Exploration Insights May 2020 | Page 12

12 | Halliburton Landmark Exploration Insights | 13 A quantification of the magnitude of sea-level change is difficult to determine because of significant uncertainties in establishing accurate and precise measurements of sea-level change, and uncertainties in determining the age synchronicity of sea-level change between geographically widespread studies. The most useful approach for estimating magnitude ranges is to make a comparative synthesis of published 3. The magnitude estimates are derived by clearly documented, reliable methods Commonly used methods for estimating the magnitude of sea-level change include: backstripping; δ 18 O analysis; sedimentological and palaeontological observations, such as erosional and depositional relief; facies juxtaposition; fossil assemblages; and seismic and stratigraphic geometries. Rygel et al. (2008) pioneered a comparative synthesis methodology for the study of Late Palaeozoic eustasy, and more recently Ray et al. (2019) followed a similar approach to determine Cretaceous eustatic magnitude limits, supported by a data sensitivity analysis. The principal advantages of these approaches were that they overcame the caveats and assumptions associated with each method of calculating eustatic magnitude, and removed local and High s t a s y o - e u i c a G l 10 ky Short-term changes (Duration) 1 100 y 40 10 Miller et al. 2004 Transgression Regresssion Haq 2014 Transgression Regression 100 2. The sea-level changes are accurately calibrated to the geologic timescale 100 Sahagian et al. 1996 Transgression Regression 120 1. The sea-level change is deemed to be eustatic (because the location was relatively tectonically stable, and the event was short in duration) 1,000 200 140 1 My Figure 1> A schematic representation of the duration, magnitude, and rate of known drivers of short-term eustasy, alongside the impact upon the stratigraphic record. The curves for thermo-, aquifer-, and glacio-eustasy reflect the upper limits of the climatic drivers of the eustasy (modified from Figure 7 of Ray et al., 2019). 80 60 40 Magnitude limits from Ray et al. 2019 20 0 Maastrichtian HOW IS THE MAGNITUDE OF SEA- LEVEL CHANGE DETERMINED? magnitude records. Ideally, such records are derived from studies where: only glacio-eustasy is capable of generating magnitudes of short-term sea-level change that are >20 m (Davies et al., 2020). Accordingly, in an “icehouse” world, the magnitude of sea-level change is related to the volume of global icecaps, with cooler climates and larger icecaps resulting in greater magnitude sea-level changes. In this way, the short-term magnitude of eustasy can contribute to our knowledge of Earth systems science, including palaeoclimate evolution, orbital forcing of sedimentary systems, geochemical evolution of the oceans, and biological evolutions and extinctions. It, thereby, helps validate the Neftex Earth system models and the predictions of source rock, reservoir, and seal rock facies distribution derived from these models. Campanian San. Con. Turonian Cenomanian Albian Late Aptian Bar. Hau. Valanginian Berriasian Early Cretaceous Figure 2> A comparison of the eustatic sea-level changes calculated by Sahagian et al. (1996), Miller et al. (2004), Haq (2014), and Ray et al. (2019), illustrating the marked difference in magnitude estimates. Estimates are shown of individual sea-level rises and falls derived from Sahagian et al. (1996), Miller et al. (2004), and Haq (2014), alongside the magnitude limits from Ray et al. (2019). Note, maximum values are shown where upper and lower limits were given, otherwise best estimate values were taken. The data points identify the age and magnitude of sea-level rises and falls. San. = Santonian; Con. = Coniacian; Bar. = Barremian; and Hau. = Hauterivian. regional biases from the data. This was only achievable by means of a global synthesis of all applicable data. Both studies identified broad stratigraphic intervals, which approximate stages in duration, from which robust upper magnitude limits were calculated. The stratigraphic intervals were identified by step-shifts in the magnitude of short-term sea-level change, thus grouping data into intervals that can be globally correlated with ease. The identification of intervals characterized by short-term sea-level changes of particular magnitudes strongly suggests the dominance of a global eustatic signal, rather than the presumably random signal that might be expected from relative sea-level changes derived from local variations in subsidence and sedimentation rates. The potential pitfalls of more qualitative approaches to estimating the magnitude of eustasy can be seen by comparison with the eustatic curves of Haq and Schutter (2008) and Haq (2014). These studies derived eustatic magnitude estimates by averaging local measurements from a limited number of stratigraphic sections. Haq (2014) has acknowledged that such measurements are approximations, but the magnitudes of eustatic change suggested greatly exceed those of Rygel et al. (2008) and Ray et al. (2019), respectively. They also exceed estimates purely from backstripping (e.g. Sahagian et al., 1996; Miller et al., 2004) (Figure 2). A simple conclusion might be that the magnitude of local water depth change in the sections selected by Haq and Schutter (2008) and Haq (2014) was overestimated. ESTABLISHING THE MAGNITUDE OF SHORT-TERM CRETACEOUS SEA-LEVEL CHANGE Ray et al. (2019) utilized records of Cretaceous sea-level change with durations of 3 Myr or less. By doing so, they reduced the influence of local tectonics and long-term drivers of eustasy (e.g. sea-floor spreading and sedimentation) in favor of a short-term climate-driven eustatic signal linked to orbital forcing (climate-linked) mechanisms. Almost 800 individual estimates of sea-level rise and fall were included in the synthesis following a rigorous selection process. A consensus view was extracted from these data in a step-wise manner. First, a preliminary statistical analysis of the entire dataset was undertaken to identify robust temporal trends in magnitude estimates, and to establish intervals characterized by a particular range of magnitudes. Once these intervals had been established, an in-depth review was performed