1-20 OF 402 RESULTS FOR

Almond River basin

Results shown limited to content with bounding coordinates.
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 November 1998
AAPG Bulletin (1998) 82 (11): 2135–2147.
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 January 1997
AAPG Bulletin (1997) 81 (1): 62–81.
...Mario García-González; Ronald C. Surdam; Milton L. Lee ABSTRACT Petrographic and geochemical studies of coal from the Almond Formation in the Greater Green River basin demonstrate that the coal contains important volumes of stored liquid petroleum, as well as methane. Modeling indicates...
FIGURES | View All (27)
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 June 1960
AAPG Bulletin (1960) 44 (6): 865–873.
... River and Wind River basins. The search for gas was greatly accelerated. The most significant development was the discovery of commercial oil in the Almond on the east flank of the Rock Springs uplift, previously looked upon as a gas province. Most of the exploratory drilling in 1960 will probably...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 March 1961
AAPG Bulletin (1961) 45 (3): 415.
... of these latter structural elements. The stronger south flank of the arch dips into the Washakie segment of the Green River Basin. The north flank fades gradually into the Red Desert segment of the Green River Basin. The stratigraphic section follows. Eocene Tipton tongue of Green River formation Very gentle...
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 March 1961
AAPG Bulletin (1961) 45 (3): 417.
..., the size of the delta is comparable with the present Mississippi River delta. The deltaic deposits range in thickness from 1,500 to 3,000 feet. Much of the delta has been removed by erosion but parts are now found in 7 separate structural basins. Formations comprising the delta are as follows: (1) Iles...
Image
Schematic chronostratigraphic cross section of the Almond Formation in the eastern Greater Green River Basin.
Published: 01 August 2010
Figure 3 Schematic chronostratigraphic cross section of the Almond Formation in the eastern Greater Green River Basin.
Image
—Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra for Almond coal, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Published: 01 January 1997
Figure 7 —Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra for Almond coal, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Image
—Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra for Almond shale, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Published: 01 January 1997
Figure 8 —Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra for Almond shale, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Image
Structure and upper Almond sandstone isopach maps of Dripping Rock field, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Published: 01 December 2003
Figure 5 Structure and upper Almond sandstone isopach maps of Dripping Rock field, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Image
—Production index (PI) vs. depth for Almond coal and shale samples, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Published: 01 January 1997
Figure 5 —Production index (PI) vs. depth for Almond coal and shale samples, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Series: AAPG Memoir
Published: 01 January 1963
DOI: 10.1306/M2358.C17
EISBN: 9781629812359
... structural elements. The stronger south flank of the arch dips into the Washakie segment of the Green River basin. The north flank fades gradually into the Great Divide segment of the Green River basin. The stratigraphic section follows. Gas and oil have been found in the Mesaverde Group, mostly...
Series: AAPG Memoir
Published: 01 January 1999
DOI: 10.1306/M711C4
EISBN: 9781629810720
... transgressive systems tract within the greater Green River Basin. Bedding style, lithology, lateral extent of beds of bedsets, bed thickness, amount and distribution of depositional clay matrix, bioturbation, and grain sorting provide controls on sandstone properties that may vary more than an order...
Image
—Mean vitrinite Ro reflectance vs. depth for Almond Formation shale and coal, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Published: 01 January 1997
Figure 4 —Mean vitrinite R o reflectance vs. depth for Almond Formation shale and coal, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming.
Series: SEPM Gulf Coast Section Publications
Published: 01 December 1996
DOI: 10.5724/gcs.96.17.0089
EISBN: 978-0-9836097-6-6
... ABSTRACT One essential component of productive sweetspots in the Upper Almond marine bar sands, Green River Basin, Wyoming, is thought to be the connection to the underlying coals and sands of the coastal plain. Vertical natural extension fractures may provide this connection. In 1993 Amoco...
Image
—Tmax vs. depth for Almond Formation core samples, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming. Conventional oil-generation window boundaries shown at about 4000 and 12,000 ft (1200–3700 m) depth.
Published: 01 January 1997
Figure 20 —T max vs. depth for Almond Formation core samples, Greater Green River basin, Wyoming. Conventional oil-generation window boundaries shown at about 4000 and 12,000 ft (1200–3700 m) depth.
Image
Map-view of the late retrogradational stage of Williams Fork clastic wedge development (references are in Table 1). This phase is characterized by a dramatic retreat of the Almond shorelines and the eventual formation of a deepwater basin (Lewis Shale). Representative formations include the Evanston (Hams Fork), Price River, and North Horn coarse conglomerates; and the Almond, Farrer, Tuscher, and Williams Fork (including the Twentymile and Sub-Twentymile sandstones), Lion Canyon, Lewis, and Pierre (including the Larimer, Rocky Ridge, and Gunsight Pass members) formations. Fm—Formation; Mbr—Member; SS—sandstone; LS—limestone; Sh—shale; Congl—conglomerate; MS/Sh—mudstone/shale; WY—Wyoming; UT—Utah; CO—Colorado.
