November/December Reservoir 2022

NOV/DEC 2022 • ISSUE 6 • VOL 49

THE MAGAZINE OF CANADIAN ENERGY GEOSCIENTISTS

Reservoir cspg.org

2

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

In This Issue

NOV/DEC 2022

4

Letter from the Editor

25 Two Generations of Trailblazers Meet

6

From the Desk of the AER

26 Go Take A Hike – Guide to Alberta Fossils

8

Petrophysics in the Green Economy – Part 3: Geothermal: Basics and Examples

44 The Blue View: Industry Trends Through Woodmac’s Lens

14 Core Logging Checklist – A High Level Overview

49 Thank You to all the CSPG Sponsors

22 The Evolution of Canstrat

CONFERENCES

UPCOMING EVENTS

PAGE 47

PAGE 48

2023 CORE CONFERENCE SAVE THE DATE

2022 MOUNTJOY CONFERENCE WRAP-UP

PAGES 42

2022 UPCOMING INFORMATION

LICANCABUR VOLCANO, CHILE-BOLIVIA BORDER This dormant volcanic edifice with an elevation of 5,916 m is on the Altiplano in the Central Volcanic Zone. It is related to the subduction of the Nazca Plate beneath the South American Plate. This stratovolcano is composed of pyroxene-bearing andesite flows and pyroclastic deposits. Inside its crater is the one of the world’s highest lakes at 5,826 m. The proximal body of water contains high concentrations of various elements. High winds in this high-altitude region can stir up its sediments and alter the colour of the lake. Photo by: Sherman Hirowatari

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

3

FROM THE EDITOR TOM SNEDDON, PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIST (ALBERTA), PROFESSIONAL GEOSCIENTIST

H

ow can it possibly be November! The Reservoir only comes out every 2 months, although the time seems to scream by, and the deadline once more has arrived. 2022 saw the return of face-to-face events that kept us all busy. We also saw a goodly number of articles arrive from first-time authors through our familiar crowd of faithful contributors. You may have heard the rumour that your humble Editor has decided to pass the baton to a new scribe as soon as one has been identified. If you would like to pick up the ball, please contact Kiersten Mohr, your Publications Director or Britney Teng, through the CSPG Office. I managed to over-commit myself and the choice of commitment was not an easy one. I hope to see you at the Technical Division Holiday Social! The November/December Edition of The Reservoir is really packed for your reading pleasure. Our call for manuscripts was heard. We lead off with the regular AER Staff column proclaiming, “A Bright Future for Bitumen in Alberta”, which proclamation we all agree with. We are also proud to present Part 3 of Ross Crain’s series on the role of petrophysics in the new economy, entitled “Geothermal: Basics and Examples. Geothermal energy resources are little known outside of our two active volcanic provinces, however there are plenty of opportunities available. As a country, we need to get on it and Ross tells us how to evaluate those opportunities with the aid of petrophysics.

Like what you see? Let the Reservoir Team know, particularly if you would like to contribute articles, photos or videos of what you are up to in the exciting world of Energy Geoscience.

One of our newest contributors is Eva Dravet, P.Geol. Eva has an excellent overview of how to use core logging more effectively and has included a video that demonstrates how to do it yourself. “Core Logging Checklist” is an article many of us could have used at the beginning of our careers to speed the path to expertise in this most fundamental geological activity. We continue our series on the most recent awards to our outstanding members, including the 2022 Patricia J. Lee Trailblazer Award to Jeanine Varney, for her leadership with geothermal resources promotion. Details are in the article. Go Take a Hike follows a different path in this Edition. Howard and Philip provide us with a field manual for identification of both common and extraordinary fossils that are found in sedimentary rocks from all over Canada. Take their work with you on your next hike and wow your companions! Once again, Woodmac instructs us with overarching themes across the oil and gas industry in North America with descriptions of three major plays in Canada and the United States. It’s a good read. Conferences, conferences conferences! We all look forward to the 2023 May Core Conference (see the articles above for improving your skills in advance). Conferences Past are described using the Mountjoy Carbonate Research Conference III from August of 2022 as an example. Like what you see? Let the Reservoir Team know, particularly if you would like to contribute articles, photos or videos of what you are up to in the exciting world of Energy Geoscience. n

Tom Sneddon PUBLICATIONS INFORMATION The RESERVOIR is published 6 times per year by the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists. The purpose of the RESERVOIR is to publicize the Society’s many activities and to promote the geosciences. We look for both technical and non-technical material to publish. The contents of this publication may not be reproduced either in part or in full without the consent of the publisher. No official endorsement or sponsorship by the CSPG is implied for any advertisement, insert, or article that

4

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

appears in the RESERVOIR unless otherwise noted. All submitted materials are reviewed by the editor. We reserve the right to edit all submissions, including letters to the Editor. Submissions must include your name, address, and membership number (if applicable). The material contained in this publication is intended for informational use only. While reasonable care has been taken, authors and the CSPG make no guarantees that any of the equations, schematics, or devices discussed will perform as expected

or that they will give the desired results. Some information contained herein may be inaccurate or may vary from standard measurements. The CSPG expressly disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions, or conduct of any third-party user of information contained in this publication. Under no circumstances shall the CSPG and its officers, directors, employees, and agents be liable for any injury, loss, damage, or expense arising in any manner whatsoever from the acts, omissions, or conduct of any third-party user.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2022

PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT ELECT

PAST PRESIDENT

FINANCE DIRECTOR

Kelty Latos

Simon Haynes

Neil Watson

Erin Crerar

ConocoPhillips Canada Ltd. president@cspg.org LinkedIn

presidentelect@cspg.org LinkedIn

Enlighten Geoscience Ltd. pastpresident@cspg.org Linkedin

directorfinance@cspg.org Linkedin

FINANCE DIRECTOR ELECT

DIRECTOR

DIRECTOR

DIRECTOR

Kathy Diaz

Nicholas Ayre

Mark Caplan

Shelley Leggitt

Krux Analytics Inc. directorfinanceelect@cspg.org LinkedIn

Rife Resources conferences@cspg.org Linkedin

Prairie Lithium technicaldivisions@cspg.org Linkedin

Kiwetinohk Energy Corp. education@cspg.org Linkedin

DIRECTOR

DIRECTOR

DIRECTOR

Mark Mallamo

Kiersten Mohr

Valentina Vallega

Acquisition Oil Corp. fieldtrips@cspg.org Linkedin

Terra Firma Transition publications@cspg.org LinkedIn

Schlumberger membershipdirector@cspg.org Linkedin

OFFICE CONTACTS

CSPG OFFICE #150, 540 - 5th Ave SW Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 0M2 Tel: 403-264-5610 | www.cspg.org

MEMBERSHIP INQUIRIES Tel: 403-264-5610 Email: membership@cspg.org

CONFERENCE INQUIRIES Shaelyn Brown Tel: 403-513-1238 Email: shaelyn.brown@cspg.org

ADVERTISING INQUIRIES Britney Tang Tel: 403-513-1230 Email: britney.tang@cspg.org

MANAGING DIRECTOR Emma MacPherson Tel: 403-513-1230 Email: emma.macpherson@cspg.org

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

5

From the Desk of the AER Tiffany Playter, Ph.D., P.Geo.

A Bright Future for Bitumen in Alberta

FIGURE 1 Members of the project team with fieldtrip guide, Prof. Murray Gingras (UofA). In the background is the Amphitheatre outcrop section. Estuarine sand deposits comprise the base of the outcrop. An infilled fluvial channel is visible in the middle of the outcrop, behind the participants.

In support of accurate resource-in-place estimation, the Alberta Geological Survey (AGS) initiated a project in 2021 to update our maps for the oil sands in the Athabasca region of northeastern Alberta. The project is focused on the McMurray Formation and overlying Wabiskaw Member of the Clearwater Formation, as these maps in ST-98, published annually by the AER, were last updated in 2004. This work will generate current maps that incorporate our latest understanding of the McMurray Formation sequence stratigraphy and controls on its depositional system, such as karst at the sub-Cretaceous unconformity.

As part of the project, members of the team recently participated in a fieldtrip to Ft. McMurray where they visited outcrops of the McMurray Formation and toured CNRL’s Horizon mine (Figure 1). An outcrop of particular interest was the Amphitheatre outcrop (Figure 1 and 2). This outcrop displays cross bedded, bioturbated estuarine sand crosscut by a fluvial channel (Wightman and Pemberton, 1997). The channel is filled with vertical accretion channel fill. The upper part of

6

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

the succussion consists of brackish bay sediments overlain by tidal channel deposits. These sediments reflect the transgression of the Boreal Sea from the north during McMurray deposition (Wightman and Pemberton, 1997). Visiting outcrop helped to put into context core that was viewed at the Core Research Center in Calgary during a core seminar that

preceded the field trip. This core displayed many of the typical McMurray Formation facies such as inclined heterolithic stratification (IHS). The seminar highlighted pay intervals within the McMurray Formation and how stratigraphically complex the formation can be. The knowledge gained during the seminar and fieldtrip will be used to inform our stratigraphic mapping. In addition to stratigraphic complexity, structural elements are also being considered by the project team. At the first order, McMurray deposition was influence by sedimentation from the Canadian Shield, the Cordilleran orogen and the Appalachian Mountains in eastern North America (Benyon et al., 2014). On a more local scale, Devonian salt dissolution created an escarpment, roughly trending north-south, which influenced the location of the main paleovalley in which McMurray deposition took place (Broughton 2013; Hauck et al, 2017). Karst landscape also included small scale collapse structures that locally influenced the depositional system (Broughton, 2013). Another source of information the project team is utilizing are annual performance reports submitted by in-situ oil sands operators under Directive 54. These reports provide detailed information related to structure and stratigraphy at the project scale. Additionally, pay definitions are included, which is especially useful. It is very informative to note how the pay definitions change from year to year within the reports, depending on economics, recovery methods, etc. For determining resource-in-place estimates, a multiscenario petrophysical approach is being evaluated. One of the benefits of using a multiscenario approach is the ability to quantify the uncertainty related to selecting different petrophysical cutoff values. This approach allows for multiple possible bitumen maps, constrained by our understanding of the depositional system, to be generated simultaneously. An automated approach should allow for the relatively quick addition of data from new wells in the future.

REFERENCES Benyon, C., Leier, A., Leckie, D.A., Webb, A., Hubbard, S.M., and Gehrels, G. 2014. Provenance of the Cretaceous Athabasca oil sands, Canada: implications for continental-scale sediment transport. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 84, p. 136-143. Broughton, P.L. 2013. Devonian salt dissolution-collapse breccias flooring the Cretaceous Athabasca oil sands deposit and development of lower McMurray Formation sinkholes, northern Alberta Basin, Western Canada. Sedimentary Geology, 283, p. 57-82. Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Report 2003-A: EUB Athabasca Wabiskaw-McMurray Regional Geological Study. 2003. 195 p. Hein, Frances J., Graham Dolby, and Brent Fairgrieve, 2013. A regional geological framework for the Athabasca oil sands, northeastern Alberta, Canada, in F.J. Hein, D. Leckie, S. Larter, and J.R. Suter, eds., Heavy-oil and oil-sand petroleum systems in Alberta and beyond: AAPG Studies in Geology, 64, p. 207-250. Hauck, T.E., Peterson, J.T., Hathway, B., Grobe, M., and MacCormack, K. 2017. New insights from regional-scale mapping and modelling of the Paleozoic succession in northeast Alberta: Paleogeography, evaporite dissolution, and controls on Cretaceous depositional patterns on the sub-Cretaceous unconformity. Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, 65, p. 87-114. Wightman, D.M., and Pemberton, S.G. 1997. The Lower Cretaceous (Aptian) McMurray Formation: an overview of the Fort McMurray area, northwestern, Alberta, in S.G. Pemberton and D.P. James, eds., Petroleum Geology of the Cretaceous Mannville Group, Western Canada: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 18, p. 312-344.

FIGURE 2 The view overlooking the Amphitheatre outcrop. Quaternary deposits, including a small channel, overlie the Cretaceous McMurray deposits.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

7

Petrophysics in the Green Economy

PART 3

GEOTHERMAL: Basics and Examples E.R. CRAIN, P.ENG.

