Printer Friendly

Source rock potential of lower-middle Miocene lacustrine deposits: example of the Kucukkuyu Formation, NW Turkey.

1. Introduction

The study area is located north of the Gulf of Edremit, northwestern Anatolia (Fig. 1). The area of interest is southwest and north of the Kazdag Massif on Biga Peninsula. The peninsula and surroundings are an important source region for industrial minerals, ore deposits and fossil fuel (especially lignite) in Turkey. The Kucukkuyu Formation is widely exposed on Biga Peninsula to the north and south of the Gulf of Edremit and represents a potential petroleum source rock in the region. In this study, stratigraphy and source rock characteristics of the formation outcropping on Biga Peninsula were investigated. The formation is composed of alternating shale, siltstone and sandstone and is Early-Middle Miocene age. The shale units are thin-bedded, laminated and bituminous.

The hydrocarbon (HC) potential of the formation has been mentioned in previous studies [1-5]. Saka [1] refers to oil seepages in the Kucukkuyu Formation. Siyako et al. [2] indicate that the total organic carbon (TOC) values of the shale samples from the Kucukkuyu Formation ranged from 0.30-1.17 wt% and volcanism in the region was negative in terms of organic matter maturity. According to Kesgin [3], TOC, S2, hydrogen index (HI), kerogen type, [T.sub.max] and vitrinite reflectance (Ro) values of the Kucukkuyu Formation show that the formation had source rock potential. Kerogen of the samples is Type III indicating gas prone.

According to Ciftci et al. [4], elements occurring in active hydrocarbon systems are present in the area surrounding the Gulf of Edremit. The hydrocarbon potential of the northern Aegean Sea and the adjacent Turkish land area is of particular interest. The Prinos oil field of Greece in the northwestern part of the study area, gas fields in the Thrace Basin in the north and other hydrocarbon seeps in the region increase the potential of the region. In addition, the authors revealed TOC contents of the Kucukkuyu Formation were generally higher than 0.5% and HI values were up to 600 mg HC/g TOC. Kerogen has been characterized as Type II or Type III.

A total of 275 outcrops and boreholes samples were analyzed by Ciftci et al. [5] in the graben fill, all of western Anatolian graben basins, including the Edremit Graben. In this work, analysis values of all 275 samples are evaluated together. The total organic carbon (TOC) average was 2.34%, and 80% of the samples had more than 0.5% TOC. Organic matter is generally amorphous and herbaceous, with coaly material. The hydrogen index and kerogen type show a wide range of distribution. Most of the kerogen samples are Type II, indicating a good oil-generative potential of the lacustrine shales of the region. Type III kerogen also exists and suggests that the organic matter is both oil and gas generative at maturation. The pyrolysis [T.sub.max] values indicate that the outcrop samples are generally immature to mature for hydrocarbon generation whereas maturation is apparently increased in borehole samples, which are within the oil window.

Investigation of outcrop area and source rock characteristics of bituminous shale of western and northwestern Anatolia is important. Well drilling by the Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO) in Gomec in the southern part of the Gulf of Edremit, Edremit-1 well (1988) in the Gulf of Edremit, petroleum exploration drilling in AlaSehir (1998 and 2008), and Anafartalar-1 well drilling for natural gas in the Gulf of Saros (2008) have all produced gas. Bituminous shales of Biga Peninsula may be an important source rock for these hydrocarbons.

2. Geology and stratigraphy

The basement of the Tertiary units on Biga Peninsula is comprised of tectono-stratigraphic units of different origin and age (Figs. 1, 2). These are: (i) Kazdag Group; (ii) Camlica Group (Camlica Metamorphics); (iii) Karakaya Complex; and (iv) Cetmi Ophiolitic Melange [6-10]. In the region, a very thick magmatic sequence (> 2500 m) with various chemical compositions formed in the Eocene-Pliocene interval. The sequence has an interfingering contact with sedimentary rocks in places [11].

In the region, terrestrial deposits also developed with volcanic rocks in the Early-Middle Miocene. These are bituminous shale, claystone with intercalations of coal, siltstone, sandstone and tuff [1, 2]. The Kucukkuyu Formation was deposited during this period in the northern part of the Gulf of Edremit, around Kucukkuyu and north of the Kazdag Massif around Kizilelma on Biga Peninsula. The Lower-Middle Miocene Kucukkuyu Formation [1] starts with a conglomerate level, continues through sandstone-shale alternations, with observed tuff levels above, and ends with sandstone. The bituminous shale of the formation has source rock potential. The formation is divided into three members. The lowest is the Kizilyar Conglomerate, the tuffs are termed the Arikli Tuff, and the upper sandstone forms the Adatepe Sandstone member. The formation is overlain unconformably by the IlyasbaSi Formation [1] (Fig. 3).

In the Upper Miocene-Pliocene, conglomerate, sandstone, shale, lignite and volcano-clastic layers were deposited and reflect fluvial and lacustrine environments. These sediments show lateral and vertical transition to shallow marine sandstone, conglomerate, shale, marl and oolitic limestones [2].

