This Paper has been reviewed by Leonard Lisapaly

IPA24-SG-63

PROCEEDINGS, INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION

Forty-Eighth Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2024

UNTAPPING A BEHIND CASING HYDROCARBON POTENTIAL BY INTEGRATING

WELL AND SEISMIC DATA WITH STATIC MODEL: CASE STUDY IN THE
LOWER LEMAT FORMATION IN SOUTH SUMATERA BASIN

Muhamad Ardhian Bayu Aji*

Bakhtiyar Irfan Alfani*
Ilyas Anindita**
Muchamad Ocky Bayu Nugroho*

ABSTRACT

The Eocene - Oligocene lacustrine syn-rift deposits in the South Sumatra Basin, known as the
Lemat Formation, are considered a prolific regional source rock in the area, in which the
hydrocarbon typically accumulates towards reservoir rocks of the Talangakar and Baturaja
Formation. However, based on our study, there are sandstone intervals within the thick shale
layers of the Lower Lemat Formation with the right petrophysical properties to become
reservoir rocks and the potential to contain hydrocarbons.

This research was carried out by integrating wellbore data (wireline log, mud log & pressure
log, core, biostratigraphy, and DST) and 2D seismic to obtain the of lithology, facies, sequence
stratigraphy from well correlation and subsurface mapping. Furthermore, a static modelling
of facies and petrophysical properties was conducted to get prospective hydrocarbon
mapping for Eocene-Oligocene Lower Lemat Formation.

Based on the results of the 2D seismic analysis, this reservoir is trapped in the anticline
structure which has been cut by reverse fault and acts as hydrocarbon trap within a three-
way closure type. We found that the lacustrine syn rift deposits in the research area are
composed of dark gray shale deposits with intercalations of fine-coarse sandstone with calcite
cement which is thought to have potential as hydrocarbon reservoir. The interpretation of a
lacustrine depositional environment is supported by the appearance of Oligocene green algae
fossils with species Florschuetzia trilobata, Leiospheres, and Botryococcus algae, where the
facies developed as subaqueous distributary channel, mouth bar and lacustrine shale. Based
on the petrophysical analysis of the sandstone interval, we found that the shale volume has
a range of 27.9 – 35.3 %; the effective porosity range is 8.6 – 14.1 %; the permeability range is
1.97 – 21.85 mD; and the water saturation range is 17.8 – 0.33 %. Through this research, it is
hoped that future exploration activities may be focused on formations that are not well known
as reservoirs.

INTRODUCTION

In Indonesia, oil and gas exploration and exploitation activities are only focused on rock
formations which are widely known as hydrocarbon reservoirs. Beyond that, there is still the
possibility of finding hydrocarbon reserves in certain quantities contained in rock formations
which are generally known as source rocks, one of which is the Lower Lemat Formation,

* UPN "Veteran" Yogyakarta.

** PT. Odira Energy Karang Agung.
** Geo Pangea Research Group.
 2

which is part of the Karang Agung Block, Musi Banyuasin Regency, Province of South
Sumatra.

In the South Sumatra Basin, lacustrine syn-rift deposits known as the Lemat Formation of
Paleocene - Oligocene age (De Coster, 1974) are known as regional source rocks that produce
hydrocarbons which will accumulate in the reservoir of the Talangakar and Baturaja
Formation. However, in the research area the Lower Lemat Formation also has potential as a
hydrocarbon reservoir when viewed from the supporting petrophysical properties.

Untapping the potential for lacustrine syn-rift deposits in the Lower Lemat Formation can be
done by integrating wellbore data (wireline log, mud log & pressure log, core,
biostratigraphy, and DST) and 2D seismic reflection data to determine the variations of
lithology, depositional facies and environment, stratigraphic sequence, and subsurface
mapping, which is then strengthened by petrophysical analysis to determine the physical
properties that support the presence of hydrocarbons in the Lower Lemat Formation. By
integrating this data, a static model is produced in the form of a facies model and a property
model that can describe the geological conditions of the subsurface, which can be further
developed to calculate the amount of hydrocarbon resources contained in the Lower Lemat
Formation.

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

According to Ginger and Fielding (2005), the tectonic deformation that influenced the
formation of the South Sumatra Basin can be divided into three main tectonic phases (Figure
1):
1) Syn Rift Megasequence (40-29 Ma), which was caused by extension due to plate
subduction along the western Sumatran trench. In this phase, a series of horst-grabens
oriented east – west occurs which then rotates by 15 degrees to become north – northeast
and south – southwest.
2) Post Rift Megasequence (29-5 Ma), which begins with the cessation of rifting and is
followed by thermal balance of the lithosphere resulting in shrinkage of the continental
crust. This event was then followed by transgression caused by the speed of basin
subsidence and sea level rise to a maximum limit of around 16 Ma. Then at 16-5 Ma,
regression occurred which was caused by a decrease in tectonic intensity and an increase
in sedimentation speed.
3) Syn Orogenic Megasequence (5 Ma-Present), which was initiated by an orogenic event
that formed a transpersional fold which became a hydrocarbon structural trap oriented
northwest – southeast along South Sumatra and cut the syn-rift structure at the bottom.
 3

Figure 1 - Regional tectonic framework of the South Sumatra Basin (Ginger and Fielding, 2005).

Physiographically, the research area is located in the South Sumatra Basin, which is part of
the back-arc basin of Tertiary age with a relatively northwest - southeast direction. According
to Bishop (2001), this basin can be divided into four parts, namely the South Palembang Sub
Basin, the Central Palembang Sub Basin, the North Palembang Sub Basin, and the Jambi Sub
Basin (Figure 2).

