The Pore Structure and Difference between Wufeng and Longmaxi Shales in Pengshui Area, Southeastern Sichuan
-
摘要: 页岩孔隙结构及差异性是页岩含气性和产能评价的基础性问题.针对川东南彭水地区五峰组与龙马溪组页岩的孔隙结构已有若干研究成果，然而在页岩孔隙结构差异性和有机孔定量特征方面还缺乏研究.利用低温低压氮气吸附测定和氩离子抛光-场发射扫描电镜（FE-EM）技术，对页岩样品纳米孔隙进行了二维观察与统计以及分形特征计算，研究了3nm至几百nm页岩孔径范围的孔隙结构及其差异性.研究区五峰组-龙马溪组页岩有机孔十分发育；氮气吸附测定页岩孔隙形状包含开放型圆筒状、层状结构狭缝状和墨水瓶状等；扫描电镜观察有机孔形态主要有近圆形、椭圆形和多角形等.五峰组和龙马溪组页岩孔隙结构具有明显的差异性，主要体现在孔径大小、形态和数量上.氮气吸附测定表明，五峰组页岩孔隙比表面积和总孔容较龙马溪组大，微孔所占总孔的比例也较高；五峰组页岩孔径相对龙马溪组更细窄.扫描电镜二维图像观察与统计结果表明，五峰组有机孔径以小于3nm为主，形态以多角形为主；龙马溪组有机孔径以小于0nm为主，形态多呈近圆形和椭圆形.五峰组页岩的分形维值大于龙马溪组页岩，说明前者孔隙复杂程度较高.Abstract: Pore structure and its difference is a basic issue in shale gas content and capacity evaluation. A number of studies have been made on the pore structure of the shale in the Wufeng Formation and Longmaxi Formation in Pengshui area, southeastern Sichuan. However, there is a lack of research on shale pore structure difference and organic pore quantitative characteristics. Using low-temperature and low-pressure N2 adsorption and Ar ion milling field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM), for Wufeng and Longmaxi marine shales in Pengshui area of southeastern Sichuan, this paper investigated the pore structure of shale samples with the pore size ranging from 3nm to hundreds nm, and its difference between Wufeng and Longmaxi formations was also analyzed by observing and counting nano-pores in two-dimension, and computing fractal dimension. Results indicate that organic pores from Wufeng and Longmaxi shales in Pengshui area are very developed. Results of N2 adsorption show the shale samples contain open cylindrical-like pores, layered slit-like pores and ink-bottle pores. And observation of scanning electron microscopy reveals organic pore morphology mainly is nearly circular, elliptic and polygon. The obvious difference of pore structure between Wufeng and Longmaxi shales is mainly reflected on the pore size, shape and quantity. N2 adsorption results show that Wufeng shales have higher specific surface area and total pore volume than that of Longmaxi shales, and micropore within Wufeng shales accounts for higher proportion of total pore; pore size of Wufeng shales is narrower than that of Longmaxi shales. Observation and statistics of FE-SEM two-dimensional images indicate organic pores in Wufeng Formation are mainly pores with diameter less than 35nm and have irregular shapes. While Longmaxi organic pores are mainly less than 50nm in diameter and pore shapes mainly are nearly circular or elliptic. Based on the pore fractal dimension calculation of N2 adsorption and FE-SEM, Wufeng Formation has higher pore fractal dimension values than Longmaxi Formation, which indicates that the pore structure of Wufeng shales is more complex than that of Longmaxi shales.
-
Key words:
- pore structure /
- fractal features /
- Wufeng Formation /
- Longmaxi Formation /
- marine shale /
- Pengshui area /
- petroleum geology
-
图 1 研究区位置(a)，川东南彭水地区构造位置(b)和构造剖面(c)
Fig. 1. Location of the study area (a), tectonic location (b) and profile (c) of Pengshui area in southeastern Sichuan
图 4 IUPAC吸附等温线与脱附迟滞分类
修改自Thommes et al.(2015)；a.物理吸附等温线分类；b.脱附迟滞分类
Fig. 4. IUPAC classification of isotherms and hysteresis
图 5 页岩平均孔径与孔隙体积关系
Fig. 5. The relationship between average pore diameter and pore volume of shale samples
图 6 PY1井页岩样品纳米孔缝类型
a.有机孔，孔隙长轴方向与有机质延伸方向基本一致，PY1井2 100.80 m；b.有机孔，孔隙长轴方向与有机质边缘基本平行，PY1井2 153.19 m；c.较大有机孔内有较小有机孔相连通，PY1井2 129.73 m；d.充填在矿物颗粒之间不规则有机质，发育大量椭圆状、扁长形有机孔，脆性矿物边缘发育粒间孔，内部有粒内孔，PY1井2 158.12 m；e.充填在矿物颗粒之间不规则有机质，有机质内发育大量有机孔，矿物颗粒内发育少量粒内孔，PY1井2 153.19 m；f.页岩中孔隙发育复杂，溶蚀孔发育, 黄铁矿与石英颗粒间存在粒间孔，碎屑颗粒与粘土矿物间存在贴粒缝，PY1井2 129.73 m；g.充填在草莓状黄铁矿晶体之间的有机质，发育大量不规则晶间-有机质复合孔，PY1井2 144.77 m；h.矿物结晶微裂缝，最宽处裂缝可达188.6 nm，PY1井2 100.80 m；i.构造微裂缝，PY1井2 129.73 m
Fig. 6. Pore types of shale samples from well PY1
图 7 PY1井有机孔孔隙特征统计图
a.有机孔孔径分布直方图；b.有机孔圆度系数分布直方图
Fig. 7. Statistical graph of organic pore characteristics in well PY1
图 8 五峰组-龙马溪组页岩有机孔隙形态对比
a.12万倍下龙马溪组典型有机孔扫描电镜图像，孔径相对较大，形态呈椭圆、近圆形；b.图a处理图，红色区域为有机孔；c.25万倍下龙马溪组典型有机孔扫描电镜图像；d.图c处理图，红色区域为有机孔；e.12万倍下五峰组典型有机孔扫描电镜图像，孔径相对较小，形态呈椭圆、扁长、菱角状；f.图e处理图，红色区域为有机孔；g.25万倍下五峰组典型有机孔扫描电镜图像；h.图g处理图，红色区域为有机孔；i.图a和图e为12万倍下有机孔圆度系数对比；j.图c和图g为25万倍下有机孔圆度系数对比
Fig. 8. Organic pore shapes comparison between Wufeng Formation and Longmaxi Formation
图 10 五峰组(a)和龙马溪组(b)有机孔孔隙周长与面积分维关系
Fig. 10. Fractal dimension relationship of organic pore perimeter and area in Wufeng Formation (a) and Longmaxi Formation (b)
表 1 页岩样品地化参数和矿物组成特征
Table 1. Geochemical parameters and mineral composition of shale samples
样品编号 深度(m) 层位 岩相 TOC (%) 矿物组成(%) 粘土 石英 长石 碳酸盐 黄铁矿 PY1-1 2 100.80 龙马溪组 富泥/硅混合质页岩 0.82 29.4 36.6 16.9 15.2 1.9 PY1-2 2 129.73 龙马溪组 富泥/硅混合质页岩 1.27 37.9 36.4 14.7 7.6 3.4 PY1-3 2 138.08 龙马溪组 富泥/硅混合质页岩 2.34 25.9 40.8 12.3 15.9 5.1 PY1-4 2 144.77 龙马溪组 富泥硅质页岩 3.07 25.4 43.1 9.5 17.5 4.5 PY1-5 2 153.19 五峰组 富泥硅质页岩 3.27 25.9 55.8 9.6 4.3 4.4 PY1-6 2 158.12 五峰组 富泥/硅混合质页岩 3.92 41.8 39.6 10.5 5.3 2.8 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 页岩样品孔隙结构参数
Table 2. Pore structure parameters of shale samples
样品编号 深度(m) 层位 BET比表面积(m2/g) BJH总孔容(mL/g) t-plot微孔比表面积(m2/g) t-plot微孔孔容(mL/g) 微孔比表面比例(%) 微孔孔容比例(%) PY1-1 2 100.80 龙马溪组 8.229 9 0.009 862 2.859 0 0.001 217 34.74 12.34 PY1-2 2 129.73 龙马溪组 10.240 8 0.012 067 3.641 3 0.001 548 35.56 12.83 PY1-3 2 138.08 龙马溪组 15.936 1 0.016 718 6.417 6 0.002 744 40.27 16.41 PY1-4 2 144.77 龙马溪组 16.662 4 0.017 147 6.774 4 0.002 905 40.66 16.94 PY1-5 2 153.19 五峰组 17.648 8 0.017 850 7.213 0 0.003 095 40.87 17.34 PY1-6 2 158.12 五峰组 21.102 2 0.017 778 9.632 4 0.004 147 45.65 23.33
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 基于FHH模型的吸附孔孔隙分维值计算结果
Table 3. Calculation results of adsorption pore fractal dimension obtained from FHH model