At the end of the Late Miocene in the region, volcanic activity was renewed and alkali basalts crop out along the young faults formed by extensional tectonics [12].

2.1. The Kucukkuyu Formation

Alternating bituminous shale and sandstone crop out extensively around the Gulf of Edremit. Three different members are distinguished on the basis of lithological and stratigraphic characteristics [1]. These are: the Kizilyar Conglomerate, the Arikli Tuff and the Adatepe Sandstone.

The Kizilyar Conglomerate consists of reddish, weakly cemented conglomerate and sandstone. The conglomerate is reddish, dark purplish-red and purple coloured, well rounded but poorly sorted and consists of andesite, chert, alkaline lava pebbles and coarse-grained sandstone layers around Kizilyar village (Fig. 4a). The age of the conglomerate is Early Miocene [1, 2, 4]. The depositional environment of the unit was braided-river and/or steeply dipping alluvial fan [13]. Lateral thickness change and geometry of the unit reflect sedimentation of fan sediments in a section near Kizilyar village. Sedimentation conditions and lithological properties of the conglomerate indicate that the formation formed in a fault-controlled basin.

Volcanics (Doyran Volcanics) and volcaniclastics with terrestrial conglomerates (Kizilyar Conglomerate) occur in the lower part of the formation. Above this, the main facies consist of shale, siltstone and sandstone intercalations (Fig. 4b). The shale is greenish-brownish grey, dark grey and black in organic-rich levels and shows thin bedding, laminations, spheroidal weathering and paper shale features. Slump structures, synsedimentary faults and folds are frequently observed in the unit. Tuff and sandstone content (Ankli Tuff and Adatepe Sandstone members) increases through the middle-upper parts of the formation.

The Arikli Tuff is white-beige in colour on a fresh surface and yellow-brownish on weathered surfaces. It is thick-bedded, massive and quite hard in unweathered areas (Fig. 4c) The tuff also contains thick-medium bedded tuffite levels. In the thin section it consists of fine grained components and has vitric tuff characteristics. Quartz-plagioclase minerals and ferrous alteration are observed.

The Adatepe Sandstone occurs in the upper level of the formation (Fig. 4d). It crops out in a restricted area in the synclinal structure to the north of Kucukkuyu near Adatepe village. The unit starts with sandstone-shale alternation at lower levels, passing up to sandstone with pebbles. The dominant lithology is tuffite and carbonate-cemented sandstone.

Coal plant fragments, thin coal levels and pyrite crystals are observed in the formation. Synsedimentary and syntectonic structures are also widely observed. Synsedimentary structures include planar parallel stratification, lamination, grading, spheroidal sandstone-siltstone nodules, ripple marks, slump structures (Fig. 4e) and mud dykes (Fig. 4f).

The stratigraphy of the formation is shown in four detailed lithological columns established from key areas (Fig. 2/ I, II, III, IV section locations). These are the Arikli section (Fig. 2/ I, Fig. 5a), the Yesilyurt section (Fig. 2/ II, Fig. 5b), the Adatepe section (Fig.2/ III, Fig. 5c) and the Kizilelma section (Fig. 2/ IV). The Arikli section of the formation along the road south of Arikli village to Nusratli village represents the lower part of the formation. The formation starts with polygenic conglomerate and ends with tuffs (Arikli Tuff). The sequence in the area consists of alternating claystone, siltstone and sandstone. The sandstone with pebbles reach 2 m in thickness; sandstone, limestone, coarse sandstone-conglomerate reaching 1 m in thickness are present in the section. Chert nodules in the bottom levels, and synsedimentary mud dykes and slumps in the upper levels are observed.

The Yesilyurt section represents the middle part of the formation. It starts with alternating sandstone-shale at the entrance of Yesilyurt village. Sandstone interbeds reach 40-50 cm in thickness, shale with carbonated sandstone nodules is observed, continuing to sandstone-shale alternations, and ending with carbonated claystone, siltstone and sandstone. Shale in the section is dark grey-black coloured.

The Adatepe section measured along the Kucukkuyu-Adatepe road represents the upper part of the formation. The main rock type is alternating sandstone-shale. The upper part (around Adatepe village) of the section consists of coarse-grained sandstone and conglomeratic sandstone (Adatepe Sandstone). Claystone reaching 10 m in thickness and sandstone beds reaching 60-70 cm in thickness are observed along the section.

The Kizilelma section, in the northern part of the study area, starts with a loosely cemented conglomerate layer with volcanic blocks above the volcanics and continues through sandstone-conglomerate and sandstone-shale layers. Shale is black, thinly foliated and shows paper shale features. Sandstone-shale alternation is dominant along the section. Limestone (20 cm thick), channel-filling conglomerate (70 cm thick), and sandstone-conglomerate 5 m in thickness are observed in the section. The measured section thickness in this area is 400 m.