Figure 2 - Map of the South Sumatra Basin which is divided into 4 sub-basins (Bishop, 2001). The red
box indicates the research area which is included in the physiography of the North
Palembang Sub Basin.

Regionally, the stratigraphy of the South Sumatra Basin consists of a sedimentation cycle
that begins in the transgression phase and ends in the regression phase. According to Ginger
 4

and Fielding (2005) in Figure 3, the tectonostratigraphy in this basin can be divided into
several formations where the sequence from old to young is as follows.

1) Basement (Pre-Tertiary), composed of complex intercalations between igneous rocks,

metamorphic rocks and sedimentary rocks with different ages and compositions.
2) Lemat/Lahat Formation (Late Eocene–Middle Oligocene), composed of sandstone facies
with lithology in the form of coarse sandstone, gravel and conglomerate at the bottom,
and shale facies with shale lithology intercalated with fine sandstone, silt, and tuff at the
top.
3) Talangakar Formation (Late Oligocene–Early Miocene), composed of coarse sandstone,
shale and coal inserts at the bottom, and interbedded sandstone and shale at the top.
4) Baturaja Formation (Early Miocene), composed of carbonate platforms and carbonate
build up.
5) Gumai Formation (Early–Middle Miocene), composed of shale and glauconite sandstone.
6) Air Benakat Formation (Middle Miocene), composed of gray-white mudstone with inserts
of fine sandstone, bluish-black gray sandstone, glauconite with lignite content and in the
upper part contains tufface, while the middle part is rich in foraminifera fossils.
7) Muara Enim Formation (Late Miocene), composed of lignite coal at the bottom which then
progressively develops shale and thick sandstone locally.
8) Kasai Formation (Pliocene–Pleistocene), composed of tuff, mudstone and volcaniclastic
sandstone.

Figure 3 - Tectonostratigraphic Column of the South Sumatra Basin (Ginger and Fielding, 2005).

According to Barber, et al. (2005), the structural orientation in the South Sumatra Basin can
be divided into four patterns, namely the Jambi Pattern (NE-SW), Sunda Pattern (N-S),
Sumatra Pattern (NW-SE), and Lematang Pattern (WNW-ENE). In the research area, the
structures that developed are NE-SW normal faults and NW-SE reverse faults which are
visible in the RAT-7 and RAT-8 seismic sections (Figure 4.a). The existence of this normal fault
is controlled by the syn-rift phase at the time of basin rift which forms basement high
morphology, while the existence of this reverse fault occurs in the syn-inversion phase which
forms a hydrocarbon trap in the form of an anticline in this area. (Figure 4.b)
 5

Figure 4 - (a). Seismic sections of RAT-7 (top) and RAT-8 (bottom) showing symptoms of normal faults
trending NE-SW and hydrocarbon traps in the form of anticlines cut by reverse faults
trending NW-SE in the study area; (b). Depth structure map top Basement showing NE-SW
trending normal faults that form basement high morphology and the presence of anticline
structures cut by NW-SE trending reverse faults in the study area.

DATA AND METHODS

In this research, wellbore data and 2D reflection seismic data are integrated to produce a
static model that can predict the hydrocarbon reservoir potential in the Lower Lemat
Formation. The wellbore data include wireline log, mud log & pressure log, core,
biostratigraphy, and DST which are used to determine the diversity of lithological variations,
facies and depositional environments, stratigraphic sequences, subsurface mapping, and
calculations of petrophysical properties. Meanwhile, 2D reflection seismic data is used to
determine the distribution of lithological formations that have the potential to become target
reservoirs in the Lower Lemat Formation, as well as indicating the presence of geological
structural symptoms in the form of folds and faults, which are then integrated with well data
to produce static models in the form of a structural model, facies model, and property model.

In general, the methodology used in this research can be divided into three main stages
(Figure 5), namely qualitative analysis, quantitative analysis, and seismic analysis and
interpretation; by integrating these three main stages a static model can then be developed.
The qualitative analysis stage was carried out to interpret the type of lithology, electrofacies,
reservoir zone, hydrocarbon zone, and well correlation. The quantitative analysis stage is
carried out to determine the petrophysical values of the reservoir in the form of shale volume,
effective porosity, permeability, and water saturation. Meanwhile, the seismic analysis and
interpretation stage is carried out to determine the distribution of lithology based on the
concept of chronostratigraphy, as well as providing information regarding the symptoms of
developing geological structures.

This research focuses on finding potential reservoirs from the Lower Lemat Formation, which
is known as a regional source rock. To determine layers that have the petrophysical values of
reservoirs, several quantitative analysis methods are used, namely:

1) Shale Volume (VSh). Gamma ray logs are used to calculate shale volume using a linear
method because the results obtained are more suitable if validated using mud log data.
This linear method is shown by the equation:
 6

Vs = x 100 %
Where :
Vs = Standard clay volume (linear) GRmin = Minimum GR log (clean zone)
GRlog = GR curve GRmax = Maximum GR log (clay zone)

2) Effective Porosity (PHIE). Effective porosity calculations use a deterministic method

through log data analysis in calculating target reservoir porosity. In this method, a
crossplot is checked between the neutron - density logs from each well, so that the
respective porosity and water saturation parameters can be determined. Apart from that,
the calculation of the effective porosity value is also carried out through validation
between the effective porosity value produced through the Neutron – Density crossplot
method and the effective porosity of the core.

3) Permeability (k). Permeability calculations use a linear method, where a crossplot

between core permeability and core porosity at NOB is translated into an equation
function. The equation is then used as a calculation to obtain the value of linear
permeability by replacing the x value in the equation with the PHIE value previously
calculated.

4) Water Saturation (SW). Water saturation calculations use the Simandoux equation,
because it takes into account the presence of shale lithology and is suitable when used in
formations that have medium to high salinity, as expressed by the equation:

Sw = √
( ) ∅
√ .
Where :
Rt = Formation resistivity
Ø = Porosity
Rlp = Clay resistivity
Vlp = Clay volume
Rw = Water resistivit

The integration of the results of qualitative, quantitative analysis, and seismic interpretation
is later progressed into static models in the form of a structural model, facies model and
property model. In structural modelling, the stages can be divided into fault modelling to
produce a fault model in the form of a three-dimensional grid; pillar gridding to create a grid
framework connected by key pillars; horizon modelling to model the horizon; and zoning &
layering to separate the upper & lower zoning boundaries. After QC modelling and well log
upscaling is carried out, facies modelling is then done to determine the direction of
distribution of reservoir layers and its relationship with petrophysical properties. The
resulting facies model can be used as a reference to create a property model that shows the
distribution of petrophysical values of the target reservoir. From the three static models
produced, reserves can be calculated using the volumetric method to determine the
estimated volume of hydrocarbons in the reservoir in the Lower Lemat Formation.
 7

Figure 5 - Flowchart showing the stages in this research

RESULTS

Facies and Depositional Environment

Qualitative lithological analysis using well data from wells NPM-1, NPM-6 and ANS-1 showed
that the Lemat Formation in the research area is composed of conglomerate and shale with
thin sandstone inserts at the bottom and interbedded shale and thick sandstone at the top.
From the mud log description, it is known that the lower part of the Lemat Formation is
composed of conglomerate with fragments of metasedimentary rock, gray shale, and light
gray sandstone sized pebbles, and at the top it is composed of conglomerate sized coarse
sand – gravel and gray shale.

There is a sandstone layer in the Lower Lemat Formation in the research area, named the "X"
Zone sandstone layer, which has potential as a hydrocarbon reservoir. Based on the
characteristics of electrofacies changes in gamma ray logs which indicated a succession of
rarefaction patterns and the presence of blocky sand, the sandstone layer interval of Zone "X"
was deposited in a lacustrine deltaic fluvial environment. This was confirmed by the
biostratigraphy data of the ANS-1 well (Table 1) which showed the significant occurrence of
fossil Leiospheres and Algal Cysts, especially the genus Botryococcus algae. Based on the
electrofacies interpretation in the NPM-1 key well, which were the facies that developed in
the "X" Zone, the Lower Lemat Formation in the study area included subaqueous distributary
channels characterized by a cylindrical pattern, mouth bar facies characterized by a funnel
pattern, and shale lacustrine facies characterized by a bell pattern (Figure 6).
 8

TABLE 1

BIOSTRATIGRAPHY DATA FROM THE ANS-1 WELL CAN ASSIST IN ANALYZING AND
INTERPRETING FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS

SINAR-1
Top Bottom Depostional Environment Fossils Age Marker Age
Spiniferites spp. ; Florschuetzia claricolpata (1301 m) ;
1301 1320 Middle Inner Sublitoral Tuberculodinium vancampoae ; Florschuetzia semilobata (1320) ; SS7 (Early Miocene)
Acrostichum aureum Florschuetzia trilobata (1320 m)
Zonocostites ramonae ; Zonocostites ramonae ; SS6-SS4 (Early Miocene-
1340 1378 Lower Intertidal
Florschuetzia trilobata Florschuetzia trilobata (1378 m) Early Oligocene
Leiospheres ; Monoporites annulatus sp ; SS6-SS4 (Early Miocene-
1481.5 1664 Inner Neritic - Lower Intertidal
Botryococcus algae Dipterocarpae (1664 m) Early Oligocene
Monoporites annulatus sp ; Monoporites annulatus sp ;
SS3-SS1 (Early Oligocence-
1690 1709 Lacustrine - Upper Intertidal Dipterocarpae ; Dipterocarpae (1690 m) ;
Eocene?)
Cricorporate Pollen Cricorporate Pollen
Polypodiidites usmensis ; Polypodiidites usmensis ;
SS3-SS1 (Early Oligocence-
1738 1762 Supratidal Durio type ; Discoidites borneensis ; Durio type ; Discoidites borneensis ;
Eocene?)
Marginipollis concinnus Marginipollis concinnus (1738)

Figure 6 - Results of facies analysis and depositional environment that developed in the layers of Zone
"X" in the Lower Lemat Formation which has the potential to be a reservoir.

Sequence Stratigraphy and Hydrocarbon Zones

Based on parameters such as sea level change, tectonics, relative sea level, accommodation
rate, and sediment supply, in the NPM-1 key well from the bottom boundary of the Lemat
Formation to the top of Baturaja Formation, several stratigraphic sequence markers were
obtained, from bottom to top in sequence, including SB-1, TS-1, FS-1, FS-2, MFS-1, SB-2, TS-
2, FS-3, MFS-2, SB-3, FS-4 (Figure 7).
 9

Figure 7 - Results of analysis and interpretation of the stratigraphic sequence in the NPM-1 well which
was carried out from the top basement to the top of Baturaja Formation based on well data.

