Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 29

Introduction to

Petroleum Geochemistry
Lesson 06

Rock-Eval Pyrolisis

Rock-Eval
- Information of hydrocarbon potential.
- Specially the composition of kerogen
types.
- S1, S2, S3 Rock-Eval pyrolysis
parameters are derived from the areas
of the P1, P2, P3 peak respectively.
- A commercial instrument for the
anhydrous pyrolysis of source rocks and
sediments.
- Developed by the Institute Francais du
Petrol (IFP).

(a). S1
- Amount of hydrocarbons already generated
by source rock, in unit mg/g.
- This value are strongly affected by migrated
hydrocarbons and contamination.

(b). S2

- Amount of hydrocarbons derived from


kerogen in rocks.
- Undergoing Rock-Eval pyrolisis representing the
remaining hydrocarbon potential, measured in
mg/g.
- Can be affected by compounds of high
molecular weight and by mineral matrix effects.

(c). S3
- Amount of carbon dioxide released during
pyrolisis.
- It is proportional to the oxygen present in
the kerogen and is measured in mg/g.

Pyrolisis
- Process of heating a rock or kerogen
sample in the laboratory to generate
hydrocarbon by thermal decomposition.
- The heating can be either in the
presence of water hydrous pyrolisis or
the absence of water anhydrous
pyrolysis.
- Rock-Eval is commonly instrument which
performances anhydrous pyrolisis.

Simple parameters define petroleum potential


of an immature source rock (after Peters and
Cassa, Rock-Eval
1994)
Rock-Eval

Potential
(Quantity)

TOC
(%)

S1

Poor

<0.5

<0.5

Fair
Good

0.5-1
1-2

0.5-1
1-2

S2

Bitumen
(ppm)

HC
(ppm)

<2.5

<500

<300

2.5-5

5001000

300600

5-10

10002000

6001200
12002400
>2400

V. Good

2-4

2-4

10-20

20004000

Excellent

>4

>4

>20

>4000

Kerogen types generate different products at peak


maturity
Kerogen*
(Quality)

S2/S3

Atomic
H/C

Main product at
peak maturity

HI

>600

>15

>1.5

Oil

II

300-600

10-15

1.2-1.5

Oil

II/III

200-300

5-10

1.0-1.2

Oil/Gas

III

50-200

1-5

0.7-1.0

Gas

IV

<50

<1

<0.7

None

*Based on immature source rock

Peters and Cassa (1994)

Descriptio TOC
n
(%)
Source
rock

2.60

S1

S2

S3

Tmax
(oC)

0.8
9

18.0
1

0.8
9

440

S3

PI

HI

OI

SOM
(mg/g)

0.0
5

69
2

34

2.0

S2

S1

HI = S2/TOC x 100
OI = S3/TOC x 100
PI = S1/(S1+S2)

Description

TOC
(%)

S1

Gilsonite
contaminati 4.25 2.13
on

S2

S3

Tmax
(oC)

23.8
5

1.71

427

PI

HI

SOM
OI
(mg/g)

0.08

56
1

40

S3
S1

S2

40.0

Description

TOC
(%)

S1

Out-of-place
15.0
hydrocarbon 2.85
5
s

S2

S3

3.48 6.95

Tmax
(oC)
421

PI

HI

OI

0.81 122 243

bimodal
S2

Note: when S2<0.2 disregard


Tmax

S3
S1

Description

TOC
(%)

S1

Diesel 1
15.2
contaminati 5.05
6
on

S2

S3

Tmax
(oC)

6.27

10.8
9

314

PI

HI

OI

0.71 124 215


S3

bimodal S2

Description

TOC
(%)

S1

Diesel 2
18.8
contaminati 3.00
1
on

S2

S1

S3

11.9
4.65
3

Tmax
(oC)
439

PI

HI

OI

0.61 397 154

S3
S1

Atomic
H/C

Results of kerogen evolution


CO2, H2O
Oil

1,50

Gas

increasing evolution
1,00

0,50

0
0,10
Atomic O/C

van Krevelen diagram

0,20

HYDROGEN INDEX
(HI)

S2/TOC x 100

OXYGEN INDEX (OI)

S3/TOC x 100

Modified van Krevelen diagram

Green River shales


Lower Toarcian, Paris
Basin
Silurian-Devonian,
AlgeriaLibya
Upper Cretaceous,
Douala
Basin
Others

Espitalie et al. (1977)

Methods on kerogen typing:


Element analysis: H/C and
O/C
Pyrolysis: HI versus OI

Correlation between H/C and HI or between


O/C and OI may be not well matched, due
to:
1. pyrolysis was done on whole rock, whereas
element analysis on isolated kerogen
organic material may be altered during
kerogen preparation,
2. minerals may influence pyrolysis results,
3. Rock-Eval FID does not calculate hydrogen
or water which are the important products
for immature rocks,
4. pyrolysis product for different organic
materials will response differently to the

TOC and Rock-Eval analyses results for some selected core


samples from an exploration well in Montana (Peters, 1986)
Depth
(ft)

Description

TOC

S1

S2

S3

Tmax

1950

Calcareous shale,
layered, dark-grey

3.54

1.77

23.81

1.21

422

1975

Calcareous shale,
massive, dark-grey

3.56

0.28

2.96

1.21

427

2007

Massive shale, medium


grey

1.04

0.04

0.55

2.43

0.09

0.56

0.62

432

0.38

0.05

0.25

0.51

432

0.61

3.61

4.08

0.12

415

0.52

0.04

0.14

0.45

422

2073
Calcareous shale, black,
shaly
2076
Calcareous shale,
medium grey
2090
Siltstone, brown (oily)
2146
Massive clay, medium
grey

TOC and Rock-Eval analyses results for some selected core


samples from an exploration well in Montana (Peters, 1986)
Depth
(ft)

Description

TOC

S1

S2

S3

Tma
x

PI

HI

OI

23.8
1

1.21

422

0.07

673

34

1.21

427

0.09

83

34

0.55

53

0.62

432

0.14

23

26

0.51

432

0.17

66

134

0.12

415

0.47

669

20

0.45

422

0.22

27

87

1950

Calcareous shale,
layered, dark-grey

3.54

1.77

1975

Calcareous shale,
massive, dark-grey

3.56

0.28

Massive shale,
medium grey

1.04

Calcareous shale,
black, shaly

2.43

Calcareous shale,
medium grey

0.38

Siltstone, brown
(oily)

0.61

2007
2073
2076
2090
2146

2.96
0
0.09
0.56
0.05
0.25
3.61
4.08
0.52

Massive clay,
medium grey

0.04

0.04
0.14

For these S2 values, Tmax data etc. are