2024 / Accepted: 20 August 2024 / Published: 26 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Exploration, Exploitation and Utilization of Coal and Gas Resources)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Daning-Jixian Block harbors abundant tight sandstone gas resources. However, significant variations in gas production exist among the different wells within the block. A comprehensive study was conducted on key factors such as sedimentary strata and petrophysical characteristics to elucidate their impact on gas reservoir productivity. Linear regression equations were employed to classify the favorable reservoirs within the study area. The analysis revealed that within the first 6 months of production from the Shan 23 gas layer, daily gas production ranged from 2576.19 to 156,078.17 m3/d, averaging 24,037.9 m3/d. Over the first year, average daily production varied from 2185.05 to 136,806.99 m3/d, averaging 23,469.23 m3/d, indicating relatively stable production from the Shan 23 layer alone. In the dominant central area of the underwater distributary channel delta front in Shan23, the sand body exhibits a superimposed cutting type, resulting in high production rates. Conversely, the sand bodies on the periphery gradually transition to superimposed and isolated types, leading to decreased production. Through a correlation analysis of gas layer thickness, porosity, permeability, and initial gas well production, it was determined that gas production from the wells within the same layer is primarily influenced by gas layer thickness, porosity, and permeability. Gas saturation demonstrates a minimal impact on production according to single-factor analysis. The evaluated factors such as the gas productivity coefficient, energy storage coefficient, and enrichment coefficient exhibited similar distribution patterns across the study area. The high-value areas for the gas productivity coefficient, energy storage coefficient, and enrichment coefficient are concentrated in distributary channel zones and delta lobes. In contrast, regions with underdeveloped skeletal sand bodies generally display lower values for these parameters. The linear relationships between these parameters and the average gas production were calculated to further classify the favorable reservoirs in the study area. This study aimed to establish a scientific basis for the efficient development of the tight sandstone gas reservoirs within the Daning-Jixian Block.

1. Introduction

Natural gas, as a clean and low-carbon fossil fuel, plays a pivotal role in the pursuit of environmental sustainability, climate change mitigation, and the global transition towards greener, low-carbon energy systems. China has emerged as the world’s fourth-largest natural gas producer and the third-largest consumer [1,2]. The Ordos Basin stands as a vital energy resource base within China, with total natural gas resources of 15.16 × 1012 m3, of which the tight sandstone gas resource accounts for 10.37 × 1012 m3. Tight sandstone gas, characterized by relatively low extraction costs [3,4], holds strategic significance in reshaping global energy consumption patterns and optimizing energy structures [5,6,7]. Among the Upper Paleozoic tight sandstone gas reservoirs in China, those in the Ordos Basin rank highest in production [8,9]. The Daning-Jixian Block, noted for its potential as a gas reservoir area, has garnered significant attention from the natural gas industry. The geological reserves of tight sandstone gas in this block amount to 82.3 billion cubic meters, supporting an estimated production capacity of 1 billion cubic meters annually [10]. However, its development faces numerous challenges. Tight sandstone gas reservoirs present more challenges in comparison to conventional gas reservoirs due to complex pore throat systems, limited connectivity, low porosity, low permeability, pronounced reservoir heterogeneity, substantial lateral variability, and significant variations in individual well production [11,12,13,14,15,16]. These factors directly impact the development efficiency and production capacity of gas reservoirs.
The exploration and utilization of tight sandstone gas layers of the Daning-Jixian Block encompass several formations: the Shihezi Formation from the Middle Permian, the Lower Shanxi Formation (Shan 1 and Shan 2 Members), and both the Taiyuan and Benxi Formations from the Upper Carboniferous. Among these, the Shan 23 sub-member serves as the primary gas reservoir layer. It exhibits several characteristics, including low porosity, permeability, pressure, abundance, and yield. Progress in the exploration of the tight sandstone gas in the Daning-Jixian Block has been sluggish, influenced by early coalbed methane exploration and complex geological conditions. Recent studies by Dang et al. [9] and Shi [17] have focused on the sedimentation, reservoir properties, source rocks, and the timing of reservoir formation in the Shan 2 and He 8 Members in the area. The enrichment patterns of tight sandstone gas are governed by multiple factors, including generation, storage, and sealing relationships. The presence of thick sand and the favorable physical conditions within the underwater distributary channel promote natural gas accumulation [9]. The pore structure of the tight sandstone of the Daning-Jixian Block is influenced by both sedimentation and diagenesis processes [18,19]. Li et al. [20] conducted a detailed characterization of the Lower Permian Shan 23 sub-member’s tight sandstone reservoir using core, logging, and analytical data, developing a prediction method under sedimentary microfacies’ control. Additionally, Li et al. [21] established a gas reservoir identification chart based on sensitive logging parameters and defined quantitative evaluation criteria for reservoir gas content logging. Evaluations of the gas-bearing capacity of tight sandstones in the Jixian area were performed from both qualitative and quantitative perspectives.
The Daning-Jixian gas field commenced development in 2015, focusing primarily on the Daji 5–6 block. The proven geological reserves of tight sandstone gas in the Shan 23 layer constitute 42% of the total proven reserves, amounting to 325.74 × 108 m3. By 31 March 2021, cumulative gas production reached 26.3 × 108 m3, achieving a recovery rate of 8.075% and an annual gas recovery rate of 1.9%. The factors influencing the gas storage and fluid flow capacity of tight sandstone reservoirs include gas saturation, as well as reservoir pressure, permeability, and thickness [14,22]. The sand bodies’ spatial distribution is influenced by sedimentation processes [23]. Sand bodies in the main layer of Shan 2 Member exhibit a limited development scale and significant reservoir heterogeneity, with pronounced disparities in size and uneven distribution, vertically and horizontally. Due to constraints in terms of seismic exploration and research understanding, accurately predicting the effective distribution of sand bodies and identifying optimal areas for tight sandstone gas extraction and development remain challenging. A comprehensive evaluation of production in the Shan 23 sub-member of the Daning-Jixian Block necessitates a thorough analysis of its influencing factors. The objective of this research was to conduct an in-depth investigation into critical factors such as sedimentary strata and rock properties, elucidate their impact on gas reservoir productivity, and classify reservoirs through sedimentary facies’ and physical property analyses, thereby laying a scientific foundation for the efficient development of gas reservoirs in this region.

