Marine and Petroleum Geology 18 (2001) 519523

www.elsevier.com/locate/marpetgeo

Gas hydrates: importance and applications in petroleum exploration

D. Grauls*
ELF Exploration Production, CSTJF Avenue Larribau, 64018 Pau, Cedex, France
Received 20 March 1999; received in revised form 10 March 2000; accepted 22 March 2000

Abstract
A recent hydrate resources assessment (Kvenvolden, Workshop Panel Discussion Proceedings (1998a) 1; Geological Society of London
Special Publication, 137 (1998b) 9) concluded that gas hydrates might represent the most important gas resource for the next century
estimated at 10 13 and 20 10 15 m 3 (standard conditions) of methane gas in onshore and deep offshore areas, respectively. Even though it is
probable that these gures are overestimated, especially in offshore areas, and even though gas hydrates cannot be economically produced at
present, they remain, however, an important gas resource and also need to be carefully considered in deep offshore petroleum exploration for
different reasons. Gas hydrates rst of all act as an efcient seal: signicant amounts of gas can be trapped in some circumstances beneath the
base or hydrate stability zone (HSZ), or the bottom simulating reector (BSR). Furthermore, as the stability of hydrates is effectively
constrained thermodynamically, the BSR, if present, can be used as a direct thermal indicator. Predicting heat ow is of great importance for
modelling purposes in poorly explored offshore areas whenever there are no well data available. In addition, gas hydrates are a good direct
hydrocarbon indicator: the presence of a strong BSR at the base of a gas HSZ and of free gas indicates that the petroleum system has been
active since a recent period. As exploration moves more and more towards deeper offshore areas, an accurate assessment of drilling and
production hazards is of prime importance as they directly impact the exploration cost. q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Gas hydrates; Petroleum; Hazards; Seal; Hydrocarbon indicator; Thermal indicator; Minimum stress

1. Introduction

2. Hydrate resources

Gas hydrates are crystalline compounds in which ice

expands to form cages containing methane gas molecules:
eight methane molecules are trapped by 46 water molecules
in the most common crystalline structures.
Large quantities of hydrates can form under specic thermodynamic conditions (Fig. 1), which are found onshore
beneath permafrost (Canada, CEI) and in any offshore
area, usually in water depths below 500 m in near-bottom
sediments. Methane hydrates have previously been detected
in some ocean drilling program (ODP) legs at shallow
depths below the sea oor in deep offshore environments.
As petroleum exploration is now moving rapidly towards
deep offshore areas, research in passive margin contexts
needs to assess the importance of gas hydrates. The main
objective of this paper is rstly to deal with gas hydrates as
possible hydrocarbon resources and secondly to emphasise
the potential impact and applications of gas hydrates for
deep offshore exploration.

Gas hydrates are considered by the scientic community

as the main hydrocarbon source for the coming century, as
resources account for 50% of the organic carbon in the earth
(Kvenvolden, 1988) or twice the conventional fossil energy
(recoverable and non-recoverable fossil fuels). Their high
expansion factor allows huge amounts of gas to be stored in
the hydrate solid phase: 1 m 3 of hydrate yields 164 m 3 of gas
and 0.8 m 3 of water at standard temperature and pressure
conditions (Kvenvolden, 1993). Hydrate-related gas
resources were recently estimated at 10 13 and 20 10 15 m 3
(at standard conditions) in onshore and deep offshore,
respectively (Kvenvolden, 1998a,b).
Onshore estimates are probably more realistic than offshore
ones, owing to good calibration from existing elds such as the
Messoyakh gas eld in West Siberia, discovered in 1967
(Krason & Finley, 1992) or from wells drilled in the Mackensie delta, Beaufort sea, North Canada. In addition, production feasibility has already been proven despite the occasional
problems of gas recovery rate: 9.35 10 9 m 3 of gas STP have
been produced since 1970 on the Messoyakh eld. Although
some technical aspects of hydrate production are well
mastered, onshore gas production from hydrates cannot be

* Tel.: 133-5-5983-6609; fax: 133-5-5983-4502.

E-mail address: dominique.grauls@elf-p.fr (D. Grauls).