The depositional sequence from the top basement to the top of the Baturaja Formation in the
research area starts from Sequence Boundary 1 (SB-1), which is the first sedimentary deposit
that overlies unconformably on top of the bedrock, then forms an aggradation pattern in the
Lowstand System Tract-1 (LST) which ends with the Transgressive Surface-1 (TS-1) boundary
which is marked by the appearance of fine-sized deposits (shales) indicating the beginning of
the transgression process. After that, it enters the Transgressive System Tract-1 (TST-1) phase
which forms a retrogradation pattern to the Maximum Flooding Surface-1 (MFS-1) boundary.
Maximum Flooding Surface-1 (MFS-1) marks the peak of transgression and then enters the
Highstand System Tract-1 (HST-1) phase which marks the beginning of regression to form
the Sequence Boundary-2 (SB-2) unconformity boundary. The regression in the Lowstand
System Tract-2 (LST-2) phase forms thick sandstone deposits up to the top of the regression
which is bounded by Transgressive Surface-2 (TS-2). This event is then followed by
transgression which deposits fine sediment (shale) in the Transgressive System Tract-2 (TST-
2) phase up to the Maximum Flooding Surface-2 (MFS-2) boundary. After the peak of this
transgression, it then re-enters the regression with progradational deposits in the Highstand
 10

System Tract-2 (HST-2) phase which ends with the Sequence Boundary-3 (SB-3) boundary
marked by the beginning of limestone deposition. The final phase is Lowstand System Tract
3 (LST-3) which is bounded by Sequence Boundary-3 (SB-3) to Flooding Surface-4 (FS-4)
marking the top of the Baturaja Formation.

In the interpretation of the hydrocarbon content contained in the Zone "X" reservoir, the
Lower Lemat Formation in the study area was limited by the stratigraphic sequence marker
Flooding Surface-1 (FS-1) at the bottom and Flooding Surface-2 (FS-2) at the top. The log
curve showed that this interval contains hydrocarbons. This was based on the shape of the
density and neutron log curves which both have small values and touch each other at the
beginning and at the end to form a crossover, thus indicating the existence of a permeable
zone. Apart from that, the interpretation of this hydrocarbon zone was also strengthened by
drill stem test data from the ANS-1 well at a depth interval of (-1533 m) to (-1543 m) which
showed flow of non-combustible gas with a CO2 content of 99.6% (Figure 8).

Figure 8 - Comment log showing the results of the drill stem test at a depth interval of (-1533) m to (-
1543) m on the ANS-1 which could indicate the presence of hydrocarbons contained therein.

Well Correlation

The correlation of structures parallel to deposition (Figure 9) showed there was a subsidence
caused by a downward fault in the compressional phase, forming a half graben morphology
and controlling the sedimentation pattern in this study area. This was indicated by the
markers TS-1, FS-1, FS-2, MFS-1, and SB-2 (Lemat Formation) which experienced onlap on
SB-1 (basement). Apart from that, the marker pattern of the stratigraphic sequence was
shaped like steps, where it increased as one moved towards the southeast position and there
was also a thickening of the sedimentary deposits. So it might be interpreted that the structure
that developed in this study area is an anticline structure, where the further you went the
southeast, the more you moved towards the top of the anticline and the further you went to
the northwest, the more you moved towards the wing of the anticline.
 11

Figure 9 - Regional structural correlation.

Petrophysical Property Calculations

1) Calculation of Shale Volume (VSh)

This calculation was done with gamma ray log analysis using a linear method, because
the results obtained were more appropriate if validation was carried out using mud log
data. Based on shale volume calculations using the linear method, in the "X" Zone interval,
the Lemat Formation in the study area has an average shale volume value range of 27.9 –
35.3 %.

2) Effective Porosity Calculation (PHIE)

Effective porosity calculations use a deterministic method through log data analysis in
calculating target reservoir porosity. In this method, the respective porosity and water
saturation parameters were determined from crossplots of the NPHI-RHOB logs of each
well (Figure 10). Based on the effective porosity calculations using the deterministic
method, the subaqueous distributary channel facies has an average effective porosity
value range of 9.7 – 14.1 %, while the mouth bar facies has a range of 8.6 – 13.7 %.
 12

NPM 1 NPM 6 ANS-1

NPHI / RHOB CNCFLS / ZDNC NPHI / RHOB
Active Zone : 1 SB 3 - FS 4 Active Zone : 1 SB 3 - FS 4 Active Zone : 1 SB 3 - FS 4

1.504 1.8 1.5805

40 1.8475
40
1.8312
2.08
40
30
40 30 40
40 2.1145 40

40 30 40
2.1584 30 20 30
30 2.36 20 30
RHOB

RHOB
2.3815 20 30

ZDNC
20 30
10 20 20
20
10
10
2.4856 10 20 20
10
10 2.64
SS 0 2.6485
10 SS 0
LS 0 10
SS 0 LS 0
10
LS 0
2.8128
DOL 0 DOL 0
2.92 2.9155
DOL 0

