Click to view page images in PDF format.
Tectonostratigraphic Framework of the Columbus Basin, Eastern Offshore Trinidad*
L. J. Wood
Article #10014 (2001)
*Adapted for online presentation from article, entitled “Chronostratigraphy and Tectonostratigraphy of the Columbus Basin, Eastern Offshore Trinidad," by the author in AAPG Bulletin, v. 84, no. 12 (December, 2000), p. 1905-1928.
1Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713-8924; email: [email protected]
The Columbus Basin, forming the easternmost part of the Eastern Venezuela Basin, is situated along the obliquely converging margins of the Caribbean and South American plates. The two primary structural elements that characterize the basin are (1) transpressional northeast-southwest-trending anticlines and (2) northwest-southeast-oriented, down-to-the-northeast, extension normal faults. The basin was filled throughout the Pliocene and Pleistocene by more than 40,000 ft (>12,200 m) of clastic sediment supplied primarily by the Paleo-Orinoco Delta system. The delta prograded eastward over a storm-influenced and current-influenced shelf during the Pliocene-Pleistocene, depositing marine and terrestrial clastic megasequences as a series of prograding wedges atop a lower Pliocene to pre-Pliocene mobile shale facies.
Biostratigraphic and well
log
data from 41 wells were integrated with
thousands of kilometers of interpreted two-dimensional and three-dimensional
seismic data to construct a chronostratigraphic framework for the basin. As a
result, several observations were made regarding the basin's geology that have a
bearing on exploration risk and success: (1) megasequences wedge bidirectionally;
(2) consideration of hydrocarbon-system risk across any area requires looking at
these sequences as complete paleofeatures; (3) reservoir location is influenced
by structural elements in the basin; (4) the lower limit of a good-quality
reservoir in any megasequence deepens the closer it comes to the normal fault
bounding the wedge in a proximal location; (5) reservoir quality of deep-marine
strata is strongly influenced by both the type of shelf system developed (bypass
or aggradational) and the location of both subaerial and submarine highs; and
(6) submarine surfaces of erosion partition the megasequences and influence
hydrostatic pressure, migration, and trapping of hydrocarbons and the
distribution of hydrocarbon type.
Figure
1. Tectonic map (after Pocknall et al., 1999) showing regional structural
features of northern South America, including the island of Trinidad, as
well
as
the modern outlet of the Orinoco River and location of the present-day delta
relative to the Columbus Basin. Soldado 189
well
is indicated in the Gulf of
Paria.
Figure
2. Major structural features of the Columbus Basin, offshore eastern
Trinidad, including regional normal faults, right lateral strike-slip faults,
and offshore structural ridge trends.
Click here for sequence and overlay of Figures 2 and 4.
Figure
3. Simplified stratigraphic chart of the Eastern Venezuela Basin (after
Heppard et al., 1998). Major source rock intervals have been identified as the
Upper Cretaceous San Antonio and Querecual formations in eastern Venezuela and
the Naparima Hill and Gautier formations in Trinidad. Units that have been
important reservoirs are also indicated. The dotted line indicates the
diachronous nature of top overpressure as it climbs stratigraphically to the
east.
Figure
4. Columbus Basin and the island of Trinidad showing wells used in this
study and location of major oil and gas fields. Cross section AA' and seismic
line XX' are shown in Figures 7 and 5,
respectively. Outcrop photographs are
shown in Figures 9a and 9b.
Click here for sequence and overlay of Figures 2 and 4.
Figure
5. (a) Southwest-northeast-trending seismic line XX' (see Figure 4
for
location) and (b) accompanying line drawing illustrating the two-dimensional
geometry of normal fault and counterregional glide surface and their
relationship to one another. Regionally extensive lowstand surfaces
(unconformities) and their basinward-equivalent correlative conformities that
bound megasequences are shown. Note the thickening of sediments down into the
counterregional surface and the upturned toe reflectors associated with sediment
drag as shale evacuates from beneath the sediment wedge (SP1800-1600 between 3.0
and 5.0 s). Sediment wedges thin landward (southwest) and show truncation of
their upper parts by means of the lowstand surface of the overlying
sequence
.
Significant thickening of sediments occurs across major normal faults (SP2100,
SP2740). Although similar seismic facies are identifiable in different fault
blocks at approximately the same seismic depth, they are of different ages, as
shown by biostratigraphic data (see Figure 10).
Click here for sequence
and overlay of seismic
line and line drawing.
Figure
6. Paleogeography of the lowstand paleo-Orinoco Delta in the Pliocene and
Pleistocene. Low-sloping broad fluvial distributary plain feeds line-source,
wave-modified strand-plain shoreline systems. These systems in turn feed
line-sourced slope and fan deposits. Rising shale diapirs at the toe of the
slope helped focus slope and basin floor deposition and ponded thick sediments
on the basin floor in toe-of-slope sediment sinks.
Figure
7. Southwest-northeast
well
log
cross section AA' from Poui field to East
Mayaro field across the Columbus Basin, illustrating the typical gamma-
log
(left) and resistivity-
log
(right) signatures associated with depositional
facies that make up the prograding megasequences. Note the abrupt stratigraphic
thickening across the major normal growth faults in the depositional dip
direction (OPR4-Omega and Flambouyant-NEQB-EM3-EM1), as
well
as the continuity
of facies in the depositional strike direction (Omega-Flambouyant). Logs and
base Pleistocene pick in OPR4 and Flambouyant are from Heppard et al. (1998).
Environments of deposition are based on interpretation of integrated
biostratigraphic data,
well
log
motifs, seismic facies, and regional
paleogeography. Line of section shown in Figure 4.
Figure
8. Biostratigraphic ranges defined by Pocknall et al. (1999) and derived in
conjunction with this study to differentiate chronostratigraphy of the Columbus
Basin.
Figure
9. Photographs of Pliocene shelf-deltaic deposits of Gros Morne Formation of
the Columbus Basin outcropping along the southeast coast of Trinidad show
soft-sediment deformation, including (a) large channel scour truncating
underlying fine-grained sandstone, siltstone, and claystones deposited in a
shelf deltaic setting. The channel scours into structurally tilted sediments.
Its irregular base is filled with large rectangular blocks, which were
semicohesive when deposited and are composed of the substrate material. The
remainder of the channel is filled with alternating wavy-bedded silty sands and
shales. (b) Flame structure, characteristic of these rapidly deposited
sediments. Location of photos shown in Figure 4.
Figure
10. Chronostratigraphic chart of the Columbus Basin, showing progradational
character of the basin fill throughout the Pliocene and Pleistocene. Regional
subsidence in the southwest parts of the basin resulted in continuous
aggradation of mixed fluvial and estuarine deposits over much of the area.
Unconformities exhibit the greatest amounts of missing time in locations central
to the structural hinge of each megasequence. Foraminiferal and palynological
ranges are from Pocknall et al. (1999).
Figure
11. Curves showing sea level change, fauna discontinuities, and
sequence
boundaries for the world (columns 1, 2, 3) (Haq et al., 1988), the U.S.A.
margins of the Gulf of Mexico (columns 4, 5, 6), and the Columbus Basin,
Trinidad. Some
sequence
boundaries in the Columbus Basin appear correlative with
time-equivalent sea level falls and associated
sequence
boundaries identified in
other areas of the world. These
sequence
boundaries in the Columbus Basin are
most likely a function of eustatic base-level change (E); others appear to have
a more local tectonic origin (T). The tectonic nature of these boundaries is
supported by the presence in some wells of Cretaceous, Eocene, and Oligocene
fauna and flora identified as reworked in association with these boundaries (Pocknall
et al., 1999). Sources for the curves are (1) Beard et al. (1982); (2) Lamb et
al. (1987); (3) Haq et al. (1988); (4) Wornhardt and Vail (1990); (5) Pacht et
al. (1990); and (6) Armentrout and Clement (1990).
Figure
12. Illustration of a single lower Pleistocene megasequence deposited across
the Southeast Galeota (SEG), East Queen's Beach (EQB), and East Mayaro (EM)
areas between the JLS (T1) and the HLS (top surface). This
sequence
includes
many of the hydrocarbon productive sands of East Mayaro field and is bounded in
the proximal direction by the G fault (G) and in the distal direction by a lower
Pleistocene counterregional surface moving along a mobile shale body located
northeastward of the EM1 and EM2 wells (Figure 4).
Figure
13. Illustration of the timing of formation (from oldest to youngest, a to b
to c, respectively) of various aspects of a typical megasequence across the gas
trend area from Cassia field (shown by the WSEG
well
[Figure
4]; southwest)
to East Mayaro field (shown by the EM wells [Figure
4]; northeast). See text
for detailed discussion. CRG = counterregional guideplane.
Click here to view sequence
of images in Figure
13.
Figure
14. Illustration of the similarities and differences that exist between the
tectonostratigraphic characteristics of the Columbus Basin, Trinidad, model (a)
and that of Evamy et al. (1978) Niger Delta, Nigeria, model (b). Note the
bidirectional wedging of sediments, both distal toward the shale diapir and
proximal toward the normal fault, in the Columbus Basin, as compared with the
unidirectional wedging proximally that occurs in the Niger Delta.