2. Geological Background

2.1. Structural Geological Conditions

The Ordos Basin is structurally segmented into several secondary units [24]. The research zone is positioned at the southeastern fringe of the Ordos Basin, at the southern terminus of the Jinxi Fold Belt, and is characterized by a rectangular distribution and a relatively straightforward structural configuration. The burial depth of the Shan 23 tight sandstone gas layer ranges from 1901.00 to 2673.00 m, averaging 2284.25 m. This layer exhibits a progressively shallower burial depth from north to south (Figure 1).

2.2. Strata

The Upper Paleozoic strata in the Daning-Jixian area are sequentially developed from bottom to top, including the Benxi Formation, Taiyuan Formation, Shanxi Formation, and Shihezi Formation. This study focused on the Shan 2 Member, specifically investigating the Shan 23 sub-member within the Shanxi Formation. The lower boundary of the Shanxi Formation is defined by Beichagou sandstone, and the underlying Taiyuan Formation is in contact with it through regional erosion. Luotuobozi sandstone marks the upper boundary of the Shanxi Formation, where it interfaces with the Lower Shihezi Formation through integration or erosion. Lithologically, the Shanxi Formation primarily consists of dark gray or grayish-black mudstone, siltstone, and medium- to fine-grained sandstone. Medium- to fine-grained gray and dark gray sandstones are prevalent in the lower and middle parts, occasionally containing gravel with coarse sandstone at the base. Coal seams sporadically occur in the middle and lower sections, while they are generally absent in the upper part. The thickness of the Shanxi Formation ranges from 90 to 120 m. Based on lithological combinations, it can be subdivided into two members: Shan 1 and Shan 2. Each member, Shan 1 and Shan 2, further divides into three sand layer groups (Table 1). The Shan 23 reservoir is characterized by delta-front underwater distributary channel sedimentation, featuring relatively small sand bodies and narrow river channels overall.

3. Data Collection and Analysis Methods

Shan 23 features high-quality reservoir development, predominantly utilizing co-production drilling methods in the study area. There are currently 43 nonhorizontal wells in the single-layer production of the Shan 23 sub-member. Gas production, gas saturation, gas layer thickness, porosity, and permeability data for these 43 wells were collected from PetroChina Coalbed Methane Company Limited Linfen Branch.
Although there are many production wells in the research area, physical property experimental analysis and gas well testing were conducted on a limited number of wells. Drilled core samples were collected from various wells, packaged, and sent to the laboratory, where they were processed into cylindrical samples with a diameter of 2.5 cm and a length of 5 cm. In accordance with the national standard, “Practices for core analysis” of the People’s Republic of China (GB/T29172-2012), porosity and permeability tests were performed on the cylindrical sandstone samples using an ULTRAPORE-200A helium porosity meter and an ULTRA-PERMTM200 permeability meter.
Using the intersection of measured values with resistivity and acoustic logging data, as well as Archie’s formula, it is possible to further calculate porosity, permeability, and gas saturation values [12]. This method provides relatively high accuracy in logging interpretation. Detailed procedures for calculating porosity, permeability, and gas saturation of tight sandstone are discussed in reference [12]. Table 2 displays the calculated physical property parameters for the sandstone in the Shan 23 sub-member for each well.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Productivity Characteristics

According to the gas well production statistics, Shan 23 stands out as the primary production layer in the study area, exhibiting the highest output. During the initial 6 months, daily gas production ranged from 2576.19 to 156,078.17 m3/d, averaging 24,037.9 m3/d. Over the first year, daily production ranged from 2185.05 to 136,806.99 m3/d, with an average of 23,469.23 m3/d. This indicates that the gas production has been relatively stable from mining the Shan 23 layer alone (Figure 2; Table 2). According to Zhao et al. [11] and Jia et al. [25], wells are categorized based on daily production: Class I wells exceed 20,000 m3/d, Class II wells range from 10,000 to 20,000 m3/d, and Class III wells are below 10,000 m3/d. In this study area, there are 16 Class I wells (37.21%), 10 Class II wells (23.26%), and 17 Class III wells (39.53%).

4.2. Analysis of Single Factors

Gas testing analysis indicated that the high production from the Shanxi Formation gas reservoirs is primarily influenced by macro and micro factors. At the macro level, sedimentary facies’ zones play a crucial role in controlling gas reservoir productivity, whereas at the micro level, individual well output is governed by reservoir properties. Sedimentation significantly impacts the pore structure, thickness, and physical characteristics of tight sandstone, thereby influencing gas reservoir formation [26]. The thickness of gas-bearing layers, reservoir porosity, and permeability are identified as the principal factors affecting gas production [27].

