海陆相泥页岩气体生成的半封闭模拟实验

宋董军; 吴陈君; 陈科; 张明峰; 何薇; 苏龙; 张东伟; 付爽; 妥进才

doi:10.3799/dqkx.2019.197

海陆相泥页岩气体生成的半封闭模拟实验

doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2019.197

宋董军^1,2, ,,
吴陈君¹,
陈科³,
张明峰¹,
何薇^1,2,
苏龙¹,
张东伟^1,2,
付爽^1,2,
妥进才^1, ,

1.
甘肃省油气资源研究重点实验室, 中国科学院西北生态环境资源研究院, 甘肃兰州 730000
2.
中国科学院大学, 北京 100049
3.
中国地质调查局油气资源调查中心, 北京 100083

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目 41672127

国家自然科学基金项目 41602151

国家科技重大专项 2017ZX05036003-007

详细信息

作者简介:
宋董军(1993-), 男, 博士研究生, 从事油气地质及地球化学研究

通讯作者:
妥进才

中图分类号: P618
计量
- 文章访问数: 2397
- HTML全文浏览量: 802
- PDF下载量: 45
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2019-08-05
- 刊出日期: 2019-11-15

Gas Generation from Marine and Terrestrial Shales by Semi-Closed Pyrolysis Experiments

Song Dongjun^{1,2
,
,},
Wu Chenjun¹,
Chen Ke³,
Zhang Mingfeng¹,
He Wei^1,2,
Su Long¹,
Zhang Dongwei^1,2,
Fu Shuang^1,2,
Tuo Jincai^{1
, ,}

1.
Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources, Gansu Province; Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
2.
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3.
Oil & Gas Survey, China Geological Survey, Beijing 100083, China

摘要

摘要: 明确不同沉积环境下页岩气生成机理的差异性对于页岩气成因机理及页岩气地球化学特征研究具有重要意义.选择低演化阶段的海相（中元古界洪水庄组）和陆相（三叠统延长组长7段）泥页岩进行了半封闭热模拟实验，对其气体产物进行了组分和碳同位素分析.结果表明，洪水庄组页岩产气量要远远低于同温度条件下长7段泥岩的产气量.同时，长7段泥岩气体产物二次裂解程度比较高.洪水庄组页岩有机质母源以生油性为主，长7段泥岩沉积过程受到陆源混入，有机质母源以相对偏生气性为主.热模拟实验条件下黄铁矿转化成磁黄铁矿的过程也可能促进长7段泥岩烃类气的生成.热模拟实验中所用样品的状态，即柱状样或颗粒样，也可能会对气体的裂解行为产生影响.在这种情况下，南方地区页岩气高的甲烷产率以及碳同位素倒转可能与厚层页岩高的油气滞留率有关.
- 海相页岩 /
- 陆相泥岩 /
- 半封闭模拟实验 /
- 烃类气 /
- 排烃效率 /
- 差异性 /
- 油气地质
Abstract: Understanding differences of shale gas generation in different sedimentary environments has great significance to fully elucidate genesis mechanisms and geochemical characteristics of shale gas. In this study,semi-closed pyrolysis experiments were conducted on two lower-mature shales,including a marine shale from Hongshuizhuang Formation of Mesoproterozoic and a terrestrial mudstone from the Chang 7 Member of Yanchang Formation of Upper Triassic. The pyrolyzed gas productions were performed for gas constituent and carbon isotope analysis,aiming to investigate influences on gas generation from the nature of organic matter,mineralogical characteristics and rock fabric. The results show the discrepancy of sources of organic matter exists in the two shales,causing the amount of gas generated from Hongshuizhuang shale was lower than that of the Chang 7 Member under the same pyrolysis temperature. Meanwhile,the secondary cracking content of gas productions in the Chang 7 Member mudstone was relatively high. Organic matter in Hongshuizhuang Formation is oil-prone,but organic matter in the Chang 7 Member mudstone is relatively gas-prone due to mixture of continental materials. Moreover,the transformation process from pyrite to pyrrhotine also can be conducive to advancing the generation of hydrocarbon gas in the Chang 7 Member mudstone. The rock fabrics used in the pyrolysis experiments would lead to different cracking behaviors of gas. In this scenario,the characteristics of high methane composition and rollover of carbon isotope of shale gas in the South China may be associated with higher retention of oil and gas in those thick shales.
- marine shale /
- continental mudstone /
- semi-closed pyrolysis experiment /
- hydrocarbon gas /
- expulsion efficiency /
- difference /
- petroleum geology