Figure
15. Illustration of the difference in alignment, deep to shallow, of
structural crests in some fields of (a) the Columbus Basin, Trinidad, vs. (b)
the Niger Delta, Nigeria (after Weber [1987]).
Figure
16. Electric
log
from the East Mayaro 3
well
(see Figure 4
for location),
illustrating hydrocarbon-bearing transgressive system tract (TST) waste-zones in
the 23 sand interval vs. the late-highstand systems tract (HST) to lowstand
systems tract (LST) hydrocarbon accumulations in the higher quality 24 sand
interval.
General Geology of the Columbus Basin
Character of the Upper Tertiary Orinoco Delta
Faunal and Floral Biostratigraphy and Environments of Deposition
Depositional Environments and Facies
Rates of Sediment Accumulation
Sequence
Stratigraphy of the Columbus
Basin
Influence of Tectonics on
Stratigraphic Sequence
Development
Comparison with the Niger Delta
Structural Control on Depositional Systems and Accommodation Space
Implications and Recommendations for Exploration in the Columbus Basin
The Columbus Basin, defined by Leonard (1983), forms the easternmost part of the Eastern Venezuela Basin (EVB) off the east coast of Trinidad (Figure 1). The basin is bordered on the north by the Darien Ridge, an offshore extension of Trinidad's Central Range, and on the south by the stable Delta Amacuro Platform (Figure 2). To the east of the basin is the South American continental shelf, and to the west, onshore Trinidad and the EVB. Downwarping of the west margin of the EVB began during the Oligocene in association with subduction of the Caribbean plate from the north (Parnaud et al., 1995). A diachronous series of en echelon east-northeast-oriented depocenters developed across the northern South America region in response to this downwarping as the foredeep migrated eastward. The depocenters were successively filled by more than 40,000 ft (>12,000 m) of sediment, the Columbus Basin being the easternmost depocenter (Figure 1). The Orinoco River has been the primary source of sediment filling these depocenters; since the mid-Miocene, its course has been heavily influenced by the progressive downwarping of the eastward-migrating foreland basin (Hedberg, 1950; Hoorn et al., 1995; Diaz de Gamero, 1996). Local tectonic features, such as the Urica arch (Figure 1), were intermittently active during the Miocene to Holocene, significantly affecting the character of the proto-Orinoco River feeding the Columbus Basin (Erlich and Barrett, 1994). In addition, phases of thrusting and thrust-load subsidence along the east margin of the northern Andes Cordillera influenced the discharge rate and sediment load of the river throughout the late Tertiary (Hoorn et al., 1995).
The EVB is a prolific hydrocarbon province, having produced more than 7 billion bbl of oil in the Venezuelan part of the basin (Erlich and Barrett, 1994) (Figure 1). Production has come mainly from Oligocene to Miocene fluvial-deltaic and shallow-marine deposits (Figure 3). Onshore and offshore hydrocarbon exploration in Trinidad has been active since the 1860s, and the first commercial production was established in 1902 (Tiratsoo, 1986). Eastern offshore exploration for hydrocarbons in the Columbus Basin began in the late 1960s, resulting in the discovery of Teak field (SDT2) (Figure 4). Subsequent activity has resulted in more than 2.6 billion bbl of oil having been produced in these areas from fluvial-deltaic, shallow-marine, and deep-marine turbidite deposits of the Miocene-Pliocene (Rodrigues, 1998). Further estimates indicate more than 3.27 billion bbl of oil in place and 20 tcf of gas in place.
The complex interplay of regional tectonics, extension normal faulting, high
rates of sediment supply, and sea level change has created a complicated
stratigraphy in the Columbus Basin, one that resists many standard methods of
sequence
stratigraphic
analysis
. Classic
sequence
analysis
techniques and models
that were developed in passive-margin settings (Vail et al., 1977; Posamentier
and Vail, 1988) typically operate on the assumption that sea level has been the
dominant mechanism driving stratigraphic
sequence
development. Application of
sequence
stratigraphic models from foreland-basin (Swift et al., 1987; Devlin et
al., 1993; Posamentier and Allen, 1993) or passive-margin settings (Mitchum et
al., 1991) oversimplifies the complexity of transpressional settings.
Transpressional basins, such as the Columbus Basin, contain elements of thrust
belt-foreland models, the growth-normal faulting and mobile substrate movement
common to passive-margin settings, and extension structuring common along
strike-slip plate margins (Babb and Mann, 1999). Structural complexity,
syndepositionally active structures, high rates of sedimentation, and
high-frequency sea level change all influenced the Pliocene-Pleistocene
sequence
stratigraphy of the Columbus Basin. The dearth of understanding of the relative
magnitude of influence these elements have on stratigraphic
sequence
geometry,
character, and distribution has led to mixed exploration and production results.
Understanding of the true age and nature of the basin's stratigraphic section
will decrease uncertainty in reservoir and seal prediction,
hydrocarbon-generation modeling, migration
analysis
, and pressure prediction, as
well
as many other variables involved in an integrated exploration solution. As
petroleum exploration in the basin matures, there is a need for more detailed
understanding of the reservoir, seal geometry and distribution, and the timing
of all elements that make up the hydrocarbon system. The syndepositional nature
of structure in the basin has created opportunities for the occurrence of
stratigraphic and combination stratigraphic/structure plays. However, these play
types cannot be pursued with any degree of confidence at the current level of
understanding stratigraphic
sequence
development in the Columbus Basin.
The goals of this article are to
- Detail a chronostratigraphic framework of the Columbus Basin;
- Outline a tectonostratigraphic
model for
sequence
development in the Pliocene and Pleistocene of the Columbus Basin, one that may serve to describe
sequence
stratigraphic development in other transpressional settings;
- Compare and contrast the Columbus Basin with similar settings, such as the Niger Delta; and
- Discuss implications of the results of this work on exploration in the Columbus Basin and other transpressional settings.
A multidisciplinary data set, including well
logs, palynology, benthic and
planktonic foraminifera, oxygen isotopes, lithologic samples, core and outcrop
descriptions, and seismic-line interpretations, was used to develop a
chronostratigraphic and
sequence
stratigraphic framework for the
Pliocene-Pleistocene deposits of the Columbus Basin. Data from 41 wells included
paleontology assemblages and abundance and occurrence data, as
well
as
gamma-ray, resistivity, and caliper logs. These data formed the ground truth for
correlation of additional logs in the basin and were integrated with thousands
of kilometers of interpreted two-dimensional (2-D) and three-dimensional (3-D)
seismic lines to construct regional chronostratigraphic cross sections and to
generate a chronostratigraphic framework for the Pliocene-Pleistocene of the
basin.
The methodology employed in this study included the following:
- Reconciliation of multiple
data types into an integrated depositional
sequence
analysis
for each
well
in the study area. This required recognition of surfaces of reworking, flooding, and condensed sedimentation, as noted from
well
log
motif and seismic data. In addition, casing points, sampling intervals, and drilling data were used to resolve in-situ from non-in-situ paleostratigraphic data and to refine environments of deposition. Key data for detailed interpretation of environments of deposition included benthic foraminifera and palynomorph assemblages,
well
log
motifs, observable seismic facies, and location of specific wells within the context of the regional paleogeography.
- Use of palynomorph and
planktonic foraminifera first uphole occurrence, extinction, and acme events
in each
well
to age-date stratigraphic horizons.
- Use of seismic data to correlate specific time markers between wells within each fault block and to identify significant event surfaces within each fault block (bypass surfaces and basinward equivalent conformities, transgressive surfaces, condensed sections, flooding events, etc.).
- Definition of parasequences within each fault block, using identified key event surfaces and parasequence bounding surfaces.
- Reconciliation of the
chronostratigraphic framework of each fault block with adjacent fault blocks
by using seismic and
well
-data loops to ensure cross-fault correlation of time-equivalent depositional sequences and to construct regional chronostratigraphic cross sections.
- Correlation of chronostratigraphic packages between fault blocks, definition of basinwide depositional sequences, and construction of chronostratigraphic diagrams.
- Integration of chronostratigraphy and paleogeography with seismic data to develop a tectonostratigraphic model and to constrain the time of movement of major structures in the basin.
General Geology of the Columbus Basin
The Columbus Basin is located along the south margin of the obliquely
converging Caribbean-South American plate boundary, a zone of intense structural
deformation (Figure 1) (Speed,
1985; Robertson and Burke, 1989). Primary structural elements in the basin
include (1) a series of transpressional northeast-southwest-trending ridges and
(2) northwest-southeast-oriented, down-to-the-northeast, normal faults (Figures
2, 5). Most reservoirs have
been discovered where compressional deep ridges are juxtaposed against major
normal growth faults to produce structural closure. Fold axial traces and normal
fault orientation, both less than 45~ to the plate boundary zone, indicate a
transpressional rather than a transcurrent or transtensional setting for the
Columbus Basin. Gravity tectonics along a thin-skinned detachment surface
dipping to the east-northeast, however, may have also influenced the orientation
of these structural features, as well
as masked the appearance of other
structures associated with these regimes, such as positive or negative flower
structure. The interpretation of a transpressional structural regime for this
area was
well
documented by Babb and Mann (1999), and the reader is referred to
this article for many data documenting the structural framework of the
Caribbean-South American margin in this area. Because a more detailed discussion
is beyond the scope of this article, the reader is additionally referred to
Perez and Aggarwal (1981), Robertson and Burke (1989), Erlich and Barrett
(1990), Ave Lallemant (1991), and Russo and Speed (1992).