INTRODUCTION Geothermal energy is a well established member of the Green Economy using many technical skills borrowed from the oil and gas industry, including drilling, logging, well completions, and of course petrophysics. This article describes basic geothermal concepts and illustrates the petrophysical aspects with extracts from several published case histories.

Geothermal energy has two distinct meanings. One is electrical power generation using medium and high temperature water or steam from wells drilled into the Earth’s subsurface. The virtue of this method is that it produces a constant base load of electricity, while wind, wave, and solar methods offer only intermittent or variable output. The logging tools and petrophysical analysis techniques developed for oilfield work are equally applicable to geothermal exploration and development. The other meaning is the use of low temperature geothermal heat pumps (GHPs) for space heating or water heating applications in homes and small industrial settings. Such systems involve a continuous loop of plastic pipe buried about 2 feet below the frost line in an area beside the building to be heated. A pump and heat exchanger are connected to the pipe and a fluid is circulated through the system. Most internet searches will pop up dozens of

8

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

webpages offering to sell and install these systems for your home or business. GHPs are of no direct interest to petrophysicists. Geothermal power projects are classified “High Temperature”, above 150 degrees C and up to 260 C or more OR “Medium Temperature”, below 150 degrees C and down to about 60 C. The high temperature systems drive steam turbines directly; medium temperature systems use a heat exchanger and a secondary fluid with a low boiling point to drive the turbine. High temperatures are found near volcanoes, dormant or not, and the lower values in the deeper portions of sedimentary basins. High temperature systems come in two flavours: dry steam plants, which directly use geothermal steam to turn turbines, and flash steam plants, which pull deep, high-pressure hot water into lower-pressure tanks and use the resulting flashed steam to drive turbines back into the reservoir.

TABLE 1 - UNITS CONVERSIONS

FIGURE 1: Schematic diagram of geothermal energy system. The “hot rock” portion, shown in red, could be porous, permeable, and fractured, making a conventional geothermal reservoir. Or it could be tight and un-fractured -- subsequent drilling of horizontal wells and hydraulic stimulation could be used to exploit this type of unconventional geothermal reservoir. (USGS image)

Geothermal reservoirs are described as “Conventional” when they are hot, wet, porous, permeable, often fractured, OR «Unconventional” when they are hot, dry, non-porous, non-permeable, no natural fractures.

Systems (EGS) or “hot, dry rock” reservoirs. They require hydraulic fracturing and horizontal wells to obtain a flow path through which water can be circulated in a closed loop.

Conventional geothermal reservoirs are exploited by producing hot water or steam from the reservoir and disposing of the spent steam to the atmosphere or condensing and injecting it back to the reservoir. Typical oilfield practices are used to enhance production, such as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal wells, provided the temperature does not exceed the limits of available technology.

To add more complexity, it should be possible to extract lithium from the natural brines in conventional geothermal reservoirs as they pass through the plumbing before or after passing through the turbines.

Unconventional geothermal reservoirs are often called Enhanced (or Engineered) Geothermal

The heat generation in a geothermal reservoir comes from proximity to plutonic rock or the continuously supplied by radioactive decay in or below the reservoir. The properties of heat and heat transfer are not usually part of a petrophysicist’s lexicon. The table above covers some of the basic terms and units of measurement. Source: GSC Open File 5906 Heat content is expressed in uW/m3 (microWatts per cubic meter). Normal values range from undetectable to 10 uW/m3. A single geothermal well-pair can produce a few to more than 10 megaWatts of power. That’s enough to cover the base load electricity demand of about 1000 homes without creating any significant greenhouse gases (GHGs). A project to service a city would be a major undertaking. But a good number of larger units using medium temperature sedimentary reservoirs combined with wind and solar would go a long way to reduce GHGs.

FIGURE 2: About 70% of known geothermal reservoirs are below the 150C temperature limit for conventional logging tools; most are below the 260C limit for hostile environment tools. (red = magmatic, blue = non-magmatic reservoirs). The Geysers geothermal system in California reaches 656F (346C). (USGS image)

Capital costs for conventional geothermal are about twice that of a similar gas fired plant. Drilling accounts for over half the costs, and exploration of deep resources entails significant risks. A typical well-pair can support 4.5 megawatts (MW) of electricity generation and costs about $10 million to drill. In total, electrical station construction and well drilling costs $2 – 5 million per MW of electrical capacity, while the energy cost is $0.04 – 0.10 per kW·h. Enhanced geothermal systems are on the high side of these

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

9

FIGURE 3: Geothermal map of Canada. Red colours show areas where hot water or hot rock reservoirs may be present. Blue indicates warm water possibilities. (GSC image)

ranges, with capital costs above $4 million per MW and costs above $0.054 per kW·h in 2007 dollars.

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY IN CANADA The largest conventional geothermal power resources in Canada are located in British Columbia, Yukon, and Alberta. These regions also contain potential for Enhanced Geothermal Systems. The most advanced project exists as a test geothermal site in the Meager Mountain-Pebble Creek area of British Columbia, where some exploration wells reached 240 - 260C at depths between 400 to 800 meters. Other wells had much lower temperatures. Three directional wells were then drilled in the hotter areas. Each well was estimated to be capable of producing 4 to 9 MWe, but there has been no attempt at commercial production. In 2021, two medium-temperature pilot projects were announced, one in northwest Alberta, the other in southeast Saskatchewan. Both would be binary systems, using 110C (+/-) source water in sedimentary rocks. To date (2022) there is no commercial geothermal electricity in Canada. A good reference for the Canadian scene is “Review of National Geothermal Energy Program Phase 2 – Geothermal Potential of the Cordillera”, by A. Jessop, 2008, GSC Open File 5906.

stability, stress regime, and elastic moduli are typical results that can be calculated from well logs, time lapse temperature logs are used to estimate stabilized geothermal well temperature. Casing and cement integrity logs ensure safe and permanent well completions. Standard oilfield logging tools can survive 300F (180C) for short periods and hostile environment logging tools are good to 500F (260C). Such tools have been available since 1981 (but the USGS website about logging geothermal wells seems to be unaware of this). Resistivity and porosity logs are available for the high temperature range, but some specialty logs, such as acoustic and resistivity imaging, may not reach 500F yet. Technology is always on the move, so check with service companies for current availability. Purpose-built tools have also been used and logs of these may be found in project files. There are numerous problems associated with petrophysical analysis of logs for any purpose, and geothermal wells are no exception. Poor borehole condition, high temperature, and unusual lithology are well known issues, even in the oil and gas industry.

LOG ANALYSIS IN GEOTHERMAL WELLS

Unfortunately, a DOE report written in 1979, based on the logging technology of the early 1970’s, is still widely distributed and still believed even by USGS professionals. See “Geothermal Well Log Interpretation Midterm Report” by S.K. Sanyal, L.E. Wells, R.E. Bickham, 1979, LA-7693-MS Informal Report UC-66e. Sadly, the SPWLA Geothermal Log Interpretation Handbook dates from 1982 so it too is not much help to 21st century petrophysicists.

Well logging to assess reservoir properties of geothermal prospects is possible in most cases. Lithology, porosity, permeability, fracture intensity, temperature, borehole shape and

Most 1970’s era complaints have long been resolved over the 45 years since the logs reported upon were run. Modern computer software, digital logging tools, new understanding of multi-mineral

10 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

models, better knowledge of tool responses, realistic estimates of measurement accuracy, higher temperature and pressure ratings, statistically based calibration to ground truth, and 45 years of published works from 1000’s of practitioners have solved a lot of the uncertainty concerns.

FIGURE 4: Resistivity image log in a fractured granite, with true dip and direction on right side of the log

To perform a competent petrophysical analysis in a geothermal well, as for any well, we need a good set of digitized well logs, sample descriptions, core data (if any), and some basic well location and directional information. We can then use the standard deterministic or probabilistic models. You will need some skill with complex lithology, fractured reservoir models, and possibly igneous and metamorphic reservoir analysis. The minimum log suite would include resistivity, shear and compressional sonic, neutron, density, photoelectric, spectral gamma ray, caliper, acoustic and/or resistivity image logs, where temperature limitations can be met. A temperature profile and some time lapse bottom hole temperatures are essential. If the well can flow, spinner surveys can be run to assess flow rates. Deliverables expected are rock mineralogy, porosity, water resistivity, matrix permeability, fracture intensity, fracture aperture, fracture porosity, fracture orientation and dip angle, and rock mechanical properties, such as shear and bulk modulus, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and Biot’s constant. Since logs respond only to minerals, the initial log analysis model will generate the mineral composition of igneous rocks (eg. quartz, feldspar, mica, etc. and not generic rock types such as granite or diorite). If needed, the minerals can be composed into rock types for comparison to sample descriptions.

Once mineralogy, porosity, and temperature are known, rock properties pertinent to the geothermal industry can be derived. Thermal conductivity, specific heat capacity, volumetric heat capacity, isobaric enthalpy change, and diffusivity are derived from empirical curve fits to measured rock property data published in the literature. From these results and the reservoir volume, a complete assessment of its potential as an economic energy source can be made. These calculations are best performed by experts in geothermal energy and are probably beyond the scope of petrophysical practice.

FIGURE 5: Fractured granite example: raw data curves in Tracks 1, 2, and 3 with effective porosity, water saturation, and matrix permeability in Tracks 4, 5, and 6. The mineral model calculated from the log analysis is in Track 7 and the rock type model calculated from the minerals using a ternary diagram is in Track 8. Basalt was triggered from high density or high PE or both. This is an oilfield example in a deep, hot pluton.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

11

FIGURE 6: Fracture frequency, aperture, and porosity log in a fractured granite reservoir derived from a resistivity image log. The most accurate method is based on the measured resistivity curves on the image log. The pixel count method is much less accurate because of borehole erosion and breakouts.

FIGURE 7: Temperature logs from a Canadian geothermal prospect in the Rocky Mountains of BC. (GSC image)”

FIGURE 8: Comparison of acoustic image log and resistivity image log in a geothermal well. (a) BHTV amplitude image, (b) BHTV travel time image, (c) FMS resistivity image, (d) sketch of fractures, (e) fracture orientation, (f) core image. Dark colours are fractures or borehole breakouts, light colours are unaltered rock. Direction scale at top of each log is N - E - S - W - N.

FIGURE 9: Synthetic and processed logs based on BHTV and FMS logs to quantify fracture intensity in a geothermal reservoir.

12 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

LOGGING EXAMPLES IN GEOTHERMAL WELLS EXAMPLE 1: Temperature Logs From Meager Mountain, BC From: “Review of National Geothermal Energy Program Phase 2 – Geothermal Potential of the Cordillera”, by A. Jessop, 2008, GSC Open File 5906. EXAMPLE 2: Fracture identification at Coso, CA From “Comparison Of Acoustic And Electrical Image Logs From The Coso Geothermal Field, Ca” by Nicholas C. Davatzes and Steve Hickman, USGS, 2005. See Figures 8 and Figure 9 (page 14) EXAMPLE 3: Spinner Survey, Geysers Field, CA From: “Well Logging In Hostile Environments - A Status Report”, by E. Frost and W.H. Fertl, CWLS, 1985 See figure 10

FIGURE 10: Gamma ray, caliper, spinner, temperature, and long spaced density (full bore, counts per second) logs in a Geysers well in California, 1985. Temperature is above 485’F.

REFERENCES As noted in captions to illustrations

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

13

CORE LOGGING CHECKLIST – A High Level Overview By: Eva Drivet (M.Sc. P.Geol., Drivet Geological Consulting Ltd.) eva@drivetgeologicalconsulting.com www.carbonates.ca

The petroleum industry and academia have experienced a grueling 7 years: a commodity price downturn starting in late 2014, the COVID lock down in 2020 that forced core facilities to shut down for months at a time, and ongoing difficulties with traveling to out of province and out of country core labs just to name a few. All of this has negatively impacted our ability and available funding to examine cores for the past several years. Recently, there have also been exciting changes in our industry, including the rebranding of the CSPG from petroleumfocused to encompassing all “Energy Geosciences”. In doing so, the CSPG recognizes the on-going transition in our efforts as Canadian Geoscientists; continued focus on hydrocarbons, with an expanding scope to include carbon capture, characterizing reservoirs for water disposal projects, helium exploration, and generating green energy opportunities in the lithium and geothermal spaces.

