High-Impact Reservoirs

Roger Barton To the surprise of many in the E&P industry, the impact of an extraterrestrial mass
True Oil LLC
Casper, Wyoming, USA may bring about conditions conducive to the formation of petroleum reservoirs.
Conversely, these Earth-shattering events can also disrupt hydrocarbon accumulations.
Ken Bird
US Geological Survey
Menlo Park, California, USA
Geologic processes and events shape the Earth reservoirs and traps. Case studies from the USA
Jesús García Hernández
and determine the location and quality of petro- provide evidence of current oil and gas produc-
PEMEX
leum reservoirs. Many geologic processes, including tion from ancient impact structures. An example
Villahermosa, Tabasco, Mexico
erosion, mountain building, sediment deposition, from Mexico shows how a massive impact con-
José M. Grajales-Nishimura continent breakup and ocean spreading, occur tributed to the formation of some prolific reser-
Gustavo Murillo-Muñetón over tens of millions of years. These gradual pro- voirs. In a case from Alaska, USA, inclusion of
Mexican Petroleum Institute cesses are often punctuated by distinct events— impact effects increased the reliability of the
Mexico City, Mexico earthquakes, landslides and volcanic eruptions— basin and petroleum system model.
that are instantaneous on a geologic time scale.
Ben Herber Another type of sudden event, and one that is Sustaining Impact
Paul Weimer seldom mentioned in petroleum geology discus- For billions of years the Earth has been bom-
University of Colorado sions, is asteroid impact. Although relatively rare, barded by comets, asteroids and meteoroids.
Boulder, Colorado, USA
a collision between the Earth and a large extrater- Comets are composed of ice, dust and rock and
restrial object dramatically alters surface and sub- have diameters up to 20 km [12 mi]. In our solar
Christian Koeberl
University of Vienna surface rock properties and can have lasting system they typically have long elliptical orbits
Vienna, Austria effects over large areas. Equipped with a better about the Sun and rarely impact the Earth or
understanding of the consequences of an asteroid other terrestrial planets. Asteroids can be larger,
Martin Neumaier strike, explorationists can exploit the isolated up to 900 km [560 mi] in diameter, and are
Oliver Schenk basins and fractured rock left in the aftermath. formed of rocky matter. Most asteroids orbit the
Aachen, Germany This article describes the processes that Sun in the asteroid belt, which lies between Mars
accompany impact and the roles they play in and Jupiter, but some—the so-called Earth-
Jack Stark creating or destroying petroleum source rocks, crossing asteroids—come closer to the Earth.
Continental Resources, Inc.
Enid, Oklahoma, USA

Oilfield Review Winter 2009/2010: 21, no. 4.

Copyright © 2010 Schlumberger.
Every year
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Judson
Ahern, University of Oklahoma, Norman; John Dribus, New
Orleans; Gretchen Gillis, Sugar Land, Texas, USA; Alan
Hildebrand, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada; Kenneth Once a
J. Kerrihard, Continental Resources, Enid, Oklahoma; Jorge century
Impact interval

Lopez de Cardenas and Jesus Mendoza Ruiz, Mexico City;

Jodie Lowry, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Josephine Ndinyah, Every
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA; Ken Peters, Mill Valley, 10,000
California; and Matt Varhaug, Houston. years
1. Lowman PD Jr: “Extraterrestrial Impact Craters,” in
Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure Every
in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin million
and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, years
Oklahoma, USA: Oklahoma Geological Survey,
Circular 100 (1997): 55–81. Every 100
Buthman DB: “Global Hydrocarbon Potential of Impact million years
Structures,” in Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames
Structure in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: 4 20 90 400 2,000 9,000
Origin and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium). Impactor diameter, m
Norman, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey,
> Frequency of impact. Impact frequency is inversely proportional to
Circular 100 (1997): 83–99.
2. “Hazards, Impacts in Our Future?” American Museum impactor size. [Adapted from Short N: “The Remote Sensing Tutorial, Section
of Natural History, Arthur Ross Hall of Meteorites, 18: Basic Science II: Impact Cratering,” http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/ (accessed
http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/meteorites/ December 10, 2009).]
impacts/hazards.php (accessed September 7, 2009).

14 Oilfield Review
Meteoroids are small pieces of interplanetary vaporized upon impact, but for the purpose of this and others undergo glancing or full-on collisions.
debris and are commonly fragments of asteroids. article, the term asteroid will encompass bodies Frequency of impact is inversely proportional to
Most meteoroids that become visible as meteors, of all sizes that strike the Earth. The surface rock asteroid size; while several pebble-sized meteor-
or “shooting stars,” when they enter the Earth’s that sustains impact is called target rock. ites may land per year, and asteroids that cause
atmosphere are the size of pebbles or smaller. Craters formed by asteroid impact are the craters 20 to 50 km [12 to 31 mi] across occur
Remnants of meteoroids and asteroids that are most common landforms in the solar system.1 every million years or so, asteroids large enough
slowed by the Earth’s atmosphere and reach the However, impact craters are comparatively to cause widespread catastrophe intersect the
surface are all called meteorites. Larger bodies uncommon on Earth, where the atmosphere Earth’s orbit only every 100 million years or more
called bolides are not slowed as much and are causes most falling bodies to disintegrate. A few, (previous page).2
known as fireballs, explode quite near the surface,

Winter 2009/2010 15
 When craters are formed by impact events, changes in the target rocks occur during the first temperatures greater than 3,000°C [5,400°F] in
they disappear relatively quickly with the rework- stage, and the morphology of the crater is deter- the impact volume, causing fracturing, shock
ing of the Earth’s crust—buried beneath sedi- mined in the later stages. metamorphism, mineral phase changes, melting
ments, pulled under at subduction zones, folded Upon contact, the projectile pushes target and vaporization.4 Duration of the contact and
into mountain ranges or eroded. Eroded, buried material out of its path, compressing and acceler- compression stage depends on the projectile’s
or otherwise modified impact craters are called ating it. The target resists penetration and decel- size, composition and velocity; for all but the
impact structures. erates the projectile. Following contact, the largest impacts, this stage lasts only up to a
An asteroid can hit the Earth with a velocity projectile stops almost immediately, traveling a few seconds.
between 10 and 70 km/s [up to 250,000 km/h, or distance approximating one or two times its During the excavation stage, which lasts a few
160,000 mi/h], releasing large amounts of kinetic diameter into the target rock. The kinetic energy seconds to minutes, a hemispherical shock wave
energy.3 Crater formation is a rapid process that is converted into heat and shock waves that pen- propagates into the target, generating high pres-
can be divided into three stages: contact and etrate both the impacting body and the target sure in the material. The expanding shock wave
compression, excavation, and postimpact crater rock. A large asteroid can produce shock pres- causes irreversible changes in the shocked
modification. Structural alterations and phase sures in excess of 100 GPa [14.5 million psi] and volume. After the shock wave passes, the high
pressure is released by a rarefaction, or pressure-
release wave. This pressure wave leads to cre-
ation of a mass flow that opens the crater. The
material excavated by the impact is ejected from
the crater and can be thrown great distances.
The larger the impactor, the more likely it will be
completely vaporized and ejected as well. Solid,
liquid and vaporized debris are thrust back up
along paths that form a cone-shaped “ejecta cur-
tain.” Ejected material follows ballistic trajecto-
ries upward and back down to Earth. Some debris
may travel beyond the atmosphere and then
reenter it thousands of kilometers away.
Ejecta size ranges from vapor and dust to
giant blocks. Molten rock and vaporized matter
that condenses during flight can form round,
sand-sized particles called spherules. Such
spherules, often glassy, can land thousands of
kilometers from the impact site and form distinc-
tive layers in the sedimentary record.5 In the
Chicxulub, Mexico, impact of 65 million years
ago, ejecta distribution reached global propor-
tions, with some spherules traveling as far as
Glassy impact-melt inclusions
New Zealand.6 Spherule layers often outlast the
crater itself and may be the only evidence of an
ancient impact, as is the case for some 3.5 billion-
year-old impact deposits in South America and
Australia. The thickness of the spherule layer
typically decreases with distance from the
impact site.
Nearer the crater and inside it, ejected mate-
rial is deposited as coarsely sorted breccias—
mixtures of angular fragments of target rock
and basement rock in a fine-grained matrix of
> Rocks formed by impact. Suevite (top) is a glass-bearing impact breccia. pulverized material. Clastic breccias that
This whole-rock specimen from the Bosumtwi impact structure, in Ghana, contain mixed rock types, including shock-
shows a variety of irregular rock clasts plus frothy glass inclusions in a metamorphosed fragments, impact melt or glass,
fine-grained, clastic matrix. A close-up of a drill core (bottom) from the are called suevites (left).7 In impact-melt brec-
suevite outside the northern rim of the Bosumtwi crater also shows
cias, the matrix cementing the fragments is
inclusions of glass. The wide dimension of the upper sample is 25 cm [9.8 in.],
and the core diameter in the lower figure is 5 cm [2 in.]. (Photographs crystallized from molten rock. Rocks affected by
courtesy of Christian Koeberl.) impact are known collectively as impactites.