The total thickness of the Kucukkuyu Formation was measured average 900 m in sections around Kucukkuyu by Saka [1]. It is stated that in the Gulf of Edremit the formation is more than 900 m thick. In this study the measured thickness of the formation is about 400 m.

The age of the formation is Early Miocene. The first age data came from [14], determining it to be Miocene according to palynomorph associations from bituminous shale. According to the palynomorph group determined by Kesgin [3], the age of the formation is Early-Middle Miocene. Beccaletto [13] dated a biotite grain sampled from a detrital tuffite of the upper member (equivalent to Adatepe Sandstone) of the formation using the [sup.40]Ar/[sup.39]Ar method. Late Eocene age (Priabonian) established by this method is interpreted as the age of volcanism that provided the source rock for detritus at the time of deposition of the upper member [13]. Ciftci et al. [4] determined the age of the formation to be Early-Middle Miocene according to characteristic spores accepted as the index taxon for the Early-Middle Miocene.

3. Material and methods

Twenty-eight outcrop samples of potential source rock were collected from the Kucukkuyu Formation. Rock-Eval pyrolysis, gas chromatography (GC), stable carbon isotope and total sulfur analyses were carried out. Vitrinite reflectance studies were also performed. The analyses were performed at the Research Group Laboratories of Turkish Petroleum Corp. (TPAO). Pyrolysis was carried out using a RockEval-6 device, IFP 160000 (Institut Francais du Petrole) standard Table 1. Five samples for GC were extracted using dichloromethane in a Soxhlet apparatus. Samples prepared from the extract were analysed according to the ASTM D 5307-97 (Reapproved 2002) (e1) method. Carbon isotope analysis (5 samples) used a GV Instruments Isoprime gas chromatography-combustion-isotope ratio mass spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS) apparatus. The results are reported accordingly as [delta][sup.13]C[per thousand] vs. VPDB, calibrated according to international standards in which standard deviation can be accepted at 95% confidence interval (calibrated according to NSG 1 and NSG 2 gas standards).

4. Source rock geochemistry

4.1. Geochemical analysis

The amount of organic matter (OM) can easily be estimated from an organic carbon analysis for total organic carbon (TOC). The quality and maturity of OM can be evaluated using different chemical and optical techniques. Pyrolysis is probably the best routine tool for determining OM type and maturity at the same time [15]. Twenty-eight shale samples were selected to evaluate the hydrocarbon generation potential. The results for these outcrop samples are shown in Table 1. Most of the samples (from Y-1 to Ku-11) are from around Kucukkuyu (Fig. 2a), samples from K3-07 to C1-08 are from around Kizilelma (Fig. 2b).

4.1.1. Amount of OM

The samples were analyzed for TOC content (Table 1). TOC ranges from 0.27 to 7.44 wt% (except for one sample, 57.77 wt%). The values are generally greater than the 0.5 wt% threshold required for clastic source rocks to generate oil [16]. Half of the 28 samples have TOC > 1 wt%. Average values are 1.69 wt% (57.77 wt% outlier removed). So, according to these values the Kucukkuyu Formation is a good source rock. The TOC content of Kucukkuyu samples reaches on average 2.31 wt%, while the Kizilelma samples have an average TOC value of 0.79 wt%. The Kucukkuyu samples are better source rock than the Kizilelma samples. In addition, the Kucukkuyu samples representing the middle level of the formation (especially Y-1, Y-2, Y-4, Y-8) have higher TOC and HI values.

HI values for the Kucukkuyu and Kizilelma samples are different. The HI values of Kucukkuyu samples range from 38 to 900 mg HC/g TOC, whereas those of Kizilelma samples are very low, being between 0 and 5 mg HC/g TOC (Table 1).

4.1.2. Kerogen type

Kerogen can provide essential information on topics such as past environments, climates and biota [17].

Sedimentary rocks contain three types of kerogen. These are: Type I (algal kerogen), Type II (liptinitic kerogen) and Type III (humic kerogen). According to pyrolysis analysis the types can be distinguished on two different plots: hydrogen index (HI) vs. oxygen index (OI) and hydrogen index (HI) vs. [T.sub.max]. Plotting values of HI against those of OI on a van Krevelen-type diagram (Fig. 6) reveals a predominance of Type II and III kerogens. HI values in the range of 0 to 200 mg HC/g TOC represent humic (terrestrial), 200 to 600 mg HC/g TOC mixed (liptinitic) and, 600 to 1000 mg HC/g TOC sapropelic (algal) OM. Most samples (19 of 28) reveal humic (terrestrial) OM and 8 mixed (Type II-III) OM. Type II-III kerogen is oil and gas-prone, so the formation in Biga Peninsula has a potential for producing oil and gas. It is noted that HI values of all of the Kizilelma samples range from 0 to 5 mg HC/g TOC, indicating Type IV kerogen (HI < 50, inertinitic or recycled kerogen) according to Peter and Cassa [18].