Published: 18 May 2021
Figure 15. Map-view of the late retrogradational stage of Williams Fork clastic wedge development (references are in Table 1 ). This phase is characterized by a dramatic retreat of the Almond shorelines and the eventual formation of a deepwater basin (Lewis Shale). Representative formations
Image
Oil and gas field map of the eastern Greater Green River basin showing Almond production, location of cross section AA′ (Figure 4) and Dripping Rock field. Area of map is shaded area in inset map of Wyoming. Modified from Gregory and DeBruin (1991).
Published: 01 December 2003
Figure 3 Oil and gas field map of the eastern Greater Green River basin showing Almond production, location of cross section AA′ ( Figure 4 ) and Dripping Rock field. Area of map is shaded area in inset map of Wyoming. Modified from Gregory and DeBruin (1991) .
Image
Structural setting of the Rock Springs Uplift, a basement-cored structure that formed during the Cretaceous to early Tertiary in the Greater Green River Basin of the Rocky Mountain Foreland Belt (after Hendricks 1994). The approximate position of the shoreline near the end of deposition of the upper Almond Formation is indicated (Fig. 1C; after Roehler 1988). The study areas (Fig. 3B, C) are located.
Published: 01 July 2011
Figure 2 Structural setting of the Rock Springs Uplift, a basement-cored structure that formed during the Cretaceous to early Tertiary in the Greater Green River Basin of the Rocky Mountain Foreland Belt (after Hendricks 1994 ). The approximate position of the shoreline near the end
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 June 1960
AAPG Bulletin (1960) 44 (6): 954.
... from oldest to youngest of the Blair, Rock Springs, Ericson, and Almond formations. Data from 14 measured surface sections and more than 120 wells were used to make isopach maps of individual formations, members and tongues. These maps show that basins and relative arches of Late Cretaceous time...
Image
Composite figure illustrating wireline logs and Pickett-type plots for the Almond and Ericson Sandstones from the Wamsutter field area in the Greater Green River basin, southwest Wyoming. Top of the Almond Formation, Ericson Formation, and an intra-Almond flooding surface, the FS-100, are shown for stratigraphic reference. On all wireline displays gamma-ray less than 75 API is shaded yellow and Rt greater than 30 ohm-m is shaded red. Green, orange, and red pay flags reflect pay cutoffs at 6%, 8%, and 10% porosity values respectively. (A) Wireline log and interpreted V-shale, effective porosity, bulk-volume water, water saturation (Sw), and “pay” curves. Water resistivity (Rw) from Pickett-type plots for both the Almond and Ericson result in estimated “pay” in both the Almond and Ericson. The Ericson interval has porosity and resistivity values equal or greater than the overlying Almond interval. (B) Pickett-type plot for the Ericson interval. Traditional practice would place a Ro-trend along the “left edge” of the sandstone values and would project to 100% porosity to estimate in-situ values of Rw. (C) Log plot for the Ericson interval showing greater detail than (A) showing much of the Ericson is at significantly lower Sw indicating probable “pay”. Because the Ericson produces water the evaluation process can be reversed to determine the nature of Rw required to calculate high Sw in the Ericson. (D) Log plot for the Ericson interval similar to (C) using a value for Rw of 1.0 ohm-m. Even at Rw = 1 ohm-m some “calculated pay” remains. (E) Pickett-type plot for the Ericson interval showing the effect of a Rw value of 1.0 ohm-m. We estimate that a Rw value in excess of 2.6 ohm-m is required to remove all “apparent pay”. (F) Chart Gen-6 (Schlumberger, 2005) showing the resistivity of NaCl solutions as a function of temperature. Typical salinity values for the Almond and Ericson are shown as is the salinity range required to produce high Sw values in the Ericson. Traditional interpretation of Picket-type plots where the “left edge” of sandstones are used to infer a likely Ro-line leads to the interpretation that much of the Ericson is at low water saturation and is likely “producible pay”. It is more likely that the Ericson Sandstone is at or near residual saturation and the “left edge” of the data cloud is not wet, but at residual saturation. The use of Pickett-type plots in non-primary drainage cases should be done with care. All abbreviations shown in Figure 11 are explained in Appendix.
Published: 01 October 2015
Figure 11 Composite figure illustrating wireline logs and Pickett-type plots for the Almond and Ericson Sandstones from the Wamsutter field area in the Greater Green River basin, southwest Wyoming. Top of the Almond Formation, Ericson Formation, and an intra-Almond flooding surface, the FS-100