Research paper
Surface geochemical methods used for oil and gas prospecting — a review

https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-6742(82)90017-6Get rights and content

Abstract

The majority of the world's oil and gas deposits have been discovered by drilling in the vicinity of natural petroleum seeps, and to date the most successful geochemical prospecting methods still rely upon the surface detection of hydrocarbons. Gas chromatographic techniques are now commonly used in the analysis of hydrocarbon gases for prospecting both onshore (analysis of soils and rocks) and offshore (analysis of near-bottom waters and sediments). Detection of helium fluxes has been partially successful as a geochemical prospecting technique. Many indirect techniques such as the determination of isotope and metal-leaching anomalies in surface rocks and the measurement of radon fluxes have not been widely used.

Onshore geochemical prospecting appears to have more problems associated with it than offshore prospecting due to the more complex migration mechanism of near-surface waters containing dissolved gases. No onshore prospecting studies have been published which thoroughly consider this factor and the success of onshore prospecting remains equivocal. In offshore prospecting “sniffers” have been used to detect hydrocarbon anomalies in near-bottom waters, and coring equipment has been used for the detection of hydrocarbons in near-surface sediments. Success is claimed using these techniques.

Geochemical prospecting methods are complementary to the widely used geophysical methods. Geochemical methods can provide direct evidence for the presence of petroleum accumulations and are relatively cheap and rapid. Failures in prospecting to date are attributable to the simplistic manner in which data have been interpreted; insufficient attention has been paid to the hydrological and geological factors which modify the upward migration of indicator species to the surface. As oil and gas deposits become more difficult to locate, greater attention should be paid to geochemical prospecting techniques, especially as a regional exploration tool.

References (149)

  • E.A. Bars et al.

    Hydrogeochemical survey in the Archangel region of the Bashir

    SSSR. Tr. Geol. Inst., Akad. Nauk SSSR

    (1960)
  • B.B. Bernard et al.

    A geochemical model for characterization of hydrocarbon gas sources in marine sediments

  • V.P. Biryulin et al.

    Geochemical prospecting for oil and gas by remote laser spectrometry of methane in air at ground level

    Int. Geol. Rev.

    (1981)
  • G.C. Bogomolov et al.

    The ammonium ion as an indicator of oil and gas

    Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR

    (1970)
  • E.E. Bray

    Geochemical exploration methods

    (1956)
  • E.E. Bray

    Method of geochemical prospecting

    (1956)
  • P.G. Brisbane et al.

    The role of microorganisms in petroleum exploration

    Annu. Rev. Microbiol.

    (1965)
  • P.G. Brisbane et al.

    The utilization of methane, ethane and propane by soil micro-organisms

    J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol.

    (1968)
  • P.G. Brisbane et al.

    Growth of Mycobacterium paraffinicum on low concentrations of hydrocarbons

    J. Appl. Bacteriol.

    (1972)
  • J.M. Brooks et al.

    Sources, sinks and concentrations of light hydrocarbons in the Gulf of Mexico

    J. Geophys. Res.

    (1973)
  • J.M. Brooks et al.

    Baseline concentrations of light hydrocarbons in the Gulf of Mexico

    Environ. Sci. Technol.

    (1973)
  • J.M. Brooks et al.

    Molecular and isotopic composition of two seep gases from the Gulf of Mexico

    Geophys. Res. Lett.

    (1974)
  • C.T. Carlisle et al.

    Distribution of light hydrocarbons in seafloor sediment: correlations between geochemistry, seismic structure and possible reservoired oil and gas

  • G.V. Chilingar et al.

    Gaseous survey methods in exploration and prospecting for oil and gas: a review

    Alberta Soc. Pet. Geol. J.

    (1962)
  • G.E. Claypool et al.

    Gas analysis in sediment samples from Legs 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19

  • J.C. Cline et al.

    Submarine seepage of natural gas in Norton Sound, Alaska

    Science

    (1977)
  • D.D. Coleman et al.

    Isotopic identification of leakage gas from underground storage reservoirs — a progress report

    Ill. Pet.

    (1977)
  • M.C. Dalziel et al.

    Biogeochemical evidence for subsurface hydrocarbon occurrence, Recluse Oil Field, Wyoming: preliminary results

    U.S. Geol. Surv. Circ.

    (1980)
  • J.B. Davis

    Petroleum Microbiology

  • J.B. Davis et al.

    Detection of microbially produced gaseous hydrocarbons other than methane

    Science

    (1954)
  • A.H. Debnam

    Field and laboratory methods used by the Geological Survey of Canada in geochemical surveys. No. 6. Determination of hydrocarbons in soils by gas chromatography

    Geol. Surv. Can., Pap., 64-15

    (1965)
  • A.H. Debnam

    Geochemical prospecting for petroleum and natural gas in Canada

    Geol. Surv. Can., Bull.

    (1969)
  • E. Degoyler

    Future position of petroleum geology in the oil industry

    Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.

    (1940)
  • S.B. Devine et al.

    An experiment in soil geochemical prospecting for petroleum, Della Gas Field, Cooper Basin

    APEA J.

    (1975)
  • T.J. Donovan

    Petroleum microseepage at Cement, Oklahoma: evidence and mechanism

    Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.

    (1974)
  • T.J. Donovan et al.

    Late diagenetic indicators of buried oil and gas

    U.S. Geol. Surv., Open-File Rep., 77-817

    (1977)
  • T.J. Donovan et al.