FIGURE

Today’s geoscientists are utilizing new tools such as artificial intelligence, data analytics, and advanced software for 3D reservoir modelling. At the heart of it all, one cannot lose sight of the importance and value of “understanding the rocks”, preferably at the very beginning of a project, to establish a solid foundation that will frame and establish the key controls on reservoir quality. There are many reasons to incorporate core description in the workflow, including but not limited to: calibrating the information from cores back to logs, the characterization of aquifers and seals, establishing the stratigraphic framework and its depositional setting, recognizing diagenetic and reservoir facies (Figure 1) and how these all relate back to petrophysical logs (Figure 2) and other data sets such as seismic - all key aspects in predicting reservoir quality (Figure 1). When looking back at my career, from the 1990’s to the 2020’s, “understanding the rocks”, including outcrop, core and cuttings,

1

This illustration highlights the complexities associated with predicting reservoir quality, and incorporates key aspects that need to be considered when characterizing carbonate reservoirs (Modified after Figure 2B (carbonates) in Morad, Ketzerand De Ros, 2012). Whether one is exploring for petroleum, geothermal or lithium resources, or working a CCUS project or water disposal project in carbonates, the bottom line is the same: reservoir quality and prediction – to get to that, one must take into consideration and understand a complex set of attributes. Core examinations and descriptions assist with three main ones (highlighted by the red circles): 1) depositional environment, 2) diagenesis and 3) establishing the stratigraphic framework. These can be related from cores, back to logs (Figure 2). Similar considerations apply to clastic rocks –provenance and source of sediments are additional aspects that can be deducted from looking at clastic cores.

14 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

has remained an essential first step, in that it constrains key geological controls on reservoir quality prediction (Figure 1). This article is a high level overview on the methodology of core description, whether one is looking at a small- or large-scale development projects, water disposal, defining regional exploration fairways, or building 3D reservoir models. This CORE LOGGING CHECKLIST is intended as a guide for geologists new to describing sedimentary core and is a handy checklist and reminder for experienced geologists. A 20-minute overview YouTube video on this topic supplements this summary (Free Videos | Carbonates.ca), filmed and produced by David Hills). I hope you will find the information below useful for both carbonates and clastics. While it is tailored towards conventional lithologies, these pointers can be used in unconventional reservoirs as well.

CORE DESCRIPTIONS – TWO MAIN STEPS: There are two main steps to core descriptions: 1

Preparation - Logistical and ` mechanical steps: a. making sure all equipment is gathered (see list in article below). b. core boxes are in the right order and proper orientation (“way up” is consistent) c. calibrating core depth to log depths d. routine core analyses data (if available) are vetted e. photographs are taken as needed

2

FIGURE

Physical logging of core: Noting geological and sedimentological data in a descriptive logging sheet format (paper or software; examples in Figure 3). This step can be “fit

2

for purpose” to address specific questions for your project – for example - the level of detail would be different for a reservoir modelling field study versus a basin-wide regional mapping effort. The core descriptions may include (but is not limited to): a. b. c.

d. e. f. g.

identification of main units (e.g. depositional, diagenetic) lithologies key surfaces, some of which may assist building a stratigraphic framework when integrated with the mapping effort using petrophysical logs rock texture fossils types of bioturbation and bioturbation index pore types

h. i. j. k. l. m.

sedimentary structures fractures diagenetic phases and textures estimated porosity net reservoir and net pay thickness as it applies collect samples, as required e.g. thin sections, routine core analyses and special core analyses, source rock data

This second step represents the challenging aspect of core descriptions. It gets easier with proper mentorship, and experience in examining cores from various formations and units. This article focuses on Step 1 (logistical and mechanical steps of core logging), with a high-level overview of some of the components from Step 2.

This montage illustrates the value of integrating thin section petrography to core examinations, and relating back to wireline logs and core analysis data with proper depth calibration. The core photo next to the log, highlights a caliche crust that corresponds to a tight streak on logs. The enhanced-dissolution associated with interparticle (IP) and vuggy (Vg) porosity in the grainstone (red dot and arrow on logs; blue epoxy highlights the porosity in the thin section photomicrograph) correlates with a density/ neutron porosity response, and occurs about 20 cm below the caliche crust seen in cores. These observations assist in better understanding deposition, diagenesis and the controls on reservoir fabrics.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

15

FIGURE

3a

Example of a core logging description for a Devonian Leduc carbonate core, done in 1992 by Drivet for her M.Sc.. Core to log depth calibration was done using intervals rich in green shales in cores, and relating back to gamma spikes on logs. Note how including the date when the cores were described (July 1992) is a useful reference More details and a different perspective would add more insight after 30 years of looking at various other cores.

BEFORE YOU GO: 1.

ASSEMBLE YOUR “FIELD” EQUIPMENT: 2. a) Hand lens b) Your book with all the charts you need (examples in reference list) c) Spray bottle for water d) Measuring tape (feet and meters, ~ 5m long) e) Bucket and brush, sponge f) Acid bottle (10% HCl)– (always store/keep your acid bottle away from camera and microscope equipment. The acid fumes will damage the lenses) g) Clipboard, paper logging forms (or laptop computer if you prefer see Figure 3 for core description examples), ruler, pencil and eraser, calculator h) Sample bags, waterproof marker i) Chalk. You can also use pieces of paper or tacks. j) Camera and scale bar. k) Grain Size card l) Sample trays, probes m) Binocular microscope. n) Reference books (e.g., trace fossils, sed structures, facies models, fossils…)

16 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

ASSEMBLE YOUR SUPPORTING DATA: a) List of core and cored intervals b) Petrophysical logs for each core in original units (to calibrate with core box depth) and perforation intervals marked c) Core gamma and core density log (if available) d) Core analysis (original version from well file is best to note plug numbers). Use the digital version to plot porosity versus permeability data, and porosity/ permeability versus depth for cored interval prior to viewing the core. e) Well ticket (original units) f) Production data g) Key Maps (base map, edge map, structural and isopach map, your preliminary facies map, etc….) h) Cross-sections i) Relevant documents from the well file (e.g. original geological report or core descriptions from the wellsite geologist)

3.

COMPLETE A LITERATURE SEARCH FOR THE REGIONAL CONTEXT (e.g. CSPG Western Canada Sedimentary Basin Atlas) and on type sections to guide you with the stratigraphy, textures, fossils, and other features you will be describing a) Check well files, public literature, internal reports for core descriptions made by others b) Consider ordering Canstrat logs. They are strip logs based on sample (cuttings) descriptions that can help you “fill in the gaps” between cored wells. Click on “log index” at www. canstrat.com. (N.B.: there is commonly a cost associated with this service.) c) Familiarize yourself with the depositional setting for your formation/area of interest established by others (literature, Geological Atlas, internal reports). Stay open minded.

FIGURE

3b

Example of a core logging description for a Jurassic / Cretaceous (Fernie/Ellerslie) cored interval (courtesy of Dr. Brian Zaitlin).

Key point from Figures 3A and 3B is that core descriptions need to be “fit for purpose”. These were done using a combination of graphics and text. In other instances, such as when completing a high-level scoping to confirm stratigraphic tops on logs, one may focus on taking notes in a notebook and directly on their logs. (David Hills has a method where he enters his descriptions directly in an excel spreadsheet that incorporates routine core analysis data for the purpose of reservoir modeling in Petrel).

NOW YOU ARE READY TO DESCRIBE THE CORE: 4.

ORIENT THE CORE: a) Check to make sure you have the correct depth interval, and the correct core location. b) Check that the core boxes are in the correct order. Note core diameter, slabbed versus unslabbed, imperial versus metric units in your descriptions. c) Make sure you know which is the top and bottom of the core - sometimes “saw marks” on the side of slabbed core can help to make sure the cores are ordered consistently – but this is not always reliable as core handlers may sometime switch sides when slabbing. Geopetal textures in carbonate rocks can help confirm the way up (as long as the key geopetal textured intervals are not brecciated or structurally displaced), as can sedimentary structures and burrows in clastics. Each core box should also be marked with “TOP” and “BOTTOM” if you become disoriented. d) Make sure the core within the boxes is ordered properly. Geological contacts and broken surfaces of pieces can be examined (and sometimes re-assembled) to ensure the core interval all fits together -Fractured zones and rubble intervals can be a challenge. e) Metrics of cores recovered: If you are missing core, it’s probably missing from the bottom of the interval but not always (see section 7f below on this topic). Make notes of lost core recovery in your descriptions. Relate full diameter and small plug analyses to the intervals you are describing (this can be done on the core analyses report or in your descriptions). f) If you take a core sample to your binocular microscope, leave an object (e.g. a pen or tape measure) in the core box, so you remember where you removed it from, so it is not misplaced while describing.

5.

FILL OUT THE TOP OF YOUR LOGGING SHEET a) Make sure you fill in the date. Your ideas/observations may change over time and it is useful to know when you described the core. b) Most of the time, log at a scale of 1m/cm or ~ 5 ft/inch]. c) Fill in your depths in original units, starting at the top of the sheet with your shallowest depth (top of the core). Indicate missing core with ‘X’ in the depth column. (Check your core analysis and the documented recovery on the core boxes.) d) Record core and box numbers for future reference and ease of retrieval. e) Note if the core is slabbed, and what the core diameter is.

6.

CORE ANALYSIS CALIBRATION AND VETTING. If core analysis data is available, calibrate your estimated core depth to the core analysis depth: a) It’s best to retrieve the original core analysis data from the original well file or government data (in addition to using the digital one available in your mapping software; Figure 4). It records the original core analysis sample numbers that are also (usually) written on the core and/or box. “Core sample numbers” as shown in the digital core analysis data often do not relate to the number written on the core – they are just sequential data entry numbers entered into the database. b) Note the difference between small plug data points (labelled SP) and full diameter sample data (labelled FD).

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

17

c) Review the original core analysis and well file for a core gamma log (and possibly a core density log), to assist you in calibrating core depth to log depth. This is a crucial piece of data that is too often ignored. d) As you proceed, match your core description depths to the depths recorded in the core analysis (including sample point numbers) and on the core gamma / core density, or the actual depths written on the core boxes by the lab or previous geologists. Note that the cut ends of the full diameter samples will have numbers written on them, sometimes with T for “top”; this will help you with ranking reservoir quality, and with estimating porosity and permeability throughout the core . Correlating your logged depths to the analyzed samples will ensure that your descriptions and core analysis data can be correlated and calibrated to petrophysical data. e) This is also an opportunity to vet the core analysis data, and make sure measurements are reliable. Ask yourself: Are there any induced fractures or other coring artifacts that could have impacted data collection and analysis, such as incomplete cleaning of the cores? If the core is fractured, core permeability readings may be overestimated, and other data (such as drill stem tests) may be integrated to constrain permeability at the reservoir scale. Can you relate the tight/porous zones in the core analysis to what you see in core and wireline logs? Were oil bearing cores cleaned properly? If not, the permeability will be underestimated. f) In some cases, drilling mud may have invaded the core, especially in intervals with high permeability, that may result in lower than actual permeability estimates, and if not properly cleaned, may result in reduced permeability measurements, especially in rush/preliminary core analyses (often annotated with a ‘p’ ahead of the core analysis sample number on the original core analysis report). A microscope is usually needed to make this determination. g) Check your core analysis (you’re calibrating your eye now). What does a 3mD rock look like (e.g. Sneider and King, 1984)? Then similarly check your petrophysical logs. Are the analyses representative of what you are seeing? Or perhaps, the data highlight a reservoir dominated by microporosity, which requires further analyses to better characterize, such as SEM and thin section petrography. 7.

