Professional Documents
Culture Documents
43
44
Fig. 1. Location of the Progreso Basin in relation to regional structural geologic elements. (a) altimiter-derived
bathymetry and SRT topography; (b) altimiter-derived free-air gravity.
INTRODUCTION
In this paper we characterize Neogene reservoirs in
the Progreso Basin, Gulf of Guayaquil, offshore
Ecuador and Peru. The purpose of this review is to
assess Neogene reservoir risk through an integrated
study of static and dynamic reservoir character.
Particular focus is placed on reservoir distribution,
lithology, provenance, environment of deposition,
quality and performance.
The study area is located in the Gulf of Guayaquil
where water depths range from 40 to 3,000 m (Figs 1
and 3). The Gulf is situated in the central part of the
Oligocene to Recent Progreso Basin, a fore-arc basin
of pull-apart origin (Fig. 1) . It is bordered to the north
by accreted oceanic crust, to the east and SE by the
Andean foothills and the Amotape Mountains, and to
the west by an accretionary complex related to
subduction of the Nazca Plate along the Peru-Chile
trench (Figs. 1a and 2b). The basin formed at the
trailing edge of the North Andean microplate as that
block separated from the South American Plate and
moved northeastward (Moberly et al.,1982).It
currently comprises two sub-basins, the Posorja subbasin to the north and the Esperanza sub-basin to the
south. These sub-basins are separated by an east-west
trending central ridge of possible mud-diapiric origin
(Figs. 1b and 2a).
Structure and stratigraphy
The Progreso Basins Oligocene (?) and Neogene fill
overlies accreted oceanic crust to the north of the
Dolores-Guayaquil shear zone, and continental crust
to the south (Fig. 1) (Moberly et al., 1982). South of
the shear zone, outcropping continental basement
J. Deckelman et al.
45
Fig. 2. Seismic transects G83-N16 (a) and SIS-20 (b) (after Collot et al., 2000) showing sub-basin geometry in
the Progreso Basin. Inset box shows profile locations. Fig. 2 (a) shows the Progreso Basins two principal subbasins; Fig. 2 (b) shows the location of the Progreso Basin with respect to the continental margin as defined
by the Peru-Chile trench.
section consists of interbedded fine- and coarsegrained clastics which coarsen upward in the Amistad
area but lack distinct vertical grain-size trends
elsewhere. Although eustasy had an important
influence on the vertical and lateral distribution of
sand in this basin, regional and local tectonic
influences were probably dominant. The basePliocene unconformity and the overlying thick
sandstone interval at the Amistad field may be related
to a particularly significant pulse of the Andean
Orogeny which resulted in uplift and shedding of
sediments into basinal areas.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The database for this study (Fig. 3) includes:
Unwashed cuttings samples from wells
Esperanza1 and Golfo de Guayaquil1
(Shearer, 2002);
46
Fig. 3. Database map. Study wells are indicated with solid black circles; 2D reflection seismic lines are shown
in green; deep-crustal seismic lines are shown in red; faults are shown in grey; oilfields are shown in black;
gasfields are shown in red; bathymetry (metres) forms the gradational blue background.
Fig. 4. Chronostratigraphy of the Progreso Basin showing the relationship of potential source rocks, proven
reservoirs and top-seals to eustasy and tectonism. Eustatic curve after Haq et al. (1987).
J. Deckelman et al.
47
Fig. 5. West-east seismic transect G83-S09 across the Progreso Basin showing complete erosional truncation
of the Pliocene sequence and partial erosion of the Miocene sequence at the intra-Pleistocene unconformity.
48
Fig. 6. Thin section photomicrographs showing framework grain mineralogy in cuttings samples of the
Miocene sequence of Esperanza1 well. Depth: 12,120 ft; plane-polarized light. Note poor sorting.
Fig. 7. Thin section photomicrographs showing exotic framework-grain mineralogy (volcanic glass and
foraminifera) in cuttings samples of the Miocene section of Esperanza1 well. Depths: 10,680 to 10,700 ft (a)
and 12,360 to 12,377 ft (b); plane-polarized light.
J. Deckelman et al.
49
Fig. 8. Thin section photomicrographs showing framework grain texture in cuttings samples of the lower
Middle Miocene sequence of Esperanza1 well. Note extreme grain angularity and variations in sorting. Depth:
12,630 to 12,640 ft (a) and 12,660 to 12,670 ft (b); plane-polarized light.
.
50
Fig. 9. Probable provenance for sandstones deposited in the Neogene sequence of the Progreso Basin based
on surface geology. Onshore areas covered by Neogene sediment are shown in grey.
J. Deckelman et al.
51
Fig.10. Map showing interpreted general environments of deposition during Miocene time based on available
biostratigraphic data.
Fig. 11. Amistad1 log motif showing upward-fining and upward-coarsening patterns and interpreted
environments of deposition.
52
Fig. 12. Comparison of the log-interpreted environments of deposition of this study with those of Nelson
(1970), based on cuttings.