4.2.1. Sedimentary Facies

The sedimentary facies’ zones and sand body structures exert a significant influence on gas well productivity. The Shanxi Formation in the research area is influenced by northeast–southwest sediment sources and primarily features sedimentary microfacies, including shallow-water delta front and subaqueous distributary channels [11,28]. In the dominant central area of the underwater distributary channel delta front in Shan 23, controlled by ancient erosion gullies, the sand body exhibits a superimposed cutting type, resulting in high production rates. Conversely, the sand bodies on the periphery gradually transition to superimposed and isolated types, leading to decreased production. For instance, Well Shan 23−3 illustrates this variability from section D44 to D31 to D42 to D45: D42, situated in the main river channel of Shan 23, features a vertically superimposed and cut sand body structure, yielding an average production of 156,000 m3/d over the first six months. In contrast, D31, located on the flanks of river channels with a vertically superimposed sand body, saw a significant decrease in average daily production to 5786 cubic meters during the same period. Well D44, positioned at the channel edge with a vertically isolated sand body type and co-mined with Shan 23 and the Taiyuan Formation, averaged a 7948 cubic meter daily production in the initial six months, with a split production of only 3900 cubic meters. This pattern indicates notable production decline on both sides. Similar production trends are observed for Wells D46, D47, D23, D48, and D49, where D23, situated in the central river section, exhibits relatively high production, with an average of 64,813 cubic meters per day, gradually decreasing towards the riverbanks (Figure 3).

4.2.2. Thickness

Based on the thickness distribution of the tight sandstone gas reservoir, this study area predominantly features four primary river channels during the Shan 23 development phase, with production wells strategically located according to these channel formations (Figure 4). The underwater distributary channel sand bodies constitute the primary reservoir, characterized by strong hydrodynamic conditions, coarse sediment particle size, and single-layer thickness exceeding 4 m, with favorable reservoir properties [11]. Consequently, as the gas layer thickness increases, there is a corresponding gradual rise in the average daily gas production from tight sandstone within the study area (Figure 5).

4.2.3. Porosity

During the diagenesis process of sandstone reservoirs, compaction and cementation are the main factors leading to a decrease in porosity. The development of secondary dissolved pores can improve the physical properties of reservoirs to a certain extent [29,30]. In terms of pore types, the Daning-Jixian Block features four categories: primary inter-granular pores, secondary dissolution pores, kaolinite inter-granular pores, and microcracks, with secondary dissolution pores being the predominant type (Figure 6). Porosity exceeding 5.4% is conducive to natural gas accumulation [9]. The reservoir’s porosity ranges from 4.80% to 11.09%, averaging 6.89%. Sandstone’s porosity varies significantly across different sedimentary environments: the underwater distributary channel’s main body exhibits the highest porosity, varying between 5.83% and 11.09%, averaging 7.50%; the river-side sandstone’s porosity ranges from 4.80% to 9.07%, averaging 6.54%; and edge-of-river sandstone shows the lowest porosity, ranging from 5.73% to 6.81% with an average of 6.15% (Figure 7). As porosity increases, the average daily gas production gradually rises (Figure 8).

4.2.4. Permeability

The lithology of the Shan 2 Member primarily consists of quartz sandstone and lithic quartz sandstone, with some feldspar quartz sandstone. The kaolin content is high, while the chlorite content and total clay content are low. Kaolin is prominently found in coarse-grained, well-sorted sandstones with good crystallization. Despite the presence of micro-pores between particles, their impact on permeability is relatively minor. Chlorite typically forms clay films along particle edges, which can easily block pore channels and significantly impair permeability [31]. Permeability ranges mainly from 0.08 to 18.02 mD, averaging 0.88 mD. Porosity correlates exponentially with permeability, demonstrating a correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.92 (Figure 9). As the permeability increases, the average daily gas production gradually increases (Figure 10).

4.2.5. Gas Saturation

Gas saturation is influenced by various factors, with reservoir heterogeneity significantly impacting the extent of natural gas accumulation [32]. There exist positive correlations between gas layer thickness, porosity, permeability, and gas saturation. Porosity, permeability, and gas saturation show a strong correlation. Permeability and gas saturation exhibit a logarithmic relationship, where the rate of increase in gas saturation gradually diminishes with increasing permeability (Figure 11). Despite the increasing gas saturation, the average daily gas production shows no significant change, indicating a relatively weak overall correlation (Figure 12).
Through correlation analyses of gas layer thickness, porosity, permeability, and gas well initial production, it was determined that the gas production from wells within the same layer is primarily influenced by gas layer thickness, porosity, and permeability. Gas saturation demonstrates a minimal impact on production according to single-factor analysis.

