OTC-25192-MS

Developments in Marine Gas Hydrate Exploration

Boswell Ray, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory

Copyright 2014, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 5– 8 May 2014.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
The evaluation of gas hydrate resource potential continues to spread across the globe. Over the past
decade, exploration emphasis has steadily shifted away from the confirmation of the presence of gas
hydrate to the more complex issue of prospecting for specific accumulations of highly-concentrated gas.
In general, concepts for gas hydrate exploration have evolved from a search for bottom-simulating
reflectors to a process much more akin with conventional oil and gas exploration that features the direct
detection of gas hydrate accumulations in seismic data supported by integrated geological/geophysical/
geochemical studies that address issues of gas supply and reservoir distribution. This report aims to
assimilate the lessons learned to date to outline a general exploration procedure for gas hydrate resources
and outline remaining research challenges as follows: 1) delineation of the gas hydrate stability zone; 2)
the identification and evaluation of strong amplitudes of the same polarity as the sea-floor (“peak”
amplitudes) within that interval, as well as intervals of increased acoustic velocity; 3) mitigation of the
geologic risk inherent in such prospects via seismic mapping of amplitude distribution along prospective
horizons as well as broader seismic facies analyses; and 4) further risk mitigation through assessment of
evidence of gas presence and gas migration into the gas hydrate stability zone.
Gas Hydrate Exploration Targets
Recent evaluation of gas hydrate energy potential indicates that methane extraction from marine gas
hydrate may become a viable energy option for numerous nations around the globe [1]. In response,
exploration for gas hydrate resources is expected to accelerate. Gas hydrate is well known to exist in a
variety of forms that pose different opportunities and challenges for energy resource exploration and
production (Figure 1). While all hydrate occurrences represent in-place resources, field, laboratory, and
numerical simulation results to date indicate that only hydrates at high saturations within permeable
sediments can currently be considered technically-recoverable [2,3,4]. However, exploration for more
challenging forms, most notably the more well-developed gas hydrate “chimney” structures, is likely to
occur in expectation that production-enabling technological advances will occur. The following provides
an overview of the primary gas hydrate resource types.
Gas hydrate as pore fill in intrinsically-permeable sediments
Numerical simulations utilizing increasingly-complex geologic models suggest that potentially-viable
production rates can be established from gas hydrate-bearing sand-rich sediments using known technol-
2 OTC-25192-MS

Figure 1—Gas hydrate resource pyramid showing general occurrence-types based on lithology (left) of the enclosing sediment and associated es-
timates of natural gas resources (right). The transition from silts to muds is likely also gradational, with key differentiation (dashed red line) be-
ing the shift from predominantly pore-fill to predominantly grain-displacing mode of gas hydrate occurrence. This figure excludes sea-floor
mound deposits as they remain an unattractive large-scale resource target (modified after [9]).

ogies [5,6,7]. Most significantly, a 2013 production test conducted by the Japan Oil Gas and Metals
National Corporation (JOGMEC) successfully demonstrated gas extraction via reservoir depressurization
from gas hydrate reservoirs in the Nankai Trough [8], extending findings established earlier in arctic field
production experiments. While reservoir quality is expected to increase with increasing grain size, the
primary control of importance may be intrinsic permeability. Sediments of high intrinsic (used here to
mean prior to the accumulation of gas hydrate) permeability have the capability to host hydrate at elevated
saturations (50% to 90%⫹ of pore space), and also to respond most favorably to gas production through
depressurization [3]. Although closely linked to grain size, permeability is also influenced by porosity,
grain texture, sediment sorting, and other factors. In well-sorted sediments, high intrinsic permeability
may be maintained in sediments well into the silt-size rang; ttherefore, the common distinction made in
discussions of gas hydrate reservoir quality between “coarse-grained” and “fine-grained” reservoirs is not
necessarily at the nominal sand/silt cut-off (62 microns), but somewhere within the middle-to-lower silt
size range. Further understanding of the nature of this transition will be important, as it can be expected
that many deepwater reservoirs will consist of very fine sands and silts and therefore may fall within this
grey area.
“Chimney” structures
“Chimney” structures are likely to be very abundant worldwide [3]. In basins in which gas hydrate-bearing
sands and coarse silts are not present, or where their occurrence is well-constrained, assessment of the
occurrence of gas-hydrate cored “chimney” structures is warranted. Chimney structures are generally
cyclindrical accumulations of increased gas hydrate saturation of roughly equal width and thickness
(typically 100s of m) with the largest features often being much more wide than tall. However, given the
large vertical exaggerations used in displays of seismic data, the features often appear to be greatly
OTC-25192-MS 3