(SWS) Density Ne utron(NPHI) Ove rlay, Rhofluid = 1.0 (CP-1c 1989) (SWS) Density Neutron(TNPH) Overlay, Rhofluid = 1.19 (CP-1f 1989)
3.14 3.1825
-0.13 0.0074 0.1448 0.2822 0.4196 0.557 (SWS) Density Neutron(NPHI) Overlay, Rhofluid = 1.0 (CP-1c 1989) -0.1323 -0.0137 0.1049 0.2235 0.3421 0.4607 0.5793
NPHI 3.2 NPHI
2929 points plotted out of 2944 -0.12 0.048 0.216 0.384 0.552 0.72 3603 points plotted out of 3621
Zone Depths CNCFLS Zone Depths
(1) SB 3 - FS 4 1218.78M - 1231.22M 2021 points plotted out of 2044 (1) SB 3 - FS 4 1211.01M - 1224.24M
(2) MFS 2 - SB 3 1231.22M - 1273.82M Zone Depths
(2) MFS 2 - SB 3 1224.24M - 1287.48M
(3) FS 3 - MFS 2 1273.82M - 1318.M (1) SB 3 - FS 4 1246.08M - 1259.43M
(3) FS 3 - MFS 2 1287.48M - 1312.08M
(4) TS 2 - FS 3 1318.M - 1339.7M (2) MFS 2 - SB 3 1259.43M - 1308.5M (4) TS 2 - FS 3 1312.08M - 1353.09M
(5) SB 2 - TS 2 1339.7M - 1441.03M (3) FS 3 - MFS 2 1308.5M - 1345.11M (5) SB 2 - TS 2 1353.09M - 1454.43M
(6) MFS 1 - SB 2 1441.03M - 1477.55M (4) TS 2 - FS 3 1345.11M - 1368.51M (6) MFS 1 - SB 2 1454.43M - 1515.02M
(7) FS 2 - MFS 1 1477.55M - 1521.14M (5) SB 2 - TS 2 1368.51M - 1505.29M (7) FS 2 - MFS 1 1515.02M - 1531.36M
(8) FS 1 - FS 2 1521.14M - 1534.1M (6) MFS 1 - SB 2 1505.29M - 1523.21M (8) FS 1 - FS 2 1531.36M - 1549.88M
(9) TS 1 - FS 1 1534.1M - 1619.36M (7) FS 2 - MFS 1 1523.21M - 1547.01M (9) TS 1 - FS 1 1549.88M - 1667.15M
(10) SB 1 - TS 1 1619.36M - 1667.52M (8) FS 1 - FS 2 1547.01M - 1557.58M (10) SB 1 - TS 1 1667.15M - 1762.93M

Figure 10 - Neutron-Density log crossplot used in calculating effective porosity values, (a). NPM-1 Well;
(b). NPM-6 Well; (c). ANS-1 Well.

3) Calculation of Permeability (k)

Permeability calculations were done using a linear method with a crossplot of core
permeability and core porosity at NOB. The equation obtained was then used as a
calculation to obtain the value of linear permeability by replacing the x value in the
equation with the PHIE value previously calculated for wells that did not have core data.
Based on permeability calculations using this method, the subaqueous distributary
channel facies has an average permeability value range of 2.686 – 19.458 mD, while the
mouth bar facies has a range of 1.974 – 21.851 mD.

4) Calculation of Water Saturation (SW)

Water saturation calculations were done with the Simandoux equation because this
method considers the presence of shale lithology and is suitable when used in formations
that have medium to high salinity. The calculations indicated the subaqueous distributary
channel facies has an average water saturation value range of 17.8 – 29.1 %, while the
mouth bar facies has a range of 19.0 – 33.1 %.

2D Seismic Analysis and Subsurface Mapping

The seismic analysis and interpretation was divided into two stages, the well seismic tie stage
and the seismic interpretation stages. Well seismic tie is a process of tying well data with
seismic data, so that an appropriate result can be obtained between well data and seismic
data. In this research, well seismic ties were carried out on wells NPM-1, NPM-6, and ANS-1
using ANS-1 corrected checkshot data, where synthetic seismograms were created using
sonic log and density data from ANS-1 wells with the RAT-8 seismic line. From the results of
fault picking in the research area, two major faults were known to be developing, namely a
normal fault trending NE-SW and a reverse fault trending NW-SE. Apart from that, two minor
faults were also found in the form of normal faults in the NE-SW direction. The existence of
a normal fault trending NE-SW (Figure 4.a above) was equivalent to the Meratus Pattern
forming a graben system in the North and South Palembang Sub-Basin, such as Pigi Through,
Benakat Gully, and Imus graben. The formation of this normal fault occurred during rifting or
basin opening during the syn-rift period which divided the South Sumatra Basin into several
other sub-basins from west to east. This rifting process was initiated by a stretching phase
that formed a downward fault pattern in the Paleogene, and was followed by an optimum
 13

depositional phase that occurred at the same time. The sedimentation process in the syn-rift
phase is what formed the Lemat Formation. Meanwhile, the existence of a NW-SE trending
reverse fault (Figure 4.a below) was related to the formation of an elongated anticlinal fold
trending northwest - southeast (NW-SE) with a relatively upright slope of the fault plane in
the syn orogenic megasequence phase. This compressional tectonic phase also caused the
reactivation of normal faults that were formed during syn-rift and formed a half graben
morphology in the study area into a strike slip fault.

After performing horizon and fault picking, the results of the interpretation were used to
create a time structure map which was then converted into a depth structure map. In
converting the time domain to the depth domain, checkshot data was needed to represent
depth and velocity. The time to depth conversion was carried out using ANS-1 checkshot data
corrected with the square polynomial method. Based on the time to depth function using
corrected ANS-1 checkshot, the following equation was obtained:

d = -50.2818 + 0.537394t – 0.000512302t2

with a correlation coefficient of 0.921.

In the SB-1 depth structure map (Figure 11.a) in the northwestern part can be seen a high area
which was thought to be a basement high in the study area. This part of the plateau was
separated by the presence of a NE-SW trending normal fault in the southeastern part where
the southeastern block relatively dipped to form a half graben structure. The presence of
closures or closing contours (in green) could indicate the presence of high morphology
forming an elongated anticline trending NW-SE.

After knowing the morphology below the surface through a depth structure map, an isopach
map was made to describe the actual thickness of a stratigraphic layer. Because the research
was only focused on analyzing the reservoir potential of the Zone "X" sandstone layer in the
Lemat Formation, the author only made an isopach map in the interval of the Zone "X"
sandstone layer whose lower boundary was limited by the FS-1 marker and the upper
boundary by the FS-2 marker. Figure 11.f shows an overlay between the FS-1 depth structure
map and the FS-1 and FS-2 interval isopach maps. It can be seen that the sedimentary bodies
in the FS-1 to FS-2 interval have a greater thickness in the northeast, southeast and southwest
parts of the study area which is a low-lying area.
 14

A B C

G
D E F

Figure 11 - Depth structure map of the Lemat Formation interval in the study area. Map A is SB-1; Map
B is SB-2; Map C is FS-1; Map D is FS-2; Map E is TS-1; Map F is MFS-1; and Map G is the
isopach of the FS-1 and FS-2 intervals showing the distribution of the thickness of the “X”
Zone sandstone layers.

Reservoir Static Modelling

The modeled "X" Zone sandstone layer in the Lower Lemat Formation is considered to have
prospective value and the potential for production, with a fairly wide aerial spread. The
production potential is confirmed by DST data in the ANS-1 well which shows this layer
contains gas fluid.

1) Structural Modelling
Structural modelling was carried out by converting the results of fault interpretation in
fault picking into a fault structure model. It was known that in the research area there were
two main fault trends, namely normal fault trending NE-SW and reverse fault trending
NW-SE. These faults divided the study area into two different segments.

2) Pillar Gridding
The creation of this model pillar was carried out at a certain X-Y distance using the vertical
trend obtained from the structural modelling. The results of the pillar gridding were then
extrapolated to the top and bottom of the structural model so that the top, middle and
bottom parts were connected by key pillars. A three-dimensional (3D) model of the
sandstone layer of Zone "X" used a grid dimension of I x J = 50 x 50 meters which was
also adjusted to the dimensions of the depth structure map as input in the next stage.

3) Horizon Modelling and Layering

The modeled horizon interval located in the Lower Lemat Formation was identified as
containing one zone bounded by FS-1 at the bottom and FS-2 at the top. The division of
the layers from the FS-1 to FS-2 interval boundaries was based on the average thickness
of the reservoir. The thickness of the FS-1 to FS-2 zones in each well was determined,
where in the NPM-1 well the thickness was 12.96 meters, in the NPM-6 well 10.32 meters,
and in the ANS-1 well 18.52 meters. The author wanted to divide the layers at 0.5 meter
intervals and make them proportional until the FS-1 to FS-2 zone was divided into 36
layers.
 15

4) Facies Modelling
The facies model of the sandstone layer of Zone "X" used the Object Modelling
(Stochastic) method which also considers the morphometric values obtained from the
analogy of the lacustrine deltaic fluvial environment. The author used as a reference the
results of research conducted by Finaldhi, et al., 2016, where the subaqueous distributary
channel has an orientation ranging from 310 - 320o (based on the direction of deposition),
amplitude ranging from 100 - 300 m, wavelength ranging from 250 - 750 m, width ranging
from 400 - 500 m, and thickness ranges from 4-7 m (based on well data). Meanwhile, the
mouth bar which forms fan lobe and a radial profile in the form of a rounded base, has an
orientation of 300 - 330o (based on the direction of deposition), minor width ranges from
150 - 210 m, major/minor ratio ranges from 0.4 - 0.6, thickness ranges from 3-5 m (based
on well data), and tapering ranges from 0.1 – 1. Based on this reference, facies modelling
of the sandstone layer of Zone "X" was obtained as shown in Figure 12. In this study, layer
K= 22 was shown which is considered by the author as the most suitable facies modelling.

Figure 12 - Static facies model of the sandstone layer facies of Zone "X", Lower Lemat Formation in
the study area. A is the 3D appearance; B is the map view appearance; C is the cross
section of incision A-A’.

5) Property Modelling

a) Shale Volume (VSh)

The method used in the static modelling of shale volume (Vsh) was the Gaussian
Random Function Simulation. Figure 13.a shows that shale volume property modelling
(Vsh) was controlled (co-krigging) by the average facies distribution map resulting
from the facies modelling previously constructed. Because this research was focused
on the sandstone reservoir of Zone "X”, the shale volume (Vsh) modelling assumed
that the shale lithology indicated by the lacustrine shale facies had Vsh = 1.

b) Effective Porosity (PHIE)

The method used in modelling static effective porosity (PHIE) was the Gaussian
Random Function Simulation. Figure 13.b shows that the effective porosity property
modelling (PHIE) is controlled (co-krigging) by the average shale volume distribution
map (Vsh) resulting from the shale volume modelling (Vsh) previously constructed.
Because this research was focused on the sandstone reservoir of Zone "X", the
effective porosity modelling (PHIE) assumed that the shale lithology indicated by the
lacustrine shale facies had PHIE = 0.
 16

c) Permeability (k)
The method used in modelling static permeability (k) was the Gaussian Random
Function Simulation. Because this research was focused on the sandstone reservoir of
Zone "X", the permeability (k) modelling assumed that the shale lithology indicated by
the lacustrine shale facies had k = 0 (Figure 13.c). This permeability modelling
produced a correlation coefficient value of 0.97 for the subaqueous distributary
channel facies and 0.89 for the mouth bar facies.