4.3. Gas Productivity Coefficient, Gas Storage Coefficient, and Enrichment Coefficient

The primary objective of natural gas exploration is to delineate predominant sedimentary facies and identify high-quality reservoirs. The extent and thickness of sand bodies constitute crucial factors for tight sandstone gas production capacity, energy storage forecasting, and well site verification in the Daning-Jixian Block. Favorable sand bodies in the forefront of shallow-water deltas are concentrated within distributary channels and river mouth barriers. The distribution of sandstone thickness in the principal producing layer, Shan 23 sandstone, exhibits distinct sedimentary patterns within the study area. By utilizing skeleton sandstone thickness as a fundamental parameter and integrating data on porosity, permeability, and gas saturation, the analysis could further elucidate the gas production, storage potential, and enrichment characteristics of the Shan 23 sandstone.
Permeability stands out as a pivotal factor influencing unconventional natural gas production [33]. The multiplication of thickness and permeability in the primary production layer’s sandstone served as a gas productivity coefficient for evaluating the advantageous gas production traits within the study area. Porosity, meanwhile, emerged as the foremost factor impacting coalbed methane gas storage, with its magnitude dictating the sandstone’s capacity to retain gas. Utilizing the product of sandstone thickness and porosity as the gas storage coefficient facilitated the evaluation of gas storage in the study area. Enhanced gas enrichment significantly benefits the efficient development of tight sandstone gas [34]. Moreover, the product of gas layer thickness, porosity, and gas saturation functions as an enrichment coefficient to appraise the gas enrichment features of tight sandstone reservoirs [35].
The gas productivity coefficients exhibit a broad range, spanning from 0.15 to 295.04, averaging 11.97, predominantly falling between 0 and 10. The variability in the productivity coefficients across wells is significant, particularly in regions characterized by extensive sheet-like sand formations and distributary bay development. Higher productivity coefficients correspond to higher levels of gas production. Notably, productive areas are concentrated around specific well sites like D16, D21, D41, and D42. High-value zones align consistently with distributary channel zones and delta lobes, whereas wells situated on the flanks of river channels, such as D11, D17, and D26 (see Figure 13a), tend to exhibit lower productivity coefficients.
The gas storage coefficient of sandstone in Shan 23 varies between 0.07 and 1.83, averaging 0.65. As the gas storage coefficient increases, the average gas production shows an increasing trend, with a slightly higher correlation coefficient. Favorable gas storage areas are concentrated primarily around well sites like D4, D16, D18, D41, and D42, which align with the distribution of the main channel skeleton sands and delta lobes, highlighting them as principal advantageous storage areas. Conversely, in lower-value areas, such as D26, D34, and D40, the wells are situated on the flanks of river channels where sand bodies are less developed (Figure 13b).
The enrichment coefficient varies between 0.05 and 1.64, averaging 0.51. Gas production exhibits an increasing trend as the enrichment coefficient rises, showing a stronger correlation (R2 = 0.22) compared to the gas productivity coefficients and gas storage coefficients. This suggests that comprehensively considering reservoir thickness, porosity, and gas saturation more accurately predicts gas production. The areas with significant enrichment coefficients are primarily concentrated around wells D4, D16, D41, and D42, which align with the distributary channels’ and delta lobes’ distribution patterns (Figure 13c).
In evaluating the favorable reservoir characteristics, we found that the gas production, gas storage, and enrichment coefficients in the study area exhibit similar distribution patterns, all having higher values in distributary channel zones and delta lobes. Conversely, areas lacking developed skeleton sand bodies generally display lower overall parameter values.

4.4. Gas Layer Type

Zhao et al. [36] established thresholds of 1 m for sandstone thickness, 3.5% for porosity, 0.1 mD for permeability, and 55% for gas saturation as lower limits for assessing favorable zones for tight sandstone gas in the eastern Ordos Basin. Meanwhile, Dang [9] categorized “desert areas” in the Daning-Jixian Block into two classes: Class I requires gas layer thickness > 3 m, gas saturation > 70%, porosity > 6.0%, and enrichment coefficient > 0.160; Class II includes gas layer thickness > 1.6 m, gas saturation > 66%, porosity > 5.4%, and enrichment coefficient > 0.058. This study established linear relationships between these parameters and average gas production, building on previous research that considered factors such as gas layer thickness, sedimentary facies, porosity, and gas saturation. Gas storage and enrichment coefficients were calculated to further classify the favorable gas layers in the region. Notably, permeability and productivity coefficient exhibit a nonlinear relationship with gas production. To ensure prediction accuracy, this study referred to previous research results for permeability classification [11,36], with productivity coefficients calculated according to established standards. The classification results in Table 3 offer detailed information.
The aforementioned classification standards for reservoir parameters in various types of gas-producing reservoirs offer guidance for positioning high-yield gas wells in the study area. However, even within favorable gas-producing reservoirs, the high heterogeneity caused by river oscillations during sedimentary processes significantly influences well productivity. Therefore, future exploration and development efforts should include thorough and detailed research on well location selection, lateral drilling directions, and other factors. This approach aims to enhance production practices and achieve the efficient development of tight sandstone gas.