elongated vertically; hence the name “chimney” structures [10]. Chimneys are characterized primarily by
amplitude reduction (“blanking”) and there is often evidence of vertical displacement of strata along the
lateral margins. Drilling and coring programs have confirmed the common occurrence of gas hydrate at
generally moderate saturations (10-40% typically) within gas chimneys [10,11]. Gas hydrate morphology
is as complex networks of grain-displacing veins of variable orientation within mud-rich sediments.
Exploration for such features will not be further discussed here, but would likely involve direct
observation of chimney structures in seismic data, complimented by evaluation of seismic velocities
associated with the cores of the structures and development of improved means to estimate gas hydrate
saturation. It is important to note that, unlike the permeable, sand-hosted occurrences, no production
scenario has yet been demonstrated for mud-hosted deposits [4]. However, the demonstrated progression
of technology that has enabled production from a range of “unconventional” onshore resources provides
reason to doubt that the engineering challenges will remain unsurmountable.
Disseminated gas hydrates in muds
Marine gas hydrate is commonly found or inferred to occur as low-to-moderate saturation deposits
broadly disseminated in clay matrix, often near the base of gas hydrate stability. It is unclear whether such
occurrences, typified perhaps best by the Blake Ridge deposits off the eastern coast of North America, are
pore-filling or grain-displacing at very small scales (Figure 1) – but in any case, the saturations are
typically low (⬍10% and often less) [3].

Recommended Exploration Process

The process for marine gas hydrate evaluation has evolved dramatically through the years. The work of
Bryan [12], Tucholke et al. [13] and Shipley et al. [14] in the late 1970s provided a strong inferential
linkage between select manifestations of “bottom simulating reflectors” (BSRs) and gas hydrates [15].
Field confirmation of this linkage was provided through well logging and sampling across a prominent
BSR on the Blake Outer Ridge, offshore eastern North America [16]. Colored in large part by the detailed
study of the Blake Ridge occurrence, for many years, marine gas hydrates were widely considered to
consist primarily of large, low-concentration, high gas-in-place occurrences for which conventional
exploration and production methods would not readily apply. However, successful discovery of high-
concentration gas hydrates in sand-rich marine reservoirs in the Nankai Trough in 1999 [17] paved the
way for a new context for gas hydrate exploration that suggested de-emphasis of BSRs and development
of more reliable indictors of sand-hosted, high-saturation occurrences [18,19]. This trend was accelerated
as continued study of the nature and generation of BSRs revealed 1) that their manifestation in seismic
data is highly sensitive to the quality and nature of the data [20]; and 2) that the nature of BSRs is very
sensitive to the occurrence of free gas and correspondingly, very insensitive to the abundance of gas
hydrate [21]. Within industry, deepwater shallowhazard assessment yielded insight into previously-
unrecognized geophysical manifestations of the base of gas hydrate stability [22].
In 2004, an extensive seismic data acquisition program followed by a mutli-well exploration drilling
and coring program (the “METI Tokai-oki to Kumano-nada” program) in the Nankai trough [23]
confirmed the limitations of BSRs in the exploration for high-concentration, sand-hosted hydrates. Based
on these drilling results, Saeki et al. [24] recommended adoption of an approach for gas hydrate
exploration that integrates evaluation of BSRs with other features, including evidence of direct geologic
and geophysical indicators of gas hydrate in the form of strong positive amplitudes and elevated internal
velocities, as well as geologic interpretation of sand-rich depositional facies. In the U.S., a similar
approach was being utilized within the DOE-Chevron Gas Hydrates Joint Industry Project and the Bureau
of Ocean Energy Management’s ongoing gas hydrate assessment effort which lead to the development of
a series of specific drilling prospects in the deepwater northern Gulf of Mexico [25]. These targets were
subsequently tested during the JIPs “Leg II” drilling program to seven locations in early 2009 [26]. The
4 OTC-25192-MS