0264-8172/01/$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0264-817 2(00)00075-1

520

D. Grauls / Marine and Petroleum Geology 18 (2001) 519523

3. Gas hydrate seal

A

100

Pressure (Mpa)

Hydrate stability
zone

10

SR
B

7,

93

ln

6
)(P

Free methane
zone

6
,7

A: Methane- 3,5 %Na Cl

B: Methane- Pure water
C: 93%Methane- 7 %CO2
1

10

20

30

Temperature (C)
Fig. 1. Pressuretemperature phase equilibrium diagram of methane
(adapted from Tucholke, Bryan, and Ewing, 1977).

envisaged on economic grounds before 20102015,

until such time as production costs decrease by at
least 50%. The thermal energy needed for dissociating
gas hydrates in in situ conditions is critical and still
remains unknown.
Offshore hydrates are more difcult to quantify due to
the lack of calibration. The estimation of 20 10 15 m 3
is in all probability excessive, mainly owing to the
limited knowledge of the type and permeability of sediments within the hydrate stability zone (HSZ). Onshore
geological models cannot be extrapolated to deep
offshore contexts because of the different tectonic
histories and the timing of migration. Low permeabilities in shale-prone contexts are doubtless the most
limiting gas recovery factor. In addition, a number of
key questions, concerning the effects of depletion on
low-cohesion rock behaviour, sea-oor instabilities,
and the real impact of gas escape on climate change,
remain unanswered as yet. To be realistic, regarding
geological uncertainties and technical challenges,
economical gas hydrate exploitation from deep offshore
areas is a distant prospect and cannot be expected before
2030.
Interest seems to be focused at present more on gas
accumulations trapped beneath the HSZ. According to
USGS (Collett, 1998), the petroleum industry might
consider producing this secondary objective in the near
future, around 2005.

The stability eld of gas hydrates is constrained by

thermodynamic conditions and the base of hydrate stability
at depth can be often clearly identied from seismic data
whenever free gas saturation exists. Under these circumstances, the acoustic impedance contrast between solid
and vapour phases allows the bottom of the hydrate zone
to be identied by a seismic marker called `bottom simulating reector' (BSR). It is reasonable to suppose that in deep
offshore most hydrates are concentrated at a depth close to
the BSR, if gas charging is assumed to originate from a
deeper biogenic or thermogenic source. As the gaswater
reaches phase equilibrium (Fig. 1), the hydrates can crystallise, forming an efcient seal for free hydrocarbon coming
up from the layers below. The seal is highly unstable and its
thickness will vary depending on recent geological history
and competition between erosive events and sedimentation
rate.
As shown in Fig. 2, seismic amplitude versus offset
(AVO) anomalies obtained beneath the BSR level or
hydrate seal can be useful in detecting hydrocarbons, evaluating the hydrocarbon column height and the nature of the
uid (gas in the present case). Gas columns encountered
within different reservoir layers beneath the HSZ are statistically 200300 m high.
Hydrocarbon accumulations depend on hydromechanical
seal properties (Grauls, Blanche, & Poudre, 1998). The
critical parameters that control the maximum HC column
are the minimum principal stress (S3) at bottom seal, the
density of HC at reservoir conditions and the hydraulic
pressure regime (P) at the hydrocarbonwater interface.
Consequently, assuming reservoir hydrostatic conditions
P Pn ; the over-pressure (dP) due to the HC buoyancy
effect cannot exceed the hydrate sealing integrity, which
corresponds to a value close to the minimum effective stress
S3 2 Pn : Gas leakage up to the sea oor transiently occurs
whenever dP . S3 2 Pn :
As shown in Fig. 3, in this South American margin area,
the maximum height of the gas column trapped beneath the
BSR ( < 300 m) is consistent with the hydrate sealing
integrity at such a depth. This provides a better quantitative
estimate of the maximum hydrocarbon potential that can be
trapped by hydrate seals.
The fact that the trapping potential of hydrates increases
with the sea-oor depth is an encouraging factor for hydrocarbon exploration in ultra-deep offshore areas (Grauls et
al., 1998). However, additional research is needed to assess
the mechanical properties of hydrate-bearing sediments and
the stress regime at very shallow depths.

