Lyell Collection
Geological Society, London, Special Publications
Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help

Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Joy, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 1996; v. 101; p. 79-90;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.SP.1996.101.01.05
© 1996 Geological Society of London

Regional Studies: Stratigraphy, Tectonics and Volcanism

Controls on Eocene sedimentation in the central North Sea Basin: results of a basinwide correlation study

Aidan M. Joy

Fina Exploration Ltd, Fina House, Ashley Avenue, Epsom, Surrey, KT18 5AD, UK
Kerr-McGee Oil (UK) plc, 75 Davies Street, London W1Y 1FA, UK

The Eocene of the central North Sea Basin consists of mudstones with locally developed deltaic and gravity-flow sandstones, some of which are important hydrocarbon reservoirs. The pronounced lateral variability in sandstone thickness, combined with the difficulties of seismic interpretation in the Eocene, obliges explorationists to develop a regional understanding of Eocene depositional systems in order to predict sandstone distribution. However the development of such a regional understanding is hampered by the need to correlate between widely spaced wells. The correlation of basinal sections with their marginal equivalents has proved to be a particularly intractable problem.

This study utilizes a simple subdivision of the Eocene into two sequences based upon the recognition of a small number of areally extensive wireline-log and seismic markers. Though the sediments belonging to these two sequences are very similar, the nature and distribution of the large-scale depositional systems developed during the two intervals are quite different. During sequence I time (early to mid Eocene) sand supply was dominated by two deltas, one in UK Quadrant 9 and one in UK Quadrant 21. The late Paleocene Moray Delta formed a positive bathymetric feature in UK Quadrant 15 at this time, suppressing delta development in this region. By sequence II time (mid to late Eocene) a rise in relative sea level had created space in Quadrant 15, allowing a single major deltaic depocentre to develop here; this delta dominated sand supply during sequence II time. Both the location and the morphology of this delta suggest that it was fluvially dominated.

This interpretation suggests that the availability of accommodation space for delta development was a fundamental controlling factor in the supply of sand to the basin. There is no evidence for a eustatic control on sand supply.