Distribution Characteristics of the Geotemperature Field in the Jiyan Gdepression, Shandong Province, North China

Abstract

Based on the analysis of geotemperature data derived from 703 exploration wells in the Jiyang depression of the Shengli oilfield, Shandong, North China, in conjunction with corresponding geothermal calculation results, we present the geothermal field distribution characteristics of this region, which include the plane contour plots of geothermal gradient present day, geotemperature at 3km, 4km and 5km depth, respectively, as well as the one at the top surface of lower Tertiary Es4 formation of the Jiyang depression. The average geothermal present day gradient of the whole Jiyang depression is about 35.5• C/km, the corresponding gradients of its four main sags, i.e. Zhanhua, Dongying, Chezhen and Huimin are 36.1• C/km, and 34.6• C/km, respectively. While for the Weibei sag, on the outer flank of the Jiyang depression, it is 35.5• C/km. The distribution of geothermal gradient and geotemperature in the Jiyang depression is mainly governed by its tectonic framework of alternating uplifts and depressions areas. This distribution is also related with the basement depth, characterizing by higher temperature in uplifts and lower one in depressions. In addition, those regions of relatively high geothermal gradient are consistent with areas of Cenozoic volcanic rock distribution. The pattern of basement depth of the Jiyang depression, which also represents the distribution of uplifts and depressions, is controlled by the lithospheric stretching during basin formation. This geodynamic process also accounts for the distribution of volcanic rocks in this region. Consequently, the geothermal field characteristics of the Jiyang depression arc resulted from its tectonic evolution process. In addition, our results also indicate that most of the Es4 formation in the Jiyang depression is still within liquid window of oil and gas.

“Uniform geothermal gradient” and heat flow in the Qiongdongnan and Pearl River Mouth Basins of the South China Sea

“…In petroleum exploration, geothermal gradient has long been applied to estimate hydrocarbon generation of source rocks, which is closely associated with temperature (Tissot et al, 1987;Sweeney and Burnham, 1990). Up to now, there have been a lot of achievements in the study of geothermal gradient of sedimentary basins (Wang et al, 1985(Wang et al, , 1990Tissot et al, 1987;Wang and Shi, 1989;Wang, 1996;Hu et al, 1998;Majorowicz and Embry, 1998;Ren, 2000;Qiu et al, 2001;Xiao et al, 2001Xiao et al, , 2004Gong et al, 2003;Yang et al, 2003;Lu et al, 2005;Ascencio et al, 2006;Yuan et al, 2006). However, the body of work referenced above, generally did not address the fact that geothermal gradients are stratigraphical, and therefore depth dependent.…”

Thermal regime of the lithosphere and geothermal potential in Xiong'an New Area

“…The analysis of the heat generation rate in the sedimentary layers reveals that the distribution of heat production is correlated with type, but heat generation rate changes irregularly with respect to depth (Clauser et al, 1997;Popov et al, 1999). The radiogenic heat generation rate in the crustal layers can be estimated using the above equation (2) (Chang et al, 2016;Gong et al, 2003 . The thicknesses of the upper, middle, and lower crustal layers in Xiong'an New Area, at 8, 7, and 8 km, respectively, were derived from the seismic velocity data (Table 2).…”

Meso–Cenozoic thermal regime in the Bohai Bay Basin, eastern North China Craton

“…Since the 1980s, there have been many studies on the present-day thermal regime of the Bohai Bay basin (Xie et al 1980;Wang et al 1985;Yang 1985Yang , 1988Wang 1987;Wang and Wang 1988;Chen 1988; Gong et al 2003aGong et al , 2003bQiu et al 2009;Zuo et al 2011). The average thermal gradient of the basin is 34.7 ± 3.5°C km -1 , based on the systematic temperature measurement of 89 wells and oil-testing temperature data from over 2000 wells (Gong et al 2003a(Gong et al , 2003b, and the average heat flow value is 65.8 ± 8.1 mW m -2 , based on 76 measured values (Wang et al 2002).…”