样品编号 层位 吸附体积与孔径双对数关系1 相关系数R2 分维值D1 吸附体积与孔径双对数关系2 相关系数R2 分维值D2 吸附体积与孔径双对数关系3 相关系数R2 分维值D3 PY1-1 龙马溪组 y=1.245 3-0.081 0x 0.994 8 2.919 0 y=0.993 3-0.163 4x 0.997 3 2.836 6 y=0.974 8-0.307 3x 0.995 2 2.692 7 PY1-2 龙马溪组 y=1.504 7-0.069 2x 0.989 7 2.930 8 y=1.206 9-0.164 4x 0.997 3 2.835 6 y=1.191 5-0.306 2x 0.993 5 2.693 8 PY1-3 龙马溪组 y=1.957 0-0.043 4x 0.995 9 2.956 6 y=1.644 8-0.151 5x 0.992 5 2.848 5 y=1.627 0-0.290 1x 0.992 0 2.709 9 PY1-4 龙马溪组 y=2.040 5-0.031 9x 0.995 8 2.968 1 y=1.688 9-0.156 8x 0.988 6 2.843 2 y=1.669 8-0.283 7x 0.991 2 2.716 3 PY1-5 五峰组 y=2.098 0-0.027 0x 0.995 4 2.973 0 y=1.751 8-0.152 1x 0.983 5 2.847 9 y=1.727 2-0.282 7x 0.991 6 2.717 3 PY1-6 五峰组 y=2.097 7-0.029 1x 0.996 4 2.970 9 y=1.913 5-0.097 0x 0.978 1 2.903 0 y=1.891 8-0.256 0x 0.985 8 2.744 0
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] Cardott, B.J., Landis, C.R., Curtis, M.E., 2015.Post-Oil Solid Bitumen Network in the Woodford Shale, USA—A Potential Primary Migration Pathway.International Journal of Coal Geology, 139:106-113.doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2014.08.012 [2] Chalmers, G.R., Bustin, R.M., Power, I.M., 2012.Characterization of Gas Shale Pore Systems by Porosimetry, Pycnometry, Surface Area, and Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy/Transmission Electron Microscopy Image Analyses:Examples from the Barnett, Woodford, Haynesville, Marcellus, and Doig Units.AAPG Bulletin, 96(6):1099-1119.doi: 10.1306/10171111052 [3] Chen, B., Pi, D.C., 2009.Silurian Longmaxi Shale Gas Potential Analysis in Middle & Upper Yangtze Region.China Petroleum Exploration, 14(3):15-19 (in Chinese with English abstract). [4] Chen, Y.Y., Zou, C.N., Mastalerz, M., et al., 2015.Porosity and Fractal Characteristics of Shale across a Maturation Gradient.Natural Gas Geoscience, 26(9):1646-1656 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.1111/1755-6724.12302_7 [5] Curtis, J.B., 2002.Fractured Shale-Gas Systems.AAPG Bulletin, 86(11):1921-1938.doi: 10.1306/61eeddbe-173e-11d7-8645000102c1865d [6] Curtis, M.E., Cardott, B.J., Sondergeld, C.H., et al., 2012.Development of Organic Porosity in the Woodford Shale with Increasing Thermal Maturity.International Journal of Coal Geology, 103:26-31.doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2012.08.004 [7] Dathe, A., Eins, S., Niemeyer, J., et al., 2001.The Surface Fractal Dimension of the Soil-Pore Interface as Measured by Image Analysis.Geoderma, 103(1-2):203-229.doi: 10.1016/s0016-7061(01)00077-5 [8] Dong, T., Harris, N.B., Ayranci, K., et al., 2015.Porosity Characteristics of the Devonian Horn River Shale, Canada:Insights from Lithofacies Classification and Shale Composition.International Journal of Coal Geology, 141-142:74-90.doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2015.03.001 [9] Fu, C.Q., Zhu, Y.M., Chen, S.B., 2016.Pore Structure and Fractal Features of Hetang Formation Shale in Western Zhejiang.Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 45(1):77-86 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-ZGKD201601012.htm [10] Guo, Y.H., Zhao, D.F., 2015.Analysis of Micro-Scale Heterogeneity Characteristics in Marine Shale Gas Reservoir.Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 44(2):300-307 (in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282709896_Analysis_of_micro-scale_heterogeneity_characteristics_in_marine_shale_gas_reservoir [11] Hou, Y.G., He, S., Yi, J.Z., et al., 2014.Effect of Pore Structure on Methane Sorption Capacity of Shales.Petroleum Exploration and Development, 41(2):248-256 (in Chinese with English abstract). https://max.book118.com/html/2014/1230/10960279.shtm [12] Hu, Z.Q., Du, W., Peng, Y.M., et al., 2015.Microscopic Pore Characteristics and the Source-Reservoir Relationship of Shale—A Case Study from the Wufeng and Longmaxi Formations in Southeast Sichuan Basin.Oil & Gas Geology, 36(6):1001-1008 (in Chinese with English abstract). [13] Jarvie, D.M., Hill, R.J., Ruble, T.E., et al., 2007.Unconventional Shale-Gas Systems:The Mississippian Barnett Shale of North-Central Texas as One Model for Thermogenic Shale-Gas Assessment.AAPG Bulletin, 91(4):475-499.doi: 10.1306/12190606068 [14] Ji, W.M., Song, Y., Jiang, Z.X., et al., 2016.Micro-Nano Pore Structure Characteristics and Its Control Factors of Shale in Longmaxi Formation, Southeastern Sichuan Basin.Acta Petrolei Sinica, 37(2):182-195 (in Chinese with English abstract). [15] Liu, W., Yu, Q., Yan, J.F., et al., 2012.Characteristics of Organic-Rich Mudstone Reservoirs in the Silurian Longmaxi Formation in Upper Yangtze Region.Oil & Gas Geology, 33(3):346-352 (in Chinese with English abstract). [16] Loucks, R.G., Reed, R.M., Ruppel, S.C., et al., 2012.Spectrum of Pore Types and Networks in Mudrocks and a Descriptive Classification for Matrix-Related Mudrock Pores.AAPG Bulletin, 96(6):1071-1098.doi: 10.1306/08171111061 [17] Ma, Y.Q., Fan, M.J., Lu, Y.C., et al., 2016.Geochemistry and Sedimentology of the Lower Silurian Longmaxi Mudstone in Southwestern China:Implications for Depositional Controls on Organic Matter Accumulation.Marine and Petroleum Geology, 75:291-309.doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.04.024 [18] Montgomery, S.L., Jarvie, D.M., Bowker, K.A., et al., 2005.Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, North-Central Texas:Gas-Shale Play with Multi-Trillion Cubic Foot Potential.AAPG Bulletin, 89(2):155-175.doi: 10.1306/09170404042 [19] Pan, L., Xiao, X.M., Tian, H., et al., 2016.Geological Models of Gas in Place of the Longmaxi Shale in Southeast Chongqing, South China.Marine and Petroleum Geology, 73:433-444.doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.03.018 [20] Passey, Q.R., Bohacs, K., Esch, W.L., et al., 2010.From Oil-Prone Source Rock to Gas-Producing Shale Reservoir-Geologic and Petrophysical Characterization of Unconventional Shale Gas Reservoirs.International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, SPE 131350.doi:10.2118/131350-ms [21] Slatt, R.M., O'Brien, N.R., 2011.Pore Types in the Barnett and Woodford Gas Shales:Contribution to Understanding Gas Storage and Migration Pathways in Fine-Grained Rocks.AAPG Bulletin, 95(12):2017-2030.doi: 10.1306/03301110145 [22] Thommes, M., Kaneko, K., Neimark, A.V., et al., 2015.Physisorption of Gases, with Special Reference to the Evaluation of Surface Area and Pore Size Distribution (IUPAC Technical Report).Pure and Applied Chemistry, 87(9-10):1051-1069.doi: 10.1515/pac-2014-1117 [23] Wang, F.Y., He, Z.Y., Meng, X.H., et al., 2011.Occurrence of Shale Gas and Prediction of Original Gas In-Place (Ogip).Natural Gas Geoscience, 22(3):501-510 (in Chinese with English abstract). [24] Wang, L., Chen, Y.Y., Liu, Y.X., 2014.Shale Porous Structural Characteristics of Longmaxi Formation in Pengshui Area of Southeast Sichuan Basin.China Petroleum Exploration, 19(5):80-88 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-KTSY201405009.htm [25] Wang, L., Zhang, X.D., Liu, Y.X., 2015.Study of Ar Ion Milling/SEM Analysis on Uncoated Shale Samples.Journal of Chinese Electron Microscopy Society, 34(1):33-39 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/dzxwxb2015010007 [26] Wang, Y., Zhu, Y.M., Chen, S.B., et al., 2013.Formation Conditions of Shale Gas in Lower Cambrian Niutitang Formation, Northwestern Hunan.Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 42(4):586-594 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD201304013.htm [27] Wang, Y.M., Dong, D.Z., Li, J.Z., et al., 2012.Reservoir Characteristics of Shale Gas in Longmaxi Formation of the Lower Silurian, Southern Sichuan.Acta Petrolei Sinica, 33(4):551-561 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.1038/aps.2012.9 [28] Wu, S.T., Zou, C.N., Zhu, R.K., et al., 2015.Reservoir Quality Characterization of Upper Triassic Chang 7 Shale in Ordos Basin.Earth Science, 40(11):1810-1823 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-DQKX201511004.htm [29] Xiao, H., 2014.Study on Shale Reservoir Characteristics and Quantitative Characterization of Longmaxi Formation in Pengshui Area (Dissertation).Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing (in Chinese with English abstract). [30] Yang, R., He, S., Yi, J.Z., et al., 2016a.Nano-Scale Pore Structure and Fractal Dimension of Organic-Rich Wufeng-Longmaxi Shale from Jiaoshiba Area, Sichuan Basin:Investigations Using FE-SEM, Gas Adsorption and Helium Pycnometry.Marine and Petroleum Geology, 70:27-45.doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.11.019 [31] Yang, R., He, S., Hu, Q.H., et al., 2016b.Pore Characterization and Methane Sorption Capacity of Over-Mature Organic-Rich Wufeng and Longmaxi Shales in the Southeast Sichuan Basin, China.Marine and Petroleum Geology, 77:247-261.doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.06.001 [32] Zhang, L.Y., Li, J.Y., Li, Z., et al., 2015.Development Characteristics and Formation Mechanism of Intra-Organic Reservoir Space in Lacustrine Shales.Earth Science, 40(11):1824-1833 (in Chinese with English abstract). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288230302_Development_characteristics_and_formation_mechanism_of_intra-organic_reservoir_space_in_lacustrine_shales [33] Zhang, Q., Liu, R.H., Pang, Z.L., et al., 2016.Characterization of Microscopic Pore Structures in Lower Silurian Black Shale(S1l), Southeastern Chongqing, China.Marine and Petroleum Geology, 71:250-259.doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.12.015 [34] Zhou, D.H., Jiao, F.Z., Guo, X.S., et al., 2013.Geological Features of the Lower Jurassic Shale Gas Play in Fuling Area, the Southeastern Sichuan Basin.Oil & Gas Geology, 34(4):450-454 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-SYYT201304006.htm [35] 陈波, 皮定成, 2009.中上扬子地区志留系龙马溪组页岩气资源潜力评价.中国石油勘探, 14(3): 15-19. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KTSY200903005.htm [36] 陈燕燕, 邹才能, Mastalerz, M., 等, 2015.页岩微观孔隙演化及分形特征研究.天然气地球科学, 26(9): 1646-1656. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TDKX201509005.htm [37] 付常青, 朱炎铭, 陈尚斌, 2016.浙西荷塘组页岩孔隙结构及分形特征研究.中国矿业大学学报, 45(1): 77-86. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD201601012.htm [38] 郭英海, 赵迪斐, 2015.微观尺度海相页岩储层微观非均质性研究.中国矿业大学学报, 44(2): 300-307. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD201502014.htm [39] 侯宇光, 何生, 易积正, 等, 2014.页岩孔隙结构对甲烷吸附能力的影响.石油勘探与开发, 41(2): 248-256. doi: 10.11698/PED.2014.02.17 [40] 胡宗全, 杜伟, 彭勇民, 等, 2015.页岩微观孔隙特征及源-储关系——以川东南地区五峰组-龙马溪组为例.石油与天然气地质, 36(6): 1001-1008. doi: 10.11743/ogg20150615 [41] 纪文明, 宋岩, 姜振学, 等, 2016.四川盆地东南部龙马溪组页岩微-纳米孔隙结构特征及控制因素.石油学报, 37(2): 182-195. doi: 10.7623/syxb201602004 [42] 刘伟, 余谦, 闫剑飞, 等, 2012.上扬子地区志留系龙马溪组富有机质泥岩储层特征.石油与天然气地质, 33(3): 346-352. doi: 10.11743/ogg20120303 [43] 王飞宇, 贺志勇, 孟晓辉, 等, 2011.页岩气赋存形式和初始原地气量(OGIP)预测技术.天然气地球科学, 22(3): 501-510. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TDKX201103019.htm [44] 王亮, 陈云燕, 刘玉霞, 2014.川东南彭水地区龙马溪组页岩孔隙结构特征.中国石油勘探, 19(5): 80-88. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KTSY201405009.htm [45] 王亮, 章雄冬, 刘玉霞, 2015.不镀膜页岩样品的氩离子抛光/扫描电镜分析方法研究.电子显微学报, 34(1): 33-39. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZXV201501006.htm [46] 王阳, 朱炎铭, 陈尚斌, 等, 2013.湘西北下寒武统牛蹄塘组页岩气形成条件分析.中国矿业大学学报, 42(4): 586-594. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD201304013.htm [47] 王玉满, 董大忠, 李建忠, 等, 2012.川南下志留统龙马溪组页岩气储层特征.石油学报, 33(4): 551-561. doi: 10.7623/syxb201204003 [48] 吴松涛, 邹才能, 朱如凯, 等, 2015.鄂尔多斯盆地上三叠统长7段泥页岩储集性能.地球科学, 40(11): 1810-1823. http://www.earth-science.net/WebPage/Article.aspx?id=3188 [49] 肖红, 2014. 彭水区块龙马溪组页岩储层特征及其定量表征研究(硕士学位论文). 大庆: 东北石油大学. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10220-1014389933.htm [50] 张林晔, 李钜源, 李政, 等, 2015.湖相页岩有机储集空间发育特点与成因机制.地球科学, 40(11): 1824-1833. http://www.earth-science.net/WebPage/Article.aspx?id=3189 [51] 周德华, 焦方正, 郭旭升, 等, 2013.川东南涪陵地区下侏罗统页岩油气地质特征.石油与天然气地质, 34(4): 450-454. doi: 10.11743/ogg20130404 -
点击查看大图
图(10) / 表(3)
计量
- 文章访问数: 5102
- HTML全文浏览量: 1896
- PDF下载量: 33
- 被引次数: 0