The sedimentary column of the eastern Columbus Basin consists mainly of thick
Pleistocene and Pliocene strata overlying mobile, pre-Pliocene shales.
Cretaceous marine facies deposited along a generally west-trending to
east-trending paleo-Cretaceous shelf break dip deep northward into the
subsurface and underlie the Tertiary sediments (Persad et al., 1993; Pindell and
Erikson, 1993; Heppard et al., 1998) (Figure
5). Although they remain undrilled in the Columbus Basin, the mobile units
of pre-Pliocene age are thought to consist dominantly of Miocene shales and
perhaps a thin veneer of Paleocene, Eocene, and Oligocene deposits. This
interpretation is supported by penetrations of pre-Pliocene units to the north
(Robertson and Burke, 1989) and south (Di Croce et al., 1999) of the basin, as
well
as onshore Trinidad (Persad et al., 1993).
Reservoirs off the east coast of Trinidad are all Pliocene-Pleistocene in age, either trapped in four-way structural closures or trapped as downthrown or upthrown faulted three-way closures. The strata are marine and terrigenous clastic sediments deposited as a series of northeastward-prograding strand-plain/nearshore sediment wedges and downdip slope/basin fan wedges (Wood et al., 1994; Wood, 1995, 1996; Heppard et al., 1998; Di Croce et al., 1999). These extremely thick, prograding megasequences were rapidly deposited; accumulation rates during the Pliocene-Pleistocene ranged from 7 to 20 ft (2 to 6 m) per thousand years. These high accumulation rates resulted from high sediment supply from the proto-Orinoco and rapid generation of accommodation space by extension tectonics.
Character of the Upper Tertiary Orinoco Delta
The modern Orinoco Delta is a complex hybrid deltaic system composed of
distinctly defined zones of wave-dominated, tide-dominated, and river-dominated
morphology (Warne et al., 1999a, b). The lower Tertiary Orinoco Delta differed
in character, however, from its modern successor. The Orinoco Delta of the later
Tertiary was a wave-dominated delta system prograding onto a storm-influenced
and current-influenced shelf (Figures
6, 7). The delta occupied
successively more eastward positions on the shelf throughout the late Tertiary,
and upon reaching each successive shelf-edge break, the deltaic system became
more aggradational in response to increased accommodation space. The
shelf-to-slope break was oversteepened as a result of bed rotation along the
counterregional glide surface formed on the landward side of rising shale
diapirs. Such rotation is reflected in seismic data by the downdip thickening of
sediments into the remnant shale bulge, as well
as the drag exhibited at the toe
of the progradational wedges (Figure 5).
Most of the basin's accommodation was focused in northwest-southeast-oriented
depocenters very near the shelf-slope break. Low accommodation on the shelf
resulted in the paleo-Orinoco Delta repeatedly prograding to the edge of the
shelf. This lowstand delta was exposed to the reworking processes of the open
ocean, having little or no outboard shelf to attenuate wave activity. The
cuspate, strike-continuous (northwest-to-southeast), cleanly winnowed reservoir
sands of the Columbus Basin are a product of this setting. Modern analogs to
this style of deltaic sedimentation are the Sao Francisco Delta, offshore Brazil
(Dominguez, 1996), and the Nayarit Coast, offshore Mexico. Ancient examples
include the lower Wilcox Formation of the Tertiary Gulf of Mexico (Galloway et
al., 1982).
Few if any incised valleys that must have fed the lowstand Orinoco Delta can be identified on 2-D or 3-D seismic lines. Paleoenvironmental data from fauna and flora, however, indicate that brackish to terrestrial conditions did exist across the basin during periods of lowstand delta deposition to the east. Local tectonic activity at the depositional shelf break focused lowstand accommodation space in shelf-break locations. High rates of sediment supply filled all available proximal accommodation space, creating a broad, low, sloping-gradient coastal plain. As a consequence, the Orinoco Delta distributary system was most likely characterized by dispersed, low-velocity flows and low stream powers that were forced to transport large volumes of sediment to shelf-edge-break depocenters. Low slopes along the continental margin mean little change in base level as sea level fell, resulting in the wide, shallow, distributary-channel incision in the coastal plain. Truncation of older shelf deposits by feeder valleys is shallow, commonly below the seismic resolution. In some locations, such as the East Queen's Beach (EQB) area (Figure 4), late-stage pop-up structures may have confined distributaries to specific pathways, resulting in point-source deltas, but for the most part late Tertiary Orinoco deltas were line-source distributary systems producing line-source slope deposits. Slope and basinal gravity deposits were, however, subject to direction by submarine topography building out in front of the shelf break.
Upper Cretaceous organic-rich mudstones acted as source rock for many of the
hydrocarbons in Trinidad (Rodrigues, 1988; Talukdar et al., 1988; Heppard et
al., 1990). Thicknesses of as much as 3280 ft (1000 m) of the Cretaceous source
interval have been penetrated in the Soldado 189 well
, Gulf of Paria (Figure
1). Cretaceous organic matter exhibits both terrigenous and marine organic
affinities; total organic carbon (TOC) values range from 2 to 12% (Persad et
al., 1993).
Previous workers have suggested two primary mechanisms for hydrocarbon migration within the Columbus Basin. Strong evidence suggests that the large, down-to-the-basin, normal faults serve as primary migration pathways for hydrocarbons (Figure 5). Such migration routes have been documented in the Columbus Basin, in the upper 2300 ft (700 m) of strata (Wood and Nash, 1995), and similar mechanisms are thought to be active at depth (Leonard, 1983; Heppard et al., 1990, 1998). Faults in Miocene strata in southern Trinidad appear to have acted as primary migration conduits into Miocene and Pliocene reservoirs (Persad et al., 1993). All offshore Trinidad fields are associated directly or indirectly with deep faults, some of which are thought to extend into underlying Cretaceous source rocks (Leonard, 1983). The occurrence of numerous hydrocarbon seeps on the island supports the notion that hydrocarbons are migrating directly along faults. Other workers have suggested that most faulting in the fields postdates generation and migration of hydrocarbons (Heppard et al., 1998). They have proposed an alternative mechanism, namely, that hydraulically induced fractures within a highly overpressured section are the conduit for migrating hydrocarbons (Miller, 1995; Heppard et al., 1998). A third possible migration pathway is via carrier beds, which downlap onto or structurally abut onto the underlying source rocks across glide planes (Figure 5) (Heppard et al., 1998). In this scenario, updip migration is also aided by significant overpressuring of fluids in the section. Most hydrocarbons in the Columbus Basin probably migrate through some combination of these three mechanisms. The result is a stair-step pattern of migration, whose tortuous nature helps explain the fractionated and variable character of the hydrocarbons in Columbus Basin reservoirs (Ross and Ames, 1988; Talukdar et al., 1990; Persad et al., 1993).
Faunal and Floral Biostratigraphy and Environments of Deposition
Regional and local factors render more difficult the task of applying conventional biostratigraphy to define the Pliocene-Pleistocene chronostratigraphic framework in the Columbus Basin. The Orinoco and proto-Orinoco rivers have drained the Andean highlands since the early Miocene, but only since the late Miocene has the Orinoco had an established outlet through the Columbus Basin (Hoorn, 1995; Hoorn et al., 1995; Diaz de Gamero, 1996) (Figure 1). The river and its associated marginal and deep-marine depositional systems have supplied more than 45,000 ft (14 km) of post-Miocene sediment into the basin (Erlich and Barrett, 1990). This rapid rate of sedimentation has reduced the number of nannofossils and planktonic foraminifera species that are used in other basins for chronostratigraphic correlation. In addition, the overthick section creates time-resolution problems across the basin because age-range-limited fauna or flora are scarce relative to the thicknesses of strata. Thickening of stratal packages across regional growth faults creates the need for some form of time marker to aid in accurate correlation (Leonard, 1983). Those planktonic faunal markers that are present commonly suffer from suppressed extinction because of the high sedimentation rates, causing them to appear much shorter lived than their worldwide ranges. The high rates of sediment supply, high marine energy levels, and the incising nature of the riverine-sediment transport system within the basin also complicate faunal and floral correlations by reworking microfossils in many environments. This reworking not only confuses age relationships but also contaminates the in-situ environmental assemblages. Active thrusting on the island of Trinidad during the late Pliocene and the resulting high-relief terrain also obscure age relationships by providing reworked microfossils of all ages to the active depositional system. Finally, the rapid rates and high volumes of sediment being deposited in the basin have produced a very young and poorly consolidated section that is prone to downhole caving during drilling, resulting in spurious tops and bases (Pocknall et al., 1999). Data types must be integrated carefully to establish true ages and depositional environments of the sections of interest.
Faunal and floral extinctions and evolutions, as well
as some abundance acme,
derived from data in more than 41 wells (Figure
4) have been used in the Columbus Basin to aid in creating a
chronostratigraphic framework for the Pliocene-Pleistocene. The age significance
of planktonic foraminifera and palynomorph occurrences is detailed in Pocknall
et al. (1996, 1999) (Figure 8).
Depositional Environments and Facies
In addition to the use of palynomorphs and planktonic foraminifera as age
indicators, assemblage and abundance data of these fossils have been used, along
with geophysical log
motif, to define five distinct depositional facies that
characterize the Columbus Basin: (1) fluvial/estuarine/transitional barrier
island, (2) prograding shoreface, (3) slope fan, (4) basin-floor fan, and (5)
condensed section facies. Details of the faunal and floral assemblages and their
environments that characterize these elements are detailed in Pocknall et al.
(1999) and are summarized in a following section.
Fluvial/Estuarine/Transitional Barrier
Fluvial/estuarine/transitional barrier depositional facies are composed of sediments deposited either subaerially or within the zone of tidal influence. Environments include active and abandoned channel fills, flood plains, swamps, estuarine sand bars, lagoons, beaches, marshes, and tidal flats. Mangrove pollen (derived from Rhizophora, Avicennia, and Pelliciera) is common in estuarine valley-fill sediments. Other significant components include the benthic foraminifera Milliammina telemaquensis, Arenoparrella mexicana, Ammonia beccarii, and Ammobaculities dilitatus; pollen derived from swamp plants such as Symphonia (Pachydermites diederixi) and Ceratopteris (Magnastriatities howardi); and Gramineae pollen derived from the swamp-marsh grass.
Log
character for the fluvial and transitional barrier-complex facies
consists of a blocky or occasional upward-fining motif commonly having a
serrated texture. Sandier units are generally interbedded with alluvial overbank,
fine-grained deposits and crevasse splay sands and fine-grained estuarine
facies. In some wells, these finer grained intervals are several hundreds of
feet thick. The sands that characterize these facies are
well
sorted and friable
and in outcrop exhibit ripples, low-angle cross-beds, and some bidirectional
cross-bedding. Interbedded dark-black, organic-rich siltstones and silty
mudstones show ripples and wavy laminations. Reworked shells and plant and
organic material are common. In outcrop, these facies exhibit soft sediment
deformation. Little evidence of coal or lignite can be found in cutting samples
from these facies, but in outcrop coals and laterally continuous lignites both
are not uncommon.
Prograding Shoreface
Prograding shoreface consists of the lower, middle, and upper shoreface
subfacies deposited predominantly below sea level and within the zone of wave,
tide, and storm influence. Faunal assemblages reflect an overall upward-shallowing
succession from Buliminella spp., Planulina foveolata, and Bolivina
multicostata, to increasing occurrences of Uvigerina peregrina in the
middle shelf, and, finally, Amphistegina lessonii, Nonionella
atlantica, and Bolivina spinata in the inner shelf sediments. Finer
grained shelfal units are characterized by abundances of dinoflagellates,
whereas sandier shelf systems show a decrease in dinoflagellates. In outcrop
these facies consist of thick, clean, fine-grained sands (10 to 20 ft [3 to 6
m]) separated by interbedded silts and clays. Isolated beds of coarse-grained to
medium-grained sand can occur at the top of upward-coarsening sequences. Sorting
varies from moderate to good as one moves distally in the shoreface system.
Thicker sands, having sharp scoured bases, contain abundant large-scale and
medium-scale trough cross-beds. Thick, fine-grained sandstone/siltstone
intervals have abundant vertical burrowing and shell fragments. Ophiomorpha
dominate the ichnofauna assemblage. Silt/sand intervals underlying coarser
grained sands contain abundant evidence of dewatering structures and convoluted
bedding. Log
motifs of these facies are characterized by an upward-coarsening
stack of progradational parasequences whose final top is commonly sharply
truncated and whose thickness may range to almost 1000 ft (330 m).
Slope Fan
Slope-fan sediments are deposited as slope fans and slope-leveed channel
complexes in depths ranging from 600 to 3000 ft (200 to 1000 m) of water.
Assemblages characteristic of these facies include the consistent occurrence of Guppyella
miocenica, Trochamina trincherasensis, Cyclammina cancellata,
planktonic foraminifera, and the occasional presence of Haplophragmoides
carinatum, H. narivaensis, Bathysiphon spp., and Reticulophragmium
venezuelanum. Transported Rhizophora pollen is commonly seen in high
numbers in these facies. These facies are poorly exposed in outcrop and core
data are extremely limited. They are dominantly composed of gray, micaceous,
highly calcareous silts and silty clays, rich in foraminifera, interbedded with
fine-grained, laminated, micaceous sands containing some carbonaceous streaks.
Sands are swaley bedded, having abundant bioturbation, and coarsen upward from
very fine to fine. Shales show some soft sediment deformation, and siltstones
show evidence of low-angle cross-bedding. Well
logs in these deposits are
characterized by ratty, sand-shale
log
character, which typically fines upward
in packages as thick as 1000 ft (330 m).
Basin-Floor Fan
Basin-floor-fan facies are deposited in very deep water (>3000 ft [1000
m]) near the toe of the slope. They contain much reworked middle to outer
neritic fauna mixed with in-situ, deeper water, agglutinated fauna. In-situ
fauna include common to abundant planktonics; benthic forms include Recurvoides
obsoletum, Cyclammina cancellata, Ammodiscus spp., and Alveovalvulina
suteri. Flora present include abundances of dinoflagellates and land-derived
Rhizophora and various species of fern spores. Basin-floor-fan facies
have not been described in outcrop or core. Well
log
motif of these sediments is
sharp to sharply gradational at the base, overlain by several stacked packages
(each ~100 ft [~30 m] thick), which show a blocky to slightly serrated
character.
Condensed Section
Deep-water, fine-grained silts and shales compose the condensed section
facies. Consistent and abundant Glomospira charoides, Alveovalvulina suteri,
and Reticulophragmium venezuelanum are found in these facies.
Dinoflagellates are common and commonly consist of monospecific assemblages of Nematosphaeropsis
lemniscata. Well
logs indicate very low resistivities and high (hot) gamma
signatures associated with these deposits. Although condensed sections have not
been cored in the basin, they are thought, on the basis of
log
character, to
consist dominantly of silts and clay.
Rates of Sediment Accumulation
Sediment supply throughout the Pliocene and Pleistocene in the Columbus Basin was enormous, having the bulk of these sediments derived from the Andes Mountains and associated regions far to the southwest of Trinidad. Rates of sediment accumulation in the basin during this time period surpassed those seen in other Tertiary deltaic settings, such as the Mississippi, Niger, or Nile deltas. Sediment accumulation rates of as much as 15 to 20 ft (5 to 6 m) per 1000 yr are typical across the basin, having rates of as much as 26 ft (8 m) per 1000 yr in some depocenters (Figure 7). Evidence of these rapid rates of accumulation can be seen in the sedimentary structures that characterize the upper Tertiary clastic section. Outcrops of Pliocene strata on the island of Trinidad exhibit dewatering structures, flame structures of as much as 3 ft (1 m) in height, fluidized flow features, large ball and pillow features, and large-scale convoluted bedding (Figures 9a, 9b). Deposits characterized by such features are commonly mistaken for deeper marine, mass-flow facies. However, careful examination of these deposits reveals coinciding ripple cross-laminations, climbing ripples, large-scale trough cross-beds, tidal bedding and in-situ shelfal ichnofauna (Skolithos), some vertical burrows reaching as much as 5 ft (15 m) in length (Farrelly, 1987). All evidence supports an interpretation of a shallow-water, shelfal setting for deposition of these units.
Pliocene-Pleistocene sediments in the subsurface of the basin are virtually unconsolidated. Sand porosities, even at burial depths exceeding 12,000 ft (>3660 m), can have 25 to 35%; permeabilities of several hundreds of darcys are not atypical. Overpressure problems exist throughout the basin and are partly due to the rapidly deposited, stacked, shallow, clastic shelf deposits overlying deeper outer-shelf and upper-slope facies (Heppard et al., 1998). All of these characteristics are evidence of a depositional setting having extremely rapid accumulation of sediment, occurring in a shallow-marine shelf setting.
Sequence
Stratigraphy of the Columbus Basin
A series of progradational clastic wedges form the Pliocene-Pleistocene stratigraphic architectural package of the Columbus Basin (Figure 10). Development and character of these wedges are driven by three primary elements, namely, tectonic activity, sediment supply, and marine-process redistribution of sediments. Although they progress from oldest in the west to youngest in the east, the wedges exhibit many similar characteristics. Each clastic wedge prograded from southwest to northeast across a part of the basin, and each exhibits a high degree of lateral facies continuity along depositional strike (northwest-southeast) (Figure 7). Within each wedge, the depositional facies deepen progressively from southwest to northeast, changing from (1) terrigenous fluvial/estuarine to (2) progradational or aggradational shoreface to (3) middle and outer neritic shelf to (4) slope and, finally, to (5) basinal facies over a distance of a few kilometers. Distal parts of each prograding wedge downlap onto a mobile substrate thought to be the top of thick Miocene marine shales (Figure 5). Megadepositional sequences (defined here as genetically related strata bounded by regionally unconformable surfaces and their basinward correlative conformities) average 10,000 to 12,000 ft (3000 to 3660 m) in thickness and accumulated over relatively short periods (300,000 to 500,000 yr).