4.1.3. OM maturity

The level of maturity can be evaluated from vitrinite reflectance data (Ro, %), Rock-Eval pyrolysis ([T.sub.max]) and biomarker parameters [19, 20]. Ro data and [T.sub.max] values are given in Tables 2 and 1, respectively. Ro values < 0.5% indicate immature OM and values between 0.5 and 2% mature (main zone of oil formation) OM, values in the range of 2-4% over mature OM [19]. For the samples measured the values (except for one) show beginning maturation (Table 2). Based on [T.sub.max] values, 13 samples are early mature (catagenetic stage, 438-453[degrees]C) and 5 are immature (diagenetic stage, 352-431 [degrees]C). Almost all of these samples are from the Kucukkuyu area.

The production index, PI = S1/(S1 + S2), can also be used to determine maturity [16, 18]. Values of PI, for most of the Kucukkuyu samples, are less than 0.1, averaging 0.07 (Table 1), indicating immature. However, the PI of most of the Kizilelma samples is greater than 0.4, averaging 0.59 (Table 1), indicating over mature (18). PI data therefore show that the Kucukkuyu Formation is not sufficiently mature to generate oil and gas in the Kucukkuyu area but is over mature in the Kizilelma area.

4.1.4. Hydrocarbon potential

Potential Yield (PY = S1 + S2) or Genetic Potential is evaluated using the pyrolysis data to determine the hydrocarbon generation potential. PY values of the majority of Kucukkuyu samples suggest good source rock potential. S1 and S2 values of Kizilelma samples are close to zero or zero. Therefore there is no hydrocarbon potential of the samples in this area. In addition, all samples in this area are overmature and their HI values are very low.

4.2. Gas chromatography

According to Didyk et al. [21], low Pr/Ph values (< 1) indicate anoxic conditions, higher values (> 1) oxic conditions and, values between 1.0 and 3.0 point to dysoxic environments. The values are affected by maturation [16].

Pr/Ph values (0.24-1.42) for five samples are shown in Table 3, indicating that two were deposited in an anoxic environment, and three in a suboxic environment. According to carbon preference index (CPI) for n-alkanes, values > 1 indicate terrestrial OM, values around 1 mature oil and values < 1 early mature oil. The values for the samples are between 0.70 and 1.67. The OM is mainly terrestrial and the maturity of the samples ranges from early mature to mature.

4.3. Stable C isotope

The stable carbon isotope compositions are shown in Table 4. Many terrestrial plants have [delta][sup.13]C values in the range of -24 to -34[per thousand]. Meyers [22] points out that marine OM typically has values between -20 and -22[per thousand]. Values for the samples investigated in this work range from -25.37 to -29.26[per thousand]. According to these, the OM is not of marine origin.

5. Total sulfur

The relationship between total sulfur (TS, %) and TOC (%) is used to distinguish oxic-anoxic, and marine-freshwater depositional environments [23, 24]. TS analysis was performed on 15 samples. Results for TOC and TS are shown in Table 5, TOC vs. TS in Figure 7. The C/S (TOC/TS) ratio is used to distinguish freshwater environment from marine environment, marine samples having low (0.5-5) values, while samples deposited in fresh water have high (> 10) values [25]. The values for the samples in this work are generally > 10, indicating that they were deposited in a lacustrine freshwater environment.

6. Discussion and Conclusions

The Kucukkuyu Formation crops out around the Gulf of Edremit in northwest Turkey. The region is shaped by a combination of the Aegean extensional tectonic regime and the strike slip faulting related to the North Anatolian fault system [26]. The Thrace Basin is situated north of, the Prinos Basin northwest of and the Aegean Graben Basin south of the Gulf of Edremit. The geology and hydrocarbon potential of the formation are different from those of Thrace and Prinos basins. The Eocene-Oligocene sequence is the main element in the hydrocarbon system in the Thrace Basin, containing economic oil and gas. The Prinos Basin has the only production field in Greece, where oil and gas have been produced for more than twenty years [27]. The Prinos Basin has a thick Miocene sedimentary sequence; marine claystone of Middle to Upper Miocene age and Messinian claystone deposited under highly reducing conditions interrupted by hypersaline episodes are considered to be the source of the oil in the basin [27]. Tertiary units in the Gulf of Edremit and surrounding areas are important for the hydrocarbon system. The Lower-Middle Miocene Kucukkuyu Formation is widely exposed on the northern Biga Peninsula and the southern part of the Gulf of Edremit and represents a potential source rock in the region. In the northern part of the gulf, on Biga Peninsula, the formation crops out along northern, western and southern parts of the Kazdag Massif and was deposited in a fault controlled lacustrine environment before exhumation of the massif.