Figure 2—Examples of prospective gas hydrate occurrences as recognized in seismic data: Left: Offshore Colombia, showing delineation of the
GHSZ through reference to the BSR, and strong amplitudes within overlying sediments. “Time-slice” maps through the amplitudes marked
“channels” showed sinuous morphology indicative of submarine channels, which can be expected to be sand-prone (from [29]). Right: from the
southwestern Gulf of Mexico, showing similar features including a clear BSR denoting the extent of the GHSZ, strong amplitudes within the
GHSZ, marked change in the character of seismic events as they traverse the base of the GHSZ, and evidence of gas presence and migration,
including high-amplitude events below the BSR and likely sea-floor explusion features (from [30]).

success of these efforts in delineating a number of gas-hydrate-bearing deepwater sands provided

confirmation that viable gas hydate exploration can be conducted prior to drilling using existing industry
3-D seismic data. The following outlines the approach.
Establishment of the extent of the gas hydrate stability zone (GHSZ)
The evaluation of offshore regions for gas hydrate potential (or siting of locations for gas hydrate resource
evaluation through drilling and coring programs) begin with the delineation of the extent of the GHSZ
through reference to all available seismic and well data. The recognition of a “BSR”, regardless of its
nature, is generally sufficient to do this (see Figure 2). Regardless of the presence of a BSR, interpretation
of the depth to the base of the GHSZ can be estimated or refined using known or estimated water depths,
bottom-water temperature, subsurface pressure and temperature gradients, and gas and water geochem-
istry.
Prospect for “direct” indicators of gas hydrate occurrence within the GHSZ
Any log data available from the region should be reviewed for the occurrence of high resistivity zones
within sand-rich units within the GHSZ. Based upon prior drilling results from numerous locations
worldwide, the most promising “direct” seismic indicators of gas hydrate at high saturations in reservoir
facies are anomalous, high-amplitude, reflections that are of the same polarity as the seafloor and that
occur within the GHSZ. All else being equal, such events will be most prospective where they occur at
relatively greater sub-sea depths as water-saturated sands encased in highly porous, uncompacted clays at
shallow sub-sea depths will also produce positive amplitude anomalies [28]. The prospectivity of
high-amplitude events is based on the concept that the generation of the sufficient impedance contrasts is
only likely to occur where gas hydrate-saturation reaches the levels generally afforded only by sand-
dominated host lithologies. An additional compelling “direct” indicator of gas hydrate occurrence is
elevated interval velocity within the section between the inferred top of gas hydrate and either the BGHS
or the corresponding inferred base of gas hydrate [24]. (NOTE: the term “direct” is used here not to
OTC-25192-MS 5

Figure 3—General overview of an approach to gas hydrate exploration, illustrated via reference to an example from the Walker Ridge 313 area
of the northern Gulf of Mexico [26]. This example was tested by drilling subsequent to evaluation and confirmed to hold multiple gas-hydrate-
bearing sand intervals.