The megasequences are internally composed of five to eight progradational parasequences, each averaging 550 to 980 ft (170 to 300 m) in thickness and deposited over 50,000 to 100,000 yr (Figures 7, 10). These parasequences contain reservoir sand bodies elongated along depositional strike. Facies within each parasequence show a high degree of continuity in the depositional strike direction but give way in a depositional dip direction (generally, north-northeast) and within a few kilometers to deep-marine environments. Parasequences are bounded by subregional regressive surfaces of erosion at their bases and by subregional deepening events at their tops. These flooding events, extensive along strike, result in accumulation of shales that make excellent local seals, although these same shales are limited in the dip direction. They therefore make poor correlation markers regionally (i.e., beyond the extent of a single megasequence) and cannot be assumed to form high-quality seals across a regional area.
Several key surfaces have been identified that are important in defining the
megasequences that fill the Columbus Basin. From youngest to oldest, the
regionally extensive surfaces (see Figures
10, 11) are (1) the near base
Pliocene lowstand surface (LS) (NBPLS; 3.8 m.y.), (2) the base green LS (BGLS;
3.6 m.y.), (3) the base 8 sand LS (B8LS; 3.0 m.y.), (4) the base braided 2 sand
LS (BB2LS; 2.3-2.4 m.y.), (5) the "N" LS (NLS; 2.0 m.y.), (6) the
"J" LS (JLS or base Alnus lowstand; 1.78 m.y.), (7) the "H"
LS (HLS; 1.5 m.y.), (8) the "F" LS (FLS; 1.3 m.y.), (9) the
"F" transgressive surface (FTS; 1.2 m.y.), (10) the "E" LS (ELS;
1.0 m.y.), (11) the "D" LS (DLS; 0.8 m.y.), and (12) the "B"
LS (BLS; 0.5 m.y.). These surfaces, with the exception of the FTS, mark
basinwide episodes of basinward facies shifts and the progressive northeastward
progradation of the Orinoco Delta system. Each episode is characterized by a
rapid thickening of the stratigraphic section across successively eastward
growth faults. Stratigraphic architecture within these fault blocks typically
consists of deep-water marine clastics grading upsection into successively
shallower shelf deposits and finally culminating in the sudden deposition of a
series of stacked shelf parasequences (Figures
5, 10). Each sequence
is
capped by an unconformity associated with sediment bypass of the next-younger
sequence
. The FTS is a regionally extensive surface of deepening that
corresponds to mid-Pleistocene marine flooding and landward translation of
facies across the basin. This event initiated a distinct change in the basin
toward higher frequency and larger magnitude translations of shoreline. The
result is a series of large-magnitude lowstand progradational and highstand
retrogradational events occurring across the area during the mid to late
Pleistocene, having thin, shallow, widespread lowstand systems tracts
alternating with thick, deep-water, transgressive shales (Figures
7, 10). The apparent increase
in number of Pleistocene sequences (six) relative to Pliocene sequences (three)
is superficial and a function of an increased abundance of key faunal and floral
extinctions and first occurrences in the Pleistocene and uppermost Pliocene
sections. This fact allows for a more detailed resolution of regionally
extensive surfaces in the younger sections.
A second level in the hierarchy of surfaces is the subregionally extensive surfaces that developed as a function of more localized, structurally driven variations in accommodation space. The most pronounced of these localized surfaces are several large-magnitude marine unconformities that are somewhat angular and appear to divide the stratigraphic sections in each megasequence into a lower and an upper stratigraphic interval (Figures 5, 7). The lower stratigraphic intervals, characterized by a few specific shallowing events, are dominated by deeper marine facies. In contrast, the upper intervals are dominated by shallow-marine to fluvial facies, which contain abundant and distinct parasequence-scale shoreface cycles. These diachronous marine unconformities postdate the preceding maximum flooding surface and early highstand systems tract deposits. These unconformities appear to be regressive surfaces of marine erosion, which precede the most dramatic and continuous phases of late highstand progradation and aggradation in the basin. These surfaces form as a result of submarine tide, wave, and storm processes active on the depositional shelf. Similar regressive surfaces of marine erosion have been identified in both ancient and modern deposits (Plint, 1988; Posamentier et al., 1992; Posamentier and Allen, 1993), albeit not having the pronounced expression seen in the Columbus Basin, which is likely a function of syndepositional tectonism. Large-scale flexuring in the basin created a structural hinge along which marine erosion was enhanced.
Influence of Tectonics on Stratigraphic Sequence
Development
The Columbus Basin regional chronostratigraphic framework discussed on preceding pages has been used to explain the complex relationships between larger, regionally extensive normal faults, mobile shale diapirs, and the deposition of large, clastic-rich megasequences that make up the stratigraphic architecture of the Columbus Basin.
Regional extension, associated with the oblique transpression of the Caribbean plate to the north and the South American plate to the south, creates sites of weakness for prograding sediments to load, further enhancing failure along normal faults. The initiation of movement on these extension faults is reflected in the stratigraphy on their downthrown side. There the stratigraphic units most proximal to the downthrown side of the fault are deep-marine deposits overlain by an initial progradational shallow-marine sand, overlain by another deep flooding event marking early activity on the normal fault. Once the tectonic accommodation space closest to the fault is filled, the succession progrades east of the proximal normal fault, eventually stalling near the depositional shelf break. These faults, once initiated, bound the proximal side of a single megasequence (Figure 12). Aided by loading from the weight of progressive sediment deposition, mobile shales are forced northeastward and begin to rise. Accommodation space is generated beneath the basinal edge of the megasequence by shale withdrawal, and subsidence begins along a counterregional glide plane, creating distal accommodation space. Growth occurs across the proximal bounding faults (G in Figure 12) as sediments from the proto-Orinoco strive to fill proximal accommodation space. Stratigraphic thickening likewise occurs toward the diapir in response to progressive downward rotation of beds along the counterregional glide-plane surface (Figure 12).
A typical sequence
of fault initiation and strata development is illustrated
in Figure 13. Fault G, active
pre-time marker 1 (T1), shows growth and terminates glide plane F at depth. The
sediment wedge to the northeast of fault G begins to be rotated above
counterregional glide plane G, creating a shelf break and locus of sediment
accumulation landward of the outlying shale diapir. Fault H is initiated in
response to continued extension and mobile-shale withdrawal. Sediment loading
proximal to the diapir and subregional subsidence enhance shale withdrawal,
severing the subsurface glide plane G. Subregional withdrawal subsidence within
fault block G-H ceases. Sediments fill remaining accommodation space in the area
and prograde the shelf break eastward of fault H. Fault G continues to show
limited activity and growth
well
into time 2 (T2), but the bulk of extension and
growth between T1 and T2 is taken up at fault H. Rotation occurs at depth above
the more eastward counterregional glide plane H, and both the shelf break and
loci of accumulation reside east of fault H and proximal of glide plane H (Figure
13c). Expansion and growth continue along the H fault (T3), stratigraphic
thicknesses increasing by shale withdrawal and counterregional rotation. The H
fault eventually proves unable to keep pace with further extension because of
exhaustion of mobile material at depth. Any remaining accommodation space is
filled and there is a progressive eastward shift of extension faulting,
shelf-slope break location, and lateral shale withdrawal.
Comparison with the Niger Delta
The relationship between structure and stratigraphy in the geologic evolution of the Columbus Basin resembles that identified by Evamy et al. (1978) in the Niger Delta (Figure 14). In the Niger Delta model, shale migration establishes a bathymetric high in front of the progradational Niger shelf system, forming a break between paralic/deltaic sedimentation, which has been trapped behind the bulge and slope/bathyal sedimentation outboard of the bulge crest. Beds deposited behind the bulge show progressive downward rotation and steepening of dip along a counterregional glide plane associated with progressively basinward migration of the mobile shale. Large growth faults develop landward in response to extension and mobile shale withdrawal at depth.
Although similarities between the offshore Nigeria tectonostratigraphic processes and those of Trinidad's Columbus Basin are obvious, a few notable differences exist. The most obvious of these differences is the location of the shelf-slope break with respect to the migrating shale bulge. In the Niger Delta model, the break between shelfal water depths and slope/bathyal water depths occurs at the crest of the shale bulge (Figure 14). This configuration limits distribution of deep-marine facies to the distal side of the bulge, having little primary depositional dip across the sedimentary shelf system, proximal to the bulge. In contrast, the Orinoco Delta strata exhibit a distinct break from shelf to slope/bathyal water depths on the proximal side of the shale bulge. The result is a significant bathymetry change across the sedimentary shelf and slope systems. Slope and basinal facies are thus able to downlap and onlap the underlying mobile shales. This difference creates significant primary depositional dip across the Columbus Basin depositional system proximal to the shale bulge.