5. Conclusions

(1)
According to gas well production statistics, Shan 23 stands out as the primary production layer in the study area. Within the first 6 months of production from the Shan 23 gas layer, daily gas production ranged from 2576.19 to 156,078.17 m3/d, averaging 24,037.9 m3/d. Over the first year, average daily production varied from 2185.05 to 136,806.99 m3/d, averaging 23,469.23 m3/d, indicating relatively stable production from the Shan 23 layer alone.
(2)
In the dominant central area of the underwater distributary channel delta front in Shan 23, the sand body exhibits a superimposed cutting type, resulting in high production rates. Conversely, the sand bodies on the periphery gradually transition to superimposed and isolated types, leading to decreased production. Through correlation analyses of gas layer thickness, porosity, permeability, and gas well initial production, it was determined that the gas production from the wells within the same layer is primarily influenced by gas layer thickness, porosity, and permeability. Gas saturation demonstrates a minimal impact on production according to single-factor analysis.
(3)
As evaluation factors of favorable areas, the gas productivity coefficient, gas storage coefficient, and enrichment coefficient of the study area exhibit similar distribution patterns, characterized by high values in distributary channel zones and delta lobes. Conversely, areas lacking well-developed skeleton sand bodies generally display lower overall parameter values. By establishing linear correlations between these parameters and average gas production, this study further classified favorable reservoirs within the area. The classification standards for reservoir parameters in various types of gas-producing reservoirs offer guidance for positioning high-yield gas wells in the study area.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.S., M.C., B.W., G.W., H.T., J.H. and B.Z.; methodology, J.S., M.C., B.W., G.W., H.T., J.H. and B.Z.; investigation, J.S., M.C., B.W., H.T., J.H. and B.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, J.S., B.W. and G.W.; writing—review and editing, B.W. and G.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Key Application Science and Technology Project of PetroChina Company Limited, grant numbers 2023ZZ18 and 2021DJ23.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in this article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors Junyi Sun, Ming Chen, Haonian Tian, Jie Hou and Boning Zhu were employed by the company PetroChina Coalbed Methane Company Limited Linfen Branch. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors declare that this study received funding from Key Application Science and Technology Project of PetroChina Company Limited. The funder had the following involvement with the study: study design, collection, analysis.

References

  1. Cheng, M.; Xue, W.; Guo, Z.; Hou, M.; Wang, C. Development of Large-Scale Tight Gas Sandstone Reservoirs and Recommendations for Stable Production—The Example of the Sulige Gas Field in the Ordos Basin. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zou, C.; Lin, M.; Ma, F.; Liu, H.; Yang, Z.; Zhang, G.; Yang, Y.; Guan, C.; Liang, Y.; Wang, Y.; et al. Development, challenges and strategies of natural gas industry under carbon neutral target in China. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2024, 51, 418–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Qin, S.; Wang, R.; Shi, W.; Liu, K.; Zhang, W.; Xu, X.; Qi, R.; Yi, Z. Diverse effects of intragranular fractures on reservoir properties, diagenesis, and gas migration: Insight from Permian tight sandstone in the Hangjinqi area, north Ordos Basin. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2022, 137, 105526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhao, G.; Li, X.; Liu, M.; Dong, C.; Chen, D.; Zhang, J. Reservoir Characteristics of Tight Sandstone and Sweet Spot Prediction of Dibei Gas Field in Eastern Kuqa Depression, Northwest China. Energies 2022, 15, 3135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Shen, J.; Zhang, C.; Qin, Y.; Zhang, B. Effect factors on co-mining of sandstone gas and coalbed methanein coal series and threshold of parameter in Linxing block, Ordos Basin. Nat. Gas Geosci. 2017, 28, 479–487. [Google Scholar]
  6. Zou, C.; Tao, S.; Han, W.; Zhao, Z.; Ma, W.; Li, C.; Bai, B.; Gao, X. Geological and geochemical characteristics and exploration prospect of coal-derived tight sandstone gas in China: Case study of the Ordos, Sichuan, and Tarim Basins. Acta Geol. Sin. Engl. Ed. 2018, 92, 1609–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Xue, Y.; Jin, Q.; Tian, H. Productivity Influence factors of tight sandstone gas reservoir with water produced. Geofluids 2021, 2021, 9926299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, W.B.; Hu, S.Y.; Deng, X.Q.; Bai, B.; Tao, S.Z.; Sun, B.; Wang, Q.R.; Cheng, D.X. Physical property and hydrocarbon enrichment characteristics of tight oil reservoir in Chang 7 division of Yanchang Formation, Xin’anbian oilfield, Ordos Basin, China. Pet. Sci. 2021, 18, 1294–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dang, J. Study on Natural Gas Enrichment Rules and Sweet Spot Evaluation of He8 Member in Daning-Jixian Area. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  10. Wang, W.; Xing, X.J.; Yang, H.T.; Zhang, Z.C.; Deng, L.; Ji, L. Mechanism and Characteristics Analysis of Water-Producing Tight Gas Well in Daning-Jixian Block. In Proceedings of the International Field Exploration and Development Conference 2023; Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering; Lin, J., Ed.; Springer: Singapore, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhao, L.; Wen, G.; Li, X.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Shi, X.; Yang, M. Evaluation of the “Sweet Spot Area” of Tight Sandstone Gas Reservoirs in the Shanxi Formation 2-3 Sub-member of the Daning-Jixian Block in the Ordos Basin. Nat. Gas Ind. 2018, 38, 5–10. [Google Scholar]
  12. Shi, M. Logging Evaluation of Tight Sandstone Reservoir Effectiveness—A Case Study of Daning-Jixian Area. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  13. Jin, H.; Liu, C.; Guo, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Niu, C.; Wang, D.; Ling, Y. Rock physical modeling and seismic dispersion attribute inversion for the characterization of a tight gas sandstone reservoir. Front. Earth Sci. 2021, 9, 641651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhong, G.; Li, S.; Tang, D.; Tian, W.; Lin, W.; Feng, P. Study on Co-production compatibility evaluation method of multilayer tight gas reservoir. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2022, 108, 104840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhang, Y.; Jiang, S.; He, Z.; Wang, Y.; Guo, M.; Zhu, G.; Cai, D.; Lu, S.; Xiao, D.; Li, Y.; et al. Characteristics of heterogeneous diagenesis and modification to physical properties of Upper Paleozoic tight gas reservoir in eastern Ordos Basin. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2022, 208, 109243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Teng, Y.; Er, C.; Zhao, J.; Guo, Q.; Shen, C.; Tan, S. Pore structure characterization based on NMR experiment: A case from the Shanxi Formation tight sandstones in the Daning-Jixian area, eastern Ordos Basin. Energy Geosci. 2023, 4, 100192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shi, Z. Evaluation of Upper Paleozoic Source Rocks and Basin Simulation Study in Daning-Jixian Block. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  18. Cui, J. The Pore Structure of Tight Sandstone of Shanxi Formation in Daning-Jixian Area. Master’s Thesis, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  19. Yin, X.D.; Jiang, S.; Chen, S.J.; Wu, P.; Gao, W.; Gao, J.X.; Shi, X. Impact of rock type on the pore structures and physical properties within a tight sandstone reservoir in the Ordos Basin, NW China. Pet. Sci. 2020, 17, 896–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, Y.; Wen, G.; Li, X.; Chang, Y.; Yu, Y.; Zhao, L.; Shi, X.; Li, X.; Zhao, Y. A prediction method for tight sandstone gas reservoirs in coal bearing strata under sedimentary microfacies control: Taking the Shanxi Formation of the Lower Permian in the Daning Jixian Block of the Ordos Basin as an example. Nat. Gas Ind. 2018, 38 (Suppl. S1), 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Li, X.; Kang, K.; Tian, H.; Gu, X.; Liu, H. Evaluation of gas-bearing properties of tight Permian sandstone in Daning-Jixian Area. Yunnan Chem. Technol. 2017, 44, 90–92. [Google Scholar]
  22. Qin, R.; Yu, J.; Huang, T. A post-fracturing productivity appraisal technology for tight sandstone gas reservoirs using logging data: Taking Linxing block of Ordos basin as an example. China Offshore Oil Gas 2019, 31, 67–76. [Google Scholar]