J. Deckelman et al.
53
Fig. 13. Porosity occlusion due to burial-induced compaction, illustrated by the deformation and emplacement
of mudstone into available pore space as pseudo-matrix. Well Esperanza-1, middle Miocene, depth: 12,440 ft,
plane-polarized light.
54
Fig. 14. Thin section photomicrographs showing porosity occlusion due to cementation, and the typical
Progreso Basin paragenetic sequence in well Golfo de Guayaquil-1. Depth: 12,660 to 12,670 ft; plane polarized
light.
Fig. 15. Plot of shale density versus depth. Note that Domito1 shale density is consistently lower than that in
other wells, possibly due to overpressuring. Note also the density reversal that occurs in most wells below
7,000 to 8,000 ft measured depth.
J. Deckelman et al.
55
Fig. 16. Plot of sidewall-core porosity vs. permeability, by age of reservoir. Lower Miocene data are largely
from Peru; Middle and Upper Miocene and Pliocene data are largely from Ecuador.
Pressure (psia)
2,000
4,000
76
5
5,000
6,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
4
3
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
6,000
5 - DST number
Amistad-1
Amistad-3
Amistad-4
Normal water gradient
Gas gradients
Water gradient
Depletion
7
46
3
5
4
1
Fig. 17. Plot of Amistad field DST pressures versus depth. Note overpressuring and the test intervals that
exhibited pressure depletion from DST production.
56
Fig. 18. Amistad3, DST No. 2 transient pressure data showing significant pressure depletion during the test.
Well
DST No.
Amistad-1
3
4
6
7
Amistad-3
Amistad-4
444
32 to 40
33 to 44
10 to 40
51 to 142
1
2
2a
3
6
321
418
300
112
234
1 to 3
6 to 47
1 to 24
2
43 to 153
1
2
4
5
43
117
129
142
13 to 27
1
398
1
6 to 19
13 to 18
4 to 7
15
J. Deckelman et al.
57
Fig. 19. East-west stratigraphic correlation diagram showing the vertical and lateral distribution of sandstone
in wells available for study. The line of section is shown in black on Figs 20 and 21.
Well
A-9-F
A-12-F
A-13-E
112
408
53
35,748
40,103
23,899
63
10
34
3,702
1,321
4,816
99,750
107
9,839
Total
Table 2. Albacora field production test results.
58
Fig. 20. Gross sand (<50% Vshale) thickness (ft) and sand presence relative risk in the Middle and Upper
Miocene interval (a) and the Pliocene interval (b). ND - no data.
J. Deckelman et al.
59
Fig. 21. Gross sand thickness (ft) in the Pleistocene interval. ND - no data.
60
REFERENCES
American International Petroleum Corporation (AIPC),
undated (1993 ?). Report on exploration results during
first stage of exploration program, Block Z-1, Peru, 60 pp.
and five volumes of enclosures (I through V). Unpublished
company report.
Ameripex International, undated (1980 ?). Exploration
significance and interpretations of geochemical data from
Block Z-1, Tumbes basin and surrounding area, northwest
Peru, 15 pp. plus figures and tables. Unpublished company
report.
BLOCH, S., LANDER, R.H. and BONNELL, L., 2002.
Anomalously high porosity and permeability in deeply
buried sandstone reservoirs: Origins and predictability.
AAPG Bull., 86(2), 301-328.
COLLOT, J.-Y., CHARVIS, P. and BETHOUX, N., 2000. La
campagne sisteur, sismique reflexion et sismique refracion
sur la marge dEquateur et de Colombie, 18 pp. and displays.
FINCH, E.M., and STURROCK, S., 1984. The biostratigraphy
of six wells, Gulf of Guayaquil, offshore Ecuador: BP
Stratigraphy Branch, EPD, Sunbury, United Kingdom, 11
pp. Unpublished company report.
HAQ., B.V., HARDENBOL, J. and VAIL, P.R., 1987. Chronolgy
of fluctuating sea levels since the Triassic. Science, 235,
(4793), 1156-1167.
LITTON RESOURCES GROUP, 1986. El estudio de la cuenca
Golfo de Guayaquil, informe integrado, para la corporacion
estatal petrolera ecuatoriana (CEPE), ten volume report.
Unpublished contractor report for CEPE.
MOBERLY, R., SHEPHERD, G.L. and COULBOURN,W.T., 1982.
Forearc and other basins, continental margin of northern
and southern Peru and adjacent Ecuador and Chile. In:
LEGGETT, J.K., (Ed.), Trench-Forearc Geology. Geol. Soc.
Lond., Spec. Publ. 10, 171-189.
NELSON, D. O., 1970. A report on the micropalaeontology
and stratigraphy of the well Amistad No. 1. Unpublished
report for Ada de Exploracion Petrolera C. A.
SHEARER, J. N., 2002. Petrographic description of cuttings
samples from Golfo de Guayaquil #1 and Esperanza #1
wells, Golfo de Guayaquil basin. Unpublished report for
ConocoPhillips, Inc., 73 pp.