4. Gas hydrates as direct thermal indicator (DTI)

Whenever free gas saturation exists at the base of the gas
HSZ, the conditions for identifying the BSR on the seismic

D. Grauls / Marine and Petroleum Geology 18 (2001) 519523

521

Fig. 2. Seismic processing carried out in a South American margin showing amplitude versus offset (AVO) anomalies, in relation to the presence of free gas
trapped beneath the bottom simulating reector (BSR): HSZ hydrate stability zone, GWC possible gas water contact.

Fig. 3. The gas column height 1 or (H) is at seal capacity, when the HC-related buoyancy (dP) balances the difference between minimum stress (S3) and seawater pressure value (Pn) at BSR level: dP S3 2 Pn (S1 vertical stress).

522

D. Grauls / Marine and Petroleum Geology 18 (2001) 519523

Heat flow in mW / m2

70

60

Upper bound

50

Regional trend
Lower bound

40

30
1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Depth in meters
Fig. 4. The distribution of heat ow (HF) values obtained from BSR in a
South American margin is plotted against depth of sea oor and clearly
emphasises the global tendency of regional heat ow to decrease towards
the deep offshore.

lines are fullled. The BSR corresponds to the equilibrium

between the solid and gaseous phases of methane. The position of the BSR in relation to the sea oor is highly sensitive
to any change in pressure due to depth variation, or in
temperature due to temperature change at sea oor. Such
a marker can therefore be used as a DTI. Predicting presentday heat ow (HF) is of great interest for thermal forward
modelling and for the assessment of hydrocarbon generation
in poorly explored offshore areas, especially in the absence
of well temperature data. HF Tbsr 2 Tsf C; where Tbsr is
the temperature at BSR obtained from the hydrate PT
phase diagram (see Fig. 1), Tsf is the temperature at sea
oor and C is the mean thermal conductivity value of the
sedimentary section down to BSR.
The relative uncertainty on HF, essentially dependent on
depth-versus-seismic time conversion and conductivity, is
about 10%.
HF was predicted on the basis of BSR in the South
American offshore, as shown in Fig. 4. Despite some data
scattering, as shown on this plot, regional HF evolves downwards, from 55 to 47 mW m 22 as the sea-oor depth
deepens from 2000 to 3000 m. HF results are given with
^5 mW m 22 relative uncertainty.
Improved HF prediction is directly dependent on a better
knowledge of timedepth conversion and conductivity
evolution through the HSZ.

5. Hydrates as direct hydrocarbon indicator (DHI)

As previously emphasised, the presence of a BSR marker
only reects the relative acoustic contrast between free gas
and overlying gas hydrate-bearing sediments. BSR formation depends on thermodynamic conditions, reservoir poros-

ity, the dip of sedimentary layers with respect to the sea

oor and of course gas supply.
Gas column heights associated with BSR clearly depend,
at geological scale, on the recent activity of the petroleum
system at greater depth. The detection of huge concentrations of hydrates and gas-related hydrate seals therefore
provides a guideline for deep hydrocarbon exploration.
Carbon and hydrogen stable isotope measurements provide
some help in discriminating between the biogenic and the
thermogenic origins of the methane.
An understanding of the formation of gas hydrates can
consequently not be dissociated from the global petroleum
system: location and type of source rock, timing of generation, expulsion and migration.
The places conducive to high hydrate concentration are
believed to be located in the vicinity of features such as
sedimentary ridges, mud volcanoes and surfacing faults
(Hovland, 1998). Understanding of the processes that
cause the gas hydrate formation is therefore needed for a
better assessment of deep targets.
6. Gas hydrate-related hazards
Drilling hazards are mainly related to free gas trapped
beneath the BSR if the gas columns are at seal capacity
(see Fig. 3). As the uid pressure at the BSR reaches the
minimum in situ stress value, there is no `safety margin'
between mud weight and fracture gradient. The mud weight
used to control the uid pressure at the seal exceeds the S3
value close to the fracture gradient, and may therefore give
rise to major instabilities causing gas to blow out or to leak
up to the sea oor. Other instabilities stem from the lowcohesion rock behaviour at the sea oor, and the relative
contributions of mechanical and gas hydrate-related
instabilities are not well assessed as yet. Gas hydratebearing layers, if their existence is conrmed throughout
the HSZ, are less critical in terms of risk, as the temperature
while drilling can easily be kept within the hydrate stability
range. Such drilling hazards can be assessed and predicted
before drilling, using the velocities and amplitude anomalies of conventional or high-resolution seismic data. The
plugging of drilling and production pipes also remains an
important risk to be dealt with.
7. Conclusions
From an economic point of view, gas production from gas
hydrates is not a present-day objective for the petroleum
industry.
Onshore, gas production from hydrates cannot be envisaged, for economic reasons, before 20102015. Even
though some technical aspects of hydrates production are
well constrained, additional research is still needed to assess
the energy to be spent for in situ hydrate dissociation.
In deep offshore areas, with regard to the geological