  23. Liu, J.; Liu, Z.; Liu, K.; Xiao, K.; Huang, Y.; Jin, W. Characterization of favorable lithofacies in tight sandstone reservoirs and its significance for gas exploration and exploitation: A case study of the 2nd Member of Triassic Xujiahe Formation in the Xinchang area, Sichuan Basin. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2020, 47, 1194–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Guo, Z.; Zhao, D.; Liu, C. Gas prediction using an improved seismic dispersion attribute inversion for tight sandstone gas reservoirs in the Ordos Basin, China. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2022, 101, 104499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Jia, A.; Wei, Y.; Guo, Z.; Wang, G.; Meng, D.; Huang, S. Development status and prospect of tight sandstone gas in China. Nat. Gas Ind. 2022, 42, 83–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yin, S.; Dong, L.; Yang, X.; Wang, R. Experimental investigation of the petrophysical properties, minerals, elements and pore structures in tight sandstones. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2020, 76, 103189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Shi, S. Study on Comprehensive Evaluation Method of Tight Sandstone Gas Reservoir. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  28. Dong, L.; Lin, Y.; Wu, Y.; Li, X.; Xing, Y.; Ma, X.; Shu, Y. Physical property and gas content characters of sandstone in Daning-Jixian Area Upper Paleozoic. China Energy Environ. Prot. 2018, 40, 87–94. [Google Scholar]
  29. Shi, S.; Er, C.; Zhang, W.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, Y.; Teng, Y. Pore structure characteristics of Upper Paleozoic tight reservoir in Daning Jixian Area of Ordos Basin and its relationship with clay minerals. J. Xi’an Shiyou Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2023, 38, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  30. Teng, Y. Study on the Pore Structure and Seepage Characteristics of the Shanxi Formation in the Daning-Jixian Area of Eastern Ordos. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  31. Li, Z.; Li, W.; Li, Y.; Yang, B.; Bai, J.; Zhang, Q. Diagenesis of sandstone and quantitative analysis of porosity evolution of He8 section in the East III part of Sulige, Ordos Basin. Chin. J. Geol. 2020, 55, 742–756. [Google Scholar]
  32. Yi, F.; Pang, H.; Zhao, G.; Zhu, X.; Wang, Q.; Wu, Z.; Li, B.; Sun, X.; Li, Y.; Ma, K. Gas-water distribution and main controlling factors of tight gas reservoir in block Su 39, Ordos Basin. Nat. Gas Geosci. 2023, 34, 1815–1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, Z.; Fu, X.; Pan, J.; Deng, Z. Effect of N2/CO2 injection and alternate injection on volume swelling/shrinkage strain of coal. Energy 2023, 275, 127377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jin, H.; Liu, C.; Guo, Z.Q. Gas prediction in tight sandstones based on the rock-physics-derived seismic amplitude variation versus offset method. Pet. Sci. 2024, in press. [CrossRef]
  35. Dang, J.; Zhao, J.; Er, C.; Ren, D. Reservoir characteristics and its gas control of He 8 Member in Daning-Jixian area. Fault-Block Oil Gas Field 2023, 30, 529–534. [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhao, W.B.; Zhang, H.; Shi, Y.H.; Fu, X.X.; Hui, J.; Jing, X.Y. Geological characteristics and exploration potential of the coal measure gas from Shan 2 of the Shanxi formation in the eastern Ordos Basin. Front. Earth Sci. 2023, 11, 1142141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Processes 12 01810 g001
Figure 1. Location and structure of the Daning-Jixian Block.
Figure 1. Location and structure of the Daning-Jixian Block.
Processes 12 01810 g001
Processes 12 01810 g002
Figure 2. Gas production box diagram.
Figure 2. Gas production box diagram.
Processes 12 01810 g002
Processes 12 01810 g003
Figure 3. Profile of Shan 23−3 single sand body within the study area.
Figure 3. Profile of Shan 23−3 single sand body within the study area.
Processes 12 01810 g003
Processes 12 01810 g004
Figure 4. Distribution of gas layer thickness in Shan 23.
Figure 4. Distribution of gas layer thickness in Shan 23.
Processes 12 01810 g004
Processes 12 01810 g005
Figure 5. Relationship between the thickness of the Shan 23 gas reservoir and well production.
Figure 5. Relationship between the thickness of the Shan 23 gas reservoir and well production.
Processes 12 01810 g005
Processes 12 01810 g006
Figure 6. Observation of sandstone slice image and scanning electron microscope photos: (a) the dissolution pore of Shan 23 sandstone of Well Y3 at a depth of 2076.71 m; (b) the residual inter-granular pores in Shan 2 Member of Well Y3 at a depth of 2076.18 m. (c) The inter-granular micropores of kaolinite developed in the medium-grained quartz sandstone at a depth of 2076.91 m in Well Y3; (d) the residual inter-granular pores developed in fine-grained quartz sandstone at a depth of 2076.18 m in Well Y3.
Figure 6. Observation of sandstone slice image and scanning electron microscope photos: (a) the dissolution pore of Shan 23 sandstone of Well Y3 at a depth of 2076.71 m; (b) the residual inter-granular pores in Shan 2 Member of Well Y3 at a depth of 2076.18 m. (c) The inter-granular micropores of kaolinite developed in the medium-grained quartz sandstone at a depth of 2076.91 m in Well Y3; (d) the residual inter-granular pores developed in fine-grained quartz sandstone at a depth of 2076.18 m in Well Y3.
Processes 12 01810 g006
Processes 12 01810 g007
Figure 7. Relationship between different sedimentary environments and porosity.
Figure 7. Relationship between different sedimentary environments and porosity.
Processes 12 01810 g007
Processes 12 01810 g008
Figure 8. Relationship between porosity of Shan 23 gas reservoir and gas well production.
Figure 8. Relationship between porosity of Shan 23 gas reservoir and gas well production.
Processes 12 01810 g008
Processes 12 01810 g009
Figure 9. The correlation between permeability and porosity.
Figure 9. The correlation between permeability and porosity.
Processes 12 01810 g009
Processes 12 01810 g010
Figure 10. Relationship between permeability of Shan 23 gas reservoir and well productivity.
Figure 10. Relationship between permeability of Shan 23 gas reservoir and well productivity.
Processes 12 01810 g010
Processes 12 01810 g011
Figure 11. Relationship between gas layer thickness, porosity, permeability and gas saturation. (a) Relationship between gas layer thickness and gas saturation. (b) Relationship between porosity and gas saturation. (c) Relationship between permeability and gas saturation.