16 Oilfield Review
 Excavation produces a bowl-shaped “tran- A
sient” crater. During postimpact modification,
Projectile
the transient crater collapses because of gravity.
The morphology of the resulting crater depends Shock wave
on target rock type and impactor size.8 Simple Target rock
structures retain their bowl shape and uplifted
rim. On Earth simple impact structures are usu-
ally small, with diameters up to 2 km [1.2 mi] in
sedimentary rock and up to 4 km [2.4 mi] in
crystalline rock. An example of a well-preserved
B
simple structure in sedimentary rock is the
Barringer crater, located in Arizona, USA (right).
Beneath the apparent floor of the crater lies a Ejecta
Vapor
layer of brecciated target material, which over-
Transient crater Rarefaction
lies the fractured but autochthonous target rocks
of the crater’s true floor. Analysis of shocked min- Melt
Shock wave
erals from the crater floor indicates that pres-
sures reached approximately 25 GPa [3.6 million
psi]. The walls of the final, collapsed, crater are
shorter than in the original, transient, crater.
Such postimpact modifications produce a final C
diameter slightly greater than that of the tran-
sient cavity. Air-fall breccia Overturned flap
Craters larger than a few kilometers in diame- Original plane
ter usually have complex morphologies character- Sediments
ized by an uplifted central area. The central uplift
may be a peak or, in the largest craters, a ring. The Dyke with impact melt
Mixed
central high consists of shocked target rock that breccia
Melt
3. For general references on the following discussion: Fracture Shocked
target rock
Melosh HJ: Impact Cratering: A Geologic Process.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
Koeberl C: “Impact Cratering: The Mineralogical and
Geochemical Evidence,” in Johnson KS and Campbell JA D
(eds): Ames Structure in Northwest Oklahoma and
Similar Features: Origin and Petroleum Production
(1995 Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma: Oklahoma
Geological Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 30–54.
Koeberl C: “Mineralogical and Geochemical Aspects
of Impact Craters,” Mineralogical Magazine 66, no. 5
(October 2002): 745–768.
4. Koeberl (2002), reference 3.
5. Simonson BM and Glass BP: “Spherule Layers—Records
of Ancient Impact,” Annual Review of Earth and
Planetary Sciences 32 (May 2004): 329–361.
6. Smit J: “The Global Stratigraphy of the Cretaceous-
Tertiary Boundary Impact Ejecta,” Annual Review of
Earth and Planetary Sciences 27 (May 1999): 75–113.
7. Koeberl (2002), reference 3.
Koeberl C, Milkereit B, Overpeck JT, Scholz CA,
Amoako PYO, Boamah D, Danuor S, Karp T, Kueck J,
Hecky RD, King JW and Peck JA: “An International and
Multidisciplinary Drilling Project into a Young Complex
Impact Structure: The 2004 ICDP Bosumtwi Crater
Drilling Project—An Overview,” Meteoritics & Planetary > Simple impact structure. During contact and compression (A) the asteroid
Science 42, no. 4/5 (2007): 483–511. hits the Earth’s surface and pushes target material downward. In the
8. Grieve RAF: “Terrestrial Impact Structures: Basic excavation stage (B), the transient crater forms. Following impact, the
Characteristics and Economic Significance with crater walls have collapsed slightly, and ejecta have fallen back into the
Emphasis on Hydrocarbon Production,” in Johnson KS
crater (C). The Barringer crater, in Arizona (D), is an example of a simple
and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure in Northwest
Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin and Petroleum impact crater. It has a diameter of 1.2 km [0.7 mi] and was formed 50,000
Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma: years ago. (Photograph courtesy of the Lunar and Planetary Institute.)
Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 3–16. Oilfield Review
Autumn 09
Impact Fig. 3
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 3

Winter 2009/2010 17
 A has been structurally uplifted by rebound (left).
Projectile The surrounding annular depression contains
Shock wave
breccias and impact-melt rocks. Postimpact modi-
fication is severe in large impacts; collapse of the
Target rock outer rim creates a final crater that is much wider
than the transient cavity.

Impact Facts and Figures

The study of craters began in 1609 when Galileo
B Galilei observed and sketched circular features
while training his telescope on the moon. The
Ejecta
Vapor first suggestion of an impact origin to the moon’s
Transient crater Rarefaction craters was put forth by Robert Hooke in 1665.
Hooke himself dismissed the idea because at the
Melt
Shock wave time, interplanetary space was thought to be
empty, and he could not imagine where the pro-
jectiles would come from; it was not until 1801
that asteroids were discovered. Through the
1800s most observers supported a volcanic origin
C
for the moon’s craters. In 1893 the geologist
G.K. Gilbert studied lunar craters and concluded
they could be explained only by impact, but he
Uplift of could not understand why the craters were
crater floor almost all circular even though many of the
impacts were undoubtedly oblique. It is now
known that craters produced by high-velocity
impact are circular even at low incidence angles.9
On Earth, most craters currently recognized
as impact related were once thought to be of
D volcanic origin. Scientists now realize that a vari-
Gravitational collapse ety of mechanisms can cause terrestrial crater-
Ejecta of crater walls like features, including volcanism, domal
collapse, tectonic activity, subsurface dissolution
and glaciation.

9. Melosh, reference 3.
10. Melosh, reference 3.
11. Koeberl (2002), reference 3.

Final crater diameter

Original plane

Structural , Complex impact structure. In the formation of

uplift complex impact structures, the first two stages—
contact and compression (A) and excavation
F (B)—are similar to the same stages in simple
crater formation. The modification stage, however,
Apparent crater diameter is more complicated. The middle of the crater
begins to rebound (C), creating an uplifted central
Original plane area. Far from the center, the crater walls begin to
collapse (D). The final diameter of the crater is
much greater than that of the transient crater (E).
After erosion of the crater (F), the diameter may
appear to be even greater.