suggest that any seismic manifestation can be conclusive, but instead to denote seismic features that are
thought to be generated by the gas hydrate occurrences themselves. This is in contrast to a range of other
valuable “indirect” indicators such as the simple presence of BSRs or the nature and abundance of
sea-floor features that help establish the geologic conditions for gas hydrate occurrence but do not
necessary relate to any specific prospective gas hydrate occurrence).
The generation of significant positive-amplitude anomalies within mud-rich sediments by the accu-
mulation of gas hydrate is unlikely as such sediments have not been observed to support sufficiently high
saturations of gas hydrate. However, a common geophysical attribute of the accumulation of gas hydrate
in mud-rich sediments is acoustic “blanking”, in which amplitudes dim due, apparently, to the accumu-
lation of low to moderate saturations of gas hydrate. Amplitude suppression is also very common in
chimney structures where the disruption of original depositional fabric by vertical gas migration likely
plays a role.
Mitigate geologic risk through evaluation of occurrence of reservoir facies
The anomalous amplitudes described above are not necessarily related to gas-hydrate-bearing sand-rich
facies. Such features only indicate a horizon that marks a strong contrast in acoustic velocity, which can
have a range of causes. Therefore, to mitigate the geologic risk inherent in such prospsects, it is critical
to map the distribution of amplitudes associated with that horizon for evidence that supports that the
amplitude is driven by a change in pore fill (as opposed to general lithologic factors). For example, if the
distribution of the amplitude indicates control by geologic structure (which would be inferred to post date
or otherwise be unrelated to lithologic variation), such as anomalous terminations against faults and/or
conformance to structural elevation, then prospectivity is increased. Similarly, if the distribution of the
amplitude is consistent with the expected morphology of sand-rich deepwater depostional facies, such as
sinous channels or lobate fans, prospectivity is greatly increased (see Figure 3). Further evidence that the
amplitude response is driven by pore fill is a marked change in amplitude as the horizon is tracked below
the inferred BGHS. Most prospective in this regard are instances where the amplitude can be shown to
reverse polarity along a single horizon [27]. In contrast, amplitudes that are pervasive and consistent over
6 OTC-25192-MS

large areas, or that do not change character as the horizon is traced out of the GHSZ, are much less
prospective. More generally, geologic risk can also be mitigated through interpretation of regional trends
in seismic facies. For example, sedimentary sections that show monotonous and laterally-consistent
seismic reflectors within intervals of laterally-consistent thickness are less prospective for sand occur-
rence. In contrast, zones of strong lateral thickness variation, including potential cut-and-fill or clear
vertical aggradation, and with generally more poorly organized internal reflections, are considered to have
greater potential for sand occurrence. Further support for the presense of sand-rich facies can be provided
through broader evaluation of the geologic history and structural configuration of the basin, including the
recognition of features or depositional sequences conducive to/consistent with the development of
coarse-sediment delivery to deepwater environments.
Mitigate geologic risk through evaluation of gas presence and migration
The evaluation described above provides strong evidence for the occurrence of gas hydrate in sand-rich
sediments. In such cases, it may be somewhat moot to independently confirm gas presence or gas delivery
pathways. However, where substantial geologic risk remains, evidence that supports the presence of gas
or delineates clearly pathways in which gas is likely to have migrated into the GHSZ, are highly valuable.
Such evidence can include the presence of 1) gas chimneys (strong evidence of gas generation at depth
and upward migration into the GHSZ); 2) BSRs (direct confirmation of gas presence and delivery to the
BGHS); 3) negative-polarity amplitude anomalies below the BGHS; 4) sea-floor features that are
consistent with active gas flux, and 5) geochemical evidence of elevated gas flux as obtained through
shallow sea-floor sampling, such as shallow depths to the sulfate-methane interface (SMI).
Prior studies have supported both thermogenic and biogenic sources for gas housed in gas hydrates.
Thermogenic gas can require relatively long-distance migration from deeper sources, and as such the
existence of deeper conventional oil/gas accumulations are favorable for the occurrence of gas hydrate.
Also, while locally-generated microbial gas can preferentially fill sand-rich reservoirs [31], there may be
limits as to the degree to which such sources can charge sand units to high-degrees of saturation,
particularly those of sufficient quantity (thickness) to be generally considered prospective for energy
resource potential [12].

Status of BSRs in Gas Hydrate Exploration

The search for BSRs dominated the early stages of global gas hydrate evaluation. As field evaluation of
gas hydrate resource potential has progressed, the relevance of BSRs became less clear. The presense of
a BSR, regardless of its nature, is certainly not sufficient to indicate the occurrence of prospective
accumulations. In fact, a well-developed, regionally-pervasive BSR is very likely a contra-indicator of
prospectivity as it suggests a diffuse (unfocused) gas flux within a homogeneously fine-grained strati-
graphic succesion [18]. Nonetheless, BSRs remain critical to gas hydrate exploration. Primarily, the
identification of a BSR (as defined broadly to include associated seismic features that mark the base of
the gas hydrate stability zone) enables delineation of the BGHS and insight into local temperature
gradients. Further, where variable stratigraphy includes a mix of muds and potentially-prospective
reservoir-quality units, the impact of traversing the BGHS (including phase reversals and other events that
are commonly considered to be a form of BSR) can provide insight into the nature of prospective horizons
[22,27].

