Sandstone Reservoir Quality Prediction The State of The Art AAPGBulletin Ajdukiewicz Lander 2010
Sandstone Reservoir Quality Prediction The State of The Art AAPGBulletin Ajdukiewicz Lander 2010
Sandstone Reservoir Quality Prediction The State of The Art AAPGBulletin Ajdukiewicz Lander 2010
Copyright ©2010. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved.
Manuscript received June 1, 2010.
DOI:10.1306/intro060110
compaction in shallow parts of a basin will not compaction is the dominant control on porosity
extrapolate successfully to deeper regions where decline.
high-temperature quartz cement begins to reduce Most current first-principle geochemical mod-
porosity at very different rates from those associated els have limited predictive capabilities because they
with compaction. In addition, differences in tex- rely on laboratory-derived kinetic parameters and
tural and compositional attributes, some of them do not account for important changes in rock tex-
subtle, can significantly affect porosity-depth trends ture and pore-system surface area during the course
(Figure 1). Taylor et al. (2010, this issue) show geo- of diagenetic alteration. These models sometimes
logic data sets with high-quality petrographic data, ignore mechanical compaction, although that pro-
in which trends from shallow intervals break down cess is responsible for the greatest amount of porosity
with increasing burial depth. They also document loss in most sandstones (Lundegard, 1991) and may
how porosity-depth trends may vary significantly significantly reduce reactive surface areas. In addition,
between basins even in shallow intervals, where such models do not consider the important impact