It is known that lacustrine sediments with source rock potential exist in western Anatolia, including the Kucukkuyu Formation. The source rock potential is associated with the following Lower(?)-Middle Miocene deposits [5]: the Kucukkuyu Formation in the Edremit Graben [4], the Alasehir Formation in the Gediz Graben [28], the Soma Formation in the Bakircay Graben [29], the Sogukcam Formation in the Buyuk Menderes Graben [30] and the Soke Formation in the Soke Graben [31]. The Neogene sedimentary sequences of these basins are mainly composed of continental clastics with minor carbonates. The thicknesses of the sequences are different, but the main depocenter thicknesses of the Edremit, Gediz, Buyuk Menderes and Denizli grabens are in the range of 1500 to 3000 m [5]. Sedimentation had started by the Early(?) to Middle Miocene with mainly lacustrine deposition [28, 32-35]. These lacustrine basin facies, especially Lower(?) to Middle Miocene units, provide the most important source rock potential [5]. These units are mainly composed of well-bedded and laminated bituminous shale (paper shale) intercalated with intervals of turbiditic sandstone and thin-bedded sandstone-siltstone alternations [4, 5, 12, 28, 29, 34].

Outcrops of the Kucukkuyu Formation show that it is extensively developed in onshore areas. Facies and thickness variation of the formation in the buried areas is interpreted to be more widespread than in the outcrop areas. The Edremit Graben is one of the largest E-W trending grabens of western Anatolia. The graben is asymmetrical. It is about 80 km long and enlarges westward from about 5 km to more than 30 km [12]. The Edremit Graben fill in Edremit-1 well is about 2700 m thick according to seismic data. [3-5]. Volcanic content is significant in Edremit-1, Ayvalik-1, and Foqa-1 in the northern basins of western Anatolia [5]. The Kucukkuyu Formation was not intersected in the Edremit-1 well up to 2700 m. The formation is overlain by Upper Miocene and more recent volcanic-volcaniclastic rocks in the region and is partially hidden beneath the Upper Miocene unit. Because of this, the distribution of the Kucukkuyu Formation must be further investigated. Its depositional environment and relationship with the lacustrine sediments of western Anatolia should be examined. A question related to basin size that needs investigation is whether the Kucukkuyu Formation was deposited in a large lake (or interior sea) or in a small lacustrine basin with limited source rocks.

Source rock analysis of organic rich sediments of the formation on Biga Peninsula provided the following results:

(i) The samples generally have a TOC content of over 0.5 wt% with a mean of 1.69 wt%, indicating that the formation is a good potential source rock. TOC values are different in Kucukkuyu and Kizilelma samples. While the Kucukkuyu samples have quite high TOC values (average 2.31 wt%) which indicate good source rock characteristic, those of Kizilelma samples are considerably lower (average 0.79 wt%), suggesting moderate source rock characteristic. HI values of Kizilelma samples are also very low (0 to 5 mg HC/g TOC).

(ii) The OM of the samples is predominantly gas-prone Type III and to a lesser extent oil-gas prone Type II kerogen. CPI values support the idea that terrestrial OM is dominant. All the Kizilelma samples have very low HI values, therefore these samples have Type IV kerogen containing mainly reworked organic debris having limited gas potential.

(iii) The samples are predominantly early mature according to the measured Ro and [T.sub.max] values. CPI results indicate that the samples are not mature enough for hydrocarbon generation, although values could increase in the buried areas. According to PI data the Kucukkuyu Formation is not sufficiently mature to generate oil and gas in the Kucukkuyu area but is over mature in the Kizilelma area.

(iv) The Kucukkuyu Formation has a good source rock potential for hydrocarbon generation as supported by high values of TOC, HI and potential yield in the Kucukkuyu area. But the formation has no source rock potential in the Kizilelma area. The Kizilelma samples have < 1 wt% TOC values. Hydrocarbon yield and HI values are very low. Also, all samples in this area are overmature.

(v) The Pr/Ph values (0.24-1.42) suggest that the samples were deposited in an anoxic-suboxic environment.

(vi) According to the geological and stratigraphic evolution, and TOC/TS values, the formation was deposited in a lacustrine freshwater environment.

doi: 10.3176/oil.2015.4.03

Acknowledgements

The study was supported financially by the Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University Scientific Research Foundation (COMU-BAP, Project number: 2007/46). Analyses were carried out in the Organic Geochemistry Laboratory, Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO).

REFERENCES

[1.] Saka, K. Geology and Hydrocarbon Possibility of Edremit Gulf and Surroundings of Neogene. Turkish Petroleum Corporation Research Group Technical Archive, unpublished technical report, 1979, Report No. 1341, 17 pp (in Turkish).

[2.] Siyako, M., Burkan, K. A., Okay, A. I. Tertiary geology and hydrocarbon potential of the Biga and Gelibolu Peninsulas. Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 1989, 1, 183-199 (in Turkish with English abstract).

[3.] Kesgin, Y. Tertiary Geology and Sedimentology of the Northeastern Aegean Offshore and Nearshore Regions. PhD Thesis, Ankara University, 2001, 265 pp (in Turkish with English abstract).

[4.] Ciftci, N. B., Temel, R. O., Terzioglu, M. N. Neogene stratigraphy and hydrocarbon system of the region surrounding the Gulf of Edremit, NW Anatolia, Turkey. Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 2004, 16, 81-104 (in Turkish with English abstract).

