Question for OT Geologists and O&G guys

As an oil and gas professional with many years' experience.... Dinosaurs?

quote:

---

question is, "What makes states like Alaska and Texas ideal for the development of large oil formations?"

---

quote:

---

I know Pennsylvania had some oil in the early 1900's but nothing on the scale of what was found in TX/AK

I'm assuming prehistoric life was a little more widespread than just TX and AK

---

pennsylvannia still has plenty

quote:

---

My question is, "What makes states like Alaska and Texas ideal for the development of large oil formations?"

---

What about North Dakota, Colorado, Montana, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, etc?

quote:

---

prehistoric life

---

Zero to do with fossil fuels.

Give a look at the research.

Texas and Alaska are totally different geology in the oil and gas realm.

West Texas is, for the most part, a Dolomite/Shale environment. When the intercontinental seaway flooded 1/3 of the North American continent during the Mesozoic (dinosaur times), in west Texas you had areas that were continuously flooded and the water would evaporate leaving behind shales and organics (microorganisms and plants -> oil and gas). Limestones developed in the reef zones that were closer to the surface in clearer waters.

The shales hold/cook/develop the oil and gas from the organics, where it either stays there or migrates out into the dolomitized limestones above it. Both rock types are horizontally drilled and fracked.

Alaska is mainly delta-based similar to Louisiana oil and gas. Except in Alaska the mountains, where the rock fragments originate that flow down the river and eventually form the hard rock the oil is stored in, are much closer to where the are deposited. The reservoir rock in Alaska deltas, compared to Louisiana can be harder to work with. They will have more clays and feldspars (shite that makes the ability to store oil and get out harder).

There's your 3 paragraph article, you can find much better material online.

quote:

---

Texas and Alaska are totally different geology in the oil and gas realm.

West Texas is, for the most part, a Dolomite/Shale environment. When the intercontinental seaway flooded 1/3 of the North American continent during the Mesozoic (dinosaur times), in west Texas you had areas that were continuously flooded and the water would evaporate leaving behind shales and organics (microorganisms and plants -> oil and gas). Limestones developed in the reef zones that were closer to the surface in clearer waters.

The shales hold/cook/develop the oil and gas from the organics, where it either stays there or migrates out into the dolomitized limestones above it. Both rock types are horizontally drilled and fracked.

Alaska is mainly delta-based similar to Louisiana oil and gas. Except in Alaska the mountains, where the rock fragments originate that flow down the river and eventually form the hard rock the oil is stored in, are much closer to where the are deposited. The reservoir rock in Alaska deltas, compared to Louisiana can be harder to work with. They will have more clays and feldspars ( shite that makes the ability to store oil and get out harder).

There's your 3 paragraph article, you can find much better material online.

---

Thanks