PETROPHYSICAL LOG CALIBRATION. a) Make a note of any depth shift that may occur between core depth and log depth (a mismatch of 1-5m is quite common). b) If you have the core gamma (and possibly a core density) log from the original analysis, compare it to the wireline gamma log (Figure 5). Do the depths match? Remember that the resolution on wireline gamma/density curves are between 2 to 4 feet depending on the tool and logging speed. The core gamma/density curves have significant higher resolution (about 0.20 ft). c) If you don’t have a core gamma, examine your core to see if there is a shale layer, a “cleaning / coarsening up” event, a cemented zone, a coal, or any other distinctive or abrupt lithology changes that can be used to tie back to the wireline gamma ray, resistivity, or porosity logs. Record any difference in the core depth compared to the petrophysical log depth on your logging sheet. It is useful to note “core depth = x, log depth = y” as sometimes it is difficult to remember which way the shift occurred (Figure 5).

18 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

d) The depth shift may vary from one core barrel to the next (e.g., for any given cored well with more than one core barrel taken, core # 1 can be on depth, but core # 2 can have a depth shift when compared to the wireline log – Figure 5). When a well has multiple core barrel runs for a given formation, some runs may vary in thickness (e.g. 9 versus 18 m), and there may be missing core between runs. e) I always describe to core depth, not to log depth, in original units as per core box. Include in the header of your descriptions the core to log depth shift for a reference. f) Missing Core or Rubble - Check to see if each core run has ‘full recovery’. By convention, all missing core is assumed to have been lost from the bottom of the core barrel, for each run (as the assumption is that the core fell out of the core catcher on its way uphole, while the core was being pulled to surface). This is not always a good assumption. Does this make sense for the core? Look for evidence (such as rubble or fractures) that the core has been milled. Refer to the core analysis. It may help you figure out what depth interval is missing core. Drilling tour sheets can also be used to understand why the core is missing (e.g., lost circulation can be indicative of a rubble zone with lots of vugs and/or fractures in carbonates, or a permeable or possibly fractured zone in sandstones). Make note of unusual core features, such as a convex/ rounded surface on the end of a piece of core or a cupped/ concave shape that may indicate “milling” during the coring process or also intervals of rubble. This may indicate an interval of missing core that may help reconcile differences between open hole logs and recovered core. Note that rubble zones may be indicating zones of high porosity that were easily broken up during the coring process. Highly porous rock is easily broken, relative to tightly cemented zones. Rubble may also indicate fractured sections, and if fractures are critical to your study, washing and cleaning the rubble will be essential to assessing features such as slickensides or mineralization along fractures or hydrothermal events. g) Finally, can you match the thickness of shale or sand/clean carbonate units (or other distinctive rock units) in core to the wireline logs?

LOGGING THE CORE 8.

DIVIDE THE CORE INTO BEDS/UNITS. a) This is the trickiest part, and where mentorship and experience help. A combination of criteria can be used to subdivide the core. In general, the more complicated the core, the finer the subdivisions. Start by picking the main lithology or texture changes / contacts; then go back if needed to further subdivide the interval described. The level of detail in the subdivision is tailored to the project and business needs. You may consider dividing lithological units into more categories at the beginning of your examination process, as you always have the option to combine units later (instead of combining too early and missing out on crucial differences). b) Start at the bottom of the core and work your way up to follow the depositional history. Look for “breaks” (see below) and mark them with pieces of paper or tacks. The breaks can be changes in grain size, lithology, trace fossil

assemblag differences, bioturbation index changes, sand/shale ratio shifts, cyclical changes in depositional facies (grainstone to packstone, to mudstone; repeat, etc.), mineralogy, sedimentary structures… When integrated with regional correlation, these subdivisions can be correlated with some depositional facies boundaries, flooding surfaces, and sequence boundaries valuable to establishing a stratigraphic framework. At this point, you’ve already started interpreting. If you’ve done your final core description job well, anyone – or you at a later date – should be able to take your description and re-interpret it. 9.

FIGURE

4

This figure illustrates the value of retrieving original core analysis reports. For example, in 4A) data point at 2331.1’ is labelled as FD24A in core, and as 24A on the original report (highlighted in yellow). On the digital report (4B), the labelling has been changed to 10 in the database, making it more difficult to track in cores. Routine core data from software are useful for cross-plotting porosity versus permeability, and porosity/permeability versus depth before examining the cores.

DESCRIBE THE UNITS: a) For each unit, look at the uppermost “break” you used to define the unit. This is a contact. Is it a lithology change (which may have no meaning from a chronostratigraphic standpoint)? Is it gradational, sharply gradational, abrupt, erosional contact? Can you characterize the surface as representing a flooding surface, or is it an exposure surface? Measure up to it (or check the nearest core analysis #) and check your wireline logs. Draw in the contact on your core logging form at the correct core depth and draw a line across your sheet. Draw the same contact on your wireline logs, using core depth shifted to log depth. b) Fill in the lithology, and the grain size column (clastics) or facies fabric (carbonates). You’ll need to use your hand lens, grain size chart, carbonate/clastic rock classification, and maybe the acid bottle and microscope here. Note bedding/interbedding scale, mineralogic composition (%), sorting, maximum and minimum grain sizes, colour (in carbonates, you may choose to use a colour chart for consistency. If so, make sure core is always dry, or always wet, when you describe color), and any unique texture you notice (e.g. “shale recovery is in poker chips”). This is also a good place to note diagenetic cements, oil staining, and any comments on permeability or porosity (check your core analysis!). (Wash off any acid with water as soon as possible after noting the reaction so you don’t stain the core for others.) Likewise, wait for the bubbling to die down or rinse with water before observing the sample under the microscope or you’ll etch the lens.

10. LOOK FOR SEDIMENTARY STRUCTURES. a) Pick the core up and turn it around. Think about possible depositional processes (currents, waves, tides etc.). Make sure you place it back in the correct location and with the proper orientation. b) Check for trace fossils and body fossils. Note when they are NOT present. Also note size, variety, and abundance (e.g. trace, rare, common, abundant). c) Put remarks in the comments section. Any thoughts, supplementary descriptions, speculations, uncertainties – record them. d) Note - You can have small pieces of core slabbed by the lab personnel for a fee to get a better look at them if necessary. 11. FACIES INTERPRETATION Write something down! It’ll probably change as you go through more core, but you must start thinking about it now. See if your interpreted facies make sense as you move up the core. If there are ‘gaps’ in your depositional environments, could you have a sequence boundary or flooding surface? Ask yourself questions. Is there cyclicity? Look at your well logs – and adjacent logs if you brought a cross section and map. 12. DIAGENESIS AND PARAGENETIC SEQUENCE Note cross-cutting relationships between various diagenetic phases and other features in cores, such as fractures and stylolites. Start

building a paragenetic sequence, based on preliminary core observations. Sampling maybe required pending on project objectives to confirm early interpretations. 13. FRACTURES Differentiate between natural and drilling / coring induced fractures (section 7f). Note size, orientation (vertical, oblique, horizontal), association with other fabrics (e.g., predominant in vuggy intervals and absent in mudstones), termination, whether open or partially/ completely cemented, and density (number of fractures per foot). 14. HYDROCARBON SHOWS Make note of hydrocarbon shows and consider testing for cuts. Analyzed full diameter core or small plugs will have been cleaned by the service company so look at the adjacent, un-cleaned rock to see the stain or other shows (usually dead oil / pyrobitumen in the case of liquids-rich gas zones). Mineralization may also occur in oil/water transition zone, such as abundant pyrite or even dead oil. Use a fluoroscope if hydrocarbon shows

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

19

are important. Refer to the original core analysis report, to determine the length of time that the cores were “cleaned”. Short turnaround times (e.g. 24-48 hours) may indicate that the core has not been fully cleaned and the permeability may be underestimated. Reach out to an experienced geologist in your company to learn how to test for cuts, and some of the limitations (e.g. vintage of cores). 15. PICTURES a) “A picture is worth a thousand words”. Core photography is a very cost-effective way to supplement your descriptions and maintain a library of photos for future references. Take pictures of each cored interval before you box it up, rather than waiting until the end of your project. Dampen the core slightly with a sponge, rather than spraying it liberally with water - the water reflects the flash. b) Make sure the boxes are parallel to the viewport to minimize distortion. c) Use a scale and put labels in the pictures with ‘way up’, core location, core analysis measurements, and depth. (Formation name also helps). d) If you have a microscope with a camera, take a few select photos through the microscope to document particle size, mineralogy, interstitial clays, as well as oil stain or dead oil presence in key zones - This will also help you when comparing cored intervals with drill cuttings. 16. SAMPLING a) The number of samples is dependent on the purpose of your project, your time, and your budget. b) Sampling is done most effectively toward the end of your project when you have some definite questions to address and an idea of the stratigraphic framework. Your sampling strategy can then be geared to the problem. (Mineralogy changes? Reservoir quality? Reservoir engineering / capillary pressure curve data? Correlation, chemostratigraphy etc.). c) Keep track of core analysis numbers, depth and core / box numbers for each sample, to facilitate any future core retrieval for the sampling interval of interest. This will help you relate rock facies/fabric to core analysis data and will ensure your samples are matched with core intervals that have been analyzed for porosity and permeability. If possible, use the original core analysis from well file to determine the correct core analysis number. If core analysis data does not match the core, particularly permeability data, note anything that may be a mechanically induced break in the core that has given spuriously high permeability numbers (refer back to section 6). d) Ask the core facility for permission. DON’T USE A HAMMER! e) Keep in mind that any special sampling (e.g., core plugs) may require permission from the operator for non-operated wells in some jurisdictions. Retrieve material sampling requirements and regulations from your area / province. For example, in Alberta, refer to Core and Drill Cutting Material Sampling | Alberta Energy Regulator (aer.ca). Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and British Columbia would have different sets of regulations. This is also an important consideration when examining cores in other countries.

20 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

17. BEFORE YOU SIGN OFF FROM YOUR CORE TABLE: Consider inviting other members of your team (reservoir engineer, petrophysicist, geophysicist, manager) for a viewing and discussion of pertinent geological observations that need to be integrated with other disciplines. Some examples where this would be of value are integrated geological / engineering reservoir characterization projects, or a project where seismic modeling is a strong component of the assessment, and the geophysicist needs to gain a better appreciation of porosity thickness and heterogeneity.

And remember, “those who look at the most rocks, always WIN!”

FIGURE

5

Four easy steps to calibrate core log to wireline log: 1) Pick a log marker on the Core Gamma Ray log, draw a line on the Core Gamma Ray log, mark the core depth, enter in table; 2) Go to the gamma ray curve from the wireline log, find the same log marker, draw line on the wireline log gamma ray, mark the log depth, enter in table; 3) Calculate the difference, and enter value for Core = Log Depth +/- ; 4) Repeat for each cored interval. Note that core-log depth shift maybe different from one cored interval to another for a given well; it may also vary within one cored interval.

BRIEF HISTORY AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In 2011, Lisa Griffith (MSc., retired clastic sedimentologist; 2008 - CSPG President), encouraged me to join her in teaching a “core description CSPG and industry course” – she covered the clastic portion, and I led the carbonates. Lisa had drafted a “core logging checklist” for the clastic section when she started teaching in-house industry courses around 2001. She shared it with me in 2011 when we taught the course together. I kept updating this document over the years for the carbonate portion of the course, with the latest version above. I thank reviewers Lisa Griffith, Doug Hayden, Mandy Williams, and Brian Zaitlin for helping make improvements to this summary. This checklist has been distributed to participants registered to core workshops taught by me, and with David Hills and Brian Zaitlin. I greatly appreciate the collaborations with David and Brian, and their continued support with teaching courses. The author thanks CNRL for donating two Mississippian cored intervals (one Frobisher and one Alida) for the purpose of teaching, Core Laboratories for sponsoring courses taught by the author with the preparation of thin sections (photomicrograph taken by Drivet), and DigitCore Library Inc. for donating core photos for the purpose of teaching.

EVA DRIVET M.SC., P.GEOL Drivet Geological Consulting Ltd. | www.carbonates.ca Eva has been describing core for 30 years, including Devonian and Mississippian carbonates from Alberta, British Columbia and the Williston basin. She has worked for a variety of companies, from multi-nationals to mid-size companies, and has been managing her own consulting business since 2008. Her portfolio includes generating exploration and development opportunities, reservoir characterization and modelling, water disposal, green energy and international projects. Eva has published several papers on carbonates, and was inspired in 2011 by past CSPG president Lisa Griffith to conduct Industry Carbonate Core Workshops. Along the way, she has had the privilege to teach and mentor many bright young geologists, where she is learning as much as she is teaching. Recently, Eva teamed-up with Brian Zaitlin to offer a CSPG Clastic – Carbonate Core Workshop. She also collaborates with David Hills on industry carbonate core workshops and a virtual library of core displays and lectures showcased at www.carbonates. ca. She is a registered Professional Geologist with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA), an active member of the Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists (CSPG), the Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM) and the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG).

