2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.orggeochem.2022.104449
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of in situ hydrocarbon contents in shale oil plays. Part 1: Is routine Rock–Eval analysis reliable for quantifying the hydrocarbon contents of preserved shale cores?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We speculate that organic maturation and hydrocarbon generation do not result in large δ 15 N variations in expelled oil over a wide range of temperatures. This small variance in δ 15 N during maturation in the presence of a progressive loss of TN kerogen (Figure ) calls for essentially nonfractionating mechanisms of N org elimination, which is quite different from Rayleigh fractionation caused by traditional element loss processes, such as the observed δ 13 C of oil. , …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…We speculate that organic maturation and hydrocarbon generation do not result in large δ 15 N variations in expelled oil over a wide range of temperatures. This small variance in δ 15 N during maturation in the presence of a progressive loss of TN kerogen (Figure ) calls for essentially nonfractionating mechanisms of N org elimination, which is quite different from Rayleigh fractionation caused by traditional element loss processes, such as the observed δ 13 C of oil. , …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The higher degree of S 1 loss in Bakken shale can be attributed to its superior porosity and permeability compared to Chang7 shale, as denser shales are more effective at retaining light oil fractions (Gao et al, 2018; Jarvie et al, 2012). Other lacustrine shales, such as the Qingshankou shale in the Songliao Basin (Li et al, 2022), the Qianjiang shale in the Jianghan Basin (Qian et al, 2022), and the Funing shale in the Subei Basin (Liu et al, 2023), had average S 1 values of 5.94, 5.23, and 1.96 mg/g for fresh samples, respectively, with corresponding average S 1 values of 3.49, 3.11, and 0.95 mg/g for old samples, resulting in S 1 losses of 41%, 41%, and 52%, respectively (Figure 10). The differences in S 1 loss among these lacustrine shales are not significant and are all lower than that observed in the marine Bakken shale, indicating that these lacustrine shales are denser than Bakken shale.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pyrolysis S 1 values and S 1 loss for the Chang7 shale in the Ordos Basin (Zhao et al, 2023), Bakken shale in the Williston Basin (Jarvie et al, 2012), Qingshankou shale in the Songliao Basin (Li et al, 2022), Qianjiang shale in the Jianghan Basin (Qian et al, 2022), and Funing shale in the Subei Basin (Liu et al, 2023). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…On one hand, when the shale is brought from the underground to the surface, small molecular hydrocarbons will release due to sudden changes in temperature and pressure (Chen and Jiang, 2020). On the other hand, sample storage, pretreatment such as crushing, and Rock-Eval crucible waiting process also lead to evaporation of light components (Jarvie, 2014;Li et al, 2022a). Generally speaking, the loss of light hydrocarbons is related to its their proportion in shale oil, and the higher the proportion, the greater the loss (Noble et al, 1997;Ma et al, 2024).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%