d) Water Saturation (SW)

The method used in static modelling of water saturation (SW) was the Gaussian
Random Function Simulation. Figure 13.d shows the modelling of water saturation
(SW) properties (co-krigging) by the height above contact (HAC) geometric model at
the lowest known gas (LKG) fluid contact at a depth of (-1508) m. The area below the
lowest known gas fluid contact was considered to have SW = 1. This water saturation
modelling produced a correlation coefficient value of -1 for the subaqueous
distributary channel facies and -0.4 for the mouth bar facies.

A B

C D

Figure 13 - Property models of the sandstone layer of Zone "X” in the study area, each showing the
3D appearance, the map view appearance, and the cross section of incision A-A'. Map A is
the Vsh model; Map B is the PHIE model; Map C is the Permeability model; and D is the
SW model.

Calculation of Hydrocarbon Reserves

Calculations using the volumetric method in the sandstone reservoir of Zone "X" obtained
several hydrocarbon volumetric values shown in Table 2. The maps resulting from this
calculation are shown in Figure 14.
 17

TABLE 2

RESULTS OF VOLUMETRIC CALCULATIONS OF HYDROCARBON RESERVES CONTAINED

IN THE "X" ZONE LAYERS

Value Unit
Bulk Volume 10.94 x 10^6 m^3
Net Volume 5 x 10^6 m^3
Pore Volume 0.58 x 10^6 rm^3
HCPV Gas 469.24 x 10^3 rm^3
IGIP 1.95 x 10^9 SCF

Figure 14 - Maps from calculating the hydrocarbon resources of the Zone "X". A is the Bulk Volume
Map; B is the Net Volume Map; C is the Pore Volume Map, D is the Hydrocarbon Pore
Volume (HCPV) Map; and E is the Initially Gas In Place (IGIP) Map.

DISCUSSION

Paleogeography in the Karang Agung Block in the Late Eocene - Middle Eocene

The interpretation regarding the non-appearance of the Lemat Formation in the research area
on the paleogeographic map of the South Sumatra Basin during the Late Eocene - Middle
Oligocene by Ginger and Fielding (2005) (Figure 15) could be due to the lack of data from
drilling wells that succeeded in penetrating the Lemat Formation at that time, so that in this
research the paleogeography of the South Sumatra Basin during the Late Eocene - Middle
Oligocene was considered speculative. This was then refined in this study with
biostratigraphic data in Well ANS-1 (Table 1) which showed the appearance of fossilized
Leiospheres and Botryococcus algae at depths of (-1481.5) to (-1664) m indicating an inner
neritic – lower intertidal environment, as well as fossil Monoporites annulatus sp. and
Dipterocarpae at a depth of (1664) m which showed the age of SS6 – SS4 (Early Miocene –
Early Oligocene) at the Chattian stage. Apart from that, at a depth of (-1690) to (-1709) m, there
were fossils of Monoporites annulatus sp., Dipterocarpae, and Cricorporate pollen appearing
which indicated a lacustrine – upper intertidal environment with an age of SS3 – SS1 (Early
Oligocene – Eocene?) in Rupelian stage. Based on this biostratigraphic data, the presence of
fossils indicating an Eocene - Early Oligocene age range is equivalent to the age of formation
of the Lemat Formation which according to Ginger and Fielding (2005) is Eocene - Middle
Oligocene.
 18

Figure 15 - Paleogeographic map of the South Sumatra Basin during the Eocene - Middle Oligocene
which is equivalent to the formation of the Lemat Formation (after Ginger and Fielding,
2005). The red box indicates the research area.

Sedimentation Direction of the Lemat Formation

According to Ginger and Fielding (2005), the Lemat Formation is a rock formation formed
during the syn-rift megasequence tectonic phase which was controlled by the opening of a
basin which formed a series of horst-graben oriented east – west which then rotated by 15
degrees to become north – northeast and south – southwest. In this study, the Lemat
Formation of Eocene – Early Oligocene age (De Coster, 1974 in Ginger and Fielding, 2005) is
composed of a sequence of coarse tuffaceous clastics or granite washes (Kikim Member)
which is harmoniously overlain by shale, siltstone, sandstone and coal. which was deposited
in a lacustrine environment - marginal lacustrine (Benakat Member). When viewed from the
paleogeographic map of the South Sumatra Basin during the Late Eocene - Middle Oligocene
which is equivalent to the formation of the Lemat Formation and the Late Oligocene - Earliest
Miocene which is equivalent to the Talangakar Formation by Ginger and Fielding (2005), the
sediment supply that fills the graben in the South Sumatra Basin has a northeast – southwest
tendency towards deposition originating from the fluvial system which eroded the Sundaland
highlands.