VIDEO TITLE

I express my sincere gratitude to all my mentors and colleagues who have helped me along the way, in my lifelong journey of “understanding the rocks”, be it in the field looking at outcrops, at the core lab, and with petrographic examination. The learning never stops.

TOP REFERENCES SELECTED BY THE AUTHOR FOR CORE EXAMINATION Archie G.E. 1952, Classification of carbonate reservoir rocks and petrophysical considerations, Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Vol. 36, No. 2, p. 278 -298. Bebout DG, Loucks RG (1984) Handbook for logging carbonate rocks. The University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, Handbook 5, 43 pp Blair T. and McPherson J.G., 1999, Grain-size and textural classification of coarse sedimentary particles, Journal of Sedimentary Research, 69 (1) pp 6 – 19. Choquette, P.W. and Pray, L.C. (1970). Geologic nomenclature and classification of porosity in sedimentary carbonates, AAPG Bulletin, v.54, No. 2, p.207 250. Dunham R.J. 1962. Classification of carbonate rocks according to their depositional textures. In W.E. Ham, ed. Classification of Carbonate Rocks – a symposium: Tulsa OK. AAPG Memoir 1 p. 108-121. Folk R.L. 1962 - Spectral subdivision of limestone types, in W. E. Ham, ed., classification of carbonate rocks - a symposium: Tulsa OK, AAPG memoir 1, p. 62-84 Folk, R.L., 1974, Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks: Austin, Hemphill Publishing Company, 182 p. Grover H., Emrich and Wobber F.J., 1963, A rapid visual method for estimating sedimentary parameters, Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp 831-843

James N.P. and Jones B., 2015, Origin of carbonate sedimentary rocks, American Geophysical Union, p. 464. https://www.wiley.com/en-ca/ Origin+of+Carbonate+Sedimentary+Rocks-p-9781118652732 Lucia FJ (1995) Rock fabric / petrophysical classification of carbonate pore space for reservoir characterization AAPG Bull 79, 9: 1275 – 1300 Morad S., Ketzer J.M., De Ros L.F., 2012, Linking diagenesis to sequence stratigraphy: an integrated tool for understanding and predicting reservoir quality distribution, Int. Ass. Sedimentol. Spec. Publ. (45), p. 1-36 Pettijohn F. J., Potter P.E., and Siever R., 1987, Sand and sandstone, 2d ed. Springer-Verlag, New York. Scholle P.A. and Ulmer-Scholle D.S., 2003, A color guide to the petrography of carbonate rocks: grains, textures, porosity, diagenesis, AAPG Memoir 77, 474 p. Sneider, R., M., King, 1984, Integrated rock-log calibration in the Elmworth field – Alberta, Canada: part I: reservoir rock detection and characterization, in Masters, J. A., ed., Elmworth – Case Study of a Deep Basin Gas Field: AAPG Memoir 38, p. 205-214. Terry, D. T., and Chilingar, G. V., 1955, Summary of “Concerning some additional aids in studying sedimentary formations” by M. S. Shvetsov: Jour. Sedimentary Petrology, v. 25, p. 229-234.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

21

THE EVOLUTION OF CANSTRAT

BY ALEKSANDRA PETRUSIC Canadian Stratigraphic Services, commonly known as Canstrat, is proud to have served the North American Oil and Gas industry for the better part of 6 decades. The beginnings of Canstrat can be traced back to the 1950’s when the company was primarily involved with the storage and washing of rock cutting samples recovered from drilling operations. At the time, detailed analysis and description of cuttings was inconsistent and without standardized processes. This resulted in varied and inconsistent output and made interpreting the results somewhat risky. Born out of that situation, Canstrat embarked on a journey to develop a standardized methodology for analyzing cuttings and cores. The initiative was very successful, and has allowed Canstrat to create the gold standard in the industry for lithologic description. We now maintain a dataset of 35,000 wells, containing a rich set of lithologic descriptions of unsurpassed detail. Today, Canstrat works hard to evolve and expand our data library while at the same time improving and modernizing access to the information it holds.

A Canstrat log is a visual and written representation of numerous petrographic properties meticulously analyzed and interpreted by our trained geologists. The format was developed by Canstrat and has become the standard for recording and representing samples. It is taught to well site geologists in a classroom setting to prepare them for their work, and is the trusted source for conveying core and drill cuttings interpretations. For decades Canstrat strip-logs have served to inform interpretations because they are confidently regarded as the next best thing to analyzing a rock sample. The data provides the ability to infer extremely detailed lithology descriptions, clay content as well as porosity and oil staining attributes thus providing our customers logs that they can confidently ground truth their interpretations in. Additionally, the strip-log is excellent in helping to pick difficult formation tops in faulted areas that have been altered by orogenic processes and have resulted in overturned lithologies. Subsequently, the logs are also used to help normalize dated wireline and in turn help deduce what physical properties are affecting doubtful and dated FIGURE 2: HAND SAMPLE ANALYSIS VS, CRUSHED SAMPLE

FIGURE 1: FLUORESCENCE’S THROUGH MICROSCOPE ANALYSIS

22 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

FIGURE 3: EXAMPLE OF A STANDARDIZED, DIGITALLY COLOURED CANSTRAT STRIP-LOG

FIGURE 4: LITHOFACIES MAP BASED ON CANSTRAT DATA

signatures. Due to the expansive nature of the data, Canstrat strip-logs are regulary incorporated in the construction of lithofacies maps that aid in facies mapping and regional studies. In addition to the detailed strip-logs, Canstrat has converted the information that they hold into digital formats to promote their integration into modern workflows. Canstrat codes all recorded petrographic information into distinct lithological intervals. This enables geologists to do rapid single and multi-well analysis. Generating maps and visualization based on our digital proprietary data set has become the most effective way for our clients to identify zones of interest quickly and efficiently. The notion of providing the oil and gas industry with access to the Canstrat data in multiple formats and to make access to the database easy has always been important. In order to continue the evolution, and to take advantage of new technology, we recently recreated the tools with which customers accessed the database. After all, we figured, what’s the use of having a rich and trusted database if finding and accessing the data isn’t easy? The product of this initiative is called LogSource. LogSource integrates and displays depth registered digitally coloured raster images as well as the coded petrographic properties from our database of strip-logs. It is a web- portal that requires no software installation, and is built to easily integrate into GIS software’s, such as Sigma’s SigMAP, allowing for easy mapbased searches which allows users to find the data they need quickly. Subscribers to LogSource have unlimited access to the entire Canstrat database, including its analytical capabilities, and are able to download the data for use in their other interpretation software. It also allows users to use their own interpreted tops.

FIGURE 5: AVERAGE POROSITY OF OIL STAINED INTERVALS OVER GROSS METERS OF OIL SHOW TREND USING CANSTRAT INTERVAL DATA

With the release of LogSource, Canstrat completed our initiative to make our entire database accessible to users and to promote the use of this important datatype in the context of modern tools and interpretation workflows. With the release of LogSource, Canstrat completed out initiative to make our entire database accessible to users and to promote the use of this important datatype in the context of modern tool and interpretation workflows. The resulting step was to take the 15,000 Canadian wells and 20,000 USA wells and embark on a project to create systematic and consistent lithology labels in every well that has wireline log data on the North American continent. The goals being to create regular and constant lithology labels or better known as ‘pseudo-logs’ that would prove to be just as affordable and universal as Canstrat’s original data. Machine learning has become a rapidly growing science recently, potentially

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

23

AS A RESULT OF THESE REVOLUTIONARY PRODUCTS COUPLED WITH THE NEED TO CONSISTENTLY EVOLVE, CANSTRAT HAS PUSHED OUR EXTENSIVE DATABASE, PROCEDURES AND EXPERIENCE INTO THE FUTURE.

FIGURE 6: CANSTRAT CODED INTERVALS FIGURE 7: LOGSOURCE MAIN SEARCH PAGE

FIGURE 8: CAML – CANSTRAT AGILE MACHINE LEARNING TEMPLATE

revolutionizing everything from financial systems to deep space exploration. We trust machine learning algorithms to recommend songs and movies that we might like and to park our cars. It helps us to dictate text messages and call our mothers. So far, however, the impact has not been felt as much in the oil and gas industry – although that is rapidly changing. One of the reasons that impact of machine learning and AI has been somewhat muted in our industry may be the data. In order to learn, computers need consistent and readily available examples to learn from. That is most often not the case when looking at exploration data. Canstrat, however, has made a business out of exactly what computers need – rigorous, consistent, and widely available lithological descriptions (labels in the vernacular of machine learning). So our latest initiative has been to investigate whether machine learning algorithms can be trained to predict lithology from ubiquitous wireline logs. Our latest offering – CAML (Canstrat Agile Machine Learning), in conjunction with the experts at Agile Scientific – has yielded very promising results. The idea of quality inspection of tools before the use of these tools in projects or exploration work is a workflow that needs to become consistent and second nature within the oil and

24 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

gas industry. The idea of creating ‘pseudo-logs’ with standardized Canstrat labels quickly expanded into refining and taming imprecise and extremely variable petrophysical data running unchecked and rampant in the industry. From our ambition of using machine learning to generate accurate and reliable pseudo-logs Canstrat uncovered a need the industry had not directly addressed. With LogSource and CAML, Canstrat has taken innovative steps in an effort to move the oil and gas industry to the next phase. Customer experience and data quality continue to be the core values Canstrat adheres to during this next chapter of existence. Projects and applications continue to be improved and developed based solely on need and necessity as was the case in the very beginnings of Canstrat. As a result of these revolutionary products coupled with the need to consistently evolve, Canstrat has pushed our extensive database, procedures and experience into the future. We are excited by the fact that the valuable information that we offer is now available to a new generation of geoscientists and that we are forging a machine learning based path to providing needed and innovative solutions to the industry for decades to come.

TWO GENERATIONS OF TRAILBLAZERS MEET Recognizing 2021 CSPG Patricia J. Lee Trailblazer Career Achievement Award recipient Jeanine Vany BY MANDY M. WILLIAMS

From L to R: Eva Drivet (award committee member), Jeanine Vany (2021 award winner), Patricia J. Lee (award namesake), and Michael Hrudey (award committee member). PHOTO CREDIT: DAVID HILLS

We may study rocks that are millions of years old, but we geologists are also at the forefront of new ideas and new ways of doing things. Of course, new ideas don’t just pop up every day, and it takes a special person to forge ahead with a new idea, of implementing it and seeing it through – that’s where the CSPG’s newest award comes in – the CSPG Trailblazer Award. Named after Patricia J. Lee, who was instrumental in discovering the 2 TCF Caroline gas field, the Trailblazer Award recognizes individuals or teams who have made significant and recent contributions in the field of energy geosciences. This award was established in 2020, under the support and leadership of CSPG 2019-2020 President, Jen Russel-Houston. Winners must have: 1) a vision, 2) demonstrate innovative technology or ideas, and 3) be collaborative in what they do.

Pictured with Jeanine are, Patricia J. Lee herself, and members of the Patricia J. Lee Award Committee, Michael Hrudey and Eva Drivet. A special thank you is extended to photographer and geologist, David Hills, for capturing the presentation of this award, and the introduction of two generations of trailblazers. The CSPG would like to congratulate Jeanine Vany on her award and invites you to read her full award citation here: LINK

This award recognizes Jeanine’s contributions through her vision of bringing geothermal energy to Western Canada, her innovative ideas around using “old” basins for something “new” Jeanine Vany, 2021 winner, with and for her collaboration across disciplines her custom-designed trophy. and within her team to bring the world’s first PHOTO CREDIT: DAVID HILLS closed-loop geothermal system to fruition. Her work has contributed to a new wave of interest On September 20, 2022, the inaugural winner of the Trailblazer and focus on geothermal resources in our basin, that didn’t exist Award, Jeanine Vany, was presented with her very own custom a decade ago. memento, crafted from travertine, by artist Karen Bradshaw 2022 nominations for the CSPG Patricia J. Lee Trailblazer Award (https://www.she-rock.ca/), at the Jaipur Bridge in Prince’s Island (current chair, Michelle Lund) are now closed. Park, Calgary.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

25

GO TAKE A HIKE

Guide to Alberta Fossils Howard Allen and Philip Benham

M

any of us had a childhood fascination with fossils. For a number of us it led to a career in the geosciences. Many of us retain that fascination and can remember many summer days exploring remote locations looking for fossil leaves, coral fragments or dinosaur bones.