Summary
Spurred by continuing favorable research and development results related to gas hydrate occurrence and
recoverability, the assessment of offshore areas for the likely presense of potentially-recoverable gas
hydrate accumulations is expected to increase. It is recommended that effort initially focus on assessment
of potential occurrences in sand-hosted sediments, as field data and numerical simulation indicate that
OTC-25192-MS 7

such deposits are amenable to recovery using known drilling and production concepts. An approach,
which has proven to be effective in the past, is to 1) prospect initially for potential direct indicators of gas
hydrate occurrence within the defined gas hydrate stability zone and then 2) mitigate the geologic risk
inherent in such prospects through evaluation of geological/geophysical/geochemical evidence that
associate those prospects with sand-rich reservoir facies and that may be connected those facies with gas
sources through recognized migration pathways.

References
1 Johnson, A., 2012. Global resource potential of gas hydrate – a new calculation. DOE/NETL Fire
in the Ice,12 .
2 Boswell, R.,Collett, T., 2011Current perspectives on gas hydrate resources. Energy and Env. Sci.,
4, 1206 –1215. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012. Assessment of in-place gas hydrate
resources of the Lower 48 United States Outer Continental Shelf. BOEM Fact Sheet RED-2012-
01. 4 pp.
3 Collett, T., Johnson, A., Knapp, C., Boswell, R., 2009Natural gas hydrates – a review, in Collett
T., et alet al., eds, Natural gas hydrates—Energy resource potential and associated geologic
hazards: AAPG Memoir 89.
4 Max, M., Johnson, A., Dillon, W., 2006. Economic geology of natural gas hydrateSpringer,
Berlin341 pp.
5 Moridis, G., Collett, T., Boswell, R.Kurihara, M., Reagan, M., Koh, C., Sloan, D.2009. Toward
production from gas hydrates: current status, assessment of resources, and simulation-based
evaluation of technology and potential, SPE Reservoir Eval. and Eng. 12 , 745–771
6 Kurihara, M., Sato, A., Ouchi, H., Narita, H., Ebinuma, T., Suzuki, K., Masuda, Y., Saeki,
T.Yamamoto, K., Fujii, T., 2010. Prediction of production test performances in Eastern Nankai
Trough OTC-20737.
7 Gaddipati, M., Anderson, B.2012. 3D Reservoir Modeling of Depressurization-Induced Gas
Production from Gas Hydrate Reservoirs at the Walker Ridge Site, Northern Gulf of Mexico, OTC
23582-MS.
8 Yamamoto, K. et alet al., 2014Operational overview of the first offshore production test of
methane hydrates in the eastern Nankai Trough. OTC-25243.
9 Boswell, R., Collett, T.2006. The gas hydrates resource pyramid; US DOE/NETLFire in the
Ice,65–7.
10 Ryu, B-J., Reidel, M., Kim, J-H., Hyndman, R.Lee, Y-J., Chung, B-H., Kim, I-S.2009. Gas
hydrates in the western deep-water Ulleung basin, East Sea of Korea. J. Marine Pet. Geol.
261483–1498.
11 Plaza-Faverola, A., Westbrook, G., Ker, S., Exley, R., Gailler, A., Minshull, T., Broto, K.2010.
Evidence from three-dimensional seismic tomography for a substantial accumulation of gas
hydrate in a fluid-escape chimney in the Nyegga pockmark field, offshore Norway, J. Geoph. Res
– Solid Earth,115B8
12 Bryan, G.1974. In situ indications of gas hydrateMarine Sci3299 –308
13 Tucholke, B.Bryan, G., Ewing, J.1977. Gas-hydrate horizons detected in seismic profiler data from
the western North AtlanticAAPG Bull. 61698 –707.
14 Shipley, T., Houston, M., Buffler, R., Shaub, F., McMillen, K., Ladd, J., Worze, J.1979. Seismic
evidence for widespread possible gas hydrate horizons on continental slopes and rises, AAPG Bull.
632204 –2213.
15 Hyndman, R., Spence, G.1992A seismic study of methane hydrate marine bottom simulating
reflectors. J. Geoph. Res. 976683–6698
16 Paull, C.Matsumoto, R.Wallace, P.1996. Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program: Science
Results, ODP 164. 623 pp.
17 Tsuji, Y., Ishida, H., Nakamizu, M., Matsumoto, R., Shimizu, S.2004. Overview of MITI Nankai
Trough wells: a milestone in the evaluation of methane hydrate resources. Mar. Geol. 54 , 3–10.
8 OTC-25192-MS