HTML全文

图 1 海相页岩(KC)热模拟气体产率

Fig. 1. Gas yields of the marine shale (KC) in the pyrolysis experiments

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 陆相泥岩(F14)热模拟气体产率

Fig. 2. Gas yields of the terrestrial mudstone (F14) in the pyrolysis experiments

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 海陆相泥页岩热模拟气体干燥系数变化

a.海相页岩(KC)；b.陆相泥岩(F14)

Fig. 3. Changes of gas dryness coefficients of the marine and terrestrial shales in the pyrolysis experiments

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 热模拟气体碳同位素变化

Fig. 4. Variations of carbon isotope of gas productions in the pyrolysis experiments

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 热模拟烃类气的ln(C₁/C₂) vs. ln(C₂/C₃)图(a)、δ¹³C₂-δ¹³C₃ vs. ln(C₂/C₃)图(b)、δ¹³C₂-δ¹³C₃ vs.(C₂/C₃)图(c)、δ¹³C₂-δ¹³C₃ vs. δ¹³C₁图(d)

Fig. 5. Plots of ln(C₁/C₂) vs. ln(C₂/C₃) (a), δ¹³C₂-δ¹³C₃ vs. ln(C₂/C₃) (b), δ¹³C₂-δ¹³C₃ vs. (C₂/C₃) (c) and δ¹³C₂-δ¹³C₃ vs. δ¹³C₁ (d) for the pyrolytic gases

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 场发射扫描电镜下F14泥岩样品部分热模拟固体残渣的矿物溶蚀现象

Fig. 6. Mineral dissolution of parts of F14 solid residues after pyrolysis experiments under FE-SEM

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 原始样品的有机地球化学信息

Table 1. Organic geochemical characteristics of original samples

样品名	岩性	TOC (%)	R_o* (%)	S₁ (mg HC/g)	S₂ (mg HC/g)	S₃ (mg CO₂/g)	T_max (℃)	HI (mg HC/g TOC)	OI (mg CO₂/g TOC)
F14	泥岩	4.49	0.77	1.41	11.58	0.12	442	216.04	2.24
KC	页岩	5.18	0.76*	0.5	15.62	0.93	440	268.00	16.00
注：R_o依据公式“R_o=0.018×T_max-7.16”计算得到(Jarvie et al., 2007).“*” R_o估计依据见补充材料.

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 原始样品的矿物组成信息

Table 2. Mineralogical characteristics of original samples

样品名	石英(%)	钠长石(%)	钾长石(%)	黄铁矿(%)	粘土矿物(%)
样品名	石英(%)	钠长石(%)	钾长石(%)	黄铁矿(%)	伊蒙混层	高岭石
F14	40	15	11	4	21	9
KC	70	nd	14	nd	16	nd
注：“nd”代表未检测到.

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 模拟气的气体组分特征

Table 3. Gas compositions of pyrolysis experiments

温度(℃)	估计R_o^* (%)	样品	非烃类气			烃类气					干燥系数(%)	总气	烃类气	非烃气
			N₂	CO₂	H₂S	C₁	C₂	C₃	C₄₊	C₂₊		mL/g TOC
			mL/g TOC									mL/g TOC
250		KC	29.41	13.99	0.00	0.24	0.03	0.02	0.04	0.11	71.86	44.00	0.35	43.75
300			49.04	27.41	0.00	0.71	0.19	0.12	0.10	0.44	62.83	78.16	1.15	77.01
350	0.9~1.2		200.10	15.41	0.00	2.84	1.08	0.66	0.54	2.29	55.49	222.89	5.13	217.77
400			245.29	5.46	0.00	8.08	2.58	1.50	1.25	5.36	60.28	266.98	13.44	253.34
450	1.5~2.0		336.33	9.67	0.00	27.32	5.94	2.53	0.98	17.32	74.31	386.77	44.64	361.52
500			197.86	37.71	0.00	157.87	17.18	3.02	1.97	22.90	87.68	418.59	180.77	237.82
550	2.5~3.0		113.81	109.20	0.00	330.70	23.94	4.03	2.96	34.09	91.45	589.19	364.79	224.40
250		F14	90.17	20.82	0.00	0.46	1.38	6.68	6.67	14.73	3.06	127.22	15.20	112.02
300			127.95	52.42	0.00	0.85	0.63	3.54	5.77	9.94	7.86	192.57	10.79	181.78
350	0.9~1.2		155.33	71.16	0.00	8.42	3.53	4.11	5.25	12.90	39.50	249.44	21.33	228.11
400			78.25	103.57	0.02	76.77	29.04	21.41	20.47	70.91	51.98	330.21	148.14	182.07
450	1.5~2.0		74.84	109.92	0.46	164.16	54.05	31.43	16.50	101.98	61.68	453.46	267.60	185.86
500			123.69	118.15	0.02	246.64	39.53	10.66	6.50	56.69	81.31	548.09	304.83	243.26
550	2.5~3.0		66.37	250.27	0.06	509.66	37.85	6.70	3.51	48.06	91.38	880.38	562.66	317.72
注：“*” R_o估计依据见补充材料.

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 模拟气的碳同位素

Table 4. Carbon isotope of pyrolysis gas productions

温度(℃)	KC (‰ PDB)				F14 (‰ PDB)
温度(℃)	δ¹³C₁	δ¹³C₂	δ¹³C₃	δ¹³C_CO2	δ¹³C₁	δ¹³C₂	δ¹³C₃	δ¹³C_CO2
250	-41.9	-34.5	-32.6	-27.4	nd	-36.3	-36.1	-4.0
300	-44.7	-40.2	-40.0	-32.2	nd	-39.0	-37.7	-4.3
350	-51.0	-42.2	-40.7	-31.0	-48.5	-39.2	-38.2	-5.1
400	-47.8	-38.4	-37.3	-28.3	-47.4	-38.0	-36.6	-8.4
450	-50.6	-37.3	-34.9	-35.0	-44.7	-37.4	-33.4	-13.8
500	-37.4	-34.5	-34.4	-33.3	-39.8	-32.5	-32.0	-16.2
550	-36.9	-28.5	-31.9	-33.3	-36.0	-28.7	-31.0	-22.3
注：“nd”代表未检测到.

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 模拟实验条件下2类泥页岩残留油产率

Table 5. Residual oil yields of the studied shales under pyrolysis experiments

温度(℃)	KC残留油产率(mg/g TOC)	F14残留油产率(mg/g TOC)
250	18.03	66.62
300	15.60	156.31
350	34.44	189.23
400	3.88	15.89
450	1.33	2.77
500	0.62	2.28
550	0.64	2.73

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(58)

[1]	Bakr, M. Y., Yokono, T., Sanada, Y., et al., 1991. Role of Pyrite during the Thermal Degradation of Kerogen Using In-situ High-Temperature ESR Technique. Energy & Fuels, 5(3):441-444. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef00027a014
[2]	Bao, Z.D., Chen, J.F., Zhang, S.C., et al., 2004. Sedimentary Environment and Development Controls of the Hydrocarbon Source Beds:Middle and Upper Proterozoic in Northern North China. Science in China(Series D:Earth Sciences), 34(Suppl.1):114-119 (in Chinese).
[3]	Behar, F., Kressmann, S., Rudkiewicz, J. L., et al., 1992. Experimental Simulation in a Confined System and Kinetic Modelling of Kerogen and Oil Cracking. Organic Geochemistry, 19(1/2/3):173-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6380(92)90035-v
[4]	Boudou, J. P., Espitalié, J., 1995. Molecular Nitrogen from Coal Pyrolysis:Kinetic Modelling. Chemical Geology, 126(3/4):319-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2541(95)00125-5
[5]	Chen, X.Y., Tian, F.Q., Zou, H.Y., et al., 2018. Study on Hydrocarbon-Generation of Lacustrine Source Rocks Based on Hydrous Pyrolysis Experiments of Source Rocks from Jizhong Depression, Bohai Bay Basin. Natural Gas Geoscience, 29(1):103-113 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqdqkx201801010
[6]	Curtis, J.B., 2002. Fractured Shale-Gas Systems. AAPG Bulletin, 86(11):1921-1938. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/dkyqt201704025
[7]	Dai, J. X., Zou, C. N., Dong, D. Z., et al., 2016. Geochemical Characteristics of Marine and Terrestrial Shale Gas in China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 76:444-463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.04.027
[8]	Dong, D.Z., Wang, Y.M., Li, X.J., et al., 2016. Breakthrough and Prospect of Shale Gas Exploration and Development in China. Natural Gas Industry, 36(1):19-32 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=trqgy201601003
[9]	Gai, H. F., Tian, H., Cheng, P., et al., 2019. Influence of Retained Bitumen in Oil-Prone Shales on the Chemical and Carbon Isotopic Compositions of Natural Gases:Implications from Pyrolysis Experiments. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 101:148-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2018.11.048
[10]	Gai, R. H., Jin, L. J., Zhang, J. B., et al., 2014. Effect of Inherent and Additional Pyrite on the Pyrolysis Behavior of Oil Shale. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, 105(5):342-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2013.11.022
[11]	Han, Y. J., Mahlstedt, N., Horsfield, B., 2015. The Barnett Shale:Compositional Fractionation Associated with Intraformational Petroleum Migration, Retention, and Expulsion. AAPG Bulletin, 99(12):2173-2202. https://doi.org/10.1306/06231514113
[12]	Hill, R. J., Zhang, E. T., Katz, B. J., et al., 2007. Modeling of Gas Generation from the Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, Texas. AAPG Bulletin, 91(4):501-521. https://doi.org/10.1306/12060606063
[13]	İnan, S., 2000. Gaseous Hydrocarbons Generated during Pyrolysis of Petroleum Source Rocks Using Unconventional Grain-Size:Implications for Natural Gas Composition. Organic Geochemistry, 31(12):1409-1418. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0146-6380(00)00070-x
[14]	Inan, S., Yalçin, M. N., Mann, U., 1998. Expulsion of Oil from Petroleum Source Rocks:Inferences from Pyrolysis of Samples of Unconventional Grain Size. Organic Geochemistry, 29(1/2/3):45-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0146-6380(98)00091-6
[15]	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. https://doi.org/10.1306/12190606068
[16]	Li, W., Zhu, Y. M., Liu, Y., 2018. Gas Evolution and Isotopic Fractionations during Pyrolysis on Coals of Different Ranks. International Journal of Coal Geology, 188:136-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2018.02.009
[17]	Liu, Q., Yuan, X.J., Lin, S.H., et al., 2018. Depositional Environment and Characteristic Comparison between Lacustrine Mudstone and Shale:A Case Study from the Chang 7 Member of the Yanchang Formation, Ordos Basin. Oil & Gas Geology, 39(3):531-540 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/syytrqdz201803010