Oilfield Review
Autumn 09
Impact Fig. 4
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 4

18 Oilfield Review
 The first proposal linking asteroid impact to
Vaporization
a terrestrial crater was made in 1906, when

Graphite
Diamond
3,000
D.M. Barringer argued that the simple crater in
Arizona now named for him was produced by
the high-speed impact of a large meteorite.10

Stishovite
Coesite
Fragments of meteoritic iron—a nickel-iron alloy

Temperature, °C

Quartz
Coesite
2,000
containing rare metals in concentrations unlike Melting
Zircon decomposes
those in any terrestrial rock—had been discov- Quartz melts
ered on the rim of the crater. Barringer was con- Sphene melts
Diaplectic
vinced that a large meteorite was buried below glass
1,000 Planar
the crater floor, and he started a mining company Granulite deformation
to drill holes in search of the iron mass. His claim Amphibolite Eclogite features
Shatter
Sanidinite Greenschist cones
was a contentious one, in part because he was Hornfels Glaucophane
never able to uncover the meteorite, which had Zeolite Schist
0
vaporized upon contact. His opponents argued 0.1 0.5 1 5 10 50 100

into the 1950s that the crater was caused by vol- Pressure, GPa

canism or collapse. The discovery of pulverized > Pressures and temperatures of impact-related mineral changes.
deposits and ultrahigh-pressure mineral phases Conditions that cause ordinary subsurface metamorphism are shaded in blue.
High-velocity impact, typically generating pressures greater than 5 GPa,
helped convince geologists and astronomers that causes phase transformations—such as the change from quartz polymorph
the Barringer crater and many others are scars of coesite to stishovite—and shock metamorphism, which is characterized by
asteroid impact. planar deformation features, diaplectic glass, shock melting and vaporization.
Because in most cases the asteroid is
destroyed upon impact, remnants that prove
impact origin are hard to find. Erosion and burial
further complicate the situation. Therefore, sci- except in impact structures. Another phase Structural changes can occur on macroscopic
entists have developed diagnostic criteria for change that can occur at impact pressures is and microscopic scales. A macroscopic indicator
identifying and confirming impact structures on from graphite to diamond. High-pressure phase of impact shock is the occurrence of shatter
Earth. In the absence of the extraterrestrial changes typically involve closer packing of the cones. These structures, which are cones with
projectile or geochemical evidence thereof, the mineral’s constituent molecules, resulting in a regular thin grooves that radiate from the apex,
following characteristics are deemed most impor- high-density version of the mineral. These develop better in some lithologies than in others.
tant for confirming asteroid impact: evidence of changes can be detected by optical and scanning They form at pressures from 2 to 30 GPa [290,000
shock metamorphism, crater morphology and electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction and to 4,400,000 psi] and range in size from milli­
geophysical anomalies. Of these three, only diag- nuclear magnetic resonance measurements. meters to meters (below).
nostic shock-metamorphic effects can provide
unambiguous evidence of impact origin.
The impact shock wave causes compression of
target rocks at pressures far exceeding the
Hugoniot elastic limit (HEL)—the maximum
Oilfield Review
stress a material will reach without permanent Autumn 09
distortion.11 The HEL for most minerals and rocks Impact Fig. 5
is 5 to 10 GPa [725,000 to 1,450,000 psi]. The only ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 5
natural process on Earth known to produce shock
pressures exceeding these levels is asteroid
impact; static pressures involved in deep meta-
morphism may approach 5 GPa, and volcanic
activity does not exceed pressures of 1 GPa
[145,000 psi].
At impact pressures, two types of shock meta-
morphism can occur: phase changes and struc-
4 cm
tural changes (above right). In a phase change, a
mineral transforms from one phase to another.
For example, quartz undergoes solid-state phase
> Shatter cone in limestone. This shatter cone was retrieved from the
transitions, forming coesite and then stishovite
Steinheim crater, in Germany. The crater was formed about 15 million years
at even higher pressures. The stishovite poly- ago and is still visible on the Earth’s surface. (Photograph courtesy of
morph of quartz has never been found in nature Christian Koeberl.)

Winter 2009/2010 19
 Structures at the microscopic scale typically
occur at higher pressures. At pressures between
5 and 45 GPa [725,000 to 6,500,000 psi] some
mineral grains develop microstructures called
planar deformation features (PDFs).12 These fea-
tures are sets of closely spaced parallel lamellae
(left). Individual grains may contain multiple
groups of PDFs at different angles. Analysis of the
orientations helps quantify the stress levels
attained during impact.
At pressures greater than about 30 GPa, some
300 µm
mineral crystals transform into an amorphous
300 µm structure called diaplectic glass. This glass forms
300 µm
without melting. Such a solid-state transforma-
tion can preserve the grain shape and some of
the grain’s original defects, distinguishing the
product from melt glass.
At pressures above 50 GPa [7.3 million psi],
silica and other mineral grains melt, and above
60 GPa [8.7 million psi] rocks undergo bulk melt-
ing and form impact melts. If they cool quickly,
these molten materials form impact glass, and if
they cool slowly, they become fine-grained impact-
melt rocks. With time, shock-generated glass
recrystallizes, or devitrifies, explaining why no
glass remains in older impact structures.
As of 2010, more than 175 impact structures
50 µm
50 µm that exhibit shock-metamorphic effects have
50 µm been identified on the Earth (next page, top).13
These circular features range in diameter from
15 m [49 ft] at the Haviland crater, in Kansas,
USA, to 300 km [190 mi] at the Vredefort crater,
in the Witwatersrand basin of South Africa. More
than 30 of these structures have some form of
potentially economic deposits, including oil and
gas, precious metals and diamonds.14
Three types of resources can result from impact:
• Progenetic deposits originate before impact;
examples are the uranium deposits of the
Carswell structure, in Saskatchewan, Canada,
which were lifted up during crater formation,
and the gold and uranium deposits of the
Witwatersrand basin, which were buried and
preserved in the Vredefort crater.
• Syngenetic deposits originate during or
50 µm
50 µm because of impact; examples are diamonds
50 µm found in impact melts in several craters in
> Grain deformation. At impact pressures, some mineral grains develop Germany, Ukraine and Russia, and copper-
planar deformation features (PDFs), which are closely spaced parallel nickel and platinum-group elements in sul-
lamellae that penetrate the whole grain. A shocked quartz grain assemblage
from the Woodleigh impact structure, in Australia (top), displays multiple fides, such as those in the prolific mines of the
orientations of PDFs (from Reimold et al, reference 12). A single shocked Sudbury structure, in Ontario, Canada.
quartz grain from an impact structure near Manson, Iowa, USA, exhibits • Epigenetic deposits result from postimpact
two main PDF orientations (middle). The colors result from interference processes; examples include hydrocarbons and
with the microscope’s light, Oilfield
causedReview
by the grain thickness. An unshocked
quartz grain (bottom) shows Oilfield
Autumn
some Review
09
features that inexperienced observers hydrothermal deposits. The remainder of this
Oilfield
Autumn Review
09
might confuse with PDFs. Impact
The Fig.
lines
AutumnFig. are
09 77 traces of subplanar fluid-inclusion article focuses on hydrocarbon resources.
trails that are the result ofImpact
ORAUT09-Impact
alteration caused Fig.low-grade
by 7 tectonic
Impact Fig. 7
deformation. They are notORAUT09-Impact
straight, planar or Fig. 7 spaced. (Photographs
closely
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 7
courtesy of Christian Koeberl.)