Figure 11. Relationship between gas layer thickness, porosity, permeability and gas saturation. (a) Relationship between gas layer thickness and gas saturation. (b) Relationship between porosity and gas saturation. (c) Relationship between permeability and gas saturation.
Processes 12 01810 g011
Processes 12 01810 g012
Figure 12. Relationship between gas saturation and well production in Shan 23 gas reservoir.
Figure 12. Relationship between gas saturation and well production in Shan 23 gas reservoir.
Processes 12 01810 g012
Processes 12 01810 g013
Figure 13. The relationship between gas storage coefficient, gas productivity coefficient, enrichment coefficient and gas well production. (a) The relationship between gas productivity coefficient and gas well production. (b) The relationship between gas storage coefficient and gas well production. (c) The relationship between enrichment coefficient and gas well production.
Figure 13. The relationship between gas storage coefficient, gas productivity coefficient, enrichment coefficient and gas well production. (a) The relationship between gas productivity coefficient and gas well production. (b) The relationship between gas storage coefficient and gas well production. (c) The relationship between enrichment coefficient and gas well production.
Processes 12 01810 g013
Table 1. Target layer division scheme and comparison marker layer table in the research area.
Table 1. Target layer division scheme and comparison marker layer table in the research area.
ForamtionMemberSub-MemberSublayerMain Signing Layer
Shihezi Formation
(P2h)		He8 Luotuobozi sandstone (K4)
Shanxi Formation
(P1s)		Shan1Shan11 Shan11 mudstone
Shan12 Shan12 sandstone
Shan13 Tiemogou sandstone
Shan2Shan21 No. 1 coal; No. 2 coal
Shan22 No. 3 coal; No. 4 coal
Shan23Shan 23−1No. 5 coal
Shan 23−2
Shan 23−3Beichagou sandstone (K3)
Taiyuan Formation
(P1t)		Tai1 Dongdayao limestone
Tai2
Table 2. Characteristics of Gas Production Well Production and Reservoir Parameters.
Table 2. Characteristics of Gas Production Well Production and Reservoir Parameters.
WellGas Layer Thickness (m)Porosity (%)Permeability (mD)Gas
Saturation (%)		Gas
Production
Coefficient		Gas
Storage
Coefficient		Gas
Enrichment
Coefficient		A6M
(m3/d)		A1Y
(m3/d)		Well Type
D115.506.260.1875.652.850.970.7314,610.5812,494.31II
D29.256.570.2478.842.240.610.487126.126657.75III
D39.256.620.2378.432.150.610.488083.068147.65III
D419.637.350.4379.308.401.441.1412,903.8714,268.91II
D511.135.930.1484.311.500.660.5640,110.4133,734.78I
D63.886.480.2160.000.800.250.1520,605.8527,280.41I
D74.006.840.2693.141.060.270.254479.123187.73III
D84.756.390.1960.000.900.300.1830,377.7024,113.63I
D913.506.470.2086.412.690.870.7510,290.407264.50III
D102.007.180.3871.930.750.140.102904.112232.95III
D113.255.970.1477.870.460.190.1515,766.2715,985.11II
D126.005.970.1494.660.850.360.349841.486376.64III
D133.757.650.5597.432.080.290.282837.643655.40III
D1410.636.790.3184.663.250.720.6111,325.8514,228.44II
D156.757.030.1672.781.090.470.3544,262.8645,016.87I
D1615.388.351.6381.9825.091.281.0532,964.4543,018.36I
D172.205.730.1357.300.290.130.0749,835.0262,647.43I
D1820.427.040.3275.386.491.441.0847,429.5241,208.90I
D1914.637.290.8279.3412.021.070.8544,169.6343,205.49I
D207.886.410.2477.561.910.500.3962,718.3153,913.13I
D219.7510.976.3383.3561.761.070.8930,797.0131,594.77I
D226.965.610.1166.030.740.390.2627,778.4827,823.98I
D236.136.410.2268.761.340.390.2764,813.6062,861.19I
D2411.007.050.1872.361.990.780.569778.848790.40III
D2516.137.820.5379.738.591.261.019235.057380.57III
D261.136.810.3075.790.340.080.0611,514.6510,901.42II
D2711.256.410.1980.112.150.720.5813,490.9114,596.22II
D286.139.070.1879.271.100.560.4419,364.1719,034.96II
D299.005.130.0872.400.700.460.3320,939.3619,940.57II
D304.886.160.1966.500.910.300.206106.007287.17III
D317.238.340.8687.036.240.600.525786.8111,100.52II
D32-4.800.1282.10---10,476.8814,903.08II
D339.386.230.1760.541.580.580.3525,037.5922,708.88I
D341.135.900.1372.490.150.070.056145.117087.51III
D358.756.110.1557.691.340.530.315700.734993.08III
D366.136.610.2263.811.320.400.264492.785028.65III
D3713.256.500.2162.052.720.860.533099.962862.57III
D384.756.370.2067.900.960.300.212576.192185.05III
D3919.385.830.1479.582.771.130.9058,031.1155,725.77I
D402.008.400.7577.371.500.170.132696.913030.05III
D4116.3811.0918.0290.57295.041.821.6488,026.8380,251.52I
D4222.008.301.4488.2531.641.831.61156,078.17136,806.99I
D436.006.140.2065.311.190.370.245385.805385.80III
“-”: No data; “A6M”: average daily gas production during the first 6 months; “A1Y”: average daily gas production during the first year.
Table 3. Parameter boundary division of different gas producing sandstone layers.
Table 3. Parameter boundary division of different gas producing sandstone layers.
Evaluation ParametersGas Layer Type
IIIIII
Average gas production (m3/d)>20,00010,000~20,000<10,000
Sedimentary faciesDistributary channel zones and delta lobesThe river channel flankThe river channel edge
Gas layer thickness (m)>7.143.20~7.14<3.20
Porosity (%)>7.506.54~7.50<6.54
Permeability (mD)>0.500.1~0.5<0.1
Gas productivity coefficient>3.570.32~3.57<0.32
Gas storage coefficient>0.670.10~0.67<0.10
Enrichment coefficient>0.530.06~0.53<0.06
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sun, J.; Chen, M.; Wang, B.; Wang, G.; Tian, H.; Hou, J.; Zhu, B. Analysis of Factors Influencing Tight Sandstone Gas Production and Identification of Favorable Gas Layers in the Shan 23 Sub-Member of the Daning-Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin. Processes 2024, 12, 1810. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091810

AMA Style

Sun J, Chen M, Wang B, Wang G, Tian H, Hou J, Zhu B. Analysis of Factors Influencing Tight Sandstone Gas Production and Identification of Favorable Gas Layers in the Shan 23 Sub-Member of the Daning-Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin. Processes. 2024; 12(9):1810. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091810

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sun, Junyi, Ming Chen, Bo Wang, Gang Wang, Haonian Tian, Jie Hou, and Boning Zhu. 2024. "Analysis of Factors Influencing Tight Sandstone Gas Production and Identification of Favorable Gas Layers in the Shan 23 Sub-Member of the Daning-Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin" Processes 12, no. 9: 1810. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091810

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop