Is the permeability of crystalline rock in the shallow crust related to depth, lithology or tectonic setting?

Abstract

The permeability of crystalline rocks is generally assumed to decrease with depth due to increasing overburden stress. While experiments have confirmed the dependence of permeability on stress, field measurements of crystalline permeability have not previously yielded an unambiguous and universal relation between permeability and depth in the shallow crust (<2.5 km). Large data sets from Sweden, Germany and Switzerland provide new opportunities to characterize the permeability of crystalline rocks in the shallow crust. Here we compile in situ permeability measurements (n = 973) and quantitatively test potential relationships between permeability, depth (0-2.5 km), lithology (intrusive and metamorphic) and tectonic setting (active and inactive). Higher permeabilities are more common at shallow depths (<1 km), but trend analysis does not support a consistently applicable and generalizable relationship between permeability and depth in crystalline rock in the shallow crust. Results suggest lithology has a weak control on permeability-depth relations in the near surface (<0.1 km), regardless of tectonic setting, but may be a more important control at depth. Tectonic setting appears to be a stronger control on permeability-depth relations in the near surface. Permeability values in the tectonically active Molasse basin are scattered with a very weak relationship between permeability and depth. While results indicate that there is no consistently applicable relationship between permeability and depth for crystalline rock in the shallow crust, some specific lithologies and tectonic settings display a statistically significant decrease of permeability with depth, with greater predictive power than a generalized relationship, that could be useful for hydrologic and earth system models.

A new global database to improve predictions of permeability distribution in crystalline rocks at site scale

“…Lugeon or water pressure tests (WD-test from German "Wasserdruck-") are mainly used in hydropower dam and tunnel projects and give a rough estimate of the hydromechanical properties of single fractures and [Denzel et al, 1997;Heitfeld et al, 1998;Prinz and Strauß, 2012;Sievänen, 2001;Snow, 1979;Steiner et al, 2006], roughly agreeing with the compiled data (Tables 1 and 2).…”

“…Based on high-quality flow rate and pressure monitoring data, diagnostic plots and heterogeneous flow models with various types of inner and outer boundary conditions [Horne, 1995;Kruseman and de Ridder, 1991] can be applied to the analysis of such packer test data. Thus, packer test results can have a very high accuracy and cover a wide permeability range, as shown by the compiled data set [ Table 1; Almén et al, 1986;Clauser, 1991;Heitfeld et al, 1998;Lee et al, 1982;Leech et al, 1984;Prinz and Strauß, 2012;Steiner et al, 2006].…”

“…The major uncertainty in the permeability conversion stems from the fluid density and viscosity estimations. Based on a maximum temperature gradient error of 10 K/km and maximum total dissolved solids (TDS) in excess of 30 kg/m 3 at deeper sites [Bucher and Stober, 2010;Frape and Fritz, 1987;Gascoyne et al, 1987;Ranjram et al, 2015;Stotler et al, 2010;Vovk, 1987], the error in the permeability calculated from hydraulic conductivity is negligible for low temperature and mineralization (shallow groundwater) and increases to about 20-25% for high temperatures and TDS [Kuder, 2011;Kwak et al, 2005].…”

Exploring the potential linkages between oil‐field brine reinjection, crystalline basement permeability, and triggered seismicity for the Dagger Draw Oil field, southeastern New Mexico, USA, using hydrologic modeling

“…As noted above, we assume that crystalline basement permeability can be represented as a bulk continuum property. Although questioned by some (e.g., Ranjram et al 2015), numerous studies argue that permeability decreases with depth (Manning & Ingebritsen 1999;Stober & Bucher 2007;Ingebritsen & Manning 2010). In two scenarios, we allowed crystalline basement permeability to decay with depth using the relationship presented by Manning and Ingebritsen (1999) and Ingebritsen & Manning (2010):…”

The Role of Fault‐Zone Architectural Elements on Pore Pressure Propagation and Induced Seismicity

“…Data from deep crystalline basement borehole tests indicate that average intrinsic permeability of the rock (k or permeability herein) ranges from 10 −16 to 10 −14 m 2 to depths of approximately 4 km, with extremes varying from 10 −19 to 10 −12 m 2 (Mazurek 1998;Bucher 2006, 2015;Ranjram et al 2015). A general permeability decay relationship (Figure 1) based on heat flow and metamorphic studies is…”