20 Oilfield Review
> Worldwide distribution of confirmed impact craters. Craters mentioned in the text appear as black dots. (Data from Planetary and Space Science Centre,
reference 13.)

Hydrocarbons in Impact Structures

Dozens of buried impact craters have produced
oil and gas.15 One of the best-studied is the Ames
structure, in Oklahoma. Some geologists argue
that this structure could be the result of igneous
activity or subsurface solution.16 However, others
contend that the evidence for impact origin Ames impact
is incontrovertible. structure
The Ames feature was initially thought to be a
graben, or downdropped fault block, because Oklahoma

drilling in the early 1970s indicated unusually

thick sections of Ordovician to Pennsylvanian
rocks called the Hunton Formation. In 1990 and
1991, exploratory boreholes established the pres-
ence of hydrocarbons at depths of approximately
9,000 ft [2,700 m] in closed, isolated highs encir-
cling the low feature (right). A number of these

12. Reimold WU, Koeberl C, Hough RM, McDonald I,

Bevan A, Amare K and French BM: “Woodleigh Oilfield Review
Impact Structure, Australia: Shock Petrography and Autumn 09
Geochemical Studies,” Meteoritics & Planetary Impact Fig. 8
Am

Science 38, no. 7 (2003): 1109–1130.

es

13. Planetary and Space Science Centre, Earth

ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 8
Impact Database, 2006, http://www.unb.ca/passc/
ImpactDatabase/ (accessed August 13, 2009).
14. Grieve, reference 8.
15. Buthman, reference 1.
16. Coughlon JP and Denney PP: “The Ames Structure
and Other North American Cryptoexplosion Features:
Evidence for Endogenic Emplacement,” in Johnson KS
and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure in Northwest N
Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin and Petroleum
Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma:
Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 133–152.
Bridges LWD: “Ames Depression, Oklahoma: Domal
Collapse and Later Subsurface Solution,” in Johnson KS
and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure in Northwest > Ames impact structure. This crater, in Oklahoma, was first recognized as
Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin and Petroleum
Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma: a circular anomaly based on drilling. A contour map of the Sylvan Shale
Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 153–168. (bottom), overlying the crater, reveals the ringed structure, which is
currently about 9,000 ft below the surface. Vertical lines show well locations.

Winter 2009/2010 21
 early wells produced oil and gas from the
Arbuckle dolomite, a formation that does not usu-
ally have significant porosity or permeability in
this region.
Late in 1991 a well targeting a small feature
Large granite in the central depression penetrated an unusu-
fragments
ally thick shale section before finding oil in what
drillers called a glassy formation, at 8,800 ft
[2,680 m].17 The borehole then encountered more
than 320 ft [98 m] of what turned out to be oil-
bearing brecciated Precambrian granodiorite base-
Large vugs that store
oil and enable flow ment (left). The well became a prolific producer.
Subsequent drilling, however, had mixed results.
Small and very fine By 1992, geologists put together the apparent
fragments of granite ring-like distribution of productive Arbuckle
wells, the extra thickness of shale and the clues
of glass and brecciated basement rock to propose
an impact origin for the Ames structure.18 To test
the impact hypothesis, scientists from several
organizations conducted petrographic, mineral-
ogic and geochemical studies of drill cuttings and
core samples from Ames boreholes. Additional
investigations tested whether gravity and mag-
> Core sample from the Ames structure. Some of the Ames oil production
netic fields in the vicinity of the structure are
comes from brecciated granodiorite basement rock. This sample contains
large holes and vugs amid fragments of granite. consistent with an impact origin (below left).19 In
the hope of understanding the distribution of
reservoir-quality rock, Continental Resources
commissioned 2D and 3D seismic surveys over
the structure.20
Microscopic scrutiny of cuttings and core
samples revealed mineralogic changes to quartz
that could be explained only by forces one to two
Bouguer Gravity
orders of magnitude greater and 10 orders of
magnitude shorter in duration than anything cre-
ated internally in the Earth, such as volcanism
–1.0
mGal

and seismicity. The shock-impact features and

–2.0 the presence of rare impact glass confirmed the
20
18
impact origin of the Ames crater.21
16
The scenario for the creation of the Ames
structure can be described in steps (next page).
14
Approximately 470 million years ago, 1,700 ft
Dist

12
[520 m] of platform carbonates in a shallow sea
ncea

10
Oilfield Review 20
overlaid granitic Precambrian basement rock. A
nort

–0.6 8 Autumn 09 18 1,000-ft [300-m] diameter asteroid traveling at

h,

16
Impact Fig. 10
km

–1.0 6 14 20 mi/s [32 km/s] created a bowl-shaped depres-

ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 10 12
mGal

–1.4 4 10 sion, excavating target rock to a depth of 2,000 ft

8 m
st, k [600 m] and compressing and fracturing the
e ea
–1.8 6
2
anc
–2.2
4 Dist basement rock. Pressures exceeded 50 GPa.
2
0 The basement rock at the center of the crater
0
> Gravity signature of the Ames crater. Bouguer gravity anomalies indicate subsequently rebounded. Around this central
lateral subsurface density variations. In sedimentary rocks impact craters high, raised basement and carbonate rock formed
that have diameters similar to that of the Ames structure typically produce a a ring 3 mi [5 km] in diameter, 1 mi [1.6 km]
negative gravity anomaly. A negative anomaly signifies material of low thick and 1,600 ft [490 m] higher than the crater
density. (Image courtesy of Judson Ahern.)
floor. Postimpact collapse of the crater’s inner

22 Oilfield Review
edge formed an outer ring 8 to 10 mi [13 to
16 km] in diameter and 1 to 2 mi [1.5 to 3 km]
wide consisting of fractured and brecciated
Arbuckle dolomite.
The bottom of the crater filled with melt brec- A

cias—mixtures of granite, carbonate and dolo-

1,700 ft
Arbuckle group dolomite
mite in a spherulitic matrix—that had been
ejected then fell back in. Tsunamis deposited Kindblade Formation marker
diamictites, poorly sorted clastic breccias, atop Basement (granodiorite)
the melt breccias.22 These crater-fill rocks con-
tained abundant shock-metamorphosed minerals
and impact glass. Approximately 10 mi
The crater formed a closed lacustrine or Ejecta
Ground zero
marine depression 300 to 600 ft [90 to 180 m] B
deep in which anoxic conditions prevailed, filling
Impact melt
with black organic-rich shales that acted as

17. Carpenter BN and Carlson R: “The Ames Meteorite-

Impact Crater,” in Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds):
Ames Structure in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar
Features: Origin and Petroleum Production (1995
Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Ejecta
Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 104–119. Collapse
C
18. Roberts C and Sandridge B: “The Ames Hole,” Shale
Shaker (March–April 1992): 203–206.
19. Ahern JL: “Gravity and Magnetic Investigation of
the Ames Structure, North-Central Oklahoma,” in
Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure
in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin
Central uplift
and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium). Norman,
Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100
(1997): 330–333. Suevite and Ejecta
D cavern system Brecciated/fractured
20. Sandridge R and Ainsworth K: “The Ames Structure impact melt megablocks (fallback)
Reservoirs and Three-Dimensional Seismic
Development,” in Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds):
Ames Structure in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar
Features: Origin and Petroleum Production (1995
Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological
Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 120–132.
21. Koeberl C, Reimold WU, Brandt D, Dallmeyer RD and
Powell RA: “Target Rocks and Breccias from the Ames E
Impact Structure, Oklahoma: Petrology, Mineralogy,
Geochemistry, and Age,” in Johnson KS and Campbell McLish sandstone
JA (eds): Ames Structure in Northwest Oklahoma and
Similar Features: Origin and Petroleum Production
(1995 Symposium). Norman, Oklahoma: Oklahoma
Geological Survey, Circular 100 (1997): 169–198. McLish shales
Koeberl C, Reimold WU and Kelley SP: “Petrography,
Geochemistry, and Argon-40/Argon-39 Ages of Karst
Impact-Melt Rocks and Breccias from the Ames Impact
Structure, Oklahoma: The Nicor Chestnut 18-4 Drill
Core,” Meteoritics & Planetary Science 36, no. 5 (2001):
651–669. > Creation and preservation of the complex impact crater at Ames. About
Fischer JF: “The Nicor No. 18-4 Chestnut Core, Ames
470 million years ago a high-velocity asteroid plunged into the shallow sea
Structure, Oklahoma: Description and Petrography,”
in Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure that covered Oklahoma (A). Impact (B) created a transient crater and also
in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin brecciated and melted the carbonate target rock. Rebound of the deepest
and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, portion of the crater resulted in a high central uplift of target rock and
Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100 underlying granitic basement (C). The outer walls of the crater collapsed
(1997): 223–239. from instability. The central uplift collapsed and formed a central ring of
22. Fischer, reference 21. fractured target rock surrounding fractured basement rock (D). Deposition
Mescher PK and Schultz DJ: “Gamma-Ray Marker of shale (E) and other sediments buried the crater, and the region
in Arbuckle Dolomite, Wilburton Field, Oklahoma—A
underwent tilting.
Widespread Event Associated with the Ames Impact
Structure,” in Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Oilfield Review
Structure in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: Autumn 09
Origin and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium).
Norman, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey, Impact Fig. 12
Circular 100 (1997): 379–384. ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 12
For more on tsunamis: Bunting T, Chapman C, Christie P,
Singh SC and Sledzik J: “The Science of Tsunamis,”
Oilfield Review 19, no. 3 (Autumn 2007): 4–19.

Winter 2009/2010 23
Oil Migration into Reservoir Rock hydrocarbon source rock and reservoir seal.23 The
impact structure was buried under 10,000 ft
[3,000 m] of sediments, ensuring its preserva-
tion. Analysis of the burial history and of source
rock and petroleum geochemistry indicates most
of the hydrocarbons were generated in the
Triassic, at approximately 225 million years ago
(Ma).24 The hydrocarbons migrated into three
types of reservoir rocks: Arbuckle dolomite with
intercrystalline porosity, Arbuckle dolomite with
leached porosity, and granite breccias (left).
Ultimate recoverable reserves are estimated
at 25 million bbl oil [4 million m3] and 100 Bcf
gas [2.8 billion m3]. As of 2009, the Ames impact
structure has produced 17 million bbl [2.7 mil-
lion m3] of oil and 80 Bcf [2.3 billion m3] of gas.25

Oil Source rock Seal rock Red Wing Creek Field

> Ames petroleum system cross section. Organic-rich shales that filled the Ames crater became the The Red Wing Creek structure, in western North
source rock for reservoirs that formed in the fractured and brecciated granites and dolomites beneath Dakota, USA, is one of several producing impact
the crater floor. Petroleum migrated into upthrown blocks in the central ring and the outer rim. Additional structures in the Williston basin.26 Early in its
shales acted as seals. The section of Devonian and younger layers overlying the structure is about
7,000 ft thick (not shown to scale). exploration history, the feature was a seismic
anomaly that fit no known pattern.27 Shell drilled
two wells in the area in the 1960s; both pene-
trated unusually thick Mississippian and
Pennsylvanian sections but were dry. In 1972
True Oil LLC drilled a well about 1 mi [1.6 km]
NW SE
away and discovered a 2,700-ft [820-m] gross oil
0 km 1 column in highly fractured and brecciated car-
Cretaceous
0 mi 1 bonates of the Mission Canyon Formation. Net
Triassic Jurassic pay of 1,600 ft [490 m] was in extreme contrast to
the 20- to 40-ft [6- to 12-m] pay sections in the
Pennsylvanian-Permian surrounding area.28 Subsequent wells helped
Mississippian
delineate the field.
Data from seismic surveys and well logs dem-
Devonian
onstrated the existence of a circular central
Silurian uplift as much as 1 mi across and comprising
Mississippian carbonates, evaporites and interca-
lated siliciclastics at about 3,300 ft [1,000 m]
North above their normal stratigraphic position for the
Red Wing Creek
OilfieldDakota
structure Review region (left). Surrounding the uplift is a depres-
Autumn 09 sion more than 1 mi wide. An uplifted ring 5 mi [8
Impact Fig. 13 km] across encloses the complex structure,
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 13
which is buried under almost 7,000 ft [2,100 m]
of sediments.
The discovery of shatter-cone fragments in
drill cuttings was the first indication that the oil
was trapped in a complex meteorite impact struc-
ture.29 More recent work confirmed there were
PDFs in quartz grains in cuttings from one of the
True Oil wells.30 Analysis of the PDF orientations
indicates shock pressures reached 12 to 20 GPa
> Impact crater oil trap in North Dakota. The Red Wing Creek field produces from a 2,700-ft section of [1.7 million to 2.9 million psi]. Estimates from
fractured carbonate breccia in the crater’s central uplift (blue). This complex impact crater is about stratigraphy place the age of the structure at 220
6 mi [10 km] wide, but the productive zone is concentrated in a 1-mi2 [2.6-km2] area in the center.
to 200 Ma.

24 Oilfield Review
 Matrix permeability of the Mission Canyon
Formation is low—from 1 to 7 mD—throughout
the Williston basin. However, in the Red Wing
Creek field, impact-induced porosity and perme-
ability enable relatively high flow rates.
Productive wells are concentrated in a 1-mi2
[2.6-km2] area on the central uplift. The earlier
Shell wells penetrated the structure on the flank
of the uplift and in the annular crater.
Interpretation of a 3D seismic dataset and
selected attributes, such as dip azimuth, coher-
ency and curvature, allows for detailed mapping
of the faults and deformed strata (right).31
To date, this field has produced 16.6 million
bbl [2.6 million m3] of oil and 25 Bcf [700 million
m3] of gas from 26 wells—22 are still producing.
It is estimated that the brecciated central uplift
contains 130 million bbl [21 million m3] of oil, of
which 70 million bbl [11 million m3] are recover-
able. Natural gas reserves are estimated at
> Red Wing Creek impact structure seismic data. Interpretation of 3D seismic data reveals the
100 Bcf. True Oil geologists and researchers at
subsurface signature of the Red Wing Creek crater. Depth of the Mission Canyon Formation is color
the University of Colorado in Boulder, USA, are
coded, from red (shallow) to blue and purple (deep). Extracted 2D sections from the 3D survey form
using seismic data to develop a geologic model the background.
for use in reservoir simulation.

Big Impact wells were drilled, some to 3,000 m or more, but was deposited there and at several other locales
The impact that has drawn the most attention in none encountered hydrocarbons, nor were the around the globe 65 million years ago following
the past 25 years is the collision of the Chicxulub results made public at the time. an impact somewhere on Earth of an asteroid
impactor with what is now the Mexican Yucatán In the late 1970s, scientists investigating sed- 10 km [6 mi] in diameter, which also caused mass
Peninsula. Though a great deal of controversy iments deposited at the end of the Cretaceous extinction of the dinosaurs and other life forms.34
surrounds the date, size and environmental rami- period and before the beginning of the Tertiary, Subsequently, other workers discovered grains of
fications of this impact, the observations point to called the K-T boundary, found extremely large shocked quartz and other shocked minerals,
a truly cataclysmic event. concentrations of iridium [Ir] and other plati- stishovite and impact diamonds in K-T boundary
Interest in this structure dates to before the num-group elements in a thin layer of clay that deposits elsewhere in the world, corroborating
1950s, when detection of a circular gravity low marks this boundary in Italy.33 Based on extrater- the notion of an immense impact with widely dis-
led Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) to conduct a restrial ratios of the platinum-group elements, persed ejecta.35
drilling program.32 Throughout the 1970s several they proposed that the high-concentration layer
23. Castaño JR, Clement JH, Kuykendall MD and 27. Gerhard LC, Anderson SB, Lefever JA and Carlson CG: 32. Cornejo-Toledo A and Hernandez-Osuna A: “Las
Sharpton VL: “Source-Rock Potential of Impact Craters,” “Geological Development, Origin, and Energy Mineral anomalias gravimetricas en la cuenca salina del istmo,
in Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure Resources of Williston Basin, North Dakota,” planicie costera de Tabasco, Campeche y Peninsula
in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin AAPG Bulletin 66, no. 8 (August 1982): 989–1020. de Yucatan,” Boletín de la Asociación Mexicana de
and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, 28. Gerhard LC, Anderson SB and Fischer DW: “Petroleum Geólogos Petroleros 2 (1950): 453–460, as cited in
Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100 Oilfield Review Stoffler D: “Chicxulub Scientific Drilling Project (CSDP),”
Geology of the Williston Basin,” in Leighton MW,
(1997): 100–103. Kolata DR, Oltz DT and Eidel JJ (eds): InteriorAutumn
Cratonic 09 http://www.museum.hu-berlin.de/min/forsch/csdp.html
24. Curtiss DK and Wavrek DA: “The Oil Creek-Arbuckle (!) Basins. Tulsa: The American Association of Petroleum (accessed October 9, 2009).
Petroleum System, Major County, Oklahoma,” in Geologists, AAPG Memoir 51 (1990): 507–559.
Impact Fig. 15
33. In the Earth’s crust, Ir concentration averages 0.001 ppm;
Johnson KS and Campbell JA (eds): Ames Structure 29. Grieve, reference 8.
ORAUT09-Impactin meteorites,
Fig. 15 the average is at least 500 times greater,
in Northwest Oklahoma and Similar Features: Origin or 0.5 ppm.
30. Koeberl C, Reimold WU and Brandt D: “Red Wing
and Petroleum Production (1995 Symposium). Norman, 34. Alvarez LW, Alvarez W, Asaro F and Michel HV:
Creek Structure, North Dakota: Petrographical and
Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey, Circular 100 “Extraterrestrial Cause for the Cretaceous-Tertiary
Geochemical Studies, and Confirmation of Impact
(1997): 240–258. Extinction,” Science 208, no. 4448 (June 6, 1980):
Origin,” Meteoritics & Planetary Science 31 (1996):
For more on petroleum system modeling: Al-Hajeri MM, 335–342. 1095–1108.
Al Saeed M, Derks J, Fuchs T, Hantschel T, Kauerauf A, 35. Bohor B, Foord EE, Modreski PJ and Triplehorn DM:
31. Huang C, Herber B, Barton R, Weimer P, Jiang S
Neumaier M, Schenk O, Swientek O, Tessen N, Welte D, ”Mineralogic Evidence for an Impact Event at the
and Hammon S: “3-D Interpretation of a Meteorite
Wygrala B, Kornpihl D and Peters K: “Basin and Cretaceous-Tertiary Boundary,” Science 224, no. 4651
Impact Field, Red Wing Creek Field, Williston Basin,
Petroleum System Modeling,” Oilfield Review 21, no. 2 (May 25, 1984): 867–869.
Western North Dakota,” presented at the AAPG
(Summer 2009): 14–29.
Annual Convention and Exhibition, Denver, June 7–10, McHone JF, Nieman RA, Lewis CF and Yates AM:
25. Vardi N: “The Last American Wildcatter,” Forbes 2009, http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/abstracts/ “Stishovite at the Cretaceous-Tertiary Boundary, Raton,
(February 2, 2009), http://www.forbes.com/ html/2009/annual/abstracts/huang.htm (accessed New Mexico,” Science 243, no. 4895 (March 3, 1989):
forbes/2009/0202/066.html (accessed September 7, 2009). October 12, 2009). 1182–1184.
26. Sawatzky HB: “Astroblemes in Williston Basin,” Friedman B: “Red Wing Data Has Big Impact,” Carlisle DB and Braman DR: “Nanometre-Size Diamonds
AAPG Bulletin 59, no. 4 (April 1975): 694–710. AAPG Explorer (April 2009), http://www.aapg.org/ in the Cretaceous/Tertiary Boundary Clay of Alberta,”
explorer/2009/04apr/redwing0409.cfm (accessed Nature 352, no. 6337 (August 22, 1991): 708–709.
September 6, 2009).

Winter 2009/2010 25
 Impact enthusiasts searched the globe for the Geophysical data show the outer ring of the The fields of the Villahermosa area and the
massive crater that would have resulted from crater to be approximately 180 km [110 mi] prolific Bay of Campeche, including the Cantarell
such an impact. Attention focused on the Gulf of across. Modeling studies indicate that the tran- complex—Mexico’s largest oil field—produce
Mexico after reports of iridium-rich K-T material sient crater may have been up to 100 km [60 mi] from these carbonate debris-flow breccias.40 With
overlying poorly sorted carbonate-rich sediments across, displacing material to a depth of 34 km 35 billion bbl [5.6 billion m3] initial oil in place,
in Texas in the midst of mudstones typical of deep- [21 mi] and excavating target rock to a depth of the Cantarell complex produces 60% to 70% of its
water sediments.36 An impact-generated tsunami 14 km [9 mi].38 oil from the Chicxulub impactites.
had been put forward as the cause of the anoma- Intense shaking, whether from the impact or The reservoirs comprise approximately 300 m
lously coarse-grained sediment layer. Through from tsunamis it generated, caused widespread [1,000 ft] of highly productive dolomitized lime-
geophysical surveys conducted in the 1980s and collapse of the continental slopes of North stone breccia underlying a 30-m [100-ft] less pro-
1990s, researchers rediscovered the circular America, South America, West Africa and ductive zone of reworked breccia and ejecta
gravity low that PEMEX had identified decades Europe.39 The carbonate platforms of the Yucatán (next page, top).41 In the lower layer secondary
earlier (below).37 The crater is buried beneath up Peninsula slumped into deeper water and were vuggy porosity is common and average porosity
to 1 km [0.6 mi] of younger sediments. covered by a layer of ejecta. With time, these car- ranges from 8% to 12%. Permeability is 3 to 5 D.
bonate rocks became important oil reservoirs. Overlying the layers is an impermeable seal
about 30 m thick. This bed, which has also been
dolomitized, is made up of fine-grained impact
ejecta, including shocked quartz and feldspar,
and clay minerals interpreted as alteration prod-
22° ucts of impact glass (next page, bottom). These