[5.] Ciftci N. B., Temel, R. O., Iztan, H. Hydrocarbon occurrences in western Anatolian (Aegean) graben basins, Turkey: is there a working petroleum system? Am. Assoc. Petr. B., 2010, 94(12), 1827-1857.

[6.] Bingol, E. Contribution a l'Etude Geologique de la Partie Centrale et Sud-East du Massif de Kazdag (Turquie). These du doctorat, Universite de Nancy, 1968, 189 pp.

[7.] Bingol, E., Akyurek, B., Korkmazer, B. Geology of the Biga Peninsula and some characteristics of the Karakaya Formation. Proceedings of the 50th Anniversary of Turkish Republic Earth Sciences Congress, Mineral Research and Exploration Institute of Turkey Publications, 1975, 70-75 (in Turkish).

[8.] Okay, A. I., Siyako, M., Burkan, K. A. Geology and tectonic evolution of the Biga Peninsula. Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 1990, 2, 83-121 (in Turkish with English abstract).

[9.] Duru, M., Pehlivan, S., Senturk, Y., Yavas, F., Kar, H. New Results on the lithostratigraphy of the Kazdag Massif in northwest Turkey. Turk. J. Earth Sci., 2004, 13, 177-186.

[10.] Sengun, F., Calik, A. Metamorphic features and correlation of the Camlica metamorphics (Biga Peninsula, NW Turkey). Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 2007, 50, 1-16 (in Turkish with English abstract).

[11.] Ercan, T. Geological, archaeological and historical features of Biga and Gallipoli peninsulas with Gokgeada, Tenedos and TavSan islands. Bulletin of the Mineral Research and Exploration, Earth Sciences and Culture Series, 1996, 1, 71 pp (in Turkish).

[12.] Yilmaz, Y., Karacik, Z. Geology of the northern side of the Gulf of Edremit and its tectonic significance for the development of the Aegean grabens. Geodin. Acta, 2001, 14(1-3), 31-43.

[13.] Beccaletto, L. Geology, Correlations and Geodynamic Evolution of the Biga Peninsula (NW Turkey). PhD Thesis, University of Lausanne, 2004, 146 pp.

[14.] Inci, U. The stratigraphy and organic properties of Demirci and Burhaniye bituminous shales. Bulletin of the Geological Congress of Turkey, 1984, 5, 27-40 (in Turkish with English abstract).

[15.] Tissot, B. P., Welte, D. H. Petroleum Formation and Occurrence. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978.

[16.] Tissot, B. P., Welte, D. H. Petroleum Formation and Occurrence, Second revised and enlarged edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984.

[17.] Vandenbroucke, M., Largeau, C. Kerogen origin, evolution and structure. Org. Geochem., 2007, 38, 719-833.

[18.] Peters, K. E., Cassa, M. R. Applied source rock geochemistry. In: The Petroleum System--From Source to Trap (Magoon, L. B., Dow, W. G., eds.), AAPG Memoir, 1994, 60, 93-120.

[19.] Peters, K. H., Moldowan, J. M. The Biomarker Guide. Interpreting Molecular Fossils in Petroleum and Ancient Sediments, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1993.

[20.] Peters, K. E., Walters, C. C., Moldowan, J. M. The Biomarker Guide: Biomarkers and Isotopes in the Environment and Human History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2005, 1155 pp.

[21.] Didyk, B. M., Simoneit, B. R. T., Brassell, S. C., Eglinton, G. Organic geochemical indicators of paleoenvironmental conditions of sedimentation. Nature, 1978, 272, 216-222.

[22.] Meyers, P. A. Preservation of elemental and isotopic source identification of sedimentary organic matter. Chem. Geol., 1994, 114(3-4), 289-302.

[23.] Leventhal, J. S. An interpretation of carbon and sulfur relationships in Black Sea sediments as indicator of environments of deposition. Geochim. Cosmochim. Ac., 1983, 47(1), 133-137.

[24.] Berner, R. A. Sedimentary pyrite formation: an update. Geochim. Cosmochim. Ac., 1984, 48(4), 605-615.

[25.] Berner, R. A., Raiswell, R. C/S method for distinguishing freshwater from marine sedimentary rocks. Geology, 1984, 12(6), 365-368.

[26.] Okay, A. I., Satir, M. Coeval plutonism and metamorphism in a latest Oligocene metamorphic core complex in northwest Turkey. Geolog. Mag., 2000, 137(5), 495-516.

[27.] Proedrou, P., Papaconstantinou, C. M. Prinos Basin--A model for oil exploration. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 2004, 36, 327-333.

[28.] Ciftci, N. B., Bozkurt, E. Evolution of the Miocene sedimentary fill of the Gediz graben, SW Turkey. Sediment. Geol., 2009, 216(3-4), 49-79.

[29.] Yilmaz, Y, Geng, S. C., Gurer, O. F., Bozcu, M., Yilmaz, K., Karacik, Z., Altunkaynak, S., Elmas, A. When did the western Anatolian grabens begin to develop? In: Tectonics and Magmatism in Turkey and Surrounding Area (Bozkurt, E, Winchester, J. A., Piper, J. D. A., eds.), Geological Society of London Special Publication, 2000, 173, 353-384.

[30.] Yazman, M. K., Copur, S., Ozdemir, I., Iztan, Y. H., Sayili, A., Bati, Z. Geology, Oil Possibilities of Buyuk Menderes Graben (Germencik from Denizli) and Nazilli-1 Exploration Well, TPAO (Turkish Petroleum Corporation) Technical Report, 2004, Report No. 4546, 71 pp (in Turkish).

[31.] Gurer, O. F., Bozcu, M., Yilmaz, K., Yilmaz, Y. Neogene basin development around Soke-KuSadasi (western Anatolia) and its bearing on tectonic development of the Aegean region. Geodin. Acta, 2001, 14(1-3), 57-69.

[32.] Iztan, H., Yazman, M. Geology and hydrocarbon potential of the AlaSehir (Manisa) area, western Turkey. In: Proceedings of International Earth Sciences Congress, Aegean Region (Savasgin, M. Y., Eronat, A. H., eds.), 1990, 327-333.

[33.] Seyitoglu, G., Scott, B. C. The age of the Buyuk Menderes graben (west Turkey) and its tectonic implications. Geol. Mag., 1992, 129(2), 239-242.

[34.] Ediger, V. S., Bati, Z., Yazman, M. Paleopalynology of possible hydrocarbon source rocks of the AlaSehir-Turgutlu area in the Gediz graben (western Anatolia). Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 1996, 8, 94-112 (in Turkish with English abstract).

[35.] Purvis, M., Robertson, A. Miocene sedimentary evolution of the NE-SW-trending Selendi and Gordes basins, W Turkey: implications for extensional processes. Sediment. Geol., 2005, 174(1-2), 31-62.

[36.] Okay, A. I., Satir, M. Upper Cretaceous eclogite-facies metamorphic rocks from the Biga Peninsula, Northwest Turkey. Turk. J. Earth Sci., 2000, 9, 47-56.

[37.] Sengun, F., Yigitbas, E., Tung, I. O. Geology and tectonic emplacement of eclogite and blueschists, Biga peninsula, northwest Turkey, Turk. J. Earth Sci., 2011, 20, 273-285.

[38.] Okay, A. I., Siyako, M., Burkan, K. A. Geology and Tectonic Evolution of the Biga Peninsula. TPAO (Turkish Petroleum Corporation) technical report, 1990. Report No. 2746, 107 pp (in Turkish).

[39.] Espitalie, J., Deroo, G., Marquis, F. La pyrolyse Rock-Eval et ses applications. Rev. I. Fr. Petrol., 1985, 40(5), 563-579; 40(6), 755-784.

Presented by A. Soesoo

Received September 9, 2014

AYSE BOZCU *

Department of Geological Engineering, Engineering Faculty, Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Terzioglu Campus, 17100 Canakkale, Turkey

* Corresponding author: e-mail abozcu@comu.edu.tr

Table 1. Rock-Eval pyrolysis results for Kucukkuyu Formation samples

Sample   TOC (a)   [S.sub.1]   [S.sub.2]   [S.sub.3]   [T.sub.max]
                      (b)         (c)         (d)          (e)

Y-1       4.18       0.26        11.8        1.89          438
Y-2       2.08       0.42        11.4        1.39          439
Y-4        1.7        0.2         9.6        1.22          440
Y-8       1.55       0.19        6.47        1.08          423
U-1       7.44       0.67         67         1.12          443
U2-07     57.77      1.79        58.4        19.68         442
A2-07     0.93       0.23        1.63        1.03          445
A4-07     1.54       1.07        2.74        0.73          443
N-6       1.04       0.01        1.57        0.93          440
B-1       3.91       0.28        15.8        2.21          431
B-2       0.27       0.02        0.11        0.58          414
Ku-07     0.98       0.82        4.98        0.88          438
Ku-2      2.43       0.17        5.36        1.47          440
Ku-5       6.1       0.24        33.8        1.83          438
Ku-6      0.56       0.01        0.21        0.74          450
Ku-10     0.97       0.12        0.52        0.43          453
Ku-11     1.34       0.16        1.14        1.00          448
K3-07      0.5       0.02          0         0.45          352
K1-08     0.83       0.02        0.01        0.25          --
K2-08     1.56       0.03        0.03        0.87          --
K5-08     0.98       0.01        0.03        1.11          --
K11-08    0.75       0.01        0.01        0.82          --
K12-08    0.87       0.02        0.04        0.78          --
K14-08     0.8       0.01        0.02        1.17          --
O-07      0.28       0.01          0         0.43          411
O1-08     0.48       0.02        0.01        0.41          --
O2-08     1.17       0.01        0.01        1.35          --
C1-08      0.5       0.01          0         0.76          --

Sample   HI (f)   OI (g)   PI (h)