18 Johnson, A., Smith, M.2006. “Gas hydrate E&P: dispelling the myths”E&P magazine,Hart’s
Publications. September.
19 Boswell, R.,2007. Gas hydrate resource potential coming into focus, J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 569 –13.
20 Vanneste, M., DeBatist, M., Golmshtok, A., Kremlev, A., Versteeg, W., 2001. Multi-frequency
seismic study of gas hydrate-bearing sediments in Lake Baikal, Siberia, Mar. Geol.,1721–21.
21 Singh, S., Minshull, T., Spence, G.1993. Velocity structure of a gas hydrate reflector, Sci-
ence260204 –207.
22 McConnell, D., Kendall, B., 2002Images of the base of gas hydrate stability, northwest Walker
Ridge. OTC-14103. 10 pp.
23 Tsuji, Y., Fujii, T., Hayashi, M., Kitamura, R., Nakamizu, M., Ohbi, K., Saeki, T., Yamamoto, K.,
Namikawa, T., Inamori, T., Oikawa, N., Shimizu, S., Kawasaki, M., Nagakubo, S.Matsushima, J.,
Ochiai, K., Okui, T.2009. Methane-hydrate occurrence and distribution in the eastern Nankai
trough, Japan: Findings of the Tokai-oki to Kumano-nada methane-hydrate drilling program.
Collett, T.; Johnson, A.; Knapp, C.; and Boswell, R., eds., AAPG Memoir89228 –246.
24 Saeki, T.Fujii, T.Inamori, T.Kobayashi, T.Hayashi, M.Nagakubo, S.Tokano, O.2008. Extraction of
methane hydrate concentrated zone for resource assessment in the eastern Nankai Trough, Japan.
OTC-19311. 8 pp.
25 Jones, E.Latham, T.McConnell, D.Frye, M.Hunt, J.Shedd, W.Shelander, D.Boswell, R.Rose,
K.Ruppel, C.Hutchinson, D.Collett, T.Dugan, B.Wood, W.2008. Scientific objectives of the Gulf
of Mexico Gas Hydrate JIP Leg II Drilling. OTC-19501. 10 pp.
26 Boswell, R.Collett, T.Fyre, M.Shedd, W.McConnell, D.Shelander, D.2012. Subsurface gas hy-
drates in the northern Gulf of MexicoJ. Mar. Pet. Geo. 344 –30.
27 Shedd, W.Boswell, R.Frye, M.Godfriaux, P.Kramer, K.2012. Occurrence and nature of “bottom-
simulating reflectors” in the northern Gulf of Mexico. J. Mar. Pet. Geo. 3431–40.
28 McConnell, D.Zhang, Z.Boswell, R.2012. Review of progress in evaluating gas hydrate drilling
hazards.. J. Mar. Pet. Geo. 34209 –223.
29 Rocha-Legoretto, F.2009. Potential occurrence of gas hydrates offshore MexicoDOE-NETL Fire
in the Ice910 –11.
30 Calle Ochoa, A.2013. Gas hydrate reservoirs in the offshore Caribbean region of Colombia.
DOE-NETL Fire in the Ice137–11.
31 Malinverno, A.2010Marine gas hydrates in thin layers that soak up microbial methane.
EPSL292,399 –408.