D. Grauls / Marine and Petroleum Geology 18 (2001) 519523

uncertainties and technical challenges, production from

gas hydrates is only a long-term prospect and is not
expected before 2030 for both technological and economic
reasons.
Interest seems to be focused primarily on gas accumulations trapped beneath the HSZ. That constitutes, if
conrmed, a secondary objective in the near future, possibly
as soon as 2005.
Gas hydrates are, however, a key topic in deep offshore
margin exploration for different reasons:
In the rst place, hydrates act as an efcient seal: signicant gas columns can be trapped in some circumstances
beneath the base or HSZ, or BSR.
Furthermore, as the stability of hydrates is effectively
constrained by thermodynamic conditions, the BSR, if
present, can be used as a DTI. Predicting HF is of great
importance for modelling purposes in poorly explored
offshore areas whenever well temperature data are not
available.
In addition, gas hydrates are also a good DHI: the
presence of a strong marker at the base of the gas HSZ
(BSR) and of free gas indicate that the petroleum system
has been active since a recent period.
As exploration moves more and more towards deeper
offshore areas, a sound assessment of drilling and
production hazards is of prime importance and a priority
as these hazards directly impact the exploration cost.
Glossary
AVO: amplitude versus offset
BSR: bottom simulating reector
DHI: direct hydrocarbon indicator
DTI: direct thermal indicator
HSE: hydrate sealing efciency
HSZ: hydrate stability zone
Mpa: Megapascal (1 MPa 10 bars/145 psi)
MSL: mean sea level
Pn: normal hydrostatic uid pressure
S3: minimum principal stress
TWT: two-way time

523

References
Collett, T.S. (1998). Methane hydrate: an unlimited energy resource? In
JNOC Methane hydrates: resources in the near future? Workshop
Proceedings (pp. 113). Tokyo, 2022 October.
Grauls, D., Blanche, J.P., Poudre, J.L. (1998). Hydrate sealing efciency
using seismic AVO and hydro-mechanical approaches. In JNOC
Methane hydrates: resources in the near future? Workshop Proceedings (pp. 8186). Tokyo, 2022 October.
Hovland, M. (1998). Are there commercial deposits of methane hydrates in
ocean sediments? In JNOC Methane hydrates: resources in the near
future? Workshop Panel Discussion Proceedings (pp. 1721). Tokyo,
2022 October.
Krason, J., Finley, P.D. (1992). Messoyakh gas eld Russia West
Siberian basin treatise of petroleum geology atlas of oil and gas
elds, AAPG (pp. 197220).
Kvenvolden, K. A. (1988). Methane hydrate a major reservoir of carbon
in the shallow geosphere? Chemical Geology, V, 71, 4151.
Kvenvolden, K.A. (1993). Gas hydrate as a potential energy source a
review of their methane content. In D.G. Howell (Ed.), USGS professional paper, 1270 (pp. 555561).
Kvenvolden, K.A. (1998a). Estimates of the methane content of world-wide
gas-hydrate deposits. In JNOC Methane hydrates: resources in the near
future? Workshop Panel Discussion Proceedings (pp. 18). Tokyo,
2022 October.
Kvenvolden, K. A. (1998b). A primer on the geological occurrence of gas
hydrate. In J. P. Henriet & J. Meinert, Gas hydrates: relevance to world
margin stability and climate change, Vol. 137. (pp. 930). London:
Geological Society of London (special publication).
Tucholke, B. E., Bryan, G. M., & Ewing, J. I. (1977). Gas horizon detected
in seismic reection proler data from the western North Atlantic.
AAPG Bulletin, 61, 698707.