As part of the “Go Take a Hike” book, published in 2019 by the CSPG, we included an online section with a guide to some of the fossils of you might spot while hiking in Alberta and other parts of western Canada. The guide is by no means comprehensive, but rather a light survey of the variety of fossils which can be found in the region, sorted by geological age. The guide has been updated, revised and slightly expanded from the original published version, and we hope you enjoy it. The second author is interested in compiling a similar guide to the kinds of rocks and minerals that can be found throughout Alberta. He is looking for contributors to provide photos and short captions for the photos that could be used to compile the guide. Captions should be concise, but include the following information: location, formation, age of the rock, and a brief description of any diagnostic

or remarkable features of the rock and the kind of minerals it contains. If the photo is of a mineral, it should contain most of the same information, but include a description of the mineral itself. The photos need not be restricted to outcrop; if you have interesting pictures from cores or photographs of minerals in your collection— or even microscopic images—I would be happy to consider all of those for inclusion in the article. Please include your name in the caption as the contributing author of that photo. When the project is complete it would be printed in the CSPG Reservoir over one or two issues. Potentially it would be included in a future “Volume Two” of the Go Take a Hike book. If you wish to contribute please email Philip Benham at benham.philip@gmail.com.

PRECAMBRIAN, CAMBRIAN AND ORDOVICIAN FOSSILS

Search for contributors to a Rocks and minerals Guide Philip Benham is interested in compiling a similar guide to the kinds of rocks and minerals that can be found throughout Alberta. He is looking for contributors to provide photos and short captions for the photos that could be used to compile the guide. Captions should be concise, but include the following information: location, formation, age of the rock, and a brief description of any diagnostic or remarkable features of the rock and the kind of minerals it contains. If the photo is of a mineral, it should contain most of the same information, but include a description of the mineral itself. The photos need not be restricted to outcrop; if you have interesting pictures from cores or photographs of minerals in your collection—or even microscopic images—I would be happy to consider all of those for inclusion in the article. Please include your name in the caption as the contributing author of that photo. When the project is complete it would be printed in the CSPG Reservoir over one or two issues. Potentially it would be included in a future “Volume Two” of the Go Take a Hike book. If you wish to contribute please email Philip Benham at benham.philip@gmail.com.

26 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Stromatolite preserved in a stream-rounded boulder. Precambrian (Mesoproterozoic), Purcell Supergroup. Waterton Lakes area, AB.

Anomalocarid feeding appendage. Lower Cambrian, Eager Fm. Cranbrook, BC. Length = 5.9 cm Howard Allen photo

Howard Allen photo

Graptolites on black shale.

Lower Ordovician, Glenogle Fm. Glenogle, BC. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo

APS file photo

(L-R): Elrathina, Olenoides and Kootenia trilobites. Middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale Fm. (guide display specimens). Walcott Quarry, Yoho National Park, BC. Width of view approx. 15 cm Howard Allen photo

Receptaculites, organism of uncertain affinity, probably an alga. Upper Ordovician, Red River Fm. The Forks, Winnipeg, MB.

Howard Allen photo

DEVONIAN FOSSILS

Nodular stromatoporoid. Devonian Kingston, ON. Scale bar = 1 cm

Amphipora, a stick-shaped stromatoporoid. Upper Devonian, Cairn Fm. Rocky Mountains, AB. ZPS file photo

Scale bar = 2 cm

APS file photo

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

27

PRECAMBRIAN, CAMBRIAN AND ORDOVICIAN FOSSILS

Olenellus sp. trilobite cephalons. Lower Cambrian, Eager Fm. Cranbrook, BC. Scale bar = 1 cm

DEVONIAN FOSSILS Cyrtospirifer, a brachiopod. Upper Devonian, Escarpment Fm. Enterprise, NT. Length = 3.5 cm

Schizophoria, a brachiopod. Upper Devonian, Escarpment Fm. Enterprise, NT. Width = 3 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Phillipsastrea, a colonial coral. Upper Devonian, Escarpment Fm. Enterprise, NT. Width = 4.2 cm

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Hypothyridina, a brachiopod. Upper Devonian, Mount Hawk Fm. Mount Stelfox, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Macgeea, a solitary coral with juvenile offset. Upper Devonian, Escarpment Fm. Enterprise, NT. Width = 2 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

APS file photo

Atrypa, a brachiopod. Upper Devonian, Mount Hawk Fm. Mount Stelfox, AB. Width = 2.8 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Melocrinites, a crinoid (“sea lily”) crown. Upper Devonian, Escarpment Fm. Enterprise, NT. Width = 2.2 cm

Geoffrey Barrett photo

28 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Sandalodus, crushing-type shark tooth. Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB. Width = 1.1 cm

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Fenestella, a bryozoan (“moss animal”). Lower Carboniferous, Rundle Group. Opal Range, Kananaskis area, AB. Width of view = 6 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Crinoid (“sea lily”) stem fragments on a bedding surface.

Syringopora, a colonial (“organ-pipe”) coral. Lower Carboniferous, Rundle Group. Elbow Lake area, AB. Width of view = 3.5 cm

Acrocyathus, a colonial coral. Lower Carboniferous, Rundle Group. Highwood Pass area, AB.

Lower Carboniferous, Lac des Arcs, AB.

Philip Benham photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

29

EARLY CARBONIFEROUS (MISSISSIPPIAN) FOSSILS

Silicified solitary (“horn”) coral. Lower Carboniferous, Mount Head Fm. Highwood Pass area, AB. Length = 4.7 cm

EARLY CARBONIFEROUS (MISSISSIPPIAN) FOSSILS

Macropotamorhynchus, a brachiopod. Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB. Scale bar = 5 mm.

APS file photo

Cryptoblastus, a small, stemmed echinoderm. Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo

Piltonia, a trilobite. Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB. Length = 4.3 cm.

Siphonodendron, a colonial coral. Lower Carboniferous, Turner Valley Fm. Elbow Lake area, AB. Length = 10 cm

Unispirifer, a brachiopod. Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Canyon Creek, AB. Length = 3 cm

30 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Conularia, an organism of uncertain affinity. Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB. Length = 3 cm

Geoffrey Barrett photo

EARLY CARBONIFEROUS (MISSISSIPPIAN) FOSSILS

GO TAKE A HIKE

Interested in Contributing? The go take a hike series has been published in the CSPG Reservoir since at least 2009 and resulted in the publication of a book compiling the hikes in 2019. The series is ongoing and is managed by Philip Benham, who is seeking new contributors to the series whether you be a student who has an interesting thesis which can be voted to a go take a hike article or whether be converted to an article. Or perhaps you are an avid hiker and you have some interest and knowledge in the geology of a region and you would like to convert it to an article as well. We are looking for hikes which are diverse both in terms of the geology but also in terms of the geography while we focus on Alberta we also will except hikes from other provinces or even articles on international destinations. Interested?

Platycrinites, a crinoid (“sea lily”). Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB.

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Lioclema, a stick-like bryozoan (“moss animal”). Lower Carboniferous, Banff Fm. Moose Dome Creek, AB. Length = 2 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Macgowanella, bryozoan (“moss animal”) holdfasts. Lower Carboniferous, Rundle Group. Highwood Pass area, AB. Length = 8 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

CONTACT: Philip Benham benham.philip@gmail.com

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

31

TRIASSIC FOSSILS Monotis, a bivalve mollusc (scallop). Upper Triassic, Pardonet Fm. Williston Lake, BC. Scale bar = 1 cm

Philip Benham photo

Typical poor ammonite impression seen in AB Triassic. Lower Triassic, Sulphur Mountain Fm. Kananaskis Valley, AB. Scale bar = 5 cm APS file photo

Ichthyosaur vertebrae in outcrop.

Crinoid (“sea lily”) bed in outcrop. Upper Triassic, Pardonet Fm. Williston Lake, BC.

Philip Benham photo

32 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Upper Triassic, Pardonet Fm. Williston Lake, BC.

Philip Benham photo

JURASSIC FOSSILS

Belemnite guards.

Lower Jurassic, Fernie Fm. Limestone Mountain, AB. Scale bar = 2 cm

APS file photo

Belemnite “battlefield” in outcrop section. Lower Jurassic, Fernie Fm. Limestone Mountain, AB.

Epizigzagiceras, an ammonite. Middle Jurassic, Smithers Fm. Smithers area, BC. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo

Pleuromya, a bivalve mollusc (clam). Middle Jurassic, Fernie Fm. Ribbon Creek area, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo.

Ammonite impressions on shale. Keith Mychaluk photo

Lower Jurassic, Fernie Fm., Poker Chip Shale Mbr. Bighorn Creek, AB. 5 cm scale

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

33

CRETACEOUS FOSSILS

$2 coin for scale

Rhizocorallium, trace fossil (“worm burrows”). Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache, AB.

Dinosaur (nodosaur) tracks on a bedding surface. Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm., Luscar Gp. Smoky River Coal Mine, Grande Cache, AB.

Philip Benham photo

Conifer twig with leaves. Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB.

Georgia Hoffman photo

Sagenopteris leaf (a seed fern). Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Georgia Hoffman photo

Philip Benham photo

Ginkgo leaves on a bedding surface.

Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm., Luscar Gp. Grande Cache, AB.

34 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Philip Benham photo

CRETACEOUS FOSSILS

Conifer twigs with leaves. Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Georgia Hoffman photo

Cycad or cycadeoid frond. Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Georgia Hoffman photo

Conifer twig.

Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Georgia Hoffman photo

Conifer twig with leaves. Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Conifer twigs with cone. Lower Cretaceous, Gates Fm. Grande Cache coal mine, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Georgia Hoffman photo

Georgia Hoffman photo

Podozamites foliage. (once thought to be a cycad; now shown to be a conifer). Lower Cretaceous, Mist Mountain Fm. Crown Mountain, BC. Scale bar = 5 cm Georgia Hoffman photo

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

35

CRETACEOUS FOSSILS

Small bivalve molluscs (clams) and plant debris.

Lower Cretaceous, Mist Mountain Fm. Sparwood, BC. Scale bar = 2 cm APS file photo

Watinoceras (larger) and Scaphites ammonites in a concretion. Upper Cretaceous, Kaskapau Fm. Spirit River area, AB. Width of concretion = 7.6 cm. Howard Allen photo

Crocodile teeth.

Fossil log impression on a bedding surface. Lower Cretaceous, Mist Mountain Fm. Crown Mountain, BC.

Crocodile dermal ossicles (“scutes”). Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Patricia area, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

36 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Scaphites, an ammonite. Upper Cretaceous, Wapiabi Fm. Ram River, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm APS file photo

Howard Allen photo

Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Iddesleigh area, AB. Maximum length = 1.2 cm

Inoceramus, a bivalve mollusc (clam). Upper Cretaceous, Bearpaw Fm. Moose Jaw area, SK. APS file photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Small theropod dinosaur phalanx (foot bone). Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Iddesleigh area, AB. Length = 3 cm

Champsosaurus vertebra. Upper Cretaceous, Belly River Group. Irvine, AB. Length = 2.2 cm

Turtle shell fragment.

Campeloma, freshwater snails. Upper Cretaceous, Milk River Fm. Aden area, AB. Length = 2.5 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Patricia area, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

Large theropod

dinosaur tooth.

Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Iddesleigh area, AB. Length = 3 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

CRETACEOUS FOSSILS

Ornithomimid dinosaur ungual phalanx (“claw”). Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Iddesleigh area, AB. Length = 3.6 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

Geoffrey Barrett photo

APS file photo

Shark teeth.

Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Iddesleigh area, AB. Length = 0.4 to 1.2 cm Geoffrey Barrett photo

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

37

CRETACEOUS FOSSILS Lepisosteus, gar fish scales. Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Patricia area, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo

Ossified tendons

(hadrosaur or ceratopsian dinosaurs). Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Patricia area, AB.

Myledaphus, teeth of a ray fish. Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. Patricia area, AB. Scale bar = 5 mm

38 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

APS file photo

APS file photo

Section of redwood seed cone (upper left) in ironstone. Upper Cretaceous, Horseshoe Canyon Fm. Drumheller area, AB. Scale bar = 2 cm APS file photo

“Melania”, a brackish-water snail. Upper Cretaceous, St. Mary River Fm. Waterton Dam, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo

Corbula, a bivalve mollusc (clam). Upper Cretaceous, St. Mary River Fm. Monarch, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm

APS file photo

CRETACEOUS FOSSILS

Hadrosaur (“duckbilled dinosaur”) tooth. Upper Cretaceous, Dinosaur Park Fm. ddesleigh area, AB. Scale bar = 1 cm APS file photo

Teredolites trace fossil (clam borings) in top of a coal seam. Upper Cretaceous, Horseshoe Canyon Fm. East Coulee, AB.

Baculites, a straight-shelled ammonite. Upper Cretaceous, Bearpaw Fm. Manyberries area, AB. Scale bar = 5 cm

Howard Allen photo

APS file photo

Corbicula, brackish-water clams in outcrop section. Upper Cretaceous, Horseshoe Canyon Fm. Horsethief Canyon, AB. Howard Allen photo

Silicified tree stump in growth position. Upper Cretaceous, Horseshoe Canyon Fm. East Coulee, AB.

Howard Allen photo

Ostrea, an oyster. Upper Cretaceous, Horseshoe Canyon Fm. Horseshoe Canyon, AB. Length = 9.5 cm

Geoffrey Barrett photo

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

39

PALEOGENE FOSSILS Speirseopteris, a fern leaf. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Blindman River, AB.

Metasequoia, “dawn redwood” twigs. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Blindman River, AB.

Georgia Hoffman photo

Georgia Hoffman photo (previously

Osmunda, a fern leaf. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Joffre, AB.

Georgia Hoffman photo

Macginitiea, sycamore/plane tree leaf. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Joffre, AB.

Georgia Hoffman photo

Wardiaphyllum, tree leaf of uncertain affinity. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Joffre, AB.

Georgia Hoffman photo

published on Wikipedia)

Metasequoia, “dawn redwood” seed cone. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Blindman River, AB. Georgia Hoffman photo (previously published on Wikipedia)

40 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

PALEOGENE FOSSILS

Metasequoia seed cone and freshwater mollusc shell fragments. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Joffre, AB.

Joffrea, seed pods. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Joffre, AB. Georgia Hoffman photo

Browniea, tree leaf of uncertain affinity. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Blindman River, AB.

Georgia Hoffman photo

Georgia Hoffman photo

Unio? Freshwater clams in mud-chip conglomerate. Paleocene, Paskapoo/Porcupine Hills Fm. Calgary, AB. Howard Allen photo

Glyptostrobus, conifer tree twigs. Paleocene, Paskapoo Fm. Joffre, AB. Georgia Hoffman photo (previously published on Wikipedia)

Eohiodon, mooneye fish. Middle Eocene, Kamloops Gp. McAbee, BC.

Philip Benham photo

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

41

2022 UPCOMING EVENTS INFORMATION November 8th Tuesday | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm MST

Virtual

BASS Technical Division

VISIT UPCOMING EVENTS

Burial History and Petroleum Generation of the Doig Formation Speaker: Pablo Lacerada Silva, University of British Columbia Location: this talk will be online only

NOVEMBER November 2nd Wednesday | 8:00 am - 9:00 am MST

Heavy Oil/Oil Sands Technical Division InSAR satellite imaging of oil sands in situ and mine operations: How it works, what it is used for, and the new synergistic possibilities Speaker: M arco van der Kooij, SkyGeo Stan Stancliffe, GeoRED Location: C SPG Conference Room, +15 level, 540-5 Ave SW, Calgary AB

November 3

rd

Thursday | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm MST

November 8th Tuesday | 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm

Structural Technical Division Long Time Member Reception THIS EVENT IS BY INVITE ONLY Location: Fairmont Palliser, Alberta Room, Calgary AB

November 9th Wednesday | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm MST

International Technical Division Best Practices in Play-Based Exploration: Common Risk Segment Mapping Case Study-Brazil Santos Basin Speaker: Kent Wilkinson, CNOOC International Location: CSPG Conference Room, +15 level, 540-5 ave SW, Calgary AB

Structural Technical Division Appraising Fault-Leakage - how incorporating drilling data can impact the bottom-line of projects with faulted subsurface settings

November 10th

Speaker: Arjan Brem

Location: CSPG Conference Room, +15 level, 540-5 ave SW, Calgary AB

Location: C SPG Conference Room, +15 level, 540-5 ave SW, Calgary AB

42 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Thursday | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm MST

Geothermal Technical Division

2022 UPCOMING EVENTS INFORMATION November 11th - 12th

November 23rd – 25th

Friday - Saturday

Wednesday – Friday | 8 am to 4:30 pm

Squash Tournament

Short Course

Location: Bow Valley Club, Calgary AB

Clastic Facies, Depositional Environments and Sequence Stratigraphy in Core: Examples from the WCSB

November 16th Wednesday | Doors open at 11:30 am, Talk begins at 12:00 pm

Instructor: Brian A. Zaitlin, Zaitlin Geoconsulting Ltd.

Technical Luncheon

Location: AER Core Research Centre, Calgary AB

Sedimentology and Stratigraphy of the Clearwater Formation in Marten Hills and Nipisi, Alberta Canada Speaker: Cole Ross, Spur Petroleum Ltd. Location: Hyatt Regency, Imperial Ballroom 5/7/9, Calgary AB

November 17th Thursday | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm MST

Virtual

DECEMBER December 1st Thursday | 3:30 pm - 6:30 pm MST

Technical Division Holiday Social

GeoWomen

Location: The Unicorn, Calgary AB

Supporting Safe STEM WorkplacesWomanACT & SCWIST

December 7th

Speaker: Mallory Hilkewich, Education and Training Manager, WomanACT Location: this talk will be online only

November 18th Friday | 7:30 pm - 8:30 pm MST

Palaeontology Technical Division Dallol (Ethiopis), Extremophiles, and the Possibility of Like on other Planets Speaker: Philip Behnam, assistance provided by Enku Mulugeta and Ryan Benham Location: Room B108, Mount Royal University, Calgary AB

Wednesday | Social 10:30am, Doors open at 11:30am, talk begins at 12:00pm

Holiday Social and Luncheon From tail to trunk: revealing along-strike basin-wide high-resolution stratigraphic architecture of the Montney Formation Speaker: Tristan Euzen, IFP Canada, Tom Moslow, Location: Fairmont Palliser, Crystal Ballroom, Calgary AB

December 8th Thursday | 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm Social to follow meeting

CSPG Annual General Meeting & Social Location: Fairmont Palliser, Turner Valley Room, Calgary AB

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

43

The Blue View: Industry Trends Through Woodmac’s Lens NORTH AMERICA IN CONTEXT: OVERARCHING THEMES ACROSS THE INDUSTRY DAWN 1. NEW OF OIL SANDS

TRANSACTIONS?

THE MONTNEY AND 2. INCLEARWATER

CONSOLIDATION CONTINUES

OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE 3. AREA US – WHAT ARE THE TRENDS? THE PERMIAN REMAINS A KEY

CANADA: n New dawn for oil sands transactions?

been increasingly active for the last seven years with Tamarack, Spur, Deltastream, Highwater Exploration and CNRL the dominant companies in the play.

Both TotalEnergies (TTE) and Teck Resources released separate statements, indicating their intent to potentially spin off their Canadian oil sands assets.

Deltastream owners will receive Cdn$825 million cash, with a deferred payment of Cdn$300 million, and Cdn$300 million in Tamarack Valley shares (80 million shares at approximately $3.75/share). In addition, Deltastream had sold a 5% GORR (gross overriding royalty) on all current and future production on their Clearwater lands to Topaz Energy for a cash consideration of Cdn$263 million. On the same day, Tamarack announced Cdn$100 million of 7.25% senior unsecured sustainability-linked debt notes due in 2027 to support funding of the deal.

TotalEnergies and Teck indicate potential spin off of oil sands assets

TTE holds a 50% non-op working interest in the Surmont in situ project operated by ConocoPhillips as well as a 24.58% stake in the Fort Hills Mine project. The midstream and trading businesses in Canada would be included. Total stated that the oil sands assets do not align with their emissions goals, and instead they would retain a minority equity interest in the proposed TSX listed entity. The stated cash flow for the oil sands assets is US$1.5 billion (Cdn$2.04 billion) for 2022. Teck owns a 21.31% stake in the Fort Hills project, which is operated by Suncor. Teck reiterated previous statements about the option to spin-off or divest the Fort Hills asset if they did not feel the value was being reflected in Teck’s share price. For Fort Hills, since beginning production in 2018, the project has been hampered by curtailment in Alberta, the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic and operational challenges. For Surmont, the asset has had strong performance and we expect a long term SOR of 2.3, which is among the top performers. We model the potential TTE entity producing just over 100,000 b/d, with estimated cash flow of US$1.533 billion. The valuation sits at US$6.15 billion, although the entity would likely see a significant discount in the market. We model Teck’s interest in the Fort Hills asset at US$1.9 billion with cash flow of US$477 million and production of roughly 34,000 b/d. n Tamarack Energy expands in the Clearwater

play with acquisition of Deltastream

Tamarack Valley, a rapidly growing intermediate producer in Alberta purchased Deltastream Energy, a private oil producer in Alberta's Clearwater oil play on 12 September 2022. Consideration will total Cdn$1,425 million (US$1,097 million). The Clearwater oil play has

44 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

Tamarack Valley acquires 23,000 boe/d of production (2023 expected, Q2 was 16,000 boe/d) and a large undeveloped land position, complimentary to an existing position in the play. Tamarack has grown the position in the Clearwater play with successive acquisitions of privately held Crestwynd and Rolling Hills Energy in the Perryvale and Jarvie sub-regions of the play. With the Deltastream acquisition, Tamarack will grow in the most mature Marten Hills region of the play, and into the Nipisi sub-region. After the deal closes, Tamarack will produce close to 29,600 boe/d of dominantly oil and will leapfrog Spur Petroleum to be the largest producer in the Clearwater play. There is ample upside for Tamarack to capture both from undrilled locations and the early stage of the play. As early waterflooding has had some success, implementation of secondary recovery strategies will likely further improve strong play economics and increase recoverable resource above original estimates. In addition, future consolidation in the play remains an on going opportunity, with Tamarack in the front seat to continue identifying the best opportunities. While production is growing, the purchase price was not cheap using Q2 2022 production figures the deal metric is Cdn$68,438 per flowing barrel. The deal structure and GORR is interesting here as it enables Tamarack to maintain a growth-minded capital programme.

TAMARACK VALLEY ACQUISITION OF DELTASTREAM CLEARWATER PLAY ACREAGE WEST CENTRAL ALBERTA

Source: Wood Mackenzie, geoLOGIC Solution Ltd.