[18]	Liu, Q.Y., Liu, W.H., Chen, J.F., et al., 2003. Thermal Simulation Experiment of Jurassic Coals in Talimu Basin-Geochemical Characteristics and Significance of Nitrogen. Natural Gas Industry, 23(1):26-29, 10 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=trqgy200301007
[19]	Luo, Q. Y., George, S. C., Xu, Y. H., et al., 2016. Organic Geochemical Characteristics of the Mesoproterozoic Hongshuizhuang Formation from Northern China:Implications for Thermal Maturity and Biological Sources. Organic Geochemistry, 99:23-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2016.05.004
[20]	Ma, X. X., Zheng, J. J., Zheng, G. D., et al., 2016. Influence of Pyrite on Hydrocarbon Generation during Pyrolysis of Type-Ⅲ Kerogen. Fuel, 167:329-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.11.069
[21]	Pan, C. C., Jiang, L. L., Liu, J. Z., et al., 2012. The Effects of Pyrobitumen on Oil Cracking in Confined Pyrolysis Experiments. Organic Geochemistry, 45(2):29-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2012.01.008
[22]	Qin, J., Zhong, N.N., Qi, W., et al., 2010. Organic Petrology of the Hongshuizhuang Formation in Northern North China. Oil & Gas Geology, 31(3):367-374 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=syytrqdz201003015
[23]	Shao, D. Y., Ellis, G. S., Li, Y. F., et al., 2018. Experimental Investigation of the Role of Rock Fabric in Gas Generation and Expulsion during Thermal Maturation:Anhydrous Closed-System Pyrolysis of a Bitumen-Rich Eagle Ford Shale. Organic Geochemistry, 119:22-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2018.01.012
[24]	Smith, J. W., Rigby, D., Gould, K. W., et al., 1985. An Isotopic Study of Hydrocarbon Generation Processes. Organic Geochemistry, 8(5):341-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6380(85)90013-0
[25]	Song, D. J., Tuo, J. C., Zhang, M. F., et al., 2019. Hydrocarbon Generation Potential and Evolution of Pore Characteristics of Mesoproterozoic Shales in North China:Results from Semi-Closed Pyrolysis Experiments. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 62:171-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2018.12.011
[26]	Song, Y., Xu, Y.C., 2005. Origin and Identification of Natural Gases. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 32(4):24-29 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=syktykf200504004
[27]	Tang, Q.Y., Zhang, M.J., Yu, M., et al., 2013. Pyrolysis Constraints on the Generation Mechanism of Shale Gas. Journal of China Coal Society, 38(5):742-747 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/mtxb201305004
[28]	Tang, Y., Perry, J. K., Jenden, P. D., et al., 2000. Mathematical Modeling of Stable Carbon Isotope Ratios in Natural Gases. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 64(15):2673-2687. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-7037(00)00377-x
[29]	Tian, H., Xiao, X. M., Wilkins, R. W. T., et al., 2012. An Experimental Comparison of Gas Generation from Three Oil Fractions:Implications for the Chemical and Stable Carbon Isotopic Signatures of Oil Cracking Gas. Organic Geochemistry, 46:96-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2012.01.013
[30]	Tuo, J. C., Wu, C. J., Zhang, M. F., 2016. Organic Matter Properties and Shale Gas Potential of Paleozoic Shales in Sichuan Basin, China. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 28(57):434-446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2015.12.003
[31]	Xia, X. Y., Chen, J., Braun, R., et al., 2013. Isotopic Reversals with Respect to Maturity Trends Due to Mixing of Primary and Secondary Products in Source Rocks. Chemical Geology, 339(2):205-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2012.07.025
[32]	Xie, L. J., Sun, Y. G., Yang, Z. W., et al., 2013. Evaluation of Hydrocarbon Generation of the Xiamaling Formation Shale in Zhangjiakou and Its Significance to the Petroleum Geology in North China. Science in China(Series D:Earth Sciences), 43(9):1436-1444 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-012-4538-5
[33]	Xu, S.L, Bao, S.J., 2009. Preliminary Analysis of Shale Gas Resource Potential and Favorable Areas in Ordos Basin. Natural Gas Geoscience, 20(3):460-465 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqdqkx200903024
