Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr20061328

Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia

Abstract

Although reserve (or field) growth has proven to be an important factor contributing to new reserves in mature petroleum basins, it is still a poorly understood phenomenon. Limited studies show that the magnitude of reserve growth is controlled by several major factors, including (1) the reserve booking and reporting requirements in each country, (2) improvements in reservoir characterization and simulation, (3) application of enhanced oil recovery techniques, and (4) the discovery of new and extensions of known pools in discovered fields. Various combinations of these factors can affect the estimates of proven reserves in particular fields and may dictate repeated estimations of reserves during a field's life. This study explores the reserve growth in the 42 largest oil fields in the West Siberian Basin, which contain about 55 percent of the basin's total oil reserves. The West Siberian Basin occupies a vast swampy plain between the Ural Mountains and the Yenisey River, and extends offshore into the Kara Sea; it is the richest petroleum province in Russia. About 600 oil and gas fields with original reserves of 144 billion barrels of oil (BBO) and more than 1,200 trillion cubic feet of gas (TCFG) have been discovered. The principal oil reserves and most of the oil fields are in the southern half of the basin, whereas the northern half contains mainly gas reserves. Sedimentary strata in the basin consist of Upper Triassic through Tertiary clastic rocks. Most oil is produced from Neocomian (Lower Cretaceous) marine to deltaic sandstone reservoirs, although substantial oil reserves are also in the marine Upper Jurassic and continental to paralic Lower to Middle Jurassic sequences. The majority of oil fields are in structural traps, which are gentle, platform-type anticlines with closures ranging from several tens of meters to as much as 150 meters (490 feet). Fields producing from stratigraphic traps are generally smaller except for the giant Talin field which contains oil in Jurassic river-valley sandstones. Principal source rocks are organic-rich marine shales of the Volgian (uppermost Jurassic) Bazhenov Formation, which is 30-50 m (98- 164 feet) thick. Bazhenov-derived oils are mostly of medium gravity, and contain 0.8-1.3 percent sulfur and 2-5 percent paraffin. Oils in the Lower to Middle Jurassic clastics were sourced from lacustrine and estuarine shales of the Toarcian Togur Bed. These oils are medium to low gravity, with low sulfur (less than 0.25 percent) and high paraffin (commonly to 10 percent) contents. Among the 42 fields analyzed for reserve growth, 30 fields are located in the Middle Ob region, which includes the Samotlor field with reserves of more than 25 BBO and the Fedorov field with reserves of about 5 BBO. Data used in the study include year of discovery, year of first production, annual and cumulative production, and remaining reserves reported by Russian reserve categories (A+B+C1 and C2) in January of each year. Correlation of these Russian resource categories to U.S. categories of the Society of Petroleum Engineers classification is complex and somewhat uncertain. Reserve growth in oil fields of West Siberia was calculated using a newly developed Group Growth method, which requires that the total reserve (proven reserve plus cumulative production) of individual fields with an equal length of reserve record be added together starting with discovery year or the first production year. Then the annual growth factor (AGF), which is the ratio of total reserves of two consecutive years, is calculated for all years. Once AGFs have been calculated, the cumulative growth factor (CGF) is calculated by multiplying the AGFs of all the previous years. The CGF data are used to develop reserve growth models. The West Siberian oil fields show a 13-fold reserve growth 20 years after the discovery year and only about a 2-fold growth after the first production year. This difference is attributed to extensive exploration and field delineation activities between the discovery and the first production years. Because of uncertainty in the length of evaluation time and in reported reserves during this initial period, reserve growth based on the first production year is more reliable for model development. However, reserve growth models based both on discovery year and first production year show rapid growth in the first few years and slower growth in the following years. In contrast, the reserve growth patterns for the conterminous United States and offshore Gulf of Mexico show a steady reserve increase throughout the productive lives of the fields. The different reserve booking requirements and the lack of capital investment for improved reservoir management and production technologies in West Siberian fields relative to U.S. fields are the probable causes for the difference in growth patterns. Reserve growth models based on the first production year predict that the reserve growth potential in the 42 largest oil fields of West Siberia over a five-year period (1998-2003) ranges from 270-330 million barrels or 0.34-0.42 percent per year. For a similar five-year period (1996-2001), models for the conterminous United States predict a growth of 0.54-0.75 percent per year. This abstract presents the contents of a poster prepared for the AAPG Hedberg Research Conference on Understanding World Oil Resources, November 12-17, 2006 - Colorado Springs, Colorado. A paper 'Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia' was published in Natural Resources Research, v. 12, no. 2, June, 2003.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mahendra K. Verma, Gregory F. Ulmishek. 2006. Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20061328

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona