摘要
三河次凹为苏北盆地金湖凹陷主力生烃次凹之一,古近系阜宁组二段(E_1f_2)、四段(E_1f_4)烃源岩已达生油门限,主力含油层系为阜宁组二段+一段(E_1f_(2+1))、三段(E_1f_3)和戴南组一段(E_2d_1),储层相对发育,具有稳定的区域盖层,成藏条件优越。利用最新的烃源岩分析化验资料,对三河次凹E_1f_4烃源岩进行了精细的刻画。油源对比研究表明:三河次凹(E_2d)油气主体来自E_1f_4烃源岩,石港地区发现的油气有E_1f_2烃源岩的贡献;三河次凹E_1f_4烃源岩镜质体反射率大于0. 65%戴南组的范围局限在深凹部位。
Sanhe Subsag is one of the main hydrocarbon-generating subsags in Jinhu Sag. The source rocks of E_1f_2 and E_1f_4 have reached the threshold of oil generation. The main oil-bearing strata in the subsag are E_1f_(2+1),E_1f_3,and E_2d_1,where reservoirs are relatively developed,the regional caprocks are stable,and the conditions of reservoir-forming are superior. By analyzing the latest test data of source rocks,this paper gives a detailed description of the source rocks of the fourth member of Funing Formation in Sanhe Subsag. The oil-source correlation study shows that the main oil source rocks of Dainan Formation in Sanhe Subsag are from the fourth member of Funing Formation; the source rock of the second member of Funing Formation is contributive to the oil found in Shigang area; the range of Ro more than 0. 65% in E_1f_4 source rock of Sanhe Subsag is confined to the deep sag.
引文
[1]刘世丽,徐焕友,李翔.金湖凹陷戴南组成藏主控因素及成藏模式研究[J].小型油气藏,2007,12(3):1-5,76.
[2]卢鸿,冯小杰.油源对比常规方法的使用误区[J].地球科学与环境学报,2000,22(2):56-59.
[3]陈安定.苏北盆地油源判别指标研究[J].石油实验地质,2007,29(4):397-401.
[4]王雨薇,史盼盼.苏北盆地W凹陷阜四段烃源岩研究[J].当代化工,2014,43(11):2437-2440+2456.
[5]龚永杰,蒋有录,何胜.金湖凹陷东部油源对比研究[J].断块油气田,2008,15(2):16-19.
[6]李素梅,庞雄奇,金之钧,等.苏北金湖凹陷混合原油的地质地球化学特征[J].石油大学学报(自然科学版),2002,26(1):11-15+8.
[7]彼得斯KE,莫尔多万JM著.姜乃煌,张水昌,林永汉,等译.生物标记化合物指南:古代沉积物和石油中分子化石的解释[M].北京:石油工业出版社,1995:168-170.
[8]刚文哲,林壬子.应用油气地球化学[M].北京:石油工业出版社,2011:198.