[34]	Yuan, X.J., Lin, S.H., Liu, Q., et al., 2015. Lacustrine Fine-Grained Sedimentary Features and Organic-Rich Shale Distribution Pattern:A Case Study of Chang 7 Member of Triassic Yanchang Formation in Ordos Basin, NW China. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 42(1):34-43 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[35]	Zhai, G.Y., Wang, Y.F., Bao, S.J., et al., 2017. Major Factors Controlling the Accumulation and High Productivity of Marine Shale Gas and Prospect Forecast in Southern China. Earth Science, 42(7):1057-1068 (in Chinese with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.3799/dqkx.2017.085
[36]	Zhang, G.T., Chen, X.H., Zhang, B.M., et al., 2019. Gas-Bearing Characteristics and Origin Analysis of Shale Gas in Longtan Formation, Permian, Shaoyang Sag, Central Hunan. Earth Science, 44(2):539-550 (in Chinese with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.3799/dqkx.2018.182
[37]	Zhang, J.C., Xu, B., Nie, H.K., et al., 2008. Exploration Potential of Shale Gas Resources in China. Natural Gas Industry, 28(6):136-140, 159-160 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/qdhydxxb-e201804008
[38]	Zhang, M., Huang, G. H., Hu, G. Y., et al., 2008. Geochemical Study on Oil-Cracked Gases and Kerogen-Cracked Gases (Ⅰ):Experimental Simulation and Products Analysis. Science in China (Series D:Earth Sciences), 38(Suppl.2):1-8 (in Chinese).
[39]	Zhang, M.Z., Ji, L.M., Du, B.X., et al., 2017. New Understanding to the Cutinite from Source Rocks of Triassic Yanchang Formation and Its Hydrocarbon-Generation Contribution. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 38(5):525-532, 606(in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=syxb201705005
[40]	Zou, C.N., Dong, D.Z., Wang, S.J., et al., 2010. Geological Characteristics, Formation Mechanism and Resource Potential of Shale Gas in China. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 37(6):641-653 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.1016/S1876-3804(11)60001-3
[41]	鲍志东, 陈践发, 张水昌, 等, 2004.北华北中上元古界烃源岩发育环境及其控制因素.中国科学(D辑:地球科学), 34(S1):114-119. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgkx-cd2004z1013
[42]	陈晓艳, 田福清, 邹华耀, 等, 2018.湖相烃源岩热演化生烃研究:基于冀中坳陷烃源岩加水热模拟实验.天然气地球科学, 29(1):103-113. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqdqkx201801010
[43]	董大忠, 王玉满, 李新景, 等, 2016.中国页岩气勘探开发新突破及发展前景思考.天然气工业, 36(1):19-32. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqgy201601003
[44]	耳闯, 罗安湘, 赵靖舟, 等, 2016.鄂尔多斯盆地华池地区三叠系延长组长7段富有机质页岩岩相特征.地学前缘, 23(2):108-117. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/dxqy201602011
[45]	刘群, 袁选俊, 林森虎, 等, 2018.湖相泥岩、页岩的沉积环境和特征对比:以鄂尔多斯盆地延长组7段为例.石油与天然气地质, 39(3):531-540. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/syytrqdz201803010
[46]	刘全有, 刘文汇, 陈践发, 等, 2003.塔里木盆地侏罗系煤热模拟实验:氮的地化特征与意义.天然气工业, 23(1):26-29, 10. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0976.2003.01.007
[47]	秦婧, 钟宁宁, 齐雯, 等, 2010.华北北部洪水庄组有机岩石学.石油与天然气地质, 31(3):367-374. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/syytrqdz201003015
[48]	宋岩, 徐永昌, 2005.天然气成因类型及其鉴别.石油勘探与开发, 32(4):24-29. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0747.2005.04.004
[49]	汤庆艳, 张铭杰, 余明, 等, 2013.页岩气形成机制的生烃模拟研究.煤炭学报, 38(5):742-747. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/mtxb201305004
[50]	谢柳娟, 孙永革, 杨中威, 等, 2013.华北张家口地区中元古界下马岭组页岩生烃演化特征及其油气地质意义.中国科学(D辑:地球科学), 43(9):1436-1444. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgkx-cd201309005
[51]	徐士林, 包书景, 2009.鄂尔多斯盆地三叠系延长组页岩气形成条件及有利发育区预测.天然气地球科学, 20(3):460-465. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/trqdqkx200903024
[52]	袁选俊, 林森虎, 刘群, 等, 2015.湖盆细粒沉积特征与富有机质页岩分布模式:以鄂尔多斯盆地延长组长7油层组为例.石油勘探与开发, 42(1):34-43. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/syktykf201501004
[53]	翟刚毅, 王玉芳, 包书景, 等, 2017.我国南方海相页岩气富集高产主控因素及前景预测.地球科学, 42(7):1057-1058. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2017.085
[54]	张国涛, 陈孝红, 张保民, 等, 2019.湘中邵阳凹陷二叠系龙潭组页岩含气性特征与气体成因.地球科学, 44(2):539-550. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2018.182
[55]	张金川, 徐波, 聂海宽, 等, 2008.中国页岩气资源勘探潜力.天然气工业, 28(6):136-140, 159-160. doi: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2008.06.040
[56]	张敏, 黄光辉, 胡国艺, 等, 2008.原油裂解气和干酪根裂解气的地球化学研究(Ⅰ):模拟实验和产物分析.中国科学(D辑:地球科学), 38(S2):1-8.
[57]	张明震, 吉利明, 杜宝霞, 等, 2017.鄂尔多斯盆地三叠系延长组陆相烃源岩中角质体组分新认识及生烃贡献.石油学报, 38(5):525-532, 606. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/syxb201705005
[58]	邹才能, 董大忠, 王社教, 等, 2010.中国页岩气形成机理、地质特征及资源潜力.石油勘探与开发, 37(6):641-653. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/syktykf201006001