KIWETINOHK LAND BASE

n Kiwetinohk consolidates in

Placid Montney

Kiwetinohk Energy Corp. has consolidated an additional 28.5% average working interest in its operated Montney assets in Alberta. The total consideration is Cdn$61.4 million in cash and includes 1,200 boe/d (45% liquids) and an increased 14.12% ownership of the Bigstone sweet gas plant, bringing its total ownership to 39.31% in the facility, increasing processing capacity by 11 mmcfd. The acquisition increases their overall processing capacity in the area by 30 mmcfd and 1,750 b/d to a total of 100 mmcfd and 5,000 b/d, respectively. The acquisition is expected to close in September 2022. Repsol appears to have sold off another portion of their Canadian portfolio, while retaining operating interest in the Bigstone processing facility. This deal follows a divestment of Duvernay acreage to Paramount, bringing the total to Cdn$130 million since July 2022. The consolidation of the assets for Kiwetinohk provides them with greater control over the future development of its acreage. Holding 79,000 acres in the region, their average working interest increases from 59.7% to 88.2% following this deal. The company plans to ramp up production to a plateau rate between 11,500 – 13,000 boe/d by Q4 2023 from the current production of 7,000 boe/d. Plateau rates are expected to be maintained with roughly 6 wells per year. Source: Kiwetinohk company website

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

45

PERMIAN/NEW MEXICO GAS PRODUCTION AND HORIZONTAL RIG COUNT

LOWER 48: n Permian gas reaches new production record

In the last issue of the Reservoir, we discussed Permian production. The premier unconventional play continues to shatter production records month over month. Across 2022, New Mexican Permian production has eclipsed 5 bcfd several times, albeit only sustained for 1-3 days straight. Now, the New Mexico region comfortably produces 5 bcfd consistently and is forecast to continue increasing. This is even more impressive in light of the gas growth trajectory being essentially unaffected by the severe reduction in rig counts back in Q2 2020. The region has realized an impressive 165% increase in activity since the 2020 lows. Despite the pace of overall Permian rig adds effectively stalling since June, we expect the play's gas production will still comfortably maintain its upward trajectory driven by N. Mexico. Our latest forecast calls for 1.4 bcfd incremental growth in 2023 and another 1.7 bcfd in 2024 for the Permian. The good news is that the region has sufficient takeaway capacity to absorb the impressive volume increase (unlike some Canadian producers struggling with AECO price discounts). The bad news is that soaring growth contributes to expectations for softening gas prices. n Chevron lists southern Delaware acreage for sale

Chevron commissioned a data room for its Gomez field acreage in the southern Delaware Basin. Close to 1,300 boe/d of flowing production and roughly 22,000 net acres are included in the package. Declining volumes are primarily related to older vertical wells that could soon become P&A candidates. Bids on the package are due November 9, 2022, marketed with up to five zones of tight oil development potential and no drilling commitments. The Gomez field acreage seems a prime divestment asset for Chevron. No new drills in over a decade and production metrics there can't compete against the rest of Chevron's Permian

46 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

portfolio. Since the acquisition of Noble Energy in 2020, Chevron has been tailoring its shale business with small sales and trades. Thoughts on potential buyers? Diamondback is a large producer in the area with roughly 15 kboe/d of production from nearby leases. Recent Permian deals of note like Colgate/Centennial and Earthstone/Bighorn included assets with shared lease boundaries. Diamondback may discover a discount if there are few other bids, but we don't necessarily expect them to jump at the offering. Diamondback has been clear that any acquisitions need to immediately compete with current top tier inventory. Without recent horizontal wells drilled in Gomez, there might not be enough for the snake to bite. Time will tell which operator ends up with Chevron's asset, but the sale won't affect its bottom line. WoodMac estimates over US$10 billion in free cashflow from Permian assets for 2022. n OXY forms carbon capture partnership with

Western Midstream

At the beginning of October, Western Midstream signed a letter of intent with Occidental forming a partnership to pursue CCS opportunities. The two companies will explore options for constructing CCS facilities on respective existing infrastructure in the Denver-Julesburg and Delaware basins. Western will consider options for transporting carbon from the capture facilities to new and existing offtake locations operated by Oxy, namely EOR operations. Oxy's EOR operations provide a strong opportunity for the company to become a CO2 transport and storage leader. Oxy holds the most extensive EOR operations in the Permian, with 2,500 miles of CO2 pipelines and over 6,000 CO2 injection wells. The new partnership is in line with Oxy's Low Carbon Ventures strategy outlined back in March. Western Midstream's announcement mentioned the partnership would investigate expanding the proposed network to include other emitters interested in participating. Western Midstream was spun off by Occidental shortly after Oxy acquired the company through the purchase of Anadarko in 2019.

SCOTT NORLIN, GIT

BRANDON MYERS

Research Analyst, Upstream Canada

Senior Analyst – Lower 48 Upstream

Scott joined the Canadian Upstream Research team at Wood Mackenzie in June 2019. He is responsible for providing financial asset valuation and objective commercial analysis on company and play activity across Canada. His coverage ranges from North American large caps to junior private producers. He also covers CNRL and Cenovus for the corporate analysis team, providing high level company valuation and strategy analysis. Prior to joining Wood Mackenzie, Scott gained comprehensive experience in exploration and development of upstream assets. Scott worked at Parex Resources on conventional assets, Devon Energy on the Jackfish oil sands project and also has field experience in unconventional plays. Scott holds a Bachelor of Geology degree with honours from the University of Calgary and is a registered Geologist in training with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta.

Brandon is a senior analyst with our Lower 48 research team. Having joined Wood Mackenzie in 2017, he has worked on the integration of subsurface data with L48 research and conducted research into every major unconventional play in the US and Canada. Prior to this, Brandon’s career included roles in both energy efficiency and the oil and gas industry. He was a founding partner of Firefli LEDs, a carbon reduction focused LED lighting company that focused on solutions for high rise towers and industrial facilities. After that he spent time as an energy analyst for Nemalux, a Canadian, heavy industry LED manufacturer that specializes in carbon and power reduction solutions for wellsite facilities. He was a conventional field geoscientist for an innovative junior oilfield optimization exploration company in Calgary through 2016 and early 2017. Brandon graduated from the University of Alberta with a BSc, Specialization in Geology. Academically his focus was on the organic geochemistry of the Duvernay shale and his thesis was focused on hydrocarbon generation and expulsion modelling across Encana’s Kaybob acreage.

DISCLAIMER – THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS STATED BELOW ARE BASED ON WOOD MACKENZIE’S DATA, SOURCED FROM PUBLIC SOURCES ACROSS THE GLOBE AND OUR PROPRIETARY TOOLS SUCH AS LENS.

RESERVOIR ISSUE 6 • NOV/DEC 2022

47

www.cspg.org/mountjoy

By Dave Hills and Hilary Corlett Wonderful places and wonderful people; a look back on the third Mountjoy Carbonate Conference.

After a slightly longer wait than first anticipated, and after holding an online “sampler” as a placeholder, the third Mountjoy Carbonate Conference was held by the CSPG and SEPM in Banff, August 14 to 18th, 2022. The Mountjoy is a celebration of carbonate sedimentology, in the memory of Dr. Eric Mountjoy, whose research and mentorship of students had a profound impact on the science. This international conference drew delegates from around the world both in person and, for the first time as a hybrid format, online. Likewise, the list of talks reflected the international core of the conference discussing topics as widely spread as stromatolites from Korea, microbialites from the Red Sea, borehole imaging in Brazil, and patch reefs in Indonesia.

For many of the people who were able to attend in person, the Mountjoy was the first event that they had physically attended in the last three years. For this reason, the event held a special reverence as a chance to meet colleagues in the field from far flung places. We were also www.cspg.org/mountjoy honoured by the presence of Eric’s wife and co-mentor of numerous students, Anita Mountjoy, who has provided the foundation of the Mountjoy conference, not only to attend, but who took full advantage of the field trips. The committee would like to thank Anita for her continued support of this event. The Mountjoy Conference is as much about the people who make the community as it is about the science that we study, and Anita is a constant reminder of this.

What set this conference apart, has been the focus on field trips, We would also like to thank everyone who has volunteered spending two of the four conference days in the splendours of the their time to support the Mountjoy, Shaelyn Brown and Emma Canadian Rockies to see world class outcrops, where Eric himself MacPherson of the CSPG, and Howard Harper of the SEPM. We preferred to be. These included two separate excursions to view would also like to thank our sponsor APEGA for their support. Stay the Burgess Shale fossils at the Walcott Quarry and the Mount tuned for the next Mountjoy Carbonate Conference in 2025. The Stephen Trilobite TWO beds, as well as hydrothermal dolomites ofTWO Banff, DAYS location is yet to be decided but the SEPM is taking suggestions! DAYS FOUR DAYS Yoho andOF Kootenay National Parks, Mississippian carbonates of PRESENTATIONS OF FIELD TRIPS OF NETWORKING Canyon Creek and the Devonian/Mississippian boundary at Jura Learn about the latest advances Networking opportunities, Explore world-class Cambrian Creek in Kananaskis Provincial Park. on a wide range of carbonaterelated themes and discuss new ideas and techniques applied to carbonate rocks

TWO DAYS OF PRESENTATIONS Learn about the latest advances on a wide range of carbonaterelated themes and discuss new ideas and techniques applied to carbonate rocks

stromatolite beds, excellent examples of large-scale dolomitization, and exposed analogues of hydrocarbon TWO DAYS reservoirs.

OF FIELD TRIPS

Explore world-class Cambrian stromatolite beds, excellent examples of large-scale dolomitization, and exposed analogues of hydrocarbon Mountjoyreservoirs. and his

ABOUT THE CONFERENCE

Mountjoy Conferences rightly honour Eric students' outstanding contributions to carbonate stratigraphy, sedimentology and diagenesis, particularly those on the ABOUT THE Devonian reef systems exposed in theCONFERENCE Alberta Rocky Mountains. Mountjoy Conferences rightly honour Eric Mountjoy and his

students' of outstanding contributions to carbonate stratigraphy, In this third edition the Mountjoy Carbonate Research sedimentology and diagenesis, particularly those on the Conference, heldDevonian in thereef Banff Centre, we are returning to the systems exposed in the Alberta Rocky Mountains. Canadian Rockies where Eric Mountjoy spent much of his time In this third edition of the Mountjoy Carbonate Research teaching students and investigating carbonate strata that Conference, held in the Banff Centre, we are returning to form the Canadian Rockies where Eric spent reservoirs much of his time the basis for our understanding of Mountjoy carbonate and teaching students and investigating carbonate strata that form dolomitization. the basis for our understanding of carbonate reservoirs and dolomitization.

48 R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 • N O V / D E C 2 0 2 2

receptions and dinners will be available throughout all four days of the Mountjoy Conference!

FOUR DAYS OF NETWORKING Networking opportunities, receptions and dinners will be available throughout all four days of the Mountjoy Conference!

REGISTRATION

Individual Registration Rates: Member Registration: $2400.00 Non-Member Registration: $3000.00 REGISTRATION Student Registration: $1750.00 Individual Registration Rates: Member Registration: Registration$2400.00 Includes: Non-Member Registration: $3000.00 Student Registration: - Two full days$1750.00 of technical presentations

- Two days of guided field trips

Registration -Includes: Networking reception and formal conference dinner

- Two full days-ofAccomodations technical presentations at the Banff Centre from August 14th - 18th - Two days of guided field trips - Breakfast, lunch, and coffee - Networking reception and formal conference dinner breaks from August 15th-18th - Accomodations at the Banff Centre from August 14th - 18th - Breakfast, lunch, and coffee breaks from August 15th-18th

THANK YOU TO ALL THE CSPG SPONSORS TITANIUM

PLATINUM

GOLD

S I LV E R

BRONZE

CORPORATE SUPPORTERS Summit Nanotech

ROGII Inc.

MJ Systems

RIGSAT

Petrocraft Products Ltd.

Belloy Petroleum Consulting

Enhance Energy

Eavor

Canamera Coring

Schlumberger Technology Corporation SeisWare

R E S E R V O I R I S S U E 6 •As Nof OV /DEC 20 2 2 2022. 49 November 1st,

Dedicated to supporting its members since 1927, the CSPG continuously offers new opportunities to enhance their skills and enrich their experiences, from events to publications to receiving grants to awards and much more. Join CSPG, and:

Be part of the science. Be part of the legacy. Be part of CSPG.

• Benefit from member discounts on all conferences, luncheons and webinars • Enhance your technical skills through our revamped educational program • Attend more than 20 free technical talks offered every year • Have fun checking out rocks through our field trips • Engage with specialised CSPG communities • Advance your technical knowledge through peer reviewed papers in the Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology and articles in the digital Reservoir magazine • Learn new skills and expand your professional network by volunteering with any of CSPG’s programs • Share your experiences through CSPG’s upcoming mentorship program • Build your professional brand through our communications opportunities • Receive grants and awards for your distinguished work

Join today! www.cspg.org