Y-1       282       45      0.02
Y-2       548       67      0.04
Y-4       565       72      0.02
Y-8       417       70      0.03
U-1       900       15      0.01
U2-07     101       34      0.03
A2-07     175      111      0.12
A4-07     178       47      0.26
N-6       151       89      0.01
B-1       404       57      0.02
B-2        41      215      0.12
Ku-07     508       90      0.14
Ku-2      221       60      0.03
Ku-5      554       30      0.01
Ku-6       38      132      0.06
Ku-10      54       44      0.19
Ku-11      85       75      0.12
K3-07      0        90       1
K1-08      1        30      0.76
K2-08      2        56      0.45
K5-08      3       113      0.28
K11-08     1       109      0.63
K12-08     5        90      0.36
K14-08     2       146      0.36
O-07       0       154       1
O1-08      2        85      0.58
O2-08      1       115      0.56
C1-08      0       152      0.56

Sample   RC (i)    PC,    MINC,
                  % (j)   % (k)

Y-1       3.1     1.08    0.34
Y-2       1.04    1.04    0.14
Y-4       0.84    0.86    0.46
Y-8       0.95     0.6    0.12
U-1       1.68    5.76    0.42
U2-07    51.52    6.25     1.5
A2-07     0.74    0.19    2.73
A4-07     1.2     0.34    0.19
N-6       0.87    0.17    0.06
B-1       2.48    1.43    0.26
B-2       0.24    0.03    0.52
Ku-07     0.47    0.51    2.44
Ku-2      1.91    0.52    0.19
Ku-5      3.18    2.92    0.14
Ku-6      0.51    0.05    0.58
Ku-10     0.9     0.07    0.53
Ku-11     1.2     0.14    0.85
K3-07     0.48    0.02    0.11
K1-08     0.82    0.01      1
K2-08     1.53    0.03    0.25
K5-08     0.94    0.04    0.08
K11-08    0.72    0.03     0.1
K12-08    0.84    0.03    0.35
K14-08    0.76    0.04    0.38
O-07      0.26    0.02     2.9
O1-08     0.47    0.01    1.88
O2-08     1.13    0.04    0.17
C1-08     0.48    0.02    4.82

(a)--total organic carbon, wt%;

(b)--mg HC/g rock;

(c)--mg HC/g rock;

(d)--mg C[O.sub.2]/g rock;

(e)--temp ([degrees]C) of max. hydrocarbon release;

(f)--hydrogen index, 100 x S2/TOC;

(g)--oxygen index, 100 x S3/TOC;

(h)--production index, S1/S1 + S2;

(i)--residual carbon,
TOC - [0.83(S1 + S2)/10];

(j)--pyrolyzed carbon, wt%;

(k)--mineral carbon, wt%

Table 2. Vitrinite reflectance
(Ro%) analyses results for the
Kucukkuyu Formation

Sample   Ro, %

A2-07    0.55
Ku-5     0.50
Ku-10    0.88
U2-07    0.51
K2-08    1.44

Table 3. Gas chromatography results for Kucukkuyu Formation samples

Sample    Pr/Ph   Pr/n-[C.sub.17]   Ph/n-[C.sub.18]   [CPI.sub.25-33]

Y-2       1.13         1.70              1.39              1.67
Ku-11     1.42         0.25              0.16              1.24
B-1       0.24         2.55              11.94             1.04
K1-08     1.23         0.76              0.51              0.70
K11-08    0.24         0.19              0.37              1.20
Average   0.85         1.09              2.87              1.17

Table 4. Stable carbon isotope values
for Kucukkuyu Formation samples

Sample   [delta][sup.13]C

Y-2           -29.26
Ku-11         -27.39
B-1           -26.15
K1-08         -27.95
K11-08        -25.37

Table 5. TOC, TS and TOC/TS values
of the Kufukkuyu Formation

Sample   TOC, %   TS, %   TOC/TS

Y-2       2.08    0.041   50.73
Y-4       1.7     0.12    14.16
Y-8       1.55    0.077   20.12
U-1       7.44    0.95     7.83
A4-07     1.54    0.012   128.33
N-6       1.04    0.026     40
B-1       3.91    0.062   63.06
Ku-07     0.98    0.038   25.78
Ku-2      2.43    0.029   83.79
Ku-5      6.1     0.63     9.68
Ku-10     0.97    0.012   80.83
K3-07     0.5     0.019   26.31
K2-08     1.56    0.034   45.88
K5-08     0.98    0.011   89.09
O2-08     1.17    0.026     45
COPYRIGHT 2015 Estonian Academy Publishers
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Bozcu, Ayse
Publication:Oil Shale
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:7TURK
Date:Dec 1, 2015
Words:6142
Previous Article:Characteristics and comprehensive utilization potential of oil shale of the Yin'e Basin, Inner Mongolia, China.
Next Article:Exploitation and utilization of oil shale in the coal measure strata of the Haishiwan mine, Yaojie coalfield, China.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters