Determining the porosity of mudrocks using methodological pluralism

Author:

Busch Andreas12,Schweinar Kevin13,Kampman Niko1,Coorn Ab1,Pipich Vitaliy4,Feoktystov Artem4,Leu Leon15,Amann-Hildenbrand Alexandra6,Bertier Pieter3

Affiliation:

1. Shell Global Solutions International, Kessler Park 1, 2288GS Rijswijk, The Netherlands

2. Heriot-Watt University, Lyell Centre, Research Avenue S, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK

3. Clay and Interface Mineralogy, RWTH Aachen University, Bunsenstrasse 8, 52072 Aachen, Germany

4. Jülich Centre for Neutron Science (JCNS) at Heinz Maier-Leibnitz Zentrum (MLZ), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Lichtenbergstrasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany

5. Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK

6. Institute of Geology and Geochemistry of Petroleum and Coal, Energy and Mineral Resources Group (EMR), RWTH Aachen University, Lochnerstrasse 4-20, D-52056 Aachen, Germany

Abstract

AbstractPorosity of shales is an important parameter that impacts rock strength for seal or wellbore integrity, gas-in-place calculations for unconventional resources or the diffusional solute and gas transport in these microporous materials. From a well section obtained from the Mont Terri Underground Rock Laboratory in St Ursanne, Switzerland, we determined porosity, pore size distribution and specific surface areas on a set of 13 Opalinus Clay samples. The porosity methods employed are helium-pycnometry, water and mercury injection porosimetry, liquid saturation and immersion, and low pressure N2 sorption, as well as small-angle to ultra-small-angle neutron scattering (SANS–USANS). These were used in addition to mineralogical and geochemical methods for sample analysis that comprise X-ray diffraction, X-ray fluorescence, total organic carbon content and cation exchange capacity. We find large variations in total porosity, ranging from approximately 23% for the neutron-scattering method to approximately 10% for mercury injection porosimetry. These differences can partly be related to differences in pore accessibility, while no or negligible inaccessible porosity was found. Pore volume distributions between neutron scattering and low-pressure sorption compare very well but differ significantly from those obtained from mercury porosimetry: this is realistic since the latter provides information on pore throats only, and the two former methods on pore throats and pore bodies. Finally, we find that specific surface areas determined using low-pressure sorption and neutron scattering match well.

Publisher

Geological Society of London

Subject

Geology,Ocean Engineering,Water Science and Technology

Reference70 articles.

1. Mechanism of adsorption of water in carbon micropores as revealed by a study or activated carbon fibers;Journal of Physical Chemistry B,2001

2. Amann-Hildenbrand A. , Krooss B.M. , Busch A. & Bertier P. 2015. Laboratory testing procedures for CO2 capillary entry pressures on caprocks. In: Gerdes K.F. (ed.) Carbon Dioxide Capture for Storage in Deep Geological Formations. CPL Press and BP, Thatcham, UK, 355–384.

3. API. 1998. Recommended Practices for Core Analysis. Recommended Practice 40. 2nd edn. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC.

4. ASTM. 2011. Standard Test Methods for Apparent Porosity, Liquid Absorption, Apparent Specific Gravity, and Bulk Density of Refractory Shapes by Vacuum Pressure. ASTM C830-00(2011) ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.

5. Hierarchical Pore Morphology of Cretaceous Shale: A Small-Angle Neutron Scattering and Ultrasmall-Angle Neutron Scattering Study

Cited by 53 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3