A second difference between these two models is the discrepancy in the height
of the shale bulge (Figure 14).
Although Evamy et al. (1978) suggested that the shale bulges in the Niger Delta
rise to near sea level, the crests of the shale bulges in the Columbus Basin,
Orinoco Delta, never rose to shelfal water depths. This interpretation, based on
paleobathymetric data and seismic facies analysis
of deposits that onlap the
shale bulges, suggests outer neritic to bathyal water depths and facies
associated with these deposits. Finally, shale bulges in the Columbus Basin were
probably subjected to reworking by geostrophic currents, longshore currents,
slumps, and slides that were more effective than similar features in the
offshore Nigeria area. This inference is based partly on the high magnitude of
offshore submarine forces reworking the Columbus Basin area throughout the late
Tertiary and today, as
well
as the tectonic activity of the basin.
Niger Delta oil fields are characterized by structural crests that migrate back into the fault in successively younger strata (Weber, 1987). This pattern indicates syndepositional wedging back into bounding growth faults (Figure 15a). In the Columbus Basin, however, some of the structures, such as East Mayaro field, have structural crests that migrate away from the normal fault in successively younger strata. This pattern may reflect postdepositional modification of the original locations of the structural crest by late growth across the field-bounding normal fault. Figures 5 and 13 illustrate these differences, showing post-Grimsdalea (FLS) depositional growth along the H fault causing migration of the structural crests of T1 (HLS) horizons to successively more eastward positions.
A final noted difference between the Trinidad and Nigeria sequences is that
of bidirectional wedging of sediments within the Columbus Basin megasequences
vs. unidirectional wedging of strata proximally in the Niger Delta (Weber,
1987). This difference is a function of the location of the depositional shelf
break, which occurs proximal of the eastward-migrating shale diapir in the
Columbus Basin system. Sediments thicken in response to distal accommodation
along the associated counterregional surface, as well
as thickening, similar to
that in the Niger Delta setting, along the proximal normal fault.
Structural Control on Depositional Systems and Accommodation Space
Structural uplifts associated with Miocene and early Pliocene thrusting to the west of Trinidad contributed sediments to the basin and focused fluvial feeder systems into the basin (Speed, 1985). As this compressional deformation wave moved progressively southward and eastward, compressional ridges, oriented northeast-southwest were formed in the offshore areas of the Columbus Basin. Today these ridges form the productive offshore trends (Figure 4) and are as young as Pleistocene in age. Earlier formed ridges in the northwestern areas served to channel late Pleistocene distributaries along lows in the proximal coastal plain. Such focusing of fluvial feeder systems aided in transport of sediment across what was a very low, broad coastal plain.
Limited accommodation space in the coastal plain and most inner-shelf areas meant rapid progradation of depositional systems during the early stages of any sea level fall. In some cases, shorelines most likely moved basinward as a result of sediment outbuilding only to stall as they impinged upon high-accommodation zones at the shelf break, steepened by focused zones of shale withdrawal (see Figures 6, 12). Sediments from the proto-Orinoco Delta were most likely swept northeastward by strong longshore currents until abutting against the offshore bathymetric highs formed by eastern extension of the Darien Ridge. The linear (northwest-southeast) nature of shale bulge fronts led to northwest-southeast-oriented loci of deposition and subsequent lineation of strand-plain deposits.
Two types of parasequences make up these stacked shoreface parasequence sets: (1) bypass and (2) aggradational shorefaces. Bypass-shoreface development occurred in areas of limited accommodation space, either proximally along the structural hinge of a megasequence or at the shelf break during times of low subsidence. These systems exhibit a thin progradational base, indicating rapid progradation and little accumulation of sediments. The parasequence overall is of limited thickness, bypassing most sediment basinward early in lowstand time to form slope and basin-floor fan systems.
In contrast, aggradational shoreface development occurred during times of high rates of accommodation-space development, typically at the depositional shelf break. These systems may possess either thin or thick progradational bases, depending on the availability of early highstand accommodation space. Where large amounts of lowstand sediments are stored in the aggrading lowstand shoreface, little sediment is left over to form gravity deposits on the slope and basin, resulting in limited development of slope fan and basin-floor fan reservoirs. This concept was illustrated in modeling studies by Ross (1990), and these relationships between deep-water and shallow-water deposition are documented in strata across the basin.
Because of the high sediment-supply rates of the Orinoco Delta system, accommodation space is almost always completely filled during lowstand cycles. The late lowstand fill leaves little space to accommodate transgressive systems tract sediments. Biofacies associated with sediments, typically shales, overlying lowstand shoreface deposits show rapid deepening above these systems. This rapid deepening is reflected in the limited, to unresolvable, thickness of many transgressive systems tracts and limited ability to resolve shelf onlap on conventional seismic lines. Such onlap in other basins is commonly used as evidence of transgression. In addition, these rapid flooding events create an excellent reservoir/seal relationship (Figure 16). In a few locations within the basin, transgressive subsidence is greater than sediment supply, and transgressive sediments back step above the lowstand shoreface system. The resulting transgressive systems tract can form a hydrocarbon "waste zone" that has limited productivity (Figure 16) as compared with highstand and early lowstand deposits.
Implications and Recommendations for Exploration in the Columbus Basin
Several observations have been made throughout the course of this work that bear on future exploration risk and success in the Columbus Basin and in other high-sediment-supply, transpressional basins, including the following.
- Large megasequences define distinct episodes of sedimentation across the Columbus Basin; they wedge bidirectionally as a result of thickening along a proximal normal fault and along a distal counterregional glide-plane surface. Consideration of reservoir risk across such a megasequence requires looking at it as a complete paleofeature. Failure to do so could lead to an incomplete understanding of reservoir quality, thickness and distribution, and fault timing across a prospect area and result in failure to find adequate reservoir sands and problems in assessing migration risk.
- Original structural crests associated with bidirectional roll are commonly modified by subsequent growth along the proximal normal faults, resulting in posthydrocarbon migration of structural crests basinward as the section youngs upward. Such postmigration structuring can breach in-place traps. The implications for remigration of hydrocarbons from original crestal traps should be considered in assessing migration risk.
- Megasequences are composed of bypass shorefaces along the structural hinge and a combination of bypass and aggradational shoreface parasequences along the depositional shelf break. The relative abundances of aggradational and bypass shorefaces developed at the shelf break are a function of continuous vs. episodic subsidence. Understanding the distribution of accommodation-space loci and bypass loci within the megasequence in turn results in an accurate understanding of reservoir and seal risk for distinct horizons at different locations.
- Bypass shoreface systems feed early, sand-rich, lowstand slope and basin-floor fan deposits. Aggradational shorefaces bypass limited amounts of sandy sediment to slope and basinal deposits.
- Thickness of sediment accumulation is a function of available space to fill. The thickness of sediment accumulated on a proximal bypass surface has no relationship to the volume of sediment being bypassed across it. More important is the degree of shallowing associated with the surface. If sediment is not accumulating above a surface at a proximal locality, it simply means that the sediment is in either a distal or lateral location of accommodation.
- The character (i.e., thickness, rate of thinning, angle of termination, etc.) of classic seismic stratal terminations (onlap, offlap, toplap, downlap) is strongly affected by the relative relationship of progradation vs. aggradation in a system. If the setting is high accommodation, great thicknesses of sediment may aggrade before a basinward, progradational step of the delta. Conversely, low-sloping depositional surfaces (i.e., low-accommodation space) and high-energy depositional conditions (i.e., low-preservation settings) may combine to produce thin, laterally extensive delta coverage of the shelf. At a fixed vertical resolution of seismic data, classic stratal relationships used typically to classify deposits genetically above and below a surface of termination are obscured. It is important to recognize the effect that changes in accommodation and energy have on classic seismic stratigraphic interpretation criteria.
- The depth of a quality reservoir in any megasequence increases with movement more proximal to the normal fault that bounds the proximal edge of a megasequence (Ortmann and Wood, 1996). Drilling deeper in the more proximal locations of a megasequence may produce a higher quality reservoir than that found in the time-equivalent section to the northeast. Drilling deeper may bring penetration of the lowstand progradational strata that initiated failure on the proximal bounding fault, encasing them in postfailure, deeper water shales.
- The stratigraphic top of overpressured strata within the basin is diachronous. Regressive surfaces of erosion closely approximate the transition into the overpressured section within each megasequence. Heppard et al. (1998) pointed out that hydrostatic-pressure relationships across the Columbus Basin exert a strong influence on the migration and trapping of hydrocarbons and the distribution of hydrocarbon type within the basin. Understanding the genesis and distribution of regressive surfaces of erosion within each megasequence may lead to improving understanding of hydrocarbon-type distribution across the basin.
The Columbus Basin is a world-class hydrocarbon basin of Pliocene and Pleistocene age, having some of the highest accumulation rates of any basin in the world. The sediments are unconsolidated, and the stratigraphic section is more than 49,000 ft (>15,000 m) thick. A chronostratigraphic framework of the basin is presented herein that is based on several key lowstand horizons identified in the Pliocene and Pleistocene section. Using these key lowstand surfaces, we can subdivide the stratigraphic interval into at least nine megasequence units. Megasequences become progressively younger to the east and are bounded at the base and top by regionally extensive unconformities and correlative basinal conformities. Sediments within these sequences were deposited by the wave-dominated paleo-Orinoco Delta system that prograded onto a storm-influenced and current-influenced shelf to very near the shelf-slope break. At shelf-edge locations, the delta was exposed to high wave and current energy that formed sands into cuspate, strike-continuous, clean reservoir bodies that characterize the basin. Megasequences do not exhibit the classic Exxon "slug" geometries seen in passive-margin basins. Instead, these "bow-tie" sequences (Figure 12) fan down and seaward (east) into the counterregional glide surface along the shale diapir, which marks their east edge. Sedimentary packages thin landward (west) along the megasequence hinge then thicken again farther landward into the proximal, megasequence-bounding normal fault.
The megasequences range between 9800 and 13,000 ft (3000 and 4000 m) thick, and each was deposited over a period of 300,000 to 500,000 yr. Their deposition was driven by a combination of controls, including eustatic sea level and regional tectonics. Megasequences are internally composed of a series of stacked parasequences, some of which are more than 820 ft (>250 m) thick, deposited over periods of 50,000 to 80,000 yr. They are bounded at their base by local unconformity surfaces and at their top by local flooding events. Parasequence bounding surfaces are continuous in a depositional strike direction (generally northwest to southeast) but are poor horizons for regional correlation work. In this structurally complex setting, compressional structural features tended to focus transport systems, whereas extension structural features focused depositional systems.
Many similarities exist between the Columbus Basin and the Niger Delta, although there are subtle differences that have important implications for reservoir type within megasequences. In contrast to the Niger Delta setting, as structural crests in the Columbus Basin migrate progressively basinward, the younger the section becomes. This geometry reflects postdepositional alteration of some of the original structural crests, suggesting implications for secondary migration within large structures.
Armentrout, J. M., and J. F. Clement, 1990, Biostratigraphic
calibration of depositional cycles: a case study in High-Island-Galveston-East
Breaks areas, offshore Texas, in J. M. Armentrout and B. F.
Perkins, eds., Sequence
stratigraphy as an exploration tool: concepts and
practices in the Gulf Coast: Gulf Coast SEPM 11th Annual Research Conference, p.
21-51.
Ave Lallemant, H. G., 1991, The Caribbean-South American plate boundary, Araya Peninsula, eastern Venezuela, in D. K. Larue and G. Draper, eds., St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, Transactions of the 12th Caribbean Geological Conference, unpaginated.
Babb, S., and P. Mann, 1999, Structural and sedimentary development of a Neogene transpressional plate boundary between the Caribbean and South American plates in Trinidad and the Gulf of Paria, in P. Mann, ed., Caribbean basins: sedimentary basins of the world, four: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., p. 495-557.
Beard, J. H., J. B. Sangree, and L. A. Smith, 1982, Quaternary chronology, paleoclimate, depositional sequences, and eustatic cycles: AAPG Bulletin, v. 66, p. 158-169.
Devlin, W. J., K. W. Rudolph, C. A. Shaw, and K. D. Ehman,
1993, The effect of tectonic and eustatic cycles on accommodation and sequence
-stratigraphic
framework in the Upper Cretaceous foreland basin of southwestern Wyoming, in
H. W. Posamentier, C. P. Summerhayes, B. U. Haq, and G. P.
Allen, eds.,
Sequence
stratigraphy and facies associations: Blackwell Scientific
Publications, International Association of Sedimentology Special Publication 18,
p. 501-520.
Diaz de Gamero, M. I., 1996, The changing course of the Orinoco River during the Neogene: a review: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, and Palaeoecology, v. 123, no. 1-4, p. 385-402.
Di Croce, J., A. Bally, and P. Vail, 1999, Sequence
stratigraphy of the
Eastern Venezuelan Basin, in P. Mann, ed., Caribbean basins: sedimentary
basins of the world, four: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., p. 417-474.
Dominguez, J. M., 1996, The Sao Francisco strand plain: a paradigm for wave-dominated deltas?, in M. De Batist and P. Jacobs, eds., Geology of siliciclastic shelf seas: Geological Society of America Special Publication 17, p. 217-231.
Erlich, R. N., and S. F. Barrett, 1990, Cenozoic plate tectonic history of the northern Venezuelan-Trinidad area: Tectonics, v. 9, p. 161-184.
Erlich, R. N., and S. F. Barrett, 1994, Petroleum geology of the eastern Venezuela foreland basin, in R. W. McQueen and D. Leckie, eds., Foreland basins and fold belts: AAPG Memoir 55, p. 341-362.
Evamy, D. D., J. Haremboure, P. Kamerling, W. A. Knaap, F. A. Molloy, and P. H. Rowlands, 1978, Hydrocarbon habitat of Tertiary Niger Delta: AAPG Bulletin, v. 62, p. 1-39.
Farrelly, J. J., 1987, Depositional setting and evolution of the Pliocene-basal Pleistocene section of southeast Trinidad: Master's thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 141 p.
Galloway, W. E., D. K. Hobday, and K. Magara, 1982, Frio formation of Texas Gulf coastal plain: depositional systems, structural framework, and hydrocarbon distribution: AAPG Bulletin, v. 66, p. 649-688.
Haq, B. U., J. Hardenbol, and P. R. Vail, 1988, Mesozoic and Cenozoic chronostratigraphy and cycles of sea-level change, in C. K. Wilgus, H. Posamentier, C. A. Ross, and C. G. St. C. Kendall, eds., Sea level changes: an integrated approach: SEPM Special Publication 42, p. 71-108.
Hedberg, H. D., 1950, Geology of the Eastern Venezuela Basin (Anzoategui-Monagas-Sucre-eastern Guarico portion): Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 61, p. 1173-1215.
Heppard, P. H., R. L. Ames, and L. M. Ross, 1990, Migration of oils into Samaan Field, offshore Trinidad, West Indies, in K. A. Gillezeau, ed., Transactions of the Second Geological Conference of the Geological Society of Trinidad and Tobago, p. 157-168.
Heppard, P. D., H. S. Cander, and E. B. Eggertson, 1998, Abnormal pressure and the occurrence of hydrocarbons in offshore eastern Trinidad, West Indies, in B. E. Law, G. F. Ulmishek, and V. I. Slavin, eds., Abnormal pressures in hydrocarbon environments: AAPG Memoir 70, p. 215-246.
Hoorn, C., 1995, Miocene palynostratigraphy and paleoenvironments of northwestern Amazonia: evidence for marine incursions and the influence of Andean tectonics: Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands, 156 p.
Hoorn, C., J. Guerrero, G. Sarmiento, and M. Lorente, 1995, Andean tectonics as a cause for changing drainage patterns in Miocene northern South America: Geology, v. 23, p. 237-240.
Lamb, J. L., W. W. Wornhardt, T. C. Huang, and T. E. Dube, 1987, Practical application of Pleistocene eustacy in offshore Gulf of Mexico, in R. A. Ross and D. Haman, eds., Timing and depositional history of eustatic sequences: constraints on seismic stratigraphy: Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research Special Publication 24, p. 33-39.
Leonard, R., 1983, Geology and hydrocarbon accumulations, Columbus Basin, offshore Trinidad: AAPG Bulletin, v. 67, p. 1081-1093.
Miller, T. W., 1995, New insights on natural hydraulic fractures induced by abnormally high pore pressures: AAPG Bulletin, v. 79, p. 1005-1018.
Mitchum, R. M., J. B. Sangree, P. R. Vail, and W. W.
Wornhardt, 1991, Sequence
stratigraphy in late Cenozoic expanded sections, Gulf
of Mexico, in J. M. Armentrout and B. F. Perkins, eds.,
Sequence
stratigraphy as an exploration tool: concepts and practices in the Gulf
Coast: Gulf Coast SEPM 11th Annual Research Conference, p. 237-256.
Ortmann, K., and L. J. Wood, 1996, Successful application of 3-D seismic coherency models to predict stratigraphy offshore eastern Trinidad (abs.): Houston, Society of Exploration Geophysicists Abstracts with Program, p. 101-103.
Pacht, J. A., B. E. Bowen, B. L. Shaffer, and B. R.
Pottorf, 1990, Sequence
stratigraphy of Plio-Pleistocene strata in the offshore
Louisiana Gulf coast-applications to hydrocarbon exploration, in J. M.
Armentrout and B. F. Perkins, eds.,
Sequence
stratigraphy as an exploration
tool: concepts and practices in the Gulf Coast: Gulf Coast SEPM 11th Annual
Research Conference, p. 269-285.
Parnaud, F. Y., Y. Gou, J.-C. Pascual, I. Truskowski, O. Gallango, H. Passalacqua, and F. Roure, 1995, Petroleum geology of the central part of the Eastern Venezuela Basin, in A. J. Tankard, R. Sua'rez, and H. J. Welsnik, eds., Petroleum basins of South America: AAPG Memoir 62, p. 741-756.