In contrast to Ginger and Fielding (2005), in this study the authors interpret that the direction
of deposition of the Lemat Formation was northwest - southeast. This is reinforced by the
depth structure map top basement (Figure 4.b) which shows that in the northwestern part of
the study area there is a basement high which is bounded by normal faults, forming a half
graben system, where the Lemat Formation is on top of it. So it can be said that the
sedimentation process of the Lemat Formation in this research area occurred in the syn rift
megasequence tectonic phase, where the supply of sedimentary material originating from
the basement high in the northwest was brought towards the southeast and filled the part of
the fault block that was moving relatively downward. According to the author, the
sedimentation process occured on the sub lacustrine slope with a gravity flow deposition
mechanism forming fan lobes of the lacustrine delta. This is confirmed by well data which
shows that the Lemat Formation is composed of thick shale with thin sandstone inserts which
are referred to as talus deposits resulting from slope erosion. The sedimentation process of
the Lemat Formation in this research area can be described by the conceptual model for a
structurally controlled syn rift deep marine clastic depocenter by Gawthrope and Leeder
(2000) in Kristensen, et al., (2016) (Figure 16).
 19

Figure 16 - Conceptual model for a structurally controlled syn rift deep marine clastic depocentre
(Gawthrope and Leeder (2000) in Kristensen, et al., (2016).)

CONCLUSION

The Lemat Formation is one of the formations in the South Sumatra Basin which was
deposited during the syn-rift megasequence tectonic phase in a lacustrine environment
during the Eocene - Middle Oligocene. From the mudlog description in the research area
which is included in the Karang Agung Block, Musi Banyuasin Regency, South Sumatra, it is
known that the lower part of the Lemat Formation is composed of conglomerate containing
metasedimentary rock fragments, gray shale, and light gray sandstone sized pebbles, and at
the top it is composed of conglomerate sized coarse sand – gravel and gray shale. With the
existence of a succession of fine-graining patterns and the presence of blocky sand, the
sandstone layer intervals of Zone "X" of the Lower Lemat Formation in the study area were
deposited in a lacustrine deltaic fluvial environment which is confirmed by biostratigraphic
data which shows the significant occurrence of Leiospheres and Algal cysts fossils, especially
the genus Botryococcus algae.

In the research area itself, the Lemat Formation, especially in the lower part, is thought to
have potential as a reservoir rock that can accumulate certain amounts of hydrocarbons. This
has been confirmed by the results of petrophysical analysis on the sandstone of Zone "X"
which has a shale volume range of 27.9–35.3 %; effective porosity range of 9.7–4.1 % in the
subaqueous distributary channel facies and 8.6–13.7 % in the mouth bar facies; permeability
ranges from 2.686-19.558 mD in the subaqueous distributary channel facies and 1.974-21.851
mD in the mouth bar facies; and water saturation range of 17.8–29.1 % in the subaqueous
distributary channel facies and 19.0–33.1 % in the mouth bar facies.

From the results of facies modelling and petrophysical properties, and reinforced by drill stem
test data at a depth interval of (-1533) m to (-1543) m in the ANS-1 well, it is found that the
sandstone of Zone "X” in the Lower Lemat Formation contains hydrocarbon gas with
volumetric calculation results showing a bulk volume of 10.94 x 10 6 m3, net volume of 5 x 106
m3, pore volume of 0.582 x 106 rm3, Hydrocarbon Pore Volume of 492.24 x 103 rm3, and Gas
Initially In Place of 1.95 x 109 SCF.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express our deepest gratitude to Mr. Ricky Andrian Tampubolon, Mr. Vicky
Rulian, Mr. Charatil Asri, and Mr. Zusri Jaifan for all directions, suggestions and input starting
from processing the data obtained from PT. Odira Energy Karang Agung until the time of
discussions on the creation of this manuscript. We would also like to thank other members of
the Geo Pangea Research Group (GPRG), namely Mr. Iqbal Fardiansyah and Mr. Dicky Haris
Hidayat for all the valuable input and suggestions provided during the discussion of this
 20

research. We also thank PT. Odira Energy Karang Agung for permission to access and use
data for the purposes of this research.

REFERENCES

Barber, A.J., Crow M.J., Milsom J.S. 2005. Sumatera : Geology, Resources, and Tectonic
Evaluation: Geological Society Memoir No.31, London.

Bishop, M.G. 2001. South Sumatera Basin Province, Indonesia: The Lahat/Talangakar-
Cenozoic Total Petroleum System: U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey.

Coster, G.L.de. 1974. The Geology of the Central and South Sumatera Basins: Proceedings of
Indonesian Petroleum Association, Vol.3.

Finaldhi, Endo, Iqbal Ferdiansyah, Enry H. Sihombing, Reybi Waren, Faizil Fitris, Habash
Semimbar, Satia Graha, Abdullah F. Talib, Willy R. Paksi. 2016. Reservoir Potential of Axial
Fluvial Delta Vs Alluvial Fan Delta in Syn Rift Lacustrine: A Modern Study in Lake Singkarak,
Sumatera: Proceedings Indonesia Petroleum Association.
Ginger, D., Fielding K. 2005. The Petroleum System and Future Potential of the South
Sumatera Basin: Proceedings Indonesia Petroleum Association, 20th Annual Convention &
Exhibition.

Kristensen, Thomas B., Atle Rotevant, Davod C. P. Peacock, Gijs A. Henstra, Ivar Midtkandal,
Sten Andreas Grundvag. 2016. Structure and flow properties of syn rift border fault: The
interplay between fault damage and fault related chemical alteration (Domberjerg Fault,
Wollaston Forland, NE Greenland): Journal of Structural Geology 92 (2016), 99-115.

IPA24.SG.63 © 2024, Indonesian Petroleum Association (IPA). This publication should not be uploaded to
websites, printed for distribution or re-published in any form without the prior written permission of the