RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Question?-corr
Maybe 40% is better,
It is still twice as good as other source rocks.
Just da way I see dat!
Hardrock
========================
60% TOC eh?
Can you post a link to that data?
thks
nb
==========================================================
https://goombarhsedge.blogspot.com/2011/08/rosetta-hits-bakken-oil.html
To my understanding, the Bakken is not a goodreservoir, as the oil is tight, in other words, the shale has to be broken toallow the oil to slowly leak out from the heat and pressure. The Bakken is not a reservoir at all, but is asource rock for oil, for which it is among the best in the world, with theirTotal Organic Content (TOC) of up to 60% by weight. Contrast this with other source rocks thatare good for oil with a 5 to 10% TOC. The main driver here is that the Bakken oilhere has not been released and have not migrated elsewhere, but they arecontained in the source rock, the Alberta Basin Bakken.
The thought, is that this is very good news,Bakken is hit everywhere, with the pressure being much higher in certainsections of this play.
==================================================
I spoke to the Goombarh and he gave me this quote from Leigh Price Thesis (unpublished) he died in 2002 or so.
Bakken Shales are world class source rocks:
"Bakken shales have very high original total organic carbon (TOC) contents (16 to 40% TOC by weight), the shales, by volume, are composed of large amounts of OM. For example, 16 weight %TOC is equivalent to 31.35 volume %OM, and 40 weight %TOC is equivalent to 63.64 volume % OM. During intense oil generation, over 50% of the OM in the Bakken shales is converted to oil and gas, roughly in a 3.70 to 1 proportion. "
Source to download the thesis:
https://goombarh.fileave.com/Price%20Bakken%20Geology.pdf