36. Bourgeois J, Hansen TA, Wiberg PL and Kauffman EG:

“A Tsunami Deposit at the Cretaceous-Tertiary Boundary
in Texas,” Science 241, no. 4865 (July 29, 1988): 567–570.
37. Penfield GT and Camargo Z A: “Definition of a Major
Igneous Zone in the Central Yucatan Platform with
Aeromagnetics and Gravity,” Expanded Abstracts,
51st SEG Annual International Meeting and Exposition,
21° Los Angeles (October 11–15, 1981): 448–449.
Hildebrand AF, Penfield GT, Kring DA, Pilkington M,
Camargo Z A, Jacobsen SB and Boyton WV: “Chicxulub
Crater: A Possible Cretaceous/Tertiary Boundary Impact
Crater on the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico,” Geology 19,
no. 9 (September 1991): 867–871.
38. Kring DA: “Dimensions of the Chicxulub Impact Crater
U S A and Impact Melt Sheet,” Journal of Geophysical
Research 100, no. E8 (August 25, 1995): 16979–16986.
20°
39. Day S and Maslin M: “Linking Large Impacts, Gas
Hydrates, and Carbon Isotope Excursions Through
Widespread Sediment Liquefaction and Continental
Slope Failure: The Example of the K-T Boundary Event,”
in Kenkmann T, Horz F and Deutsch A (eds): Large
90° 89° Meteorite Impacts III. Boulder, Colorado: Geological
Society of America: GSA Special Paper 384 (2005): 239–258.
Chicxulub 40. Grajales-Nishimura JM, Cedillo-Pardo E,
structure Rosales-Domínguez C, Morán-Zenteno DJ, Alvarez W,
Claeys P, Ruíz-Morales J, García-Hernández J,
Bay Padilla-Avila P and Sánchez-Ríos A: “Chicxulub
M E X I C O Impact: The Origin of Reservoir and Seal Facies in the
of Campeche
Southeastern Mexico Oil Fields,” Geology 28, no. 4
Cantarell field (April 2000): 307–310.
Magoon LB, Hudson TL and Cook HE: “Pimienta-
Villahermosa Tamabra(!)—A Giant Supercharged Petroleum System
in the Southern Gulf of Mexico, Onshore and Offshore
Bochil
Mexico,” in Bartolini C, Buffler RT and Cantú-Chapa A
(eds): The Western Gulf of Mexico Basin: Tectonics,
0 km 300 CENTRAL Sedimentary Basins, and Petroleum Systems. Tulsa: The
AMERICA American Association of Petroleum Geologists, AAPG
0 mi 300
Memoir 75 (2001): 83–125.
41. Grajales-Nishimura et al, reference 40.
> The Chicxulub impact crater. A series of concentric features in the gravity signature (top right) Murillo-Muñetón G, Grajales-Nishimura JM,
reveals the location of the crater. The coastline is shown as a white line. This image was constructed Cedillo-Pardo E, García-Hernández J and
from gravity measurements taken by PEMEX beginning in 1948 and augmented by recent work of Hernández-García S: “Stratigraphic Architecture and
Sedimentology of the Main Oil-Producing Stratigraphic
researchers from the Geological Survey of Canada, Athabasca University, the Universidad Nacional Interval at the Cantarell Oil Field: The K/T Boundary
Autónoma de México and the Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán. White dots represent the locations of Sedimentary Succession,” paper SPE 74431, presented
sinkholes (solution-collapse features common in the limestone rocks) called cenotes. A ring of cenotes at the SPE International Petroleum Conference and
tracks the outermost gravity gradient feature. The cenotes are developed in near-surface Tertiary Exhibition in Mexico, Villahermosa, February 10–12, 2002.
limestones overlying the crater. Somehow the crater is able to influence the properties of the younger For more on dolomitization: Al-Awadi M, Clark WJ,
rocks that cover it. (Image courtesy of Alan Hildebrand.) Moore WR, Herron M, Zhang T, Zhao W, Hurley N,
Kho D, Montaron B and Sadooni F: “Dolomite:
Perspectives on a Perplexing Mineral,” Oilfield
Review 21, no. 3 (Autumn 2009): 32–45.

26 Oilfield Review
 1,650
Upper Maastrichtian
pelagic limestone

Resistivity
Stratigraphy Gamma Ray
K-T Boundary Sequence Core Laterolog Deep
0 gAPI 100

Depth, m
Top Caliper Laterolog Shallow
6 in. 16 0.2 ohm.m 3,000
1,350

Paleocene pelagic
marl and limestone

1,400

Unit 3

1,450
Unit 2

Base
1,500

K-T boundary
sedimentary
succession
Oilfield Review
Autumn 09 Unit 1 1,550
Impact Fig. 17
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 17

1,600

1,650
Upper Maastrichtian
pelagic limestone

> Stratigraphy, well log expression and samples of the K-T boundary
sedimentary
Top succession in the Cantarell oil field. The stratigraphy in Well
C-91 (top right) exhibits a well-defined fining-upward trend from Unit 1 to
Unit 3. Units 1 and 2 are carbonate breccias forming the reservoir facies.
Unit 3 is a shaly ejecta-rich layer that acts as a seal. Core samples (top left)
from Cantarell Well C-1016 show the gradation from the coarse-grained
calcareous breccia of Unit 1 at the base to the fine-grained calcareous
breccia of Unit 2 at the top. The dark color in this succession is due to oil
stain. Core diameter is 10 cm [4 in.]. (Stratigraphy and log data adapted from
Murillo-Muñetón et al, reference 41.)

Base

> Core samples from the uppermost part of the K-T boundary sedimentary
succession in the Cantarell oil field. These samples from Well C-227D
contain abundant shock-metamorphic minerals from the Chicxulub impact Oilfield Review
event. Core diameter is 10 cm. Autumn 09
Impact Fig. 17
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 17

Winter 2009/2010 27
 Negative Impact
60
The previous examples have shown how impact
Lower Paleocene shaly of an extraterrestrial mass may bring about con-
limestones and
calcareous turbidites ditions conducive to the formation of hydrocar-
50 bon reservoirs. Perhaps equally important, a
Unit 3: Ejecta-rich layer
direct hit by an asteroid can also cause the
Unit 2: Fine-grained
carbonate breccia demise of a hydrocarbon accumulation. The
40
Avak structure, in Alaska, shows evidence of
such destruction.
Elevation, m

30 In 1949 gas was discovered on the flank of a

seismic and gravity anomaly near the village of
Unit 1: Coarse-grained Barrow, Alaska. Subsequent exploration revealed
20
calcareous breccia
a number of small gas accumulations in struc-
tural highs encircling the feature. As early as
10 1967, investigators at the US Geological Survey
(USGS) suggested an impact origin for the circu-
lar structure, citing the ring-like morphology and
0
Upper Maastrichtian the disrupted stratigraphy encountered by bore-
pelagic limestones
with chert nodules holes penetrating the anomaly.45 Microscopic
analysis identified shock-metamorphic PDFs in
quartz grains from a well in the central uplift,
confirming the impact origin.46 Time of impact
> Outcrop analog of the K-T boundary carbonate breccia succession at was estimated at 90 to 100 Ma.
Bochil, Tabasco, southeastern Mexico. Although the impact-related deposit The Avak impact structure is situated on the
is thinner here than in the Cantarell field, this outcrop exhibits the same same regional feature—the Barrow Arch—as
stratigraphy, including the fining-upward trend in Unit 1 and the fine-grained
ejecta of Unit 3. Additionally, an Ir anomaly has been documented in the the nearby Prudhoe Bay field that contains 25 bil-
uppermost layer of Unit 3 here. The length of the pencil in the top four lion bbl [4 billion m3] of oil. Yet the Avak struc-
photographs (right) is 13 cm [5 in.]. The length of the rock hammer in the ture contains only small gas reservoirs, which are
bottom photograph is 46 cm [18 in.]. located on its flanks. To explain the lack of
reserves, scientists proposed that a hydrocarbon
layers can also be correlated between offshore Jurassic rocks, forming the giant Cantarell trap.42 accumulation as extensive areally as but volu-
wells and onshore outcrops (above). Hydrocarbons migrated into the breccias in the metrically smaller than that at Prudhoe Bay was
Interpretation of the sedimentary succession Miocene period from high-quality Upper Jurassic trapped in this area before being disrupted by the
supports the following sequence of events within source rock.43 impact and flushed to the surface.47
the minutes and hours of the Chicxulub impact: In 1998, using improved seismic imaging, As part of an Alaska North Slope (ANS) 3D
The carbonate platform collapsed, resulting in PEMEX discovered another giant accumula- multiclient petroleum system study, geologists at
deposition of the lower breccias. Impact ejecta tion—the Sihil field—beneath the Cantarell res- Schlumberger and the USGS tested this hypothe-
arrived and were reworked and mixed Oilfield Review
with ervoirs.44 The Sihil reservoirs, with hydrocarbon sis by modeling the geologic events and processes
Autumn 09
Impact Fig. NEWreserves
coarser material by surges of impact-generated 19 of 1.136 billion bbl [180 million m3], are that led to hydrocarbon generation, migration
tsunamis that reverberated across ORAUT09-Impact
the Gulf of also Fig. NEW 19
dolomitized carbonates formed from the and accumulation in this area. Simulation results
Mexico. The final ejecta layer blanketed these detritus of the Chicxulub impact. The block con- show an extremely large oil accumulation in the
deposits, sealing in diagenetic fluids. Folding and taining the Cantarell field was thrust up and over Barrow Peninsula at 97 Ma (next page). Results
compression in the early Miocene to Pliocene that of the Sihil field, forming the trap that now from running the simulation to the present day
thrust up a large block of Cretaceous and Upper contains the Sihil reserves. with no intervening extra­terrestrial bombard-
ment show preservation of this accumulation.
42. Grajales-Nishimura et al, reference 40. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc1995/pdf/1702.pdf
(accessed October 8, 2009).
Incorporating the impact effects in the simu-
Aquino JAL, Ruis JM, Flores MAF and García JH:
“The Sihil Field: Another Giant Below Cantarell, 47. Kirschner CE, Grantz A and Mullen MW: “Impact Origin lation required modification of several parame-
Offshore Campeche, Mexico,” in Halbouty MT (ed): of the Avak Structure, Arctic Alaska, and Genesis of the ters of the petroleum system model. The impact
Giant Oil and Gas Fields of the Decade 1990–1999. Tulsa: Barrow Gas Fields,” AAPG Bulletin 76, no. 5 (May 1992):
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 651–679. itself was not modeled, but its overall effects on
AAPG Memoir 78 (2003): 141–150. 48. Herd CDK, Froese DG, Walton EL, Kofman RS, Herd EPK the target rock were estimated and used to
43. Magoon et al, reference 40. and Duke MJM: “Anatomy of a Young Impact Event
in Central Alberta, Canada: Prospects for the Missing
update the model. Permeabilities of the rocks
44. Aquino et al, reference 42.
Holocene Impact Record,” Geology 36, no. 12 within the 1,200-m [4,000-ft] damaged zone were
45. Collins FR and Robinson FM: “Subsurface Stratigraphic,
(December 2008): 955–958.
Structural and Economic Geology, Northern Alaska,” increased. Temperature was increased to 3,000°C
USGS Open-File Report 287, US Geological Survey, 1967. 49. Pilkington M and Grieve RAF: “The Geophysical
Signature of Terrestrial Impact Craters,” Reviews of within the entire structure, and vertical faults
46. Therriault AM and Grantz A: “Planar Deformation
Geophysics 30, no. 2 (May 1992): 161–181. extending from the 97 Ma surface to the base-
Features in Quartz Grains from Mixed Breccias of the
Avak Structure, Alaska,” Abstract 1702 in Lunar and Mazur MJ, Stewart RR and Hildebrand AR: “The
Seismic Signature of Meteorite Impact Craters,”
ment were introduced.
Planetary Science XXVI, Abstracts of the 26th Lunar
and Planetary Science Conference (1995): 1403–1404, CSEG Recorder 25, no. 6 (June 2000): 10–16.

28 Oilfield Review
 CANADA
Alaska

Point Barrow
S e a
hi
C h u kc
Barrow Arch Prudhoe Bay

National Petroleum
Reserve of Alaska

110 Ma 97 Ma
Point Barrow
Brooks Range
Foothills Study area

Coastline 0 km 100
0 mi 100

96.01 Ma (impact) Present day

Avak structure

Vapor
Liquid

> Including impact in petroleum system modeling. Simulation of hydrocarbon maturation, migration and accumulation through
time in the Barrow Peninsula shows a large accumulation at 97 Ma. At about 96 Ma, the Avak meteorite impact occurred,
producing a circular, crater-like damage area (gray), effectively increasing the permeability and temperature. After the impact,
the large oil accumulation disappeared. At present day, petroleum system modeling shows several gas accumulations near the
impact structure. Modeled hydrocarbon phases are shown in green for liquid and red for vapor. Black dots indicate wells, and
red arrows indicate the direction of plunge of the Barrow Arch.

Compared with the nonimpact model, the Embracing Impact Though some craters are visible on the
postimpact petroleum system model gave a vastly Asteroid impact causes significant changes in surface, many are obscured by sediments.
different outcome. The sudden change in rock surface morphology and subsurface rock proper- Traditional methods for detecting buried impact
properties resulted in the release of trapped ties that should be considered when exploring for structures rely on surface geophysics—gravity,
hydrocarbons. In addition, the drop in overpres- and producing hydrocarbons. These changes may seismic and electromagnetic surveys.49 The strat-
sure caused by excavation and postimpact uplift be highly localized or regionally extensive; they egy is to identify anomalies consistent with an
triggered a hydrocarbon phase transition from may contribute to the formation of reservoirs or impact origin and then confirm them—or
liquid to vapor. After impact, newly generated destroy them. not—by examination of the rocks for traces of
liquid hydrocarbons migrated into traps in the Advances in remote sensing are making it shock metamorphism.
outer ring of the impact structure. With Tertiary easier to find craters on the Earth’s surface that Until now, this has been the realm of plane-
uplift and erosion, these accumulations were may be hiddenOilfield Review or other obstacles.
by vegetation tary-science experts. In the future, as exploration
transformed into vapor phases. The simulated For example, Autumn 09 from satellites can help
images teams learn to recognize impact structures, they
present-day accumulations on the west, south Impact Fig. 20
identify impact-related features that are not rec- will be able to model and exploit the effects of
ORAUT09-Impact Fig. 20
and east sides of the Avak structure match the ognizable from the surface. Airborne light detec- asteroid impact. —LS
known gas accumulations in the area. tion and ranging (LiDAR) has been successful in
locating an impact crater that was undetectable
using visible imagery.48

Winter 2009/2010 29