    Recognition of petroleum-bearing traps by unusual isotopic compositions of carbonate-cemented surface rocks

    Geology

    (1974)
  • T.J. Donovan et al.

    A possible petroleum-related geochemical anomaly in surface rocks, Boulder and Weld Counties, Colorado

    U.S. Geol. Surv., Open-File Rep., 75-47

    (1975)
  • T.J. Donovan et al.

    Late diagenetic indicators of buried oil and gas: II. Direct detection experiment at Cement and Garza oil fields, Oklahoma and Texas, using enhanced LANDSAT I and II images

    U.S. Geol. Surv., Open-File Rep., 79-243

    (1979)
  • T.J. Donovan et al.

    Aeromagnetic detection of diagenetic magnetite over oil fields

    Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.

    (1979)
  • H.F. Dunlap et al.

    Marine seep detection

    Offshore

    (1961)
  • H.F. Dunlap et al.

    Marine seep detection — a new reconnaissance method

    Geophysics

    (1960)
  • W. Dyck

    Radon-222 emanations from a uranium deposit

    Econ. Geol.

    (1968)
  • W. Dyck

    Field and laboratory methods used by the geological survey of Canada in geochemical surveys. No. 10 — Radon determination apparatus for geochemical prospecting for uranium

    Geol. Surv. Can., Pap., 68-21

    (1969)
  • W. Dyck

    Development of uranium exploration methods using radon

    Geol. Surv. Can., Pap., 69-46

    (1969)
  • W. Dyck et al.

    The use of radon-222 in surface waters in geochemical prospecting for uranium

    Colo. Sch. Mines, Mag.

    (1969)
  • K.O. Emery et al.

    Gases in marine sediments

    Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.

    (1958)
  • D.J. Frank et al.

    Methane, ethane and propane concentrations in the Gulf of Mexico

    Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.

    (1970)
  • R.A. Freeze et al.

    Theoretical analysis of regional groundwater flow, Part 1

    (1966)
  • R.A. Freeze et al.

    Theoretical analysis of regional groundwater flow, Part 2

    Water Res.

    (1967)
  • Cited by (56)

    • Marine seepage variability and its impact on evaluating the surface migrated hydrocarbon seep signal

      2020, Marine and Petroleum Geology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The detection of chemically identifiable seeps, also known as surface geochemistry, has been a petroleum industry evaluation tool since the early days of exploration: Laubmeyer (1933); Sokolov (1935); Link (1952); Kartsev et al. (1959); Stegena (1961); Hitchon (1974); Coleman et al. (1977); Philp and Crisp (1982); Jones and Drozd (1983); Horvitz (1969), 1981, and 1985; Brooks and Carey (1986); Clarke and Cleverly (1991); Glotov (1992); Klusman (1993); Schumacher and Abrams, 1996; Schumacher and LeSchack (2002); Kvenvolden and Cooper (2003); O'Brien et al., 2003; Abrams (2005); Huang et al., 2009; and Abrams and Dahdah (2011).

    • Origin of near-surface hydrocarbon gases bound in northern Barents Sea sediments

      2019, Marine and Petroleum Geology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The compositional and stable isotope signature of thermogenic hydrocarbon gas can be altered through secondary processes including oxidation of methane, which increases gas wetness and δ13C CH4 (Abrams, 2017; Barker and Fritz, 1981; Coleman et al., 1981; Whiticar and Faber, 1986; Orphan et al., 2001; Kniemeyer et al., 2007), microbial degradation of higher hydrocarbons, which decreases gas wetness and increases δ13C of C2+ (Jaekel et al., 2013; Musat, 2015) or mixing with microbial gas (Fukuda et al., 1984a,b; Whiticar et al., 1986; Balabane et al., 1987; Hinrichs et al., 2006) or thermogenic gas generated from different kerogen precursors or generated at different levels of thermal maturity (Stahl, 1977; Chung and Sackett, 1980; Schoell, 1980; Berner and Faber, 1988; Berner et al., 1995). Bound gas surveys have been frequently applied in regional onshore and offshore studies (Bjorøy and Løberg, 1993; Blumenberg et al., 2016; Cramer and Franke, 2005; Faber et al., 1990, 1997; Faber and Stahl, 1983, 1984; Horvitz, 1972, 1985; Knies et al., 2004; Mani et al., 2011, 2012; Patil et al., 2013; Philp and Crisp, 1982; Rao et al., 2013). Most of these studies use the stable isotope and molecular composition of bound gas to differentiate between (migrated) thermogenic gas and microbial gas, based on interpretation schemes derived from natural gas reservoirs (Schoell, 1980) and interstitial and seep gas (Bernard et al., 1976).

    • Regional hydraulic behavior of structural zones and sedimentological heterogeneities in an overpressured sedimentary basin

      2013, Marine and Petroleum Geology
      Citation Excerpt :

      These areas would, therefore, be hydraulically favorable targets for near-surface geochemical hydrocarbon exploration. [ Principles of and examples for this exploration method, called “near-surface geochemical exploration”, can be found in e.g., Laubmeyer (1933); Philp and Crisp (1982); Schumacher (2000); Tóth (1996)]. The spatially uniform and ubiquitous upward flow can be observed generally down from the top of the Algyő Aquitard, i.e. within the z = (−1200) − (2000) m asl elevation interval.

    • Formation and Geochemistry of Oil and Gas

      2013, Treatise on Geochemistry: Second Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text