Perez, O. J., and Y. P. Aggarwal, 1981, Present-day tectonics of the southeastern Caribbean and northeastern Venezuela: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 86, p. 10791-10804.
Persad, K., S. Talukdar, and W. Dow, 1993, Tectonic control in source rock maturation and oil migration in Trinidad and implications for petroleum exploration: Gulf Coast SEPM Foundation 13th Annual Research Conference Proceedings, p. 237-249.
Pindell, J. L., and J. P. Erikson, 1993, Mesozoic passive margin of northern South America, in J. A. Salfity, ed., Cretaceous tectonics in the Andes: Wiesbaden, FRG, Vieweg Publishing, Earth Evolution Sciences, International Monograph Series, p. 1-60.
Plint, A. G., 1988, Sharp-based shoreface sequences and "offshore bars" in the Cardium Formation of Alberta; their relationship to relative changes in sea level, in C. K. Wilgus, H. Posamentier, C. A. Ross, and C. G. St. C. Kendall, eds., Sea level changes: an integrated approach: SEPM Special Publication 42, p. 357-370.
Pocknall, D. T., L. J. Wood, A. F. Geen, B. E. Harry, and R. W. Hedlund, 1996, Integrated paleontological studies of Pliocene to Pleistocene deposits of the Orinoco Delta, eastern Venezuela and Trinidad (abs.): Houston, 9th International Palynological Congress, Program and Abstracts, unpaginated.
Pocknall, D. T., L. J. Wood, and A. F. Geen, 1999, Depositional facies in the Pliocene-Pleistocene section, offshore eastern Trinidad: Port-of-Spain, Transactions of the 14th Caribbean Geologic Conference, unpaginated.
Posamentier, H. W., and G. P. Allen, 1993, Siliciclastic sequence
stratigraphic patterns in foreland ramp-style basins: Geology, v. 21, p.
445-458.
Posamentier, H. W., and P. R. Vail, 1988, Eustatic controls on
clastic deposition II-sequence
and systems tract models, in C. K.
Wilgus, H. Posamentier, C. A. Ross, and C. G. St. C.
Kendall, eds., Sea-level changes: an integrated approach: SEPM Special
Publication 42, p. 109-124.
Posamentier, H. W., G. P. Allen, D. P. James, and M. Tesson,
1992, Forced regressions in a sequence
stratigraphic framework: concepts,
examples, and exploration significance: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1687-1709.
Robertson, P., and K. Burke, 1989, Evolution of the southern Caribbean plate boundary, vicinity of Trinidad and Tobago: AAPG Bulletin, v. 73, p. 490-509.
Rodrigues, K., 1988, Oil source bed recognition and crude oil correlation, Trinidad, West Indies: advances in organic geochemistry 1987: Organic Geochemistry, v. 13, p. 365-371.
Rodrigues, K., 1998, Factors controlling API gravity variations among Trinidad crudes: Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, Transactions of the 3rd Geological Conference of the Geological Society of Trinidad and Tobago and the 14th Caribbean Geological Conference, unpaginated.
Ross, W. C., 1990, Modeling base-level dynamics as a control on basin-fill geometries and facies distribution: a conceptual framework, in T. Cross, ed., Quantitative dynamic stratigraphy: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, p. 387-399.
Ross, L. M., and R. L. Ames, 1988, Stratification of oil in Columbus Basin of Trinidad: Oil & Gas Journal, v. 86, no. 39, p. 72-76.
Russo, R. M., and R. C. Speed, 1992, Oblique collision and tectonic wedging of the South American continent and Caribbean terranes: Geology, v. 20, p. 447-450.
Speed, R. C., 1985, Cenozoic collision of the Lesser Antilles Arc and continental South America and the origin of the El Pilar fault: Tectonics, v. 4, p. 41-69.
Swift, D. J. P., P. M. Hudelson, R. L. Brenner, and P. Thompson, 1987, Shelf construction in a foreland basin: storm beds, shelf sand bodies, and shelf-slope depositional sequences in the Upper Cretaceous Mesaverde Group, Book Cliffs, Utah: Sedimentology, v. 34, no. 3, p. 423-457.
Talukdar, S. C., O. Gallango, and A. Ruggiero, 1988, Generation and migration of oil in the Maturin subbasin, Eastern Venezuela Basin: advances in organic geochemistry, 1987: Organic Geochemistry, v. 13, p. 537-547.
Talukdar, S. C., W. G. Dow, and K. M. Persad, 1990, Deep oil prospects in Trinidad: Houston Geological Society Bulletin, October, p. 16-19.
Tiratsoo, E. N., 1986, Oilfields of the World, 3d ed.: Houston, Texas, Gulf Publishing Company, 392 p.
Vail, P. R, R. M. Mitchum, and S. Thompson III, 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, part 3: relative changes of sea level from coastal onlap, in C. W. Payton, ed., Seismic stratigraphy applications to hydrocarbon exploration: AAPG Memoir 26, p. 63-97.
Warne, A. G., A. Aslan, W. A. White, J. C. Gibeaut, T. A. Tremblay, R. C. Smyth, E. H. Guevara, R. Gutierrez, S. D. Hovorka, and J. A. Raney, 1999a, Final report year two: geoenvironmental characterization of the Delta del Orinoco: University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, Report to Petr¾leos de Venezuela, S.A., 327 p.
Warne, A. G., E. H. Guevara, J. C. Gibeaut, W. A. White, R. C. Smyth, A. Aslan, and J. A. Raney, 1999b, The Orinoco River and Delta, Venezuela: a comparison with other major fluvio-deltaic systems: Proceedings of the International Association of Geomorphologists Large Rivers Conference, unpaginated.
Weber, K. J., 1987, Hydrocarbon distribution patterns in Nigerian growth fault structures controlled by structural style and stratigraphy: Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, v. 1, p. 91-104.
Wood, L. J., 1995, Stratigraphic sequence
development in high sediment
supply, high accommodation space basins (abs.): Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, 14th
Caribbean Geologic Conference, Abstracts with Program, v. 3, p. 87.
Wood, L. J., 1996, A model for tectonostratigraphic sequence
development in a rapidly subsiding basin and implications for successful
exploration: Columbus Basin, Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies: Baku, Azerbaijan,
AAPG Hedberg Conference on Oil and Gas Petroleum Systems in Rapidly Subsiding
Basins Proceedings, unpaginated.
Wood, L. J., and G. J. Nash, 1995, Shallow hydrocarbon migration and seafloor seepage, offshore Samaan field, southeastern Trinidad (abs.): Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, 14th Caribbean Geologic Conference, Abstracts with Program, p. 87.
Wood, L. J., M. Henry, B. Lanan, L. Spencer, P. Belanger, K. Ortmann, N.
Engelhardt-Moore, D. Pocknall, and T. Romero, 1994, Sequence
stratigraphy in
structurally complex areas: integration of multidisciplinary data sets, Columbus
Basin, Trinidad (abs.): AAPG Annual Meeting, Abstracts with Program, v. 3, p.
286.
Wornhardt, W. W., and P. R. Vail, 1990, Revision of the Plio-Pleistocene
cycles and their application to sequence
stratigraphy of shelf and slope
sediments in the Gulf of Mexico, in J. M. Armentrout and B. F.
Perkins, eds.,
Sequence
stratigraphy as an exploration tool: concepts and
practices in the Gulf Coast: Gulf Coast SEPM 11th Annual Research Conference, p.
391-397.
Lesli J. Wood is a research associate in the Bureau of Economic Geology's
Industrial Associates Research Program at the University of Texas at Austin. She
received her Ph.D. from Colorado State University in 1992, where she studied
sequence
stratigraphy of clastic shoreline and nearshore systems and their
response to base-level changes. Wood joined Amoco Production Company in 1992,
where she obtained extensive exploration and production experience in South
America and the Caribbean and was a member of the Seismic Attributes Development
Team working in clastic basins in Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, and Azerbaijan. Wood
joined the bureau in 1997 as a member of the Deltaic Systems Research Group and
is currently working in the modern Orinoco Delta in Venezuela, as
well
as in
ancient fluvial/deltaic outcrops of the United States western interior.
The regional chronostratigraphic framework and tectonostratigraphic model for
development of the Columbus Basin is a product of 3 years' regional work by
many, many individuals. I would like especially to thank Peter Bentham, David
Pocknall, Maria Henry, and Ken Ortmann for direct input into ideas,
correlations, and implications. I would also like to thank Amoco Energy Company
of Trinidad and Tobago for permission to publish the results of this work and
the company geoscientists for many stimulating conversations regarding the
geology of the Eastern Venezuela Basin. Much appreciation to M. Wade, F. Krause,
and an anonymous reviewer, too, for reviews of this manuscript, as well
as to
Martin Jackson for conversations regarding the diapirs of the Columbus Basin.
Finally, thanks to the graphics and editing staff at the Bureau of Economic
Geology, University of Texas at Austin, for assistance in completing final
figures and manuscript.